 |
Reply
| | From:  Linda_J9 (Original Message) | Sent: 11/27/2007 7:15 PM |
Have any of you read the David Starkey books on English history and/or the Tudors? I had never heard of Mr. Starkey until TV Ontario (educational/cultural network) began showing his Monarchy series. I'm finding the series quite interesting, and he's not quite as pedantic as Simon Schama! I recently read Starkey's book about H8's six wives. Quite good, I thought, except that most of the book was about Catherine and Anne -- he gave pretty short shrift to the other 4 wives. And, even in print, Starkey is more accessible than Schama! Now I have _Elizabeth: The Struggle for the Throne_ out from the library, and am just starting it. Does anybody have any strong views one way or the other about how accurate Starkey is? Linda |
|
 First
Previous
2-8 of 8
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
I've read both those books, & my impression was that he was equally as opinionated as Weir & I was a little disappointed as he was touted to be this top-notch historian & I recall seeing a lot of discrepancies with other stuff I've read. Makes you wonder who did his research. Unfortunately it was so long ago that I read them that I can't remember what irked me specifically. |
|
Reply
| |
Ages ago, our PBS station ran a series hosted by Starkey. I can't remember exactly what it was about, but in one scene, he was talking about the sport of hawking. He was wearing a leather glove, as he explained, "to keep the bird's talons from sinking into my flesh". The words alone don't convey the pedantic style in which he spoke them. For some reason, that quote cracked my son up! I recently got Starkey's series on the 6 wives from our local library to re-watch, and my son, passing through the room, heard that voice and shouted "that's the 'talons sinking into my flesh' guy!!!" One of those odd phrases that has made a permanent home in our family lexicon!  Especially when playing with our kitten!  Oh, and I totally agree with Linda, Starkey is absolutely predisposed to Katherine of Aragon! While I'll freely admit that I find Anne Boleyn the most fascinating wife, I find something to admire or be interested in, in each of the unfortunate women. I don't think any "6 wives" biographer is completely unbiased, they all seem to have their 'favorites'. terrilee |
|
Reply
| |
In a earlier post regarding Tudor historians, I referred to David Starkey as Richard Starkey of all people....Ringo! I am a child of the Beatles age. LOL! As far as David Starkey spending most of his time on Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn...it is understandable isn't it, when you consider the amount of time he was married to Catherine and of course the political and religious upheaval that occured when he divorced her to marry Anne. This caused religious and secular upheaval for generations thereafter. |
|
Reply
| |
There's also a great deal more material available on Catherine of Aragon & Anne Boleyn than on the other 4 wives combined. I think he took the easy way out by focusing mainly on them. |
|
Reply
| |
I found a lot of things in Satrkey that didn't quite jibe with facts I've seen elsewhere. When an author is disagreeing with Garrett Mattingly on Catherine of Aragon (though it was published in I think 1941, it's still considered the definitive work on her), I have to wonder what else he's gotten wrong. |
|
Reply
| |
I wouldn't necessarily say he's gotten things wrong...since alot of history is open to interpretation...disagreeing isn't always getting it wrong... |
|
|
First
Previous
2-8 of 8
Next
Last
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to The Tudors
