Synopsis: We all know the story of Henry VIII, the man who created a religious schism for the sake of divorce. A man desperate for a son he had six wives. Henry VIII had only one son in his life, Edward VI, and this is his story...
Edward ascended to the throne of England at just nine years old and became the last male of the House of Tudor, dying at the young age of fifteen under somewhat dubious circumstances. Was it poison or tuberculous? Was Edward’s half-sister, Bloody Mary, the murderer?
In The Murder of Edward VI, readers follow castle intrigue through the eyes of Richard Barton, a fictional protagonist who takes part in the events of the period. What starts as a story of King Henry’s desperate efforts to obtain a healthy male heir ends in murders.
The premise is the murder of Edward VI, son and heir of Henry VIII of England, with events being recounted by one Sir Richard Barton, a confidant of Henry.
After suffering a number of illnesses, in January 1553 Edward became seriously ill with fever, progressive weakness, and shortness of breath. He was troubled by a persistent cough, his legs swelled so severely that he had to lie on his back. He became increasingly worse and died in July 1553. At his autopsy, two large “putrefied ulcers” were found in his lungs. His physicians declared that he had died of consumption, which has been interpreted as tuberculosis. The truth is we will never know for sure whether it was tuberculosis or not. But we do know it was a long, painful and excruciating death.
This is a fictional work and one in which the author has admittedly taken many liberties with the facts. It is speculative history, positing an alternate or plausable scenario for an historical event that may have been shrouded in a bit of mystery. Sometimes it works - sometimes it doesn't. Unfortunately, this didn't.
The plot - the alleged murder of Edward VI - was a good start. However, it was in the execution (pardon the pun) of the storytelling that I think a good idea became quite lost. We begin with the imprisoned Barton retelling the tale of how he came to be in this predicament to William Cecil, Chief Minister of Elizabeth I.
" ... years of confinement have made it difficult .. to distinguish between that which is real and that which is imagined, or even to correctly recall events in the sequence of time in which they occurred ... "
The first line of the synopsis says "we all know the story". Unfortunately, we spend far too much time in the court / reign of Henry VIII laboriously retelling this known story before we get anyway near the murder plot (page 357 out of 408). I am fairly certain that the narrative of the preceding thirteen chapters could have been condensed and then the final chapters expanded to reveal more of the "plot" and courtly intrigue.
The detailed accounts of the fictional Barton's time in Calais, in Rome sparring with Pope Clement VII, and as a witness to the political skirmishes between Henry and his chief ministers could and should have been seriously condensed. A simple couple of chapters of background and then get into it from the birth of Edward. This period, where the plot against Edward by Mary was to be manifested, should have been given more page time - and here the "castle intrigue through the eyes of Richard Barton" should really have started to take shape and formalise. It was claimed that upon his succession, Edward kept a diary which upon reading, "... portrays him as cold, unfeeling and uncompromising – a dangerous blend of traits that might have hardened into tyranny if he had lived ..." (source: History Extra). But Edward's reign, including his relationship with his sisters Mary and Elizabeth, is merely glossed over until he is presented to us on his deathbed.
In addition, I did not feel that the Marta narrative necessary, nor did I find the Catherine / Mary narrative convincing. Then we skip over the succession of Lady Jane Grey - which was okay - and then onto Mary's quest for the throne. Just what our narrator - who passes himself off as a loyal supporter of Henry and Edward - was doing at this time in unknown until he comes before an "angry, aggressive, bitter" Mary, and ends up in the tower.
Back to the present, Barton finally tells Cecil what exactly it was that he knew of Edward's death. Barton laments "... she got all of use, just as she promised her mother she would, everyone who had ever harmed her mother or stood between Mary and the throne was dead .."
I just really did not bond with Barton - I didn't find him a credible character, and could not understand why he - and not one of the many other confidants of Henry VIII - would be included in the cabal of Henry, Cramner and Wolsey, especially concerning the activities of the Star Chamber. Even Cecil doubts Barton's character and involvement! I wasn't a fan of the structure of the narrative which really let down what could have been a more engaging story.
Those who liked the TV Series, "The Tudors" and are fine with a generous amount of artistic license may like this - but I would suggest doing so with a very open mind. For the purists, maybe not.
