Sadly PG is that popular.  Or at least she is where I live.  I was in the bookstore the other day and they’d already sold most of their new stock of her re-released books.  And they’d only had that display for less than two weeks so someone's buying her work.

I saw the same post on Tudor Tutor facebook page, and was shocked by people's comments. It seems people are still taking PG (and Weir) as authorities on the subject of Tudor history when they are not. I shall return to banging my head and pulling my hair out!

As for Thomas Boleyn, he has become the villian of the worst kind: the father who pimps out his daughters, which there is no hard evidence to support this theory. Do I agree with Joanne Denny's version of Thomas? No? Do I buy into the pop culture version of him? No. I feel, like Anne and George, Thomas has been defamed, ridiculed, and people have accepted a negative vesion of him. From my reading, Thomas was a complex man. Anne was certainly his daughter, and I feel he was very much like Ives's definition of Anne. For me, Thomas was “religious yet aggressive, calculating yet emotional, with the light touch of the courtier yet the strong grip of the politician” (pg. 359). Perhaps someday, Thomas's image will be better examined, and a portrait of a great Tudor man will emerge. Until then, I hope people will look beyond PG and Weir to discover the real historians who bring Tudor history to life.

I must apologize as it is the “The Boleyn Inheritance and Historical Recommendations” discussion forum. They don't really “praise” PG, but they seem to have read her. The first one does say that they wonder why PG hates Anne Boleyn so much.

Anything opinion, judgment or anything else I don't believe would ever interest me in a PG book again, and it took me only half of “The Other Boleyn Girl” that I put it down one third of the way through, and was sorry that I had bought all the copies I had bought at booktraders, and at least was able to take them all back (where I later explained they were all gone and the lady told me that anything by her immediately sold) and get some credit to by a few books that I would enjoy on my own without having to pay more money again. My undergraduate degree is in European History with a concentration on the Renaissance and Reformation, and my almost obsession with Anne Boleyn when I was 8 and saw the BBC series with Glenda Jackson that made me put down her book. It and all her others are nothing but plain garbage as historical fiction. She absolutely should be on the strictly fiction list. Thank you so very much again. Wileswales

Thank you,

Claire, I agree that the Countess of Worcester might have been that person. Every part of an interrogation in those days was not written down in total completion, so I agree that there is no evidence to malign Jane, but she was questioned much, much longer than anyone else, and who knows what happened with Cromwell in that room. Even though Mark Smeaton, was “probably tortured,” there is no evidence to the fact that he might have been. I wrote one paper in college titled, “In Defense of Anne Boleyn,” and had stacks of books, and scholarly articles found in “Historical Abstracts,” (these were the old day of the 80's when one had to do all the leg work and research year by year, and the HOPE that the periodical cited and supposedly held in a library that size would be there, and then have to bring the correct change to copy it, most of it, not for the works cited, information, but for the source volume number, works cited for the peer reviewed/refereed work that was involved. I could go on and on, but I think most of your members know about what I am speaking. My professor was so impressed that he pressed me to go for an MA in European history (speaking which the concentration in the Renaissance and Reformation were enough, and PG is now into Georgian England. I ended up going for an MA in Library and Information Science and then post graduate studies, and over 15 hours of postgraduate work after that.

All that being said, (and not to brag, but to back up what is was written and research for that paper alone, and to mention PG and her lack of education, and her ridiculous claim of being an historian, ugh!) Mark was most likely tortured and/or was promised life is he confessed. It could be either/or, but Jane was in there a lot longer than the Countess. Why? We don't have any real concrete evidence. Then, after her husband being put to death for incest, she aids Catherine Howard? Then she ends up dying on the block as well. It's a little too coincidental to me. Cromwell loved Lady Rochford after Anne's execution in on that day in May of 1536.

Any suggestions about PG on her latest as an historian? Suggestions on this post are most welcome as well. That's why I LOVE this site. I didn't mean to off on my education, but I did it for the sake of PG being an historian, going into Georgian England (and as a member of Sons of the American Revolution I know just enough about George III to be dangerous, and that's it), and now into to other things. I don't think professors at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Oxford, any Rhodes Scholar, etc. are taking her seriously either. This is making me laugh.

Once again please feel more than free to add, slash, or whatever to this post. The point is education, and discussion about PG. Thank you very much, WilesWales

Hi everyone, I'm new 🙂 I was just looking around the forum and was having a chuckle at the passionate loathing for Philippa Gregory.

I don't mind her books.  I've read all of her Tudor books and the Cousins War books now, I didn't really enjoy all of them, but they're an easy read. I like that she picks obscure historical characters. As a bookseller I know that when books like this become popular they promote sales of other authors books, which is a good thing (booksellers like to see books selling)  Serious readers will want to research further, there's not much help for people who want to read one book and decide it's completely factual, they were never going to go out and study the matter.

She's got a huge fan-base, obviously, who are going to read her new book, and David Baldwin and Michael Jones are going to pick up some interested readers and sell more books. It's the sort of thing that gets new books published and old ones reprinted. Whether or not she's the devil, she does good for the book industry and for readers by getting more books published.

I haven't read her latest book actually. The fifty-page waffling introduction has put me off I'm also not disputing she shouldn't pose as a Historian. They call her Dr. Gregory in the latest book.

I had never read much on Tudor History bar Starkey's Six Wives and Elizabeth before I read a Philippa Gregory book. After reading her books I started making a list from the bibliographies and looking on the net, and now I have a very large lists of books I want to buy. So, I still think she can get people interested in Tudor history *shrug* it's not a bad thing when people can discover a whole wealth of information that's available, especially as our book shops here (Australia) tend to only stock Weir or Starkey.

I wanted to mention one last thing. I have several books on Anne Boleyn yet left to read, but also because of Katharine of Aragon and “The Great Divorce,” I learned of a new historical fiction novel about Katharine's older sister, Queen Juana. It is called The Last Queen: A Novel, by C.W. Gortner from the New College of California, and has taught university courses on women of power in the Renaissance. I will be reading that as I read the other books I have received through “Books by Mail.” Thank you, once again!

Although I did purchase her back catalogue myself in paperback, I have to confess I now get my Philippa Gregory books sent from the publisher as review copies, I would have a hard time paying $30 or $45. I am very lucky not to have to pay for them lol.

We don't really see her much on TV here so I wasn't aware she was swanning about posing as a historian. Wiki says she has a doctorate in 17th century literature actually, I'm not sure I haven't really looked at her website a lot.

Thank you for the book recommendations I'm going to start a seperate thread asking for some, I hope you'll come along and give me some more. I don't know a lot about Juana of Castile, I have seen her mentioned a fair bit, and yes, that she was mad.

Okay, I got and not from Wikipedia or Simon and Schuster either. She did graduate from the University of Sussex in History (could not find emphasis), and went to the National Council for the Training of Journalists at Cardoff (sp?), she also received her P.h.D. from the University of Edinburgh in 18th Century Literature, and worked as a journalist for “Portsmouth News,” and was journalist and producer at BBC Radio. So journalism is where she learned to shamelessly promote herself. 

Her first book was “Wideacre(s?)” and was a world-wide bestseller. This is when she became a full-time writer.

With the publishing of “The Other Boleyn Girl,” this is what transpired:

“The flowering of this new style was undoubtedly The Other Boleyn Girl, a runaway best-seller which stormed the US market and then went worldwide telling the story of the little-known sister to Anne Boleyn. Now published in 26 countries with more than a million copies in print in the US alone, this is becoming a classic historical novel, winning the Parker Pen Novel of the Year award 2002, and the Romantic Times fictional biography award.”

As I said, it is common for P.h.D's to add their titles to their names at the end of their names, but be called “Dr.” in the collegiate atmosphere, where she no longer is, and hasn't been since graduation in 18th Century Literature (I don't know what kind of literature, as even Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy's Bachelor's degree was in French Literature, and my B.A. in European History with an emphasis in the Renaissance and Reformation, etc.). So calling herself “Dr.” to promote a book with two other P.h.D's is inappropriate at best. To put P.h.D. after her name would be correct. In other words, she is deliberately misleading the public, as the public is generally not aware of these things, alas…Thank you for bearing with me, but her biographies in most sources are sketchy.

Thank you for the compliment! I was going from one site to another and making notes on her education and background, and a lot and most of them were newspapers and such with interviews with her. I avoided them.

I did hear when I was a member of Tudor Wiki that “The Red Queen” was better than “The White Queen.” After, though, reading about a third of “The Other Boleyn Girl,” and discovered it was nothing but almost all pure conjecture and more fiction than historical fiction, I had no respect for her writing, nor for her style either. I guess what sells sells. It was like when I lived in South Beach (Miami Beach) that “The Miami Herald” introduced the same issue each day in Spanish, I was outraged. I was enlightened when I was told that even though English is the national language, the sales went way up and they still, I believe print it today that way today.

I started out reading historical fiction without realizing it when I started to read “The Tudor Rose,” by Margaret Campbell. It is about Elizabeth of York, and I didn't think anyone had ever written a biography on her (she is also the Queen on at least two of the four queens on a deck of cards). It was great, and how she felt about being the real heir to the throne and marrying Henry II after Margaret Beufort encouraged her and thus united the Plantagenet and Tudor roses on Bosworth field in 1485.

So I thought after all the “hype,” about “The Other Boleyn Girl” that I went and snatched all of Phillpa's books from the bookstore. Can you realize how I felt when I put “The Other Boleyn Girl” down, and returned all the others after skimming through them? Utter and complete disapointment, dismay, and discouraged would top the list.

I love the “thread” you found, and love it.

I am, after your recommendation going to order the book from the library if only to read about Elizabeth Woodville. Born a commoner and married Edward IV, and what a character. I do remember you saying how you felt after the 50 page introduction, so we'll see!

Also, thank you for mentioning the fact that most historians don't mention their titles, etc. It is usually a matter of choice, but in wanting to sell on the mass market, it's most likely better if they don't. I do think they got in with Philippa for the money, and who wouldn't? From what you tell me, they do write with accuracy.

Forgive me for the long reply, and thank you very much!