I purchased this book expecting an unbiased and objective account of the Belvoir witches.Sadly, I was hugely disappointed. Although apparently well researched and written in a clear, accessible style, the author's limited knowledge of witchcraft becomes apparent, resulting in several errors. For example, Henry Holland's 'Treatise against witchcraft' was not the first work published in England, nor was it a pamphlet. Similarly, England did not have the highest proportion of female suspects. However, the worst aspect of the book is that despite the author's bold claim that the 'Machiavellian' George Villiers, then marquis of Buckingham, 'would mastermind a conspiracy that has remained hidden for centuries', no real evidence is provided to back up the claim that he arranged to have the earl of rutland's sickly youngest son done away with. Buckingham was accused of many crimes, and he and his family were derided and lampooned in numerous scurrilous ballads and poems, yet he was never accused of such a crime, nor were there even any rumours, despite being accused of poisoning King James I in 1625, along with his mother, the Countess of Buckingham and Prince Charles, later Charles I; a charge to which few reputable historians give any credence. The supposed evidence is purely circumstantial, and made to fit, presumably, to give more spice to the tale.
I cannot recommend this book, which I found sensationalist and prejudiced. If readers are interested in a work on witchcraft which is accurate and written without bias,then Malcom Gaskill's,'Witchfinder: A seventeenth century English Tragedy' is superb.