What do you think?
Rate this book
Katherine Swynford
Jeannette Lucraft presents this historical biography of Katherine Swynford, a powerful figure in the politics of 14th century England, and an example of how a woman could manipulate the social mores of the time for her own interests.
256 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2006
59 people are currently reading
1638 people want to read
About the author
Jeannette Lucraft
1 book3 followersJeannette Lucraft is a graduate of the University of Huddersfield, where she was awarded a first class history degree. She lives in West Yorkshire.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
May 2, 2011
Wife to the son of a king, mother of numerous important people and the ancestress of many of the royal houses of Europe, Katherine Swynford is someone whose importance to history is not reflected in the documents and written record of the time she lived. No letters written by her survive and not even her testament has come down to us. Her grave seems to have been a relatively modest affair, even before it was partially destoyed in the seventeenth century.
I think Jeannette Lucraft is right to emphasise that in part this is because of Katherine's own discretion. Katherine was "baseborn", and before her marriage and elevation to the title of Duchess of Lancaster, she was the mistress of John of Gaunt, son of King Edward III, for over twenty years. A key part of Lucraft's work is to deconstruct the hostile references in the monastic chronicles of the time, which contain much of our information of Katherine. She reveals that they reveal very little about her. The entries were ultimately written to criticise Gaunt not Katherine and they use relatively stock phrases - comparisons to Eve, calling her an enchantress and so on. They are nothing like the targeted attack on Edward III's mistress Alice Perrers, who was at one time impeached in parliament. This lack of information indicates the dignity and discretion with which Katherine carried out her duties and relations within the Lancaster household. She does not seem to have had much of a political role, but she possessed enough political skill (and perhaps character as well) to maintain the goodwill of both kings Richard II and Henry IV in the turbulent political period of the early fifteen century.
Lucraft often finds herself forced by the lack of direct evidence having to use information relating to Katherine's family or associates to make her point. As governess to Gaunt's children, it could be assumed that she was educated to a degree. Lucraft comes as close to proving this as she can with current evidence by pointing out the literacy of her Beaufort children and her Lancastrian step family. It was interesting to read of the close links between the various branches of the family - Katherine's two sets of children from her two husbands and Gaunt's children by his first wife Blanche of Lancaster. Where information can be more directly inferred - such as her coat of arms, for example - Katherine Swynford does seem to have consciously tried to fashion her own identity. In this case her badge of Katherine wheels was seemingly used to connect her with one of the most popular saints of the Middle Ages - Saint Katherine.
Anyone not used to the limitations of Medieval sources would probably be disappointed by the lack of biographical information provided here. There is also some clumsy language and repetition. "The English Queen was known for her willingness to care for the children of those in her service. Almost all the letters of Philippa that are extant were written on behalf of others. If Paon was a favourite in the King's retinue, then it would seem highly likely that the Queen's good and kind nature would have led her to place his daughters in suitable positions" appears on both pages 5 and 102 of my copy with the only changes being one word wrongly inserted, the alteration of the spelling of Paon's name to Payne and "the King's retinue" to "Edward III's retinue" all in the second entry. On the whole Lucraft has written an entertaining book, and one long-overdue.
I think Jeannette Lucraft is right to emphasise that in part this is because of Katherine's own discretion. Katherine was "baseborn", and before her marriage and elevation to the title of Duchess of Lancaster, she was the mistress of John of Gaunt, son of King Edward III, for over twenty years. A key part of Lucraft's work is to deconstruct the hostile references in the monastic chronicles of the time, which contain much of our information of Katherine. She reveals that they reveal very little about her. The entries were ultimately written to criticise Gaunt not Katherine and they use relatively stock phrases - comparisons to Eve, calling her an enchantress and so on. They are nothing like the targeted attack on Edward III's mistress Alice Perrers, who was at one time impeached in parliament. This lack of information indicates the dignity and discretion with which Katherine carried out her duties and relations within the Lancaster household. She does not seem to have had much of a political role, but she possessed enough political skill (and perhaps character as well) to maintain the goodwill of both kings Richard II and Henry IV in the turbulent political period of the early fifteen century.
Lucraft often finds herself forced by the lack of direct evidence having to use information relating to Katherine's family or associates to make her point. As governess to Gaunt's children, it could be assumed that she was educated to a degree. Lucraft comes as close to proving this as she can with current evidence by pointing out the literacy of her Beaufort children and her Lancastrian step family. It was interesting to read of the close links between the various branches of the family - Katherine's two sets of children from her two husbands and Gaunt's children by his first wife Blanche of Lancaster. Where information can be more directly inferred - such as her coat of arms, for example - Katherine Swynford does seem to have consciously tried to fashion her own identity. In this case her badge of Katherine wheels was seemingly used to connect her with one of the most popular saints of the Middle Ages - Saint Katherine.
Anyone not used to the limitations of Medieval sources would probably be disappointed by the lack of biographical information provided here. There is also some clumsy language and repetition. "The English Queen was known for her willingness to care for the children of those in her service. Almost all the letters of Philippa that are extant were written on behalf of others. If Paon was a favourite in the King's retinue, then it would seem highly likely that the Queen's good and kind nature would have led her to place his daughters in suitable positions" appears on both pages 5 and 102 of my copy with the only changes being one word wrongly inserted, the alteration of the spelling of Paon's name to Payne and "the King's retinue" to "Edward III's retinue" all in the second entry. On the whole Lucraft has written an entertaining book, and one long-overdue.
December 5, 2014
This is a nonfiction book about Katherine, the long time mistress and later wife of John of Gaunt. However it is not a biography that gives timely description of Katherine’s life; it’s more like a dissertation. That doesn’t mean it’s bad or not interesting – quite the contrary. The author analyzes historical references to Katherine in the contemporary and later sources and I find her conclusions and assertions there overall well founded. The Katherine/St Katherine line and the Camilla parallels are also interesting. There are some repetitions in the book but Mrs. Lucraft deals with the information available, assesses it critically and generally refrains from building theories on pure conjecture, an issue that irritated me when reading Mrs. Weir’s book on Katherine.
Yet I give it only three stars. The book that introduced Katherine to most of us – Mrs. Seton’s amazing novel – has been rightfully accused of building an image of its heroine that’s influenced by the author’s time and ascribing her feelings and motives from it rather than from her own. But, in my view, the two recent nonfiction books I’ve read about her try to portray her too much in the light of the conceptions of our time – most notably individualism and feminism and that’s my main issue with this book. Anyone interested in Katherine will conclude that she must have been a remarkable woman: for being able to hold the Duke’s attention for so long; for prompting him make such an extraordinary step; for being valued by both her and Gaunt’s children; for being well accepted at court after the marriage; for being held in high esteem by the two quite different and conflicting kings – Richard II and Henry IV. Achieving all these requires numerous qualities but they are mainly soft skills and do not coincide with our notion of active strong individuality. After all, she is known to history for being Duke of Lancaster’s long time mistress and wife and ancestress to many kings and queens. All these are things out of her control and it was not her, but her royal lover who acted bold for whatever reasons. Even the core of the author’s suggested self-proclaimed identity of Katherine - her newly adopted coat of arms – may well have been her husband’s doing since it was only after their marriage. As for her wish of being remembered as Duchess of Lancaster only – who wouldn’t want so in her situation for a variety of reasons? (it’s a bit of an irony then that she’s predominantly referred to as Katherine Swynford) But then: doesn’t her plausibly deliberate omission of her first husband and the fact that she became the Duke’s mistress so soon after Hugh’s death contradict Mrs. Lucraft’s assertion of her first marriage being her own choice? Actually I think the whole presentation of her Swynford marriage in the book is a good example of applying contemporary concepts on the matter.
There are many reasons to assert that Katherine undoubtedly possessed great discretion but the second part of the saintly appropriation –her piety - is not so obvious. Her wish of having private masses at home could make her look religious, not pious; moreover, the author herself admits it was a kind of a fashion at the time. I guess both in hers and our time a woman living in open adultery could hardly be considered pious; not to mention the author’s – in my view ungrounded – suggestion of a shotgun marriage with Hugh: it would make her a ‘serial offender’. Al least in her novel Mrs. Seton has addressed this contradiction in a convincing (even though in all likelihood historically incorrect) way.
And finally, unlike Katherine, poor Constance has not been given the privilege of contemporary individualism: we’ve been duly reminded that it’s a comparatively modern concept to view the wife and the mistress as necessarily enemies. But then, Mrs. Lucraft admits she’s not impartial to Katherine; and I guess it’s not much of a problem since we, her readers, are most likely not either.
Yet I give it only three stars. The book that introduced Katherine to most of us – Mrs. Seton’s amazing novel – has been rightfully accused of building an image of its heroine that’s influenced by the author’s time and ascribing her feelings and motives from it rather than from her own. But, in my view, the two recent nonfiction books I’ve read about her try to portray her too much in the light of the conceptions of our time – most notably individualism and feminism and that’s my main issue with this book. Anyone interested in Katherine will conclude that she must have been a remarkable woman: for being able to hold the Duke’s attention for so long; for prompting him make such an extraordinary step; for being valued by both her and Gaunt’s children; for being well accepted at court after the marriage; for being held in high esteem by the two quite different and conflicting kings – Richard II and Henry IV. Achieving all these requires numerous qualities but they are mainly soft skills and do not coincide with our notion of active strong individuality. After all, she is known to history for being Duke of Lancaster’s long time mistress and wife and ancestress to many kings and queens. All these are things out of her control and it was not her, but her royal lover who acted bold for whatever reasons. Even the core of the author’s suggested self-proclaimed identity of Katherine - her newly adopted coat of arms – may well have been her husband’s doing since it was only after their marriage. As for her wish of being remembered as Duchess of Lancaster only – who wouldn’t want so in her situation for a variety of reasons? (it’s a bit of an irony then that she’s predominantly referred to as Katherine Swynford) But then: doesn’t her plausibly deliberate omission of her first husband and the fact that she became the Duke’s mistress so soon after Hugh’s death contradict Mrs. Lucraft’s assertion of her first marriage being her own choice? Actually I think the whole presentation of her Swynford marriage in the book is a good example of applying contemporary concepts on the matter.
There are many reasons to assert that Katherine undoubtedly possessed great discretion but the second part of the saintly appropriation –her piety - is not so obvious. Her wish of having private masses at home could make her look religious, not pious; moreover, the author herself admits it was a kind of a fashion at the time. I guess both in hers and our time a woman living in open adultery could hardly be considered pious; not to mention the author’s – in my view ungrounded – suggestion of a shotgun marriage with Hugh: it would make her a ‘serial offender’. Al least in her novel Mrs. Seton has addressed this contradiction in a convincing (even though in all likelihood historically incorrect) way.
And finally, unlike Katherine, poor Constance has not been given the privilege of contemporary individualism: we’ve been duly reminded that it’s a comparatively modern concept to view the wife and the mistress as necessarily enemies. But then, Mrs. Lucraft admits she’s not impartial to Katherine; and I guess it’s not much of a problem since we, her readers, are most likely not either.
December 30, 2019
Katherine Swynford is a relatively well-known figure thanks to the enduring popularity of Anya Seton’s historical fiction classic, Katherine. But the real, or historical, Katherine is harder to discover. Much of the evidence of her life has been lost or destroyed, leaving large gaps in our understanding of Katherine.
Jeannette Lucraft’s approach in Katherine Swynford: The History of a Medieval Mistress is far different from a conventional biography, namely because of this lack of evidence. She begins with a biographical sketch of Katherine’s life and family before spending two chapters discussing how Katherine has been seen and talked about by her contemporaries and by historians. Then Lucraft focuses on trying to discern facets about Katherine’s life by turning to the wider world of the late fourteenth century, for instance arguing that the fact that Katherine was mother and/or governess to highly educated and highly literate children suggests that Katherine herself was intelligent, well-educated and literate, or else exploring the idea that Katherine, as mistress to John of Gaunt, might not have been so derided or so scandalous as we might think – after all, bastard children and mistresses were a normal occurrence in medieval nobility. The last two chapters of the book are look at the ways Katherine formed her own identity, suggesting that Katherine’s adoption of Katherine wheels (associated with St Catherine of Alexandria) in her coat of arms was a deliberate act to construct her identity and then diverting her attention to show how other figures of Katherine’s era (Margery Kempe, Richard II) similarly associated themselves with saints for various reasons.
Lucraft’s writing is academic in tone, sometimes a bit clunky but still readable. She is very clear when she speculating about Katherine’s life or personality and her arguments are logical and convincing. I appreciated that while she discussed the various theories that connect Katherine with various aspects of Geoffrey Chaucer’s work (for instance, the idea that she was the model for his Criseyde), she is also explicit about the difficulties and dangerous of making assumptions based on Chaucer’s work, which was fiction and was recited in front of a royal audience. Lucraft also cautions us in taking the chroniclers at face-value, arguing that the condemnation of Katherine tended to characterise her in the model of the Biblical Eve, the treacherous, inferior woman, and lacked the personal details that featured in the criticisms of Alice Perrers, Edward III’s notorious mistress.
There were a few little blights. The introduction begins by paralleling John of Gaunt, Blanche of Lancaster and Katherine Swynford with Prince Charles, Princess Diana and Camilla, which I found bizarre and unnecessary, especially since Blanche of Lancaster hardly features in Lucraft’s book and it’s doubtful that Gaunt and Katherine began their affair while Blanche was still alive. Lucraft’s final chapter, while I understand what she was arguing and why (and found it interesting), seemed to go on for a long time without much discussion of Katherine.
All up, however, this is a fascinating study of Katherine Swynford. Highly recommended.
Jeannette Lucraft’s approach in Katherine Swynford: The History of a Medieval Mistress is far different from a conventional biography, namely because of this lack of evidence. She begins with a biographical sketch of Katherine’s life and family before spending two chapters discussing how Katherine has been seen and talked about by her contemporaries and by historians. Then Lucraft focuses on trying to discern facets about Katherine’s life by turning to the wider world of the late fourteenth century, for instance arguing that the fact that Katherine was mother and/or governess to highly educated and highly literate children suggests that Katherine herself was intelligent, well-educated and literate, or else exploring the idea that Katherine, as mistress to John of Gaunt, might not have been so derided or so scandalous as we might think – after all, bastard children and mistresses were a normal occurrence in medieval nobility. The last two chapters of the book are look at the ways Katherine formed her own identity, suggesting that Katherine’s adoption of Katherine wheels (associated with St Catherine of Alexandria) in her coat of arms was a deliberate act to construct her identity and then diverting her attention to show how other figures of Katherine’s era (Margery Kempe, Richard II) similarly associated themselves with saints for various reasons.
Lucraft’s writing is academic in tone, sometimes a bit clunky but still readable. She is very clear when she speculating about Katherine’s life or personality and her arguments are logical and convincing. I appreciated that while she discussed the various theories that connect Katherine with various aspects of Geoffrey Chaucer’s work (for instance, the idea that she was the model for his Criseyde), she is also explicit about the difficulties and dangerous of making assumptions based on Chaucer’s work, which was fiction and was recited in front of a royal audience. Lucraft also cautions us in taking the chroniclers at face-value, arguing that the condemnation of Katherine tended to characterise her in the model of the Biblical Eve, the treacherous, inferior woman, and lacked the personal details that featured in the criticisms of Alice Perrers, Edward III’s notorious mistress.
There were a few little blights. The introduction begins by paralleling John of Gaunt, Blanche of Lancaster and Katherine Swynford with Prince Charles, Princess Diana and Camilla, which I found bizarre and unnecessary, especially since Blanche of Lancaster hardly features in Lucraft’s book and it’s doubtful that Gaunt and Katherine began their affair while Blanche was still alive. Lucraft’s final chapter, while I understand what she was arguing and why (and found it interesting), seemed to go on for a long time without much discussion of Katherine.
All up, however, this is a fascinating study of Katherine Swynford. Highly recommended.
May 8, 2016
I think this deserves 3.5 (sometimes a girl needs a half) but since that's not possible, 3 it is.
I found this a very enjoyable and thought provoking look at a woman who could easily have been lost to history. Not one word of hers is known to have survived: no will and testament; no diary; no letter. Frustratingly, therefore, we must look at her reflection in those around her and this is the task Lucraft sets herself. In this, I believe she has been largely successful. Clearly, in order to become the governess of Gaunt and Blanche of Lancaster, Katherine must have been an accomplished woman as indeed we might expect of her court upbringing. To hold Gaunt's attention for decades, she must have been more than that. The most powerful magnate and politician of a generation, Gaunt seems to have inspired great loyalty; so we can say Katherine was loyal and intelligent. To manage long periods in his absence implies self-reliance; to keep a cordial relationship with both Richard II and Henry Bolingbroke suggests a personal integrity and quite possibly a good sense of humour; to live as Gaunt's Mistress in the household of his wives speaks to her discretion and diplomacy; to be admired so much by her daughter, Joan Beaufort, that she chose to buried with her mother and not, as he expected, her husband suggests a warm and loving nature.
For me though, where Lucraft has excelled is in drawing out for a modern audience Katherine's intent in choosing St Katherine as her personal saint. Neither Katherine was broken on the wheel of fortune and both were seemingly strong women, atypical for their time and possessing characteristics than any 21st woman would recognise: the ability and determination to forge their own paths.
Lastly, we have Katherine's tomb in Lincoln Cathedral. No stone figure tops what was described as a 'curious' monument to a woman discreet to the last. I'd like to think Katherine was grinning at us from the shadows, amused that she fascinates us still.
I found this a very enjoyable and thought provoking look at a woman who could easily have been lost to history. Not one word of hers is known to have survived: no will and testament; no diary; no letter. Frustratingly, therefore, we must look at her reflection in those around her and this is the task Lucraft sets herself. In this, I believe she has been largely successful. Clearly, in order to become the governess of Gaunt and Blanche of Lancaster, Katherine must have been an accomplished woman as indeed we might expect of her court upbringing. To hold Gaunt's attention for decades, she must have been more than that. The most powerful magnate and politician of a generation, Gaunt seems to have inspired great loyalty; so we can say Katherine was loyal and intelligent. To manage long periods in his absence implies self-reliance; to keep a cordial relationship with both Richard II and Henry Bolingbroke suggests a personal integrity and quite possibly a good sense of humour; to live as Gaunt's Mistress in the household of his wives speaks to her discretion and diplomacy; to be admired so much by her daughter, Joan Beaufort, that she chose to buried with her mother and not, as he expected, her husband suggests a warm and loving nature.
For me though, where Lucraft has excelled is in drawing out for a modern audience Katherine's intent in choosing St Katherine as her personal saint. Neither Katherine was broken on the wheel of fortune and both were seemingly strong women, atypical for their time and possessing characteristics than any 21st woman would recognise: the ability and determination to forge their own paths.
Lastly, we have Katherine's tomb in Lincoln Cathedral. No stone figure tops what was described as a 'curious' monument to a woman discreet to the last. I'd like to think Katherine was grinning at us from the shadows, amused that she fascinates us still.
July 27, 2013
http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2149871.html[return][return]A fairly short book, with a bit of a sense of PhD thesis pushed into book form, looking at the life and historical treatment of Katherine Swynford, John of Gaunt's lover and later his wife in the late 14th century. The core facts are interesting enough - her father appears to have been a Flemish mercenary, but she moved comfortably in royal circles and her sister married Geoffrey Chaucer, and her love affair with Gaunt was publicly acknowledged while his second wife was still living. Lucraft dwells on the scandalised treatment of the Gaunt household arrangements by later monastic chroniclers, but carefully dissects them to demonstrate that there may really have been general acceptance of the situation, with the most negative comments written some time afterwards, politically motivated and inaccurate on the facts. Indeed I wish she had gone a bit further and explicitly looked at the John of Gaunt / Katherine Swynford / Isabella of Castile relationship as a stable triad, terminated only by Isabella's death; there are plenty of historical, literary and contemporary examples to draw from. (One favourite of mine is Peter Dickinson's alternate twentieth-century British Royals in King and Joker.)[return][return]Lucraft then offers an interpretation of Katherine's personal worldview as having been inspired by St Catherine of Alexandria. Here she makes a very good case for the fact of Katherine's devotion based on the surviving iconography, but falls down a bit in interpreting what this might have meant to her subject: Catherine of Alexandria was, famously, a virgin, and Katherine Swynford, also fairly famously, was not (Swynford was the surname of her first husband, by whom she had had three children before the four she had with John of Gaunt). I think that there must be something in St Catherine's facility in helping her devotees to overcome suffering, and also possibly her personal devotion to learning, but Lucraft disappointingly strays off the specifics into a general discussion of godly women (though I did find the parallels with Margery Kempe interesting).[return][return]This was an interesting example of what you can learn about a person, and about history, when they were moderately important in their won right but can only be reconstructed from physical artefacts and from what other people said about them.
July 21, 2015
I wavered back and forth on this rating. Probably the fairest would be a 3.5 or about there, but let's round up because we're feeling generous.
The pros: This is a well researched book on not only Katherine, but also the world she lived in and the pressures she faced. Honestly, we just can't know a lot about her. Women were not written about a lot. If it wasn't for Anya Seton's bio on KS, we would probably ignore her as well--but a best seller will do that for a girl. Who doesn't love the tale of a powerful man marrying his life long love despite public opposition? It's a dang good Cinderella story, and we all know how popular that can be. Lucraft makes excellent arguments about the tightrope KS had to walk and that to be a woman loved by John of Gaunt, she couldn't be the stereotypical mistress. In order to hold the place she did, she couldn't have been Alice Perrers or the like. By all evidence, Katherine had to be substantially different. Lucraft does well in showing the differences.
The cons: The evidence about Katherine's life is rare. Lucraft relies on suppositions and external evidence, sometimes getting caught in the minutia of her arguments. Margery Kempe is interesting, but probably deserves her own book rather than pages in Katherine's. I think these arguments are valid, just perhaps went on a little long in places. It made for tedious reading in parts.
The pros of this being a book about someone my foolish romantic nerd heart adores definitely outweighs the cons, but they can't make me blind to them--alas.
The pros: This is a well researched book on not only Katherine, but also the world she lived in and the pressures she faced. Honestly, we just can't know a lot about her. Women were not written about a lot. If it wasn't for Anya Seton's bio on KS, we would probably ignore her as well--but a best seller will do that for a girl. Who doesn't love the tale of a powerful man marrying his life long love despite public opposition? It's a dang good Cinderella story, and we all know how popular that can be. Lucraft makes excellent arguments about the tightrope KS had to walk and that to be a woman loved by John of Gaunt, she couldn't be the stereotypical mistress. In order to hold the place she did, she couldn't have been Alice Perrers or the like. By all evidence, Katherine had to be substantially different. Lucraft does well in showing the differences.
The cons: The evidence about Katherine's life is rare. Lucraft relies on suppositions and external evidence, sometimes getting caught in the minutia of her arguments. Margery Kempe is interesting, but probably deserves her own book rather than pages in Katherine's. I think these arguments are valid, just perhaps went on a little long in places. It made for tedious reading in parts.
The pros of this being a book about someone my foolish romantic nerd heart adores definitely outweighs the cons, but they can't make me blind to them--alas.
November 28, 2010
Lucraft's study of Katherine Swynford was an award-winning academic paper which ended up published. The author's purpose was to find the personality of Katherine in the barren contemporary sources. For me her approaches worked. Her reasoning is laid open in chapters that consider church chroniclers, social conventions, religious preferences, and what she calls "medieval spin" -- image presentation. I am left with the feeling of having read balanced good sense.
October 18, 2012
An excellent take on an intriguing woman. It's a bit odd, at first glance, with a book about a person where her (or his, but in this case her) life is dealt with on the first 16 pages of a biography about someone. In this case it isn't really odd - because there is precious little hard historical records about this woman, and what is known is here presented as a background for this study. In short, it is not a biography in the conventional sense, where the book starts with the birth and ends with the death. Instead it deals a lot with both how history has treated her (from a few contemporary sources up to modern times) but also how Katherine, long time mistress and finally wife of John of Gaunt and mother of several prominent members of the English aristocracy, could have wanted to be viewed herself (for example through her choice of coat of arms).
It's a dissertation, and as such of course well researched and with an ample set of notes and both primary and secondary texts used in the study. And it is still a very entertaining book (I know, dissertations can very well be entertaining - but not always, not even when they deal masterfully with the subject - so it's worth pointing out).
It's a dissertation, and as such of course well researched and with an ample set of notes and both primary and secondary texts used in the study. And it is still a very entertaining book (I know, dissertations can very well be entertaining - but not always, not even when they deal masterfully with the subject - so it's worth pointing out).
May 13, 2015
This history about Katherine Swynford is just what has been missing from the lexicon of medieval England. Lucraft's well-researched biography sheds light on one of England's most forgotten matriarchs. Katherine's story is compelling and Lucraft uses her rich storytelling skills to share it.
August 7, 2019
An example of that well-known genre, the thesis worked up into a book. Kind of interesting for what it says about the status of medieval women, but very dry. TL:DR - nobody knows jack about Katherine Swynford herself, here's some ideas of what she *might* have been like.
May 18, 2024
Two stars means "it's OK" and after dithering a while, I think that seems a fair rating. The author did extensive and careful research. She put a lot of thought into everything. She worked very hard to draw out any bit of insight into the real Katherine Swynford that she possibly could. Given the subject matter, her original text was probably a very good disertation. There is just no getting around the sad fact that there is not much information about Katherine who I am sure was an interesting woman. John of Gaunt found her fascinating for decades! Most of the book is wordy and convoluted, however. It would have been nice if Lucraft had been offered the chance to write a chapter in a book about medieval women instead.
December 27, 2016
Qué difícil tarea la de retratar a un personaje del que sólo hay fuentes indirectas. Aún despojada del encanto con la que la imaginación de Seton la envuelve en su clásica biografía, el estricto trabajo de investigación que aquí presenta la autora, nos deja ver la misma Katherine Swynford: valiente, inteligente, altamente instruida, prudente, carismática y bella, todos estos atributos en superlativo. No podía ser de otra manera una niña de indiferente cuna que lograría superar el estigma de un adulterio imposible de esquivar para alcanzar la legitimidad de una estirpe de la que habría de descender la más intrépida dinastía de occidente.
May 13, 2020
Not at all the biography I was expecting. In my humble opinion, not a biography at all. More a discussion about the identity of Katherine Swynford. Who was she really? How did she impact the Wars of the Roses and the Tudors? What did her contemporaries think of her? What is the identity she wanted others to see? More of a research paper feel than a true biography. There was very little talk about Katherine's actual life (perhaps because there is so little data) but it still would have been nice to have things laid out in a more orderly, chronological fashion.
April 18, 2022
While I enjoyed this book it wasn't actually a biography of the said woman,(very little is known about her personality etc) but more a book about women's role generally in the 14th c. There was maybe approx 1/4 devoted to supposition of what Katherine may have been thinking or why she may have acted in certain ways etc according to the social rules of the day. Rather a good social statement about women's roles but not a biography of Katherine.
May 15, 2017
Rare but eminently worthwhile book. The style and extensive examination of primary sources might not appeal to the general reader, but for its worth persevering. Reveals a lot about this remarkable woman and her family, and also cuts through some of the nonsense currently circulating about John of Gaunt.
January 11, 2022
Opens up new avenues of thought
Very thorough research. Gives more insight into that remote and fascinating woman who kept her love, raised a great family and maintained her place in society against the probable doubts of church and council. I felt I knew her a little better than before.
Very thorough research. Gives more insight into that remote and fascinating woman who kept her love, raised a great family and maintained her place in society against the probable doubts of church and council. I felt I knew her a little better than before.
January 7, 2019
not bad
Repetitive in the way it is written. I've read much more informative books concerning this subject although the timeline seems accurate
Repetitive in the way it is written. I've read much more informative books concerning this subject although the timeline seems accurate
March 21, 2019
Very good and compact biography of Katherine with a nice insight into life of medieval women.
November 12, 2009
Realizing that there are not enough details for a full biography of Katherine Swynford, mistress and then wife of John of Gaunt in the fourteenth century, Lucraft instead investigates Katherine's history: not just the details of her life, but her place in her times. She looks at the depiction of Katherine by sources from her own time to the present, separating fact from conjecture, and discusses how Katherine may have chosen to present herself and her own image, notably through her association with St. Katherine. I found this a readable (though occasionally stilted), balanced, scholarly assessment.
June 21, 2016
This read like someone's history thesis.
It's not a bad read overall - the history, from what I know of the period, makes sense, and the dive into the historiography, and how to DO history about someone who has left no direct sources, was interesting.
There were a couple of places where it desperately needed an editor - one where the same sentence was repeated within a page of itself, and another where an entire paragraph was repeated about 100 pages on from where it was originally.
I don't know enough about Margery Kempe to assess the chapter about her (which honestly didn't really make sense in the context of Katherine Swynford, although it did flesh out the book nicely.)
It's not a bad read overall - the history, from what I know of the period, makes sense, and the dive into the historiography, and how to DO history about someone who has left no direct sources, was interesting.
There were a couple of places where it desperately needed an editor - one where the same sentence was repeated within a page of itself, and another where an entire paragraph was repeated about 100 pages on from where it was originally.
I don't know enough about Margery Kempe to assess the chapter about her (which honestly didn't really make sense in the context of Katherine Swynford, although it did flesh out the book nicely.)
June 16, 2011
Not a bad book, but there's just so little really known about Katherine Swynford there's hardly enough to make a biography out of! I finished this feeling I had learned more about Margery Kempe than I had about Katherine Swynford. There were also several times when I found text repeated almost verbaitm from one section to another.
January 26, 2014
Not a bad book, just not very informative. I am not sure any non-fiction bio of Katherine Swynford can tell us very much, as she didn't leave a great deal of information behind her. We can imagine so much more, and to me historical fiction novels on this subject are so much more satisfying.
March 31, 2017
Interesting view points and information about the society in which Katherine lived but it sometimes felt like there was a lot devoted to not Katherine to make a point. Still a really interesting read and I learned a lot more about the focus of saints in medieval society.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews