the Mind of Thomas Cromwell
931111
"Wolf Hall: a Novel" delves into the period of English history that coincides with the remarkable rise of Thomas Cromwell, and the decline and fall of the other Thomas, surnamed Moore.  The book is a cut above many of the novels written about the period.  It is not a romance, although Ill-fated Ann Boleyn ultimate seduction of Henry VIII is vividly brought to life as are the discarded, still popular Queen Kathryn and the Princess Mary.  Yet the character that is most vividly brought to life is Thomas Cramer, his probable motivation and his fears.  Whether completely accurate historically or simply a fiction, he lives and breathes in these pages.
The author's style takes some getting used to, but once one grasps it, the beauty of the written word shines through.
3273300
Very well written, keeps the many people and events straight, totally spell binding. Flows very well, could not put it down.
Good insight into the major ideas driving those times. Great entertainment, and I learned a lot. Thomas Cromwell is the central character, and becomes very much part of the readers universe..
3701280
The best part is the compelling accuracy of the historical figure Thomas Cromwell and his "boss" Henry the eighth of England. Between the two of these historical figures They literally changed in many significant ways the history of England which I ultimately had a huge impact on the United States.
4598182
The book is both an overview of religious developments among the English in the 16th and 17th century and an examination of the extremist thought of Roger Williams, a Separatist-Puritan who came to the Massachusetts Bay colony in 1631. Religion in England had transitioned from Roman Catholicism to the Protestant Church of England to the Puritans by the end of the 16th century. The Separatist-Puritans were unwilling to compromise with elements of the Church of England and were forced to emigrate either to Holland or the New World. Key concerns were the inclusion of both believers and lesser believers and the administration of sacraments to all, as well as a priestly hierarchy.

Williams, in his insistence on enforcing a purist interpretation of Separatist-Puritan principles, incurred the disfavor of all varieties of Puritans in New England and as a consequence was forced to relocate several times before being banned from Massachusetts Bay. He ended up in Rhode Island as a relatively young man, but the author gives no indication of how his life proceeded from that point on.

Williams questioned the legitimacy of self-selected, so-called elected, individuals to form churches and elect ministers. In addition, he disagreed that a civil government formed by a people ruled by divine right. What was the process whereby God extended authorization and legitimacy, he asked. His views undercut the Massachusetts General Court, which took on the responsibility of enforcing religious standards in the colony along with the ministers. According to Williams, a civil government was only about protecting the bodies and property of subjects. While fundamental morality was also of concern to governments in so far as immorality affected community peace, enforcing religion interfered with liberty of conscience concerning religion. In other words, religion could not be coerced. It was these fundamental views as well as his criticisms of practices within churches that exasperated authorities sufficiently to exclude him from the colony.

The author gives high marks to Williams as an uncompromising thinker. But with Williams there seems to be a fine line between intellectual integrity and self-indulgent nit-picking. As a religious man, where was he going with his view that no true churches existed or his idea that ministers could not preach to the unconverted? On the other hand, his ideas of separation of church and state were remarkable for the times. The author perhaps should have paid more attention to the practicalities of Williams' unfettered thinking. In this era of inclusion and acceptance, Puritan exclusiveness and rigidities are hard to grasp. This book helps.
4795521
A summary of the review on StrategyPage. Com:

'Prof. Riley (Kings College London), a retired British general, gives us a very interesting look at a long forgotten campaign, one which saw the last elements of Cromwells New Model Army take the field alongside Royalist troops to fight for Portugal against Spain in the name of the recently restored Charles II. Its a tale of tough campaigning, grueling marches, hard fighting, bureaucratic neglect, and more that reduced the small army from 3,500 men to 1,000, few of whom ever saw England again. As he tells this story, Riley touches upon the conduct of war in the period, and at times makes comparisons with later English campaigns in Portugal and Spain. Despite its rather obscure subject, this lively, well written account will prove interesting reading for any armchair general.'

For the full review, see StrategyPage. Com
3560275
This was a bloody and violent period of history and it shows. It is an interesting juxtaposition if you have read WOLF HALL and the other books on Thomas Cromwell. There is another interesting element in the end of the Plantanget line as a part of the aristocracy. The family did continue as commoners and even Labor Party members trace their family history to these folks.
3559002
Growing up in England, I've enjoyed many historical accounts and dramatizations of Henry VIII's reign, but this is the first in which Thomas Cromwell - architect of Anne Boleyn's downfall - is portrayed by Mark Rylance, through measured speech and subtle body language, as a complex thinker who attempted to balance a complex spectrum of royal emotions, the Church and the savage political greed of competing noble families.
4873975
Excellent production values, and the acting is superb. But I quit early on because of the way this rewrites history. There is solid documented evidence that Thomas Cromwell was unprincipled and vicious. There is solid evidence that Thomas More was a man of courage and integrity. I have no idea why Hilary Mantel decided to misrepresent history in this way, and I have no use for it.
1096136
Michael Braddick, professor of history at Sheffield University, has written a splendid new history of the civil wars in Britain in the 1640s. The book is in three parts: the crisis of the three kingdoms (1637-42), war (1642-46), and revolution (1646-49).

Part 1 describes the Scottish Prayer Book rebellion and the politics of reformation, politics and society in Charles' England, the English and the Bishops' Wars, the Long Parliament, the Irish rising, the struggle for the provinces and the slide into war. Part 2 studies the battle of Edgehill, the English war efforts in 1643, the Irish Cessation and the Solemn League and Covenant, the battle of Marston Moor, death and its meanings, the battle of Naseby and the New Model Army, the costs and benefits of civil war, and the politics of parishes at war. Part 3 describes postwar politics, attempts at settlement, the Putney debates, the Engagement and the vote of No Addresses, Charles' starting of the second civil war, his trial and execution, and England's freedom.

The people opposed the king's party on the issues of royal powers, his religious policies, taxation, his foreign policy, and his Catholic advisers. Charles sought to uphold his supreme power over the people. He refused to work with Parliament or to be subject to its authority. People noted that Charles tried to stay out of war in Europe against Catholics, but was ready to go to war against his own Protestant subjects. Public opinion was such that, as Braddick writes, "Military mobilization by prerogative power in order to enforce Laudian ceremonialism would have plenty of opponents." Yet in 1649, the king was still unrepentant and uncompromising, and still bent on another war: defeated in England and Scotland, he was as yet unbeaten in Ireland.

Braddick recounts the organised, disciplined and popular assertions of traditional common rights - throwing down enclosures in forests and fens, tearing up hedges, and breaking open the Earl of Middlesex's deer park and killing his deer. Tactically astute, people gathered in groups of two, thus evading the legal definition of a riot.

More and more people became active citizens. People fought for the idea that "All power is originally and essentially in the whole body of the people of this Nation."

As Braddick writes, "What was really new and radical ... was that fundamental questions were being debated before a public audience." It was `a decade of intense debate and spectacular intellectual creativity ... the beginnings of a passage from the world of reformation to the world of enlightenment'.
3677971
This is an incredible historic novel and Mantel is a master at creating a realistic world of political nuance.  In the struggle for power and influence, every comment and action can be interpreted in multiple ways, to advantage and disadvantage. Capturing this subtle aspect of human interactions is difficult but Mantel does an outstanding job in this novel. The juxtaposition of Thomas Cromwell with Anne Boleyn allows the reader to see the strategic moves of a man who knows that for every victory there is a price to pay as compared to a woman who is not yet mature enough to realize that behind every victory is a loss.  Mantel focuses on Cromwell, as she did in the novel Wolfe Hall, because the rise of this brilliant man from urchin and mercenary soldier to secretary to the King of England makes for fascinating reading. The complexity of the character and personality of Henry VIII sets the stage for much intrigue and power plays. Mantel creates the character of Cromwell as the perfect corporate player that follows the rule of always ensuring that the King gets what he wants but can blame others if things go wrong. Cromwell knows to listen more than he talks, to assess the other mans motives and desires, to allow others to do the dirty work if possible, to nurture allies, to gather a strong support network, to be as transparent as possible with allies, and to allow the enemy to overextend themselves.

But Mantel is more than a writer of great political history because she makes the story alive again and her writing style is masterful as she builds a world of dread and latent violence with every small detail that she describes. She is a master of the political novel, of historic characterization, and of creating a charm of witchy words that hold the reader in a world of escalating violence. Outstanding and worthy of 10 gold stars.
3196129
A very informative examination of James Ussher, this book is a handy resource for anyone interested in his life and personal background.  The frequent caricature of the Archbishop is set right through this work, revealing the man for who he was, exemplary in Christian behavior, though certainly a man of his times; a scholar of no mean erudition; and a defender of the doctrines and practice held by the traditionalist and episcopal branch of church persuasion.  The most interesting context of his life was that he was from and was appointed over the Irish archdioceses of the Anglican church, a fact most do not realize or apply.  All in all, this work will serve to broaden one's perspectives and knowledge of some of the lesser-known figures of the 16th and 17th century Anglican Church.
700965
An abridged version of a multi-volume history of England from 1680 written in the 1840's.  This is a narrative history of men, ideas and politics.  The focus is on the 1680's when modern England was formed, keeping some of the feudal, medieval, cultural past, but becoming a thoroughly new and more complex world.  Kings and queens matter, but have lost their absolute authority, balanced by the power of religious and political bodies.  England bullies Ireland and Scotland, with self-interested justification.  England, Spain, France, the Netherlands and other nations jockey for position.  The Roman Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian and other churches establish their positions.  This history is focused on military, political and religious conflicts rather than the progress of trade, arts and sciences.  For Americans, the notion that England was wrestling with many of the issues of the American Revolution a century earlier may come as a surprise.  The author tells interesting stories that support his world view and justification for the commanding English world view of the nineteenth century.  As for America in the twentieth century there is a sense of providential guidance and exceptionalism.  With another 150 years of perspective many of the self-serving national beliefs are obviously wishfull thinking.  This book is a great reminder of man's need to make sense of his universe, using the best available tools and have faith that there is progress, not merely recurring cycles of growth and decline.
3938145
Thomas Cromwell is a fascinating character. Mantel cleverly explores his persona but leaves us somehow still on the outside; as Cromwell was outside to himself based on the novel's approach.
622929
The characters in this book are puppetes, stringed to their history, forced to play out their past, but infused with life, words, sentences, laughter, anger and despair by their author, Hilary Mantel. The main character in this book is a man: Thomas Cromwell, a blacksmiths son. The main plot in the book is how a blacksmith's son socialize, and survive, among the aristocracy, and at the same time implement social constructs and laws in the people. What comes first? What are the drivers? Is Cromwell's role in the aristocracy a driver for his role as law maker? Or is it more a driver for his ambition to become rich? "He wants the church reformed, he wants it pristine, but he also wants money." (p. 45); "He (Cromwell) has laws to write . the good of the commonwealth to serve, and his king: he has titles and honors still to attain.." (p. 407). When I read the book, those are the questions that attach themselves, un-inked, in the margins of the book as I turn the pages. However, after some time I give in to find clues to insight, the characters are talking, but not revealing.  Although the talk is funny:"old Sir John tells..all maids were fair maids. all knights were gallant and life was simple and violent and usually brief" (p. 16), their talk does not bring me further.

The characters. So, why is it like this? I can think of two solutions, the first is that the author feel constrained by the characters historic personality, and never manage to create them as living characters, that at least, occasionally, take over their own life. They can't. Henry has to wake up. "It is the king, Rafe says. It is Henry, he is dead". But we all know he can't die on p 168. The second solution is that for English readers the characters are already alive, so it does not matter. The author just has to brush some strokes, like blurring a hand to show that it moves, and the English reader understands. But I not.

The conflicts and the solutions. A comparison of Hilary Mantel' book: "Bring up the bodies" about Henry 8's England and Umberto Eco's mainland Europe: "The Prague cemetery" may have some points of interest. Eco addresses the "what if...", and propose his own solution.  Did Garibaldi pay off his enemies rather than defeat them in fight? I don't find anything like that in Mantel's book. I understand that she has another agenda, to dig out Cromwell's" densely inaccessible... choice plum."(p. 410), but then, could not that task be done with more vigor, more imagination, and more freedom? Mantel would be free to offer a suggestion, but waits to the next volume. I notice that the author has further plans: "... but I hope to continue my efforts to dig him (Cromwell) out" (p. 410)

Please, this is not a really boring book, and I am sure many readers will enjoy it and its brilliant writing; I use the term brilliantlyboring, which should be close to an oxymoron. It would be wrong to say that I did not enjoy it when I read it,  would be wrong not to say I did hestitate before I took it up to read further.

Citations. "Some people veer away in the second before the clash. It is natural, but forget what is natural" (p. 165). "It is well to keep behind her (Anne Boleyn) in the hunting field" (p. 41). But as a native of the sign Cancer, he proceeds crab-wise to his objective: a side shuffle, a weaving motion."
2269171
While I was reading the Introduction and the first chapters I realised the depth and strenghness of Dawson's stream of thought.

His conclusions, in front of those of the widespread common thinking, are sharp and have a paradoxical revolutionary point of wiew dealing with Rationalism and Cartesianism, performing a genuism Catholic thinking that collects the best tradition of English Tractarians.

I very recommend the reading of "Dynamics" to those interested in understanding the chain of historic events leading to nowadays state of affairs.
749994
I read this book with some interest, but It gave me true insights into the mind of Lee. The book is a good argument aginst the image of Lee a true noble personality. He was slave holder and felt that  Blacks were inferior to white and deserved slavery.
3389045
Its 1663, Charles II has been restored to the throne of England for 3 years. Cromwell's tenure as head of the country has entered the possibility of rebellion into the public consciousness. Thomas Chaloner finds himself once more in England after a decade of spying on the powerful Dutch nation. We follow in his wake as he reacquaints himself with London's denizens inhabiting intellectual coffee houses, bawdy houses, the barber surgeon's dissection theater, and the palace of Whitehall itself.

A man dressed as a beggar tries to pass information to Chaloner as he secures the area for a royal visit. The man is murdered before he can finish speaking. Thus begins an engaging historical mystery set in the London of Samuel Pepys. The mystery deserves 5 stars for the fresh location and well researched detail that transports us to another world distinct from our own but with many of the same problems we face in our modern world.

My rating for the book falls to 4 stars due to an overly contrived ending, but the journey there was far to fun to miss.