What do you think?
Rate this book
Mistress of the Vatican: The True Story of Olimpia Maidalchini: The Secret Female Pope
Born without a dowry, nearly forced into a convent, and later married off to a man she didn't love, Olimpia Maidalchini vowed never to be poor, powerless, or beholden to any man again. Instead, using her wits, Olimpia became the unofficial ruler of the most powerful institution in the world: the Roman Catholic Church.
496 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2008
400 people are currently reading
4460 people want to read
About the author
Eleanor Herman
16 books1,024 followersNew York Times best-seller Eleanor Herman's new non-fiction book, The Royal Art of Poison: Filthy Palaces, Fatal Cosmetics, Deadly Medicine, and Murder Most Foul, is set to come out in June 2018. Think royal palaces were beautiful places to live? Think again!
Herman offers a rare combination of skills for a historian – her research is intensely scholarly, yet she writes the story in a colorful, witty manner. “History is so fascinating that it never has to be presented in a boring way,” she explains. “These were flesh and blood people, just like you and me, facing war and plague, falling in love, living among splendid art and gut-wrenching poverty. Sometimes people ask me if I plan to write novels. And I say, with all the things that really happened, who needs to make stuff up?”
Reviewers agree. The New York Times Book Review wrote that Eleanor writes “enlightening social history that is great fun to read.”
The Boston Globe wrote, “Herman’s writing sparkles off the pages.”
The Washington Post called Eleanor Herman “A lot more fun than Danielle Steel or Dan Brown.”
Eleanor, a New York Times bestseller, has also written Sex with Kings (a history of royal mistresses), Sex with the Queen (a look at queens' love affairs), Mistress of the Vatican (a biography of an influential papal mistress), and a four-part YA fantasy series on Alexander the Great, called The Blood of Gods and Royals.
Eleanor is a frequent commentator in the media about royal scandals, and has hosted episodes for The History Channel, the National Geographic Channel, and America: Fact vs. Fiction. Born in Baltimore, Maryland, Eleanor graduated with a degree in journalism from Towson University, studied languages in Europe, and for thirteen years worked for NATO’S Nations & Partners for Peace magazine. She is married and lives in McLean, VA with four very demanding cats
.
Herman offers a rare combination of skills for a historian – her research is intensely scholarly, yet she writes the story in a colorful, witty manner. “History is so fascinating that it never has to be presented in a boring way,” she explains. “These were flesh and blood people, just like you and me, facing war and plague, falling in love, living among splendid art and gut-wrenching poverty. Sometimes people ask me if I plan to write novels. And I say, with all the things that really happened, who needs to make stuff up?”
Reviewers agree. The New York Times Book Review wrote that Eleanor writes “enlightening social history that is great fun to read.”
The Boston Globe wrote, “Herman’s writing sparkles off the pages.”
The Washington Post called Eleanor Herman “A lot more fun than Danielle Steel or Dan Brown.”
Eleanor, a New York Times bestseller, has also written Sex with Kings (a history of royal mistresses), Sex with the Queen (a look at queens' love affairs), Mistress of the Vatican (a biography of an influential papal mistress), and a four-part YA fantasy series on Alexander the Great, called The Blood of Gods and Royals.
Eleanor is a frequent commentator in the media about royal scandals, and has hosted episodes for The History Channel, the National Geographic Channel, and America: Fact vs. Fiction. Born in Baltimore, Maryland, Eleanor graduated with a degree in journalism from Towson University, studied languages in Europe, and for thirteen years worked for NATO’S Nations & Partners for Peace magazine. She is married and lives in McLean, VA with four very demanding cats
.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 234 reviews
October 29, 2008
The subject of the book was fascinating, but the author never really brought her to life for me. What I enjoyed the most was the portrayal of the papal court in the 17th century. The way corruption and nepotism were institutionalized in the Vatican of the time was enlightening. I'm glad I read it because it's helped me to understand the Protestant Reformation in a way I never did before.
December 31, 2014
"Well behaved women seldom make history".
I have always been fascinated by strong women who carve places in history for themselves. Olympia Maldachini is a woman I've never heard of, and with good reason. Why on earth would The Catholic Church ever want it bandied about that a woman ruled the papacy for ten years, made herself wealthy and self-sufficient in an era where women's roles were so heavily proscribed? Pope Joan (whom I believe did exist) was problematic enough, but the sister-in-law of Pope Innocent X has got to be a huge thorn in the side of an institution that continues to bar women from positions of power.
What fascinates me even more about Olympia is the automatic assertion that she was having an affair with her brother-in-law, soon to be Pope. That tends to be a typical fallback default when dealing with powerful women. Throw the hint of illicit sex at them. My feeling is theirs was a Platonic relationship, and Olympia was far more in love with power than a prince of the church.
Olympia's story would make a great miniseries. There's plenty of greed, corruption and general venality.
I have always been fascinated by strong women who carve places in history for themselves. Olympia Maldachini is a woman I've never heard of, and with good reason. Why on earth would The Catholic Church ever want it bandied about that a woman ruled the papacy for ten years, made herself wealthy and self-sufficient in an era where women's roles were so heavily proscribed? Pope Joan (whom I believe did exist) was problematic enough, but the sister-in-law of Pope Innocent X has got to be a huge thorn in the side of an institution that continues to bar women from positions of power.
What fascinates me even more about Olympia is the automatic assertion that she was having an affair with her brother-in-law, soon to be Pope. That tends to be a typical fallback default when dealing with powerful women. Throw the hint of illicit sex at them. My feeling is theirs was a Platonic relationship, and Olympia was far more in love with power than a prince of the church.
Olympia's story would make a great miniseries. There's plenty of greed, corruption and general venality.
Read
October 14, 2008"MISTRESS OF THE VATICAN,"
by Eleanor Herman
When I'm at the bookstore or library I tend to pick up anything that has "Vatican" in the title, so I couldn't pass up something as titillating as "Mistress of the Vatican" when publisher William Morrow offered a review copy.
The jacket cover suggested hanky-panky with the bare-shouldered portrait of a beautiful woman with a painting of St. Peter's Basilica and Square covering her, uh, feminine charms, and a subtitle, "The True Story of Olimpia Maidalchini: The Secret Female Pope."
The adage that you can't judge a book by its cover still applies.
Author Eleanor Herman offers no real evidence that 17th century Pope Innocent X had a sexual relationship with Olimpia, his sister-in-law, as the term "mistress" would suggest.
She offers no facts that Olimpia was pope, although she apparently was extremely influential in papal decisions.
Even the cover artwork is misleading: You'd think that the beautiful woman depicted is Olimpia, but no; the jacket painting is of "Venus at the Mirror," by Tiziano.
Despite that, this book was hard to put down.
She's done the research
Herman has culled the diaries and papers of Vatican officials of the period and the works of commentators during the mid 1600s, and what she's come up with are some things about our church at the time that today we'd consider unthinkable. The nepotism, the bribery, the selling of church offices, the misuse of church funds -- they saturate these 419 pages, and that's without the bibliography and index.
Even those of us who love our church ought to know that at times in the past some pretty ridiculous things have been done in the name of our faith. Herman points out the silliness of some of the practices surrounding relics, for one thing. An Italian church claimed to have preserved the umbilical cord of Jesus, another drops of the Virgin Mary's breast milk.
What gets tiresome, though, is the author's tendency to slip into extended "filler" -- background information that seemingly has little or nothing to do with the story of Donna Olimpia and her brother-in-law the pope.
Early on she extrapolates the cultural mores of the era and presumes much. While there is no factual evidence that Olimpia did this or that, women of the times did things this way, so Olimpia must have as well, she posits. It's a bit too much innudendo for my taste.
Evidence shows Olimpia's influence
There seems to be little doubt, though, that the widow of Pope Innocent X's brother was extremely influential in day-to-day decisions concerning the Papal States. The evidence author Herman brings to light shows that Olimpia's fingerprints are on the appointments of cardinals, on the finances of the church, on the church's relationship with the governments and royalty of nations such as France and Spain, among others, and much, much more.
Be ready to read a boatload of language pointing out how anti-woman the Catholic Church is and has been through the ages. And the author uses some misleading descriptions that makes you wonder if she made this stuff up or is actually quoting some 17th century theologian or document.
Take Holy Orders: She writes that priestly ordination was "a sacrament that was thought to tattoo the human soul with an invisible but ineradicable seal that prevented marriage."
Tattoo the soul?
I hadn't heard that one before. But then, I really hadn't been up on some of the less-flattering history of our church, like the regular elevation of papal nephews to rank of cardinal although they might still be in their teens, the regular practice of popes to appoint their relatives to jobs in the Vatican, the fawning of European royalty to curry the pope's favor with expensive gifts, etc.
The saving grace is that at some point Innocent did have a crisis of conscience and put the dignity and integrity of the church first, and that many of the laughable practices of those times are long gone.
So read this. It's not sexy. It promises one thing and delivers another, but it's still a good read. -- bz
by Eleanor Herman
When I'm at the bookstore or library I tend to pick up anything that has "Vatican" in the title, so I couldn't pass up something as titillating as "Mistress of the Vatican" when publisher William Morrow offered a review copy.
The jacket cover suggested hanky-panky with the bare-shouldered portrait of a beautiful woman with a painting of St. Peter's Basilica and Square covering her, uh, feminine charms, and a subtitle, "The True Story of Olimpia Maidalchini: The Secret Female Pope."
The adage that you can't judge a book by its cover still applies.
Author Eleanor Herman offers no real evidence that 17th century Pope Innocent X had a sexual relationship with Olimpia, his sister-in-law, as the term "mistress" would suggest.
She offers no facts that Olimpia was pope, although she apparently was extremely influential in papal decisions.
Even the cover artwork is misleading: You'd think that the beautiful woman depicted is Olimpia, but no; the jacket painting is of "Venus at the Mirror," by Tiziano.
Despite that, this book was hard to put down.
She's done the research
Herman has culled the diaries and papers of Vatican officials of the period and the works of commentators during the mid 1600s, and what she's come up with are some things about our church at the time that today we'd consider unthinkable. The nepotism, the bribery, the selling of church offices, the misuse of church funds -- they saturate these 419 pages, and that's without the bibliography and index.
Even those of us who love our church ought to know that at times in the past some pretty ridiculous things have been done in the name of our faith. Herman points out the silliness of some of the practices surrounding relics, for one thing. An Italian church claimed to have preserved the umbilical cord of Jesus, another drops of the Virgin Mary's breast milk.
What gets tiresome, though, is the author's tendency to slip into extended "filler" -- background information that seemingly has little or nothing to do with the story of Donna Olimpia and her brother-in-law the pope.
Early on she extrapolates the cultural mores of the era and presumes much. While there is no factual evidence that Olimpia did this or that, women of the times did things this way, so Olimpia must have as well, she posits. It's a bit too much innudendo for my taste.
Evidence shows Olimpia's influence
There seems to be little doubt, though, that the widow of Pope Innocent X's brother was extremely influential in day-to-day decisions concerning the Papal States. The evidence author Herman brings to light shows that Olimpia's fingerprints are on the appointments of cardinals, on the finances of the church, on the church's relationship with the governments and royalty of nations such as France and Spain, among others, and much, much more.
Be ready to read a boatload of language pointing out how anti-woman the Catholic Church is and has been through the ages. And the author uses some misleading descriptions that makes you wonder if she made this stuff up or is actually quoting some 17th century theologian or document.
Take Holy Orders: She writes that priestly ordination was "a sacrament that was thought to tattoo the human soul with an invisible but ineradicable seal that prevented marriage."
Tattoo the soul?
I hadn't heard that one before. But then, I really hadn't been up on some of the less-flattering history of our church, like the regular elevation of papal nephews to rank of cardinal although they might still be in their teens, the regular practice of popes to appoint their relatives to jobs in the Vatican, the fawning of European royalty to curry the pope's favor with expensive gifts, etc.
The saving grace is that at some point Innocent did have a crisis of conscience and put the dignity and integrity of the church first, and that many of the laughable practices of those times are long gone.
So read this. It's not sexy. It promises one thing and delivers another, but it's still a good read. -- bz
August 31, 2019
This was chock full of interesting information but read more like a textbook. I did enjoy the view of life at that time but the main character never came alive to me. For information it's great but for a story, not so much.
January 3, 2010
A friend of mine described this as a "jaw-dropping read". I couldn't agree more, and not for any of the reasons I expected. The author is clearly enamored of his subject for her intelligence, audacity and strength of will. Unfortunately, he seems less effected by her complete lack of moral or ethical fiber.
I do not believe that I am either ignorant of church history or naive about the perils of organized religion. Nevertheless, this book's very modern perspective on 17th Century religious conduct was, well, jaw-dropping. It isn't any single fact that surprised me. It was the whole picture, which was made more compelling by a very modern tone and writing style.
Really this book's shortcoming is that it was difficult to tell what is actually known and how it was known, versus what was supposed by the author and on what basis. Increased documentation would have slowed the narrative, but would have made this an even more compelling biography.
I do not believe that I am either ignorant of church history or naive about the perils of organized religion. Nevertheless, this book's very modern perspective on 17th Century religious conduct was, well, jaw-dropping. It isn't any single fact that surprised me. It was the whole picture, which was made more compelling by a very modern tone and writing style.
Really this book's shortcoming is that it was difficult to tell what is actually known and how it was known, versus what was supposed by the author and on what basis. Increased documentation would have slowed the narrative, but would have made this an even more compelling biography.
January 18, 2011
I think the title is a little misleading. And, the jacket illustration, though it's rather lovely. I'd imagine, though, the bust of Olimpia on the cover wouldn't gain as much attention. As the photo of it in the book was, well, she was fierce looking, but not in that idea of sex appeal. Just, you know, regular fierce.
I did find the book to be very interesting overall. Not just because it was a look inside the Vatican during the 1600s, but because it was a look at social class and gender as well. Herman, to me, didn't stand on a soapbox and point out how Olimpia was really an amazing feminist for her time. I'm not particularly sure if Olimpia would've considered herself one. Her actions certainly point to her believing herself on par, if not higher, intellectually with men and she did do things to help poorer women, but most of her ambition was turned inward, to pull herself up from the dust first and then her family.
I guess, though, reading this and knowing how different things were from now to then, it's just a little difficult to imagine having no say in your life. As girls we're taught that we're completely equal, we can do anything, Barbie shows us the way like a pink Virgin Mary, though she has better shoes and probably holds a puppy. It's the past, and women like Olimpia, who helped to eventually shape the future.
Now, personally, I found Olimpia rather horrible as a person. I couldn't say if it was her blatant greed, her manipulations, or her on-going sense of revenge that stuck me as so out of place. She did do some good things as well, but stealing from a dying pope hardly seemed to be high on the list of those. Yet, at the same time, I understand and sympathize with her. Who would have taken care of her if she didn't take care of herself? I don't think anyone would as family and friends seemed likely to buy and sell relationships just like they did positions. It would all be dependent on which way the wind blew that day.
Still, it's a really enjoyable read, particularly for anyone interested in church history or women's studies.
I did find the book to be very interesting overall. Not just because it was a look inside the Vatican during the 1600s, but because it was a look at social class and gender as well. Herman, to me, didn't stand on a soapbox and point out how Olimpia was really an amazing feminist for her time. I'm not particularly sure if Olimpia would've considered herself one. Her actions certainly point to her believing herself on par, if not higher, intellectually with men and she did do things to help poorer women, but most of her ambition was turned inward, to pull herself up from the dust first and then her family.
I guess, though, reading this and knowing how different things were from now to then, it's just a little difficult to imagine having no say in your life. As girls we're taught that we're completely equal, we can do anything, Barbie shows us the way like a pink Virgin Mary, though she has better shoes and probably holds a puppy. It's the past, and women like Olimpia, who helped to eventually shape the future.
Now, personally, I found Olimpia rather horrible as a person. I couldn't say if it was her blatant greed, her manipulations, or her on-going sense of revenge that stuck me as so out of place. She did do some good things as well, but stealing from a dying pope hardly seemed to be high on the list of those. Yet, at the same time, I understand and sympathize with her. Who would have taken care of her if she didn't take care of herself? I don't think anyone would as family and friends seemed likely to buy and sell relationships just like they did positions. It would all be dependent on which way the wind blew that day.
Still, it's a really enjoyable read, particularly for anyone interested in church history or women's studies.
April 5, 2013
I went from never knowing who this woman was, to becoming completely fascinated by her. Seriously considering naming my first born after her. I don't want to give away her story for those that need to read this book. Gripped this book til the very end. Cannot believe how much research Eleanor Herman went through to make it, but so thankful she did not only did she tell Olimpia's story but she explain what Rome was like during her time. I can truly say that Olimpia will remain forever on my mind.
June 28, 2013
Fascinating; utterly, utterly fascinating. Eleanor Herman takes her readers deep into the life of a woman few outside certain cities in Italy have heard of (apparently to the great relief of the Catholic Church): the incorrigible, the stubborn, the rebellious, the determined, the street-smart Olimpia Maidalchini. Ms. Herman has a fine sense of irony and there is much irony to be found in Olimpia's life and times. Born today, she might be the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, or a Prime Minister. As it was, she was born in Italy in the late 16th century and, for a time, it looked like she would fall victim, as so many girls did in those days, to being given a life sentence behind convent walls against her will. To society's dismay, Olimpia accomplished the rare feat of not only refusing to go quietly but also turning the world upside down in her favor. Despite her refusal to conform, Olimpia was very much a creature of her time and quickly learned how to play the game to achieve the wealth and power that she wanted. Successful though she was, she ran headlong into a life-long clash with the double standards, the hypocrisy, the sheer ridiculousness and the many dangers that defined the time and place in which she lived. Her story encompasses more than just her own life events. Hers is also the story of the rich and powerful, the poor and powerless, Rome's often tenuous hold onto survival, a greedy and corrupt Church, dangerous secrets, and our own fruitless need to feel safe from the world we're forced to live in. Centuries later, the world Olimpia knew isn't as dead and gone as we might think; the evidence that it existed is plain to see. The people of that time are waiting, just on the other side, for us to reach out and touch their hands so we connect, so we remember them. Mistress of the Vatican lets them live again.
April 28, 2017
Alternating between mildly interesting tidbits about 17th century life, the unexpected actions of a woman in the face of misogyny, and the infuriating greed, theft, nepotism, and general corruption of the Catholic church, this book tediously and salaciously plods along as it chronicles the life of Olimpia Maidalchini Pamphili. Certainly Olimpia held great influence over her brother-in-law, Pope Innocent X, but the claim that she was secretly the pope herself are dubious at best. Olimpia stole from the Vatican treasury, manipulated the Cardinal creation process, and sold appointments all for her own gain and the promotion of her family, but so did all other close papal relatives, it just happened that she was a woman, so ZOMG! SCANDAL!
This book basically reads like a multi-part collaboration between People magazine and the National Enquirer, and just happens to be set in the papal states instead at the Jersey Shore. The over dramatization and speculation on what *might* have happened was entirely unnecessary, because by all accounts Olimpia Maidalchini did seem to live a fascinating life during an interesting point in history. A biography doesn't need to be written like a soap opera to be compelling, and the conjecture detracted from the true history.
This book basically reads like a multi-part collaboration between People magazine and the National Enquirer, and just happens to be set in the papal states instead at the Jersey Shore. The over dramatization and speculation on what *might* have happened was entirely unnecessary, because by all accounts Olimpia Maidalchini did seem to live a fascinating life during an interesting point in history. A biography doesn't need to be written like a soap opera to be compelling, and the conjecture detracted from the true history.
July 15, 2014
I couldn't get into this. Too much speculation, not enough source material, and written like a breathless romance novel.
May 22, 2021
Un libro bellissimo, avvincente, oltre 500 pagine senza sentirle pesanti.
La scrittura è scorrevole ma precisa, con abbondanti spiegazioni culturali ed "etnologiche" sulla roma papalina barocca: usi, costumi, pasquinate sono descritti con grande certezza inframezzate al racconto cronologico, senza però interrompere il filo del discorso.
La figura della protagonista, Olimpia Maidalchini-Sforza Pamphili è inquadrata benissimo, con ottime rese caratteriali. Si parteggia per lei, ma piano piano, nel corso della lettura, ci si stacca in seuguito ai suoi comportamenti simoniaci e avari, per poi tornare ad affezionarsi quando, ormai anziana, è in rotta con tutta la grande famiglia che lei stessa ha contribuito a creare ma su cui ha tiranneggiato. Oserei dire una delle prime femministe che deve molte delle leggende sulla sua figura alla sola colpa di essere un'arpia donna in mezzo a tanti rapaci uomini di chiesa, egoisti e mai soddisfatti della loro ricchezza. Ma, come viene spesso ripetuto nel libro, la sua colpa è appunto di essere donna e di interessarsi agli affarri, alla politica e alla religione con impetuosità maschile.
E' una lettura piacevolissima ed avvincente. Per chi -come me- ama Roma, la sua storia e l'arte, sarà un libro interessante e raccomandato!
La scrittura è scorrevole ma precisa, con abbondanti spiegazioni culturali ed "etnologiche" sulla roma papalina barocca: usi, costumi, pasquinate sono descritti con grande certezza inframezzate al racconto cronologico, senza però interrompere il filo del discorso.
La figura della protagonista, Olimpia Maidalchini-Sforza Pamphili è inquadrata benissimo, con ottime rese caratteriali. Si parteggia per lei, ma piano piano, nel corso della lettura, ci si stacca in seuguito ai suoi comportamenti simoniaci e avari, per poi tornare ad affezionarsi quando, ormai anziana, è in rotta con tutta la grande famiglia che lei stessa ha contribuito a creare ma su cui ha tiranneggiato. Oserei dire una delle prime femministe che deve molte delle leggende sulla sua figura alla sola colpa di essere un'arpia donna in mezzo a tanti rapaci uomini di chiesa, egoisti e mai soddisfatti della loro ricchezza. Ma, come viene spesso ripetuto nel libro, la sua colpa è appunto di essere donna e di interessarsi agli affarri, alla politica e alla religione con impetuosità maschile.
E' una lettura piacevolissima ed avvincente. Per chi -come me- ama Roma, la sua storia e l'arte, sarà un libro interessante e raccomandato!
August 28, 2024
We'll call this a strong 3.5 stars. The soap opera nature of the story becomes rather tiresome by the third act, but this remains an interesting look at the post-Renaissance/Baroque Roman period that seems rather neglected by other historians. The outrageous title may give people the wrong impression about Olimpia's role in this time and place -- best to set it aside and just read.
January 28, 2020
Did not finish. So many details. Not my interest genre. Tried my best.
July 5, 2021
4.5 stars. Nonfiction. So interesting! I learned a lot about how women were treated in the 1600s, and how the Catholic Church was embroiled in land struggles before Italy became a nation and the church paid for Vatican City. Despite the title, this is not a smutty relationship book.
January 26, 2024
Fun! I had never heard of Olimpia Maidalchini before, but her life story was fascinating. I thought the author did a good job at explaining the context of 17th century Rome, and the power structure in and around the papacy.
October 12, 2019
DNF at 30% too boring for words May give it another attempt at some point
November 13, 2017
I absolutely loved this! Such a beautifully written historical journey.
Read
September 23, 2019This material as laid out here in this book would have worked better as a historical-fiction novel. None of the character even being real persons was ever fully fleshed out, unless one likes a book full of greedy, manipulative, fearful people just trying to survive into their 40's... The Vatican was corrupt Kingdom trying to rule the catholic church at the same time.
There is some interesting history... yet I don't agree that Olimpia Maidalchini is a woman that people would truly use as a role model for women's freedom.
There is some interesting history... yet I don't agree that Olimpia Maidalchini is a woman that people would truly use as a role model for women's freedom.
June 3, 2019
Shocking!
April 16, 2013
This author has a great storytelling ability. To her understanding of the history of this time, she adds a good eye for detail, pacing and depth to her characters. Highlights include the descriptions of the conclaves, Innocent X's death, the rivalry between Olimpia and Olimpia, the role of relics (and Olimpia's relic) and the short lived but pungent rebellion of a favorite granddaughter.
Eleanor Herman compares the fruits of Olimpia's intrigues with peers in her own time, she explains the motives of the popes and the pressures on them, how taxes were collected and something of the food distribution system and more. One example of her interpretive ability is explaining the meaning for the Popes and the Church in general of the conversion of the Swedish queen. There are many mini-history lessons like this throughout the book.
This book joins other recent titles that I'm aware of that profiling Italian women The Pope's Daughter: The Extraordinary Life of Felice Della Rovere by Carolyn Murphy, Lucia: A Venetian Life in the Age of Napoleon and A Venetian Affair: A True Tale of Forbidden Love in the 18th Century by Andrea di Robelant. I hope this represents a trend in capturing the lesser known historical players.
In popular history an intriguing character or an exciting time can cover for a dull writer. In this book, you get not only an intriguing character and exciting time, you get a very well composed story. There are many histories that I really liked, but I would not recommend to my friends who "don't get" the genre, but I would unequivocally recommend this book to just about anyone.
Eleanor Herman compares the fruits of Olimpia's intrigues with peers in her own time, she explains the motives of the popes and the pressures on them, how taxes were collected and something of the food distribution system and more. One example of her interpretive ability is explaining the meaning for the Popes and the Church in general of the conversion of the Swedish queen. There are many mini-history lessons like this throughout the book.
This book joins other recent titles that I'm aware of that profiling Italian women The Pope's Daughter: The Extraordinary Life of Felice Della Rovere by Carolyn Murphy, Lucia: A Venetian Life in the Age of Napoleon and A Venetian Affair: A True Tale of Forbidden Love in the 18th Century by Andrea di Robelant. I hope this represents a trend in capturing the lesser known historical players.
In popular history an intriguing character or an exciting time can cover for a dull writer. In this book, you get not only an intriguing character and exciting time, you get a very well composed story. There are many histories that I really liked, but I would not recommend to my friends who "don't get" the genre, but I would unequivocally recommend this book to just about anyone.
September 4, 2023
I promise, I read the first page of the first chapter before buying this. Fortunately, I am out less money than the price of a movie ticket, but I also tweaked a nerve in my neck from tension. Why did I keep reading? Spite. That’s the only answer.
Number one sign a historian doesn’t have enough on a single subject to justify an entire book: Most of the book focuses on anyone and everyone but the title figure. I’m going to be very generous and say about 70 pages are immediately relevant to Olimpia Maidalchini. If Herman had dug down into details instead of summarizing everything in a broad brush, the book could have easily been around the 300 page mark and would have focused on her paternal and marital families. It would have been interesting, especially with all the drama her kids and grandkids add. Instead, we are given a sweeping narrative that ping-pongs all over the place and goes down rabbit trails like a hyperactive squirrel jacked up on caffeine. For example, spending 30 pages on the crowning of Innocent X as Pope PLUS a hard swing back to “the origins of the papacy are shrouded in time”, cue random Bible verses. Herman would swing from discussing something in the 1640s to the 1500s, back to the 1620s with a detour via Luther, then to Imperial Rome, then Luther again, then something contemporary, and back to the 1630s or ‘50s. The correct way to handle this does not involve talking about everything like it is all happening all at once. There is a LOT of history between 1517 and 1630, but sure, let’s squeeze in Charles V and Henry VIII into a biography of a woman born in 1591.
I understand Herman is writing for pop history, presumably piggy-backing off a documentary that she presented on, but “Mistress of the Vatican” reads like Cosmopolitan attempting academia with a Buzzfeed editor: “20 Places to Visit for Fans of Innocent X” or “Top 50 Scandals of the Vatican”. As a travelogue for Visit Italy, Herman does a decent job setting the scene, but she spends too much time setting the scene. A competent fiction editor would have chopped a good thirty pages. The anti-Catholic and anti-Protestant (except Martin Luther who brought sexual freedom) tones were confusing and is worrying. If you’re prejudiced against a subject, maybe don’t volunteer to write on it? I would like to think Herman simply needs a better ghost writer. I think it was about the time she glossed over the Great Western Schism as “leadership was tired of Rome” that the nerve in my shoulder went nuts.
By page 29, I was bored and irritated enough from the endless “we must imagine” and “possibly” and “it’s very likely we can assume” that I was ready to jump back into Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, a game I am not overly fond of but at least it does justice to Renaissance Rome. Around page 150, I started taking notes to document my rage, even backtracking for a few extra points. Herman may believe in the bare minimum number of quotes, but I do not.
Page 100: “Fortunately for his reputation, Cardinal Pamphili would not be appointed to the Holy Office of the Inquisition until later in the decade, or else his name would have joined the list of numskull cardinals who had signed Galileo’s condemnation”. Ma’am??? “Numskulls”? It was the blooming Inquisition! Unless this is a Mel Brooks reference, please treat the horror with the respect it deserves. All this does it make it sound like Galileo was hauled in front of the HOA. Also, please explain this act would have affected Pamphili’s reputation in the moment of signing, not the better part of four centuries later.
Page 173: [Olimpia’s] zeal for power and wealth would have been lauded in a man; after all, almost every cardinal and Roman nobleman had the same aspirations. But there was one problem with Olimpia: she was a woman, operating at the apex of the oldest continuously misogynistic institution in the world”. I don’t have the time or the crayons to explain all the problems here, especially since the page break jumps to three paragraphs speed-running everything that went wrong with the church and its relationship with men and women, but no, it’s not the Roman government’s fault (as documented by people living at the time). Just the Patriarchy.
Chapter 14: Literally titled “The Imbecile Cardinals”. Very bad form from someone claiming authority as a historian. (My own side note: I hate when something is published and all it does is justify prejudice against female historians, specifically the ones without academic credentials; it ruins the fun for the rest of us.)
Chapter 19: As a whole, runs very cosy with libel and slander. It doesn’t quite make it over the fence and into the grounds of a justifiable lawsuit, but I hope the publishers triple-checked relevant laws on discussing public figures, no matter how long they’ve been dead.
Pages 325-327: These pages were on the marriage of Olimpia’s granddaughter, Olimpiapuccia, and how she resisted her arranged marriage at twelve. They specifically underscored the tragedy of Herman’s work because there was so much potential if events had been broken down, not summarised. A five-month battle of wills that’s wrapped up less than five pages.
Page 393: “Though they had few, if any, similar interests, and completely different backgrounds, these two remarkable women had one striking characteristic in common—despite the oppressive misogyny of their world, they had both completely taken charge of their lives and not allowed men to dictate to them. They lived exactly as they wished to—no matter how loudly the men squawked. It is possible that Christina [of Sweden] and Olimpia would have truly liked each other.” Fascinating as Herman claims earlier that Olimpia isn’t a girl’s girl. Moving on.
Page 415: “Ironically, the loss of [the Papal States] was a great boon to the pope, who could now concentrate on religion. As Jesus himself said, it is impossible to serve two masters”.
…….*deep, deep breath*…..
How FLIPPING self-righteous and SMUG can you get?! Are we sure this isn’t a smear campaign? Dan Brown is looking more religiously neutral in this moment!
I hate this book so much. I hate that I spent money on it. It may outstrip The Book of Margery Kemp for the title of Most Hated Book (“Stalking Jack the Ripper” and “Darth Plagueis” are still in a death match for second place). “Mistress of the Vatican” only qualifies if I remember reading it a week or more from now.
There was so much potential, and “Mistress of the Vatican” has the bones of a really excellent history, bones that can be fleshed out if it actually focused on Olympia. She was a woman who went from very little to the sister-in-law of a pope! She had dramas and intrigues, and I would be interested in a work focusing entirely on the codes she and her family developed and worked with. Those were maybe my two favourite pages of this entire book! Also, let her be a real human being, a flawed figure who imposed her will on anyone and anything who would let her and would have what hinted to have been some truly spectacular throw-downs with the different people in her world.
Number one sign a historian doesn’t have enough on a single subject to justify an entire book: Most of the book focuses on anyone and everyone but the title figure. I’m going to be very generous and say about 70 pages are immediately relevant to Olimpia Maidalchini. If Herman had dug down into details instead of summarizing everything in a broad brush, the book could have easily been around the 300 page mark and would have focused on her paternal and marital families. It would have been interesting, especially with all the drama her kids and grandkids add. Instead, we are given a sweeping narrative that ping-pongs all over the place and goes down rabbit trails like a hyperactive squirrel jacked up on caffeine. For example, spending 30 pages on the crowning of Innocent X as Pope PLUS a hard swing back to “the origins of the papacy are shrouded in time”, cue random Bible verses. Herman would swing from discussing something in the 1640s to the 1500s, back to the 1620s with a detour via Luther, then to Imperial Rome, then Luther again, then something contemporary, and back to the 1630s or ‘50s. The correct way to handle this does not involve talking about everything like it is all happening all at once. There is a LOT of history between 1517 and 1630, but sure, let’s squeeze in Charles V and Henry VIII into a biography of a woman born in 1591.
I understand Herman is writing for pop history, presumably piggy-backing off a documentary that she presented on, but “Mistress of the Vatican” reads like Cosmopolitan attempting academia with a Buzzfeed editor: “20 Places to Visit for Fans of Innocent X” or “Top 50 Scandals of the Vatican”. As a travelogue for Visit Italy, Herman does a decent job setting the scene, but she spends too much time setting the scene. A competent fiction editor would have chopped a good thirty pages. The anti-Catholic and anti-Protestant (except Martin Luther who brought sexual freedom) tones were confusing and is worrying. If you’re prejudiced against a subject, maybe don’t volunteer to write on it? I would like to think Herman simply needs a better ghost writer. I think it was about the time she glossed over the Great Western Schism as “leadership was tired of Rome” that the nerve in my shoulder went nuts.
By page 29, I was bored and irritated enough from the endless “we must imagine” and “possibly” and “it’s very likely we can assume” that I was ready to jump back into Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, a game I am not overly fond of but at least it does justice to Renaissance Rome. Around page 150, I started taking notes to document my rage, even backtracking for a few extra points. Herman may believe in the bare minimum number of quotes, but I do not.
Page 100: “Fortunately for his reputation, Cardinal Pamphili would not be appointed to the Holy Office of the Inquisition until later in the decade, or else his name would have joined the list of numskull cardinals who had signed Galileo’s condemnation”. Ma’am??? “Numskulls”? It was the blooming Inquisition! Unless this is a Mel Brooks reference, please treat the horror with the respect it deserves. All this does it make it sound like Galileo was hauled in front of the HOA. Also, please explain this act would have affected Pamphili’s reputation in the moment of signing, not the better part of four centuries later.
Page 173: [Olimpia’s] zeal for power and wealth would have been lauded in a man; after all, almost every cardinal and Roman nobleman had the same aspirations. But there was one problem with Olimpia: she was a woman, operating at the apex of the oldest continuously misogynistic institution in the world”. I don’t have the time or the crayons to explain all the problems here, especially since the page break jumps to three paragraphs speed-running everything that went wrong with the church and its relationship with men and women, but no, it’s not the Roman government’s fault (as documented by people living at the time). Just the Patriarchy.
Chapter 14: Literally titled “The Imbecile Cardinals”. Very bad form from someone claiming authority as a historian. (My own side note: I hate when something is published and all it does is justify prejudice against female historians, specifically the ones without academic credentials; it ruins the fun for the rest of us.)
Chapter 19: As a whole, runs very cosy with libel and slander. It doesn’t quite make it over the fence and into the grounds of a justifiable lawsuit, but I hope the publishers triple-checked relevant laws on discussing public figures, no matter how long they’ve been dead.
Pages 325-327: These pages were on the marriage of Olimpia’s granddaughter, Olimpiapuccia, and how she resisted her arranged marriage at twelve. They specifically underscored the tragedy of Herman’s work because there was so much potential if events had been broken down, not summarised. A five-month battle of wills that’s wrapped up less than five pages.
Page 393: “Though they had few, if any, similar interests, and completely different backgrounds, these two remarkable women had one striking characteristic in common—despite the oppressive misogyny of their world, they had both completely taken charge of their lives and not allowed men to dictate to them. They lived exactly as they wished to—no matter how loudly the men squawked. It is possible that Christina [of Sweden] and Olimpia would have truly liked each other.” Fascinating as Herman claims earlier that Olimpia isn’t a girl’s girl. Moving on.
Page 415: “Ironically, the loss of [the Papal States] was a great boon to the pope, who could now concentrate on religion. As Jesus himself said, it is impossible to serve two masters”.
…….*deep, deep breath*…..
How FLIPPING self-righteous and SMUG can you get?! Are we sure this isn’t a smear campaign? Dan Brown is looking more religiously neutral in this moment!
I hate this book so much. I hate that I spent money on it. It may outstrip The Book of Margery Kemp for the title of Most Hated Book (“Stalking Jack the Ripper” and “Darth Plagueis” are still in a death match for second place). “Mistress of the Vatican” only qualifies if I remember reading it a week or more from now.
There was so much potential, and “Mistress of the Vatican” has the bones of a really excellent history, bones that can be fleshed out if it actually focused on Olympia. She was a woman who went from very little to the sister-in-law of a pope! She had dramas and intrigues, and I would be interested in a work focusing entirely on the codes she and her family developed and worked with. Those were maybe my two favourite pages of this entire book! Also, let her be a real human being, a flawed figure who imposed her will on anyone and anything who would let her and would have what hinted to have been some truly spectacular throw-downs with the different people in her world.
September 25, 2013
I like reading about women we rarely hear about in textbooks. To learn that a woman was able to command that much authority in the Vatican shortly after the Reformation, it was utterly enlightening. I learned a great deal about the Vatican, the Papal States, women's roles, and even day to day living in Rome -- the prostitutes' union, the feast days, what every day Romans went through. So it should be a 4 star book.
I didn't like the tone of the book. There were times where it almost seemed like Herman was imposing modern day morality on the women she would discuss, and it just fell flat for me. The tone worked for her short segments in Sex with Kings: 500 Years of Adultery, Power, Rivalry, and Revenge and Sex with the Queen: 900 Years of Vile Kings, Virile Lovers, and Passionate Politics. I didn't enjoy it spread out over 400 pages on one person.
However, I am intrigued to learn more about Christina of Sweden, because the little tidbits Herman threw at us were incredibly fascinating! As well as Cardinal Chigi, later Pope Alexander VII. So there are those jumping off points!
I didn't like the tone of the book. There were times where it almost seemed like Herman was imposing modern day morality on the women she would discuss, and it just fell flat for me. The tone worked for her short segments in Sex with Kings: 500 Years of Adultery, Power, Rivalry, and Revenge and Sex with the Queen: 900 Years of Vile Kings, Virile Lovers, and Passionate Politics. I didn't enjoy it spread out over 400 pages on one person.
However, I am intrigued to learn more about Christina of Sweden, because the little tidbits Herman threw at us were incredibly fascinating! As well as Cardinal Chigi, later Pope Alexander VII. So there are those jumping off points!
September 13, 2011
Book reveals one of many sordid chapters in the history of the Catholic Church. Set in 17th century Italy, the story weaves real historically-documented characters, places, events, and times when the church was nothing but a vehicle to fulfill family ambitions and enrich family coffers. I loved and hated all the characters who robbed, deceived, bribed, and manipulated each other (the powerful) and abused their authority over the masses. It wasn't the holiest who got to be Pope, but the wealthiest, the most politically and/or socially connected, and the most daring and power- hungry. Olimpia(a woman!!)was all of these and became more as she beat the men at this game and became the most powerful, influential person closest to the Pope; a woman practically ran the church, from within the Vatican, with the Pope's permission. She got there, but she also had to hold on to her position! One slip, and there was always someone looking upwards and ready. And how she gloried in her position and plotted to maintain it!
June 6, 2016
I enjoyed this book for both its accounting of the history of Rome and of the fascinating, though excessively greedy, Olipia Maidalchini. The author used the term kleptocracy to describe the form of government/life in which you stole whatever you could get your hands on and expected others to do the same. The story of Pope Innocent X, having everything stripped from his room including sheets, utensils, and clothes, was sobering especially as Eleanor Herman presents him as a reasonably nice, if dithering, man.
Besides Olipia and Pope Innocent, the book provides interesting accounts of the Doria Pamphili family, the Berberinis, Alexander VII (Chigi), and Queen Christina.
The draw-back of the book is that it is written at times in the slighly breathless tone of the tabloids and the author sounds "proud" of Olipia even when her behavior is dispicable because she took control of her fate in a misogynist society. It appeared to me that Olimpia lost her humanity early on and later verged on the truly evil.
March 24, 2012
Open the book and 17th century Rome, with all its poverty and deprivation, greed, nepotism, corruption, criminality and excess falls out into your lap. Written in a modern style that can seem by turns shocking and funny, the author has left no turn unstoned to lay what amounts to a textual feast before the reader. I loved the snippets of historical gossip and little-known facts that popped up to make me gasp - better not risk spoiling a single one by telling. If history had been like this at school I'd have soaked it up, and now, with the bonus of Google images to find people and places, the book brings those times instantly and vividly to life.
The story itself is extraordinary, and details the rebellion, machinations and meteoric rise of one woman, with a strong supporting cast of fascinating characters. More extraordinary still is that the author's undiluted admiration for this monster is maintained up to and beyond the very last page. Enough from me though - read it - it's brilliant.
The story itself is extraordinary, and details the rebellion, machinations and meteoric rise of one woman, with a strong supporting cast of fascinating characters. More extraordinary still is that the author's undiluted admiration for this monster is maintained up to and beyond the very last page. Enough from me though - read it - it's brilliant.
February 1, 2015
Almost impossible to put down. I’m so happy I found this, I’ve wanted to read about Olimpia Maidalchini since I first heard about her. A woman in the centre of the Church, and not because of sex! And my favorite Baroque era!
Those times were crazy – not much crazier than any other times, but immensely fun to read about. Cardinals for whom a conclave was a deadly affair, the Romans always on the ready to sack a palace or two, with the permission of the owners, popes who died naked on the floor, because no one cared whenever it became clear that the pontiff wouldn’t live, nobles marrying boys in front of the altar, in anticipation of a suitable absolving document for which they paid in gold – would like to know how this affair ended… hopefully the guys didn’t burn? :(
Well, Olimpia Maidalchini was a force of nature, and she was vengeful and ruthless. But she had taken the prostitutes of Rome under her protection – they could even ride carriages, if they had Olimpia’s crest on the door – and for this, I am her fan.
Those times were crazy – not much crazier than any other times, but immensely fun to read about. Cardinals for whom a conclave was a deadly affair, the Romans always on the ready to sack a palace or two, with the permission of the owners, popes who died naked on the floor, because no one cared whenever it became clear that the pontiff wouldn’t live, nobles marrying boys in front of the altar, in anticipation of a suitable absolving document for which they paid in gold – would like to know how this affair ended… hopefully the guys didn’t burn? :(
Well, Olimpia Maidalchini was a force of nature, and she was vengeful and ruthless. But she had taken the prostitutes of Rome under her protection – they could even ride carriages, if they had Olimpia’s crest on the door – and for this, I am her fan.
January 20, 2010
I enjoy off beat historical moments and this one was outside my normal boundaries. In 1600's Italy, Olimpia Maidalchini was a woman to reckon with. She refused to obey her father when he ordered her and her two younger sisters to join a convent. She had a head for figures and an interest in legal matters, which are hardly womanly attributes. She had a very long memory for slights and disagreements--and a way of subtly and not so subtly redressing any wrongs done to her and her family. For years she steered her brother-in-law's career in the church, until at last he became pope.
In addition to the story of Olimpia's life, there is a considerable amount of history about the Catholic church. You need not be Catholic, though, to enjoy this story.
The biggest drawback for me was at the end at Olimpia's death when the author became just a little mystical for a paragraph or two. But that was minor.
In addition to the story of Olimpia's life, there is a considerable amount of history about the Catholic church. You need not be Catholic, though, to enjoy this story.
The biggest drawback for me was at the end at Olimpia's death when the author became just a little mystical for a paragraph or two. But that was minor.
April 2, 2011
In all my years of Catholic school, I have never been exposed to the secret life of the Vatican in such detail. This book is truly stunning. To think Olympia Maidalchini could rise and fall to power so many times over the course of her life is just crazy. She was a celebrity of her time.
There were many people who told Olympia that women could not be included in church leadership positions. But she remained at the very top for many years as Pope Innocent X's key consultant and possibly lover. She appointed cardinals, negotiated with ambassadors, built villages, and bought estates with her helping of the Papal State's treasury.
For me, I loved hearing about what really goes on behind the scenes at the Vatican. It all sounded like a giant soap opera. Also to hear about how people lived in the times when bathing wasn't very common was also a bit alarming.
This was a great book. Well researched and very detailed.
There were many people who told Olympia that women could not be included in church leadership positions. But she remained at the very top for many years as Pope Innocent X's key consultant and possibly lover. She appointed cardinals, negotiated with ambassadors, built villages, and bought estates with her helping of the Papal State's treasury.
For me, I loved hearing about what really goes on behind the scenes at the Vatican. It all sounded like a giant soap opera. Also to hear about how people lived in the times when bathing wasn't very common was also a bit alarming.
This was a great book. Well researched and very detailed.
October 9, 2021
This is a good book, well researched and very informative, looks at a partial history of the Catholic Church. It's funny because every time I think 'now I know EVERY hidden detail about the Catholic church" something like this book happens...
All in all, I liked reading about this lady. The problem I had with this book is the heavy speculations, means this biography relies too heavily on phrases such as "we can imagine" and "we can picture", rather than intellectual analysis. Plus, the author "guesses" about what the characters might be doing or feeling. I personally feels Eleanor Herman should have changed the whole book into a fiction as it is fiction-like anyway.
Even before reaching 100 pages, I got tired with too many speculations and guesswork. This just couldn't keep me engaged as a good book usually does.
2 & 1/2 stars.
All in all, I liked reading about this lady. The problem I had with this book is the heavy speculations, means this biography relies too heavily on phrases such as "we can imagine" and "we can picture", rather than intellectual analysis. Plus, the author "guesses" about what the characters might be doing or feeling. I personally feels Eleanor Herman should have changed the whole book into a fiction as it is fiction-like anyway.
Even before reaching 100 pages, I got tired with too many speculations and guesswork. This just couldn't keep me engaged as a good book usually does.
2 & 1/2 stars.
June 11, 2009
I enjoyed this book overall. My only criticism is that are certain points in the book it almost felt like I was reading historical fiction rather than non-fiction. This isn't bad by itself but it makes you wonder which part is fact and which part is author speculation based on the evidence. Other than that I really liked the book. It gave an interesting insight into the 17th century Catholic Church and all the politics and intrigue that occured. Olimpia Maidalchini may not have been the nicest woman but she certainly was an exceptional woman and definitely worth reading about.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 234 reviews