The King's Sister

by Anne O'Brien

1382. Daughter of John of Gaunt, sister to the future King Henry IV, Elizabeth of Lancaster has learned the shrewd tricks of the court from England’s most powerful men. In a time of political turmoil, allegiance to family is everything. A Plantagenet princess should never defy her father’s wishes. Yet headstrong Elizabeth refuses to bow to the fate of a strategic marriage. Rejecting her duty, Elizabeth weds the charming and ruthlessly ambitious Sir John Holland: Duke of Exeter, half-brother to King Richard II and the one man she has always wanted. But defiance can come at a price. 1399. Elizabeth’s brother Henry has seized the throne. Her husband, confident to the usurped Richard, masterminds a secret plot against the new King. Trapped in a dangerous web, Elizabeth must make a choice. Defy the King and betray her family. Or condemn her husband and send him to his death. Sister. Wife. Traitor. She holds the fate of England in her hands.

Genres: Historical Fiction, Historical, Fiction, Medieval, 14th Century, Romance, British Literature

560 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 2014

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.

My home is in the Welsh Marches, although much of my early life was spent in Yorkshire, most recently in the East Riding.Ann O'Brien The Marches is a remote region of England, surrounded by echoes from the past. Hereford is close with its famous Mappa Mundi and chained library.So is Shrewsbury, and also Ludlow with its splendid castle and its connections with our Plantagenet and Tudor kings. With my husband, I live in an eighteenth century timber framed cottage, which itself must have seen much history over two hundred years.

I have always enjoyed the appeal of History.I taught the subject with enthusiasm but it became my ambition to write historical romances. My first novel, The Runaway Heiress, was published by Mills and Boon in 2004.
This first book was a Regency Romance in the great tradition of Georgette Heyer - who has not admired her skill and delicate touch for the period? I have drawn on my interest in the Stuart century to write about the English Civil War and Restoration England of Charles II. Living in the Marches however I soon discovered the wealth of atmosphere and legend in this isolated part of England from medieval times. It was not long before I was encouraged to create a medieval romance inConquering Knight, Captive Lady.

When not writing, I have a large rambling garden where George and I grow organic vegetables and soft fruit - or perhaps I should admit that he grows them whilst I pick and cook them. We have a wild garden, an orchard, a formal pond and herbaceous flower borders. We share it all with rabbits and pheasants, frogs and goldfinches, hedgehogs and buzzards. It is a beautiful place. When we first settled into our cottage I planted a herb garden on a Tudor pattern with stone pathways and clipped box hedges. From this I developed my interest in herbs and their uses.

Nicholas Culpeper's The Complete Herbal, a fascinating resource to a historical novelist first published in 1649, has become essential bedside reading. As a result the use of herbs in medicine and witchcraft, for both good and ill, has appeared in some of my novels.

For pure relaxation I enjoy yoga as well as singing with a local Choral Society. Watercolour painting allows me to simply sit and appreciate the landscape and the flowers in my garden, when my mind is busy constructing my next plot.

Reviews

[Sean Barrs · Rating 3 out of 5]

From the very beginning Elizabeth of Lancaster is characterised as vain, prudish and snobbish. She is the daughter of a wealthy man, John of Gaunt the Duke of Lancaster, so as a consequence she has all the characteristics of a spoilt child. And to make things worse she is the sister of the future King of England: Henry IV. The whole world turns for her convenience, and her pompous nature reassures her misplaced sense of superiority as a Plantagenet. I hate O'Brien's Elizabeth of Lancaster; I really do.

I mean could she love herself any more than this?

"When my woman combed my hair to braid it for the night and I inspected my features in my tall looking glass I knew that my husband would have an affection for me. Was it possible for s msn of perception not to fall in love with a face as perfectly proportioned as mine? There was the elegant Plantagenet nose, the dark hooded eyes that suggested a mine of secrets to be explored. My lips were quick to smile, my brows, surprisingly dark and nicely arched, and my hair was the same lustrous fairness of my mother whose memory faded from me as the years passed. It was a face that promised romance and passion, I decided. No, my husband would be unable to resist and would continue to indulge my desires in a formidable style. I was destined to enjoy my future life.

Get a life girl! There is more to life than your looks!

However, one cannot help but feel sorry for her. In spite of her family’s wealth, power and position she has none herself. This is because she is a woman of fourteenth century England; she is not a widow or a mother, but a daughter to be used for political advantage; she is, in essence, a bargaining chip for her farther. The poor girl’s reaction to her arranged marriage is unsurprising then. Her dreams of a strong husband are crushed when her betrothed turns out to be no other than the eight year old Earl of Pembroke.

How could my father do this to me? My life as an indulged daughter has come to a breathless halt.

Indeed, they have Elizabeth; they really have; your brattish days are over. But, this is merely the beginning. First you must learn to tolerate your new husband who is more akin to your little brother, Henry, than the man of your dreams; he is not the knight you fantasise about; he is not that chivalric piece of manhood you wish to share your bed with: he is not Sir John Holland the only man you ever wanted. But, alas, he is a child.

Despite my sympathy, and hatred, for Elizabeth I did quite enjoy this book. I cannot fault the authors writing; she has, after all, masterfully written an annoyingly frustrating character that I would like to push of a castle wall, but that’s not the point. Elizabeth is a product of her time and upbringing, though a little bit of looking beyond her own appearance and problems would do her a bit of good.

Overall a good solid 3 stars.

[Vickie (I love books) · Rating 5 out of 5]

I had to give 5 stars. It made me cry twice near the end of the book. I had never read anything about Elizabeth of Lancaster daughter of John of gaunt. She is in my family’s tree so it was nice even though fiction to read about her. I will be reading more of this author’s books. I could hardly put it down.

[B the BookAddict · Rating 2 out of 5]

A little too much historical romance and not enough historical fact, for my liking!

[Kerry Bridges · Rating 1 out of 5]

Elizabeth of Lancaster is cousin to the King. It is her place to marry well and to make the right connections for her father, John of Gaunt. But Elizabeth is headstrong and spoilt and wants to make her own future so she marries the King's half brother, John Holland, instead. But when her brother Henry comes to claim the throne, Elizabeth must make a terrible choice. Which side of her family should she choose?

I have lived in Lancashire for the past 12 years so I felt an affinity with the Plantaganets and thought I would really enjoy a novel about their exploits. I might still do that, but I am afraid I didn't enjoy this one at all. ELizabeth, the character around whom the whole story revolves is a distinctly unpleasant and tedious character. She isn't a villain, with all the intrigue and interest which a character of that ilk can generate, she's just a thoughly self-centred and unpleasant individual.

Even more sadly, it's not as if any of the other characters in the novel are more pleasant or endearing. It might actually be that we don't get the chance to know them intimately enough since the book races through scenes with minute and pointless detail without fleshing out the characters in any way. I don't feel I know any of them any better than when I started it and sadly, I just don't want to. This was not a novel for me and I would be very surprised to find the audience it did appeal to. An idea of great promise, very poorly executed; I would not recommend this book at all.

[Lorraine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Elizabeth of Lancaster, John of Gaunt’s younger daughter, was quite a woman. Anne O’Brien’s The King’s Sister relates the life of this strong woman. Elizabeth, a Plantagenet princess married three times, and she had six children with her second husband and two with her third, but the time period within she lived was a time of great political turmoil. Elizabeth finds herself placed inhe middle between her husband and her king who happens to be her younger brother, Henry Bolingbroke (Henry IV) in the year 1399. The reason for this is until 1399 her cousin, Richard II, is her husband’s half-brother, is king, a very young king, who appears to resent guidance from his royal uncles & other advisors. As he reaches his majority, Richard II begins to make poor political decisions which seem to be emotional rather than thoughtful. He alienates his cousin, Henry Bolingbroke, and even exiles him for life. Henry returns to England to fight for what is rightfully his, Richard is captured, flees, and resigns all of his authority. Then Henry is proclaimed king, and Elizabeth’s husband stands by his half-brother, Richard, which is a threat to Henry IV. All that takes place; the pain, sorrow, and death come alive with Ms. O’Brien’s dynamic writing. I felt as though I was at court and not reading about it. 4.5-5 stars

[Margaret · Rating 4 out of 5]

Elizabeth of Lancaster is Henry of Lancaster (later Henry IV) sister.

Married to a child when she was only 17, she falls for Richard II's half brother Sir John Holland. So far, so soap opera.

The marriage to the child Earl of Pembroke is annulled and Elizabeth marries Sir John.

Those of you who know your medieval history knows what happens next. Richard banishes Henry, first for a period of years and later for life, and Henry returns to claim his rights.

This novel deals with his sister and how she copes with things, caught, as she is, between her brother and her husband, a man whose naturally inclination is to support his own brother.

Well written and researched, "The King's Sister" is an excellent read.

Highly recommended.

[Kathi · Rating 3 out of 5]

The stamp one the cover reads: "Outdoes even Philippa Gregory". I heartily disagree, although Ms. Gregory did not write much about this generation of the English monarchy, so is it a fair comparison?

I thought that THE KING'S SISTER was much too long and drawn out at 560 pages, especially since the important events (the actions of the Lords Appellant, Henry IV assuming the throne ...) are just glossed over. I found myself skimming over portions of the tome, not quite willing to set it down and walk away.

I am, however, left with a desire to read something on the life of Kathryn Swynford (the preceding generation). Oh, wait. KATHRYN, by Ana Seton, is on my TBR shelves...

[Elia Princess of Starfall · Rating 3 out of 5]

The King's Sister is the third book of Anne O'Brien's that I have read with the other two being the King's Concubine and the Scandalous Duchess. This is the story of Elizabeth of Lancaster, the daughter of John of Gaunt, third son of King Edward III, and his first wife Blanche of Lancaster. Her full siblings include the future Lancastrian King Henry IV and Philippa, Queen of Portugal. Her half-siblings the Beauforts, the children of John's mistress and eventual third wife Katherine Sywnford and Catalina, the daughter of John's second wife Constance of Castile make no appearance and are rarely even mentioned in passing. This struck me as odd, did her other siblings make no impression on Elizabeth's life? Also, no explanation was given for their absence despite the prominence of Katherine and Constance.

The King's Sister is the story of Elizabeth, primarily her tumultuous romance with the dashing John Holland, Duke of Exeter and maternal half-brother to King Richard II. Elizabeth is introduced as a flighty, indulged and rather spoilt young woman whose reaction to being married to the eight year old John Hastings, Earl of Pembroke is melodramatic and highly childish. From the beginning, Elizabeth is a self-absorbed and selfish noblewoman, who descends into frequent bouts of woe is me tirades and rallies against her supposedly unjust marriage to Pembroke.

Therein lies the crux of the King's Sister.

Anne O'Brien's are historical romances rather then historical fiction. Her heroines are focused on their love lives, not on the politics and social upheaval that characterises their era of history. The King's Sister is no exception to this and romance is what makes Elizabeth's world go round.

Romance consumes Elizabeth's life, from the moment she discovers her marriage to a child heir and to her meeting with the future love of her life, John Holland. It is her primary thought and her driving motivation. Other characters often attempt to remind Elizabeth of the politics and court intrigue that plague King Richard II's reign. But all of this potential is squandered when the forbidden romance between Elizabeth and Holland is flares into existence and soon takes over as the main story line.

And never lets go.

That isn't to say that there are not other events and occurrences that have influence over Elizabeth and her life. The ineptitude of King Richard is emphasised, the power that John of Gaunt wields over England is immense but often challenged by jealous courtiers, the futile war over the Castilian succession in Spain is mentioned, the plot to destroy King Henry IV and reinstate Richard has colossal implications for England and Elizabeth and the threats facing Henry in his early years are duly fleshed upon in some detail. But Elizabeth is steadfast in her determination to see her romance with Holland as the pinnacle of her life's achievement. Everything else in her life is pushed to the background where John Holland is concerned. To her, Holland is the sun and all else must learn to orbit around him or be burnt.

The relationship between Elizabeth and Holland is passionate yet lacking real chemistry, loyal yet secrets fester between the two and unstable yet loving. It is the typical Mills and Boons ware. Forbidden courtship, (supposed) magnetic chemistry, secret trysts, irate fathers, hasty weddings, happy marriages and boisterous children abound in the King's Sister making for a highly romantic yet unrealistic affair.

Elizabeth is especially difficult to like as a character. She is spoilt, wilful and arrogant. She has little regard for her actions or the consequences that follow. It is only in her later years that she is forced to mature, that she finally becomes shrewd and politically savvy. John Holland, oddly, was my second favourite character. He was brash, proud, pragmatic, insightful, determined and loyal. He never swerved from a painful decision and remained loyal to Richard despite the risks. The only thing I disliked was his rampant romantic monologues that were at times completely illogical and ridiculous at the best of times. Richard II is portrayed as vain and insecure, a man bent on earning fear and respect but lacking the means and will to achieve it. His fall was partly his own fault. King Henry IV was my favourite. I found him refreshing and honest. A proud man, determined to regain his inheritance yet cynical enough to have threats done away with the utmost ruthlessness with no moral qualms. Personally, I think if the King's Sister had instead focused the relationship between Elizabeth and Henry it would have been a superior book. A missed opportunity IMHO. The historical detail, as in the other O'Brien books, is light. Very light. Often there is little shown besides the mention of clothes and tournaments. Facts are kept simple and are not elaborated upon. Only a very vague portrait of the Middle Ages is given and this only takes away from the book's enjoyment value.

All in all, I would rate this novel a 6/10. Well-written, with mildly engaging characters, superfluous historical detail and riddled with melodramatic romance, the King's Sister will probably appeal to fans of romance while disappointing historical fiction aficionados.

[Kelly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anne O'Brien just kills me.

I thought that this novel fell into two very distinctive portions. The first was the wooing and 'falling in love' stage of the novel. There was little action in this half of the novel from a political standpoint, therefore the 'romance' and the development of John and Elizabeth was central. Unfortunately I did not warm to Elizabeth, she was selfish and vain and I hoped that she would eventually develop into a woman rather than this spoiled child. Retrospectively I wish that this first half would have been Book 1 and written from the viewpoint of John Holland. He was passionate about Elizabeth and doggedly pursued her despite all political and personal obstacles. I wish we could have felt this from his point of view because it wasn't well translated with Elizabeth as our narrator. In fact at times, I felt only a tense anger between John and Elizabeth. Their conversations were so often made in anger, frustration and hatred and it ruined the wooing that John was so intent on. I found this portion of the novel lacking, and very nearly stopped reading the novel altogether. The whole section went on for far too long, as previously mentioned, there was little action and I would much rather have been reading about their relationship post-marriage.

As it happens, I was vastly pleased that I had forged on. Feeling much like a stubborn Plantagenet woman myself, to be honest.

The second 'half' was really from the point that political action begins to affect the relationship between John and Elizabeth. In this portion of the novel their love is tangible, and so emotionally affecting to read. The tensions radiating from political turmoil are beginning to affect them and you have a wondrous sense of foreboding as you read, a mounting tension that was so lacking in the first half of the novel. I feel that Elizabeth has grown into a mature role as wife and mother and she becomes a much more likable narrator. Her feelings for John, and his for her, are evident in every conversation, even in angry political disputes. I hated John for sacrificing that bond in the name of loyalty to Richard, who had so frequently cast his brother off, and yet I sobbed throughout the entirety of his imprisonment, death and through Elizabeth's subsequent grief because I missed him so much, and mourned his loss as a character. Elizabeth became a strong woman in this isolation and fought for her children and husband proudly, even if she did still display these shows of vain selfishness. I hated her for supporting her brother over her bond with John but appreciated that it tore her apart to choose anyone but her love. Though their love was a deep bond, it was not enough.

Every time I thought about Elizabeth and John saying goodbye to each other, and then her knowing that he was dead, my stomach made this awful flop as though I too were grieving. When I read his letter of forgiveness, I nearly worked my way through a box of tissues! It takes a superb writing talent to be able to affect a reader so emotionally and I absolutely applaud that. I don't know whether it is because this is based on real people and real events, that you almost believe that it is fact, which makes it all the more tangible.

Overall I think that the whole novel needed to be slim-lined because there was a lot of waffle in the first half of the book that almost put me off, but I could recommend sticking with it because it was an absolute experience reading the development of Elizabeth and John as a married couple, torn apart by familial loyalty but desperately in love.

[Jaffareadstoo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Elizabeth of Lancaster is the formidable daughter of John of Gaunt, and as such inherits the pride and arrogance of the great Plantagenet dynasty. Rejecting a marriage to John Hastings, the juvenile Earl of Pembroke, Elizabeth flouts convention to marry the ruthlessly ambitious, Sir John Holland, Duke of Exeter, who is half brother to the King Richard II. The marriage is passionate, volatile and not without danger. However, disobedience comes at a price, and the rebellious nature of Elizabeth’s husband ensures that the marriage is both dynastically and emotionally flawed from the very start. Being close to the crown is to play with fire and as the brothers, sisters and cousins in this deadly game of thrones continue to play out their petty dynastic dramas, Elizabeth of Lancaster must act as a political shield, in order to keep both her husband and brother from committing the ultimate betrayal.

In history books, Elizabeth of Lancaster, is portrayed as a shadowy figure caught on the periphery of royalty, but her Plantagenet connections to both King Richard II and King Henry IV ensured her a prominent role in the history of England, and it is commendable that her story is told by an author who handles both her character, and the time in which she lived, with remarkable sensitivity. There is danger and intrigue in abundance and yet the shadow of loss seems to follow Elizabeth around and I felt immense sympathy for her. I was less enamoured of her husband, who I felt let her down, but as is the way with historical fiction, nothing can be done about the eventual outcome.


There is no doubt that the author has captured this genre of historical romance, her books are delightfully readable, not just with a good dollop of romance to keep you entertained, but also with a wealth of factual detail which helps to connect the story accurately into time and place. Impeccably researched and with a fine eye for historical accuracy, the characters really come to life. As the drama of their complex lives start to unfold, it becomes obvious that life at the royal court, in the fourteenth century, was fraught with the threats and menace of a dark and dangerous time. The consequences of this deadly manoeuvring for supremacy would, of course, tear the Plantagenet family apart for generations.

[Girl with her Head in a Book · Rating 3 out of 5]

In choosing to write The King's Sister, O'Brien is creating a novel which is almost a sequel or at the very least a companion to The Scandalous Duchess. This is the story of John of Gaunt's second daughter, Elizabeth of Lancaster, consigned to history as a wild girl who caused nothing but trouble and who put her own carnal desires before her family duties. It is kind of surprising that it has taken this long for her to make her historical fiction debut.

Unlike other historical hoydens (Margaret of Anjou, Elizabeth Woodville, Anne Boleyn, Mary Boleyn, Katherine Howard, certain interpretations of Elizabeth I ...), Elizabeth Plantagenet is largely forgotten, I think more or less she lived one hundred years before the Wars of Roses which is when 'popular history' kind of begins. For the uninitiated, John of Gaunt's first wife was Blanche of Lancaster, making John the Duke of Lancaster. They had three surviving children; Philippa, Elizabeth and Henry. Then Blanche died young of the plague. Sad. But after that, John of Gaunt married Constanza of Castile because he wanted to be a King and thought that if he helped her to regain her throne (she had been deposed) then being King of Castile would do nicely. It never quite happened but they did have a daughter Catalina (Spanish for Katherine) which was ironic because at some point around the beginning of their marriage, John of Gaunt started having an affair with Katherine Swynford who had been one of Blanche's ladies-in-waiting and then was promoted to being Philippa and Elizabeth's governess. John and Katherine had four children, John, Henry, Joan and Thomas Beaufort. Then John took Katherine's bridle in public that one time and everyone was scandalised and the Peasant's Revolt happened and so they had to part ways. But when Constanza died, the two of them got married. Happy ever after!

So, basically, the House of Lancaster was ever so very slightly dysfunctional. On the one hand, John of Gaunt's wife and stepmother to Philippa, Elizabeth and Henry was Constanza. Yet, it is not hard to imagine that a truer mother figure was Katherine, their long-term governess and I can easily believe that for the Lancaster children, the interloper was Constanza. A decent writer could get a pretty reasonable novel out of any of Philippa, Henry and Elizabeth, they all had fascinating lives and emotions clearly ran high within the family - although their personal lives were governed by politics, like their father, the Lancaster brood (with the probable exception of Philippa) put desire above duty at various points in their lives. For centuries, there has been the disapproving hiss that no better could be expected given the example their father set.

John of Gaunt had a plan to marry Philippa to a foreign prince which was a nice idea in theory but it took him until she was twenty-seven to find one, then he married her off to the King of Portugal and never saw her again. Anyway, because of that young Elizabeth was married off first and the novel opens as the seventeen year-old meets her new husband, the Earl of Pembroke. Alas, Elizabeth is Unimpressed. Her new husband is only eight years old. Cue much wringing of hands and snivelling before Elizabeth stomps through her wedding feeling thoroughly irritated and having to wait until she is at least twenty-five to have sex. It was interesting; in the afterword, O'Brien explained that a wish to rescue Elizabeth's reputation had been what motivated her to write The King's Sister and that the centuries-old description of Elizabeth as 'wanton and highly-sexed' had seemed unfair. Still, The King's Sister does not do a lot to undermine this notion - Elizabeth is open about her physical desires, that she seeks 'pleasure between the sheets'. Watching her husband, young Jonty, keen in his pursuit of dogs and horses, Elizabeth feels that really, this will simply not do at all. Enter John Holland.

I kind of imagine Taylor Swift's song I Knew You Were Trouble accompanying him. John Holland was Richard II's elder half-brother and according to history, he was so struck by Elizabeth that he sought her out day and night. Naturally the chronicles which record this imply that this was somehow Elizabeth' fault. O'Brien makes it more of a slow-burner, a teenage crush on Elizabeth's part due to her unheated loins which grows into an unstoppable attraction. I did not feel that O'Brien really fleshed out John Holland as well as she did John of Gaunt in The Scandalous Duchess or even Richard in The Virgin Widow. Events did not feel dramatic enough to really make it believable that a man with the scoundrel's reputation that O'Brien dreams up for him would suddenly drop everything and swear undying love for Elizabeth. Even though John of Gaunt warns his daughter firmly that Holland's suit is a political move, we are still expected to believe that it is the Real Thing.

The famous bit about Elizabeth of Lancaster is that Holland knocked her up - there was no way of hiding it given that her husband was still battling through puberty and would have struggled to grow a beard let alone create a child. O'Brien gives Elizabeth a surprising amount of agency - she calmly considers her options, decides what she wants and she sets about getting it. John of Gaunt is naturally horrified but he pays up for the annulment and so the stage is set for Elizabeth and John's Happy Ever After. But alas. Oh alas. Here come the official start of the Wars of the Roses.

Admittedly, Elizabeth does get ten apparently spectacular years of marriage before things start to go badly south. We have the flash forward where O'Brien assures us via Elizabeth that everything's great, the five kids are great, the husband is great, the sex is still great and life is well ... great. If this was a real person telling me all this, I would smile sympathetically and realise that this person's life is most likely so bad that they are probably borderline suicidal but trying to put on a brave front. There is some really lumpy prose here - O'Brien uses the word 'lachrymose' on more than one occasion, then there is the passage in the opening pages where Elizabeth rhapsodises about how 'romantic' her own face is. Really, Elizabeth, really? Still, O'Brien does successfully conjure a woman who is vain and rather spoilt - not actively unpleasant but just one of those people who it's best to go along with because they tend to mysteriously get their own way in everything anyway.

Richard II is also an interesting character here - the slightly-deranged egomaniac. O'Brien contrasts him nicely with the 'man's man' Henry, brother to Elizabeth. His fall from power is unavoidable - and to be fair, having read Dan Jones' The Plantagenets, I thought that the point was made without being overly didactic. Richard II was just a bit pants at being a King. He exiled Henry on trumped-up charges, knowing that John of Gaunt was likely to die before his heir returned and that he could then seize the Lancaster lands. As an eyewitness, Elizabeth is horrified and knows that Bad Things will follow. And they do - Henry returns and takes back his lands and Richard's throne too. Cue much marital mutterings between Elizabeth and John since her brother has just deposed his brother.

It's strange, O'Brien writes the most spoiler-ific titles for her books out of any author I've ever heard of. The Scandalous Duchess revealed that Katherine would get to be a duchess at the end so when John reveals his plans to wed her, there is no surprise. The Virgin Widow clues us in that Anne's first marriage will remain unconsummated, again lessening the impact of what is supposed to be a shocking scene. And then The King's Sister, making it obvious that a regime change is in order. Ah well, I guess historical fiction is hardly where you go if you're looking for shocking twists of events.

Elizabeth's torn feelings between duty to her husband and duty to her brother and king are well-captured but O'Brien truly starts to hit gold when we realise that Elizabeth has been hiding something from us - a dark secret of jumbled feelings and loyalties. John Holland's fall is well-documented - he could not save his brother, he could not save himself and Elizabeth's grief at his violent death is savage. She has lost her titles, she has lost her lands, she has lost her husband. Furious with her brother, herself, her husband and indeed everyone, there is really only one person who she can turn to. And so she heads to see her mummy, aka her stepmother/erstwhile governess, Dame Katherine. Again, I felt that it was an inspired choice to have Elizabeth's final 'absolution' come from Katherine Swynford, who readily assumes the Voice of God as she advises Elizabeth to forgive herself. Having a letter from Beyond The Grave come from her husband in the style of PS I Love You and advising the same thing felt a little heavy-handed.

The strangest thing about The King's Sister though were the missed opportunities - it's true that Elizabeth did indeed get married again after John Holland's death but rather than being ordered to do so by her brother to help him gain allies as O'Brien states it , Elizabeth made her own choice. Again, living up to her wild reputation, Elizabeth married a man twelve years younger than her within a year of her husband's death and without her brother's permission, meaning that her new husband actually got arrested briefly. Because Henry was fond of his sister, he got over it. But it wasn't his idea. I felt that another story could have played out here. One about an Elizabeth who married a man who she was passionately in love with, had five children with him but that the love did not last. Perhaps he had a temper, was rude, unpleasant - certainly it is hard to believe that he was faithful. Then that man even plotted against her brother. She was thankfully released from the marriage by his death and was even able to find love again. Again, it's just a story but it fits the romance template just as well and suits the events slightly better. Just saying.


It's not easy though with historical fiction in making the romance fit the facts. The Virgin Widow ended awkwardly with Anne looking delightedly on her newborn baby, rejoicing in her happy ending. But it was not the end. The child died before it reached double figures and Anne herself failed to make it to thirty. Writers of historical fiction frequently have to grease the wheels, stop in the right place or finesse claims of infidelity, violence or just plain unpleasant behaviour. Their greatest stumbling block is events, dear reader, events. They just refuse to fit into a neat template. It's ironic that Game of Thrones which is set in a fictional universe (although I do feel that I could probably pass a GCSE in the history of Westeros), making it at liberty to do whatever it likes vis-a-vis events, is very light on the romantic plot-lines. I'm not talking about the sex, the television series has sex everywhere (way more than the books), I'm talking about True Love. Robb chose love over duty and lost his head for it (although to be fair to him, the circumstances were a lot less clear-cut in the book than in the television series). Jon chose duty over Ygritte, Tyrion was betrayed by his family into losing Tysha then by Shae, Sansa is violated by Joffrey and then has a just-plain-weird bond with the Hound ... I could go on. Sam and Gilly are the only two whose relationship has not yet crumpled into disaster and even they have the whole 'he's in the Night's Watch' thing to contend with. My point is that if Game of Thrones had more of an emphasis on the fluffy romance, it could not offer such a compelling vision of an alternate history. It would just be a fantasy series. So basically, historical romance is a bit stuffed as a genre as far as being taken seriously goes.

I highly enjoyed The King's Sister but I think I was hoping for more about the House of Lancaster as a family. My favourite moment in The Scandalous Duchess was when the young Henry pledged his affection to Katherine no matter what the state of play was between her and his father. Despite the unconventional circumstances, it was clear that they operated as a family. Yet even in this one, there were moments that really rung true, such as when Princess Joan (mother to John Holland and Richard II) noted to Elizabeth sadly that John of Gaunt was suffering having had to part from Katherine post-Peasant's Revolt. The Princess remarked regretfully that Katherine had been a very good woman and that 'there can be little doubt that Lancaster loved her'. Really, while it may be rough for historical novelists that the facts do not make for a smooth romance, how much more painful must it have been for the people living through those events, for they were truly cursed to be living in such very interesting times!


I received a free copy of this via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.

For my full review: http://girlwithherheadinabook.blogspo...

[Lisa · Rating 1 out of 5]

Elizabeth of Lancaster is the willful and proud daughter of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster. When he marries her to the well-titled but eight-year-old ‘Jonty’ on her, she is furious and unwilling but makes an attempt to accept it. Until, that is, she begins to fall in love and lust with John Holland, the king’s older half-brother. Even as she tempts scandal and disgrace by tangling with him, the politics of Richard II’s reign threaten to tear Elizabeth’s marriage and family apart.

Oh boy, I really did not like this.

I had picked this up, along with most of Anne O’Brien’s in-print Plantagenet novels (this is out of print, but I found a rather bedraggled copy in a bookshop anyway), after really enjoying her novel The Shadow Queen. Although it was not a perfect read, most of my complaints tended towards the nitpicky historical details like “um, no, Joan of Kent and the Black Prince would not be playing a courtly game of archery, they lived in a time where archery was the purview of peasants”.

The King’s Sister had some of those nitpicky issues, although they stood out to me a lot less – that might be because they weren’t as common or as striking, or because I had bigger fish to fry.

I did not enjoy Elizabeth as a narrator or a character. She’s self-obsessed and vain, snobbish and selfish. I can sympathise with her plight – a sexually frustrated, seventeen-year-old woman ready and eager for a husband married to an eight-year-old boy. I can’t sympathise with her, however, as she is immediately characterised as a woman who sneers at ‘Jonty’ for not being the handsome knight she’s been dreaming of marrying. He’s eight years old and harmless. He’s not putting frogs in her bed or anything disgusting, he’s just a cute eight year old who’s interested in puppies and growing up to be a good knight.

Elizabeth also comes off, in the early chapters, as a dumbass. So many people warn her off John Holland, but her response is pretty much “guess I’ll go flirt with him then” and okay, in the long run, it turns out to be the right choice because it’s true love in Anne O’Brien’s tale and not John Holland being John Holland, but it’s infuriating as a character trait.

(I should admit that I’m clearly not the right audience for this novel because I really can’t come at John Holland as a romantic hero.)

Now, Elizabeth’s selfishness is clearly lampshaded as a character flaw throughout the book and in the final chapter, we do see her finally begin to grow beyond it, but man, having such a selfish narrator is not a fun read. It’s not like, say, Philippa Gregory’s The Red Queen where Margaret Beaufort is meant to be unlikeable and I’m not saying that Gregory’s novel was better (it was barely tolerable) but we’re meant to genuinely root for Elizabeth and all I could do was wish she’d have some kind of rude awakening because she’s such a horrid, small-minded person.

This was sort of doubly disappointing to me. I’d be really impressed with how complex the narrative was in The Shadow Queen and I’d chosen this, rather than the other O’Brien novels I have, because I wanted to read about a rather obscure but no less fascinating figure. Elizabeth of Lancaster is a fascinating protagonist – she’s involved in the medieval equivalent of a shotgun wedding and she’s married to a man who rebels against her brother after he deposes her husband’s brother – but I didn’t care about her at all, and the complexity and richness I’d found in The Shadow Queen was missing entirely.

To add difficulty, there were very few other characters that I could generally like. I didn’t believe O’Brien’s take on John Holland was a genuine portrait of the historical figure, but a more sanitised romantic hero version (let’s just say O’Brien and I see Holland very differently), and I couldn’t get away from my dislike of the historical Holland to care for the fictional version. The other chief supporting characters – Elizabeth’s older sister, Philippa, and their governess Katherine Swynford – are sort of too firmly cast in their roles as nagging support to have much personality, though I did like the way Katherine Swynford’s character emerged at the end (which makes me a little more hopeful about reading O’Brien’s The Scandalous Duchess). Elizabeth’s brother, Henry, is sort of oddly characterised – he’s held at a distance and frequently unseen or absent, so all we’re left to go on is Elizabeth’s love of him solely because he’s her brother. Then, when he’s king, he’s presented to us as a sort of heavy-handed, unthinking, unlikeable creature before in the final chapters we’re expected to turn around and feel like, well, he was a bit of a dick, but he’s been entirely justified the whole time. Everyone else are either just sort of there or flat out awful.

The only exception to that rule is Anne of Bohemia. She’s lovely. I love her. I want a whole novel about her. But not if she’s paired with O’Brien’s Richard II. More on that later.

The writing I found to be generally OK. I didn’t feel that Elizabeth’s voice really worked for me, but apart from two occasions the language didn’t feel jarring or anachronistic. There were some great expositional dumps, where, because Elizabeth wasn’t directly involved in matters, she has to recount what happened – for example, the novel skips ten years into the future, neatly stepping over the Appellant Crisis, Anne of Bohemia’s death, and Richard II’s peace treaty with France and second marriage. Similarly, Richard II’s deposition is almost entirely told through exposition. Now, I believe a skilled writer can put a bit of effort in and make a novel about a character cut off from the action really work by focusing it on their experience – a woman waiting to hear news of her husband’s or brother’s fate is a premise ripe for incredible emotion and drama – but just dumping exposition in doesn’t work, and that’s what O’Brien went for.

Some of the summary narrative means that a disservice is done to the real history. Henry’s exile is explained as Richard “fabricating a treasonable plot” (p. 317) – yet the events that led to that exile are not as simple, and Richard’s role in them is not so simply summarised, nor can he be credited as the great architect of the feud between Thomas Mowbray and Henry Bolingbroke which lead to their exile. He wasn’t sitting there, rubbing his hands with glee, but trying desperately to reconcile them while they stubbornly refused to come to terms with each other. Kathryn Warner, I think, rightly points out that the feud put Richard in an impossible situation where the guilt of either of them would also condemn him in some measure.

O’Brien apparently got her start writing historical romances and it does show in parts – the will they, won’t they melodrama of Elizabeth and John’s romance carried on far too long for my liking. Likewise, the scenes wherein Elizabeth is torn between her husband and her brother. It’s hard to care when it’s the same conflict again and again, with no nuance – Henry is the priority for Elizabeth and should be for John as well, but he’s sticking to his own brother for the sake of ambition before he finally musters up fraternal loyalty (seriously, the novel spends so long saying John is only supporting Richard II out of ambition before suddenly dropping that to say it’s because Richard is his brother).

There are some more obvious historical goofs. O’Brien repeats the once accepted, the now well and truly debunked narrative that Henry Bolingbroke (later Henry IV) and his wife, Mary de Bohun, had sex before they were supposed to and Mary gave birth to a son (named Edward by Alison Weir) that didn’t live long when she was 12-14. The ‘evidence’ for this theory was misread and the reference to this child in actual fact refers to the birth of Humphrey of Gloucester, the son of Thomas of Woodstock and Eleanor de Bohun (whose care Mary was in). This was published in Ian Mortimer’s The Fears of Henry IV, the most accessible and affordable biography of Henry IV on the market and first appeared on the market seven years before The King’s Sister was published. I find that level of goof inexcusable, though perhaps this plot detail appeared in one of O’Brien’s earlier novels and she didn’t want to contradict herself.

Another bewildering and inexcusable goof is the fact that Henry IV’s second son is named as Lionel. Err, no. His name was Thomas. None of Henry IV’s sons were named Lionel, not even his obscure illegitimate son Edmund. I could understand changing his name if Thomas of Lancaster was a major character (he’s not, he’s literally only named twice) and there were a lot of men named Thomas (not as many as there are named John and Henry and none of them get their name changed). Compounding this error is the fact that in the same sentence, Henry IV’s sons are said to between fourteen and ten years in early 1400 – nope, they were thirteen to nine years of age at this stage (Henry, the eldest, was born August/September 1386 and so 13, the youngest, Humphrey, born 3 October 1390 and so 9). This line was even contradicted later on, with Henry’s age stated correctly to be thirteen.

I don’t believe there’s any evidence that Elizabeth of Lancaster was in the Tower during the Great Uprising of 1381, much less heroically rescued by John Holland. Henry Bolingbroke, 14 at the time, was, and was rescued by a man called John Ferrour, but there is no evidence Holland’s was involved or even directed Ferrour to do so. But, whatever, romance plot gotta romance plot.

So. Now to my rant about Richard II’s treatment in this novel. Here is a picture depicting my experience of reading this book:



I should admit that I’m a bit sensitive to how Richard II is handled. He was a terrible king and did some awful things. But he was not a monster, nor was he mad and I’m just tired of seeing that characterisation in fiction.

O’Brien’s Richard II is probably not the worst I’ve seen, but close. There’s no real attempt to understand his behaviour, he’s just presented “as is”. He’s unreasonable and egocentric, entirely irrational – someone that has to be at the centre of attention and resorts to petty tricks to be so, someone who the other characters have to “manage” and cajole into not being a complete monster.

We’re told of his utter unreasonableness when informed that John of Gaunt is plotting treason against him and it’s presented as obvious that Gaunt wouldn’t. Never mind the fact that rumours abounded that Gaunt wanted to usurp Richard’s position and inheritance before Richard was even Prince of Wales. For crying out loud, Edward of Woodstock (the Black Prince, Richard’s father and Gaunt’s eldest brother) spent his dying days trying to safeguard his son from being cheated out of his inheritance – the chief suspect, at least in the public’s mind, was John of Gaunt. Parliament even had Richard presented to them officially as Edward III’s heir to try and avoid any designs Gaunt had on usurping him. These rumours and the whispers of Gaunt’s villainy did not magically go away on the day Richard was coronated, either. The rebels of the Great Revolt, for example, wanted to free Richard from his “evil counsellors” and the man they wanted to destroy most was Gaunt. Now we can talk about Richard having bad taste in friends who tried to poison him against the influential, rich and vastly unpopular Gaunt, but it doesn’t seem like Gaunt tried very hard to endear himself to Richard (or anyone else for that matter).

While Gaunt might have ultimately been a “good guy” and tolerated Richard on the throne and while Richard may have had a weak personality that was exploited by his so-called friends, it wasn’t like Richard had a totally irrational hate boner for Gaunt which is how things are presented in The King’s Sister. There were very real fears about Gaunt’s ambitions that Richard grew up hearing and saw them treated as credible and real.

On a similar note, Richard is presented as totally unreasonable and beholden to his emotions and his favourites when John Holland murders a nobleman, Ralph Stafford, and Richard refuses to intervene and leaves Holland to face justice unprotected by royal protection. Elizabeth and Gaunt plead for him to no avail, and Joan of Kent rouses herself from her sickbed to add to the pleas for her (apparently favourite) son’s life, Richard is a gigantic, unreasonable dick and refuses, so when Joan dies, supposedly of grief, Richard is given the brunt of the blame and even then must be flattered and cajoled into pardoning John Holland. Without the manipulative treatment of Richard as unreasonable (and we have no real idea what went down beyond the basics), this whole plot point looks very different. At least to me, it reads as though Elizabeth of Lancaster and her family are a bunch of self-serving parasites who want to protect a murderer because he’s ~family~ and omg so hot, while blaming the guy who was like “maybe he should face justice…” for his already ill mother’s death.

There has been excellent research on Richard II’s reign that has looked at untangling his life and reign. Christopher Fletcher, for instance, has done a lot of research in Richard and masculinity, arguing against some of the more common tropes that O’Brien deploys (i.e. he wasn’t a coward afraid of conflict or battle, there is evidence that he did indeed joust). Other research suggests Richard did not disinherit Henry Bolingbroke but merely prevented him from claiming his inheritance until his term of exile was up (Kathryn Warner has also suggested that Richard may have been driven by fears of being controlled by Bolingbroke with the weight and wealth of the Lancaster duchy behind him, as Edward II was beholden to Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, during his reign). Anne Curry argues that Bolingbroke’s son, the future Henry V, went to Ireland, not as Richard’s hostage, but as a young noble to be “blooded” in an actual war.

Actually, O’Brien’s… subplot? about the young Henry as Richard’s hostage is weird – it’s the one moment which proves to be the impetus for Elizabeth to decide that Richard has to go and Bolingbroke has to return to do it. Yet we never hear about Henry as Richard’s hostage again, and when Bolingbroke returns… nothing is mentioned of Henry’s fate. When Elizabeth reunites with Bolingbroke, she doesn’t ask if Henry is even alive, though she begs to find out whether her husband sided with Bolingbroke (priorities, man – a kid being murdered is no big deal so long as her husband picked the right side), and we have to wait until the parliament scene to casually find out that mad, unreasonable, hostage-taking Richard didn’t execute his enemy’s son and Henry is still, apparently, alive and completely unharmed. Nor are we given any indication why either. While the historical evidence points to the bond between Henry and Richard as somewhat affectionate, at least on Henry’s side, which is unlikely if he’d been mistreated by Richard or fully aware of his status as a hostage. But this would clearly be at odds with O’Brien’s characterisation of Richard II so it’s just ignored by the story. It’s not an issue of historical accuracy, however, it’s about having this be a huge, big moment and then… nothing, it’s as though it never happened.

The Appellant Crisis, in which five nobleman, including Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, and Henry Bolingbroke, attempted to restrain Richard’s rule by removing his favourites, is really weirdly handled. It’s mainly treated as the Lords Appellant wanting to remove Robert de Vere, one of Richard’s friends and favourites, from influence and Richard is depicted as being driven to revenge by de Vere’s loss – this reading would be far more in keeping in a novel about Edward II and his loss of Piers Gaveston. The Appellant Crisis saw others close to Richard executed, including Simon Burley, his tutor, and it appears that Richard may have actually been deposed for three days before being restored to the throne because the Lords Appellant disagreed amongst themselves about who should be king next – Gloucester wanted to become king himself, but Henry Bolingbroke argued against that as he, his father, amongst others, were before Gloucester in the line of succession. It was so much more than just de Vere and to reduce the conflict down to that is utterly silly and entirely misleading.

There are excellent reasons why Richard might have been upset and angry about the Appellant Crisis, but the novel just acts like he should just forget all about it. He lost his friends, his royal dignity and status was attacked and efforts were made to put him under strict control – why the hell shouldn’t he be resentful?

Because Elizabeth of Lancaster says so, I guess. There’s a thing in this novel that I don’t really like and it’s all about how the heroes can treat the antagonist any way they like because they’re the hero and the antagonist therefore is the villain. Lancaster is good, therefore everything about that family is good and right, and Richard II is bad, therefore everything about him is bad. John Holland’s loyalty to his brother is initially dismissed as ambition and, to be fair, it could’ve been – but the novel acts like that’s the only reason why Richard could have someone loyal to him. That is, until it’s time for Elizabeth to berate John Holland for being loyal to his brother instead of her brother. In a bewildering moment, John finally confronts her over that and says, in response to her “why you commit treason against my brother” nagging, “I can’t let my brother die” and she’s all “Henry would never! You have no evidence he’d kill Richard!” despite the fact that it’s been treated like open knowledge that Henry would eventually have Richard killed, including by her own young children. Just… where is the logic? Is she meant to be that much of a hypocrite or is it a writing fail?

Also, the part where she seems to accept that she’s going to rejoice in Richard’s death is pretty damn gross. I know Richard is a dickhead in her world, but I find it really hard to care about a character who’s salivating over someone else’s death.

Now, all of this is might be excused by the lens of the novel – i.e. this view of Richard is just what Elizabeth of Lancaster thinks he’s like. And maybe it is. But I don’t feel like there’s anything in the novel to suggest it or suggest her unreliability as a narrator.

So, at the end of this – I did not like The King's Sister. I struggle to say anything positive about it – I didn’t like the characters, the history was mishandled, I hated how the things I enjoyed about O’Brien’s other novel turned out to be missing. I am now viewing her other novels with great caution.

[Jenny Langley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Has to be one of my favourites! 💙

[Deborah Pickstone · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is better than The Queen's Choice which I read last week and is recently published. I had not intended to read more by this author because of that book but had already ordered it from the library, where it arrived tout de suite; so I read it.

It's a bit of a stretch to call it biographical fiction because, as the author acknowledges, little is known about Elizabeth of Lancaster, daughter of John of Gaunt. She is on record as being 'spirited' so I guess depicting her as a feisty woman is, in this case, reasonable.

The story depicts her alleged choice between loyalty to husband or family over the taking of the throne by Henry IV, her brother, that dilemma being occasioned by her husband, John Holland, being brother to the deposed Richard II (an older brother of Joan of Kent's prior marriage to Thomas Holland: she later married Edward, the Black Prince): he attempted rebellion on his brother's behalf.

More is known about John Holland than about Elizabeth (he was a man, dear), thus most of it is frankly made up around details known about him. The marriage is presented as a passionate romance leading to the dilemma: this is naturally fictional and Elizabeth may never have seen any dilemma but held first loyalty to her own family OR she may never have known about his plot (the Epiphany Uprising); the story presupposes that he told her.

History records that she remarried shortly after his execution and, though the book describes her reluctance to marry at Henry IVs request history suggests that she married at her own choice, causing scandal by doing so without Henry's permission and that her third husband, John Cornwall, was arrested for marrying her. This rather suggests that the great romance between Elizabeth and John Holland did not occur as depicted in this novel.

All that aside, this was very readable and historically not too annoying as to context of time so I will try a third - I am very interested in the period covered and it looks like she has given John of Gaunt some attention. Watch this space!

[V.E. Lynne · Rating 3 out of 5]

When I started this book my knowledge of Elizabeth of Lancaster was close to non-existent. I knew that she was the daughter of John of Gaunt, one of the most powerful figures in Plantagenet England, and that was about it. "The King's Sister" therefore filled in most of the blanks surrounding her life for me and I found the novel to be an interesting and informative read. As a young woman, Elizabeth was betrothed to John Hastings, a mere child, but she longed to wed Sir John Holland, a handsome and charismatic courtier whom she passionately adored. The love story between them forms the bulk of the book and Anne O'Brien has done a great job in bringing them so vividly to life. Other events in the historical record sometimes felt a little glossed over but that could've been because information on them is scanty or Elizabeth's role uncertain. Either way the flow of the book was not much affected.

[Kiesha ~ Gwenllian ferch Gruffydd · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this to be enjoyable. I expected to dislike Elizabeth based off other reviewers but I liked her. Sure she was selfish & mulish at times but she was a Plantagenet Princess, most of them were. I also found her to be fair, loving & compassionate. The first half isn't as politically exciting, though not full of romamce as others have said. I really like Holland too, Henry of Darby, later Henry IV not so much. I loved the cameos from Joan of Kent and Katherine Swynford.

[Sandy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book and think it was well written but I wasn’t blown away !
Sometimes I found the main character Elizabeth to be so annoying !

I liked reading about the pre war of the roses history and keen to learn and read more but I wouldn’t rush to read a book by this author again soon - sorry.

[Esther Turnbull · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is probably the worst book by Anne O'Brien I have read. So bad I did not finish.

[M.J. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Took me a while to get into, but having managed to swag an EARC of Tapestry of Treason, I went back to this book and thoroughly enjoyed it. It might even have been better because I'd read Tapestry of Treason first!

[Mercedes Rochelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cover reads: "Sister. Wife. Traitor." Who can resist that? I certainly couldn't and my knowledge of Elizabeth of Lancaster was nonexistent. So I plunged into this novel and the world of Richard II, which is one of my favorite medieval periods. Anne has certainly landed a juicy heroine, and her story is lively, complicated, and intriguing. Since I don't know how much of this novel is historical and how much is fiction, I'm obliged to take the story on faith (as a control freak, this makes me very uncomfortable!). Elizabeth was the spoiled, headstrong, pampered daughter of John of Gaunt who originally did her duty and married her father's choice - a boy - but later saw fit to follow her own inclinations and behave in a most unladylike manner, throwing contemporary morals and customs by the wayside.

Elizabeth's head was turned by the charming and rakish John Holland, half-brother to Richard II, and her indulgent father was obliged to reward her bad behavior rather than risk her eternal shame. Her tempestuous relationship with John takes up much of the book, and I felt the story crossed the line into Historical Romance, which is not a genre I favor. I see the necessity, however, because no one would put themselves into such a pickle unless their love affair surmounted every other consideration.

Even after their marriage was settled, the story plunged into yet more trouble, as her brother Henry Bolingbroke went for the crown, pitting Elizabeth against her husband and his loyalty to Richard II. It was an impossible situation and tested their love to the breaking point. I got the feeling that our heroine was always destined to land on her feet, but she could have been happier if she wasn't so uncompromising. She made for an interesting character study.

[TheBitchyBookClub · Rating 4 out of 5]

Recensione completa sul blog a cura di Ecate

4.5

Non avevo previsto di scrivere questa recensione. Quando ho acceso il mio Kindle e ho iniziato a cercare tra le cartelle dei vari autori qualcosa da leggere non avevo ancora idea di quale libro avrei scelto, non ero sicura neanche su quale genere far ricadere la mia decisione. E poi ho iniziato La sorella del re, ancora non del tutto convinta che uno storico fosse la scelta giusta per me in questo periodo. Non perché non ami i romanzi storici, li adoro profondamente, ma ero reduce da letture abbastanza deludenti e non volevo che il mio cattivo umore potesse rovinare il mio approccio a questo libro.

Ebbene, non sono riuscita a staccarmene fino a quando non sono arrivata all’ultima pagina. E ancora non avevo deciso se recensirlo o meno. Sono andata a dormire e al mio risveglio il mio pensiero era ancora rivolto a Elisabetta di Lancaster e a John Holland.
E allora ho capito che dovevo condividere quel pensiero con voi, perché sono molteplici le motivazioni che possono condizionare il nostro giudizio su un libro: lo stile dell’autore, la trama, la caratterizzazione dei personaggi e il loro evolversi nel corso della storia, la verità storica sugli eventi narrati (ed eventuali libertà che lo scrittore si è concesso per scrivere il proprio romanzo, che non è e non potrebbe essere una biografia dei personaggi inseriti), ma a volte sono le emozioni che esso suscita in noi a prendere il sopravvento e in alcuni casi finiscono per offuscare tutti o quasi i punti dell’elenco appena citato.

Recensione completa sul blog a cura di Ecate

[Pupottina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anne O'Brien, dopo LA REGINA PROIBITA, è tornata ad appassionarmi con un suo nuovo romanzo storico, LA SORELLA DEL RE. La vita di Elisabetta di Lancaster è avvincente e ricca tanto di intrighi quanto di sentimenti.
Lo stile sobrio ed elegante della O'Brien rende la narrazione gradevole, avvincente e coinvolgente. È come sentirsi nella corte inglese.
La vicenda è ambientata in due momenti storici precisi: il 1382 e il 1399. Elisabetta di Lancaster è la figlia di Giovanni di Gand e sorella di Enrico IV, futuro re d'Inghilterra. Elisabetta rifiuta di soggiacere a un matrimonio combinato e, ribellandosi al suo destino, sposa l'affascinante e ambizioso Sir John Holland, Duca di Exeter, fratellastro del re Riccardo II. John è l'unico uomo che lei abbia mai amato, ma sposandolo disobbedisce a ciò che una donna del suo lignaggio dovrebbe fare. Il suo temperamento indomito la porta a dover fare i conti con le sue scelte.
Nel 1399, Enrico IV, fratello di Elisabetta, è diventato re d'Inghilterra. Qualcuno, però, trama contro di lui. Le vicende del fratello ricadono su Elisabetta che resta intrappolata in una mortifera rete di inganni e segreti. Elisabetta di Lancaster deve decidere se tradire il fratello e la famiglia o smascherare il complotto del marito, decretandone la caduta e la morte.
Elisabetta di Lancaster è un personaggio storico molto interessante che si impara a conoscere e ad amare, una pagina dopo l'altra.
È una sorella. È una moglie. Ma è anche una traditrice che ha nelle sue mani il destino d'Inghilterra. È una donna del passato chiamata a compiere un'importante scelta, destinata ad incidere sulle pagine di storia future.

[Elizabeth Grieve · Rating 1 out of 5]

Having read a couple of books by this author before, I expected to like this .... however, I found it to be not particularly well written, and more importantly, the story did not interest me. I gave up and returned to it several times, but could not finish it. Elizabeth, daughter of John of Gaunt, is not a sympathetic character here, acting like a spoilt modern teenager when it comes to her putative relationship with John Holland - love, hate, obsession, swooning, more hate, etc etc, more like a Mills and Boon type of flimsy romance. After a while I just didn’t care anymore. None of the other characters came to life for me, except for a tantalising glimpse of Princess Joan (now there's an interesting character), and I found it tedious. I had previously enjoyed this author's work, but this book is not up to previous standards.

Reviewed in exchange for a preview Kindle copy.

[Mills · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love me a bit of historical fiction and most of my knowledge of English history has come not from school but from books (although I'm British, I spent much of my childhood in America). I was interested to read a story which branches out a little from the plethora of Tudor fiction and introduces a character who was new to me: Elizabeth of Lancaster.

I was not disappointed. As I remember from The Forbidden Queen, Anne O'Brien's writing is light (but not thoughtless) and fun. She does lean more towards romance than history, but that is hardly a crime. As long as you take her stories with a pinch of salt, remembering that they are historical FICTION, they are a pleasure to read.

[jellybean · Rating 3 out of 5]

more romance than history, but i did really enjoy the writing. the characters however, i didnt really connect with. elizabeth's spoiled & selfish and she acknowledges this a few times and says she will do better, but then goes around again and does something selfish 😭😭 very entertaining though

[Thea Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received a copy of The Kings Sister from the publisher, Harlequin MIRA UK via Netgalley for review purposes.

As regular readers to my blog know I have a thing for this kind of book but in the past have stuck close to the Tudor era. This year I have been expanding my reach in historical reach an venturing further into the past, into the time around.... into the War Of The Roses and beyond. This is further back than even that and it's a time I know little about. I was lucky enough earlier this year to read a book by Emma Campion called A Triple Knot which was basically about the love affair between Sir John Holland's parents Thomas Holland and Joan, the Fair Maid Of Kent so I was aware of events leading up to the time covered in this book and know of the scandal attached to that love affair. It seems their younger son followed in their footsteps causing a scandal of his own by chasing after a married woman and a member of the royal family at that. This book is about that love affair between Elizabeth of Lancaster and John Holland, Duke of Exeter.


The Plot Of The Story:

This is the story of the interesting love life of John of Gaunt's daughter, Elizabeth of Lancaster and in particular the romance between Elizabeth and Sir John Holland.

Elizabeth of Lancaster is married as young woman to a boy child, a unconsummated marriage with no chance of consummation taking place any time soon. Being a young woman with all the lust and fancies of her age, she allows an older man, John Holland, to turn her head and slowly woo into breaking her marriage vows. Of course events lead to annulment of her first marriage in favour of a marriage between Elizabeth and John despite everyone thinking that John would make Elizabeth unhappy in the end.

What follows is a book about their love affair and how entangled it becomes in the intrigues of the royal throne, with Elizabeth being cousin of current King Richard who's John Holland's half brother and then when Richard is removed from the throne and Henry takes his place, Elizabeth is now the king's sister with a husband loyal to the former king. Elizabeth becomes torn between her husband and her brother with her loyalties to both being twisted and called into question.

As a love affair goes this is one of those epic and fascinating ones taking pace in time where loyalty is almost currency and so important within the elite of England. Elizabeth is torn between loyalty to her husband (and his family) and her own brother while John is torn between his brother, the King, and his wife's family


The Characters:

Elizabeth of Lancaster - Younger daughter of John of Gaunt, cousin the the current king. Wed to a boy child and deeply unhappy in an unconsummated arranged marriage, she falls under the spell of an older man. She shows her youth when she allows Holland to turn her head, feeling unloved and overwhelmed by all the new emotions that come with being a young lady she is flattered by the new attention she's getting from Holland, attentions she'd never experienced from a man as he's the first man to show her affection in a time when she feels starved of it, she feels alone and unloved with her husband being so young and childish, caring more about animals and fighting than about her like young boys do. Against all the sage advice she is given and against her father express wishes she allows Holland to woo her and eventually lead her into betraying her marriage vows. She believes with all the naivety of young girl in the first thrills of young love that Holland is her true love and feels she should be with him alone and not married to a boy, she wants Holland and is determined to have him at any costs. She is the kind of girl who knows what she wants but with the innocence of the young doesn't realise what effects her moves have on others in her life. Elizabeth will do anything for Holland, he's her entire world and her entire life and she simply cannot see beyond that and the consequences of her actions. She wears her heart on her life and all her emotions are plain for all to see.


Sir John Holland, Duke of Exeter - Half brother to the current king, Holland meets young Elizabeth and despite her being married falls for her and woos her regardless of her married status. Holland's own parents caused a scandal with their own secret marriage and it seems he is going to follow in their footsteps and cause a scandal of his own. Holland is a fiercely loyal man when it comes to his family but has a reputation for being a ladies man. He is a more complex character than Elizabeth, his emotions are more guarded with many more hidden depths. He has a reputation and to being with we are unsure of his motives towards young Elizabeth, is he chasing her because he wants her or because he need something from her, like position with her influential father. Saying that the lengths he goes to to woo her are genuinely lovely to watch, his gifts are thoughtful and effort he puts into winning her over are heart-felt, you want him to be on the level and wish someone would woo you in that way. Throughout the early part of their relationship there is always a seed of doubt about him and his feelings for Elizabeth but at the end of the day he wins both Elizabeth and the reader over. It does have to be said that Holland really isn't the best influence on Elizabeth, he makes her forget her wedding vows and go against her families wishes for him. He wants her and will stop at nothing to get her, to prove himself loyal to Elizabeth. It is his strong loyalties to those he loves that could be undoing.


King Richard II, King of England - Son of The Black Prince, cousin to Elizabeth and half brother to John Holland.


Henry of Lancaster - Elizabeth's brother and future King Henry IV.


John of Gaunt - father to Elizabeth and Henry, brother to the former king, The Black Prince. Uses both of his daughters in marriage for alliance purposes and thoughtlessly marries his youngest daughter to a boy half her age thinking the love will grow but ultimately he loves his children and only wants what is best for them even if that leads a little disgrace. He is a man who has broken his own marriage vows by having a long-term affair with Katharine Swynford and should be the last person to lecture on the importance of fidelity in a marriage.


Princess Joan - John Holland's mother who married The Black Prince after her beloved husband Thomas Holland's death, she had a son Richard with the Prince. Fiercely protective of her sons.


Katherine Swynford - mistress to John of Gaunt and governess to his children. Eventually Gaunt does marry her and makes their union legitimate.



The Book's Setting (Time and Place):

The Time - The book begins in 1380 and works it way through two decades, chronicling the life of Elizabeth, her loves and her choices. We also see two kings and countless battles while the throne is contested.


The Place - England of the fourteenth century.



The Writing:

As always with Anne O'Brien's books this is flawlessly written and so expressive. She gives us an insight into a time gone by and the imagery she evokes is crisp and crystal clear

The characters are compelling and have a real depth to them, they are fragile yet strong and they have all of the most human flaws of character that we still have today.

One thing I did note was this time it felt rather like the author had swallowed a dictionary as I was constantly having to highlight the archaic words the author had used. It was slightly annoying to have to keep looking them up but they are words used back then and have a serious place within the text and only add to the feel of the age in the book making them worth looking up as I learnt a fair bot by doing so. Apart from these odd words in places O'Brien's style flows effortlessly from the page, it's simple to read while being full of.


Final Thoughts:

Once again Anne O'Brien has seriously impressed me with her latest work, she's crafted a beautiful tale of forbidden love and the consequences of misplaced loyalty and introduced me to a cast of characters that, for the most part, I was completely unaware of and that is what I love about historical novels like this, the insight into real people in a bygone time and the lives they led in hard and harsh times where your reputation is everything and your loyalties carve your path in the world. Intriguing, immersive and educational to boot!

You can't help having questions at the end of the book but they are the 'what if' kind of questions, the good kind of questions that you want to have after finishing a book like:

What if Elizabeth had been wed to a man rather than a boy-child?

Would she have needed the touch of Holland if she'd been getting what she craved from her marriage?

Would Holland have been as interested if Elizabeth had married one of his contemporaries?

Would Elizabeth have still left her husband for Holland?

Is Elizabeth truly to blame for the affair or should some of it be left at her father's door for wedding her to the child he chose instead of choosing someone closer to her own age?

Would any of it mattered as much if Elizabeth not been of 'royal blood'?

Did the way his parents meet and get married have any influence on Holland's carefree nature when it comes it love?

All things to think about when the book is finished and each linger in the mind.

This is an interesting look into a intriguing couple, it's a tale of scandal and its effects, of loyalty worth dying for and it's all put together in a beautiful, seamless and completely readable fashion . If want something different from the usual Tudor historical tales then give one a whirl as I believe that you won't regret it as it really is just THAT good!

One for fans of Philippa Gregory, Alison Weir and Elizabeth Chadwick and if may say it, even better still!

[DarkStar's Book Cavern · Rating 2 out of 5]

There’s not much to say about this one. We are stuck in the POV of Elizabeth of Lancaster, who is a really interesting historical figure. Daughter of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster. Cousin to King Richard 2nd who was deposed by her brother – Henry. Married to the half-brother of King Richard – John Holland, who then plotted to have her brother Henry disposed of. Elizabeth was in the middle of all of it. However, in this, she is portrayed as selfish, shallow and spoiled. She is a bitch to Jonty (a young boy she is betrothed to) simply because he is not a swoon-worthy knight to sweep her off her feet. She is drawn to John Holland, primarily because she is told repeatedly NOT to be drawn to him. She is told “no” and does it anyway, and then whines at the consequences. Elizabeth knows for over half the book that John Holland’s loyalty lies with his half-brother, King Richard. And is surprised that he does not have the same loyalty to her brother King Henry when he deposed and imprisons King Richard, who ultimately dies in house arrest. This is supposedly a character who is intelligent and politically savvy and she is surprised that her husband would be part of a plot to overthrow her brother. This book would have benefited from more historical events and less romance.

[Patrizia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sono stata attratta da questo libro perché mi ricordava quelli di Philippa Gregory e ho avuto ragione a pensare che meritasse di essere letto. Non do spesso voto pieno, ma questo se lo merita tutto. Il titolo parla della sorella di Re Enrico IV, ma per la maggioranza del libro Elisabetta ne è solo la cugina, dove racconta sì di politica e manipolazioni, ma soprattutto del suo amore per John Holland. Un amore tutt'altro che facile, ma che ha saputo emozionarmi, soprattutto alla fine. Ho versato lacrime praticamente per 4 capitoli ed è tutto dire se consideriamo che hanno almeno 10 pagine l'uno.
La famiglia la fa sposare a un bambino, ma lei ha 17 anni e desideri che un bambino non può soddisfare, è inevitabile che si guardi intorno nonostante il matrimonio (anche se non consumato), senza contare che ha sempre avuto un debole per John Holland, fratellastro del re. Le persone intorno a lei cercano di farla ragionare, ma come si dice in questi casi, al cuore non si comanda.
Ora che ho scoperto questa autrice, sono decisa a procurarmi anche La regina straniera e La regina proibita, che ho già aggiunto in wishlist.

[Carole P. Roman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Elizabeth of Lancaster is the privileged daughter of John of Gaunt. Anne O'Brien starts the fictional story of her life on the eve of her arranged and political marriage. The author captures the spoiled entitlement of a child born with royal blood. Elizabeth has been brought up to know both her worth and her duty. She marries, but falls in love with the King's half brother. The book is filled with the complicated political turmoil of the times. Richard the Second is holding the throne, surrounded by his favorites, pitting cousin against cousin, and husband against wife. Elizabeth must decide to follow her loyalty or her heart.
Well written, filled with intrigue, the book had me running to look up all the key players. The book leaves you with an intimate knowledge of the life and times that ultimately led to the Cousin's War.

[Yoanna · Rating 1 out of 5]

Too much of a romance, not a historical novel. The tedious details and repetitions, the going around and around the topics were completely unnecessary to get the action moving, and did not add any dimension to the protagonists. Several times I almost left this novel unfinished.
The really annoying stylistic feature is the multitude of metaphors and comparisons, there are thousands of them! And the questions "do I ?"... The author tries really hard to show off her vocabulary and imagination in using the language, but it only works in drawing attention to the novel as being too talkative. Less is more!
I was really interested to learn more about this complex history and getting a different side to the morally difficult decisions of the individuals involved, as well as some more facts, but there was so little historical background that I feel I wasted time.