I bought this book, in hardback, a week ago in
Waterstones, on a bit of whim. Over the last few years, I’ve developed a real
interest in the history of Britain under the Stuart Kings, and I’ve always had
a bit of interest in magic, mystery, and the macabre. This book promised to hit both with its tale
of ‘Sorcery, Scandal and Seduction’ in the case of the Belvoir witches.
Unfortunately, instead of telling an interesting story,
the book is mostly just an information dump of facts about witch trials in
England over a two-hundred year period. Every time the author makes any point,
she feels the need to back up the point with two or three quotes from period
sources. These quotes, some of which are quite lengthy, are interesting at
first, but grow increasingly annoying, especially as they are presented in
their original seventeenth century spelling. The reading soon becomes tedious.
In many places the author manages to go pages without any
reference to the story she is supposedly telling, and when she does return to
it, it is often presented with a non-historic word such as ‘probably, maybe,
possibly’.
This book is a glaring example of something that is seen
all too often in historical publishing. Although the story of the Belvoir
witches certainly contains a few interesting details, it is painfully
obvious that there is far too little historical fact about the case to form the
basis for a book length discussion. The author really should have accepted that
and moved on.
I have to agree. I have to read a chapter or so before purchasing a book of this sort as it gets on my nerves and I just shove it ones side after a bit. Shame it sounds really interesting as well.
ReplyDeleteI think I'd have the same thoughts about the repetitive quotes in the older style. That would be tediouf ;) Best, Dean
ReplyDelete