Customer Reviews

Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

My children bought this book for me -- I'm a big reader of English history -- and, despite some reservations (based upon Starkey's sloppy bio of Elizabeth) I did give it a shot. But, it's simply unreadable.

First, the writing is just awful. Execrable. Like a really bad pulp novel. Most sections (not just chapters, but sections in a chapter) end with some inane rhetorical question or similar lame attempt to build mystery. Here are some random samples:

"But, within a few days, the minister was singing a very different tune."

"There was a cloud over Catherine's marriage. But it was no bigger than a man's hand."

"And soon she would have vengeance in kind."

Da da da DUMMMM.

Second, there's supposition and speculation about motives and actions, based seemingly upon how Starkey thinks normal women feel and think and act, as if the actions of these very forceful and determined people weren't enough to speak for themselves. There is absolutely NO context -- as if a 16th century queen, or would-be queen, trying to save her life and sovereignty, would act the way a 21st century suburban person would act.

Third, he simply guesses at things!! And admits it! And then he uses his guesses to weave a fantasy of something that may have happened to explain something that did happen. A quick look at p. 419 -- not atypical -- will illustrate this tactic. Starkey sums it up himself by saying "It seems as likely as not." Really? Why?

This is a shameful effort by someone who is associated with Cambridge (what were they thinking at that university?) or by anyone who purports to be a serious historian. Even Publishers' Weekly had a hard time finding anything good to say about this book. Save your $$, or go get Allison Weir's or Antonia Frasier's book(s). Better written and much more exciting. Or buy a good novel.

This massive, but generally entertaining book has finally arrived after growing from a planned modest TV-tie-in to the largest and possibly the best of recent multibiog coverage of Henry VIII's six queens. But this book is not for the weak of wrist or the Tudor history rookie; the biggest audience will probably be those who have already devoured the lives of the wives by Alison Weir and Antonia Fraiser and know their Tudor history. Starkey hasn't uncovered any new, long-lost documents(although a reidentified portrait of probably a young Catherine of Aragon and one of Catherine Parr, formerly id'ed as Lady Jane Grey grace the book's cover and give us a look at both queens as Henry might have first saw them), but goes back to the surviving original and contemporary sources to attempt to strip off as much of the varnish of previous historical interpretations to get as close as possible to the real women who were Henry VIII's consorts.

Listing the 6 wives of Henry VIII and their fates was my childhood equivalent of counting sheep. I don't know why I had this fascination with the 3 Catherines, 2 Annes, and one Jane from such an early age, but I surely wasn't alone. King Henry's eventful matrimonial history has driven writers and historians to delve into the psyche of this charismatic monarch for several centuries. Generally Henry is portrayed as a depraved glutton, seeking only his own pleasures and intent upon changing laws and religions to have his way. In this terrific new study, David Starkey argues that the king was made of simpler stuff, and was seeking happiness, as well as a son and heir. In the process, he made near cult figures of 6 women and changed the way a nation was governed.
Thumbnail sketches of these women and their fates:
Catherine of Aragon - Catholic , deeply religious, no male child in spite of many pregnancies and miscarriages. Henry divorced her (creating the Anglican church in order to do so) to marry wife #2.
Anne Bolyn's greatest contribution was giving birth to Elizabeth I (who went on to be queen of one of England's greatest eras). She was the first queen to lose her head.
Jane Seymour, whom Henry married the day Anne was executed. She gave birth to Edward VI, the long sought male heir, but he proved sickly, as did his mother, who died 12 days after giving birth.
A brief marriage to Anne of Cleves, which ended in anullment. Grateful for her cooperation, Henry granted her several homes and a generous income; she enjoyed an unusually independent lifestyle and often visited court as an honored guest. It's said ale and gambling were her only vices.
Catherine Howard, an adolescent flirt and a beauty, was Henry's ill-fated 5th wife. She made a fool of him when powerful court figures suggested she conceive a child by one of the many young men who sought her favors and pass that child off as Henry's. She lost her head as a result of that game.
Catherine Parr, a shrewd and brilliantly powerful woman who outlived Henry.
Superb in every way.

David Starkey has done an incredible job of biographing the six wifes of Henry VIII. This is a huge book loaded with politics, religion, and detailed information on all of his wives. His first two wives, (Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn) take up about half of the book with respective chapters to his 4 other wives. Henry VIII's character is put to the question in each of his marriages and the fault he lies with his wives (with the exception of Jane Seymour) to produce a male heir. Most of these women were intelligent, spoke other languages fluently and Catherine of Aragon and Katherine Parr were left as Regents to the throne when the King was off on campaign. These were not weak and feeble women.

If you like history you will love this book. Again, it's a huge book with many characters and much intrigue, betrayal, love and tragedy.

I also recommend all books from Alison Weir and Antonia Frasier and the novels of Henry VIII and Mary Queen of Scots from Margaret George.

Now that David Starkey is famous, does this mean that neither he nor anyone else has to proof-read his work? All of the "history" in this book could easily be learned in a children's picture book on the subject, and the writing was just abominable. Mixed metaphors, poor grammar, wrong verb tenses, and not a complex sentence to be seen.

The research was poor and seems like it was done entierly by reading Antonia Frasier books and taking a class in psychology. He openly admits to making things up and is constantly putting words in his subjects' mouths: "That day in the spring of 1489 at Medina del Campo-- was it, perhaps, Catherine's earliest memory?" Who cares? Does it matter? Why make up an "earliest memory" for a character that you are purporting to write a biography of?

I am shocked at the number of positive reviews that this book has recieved. Who is writing them, anyway? I know that ballot-stuffing is a problem on Amazon, but how can anyone get though an 800 page book that reads like a second grade primer? Every third sentence begins with "And," "But," or "Actually," he makes up or mis-uses words on every page, the punctuation is abysmal, and the number of three word sentences is truly apalling. This is an actual example of his writing, not taken out of context:

"In the middle of the celebrations, howerver, came terrible news. The Infante Juan was seriously ill. Ferdinand rode furiously back to Valladolid. But Juan died."

If you are interested in this subject at all, go straight to the source and check out the Frasier book on the subject. For a slightly easier read, without dumbed-down content, try the Alison Weir. But do not, under any circumstances, buy this book for someone unless you want to purposely insult their intelligence. It is completely unreadable and offers EXTREMELY dubious history.

Author David Starkey relates, in his introduction, how this book began as a short(!) warm-up to a projected biography of Henry VIII. As he uncovered new facts and reconsidered old interpretations, the scope of the book expanded into a major, lengthy (750 pages of text + 50 more pages of notes), and rather ambitious study of that monarch's six marriages.

While building appropriately upon previous scholarship, Starkey does not hesitate to provide correction where he feels that earlier writers have gone astray. His own writing is fluent, in the best traditions of narrative history, and peppered here and there with the dry wit that is characteristic of Cambridge dons.

After reading through the details of their lives, I felt that I had come to know the Queens much better as people - their characters, strengths, weaknesses, aims, and concerns. On the other hand, in terms of the overall history, there is so much to absorb that I sometimes felt (as the cliche goes) that I wasn't quite seeing the forest for all the trees.

In reading this book, it will be very helpful if the reader already knows something about 16th century English and European history. Much essential background (especially relating to the Reformation in Europe, and the political events of Henry's reign) is assumed, or only mentioned in passing, by the author.

The book is a quick read for its length, and combines detailed scholarship with a flowing narrative style. I would recommend it to almost anyone who is interested in Henry's wives and who wants to delve deeply into the history of these powerful, ambitious, and accomplished women.

I read this book with great deal relish in thinking that I might get fresh perception on the history of the six wives of Henry VIII. What I found was an easy to read, easy to understand, well researched but highly opinionated book. I think the author tries so hard to be different from other historians and books on this subject that he managed to turned opinions and conjuctures into facts as he see it.

Most of the book deals with two wives, Katherine of Aragon and Ann Boleyn. The rise, love and fall of both women who dominated much of Henry's life takes up much of the author's book. The rest of the four wives, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard and Katherine Parr all got parred down, almost like an summarized aftermath after the two main events. I always thought each woman was pretty unique. (Henry seems to like "Katherine or Catherine as a name in his women.)

This book also proves to be dominated by Henry VIII as he's in almost every single page once he's crowned. From this book, the reader will have a good understanding about how Henry deals with his interpersonal relationship with his wives. You may have a better understanding of Katherine of Aragon and Ann Boleyn even if you may not agreed with many of the author's opinions. But after that, the rest of the four wives adds nothing to what lies published before this book.

I would recommend Allison Weir or Antonia Fraser books on this subject initially. I would recommend this book only for experienced readers of this subject matter. Reason for that is that the author proves to be too opinionated in his writing and it would be best if you read this book if you got a good grounding on the subject.

No, sorry, but this work isn't based on scholarly research
as is suggested by the book's length and copious chapter notes.
The author takes far too much liberty with established facts and well-established theories based on hundreds of years of research by many scholars, and he is far too willing to toss aside all precedent because of his "feelings" or some such ideas.
His theories on the character of Henry's 5th wife, Catherine Howard, are a good example of the author's thinking. It is well established that Catherine had engaged in significant intimacies during her teen-age years when she was living with the Dowager Dutchess of Norfolk, and these meetings and trysts were attested to by her roommates and friends of that time. And, far worse, she met behind closed doors, during late night hours, with at least two men after she was married to King Henry, when everyone in the English-speaking world (as well as most of those in the French-speaking and Spanish-speaking worlds) knew such behavior would be considered treasonable. Of course she was young, and she was encouraged in her misdeeds by
both the 3rd Duke of Norfolk, her uncle, and Lady Rochford, because both of those relatives had their political motives regarding the King.
But her behavior and deeds are well known to historians, and we might have to wonder what prompted the author to take a contrary view. Did he uncover new documents? Make a new translation of original papers?
As to her behavior, he brushes that off by saying it was all due to her "...indiscriminate good nature..." Is that what it's called? Plus, he further dismisses her teen-age sexual
licentiousness by making the bald, unsupported statement: "Many, even most, Tudor girls had similarly murky pasts." But he does cite an "authority" for this view: Chapuys, the Spanish Ambassador to England. He doesn't remind the reader that the Spainard was reporting to the King of Spain, who hated Henry because of Henry's treatment of Catherine of Aragon, who happened to be the Spanish King's aunt.
As far as her later liaisons, which she tried keeping secret from King Henry, this author attributes all that long history to "Victorian prudes." You don't have to be much of a scholar to know that Catherine Howard's misconduct and brazen behavior
was well-documented long before there were any Victorians to write about it.
These examples of the few aspects of this one wife show rather clearly the casual attitude this writer has toward established historical fact, and once such poor scholarship is demonstrated,
it's difficult to take seriously rhe rest of his writing.
Anyone interested in this fascinating period of history will be
better served, and have a more enjoyable time, reading the histories of Alison Weir. She does the proper work, and she has
a very nice understanding of all aspects of that period, and her writing style is most enjoyable.
If your reading time is limited, grab a Weir book first.

David Starkey's "Six Wives" is very engaging and easy to read, despite the intimidating weight of the hardcover. Starkey is a brilliant historian and he breathes life into his subjects as he covers their life and times. He is an expert on all things Elizabethan and readers can trust that his interpretation of events always has extensive research behind it. The few pages of prints in the center of the book are a nice addition, though personally, I wish there were illustrations of the various castles and manors as well as the formal portraits we are given.

David Starkey's 'Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII' is obviously a highly researched piece of work. I've read many Tudor biographies, and this is by far the most extensive I have ever laid eyes on. But unfortunately I have more bad than good to say about it.

What good I can say is trivial. It's a large, long book that takes some concentration and thought to get through. Starkey knew his material well before getting down to business, although I don't believe he wrote about everything he could have. In the space of 765 pages (not counting the index and notes, which took an additional 80+ pages) there is so much information on the politics of Henry VIII's marriages, one cannot help but feel some awe. But that is where the interest ends for me as a reader. Unlike with the Tudor biographies of Alison Weir and Antonia Fraser, I wasn't drawn into the story in the least. And this is where the bad begins.

Where should I start? First of all, the book is completely unbalanced. Well over 300 pages are devoted to the rise and fall of Anne Boleyn, while barely 40 explain the relationship with Anne of Cleves. The same can be said for the story of Catherine Howard and Catherine Parr. Perhaps there really is much, much more to the relationship between Boleyn and Henry Tudor, but I still believe that a balance could have been found and more depth explored with Henry's other wives.

Many reviewers have lashed out against Starkey's language and grammar. While I'm no English expert, I must agree that it's difficult to "get into" the story and stay focused on Starkey's writings. And yes, he does tend to ask too many questions and doesn't hesitate to express his opinion, and stick with it, over historical facts.

And last for this review, but certainly not least and not the truly last of my personal complaints against the book, is Starkey's blatant disregard for other historians and authors. In his introduction, he denounces the books of Fraser and Weir (with author names), which totally lacks class and respect and in my opinion. And that's far from the only time he does such a thing. I remember at one point in the book, just after the birth of Elizabeth (daughter of Henry and Anne Boleyn), Starkey denounced, with a bit of cool arrogance, the "unsubstantiated" claim that Anne wanted to breast-feed Elizabeth but Henry wouldn't allow it. I won't deny that I have read about this before and that I really don't know if it's true or not, as I am not a hard-core historian. But I am curious as to why Starkey believes, as he seems to in many sections of his book, that his is the one and only true version of events. How does he know that? And just because there is no hard evidence for certain events, how does Starkey know that they did or didn't happen?

PBS created a mini-series based on Starkey's book (Starkey himself narrated) which turned out to be worse than the book. It's a sorry thing that a book so long and informative should turn out so uninteresting, but it did.