Part of me wants to give 4 stars for the absolute brilliance of Fraser's research into these women's lives, and the other part of me wants to give 3 1/2 stars for the writing style. I think, though, that the importance of the meticulous research she has done merits 4 stars. And I've read other books by Lady Antonia and the research she has done still rattles around in my brain.

She begins with the history of both Cleopatra and Boudica (heroically "Boadicea") as the earliest examples of women who led their nations in wartime, and how they as warriors fulfilled Goddess imagery in their respective cultures. Her research into Boudica forms the main narrative for how warrior queens are remembered and changed by history. Lady Antonia also pulls together Syndromes (archetypes) to show how women who lead are viewed by their contemporaries and by history: Voracity, Shame, Appendage, Figurehead are examples.

What little we do know about the historical Boudica comes from the writings of Tacitus and Dio Cassius and, interestingly enough, from modern era excavations starting in 1915 of a "red layer" attesting to the burning of Londinium from the time of Boudica and the Iceni wars with the Romans. Fraser then continues with her research into Matilda, Maud, Zenobia, Catherine the Great, and the other women warriors with the legend of Boadicea as her backdrop. Which is a good way to tie the history together with a common thread, instead of having a thousand years and a host of countries and disparate lives.

The distracting part of reading this book, again, is the writing style. Lady Antonia can tell a straightforward tale as she does with Cleopatra and Boudica; she seems to fill an inner need by making asides and references within sentences again and again, thus filling in pages with writing but failing to advance Story as a whole. And maps - when will book publishers insist on maps when geographical locations are as varied as they are here? ( )

I’m not 100% sure how I feel about this book. The writing was okay, and it was a decent read. However, I just . . . don’t know how to feel. It’s nice that these women were discussed in one book as “warrior” leaders, but I definitely think that the title is a little misleading. I thought it was interesting how Fraser started out with looking at figures like Boudicca and then transitioned to real life women. However, there were too many times where I was just sitting, reading, and . . . confused. ( )

just not very interesting.i am losing interest in Fraser. ( )

I liked the information about the warrior queens - but the obsession of Boadicea, referenced in every chapter, often randomly, really made this book annoying. I get that she is the epitome of what a warrior queen should be, but with scant facts about her, and only one sided information, it got old fast.

Second, queens from non-europe was not featured as much as they should be - we have a queen from Africa and Asia, and I found these a lot more interesting than the rest of the queens. The writing is a bit dry, but British, and I suspect the information is well researched. Overall, a decent introduction into the subject, but I suspect there are better books on the subject. ( )

I finished Fraser's truly awful Warrior Queens today. She jumps back and forth between time periods constantly, keeps trying to relate every woman she writes about to Boudica and her legend, is in love with her own lame terminology, and dedicates a lot of ink to speculation. I can't even say that I trust her research since in chapter 14 she calls Pocahontas "a member of the Sioux tribe": I don't have words enough to say how wrong this statement is.*

Avoid this one at all costs.


*Seriously, it's like saying Eleanor of Aquitaine was Polish. ( )