John's Reviews > The Tudors
The Tudors
by G.J. Meyer, Robin Sachs
by G.J. Meyer, Robin Sachs
Historically accurate perhaps, though incredibly slanted.
Henry VIII was a bully/monster/tyrant. Period. End of Story. Most of the coverage of his reign focused on the men around him, and their roles in enforcing the break with Rome, as well as persecution of monks during the dissolution of the monasteries.
Edward VI was a fervent Protestant, but ... that was okay as he truly respected his sister Mary (in spite of their religious differences) - not a syllable to acknowledge the fact that (according to other books), he genuinely liked Elizabeth.
Mary was a well-meaning, tragic figure, in spite of all those unfortunate burnings, which, yes, were ultimately her responsibility, but weren't really so bad, especially compared to the brutality of her father and sister.
Elizabeth was Bad News - no two ways about it. So bad, that it might've been better for Jane Grey to have remained, and her heirs to follow, even if that meant sacrificing Mary in the process. Seriously! Meyer does his best to portray Mary Queen of Scots as a sensible, trustworthy counter-figure; the wrong chick got the chop (conveniently omitting that although Walsingham gave her the bait, she fell for it). We hear how the Jesuits sneaking into England were there only to minister to the oppressed minority, no threat at all. The author conveniently neglects to mention that by the 1580's, the Pope was crying for Elizabeth's head, strongly encouraging her assassination. There was indeed anti-Catholic sentiment among (at least some of) Elizabeth's advisers, but Meyer would have the reader believe that was entirely the result of xenophobia and bigotry. Regarding the St. Bartholomew's Day slaughter of French Huguenots, which influenced Elizabeth in favor of those advisers, Meyer maintains "they asked for it in displaying their wealth" (paraphrased).
As a rough parallel: Henry VIII = Reagan (bad!); Edward VI = Bush daddy (bad, but you can't help feeling a little sorry for him); Mary = Clinton (good intentions, but things didn't work out as well as they should've); and Elizabeth as Bush Jr. - just plain awful, including a sly comparison of her speech at Tilbury to the Armada troops (play acting), and her refusal to care for the returning diseased veterans.
Now you know what to expect.
Henry VIII was a bully/monster/tyrant. Period. End of Story. Most of the coverage of his reign focused on the men around him, and their roles in enforcing the break with Rome, as well as persecution of monks during the dissolution of the monasteries.
Edward VI was a fervent Protestant, but ... that was okay as he truly respected his sister Mary (in spite of their religious differences) - not a syllable to acknowledge the fact that (according to other books), he genuinely liked Elizabeth.
Mary was a well-meaning, tragic figure, in spite of all those unfortunate burnings, which, yes, were ultimately her responsibility, but weren't really so bad, especially compared to the brutality of her father and sister.
Elizabeth was Bad News - no two ways about it. So bad, that it might've been better for Jane Grey to have remained, and her heirs to follow, even if that meant sacrificing Mary in the process. Seriously! Meyer does his best to portray Mary Queen of Scots as a sensible, trustworthy counter-figure; the wrong chick got the chop (conveniently omitting that although Walsingham gave her the bait, she fell for it). We hear how the Jesuits sneaking into England were there only to minister to the oppressed minority, no threat at all. The author conveniently neglects to mention that by the 1580's, the Pope was crying for Elizabeth's head, strongly encouraging her assassination. There was indeed anti-Catholic sentiment among (at least some of) Elizabeth's advisers, but Meyer would have the reader believe that was entirely the result of xenophobia and bigotry. Regarding the St. Bartholomew's Day slaughter of French Huguenots, which influenced Elizabeth in favor of those advisers, Meyer maintains "they asked for it in displaying their wealth" (paraphrased).
As a rough parallel: Henry VIII = Reagan (bad!); Edward VI = Bush daddy (bad, but you can't help feeling a little sorry for him); Mary = Clinton (good intentions, but things didn't work out as well as they should've); and Elizabeth as Bush Jr. - just plain awful, including a sly comparison of her speech at Tilbury to the Armada troops (play acting), and her refusal to care for the returning diseased veterans.
Now you know what to expect.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Tudors.
sign in »
Comments (showing 1-3 of 3) (3 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Alisa
(new)
Jan 05, 2011 03:19pm
Thanks. You just saved me from buying a copy of this book and then being incredibly annoyed by it!
reply
|
flag
*


