One of the many things I love about reading history (and there are MANY MANY MANY things) is that I really have no worries about spoilers. I can tell you whatever I want about this book and it won't ruin it for you anymore than reading a wikipedia page. Because the fun in a history book is in the details and how the author sews these details together in to a quilt (or a tapestry depending on your choice of metaphor).

Before reading this book, I knew nothing of Queen Joanna of Naples. I had heard her referenced in side long glances in other books, but certainly nothing in depth. I enjoyed going into a book without my mass of preconceived notions.

Joanna inherited Naples from her grandfather. Being a ruling queen was never an easy thing in the middle ages, but J had it twice as bad. She was queen with disputed title. Turns out the Naples ruling family had skipped the law of primogeniture when they gave the throne to her granddad, and now that line of the family wanted it back. Had Joanna been a guy, they probably just would have dealt with the situation, but a queen was essentially (at the time) weaker than a king. So why not strike when the iron was hot. This led to a compromise and Joanna's first (of three) ill-fated marriages. (Her fourth marriage was actually pretty decent because she married a relative nobody.)

You know how you have the Henry VIII mantra, Divorced, Beheaded, Died...

With Joanna you have, Murdered, Bastard, Insane, Nobody.

I think Joanna wins.

The book is well-written (I've generally liked books by Nancy Goldstone). So you're probably wondering why this didn't get more stars.

To be honest, I don't know. I never really got the feel of Joanna--and thus never got swept away by her story. Whether this is the fault of the author, my reading, or the lack of evidence, I am not sure. At times Joanna seemed little more than a stage prop with the rest of the world whirling around her. Even minor characters were more interesting (especially this Hawkwood mercenary guy). I think Joanna could have been replaced by a cardboard cutout--and I'm not sure I would have noticed. For those not aware: this is not a good sign.

So yes read it if you're intrigued by the time period, and maybe you'll enjoy it more than me. I'm perfectly content to find that the reader was lacking rather than the book. But if you find yourself kinda "meh" on it, call me up. I'll loan you some Garrett Mattingly and we'll cleanse our reading palates.