Scan barcode
gracie1999's review against another edition
I don’t like his style of writing, his theories and arguments I found to be out dated and sexist
jen1701's review against another edition
3.0
Tremlett obviously loves Catherine & hates Anne Boleyn, so he forgives Catherine's trespasses while heaping constant derision on Anne, as if Henry was not ultimately to blame for his own actions.
In one particularly egregious example of Tremlett's attitude, he described Boleyn's first pregnancy as "calculated." Apparently, it's difficult to write about women without resorting to sexist tropes about she-wolves and harlots controlling the men in their lives. This book would've been great without the fucking constant sexism.
In one particularly egregious example of Tremlett's attitude, he described Boleyn's first pregnancy as "calculated." Apparently, it's difficult to write about women without resorting to sexist tropes about she-wolves and harlots controlling the men in their lives. This book would've been great without the fucking constant sexism.
bibliotequeish's review against another edition
3.0
Its difficult to write books about topics and people who are so well known.
Not bringing any new information, while still creating a book people will want to read.
There are not too many books dedicated to Catherine (that I have seen/read) and I guess I just expected more.
Not bringing any new information, while still creating a book people will want to read.
There are not too many books dedicated to Catherine (that I have seen/read) and I guess I just expected more.
erinnicole980's review against another edition
3.0
This is an extremely easy to read biography all about the life of Catherine of Aragon; the first wife of King Henry the Eighth. It is written more like a novel which makes it very interesting!
ohmygodlinda's review against another edition
3.0
Deep, fascinating and lush history of a woman I knew shamefully little of despite being so familiar with her story. She was married to Henry VIII for almost 20 years, and fought his efforts to divorce her every step of the way, with cunning and skill that flummoxed him to madness. The book, like most biographies of medieva women (or possibly life in general, which is too depressing to contemplate at length) suffers from a less than thrilling conclusion, but that's a function of the sadness of Catherine's situation at her passing, and not a failing of the writer. Overall, wonderful, and wonderfully sympathetic.
adventuresofv's review
2.0
I anticipated historical fiction or some type of story. This was simply facts. Way too many inane details for me, like what each lady in waiting wears from their hair to their toenails...ummm I don't care about that. Simply not what I expected
lberestecki's review against another edition
4.0
I enjoyed reading about Catherine's life, especially her earlier years. Most books on the Tudors seem to focus on her only as the rival to Anne Boleyn, so I enjoyed seeing her as the protagonist and I learned a lot. This book is very readable nonfiction- lots of information but not overly dense. My one critique is that the author definitely seemed to present an entirely negative portrayal of Anne Boleyn instead of viewing her more neutrally.
lauren_k_elizabeth's review
3.0
I started out rather enjoying this book, but that quickly sunk as it approached and then delved into the King’s Great Matter. There was a distinct lack of nuance and analysis in a recitation of one of history’s most turbulent periods. People as significant as Thomas More, Eustace Chapuys, and the Bishop of Rochester are given minimal introductions and little explanations beyond their immediate significance to Catherine’s case. The fact that Rochester became one of Catherine’s most devoted supporters is largely glossed over; More’s long-standing friendship with Henry is essentially ignored, despite the conflict it eventually gave rise to.
I realize that this is a book that centers on Catherine and not solely on the divorce or religious upheaval of the time, but it still seems that all discussion was very surface level.
Then there were things that REALLY bothered me, such as:
•no direct mention of the death of Pope Clement VII and the ascension of Paul III, who handled the divorce/annulment VERY differently. Instead it remains vaguely as “the pope” even past the point of change in power.
•there’s a line where the gossip surround Henry and the Boleyn family is discussed and it says “He had also been told that Henry was the mother of Mary Boleyn’s child...” - the MOTHER. Henry was the MOTHER. How did that not get noticed by the author or editors?
•maybe it’s the years I spent in grad school, but it drives me nuts when there’s no footnotes or endnotes immediately available in the book, and I have to find them elsewhere.
•Catherine’s last few years are crammed into a few chapters, despite the fact that they were FULL of intrigue and back-and-forth with Henry and so much more. She was not just a prisoner wasting away in a manor for 5 years.
The last thing that bothers me is a result of my own bias, which I know and acknowledge and try to be aware of. I’ve spent years, YEARS, studying and researching Anne Boleyn, and I knew going in to this book that it’s portrayal of her would not be favorable, given that Anne was a direct rival to Catherine. However, I do feel that there could have been better nuance to the discussion of Anne than there was. This book portrays her as a shrill, nagging, harpy of a woman who was after one thing and one thing only. There’s no discussion/analysis of the desire of EVERYONE at court for a position of power and wealth, that many families happily offered up their daughter(s) to be the king’s mistress (and the Boleyns were no different). There’s no discussion of Anne’s personal ambition or that of her family; instead she is a gold-digger who was the root of almost all of Henry’s bad decision-making, which also erases all of Henry’s agency.
I realize, again, this is a book about Catherine, but it still just felt very underdeveloped in a lot of places where there was plenty of information and analysis to be had.
Started out as a strong 4, but now a 2.5.
I realize that this is a book that centers on Catherine and not solely on the divorce or religious upheaval of the time, but it still seems that all discussion was very surface level.
Then there were things that REALLY bothered me, such as:
•no direct mention of the death of Pope Clement VII and the ascension of Paul III, who handled the divorce/annulment VERY differently. Instead it remains vaguely as “the pope” even past the point of change in power.
•there’s a line where the gossip surround Henry and the Boleyn family is discussed and it says “He had also been told that Henry was the mother of Mary Boleyn’s child...” - the MOTHER. Henry was the MOTHER. How did that not get noticed by the author or editors?
•maybe it’s the years I spent in grad school, but it drives me nuts when there’s no footnotes or endnotes immediately available in the book, and I have to find them elsewhere.
•Catherine’s last few years are crammed into a few chapters, despite the fact that they were FULL of intrigue and back-and-forth with Henry and so much more. She was not just a prisoner wasting away in a manor for 5 years.
The last thing that bothers me is a result of my own bias, which I know and acknowledge and try to be aware of. I’ve spent years, YEARS, studying and researching Anne Boleyn, and I knew going in to this book that it’s portrayal of her would not be favorable, given that Anne was a direct rival to Catherine. However, I do feel that there could have been better nuance to the discussion of Anne than there was. This book portrays her as a shrill, nagging, harpy of a woman who was after one thing and one thing only. There’s no discussion/analysis of the desire of EVERYONE at court for a position of power and wealth, that many families happily offered up their daughter(s) to be the king’s mistress (and the Boleyns were no different). There’s no discussion of Anne’s personal ambition or that of her family; instead she is a gold-digger who was the root of almost all of Henry’s bad decision-making, which also erases all of Henry’s agency.
I realize, again, this is a book about Catherine, but it still just felt very underdeveloped in a lot of places where there was plenty of information and analysis to be had.
Started out as a strong 4, but now a 2.5.