What do you think?
Rate this book
Elizabeth Woodville: Mother of the Princes in the Tower
Elizabeth Woodville is a historical character whose life no novelist would ever have dared invent. She has been portrayed as an enchantress, as an unprincipled advancer of her family's fortunes and a plucky but pitiful queen in Shakespeare's histories. She has been alternatively championed and vilified by her contemporaries and five centuries of historians, dramatists and novelists, but what was she really like? In this revealing account of Elizabeth's life David Baldwin sets out to tell the story of this complex and intriguing woman. Was she the malign influence many of her critics held her to be? Was she a sorceress who bewitched Edward IV? What was the fate of her two sons, the 'Princes in the Tower'? What did she, of all people, think had become of them, and why did Richard III mount a campaign of vilification against her? David Baldwin traces Elizabeth's career and her influence on the major events of her husband Edward IV's reign, and in doing so he brings to life the personal and domestic politics of Yorkist England and the elaborate ritual of court life.
224 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2002
59 people are currently reading
1341 people want to read
About the author
David Baldwin
10 books8 followersDavid Baldwin was a historian that specialised in late medieval history, particularly the Wars of the Roses, and was a lecturer at both the University of Leicester and the University of Nottingham. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society in 2012.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
December 24, 2014
**3 1/2 stars** A thoughtful, sympathetic biography of the unfairly maligned England's Queen Elizabeth, Consort to King Edward IV from 1464 until his death in 1483. This was the famed time in English history known as the War of the Roses. Elizabeth, the White Queen of York, was wife to the first king of the Yorkist supporters. Baldwin does his best to sort through the old evidence, attempting to paint one of the most accurate portraits of the Queen to date. For most of his endeavor, I think he succeeds.
This is certainly not a quick or easy read. Baldwin's research is meticulous, but the result, while compellingly intriguing, is somewhat weighed down by the burdensome Middle English language used during the mid-fifteenth century in which he writes. To a modern reader not versed in the English language of the Middle Ages. these passages, while understandable if read with care, are, nonetheless, at times, tedious. With that said, I understand the inclusion of these sections. Baldwin, perhaps more than any other modern historian, is valiant in his efforts to stay authentic to the time period of his subject and the period in which she lived.
Like fellow historian Arlene Okerlund's biography of Elizabeth Woodville, David Baldwin's Queen Elizabeth fares well. She's shown in a sympathetic light, but unlike Okerlund, I believe Baldwin makes somewhat grasping suppositions towards the end of his biography in his attempt to connect circumstances with assumptions. I believe the conclusions he makes about Elizabeth after Richard III's defeat at Bosworth could be deemed as conjecture at best. Even before that time, Baldwin shows his willingness to base conclusions on arguments which stand on possibilities and circumstantial evidence more than any other reliable factors. This, in and of itself, would be no different than what other historians of that time period (including Okerlund) have supposed considering the limited surviving evidence, but after having read both Okerlund's and Baldwin's biographies, it seems Baldwin's is more reaching in his conclusions, and, therefore, I find those conclusions not as probable and his arguments certainly less compelling. One major case in point -- Baldwin expostulates the possibility (and indeed his conclusion) that Elizabeth plotted to depose her son-in-law, Henry VII so as to re-establish herself to be in a position, once again, of power. His "proof" for this is stated as -- Elizabeth's retirement and subsequent removal of lands came at the same time of the first major rebellion against Henry. Baldwin suggests that it would make sense that the historically anonymous, politically connected supporter must have been Elizabeth and that Henry, discovering this plot on the part of his mother-in-law, must have stripped her of her lands and forced her to a retirement from court to a nearby Abbey as punishment. Baldwin offers no documented evidence to support his theory. This supposition is even more questionable when the reader considers that Baldwin had used much of the book up to that point to propose that Elizabeth was not the power-hungry, ambitious, politically savvy Queen that history (thanks in part to propaganda postulated by Richard III) has been deemed as fact -- when it has been shown by Okerlund and Baldwin himself to be pure slander. In fact, Baldwin supposes that one of the reasons Elizabeth lost her sons, her reputation, and her rights as Dowager Queen at the hands of Richard III during the political maneuvering that followed her husband's death was because she lacked the ruthless understanding needed to succeed in the harsh world of royal politics. As Baldwin himself states, Elizabeth was sinned against much more than she sinned, in large part, because of the naive, but well-meaning assumptions she held.
Historical fiction writer of this period, Philippa Gregory has been known to use some of the suppositions put forth by Baldwin in this biography of Elizabeth Woodville. Indeed, it's been documented that Gregory used part of the historical research results of Baldwin's in her own writings of The White Queen & The White Princess -- novels about Elizabeth and her daughter Elizabeth of York. This point notwithstanding, Gregory takes divergent views, arriving at different conclusions. While she agrees with Baldwin's assertion that Elizabeth plotted to dethrone Henry, she suggests the only viable reason that would justify Elizabeth supporting removing her daughter from the throne she herself once occupied was because the Dowager Queen must have believed that one of her sons survived and was not killed as publicly thought at the time. Gregory proposes that the only basis for Elizabeth's support of any plot against her son-in-law must have been to place her son, the rightful heir, on the English throne. This is where she and Baldwin part views. Baldwin believes the Princes in the Tower were indeed killed, but his reasoning for Elizabeth's motive to support a rebellion against her son-in-law must have been steeped in her own ambition for power as well as due to a singular dislike for Henry's mother, Margaret Beaufort; a point that seems even less credible when many other historians have stated their belief that Elizabeth's supposed animosity for the King's mother is pure conjecture -- the two had a long history of friendship. Baldwin's belief in Elizabeth's supposed plot against her son-in-law, King Henry VII, while not as far-fetched as Gregory's, nonetheless, tends to fall just as short.
All in all, in spite of what I see as flaws in his conclusions, I do believe Baldwin has done a fine job giving what is most probably an overall accurate description of this most slandered queen. He can be forgiven for arriving at certain explanations, because the reader can never truly arrive with any degree of certainty at a definitive answer to certain questions that still abound. Unless new evidence is found to shed light on these questions, students of history will need to rely on historians like Baldwin & Okerlund -- those more verse and knowledgeable of the time than many who arrived at competing conclusions before them. At the very least, Baldwin has made a more than informed, honest effort to seek the truth in as an objective way as possible. As the facts seem to point out, Elizabeth Woodville, the mother of the tragic Princes in the Tower, was a captivating, cultured, intelligent woman -- one who served her realm with dignity and grace befitting her role. When she found herself out of her depth within the political intrigues of the court after her husband's death, she used her instincts, courage, and determination to survive in a world that was out of her control using the same dignity and grace in which she lived as queen.
This is certainly not a quick or easy read. Baldwin's research is meticulous, but the result, while compellingly intriguing, is somewhat weighed down by the burdensome Middle English language used during the mid-fifteenth century in which he writes. To a modern reader not versed in the English language of the Middle Ages. these passages, while understandable if read with care, are, nonetheless, at times, tedious. With that said, I understand the inclusion of these sections. Baldwin, perhaps more than any other modern historian, is valiant in his efforts to stay authentic to the time period of his subject and the period in which she lived.
Like fellow historian Arlene Okerlund's biography of Elizabeth Woodville, David Baldwin's Queen Elizabeth fares well. She's shown in a sympathetic light, but unlike Okerlund, I believe Baldwin makes somewhat grasping suppositions towards the end of his biography in his attempt to connect circumstances with assumptions. I believe the conclusions he makes about Elizabeth after Richard III's defeat at Bosworth could be deemed as conjecture at best. Even before that time, Baldwin shows his willingness to base conclusions on arguments which stand on possibilities and circumstantial evidence more than any other reliable factors. This, in and of itself, would be no different than what other historians of that time period (including Okerlund) have supposed considering the limited surviving evidence, but after having read both Okerlund's and Baldwin's biographies, it seems Baldwin's is more reaching in his conclusions, and, therefore, I find those conclusions not as probable and his arguments certainly less compelling. One major case in point -- Baldwin expostulates the possibility (and indeed his conclusion) that Elizabeth plotted to depose her son-in-law, Henry VII so as to re-establish herself to be in a position, once again, of power. His "proof" for this is stated as -- Elizabeth's retirement and subsequent removal of lands came at the same time of the first major rebellion against Henry. Baldwin suggests that it would make sense that the historically anonymous, politically connected supporter must have been Elizabeth and that Henry, discovering this plot on the part of his mother-in-law, must have stripped her of her lands and forced her to a retirement from court to a nearby Abbey as punishment. Baldwin offers no documented evidence to support his theory. This supposition is even more questionable when the reader considers that Baldwin had used much of the book up to that point to propose that Elizabeth was not the power-hungry, ambitious, politically savvy Queen that history (thanks in part to propaganda postulated by Richard III) has been deemed as fact -- when it has been shown by Okerlund and Baldwin himself to be pure slander. In fact, Baldwin supposes that one of the reasons Elizabeth lost her sons, her reputation, and her rights as Dowager Queen at the hands of Richard III during the political maneuvering that followed her husband's death was because she lacked the ruthless understanding needed to succeed in the harsh world of royal politics. As Baldwin himself states, Elizabeth was sinned against much more than she sinned, in large part, because of the naive, but well-meaning assumptions she held.
Historical fiction writer of this period, Philippa Gregory has been known to use some of the suppositions put forth by Baldwin in this biography of Elizabeth Woodville. Indeed, it's been documented that Gregory used part of the historical research results of Baldwin's in her own writings of The White Queen & The White Princess -- novels about Elizabeth and her daughter Elizabeth of York. This point notwithstanding, Gregory takes divergent views, arriving at different conclusions. While she agrees with Baldwin's assertion that Elizabeth plotted to dethrone Henry, she suggests the only viable reason that would justify Elizabeth supporting removing her daughter from the throne she herself once occupied was because the Dowager Queen must have believed that one of her sons survived and was not killed as publicly thought at the time. Gregory proposes that the only basis for Elizabeth's support of any plot against her son-in-law must have been to place her son, the rightful heir, on the English throne. This is where she and Baldwin part views. Baldwin believes the Princes in the Tower were indeed killed, but his reasoning for Elizabeth's motive to support a rebellion against her son-in-law must have been steeped in her own ambition for power as well as due to a singular dislike for Henry's mother, Margaret Beaufort; a point that seems even less credible when many other historians have stated their belief that Elizabeth's supposed animosity for the King's mother is pure conjecture -- the two had a long history of friendship. Baldwin's belief in Elizabeth's supposed plot against her son-in-law, King Henry VII, while not as far-fetched as Gregory's, nonetheless, tends to fall just as short.
All in all, in spite of what I see as flaws in his conclusions, I do believe Baldwin has done a fine job giving what is most probably an overall accurate description of this most slandered queen. He can be forgiven for arriving at certain explanations, because the reader can never truly arrive with any degree of certainty at a definitive answer to certain questions that still abound. Unless new evidence is found to shed light on these questions, students of history will need to rely on historians like Baldwin & Okerlund -- those more verse and knowledgeable of the time than many who arrived at competing conclusions before them. At the very least, Baldwin has made a more than informed, honest effort to seek the truth in as an objective way as possible. As the facts seem to point out, Elizabeth Woodville, the mother of the tragic Princes in the Tower, was a captivating, cultured, intelligent woman -- one who served her realm with dignity and grace befitting her role. When she found herself out of her depth within the political intrigues of the court after her husband's death, she used her instincts, courage, and determination to survive in a world that was out of her control using the same dignity and grace in which she lived as queen.
December 3, 2013
I enjoyed this biography. It was a swift read, and covered most everything I already knew about Elizabeth. However, the rich finds (for me) came in the appendices. Baldwin includes some interesting material about Elizabeth Woodville (not all of it verified, he acknowledges), but excellent for historiographical purposes.
Baldwin takes a pretty hard line against Richard III (as biographers of Elizabeth Woodville tend to do, I've found) but I appreciate that he acknowledges that other players also wanted the princes in the Tower dead, notably the Duke of Buckingham.
Overall, an excellent introduction to anyone who wants to know more about Elizabeth Woodville.
Baldwin takes a pretty hard line against Richard III (as biographers of Elizabeth Woodville tend to do, I've found) but I appreciate that he acknowledges that other players also wanted the princes in the Tower dead, notably the Duke of Buckingham.
Overall, an excellent introduction to anyone who wants to know more about Elizabeth Woodville.
September 27, 2009
I just got David Baldwin's "Elizabeth Woodville" from the library through inter-library loan. I am thoroughly enjoying it! Lots of great genealogy information that helps to sort out some of the complicated inter-related family lines. Mr. Baldwin also introduces lots of direct quotes from relevant documents that are, generally speaking, easier to read then I had thought they would be. Interesting to see how the language has morphed since then. Excellent book for anyone interested in the realities of Elizabeth's life. What a woman she must have been!
July 12, 2016
Not for the casual historian.
This book is chocked full of information which was well researched. It's perfect for any serious history student. I'd give the informational content five stars. But it's not at all easy to read.
The writing style is very "professional", meaning it reads like a university professor would sound. There are many quotes from 15th century manuscripts and letters (which is great), but the original phonetic spelling was kept, making deciphering the text tedious (unless you like that sort of thing, in which case this is the book for you).
The other problem I have is the physical layout of the book. There is little "white space" in the hardback and even less in the paperback. If you have a problem with letters blurring together when you're reading (you know who you are), make sure and get the hardback edition.
If Alison Weir is your favorite Tudor Historian, you probably will have a hard time with this book. If you're looking for serious study material, this is perfect.
This book is chocked full of information which was well researched. It's perfect for any serious history student. I'd give the informational content five stars. But it's not at all easy to read.
The writing style is very "professional", meaning it reads like a university professor would sound. There are many quotes from 15th century manuscripts and letters (which is great), but the original phonetic spelling was kept, making deciphering the text tedious (unless you like that sort of thing, in which case this is the book for you).
The other problem I have is the physical layout of the book. There is little "white space" in the hardback and even less in the paperback. If you have a problem with letters blurring together when you're reading (you know who you are), make sure and get the hardback edition.
If Alison Weir is your favorite Tudor Historian, you probably will have a hard time with this book. If you're looking for serious study material, this is perfect.
June 27, 2025
Women's stories are hard to find, particularly those who lived from the 16th century backwards in time. However, David Baldwin has scoured the annals of the 15th century to collect and collate what could be found on Elizabeth's life, and to discover what can be inferred from the stories of her family. In this, I feel he has been mostly successful.
I do think it's worth exploring the appendices. One covers the fate of Elizabeth's sons by Edward IV. Another uncovers a possible, indeed likely, author of the Croyland Chronicle.
I do think it's worth exploring the appendices. One covers the fate of Elizabeth's sons by Edward IV. Another uncovers a possible, indeed likely, author of the Croyland Chronicle.
May 6, 2021
This, regardless of the title, is not a book about Elizabeth Woodville.
It's a book about Edward IV, Warwick, the various male Rivers' and Woodvilles, and other male allies and enemies of Edward IV.
After Edward's death, it becomes a book about Richard III, then Henry VII.
Apart from a few decent early chapters, there is little about Elizabeth in the book, and most of that is written from the view point of what the males around her were doing, rather her.
I appreciate that it is often difficult to write informatively about historical female figures because of the dearth of contemporary records and information. However, once past the royal wedding and Elizabeth's coronation, this book skimmed over the key events of Elizabeth's life in its galloping hurry to get back to the men.
One very positive note for the author and the book, which earned the 2 star rather than 1 star rating:
David Baldwin was very articulate in his dismissal of the claims of witchcraft and undue influence put at Elizabeth's feet by both contemporary writers and later historians. He also intelligently refuted claims of Elizabeth's supposed false grandiosity.
Sadly though, the overall book was lacking in substance in terms of Elizabeth.
The writing style was clunky. In particular, the frequent references to 'him' in a discussion where 'him' could have been one of 2 or more men, made it difficult to determine as to which 'him' the statement referred.
While it was nice to see quotes of writings with the actual spelling and writing style used when the letters/reports were written, without a translation to modern English, these did not help to clarify a statement or claim.
With several people having the same name, using just a last or first name made differentiating between individuals was difficult - especially when a person is on different occasions referred to by first name, or last name, or title. But in all honesty, David Baldwin is not the only author to fail in this regard.
And one thing throughout the book really niggled. Male historians and sources were referred to by their whole name. But not Miss Scofield.
Ultimately, the value of the book (for me) comes down to a few pointed questions.
Did I learn anything about Elizabeth Woodville that I couldn't have read in any decent biography of Edward IV?
No.
Did I come away from from this book with a greater understanding of Elizabeth?
No, although I once again state my appreciation for the defence against witchcraft.
Given so much of the book's focus was on the men around Elizabeth, did I come away feeling I had learned more about them?
No. However, this is more to do with my level of previous reading on the various subjects of this book, than overall shortcomings in David Baldwin's knowledge.
Not a satisfying read for me.
It's a book about Edward IV, Warwick, the various male Rivers' and Woodvilles, and other male allies and enemies of Edward IV.
After Edward's death, it becomes a book about Richard III, then Henry VII.
Apart from a few decent early chapters, there is little about Elizabeth in the book, and most of that is written from the view point of what the males around her were doing, rather her.
I appreciate that it is often difficult to write informatively about historical female figures because of the dearth of contemporary records and information. However, once past the royal wedding and Elizabeth's coronation, this book skimmed over the key events of Elizabeth's life in its galloping hurry to get back to the men.
One very positive note for the author and the book, which earned the 2 star rather than 1 star rating:
David Baldwin was very articulate in his dismissal of the claims of witchcraft and undue influence put at Elizabeth's feet by both contemporary writers and later historians. He also intelligently refuted claims of Elizabeth's supposed false grandiosity.
Sadly though, the overall book was lacking in substance in terms of Elizabeth.
The writing style was clunky. In particular, the frequent references to 'him' in a discussion where 'him' could have been one of 2 or more men, made it difficult to determine as to which 'him' the statement referred.
While it was nice to see quotes of writings with the actual spelling and writing style used when the letters/reports were written, without a translation to modern English, these did not help to clarify a statement or claim.
With several people having the same name, using just a last or first name made differentiating between individuals was difficult - especially when a person is on different occasions referred to by first name, or last name, or title. But in all honesty, David Baldwin is not the only author to fail in this regard.
And one thing throughout the book really niggled. Male historians and sources were referred to by their whole name. But not Miss Scofield.
Ultimately, the value of the book (for me) comes down to a few pointed questions.
Did I learn anything about Elizabeth Woodville that I couldn't have read in any decent biography of Edward IV?
No.
Did I come away from from this book with a greater understanding of Elizabeth?
No, although I once again state my appreciation for the defence against witchcraft.
Given so much of the book's focus was on the men around Elizabeth, did I come away feeling I had learned more about them?
No. However, this is more to do with my level of previous reading on the various subjects of this book, than overall shortcomings in David Baldwin's knowledge.
Not a satisfying read for me.
April 17, 2017
I respect and admire this lady so much, and this book really helped me to know her better. Elizabeth lived an extraordinary (and tragic) life. I just wish history had remembered her more kindly.
September 13, 2015
Elizabeth Woodville is someone who has received much attention throughout the last five hundred and more years since her death, a woman 'vilified and championed by her contemporaries' as the author puts it. Like certain other people in history, such as Anne Boleyn, Richard III, Henry VIII, Oliver Cromwell, Charles I- to name just a few- Elizabeth Woodville divides opinions from people. Often, she is seen as a proud and haughty woman, scheming to get ahead in the difficult power struggles during the period of the Wars of the Roses, in which the houses of Lancaster and York, fought on the various battlefields for the throne of England. A woman who manipulated her husband (Edward IV) to do her bidding, and advance her upstart family to high positions at court.
In this biography, David Baldwin seeks to uncover the real Elizabeth, was she a proud and haughty schemer? Or was she simply someone who fell in love with a man, she only could of dreamed of marrying. Baldwin divides his biography into the following sections; from her 'early life', to her first years as Queen, the disaster of her husband's brief overthrow, 'Elizabeth the Queen', 'Elizabeth and Richard III', Elizabeth and Henry VII' and 'Elizabeth's Reputation'. In the Appendix section, Baldwin looks at Elizabeth's descendants (seven of whom either became Queen Regnants or Consorts), the memorials throughout England to Elizabeth and the Woodville family, 'The Woodville's and Witchcraft', Elizabeth's 'diary', 'Elizabeth and Jocelyn of Hardwick', 'The Fate of the Princes in the Tower', among others.
Baldwin acknowledges that there are areas in which we have no records of- and to his credit he does not try to 'fill in the gaps'- and it is fair to say that he his sympathetic to Elizabeth Woodville, and takes into account the period in which she lived. He his right in that she would have been foolish not to advance her family's fortune, and he does dismiss the allegations that she was haughty and arrogant, with good evidence, and instead, presents good evidence of a charitable lady, with a good sense of humour. Elizabeth, as someone on my Facebook page so brilliantly put 'rose higher than all her peers, and fell greater than any of them'. She is a woman who will likely always divide people, yet in fact, she was not quite the seductive schemer she has often been wrongly credit as.
In this biography, David Baldwin seeks to uncover the real Elizabeth, was she a proud and haughty schemer? Or was she simply someone who fell in love with a man, she only could of dreamed of marrying. Baldwin divides his biography into the following sections; from her 'early life', to her first years as Queen, the disaster of her husband's brief overthrow, 'Elizabeth the Queen', 'Elizabeth and Richard III', Elizabeth and Henry VII' and 'Elizabeth's Reputation'. In the Appendix section, Baldwin looks at Elizabeth's descendants (seven of whom either became Queen Regnants or Consorts), the memorials throughout England to Elizabeth and the Woodville family, 'The Woodville's and Witchcraft', Elizabeth's 'diary', 'Elizabeth and Jocelyn of Hardwick', 'The Fate of the Princes in the Tower', among others.
Baldwin acknowledges that there are areas in which we have no records of- and to his credit he does not try to 'fill in the gaps'- and it is fair to say that he his sympathetic to Elizabeth Woodville, and takes into account the period in which she lived. He his right in that she would have been foolish not to advance her family's fortune, and he does dismiss the allegations that she was haughty and arrogant, with good evidence, and instead, presents good evidence of a charitable lady, with a good sense of humour. Elizabeth, as someone on my Facebook page so brilliantly put 'rose higher than all her peers, and fell greater than any of them'. She is a woman who will likely always divide people, yet in fact, she was not quite the seductive schemer she has often been wrongly credit as.
July 11, 2016
After reading this book, I feel I know only slightly more about Elizabeth Woodville than I did when I started. The book is chock-full of facts about events and people around Elizabeth, but precious little information about her. It's not an easy read, either, thanks to the author's insistence upon using medieval spelling and grammar and not clearly identifying various dukes and earls. I am by no means an academic or an expert on this period of history so it could very well be that this book is simply over my head and if I were better educated, it would all be perfectly understandable. If, like me, you're not a hard-core historian, I would advise choosing another book or doing lots of background research before taking this one on.
December 9, 2020
This is a well written book on a historical character that, due to recent books and TV Shows, has regained a certain notoriety among the commonfolk. It is a good start if you don't know anything about Elizabeth - as I feel that it manages to cover everything without getting too lost in the details, but also without getting to essay-like.
It paints a generally positive picture of her, but it does not refrain from mentioning the less honourable sides of her story.
It manages to stay somewhat neutral in the most controversial part of Elizabeth's story - the Princes in the Tower. I appreciate the fact that it does not defend Richard III's more ruthless actions but also does not automatically assume him guilty of killing the Princes. In fact, this book is one of the very few that actually take the Duke of Buckingham seriously as an alternative suspect. This is a particular aspect that I appreciated - as currently the heated debate is either "Richard did it" or "The Tudors did it" (I include here both Henry VII and his mother), while completely ignoring all of the other options - of which Buckingham feels more likely to me.
Highly recommended.
It paints a generally positive picture of her, but it does not refrain from mentioning the less honourable sides of her story.
It manages to stay somewhat neutral in the most controversial part of Elizabeth's story - the Princes in the Tower. I appreciate the fact that it does not defend Richard III's more ruthless actions but also does not automatically assume him guilty of killing the Princes. In fact, this book is one of the very few that actually take the Duke of Buckingham seriously as an alternative suspect. This is a particular aspect that I appreciated - as currently the heated debate is either "Richard did it" or "The Tudors did it" (I include here both Henry VII and his mother), while completely ignoring all of the other options - of which Buckingham feels more likely to me.
Highly recommended.
March 25, 2020
No es una mala biografía, pero como escritor el autor no me convenció. Primero, escribe asumiendo que el lector ya sabe de antemano todo lo que sucedió, por lo que no la recomiendo introducirse al tema. Segundo, en general no fui muy fan de como escribe, narrativamente por momentos no me parecía nada interesante (y hasta llegó a aburrirme, pero por suerte es corta y eso no lo sentí tanto). Tampoco siento que aprendí muchas cosas nuevas, pero le doy crédito por que me dio una nueva perspectiva sobre los eventos de los últimos años de la vida de Elizabeth sobre los que yo ya tenía una idea preestablecida, que ahora dudo. Dicho todo esto, no es un mal libro, y rescato sobre todo que es una biografía amable y comprensiva sobre la polémica reina.
March 9, 2023
I will not know peace until the historical memory of Elizabeth Woodville is restored.
The fact that her good deeds and attributes have been taken from her and assigned to others while she has been reduced to a shallow and vindictive harpy because it better fit the political (misogynistic) narrative of writers and historians.
Baldwin went beyond the image of Elizabeth as the gilt haired tempestuous queen and gave her the depth that she deserves. That she went from a widowed mother in financial crisis to the queen of England in such a turbulent and unstable period of history should be a testament to her strength. Yet even in these modern times the myth of her being a greedy women with nothing more to her than beauty continues...
The fact that her good deeds and attributes have been taken from her and assigned to others while she has been reduced to a shallow and vindictive harpy because it better fit the political (misogynistic) narrative of writers and historians.
Baldwin went beyond the image of Elizabeth as the gilt haired tempestuous queen and gave her the depth that she deserves. That she went from a widowed mother in financial crisis to the queen of England in such a turbulent and unstable period of history should be a testament to her strength. Yet even in these modern times the myth of her being a greedy women with nothing more to her than beauty continues...
January 28, 2024
I’m quite fascinated by this much-maligned Queen. Her reputation is not helped by the few primary sources of her life being written by those who didn’t know her or who had cause to blacken her name.
Her understandable promotion of the “upstart” Woodville clan is held against her but it really didn’t do many of them much good, life, even for the favoured classes being nasty, brutish and short, usually due to illness, death in battle or choppy heads.
Still if it were possible for her to regard her legacy I’m sure she’d have had some quiet satisfaction at finding her direct descendants included 7 (seven) more Queens over the next 60 years or so.
Her understandable promotion of the “upstart” Woodville clan is held against her but it really didn’t do many of them much good, life, even for the favoured classes being nasty, brutish and short, usually due to illness, death in battle or choppy heads.
Still if it were possible for her to regard her legacy I’m sure she’d have had some quiet satisfaction at finding her direct descendants included 7 (seven) more Queens over the next 60 years or so.
October 31, 2018
Baldwin takes an angle not often concentrated with Elizabeth Woodville--the Princes in the Tower are usually their own subject matter of books and articles. Admittedly, the majority of the book covers Elizabeth's earlier life but enough is devoted to the decision to relinquish Richard, Duke of York to join his brother, Edward, the Prince of Wales into the care of Richard, Duke of Gloucester (later Richard III). What a difficult choice for a mother with several other children to protect let alone a Queen having to make political decisions for the good of the country as well.
June 23, 2019
Not as informative as I’d have liked. Baldwin says he will focus on Elizabeth herself rather than just rehearse events in her husband’s reign like other biographers have, but he still ends up falling in that trap for much of the book. I was interested in learning more about the witchcraft allegations, but they’re only referenced in passing in the final chapter.
November 16, 2019
A highly sympathetic biography of Elizabeth Woodville, pushing back against the "proud and haughty" version presented by other historians and historical fiction writers, offering a more nuanced and context based explanation of her motivations and actions.
October 8, 2020
The book started off quite well but, at a quarter of the way through, I’m giving up. It’s all just too complicated...
February 5, 2014
There is just not very muchb contemporary source material on poor Elizabeth, but David Baldwin makes some well researched guesses and it's a far more sympathetic treatment then she usually receives from biographers. Believe it or not, it seems like Shakespeare's version of the lady, plucky, intelligent, forced to make horrible decisions in a series of dangerous circumstances, may be fairly accurate. At least the populace of England seemed to like her, which is more than you can say for poor Margaret of Anjou!
May 19, 2013
Loved this book! Not only was Baldwin thorough, but I felt that he put a lot of effort into producing the most factual account of Woodville's life and circumstances. He was comfortable to plainly state when the information just wasn't available as well as pointing out the flaws and discrepancies of other accounts. It gives me confidence in the quality and legitimacy of his work. This was a very enjoyable book to read!
December 30, 2014
I really didn't like this book all that much because I wanted to learn more about Elizabeth Woodville and what I got was info on the times and her husband's fight to keep the throne. No word on if she know or thought what had happened to her sons or how she survived periods of time I already knew about from the Historical fiction book THE WHITE QUEEN. Why do authors say its on a subject but it really isn't.
November 22, 2009
Very interesting, though not the easiest to read. I don't love non-fiction, but after reading a few books with conflicting accounts of Elizabeth, I really wanted a factual basis for her personality and actions.
Baldwin does a great job of giving historical evidence of Elizabeth's personality and her actions. To me, it seems like she's been unfairly maligned by many novelists.
Baldwin does a great job of giving historical evidence of Elizabeth's personality and her actions. To me, it seems like she's been unfairly maligned by many novelists.
June 5, 2012
Despite liking one of David Baldwin's other books, I actually found this one really really tedious. It's just a procession of facts with precious little interpretation, and nothing I hadn't gleaned from mere chapters in books like Queens Consort (Lisa Hilton). Not really recommended unless you need a painstakingly in depth study of Elizabeth Woodville.
December 30, 2013
Despite being a non-fiction it's easy to read and get into the topic. Though some of the statements have been discussed by later publications on the Woodville family the author makes valid points that are essential for a round observation of the subject. This is probably the most balanced view on Elizabeth and one of my favorite biographies. I came to admire her even more than I did.
April 17, 2014
I read this book hoping to get a clearer picture of Elizabeth Woodville, but i still found myself lost as to who she was. I was more caught up in the political history of the late 15th century and drowning in a list of names and found myself very confused as to who was who. I understand reliable information is scant on this topic, but i was really hoping for better.
February 24, 2011
Would have been more enjoyable as a recreational read had it not been written as an academic/scholarly history. The author's insistence on quoting his medieval sources verbatim, without translating the Old English for contemporary readers, was pretty tiresome.
October 16, 2014
Naturally a biography of this period, 15th century, suffers from the lack of reliable sources and has to make do with guesswork and legends. Nevertheless, an interesting book with a clear intention not to be "another book about the War of the Roses".
September 27, 2013
A good and brief account of this ancestress of the royal family. So many novels drag her through the mud, and this clears it up a bit, though as so often with history so distant, so many questions remain. Not too much conjecture either.
January 16, 2009
Very historically grounded. Interesting portrayal of the families involved in the Wars of the Roses. Richard III was really EVIL!
August 3, 2011
Probably the most through and only exisiting biography of Elizabeth Woodville. A must for any collector of English royal history.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews