David Starkey (1) (1945–)

David Starkey is the David Attenborough of English history; there's that same breathless, excited, delivery. Since history is just "little more than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortunes of mankind" listening to Starkey can never be as enjoyable as listening to Attenborough. The book ends with an epilogue contrasting Edward VIII with Princess Diana. Both placed their own happiness first, but the British people sided with Diana, apparently, and the royal family's popularity show more went into a tailspin. What will happen next, he wonders.

I, unlike Starkey, take no interest in the modern British monarchy --- those people are mere celebrities now, although it wasn't always so.

What did I get out of listening to this book? A more detailed understanding of the House of Hanover, and a realization that Prince Albert was more politically powerful than I had previously understood. All this must be useful for something, if just for better understanding of novels written or set during these periods.

What is the narrative? That the power of the monarchy showed a general tendency to diminish from the reign of Henry VIII as successive new monarchs were forced to make compromises with those who were willing to support them. But it is hard to understand why they needed a monarch in the first place. There is something of the supreme executive, analogous to a United States President, except hereditary, in the English king. Through William III, an English king could be the actual commander-in-chief, and in the reigns of the George's the monarch's son might be a generals. There are analogies to the role of the kings of Ancient Sparta in that. Of course, in the reign of Queen Anne, the monarch was in no state to lead armies, hence the importance of the, also very talented, Duke of Marlborough. Are documents like Charles II's Declarations of Indulgence equivalent to a United States President's Executive Orders? It is impossible for me to tell.

Reading the book in reverse order of the chapters makes it somewhat more interesting. But it seems to me that all the theorizing and compact signing was just window dressing and what really mattered was chance and money.

The Plantagenet family tree demonstrates how the Wars of the Roses were not properly civil wars, just cousin wars that were waged until most of the cousins were eliminated. Richard II was murdered, Henry VI was murdered, Edward V was murdered, Richard III was killed in battle. That's plenty. show less

This was less the Six Wives: The Queens of Henry VIII Used As Backdrop for Countless Men Including but not Limited to Foreign Ambassadors, Bishops, Archbishops, Popes, Chamberlains, Assorted Privy Council and Gentried Fellows. While this book is doubtlessly chock full of great information, it is less about the wives and other women in Henry VIII's life. They are merely the lovely coat rack that the men drape themselves on reverently while scheming, counter-scheming, abstaining from scheming show more and considering scheming. Though of course, there are a few who abstain from scheming. The results are still the same - a bunch of talk about what the men folk are doing and quite bit less to do about the women.

I'd really hoped for a strong telling of the wants, needs, personalities and trials of each woman. I did get that but to have it, I was first required to weed through endless talk of ambassador this and bishop this and Lord High Everything Else that.

I've since seen that there is a feminist take on this same subject matter and that's likely what I'll need. I wouldn't discourage others from reading this book. I'd only say that you should read it with the caveat that Starkey couldn't dissect his female subjects from the men that roughly controlled their lives. It's both true of the author and the times in which they lived - these women were made/broken by men and therefore a complete story cannot be told without their inclusion.

It's brilliant study and educated reasoning. I just don't give a fig for it. show less

Most people believe the British monarchy to be a long unbroken line stretching into some unspecified medieval past where the whole panoply of state and parliament was born fully formed. In this book David Starkey presents a very different picture.

The relationship between the monarchy and the political culture of Britain is long, but has been full of personality, revolution, civil conflict and enough skullduggery and excitement to match any other nation on Earth. It is clear that Britain’s show more parliamentary democracy has evolved through those relationships the monarch formed with the leading political class - warlords, aristocracy or, latterly, leading political figures.

A common theme is that Britain has always seen a monarchy as the preferred model for governing the nation. The argument has always been about how much personal power the monarch has and how much control over the monarch the governing structure, eventually, parliament, has.

Starkey’s book is a little whirlwind at times as he crams in all the action, but is always readable and always exciting. This excellent book provides anyone who needs it a perfect overview of Britain’s monarchy and why they are so important to the structure of the country and the way we live now. show less

This book was really everything I look for in a non-fiction book about history. It was so engagingly written that it could have been non-fiction, but sources were all cited and deviations from accepted wisdom among Henry VIII scholars were mentioned. The story was presented chronologically, with a few, well integrated digressions to give us the history of each of Henry’s wives. Chapters were short and the introduction of new characters was kept to a minimum, creating a very lucid show more narrative. New characters were always given context, both in the writing and by some great family trees, and we were often reminded who recurring characters were. This made the massive amounts of information in this 880 page book fairly manageable.

Overall the book was very approachable, especially for something that clearly involves an awful lot of scholarly research. The straightforward writing style and family trees helped, as did the author’s lack of assumptions about the reader’s previous knowledge. It also helped, of course, that the book was just fun. The author is clearly enthusiastic about his subject and in addition to dates and events, there was speculation about people’s feelings and motivations, obviously separated from but based on historical records such as personal correspondences. Quotes from these sources were integrated into the story very nicely, adding to the narrative without disrupting it.

Finally, the story itself was full of enough drama for a TV show. And, in fact, it has been made into a show called Tudor, which I tried watching but couldn’t get into for lack of a sympathetic character in the first episode. The book, however, made if very easy to feel for each of Henry’s wives, even as they replaced each other. I think that’s what made the book so great – its stuck the perfect balance between historical accuracy and engaging personal stories.

This review first published on Doing Dewey. show less