What do you think?
Rate this book
The Rival Queens: Catherine de' Medici, Her Daughter Marguerite de Valois, and the Betrayal that Ignited a Kingdom
The riveting true story of mother-and-daughter queens Catherine de' Medici and Marguerite de Valois, whose wildly divergent personalities and turbulent relationship changed the shape of their tempestuous and dangerous century.
Set in magnificent Renaissance France, this is the story of two remarkable women, a mother and daughter driven into opposition by a terrible betrayal that threatened to destroy the realm. Catherine de' Medici was a ruthless pragmatist and powerbroker who dominated the throne for thirty years. Her youngest daughter Marguerite, the glamorous "Queen Margot," was a passionate free spirit, the only adversary whom her mother could neither intimidate nor control.
When Catherine forces the Catholic Marguerite to marry her Protestant cousin Henry of Navarre against her will, and then uses her opulent Parisian wedding as a means of luring his followers to their deaths, she creates not only savage conflict within France but also a potent rival within her own family.
Rich in detail and vivid prose, Goldstone's narrative unfolds as a thrilling historical epic. Treacherous court politics, poisonings, international espionage, and adultery form the background to a story that includes such celebrated figures as Elizabeth I, Mary, Queen of Scots, and Nostradamus. The Rival Queens is a dangerous tale of love, betrayal, ambition, and the true nature of courage, the echoes of which still resonate.
Set in magnificent Renaissance France, this is the story of two remarkable women, a mother and daughter driven into opposition by a terrible betrayal that threatened to destroy the realm. Catherine de' Medici was a ruthless pragmatist and powerbroker who dominated the throne for thirty years. Her youngest daughter Marguerite, the glamorous "Queen Margot," was a passionate free spirit, the only adversary whom her mother could neither intimidate nor control.
When Catherine forces the Catholic Marguerite to marry her Protestant cousin Henry of Navarre against her will, and then uses her opulent Parisian wedding as a means of luring his followers to their deaths, she creates not only savage conflict within France but also a potent rival within her own family.
Rich in detail and vivid prose, Goldstone's narrative unfolds as a thrilling historical epic. Treacherous court politics, poisonings, international espionage, and adultery form the background to a story that includes such celebrated figures as Elizabeth I, Mary, Queen of Scots, and Nostradamus. The Rival Queens is a dangerous tale of love, betrayal, ambition, and the true nature of courage, the echoes of which still resonate.
Audiobook
First published June 18, 2015
676 people are currently reading
8908 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 456 reviews
August 26, 2019
This book was such a disappointment! I was so looking forward to reading this book to learn more about Catherine de' Medici, but I really struggled through it! Don't get me wrong - I do appreciate learning new vocabulary, and I would always encourage my students to be voracious readers so that they could do the same, but when you need to use a dictionary for every fifth word, it becomes a hard pill to swallow. I felt that the author was having fun using her new thesaurus!
February 26, 2015
I found this dual biography that sheds light on the fraught relationship between misused, determined power-seeker Catherine de Medici and her equally misused, more idealistic daughter Marguerite fascinating and its tone just right. Rich with historical detail and compelling personalities, it’s as engaging as a novel but more substantial, and it’s backed up by 24 pages of notes and an extensive bibliography.
Taking place in France during the reign of Elizabeth I, the book helped expand my knowledge of that era beyond the borders of England. Its eloquent but hair-raising accounts of arranged marriages, shifting alliances, deadly power struggles, disfiguring diseases, royal family dysfunction, and religious wars between Catholics and Huguenots kept me reading late into the night, and many interesting people of the time, including Mary Queen of Scots, Philip II of Spain, and Nostradamus make appearances on its pages.
Daughter Marguerite was forced by Catherine to marry her Huguenot kinsman Henry, King of Navarre, which went against Marguerite's strongly held Catholic beliefs, only to have her wedding celebration turn into a Huguenot slaughter orchestrated by her mother. Later Marguerite was imprisoned by her mother and her brother the king of France under circumstances that could have led her to a fate similar to that of Mary Queen of Scots, who had just been executed by Elizabeth I accross the channel, but Marguerite’s good sense, good negotiating skills, and good luck saved her neck.
One of my favorite facts from the book: Marguerite and Henry’s court at Navarre was parodied by Shakespeare in Love’s Labor’s Lost--though it wasn’t Marguerite he was poking fun at. In a time of religious power struggles, Protestant England was tired of Huguenot King Henry’s compromises with French Catholics.
Marguerite comes across as romantic but devout, as well as intelligent, self-educated, and compassionate. Her diplomacy skills helped changed the course of French history and promoted religious tolerance. Catherine was treated shoddily by her husband Henri II--his blatant affair with Diane de Poitiers humiliated her--but after his death she herself was often opportunistic, ruthless, and cruel making her unpopular during her lifetime. Her daughter Marguerite lived and died mostly beloved by the French people, but according to this author the two reputations have been somewhat reversed in the minds of many modern historians, with Catherine being portrayed as pragmatic in a difficult time and Marguerite not given credit for her achievements. Goldstone’s book succeeds at tipping the balance back a little.
Taking place in France during the reign of Elizabeth I, the book helped expand my knowledge of that era beyond the borders of England. Its eloquent but hair-raising accounts of arranged marriages, shifting alliances, deadly power struggles, disfiguring diseases, royal family dysfunction, and religious wars between Catholics and Huguenots kept me reading late into the night, and many interesting people of the time, including Mary Queen of Scots, Philip II of Spain, and Nostradamus make appearances on its pages.
Daughter Marguerite was forced by Catherine to marry her Huguenot kinsman Henry, King of Navarre, which went against Marguerite's strongly held Catholic beliefs, only to have her wedding celebration turn into a Huguenot slaughter orchestrated by her mother. Later Marguerite was imprisoned by her mother and her brother the king of France under circumstances that could have led her to a fate similar to that of Mary Queen of Scots, who had just been executed by Elizabeth I accross the channel, but Marguerite’s good sense, good negotiating skills, and good luck saved her neck.
One of my favorite facts from the book: Marguerite and Henry’s court at Navarre was parodied by Shakespeare in Love’s Labor’s Lost--though it wasn’t Marguerite he was poking fun at. In a time of religious power struggles, Protestant England was tired of Huguenot King Henry’s compromises with French Catholics.
Marguerite comes across as romantic but devout, as well as intelligent, self-educated, and compassionate. Her diplomacy skills helped changed the course of French history and promoted religious tolerance. Catherine was treated shoddily by her husband Henri II--his blatant affair with Diane de Poitiers humiliated her--but after his death she herself was often opportunistic, ruthless, and cruel making her unpopular during her lifetime. Her daughter Marguerite lived and died mostly beloved by the French people, but according to this author the two reputations have been somewhat reversed in the minds of many modern historians, with Catherine being portrayed as pragmatic in a difficult time and Marguerite not given credit for her achievements. Goldstone’s book succeeds at tipping the balance back a little.
January 23, 2024
The name de' Medici resonated through European history during the Middle Ages. From Popes to Queens, the family, always controversial, held seats of power and were not to be trifled with. This biography concentrates on the later life of the Queen of France, Catherine, who also became Regent at the death of her son; and that of her daughter Marguerite (known as Margot) who became a pawn in a bloody religious war.
Margot was married off to Henry, King of Navarre after her mother brokered her, without success, to many of the reigning houses of Europe. But her reasoning for this less than perfect union, was the fact that Henry was a Huguenot, a Protestant sect in a Catholic country. And the Huguenots were causing trouble in France (and other Catholic countries) by demanding religious freedom. Queen Catherine assumed that the marriage would help to quell or, at least, diminish the problems facing the realm. And thus began a tug-of-war between mother and daughter and political machinations that put modern politics in the shade. Broken promises, executions, betrayals, imprisonments, and general warfare raged for years and Margot was out of favor with both her mother and her husband for most of her tortured and horrible life.
This is interesting history written in a smooth and readable style and goes to prove the Catherine de' Medici was probably the worst mother who ever lived.
Margot was married off to Henry, King of Navarre after her mother brokered her, without success, to many of the reigning houses of Europe. But her reasoning for this less than perfect union, was the fact that Henry was a Huguenot, a Protestant sect in a Catholic country. And the Huguenots were causing trouble in France (and other Catholic countries) by demanding religious freedom. Queen Catherine assumed that the marriage would help to quell or, at least, diminish the problems facing the realm. And thus began a tug-of-war between mother and daughter and political machinations that put modern politics in the shade. Broken promises, executions, betrayals, imprisonments, and general warfare raged for years and Margot was out of favor with both her mother and her husband for most of her tortured and horrible life.
This is interesting history written in a smooth and readable style and goes to prove the Catherine de' Medici was probably the worst mother who ever lived.
July 29, 2015
Unarguably, Catherine de Medici was one of the most fascinating women to have lived. She couldn’t have stayed out of the history books even if she had tried. Although lesser discussed, her daughter Marquerite de Valois, was also captivating in her own right. Nancy Goldstone presents a dual-biography of this mother/daughter force in, “The Rival Queens: Catherine de Medici, Her Daughter Marquerite de Valois, and the Betrayal that Ignited a Kingdom”.
Goldstone breaks “The Rival Queens” into three parts: 1) Catherine de Medici 2) Marquerite de Valois and 3) The Rival Queens. The initial section describes some of the predominant events that occurred in Catherine’s life; portraying this illustrious figure well and setting a steady pace. Although the reader isn’t necessarily sure how this will relate to Marquerite; it regardless highlights Catherine suitably.
In typical Goldstone fashion, “The Rival Queens” is written with a flowery, visual, descriptive language which although better-suited for a novel than a history piece; helps to lighten the load and maintain the pace. This doesn’t dummy down the material, though, which is heavy with facts and research.
There are some problems evident in “The Rival Queens”. In Goldstone’s other books, she is guilty of speculative statements. Although she chose to forgo wording choices that would allude to such conclusions in “The Rival Queens”; much of the text is obviously not sourced and is merely an assumption taken by the author (no explanations appear for much of the text in the notes, either). Again, Goldstone tends to lean more towards a fictional route, at times. Goldstone also is at fault for going off on tangents and straying from her thesis (this problem is evident in all of her works). “The Rival Queens” feels more like two small mini-biographies versus a dual biography.
Similarly, Marquerite’s section of “The Rival Queens” hardly talks about her. Aside from some direct quotes from her personal memoirs; her inner psyche is not revealed nor analyzed and she is basically an afterthought in the text. Granted, this is probably based on the amount of source material available perhaps being scant but then as a result Goldstone fails in her goals on what “The Rival Queens” claims to be.
There are moments in the text when Goldstone tries to be too conversational and humorous. Some readers may find this to be quirky and compelling but staunch history lovers can be distracted and deem this, simply, as being unprofessional.
As Marquerite’s section progresses, the focus finally begins to shift more towards her own actions and involvement. Goldstone even utilizes some sleuth skills and debunks some myths. Regardless of this though, Marquerite still doesn’t seem like an important figure in history and Goldstone merely plumps her up but emptiness still remains.
The third section is noticeably the strongest; being that Marquerite is finally highlighted and presented with excitement. The reader begins to gain access to her and thusly the text evokes an emotional response towards the terrible experiences and trials Marquerite faced even from her own family. Even though this is too little too late; it concludes “The Rival Queens” nicely. On the other hand, the ending is a bit too flowery of an epitaph and doesn’t quite mesh well with the preceding pages.
“The Rival Queens” includes a glossy section of color plates, notes (although not very detailed or annotated), and a bibliography for fact checkers.
“The Rival Queens” isn’t horrible and is a solid work living up to Goldstone’s other pieces (I have given them all 3 stars). However, it simply feels “all over the place” and doesn’t quite live up to its aim nor brings Marquerite to life (except slightly at the end). “The Rival Queens” is suggested for those interested in Catherine de Medici, her children and the French court, and the religious wars of France. However, don’t expect a masterpiece or a plethora of new information/angles/outlooks.
Goldstone breaks “The Rival Queens” into three parts: 1) Catherine de Medici 2) Marquerite de Valois and 3) The Rival Queens. The initial section describes some of the predominant events that occurred in Catherine’s life; portraying this illustrious figure well and setting a steady pace. Although the reader isn’t necessarily sure how this will relate to Marquerite; it regardless highlights Catherine suitably.
In typical Goldstone fashion, “The Rival Queens” is written with a flowery, visual, descriptive language which although better-suited for a novel than a history piece; helps to lighten the load and maintain the pace. This doesn’t dummy down the material, though, which is heavy with facts and research.
There are some problems evident in “The Rival Queens”. In Goldstone’s other books, she is guilty of speculative statements. Although she chose to forgo wording choices that would allude to such conclusions in “The Rival Queens”; much of the text is obviously not sourced and is merely an assumption taken by the author (no explanations appear for much of the text in the notes, either). Again, Goldstone tends to lean more towards a fictional route, at times. Goldstone also is at fault for going off on tangents and straying from her thesis (this problem is evident in all of her works). “The Rival Queens” feels more like two small mini-biographies versus a dual biography.
Similarly, Marquerite’s section of “The Rival Queens” hardly talks about her. Aside from some direct quotes from her personal memoirs; her inner psyche is not revealed nor analyzed and she is basically an afterthought in the text. Granted, this is probably based on the amount of source material available perhaps being scant but then as a result Goldstone fails in her goals on what “The Rival Queens” claims to be.
There are moments in the text when Goldstone tries to be too conversational and humorous. Some readers may find this to be quirky and compelling but staunch history lovers can be distracted and deem this, simply, as being unprofessional.
As Marquerite’s section progresses, the focus finally begins to shift more towards her own actions and involvement. Goldstone even utilizes some sleuth skills and debunks some myths. Regardless of this though, Marquerite still doesn’t seem like an important figure in history and Goldstone merely plumps her up but emptiness still remains.
The third section is noticeably the strongest; being that Marquerite is finally highlighted and presented with excitement. The reader begins to gain access to her and thusly the text evokes an emotional response towards the terrible experiences and trials Marquerite faced even from her own family. Even though this is too little too late; it concludes “The Rival Queens” nicely. On the other hand, the ending is a bit too flowery of an epitaph and doesn’t quite mesh well with the preceding pages.
“The Rival Queens” includes a glossy section of color plates, notes (although not very detailed or annotated), and a bibliography for fact checkers.
“The Rival Queens” isn’t horrible and is a solid work living up to Goldstone’s other pieces (I have given them all 3 stars). However, it simply feels “all over the place” and doesn’t quite live up to its aim nor brings Marquerite to life (except slightly at the end). “The Rival Queens” is suggested for those interested in Catherine de Medici, her children and the French court, and the religious wars of France. However, don’t expect a masterpiece or a plethora of new information/angles/outlooks.
October 7, 2015
Writing for the general audience requires decisions that academic writers never need to make. The scholar can report the facts but only reported facts would quickly lose a general readership. Academic writers can present issues and controversies and build a logical interpretive case. The general audience needs a condensed background and a wants a good story with the settled facts. Academics don’t often deal in personality, and the general reader wants to know and relate to the characters.
This is the third Nancy Goldstone book I’ve read. In this one, for me, she has hit the perfect style. I had very little background, and Goldstone gave just enough to get me into the story. As I came to understand the people and their situation it was more and more riveting. Last night I couldn’t sleep until I knew how Marguerite got out of her captivity.
The two women come alive. Goldstone not only describes, she interprets: Catherine’s abandonment of the Huguenots (she only needed them when she had no access to power), her hatred of the Guise family (too powerful and too popular), her travels (to “sell” herself or to dazzle Henry’s court with the beauties of Paris); the reasons for Marguerite’s patience with her husband (appearances for her mother and brother; her safety, her lack of attraction to him, etc.) her flights (to counterbalance her brother or fear for her life) and more.
The men come to life as well as Goldstone interprets the reasons for Henry of Navarre’s conversions (youth, loyalty, kingship); Henri III’s view of Poland (no parties!), his favorites (and how they dressed); and poor young Charles IX (overwhelmed by his mother) and more. Most compelling was the understated reaction of Henry (of Navarre) when Catherine (de Medici) offers him with a deal in which she and her son (Henri III) will kill his wife (her daughter, Henri’s sister).
The epilogue gave me what I need to situate this as prologue to subsequent French history of which I am more familiar.
The Index worked for the few times I checked it. I read all the on page footnotes (a sign that they are useful). All the color photos are great; I wish there were more.
I highly recommend this book for the general reader. It is a story of adventure, a dual character study, a story of the mind set of the times and a thoroughly engrossing read.
This is the third Nancy Goldstone book I’ve read. In this one, for me, she has hit the perfect style. I had very little background, and Goldstone gave just enough to get me into the story. As I came to understand the people and their situation it was more and more riveting. Last night I couldn’t sleep until I knew how Marguerite got out of her captivity.
The two women come alive. Goldstone not only describes, she interprets: Catherine’s abandonment of the Huguenots (she only needed them when she had no access to power), her hatred of the Guise family (too powerful and too popular), her travels (to “sell” herself or to dazzle Henry’s court with the beauties of Paris); the reasons for Marguerite’s patience with her husband (appearances for her mother and brother; her safety, her lack of attraction to him, etc.) her flights (to counterbalance her brother or fear for her life) and more.
The men come to life as well as Goldstone interprets the reasons for Henry of Navarre’s conversions (youth, loyalty, kingship); Henri III’s view of Poland (no parties!), his favorites (and how they dressed); and poor young Charles IX (overwhelmed by his mother) and more. Most compelling was the understated reaction of Henry (of Navarre) when Catherine (de Medici) offers him with a deal in which she and her son (Henri III) will kill his wife (her daughter, Henri’s sister).
The epilogue gave me what I need to situate this as prologue to subsequent French history of which I am more familiar.
The Index worked for the few times I checked it. I read all the on page footnotes (a sign that they are useful). All the color photos are great; I wish there were more.
I highly recommend this book for the general reader. It is a story of adventure, a dual character study, a story of the mind set of the times and a thoroughly engrossing read.
November 20, 2023
Catherine de Medici. The "Serpent Queen". The "Black Queen of France". Catherine is certainly one of the more nefarious characters in history. This is her story and the rivalry, if not sheer hatred, that developed between Catherine and her daughter, Marguerite (Margot) de Valois, Queen of Navarre. It is a tale of murder, hatred, lust, war, and violence that would put to shame the most convoluted plot in a fantasy story. It truly begs the wisdom of parents or girls who wish to "be a Princess". Do you truly?
Catherine is often portrayed as the inveterate schemer (accurate) and a shining exemplar of Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" (inaccurate). If one reads The Prince one finds that Machiavelli stresses the concept of "virtu" or honor. He also takes pains to remind Princes not to be despised by those whom they rule. Catherine failed miserably on both accounts. Often her scheming was the cause of multiple later problems.
Catherine, the product of an unhappy marriage and a fraught existence in the court of Francois I of France. Her ability to manipulate her children- from the two kings to interfering in the lives of the others whom she didn't seem to care for if not actively dislike.
Margot, a far more decent person, is caught up in this vicious family conflict. Used as a pawn, her attempts to find freedom from her family's machinations will be a nearly Herculanean task. This story has it all from the betrayal of the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre to scenes that would do the "Red Wedding" scene from Game of Thrones justice.
A remarkable story. Shocking and interesting at the same time. Goldstone's history reads like a thriller novel but is a brilliant look at the complex family situation at the Court of France in the 1500's. Highly recommended.
Catherine is often portrayed as the inveterate schemer (accurate) and a shining exemplar of Niccolo Machiavelli's "The Prince" (inaccurate). If one reads The Prince one finds that Machiavelli stresses the concept of "virtu" or honor. He also takes pains to remind Princes not to be despised by those whom they rule. Catherine failed miserably on both accounts. Often her scheming was the cause of multiple later problems.
Catherine, the product of an unhappy marriage and a fraught existence in the court of Francois I of France. Her ability to manipulate her children- from the two kings to interfering in the lives of the others whom she didn't seem to care for if not actively dislike.
Margot, a far more decent person, is caught up in this vicious family conflict. Used as a pawn, her attempts to find freedom from her family's machinations will be a nearly Herculanean task. This story has it all from the betrayal of the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre to scenes that would do the "Red Wedding" scene from Game of Thrones justice.
A remarkable story. Shocking and interesting at the same time. Goldstone's history reads like a thriller novel but is a brilliant look at the complex family situation at the Court of France in the 1500's. Highly recommended.
June 28, 2015
This was a difficult read for me. It's nearly a 5 star blow by blow detail for Marguerite de Valois' (Queen Margot) entire life. The French houses/district locations coupled with the alliances and intermarriages between nobility that are already blood related by some degree! So convoluted! Despite being difficult to follow (three Henry's in key positions)- Nancy Goldstone did a great job with pages and pages of references and footnotes that truly helped. You needed them to follow all these cabals. Or the quick deaths.
Life was usually much shorter than even 3 centuries later. Highest born being no exception to sickness or violence. Plus the Reformation factor with the Civil War repercussions! And having read numerous Catherine de'Medici renderings before this- I can only say that Marguerite absolutely had to have been a savvy diplomat with slyness and forgiveness in equal measures for her to have lived to 61.
The French court was so corrupt during all these years and reigns that I cannot believe they held France as a national entity together at all.
That it loosely held proves the sorry and pitiful state of the lower and merchant classes that had next to no access toward any progress in any attempt at an improved living style (warmth/clean water keys) or goods. Disease and starvation being their genuine and usual condition it took very little to dominant by force and tax. Both the wedding massacre and all the progressions or exile wagon parades for 200 or 300 that cost more than the entire treasury's holding were absolutely appalling. At least three exact situations were used in/ on Game of Thrones. The wedding massacre being one that was nearly identical.
I thought all the intro quotes from "The Prince" were an added excellent touch.
Life was usually much shorter than even 3 centuries later. Highest born being no exception to sickness or violence. Plus the Reformation factor with the Civil War repercussions! And having read numerous Catherine de'Medici renderings before this- I can only say that Marguerite absolutely had to have been a savvy diplomat with slyness and forgiveness in equal measures for her to have lived to 61.
The French court was so corrupt during all these years and reigns that I cannot believe they held France as a national entity together at all.
That it loosely held proves the sorry and pitiful state of the lower and merchant classes that had next to no access toward any progress in any attempt at an improved living style (warmth/clean water keys) or goods. Disease and starvation being their genuine and usual condition it took very little to dominant by force and tax. Both the wedding massacre and all the progressions or exile wagon parades for 200 or 300 that cost more than the entire treasury's holding were absolutely appalling. At least three exact situations were used in/ on Game of Thrones. The wedding massacre being one that was nearly identical.
I thought all the intro quotes from "The Prince" were an added excellent touch.
Read
September 20, 2016This is another non-fiction book that follows the bad advice to start in the middle of the action and then explain how things got there. In this case, that means beginning with the St Bartholemew's Day massacre. For either fiction or non-fiction I do not want to read about things happening to people when I don't have any reason to care about the people yet. This is a fascinating book, well written and engaging, and good at explaining what's going on. She does a good job of picking her way through the minefield of too many people being called Henri. She also unashamedly takes sides -- Margot's side over Catherine's. I would have liked it much better had it begun in the beginning, but I did enjoy it nevertheless. It very much made me want a book about the previous generation in France -- why hasn't somebody written a good biography of Anne of Brittany? I'd have thought she was just the kind of person.
Recommended to anyone who is vaguely interested in France in the sixteenth century and doesn't know much about it. This is far from being a special interest of mine, so this filled gaps nicely.
Incidentally, it doesn't explain who Catherine de' Medici is, other than Italian and a Medici (Goldstone is only interested in France as far as I can tell), so for Medici obsessives I will footnote it here. She's the daughter of Lorenzo II and his aristocratic French wife Madeleine de la Tour d'Auvergne, and therefore the grand-daughter of Piero the Unfortunate and Alfonsina Orsini, and the great-grand-daughter of Lorenzo the Magnificent and Clarice Orsini. She did some terrible things, but she also had a terrible and fascinating life.
Recommended to anyone who is vaguely interested in France in the sixteenth century and doesn't know much about it. This is far from being a special interest of mine, so this filled gaps nicely.
Incidentally, it doesn't explain who Catherine de' Medici is, other than Italian and a Medici (Goldstone is only interested in France as far as I can tell), so for Medici obsessives I will footnote it here. She's the daughter of Lorenzo II and his aristocratic French wife Madeleine de la Tour d'Auvergne, and therefore the grand-daughter of Piero the Unfortunate and Alfonsina Orsini, and the great-grand-daughter of Lorenzo the Magnificent and Clarice Orsini. She did some terrible things, but she also had a terrible and fascinating life.
July 18, 2017
I was flipping through the pages to start reading when I noticed on the family tree a pencil notation. A person who checked out this book before me had made a correction. Henry IV was listed to have died in 1616 and this person corrected it to 1610. Yep, the date was wrong. But it wasn't the only one. Before the first chapter was over, there were several other things missing or slightly off. I found other notations in the book which led me to look up other facts. I don't want to spend an entire book looking up facts. Goldstone appears to be careless in this entire book, which is a shame because these were such interesting and forceful women.
July 15, 2021
This is a very entertaining work of popular history, covering a time period in Renaissance France that I knew virtually nothing about, with a focus on two royal women who had very eventful lives. That said it’s more lightweight than I’d previously taken Goldstone to be. I love that she’s a great storyteller with a dry sense of humor (and that she writes historical biographies of women from non-English-speaking countries and known for something other than their love lives—this is hard to come by!), but here she’s also extremely partisan, unwilling to admit a single positive quality in Catherine de Medici, nor a single negative one in her daughter Marguerite de Valois. I like my biographies more balanced than this.
Catherine de Medici arrived in France an unwanted 14-year-old bride, and it’s easy to see how she became a historical villain: given how traumatic, humiliating and loveless the first 40 years of her life were, she was never going to be someone who used power in a thoughtful and pro-social way. Instead she adapted to keep herself safe by pleasing others, until she came into enough power that she no longer needed to. Now, not every hated historical woman ought necessarily be rehabilitated—this one was behind the Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre after all, in which thousands of French Protestants were murdered. (Interestingly, Catherine overall favored the Huguenots, but doing what it took to remain in power was her first priority). That said, Goldstone is trying to refute later historians who interpret Catherine as brutal but effective and astute, arguing that she was actually short-sighted, reactive, and not very bright. Not having read any other works about her, I can’t necessarily argue, but Goldstone focuses in on the dramatic interpersonal moments without really addressing Catherine’s day-to-day running of the government, and her assessment seems clouded by her love of Marguerite (usually at odds with her mother) and a lot of judgment about Catherine’s apparent lack of attachment to most of her children. To which I can only say, no wonder: she never had parents herself, or any kind of safe and stable environment as a child; she didn’t get to raise her kids, who were taken away to be raised by staff chosen and supervised by her husband and his mistress; and it was the 16th century, a time period in which Catherine’s having ten kids and outliving eight was normal.
Marguerite though—Catherine’s youngest daughter, who became Queen of Navarre and very nearly of France—Goldstone clearly adores. Marguerite certainly had an interesting life, including a lot of political intrigue, daring escapes, love affairs, and brushes with death. She also left a memoir, which is helpful in reconstructing her life. That said, Goldstone seems inclined to take all Marguerite’s claims at face value, to characterize her words and actions in flattering ways, and to excuse all her mistakes while highlighting and underlining her suffering whenever anything goes wrong—all quite at odds with how she handles Catherine.
Nevertheless, as an entertaining and highly readable account of a time period I knew very little about, I still enjoyed the book. Goldstone really is an excellent storyteller, but she also seems familiar with the primary sources and to be writing based on real research and knowledge of the period, while avoiding too much speculation. Some of these events are truly wild, with plots and counterplots, spies everywhere, captures and rescues, religious wars and double-dealing and absurd incompetence. And I enjoy Goldstone’s bringing some perspective and common sense to her relation of events, putting the knights and courtiers in context, for instance, as testosterone-fueled young men. It’s unfortunate that she virtually only cites the sources for direct quotes (of which there are a lot, again, overwhelmingly from Marguerite). In the end, while I came away with the urge to read another account to counteract this author’s biases, this fun and lively account of 16th century France was still worth my time.
Catherine de Medici arrived in France an unwanted 14-year-old bride, and it’s easy to see how she became a historical villain: given how traumatic, humiliating and loveless the first 40 years of her life were, she was never going to be someone who used power in a thoughtful and pro-social way. Instead she adapted to keep herself safe by pleasing others, until she came into enough power that she no longer needed to. Now, not every hated historical woman ought necessarily be rehabilitated—this one was behind the Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre after all, in which thousands of French Protestants were murdered. (Interestingly, Catherine overall favored the Huguenots, but doing what it took to remain in power was her first priority). That said, Goldstone is trying to refute later historians who interpret Catherine as brutal but effective and astute, arguing that she was actually short-sighted, reactive, and not very bright. Not having read any other works about her, I can’t necessarily argue, but Goldstone focuses in on the dramatic interpersonal moments without really addressing Catherine’s day-to-day running of the government, and her assessment seems clouded by her love of Marguerite (usually at odds with her mother) and a lot of judgment about Catherine’s apparent lack of attachment to most of her children. To which I can only say, no wonder: she never had parents herself, or any kind of safe and stable environment as a child; she didn’t get to raise her kids, who were taken away to be raised by staff chosen and supervised by her husband and his mistress; and it was the 16th century, a time period in which Catherine’s having ten kids and outliving eight was normal.
Marguerite though—Catherine’s youngest daughter, who became Queen of Navarre and very nearly of France—Goldstone clearly adores. Marguerite certainly had an interesting life, including a lot of political intrigue, daring escapes, love affairs, and brushes with death. She also left a memoir, which is helpful in reconstructing her life. That said, Goldstone seems inclined to take all Marguerite’s claims at face value, to characterize her words and actions in flattering ways, and to excuse all her mistakes while highlighting and underlining her suffering whenever anything goes wrong—all quite at odds with how she handles Catherine.
Nevertheless, as an entertaining and highly readable account of a time period I knew very little about, I still enjoyed the book. Goldstone really is an excellent storyteller, but she also seems familiar with the primary sources and to be writing based on real research and knowledge of the period, while avoiding too much speculation. Some of these events are truly wild, with plots and counterplots, spies everywhere, captures and rescues, religious wars and double-dealing and absurd incompetence. And I enjoy Goldstone’s bringing some perspective and common sense to her relation of events, putting the knights and courtiers in context, for instance, as testosterone-fueled young men. It’s unfortunate that she virtually only cites the sources for direct quotes (of which there are a lot, again, overwhelmingly from Marguerite). In the end, while I came away with the urge to read another account to counteract this author’s biases, this fun and lively account of 16th century France was still worth my time.
August 13, 2016
Horrible. Couldn't get past chapter 7. The author has a hate on for Huguenots. It's full of contradictions. The title should actually be: The War of Religions. I also found the author rather arrogant and condescending. Especially in her footnotes. " The town in Belgium was called Spa. And you thought history was irrelevant."
If I thought history was irrelevant, why would I be reading it? Twat.
If I thought history was irrelevant, why would I be reading it? Twat.
February 16, 2018
AUDIO # 18
2018 Reading Challenge: set in a country that interests me
Like sand through the hourglass, so are the days of sixteenth century France
Bloodlust ruled; there were few level heads.
Not much new territory was covered re: Catherine de Medici, but the book was positively revelatory about Margot, who was also called by her birth name margueritte, but since there were about 100 of those walking about the royal halls it became a bit confusing.
2018 Reading Challenge: set in a country that interests me
Like sand through the hourglass, so are the days of sixteenth century France
Bloodlust ruled; there were few level heads.
Not much new territory was covered re: Catherine de Medici, but the book was positively revelatory about Margot, who was also called by her birth name margueritte, but since there were about 100 of those walking about the royal halls it became a bit confusing.
February 29, 2024
I quite enjoyed this.
This is light in tone, extremely engaging and fairly humorous.
Since I know a bit about Catherine de Medici I'm aware that all of the info isn't entirely accepted history but the author is also open when this is case in some areas.
I would label this a fairly thorough biography of Queen Margaret with a focus on the relationship with her mother.
The author clearly sides with Margaret and I think she somewhat presents Catherine in her worst light and Margaret in her most idealized.
None the less this was fun, fun, fun.
Also the details on the other players at court are helpful.
I do wish the author had focused a bit more on Navarre and Henry IV of France's parents.
I understand that this period is complex, complicated and intense.
Frankly the Spanish Monarchy needed to be fleshed out a bit as well.
These kingdoms are heavily intertwined and its hard to understand just how ruinous this period was for France without taking into account it's general behavior prior to the death of Henry II, Catherine's husband and Margaret's father.
Also there was a weird reference to someone looking like a 'negress' a term I'm not aware of being in familiar use at this time period. In the 1500's 'Black' and 'white' people didn't really exist.
The first enslaved peoples of the Jamestown colony in 1619 are listed as 'Angolans' and not 'Black', 'negro' or otherwise.
So I'm unsure of what term was translated from french, I presume, to lead the author to define it that way.
This is light in tone, extremely engaging and fairly humorous.
Since I know a bit about Catherine de Medici I'm aware that all of the info isn't entirely accepted history but the author is also open when this is case in some areas.
I would label this a fairly thorough biography of Queen Margaret with a focus on the relationship with her mother.
The author clearly sides with Margaret and I think she somewhat presents Catherine in her worst light and Margaret in her most idealized.
None the less this was fun, fun, fun.
Also the details on the other players at court are helpful.
I do wish the author had focused a bit more on Navarre and Henry IV of France's parents.
I understand that this period is complex, complicated and intense.
Frankly the Spanish Monarchy needed to be fleshed out a bit as well.
These kingdoms are heavily intertwined and its hard to understand just how ruinous this period was for France without taking into account it's general behavior prior to the death of Henry II, Catherine's husband and Margaret's father.
Also there was a weird reference to someone looking like a 'negress' a term I'm not aware of being in familiar use at this time period. In the 1500's 'Black' and 'white' people didn't really exist.
The first enslaved peoples of the Jamestown colony in 1619 are listed as 'Angolans' and not 'Black', 'negro' or otherwise.
So I'm unsure of what term was translated from french, I presume, to lead the author to define it that way.
January 23, 2018
Nancy Goldstone is extremely adept at the art of presenting historical events without becoming either repititious or plodding. This book is set in 16th Century France during the Renaissance. Court politics, loyalties, traitors, murder, faith...it's all here. At the beginning of the novel you will meet Marguerite de Valois who is marrying Henry de Bourbon. The problem is the Marguerite is an extremely devout Catholic and Henry is Protestant. Sparks are inevitable. Many members of each family who are attending the festivities, or participating in them, may be assassinated sooner rather than later. In fact, many have been lured to the wedding with that in mind. Marguerite also happens to be the daughter of Queen Catherine de' Medici, who finds her daughter quite bull headed and not so easy to control. She does, however, force her daughter to marry Henry against her will. Did I mention Henry is also her cousin? Oh yes, he is. The over-the-top royal wedding is meant to provide the backdrop for Catherine to see that some of her bitter rivals can be eliminated. Catherine is brutal and unforgiving. As with many stories based in a Royal Court, no one can truly be trusted. Loyalties are tested, and failing can lead to death. Your religion must be the correct one. Very interesting novel and very well written.
March 22, 2015
This is an enjoyable non-fiction read that is written much like a novel in it's chronological portrayal and description of encounters between the "characters". Characters who in this story were actually living, breathing people who did in fact behave just as scandalously as the story suggests. A real-life soap opera: how fascinating!
Catherine de' Medici is perhaps most famously known for her involvement in what is known as the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre, where thousands of Huguenots (French protestants who followed the teachings of Calvin) were murdered in the streets of Paris. The author of this novel makes it very clear to the reader that she believes Catherine was responsible for the massacre, saying that it was "executed by the one individual in France powerful enough to ensure it's success: Marguerite's mother, Catherine de' Medici".
Having previously read conflicting opinions about the players behind the massacre, I find it difficult to believe that Catherine was the sole perpetrator of the incident, however the author spends a great deal of time in this novel showing how Catherine had great control over her sons, respectively Kings of France (Francis II, Charles IX, Henri III). Therefore I feel as though it is insinuated just how much control the author feels Catherine had over events in her Kingdom, and therefore the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre.
The author believes that Catherine's insistence upon her daughter Marguerite's marriage to Henry of Navarre was a ploy to draw the Huguenot's into Paris and murder them, leaving Navarre at Catherine's mercy upon which he would throw himself and then hopefully revert to Catholicism. Although I have my doubts about whether the massacre was premeditated by Catherine, I do feel as though a good case is made for Catherine to have wanted Henry of Navarre to convert to Catholicism. France was at war with itself. The author gives a good grounding in the hostilities between the Catholics and the Huguenots that were taking place all over France and weakening the country from the inside. With key European players such as Phillip II of Spain and Elizabeth I of England watching France destroy itself with eager eyes, Catherine must have felt as though she were captaining a sinking ship. By making a marriage alliance with Navarre perhaps she felt that she could make peace between the two warring factions. However, after the massacre, this didn't seem very likely.
Once married to Navarre, even though she spoke out against it vehemently, Marguerite is claimed to have protected her husband's countrymen the night of the massacre and not allowed any harm to come to them as she sheltered them in her rooms. However this did not make the beginnings of a happy marriage. Her marriage was even less successful than her mother's had been and she quarreled fiercely with her husband.
It is interesting to me how the author describes the environment in which Marguerite was raised, going back as far as her very young girlhood when her mother was the unimportant wife shunned by her husband in favor of his mistress, Diane de Poitiers. This is a figure that I have always found particularly interesting as she wielded so much power for a mistress, even one of a King. The author shows how Catherine was treated abysmally by her husband and his mistress, allowing the reader to see Catherine in a different light to that which history has depicted her. It was upon the death of her husband that things changed and "the servile woman once scorned for her petty bourgeois lineage was transformed into one of the most powerful monarchs in Europe''. As regent to her son, Francis II, Catherine really came into her own.
Once her mother was regent Marguerite found herself in a court full of espionage and intrigue. Her mother's "Flying Squadron", beautiful women employed by Catherine to infiltrate court politics and report only to her, would have been the women she rubbed shoulders with as she grew into womanhood. The author draws attention to this and the effect that it would have had on Marguerite. I enjoyed this background information and felt that it really added to the book.
Marguerite's story is one is which I'm less familiar with. Stuck in a loveless marriage and subsequently imprisoned by her brother the King for eighteen long years I began to draw parallels between her and Eleanor of Aquitaine, another queen imprisoned for many years albeit by her husband rather than her brother. It was during this time that Marguerite wrote her memoirs and it is these that bulk out the majority of the story. The author uses Marguerite's own words to paint a picture of what actually occurred behind closed doors at the French court. I loved these first hand accounts.
One thing I did have to keep telling myself to remember however was that these were Marguerite's memoirs, not Catherine's, and therefore likely to be bias. Even after reading these pages I still hate to pin blame on one woman or the other for the rocky relationship that they shared. Mother/daughter relationships are often hard...throw a kingdom continuously on the brink of civil war into the equation and you'll find it gets pretty darn tricky!
Catherine de' Medici is perhaps most famously known for her involvement in what is known as the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre, where thousands of Huguenots (French protestants who followed the teachings of Calvin) were murdered in the streets of Paris. The author of this novel makes it very clear to the reader that she believes Catherine was responsible for the massacre, saying that it was "executed by the one individual in France powerful enough to ensure it's success: Marguerite's mother, Catherine de' Medici".
Having previously read conflicting opinions about the players behind the massacre, I find it difficult to believe that Catherine was the sole perpetrator of the incident, however the author spends a great deal of time in this novel showing how Catherine had great control over her sons, respectively Kings of France (Francis II, Charles IX, Henri III). Therefore I feel as though it is insinuated just how much control the author feels Catherine had over events in her Kingdom, and therefore the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre.
The author believes that Catherine's insistence upon her daughter Marguerite's marriage to Henry of Navarre was a ploy to draw the Huguenot's into Paris and murder them, leaving Navarre at Catherine's mercy upon which he would throw himself and then hopefully revert to Catholicism. Although I have my doubts about whether the massacre was premeditated by Catherine, I do feel as though a good case is made for Catherine to have wanted Henry of Navarre to convert to Catholicism. France was at war with itself. The author gives a good grounding in the hostilities between the Catholics and the Huguenots that were taking place all over France and weakening the country from the inside. With key European players such as Phillip II of Spain and Elizabeth I of England watching France destroy itself with eager eyes, Catherine must have felt as though she were captaining a sinking ship. By making a marriage alliance with Navarre perhaps she felt that she could make peace between the two warring factions. However, after the massacre, this didn't seem very likely.
Once married to Navarre, even though she spoke out against it vehemently, Marguerite is claimed to have protected her husband's countrymen the night of the massacre and not allowed any harm to come to them as she sheltered them in her rooms. However this did not make the beginnings of a happy marriage. Her marriage was even less successful than her mother's had been and she quarreled fiercely with her husband.
It is interesting to me how the author describes the environment in which Marguerite was raised, going back as far as her very young girlhood when her mother was the unimportant wife shunned by her husband in favor of his mistress, Diane de Poitiers. This is a figure that I have always found particularly interesting as she wielded so much power for a mistress, even one of a King. The author shows how Catherine was treated abysmally by her husband and his mistress, allowing the reader to see Catherine in a different light to that which history has depicted her. It was upon the death of her husband that things changed and "the servile woman once scorned for her petty bourgeois lineage was transformed into one of the most powerful monarchs in Europe''. As regent to her son, Francis II, Catherine really came into her own.
Once her mother was regent Marguerite found herself in a court full of espionage and intrigue. Her mother's "Flying Squadron", beautiful women employed by Catherine to infiltrate court politics and report only to her, would have been the women she rubbed shoulders with as she grew into womanhood. The author draws attention to this and the effect that it would have had on Marguerite. I enjoyed this background information and felt that it really added to the book.
Marguerite's story is one is which I'm less familiar with. Stuck in a loveless marriage and subsequently imprisoned by her brother the King for eighteen long years I began to draw parallels between her and Eleanor of Aquitaine, another queen imprisoned for many years albeit by her husband rather than her brother. It was during this time that Marguerite wrote her memoirs and it is these that bulk out the majority of the story. The author uses Marguerite's own words to paint a picture of what actually occurred behind closed doors at the French court. I loved these first hand accounts.
One thing I did have to keep telling myself to remember however was that these were Marguerite's memoirs, not Catherine's, and therefore likely to be bias. Even after reading these pages I still hate to pin blame on one woman or the other for the rocky relationship that they shared. Mother/daughter relationships are often hard...throw a kingdom continuously on the brink of civil war into the equation and you'll find it gets pretty darn tricky!
June 23, 2023
I picked up The Rival Queens by Nancy Goldstone for historical context for Dumas's La Reine Margot, and what a ride. If you thought there was drama on the England throne in the 1500s, things across the channel were truly bananas. This book profiles Catherine de Medici, a queen and later regent during the French Wars of Religion in the latter half of the 16th century, and her daughter Marguerite of Valois, queen of Navarre upon her marriage to Henry de Bourbon, later Henry IV of France.
Catherine, known for her part in the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, is shown to be a resourceful and adaptable woman, albeit a ruthless one more concerned with maintaining power than needs of the state or welfare of her family. Nostradamus reportedly prophesied that she would see all her sons become kings, which thrilled her because one of her primary goals in life was orchestrating lucrative marriages between her children and other monarchs. But in a twist of fate that no doubt inspired George R. R. Martin, she outlived most of her children and saw three sons succeed each other on the same throne, after which it would pass out of the Valois line completely.
But the star of Goldstone's story is clearly Margot. There's no doubt she was an impressive person, erudite and capable of charming diplomatic envoys in fluent Latin, whose loyalty saved her husband's life more than once. Constantly undermined and antagonized by her mother, she nevertheless survived her murderous family and multiple assassination attempts to become the last Valois standing. But the portrait of her in this book feels a little too idealized as Goldstone defends her every action, including an order to levy heavy taxes and demolish homes for a fortress because "it simply didn't occur to her that she was ruining other people's lives."
Some of the conjectures seem a bit flimsy and sources a little scant, but the book does a good job of making the events of this period of history clear and easy to follow, which is not easy when there are at least four Henrys involved. It's a thrilling story full of murder, conspiracy, and fascinating characters, and I'll be patiently waiting for a Starz show about Margot.
Catherine, known for her part in the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre, is shown to be a resourceful and adaptable woman, albeit a ruthless one more concerned with maintaining power than needs of the state or welfare of her family. Nostradamus reportedly prophesied that she would see all her sons become kings, which thrilled her because one of her primary goals in life was orchestrating lucrative marriages between her children and other monarchs. But in a twist of fate that no doubt inspired George R. R. Martin, she outlived most of her children and saw three sons succeed each other on the same throne, after which it would pass out of the Valois line completely.
But the star of Goldstone's story is clearly Margot. There's no doubt she was an impressive person, erudite and capable of charming diplomatic envoys in fluent Latin, whose loyalty saved her husband's life more than once. Constantly undermined and antagonized by her mother, she nevertheless survived her murderous family and multiple assassination attempts to become the last Valois standing. But the portrait of her in this book feels a little too idealized as Goldstone defends her every action, including an order to levy heavy taxes and demolish homes for a fortress because "it simply didn't occur to her that she was ruining other people's lives."
Some of the conjectures seem a bit flimsy and sources a little scant, but the book does a good job of making the events of this period of history clear and easy to follow, which is not easy when there are at least four Henrys involved. It's a thrilling story full of murder, conspiracy, and fascinating characters, and I'll be patiently waiting for a Starz show about Margot.
May 29, 2019
Outstanding. Admittedly, this is one of my first forays into the French monarchy so this may be old news to some people, but WOW, Catherine de Medici and Henry III make the Tudors look tame. Multiple assassinations, massacres, favoritism, political intrigue, rebellions, this book has it all.
Some people seem to be annoyed with Goldstone’s humorous approach to some of the narrative but I really enjoy her style. She helps keep the story moving along and points out how absolutely bonkers some of these people were. I particularly enjoyed her descriptions of Louis de Bussy d'Amboise and his heroics, which are truly perfect material for a Showtime mini series.
This book made me hate Catherine de Medici. Did she actually have any redeeming qualities? I can’t wait to read more and find out. I couldn’t believe that she would treat Marguerite so terribly—how could a mother plot to have her own daughter murdered? And at the end of it all, she still tried to disinherit her. There are so many twists and turns with this family it’s incredible to think that these were true events and not another Game of Thrones novel.
See more of my reviews: Blog // Instagram
Some people seem to be annoyed with Goldstone’s humorous approach to some of the narrative but I really enjoy her style. She helps keep the story moving along and points out how absolutely bonkers some of these people were. I particularly enjoyed her descriptions of Louis de Bussy d'Amboise and his heroics, which are truly perfect material for a Showtime mini series.
This book made me hate Catherine de Medici. Did she actually have any redeeming qualities? I can’t wait to read more and find out. I couldn’t believe that she would treat Marguerite so terribly—how could a mother plot to have her own daughter murdered? And at the end of it all, she still tried to disinherit her. There are so many twists and turns with this family it’s incredible to think that these were true events and not another Game of Thrones novel.
See more of my reviews: Blog // Instagram
March 12, 2016
This volume is a detailed look at the Medici family in France. Much has been written of the Italian line; this was really the first detailed glimpse that I had of the French branch.Catherine de' Medici became Queen of France, being married off to Henry II, King of France. Once arriving at Paris, she learned the extraordinary challenge of being in the royal family. There were intrigues that are told for her early years as well as her later years as well as for her daughter, Marguerite. For both of them to have survived was in itself extraordinary.
This is a tale of the two queens and the difficulties that they faced--including their own families. Catherine's sons came to rule France or serve as leaders. However, they intrigued often against one another. Her brother once tried to orchestrate the death of his sister--Marguerite. Marguerite's early love was denied her. Later, she married a Huguenot (Protestant) leader, Henry de Bourbon. Given the tensions between Catholics and Huguenots, this did not bode well. Worse, Henry preferred another woman to his queen. Her ability to survive the plots against her shows that she was a woman who did not give up.
Later, she and Henry became good friends (against all odds) and the time they had is poignantly depicted.
The book makes one thing clear--no one among major political figures could expect to live to a ripe old age. Survival was not to be taken for granted. The plotting of individuals against one another is a theme of this book. Yet, within this insidious environment, Marguerite lived a full life after the various attempts to take her life. The interplay between the two queens is well described in this work.
The writing of the author is another plus. This is a very well written work, and the narrative moved along very nicely.
A fascinating examination of the "two queens" in a turbulent time in France of the 16th century. . . .
This is a tale of the two queens and the difficulties that they faced--including their own families. Catherine's sons came to rule France or serve as leaders. However, they intrigued often against one another. Her brother once tried to orchestrate the death of his sister--Marguerite. Marguerite's early love was denied her. Later, she married a Huguenot (Protestant) leader, Henry de Bourbon. Given the tensions between Catholics and Huguenots, this did not bode well. Worse, Henry preferred another woman to his queen. Her ability to survive the plots against her shows that she was a woman who did not give up.
Later, she and Henry became good friends (against all odds) and the time they had is poignantly depicted.
The book makes one thing clear--no one among major political figures could expect to live to a ripe old age. Survival was not to be taken for granted. The plotting of individuals against one another is a theme of this book. Yet, within this insidious environment, Marguerite lived a full life after the various attempts to take her life. The interplay between the two queens is well described in this work.
The writing of the author is another plus. This is a very well written work, and the narrative moved along very nicely.
A fascinating examination of the "two queens" in a turbulent time in France of the 16th century. . . .
November 11, 2018
A bit over the place, but it does give a little light on Marguerite de Valois, though both women seem to be a bit mysterious in this history. It is a good introduction, and Goldstone deserves praise for presenting a countering view of Catherine de' Medici (as opposed to the mastermind plotter that is currently in vogue).
August 4, 2016
This was a fantastic read!!!!!!!!
December 16, 2019
I mostly read fiction, as I’ve said a hundred times before. This makes reading historical nonfiction a kind of weird experience because I’m so used to reacting to characters and narratives that were conceived by a third party and therefore are theoretically mutable. But in nonfiction, I can’t say “this was repetitive” or “I wish the author had made a different move here” because… it happened! It poses a quandary for me because there was a lot that I found lacking in this book but untangling what was due to the telling versus the mundanities of real life is tough.
For example, I found Margot and Catherine alike frustrating characters, making decisions that I rolled my eyes at, or doing things I found personally unlikeable. But what do I do with that, when these were real people? Real people’s decisions often don’t follow an elegant structure or logic, even with the benefit of 500 years of hindsight. That said, Goldstone frames Margot as extremely smart and frequently underestimated, and yet her insistence on trusting Henri III would seem to run counter to that. Of course he was her brother and the book also takes pains to imply that Margot was a fundamentally good person, putting her at odds with him and much of the French court, but this blind spot for her family undercuts her supposed smarts - it just makes her seem easily deceived.
Real humans can be, of course, both canny and gullible in different areas of their lives, but the context in which this story was told would seem to push one trait at the expense of the other. Catherine is given a much richer personality (or did she just have one?). Her arrogance and overcompensation are consistent through both her periods of success and failure. She is a power player, but not a particularly good one, and exploring that dichotomy is one of the strongest aspects of the book.
On the other end, Henri III is almost a cartoon villain. Loathing for him seeps into every word she writes about him and it unintentionally suggests there’s another side to his story that we’re not hearing. I don’t mind author bias really, especially when a European monarch in the Renaissance was sort of by definition an evil fuck, but I think that bias is important to acknowledge, at least implicitly. (I think in this case of The Borgias: A Hidden History , where his defensiveness of Rodrigo Borgia got grating and it damaged his credibility, but to his credit he reported the rumors he was trying to dispel.)
That said, Goldstone’s willingness to throw in a good aside was incredibly fun! The two favorites that I specifically noted were the very funny “For example, it is helpful when organizing the overthrow of an established government if everybody involved in the cabal pays attention to minor details such as the date on which the various troops comprising the rebel force are supposed to rendezvous and storm the castle,” and “That’s the trouble with setting a precedent like that of Saint Bartholomew's day. One little massacre and you're tainted for life.“ I cheered at some bits where she threw a little shade at historians who write more salaciously. (I booed when she threw in a sanctimonious “and you thought history didn’t matter,” as if I didn’t invest in reading a 500 page book about history.)
As a learning exercise, what I found most interesting was the French court in general. Most of my Renaissance reading has been about Italy, obviously, and Goldstone’s rich portrayal of the court showed the marked contrast between them very well. Because France was a single centralized monarchy rather than city states, its conflicts are much more international. Because it is not the nexus of Catholicism - and because this was a century later - most of the infighting that did exist centered on religion rather than real estate. It was also so much prissier and more buttoned-up—sort of proto-Victorian, in a way. Despite Italy being the center of a religion requiring abstinence of so many of its clergy, everyone seemed to be having, enjoying, and getting away with lots more sex than France, where even the run-of-the-mill Catholics - not Huguenots - were clutching their proverbial pearls all the time.
I have two views to balance. One: it was an interesting study of two queens I had never heard of before, a new take on female power in Renaissance Europe, and a look at a less-televised and less-discussed social landscape. (Reign, while very fun for at least its first two seasons, is not the same as getting countless biographies and adaptations like the Borgias and Leonardo da Vinci... and on and on.) Two: reacting as I would to fiction, I would rate it middling - the plot was convoluted and sometimes repetitive (oh, another Huguenot uprising? More religious suppression? Wow, groundbreaking) and the characters often annoying, even though a nuanced portrayal of Catherine was genuinely fascinating. The French court as a real place doesn’t thrill me the way the gossipy, scheming landscape of other settings and periods in history. All I am able to truly determine is what’s stuck with me after so many months: a good piece of education for me, and one I don’t think was exciting enough to return to.
For example, I found Margot and Catherine alike frustrating characters, making decisions that I rolled my eyes at, or doing things I found personally unlikeable. But what do I do with that, when these were real people? Real people’s decisions often don’t follow an elegant structure or logic, even with the benefit of 500 years of hindsight. That said, Goldstone frames Margot as extremely smart and frequently underestimated, and yet her insistence on trusting Henri III would seem to run counter to that. Of course he was her brother and the book also takes pains to imply that Margot was a fundamentally good person, putting her at odds with him and much of the French court, but this blind spot for her family undercuts her supposed smarts - it just makes her seem easily deceived.
Real humans can be, of course, both canny and gullible in different areas of their lives, but the context in which this story was told would seem to push one trait at the expense of the other. Catherine is given a much richer personality (or did she just have one?). Her arrogance and overcompensation are consistent through both her periods of success and failure. She is a power player, but not a particularly good one, and exploring that dichotomy is one of the strongest aspects of the book.
On the other end, Henri III is almost a cartoon villain. Loathing for him seeps into every word she writes about him and it unintentionally suggests there’s another side to his story that we’re not hearing. I don’t mind author bias really, especially when a European monarch in the Renaissance was sort of by definition an evil fuck, but I think that bias is important to acknowledge, at least implicitly. (I think in this case of The Borgias: A Hidden History , where his defensiveness of Rodrigo Borgia got grating and it damaged his credibility, but to his credit he reported the rumors he was trying to dispel.)
That said, Goldstone’s willingness to throw in a good aside was incredibly fun! The two favorites that I specifically noted were the very funny “For example, it is helpful when organizing the overthrow of an established government if everybody involved in the cabal pays attention to minor details such as the date on which the various troops comprising the rebel force are supposed to rendezvous and storm the castle,” and “That’s the trouble with setting a precedent like that of Saint Bartholomew's day. One little massacre and you're tainted for life.“ I cheered at some bits where she threw a little shade at historians who write more salaciously. (I booed when she threw in a sanctimonious “and you thought history didn’t matter,” as if I didn’t invest in reading a 500 page book about history.)
As a learning exercise, what I found most interesting was the French court in general. Most of my Renaissance reading has been about Italy, obviously, and Goldstone’s rich portrayal of the court showed the marked contrast between them very well. Because France was a single centralized monarchy rather than city states, its conflicts are much more international. Because it is not the nexus of Catholicism - and because this was a century later - most of the infighting that did exist centered on religion rather than real estate. It was also so much prissier and more buttoned-up—sort of proto-Victorian, in a way. Despite Italy being the center of a religion requiring abstinence of so many of its clergy, everyone seemed to be having, enjoying, and getting away with lots more sex than France, where even the run-of-the-mill Catholics - not Huguenots - were clutching their proverbial pearls all the time.
I have two views to balance. One: it was an interesting study of two queens I had never heard of before, a new take on female power in Renaissance Europe, and a look at a less-televised and less-discussed social landscape. (Reign, while very fun for at least its first two seasons, is not the same as getting countless biographies and adaptations like the Borgias and Leonardo da Vinci... and on and on.) Two: reacting as I would to fiction, I would rate it middling - the plot was convoluted and sometimes repetitive (oh, another Huguenot uprising? More religious suppression? Wow, groundbreaking) and the characters often annoying, even though a nuanced portrayal of Catherine was genuinely fascinating. The French court as a real place doesn’t thrill me the way the gossipy, scheming landscape of other settings and periods in history. All I am able to truly determine is what’s stuck with me after so many months: a good piece of education for me, and one I don’t think was exciting enough to return to.
September 16, 2023
My internet has been out for a week and a half, so I am lacking in book reviews and catching up on homework. If you are a follower of my reviews, I apologize for the flood of them you are about to receive. I certainly got plenty of reading done while living in the Stone Age.
This book discusses the relationship between Catherine de Medici, wife of Henri II of France, and her daughter Marguerite de Valois. Catherine's story itself is full of shady doings and intrigue. If you have watched the show Reign, that is a dramatized introductory into her conniving and manipulation. Marguerite had a different personality than her mother, often causing clashes. Catherine forced Marguerite to marry Henry III of Navarre. Their marriage was particularly controversial, as it was between a Roman Catholic and a Huguenot. Despite the difference in religion, Henry was a relative and from a French royal house, and this marriage was meant to strengthen ties and good relationships between the two royal houses. Right after the wedding, Catholics wound up murdering some of the Huguenots that were in Paris for the festivities, resulting in the Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre. Catherine's actions surrounding this are questionable at best. This was a really wild series of events, and made for some dramatic reading.
The author of this book is a wonderful writer. I have enjoyed her work, and I also enjoyed interacting with her on a human level before I joined the exodus from Twitter. She conducts her research in a thorough and methodical way, and tells the story of her subjects in a way that is informative and engaging. I had known about Catherine Medici and Marguerite's relationship prior to reading this book, but the details presented included some facts I didn't know and provided more in depth details to supplement my previously learned facts. This was a little longer than some of the other books that I selected for this month, coming in at just over 400 pages, but wasn't a slow paced read. Certainly worth checking out.
This book discusses the relationship between Catherine de Medici, wife of Henri II of France, and her daughter Marguerite de Valois. Catherine's story itself is full of shady doings and intrigue. If you have watched the show Reign, that is a dramatized introductory into her conniving and manipulation. Marguerite had a different personality than her mother, often causing clashes. Catherine forced Marguerite to marry Henry III of Navarre. Their marriage was particularly controversial, as it was between a Roman Catholic and a Huguenot. Despite the difference in religion, Henry was a relative and from a French royal house, and this marriage was meant to strengthen ties and good relationships between the two royal houses. Right after the wedding, Catholics wound up murdering some of the Huguenots that were in Paris for the festivities, resulting in the Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre. Catherine's actions surrounding this are questionable at best. This was a really wild series of events, and made for some dramatic reading.
The author of this book is a wonderful writer. I have enjoyed her work, and I also enjoyed interacting with her on a human level before I joined the exodus from Twitter. She conducts her research in a thorough and methodical way, and tells the story of her subjects in a way that is informative and engaging. I had known about Catherine Medici and Marguerite's relationship prior to reading this book, but the details presented included some facts I didn't know and provided more in depth details to supplement my previously learned facts. This was a little longer than some of the other books that I selected for this month, coming in at just over 400 pages, but wasn't a slow paced read. Certainly worth checking out.
October 6, 2015
Dual biographies of two French royals of the late 17th century: Marguerite of Valois [Margot] wife and queen of Henry of Navarre and of Catherine de Medici, wife and queen of Henri II, Margot's mother. A manipulating pragmatist all her life, Catherine engineered the unwanted marriage between Margot [a Catholic] and Henry [a Huguenot], ostensibly as a peace-making measure. The book was very comprehensive, and drawn heavily from Memoirs of Marguerite de Valois .. and statements of other envoys and ambassadors. We follow the lives of these two women: the power-hungry, odious Catherine, trying to influence events to her advantage and the pawn Margot--and French history of that period. As the author put it in her summation: Margot refused to accept this submissive role and attained a measure of independence and influence for herself. She certainly tried to improve Catholic-Huguenot relations. The author feels if Margot had had a child, she would have come down to posterity as one of France's great queens instead of mainly being remembered as the tragic heroine of Dumas's Queen Margot, or Marguerite de Valois. The movie with the same name of a few years ago is no slouch either.
I learned a great deal from this readable history. I never realized the connection Mary Stuart had with the French royal family as wife of the dauphin Francis. And that Drake's defeat of the Spanish Armada had almost as much effect on French history as on English. The section on the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre was outstanding.
Recommended for insight into this period, through the lives of two strong women.
I learned a great deal from this readable history. I never realized the connection Mary Stuart had with the French royal family as wife of the dauphin Francis. And that Drake's defeat of the Spanish Armada had almost as much effect on French history as on English. The section on the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre was outstanding.
Recommended for insight into this period, through the lives of two strong women.
January 20, 2018
This was the perfect audiobook title for me - great personalities, intrigue, an extraordinary historical period, religious wars, a parade of kings, queens, duchesses; assassinations, money, sex, dynastic politics. Catherine de Medici has dominated a period that has seen several of her sons living, dying and mismanaging the country. Power-hungry, ruthless, scheming, yet always just reacting, never really manipulating events in a planned way, she had ruled over an overspending, lavish, morally and financially bankrupt French court for decades. She favored her son, Henri, a vengeful, narcisstic and petty man, over her other, more talented and gracious children, especially Margot, whom she had actively tried to murder when she got in the way. Great mothering...
The title is misleading. This book is more about Catherine and Margot’s time than themselves. A better title would have been the Huguenot wars. There is a lot of political intrigue and a war that keeps swinging both ways. This is sometimes difficult to follow, and the characters of the title women takes a back seat. I have enjoyed it, the narrator was great. Highly recommend to history buffs.
The title is misleading. This book is more about Catherine and Margot’s time than themselves. A better title would have been the Huguenot wars. There is a lot of political intrigue and a war that keeps swinging both ways. This is sometimes difficult to follow, and the characters of the title women takes a back seat. I have enjoyed it, the narrator was great. Highly recommend to history buffs.
November 8, 2017
Engaging from start to finish. The only complaint I have is that the life of young Marguerite is covered very well, while her later years are only allotted about 50 pages. It was nice to her presented as a three-dimensional character, a real person, rather than just a frivolous airhead, which is pretty much the treatment she gets in other books. Also, the author did a very good job of showing how Catherine gradually lost control of her favorite son, Henri III, although it's hard not feel she brought it on herself by spoiling him completely. Also, I appreciated that this book did not portray Henry IV, Marguerite's husband, as a complete saint. Most gloss over anything unflattering about him, which is irresponsible I think.
May 1, 2016
I've seen many reviews about this book and a lot of them are people who complain that this book reads like a history book and not a novel. Well DUH! This is a Nonfiction book. It does not read like a history book though.
I loved how Nancy Goldstone wrote this book. She kept me interested in it from start to finish. She wrote it as if we were just talking about the subject matter face to face. There were many times that I even snorted out loud at how she explained the situations. If I had not been in college during this time period I would have certainly have read this book much quicker.
I will certainly read more of her books, because I like how she writes. Go Nancy Goldstone!
I loved how Nancy Goldstone wrote this book. She kept me interested in it from start to finish. She wrote it as if we were just talking about the subject matter face to face. There were many times that I even snorted out loud at how she explained the situations. If I had not been in college during this time period I would have certainly have read this book much quicker.
I will certainly read more of her books, because I like how she writes. Go Nancy Goldstone!
April 16, 2015
I've yet to be disappointed in a Nancy Goldstone book. "The Rival Queens" is Goldstone at her narrative nonfiction best. I love her ongoing trend of analyzing the relationship between two figures (her last book was about Joan of Arc and her queenly patron), and she couldn't have chosen a more dysfunctional pair than Catherine and Margot. As usual, there is a wealth of historical detail and the information is presented in an engaging way.
July 16, 2015
Romping royals...
It's little wonder that Nancy Goldstone has chosen to use quotes from Machiavelli to head each chapter in her romping history of her rival Queens, Catherine de' Medici and her daughter Marguerite de Valois. It was a great time for Queens, though maybe not quite so great for their subjects. Over in England, Elizabeth was working up to the beheading of her cousin Mary, Queen of Scots. But the shenanigans of Catherine and Marguerite frankly make the British Royals look tame.
Goldstone sets the scene well by beginning with Marguerite's wedding to Henry of Navarre, a marriage she didn't want since she was a devout Catholic and Henry was one of the leaders of the Protestant Huguenots. But Catherine didn't much care for what her children wanted, on the whole - especially her daughters. From her perspective, they were simply pawns to be pushed around on the dynastic chessboard of Europe. To be fair, that was how she had been treated herself, so hardly surprising that she dealt with her own children's wishes as cavalierly. But to then massacre the bridegroom's friends and relatives during the wedding celebrations might have been a little over the top even for Renaissance royalty!
Goldstone then takes us back to Catherine's early life as Queen to Henri II of France. Throughout, the tone of this hugely readable history is light. This early section in particular is full of some fairly ribald humour, as we learn of Catherine's difficulties in becoming pregnant, and the helpful bedroom tips she is offered by Henri's long-term mistress, Diane de Poitiers. In truth, by page 25 I had tears of laughter streaming down my face but I refuse to spoil the fun of reading the book by quoting the relevant passages here! Suffice to say, this book has the honour of containing the funniest footnote of all time and my Google search recommendations may never recover...
After this rocky start, Catherine managed to produce ten children (Diane's advice must have been spectacular!) before Henri's death left her poised to become regent for her young son Charles IX. After years of playing second fiddle to Diane and being sidelined as Queen, there might be some slight justification for Catherine's desire to grab power when the chance arose. And she soon proved there was nothing that she wouldn't consider, including murder and war, to hold onto it. Unfortunate for her that this was the time of the Reformation, meaning that the country was almost constantly either in civil war or in danger of it. The Huguenots were numerically hugely outnumbered in the general population, but had some influential people at their head, while the Catholic Guises were constantly on the prowl, looking for opportunities to gain control over the throne for themselves.
Catherine started out willing to conciliate the Huguenots, hence the betrothal of her young daughter to Henry of Navarre. But by the time of the marriage, Catherine's attitude had changed, not for reasons of religious conviction (of which she had none, it would seem), but mainly to try to get in the good books of Philip of Spain. Having gone through with the marriage and then been horrified by the massacre which followed, Marguerite found herself in an uneasy alignment with the Huguenot husband she didn't love and the brother, Francis, whom she did, and at odds with her mother and the King. From there on, the story is one of plot and counter-plot, shifting allegiances, betrayals and lots and lots of romping! Unloved by her husband, Marguerite took comfort in a succession of affairs throughout her life, seeming to be fairly indiscriminate on whom she bestowed her favours. In and out of her mother's favour at different times, always for reasons of politics rather than any kind of familial love, the rivalry was finally resolved only by Catherine's eventual unlamented death. Marguerite's husband later ascended to the throne of France, at which point he promptly divorced the childless Marguerite (if only Diane had still been around to advise, eh?). But they got on better after that, and Marguerite ended her days as a sort of favoured aunt to Henry's children with his second wife, and loved by the populace for her charitable works.
Despite the light tone, the book feels well-researched, although I give my usual disclaimer that I’m not qualified to judge its historical accuracy. Goldstone handles all the personalities well, making it easy for the reader to keep up, despite the fact that almost everyone is called either Henri or Henry. I felt that she was very biased in Marguerite’s favour and against Catherine. As often as not, the source material that she quotes is Marguerite’s own memoirs – again, I can’t judge, but I’d have assumed these would not be an unbiased account of the period. My own view was that Catherine was indeed not a shining example of motherhood, or Queenhood for that matter, but that Marguerite wasn’t exactly blameless either. Both women seemed willing to use their subjects as dispensable pawns in their own struggle for power and wealth and both seemed to have a pretty superficial view of what was important in life – money, sex, money, power and money. Goldstone remarks on Marguerite’s devotion to Catholicism frequently, but her moral behaviour suggests she was pretty relaxed about following the Church’s teachings only when it suited her.
Goldstone just stops short of claiming that Marguerite’s sexual adventures showed her to be an early feminist, demanding the same sexual freedom as the men. This seemed like a fairly ridiculous leap to me – historical characters must surely be judged by the standards of the society in which they lived rather than by those of today, and there seems little doubt that Marguerite was more promiscuous, or at least less discreet, than was considered acceptable at the time. And Goldstone is fairly harsh on Catherine for remaining in control (emotionally and politically) each time one of her children died – again I felt this was projecting today’s sensibilities backwards. Early death was much commoner then and therefore something that had to be coped with. I wondered if Goldstone would have expected a King to fall apart in similar circumstances. It seemed a bit unbalanced that Marguerite’s behaviour was a sign of feminism while Catherine’s was a sign of unwomanliness.
A biased history then, I think, but a highly readable one. At points it reads like a great thriller, complete with cliffhanger endings to chapters, and then at others it becomes like an episode of Dallas, with Catherine in the role of JR and Marguerite as sweet little Pamela. It concentrates entirely on the machinations of those in power, so there is no feeling for the social history of the time beyond mentions of the disruption caused by the religious wars. For me, this was a limitation although clearly an intentional one, and it undoubtedly made the book easier to read and more enjoyable. However sometimes I felt the subject matter perhaps deserved a rather more serious treatment – one feels somehow that the French people probably didn't have as much fun living under these awful monarchs as I had reading about them. A great starter book though for someone who, like me, knows very little of that period of French and European history – a very palatable way to learn some history.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
It's little wonder that Nancy Goldstone has chosen to use quotes from Machiavelli to head each chapter in her romping history of her rival Queens, Catherine de' Medici and her daughter Marguerite de Valois. It was a great time for Queens, though maybe not quite so great for their subjects. Over in England, Elizabeth was working up to the beheading of her cousin Mary, Queen of Scots. But the shenanigans of Catherine and Marguerite frankly make the British Royals look tame.
Goldstone sets the scene well by beginning with Marguerite's wedding to Henry of Navarre, a marriage she didn't want since she was a devout Catholic and Henry was one of the leaders of the Protestant Huguenots. But Catherine didn't much care for what her children wanted, on the whole - especially her daughters. From her perspective, they were simply pawns to be pushed around on the dynastic chessboard of Europe. To be fair, that was how she had been treated herself, so hardly surprising that she dealt with her own children's wishes as cavalierly. But to then massacre the bridegroom's friends and relatives during the wedding celebrations might have been a little over the top even for Renaissance royalty!
Goldstone then takes us back to Catherine's early life as Queen to Henri II of France. Throughout, the tone of this hugely readable history is light. This early section in particular is full of some fairly ribald humour, as we learn of Catherine's difficulties in becoming pregnant, and the helpful bedroom tips she is offered by Henri's long-term mistress, Diane de Poitiers. In truth, by page 25 I had tears of laughter streaming down my face but I refuse to spoil the fun of reading the book by quoting the relevant passages here! Suffice to say, this book has the honour of containing the funniest footnote of all time and my Google search recommendations may never recover...
After this rocky start, Catherine managed to produce ten children (Diane's advice must have been spectacular!) before Henri's death left her poised to become regent for her young son Charles IX. After years of playing second fiddle to Diane and being sidelined as Queen, there might be some slight justification for Catherine's desire to grab power when the chance arose. And she soon proved there was nothing that she wouldn't consider, including murder and war, to hold onto it. Unfortunate for her that this was the time of the Reformation, meaning that the country was almost constantly either in civil war or in danger of it. The Huguenots were numerically hugely outnumbered in the general population, but had some influential people at their head, while the Catholic Guises were constantly on the prowl, looking for opportunities to gain control over the throne for themselves.
Catherine started out willing to conciliate the Huguenots, hence the betrothal of her young daughter to Henry of Navarre. But by the time of the marriage, Catherine's attitude had changed, not for reasons of religious conviction (of which she had none, it would seem), but mainly to try to get in the good books of Philip of Spain. Having gone through with the marriage and then been horrified by the massacre which followed, Marguerite found herself in an uneasy alignment with the Huguenot husband she didn't love and the brother, Francis, whom she did, and at odds with her mother and the King. From there on, the story is one of plot and counter-plot, shifting allegiances, betrayals and lots and lots of romping! Unloved by her husband, Marguerite took comfort in a succession of affairs throughout her life, seeming to be fairly indiscriminate on whom she bestowed her favours. In and out of her mother's favour at different times, always for reasons of politics rather than any kind of familial love, the rivalry was finally resolved only by Catherine's eventual unlamented death. Marguerite's husband later ascended to the throne of France, at which point he promptly divorced the childless Marguerite (if only Diane had still been around to advise, eh?). But they got on better after that, and Marguerite ended her days as a sort of favoured aunt to Henry's children with his second wife, and loved by the populace for her charitable works.
Despite the light tone, the book feels well-researched, although I give my usual disclaimer that I’m not qualified to judge its historical accuracy. Goldstone handles all the personalities well, making it easy for the reader to keep up, despite the fact that almost everyone is called either Henri or Henry. I felt that she was very biased in Marguerite’s favour and against Catherine. As often as not, the source material that she quotes is Marguerite’s own memoirs – again, I can’t judge, but I’d have assumed these would not be an unbiased account of the period. My own view was that Catherine was indeed not a shining example of motherhood, or Queenhood for that matter, but that Marguerite wasn’t exactly blameless either. Both women seemed willing to use their subjects as dispensable pawns in their own struggle for power and wealth and both seemed to have a pretty superficial view of what was important in life – money, sex, money, power and money. Goldstone remarks on Marguerite’s devotion to Catholicism frequently, but her moral behaviour suggests she was pretty relaxed about following the Church’s teachings only when it suited her.
Goldstone just stops short of claiming that Marguerite’s sexual adventures showed her to be an early feminist, demanding the same sexual freedom as the men. This seemed like a fairly ridiculous leap to me – historical characters must surely be judged by the standards of the society in which they lived rather than by those of today, and there seems little doubt that Marguerite was more promiscuous, or at least less discreet, than was considered acceptable at the time. And Goldstone is fairly harsh on Catherine for remaining in control (emotionally and politically) each time one of her children died – again I felt this was projecting today’s sensibilities backwards. Early death was much commoner then and therefore something that had to be coped with. I wondered if Goldstone would have expected a King to fall apart in similar circumstances. It seemed a bit unbalanced that Marguerite’s behaviour was a sign of feminism while Catherine’s was a sign of unwomanliness.
A biased history then, I think, but a highly readable one. At points it reads like a great thriller, complete with cliffhanger endings to chapters, and then at others it becomes like an episode of Dallas, with Catherine in the role of JR and Marguerite as sweet little Pamela. It concentrates entirely on the machinations of those in power, so there is no feeling for the social history of the time beyond mentions of the disruption caused by the religious wars. For me, this was a limitation although clearly an intentional one, and it undoubtedly made the book easier to read and more enjoyable. However sometimes I felt the subject matter perhaps deserved a rather more serious treatment – one feels somehow that the French people probably didn't have as much fun living under these awful monarchs as I had reading about them. A great starter book though for someone who, like me, knows very little of that period of French and European history – a very palatable way to learn some history.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
November 26, 2020
I appreciated Goldstone's writing style. She made the history very accessible and easy to read. Some non-fiction work can be quite daunting to read but I did not feel like that when reading this. I also appreciated learning more about Margot and Renaissance France. It's a period I'm a little familiar with and I'm glad to have a greater understanding with this book. However I was very put off by Goldstone's treatment of Catherine de' Medici in this. Catherine is obviously a very complex figure and I am by no means condoning some of her actions but I do feel that Goldstone treated her VERY unfairly in this. She is basically portrayed at this incompetent, power hungry, middle-aged woman whose every decision was wrong and I just don't feel that is accurate nor does it give Catherine the credit she deserves. That brought the book down immensely for me. Overall it's a good read and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from reading it but I also don't think this should be the ONLY book someone reads on Renaissance France. You should definitely seek out less biased books to supplement this book.
August 5, 2019
After reading 'The Queen Margot' by Alexandre Dumas, I was really interested to get to know better the main characters in this bloody slice (another one!) of French history. This book reads even better than Games of Throne, and I cannot help but thinking that the story of the St Bartholemew's Massacre was at the back of George RR Martin' s mind as he was writing up the plot for the 'Blood Wedding' story. Reading Nancy Goldstone's book, you could be forgiven for thinking yourself in some grimdark novel as reality goes beyond fantasy. A very interesting (if extremely dark!) moment in history seen through two of the most influential people of their times.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 456 reviews