What do you think?
Rate this book
Gloriana Nascent: An Alternate Tudor History
Henry VIII is dead, and history will never be the same. The year is 1536. Three claimants vie for his Anne Boleyn, who fights for her young daughter Elizabeth; Mary Tudor, who sees the hand of Providence at work; and Henry FitzRoy, the king's illegitimate but recognised son. Factions form and battles are fought over who will win the Crown. Will this war tear the kingdom apart, or will a ruler emerge victorious who can unite England?
230 pages, Paperback
Published July 23, 2018
20 people are currently reading
44 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
October 6, 2018
I have read plenty of bad historical novels without reviewing, but I can't let this one go simply because the premise, that Henry VIII died in 1536 without a male heir, prompting a succession crisis, is so good yet so wasted. Lancaster could have done so much and completely turned the Tudor period upside down, but instead we are treated to flat characters who do not think, act, or speak like their real-life counterparts, and a paper-thin plot that barely scrapes the surface of what could have been a fantastic alternate reality.
There are none of the details of sight, sound, smell, or customs that make historical fiction come alive. Where is the religion? Oh, yes, Mary prays a lot, but I don't see her holding a single rosary. Would the Dissolution of the Monasteries have happened without Henry? Anne Boleyn may have had Lutheran leanings, but she certainly didn't have the power or the popularity to push through such a major overhaul of English religion. Speaking of which, does she not pray to God or have any religious beliefs whatsoever? Does none of the London court?
And where are the characters who should be there? Where are Mary Boleyn, George Boleyn's wife Jane, and others?
There's a lot of talk about securing Elizabeth's right to the throne, but very little practical action. What do you do if you have an infant claimant to the Crown, in London, in Whitehall Palace? Don't you remove her to the Tower royal apartments for her safety? Don't you take steps to have her crowned and anointed by Archbishop Cranmer to keep one step ahead of rival factions? Anne Boleyn, remember, wasn't popular with the English people, and Catherine of Aragon, who was, has just died. Anne was widely considered to be a witch and a "goggle-eyed whore." Princess Mary, on the other hand, was very popular; she didn't lose her popularity with the English until after her disastrous Spanish marriage and the burnings of English Protestant heretics. It should be a lot harder for Anne and her family to secure Elizabeth's rights. So why aren't we seeing Londoners demonstrating against the Boleyns? Why aren't we seeing foreign ambassadors (apart from Eustace Chapuys) snubbing Elizabeth and scrubbing the possibility of a foreign betrothal for the young queen? Why isn't Anne wearing formal mourning for Henry and trying her utmost to win over popular support? Why isn't she more afraid and uncertain? We're told she is, but then we never see her fear, her stress. And then she does the single dumbest thing she possibly could, something so reckless that it would have been completely out of character for the RL Anne Boleyn that I wanted to hurl my Kindle across the room. No, Anne. No, no, no.
What would have catapulted this book above and beyond is if Lancaster had had Anne carry her third pregnancy to term and actually delivered a live male heir, and then run with that idea. Because young Elizabeth, who we hardly see at all in this book, is not going to turn out to be the Queen Elizabeth I we know from history; it was the hardships of her childhood under Henry and the revolving door of her stepmothers, and the subsequent trials of the Seymour affair and Mary's suspicions of her that shaped her character. Without that, she isn't the same Elizabeth. Not to mention that the whole idea of female rule was so foreign, so generally abhorrent, that the real Elizabeth negotiated her queenship by promoting herself as a special kind of king--with the body of a woman, but the soul of a man. Instead, Anne Boleyn seems to be promoting an anachronistic kind of feminism. At least Mary realizes the order of the day and sees the need to find a husband. I was not expecting the choice she made--it was very interesting--but Lancaster went nowhere with it. Why not have Mary's pregnancy come to term and her deliver a male heir? Why not shake things up a bit? Throwing Henry Fitzroy late into the mix does nothing. He has no chapters of his own; he doesn't even matter in the long run.
In the hands of a better writer, this novel could have been epic. As it is, it's a huge disappointment.
There are none of the details of sight, sound, smell, or customs that make historical fiction come alive. Where is the religion? Oh, yes, Mary prays a lot, but I don't see her holding a single rosary. Would the Dissolution of the Monasteries have happened without Henry? Anne Boleyn may have had Lutheran leanings, but she certainly didn't have the power or the popularity to push through such a major overhaul of English religion. Speaking of which, does she not pray to God or have any religious beliefs whatsoever? Does none of the London court?
And where are the characters who should be there? Where are Mary Boleyn, George Boleyn's wife Jane, and others?
There's a lot of talk about securing Elizabeth's right to the throne, but very little practical action. What do you do if you have an infant claimant to the Crown, in London, in Whitehall Palace? Don't you remove her to the Tower royal apartments for her safety? Don't you take steps to have her crowned and anointed by Archbishop Cranmer to keep one step ahead of rival factions? Anne Boleyn, remember, wasn't popular with the English people, and Catherine of Aragon, who was, has just died. Anne was widely considered to be a witch and a "goggle-eyed whore." Princess Mary, on the other hand, was very popular; she didn't lose her popularity with the English until after her disastrous Spanish marriage and the burnings of English Protestant heretics. It should be a lot harder for Anne and her family to secure Elizabeth's rights. So why aren't we seeing Londoners demonstrating against the Boleyns? Why aren't we seeing foreign ambassadors (apart from Eustace Chapuys) snubbing Elizabeth and scrubbing the possibility of a foreign betrothal for the young queen? Why isn't Anne wearing formal mourning for Henry and trying her utmost to win over popular support? Why isn't she more afraid and uncertain? We're told she is, but then we never see her fear, her stress. And then she does the single dumbest thing she possibly could, something so reckless that it would have been completely out of character for the RL Anne Boleyn that I wanted to hurl my Kindle across the room. No, Anne. No, no, no.
What would have catapulted this book above and beyond is if Lancaster had had Anne carry her third pregnancy to term and actually delivered a live male heir, and then run with that idea. Because young Elizabeth, who we hardly see at all in this book, is not going to turn out to be the Queen Elizabeth I we know from history; it was the hardships of her childhood under Henry and the revolving door of her stepmothers, and the subsequent trials of the Seymour affair and Mary's suspicions of her that shaped her character. Without that, she isn't the same Elizabeth. Not to mention that the whole idea of female rule was so foreign, so generally abhorrent, that the real Elizabeth negotiated her queenship by promoting herself as a special kind of king--with the body of a woman, but the soul of a man. Instead, Anne Boleyn seems to be promoting an anachronistic kind of feminism. At least Mary realizes the order of the day and sees the need to find a husband. I was not expecting the choice she made--it was very interesting--but Lancaster went nowhere with it. Why not have Mary's pregnancy come to term and her deliver a male heir? Why not shake things up a bit? Throwing Henry Fitzroy late into the mix does nothing. He has no chapters of his own; he doesn't even matter in the long run.
In the hands of a better writer, this novel could have been epic. As it is, it's a huge disappointment.
December 31, 2019
It was good. It was interesting and in my opinion, could have been so much better.
Henry VIII - even as he has started his affair with Jane Seymour while Anne Boleyn is pregnant - has to prove his manly kingliness and joust in a tournament. His horse falls and rolls over him inflicting devastating injuries that he eventually succumbs to. This is the basis of this piece of alternative historical fiction.
Of course, Anne loses the child - a boy - even as she has summoned her 2-year-old daughter, Elizabeth, and the new queen to court. Of course, Mary believes she is to be the next queen despite her removal from the line of succession by Henry. And there is also a recognized illegitimate son, Henry FitzRoy, to provide a third claimant to the throne. So there are numerous opportunities for changing history.
Unfortunately, the author doesn't seem to do much beyond giving John Dudley (future father-in-law to the Nine-Day Queen, Jane Gray) the chance to tup the Queen Mother, Anne, and give Mary a loving husband before she dies - likely from giving birth to a stillborn child on the side of the road as well as the emotional shock of losing her loving husband.
I could think of at least three opportunities created and basically tossed aside -
- Anne not miscarry after Henry's death and see how the council and court waits to see if the child she carries is an infant king (maybe the wait would have been too long to provide an interesting storyline)
- Fitzroy wasn't an idiot that accidentally killed himself instead has to eventually make a choice between himself and the final claimant to see who got the throne.
- Jane Seymour to be pregnant from her private time with Henry VIII. But that likely would have eventually ended with her death in the Tower - by accident or by deliberation.
Yes, it was interesting to see what Lancaster picked to go forward with. Historically, both daughters had to deal with the constant threat of treachery and death during their father's remaining years and it molded who they were as did the religious conflicts between Catholic and Anglican once they each ascended to the English throne.
Thinking I may have missed something, I did look up the title:
Gloriana was one of Elizabeth I's nicknames
Nascent means beginning to show signs of future potential.
If she was referring to Elizabeth, the toddler was more interested in playing with her mother's pearls rather than what any of the council had to say.
2019-188
Henry VIII - even as he has started his affair with Jane Seymour while Anne Boleyn is pregnant - has to prove his manly kingliness and joust in a tournament. His horse falls and rolls over him inflicting devastating injuries that he eventually succumbs to. This is the basis of this piece of alternative historical fiction.
Of course, Anne loses the child - a boy - even as she has summoned her 2-year-old daughter, Elizabeth, and the new queen to court. Of course, Mary believes she is to be the next queen despite her removal from the line of succession by Henry. And there is also a recognized illegitimate son, Henry FitzRoy, to provide a third claimant to the throne. So there are numerous opportunities for changing history.
Unfortunately, the author doesn't seem to do much beyond giving John Dudley (future father-in-law to the Nine-Day Queen, Jane Gray) the chance to tup the Queen Mother, Anne, and give Mary a loving husband before she dies - likely from giving birth to a stillborn child on the side of the road as well as the emotional shock of losing her loving husband.
I could think of at least three opportunities created and basically tossed aside -
- Anne not miscarry after Henry's death and see how the council and court waits to see if the child she carries is an infant king (maybe the wait would have been too long to provide an interesting storyline)
- Fitzroy wasn't an idiot that accidentally killed himself instead has to eventually make a choice between himself and the final claimant to see who got the throne.
- Jane Seymour to be pregnant from her private time with Henry VIII. But that likely would have eventually ended with her death in the Tower - by accident or by deliberation.
Yes, it was interesting to see what Lancaster picked to go forward with. Historically, both daughters had to deal with the constant threat of treachery and death during their father's remaining years and it molded who they were as did the religious conflicts between Catholic and Anglican once they each ascended to the English throne.
Thinking I may have missed something, I did look up the title:
Gloriana was one of Elizabeth I's nicknames
Nascent means beginning to show signs of future potential.
If she was referring to Elizabeth, the toddler was more interested in playing with her mother's pearls rather than what any of the council had to say.
2019-188
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 10, 2018
I love to read about the English royalty and loved this story with great characters, romance and lots of intrigue. Three different factions were fighting for the crown when Henry was killed while jousting. Each thought they had the legitimate claim, but only one could win. It was sad at all the deaths and how both Henry's daughter and his wife lost a child prematurely during this trying time. I voluntarily reviewed an advanced reader copy from Booksprout
November 22, 2018
The Story of Anne Boylan but twisted history.
This story is a great read on how if some decisions weren't made and things didn't occur how history would be different.
It got me excited to go back and read what true history happened during this time and then dive into the twist.
If you love history you got to see this twist- it answers some of those what if questions.
I received a free copy of this book via Booksprout and am voluntarily leaving a review.
This story is a great read on how if some decisions weren't made and things didn't occur how history would be different.
It got me excited to go back and read what true history happened during this time and then dive into the twist.
If you love history you got to see this twist- it answers some of those what if questions.
I received a free copy of this book via Booksprout and am voluntarily leaving a review.
August 11, 2018
This is a twist on the history of king henry VIII. He has died and there are three who want to take over the throne. Who will win the throne and how would it change the history we now know. A new read
I received a free copy of this book via Booksprout and am voluntarily leaving a review.
I received a free copy of this book via Booksprout and am voluntarily leaving a review.
July 13, 2019
The only good thing about this book was it was a short read. Boring and Predictable. Very Disappointed.
February 19, 2024
Good premise, poor execution. The idea is creative, but all the characters are caricatures. They're utterly predictable almost tropes: the conniving whore, the religious fanatic. Except that the religious fanatic historically speaking has one of the best educations a gal can get in the early Renaissance, and the understanding of Catholic medieval religiosity is poor (almost comically so). Some editor finally told her to stop telegraphing everything the characters think/plan, but someone also told her "you're out of words wrap it up" and so it got an abrupt and unsatisfying ending. I almost abandoned it but I forced myself to finish so I could keep up with my reading challenge.
August 2, 2020
Unlike many alternate history books that go along feeling predictable with expecting directions, this one doesn't. I have always wondered what might have happened if Henry the Eight had died in his fateful jousting accident, and this book does give the reader an exciting "What If..." tale of the aftermath of his death. Listening to the audio book version of this, while no audio drama, was worth it.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews