What do you think?
Rate this book
Lady Jane Grey: A Tudor Mystery
Lady Jane Grey is one of the most elusive and tragic characters in English history. In July 1553, the death of the childless Edward VI threw the Tudor dynasty into crisis. On Edward's instructions, his cousin Jane Grey was proclaimed queen, only to be ousted 13 days later by his half-sister Mary, and later beheaded. In this radical reassessment, Eric Ives rejects traditional portraits of Jane both as hapless victim of political intrigue or Protestant martyr. Instead, he presents her as an accomplished young woman with a fierce personal integrity. The result is a compelling dissection by a master historian and storyteller of one of history's most shocking injustices.
367 pages, Hardcover
First published September 25, 2009
About the author
Eric Ives
8 books96 followersHistorian of Tudor England. Studied under S. T. Bindoff. He taught at the universities of Liverpool and Birmingham and wrote on faction at the Tudor court, Anne Boleyn and Lady Jane Grey.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews
January 3, 2015
Given the choice of being a queen but for only about 2 weeks and finding your death by beheading or not being a queen at all; which would you choose? Unfortunately, Jane Grey didn’t have a decision to make and was thrown into her fate earning her the nickname, “The Nine Days Queen”. Eric Ives explores this incident in Tudor history in, “Lady Jane Grey: A Tudor Mystery”.
Before even proceeding; a stylistic detail regarding the format of “Lady Jane Grey” must be made. Several reader reviews have complained that the text of “Lady Jane Grey” is not written as a portrait or biography and therefore fell short of satisfaction. Well, people need to read THOROUGHLY , as Ives clearly states in his introduction that he penned “Lady Jane Grey” in a mystery/court case format looking at figures involved, motives/intent, situation, and conclusion. Ives never claimed to be writing a biography. Learn to read, people! With that being said, Ives has both successes and failures in this work.
“Lady Jane Grey” is definitely not recommended for those not versed on the subject as Ives packs the pages with information. This compounded with his writing style can easily overwhelm some readers. Ives focuses on debunking myths and immersing in research by presenting full quotes, cross-referencing on dates, and exploring various theories which is perfect for Tudor lovers who seek this in-depth breakdown.
The issue with this is that Ives seemingly strays off the topic by large margins. Meaning, a figure is mentioned and then an entire background is given even if it is irrelevant to the topic at hand and thus; losing the stream and slowing the pace of “Lady Jane Grey”. However, this truly reveals the macro environment related to the accession of Jane Grey to the throne.
Ives cunningly brings forth many theories previously unexplored. Although some of these aren’t mainstream agreeable (such as John Dudley being an innocent party); Ives logically explains and backs up his thinking causing the reader to respect the views even if they are not agreed with.
There are slow moments in “Lady Jane Grey” but when it is great: it is great. Therefore, the text can feel somewhat jumpy and disjointed. Plus, Ives has the habit of trying to make modern-day or humorous comparisons which has no place in an academic text and “throws things off”.
The major issue is the absence of Jane’s view in “Lady Jane Grey”. Everyone seems to be discussed but her (obviously making her the ‘victim’ in the ‘case’). Her side is simply not thoroughly explored. This relates to the fact that Ives’s thesis is somewhat lost presenting the situation as a ‘mystery’. His intent appears to be to explore why and how Jane Grey gained the throne but the idea and conclusion are somewhat lost. Simply: the presentation/format of the text is not for everyone.
The highlight of “Lady Jane Grey” occurs at Part III when Ives describes the rise and fall of Jane Grey in great detail from Mary’s perspective to the military tactics of Dudley. Ives’s version is one of the better-researched and well-written accounts on the matter and even those readers familiar with events will learn some new facts.
The final chapters of “Lady Jane Grey” focus on the impact of events on Jane and her supporters. The conclusion is notably strong with a look at depictions of Jane in art and media. “Lady Jane Grey” also features annotated notes (well presented) and a section of back-and-white plates.
Even taking complaints into consideration and the stylistic format of “Lady Jane Grey” which may not appeal to all readers; Ives offers a strong and meticulously- researched look at the events of Jane Grey’s ‘reign’. Again, the text is NOT a biography so readers won’t necessarily gain a glimpse into Jane’s psyche but will come away with some new knowledge. “Lady Jane Grey” is recommended for Tudor lovers with some background on the time period.
Before even proceeding; a stylistic detail regarding the format of “Lady Jane Grey” must be made. Several reader reviews have complained that the text of “Lady Jane Grey” is not written as a portrait or biography and therefore fell short of satisfaction. Well, people need to read THOROUGHLY , as Ives clearly states in his introduction that he penned “Lady Jane Grey” in a mystery/court case format looking at figures involved, motives/intent, situation, and conclusion. Ives never claimed to be writing a biography. Learn to read, people! With that being said, Ives has both successes and failures in this work.
“Lady Jane Grey” is definitely not recommended for those not versed on the subject as Ives packs the pages with information. This compounded with his writing style can easily overwhelm some readers. Ives focuses on debunking myths and immersing in research by presenting full quotes, cross-referencing on dates, and exploring various theories which is perfect for Tudor lovers who seek this in-depth breakdown.
The issue with this is that Ives seemingly strays off the topic by large margins. Meaning, a figure is mentioned and then an entire background is given even if it is irrelevant to the topic at hand and thus; losing the stream and slowing the pace of “Lady Jane Grey”. However, this truly reveals the macro environment related to the accession of Jane Grey to the throne.
Ives cunningly brings forth many theories previously unexplored. Although some of these aren’t mainstream agreeable (such as John Dudley being an innocent party); Ives logically explains and backs up his thinking causing the reader to respect the views even if they are not agreed with.
There are slow moments in “Lady Jane Grey” but when it is great: it is great. Therefore, the text can feel somewhat jumpy and disjointed. Plus, Ives has the habit of trying to make modern-day or humorous comparisons which has no place in an academic text and “throws things off”.
The major issue is the absence of Jane’s view in “Lady Jane Grey”. Everyone seems to be discussed but her (obviously making her the ‘victim’ in the ‘case’). Her side is simply not thoroughly explored. This relates to the fact that Ives’s thesis is somewhat lost presenting the situation as a ‘mystery’. His intent appears to be to explore why and how Jane Grey gained the throne but the idea and conclusion are somewhat lost. Simply: the presentation/format of the text is not for everyone.
The highlight of “Lady Jane Grey” occurs at Part III when Ives describes the rise and fall of Jane Grey in great detail from Mary’s perspective to the military tactics of Dudley. Ives’s version is one of the better-researched and well-written accounts on the matter and even those readers familiar with events will learn some new facts.
The final chapters of “Lady Jane Grey” focus on the impact of events on Jane and her supporters. The conclusion is notably strong with a look at depictions of Jane in art and media. “Lady Jane Grey” also features annotated notes (well presented) and a section of back-and-white plates.
Even taking complaints into consideration and the stylistic format of “Lady Jane Grey” which may not appeal to all readers; Ives offers a strong and meticulously- researched look at the events of Jane Grey’s ‘reign’. Again, the text is NOT a biography so readers won’t necessarily gain a glimpse into Jane’s psyche but will come away with some new knowledge. “Lady Jane Grey” is recommended for Tudor lovers with some background on the time period.
July 16, 2010
The author believes that Jane was the true heir to Edward VI and Mary Tudor was the rebel who stole her crown. He attempts to make a case that it was legally impossible for either Mary or Elizabeth to inherit the crown because they were both bastards. How he can legally or logically come to this conclusion defies logic and ruins any and all proof he puts forward to substantiate this claim.
He moves one by one through the main characters of the day, trying to justify their actions and how they were acting with only the best interests of crown and country when they pushed an ill, fifteen year old to write a will naming Jane as his heir. The differences in religion between Edward and Mary was truly an important issue to be sure, but the circuitous route that leads Edward to choose Jane defies logic. There were other Protestant family members that were older and better able to rule, rather than a sixteen year old, sheltered girl, ruled by her parents and forced into marriage with one of the most powerful families of the time. An entire branch of the family, the Stuarts, is dismissed out of hand as unable to inherit as well as Jane's mother, who was Henry VIII's niece.
It is an earnest attempt to show a different perspective on a topic that is usually glossed over in history. Jane was certainly a remarkable young woman if Ives is to be believed and England may have been a different place if she had ruled. His initial hypothesis based on the illegitimacy of Mary and Elizabeth is just too much to get past. They BOTH cannot have been illegitimate, despite the conflicting pronouncements of the day stating otherwise and were listed by their father as his heirs if Edward died childless. A valiant effort, but it falls short with this historian.
He moves one by one through the main characters of the day, trying to justify their actions and how they were acting with only the best interests of crown and country when they pushed an ill, fifteen year old to write a will naming Jane as his heir. The differences in religion between Edward and Mary was truly an important issue to be sure, but the circuitous route that leads Edward to choose Jane defies logic. There were other Protestant family members that were older and better able to rule, rather than a sixteen year old, sheltered girl, ruled by her parents and forced into marriage with one of the most powerful families of the time. An entire branch of the family, the Stuarts, is dismissed out of hand as unable to inherit as well as Jane's mother, who was Henry VIII's niece.
It is an earnest attempt to show a different perspective on a topic that is usually glossed over in history. Jane was certainly a remarkable young woman if Ives is to be believed and England may have been a different place if she had ruled. His initial hypothesis based on the illegitimacy of Mary and Elizabeth is just too much to get past. They BOTH cannot have been illegitimate, despite the conflicting pronouncements of the day stating otherwise and were listed by their father as his heirs if Edward died childless. A valiant effort, but it falls short with this historian.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 17, 2013
I'm confused as to how some reviewers don't understand that Jane was the rightful heir according to Edward. According to Henry, Mary was next, this is true. However, given that upon their mothers losing their crowns, both girls were declared illegitimate, it makes sense. Henry included Frances' children in the succession after his daughters, Edward excluded his half-sisters, it seems pretty straight-forward to me.
That aside, I was a bit disappointed in this book. Jane is intriguing, perhaps more so because of how little we know about her. She's also intriguing because of how unimportant she is in the grand scheme of the history of the English monarchy, yet hundreds of years later we still are fascinated by her short life and unnecessary death. But unfortunately the text itself was sluggish in places and that made it hard to continue. Easily could have been finished in a day or two, but just wasn't the quality I'd expect from Ives. Sadly, the book really isn't even about Jane, but the key figures surrounding her. Again, we just don't have a lot of information about her, but the title is quite misleading then in the regard.
That aside, I was a bit disappointed in this book. Jane is intriguing, perhaps more so because of how little we know about her. She's also intriguing because of how unimportant she is in the grand scheme of the history of the English monarchy, yet hundreds of years later we still are fascinated by her short life and unnecessary death. But unfortunately the text itself was sluggish in places and that made it hard to continue. Easily could have been finished in a day or two, but just wasn't the quality I'd expect from Ives. Sadly, the book really isn't even about Jane, but the key figures surrounding her. Again, we just don't have a lot of information about her, but the title is quite misleading then in the regard.
November 4, 2012
Horribly disappointing. Much too technical for my tastes. Some of the pages were one paragraph containing conflicting arguments put forth in tons of various accounts of unimportant points. Ugh. Love the subject, hate the book...
June 14, 2017
I love the Tudor period and have read extensively about the era. Jane Grey is often overlooked as most people are interested in Henry and his 6 wives! I was disappointed with this book. I was expecting a biography of Jane Grey and it wasn't. Its well written but read like a dull history lesson :-(
May 14, 2024
I’ve loved Lady Jane’s story for a long time, and enjoyed learning more about the characters involved, especially her father (Sussex) and father in law (Northumberland) as well as the mystery involved figuring out why the council turned suddenly against her. Well researched.
May 29, 2019
If any past event proves the saying that 'history is written by the winners' the English Succession Crisis of 1553 must surely be it. Traditionally the drama has been presented as follows: the teenage king Edward VI, dying horribly of a mysterious illness, is bullied into cutting out his half sister Mary from the succession and replacing her with his cousin, Lady Jane Grey, by his evil and self-seeking adviser John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, who just happens to be Jane's new father in law. Once Edward finally dies, the commons of England reject Jane and rise up for the rightful queen Mary. The scheming Dudley is overthrown and executed, as is the tragic Jane and her young husband Guildford, albeit a few months later. That's the tale we've all been told but as Eric Ives sets out in this book, it is largely incorrect, a convenient fiction designed to condemn Dudley only and allow everyone else to get away scot free (which they did).
Edward VI, a very zealous Protestant, did not want the Lady Mary, a Catholic who had been declared illegitimate by Parliament, to succeed him as monarch. He therefore did what Henry VIII before him had done and changed the succession to reflect his own wishes. Dudley carried out his orders and certainly saw a chance for his own family, via the marriage of Jane and Guildford, as any Tudor politician would have done. The council and virtually the whole of the english ruling class signed up to support the change but Dudley and Jane's problem was that Mary was still at large when Edward died and she was a well known person to the public as the daughter of Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon whereas Jane was a comparative stranger. Once it was clear that Mary's coup was going to succeed all the rats deserted the sinking ship and Jane would be forced to pay with her life for wearing a crown she never really wanted to begin with.
This book is not really a biography of Jane, though it contains an interesting assessment of her, but more an in depth, absorbing, and at times trenchant analysis of one of the most interesting, and most utterly misrepresented, events in English history. Four stars.
Edward VI, a very zealous Protestant, did not want the Lady Mary, a Catholic who had been declared illegitimate by Parliament, to succeed him as monarch. He therefore did what Henry VIII before him had done and changed the succession to reflect his own wishes. Dudley carried out his orders and certainly saw a chance for his own family, via the marriage of Jane and Guildford, as any Tudor politician would have done. The council and virtually the whole of the english ruling class signed up to support the change but Dudley and Jane's problem was that Mary was still at large when Edward died and she was a well known person to the public as the daughter of Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon whereas Jane was a comparative stranger. Once it was clear that Mary's coup was going to succeed all the rats deserted the sinking ship and Jane would be forced to pay with her life for wearing a crown she never really wanted to begin with.
This book is not really a biography of Jane, though it contains an interesting assessment of her, but more an in depth, absorbing, and at times trenchant analysis of one of the most interesting, and most utterly misrepresented, events in English history. Four stars.
July 18, 2016
If you are looking for a biography of Jane Grey, keep looking. This is not the book you are looking for.
If you are looking for an in-depth analysis of the brief reign of Jane Grey and the events leading up to it, stop. This is the book you are looking for.
This book was an excellent look at the politics and the people who were responsible for putting Jane Grey on the throne for a brief nine-day reign. It should challenge most of what the reader learned in history class and hopefully encourage the reader to take a different view of events.
If you are looking for an in-depth analysis of the brief reign of Jane Grey and the events leading up to it, stop. This is the book you are looking for.
This book was an excellent look at the politics and the people who were responsible for putting Jane Grey on the throne for a brief nine-day reign. It should challenge most of what the reader learned in history class and hopefully encourage the reader to take a different view of events.
April 28, 2017
Very disappointed it was NOT about Jane's life, but about the events and people surrounding Jane's ascend to queenship. I understand they are important too but I wanted a Jane Grey bio, not this.
September 12, 2013
When reading this book it was very apparent to me, what Ives wanted to accomplish. He just didn't get there, if you ask me. His main concern with this book is to establish Jane Grey as the 'true queen' and Mary Tudor as nothing but a usurper. He also goes to great length to rehabilitate John Dudley, making him as much a victim as Lady Jane. Again, I don't feel like he accomplished it.
November 7, 2016
What an enormous mess this book is. The case Ives makes is plausible, but the writing is scattered and the book is poorly organized.
November 2, 2019
If you want to read one (non-fiction) book about Jane Grey, read this one. Eric Ives examines and clears up with many of the popular beliefs about Jane Grey and her family and still delivers a compelling and believable portrayal of the Tudors and this specific period of time.
Especially interesting is the part where Ives explains why Mary and not Jane won the throne: As much as I like Jane: While she had the right parents, religion and John Dudley backing her, Mary had actual supporters. As a rich landowner with many retainers, Mary had, along with her popularity as the king's daughter, the power it takes to become queen. Finally someone dismisses the idea popular in historical fiction that a pretender without means or allies can gain a throne just by claiming "the best" pedigree.
Especially interesting is the part where Ives explains why Mary and not Jane won the throne: As much as I like Jane: While she had the right parents, religion and John Dudley backing her, Mary had actual supporters. As a rich landowner with many retainers, Mary had, along with her popularity as the king's daughter, the power it takes to become queen. Finally someone dismisses the idea popular in historical fiction that a pretender without means or allies can gain a throne just by claiming "the best" pedigree.
December 27, 2016
A superbly crafted account of the life of one of the most tragic Queens; nine day Queen, Jane Grey. I really enjoyed this throughout, it was never dull and Eric Ives writes really well, separating the fact from fiction. He also writes in length about Guildford Dudley, and Mary I, among others that were connected to Jane.
August 18, 2010
Professor Ives makes a case against Mary Tudor for effecting a military coup against her cousin Jane, the rightful queen by decree of Edward VI shortly before his death. Part of the tragedy of Jane's story is that she was almost universally acknowledged by some of the most renowned scholars in Europe as a young girl of exceptional intelligence; one wonders what her intellect could have accomplished as queen. Instead, England got five years of the Marian Persecutions and embroiled in an expensive war in the Netherlands it wanted no part of. (Yet had Jane retained her crown, England would also have never had its Elizabethan Golden Age.) Ives concludes that the execution of Lady Jane was nothing short of an act of judicial murder, likely Mary acting out of panic after Wyatt's Rebellion, in which the object had not even been to restore Jane but to put Elizabeth on the throne.
December 13, 2020
The victors get to write history, and unfortunately Queen Jane, latterly Lady Jane Dudley (nee Grey) doesn’t get a word in edgewise. Until this book. This was good, helping uncover the mystery of the delegitimized Tudor Queen, left off that infamous roster with a dismissive footnote as the “Nine Days’ Queen” (it was actually thirteen). A look at those turbulent two weeks and each of the players involved in her accession, usurpation, and execution later. I found this interesting and illuminating. 3 stars. #bibliophile #book #bookish #booklover #books #books2020 #booksofinstagram #bookstagram #bookworm #goodreads #instabook #instabooks #reader #readers #reading #readersofinstagram #bookreview
September 18, 2010
I was primarily interested in Grey's education and personality. There were excellent chapters on these aspects of her life. Throughout, the book is very conscientious about the conclusions that can be drawn from the few available documents and from the traces left by this remarkable but short life. This care made for convincing arguments about why her reign so quickly crumbled under Mary's challenge. Sometimes this analysis offered more information than I was eager to have (my rating reflects my being more interested in her character than the rebellion, rather than the quality of the research.)
August 19, 2013
It was alright, not of the better stories of Lady Jane's life. My all-time favourite will forever be Innocent Traitor by Allison Weir. There have been several books about the Nine-Days Queen and none of them will ever really do her justice. I believe firmly this little girl would have happily been a prisoner of her great cousin Mary Tudor and been quite content with her books in the tower of London until her last days. But her family, ambitious and useless, revolted against the queen (in Jane's name, while Jane was Mary's prisoner) and Mary was left with no choice but to kill the ex-claimant. Tragic waste of a brilliant mind.
But about the book, well written, good story. A little dull.
But about the book, well written, good story. A little dull.
March 10, 2021
It's a shame. I wanted to love this book. I admire Eric Ives' work generally, but this book is not his best. For one, it's mistitled - this is not a book about Lady Jane Grey, it's a book about the 1553 succession crisis. Less than half of the chapters have anything to do with Jane Grey, since Eric Ives uses most of the page count to attempt to exonerate the Duke of Northumberland instead.
And it's a shame. Jane utterly vanishes here, as in life, overshadowed first by her parents, then by Northumberland, and finally by her own tragedy. Between those three things, as well as a great deal of time dedicated to Edward VI and Mary I, there's not much room left for Jane herself.
And it's a shame. Jane utterly vanishes here, as in life, overshadowed first by her parents, then by Northumberland, and finally by her own tragedy. Between those three things, as well as a great deal of time dedicated to Edward VI and Mary I, there's not much room left for Jane herself.
June 23, 2019
The story of Jane Grey is unique, the 9 days Queen as she was named. Proclaimed Queen by her cousin Edward, in order to leave his sisters Mary and Elizabeth out of succession. The plot went wrong and after 9 days, Mary I reached London with her supporters and removed Jane. Also, she looked Jane and her husband in the Tower for months and then executed them. Jane Grey was a victim of the politics of the times, poor girl. The problem with this book is that it contains too much information and letters and it gets boring. Better read Innocent Traitor by Alison Weir
December 27, 2009
Not an easy read but it had some interesting facts in it.
March 1, 2013
This is an essential book for anyone interested in Tudor history--and mystery! I'm using it to fill in blanks in my Tudor mystery series: http://sarahkennedybooks.wordpress.com
July 4, 2024
I liked this one; it starts out by saying Jane Grey was the rightful queen of England and Mary rebelled and usurped her, which is a bold start to a book about this debacle (we all know who 'won' in the end and have often built our ideas accordingly) and I respect that. It made me want to keep reading and see where the author took it.
This book supports the idea that Edward took a leading role in making the new succession plan - some accounts have viewed him as little more than a puppet but for the time and given that he's the king he'd be viewed as if not quite an adult then very close to it. He does seem to have been quite precocious in matters of religion (even a bit of a fanatic) and even is we assume children didn't 'age faster in those days' a fifteen year old is not a nine year old and they're quite capable of coming up with their own ideas and sticking to them.
Henry VIII had set up the idea that a king could just name any heir he chose, but when a king is dead his word no longer has any power, and while the 'bloodline' monarchy idea is nonsense it's a nonsense people have to believe for the idea to work - Henry and Edward were making it a bit too obvious that a hereditary monarch has no logical basis for their power and may as well be chosen at random.
The argument that Edward simply ignored Mary and Elizabeth as potential heirs because they were illegitimate is an interesting notion, but that section felt like it was ignoring the elephant in the room of how far Edward's plan went in attempting to avoid a female successor, which Ives had only just pointed out, and of course Mary was doubly-troublesome in Edward's eyes for being both a woman and a Catholic. So I'm not convinced either he or anyone else was primarily worried about setting a precedent that illegitimate children could inherit.
(The other elephant in the room is that everyone knows full well that Mary and Elizabeth weren't illegitimate in the same way someone like Henry Fitzroy was. King Henry might have convinced himself he was never married to Catherine of Aragon, but asking the population of England to just forget her twenty years as queen and play along with the "let's pretend that Mary was born out of wedlock" is another matter, isn't it?)
Jane herself comes across as intelligent, strong-minded, and quite dogmatic about her faith. She died not so much for things she did as for her potential role as a figurehead for rebellion against Mary, who was initially keen to spare Jane as an innocent party exploited by others.
The book felt quite academic but I already knew about this dramatic little episode, am not sure if it'd be as readable to someone entirely new to it all. If you're looking for strictly a biography of Jane Grey this wouldn't be ideal either it spends a lot of time on the other important players like John Dudley and Mary I. Some things I hadn't seen touched on in other books, like the importance of Mary's role as a landlord in the south-east of England when it came to standing her ground and trying to raise an army of her own, and that people and towns didn't always choose based just on religious denomination as there were other concerns at work to like personal loyalty, and that Mary was purposely vague about her plans for religious change when seeking support for her claim to the throne.
This book supports the idea that Edward took a leading role in making the new succession plan - some accounts have viewed him as little more than a puppet but for the time and given that he's the king he'd be viewed as if not quite an adult then very close to it. He does seem to have been quite precocious in matters of religion (even a bit of a fanatic) and even is we assume children didn't 'age faster in those days' a fifteen year old is not a nine year old and they're quite capable of coming up with their own ideas and sticking to them.
Henry VIII had set up the idea that a king could just name any heir he chose, but when a king is dead his word no longer has any power, and while the 'bloodline' monarchy idea is nonsense it's a nonsense people have to believe for the idea to work - Henry and Edward were making it a bit too obvious that a hereditary monarch has no logical basis for their power and may as well be chosen at random.
The argument that Edward simply ignored Mary and Elizabeth as potential heirs because they were illegitimate is an interesting notion, but that section felt like it was ignoring the elephant in the room of how far Edward's plan went in attempting to avoid a female successor, which Ives had only just pointed out, and of course Mary was doubly-troublesome in Edward's eyes for being both a woman and a Catholic. So I'm not convinced either he or anyone else was primarily worried about setting a precedent that illegitimate children could inherit.
(The other elephant in the room is that everyone knows full well that Mary and Elizabeth weren't illegitimate in the same way someone like Henry Fitzroy was. King Henry might have convinced himself he was never married to Catherine of Aragon, but asking the population of England to just forget her twenty years as queen and play along with the "let's pretend that Mary was born out of wedlock" is another matter, isn't it?)
Jane herself comes across as intelligent, strong-minded, and quite dogmatic about her faith. She died not so much for things she did as for her potential role as a figurehead for rebellion against Mary, who was initially keen to spare Jane as an innocent party exploited by others.
The book felt quite academic but I already knew about this dramatic little episode, am not sure if it'd be as readable to someone entirely new to it all. If you're looking for strictly a biography of Jane Grey this wouldn't be ideal either it spends a lot of time on the other important players like John Dudley and Mary I. Some things I hadn't seen touched on in other books, like the importance of Mary's role as a landlord in the south-east of England when it came to standing her ground and trying to raise an army of her own, and that people and towns didn't always choose based just on religious denomination as there were other concerns at work to like personal loyalty, and that Mary was purposely vague about her plans for religious change when seeking support for her claim to the throne.
October 31, 2021
Another thorough masterpiece by Eric Ives. Jane Grey is usually overlooked in favour of her other Tudor relatives and this book offers readers the chance to familiarize themselves with a detailed account of Jane's short life. Her last days made a significant impact on the image of Jane as a Protestant martyr, whereas her nine days as queen do not provide us with sufficient evidence to judge whether she could have made an accomplished leader. Praised for her scholarly mind and devotion to the reformed religion, she became one more victim of the political machinations of the Tudor court. Even though she is not often recognised as one of the English monarchs, her story continues to inspire and fascinate history enthusiasts.
June 29, 2020
An original take - Eric Ives looks past the stereotypes of Jane Grey's story to present a number of points that complicate the standard narrative of martyrdom and tyranny, based on the primary sources. The only negative about the book is that it focuses far more on John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, and his part in Edward VI's government/putting Jane on the throne. That's understandable, as a huge part of the Jane Grey mythos is that he was a power-seeking mastermind who forced everyone else to go along with her succession against the natural law of inheritance, but it's also a bit of a letdown when you expect a book to spend most of its time exploring the title person.
November 7, 2017
I think a "cast of characters" list and an author's chronology would have helped. I used the end notes consistently, as well as the bibliography [which should have been annotated], but I kept getting lost in the details of the chronology of what the author was arguing vs what others had written. A "closing" argument summing up the author's idea [Jane as legitimate successor, Mary as usurper] would've helped, too, while the section on everything afterwards [publications/plays/movies/etc] would have worked better as an appendix.
February 14, 2020
Ives lives up to his academic reputation. Lady Jane Grey is very much a mystery to this day, surrounded by myth and legend - someone even saw me reading this and commented on how beautiful Jane was said to be. Over the centuries developed the image of a beautiful passive virgin martyr - realistically we know little about Jane. I really enjoyed the structure of this book. Ives uses facts logically to come to conclusions that are very reasonable. This isn’t light reading or a popular history biography but it is highly rated for a reason.
January 14, 2022
A well-researched book, but I do think there were many errors and weak arguments throughout. My biggest issue is Ives claiming Jane was born in the spring of 1537 based on Banks’ letter and another piece of evidence. The actual letter mentions how she was as a person by age 16, not her actual death age, which was actually 17, based on Florio’s account. Some parts of this book were unnecessary, such as a full chapter dedicated to Mary I. In all, this was more of a biography about the world around Jane instead of the girl herself.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 30, 2022
I bought this thinking it was a historical novel. Surprise, it is a well researched and written narrative of the "nine days" queen. He debunks lots of theories as to exactly what happened with historical records and corrects a lot of myths, explaining why her story has remained so popular. For the real history buff, otherwise you may find it overly tedious and detailed. I enjoyed it.
August 21, 2022
Eric Ives was (he unfortunately passed away some time ago) a top-notch Tudor scholar. This books goes a long way towards clearing up many misconceptions surrounding Lady Jane Grey as well as John Dudley.
July 8, 2024
I liked how it's not generally a narrative, and there are large sections discussing and evaluating the relative reliability of the sources, and what we know vs what is conjecture vs what is pure fantasy. It's neat!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews