Scan barcode
thatlizhunter's review against another edition
5.0
amazingly well written non fiction that gives you a lot of insight into Catherine de Medici. Confirmed my eternal opinion that CW's Reign is absolute trash. Just trash compared to the REAL history.
magnetarmadda's review against another edition
3.0
Because of the woman who the book was about, I wish I could give it more stars, but I definitely don't think the writing or research was worth more than 2 stars, so this is a compromise.
hmalagisi's review against another edition
3.0
When we think about women rulers in the 16th century, some names, like Queen Mary I, Queen Elizabeth I, and Mary Queen of Scots, come to mind. However, another woman should be included in this list as her life helped keep the Valois dynasty alive and well in France, even though she was Italian by birth. Her name has been tainted with dark legends of poisoning, deadly incidents, and the infamous St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre. This notorious queen was Catherine de Medici, and Leonie Frieda has chosen to shed some light on the myths and mysteries surrounding this misunderstood woman in her biography, “Catherine de Medici: Renaissance Queen of France.”
Catherine de Medici’s life was rough as her parents, Lorenzo II de Medici Duke of Urbino and Madeleine de La Tour d’ Auvergne, died shortly after she was born. A wealthy young heiress who was now an orphan, Catherine’s marriage was vital for the success of her family. The union meant for the young woman was with Henry II of France, the son of Francis I. Catherine fell deeply in love with Henry II. Still, another person in this marriage was Henry II’s mistress Diane de Poitiers. It took a while for Catherine and Henry to have the heirs necessary for their union to prove successful, but they did have ten children, including three sons that would become King of France; Francis II, Charles IX, and Henry III.
When her beloved husband, King Henry II, died in a jousting accident, a lance in the eye, Catherine had to step up and protect her family, no matter what. Her first son to be King was Francis II, alongside his Scottish bride, Mary Queen of Scots, but he died after only a year on the throne from a severe earache. Catherine had to act as regent for her third son, King Charles IX, as he was too young to rule independently. Unfortunately, his reign was mired by several wars of religion between Catholics and Protestants. One of the most tumultuous events of his reign occurred in August 1572, known as the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, which left a massive black mark on the legacy of Catherine de Medici for her supposed role in the disaster. After the death of Charles IX, Catherine had to once again act as regent as her fourth and favorite son, Henry III, had to make the journey back to France after being named King of Poland. Catherine de Medici died in 1589, and her favorite son Henry III died a few months later, ending the Valois dynasty and making way for the Bourbon dynasty in France.
In my opinion, I found this book a tad dry in areas, especially concerning the eight wars of religion in France. As someone who doesn’t read much about 16th-century France and its politics, this book was a bit of a challenge for me, and I felt that in some places, Catherine de Medici was more of a side character than the principal character in her biography. I also felt that Frieda focused on the black myth of Catherine de Medici and her supposed evil deeds instead of trying to debunk them.
Overall, I think this was a decent biography. Frieda does have a passion for her subject, and it shows from the political quagmire that she tries to navigate to the fun facts about Catherine and her family. If you know the story of Catherine de Medici and 16th-century France, you might find this book fascinating, but it might be challenging for novices in this area of research. If you want to know more about Catherine de Medici, “Catherine de Medici: Renaissance Queen of France” by Leonie Frieda could be the book for you.
Catherine de Medici’s life was rough as her parents, Lorenzo II de Medici Duke of Urbino and Madeleine de La Tour d’ Auvergne, died shortly after she was born. A wealthy young heiress who was now an orphan, Catherine’s marriage was vital for the success of her family. The union meant for the young woman was with Henry II of France, the son of Francis I. Catherine fell deeply in love with Henry II. Still, another person in this marriage was Henry II’s mistress Diane de Poitiers. It took a while for Catherine and Henry to have the heirs necessary for their union to prove successful, but they did have ten children, including three sons that would become King of France; Francis II, Charles IX, and Henry III.
When her beloved husband, King Henry II, died in a jousting accident, a lance in the eye, Catherine had to step up and protect her family, no matter what. Her first son to be King was Francis II, alongside his Scottish bride, Mary Queen of Scots, but he died after only a year on the throne from a severe earache. Catherine had to act as regent for her third son, King Charles IX, as he was too young to rule independently. Unfortunately, his reign was mired by several wars of religion between Catholics and Protestants. One of the most tumultuous events of his reign occurred in August 1572, known as the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, which left a massive black mark on the legacy of Catherine de Medici for her supposed role in the disaster. After the death of Charles IX, Catherine had to once again act as regent as her fourth and favorite son, Henry III, had to make the journey back to France after being named King of Poland. Catherine de Medici died in 1589, and her favorite son Henry III died a few months later, ending the Valois dynasty and making way for the Bourbon dynasty in France.
In my opinion, I found this book a tad dry in areas, especially concerning the eight wars of religion in France. As someone who doesn’t read much about 16th-century France and its politics, this book was a bit of a challenge for me, and I felt that in some places, Catherine de Medici was more of a side character than the principal character in her biography. I also felt that Frieda focused on the black myth of Catherine de Medici and her supposed evil deeds instead of trying to debunk them.
Overall, I think this was a decent biography. Frieda does have a passion for her subject, and it shows from the political quagmire that she tries to navigate to the fun facts about Catherine and her family. If you know the story of Catherine de Medici and 16th-century France, you might find this book fascinating, but it might be challenging for novices in this area of research. If you want to know more about Catherine de Medici, “Catherine de Medici: Renaissance Queen of France” by Leonie Frieda could be the book for you.
onedayrobots's review against another edition
5.0
Not even remotely neutral so if you want a just-the-facts, no slant here biography this is not it, but the snark included was incredible and made me laugh out loud multiple times. Very readable and interesting.
lauren708's review against another edition
4.0
I really enjoyed this book. The subject matter is of course, great, but it was well-written and engagingly so. The bibliography is complete which is important to me in non-fiction in addition to having a good flow that is factual, but not dry. An incredibly interesting woman and time-period.
oeufmily's review against another edition
3.0
i kind of love when non-historians write history books. their source material, methodologies, & historiography can be kind of iffy, but you're probably going to be in for a good time. i enjoyed this biography of catherine de medici—i knew a fair amount of history re: french wars of religion, but it definitely wasn't my Focus in undergrad or anything. i found leonie frieda's tone very readable. she was able to distill the complicated politics behind multiple wars of """religion""" for a general audience. love that!
but one thing i don't love is the truly comical amounts of moral relativism going on in here. like. i think the mark of a true biographer is shamelessly hinting that, if given the opportunity, you would bang your chosen hyperfixation. great biographers are always a little down for their subjects. leonie frieda is a catherine de medici apologist through and through. in the introduction, she literally says she's setting out to rehabilitate catherine's reputation. it's a pretty tall order. catherine de medici is infamous for her role in the st. bartholomew's day massacre, a bloodbath that kicked off literal weeks of ethno-religious murders and mob lynchings all across france. all in all, the wave of violence claimed anywhere between 5,000 and 30,000 (?!?!?!?) lives. frieda's judgment of catherine's culpability in this borderline genocide is, essentially: she didn't understand people took religion that seriously, she probably could have handled it better, and anyway, she was a product of her time.
what, lol.
there are other wild stories that are just completely glossed over, like how her son, francis the duke d'anjou & alençon, personally presided over the murder of 3,000 french protestants in issoire in 1577. it gets mentioned in one paragraph and is never brought up again. i know all the valois were absolutely awful people but just. what even! and her evaluation of diane de poitiers's affair with catherine's husband, king henry ii, is just so funny to me. she hates this dead woman SO much, for NO reason other than the fact that she hates to see a girlboss winning. henry ii wanted to be a malewife so bad and i think we should have just left him to it.
i think it's perfectly fine to judge historical figures' moral scruples, so long as there is plenty of context provided. this is the hurdle that so many trained historians have to overcome—it's rare that you'll find a good historical monograph that balances the context with a compelling, engaging narrative. this biography of catherine de medici is definitely way heavier on the narrative. it's descriptive, it's fun, it's informative. but i think there could have been a bit more contextualization and Serious History going on in here.
let me be clear, though: i did enjoy it! i was hesitant to pick up a history book after being burned out from grad school, but this was enough of a palate cleanser that i was able to breeze right through it. if you're curious about the end of the valois and want to learn a little more about renaissance france and catherine de medici, this is a great place to start! just take it with a grain of salt.
but one thing i don't love is the truly comical amounts of moral relativism going on in here. like. i think the mark of a true biographer is shamelessly hinting that, if given the opportunity, you would bang your chosen hyperfixation. great biographers are always a little down for their subjects. leonie frieda is a catherine de medici apologist through and through. in the introduction, she literally says she's setting out to rehabilitate catherine's reputation. it's a pretty tall order. catherine de medici is infamous for her role in the st. bartholomew's day massacre, a bloodbath that kicked off literal weeks of ethno-religious murders and mob lynchings all across france. all in all, the wave of violence claimed anywhere between 5,000 and 30,000 (?!?!?!?) lives. frieda's judgment of catherine's culpability in this borderline genocide is, essentially: she didn't understand people took religion that seriously, she probably could have handled it better, and anyway, she was a product of her time.
what, lol.
there are other wild stories that are just completely glossed over, like how her son, francis the duke d'anjou & alençon, personally presided over the murder of 3,000 french protestants in issoire in 1577. it gets mentioned in one paragraph and is never brought up again. i know all the valois were absolutely awful people but just. what even! and her evaluation of diane de poitiers's affair with catherine's husband, king henry ii, is just so funny to me. she hates this dead woman SO much, for NO reason other than the fact that she hates to see a girlboss winning. henry ii wanted to be a malewife so bad and i think we should have just left him to it.
i think it's perfectly fine to judge historical figures' moral scruples, so long as there is plenty of context provided. this is the hurdle that so many trained historians have to overcome—it's rare that you'll find a good historical monograph that balances the context with a compelling, engaging narrative. this biography of catherine de medici is definitely way heavier on the narrative. it's descriptive, it's fun, it's informative. but i think there could have been a bit more contextualization and Serious History going on in here.
let me be clear, though: i did enjoy it! i was hesitant to pick up a history book after being burned out from grad school, but this was enough of a palate cleanser that i was able to breeze right through it. if you're curious about the end of the valois and want to learn a little more about renaissance france and catherine de medici, this is a great place to start! just take it with a grain of salt.
harriet64's review against another edition
5.0
An absolutely stellar read. Despite picking it up then not touching it for a few months due to circumstances, this was the most fascinating biography I’ve read yet. I’ve really been able to develop my opinions on this woman throughout this book, and it’s allowed me to consider further paths of study. The dear Margot and her letters have piqued my interest! Also the fact that perhaps it was due to Catherine that the French monarchy was secured until the French Revolution?! Fascinating. Well written, what a life. What to do?