The Stolen Crown: The Secret Marriage that Forever Changed the Fate of England

by Susan Higginbotham

Trapped in the Wars of the Roses, one woman finds herself sister to the queen...and traitor to the crown

Katherine Woodville's sister never gave her a choice. A happy girl of modest means, Kate hardly expected to become a maker of kings. But when her sister impulsively marries King Edward IV in secret, Katherine's life is no longer hers to control...

Genres: Historical Fiction, Historical, Fiction, British Literature, Medieval, 15th Century, Royalty

384 pages, Paperback

First published March 1, 2010

About the author

Welcome! I write historical fiction and nonfiction set in medieval and Tudor England and, most recently, nineteenth-century America.

As a writer of biographical fiction, one of my main goals is to avoid the stereotypes, myths, and misconceptions that have gathered around historical figures over the centuries. At the same time, I strive to remain true to known historical facts and to the mores of the times in which my characters lived. I use both primary sources and modern historical research to bring my characters to life.

Reviews

[Misfit · Rating 4 out of 5]

(4.5)

The Stolen Crown begins is told from the alternating POV of Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham and his wife Katherine Woodville. Henry (Harry) was married as a young child to Katherine, younger sister of Elizabeth Woodville - Queen of England and wife to Edward IV (no small feat for those *grasping* Woodvilles). When they grow older Harry and Katherine are able to establish a strong marriage, but Harry wants more power and position at court than Edward is willing to give him and he chafes at the bit, which only exacerbates his dilema. Harry is on firmer ground with Edward's younger brother Richard and when Edward dies and Richard thinks he can take it all.......

This period and it's history is much too complicated to try to spell out in a review - either you know the basics going in and don't need a rehash or if you don't I'd just have your eyes glazing over trying to explain it all. What I enjoyed most about this one was the *fresh* look at the period from the POV of Harry and Kate and how his rebellion against Richard III might have come about. I just loved Kate's voice and her dry sense of humor, as well as seeing them both as children and then adults caught up in a political storm beyond their control.

I loved the way the author brought some humor into the York/Lancaster differences, as well as busting some of those commonly held myths - Katherine being much older than Harry as well as the Woodville women being practicing witches. I appreciate that Higginbotham doesn't try to muddle her story with *authentic* period language - no "woe is me" to be found in this book (but that's a good thing). You also won't find a saintly-pure-as-the-driven-snow Richard as he's been painted by recently by some of our latest and *cough* greatest historical fiction authors, although this Ricardian may not always agree with the author's interpretations :p

Impeccably researched, the author mentions in her notes what is fact, what is surmised from the known facts as well as those mysteries that will probably never be solved like the Princes in the Tower. Highly recommended for any fan of this period as well as a good eye-opener for those new to it, this should give you a good grounding without overwhelming you at once. My all time favorite is still Sharon Penman's fabulous The Sunne in Splendour. 4.5/5 stars.

[BAM doesn’t answer to her real name · Rating 3 out of 5]

The original Game of Thrones told from the POV of the 2nd Duke and Duchess. The Wars of the Roses, to me, was the cruelest of the English wars, killing the entire male lineage of noble families.

[Marquise · Rating 1 out of 5]

While I'm reading, I never think of how many stars I'll award the book I have in my hands. That's one way of setting oneself up for disappointment as well as often premature; best to reserve the final judgment till finished, if one doesn't drop the book first.

However, there's a first time for everything, and this was it for me. Just a couple chapters in, I was already captivated by the story and the characters, which were so unusual. A Wars of the Roses novel that has as narrators Katherine Woodville, youngest sister to Elizabeth Woodville, and Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham and first cousin to Edward IV and Richard III? That novel exists, seriously? Count me in! I wanted to read that, and rushed to grab a copy out of the library, and sat to enjoy it. It didn't disappoint with the opening chapters, and as Kate's and Harry's voices started to become familiar to me, and become lovable, showing a side of the conflicts and politics from a standpoint not seen in Historical Fiction, that of the Woodville family, I was quite happy and thought this book would get as a minimum 4 stars and a place in my Keepers shelf . . .

The hopes I build up for myself with so little! The Stolen Crown didn't live up to them, and now, when I've finished and have had time to digest it, it's hardly earned more than one star from me.

What happened? What went so wrong that spoilt the story? This is one of those cases when I know exactly at what point and in what chapter the story took a nosedive and started to fall down and down and down: the scene where poor mad Henry VI tells a "prophecy" to Harry Buckingham upon meeting Jasper and Henry Tudor that the latter will one day be King of England. Yes, I'm aware that there's a historical document telling that Henry VI supposedly said that, though not in such a context. And? It's still clumsy, awkward, and poorly written. Readers aren't idiots, they know Henry Tudor will become Henry VII some years later, and to use a "prophecy" by an old insane king to herald such a future event is downright insulting to our intelligence no matter what documents say, which can always be fabricated anyway. Look at it this way: if some boot-licking courtier had left a document swearing that Mad King Harry had said young Henry Tudor would be king decades before that happened, when Edward IV was still king, would you take it as reliable? And if so, would you use it in a novel presenting it as fact and expect your readers to roll with it unquestioningly? I doubt many would.

I certainly didn't, and from then onwards, the novel acquired a distinctly "reactionary" narrative that seriously harmed the story and the characterisation, especially by the end. What do I mean by "reactionary"? That the author, who by her own admission is no fan of Richard of Gloucester and styles herself as objective in all things related to him, in reality has chosen to go to the other extreme instead of presenting a balanced view of the then duke and future king, which seems to answer more to a wish to go against the grain than to be objective. How do I know this? Because if you're arguing you're objective, then you don't go for depicting the worst choice in deed or behaviour automatically. You present good and bad, not bad and questionable only.

I'll give some examples, not without warning you beforehand that there'll be spoilers. When Harry and Richard are talking about the Woodvilles, the author chooses to make Richard's objection to his brother's political family be one of merely rank. They're commoners, parvenus. So? Aren't you arguing that Richard is "a man of his times"? Then why do you go for presenting him as a mere snob that thumbs his nose at the Woodville clan for being common, given that he's a royal and any high-ranking noble would think the same about commoners? Modern attitude, that one. And it's interesting that the rest of the York family are rather congenial with the Woodvilles . . . except Richard (and to a minor extent, Cecily Neville). That was compounded with one off-putting characterisation element, when Higginbotham chooses to have Harry Stafford harbour homoerotic feelings for Richard. Those who've read the novel will know what scene I mean, because it's explicit enough. Coming from an author who has defensive views on the characterisation of Edward II with his favourites Gaveston and Despenser in HF, such a choice for Buckingham and Richard is curious, and disingenuous as well, given that there's no evidence to back her choice.

Then, by mid-book, the writing starts to become clumsier and more hurried. Higginbotham no longer seems to be telling a story but aiming to pack in as many facts and more facts as per the historical records before the book is over. The pace becomes more and more rushed, and the dialogue also loses in favour of inner monologue and first-person tell, tell, tell. The language in this novel is rather modern all along, and in principle I don't have any issue with modern language for historical novels, but I draw a line in the sand for what is "too modern" to the point it kicks you out of immersion. And this book crosses that line as regards dialogue. For example, how much more "modern" can you make Richard sound when you have him say stuff like "the operative word here is . . ." or "Holy shit!"? An English king of 500 years past, talking like an American.

If Kate and Harry Buckingham had started off as compelling and sympathetic, they progressively become more stupid. And it's not out of character progression as much as due to authorial choice. And what curious choices they are. You recall the reason why Richard became king? Here, the Eleanor Talbot betrothal is presented as something Lady Eleanor's sister reveals to Katherine Woodville whilst drunk at a banquet, and she in turn tells Harry, who in turn tells Richard, who . . . enfin. The author makes sure to establish that the marriage never happened, it's just a dalliance and nobody has proof, but Richard chooses to use the lie to usurp the throne, and this is one direct cause for executing Hastings. Funnily, Harry Buckingham goes along with the usurpation out of his hero-worship of Richard and against the so wise warnings from Kate. He becomes violent and a rapist in defence of his idolised king, until said idolised king flippantly tells him he's ordered his two nephews be killed. Then, and only then, is when the blinders come off Harry's eyes and he realises what a monster he's been serving, and rebels.

Of course, he loses and is beheaded for his pains. And his silly wife argues that he "meant no harm." Seriously? He rebelled against the king, which is high treason, and you say he meant no harm to him? That's just one example of the U-turn the characters take by the end, so inconsistently. If the author wanted to paint the Woodvilles positively, I think she failed despite her obvious efforts to characterise them sympathetically, because they come across as a bunch of turncoats who hop happily from Lancaster to York to Tudor, all the while telling themselves they have no ambition and aren't the social climbers everyone thinks they are. Kate Woodville, for one, closes two chapters with wry allusions to carnal activities with Jasper Tudor and her third husband, with little self-reflection.

I have no issues when Richard is characterised as darker or greyer; it can be very interesting and refreshing. I do often find some Ricardians irritating with their worshipful whitewashing, and whilst I remain unconvinced that the Princes in the Tower were in effect murdered on orders by Richard III, when it comes to fiction I can accept such an idea when it's presented convincingly, for the sake of the narrative or the plot choices of the author. But Higginbotham didn't do it convincingly, and she really went to the other extreme in every sense, and that's blackwashing, which to me is just as questionable as whitewashing. In this novel, Higginbotham has made Richard be the one that personally murdered Henry VI, for example, smothering him with a pillow in his sleep, and she also makes him talk unmoved about George of Clarence's execution, even smiling and making a joke about how his brother George died, talking about which titles of Clarence's will be his once he's dead, and even tells Stafford that he could've saved George by intervening to Edward IV in his favour if he had wanted, which of course he didn't. Furthermore, he's the one who suggests to the Duke of Buckingham to annul his marriage to the Woodville woman, whom of course Harry loves to bits, and bastardise his children. On what grounds? Oh, who she is, basically.

Probably you can see now why I say this is reactionary rather than objective counter-argumentation through fiction: if the usual Ricardian or WoR fiction goes for one depiction, the author of The Stolen Crown goes for the exact opposite. And it's fine if you want to do that, but when you combat extremes by going to the other extreme, then that's shooting yourself in the foot in my view.

Bah, not really worth it expanding further even though there's more stuff in this novel I found objectionable. Suffice to say it was a novel that started well and fell from grace by the sheer weight of its numerous flaws.

[Orsolya · Rating 3 out of 5]

Cousin against cousin, brother against brother… The civil wars now known as the “Wars of the Roses” are nothing short of intriguing. Susan Higginbotham explore this period of English history in, “The Stolen Crown”.

“The Stolen Crown” alternates first-person narratives of Katherine Woodville (sister to Queen Elizabeth Woodville) and her husband, Harry Stafford, the Duke of Buckingham during the turbulent times leading to the Battle of Bosworth. As usual in Higginbotham’s novels; the beginning of “The Stolen Crown” is quite slow and uneventful. It always seems that Higginbotham takes some time to find her stride (in this case, it takes until approximately page 100).

During this initial slow pace, the plot is not brought to life and there is too much talking about events versus living them. Higginbotham is simply too focused on setting the backdrop instead of livening up the current story. In fact, she is guilty of the, “As you know, Bob”-style describing people/events in “The Stolen Crown” (something that she complains about, herself).

On the other hand, “The Stolen Crown” is more history than fiction (another common Higginbotham trait) which is great for those readers who do not enjoy the extensive fluff which laces many historical fiction novels of today. Higginbotham’s language/text is also historically accurate and beautifully written but with an accessible, modern twist.

Another strong suit of “The Stolen Crown” is the portrayal of Katherine. Even though Katherine begins the novel as a small child, her voice isn’t either too childlike or too mature; with a believable medium. This is sometimes marred by all of the ‘talking’ (as mentioned earlier) which prevents the reader from truly getting to know Katherine but it is still well-done.

As the novel progresses, it is Harry, though, who takes over the show. His point of view becomes stronger with Higginbotham incorporating solid bites of why things turn out the way they do for those who know the history of the times. Thankfully, this isn’t overly foreshadowed and thus, the plot isn’t inhibited. In addition, there are occasional humorous moments which result in chuckles and smirks, showing Higginbotham’s writing personality (a mixture of history with some sarcasm).

The second half of “The Stolen Crown” is much more compelling with a faster pace. This can be attributed to the focus on Harry (plus the time period described). Although the novel would be better if the entire piece was equally moving; the story harkens along with anticipation and suspense at this point.

The last quarter of “The Stolen Crown” contains some historical liberties but instead of being fluffy or overly dramatic as s shock value tool; they are instead used by Higginbotham to explore possible theories and are therefore well-executed. Not to mention, the focus isn’t on sex (ahem, other HF novels!). Also gratifying for Ricardian readers is that “The Stolen Crown” doesn’t portray Richard III as an innocent angel but not as a Humpback either.

Sadly, the conclusion of the novel is quite rushed and a bit lost in substance feeling as though Higginbotham ‘had’ to express more facts before the pages slipped away leaving a somewhat weak ending. This is countered by a splendid “Author’s Note” detailing the novel’s historical liberties, debunking common myths, and dropping interesting factoids; leaving much to ponder for both expert and novice readers.

Overall, “The Stolen Crown” is an interesting take on the Wars of the Roses, bringing the Duke of Buckingham to life. Whereas before I hate him; now I view him as a person. However, the novel isn’t as compelling to me as others I have read so far from the author which I gave 4 stars to (and therefore explains my rating here). Despite this, “The Stolen Crown” is still rather good and suggested for all readers interested in the period.

[Cher 'N Books · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 stars = Fantastic and easy to recommend.

“To those who died in 1483…”

An engaging historical fiction story based on England’s 15th century real life version of the Game of Thrones, the War of the Roses. Seeing the events from a fresh perspective, it is dual narrated by minor players in the war, the Duke and Duchess of Buckingham, Henry (Harry) Stafford and Katherine Woodville, in alternating chapters told in the first person. The story starts when they are children before their prepubescent wedding and follows them for the next two decades. Both POVs are equally interesting and have distinct voices.

At the end the author gives a thorough explanation of what was known, what was fictionalized and what is disputed by historians. I was already aware of most of these historical events, but this novelized version really brought the characters and events to life in a vivid way, without being dry or overdramatized. King Richard III is mostly balanced - coming across as a complex morally grey character, unlike many novels that paint him as all good or evil.

This was the second novel I have read by Higginbotham, and the best one so far. Even though highlight worthy prose was sparse, she has an excellent way of blending history and fiction that results in the immersive telling of a good story.
---------------------
First Sentence: You might think that the last night of a condemned traitor would be a rather solitary affair, but you would think wrong, for the last couple of hours have been bustling with people coming and going.

Favorite Quote: “Go to the devil Harry." I turned away, then looked back over my shoulder. "But you already have, haven't you?”

[C.E. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Why is it any take on Richard III and his older brother must demonize someone? SKPenmantagged. Buckingham, this one paints Richard3 as wholy responsible for all evils. From what I have read, the way the boys vanished was damaging to Richard, so why would he do it so stupidly? He was noted for his caution in most else, tho he did have a temper...yet he was trusted with his nieces by their mother, which argues against her believing he killed her sons. Buckingham was known to be a hothead and not asrute politically, so he makes a better suspect, and he DID rebel, to either claim the throne himself or for Tudor....in any case, neither man can be exonerated or blamed entirely on what is known.

as for whether or not Ed4 had a previous betrothal that negated his marriage... he was a womanizer extraordinaire, and it is just as probable as not.

For a take on this period, SKPenman with Sunne in Splendour did far better and was more convincing in her interpretation, IMO. I think her scholarship is better. Always a winner with me.

[Annette · Rating 3 out of 5]

In 1460, Harry becomes the second Duke of Buckingham, heir to one of the richest estates in the realm.

In 1464, King Edward IV, the Duke of York, marries Kate’s sister (Elizabeth Woodville known as Bessie) in secret due to a fact that Bessie’s father was no more than a knight, which is not useful at time of war (where instead alliances between countries should have been set up to avoid those wars.) And another fact that Bessie’s first husband who died at the second battle of St Albans was from the House of Lancaster, enemy of the House of York. After the death of her husband, their father switched alliances from the House of Lancaster to the House of York.

At Eltham Palace, Kate meets young Harry, whom she later marries.

I was interested in this read as I’m not familiar with this aspect of history, King Edward getting married in secret. Plus the story of Kate and Harry seemed to be interesting as well. However, the style of writing is my dilemma. A lot of historical figures and facts presented as explanatory, which doesn’t make the read engaging. At many parts the story is heavy with dialogue, which doesn’t move the story forward.

@FB/BestHistoricalFiction

[Maja - BibliophiliaDK ✨ · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was quite pleasantly surprised by this book. Especially after having just read Philippa Gegory's 'The Red Queen' on the exact same subject. I really enjoyed how the relationship between Katherine and Harry was portraied, which was quite the opposite of what it usually is (and also was in 'The Red Queen' I might add). I was also really glad when I read the author's note, which is definitely not something that I usually do. But this time, since I don't really know all that much about the Duke of Buckingham, I felt that I wanted to know how much was truth and how much was fiction. What I read in this note really amazed me; I found that Higginbotham had been quite thorough in her research and that she even went so far as to post some of the other theories except for just her own believes. It was quite refreshing. The only things that bothered me about this book was the title - because this is a book about Kate and Harry, but the title refers to Edward and Bessie. And the catch frase, 'The Secret Marriage that Forever Changed the Fate of England', was never really proved. At least I for one didn't see, in this book, how their marriage changed the the fate of England. Forever.

[Mimi · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really enjoyed the viewpoint of this book - Kate Woodville. By choosing a Woodville relative, Higginbotham was able to tell the story of Richard III from inside his circle. I enjoyed the book, but did find that it was not a quick read.

[Sensitivemuse · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, the book started off a little too slow for me and although it was interesting to read about their lives, I found it not as interesting as some other historical fiction novels I have read in the past. What nearly threw me off of this book was the abundant number of characters, and the majority of them having the same name. So, it was hard for me to figure out who was who. There is a character page in the beginning of the book, detailing who's who in each family and how they are related. It's a lot of information to take and I would have preferred it in family tree format (it's presented as one long list). It did seem overwhelming for me and keeping the characters straight is difficult in this novel. I think one would have to be rather familiar with the history (Wars of the Roses, the Reigns of Edward IV and Richard III, and the Princes in the Tower) to actually grasp the characters and the main events in the storyline. I am not familiar with it, I'm sure if I was, my enjoyment of the novel would be magnified tenfold.

However, I did not give up and continued reading - as I do have a love for history and although the plot didn't seem to go nowhere, it did pick up the pace halfway through the novel. Especially events after the death of Edward IV, this is where the story gets a lot more interesting. The narration from Harry dominates most of the time but you get an interesting point of view of events (like the Princes in the Tower). It's hard not to like him. I thought at first he was just a normal spoiled brat who cared about his inheritance and land but as he grew older and realized who Richard really was, it changed him and I felt a great feeling of sympathy towards Harry. I'm not sure how I feel about Katherine. I admired her after having to go through a lot of tragic events of losing her family and loved ones but I thought both Katherine and Harry were indeed fit for one another and 'looked' great together.

I loved the ending of the novel, there was a feeling of hope and happiness that Kate deserved after what she had been through. Also, I didn't realize Jasper Tudor could be such a dashing man (albeit, he had a very small part in the novel towards the end but it was enough to make an impression to me). The author's note is very informative and extensive but it is well written and a great follow up to those not familiar to the history.

Overall, I would say, don't give up on this novel if you feel so overwhelmed with the names and characters. If you get the general idea on who is who then reading this should not be a problem. I recommend this novel to those in love with history particularly the Wars of the Roses, Richard III and the Princes in the Tower however those new to that time period like I am, give it a chance. I found myself learning a lot and wanting to read more of the history to understand better of the events portrayed in the book.

[Samantha · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book captured me with the dedication, "To those who died in 1483." I paused here considering what I already knew about this tragic year. Higginbotham uses a completely different method of sharing her theory on Richard III, telling the story from the points-of-view of Henry Stafford, the Duke of Buckingham, and his wife, Kate Woodville. Besides the fact that I am not crazy about the alternating first-person chapters, this new perspective was quite refreshing.

The Woodvilles of "The Stolen Crown" are not the grasping, scheming upstarts that so many others portray them as. Elizabeth (Bessie) is a quiet, pious woman who agrees to marry a handsome young king. It is the king who is determined to take care of her family. Henry is not forced into a loveless marriage to a Woodville spinster, but is quite happily married to Kate when they are both children. It was an eye opening read in which these characters were written so differently than what I am used to that I had to remind myself who they were from time to time. "That sweet Bessie girl? That's Elizabeth Woodville!"

Richard, Duke of Gloucester and later Richard III, is quite dastardly but in a more believable way than Shakespeare. Rather than reveling in his evilness, he does things because he feels that the ends justify the means. His manipulations and justifications go too far and he ends up turning people against him, even people who loved him.

Higginbotham makes a good case for how people are characterized in her author's notes. Maybe the Woodvilles were not really all scheming witches, maybe Richard was the creep that Shakespeare said he was, maybe the Duke of Buckingham was a basically good, but naïve, guy. If only we could truly know.

It was new to me to cry for Richard and John Woodville, cringe when Richard moved toward someone, and to feel pity and affection for Henry Stafford. This is where "The Stolen Crown" excels: in convincing the reader that the people you thought you had figured out were really entirely different. This was probably the most realistic portrayal of Richard that I have read, even if it was not the most romantic and enjoyable. A part of me will always hope that the Richard of "Sunne in Splendour" is somehow true.

Higginbotham includes a huge cast of characters that can be somewhat confusing even if you are basically familiar with the events surrounding 1483. However, she does not include the description of battles, so if that is something that you can't live without in a Wars of the Roses era novel, you will be disappointed. If you are a hardcore Ricardian, you may find it difficult. But if you are looking for a clever, fast-paced, well-written look at what might have been from a fresh point of view, you will enjoy this book.

[Regina Lindsey · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the second Higginbotham novel I've read, the first being The Queen of Last Hopes. In The Stolen Crown, Higginbotham continues the tale of the Yorks and Lancasters' struggle for the English crown. Again, Higginbotham masterfully takes the scant historical details of Harry, Duke of Buckingham, and his wife Kate. Told through alternating voices, the reader follows the couple as Kate's family rises to power when her older sister secretly marries Edward IV and falls from grace when his brother Richards wrestles the crown from his young nephew after Edward's death, with the help of Harry.

I am quickly becoming a huge fan of Higgenbotham. First, she always provides excellent information in her author's notes clearly distinguishing fact from areas in which she took creative liberties and points out where historians differ on conclusions. Secondly, she seems to have a real talent for character development. She admits that so little is known about Harry and Kate, but she develops them so well that I find myself really hoping she hit the mark, flawed as they may be, I really liked them. I always learn something from her writing. In this work she lays the foundation for the rise of the Tudor family, which is the dynasty I'm most familiar with. Finally, I rarely get emotional with historical fiction books outside of WWII era; however, there were about five different scenes where Higginbotham successfully elicited emotion on my part.

Admittedly, Higginbotham deviates from other historical viewpoints on Harry and Kate's marriage, but more importantly on Richard III. I am motivated at this point to read the alternative view point for a comparison.

[Jo Anne B · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars

This was a beautifully written historical fiction novel. It takes place in the mid to late 1400s in England when King Edward IV reigns amidst the War of the Roses. He  marries Elizabeth Woodville and the story is told by both her sister Kate and her husband Harry, the Duke of Buckingham. I really liked the alternating perspectives because it gave a lot of insight into the way they thought and felt and that made it easier to understand why they did what they did (especially Harry).

I never really knew much about Richard III. Wow was he ever a bastard. It is too bad Harry was so in love with him. That clouded his judgment about everything and eventually led to his downfall. I felt bad for Kate the whole time. She was such a loving, kind, and caring person and too good for her husband. It was interesting to see how their relationship developed having been married since she was like 9. He was young too, but even in the beginning he was jealous and had a mean streak. She was like his rock and made him a better person. But Richard was out for himself and manipulated Harry into wanting the same things as he did. Of course Harry went along with it because he worshipped Richard and loved him. Poor Kate lost a lot of her family at the hand of Richard because of conspiracies he made up. Dumb Harry believed Richard over his wife and her family, his loyalty to Richard unwavering as always. But there was some good in Harry, and even after he hit Kate and basically raped her, she was able to make him see the truth of who Richard really was. I mean, after killing innocent children, Harry himself knew deep down, Richard was an evil bastard. But kinda hard to go up against the King. I gotta give him credit. He would have been the second most rich and powerful man if he had just gone along with Richard. 

The writing in the book was so eloquent well done. I was so emotionally invested in the story that I felt like I knew Kate and Harry personally. Susan Higginbotham seems to be very well researched. It takes a lot of talent to syphon through all those facts and turn it into such a fabulous read that is not for one second boring but is rather 100% captivating. I can't wait to read her other two books. I hope she continues to write more from these time periods.

[Erin Germain · Rating 1 out of 5]

This was a very quick read, and from the standpoint of it being a simple historical fiction, I can't say it was all that bad. The narration went back and forth between Katherine Woodville and her husband, Harry Stafford (Duke of Buckingham).

If the characters had been generic people, I would have said it was light, a little mindless, but fun. Given that it involves the Plantagents, the Woodvilles, and the Tudors, it is much less enjoyable. They author writes with a strong and obvious bias against Richard III (okay, I understand that he was not a favorite of the Woodville women, but still, her characterization seems to have been plucked straight from Shakespeare - all that is missing is the mythical humpback.) that kept jarring me out of the story.

I'll admit, my sympathies lean more toward Richard than Henry Tudor, but I didn't mind the softer portrayal of Henry. It fit with the story and was what you'd expect from the family who were eventually tied in with him, through the marriage of Elizabeth of York. Edward IV was shown in a very favorable light, as well, so I ended up wondering what Susan Higginbotham has against the youngest York brother.

[Rio (Lynne) · Rating 4 out of 5]

First of all, the author knows her history, but this book was tough for me. There were parts that I couldn't put down, then there were parts that made my eyes glaze over. I want my historical fiction books to be as accurate as they can, but the author gives you so much information, it is overwhelming. Many reviews said to stick with it until Edward dies and they were right. The second half of the book was great. I also enjoyed the epilogue and the part where Harry's ghost supposedly haunts the inn, where the Blue Boar Inn once stood. Overall, I did enjoy this book. There are so many mysteries about that time, that we will never know.

[May · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the first of Susan Higginbotham's books for me. It certainly will not be my last! She was recommended to me because my friends know I love Historical Fiction. I read this one because I know little about Buckingham & his family. I really appreciate the skill used to weave the few known facts into a wonderful read!
As many readers have stated in their reviews, the historical notes at the end of the book are awesome & certainly enhance the experience!

[Belinda Vlasbaard · Rating 5 out of 5]

4,5 stars - English Ebook

You might think that the last night of a condemned traitor would be a rather solitary affair, but you would think wrong, for the last couple of hours have been bustling with people coming and going. In some ways I welcome the commotion; it keeps my mind from the object that lies hard by my lodgings here at the Blue Boar Inn in Salisbury. It is a scaffold, and I will be its first, and probably its last, occupant, for it has been built just for me. Such is the fate of a man who tries to take a king from his throne, and fails.

Yet I do wish that things were more peaceful so I could better gather my thoughts, for what I say in the next world about my life will determine whether I am saved or damned. The best way to explain myself, I suppose, is to start at the beginning.

People who knew all of us say-or said, for there are few of them alive now-that I favor my mother more than my father. I will have to take their word for it, for he died just a month or so after I turned three. I remember a man who bounced me on his shoulders and held me on his lap when I saw him, which was not all that often, and I remember the scar on his right hand, which I would trace wonderingly because it made the hand so different from my mother's, soft and white, and my nurse's, plump and scarred by nothing worse than years of honest labor.

Father's scar was from the battle at St. Albans in May 1455. The battle had been a disastrous one for my family. My mother's father, Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, had died there, and his eldest son, Henry, had been hauled away insensible in a cart, more dead than alive.

My paternal grandfather, Humphrey, had had his face slashed, and my father too had been badly injured. Worse, the battle had left the Duke of York the ruler of England in all but name, and my family had fought for the House of Lancaster. All of this must have dispirited my parents, and I like to think I cheered them a little when I was born on the fourth day of September of that year and when I was named not Humphrey, the name my father and his father bore, but Henry, after the king for whom they had fought. I do hope indeed I cheered them, for in my eight-and-twenty years in this world I do not think I can say that I have done so for many people.

In the fall of 1458, the pestilence, which in those days still swept through England regularly, paid one of its dreaded visits. It did what the Yorkists had failed to do-kill my father. As I was now the heir to the dukedom of my grandfather, he and my grandmother wished to take custody of me. So to their care I went, once the pestilence had stopped its raging and it was considered safe for me to travel. I was not much upset at the change. The two mainstays of my existence at that time were my nurse and my puppy, and both went with me.

I came to know my grandfather somewhat better than I had my father, being more of an age now to observe what went on around me-and being doted on by my grandparents besides that. (Four of their seven sons had died young, my father had just died, and neither of my surviving uncles, Henry and John, had sons yet. I, therefore, was precious.) Grandfather, Humphrey Stafford, was a good man who tried to do what was best for England and to protect King Henry while trying to reach some sort of accord with the Duke of York. If only he had lived longer for me to profit by his example!

As I settled into my new life with my grandparents, Fortune's Wheel, which had been spinning back and forth with regularity, spun in the direction of Lancaster. As a result, not long before the Christmas of 1459, visitors arrived at my grandparents' Essex manor of Writtle: Cecily Neville, Duchess of York, and her three youngest children, Margaret, George, and Richard. Cecily was my grandmother's younger sister. Needless to say, she and my Lancastrian grandmother had not been on the warmest of terms as of late, and though we politely referred to her and her children as our guests, it was no social visit the Duchess of York was paying now. The Duke of York was in exile, and his wife had been placed in my grandmother's custody at the order of King Henry.

I enjoyed this novel for it's refreshing perspective on the Buckingham rebellion and the marriage between Henry Stafford and Katherine Woodville. It is a shame that one historical record can become the defining word upon such a thing as a marriage and the author quotes in her author's note the words of Dominic Mancini that are taken as the basis for the nature of Henry and Kate's marriage: "for, when he (Henry) was younger, he had been forced to marry the queen's sister, whom he scorned to wed on account of her humble origin".

Therefore, it was very interesting to me to read a much more balanced version of their marriage and I felt as though Ms. Higginbotham gave sound reasoning for her decision to portray it as such.

Sometimes we have to realize that the facts are there in front of us, if we would just get past the murky waters of historical bias.
Overall, I really liked both characters and enjoyed reading of how their relationship changed as they grew up together. A child marriage may seem strange to a modern day reader, but through this novel I could clearly see how Henry and Kate became a strong couple due to their shared experiences in childhood as well as adulthood. It was very well-written.

Even though it does not affect the quality of the novel itself I will note that the author is not a follower of Richardian ideas, which seem to be rather prevalent in historical fiction these days. That is not to say that she portrays Richard as a monster in keeping with Shakespeare, but rather he is not portrayed as either devil nor saint.

He was a man as any other, with ambitions and dreams and a measure of both good and bad. However, if you do not respond well to anything other than saint then this novel is not for you. (Again, not a reflection on the novel itself, only a caution to those with strong feelings on the matter).

In my opinion though, Ms. Higginbotham has researched the facts and portrayed the events in a way that resonates with her, as every Cousins War author does. Truthfully, this varied number of perspectives is one of the reasons why this is my favorite era of British history. I could read about it forever, and it would never get old!

My recommendation!

[Iset · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Stolen Crown was another good read from Susan Higginbotham for me, but I didn't quite get into it as much as The Queen of Last Hopes. It starts promisingly with exciting opening scenes that immediately grabbed my attention and made me want to keep reading, but it does tails off in the middle – that is, it’s well-written, but the story kind of treads water for a while in the middle whilst Katherine Woodville and Henry Stafford grow up, and you just know we’re all waiting for Richard III to seize the throne and the upheaval to break loose.

Higginbotham admits in her author’s note that very little is known about Buckingham and his motives, so I enjoyed reading about a plausible recreation of his motives. We’ll never really know, of course. I kind of felt that the marriage between Katherine and Henry depicted here seemed the same as the other marriages in medieval historical fiction – rocky starts, solidifying as they get to know each other. Having read a lot of medieval fiction recently, I've noticed that this sort of marriage seems to crop up a lot.

One thing I'm not sure was a decision that worked was telling the story from the perspective of Katherine and Henry. It was definitely interesting to get the perspective of characters who we don't often get to know very well in wars of the roses fiction because they're not the main players... but because they are often secondary figures in events, they're not always present for key events, or aware of what's going on. That works for me as a reader who already knows the wars of the roses well and so I can gain novelty and enjoyment from reading the same tale again from this fresh new angle, but for other readers it may be different. It can restrict the scope of the story, and I couldn't help wishing that there was more of the key players in The Stolen Crown - I was curious how Higginbotham would portray Edward IV, Richard III, Elizabeth Woodville, Warwick, George Plantagenet and so on, but I wanted more of them than I got, so to speak.

Maybe I've been spoiled by Sharon Penman's Sunne in Splendour, but that remains the definitive wars of the roses epic for me. Meanwhile, The Stolen Crown is a darn good read.

8 out of 10

[Adelheid · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is heavily biased toward that Lancasters and not for experts on The War of the Roses. It comes off especially bad, if one supports Richard's actions against the Woodvilles. Having done heavy research into that time period, Henry: The Duke of Buckingham is my prime suspect for having murdered The Princes in the Tower. Seeing him glorified and Richard portrayed as he is in Shakespeare's Tudor biased History is too hard to swallow.
Further more, there were Historical inaccuracies in the very first ten pages! Two battles were merged into one and History was thrown into a parallel dimension when Henry VI was killed after his first capture, not after he had escaped, retook his thrown, then was captured again. Never mind that Prince Edward had still been a little boy at the time.
This book had been presented to me as the view point of Elizabeth Woodville, not Catherine (it was spelled with a C people!). This could account for one of my one stars. I would rather see an unbiased view at how clever, yet calculating, she was. After all, SHE managed to get a king to marry her, despite the unpopularity of the decision (and the fact that he was contracted to marry someone else). Despite being imprisoned, SHE managed to get a message to a one time enemy (Magaret Beufort) and form an alliance that made her daughter queen as well.

[Deyanira C. · Rating 1 out of 5]

It's one of those cases where I'd like Goodreads to allow 0 stars, and for the record that's just what I'm giving to this disappointing and poorly written book.

This book tells part of the story behind the war of two roses from the POV of kate Woodwille and the duke of Buckingham her husband, their marriage starts when they are very young and you can see their evolution as a couple while many things are happening around them, political and personal, they will see theirselves in the middle of powerful people like the king and queen of England , Richard III, Margaret of Anjou etc. I will start saying it's a good idea to tell the story from this relatively new point of view, because indeed both of them were in the middle of important issues, and people, Kate is the most famous of the Queen's sisters she even was married after all with jasper Tudor so I thought that here we would have a fresh version of the transitions of power, the betrayals and the wars, and hopefully a view of this arranged marriage, but this book is nothing more than a story without logic or head that tries to tell the same version that has been repeated for centuries from the point of view of two people who were not even close to the facts, they were familiarly connected but were not participants in much of the conflict so the dialogues are clumsy and illogical, and the worst is that happened the most I feared, the same cliches as always, you know since the Woodwilles are victims RIII and everyone against them are horrible demons, so in this case I have plenty of reasons not to award a star to the book.

* It does not bother me that the novel pretends to explore Bukingham, it is intriguing to me the idea, but in this book he is a fool in love with RIII, who leads him to bea bad boy, but the book insists that he was a good man, well I am not agree with this but maybe I'm just a crazy person who thinks that a rapist and murderer (And that is not said by me or the history, this book says it!)should not be considered a good person , it is a shame the poor characterization of him in this book because we could have read his motivations as someone ambitious but not necessarily bad, which the book does not do in order to sell him as good in a silly and illogical way.

* The narrative is terrible, it tries to tell the story in the first person and then the news that has no reason to reach our narrators, reaches them in such stupid ways that I wanted to throw the book out my window, the way these people talk about the events it's so ridiculous and bland that it takes courage to go through with this book.

* I can't believe I'll say this, but when the book wasn't horrible it was boring.

* Some things in the plot are so stupid that they made me laugh so although this is not a bad point, I still need to say that if you want to write a novel you must analyze the twists in your story well, for example Anne Neville yes is placed in a kitchen but do not be confused she is the head of the kitchen and controller of the place, look I like the idea that she has some character but I cannot imagine a former princess, a noble and privileged girl , who lost almost her entire family recently and is 15 years old, in a kitchen during the Middle Ages and she did not suffer anything but ended up being "the boss of the place", yes of course it is credible.

* Continuing with the implausible, the friendship between RIII and Buckingham is so rare, and the way in which Buckingham participates in everything is not only impossible to believe but also ridiculous.

* I will not talk about how wrong this book is in terms of historical facts because I would finish the characters, but I am always willing to throw the facts out the window in order to have a good story, but this book does not follow them correctly or make a good story.

* The Woodwille family especially women, are so victims that I do not identify them with historical people whom I admire and who here were reduced to being fools, which believe me, they were not, these women jumped from the arms of the Lancasters, to the Yorkists , and the Tudors, curiously always where the balance of power and money tipped, so I do not see how a person without ambitions with a pure heart make those transitions without harming anyone as the author tried to sell me, admire to EW, but she wasn't a saint.

* Finally the worst of this book is Richard III, here I will add that I love reading about him, I really love it very much, why? because even historians tend to hate or love him, and there is nothing better for me than reading a novel with a great hero or a great villain and even more if they have the war of the two roses as a background, in this book he is a villain which does not bother me, believe me, I like the man as a character in novels and a historical character but I don't consider him a saint or anything like that, and I have enjoyed novels with him beign horrible, you know, a murderer, treacherous and liar but in this novel the characterization is so flat that not even him rescued the story, he is a predictable and graceless villain, for example he hates the woodwilles for being commoners and that is so so so evil that we should hate him ... LOL, he obviously commits all the crimes that exist in this period, Why ? Well, because he wants the crown and that will justify everything, the man is perverse, no other explanation is needed, forget about any interesting characteristic, not to mention something positive, I find it hard to believe that someone followed him and I never understood why Buckigham loved him.
RIII is a character about whom so many books have been made so it is difficult to surprise with a portrait of him in novels, I would like the authors to see him as a complex man with errors and virtues, hopefully they would present us with a decent version of his actions, but almost no author is interested in exploring things intelligently or impartially, and fine its your book but if you want to get into the boring task of making him a misunderstood hero or an unsavory villain, you need talent to make your character stand out and more talent to to do it well, that talent is not present here, so in the end the book is a complete disgrace, nothing to rescue.

[Starless One]

trigger warning: mentions of sexual assault

I will discuss a major plot point but since I would have wanted to know about it before I picked up this book, I have not marked it as a spoiler.

It’s interesting to read a book from a Woodville point of view for a change. Whether Yorkist or Lancastrian in their sympathies, historical novelists covering the Wars of the Roses tend to be unkind to the Woodvilles and portray them as an opportunistic family of lowborn upstarts. In The Stolen Crown, we are treated to a different picture and the novel’s heroine, Kate Woodville, really comes to life as a smart, caring and strong-willed woman fearlessly championing the rights of her family and even inciting her husband to rebel against Richard III when the latter usurps the crown from her nephew.

I enjoyed the unusual perspective, but I have to say that, ultimately, The Stolen Crown was not for me. The structure is awkward – since both narrators, Harry and Kate, are absent from many crucial events, most of the plot is narrated to them by other characters. There is simply too much narration and too little dialogue for my taste. However, what really put me off were some of the plot choices Susan Higginbotham made. She has always been one for taking creative liberties (Margaret of Anjou’s affair with Henry Beaufort in The Queen of Last Hopes comes to mind, as does Eleanor de Clare sleeping with her uncle Edward in The Traitor's Wife: A Novel of the Reign of Edward II), but this time, one of her choices appears to have been made purely for shock value. I could understand her decision to have Harry, Duke of Buckingham harbour romantic feelings for Richard III even though it was a surprising one. After all, it’s as good a reason as any to explain why he stuck with him for so long. But any chance of a positive review from me died with the scene in which Harry brutally rapes his wife.

Of course marital rape was (and sadly still is) not uncommon and a sensitive handling of this topic would have been a brave addition to a hitherto rather nuanced historical novel. But Higginbotham reduces this rape to a plot point, a minor altercation between two quarrelling spouses who actually love each other, and then expects us to forgive the hero and still pretend this is a love story.

Some reviewers have criticised Higginbotham’s negative treatment of Richard III in this novel. I must say, I had no problem with it. I’m no diehard Ricardian, nor am I firmly anti-Richard. Any portrayal that is well-argued and entertaining to read is fine with me. So, although I have never been particularly interested in either Buckingham or his wife, I was prepared to root for them and their rebellion against Richard. The rape scene changed all that and left me horrified. Of course there are good books whose main characters are disgusting scum but that needs to be an active decision on the part of the author. In this case, Higginbotham clearly expected the reader to be on Buckingham’s side and to feel sorry for him when he dies. I think I speak for a lot of readers when I say that this was a miscalculation and that I will think twice before I pick up another novel by Higginbotham.

[LibraryCin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Set in the mid to late 1400s, King Edward IV married Elizabeth Woodville. This story is told, in alternating voices, by Kate, Elizabeth's youngest sister and Harry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, who married Kate while they were both still children. The novel continues past Edward's reign into Richard III's.

This was really good. I've only read a couple of other books about these people, so at times, it is hard to keep straight who is who (especially with so many people with the same name!). There is not a lot known about the main characters in this novel, but the author weaved a really good story, using what is known. She provides a detailed note at the end, explaining what really is known and what she made up for the story. As always, I tend to prefer a woman's voice in historical novels, so I did find Kate's viewpoint a little more interesting than Harry's, but they were weaved in together very well.

[Amanda · Rating 4 out of 5]

While this began to feel more and more like a knock-off of The Other Boleyn Girl as I read, I still very much enjoyed this book. Elizabeth Wydville is one of my favorite historical figures, and I knew the role Henry the Duke of Buckingham played during Richard III's reign. This book did at times come off as quite self-important, it was still a great read. Katherine Wydville deserves more time in the literary sun if you ask me.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this novel for it's refreshing perspective on the Buckingham rebellion and the marriage between Henry Stafford and Katherine Woodville. It is a shame that one historical record can become the defining word upon such a thing as a marriage and the author quotes in her author's note the words of Dominic Mancini that are taken as the basis for the nature of Henry and Kate's marriage: "for, when he (Henry) was younger, he had been forced to marry the queen's sister, whom he scorned to wed on account of her humble origin". Therefore, it was very interesting to me to read a much more balanced version of their marriage and I felt as though Ms. Higginbotham gave sound reasoning for her decision to portray it as such. Sometimes we have to realize that the facts are there in front of us, if we would just get past the murky waters of historical bias.
Overall, I really liked both characters and enjoyed reading of how their relationship changed as they grew up together. A child marriage may seem strange to a modern day reader, but through this novel I could clearly see how Henry and Kate became a strong couple due to their shared experiences in childhood as well as adulthood. It was very well-written.
Even though it does not affect the quality of the novel itself I will note that the author is not a follower of Richardian ideas, which seem to be rather prevalent in historical fiction these days. That is not to say that she portrays Richard as a monster in keeping with Shakespeare, but rather he is not portrayed as either devil nor saint. He was a man as any other, with ambitions and dreams and a measure of both good and bad. However, if you do not respond well to anything other than saint then this novel is not for you. (Again, not a reflection on the novel itself, only a caution to those with strong feelings on the matter).
In my opinion though, Ms. Higginbotham has researched the facts and portrayed the events in a way that resonates with her, as every Cousins War author does. Truthfully, this varied number of perspectives is one of the reasons why this is my favorite era of British history. I could read about it forever, and it would never get old!

[JoLene · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars
The title of this book is not exactly accurate. This is the story of Henry Stafford and Katherine Woodville, the Duke and Duchess of Buckingham. The secret marriage is that of Katherine's sister to King Edward IV --- this marriage led to the elevation of the entire Woodville family and is why Katherine and Henry were wed while they were still both children. The stolen crown refers to events much later than King Edward's marriage -- but I don't want to spoil for those not familiar with the story.

I really enjoyed this take on some of the events in the period of the War of the Roses. The story unfolds from the perspective of both Henry and Katherine. While some of the story is confusing because it seems that many of the major players during this time are named: Edward, Margaret, Elizabeth, or Henry, but there is a character listing in the front. Since I was kindling, I did not use it and was able to keep the story straight. This is my first exposure to the overall story, although I know that there are several other works (including Shakespeare's) which offer their own conclusions. In the author's note, Higginbotham outlines what some of the key mysteries are and how she reached her conclusions.

The style of story-telling and the voices seemed very modern. This style made the book a quick read for me, but I'm sure that some folks may not like the modern voice. This was one of those books that I was sad when it ended and even though I knew from the start, that it didn't necessarily have a happy ending, I was still routing for the couple all the way to the end. I will definitely be picking up other works by this author.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Stolen Crown by Susan Higginbotham was riveting historical fiction. Once I started reading it, I couldn’t put it down. This is amazing as I love this time period and have read several books concerning the War of the Roses, Elizabeth Woodville, etc. I have never read a book about her younger sister, Katherine Woodville and her husband, Harry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham. I was intrigued to find out how they would survive the turmult of the times they lived during.

Young Katherine Woodville discovers her sister Elizabeth marrying King Edward IV in secret one morning. Little does she know that life is about to change in a major way for her entire family. Her and her siblings are matched with some of the greatest families in the land. Katherine marries Harry Stafford, the young Duke of Buckingham at a very young age. As they grow up together, they learn to love each other. Katherine’s family’s rise does not make them many friends, and when King Edward unexpectedly dies, the winds of change threaten to tear apart Katherine and Harry’s family.

Overall I really enjoyed this novel and read it quickly. If you are a fan of historical fiction and/or The War of the Roses, you must read this novel for a fresh take through the eyes of two interesting historical people.

[Ron · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm a sucker for well-told historical fiction, and this is. Actually better than The White Queen, which with two follow-on novels, cover the same period of English history, largely from the point of view of the involved women.

I'd quibble with the title as sensational and only semi-related to the story. And the marriage in question may have altered English history, but who knows whether it was not the fate of that time (as opposed to changing that fate)? But titles are to beguile you into buying the book: rules of evidence don't apply.

Trying to reproduce period language, of course, would impair readability--as demonstrated by several excerpts from documents of that time--but Higginbotham uses so many modern idioms that they also knock the reader out of the "spell" of the story.

On the other hand, she leavens her storytelling which just enough humor to make her characters all the more human.

A good read.

[Elena · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have read a couple of Susan Higginbotham books before and really enjoyed them. The Stolen Crown was just as good.

As with the others I've read, Higginbotham recounts important historical events through the eyes of historical figures who are almost forgotten today. In this case, she recounts the years from the marriage of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville to the rise of Henry VII through the eyes of Henry Stafford, the Duke of Buckingham, and his wife, Katherine Woodville.

This choice not only gives a fresh and interesting view of well known events, but also rehabilitates Henry and Katherine, who as I said are not very well known today. Their marriage, often recounted in a negative light, is here a match of love, not idealized but realistic. Henry, who is often considered an ambiguous figure, is here portrayed as a good man who makes bad decisions, driven by his love for Richard III. I was sometimes frustrated with him and didn't agree with his decisions, but I could understand his motivations and felt sympathetic towards him.
Katherine, who was my favourite character, has suffered a bad reputation just like all her family members, but here she is vivacious, affectionate and kindhearted. The other Woodvilles are portrayed in a similar sympathetic way.
The one who suffers the most is Richard III. His portrayal is not a good one, so if you like him you probably won't be happy with it; however, I think his motivations are well explained and he is not a one-dimensional villain.

[Joanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have read quite a bit about the Woodville family and the royal marriage that changed England. However, this was a new take on it for me. The story is told through the eyes of the younger sister of Bessie Woodville (who married King Edward IV ) Katherine and the young Duke of Buckingham. Other stories on these two have been harsh, while this shows a much softer side of the Duke and gives one some hope that not all marriages of that time period were forced for politics, or if they were, love actually grew from them.

Higginbotham writes a well rounded explanation of her theories at the ending and makes her case believable. I enjoyed this HF and can recommend it to any who love a good story.

[Lilith · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was amazing!!! I loved it.

During the war of the Roses, we know how depending on which side you were on faired how well you lived once whoever was in power, since it flip flopped so much. I’ve read from royal POV mostly. As well as Jasper Tudor’s but that book ended before Lancaster and York were United. But it was nice to see how it was as a Yorkist wife with a Lancastrian husband. Who eventually turned Yorkist but he still F’ed her family over while married to her.

Liberties were taken of course, as historic fiction goes, but why the implied homosexuality between Harry and Richard? Especially when you acknowledged that it’s not known if they were ever close in real life. It didn’t add anything to the story for the 2 dudes make out and lay together.

Otherwise, still great. I appreciate any book that doesn’t turn Margaret Beaufort into a villainous shrewd. I notice TV does that a lot to her.