Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII (Paperback)

~ David Starkey (Author) "Catherine of Aragon, the first wife of Henry VIII, was born on 16 December 1485..." (more)
Key Phrases: decretal commission, river pageant, public honesty, York Place, Dona Elvira, Hampton Court (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

Praise for Elizabeth 'The best account in English of the early years of Elizabeth! must be one of the most zestful pieces of history written in the last few years! The result is a racy read and first rate history.' Evening Standard 'Both thrills and convinces! Indeed this is very much Elizabeth for our times' Independent 'Fresh and lively! vividly told! He sets before us not only the woman behind the throne but the girl behind the woman' Sunday Times --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Review

"Acute and imaginative. ... [Starkey's] communication of subtle points in simple and vivid language is masterly." (Sunday Telegraph )

"Exciting. ... Very acute. ... It is so gripping that one finishes it wishing it were even longer." (Mail on Sunday )

"Truly, this is history made as fluent and compelling as excellent fiction." (Booklist (starred review) )

"Extraordinary. . . . With each queen, Starkey offers a vivid character study." (Sunday Times (London) )

"Brilliant. ... Six Wives provides an intriguing new perspective on this key period in English history." (Daily Telegraph (London) )

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 880 pages
• Publisher: Harper Perennial (May 4, 2004)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0060005505
• ISBN-13: 978-0060005504
• Product Dimensions: 8.1 x 5.3 x 1.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.6 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (24 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #102,492 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

59 of 71 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars God's gift to English history, July 22, 2004

By	jenbird "book and classic movie fiend" (Havertown, PA) - See all my reviews

Or so David Starkey would have you believe. He sets the tone when, in the introduction to this book, he comes right out and says that previous books on Henry's six wives (by Alison Weir and Antonia Fraser) aren't nearly as good as his. The quote: "Inevitably, the 20th century versions of the Six Wives have stood in Strickland's [a 19th century biographer] shadow. Both...Weir and Fraser...have reverted to Strickland's tried-and-tested formula." Strickland caused scholars to "see things" and by balancing their books among the Six Wives (instead of doing as Starkey does, devoting the lion's share of his book to Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn), the other authors are "distorting the record."

And that's just the beginning. Through out the book, Starkey will interrupt his own historical narrative with the "I" point of view, citing facts or anecdotes that *he* has found that other historians have "overlooked" or "ignored" or "misinterpreted." Examples: p. 447, "In fact, though much has been made of St. German by some modern historians, his ideas fell at the first fence." From p. 435, "Here it is important to be clear about Henry's developing strategy. From the moment of the failure of the Blackfriar's trial, it had been taken for granted that an English verdict on the Divorce would somehow have to be sanctioned by Parliament. There is no mystery about this, as some modern historians like to claim." These are only two of many, many instances where Starkey pats himself on the back about how brilliant he is, and how everyone else has gotten it so, so wrong. He claims to be the only one to have properly identified Catherine Howard's and one of Catherine Parr's portraits. He also claims to be revealing much information "for the first time ever." Apparently no one else does their research but him.

Another complaint I had was with the structure of the book; as previously mentioned, Starkey devotes about 75% of the book to the first two wives, Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn. He goes on for far too long about Henry's divorce from Catherine, to the point where the detail becomes mind-numbing, and it's difficult to keep track of who's doing what. In addition, the sections on Catherine and Anne are kept completely separate, despite the fact that their histories with Henry overlap by a number of years. As a result, Starkey ends up repeating much of his story twice over, once in the "Divorcing Catherine" section (where Anne's name is never mentioned) and once again in the "Anne Boleyn" section (from which Catherine is completely absent for about the first half). This makes the flow of the story very choppy.

Henry's last four wives get short changed to a great extent; apparently since none were married to Henry nearly as long as either Catherine of Aragon or Anne Boleyn, they don't count for as much. And the book ends abruptly when Henry dies, finishing up the tale of Catherine Parr in only one paragraph. If Starkey was set on the idea of ending the book right after Henry's death (which, by the way, is related in one off-hand sentence!), I think at least an epilogue detailing Catherine Parr's eventual fate would have been more appropriate; as written, the ending to her story is far too hastily done and neglects important events in her life as well as the advancement of the Protestant faith in England.

On a related note, Starkey's favorite is obviously Anne Boleyn, with the other wives suffering a bit by his comparisons; if you believe Starkey, Catherine of Aragon was a hysteric who lied about consummating her first marriage to Henry's brother Arthur, Jane Seymour was an "accessory after the fact" to Anne Boleyn's murder, and Anne of Cleves spent most of her life after her divorce either scheming to get Henry back, or whining about the raw deal she got. Starkey does have some sympathy for Catherine Howard, but it seems misguided at times; he claims she couldn't possibly have actually slept with Thomas Culpepper, they were just platonic friends from way back, an assertion that seems based on nothing more than Starkey's own personal beliefs on the subject.

Having now read all three of the major, modern biographies of Henry's Six Wives, I would recommend Antonia Fraser's book over this one. One review printed on the back of this book says that with "Starkey's wit and style, it doesn't seem a page too long." Oh, I quite definitely disagree.

12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars I wish I'd read these reviews before buying the book!, July 17, 2007

By	Valerie E. Whiffen "Psychologist" (Vancouver, BC) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I bought this book on a whim, without benefit of these reviews. I should have done my homework. The other reviews on this website are excellent and I won't repeat them here except to underscore two points.

First, as an academic myself I was stunned by the extent to which Starkey's scholarship is biased, subjective and speculative. He blithely makes racist comments about other cultures (the Spanish are "instutionalized sadists," for example). Evidence that is accepted by other writers he dismisses out of hand, while other, more dubious sources that are not normally consulted he accepts without question. Ideas that start out as speculation are facts a few chapters later. Starkey may be a respected historian, but this is not a good piece of scholarship.

Most significantly, he seems unable to put these women into an historic context. He doesn't appear to appreciate what it was like to be a woman, without legal powers, who attracted the attention of a ruthless and brutal king. For instance, he characterizes Ann Boleyn as manipulative. Maybe she was intelligent enough to realize that if she refused the King, she and her family would suffer the loss of their wealth and possibly their lives. The best she could do was to hold out for marriage which at least gave her some legitimacy. Starkey's failure to appreciate the brutal reality of women's lives at this point in history is a huge handicap in writing their biographies.

22 of 26 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Completely unreadable, February 21, 2005

By	pmegan "pmegan" (Massachusetts) - See all my reviews

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 (whose research he then disses in the first pages of the book... NOT cool, dude) and taking a class in pop 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 completely invent an "earliest memory" for a historical figure 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, chosen from a page at random as I wrote this review:

"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.