Joan of Arc: A History read like a school textbook- the dull kind.Īctually, it reminded me of translating Livy's History of Rome from Latin into English during college. Why is it that experts on topics are rarely able to translate that interest and depth of knowledge into stories that the general public would enjoy? I love medieval history, especially the backgrounds of the handful of female figures who made it into print during that period. Maybe this was a doctoral thesis that Castor tweaked a bit and published? It reads like that. It was a good premise, but it just didn't work. The reader could appreciate the main players, the attitude towards spiritual visions, the belief of divine will in war and the monarchy, and capture the overall general flavor of the time period. In that way, she thought that the legend of the woman could be separated away from the reality. Helen Castor wanted to present Joan's story in context with an extended history of France for years before and after her appearance on the world stage. The general idea behind Joan of Arc is sound. Unfortunately, that mega-effort did not lend itself to a readable or enjoyable book. On the contrary, I found this to be an extraordinarily well researched and cited biography. The two star rating that I'm giving Joan of Arc: A History has nothing to do with the historical accuracy of the book.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |