Top critical review
2 people found this helpful
Who exactly is this book aimed at?
on 3 December 2012
These very brief history books are a great idea,but they seem to belittle the reader,and I wonder why specialists have not been employed to write them than a proverbial "Jack of All Trades".Moreover I wonder just how long they take to reproduce and who on earth is doing the Proof Reading? Since they are so short there really is no excuse for such howlers!"Elizabeth was fairly healthy until 1802......" Mary apparently reinstated the Herecy acts in 1544,even though her father Henry VIII was on the throne and her step brother Edward was yet to reign! In reality, Mary was never actually pregnant and the first half of the book is devoted to a lot of waffle about Court intrigues,before Elizabeth became Queen, which only concern her by implication, and not by substance.These are important in showing us the character of the young Elizabeth, but they are discussed in too much detail in the manner of a modern day soap opera. This means that Elizabethan heroes like Sir Francis Drake and Sir Walter Ralegh are kicked into touch without a mention and no proper assessment of her reign is discussed,nor its immediate implications for the rule of James I.