Regina: The Queens Who Could Have Been

by Emily Murdoch Perkins

What queens would England have had if firstborn daughters, not firstborn sons, had inherited the throne? We may think of princesses as dutiful, marital conveniences to build alliances, wearing long flowing dresses, but the eldest daughters of our kings have been very different.

Political intriguers. Abducted nuns who demanded divorces. Murderers.

Our princesses have been mothers willing to risk anything for their children, wives who followed their husbands to the very ends of earth, and spinsters who demanded their intellectual and societal freedom.

This book explores what it meant to be royal, how sons came to be valued higher than daughters, and just how England might have looked under a royal matriarchy. The politicians we lost, the masterminds we see negotiating nunneries not armies, the personalities shining brilliantly even hundreds of years the Queens who should have been.

Let's meet them.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Biography, Feminism, Audiobook, Royalty

256 pages, Hardcover

Published June 3, 2025

Reviews

[Lois · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a fun and interesting biography of the oldest born daughters of British Monarchs. The final chapter quickly covers the Queens Regnant.

I would've rated this more highly if it didn't pretend to be feminist. Feminism isn't synonymous with 'women leadership'. This is why Nazi women aren't included in feminist history. Or the multitudes of white women who participated in the Transatlantic Slave Trade and directly profited. Chattel slavery was an early area in which white women had a lot of power and agency. Those women definitely weren't feminist and its not appropriate to label them as such.

This attempts to include that slavery was wrong but erroneously identifies serfs as 'slaves'. When that's not really accurate. Serfs weren't forcefully bred to create surplus serfs to be sold for profit. They weren't refused the right to marry or regularly had their children stolen from them. They weren't refused personhood. They were restricted by class in ways that are a violation of human rights and terrible. However, just like Japanese Concentration Camps weren't synonymous with Nazi Death Camps, both were violations of human rights and horrible but not the same. Those differences are important and matter.

She is also clearly unfamiliar with the history of chattel slavery in Europe, which started with Portugal before 1450. So many of the Black folks named in the chapter on Margaret Tudor Queen Consort of Scotland were the descendants of enslaved Black folks from Portugal or Castile.

Her treatment of Queen Regnant Anne is egregious. Queen Anne made Great Britain the slave trading capital of the world for a time via the Asiento de negros in 1713. For better or worse a vast expansion of The Transatlantic Slave Trade *is* her legacy. That's not even mentioned. Instead, we're told about her work ethic and other bullshit.

She's harder on Queen Victoria but also soft on her abysmal human rights policies. Not to mention the 'scramble for Africa' or her atrocious behaviors in India. Sigh. I don't care about her being a bad mom.

Feminism means these monarchs have to be judged using an intersectional lens. The author ignores racism that would've existed in the lifetime of the last 'daughter' covered, Princess Anne, the current Princess Royal. Who's definitely said and participated in racism. You can't focus on the leadership and remove the ugly shit they supported and consider this a Feminist history of anything or anyone.

This is just your average white washed view of the oldest daughters of British monarchs. Which is fine, but let's not pretend because the focus is on women that alone makes this a feminist history.

For more on UK Monarchs and their expansion and profits from Transatlantic Slavery:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2....

[Karyn M · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 / The Queens who might have been; the world that could have been. It’s intriguing to ponder living in a very different world, if only they were chosen to rule instead of being overlooked.

An interesting dive into what could have been for the firstborn daughters of English royalty. Spanning centuries, Emily writes in a chatty style. Working with sometimes little to go on, she brings history (herstory) to life.

The Edith Queens (870-?)
The Nordic Queens (990-c.1093)
The Norman Queens (?-1182)
The Plantagenet Queens (1102-1275)
The Edward Queens (1269-1382)
The Rose Queens (1392-1503)
The Renaissance Queens (1489-1662)
The George Queens (1687-1828)
The Modern Queens (1840-today)
The Queens Who Were (1516-2022)

I really enjoyed learning about the different family dynamics, politics and feudal territories of the day (there are many). Filled with snippets, interesting insights and annotations, it does not feel too heavy on text for me. Sometimes difficult to follow, as so many names are similar, occasionally jumping back and forth, but once I let go of the desire to keep track of everyone precisely, it flowed better. 

This is a great book for anyone who has even a passing interest in history. Who knows, it might be a starting point to a whole new passion.

Marked up to 4⭐️

3.5 ⭐️ Kindle Edition

[Karlie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating read! I especially loved learning about all the medieval princesses. The writing also had an engaging narrative style that wasn’t boring.

My only complaint is the writer’s characterization of Queen Victoria at the end. I felt like for every other woman she did a good job of being impartial and laying out each woman’s good qualities and flaws but she kind of raked Victoria over the coals without giving any good qualities. And then she ended the chapter saying that basically the one good thing Victoria left the world with was lots of heirs, but since there were a bunch of males, England won’t get another Queen Regnant for at least 100 years. I don’t think you can put all the blame for that on Victoria, sheesh. I love Queen Victoria not because she was a perfect untouchable monarch but because she was a dynamic, 3-dimensional human being. Yes, she did have sexist views and didn’t support feminism, but like look at her traumatic childhood. Also Albert always gets portrayed as a perfect saint but he was really sexist and I think he limited her abilities. I think his sexist attitudes played a role in shaping Victoria’s opinions. I think she genuinely had attachment issues because everyone in her life was trying to manipulate and use her from the moment she was born, and when she decided she could trust someone, she went all in, even if it was to an extreme. And I think this aspect of her mental health is relatable and too often disregarded by historians. I just really think this book’s writer did Victoria a disservice in her portrayal. Yes, everything that was said of her was true, but it was not balanced with positive things or acknowledgement of her full circumstances. The writer mentioned wanting to include stories people hadn’t heard when talking about the 6 queen regnants from British history. So why not mention Victoria’s friend Abdul, or her goddaughter Sarah Forbes Bonetta (who was an African princess), or how she single-handedly made medicated births become more socially acceptable, or that she is the reason we all decorate Christmas trees? There’s so much more to her than just a grumpy widow who sulked in her palace and nitpicked her children.

*thank you for coming to my Queen Victoria Ted talk. For further reading on Victoria I would recommend Lucy Worsley’s books*

[historic_chronicles · Rating 5 out of 5]

Picture this: instead of kingdoms being left to the eldest legitimate son, what if they were instead left to the eldest daughter?

This is the question that Emily Murdoch Perkins asks her readers to challenge as she leads them on a journey through British history from the days of the Anglo-Saxon period right up to the current royal family.

Perkins' research is immaculate in this comprehensive volume highlighting the female figures who could have ruled in the place of their more famous male counterparts. The narrative is amusing and engaging, drawing the reader in from the very first pages and keeping them hooked throughout with fascinating facts and theories.

With a feminist approach that easily encourages readers in their enthusiasm, this book is a fantastic addition to any non-fiction bookshelf.

[Rosie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book explores the Queens who could have been and frankly I’m slightly disappointed some of them didn’t get their shot on the throne!

The book takes us from medieval times to present day, and explores those who never got their chance at ruling - most of them daughters of monarchs who would have been capable or even given current inheritance rules, eligible to rule, but not deemed worthy due to being female. What shocked me the most is that I didn’t even know most of these famous figures had daughters … I was surprised to read so many names of Princesses I’d never heard of!

Of course a few of the names are known to us, Empress Matilda for example, but most of the women in this book have barely been recorded in history, let alone well-known.

This book is an enjoyable read, it’s split in to manageable sections and the format is easy to digest and follow (despite the fact that everyone and their husbands seem to have the same names!)

If you like your royal history or women’s history then I highly recommend this book to give you a different outlook on what could have been, and don’t worry it’s not conspiracy theory led at all, each could be Queens section ends with a summary of what the Queen may have been like based on the records of their personality, hobbies and achievements.

[Bluebelle-the-Inquisitive (Catherine) · Rating 4 out of 5]

English and British queens are, statistically, long rulers. Though only seven of the forty-four monarchs from William the Conqueror to Elizabeth II have been women, we have been ruled by women for over 22 per cent of that time.

Regina is definitely one for history lovers and women who know you never send a man to do a woman's job. I, for one, really, really wish we had been granted Vicky as Queen in 1901 rather than Bertie. She would have honoured Queen Victoria and Great Britain much better than her idiot brother. Vicky was a kind, skilled woman; her flaws in Prussia were due to a lack of training; it would not have been an issue with the throne of her birth.

Regina explores the idea of the English and subsequently the United Kingdom’s throne being inherited through strict primogeniture rather than male-preference primogeniture. AKA what would happen if older daughters could inherit the throne before their younger brothers. This is the situation now, but this only applies to births after 28 October 2011. Emily Murdoch Perkins does not try to imagine a potential entire line or the potential sociocultural ramifications; she just moves through the eldest born Princesses who missed out on the crown because of their gender, though there are some exceptions for exceptional or well-known Princesses. This is an author knowing her skills and limits and staying in her lane.

The book begins with Æthelflæd, the Lady of the Mercians, who was the first female consort of England, as would recognise it, from 881 to 911, and its first female leader from 911 until her death in 918. It ends with Anne, Princess Royal (b. 1950), the firstborn daughter of Queen Elizabeth II. The last chapter is dedicated to the Queens who were. It would have been disrespectful to ignore them in a book about the potential for female power. Those 6 women were the ones who showed the people what a female ruler could be, that a female ruler was possible. Murdoch Perkins wrote Regina after the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

The book is divided into chapters containing three or four would-be Queens, these are done by era, titled with a recognised name or a moniker, for example, The Edith Queens (870-?), The Plantagenet Queens (1102-1275) and The George Queens (1682-1828). Each would-be Queen has a biographical section and an ‘and if she had been Queen?’ section, so essentially what was and what could have been. It is very well organised and very listenable. It is an overview, a way to introduce people (let’s be honest, mostly women) to the women of the past in a different light.

Emily Murdoch Perkins narrates her own book. I think that was a very good choice. For a book with this sort of pronunciation, it takes skill to not completely mess up names like Æthelflæd (ETH-el-fled) and Estrith’s (ES-trith). I refer to hesr my non-fiction with some passion too. When you hear this, you don’t just get the intended inflections; you get to hear how much passion Murdoch Perkins has for her topics, for the lost potential. I won’t tell you who, but she definitely has favourites, both women and stories.

I’m going to include this as part of Popsugar's Reading Challenge 2025 for prompt #32 ‘A book about an overlooked woman in history’. Regina isn’t about one, it’s about many, many forgotten women. Women who could have changed the world, some of them still did, but not as Queens of the isle of their birth.

This marriage typifies the ‘trade’ of women, particularly princesses, to leading nobles and powerful men. The women were called frythwebba, or peace-weavers, this concept would have been familiar to all tribes in England, Nordic countries, and the Continent.

[angel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gives a brand new perspective on female heirs that were never given queenship.

[U · Rating 4 out of 5]

“I can’t wait to introduce you to women who demanded more and sometimes got it. They took their husbands to court, were the victims of kidnap plots, and were the first royals to have proper jobs. They were the princesses who changed the direction of not only English but European politics, and who could have done so much more. The queens who could – who should – have been. The politicians we lost, the masterminds we see negotiating nunneries not armies, the personalities who shine brilliantly even hundreds of years later.”

Regina: The Queen Who Could Have Been explores the lives of the eldest daughters of English monarchs, re-examining their historical roles and influence through a feminist lens. Spanning from the Anglo-Saxon era to the modern royal family, the book asks how British history might have unfolded if succession had favoured firstborn daughters rather than sons.

I was initially drawn to the book by its premise, curious about an England shaped by queens regnant rather than kings. However, I misinterpreted the description and expected a work of alternate history or speculative fiction, imagining a fully restructured monarchy where female succession was the norm. Instead, the book offers vivid, well-researched portraits of historical women based on available records, followed by brief reflections on how they might have ruled had they been prepared for the throne. These speculative sections often compare them to their reigning male relatives, assessing their potential as monarchs. While this method was engaging, I sometimes found the projections overly optimistic, occasionally extending beyond what the sparse historical sources can support. It's also worth noting that being on par with their male counterparts doesn’t necessarily imply effective rule, as many of those kings were deeply unpopular.

The writing is conversational, engaging, and often laced with humour, particularly when the author revisits earlier remarks, such as the shortage of Protestant princes or Thomas Becket’s demise. From a historiographical standpoint, I would have welcomed footnotes or more direct citations to support certain claims and allow for further exploration of unfamiliar figures, though I understand the author's choice to avoid overwhelming the narrative. That said, a few clarifications would have been helpful; for instance, I spent quite some time tracing the identity of Victoria, Princess Royal’s cousin-in-law, eventually discovering it was Maria Anna of Anhalt-Dessau.

One of the book’s most compelling choices was beginning not with the Normans, but with Æthelflæd, Lady of the Mercians, daughter of Alfred the Great. This decision allowed for a richer exploration of early medieval queenship and the political influence of women in the Anglo-Saxon world. I was particularly fascinated by the insight that women at the Mercian court around 750 were often as educated and politically engaged as their male counterparts. The early chapters were especially absorbing, likely because I was less familiar with the period, and the author’s research and storytelling were especially strong here. Despite the scarcity and occasional contradictions in early sources, I found the level of detail to be impressive.

As the book progressed into more familiar historical periods, I noticed slightly more liberties. For example, the account of Eleanor of Woodstock allegedly stripping to disprove she had leprosy and prevent the annulment of her marriage is likely apocryphal, and I wish the author had made that clearer. That said, I enjoyed the speculative elements overall and would have welcomed more engagement with contradictory interpretations or underexplored historical debates.

The final chapters concentrate on regnant queens and their legacies. Understandably, this section is briefer as these figures have been extensively studied, but the author still seeks to reframe common narratives, highlighting lesser-known achievements or accolades. However, the analysis might have been strengthened by a more critical engagement with their flaws, such as complicity in the slave trade and colonialism, to add necessary nuance.

From each of the ten sections, one daughter’s story particularly resonated with me: Eadgyth the Pawn (possibly Edith of Polesworth) of the Edith Queens, who repudiated her peace-weaving marriage fora religious life; Gunhild the Wise (Gunhilda of Denmark) of the Nordic Queens, who defended her honour against charges of infidelity and continued to advise on family matters long after marriage; Marie the Bold (Marie I, Countess of Boulogne), of the Norman Queens, who had the courage to leave a constrained marriage; Margaret the Loyal (Matilda of England, Duchess of Saxony) of the Plantagenet Queens, who governed Brunswick as regent during her husband’s exile and was a noted patron of the arts; Eleanor the Shameless (Eleanor of Woodstock), of the Edward Queens, whose bond with her sister-in-law, Philippa of Hainault, was so deep that she was depicted on Philippa’s tomb alongside her children; Elizabeth the Kingmaker (Elizabeth of York) of the Rose Queens, who lent legitimacy to the Tudor dynasty, shared an affectionate partnership with Henry VII, and played an active role in royal palace design; Bridget the Politician (Bridget Cromwell) of the Renaissance Queens, daughter of a Lord Protector, who fiercely defended her family during the Restoration despite her husband’s brutal political legacy; Royal the Ignored (Charlotte, Princess Royal) of the George Queens, who found purpose and belonging in Württemberg, choosing to stay and nurture her stepchildren after her husband’s death; Mary the Compassionate (Mary, Princess Royal and Countess of Harewood), of the Modern Queens, who trained as a nurse during wartime and became the first royal to lay a wedding bouquet at a war memorial; and finally, Mary I, of the Queens That Were, whose reign is often eclipsed by her sister’s but was re-examined here for its complexity and long-lasting impact.

Regina is a well-researched and accessible book, which balances historical evidence with thoughtful speculation. I found it both enlightening and thought-provoking, especially in the way it sheds light on often overlooked women and imagines how the course of British history would have changed had they been given the power they were born to inherit.

Similar read: https://rebeccastarrbrown.com/2017/08...

[R · Rating 2 out of 5]

Writing a book centred around the women of British royalty is certainly a worthwhile topic. Where Regina falls down is by biting off far more than it can chew.

To its credit, Regina does manage to expose and highlight some stories which most people won't be aware of. The conversational tone of the author will probably split opinion but the accounts are well researched and told with pace and an eye for interesting detail. If it went no further than that, it would probably have got more stars from me.

Where it unfortunately falls down is threefold:

Firstly, the breadth of the narrative prevents genuine depth from being achieved, either in terms of discussing the full context of each woman's life or the environment in which they were raised, and the extent to which the book crashes through its 28 subjects in around 250 pages does mean that it's very hard to draw any deep conclusions from it.

Secondly, the central gimmick of the counterfactual is executed infuriatingly. In each instance, the author presents maybe four paragraphs about what would have happened if the individual had achieved the throne, but rather than comparing them to the personality of who actually took the throne, it's an infuriatingly vague set of thoughts about the feel of their reign based on their personality, likes and passions, rather than anything more concrete.

Partly, this is irritating because it's often based not so much on evidence but on the author's gut feel about their subject, and a more direct evidence to outcome line would have helped, but more importantly, it fails to grasp the whole point about counter-factuals and monarchy. Namely, monarchy is one of the few situations where the fate of nations hang on the personalities of individuals, and placing a different individual in a specific role at a specific time might have created a different outcome.

To give but one example, the chapter on Margaret (placed in comparison to her brother Henry VIII) observes some general things about her personality and her own life story (her love of pageantry, her acrimonious marriage etc.) but it fails to address how she might have dealt differently with the specific issues met by Henry VIII and his court, such as the Reformation, the influence of men like Wolsey and Cromwell, the relationship with France and Hapsburg Spain etc. instead of speculating about whether the people might have liked her or not.

Thirdly, the author seems to have little understanding of the actual business of kingship or queenship and how it genuinely functioned. Throughout, she fails to appreciate that even the most powerful of British kings ruled far more by consensus and managing of their magnates that by simply giving orders and expecting to be obeyed, and indeed that no kingdom ever ran solely through the person who wore the crown.

This feels both out of place in her earlier speculations about alternative futures in the medieval period (given how many medieval and early modern kings spent much of their time managing their exchequer, magnates and the internal issues of their kingdoms) but even moreso when the modern era is reached and the link between monarchy and government becomes mostly symbolic.

Speculating that a hypothetical Queen Anne as an alternative to Charles III might have resulted in more emphasis on the Northern Powerhouse (given the very deliberate decoupling of the modern monarchy from the government of the day) is almost as historically questionable as suggesting that Vicky, daughter of Victoria, would have been allowed to become 'one of the greatest pacifist monarchs' of either Bismarkian Germany or indeed Victorian England, given how much both monarchies were effectively figureheads for the policies of the political interests who actually ran the countries and cheerfully ignored the whims of the people who actually wore the crown.

Ultimately, doing more with a smaller selection or a limited time period, or abandoning the conceit of the counterfactual would have made this a far better book for me.

[Kym Lucas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not quite what I expected based on the description, but I may have misunderstood. What I expected was kind of a historical novel, an alternate history where women were part of the succession line in England. But the book is more like a review of what is known and believed about the women who would have been in line to serve as regent (had women been considered part of the regal line) and short guesses about how they might have ruled. It wasn’t horrible, just a bit disjointed and not fiction.

Again, this was probably me projecting what I’d like to read on a description of the book, but I felt disappointed. If anyone would like to write a history of England where women actually did rule rather than the men, I think there would be a market for it, perhaps a market of only one (me). There have been men with very little familial claim to the monarchy who ruled the country. Why not a book that imagines women doing the same? And since so little is known about these women, an author could develop them as characters in any way they’d like to imagine them

Sorry, I seem to have gone on a side tangent in this review, when it should be about this actual book.

So, a summary: The book was a little confusing and disjointed, but then the royal line has always been disjointed and confusing. It contains vignettes about the women who might have reigned had things been different, what is known and believed to be true about them, and guesses as to how they might have ruled had they been given the opportunity. Since women’s lives have always been kept under history’s radar, this is still an accomplishment.

[Gjohnson135 · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a great read. Steeped in history, this book was a delight. These ‘Queens’, professionally researched, was full of their times, their struggles, these women who lived ages before us. History came to life, with highlights of their stories, never judgemental and always supportive. The author turned the spotlight on these women and shared with us stories of families, rulers, and perhaps what might have been. The what if’s were grounded in their stories. For some, not much is known, for others perhaps our perceptions are now a bit challenged. Written well, the lense that was used, how they may have shaped the world really helped focus on who they were, how they and their families evolved, and how they were perceived. In a man’s world they all made their own paths as well as they could. For a first-time foray into nonfiction, this author should be so pleased at the results. Love her fiction work, and this just seemed to be a natural extension of her writing skills. The Queens were brought to life. Brilliant. Well Done. I received an advance review copy for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.

[Julie Schooler · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you wanted a speculative history of what the world could have looked like under a succession of English queens this is NOT the book to read. But if you want a rich, detailed history of little known female royals then this is the book for you. Meticulously researched and well-written, this was an interesting but dense book. I actually really enjoyed learning some history they don't teach at school especially stories that involve nakedness, adultery and (accidental?) murder. Yes some of the names were hard to read and too there were way too many Eleanors, Charlottes, Mary's and Elizabeths to keep track of but it was very well done how this little-known history was brought to light. I would recommend this book, I am just not sure who to.

[Eirlys · Rating 4 out of 5]

An unusual history book.

This was a fascinating look into the lives of women who could have , or did, change this country. The first four women, who all had similar, difficult to pronounce names. Information on them was sketchy and speculative at best, but was interesting. I liked how each era had four women,the who were evaluated according to the information that survived them.

[Carolyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating approach to an even more compelling topic! This book tackles a wide scope of history, with writing is taut, engaging, and just a touch humorous. It was so interesting to learn about the women who could have been queens, and who are usually otherwise overlooked or background characters in the story of kings. The author also does an excellent job of balancing speculation (what would these women have been like, if they had been queens regnant?) and historical context/fact.

[Helene Ansell · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well kept chronicle of English princesses and their king father's. If only history could have been taught that way with a bit of humor and drama. Patriarchy is not a new concept and women power had always it's place even in bible time. It is not the gender but the character that makes for a good ruler. Wisely the autor skipped princess Diana for she was not royal born but regal to her people.

[Louise Stevens · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow! I loved every minute reading this. I love the structure of each woman and each period they were involved in getting their own chapter so it was super easy to follow. I love the energy and the passion written into it, I love the random facts interweaved without the content verging off course. Her writing was so engaging too you could feel the love and passion for the subject. I devoured it!

[Kristin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a clever look at lots of women born into royalty but never allowed to reign. There are lots of women I’ve never heard of and this is going to be a key book to look back on and use for further research.

[Natalie · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was fine. The description made me think this was going to be written/presented in a different way - more narrative, fictional - but it was pretty text book non fiction heavy. However, the author did a good job keeping me interested despite this and I enjoyed learning everything I did.

[Lizz Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting "what if" history book that ends with details about the actual queens of England. Well researched. It was narrated by the author who has a lot of passion for all of the subjects of the book.

[Lottie Luke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enjoyed this book! Gave me a great insight into the queens that could have been and I learnt loads about female figures in British history!

[Barbara Bubser · Rating 5 out of 5]

A what if look at history

I enjoyed this look at royal women during the ages. They could have been queens and it is interesting to learn more about them.

[Hapkap · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting book but…

[Kelsey · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5 ⭐️ loved this concept

[Irene · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book! I adore the writing style of the author, it's so easy to read. It's awesome to read about all the women who could have been Queen. Glad to know more about their lives and personalities.

[Gretchen · Rating 4 out of 5]

interesting look at the women who could gave ruled Britain

[cerys · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 ⭐️ quite an interesting listen. not Mary I being an endometrioSIS!

[Fiz · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

[Wendy · Rating 3 out of 5]

fun, chatty popular history. the author speculates about how English History would have been different if succession passed through the female line instead of the male line.

[Judith Romero · Rating 2 out of 5]

DNF @ 20%

Este libro necesita un trabajo de edición en condiciones como respirar. No puedo con tanta falta de ortografía y errores gramaticales.

[Sally Ann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bought this after hearing author talk about it at a book fest. Chatty engaging style. Lots of interesting information which certainly was easier to understand once I got to more recent eras.