What do you think?
Rate this book
Within the Fetterlock by Wainwright, Brian (March 1, 2004) Paperback
The cognizance of the House of York was a Falcon, enclosed within a Fetterlock... The year is 1396. King Richard II is childless, the succession to the English throne is in doubt. When the rebellious Henry of Lancaster returns from exile in France in a bid to claim the throne, Constance of York is threatened on all sides. Closely related to both the King and Henry of Lancaster, she is drawn into intrigues as her husband and her brother jostle with their Lancastrian and Mortimer cousins in the race for supremacy.
Paperback
First published March 30, 2004
4 people are currently reading
1803 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
August 20, 2008
A great read -- not your usual true love and battles and a happy ending -- this is a complicated tale of intrigue, treachery and conspiracy. This is not a quick and easy read. The "cast of characters" is large and complicated, it was well into 100+ pages before a grasped it all but well worth it. The author provided a list of characters to refer to which I found very helpful.
All in all a great read about a period I knew little about. As a side note, this book begins about the period that Katherine leaves off -- but is not related to that book and does not favor Henry of Bolingbrook that well. I did love the final scene between Constance and Henry's Queen. LOL. At the same time, I did enjoy reading about what become of Henry, as well as Katherine and John's two sons. Highly recommended.
As a side note, check out this author's other book, The Adventures Of Alianore Audley. An hysterical send up of historical fiction, I doubt that Mel Brooks could have done better. Set in the period of Edward IV and Richard III. I recommend having a passing knowledge of the period or you'll miss half the jokes.
All in all a great read about a period I knew little about. As a side note, this book begins about the period that Katherine leaves off -- but is not related to that book and does not favor Henry of Bolingbrook that well. I did love the final scene between Constance and Henry's Queen. LOL. At the same time, I did enjoy reading about what become of Henry, as well as Katherine and John's two sons. Highly recommended.
As a side note, check out this author's other book, The Adventures Of Alianore Audley. An hysterical send up of historical fiction, I doubt that Mel Brooks could have done better. Set in the period of Edward IV and Richard III. I recommend having a passing knowledge of the period or you'll miss half the jokes.
December 9, 2011
I've always been a Sharon Kay Penman fan for historical fiction, and I'm usually disappointed when I pick up British historical fiction of that style by other authors -- too much romance, and too much ridiculous fiction. Despite the complex and massive cast of characters, I thought this was a really interesting story... it was great to follow-up and read more about a cast that falls between the settled Plantagenets and the generation or two preceding the War of the Roses. Constance is a complex, admirable, and often incredibly frustrating main character.
It's a good book, and I enjoyed it, but I'm not sure it's one that I want to run out and buy. Also, my recommendation to anyone has to include a caution about the cast of characters... I felt, at times, that characters were very briefly introduced, only to have them play an integral part 200 pages later, at which point, you've forgotten their introduction. This happened throughout three-quarters of the book. Only by the last hundred pages did I feel as though I finally had a good grasp on every character, without flipping to the guide at the front.
It's a good book, and I enjoyed it, but I'm not sure it's one that I want to run out and buy. Also, my recommendation to anyone has to include a caution about the cast of characters... I felt, at times, that characters were very briefly introduced, only to have them play an integral part 200 pages later, at which point, you've forgotten their introduction. This happened throughout three-quarters of the book. Only by the last hundred pages did I feel as though I finally had a good grasp on every character, without flipping to the guide at the front.
September 29, 2010
Wow, what an richly detailed and wonderful book! I thoroughly enjoyed reading "Within the Fetterlock" and put the book down very reluctantly when finished. The amount of detailed historical research within the book is evident; however, the story flows quickly, keeping the reader's interest throughout. I especially enjoyed reading about a different historical period than I usually do, and greatly loved learning more about Richard II, Henry IV and the main character, Constance Despenser. I certainly cannot wait for Brian Wainwright's next novel.
December 18, 2020
Edmund of Langley, the fourth son of Edward III and first Duke of York, had as his cognizance a falcon enclosed within a fetterlock, purportedly chosen to signify that he and his heirs were foreclosed from any hope of gaining the throne. Edmund had three children: the wily and ambitious Edward, Constance, and Richard of Conisbrourgh. This novel is a saga of this family, primarily centering on Constance, from 1396 until 1406, during which time Henry Bolingbroke usurped the throne from Richard II, sowing the seeds from which the War of the Roses sprang.
As the tale opens, Richard II’s court is buzzing with the news that his uncle John of Gaunt has just married his long time mistress, Katherine Swynford. Constance, wife of Thomas Despenser, Earl of Gloucester, is part of that court, and staunchly loyal to her cousin the king. Even at this time, Constance and Thomas’s position is threatened by those that are opposed to Richard, foremost among them the Earl of Warwick, Richard Beauchamp. Her brother Edward is a favorite of the king, but aims to rise even higher. Both are also close to their Mortimer cousins, next in line to Richard’s throne.
Neither Constance nor her husband can reconcile themselves to Henry Bolingbroke’s usurpation of the throne and, along with brother Edward, join in an unsuccessful plot to unseat him. Thomas pays with his life, and Constance with her property and freedom. The shrewd and charming dissembler Edward manages to ingratiate himself with the new King Henry.
The novel ends after the failure of Constance and Edward’s latest scheme to rescue the legitimate heirs to the throne, the Mortimer brothers, and deliver them to the custody of their uncle in Wales. Both manage once again to escape with their lives, it being implied that this was due to Henry’s secret love for his cousin Constance. The chameleon Edward had also managed to ingratiate himself with Prince Hal.
Constance is proud, condescending, but also courageous. Unlike many historical novels, she does not develop any kind of warm and fuzzy relationship with her waiting women, but remains disdainful of them. Edward’s wife—silly on the surface but just as conniving and ambitious as her husband—consistently irritates Constance by addressing her as “Connie.” I can’t say I found Constance likable, but I did find her admirable.
Richard, the third York sibling—and grandfather of Edward IV and Richard III, gets the least amount of ink, primarily because he is much younger than his siblings during this time and because less is known about him. However, his budding romance with his future wife, Anne Mortimer is portrayed. Richard was poor and landless. Even as a second son, this was unusual but it was suggested that the Duke of York made no provision for him because he believed Richard was the product of his wife’s adultery.
While the political intrigues during this time period are at the forefront, the author skillfully weaves in the human stories. Constance’s marriage to Thomas is a happy one, and when he is killed she finds love with her cousin Edmund Mortimer. Constance put herself at enormous risk to try to deliver the Mortimer heirs to their uncle Edmund. While there is no historical evidence for this relationship, the author explains that he wanted to show in human terms that the destinies of the York and Mortimer families were already linked, and in this he is successful.
When Edmund Mortimer is captured and then marries Owain Glyn Dwr’s daughter, Constance feels betrayed and alone in Henry IV’s court. She feels the need for comfort and support and finds it in the arms of Edmund (Mun) Holland, Earl of Kent, to whom she bears a child. However, Mun’s support proves to be illusory; charged with treason, Mun fails to come forward when Constance asks for a champion to represent her in a trial by combat. But we already had the measure of the man, when shortly after their liaison began, he brags to comrades that he "had" Constance, and “left her begging for more.”
This is a model of first class historical fiction with the author’s extensive knowledge of the period providing a rich backdrop for some vividly portrayed personalities. If I have any criticism, it is that it is probably a tad too much detail about the ins and outs of the political situation in the first 200 pages.
As the tale opens, Richard II’s court is buzzing with the news that his uncle John of Gaunt has just married his long time mistress, Katherine Swynford. Constance, wife of Thomas Despenser, Earl of Gloucester, is part of that court, and staunchly loyal to her cousin the king. Even at this time, Constance and Thomas’s position is threatened by those that are opposed to Richard, foremost among them the Earl of Warwick, Richard Beauchamp. Her brother Edward is a favorite of the king, but aims to rise even higher. Both are also close to their Mortimer cousins, next in line to Richard’s throne.
Neither Constance nor her husband can reconcile themselves to Henry Bolingbroke’s usurpation of the throne and, along with brother Edward, join in an unsuccessful plot to unseat him. Thomas pays with his life, and Constance with her property and freedom. The shrewd and charming dissembler Edward manages to ingratiate himself with the new King Henry.
The novel ends after the failure of Constance and Edward’s latest scheme to rescue the legitimate heirs to the throne, the Mortimer brothers, and deliver them to the custody of their uncle in Wales. Both manage once again to escape with their lives, it being implied that this was due to Henry’s secret love for his cousin Constance. The chameleon Edward had also managed to ingratiate himself with Prince Hal.
Constance is proud, condescending, but also courageous. Unlike many historical novels, she does not develop any kind of warm and fuzzy relationship with her waiting women, but remains disdainful of them. Edward’s wife—silly on the surface but just as conniving and ambitious as her husband—consistently irritates Constance by addressing her as “Connie.” I can’t say I found Constance likable, but I did find her admirable.
Richard, the third York sibling—and grandfather of Edward IV and Richard III, gets the least amount of ink, primarily because he is much younger than his siblings during this time and because less is known about him. However, his budding romance with his future wife, Anne Mortimer is portrayed. Richard was poor and landless. Even as a second son, this was unusual but it was suggested that the Duke of York made no provision for him because he believed Richard was the product of his wife’s adultery.
While the political intrigues during this time period are at the forefront, the author skillfully weaves in the human stories. Constance’s marriage to Thomas is a happy one, and when he is killed she finds love with her cousin Edmund Mortimer. Constance put herself at enormous risk to try to deliver the Mortimer heirs to their uncle Edmund. While there is no historical evidence for this relationship, the author explains that he wanted to show in human terms that the destinies of the York and Mortimer families were already linked, and in this he is successful.
When Edmund Mortimer is captured and then marries Owain Glyn Dwr’s daughter, Constance feels betrayed and alone in Henry IV’s court. She feels the need for comfort and support and finds it in the arms of Edmund (Mun) Holland, Earl of Kent, to whom she bears a child. However, Mun’s support proves to be illusory; charged with treason, Mun fails to come forward when Constance asks for a champion to represent her in a trial by combat. But we already had the measure of the man, when shortly after their liaison began, he brags to comrades that he "had" Constance, and “left her begging for more.”
This is a model of first class historical fiction with the author’s extensive knowledge of the period providing a rich backdrop for some vividly portrayed personalities. If I have any criticism, it is that it is probably a tad too much detail about the ins and outs of the political situation in the first 200 pages.
August 31, 2012
‘I do not understand,' she got out. 'The King hates me. He will not even uphold my rights against cattle thieves. Why does he want me where he will have me under his eye every single day of our lives?
She watched as Kent struggled with the proposition. I don't know,' he admitted. ' What does it matter? You must see you've no choice.' From Within the Fetterlock.
The second novel of Brian Wainwright, Within the Fetterlock is a true epic in the true sense of the word – an utterly satisfying historical family saga of the type very difficult to find nowadays.
Set in the unsettled times of Richard II – a time when kin destroyed kin and planted seeds that one day became the War of the Roses, Within the Fetterlock tells the story of Constance, a very proud Plantagenet princess. Possessing a strong sense of right and wrong, blue blooded to her very core, yet also vulnerable, Constance holds her pride as a shield against an uncertain, dangerous world.
Constance is the only legitimate daughter of the Duke of York, Edmund of Langley, the fourth son of Edward III. Langley chose for his family the cognizance of a falcon confined within a fetterlock, indicating his recognition and acceptance of the constraints set upon his power, which meant his family should never inherit the throne. Langley, like his daughter, desires to be loyal to his nephew, Richard II. Unlike his daughter, future events, often set in motion by Langley’s own ambitious and deceitful son, will force him to turn from his loyalty; he choses to support the complex Henry of Lancaster, another nephew and regarded by Langley almost like another son. A man who also loves Constance and knows he will never have her.
Wedded to Thomas Despenser when they both were small children, the story opens to show Constance and Thomas as young adults, very happily matched in their marriage, but Thomas is soon caught up in his brother-in-law’s machinations for the throne, with Constance pulled along by the currents and out into deadly depths not of her own making.
Within the Fetterlock possesses a multi cast of characters, but unlike many books of this type, the author never bogs down story. It is a novel that keeps the reader fully engaged and turning pages to the very end. All the characters possess clear, distinct voices, drawn with the skill of a talented author who more than just knows his history. His obvious passion for this subject and certain grip on this time period brings it alive.
Constance is a glittering character I will long remember. Her story of survival amidst so much grief and loss is so symbolic of women of this time and class. Constance's story symbolises too how women of her class were often falcons held 'within the fetterlock' of their patriarchal society. As with all Wainwright's characters, from the first page, Constance becomes real and vivid. With her beloved husband, family and then, when widowed, her lover under threat, we feel her pain and despair, her desire to remain loyal no matter the cost and her anger when she perceives herself betrayed.
Brian Wainwright’s prose weaves a densely wrought tapestry of immense colour and life, setting the reader deep within Medieval England. In a time when a King’s court moved constantly around his dominion, we experience this long ago England in all its seasons, entering a place where kin are prepared to kill one another if it means winning a blood-drenched throne.
©Wendy J. Dunn 2005
The second novel of Brian Wainwright, Within the Fetterlock is a true epic in the true sense of the word – an utterly satisfying historical family saga of the type very difficult to find nowadays.
Set in the unsettled times of Richard II – a time when kin destroyed kin and planted seeds that one day became the War of the Roses, Within the Fetterlock tells the story of Constance, a very proud Plantagenet princess. Possessing a strong sense of right and wrong, blue blooded to her very core, yet also vulnerable, Constance holds her pride as a shield against an uncertain, dangerous world.
Constance is the only legitimate daughter of the Duke of York, Edmund of Langley, the fourth son of Edward III. Langley chose for his family the cognizance of a falcon confined within a fetterlock, indicating his recognition and acceptance of the constraints set upon his power, which meant his family should never inherit the throne. Langley, like his daughter, desires to be loyal to his nephew, Richard II. Unlike his daughter, future events, often set in motion by Langley’s own ambitious and deceitful son, will force him to turn from his loyalty; he choses to support the complex Henry of Lancaster, another nephew and regarded by Langley almost like another son. A man who also loves Constance and knows he will never have her.
Wedded to Thomas Despenser when they both were small children, the story opens to show Constance and Thomas as young adults, very happily matched in their marriage, but Thomas is soon caught up in his brother-in-law’s machinations for the throne, with Constance pulled along by the currents and out into deadly depths not of her own making.
Within the Fetterlock possesses a multi cast of characters, but unlike many books of this type, the author never bogs down story. It is a novel that keeps the reader fully engaged and turning pages to the very end. All the characters possess clear, distinct voices, drawn with the skill of a talented author who more than just knows his history. His obvious passion for this subject and certain grip on this time period brings it alive.
Constance is a glittering character I will long remember. Her story of survival amidst so much grief and loss is so symbolic of women of this time and class. Constance's story symbolises too how women of her class were often falcons held 'within the fetterlock' of their patriarchal society. As with all Wainwright's characters, from the first page, Constance becomes real and vivid. With her beloved husband, family and then, when widowed, her lover under threat, we feel her pain and despair, her desire to remain loyal no matter the cost and her anger when she perceives herself betrayed.
Brian Wainwright’s prose weaves a densely wrought tapestry of immense colour and life, setting the reader deep within Medieval England. In a time when a King’s court moved constantly around his dominion, we experience this long ago England in all its seasons, entering a place where kin are prepared to kill one another if it means winning a blood-drenched throne.
©Wendy J. Dunn 2005
December 7, 2015
If you want to understand how The War of the Roses started, this is your guide! Overflowing with twisted relationships , intrigue, backstabbing and ruthlessness. Told from the viewpoint of Constance, daughter of the 4th son of Edward III, the 1st Duke of York. Her torn loyalties add immense drama to the telling. To have this quality on the front end balanced by SKP's Sunne in Splendour on the tail end, you can't resist wanting to fill in the in between. Awesome.
April 17, 2019
I had really high hopes for this one.
Within the Fetterlock is Brian Wainwright’s retelling of the events leading to the deposition of Richard II and the unstable first half of Henry IV’s reign, centred around Constance of York who was married to Thomas le Despenser, Earl of Gloucester. Like Susan Higginbotham’s The Traitor's Wife: A Novel of the Reign of Edward II, Wainwright’s novel had a buttload of glowing reviews that hailed it as something special from people who are usually picky about their historical fiction, like Higginbotham’s novel, I made an effort to find a copy for myself (this is out of print, Higginbotham’s appeared to be when I ordered my copy), and like The Traitor’s Wife, it disappointed bitterly.
At first, I thought it was going to be great. The writing was solid and mature, I liked the glimpses I got of the characters in the first 30 pages or so. After reading some absolute clunkers of novels that demonised Richard II, I appreciated that Wainwright’s Richard was sympathetically rendered. I enjoyed that the book employed multiple POVs, rather than sticking to one, as that promised characterisations that wouldn’t reduce themselves to caricatures of villains and good guys.
But as I delved deeper, I found the characterisations were highly simplistic. The writing became clunky at times and the novel suffered from a lack of focus. This lack of focus is because the protagonist is Constance of York and she is on the periphery of major events. So the early chapters meandered quite a lot while we followed Constance around without seeing much of anything. I know the history well enough to see Wainwright was laying the groundwork for future events, but even so, it didn’t hold the interest and Constance’s sections also seemed aimless. There seemed to be a lot of talking about events and not a lot of doing in the first chunk. The opening chapter takes place while the royal court travels to witness John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford’s wedding, but we don’t see it. Sure, it’s not important to the plot in the long term, but it’s one of those niggling things that stands in greater contrast when the novel was aimlessly wandering through the years.
But for me, the greatest problem was the characters. Constance of York is an interesting figure, historically speaking. She’s in a prime position to witness events – the daughter of Edmund, Duke of York, married to Thomas le Despenser (who was involved in the failed Epiphany Rising that attempted to restore Richard II of the throne), the sister of Edward of York (who was the favourite of Richard II and also involved in the Epiphany Rising (and likely the one who betrayed it)). She was also physically involved in one of the plots against Henry, abducting the “rightful” heirs, Edmund and Roger Mortimer in an attempt to crown them.
Wainwright’s Constance, however, is one of those dime-a-dozen plucky heroines who are always right and never wrong, who maintain moral superiority throughout the novel despite of her dubious actions, who is not like the other girls, who is the only thoroughly decent character around, who has a perfect snarky comment for anything and everything, and who seems to do little else other than sit in judgement of everyone from her little bubble of superiority. Worse, she’s not even that decent. When confronted by a woman pregnant with her so-called husband’s child, Constance physically abuses her. It is a tough and heartbreaking situation to be in, sure, but regardless of the circumstance, anyone who is violent to a vulnerable pregnant woman is a piece of shit, worthy only of disgust.
(I am actually surprised that woman did not miscarry because Constance and Joanne of Navarre were really wailing on her.)
We’re also introduced early on to Philippa Mohun, the abused wife of Golafre, who is initially drawn quite sympathetically but never fear! Constance’s great charity (giving her one (1) gown when her husband refuses to buy her new clothes and the rest of her clothes are unwearable) does not belie her character judgement as she inwardly recoils at Philippa calling her “Connie”! Sure enough, when her abuser is dead and Philippa marries Constance’s brother, Edward, she’s revealed to be a heinous bitch who gives herself airs, abuses animals, is overly familiar with her new family (seems to me like another case of “woman who married above her station is scum” here, cf. the historical treatments of Katherine Swynford, Eleanor Cobham and Elizabeth Woodville), thinks herself above everyone else, and is as evil and ambitious as her husband. And sure, Philippa is horrible and we’re meant to hate her. But having Constance actually, physically say Philippa deserved her husband’s abuse (because Constance believes that she was sleeping with Edward during her preceding marriage) and that Philippa slept her way in power is not doing your heroine any favours, Wainwright.
Furthermore, Constance doesn’t really come across as moral in her hatred for Henry IV, more of a fanatic. She’s practically frothing at the mouth to let rip about him.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is our heroine. A fanatic who thinks abused women deserve it and is physically violent towards a pregnant woman. Thanks, I hate her.
So what about the other characters? Everyone is very simplistically drawn. I like my historical fiction to be complex. It’s no fun for me when characters are just cartoonishly bad or good. I hate how Wainwright whacks Henry IV repeatedly in the face with the villain stick and declares job done. I have to resist the urge to vomit at the implication that he’s been secretly in love with Constance the whole time. I hate how his behaviour is exaggerated – it’s implied he’s responsible for the neglect of children, is amassing wealth by defrauding the country (this isn’t even remotely plausible), and personally and savagely beats a friar. And then we get a scene so everyone knows he’s impotent. Yay.
I don’t even like Henry IV that much and I want to defend him from this hot mess of a “characterisation” job.
Edward of York is also beaten Wainwright’s villain stick. He’s sneaky and power-hungry but physically a coward (I feel that Wainwright would nod approvingly at the sentiment that Edward’s death at Agincourt was “better” than he deserved, even if it involved him drowning in mud as per one account). Edward finds it “vaguely risible” that he is called “brother” by Richard II – a gesture of affection and respect, surely, but one Edward for some reason sees as pathetic. He’s a womaniser who sleeps around – despite the fact that there no attested children, legitimate or otherwise, for him. He latches onto various plots to unseat Henry and gain power for himself, but is too cowardly to stick to his convictions. He’s involved in every plot against Henry IV – there is good reason to believe that he fought with Henry at the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403 (a chronicler names the Duke of York and Earl of Rutland as present, Edward held both titles), but in Wainwright’s novel, he’s responsible for creating the wider plot against Henry IV and then just doesn’t turn up. The final pages of the book suggest that having gotten away with his many unsuccessful plots against the crown, he has set his sights on unseating Henry IV via his son, Hal (the future Henry V), and I would not be surprised if, in a (hopefully) hypothetical sequel, he goes onto be involved in the plots against Henry V before drowning in the mud at Agincourt because it’s what he “deserves” and it’s hilarious because Edward is fat (according to, if I recall correctly, Tudor propaganda).
I don’t think there are any other characters worthy of in-depth discussion. I did notice that most of the negative characters are described in ways that highlight their physical defects. Henry IV’s skin condition, his “squinting” eyes (Wainwright characterises him as losing his eyesight, though in at least one scene Wainwright forgets this) and often grunts his dialogue. Philippa’s gestures are very affected, her hands always “bejewelled”, her thigh “freckled” (freckles are caused by sun-exposure; why would a medieval noblewoman’s thigh be freckled?) and her mouth “ample”. The Duke of Orleans is described as ugly with “his long, ugly Valois noise, his cold deep set [sic] eyes, and his mean, cruel little mouth”. Hal (the future Henry V) has “an ugly nose” and eyes “that were striking, large and grey and unwavering, they reminded her [Constance] of someone long dead”. I’m surprised we didn’t get a lurid description of how ugly his scarred face was, but then his wounding at Shrewsbury is completely ignored. Edward’s weight is made a point once or twice.
On the opposite side of things, I was bewildered when Joanne of Navarre accused Henry of preferring someone “big and blonde” over herself and meant Constance because I had no idea what she was meant to look like – her height, build and hair colour.
In terms of historical accuracy, a lot of stuff is fine and down to interpretations. There is a historical note included where Wainwright admits to some of his creations (the adulterous affairs between Alianore Holland and Edward of York, Constance and Edmund Mortimer – the former illustrating how self-serving and ambitious that cad Edward is, the latter serving as inspiration for Constance’s rebellions in the final part of the novel, though Wainwright claims they serve to illustrate how interwoven the Mortimer and York families were). There are some scenes based on outdated information which were current during the writing of the novel – for example, Wainwright includes the now-debunked story that Henry and Mary de Bohun’s firstborn child was born when Mary was very young and didn’t live long; the evidence of this theory was misread and it actually refers to a child of Eleanor de Bohun and Thomas of Woodstock.
All in all, I am disappointed. This reads like a piece of Yorkist propaganda that bitterly resents everyone who didn’t die trying to overthrow Henry IV. Or at least, would have died had Henry IV not been secretly in love with Constance of York the whole time. Also for some reason, we’re meant to cheer on a character who beats up a pregnant woman.
Seriously, what the hell.
Within the Fetterlock is Brian Wainwright’s retelling of the events leading to the deposition of Richard II and the unstable first half of Henry IV’s reign, centred around Constance of York who was married to Thomas le Despenser, Earl of Gloucester. Like Susan Higginbotham’s The Traitor's Wife: A Novel of the Reign of Edward II, Wainwright’s novel had a buttload of glowing reviews that hailed it as something special from people who are usually picky about their historical fiction, like Higginbotham’s novel, I made an effort to find a copy for myself (this is out of print, Higginbotham’s appeared to be when I ordered my copy), and like The Traitor’s Wife, it disappointed bitterly.
At first, I thought it was going to be great. The writing was solid and mature, I liked the glimpses I got of the characters in the first 30 pages or so. After reading some absolute clunkers of novels that demonised Richard II, I appreciated that Wainwright’s Richard was sympathetically rendered. I enjoyed that the book employed multiple POVs, rather than sticking to one, as that promised characterisations that wouldn’t reduce themselves to caricatures of villains and good guys.
But as I delved deeper, I found the characterisations were highly simplistic. The writing became clunky at times and the novel suffered from a lack of focus. This lack of focus is because the protagonist is Constance of York and she is on the periphery of major events. So the early chapters meandered quite a lot while we followed Constance around without seeing much of anything. I know the history well enough to see Wainwright was laying the groundwork for future events, but even so, it didn’t hold the interest and Constance’s sections also seemed aimless. There seemed to be a lot of talking about events and not a lot of doing in the first chunk. The opening chapter takes place while the royal court travels to witness John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford’s wedding, but we don’t see it. Sure, it’s not important to the plot in the long term, but it’s one of those niggling things that stands in greater contrast when the novel was aimlessly wandering through the years.
But for me, the greatest problem was the characters. Constance of York is an interesting figure, historically speaking. She’s in a prime position to witness events – the daughter of Edmund, Duke of York, married to Thomas le Despenser (who was involved in the failed Epiphany Rising that attempted to restore Richard II of the throne), the sister of Edward of York (who was the favourite of Richard II and also involved in the Epiphany Rising (and likely the one who betrayed it)). She was also physically involved in one of the plots against Henry, abducting the “rightful” heirs, Edmund and Roger Mortimer in an attempt to crown them.
Wainwright’s Constance, however, is one of those dime-a-dozen plucky heroines who are always right and never wrong, who maintain moral superiority throughout the novel despite of her dubious actions, who is not like the other girls, who is the only thoroughly decent character around, who has a perfect snarky comment for anything and everything, and who seems to do little else other than sit in judgement of everyone from her little bubble of superiority. Worse, she’s not even that decent. When confronted by a woman pregnant with her so-called husband’s child, Constance physically abuses her. It is a tough and heartbreaking situation to be in, sure, but regardless of the circumstance, anyone who is violent to a vulnerable pregnant woman is a piece of shit, worthy only of disgust.
(I am actually surprised that woman did not miscarry because Constance and Joanne of Navarre were really wailing on her.)
We’re also introduced early on to Philippa Mohun, the abused wife of Golafre, who is initially drawn quite sympathetically but never fear! Constance’s great charity (giving her one (1) gown when her husband refuses to buy her new clothes and the rest of her clothes are unwearable) does not belie her character judgement as she inwardly recoils at Philippa calling her “Connie”! Sure enough, when her abuser is dead and Philippa marries Constance’s brother, Edward, she’s revealed to be a heinous bitch who gives herself airs, abuses animals, is overly familiar with her new family (seems to me like another case of “woman who married above her station is scum” here, cf. the historical treatments of Katherine Swynford, Eleanor Cobham and Elizabeth Woodville), thinks herself above everyone else, and is as evil and ambitious as her husband. And sure, Philippa is horrible and we’re meant to hate her. But having Constance actually, physically say Philippa deserved her husband’s abuse (because Constance believes that she was sleeping with Edward during her preceding marriage) and that Philippa slept her way in power is not doing your heroine any favours, Wainwright.
Furthermore, Constance doesn’t really come across as moral in her hatred for Henry IV, more of a fanatic. She’s practically frothing at the mouth to let rip about him.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is our heroine. A fanatic who thinks abused women deserve it and is physically violent towards a pregnant woman. Thanks, I hate her.
So what about the other characters? Everyone is very simplistically drawn. I like my historical fiction to be complex. It’s no fun for me when characters are just cartoonishly bad or good. I hate how Wainwright whacks Henry IV repeatedly in the face with the villain stick and declares job done. I have to resist the urge to vomit at the implication that he’s been secretly in love with Constance the whole time. I hate how his behaviour is exaggerated – it’s implied he’s responsible for the neglect of children, is amassing wealth by defrauding the country (this isn’t even remotely plausible), and personally and savagely beats a friar. And then we get a scene so everyone knows he’s impotent. Yay.
I don’t even like Henry IV that much and I want to defend him from this hot mess of a “characterisation” job.
Edward of York is also beaten Wainwright’s villain stick. He’s sneaky and power-hungry but physically a coward (I feel that Wainwright would nod approvingly at the sentiment that Edward’s death at Agincourt was “better” than he deserved, even if it involved him drowning in mud as per one account). Edward finds it “vaguely risible” that he is called “brother” by Richard II – a gesture of affection and respect, surely, but one Edward for some reason sees as pathetic. He’s a womaniser who sleeps around – despite the fact that there no attested children, legitimate or otherwise, for him. He latches onto various plots to unseat Henry and gain power for himself, but is too cowardly to stick to his convictions. He’s involved in every plot against Henry IV – there is good reason to believe that he fought with Henry at the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403 (a chronicler names the Duke of York and Earl of Rutland as present, Edward held both titles), but in Wainwright’s novel, he’s responsible for creating the wider plot against Henry IV and then just doesn’t turn up. The final pages of the book suggest that having gotten away with his many unsuccessful plots against the crown, he has set his sights on unseating Henry IV via his son, Hal (the future Henry V), and I would not be surprised if, in a (hopefully) hypothetical sequel, he goes onto be involved in the plots against Henry V before drowning in the mud at Agincourt because it’s what he “deserves” and it’s hilarious because Edward is fat (according to, if I recall correctly, Tudor propaganda).
I don’t think there are any other characters worthy of in-depth discussion. I did notice that most of the negative characters are described in ways that highlight their physical defects. Henry IV’s skin condition, his “squinting” eyes (Wainwright characterises him as losing his eyesight, though in at least one scene Wainwright forgets this) and often grunts his dialogue. Philippa’s gestures are very affected, her hands always “bejewelled”, her thigh “freckled” (freckles are caused by sun-exposure; why would a medieval noblewoman’s thigh be freckled?) and her mouth “ample”. The Duke of Orleans is described as ugly with “his long, ugly Valois noise, his cold deep set [sic] eyes, and his mean, cruel little mouth”. Hal (the future Henry V) has “an ugly nose” and eyes “that were striking, large and grey and unwavering, they reminded her [Constance] of someone long dead”. I’m surprised we didn’t get a lurid description of how ugly his scarred face was, but then his wounding at Shrewsbury is completely ignored. Edward’s weight is made a point once or twice.
On the opposite side of things, I was bewildered when Joanne of Navarre accused Henry of preferring someone “big and blonde” over herself and meant Constance because I had no idea what she was meant to look like – her height, build and hair colour.
In terms of historical accuracy, a lot of stuff is fine and down to interpretations. There is a historical note included where Wainwright admits to some of his creations (the adulterous affairs between Alianore Holland and Edward of York, Constance and Edmund Mortimer – the former illustrating how self-serving and ambitious that cad Edward is, the latter serving as inspiration for Constance’s rebellions in the final part of the novel, though Wainwright claims they serve to illustrate how interwoven the Mortimer and York families were). There are some scenes based on outdated information which were current during the writing of the novel – for example, Wainwright includes the now-debunked story that Henry and Mary de Bohun’s firstborn child was born when Mary was very young and didn’t live long; the evidence of this theory was misread and it actually refers to a child of Eleanor de Bohun and Thomas of Woodstock.
All in all, I am disappointed. This reads like a piece of Yorkist propaganda that bitterly resents everyone who didn’t die trying to overthrow Henry IV. Or at least, would have died had Henry IV not been secretly in love with Constance of York the whole time. Also for some reason, we’re meant to cheer on a character who beats up a pregnant woman.
Seriously, what the hell.
March 4, 2014
Quite difficult to follow for perhaps a hundred pages, many many characters (and few different names), and a period I wasn't much familiar with, so I had to keep going back to the table of characters for the family relationships, and they were not the most uncomplicated.
But then I decided to let the story take me where it would, and in the end I think I understood the roots of the Wars of the Roses (if not the political, at least the psychological ones); the many characters on stage were necessary to convey the atmosphere of the period, a chaos of plots, treachery, and schemes and a place where loyalty, trust and love were not the easiest to receive or to give.
And finally what I loved most and the gift that only the best stories can give: the unsaid, and it's not to take for granted in a book of more than 500 pages...
But then I decided to let the story take me where it would, and in the end I think I understood the roots of the Wars of the Roses (if not the political, at least the psychological ones); the many characters on stage were necessary to convey the atmosphere of the period, a chaos of plots, treachery, and schemes and a place where loyalty, trust and love were not the easiest to receive or to give.
And finally what I loved most and the gift that only the best stories can give: the unsaid, and it's not to take for granted in a book of more than 500 pages...
February 16, 2013
4.5 stars
I confess that I was a little skeptical when starting this book, as it had 2 hurdles to overcome. First, the main character is a woman while the author is a man. (My experience is that gender reversal does not work). The second hurdle is *spoiler alert* that there is no happy ending (I'm rather partial to happy endings). That being said, this is a fabulous book! It is well-written and well-researched. The characters are well-developed and interesting and likable (well, the likable characters, that is). There are no anachronisms of language that jar on the ear (or the eye), and while the historical period (Richard II's reign) is not one that I've read much about, the book provides a highly readable and highly understandable explanation of the circumstances that led to the War of the Roses.
I highly recommend this book!
I confess that I was a little skeptical when starting this book, as it had 2 hurdles to overcome. First, the main character is a woman while the author is a man. (My experience is that gender reversal does not work). The second hurdle is *spoiler alert* that there is no happy ending (I'm rather partial to happy endings). That being said, this is a fabulous book! It is well-written and well-researched. The characters are well-developed and interesting and likable (well, the likable characters, that is). There are no anachronisms of language that jar on the ear (or the eye), and while the historical period (Richard II's reign) is not one that I've read much about, the book provides a highly readable and highly understandable explanation of the circumstances that led to the War of the Roses.
I highly recommend this book!
September 9, 2012
I really like well-researched historical fiction, and this book does not disappoint, delving into a good medieval setting, portraying characters as they would have acted and not judging them by modern standards. Unfortunately, the novel also reads more like chronicle than a story, the first half especially is a continuous "and then, and then, and then". Even the slightly faster pace of the latter half is not enough to fulfill my requirements for character development and plot.
June 22, 2010
I had a difficult time keeping up with all the characters. It was very slow reading for me. I read through page 150 and I haven't yet identified the plot and the main focus of the book. It seems like the heroine goes from one city/castle to the next, doing the same thing with no goal in mind. I wouldn't recommend this book.
October 12, 2016
Mr. Wainwright has delivered a great read with this complicated, muti-character book that took me a bit of time to finish...as well as a fair amount of frustration in keeping pace with a "crazy good" plot...I recommend this tale of royalty entangled within their intrigues highly...
This is also a second reading for me...
This is also a second reading for me...
July 24, 2023
This book would have been better with a family tree to reference! The recurring names of Mortimers, Despensers, the Yorks, and the Percys pop up in every century! This is a lesser known time than the time of Edward II and Isabella of France, when these same families are on different sides, and again during the Wars of the Roses, both of which are roughly 70 years before and 70 years after this book, respectively.
This book also started slowly, but it did pick up. There was a lot of plot and less speaking between the characters, which, I felt, slowed the book down. Still, it was an interesting perspective from within the York family at the time of the usurpation of the throne of England, by the new King Henry IV. And it was surprising good as the story revolved around Constance of York, a women, and it was written by a man. (I mention this because not a lot of female-lead books are written by men.)
There is not that much historical fiction, or even well-done nonfiction, on this middle time period in England, after the plague and before Agincourt. Though the usurpation of the Crown factors heavily into later English history! If you are interested in Medieval times and would like to see what it was like pitting families against each other at the time when King Richard II is deposed, then I recommend this read. It was interesting, just not that engaging.
This book also started slowly, but it did pick up. There was a lot of plot and less speaking between the characters, which, I felt, slowed the book down. Still, it was an interesting perspective from within the York family at the time of the usurpation of the throne of England, by the new King Henry IV. And it was surprising good as the story revolved around Constance of York, a women, and it was written by a man. (I mention this because not a lot of female-lead books are written by men.)
There is not that much historical fiction, or even well-done nonfiction, on this middle time period in England, after the plague and before Agincourt. Though the usurpation of the Crown factors heavily into later English history! If you are interested in Medieval times and would like to see what it was like pitting families against each other at the time when King Richard II is deposed, then I recommend this read. It was interesting, just not that engaging.
June 1, 2015
I am a huge fan of Sharon Kay Penman, and when I heard this book compared to hers, I knew I had to read it. I wasn't disappointed. Actually, I prefer this book over Penman's most recent works, because it shows more depth and effort at character development instead of being a flat historical narrative with a cast of thousands. In addition to Penman's earlier work, I'd compare this book to Hella Haasse's In a Dark Wood Wandering, which takes place in the same late medieval time period, only in French history rather than English history. My only complaint is that it's too short. I would have liked to see it continue into the reign of Henry V, but I can see why Wainwright ended it when he did, as his main character Constance fell into relative obscurity after the events described.
Henry IV part I is also my favorite of Shakespeare's history plays, and it's fascinating to see some of the characters it depicts, namely Hotspur, his father and uncle, and Edmund Mortimer, depicted in ways that are both familiar and unfamiliar. I think this book gives depth to Henry Bolingbroke, but it doesn't provide as much insight into Richard II.
Henry IV part I is also my favorite of Shakespeare's history plays, and it's fascinating to see some of the characters it depicts, namely Hotspur, his father and uncle, and Edmund Mortimer, depicted in ways that are both familiar and unfamiliar. I think this book gives depth to Henry Bolingbroke, but it doesn't provide as much insight into Richard II.
July 6, 2012
At first, when I began this novel, I was a little worried that I could not keep the characters straight, thank goodness for the author principal character key at the beginning of the book. As I read further, I grabbed a hold of the story and could not let go.
Constance of York is the main character of this novel-closely related to King Richard the II and Henry of Lancaster. Constance of York's life is forever in tormoil over her Lancastrian and Mortimer cousins. This story dwevles deep into the life at court, the love she had for her husband, Thomas Despenser, and her loyalty to King Richard II.
Richly written, with details of the life at court, and the web of royal descendants and their courtiers-proves difficult for the reader to put down.
Historical England and the battle of the Lancasters and Plagenets could not be better told than "Within the Featherlock". Ranks up there with Sharon Penman's novels.
Constance of York is the main character of this novel-closely related to King Richard the II and Henry of Lancaster. Constance of York's life is forever in tormoil over her Lancastrian and Mortimer cousins. This story dwevles deep into the life at court, the love she had for her husband, Thomas Despenser, and her loyalty to King Richard II.
Richly written, with details of the life at court, and the web of royal descendants and their courtiers-proves difficult for the reader to put down.
Historical England and the battle of the Lancasters and Plagenets could not be better told than "Within the Featherlock". Ranks up there with Sharon Penman's novels.
October 16, 2012
Brian Wainwright does an amazing job with this novel set in the days leading up to the removal of Richard II as King of England. This story is told from the point of view of Constance of York, the only daughter of the Edmund Langley, fifth son of King Edward III. She was an eyewitness (in the novel) to what the Lords Appellant did to King Richard II just when he was taking full control of the kingdom. Constance of York is the king's ally and she will stop at nothing to remove the Usurper Henry of Bolingbroke from the throne and put Richard back in power or his legitimate heirs, the Mortimers. I came to the novel full of Lancaster sympathy, now I'm trying to see the other side, now I can see better why Richard in the 1390s is making a power play for supremacy and getting revenge on all the Lords Appellant. Wonderful book...I have ordered it to add to my copy of Harry of Monmouth by A. M. Maugham. Highly recommended.
January 23, 2017
I really enjoyed this book. It did a much better job than most of showing things from different points of view. The main character Constance is very easy to root for, and I understood her motivations. But then the point of view changed to someone else who was having difficulties with her, and I understood their perspective too. The characters came to life.
I do wish that the author had given time information. The book often jumped forward in time, and I would have liked to know exactly when I was. I was often not clear on major things like how many years since a really major event.
My other and more minor gripe is that the ending was a bit of a strange way to tie it up to me. The author hadn't done enough to support the feelings of the final perspective that were supposed to make for a poignant ending, but this is minor.
There was a little bit of language and sexual content that I whited out, but there were no lengthy sex scenes as in much historical fiction.
I do wish that the author had given time information. The book often jumped forward in time, and I would have liked to know exactly when I was. I was often not clear on major things like how many years since a really major event.
My other and more minor gripe is that the ending was a bit of a strange way to tie it up to me. The author hadn't done enough to support the feelings of the final perspective that were supposed to make for a poignant ending, but this is minor.
There was a little bit of language and sexual content that I whited out, but there were no lengthy sex scenes as in much historical fiction.
May 25, 2011
I love long rich historical fiction, especially medieval historical fiction, and Brian Wainwright may be on his way to joining Sharon Kay Penman and Elizabeth Chadwick as a master of the genre. Within the Fetterlock is the marvelous story of Constance of York and the seeds of the War of the Roses as Richard II is deposed and Henry Bolingbroke of the House of Lancaster seizes the throne.
While Wainwright does invent some information in order to move his narrative along, he makes note of these inventions and interpretations in his author's note. However, his inventions do not detract from a solid factual base. He is able to weave a fascinating and coherent story set in a confusing time often ignored by historical novelists. I hope that he will write many more such novels.
While Wainwright does invent some information in order to move his narrative along, he makes note of these inventions and interpretations in his author's note. However, his inventions do not detract from a solid factual base. He is able to weave a fascinating and coherent story set in a confusing time often ignored by historical novelists. I hope that he will write many more such novels.
June 4, 2014
Good historical novel which highlights the many difficulties that the aristocracy faced in keeping alive in the 14th and 15th centuries. As throughout history, lots of conniving and plots were being hatched and you simply had to back the right horse as there was no leeway for error. I think this book shows the very beginning of what actually culminated in the War of the Roses between Yorkists and Lancastrians. Most of the characters were related in some way either by blood or marriage and the story that the author weaves around Constance of York is both interesting and feasible. I enjoyed this first book I have read by this author and will certainly be looking for others.
September 10, 2013
A thrilling look at the court or Richard II and his overthrow by Harry Bollingbrok (later Henry IV) through the eyes of their cousin Constance of York. Constance is a forceful, intellegent somewhat frustrating, but never dull, main character who is familiar with the power politics of her day and is capable of playing them as well.
This book covers a large section of early 15th century English/Welsh history and the fallout of Own Glydower's rebellion.
This book covers a large section of early 15th century English/Welsh history and the fallout of Own Glydower's rebellion.
March 4, 2012
One of the best books of Henry IV. It's a shame because the first time I read this book, I felt sympathy for Henry, not so much anymore. The writing is amazing and the storyline fantastic. Cannot say enough about this book!
November 6, 2015
Constance of York must have been a real character. Even though this is historical fiction, enough is known about her to know she had an event filled life and lots of chutzpah. The author seemed to have fun explaining her motives and filling in the blanks.
July 29, 2014
This is one of those classics in historical fiction that I heard about from another lover of the genre. It is a great book still. Holds up well, fascinating glimpse into the time period. Worth the read for sure.
March 8, 2015
4.5 actually.
Brilliant book, very well written, chock full of historical details, and quite the cast of characters.
Highly recommend!
Brilliant book, very well written, chock full of historical details, and quite the cast of characters.
Highly recommend!
September 9, 2016
The first 2/3 was very strong. The last 1/4 was much less compelling. I found myself having to go back to remember who did what to whom in the last 75-100 pages.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews