In my personal opinion, I think all royals (particularly royals in bygone eras) are raging narcissists. You have to be to believe it's your god-given right to rule over others. Some royals balance this out with other qualities, such as intelligence or charm, so their narcissism doesn't seem as a flaw so much as necessary to maintain their rule. Enter Henrietta Maria, a royal princess who has all the narcissism of her kind but none of the positive traits to offset this. Conceited, short-sighted, selfish, and unintelligent, Henrietta Maria is not the sole reason why the English monarchy briefly lost its hold or why Charles I lost his head, but she certainly didn't help matters. This is her story.

Born as the baby of the French royal family, Henrietta Maria is able to get away with dodging lessons and instead listening to gossip. From her early years, she is seen as loyal and earnest with her friendships, and this is something she maintains throughout her life. It's probably her only redeeming quality, but it's not something that's given to just anyone. When she first marries Charles I, she is horrified with English culture, and she publicly expresses her distaste. A lot of this is due the difference in religion between her French Catholicism and the English Protestantism, but we'll get to that. Every time Henrietta doesn't get her way, she throws a tantrum like a child. For awhile, Charles I is able to stand up to her, but he needs someone with a stronger will to depend on. So, when his other friends die, he starts to lean on his wife more and more. They quarrel less because he appeases her, though she has learned some restraint in her later years, and you can see where this is going.

The English have a thing with religion. It's their way or the highway, whichever way that is. When Henrietta Maria comes in and tries to convert everyone to Catholicism, she becomes extremely unpopular. However, her religion is so ingrained in her that she cannot conceive of a life without it. She even forgoes being crowned queen, which even her own advisors told her was ridiculous, because the ceremony would be Protestant. Religion is her major sticking point, and she eventually drives everyone away from her because she cannot bend even a little bit.

A lot of other readers have said Henrietta is unlikeable or that she never grows, but how many real people do we know who are like this? How many of us cling to our beliefs, especially as we get older? I'm not defending Henrietta for being a bigot or toxic. I'm merely saying she's still interesting to read about, and she does have some positive traits. As I mentioned earlier, she's affectionate and loyal. She has quite the backbone, and she's willing to undergo harsh treatment and circumstances for her goal, such as fleeing captivity in the middle of the night and crossing the English Channel multiple times to help her husband. She's not a good person, but neither is she irredeemable. She's who she is, which since she's a real person, is all you can ask for.

The book is a fascinating portrayal of Western Europe at a time of great upheaval. Marie de Medici, Charles II, Louis XIV, Anne of Austria, and many other notable figures make an appearance. Really, it's an interesting portrayal of women in the royal sphere. Not all of them are Elizabeths or Eleanors, but royal women hold a special type of power, and that is on full display here with the many powerful women who Henrietta comes in contact with. It's a really fun and intriguing book, and I recommend it for history lovers who don't mind an anti-heroine. ( )

Once again, my favorite author, Jean Plaidy didn't disappoint. This was the first book that I read about Henrietta Maria and I found her fascinating. Her love for Charles I was unique in that most royal marriages that are arranged do not develop into true love. Theirs did and their devotion to one another was inspiring. jean's writing style is fluent, with lots of dialogue, which I love. A most enjoyable read. ( )

This was ok.
The POC are described in racist and xenophobic ways. Probably period appropriate but off putting.
I loathe the audiobook narrators. ( )

So I love reading Jean Plaidy books and am always eager to read her historical fictions.

However, for this book, I was disappointed. OK, maybe Henrietta Maria was such an obnoxious and single minded person in real life that it would be hard for any author to portray them in a positive life. or maybe the author did such a wonderful job of portraying Henrietta Maria that we truly believe that this is really who she was.

Henrietta Maria is such a spoiled and obnoxious princess that should never have left France. After everything that she has been through (the religious reform, the issue of her Catholic background, etc), she still doesn't learn her lesson and constantly pushes her views and religious learnings on everyone around her.

Always too eager to trust those who aren't trustworthy, stubbornly clinging to her Catholic upbringing despite the murmurs against her and being a down right brat when things don't go her way (from spoiled rotten Princess to ungrateful Queen). Ugh! Henrietta Maria is very, very hard to like and it got downright grating and unbearable to continue reading about her life.

Honestly, I enjoyed reading more about Charles II, Minette and everyone else except Henrietta Maria and Charles I. Truthfully, both of them are so boring bland that I could not wait for the book to end. ( )

Although I’m quite familiar with the history of Charles I, his wife Queen Henriette Marie was little known to me before reading this fiction-based-on-fact account of her life.

She’s connected to numerous famous royal personages from the French Bourbon monarchy and the English/Scottish house of Stuart, with her father being one of – if not *the* – greatest of France’s kings, namely Henry IV, making her sister to Louis XIII and nephew to Louis XIV, while Henriette was of course wife of England’s Charles I, mother of Charles II and James II, and grandmother of Mary II and Queen Anne.

As an individual, I found Henriette hard to sympathise with. As a child she comes across as a spoiled brat. As a young woman she becomes a fanatical Catholic, determined to impose her beliefs on others, making difficulties for her husband the king, who loves her despite her faults. As she grows older Henriette becomes increasingly annoying, interfering in other people’s life, even estranging herself from one of her children through her own bullheadedness.

It’s arguable that Henriette’s influence on Charles I led to his downfall, or at least hastened it. I’ve always been a Royalist sympathiser, having little respect for Cromwell and the absurdly fanatical Puritans, thus I believe what happen to King Charles was unjust in all respects.

As for the book on the whole, I thought it was pretty good, featuring few lulls. Only two criticisms come to mind, one of which being the author not “postmarking” the years when events take place, which at times prove confusing. Many historical authors will start new chapters with the year in the heading, sometimes including the month or even the day, which helps this reader at least fix myself easier into the story.

Jean Plaidy, on the other hand, tends to feature long chapters that start, say, with a character aged seven, but out of the blue she’ll suddenly state something like, “I was ten years old by this time.” This often results in me having to readjust, as I’ve been picturing the character at a certain age, also thinking, for example, that it’s 1637 when it’s been 1640 for the last three pages.

The other criticism I have, which applies to many of this author’s works, is that she has a habit of including prophesies in her stories. This one has far too many. I find this annoying, as it seems highly unlikely that people can predict future events so exactly. Okay, I realise that sometimes these things did happen, but I think it spoils a story just the same. It’s like injecting a touch of the supernatural into a tale that should feel as real to life as possible.

Whenever any author has a character’s future prophesied the reader knows that whatever is predicted will happen. I can’t think of a book where it hasn’t, thus the author isn’t being clever, but is instead spoiling what’s to come, eliminating any suspense. Much of the prophesied events in this tale were known tom me, thus it didn’t give anything away, though it did irritate me. It’s like watching a film for the first time with someone who’s previously seen it and they keep telling what’s going to happen next. Not good.

But apart from these two aspects that I dislike about this author, Jean Plaidy remains one of my favourite writers, as her good points far outweigh the bad. Her research is always thorough, creating a strong plot, while she aptly brings real people from bygone days back to life with superb characterisation. ( )