Scan barcode
Reviews
The Women of the Cousins' War: The Duchess, the Queen and the King's Mother by Philippa Gregory
beccaannekent's review against another edition
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.0
This book covers a brief, but interesting history of three women in the “Cousins War” (later known as the War of the Roses”. Jacquetta of Luxembourg, Lady Rivers. Elizabeth Woodville, Queen of Edward IV and Margaret Beaufort, mother to Henry VII. All three played significant roles in this time period’s history, but until recent times have been briefly mentioned due to their sex.
As this is co-authored by three people, each covering the history of one of the subjects, then you can separate this book into three parts.
The introduction, and Jacquetta’s story is given by Philippa Gregory. Who is known for her fictional and almost fantasy based historical novels rather than factual. I must admit, the fictional novels are a guilty pleasure of mine, even though when I read them I know there is limited accurate historical information throughout. I take them as they are.
Unfortunately, although Jacquetta’s story is the least known to me and the one I was most excited to learn more about, Philippa’s non-fictional writing is not as immersive as her fictional. I was bored, particularly in the lengthy introduction, and couldn’t wait to move on.
David Baldwin and Michael Jones’ takes on Elizabeth and Margaret were much more interesting. I was sad that Jones skipped quickly over the Battle of Bosworth with Margaret (potentially due to lack of accounts?), I can’t imagine what her thought processes were knowing her only son was either going to emerge victorious as a King of England or die trying.
Overall, a short but interesting book which would be perfect for anyone beginning to dip their toes into this time period, particularly the Wars of the Roses. I am glad that finally women in history are being brought to the forefront and we can learn more about their impact on such historical events.
As this is co-authored by three people, each covering the history of one of the subjects, then you can separate this book into three parts.
The introduction, and Jacquetta’s story is given by Philippa Gregory. Who is known for her fictional and almost fantasy based historical novels rather than factual. I must admit, the fictional novels are a guilty pleasure of mine, even though when I read them I know there is limited accurate historical information throughout. I take them as they are.
Unfortunately, although Jacquetta’s story is the least known to me and the one I was most excited to learn more about, Philippa’s non-fictional writing is not as immersive as her fictional. I was bored, particularly in the lengthy introduction, and couldn’t wait to move on.
David Baldwin and Michael Jones’ takes on Elizabeth and Margaret were much more interesting. I was sad that Jones skipped quickly over the Battle of Bosworth with Margaret (potentially due to lack of accounts?), I can’t imagine what her thought processes were knowing her only son was either going to emerge victorious as a King of England or die trying.
Overall, a short but interesting book which would be perfect for anyone beginning to dip their toes into this time period, particularly the Wars of the Roses. I am glad that finally women in history are being brought to the forefront and we can learn more about their impact on such historical events.
lindzlovesreading's review against another edition
3.0
English Medieval and Early Modern history has always been a particular guilty pleasure of mine. Battles, treachery, gigantic stone castles, affairs, arranged royal marriages have a romantic tinge of historical hindsight. There was always more at stake, power and death seemed to be always linked, a bizarre utopian game to the death.
The War of the Roses though always seemed dense and weedy. Though once you learn the main players, it all opens up like a flower or even a rose. These three essays look at the women in the centre of this bloody feud. Jacquetta Woodville, Elizabeth Woodville, and Margret Beaufort, all three highly developed in manipulation and political power play.
The strongest of the three essays would definitely be David Baldwin's on Elizabeth Woodville. With his Droll argument, Baldwin displayed the haughty yet expert political cunning not liking to stay in the shadows of her charismatic king husband. Though to be fair he had more records to work with than the other too, Jones was using a lot of guess work and circumstantial evidence with Beautfort's movements. But she seemed an exceptionally strong women. And Gregory's essay is still a little tainted with her whimsy.
But this is still an exception introduction into the later half of the 15th century. The weak and sleepy Henry VI, the ferocious Margaret of Anjou, the strappingly powerful Edward IV, the sinister pragmatic Richard III, and the cold calculating Henry VII. Most interesting has to be the mystery of the Princes of the Tower. This was a brutal time even by Medieval standards, but completely enthralling.
The War of the Roses though always seemed dense and weedy. Though once you learn the main players, it all opens up like a flower or even a rose. These three essays look at the women in the centre of this bloody feud. Jacquetta Woodville, Elizabeth Woodville, and Margret Beaufort, all three highly developed in manipulation and political power play.
The strongest of the three essays would definitely be David Baldwin's on Elizabeth Woodville. With his Droll argument, Baldwin displayed the haughty yet expert political cunning not liking to stay in the shadows of her charismatic king husband. Though to be fair he had more records to work with than the other too, Jones was using a lot of guess work and circumstantial evidence with Beautfort's movements. But she seemed an exceptionally strong women. And Gregory's essay is still a little tainted with her whimsy.
But this is still an exception introduction into the later half of the 15th century. The weak and sleepy Henry VI, the ferocious Margaret of Anjou, the strappingly powerful Edward IV, the sinister pragmatic Richard III, and the cold calculating Henry VII. Most interesting has to be the mystery of the Princes of the Tower. This was a brutal time even by Medieval standards, but completely enthralling.
berenikeasteria's review against another edition
3.0
Since this book is co-authored by three very different writers, it is best examined in three parts. David Baldwin is the author of the book’s essay on Elizabeth Woodville. It’s a pacy effort, interesting, to the point, and makes no mention of the fairytale episodes of popular myth and which Gregory, incidentally, chose to include in her novel The White Queen. Baldwin also takes the time to explain why Elizabeth might have been accused of witchcraft in her own time. It’s readable, focused, and goes beyond mere narrative to explore what Elizabeth actually did as queen, or, where there are gaps, Baldwin presents evidence and cogently argues that Elizabeth’s duties could have included such activities. I enjoyed this section on what Elizabeth did as queen, and Baldwin presents a new angle on the apparent power-grabbing of the Woodvilles – pointing out that many of their actions were normal for the times and what was to be expected for the family of the queen, whilst it was her husband and his brothers who often perpetrated more shocking power-grabbing (such as declaring the ancestress of the two Neville girls, wed to George, Duke of Clarence, and Richard, Duke of Gloucester, legally dead so that the sisters, and through them Edward’s brothers, could claim their vast inheritances!). Interestingly this is in stark contrast to Gregory’s portrayal of events in The White Queen, where Elizabeth and Jacquetta are portrayed as gleefully and rather vindictively snapping up all the marriageable prospects in the kingdom and marrying them off to Elizabeth’s siblings and other relatives against, the novel implies, the will of aforesaid marriageable prospects. Baldwin actually goes beyond the bog-standard basic narrative of Gregory’s “essay” on Jacquetta to try to explain how and why Elizabeth Woodville was, in several respects, a strong queen. Unfortunately he is somewhat limited by the lack of proper referencing, but more on that later.
Michael Jones is the author of the book’s essay about Margaret Beaufort. It’s obvious from the get-go that Jones is passionate about his subject, and I would have to say his treatment of Margaret Beaufort is definitely favourable – in addition he criticises some past works dealing with Margaret that have been less than favourable. He has a point when he notes factual errors in these past works, or where they fail to draw upon certain evidence, and Jones’ work isn’t out-and-out rabid bias by any stretch of the imagination – but just to make sure I get a balanced view I would read some other works on Margaret too, and consult the available evidence. Jones isn’t immune from making his own factual errors, I should point out. At one point in the essay he states that George Stanley, later Lord Strange, Margaret’s step-son, married “the queen’s sister”, and goes on to describe her as the daughter of Lord Strange and Jacquetta. This is incorrect, as George’s bride was the daughter of Lord Strange and Jacquetta Woodville, Elizabeth Woodville’s younger sister, making the lady a niece of Elizabeth Woodville. Still, like David Baldwin’s essay, I found myself enjoying Jones’ section. He’s focused on the subject for the most part, and presents what was to me a fresh perspective on Margaret Beaufort alongside evidence backing up his propositions and he even delves into some critical analysis and presents alternative views to the reader and not just one single conclusion – this is good academic writing. Sadly, he too is limited by the referencing issue. However, Jones’ enthusiasm and passion for the subject really filtered through and enhanced my reading experience – as a reader I feel much more engaged and interested myself when I can tell that an author cares about their subject.
Philippa Gregory is responsible for the 41-page introduction, and the following essay on Jacquetta of Luxembourg. Gregory gaffes big time in the introduction, stating that Henry VIII was Jacquetta’s grandson and that Elizabeth I was Jacquetta’s great-granddaughter. If you follow the line backwards from Elizabeth I, Henry VIII was Elizabeth I’s father, Elizabeth of York was Henry VIII’s mother, Elizabeth Woodville was Elizabeth of York’s mother, and Jacquetta was Elizabeth Woodville’s mother. That makes Henry VIII the great-grandson of Jacquetta and Elizabeth I her great-great-granddaughter. This is just the sort of basic error that I characteristically find in Gregory’s works. Moreover, Gregory seems intent upon using the introduction as her own personal soapbox, shoring up the inaccuracies in her novels by presenting the old Obi-Wan Kenobi “from a certain point of view” argument, and claiming that “Historians select what story they are going to tell, then they select what facts they are going to use to illustrate and prove this story.” This is deeply misleading and demonstrates real lack of understanding of the importance of objectivity, self-critique, and open debate that the modern fields of history and archaeology devote a lot of resources and energy to in order to ensure that as much of the facts are related to the general public as possible – long gone are the days of pervasive bias, which nowadays resides only in the realms of fake pseudo-historians and fringe theorists with a pet project to promote. Gregory then launches into a discussion about the neglect of women in history – both in the past and as historians – although this situation is greatly changed today. This discussion has some merit, but it reads like a first-year undergraduate’s first essay on gender archaeology – it lays down the very basics of the debate and barely scratches the surface of the deeper issues in this field. Worse, Gregory comes across as somewhat hypocritical. In her introduction she explains her preference for use of present tense in her novels (sounding way too much like she’s trying to defend herself, by the way, which a professional author should not stoop to), since, so Gregory claims, use of present tense allows an author to avoid writing with too much hindsight. And yet I often feel that Gregory’s novels are blemished by too much foreknowledge – take for example Anne Boleyn’s curse upon Jane Seymour in The Other Boleyn Girl, in which she all too presciently curses Jane and her son (at that stage not yet even conceived!) to early deaths, or Elizabeth Woodville’s curse in The White Queen that whoever is responsible for her son’s murder shall have his eldest son die and his surviving son shall have all his sons die also and have no heir, which is of course exactly what happens later in history to the Tudor dynasty and speaks with way too much hindsight! Gregory also derides the omniscient third person voice in non-fiction histories, especially as she feels it leads readers to accept what is written without question (not true, as I, as a reader, will happily confirm) but then goes on to use it in her own essay on Jacquetta. Perhaps the worst insult, Gregory puts forwards the position that “However vivid and powerful the historical novel, I believe it should be based on the recorded facts and never deviate from them when they are available.” This alone was almost enough to make me ceremonially bang the book against the wall in disgust, but I persevered for the sake of the other two authors. I have long since lost count of the number of times Gregory’s novels have flat out ignored recorded fact. Where is the recorded fact that Elizabeth Woodville was a genuine witch who conjured up magical storms to help her husband? Where is the recorded fact that Anne Boleyn was “guilty of at least one murder”? Where is the evidence that the Battle of Edgecote (1469 CE) actually happened in 1470 CE and was the event that restored Henry VI to the throne? Still, at least Ms Gregory can take some comfort from the fact that here is a reader who is not “accustomed to accepting information from a concealed narrator”. All this before I even came to Gregory’s “essay”.
Like other readers, I couldn’t help but notice that Gregory’s “essay” on Jacquetta St. Pol contained an awful lot of “probably”s and “likely”s. That’s to be expected, given the gaps in the historical record where Jacquetta does not appear. But Gregory does not explain why she thinks the scenarios she presents are the most likely. I am inclined to agree with her conclusions, but I want to know how Gregory got there, I want to read Gregory argue her case. How did she reach this interpretation that so-and-so scenario is the most likely? I meant it when I said I was a reader that questions what is presented to me. Gregory presents us with a linear description of Jacquetta’s life and fills in the gaps with the most probable, but she doesn’t take us behind the deductions or invite us to examine the actual sources and evidence for Jacquetta that do exist. That’s the reason I put quotation marks around the word “essay” when referring to Gregory’s section here. In academic circles this is what would be called narrative, as opposed to the next level which is critical analysis. It’s a regurgitation of events – which may be reasonably interesting if you’re interested in Jacquetta St. Pol, which I am – but it doesn’t hold up as a piece of serious academia. There’s another reason why it doesn’t make the grade, and that’s the referencing. Gregory explains in the introduction that the decision was taken not to include referencing in the text of the essays in order to make the book easier to read for the layperson (clearly as a qualified historian and archaeologist I am not her target audience) – they’re not even footnoted. After each essay there is a bibliography and a notes section where the authors go back to quotes they’ve used and finally tell us where they are from. There’s just one problem – whilst the author and work are given, the exact page reference is not, meaning that anyone wanting to check the references and do further research must search through the entire work themselves to find one reference. Serious academia is exacting about precision referencing, to put it mildly, which is another reason why this book shouldn’t be taken as a weighty authority on its subject. It’d be worth keeping in mind Gregory’s statement that the book is geared to the layperson – it’s an interesting narrative but no more, and if one wanted to take Gregory’s advice of “do what I say but not what I do”, the reader would do well to question what is presented to us here and not take The Women of the Cousins’ War as the final word. Back to Gregory’s “essay” on Jacquetta. Aside from the usual repetition and Gregory’s propensity to cite a person’s name and titulary time after time as though her readers have memories like sieves (hello, “John, Duke of Bedford”, how I’ve missed you. Not.), and the aforementioned issues, it just had a tendency to be rather meandering. Not that I’m a-mile-a-minute, high-octane action-junkie when it comes to my reading selections, but a good quality writer knows the value of being concise and succinct. Perhaps Gregory should meditate upon this literary gem the next time she thinks about writing a 41-page introduction:
“Brevity is the soul of wit” (William Shakespeare; Hamlet, Act 2, Scene 2, 90)
P.S. To decide on a rating I weighted each essay section as 30% and the introduction as 10% and then rated each one out of ten in turn, added them up out of 100 (multiply the 30% weighted sections by three) and divided by 10, to get an overall rating of 5 out of 10.
For anyone interested in a good essay on Jacquetta St. Pol I recommend Susan Higginbotham's essay, which I've linked to below:
http://www.susanhigginbotham.com/subpages/jacqwoodville.html
chelsayoder's review against another edition
2.0
2.5 stars?? The last section was the only part I really enjoyed and felt I truly learned. Greggory is wonderful at gathering and researching history but her skill at writing certainly lies in the Novel form.
freckleduck's review against another edition
2.0
I had a hard time reading this book. The accounts appeared mostly speculative, and I do not know enough about this period to assess their accuracy. I would not read this book again.
blodeuedd's review
3.0
I have actually never reviewed non-fiction before, and in the end I have not read much either, since my non-fiction mostly consists of uni textbooks (and none that exciting as this one). After having read all 3 books by Philippa Gregory it was interesting to read this book since this one is all fact and thoughts about these three women. But how to review is the question. I can't say I did not like something that happens since it is what happened. So I looked at is this way, was it boring and made me fall asleep? The question to that is no. It was never dry.
Philippa Gregory has written the first part about Jacquetta and she tells the story from cradle to grave. The little that is known about this fascinating woman. I do love any woman who went her on way at a time where your father, husband, brother or king ruled you. Sure many other women went their own way, but I just like how she married so far beneath her status, she must have loved him so and I am a sucker for that.
The next part is by David Baldwin and he tells the story about Elizabeth Woodville. I will always like the Woodville family and they are just so slandered, it is horrible. They were certainly not the first family to gain lands, titles and money when someone from their family caught a king's eye. And even if her husband was a terrible womanizer I will always like their story, lust at first sight ;)
The last part is by Michael Jones and it is about Margaret Beaufort (whom I called the bitch in The Red Queen). It is strange to say that you do not like someone that has lived and you have never met, but I just do not like it (but her story is a good one), and I certainly do not like her son Henry Tudor. Lol, I have a strange aversion for all the Tudors for some reason. Well starting from Henry. Oh and I am sure these two killed the princes in the tower, ok, I am just blaming them since I dislike them.
All in all 3 good authors writing about 3 interesting women, that history has vilified or as with Margaret made all saintly and good. It is not perhaps a book you read at once. No, you can read one section and then read another another day. History is not going anywhere.
Conclusion:
A good book to read after reading this series, or a good book to make you want to read the Cousin's War books.
Philippa Gregory has written the first part about Jacquetta and she tells the story from cradle to grave. The little that is known about this fascinating woman. I do love any woman who went her on way at a time where your father, husband, brother or king ruled you. Sure many other women went their own way, but I just like how she married so far beneath her status, she must have loved him so and I am a sucker for that.
The next part is by David Baldwin and he tells the story about Elizabeth Woodville. I will always like the Woodville family and they are just so slandered, it is horrible. They were certainly not the first family to gain lands, titles and money when someone from their family caught a king's eye. And even if her husband was a terrible womanizer I will always like their story, lust at first sight ;)
The last part is by Michael Jones and it is about Margaret Beaufort (whom I called the bitch in The Red Queen). It is strange to say that you do not like someone that has lived and you have never met, but I just do not like it (but her story is a good one), and I certainly do not like her son Henry Tudor. Lol, I have a strange aversion for all the Tudors for some reason. Well starting from Henry. Oh and I am sure these two killed the princes in the tower, ok, I am just blaming them since I dislike them.
All in all 3 good authors writing about 3 interesting women, that history has vilified or as with Margaret made all saintly and good. It is not perhaps a book you read at once. No, you can read one section and then read another another day. History is not going anywhere.
Conclusion:
A good book to read after reading this series, or a good book to make you want to read the Cousin's War books.
susannavs's review against another edition
3.0
It was a bit confusing to read the biographies separately because they covered some of the same years and had the same people, so reading from the various Yorkist, Lancastrian and Lancastrian-turned-Yorkist perspectives made it hard to keep everyone in their proper place! But I enjoyed reading about the War of the Roses from the women's side. Now to read Philippa Gregory's fictional accounts!
snowblu3's review against another edition
5.0
There are three chapters -- one per woman discussed. I only read the one about Elizabeth Woodville, since I'm writing my senior thesis paper about her. But it's shaping up to be a good source, so I'm satisfied.