Just Finished Reading: The Last Crusade – Religion and the Politics of Misdirection by Barbara Victor (FP: 2005) [287pp] 

This, I think, is going to be a difficult book to review. At base it is about the rise of political evangelism in the US from Ronald Regan onwards up to George W Bush (featured on the cover). That's pretty straight forward. Although evangelism has been around in America for quite some time apparently, they only started throwing their potential voting weight around from the late 70's onwards. No doubt, thinking about it, brought on by social changes not only in the States but throughout the western world – the invention of The Pill, the rise of no-fault divorce, the legalisation of abortion, same sex marriage and no doubt, Feminism. If they could influence or, in the best case, control the politicians that made these decisions then they could get their way and create a country, a society, more in line with their beliefs and desires. But this is where I start to struggle... 

Throughout most of my life America has portrayed itself as THE land of the Free where all things are possible and the place where you can make of yourself whatever you want to be. The watchword is FREEDOM without interference from the Government or from anyone else. Yet here we have a significant group (the figure was 80 million in the book though no doubt this has increased in the subsequent 20 years since publication) who will use their political power to RESRICT the freedoms of others to be who they are, marry who they love and worship who they wish (or not). Personally, I've long been an advocate of personal freedoms (although I'm a Socialist, I do have significant Anarchist sympathies) which allows individuals to do – or believe – whatever they want to unless it conflicts with others freedom or harms those around them. If you want to get married, then have at it but if you don't and still want to live with someone else in a consensual sexual relationship then have at that too. It's not harming me (or anyone else) and frankly I don't care. Its zero business of mine. If I found such things objectionable (and I know some people do – my mother for example) then they're just going to have to 'deal' with reality. Essentially what I'm saying is that you should happily live your OWN life and not expect others to follow YOUR rules or hold YOUR beliefs. I certainly don't! 

Anyway... I think the biggest problem I had with the underlying 'philosophy' of those portrayed in the book was the rather bizarre (at least in MY mind) relationship of evangelicals and Israel. Now I'm at least aware of the whole thing about the 2nd Coming of the Messiah and all that but having that as THE justification of supporting Israel is more than a little incomprehensible to me. I suppose that it's because since I didn't grow up in a religious household and have never had a great deal of 'education' in Christianity (or any other religion) outside of academia I just couldn't connect the dots and that's BEFORE we get to the bit where the End of the World is supposedly a GOOD thing (although that does explain why so many Americans don't seem to care very much about the planet they inhabit or the future of our species). 

Finally, the other thing I had a hard time swallowing was just how religious many American politicians are. I certainly knew that SOME were but didn't really appreciate quite how many. Here (in the UK) if the electorate suspected that a politician's decisions were being influenced by religious/faith considerations it would call their political future into question. Politicians can certainly HAVE a personal faith in their own flavour of religious belief but public displays or public pronouncements of such raise questions of suitability for office. Across Europe we are more than familiar with how toxic, and how dangerous, it is when religion and politics mix. We've learnt that particular lesson the HARD way in our various histories and with luck America won't have to learn that lesson for itself. Being a 'Christian nation' might sound like a good idea to some, but when you get down to the details, I doubt if many (and not just the non-Christian/non-religious) would like the results. Whilst this was an interesting read in some ways, I think it was far too outside my 'wheelhouse' to appreciate it enough to fully understand the narrative. I've been feeling a while now that I need to at least start to look at adding to my knowledge of Religion (if not anywhere approaching full understanding), so I'll be sprinkling a few religion/Christianity books into my schedule over the next few years. Wish me luck!  

Just Finished Reading: The Darkening Age – The Christian Destruction of the Classical World by Catherine Nixey (FP: 2017) [263pp] 

I have long wondered why so much of the known ancient knowledge has been lost to time. So much of what we do know is presented in fragments or references in other surviving texts. If it wasn't for the texts and commentaries provided by Arabic scholars our knowledge of the ancient world would be sparse indeed. It's estimated that over 80% of ancient texts have not made it to the present. Why is that? 

Part of it is simply time. The roughly 1000 years between the fall of the western Roman Empire and the Italian Renaissance was not exactly a period of peace and harmony, so it's no surprise that delicate artifacts such as pre-paper books didn't make it this far. Likewise, art, artifacts and statues... But are time and barbarism enough of an explanation? This intriguing (and to be honest disturbing) book shows us otherwise. After the Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and made that belief the default religion of the Roman Empire there was a growing movement not only to promote Christianity itself but to supress ALL other religions and beliefs as both false and dangerous. Some of the effects were obvious such as the ban on professing public belief in the 'old Gods' including sacrifice at the numerous temples. Before long these very temples were closed and eventually destroyed including any statues of the gods. Likewise, as temples often held numerous texts and documents, such items were all too often burnt by the wagonload. It wasn't long before well-known pagans were targeted and given the 'choice' between conversion, exile or death. The one choice few had, however, was the retention of heretical or demonic texts by pagan authors. These had to be given up and destroyed in public. As you can imagine few survived. 

But it wasn't just targeted destruction of especially books that resulted in so few surviving. It was often simple neglect. Books, of all types, don't last forever. They need to be looked after, cared for, preserved. Most importantly at that time they need to be COPIED to be passed on to future generations. Leave them to rot, use them to start fires, refuse to copy them – in fact scrape them clean to produce yet another Biblical commentary – and they are soon lost. Just imagine the thousands of books, the temples that were the wonder of the known world, the art, the statues that were smashed into dust that are gone. Tragic just doesn't cover it. 

This was quite the eye-opener. It its desire to be THE (not just pre-eminent) religion of the time, the new Christian church authorities very effectively eliminated much of their opposition - both secular and sacred - by erasing them from the historical record. It worked. Written with a keen eye for detail and with a scattering of humour this gives a VERY different perspective on the ancient world and is something I'll definitely be following up on. The early years of Christian domination of the Roman Empire were most definitely not a time of rainbows and bunnies for those who held onto their beliefs of the old Gods (who, of course, had been worshiped for centuries or longer). It was increasingly a rough time to be a pagan and could, indeed, be a fatal one. Definitely recommended for those with a curious mind and for those who ever wondered why we don't know MUCH more about our ancient ancestors. 

Just Finished Reading: Immortality – The Quest to Live Forever and How It Drives Civilisation by Stephen Cave (FP: 2012) [307pp] 

Here the author makes a rather sweeping proposition – that THE drive to civilisation since its very beginnings has been the unending search for ways to live forever. That’s quite the idea, so I was intrigued to see if he could pull it off.  

Essentially, he split the idea of immortality into four separate threads which each giving rise to different expansions of technology, ideas or beliefs each of which helped shape the world we inhabit. The first, logically, is actual physical immortality with the body and mind you were born with – mostly. This is the process where health is the primary outcome depending on medicine, vaccinations, food security and so on. Clearly such things might enhance longevity somewhat but not enough to live beyond our normal span. This means going further with progressively intrusive medical procedures, technological enhancements etc.. Going further still we have ideas such as transferring the human brain into indestructible robot bodies or ‘uploading’ minds into machines. Each step extends life a little, or a lot, further into the future. 

Then we have bodily reincarnation after death with the hope (dream?) of being brought back by future technical means or within a spiritual belief system. The next link in the chain encompasses various beliefs in ‘souls’ that are the essential you which, after bodily death, migrate into another reality or in some way re-engage with the material world for another round of life. Finally, we have the idea of living in the memories and culture of future generations as an historical figure through stories, icons and monuments left behind. 

Although the author does make some case for his thesis I don’t think he quite brings it off. I’d certainly go so far as saying that the idea of living forever – by whatever means – could be seen as ‘A’ driver behind various scientific endeavours and religious or philosophical belief systems I certainly wouldn’t go so far as to say it is ‘THE’ driver. On top of that I had a problem throughout by how the author defined immortality itself – taking it to the extreme with it meaning essentially outliving the Universe itself trillions of years hence with its predicted heat death. Personally, if someone could live for 10 THOUSAND years never mind 10 TRILLION years, I’d say that they’re as good as immortal at that point. 

But is immortality – ignoring the religious side of things – even possible? I think it's possible (or at least conceivable) that science can extend life a great deal. Even with present technology an average life expectancy of 100 years is achievable. Even something like 125-150 healthy years is probably not beyond us. Going much further will probably demand some radical breakthroughs beyond cloned organs and so on. With complete cloned bodies (or their replacing by – for want of a better term – androids) and an ‘uploaded’ consciousness we should be able to live a great deal longer. The only question would be – is that REALLY you? Is a copy of you – which is what we’re talking about here – really YOU isn’t just a philosophical question. It may look like you and might even feel like you from the inside but it's still a simulacrum. Somehow, I’m not sure if we can even get that far even in the reasonably far future – but who knows? This was an interesting dive into some rather fringe ideas (hopes?) with a scattering of religious belief and philosophy throughout. Reasonable. 

Just Finished Reading: A Cup of Sake Beneath the Cherry Trees by Yoshida Kenko [51pp] 

On plucking this out of the Penguin Classics boxset I thought: Oh... ANOTHER poetry booklet. What FUN! But I was, thankfully, wrong. This wasn’t poetry at all. It was instead the musing of a 14th century Japanese monk on Life, the Universe and Everything. It was, actually, rather interesting if a bit strange from time to time. 

One of the things that does surprise me reading this sort of thing was how often very different philosophies from very different cultures tend to come to broadly similar conclusions on the human condition that we all have to deal with. I suppose that it’s the fact that, despite culture or sometimes vast chasms of time we are all still human beings doing what humans do. That side of things changes very little in the grand scheme of things. 

Being of the time and place involved, the author does have a very hierarchical view of things. Those in the highest places, especially the Emperor himself, are exalted and deserve to be in those places because they are (obviously) superior beings. At the same time the poor and destitute are in THEIR place because of fundamental failings in character or through their behaviour in previous incarnations.  

Probably the strangest thing the author said was that everyone should aim to be dead before reaching 40 years of age. Personally, my post-40's where some of my very best years! There was much about how distracting women are (true) and how men have their heads turned all too easily (also true). Much also about friends and the pleasure of good conversation (couldn’t agree more), and, of course, the delight of sitting alone reading a good book! 

As you might expect there are several criticisms throughout the text on the pursuit of wealth, power and fame. What is the use of such things, the author maintains, when they stop you appreciating the beauty of a snowy landscape and forget to remark on it to an acquaintance.  

This was a booklet full of interesting cultural insights, gentle wisdom and a few funny stories. As an introduction both to Japanese culture and Buddhist philosophy it's pretty fair. Recommended. 

Translated from the Japanese by Meredith McKinney

Just Finished Reading: Witchcraft – A History by P G Maxwell-Stuart (FP: 2000) [150pp] 

Witchcraft and the witches who perform it have been around for a very long time. They were written about in Antiquity and, no doubt, existed long before the written word. So why is it that the European witch ‘craze’ and the trials that followed suddenly explode in the Late Medieval/Early Modern Period? It's a very good question and the lack of a glib answer impressed me. 

As with most cultural phenomena, the ideas circulating around witchcraft are complex. The turn against the practice has no easy answer. No doubt the turmoil of the period heated up any witch hunting – we are notorious for our scapegoats after all – but it was more than that. Extra complexity is provided by the fact that not all countries, or regions within a country, or towns within a region responded to the ‘problem’ in the same way. There was a similar diversity of opinion both between and within Catholic and Protestant beliefs after the Great Schism. An equally complex and rather mysterious question is why the craze for witch trials passed into history after around 150 years of periods of panic and recovery. Was it the growing so-called Enlightenment which resulted in a feeling of scepticism sweeping across Europe? Was it growing prosperity or a feeling of being more in control? Was it growing literacy and a more general understanding of how things worked without the need to conceive of magic or supernatural interventions? The author was brave enough to leave the answer largely unconfirmed. Both the origins and demise of the witch panic in Europe are complicated, diverse and unconfirmed. 

Magic, in its MANY forms, has existed for as long as humanity itself. It did not emerge in the late Middle Ages, nor did it vanish with the coming of the Enlightenment and the Modern age. Magic, and indeed witchcraft, is still practiced today all across the world. Even so-called ‘normal’ people cross their fingers, throw salt over their left shoulder, avoid cracks in the pavement and a thousand other things that humans have been doing to ward off ‘bad luck’ or evil spirits all across the globe. Nothing has really changed. Modern witchcraft, often referred to as Wicca, is a booming business with books, websites, conferences, equipment and consumables available at the touch of a button. Without an overarching belief system or dogma witches, in groups or solitary, can create a system that fulfils their needs and craft both spells and ceremonies that works for them. Defining a witch today is no easy task!  

I picked up this slim hardback book decades ago and have only just plucked it off my shelves. I was impressed by the author’s even handedness as well as his clear acknowledgement that the subject is complex and that research into it is far from complete. It was both a useful refresher for me and a prompt to read further into this fascinating subject. Recommended and much more to come.

Just Finished Reading: Confessions by Saint Augustine [347pp] 

If you have read as widely as I have (or for as long) you couldn’t help but hear about this classic work – in more sense than one – of early Christian text. Like most other such work I had, until recently, no intention of actually reading it. Surprisingly I did, however, find another foundational text The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius more than a little interesting, though mostly because of the quality of its writing and its philosophy. So, why did I choose to read this? Essentially, I discovered that Stephen (over at Reading Freely) was doing a re-read and thought it might be interesting adding myself to any group doing so (it actually ended up with just the two of us) adding an Atheist perspective to the reviews and, presumed, debate. 

So, what did I think? It all started with an age-old philosophical debate on the question “Who was I before I was born?” Which can be a fun debate before you start adding science and what we understand about reproduction – human or otherwise. No conclusions were reached (no surprise there) because what debate could exist was happening in a factual vacuum. It wasn’t long after that we reached the first significant speed bump when the author said: “For it is better for them to find you [God] and leave the question unanswered than to find the answer without finding you.” This goes against my fundamental beliefs and my suspected problem with the text became a confirmed one. 

The text however was scattered throughout by interesting things. One thing I did find interesting was just how LONG it was before Augustine was baptised despite his mother being a Christian. I had presumed (wrongly?) that baptism took place ASAP after birth to ensure the child’s entry to Heaven if, in all too many cases, s/he died in the first weeks/months of life. [Side note: Although both my brother & I were christened as infants I have a distinct memory of my sister WALKING to her christening in her best outfit]. 

Augustine spent a great deal of time talking about his youth and student experiences in Carthage. It sounded pretty normal to me – hanging out with questionable people, having ‘fun’ at others expense, drinking too much, gaming and chasing women. Although I did think that some of his ‘acting out’ was for the attention maybe his parents (and especially his mother) seemed not to have given him. 

At this point I started skimming bits. The CONSTANT praising of God at the beginning and end of every paragraph or section got increasingly tedious very quickly. Even the occasional good metaphor didn’t really help here. 

One thing did surprise me - already in his late 20’s he had been aware that his understanding of things was inadequate and deeply lamented the idea. Yet... he seems to have made only minimal efforts to seek the truths he was looking for. Despite having access to documents from some of the best thinkers of the age – either owning them already or having access to them through friends – he was ‘too busy’ to read them and then debate others with what he had found. That seems a little odd especially when I have been reading everything I could get my hands on for the last 50+ years in that self-same quest. His supposed motivation didn’t really match his actual effort. 

Probably the highlight of the entire book (for me at least) was when he delved into Astrology in order to disprove it. He actually ran quasi-scientific experiments which, with some more effort, may have actually been valid. His comments of outcomes of a slave and a ‘middle-class’ man born very close together and at approximately the same time being VERY different as well as the lives of twin brothers (from the Bible I think but the concept of Twin Studies stands) made me both nod in approval and laugh out loud. If only he used this level of reasoning elsewhere! 

Near the end of the book things got very philosophical with debates about Memory, Language and much else. As an introduction to Greco-Roman ideas, it might be an interesting source document but wasn’t exactly heavy on content. Yet again the author warned against the danger of being TOO inquisitive and wanting to know things – which was both kind of ironic from such a supposed seeker of Truth and kind of what I expected. This was followed by pretty constant verbal self-flagellation about being unworthy. 

Then we were back to philosophy again with a debate of origins of the Universe. Interestingly the questions mused upon still come up today including what happened BEFORE the Universe came into being. It did catch my eye when he talked about ‘pauses’ or God ‘resting’ between creation events – of course being completely unaware of the HUGE time gaps between the Big Bang, the formation of the Earth and the arrival of humans. Pause just doesn’t do it justice. But as the discussion ranged around the ideas of ‘before’ and ‘after’ there followed a LONG (and pointless) discussion about the nature of time itself. As far as I know, Time can only really be fully discussed (if not completely understood) using mathematics WAY above my paygrade. So, MUCH skimming was done here! 

Lastly there was a rather in-depth series of arguments over semantics in the Bible. Not being an English Lit person, I’ve never (fortunately) undertaken a serious course in textual analysis, so I have no clear idea if the debate in Book XII held any water. So, much skimming etc.. 

As you can probably tell by now (I hope!) I was rather less than impressed by this book. If I hadn’t been buddy-reading with Stephen I most probably would’ve DNF’d it around the halfway mark. Overall, I thought it was very light on content and often only borderline interesting. Skimming bit was definitely a necessity. Apart from the Astrology bit (which honestly made me chuckle) the only thing that stuck with me was the fact that Roman civil servants who converted to Christianity – or at least those mentioned in the book – left public service to pursue their new Religion. This brain drain couldn’t have been a good thing for an already failing Western Empire. I think (not having read it yet) this was one of the factors Gibbon cites in his ‘Decline and Fall’ as a cause of that decline. Maybe he was right? So, definitely not a recommended read from me but might appeal to those less cynical and less atheistic than I am. 

Translated from the Latin by R S Pine-Coffin 

Just Finished Reading: Hard Travel to Sacred Places by Rudolph Wurlitzer (FP: 1994) [161pp] 

The trip was, partially at least, planned. His wife had been contracted to photograph various sacred sites across Asia, and the author had some meetings planned with film makers to rough out some movie scripts. But a big part of the reason for the trip was to help ‘come to terms’ with the recent death of his wife’s son who, at age 21, had died in a car crash. 

The couple travelled to Thailand, Burma and Cambodia by plane, train and a variety of automobiles (and boats). During the several weeks of the journey they suffered through intense heat, power cuts, the threat of gunfire, illness, lack of running water or phone service, and of course waves of crushing grief. Needless to say, this was not a vacation full of rainbows and unicorns. But it did have its compensations – the scenery was often amazing, and the sacred sites themselves seemed otherworldly (which, in a way, they were). Plus, the people they met, both arranged and otherwise, added an extra dimension as local experts and Buddhist monks discussed the history of temple complexes and the varying philosophies behind their builders.  

I picked up this slim volume decades ago in (I think) a local Book Barn simply because it caught my eye in passing. I was probably routing around in the Religion/Eastern Philosophy section I was interested in at that time and thought it would be worth a read. It was. Rather sombre at times, as you might imagine, it is often beautifully written (he was the scriptwriter for Little Buddha directed by Bernardo Bertolucci in 1993) and filled with imagery which will stay with you for quite a while. The author has been doing his level best to practice (and investigate) various shades of Buddhism over the decades so has some interesting insights into life (and, naturally given the circumstances, death) which are thought provoking. A sometimes strange read, but an interesting one. Reasonable.    

Just Finished Reading: A Brief History of Misogyny – The World’s Oldest Prejudice by Jack Holland (FP: 2006) [291pp] 

I have never understood tarring a group, especially a large group, with the same brush and calling them, with high confidence indeed, either stupid, overly emotional, dangerous, weak or any other negative epithet. Anyone who knows members of any particular group – that would be pretty much all of us – knows for a fact that there is variation amongst them. The bigger the sample the bigger the variation – and that’s before we get Darwin involved. So, to get to my point, I have never understood the fact that women – HALF the human population no less – have, throughout history and across the world, generally been treated as second-class citizens AT BEST. This has always confounded me so I was hoping that this tome might either answer that question (spoiler alert: it didn’t) or at least point me in the right direction to look for more answers (which it partially did). 

The author was kind of stating the obvious when he stated that Misogyny has been around for a very long time – and certainly as long as writing has existed – and in all cultures. This is despite the reverence for the Female (or certain aspects of the female like purity, obedience and so on) at times bordering on the obsessive. Generally, women are seen as less, secondary, adjuncts to the more powerful, more relevant, more necessary, male. The female exists to help the male, to be his solace and, of course, to bare his children (preferably males at least to begin with). I can certainly understand the control (or attempted control) of women's sexuality by men. Knowing that you are, in fact, the father of a child has always been important in all kinds of societies from the very earliest days, especially where any kind of inheritance is involved. Of course, this has become a central focus of male anxiety which has fuelled the creation of laws, customs, art, literature and countless acts of violence. 

As the title suggests this is very much a HISTORY of a prejudice and looked at some origins (at least in the West) with Greek philosophy and early Christianity. Although the focus was mostly Western the author does touch on Eastern origins too, just not as deeply. The rest of the book is a rapid run through Ancient Rome, misogyny in the Christian church, in literature, Victorian England, the autocratic years in the 1930’s and 40’s and during the Sexual Revolution. The one thing the author doesn’t really cover, although he makes some attempt in the conclusion, is the central WHY of things. Sure, women have been discriminated against in a hundred ways for the last 10K years... But why? The author didn’t, in my opinion at least, make a very good stab at answering that which was more than a little disappointing. I can think of a few ideas that might address at least SOME of the reasons, but an overall overarching explanation that fits all cultures, and all times is beyond me. I thought this was a useful, if flawed, start at looking at this issue and I’ll continue to delve deeper. I don’t think I learned much that was new or surprising, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say this was a waste of my time. Reasonable. 

Just Finished Reading: Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr (FP: 1963) [51pp] 

Although I know something of the US Civil Rights movement (more later!) and MLK Jr himself (ditto) it was good to read the actual words of this significant American thinker and activist. ‘Letter...’ was in its essence a defence of the Rights movements use of non-violent but disruptive tactics in the US South against those who wanted MLK Jr and his followers to cool things down and ‘wait’ for deliverance in due time as well as against those in the larger Black community who advocated for a more robust and violent defence of their cause and very existence. Still, after all this time, it's a very powerful argument for everything he believed in and the power of a community united in its opposition to oppression and the denial of basic Human Rights. 

In addition to ‘Letter...’ this brief booklet also contains ‘The Three Dimensions of a Complete Life’ which was a sermon, given by MLK Jr, on the fundamental pillars of a Good Life. These he listed as Love of Self, Love of your Neighbour and Love of God. A person was incomplete without any of these three pillars or dimensions. Again, his arguments are good and, as far as I could tell, grounded both in Greek philosophy and, naturally, Christianity. 

This was the first book(let) in the Penguin Modern Classics boxset I picked up for my recent birthday. Containing 50 volumes taken from a very wide range of authors I’m looking forward to encountering new authors and new perspectives from across the globe. The ‘plan’ is to read the first 10 items from both boxsets (the other being the Penguin Little Black Classics series) this year and with, maybe, another 20 from each next year. At around 50-60 pages each they’re excellent for expanding my range (I might even start feeling a bit more ‘well read’ by the end of it) and adding much needed depth to my all too thin Review pile! More to come. Recommended.  

Just Finished Reading: A Brief History of The Crusades – Islam and Christianity in the Struggle for World Supremacy by Geoffrey Hindley (FP: 2003) [260pp] 

The continuing occupation of the Holyland was a stain on Christendom and could not be allowed to stand. But how to end it, who would fight and how would they be paid? The questions almost answered themselves – it would end in fire and storm; it would be fought by holy warriors of European kings and it would be paid for by taxation and the promise of washed away sins. So, the First Crusade to liberate Palestine and most especially Jerusalem was proclaimed in 1095 by Pope Urban II and, to almost everyone’s surprise, captured Jerusalem on 15th July 1099 after a number of ‘miraculous’ victories over the forces of Islam. But the idea, the thrust, of Crusade was far from over. Enemies of God – the Christian God that is – were everywhere and had to be opposed everywhere, and what better way to do so than by crusade? 

Naturally things are never that easy. Not only was Christianity itself split between Roman Catholic and Orthodox but each kingdom and principality responsible for providing the force to man the crusades where all too often divided amongst themselves, not only on who should lead the expedition but everything else. Things inevitably came to a head in October of 1187 when Jerusalem fell (again) to Saladin and Pope Gregory VIII proclaimed the Third Crusade (the Second Crusade followed the fall of Christian city of Edessa in modern day Turkey). We tend to think of crusades and crusaders operating exclusively or at least mostly in what we now call the Middle East, but that’s far from actual reality. Crusading happened against Muslim forces in Spain during the Reconquista, against Cathar heretics in Southern France, so-called ‘heathens’ in what would become Prussia and on – essentially anywhere that the Catholic church saw itself under threat. Indeed, the Catholics declared crusade on each other when the church split for a time between Rome and Avignon. One of the things that impressed me about this book was that the author managed to form the wide and twisting history into an understandable narrative that even I could follow! 

Of course, the ultimate irony wasn’t lost on me that, during the lengthy Muslim occupation of Jerusalem and other holy sites, both Jews and Christians had, by and large, easy access to their particular areas of interest. Whilst the Roman Catholics controlled the zone access by other faiths, even other Christian faiths, was often problematic or denied. Generally Islamic authorities, both in the Holyland and in Muslim Spain, cared little for people's personal faith as long as they behaved themselves and didn’t try to convert every passing Muslim. The Catholics, in contrast, abhorred the ‘schismatic’ Orthodox Christians and, when it suited them, taxed, exploited, forcibly ‘converted’, expelled or simply slaughtered their Jewish populations. 

Not being religious myself in any way, shape or form this sort of thing does confound me. As far as I can tell, the Crusades were a massive waste of time, gold and lives for no real point (except ‘control’ over areas considered to be of religious significance) and no real result except death, destruction and misery which continues to this very day. The only two ‘good’ things that eventually came from crusading activity was the fatal undermining of the Catholic church (and a by-product of the sale of indulgences) and the spread of ideas due to looted texts and other items from Muslim cities. I think that both could’ve been achieved with considerably less bloodshed.  

This was an interesting read especially if you’ve ever wondered about the Crusades but didn’t really know where to start. Not only will it give you a good understanding about why they happened (and why they almost all failed – some rather spectacularly!) but will also give you some idea of why the present Middle East is the mess it is today. Recommended. More Brief (and Short) histories to come.  

Just Finished Reading: Divine Might – Goddesses in Greek Myth by Natalie Haynes (FP: 2023) [277pp] 

You would think, or at least I would, that when we created gods to explain our world, we would have imagined them to be better than us. Sure, we often ended up making them stronger and faster than us but in other ways we were much their superiors. Greek gods (and goddesses) tended to have the morals of feral teenagers and the emotional temperaments of toddlers. Being noticed by a god was bad enough – even when they liked you (mostly a fleeting thing) - but being disliked, well THAT was often a death sentence or worse! The main reason they were worshiped (it seemed) was not to get on their bad side. They were deities who firmly believed that it was much better to be feared than to be loved. I suppose the fact that they were immortal and couldn’t easily be hurt never mind killed helped explain much. If you had almost unlimited power and an eternity to use it in then it's not surprising that you would end up pulling wings off flies, starting years long wars (for entertainment purposes) or meddling in the lives of short-lived mortals. Oh, and then there was the fun of turning said mortals into trees, cows or magpies when they offended you... Anything really to have something to distract you for a moment or (if lucky) two. 

It's difficult not to be fascinated with them though, and I definitely share the authors interests if not (maybe) to the same degree. We tend to absorb the tales of the Greek gods without even thinking of it. Like the author I grew up with movies like ‘Jason and the Argonauts’ and ‘Clash of the Titans’ which couldn’t help colour my appreciation of later divine encounters in books, comics and more modern cinematic interpretations. Greek gods, and honestly to a somewhat lessor extent goddesses, are a pervasive recurring theme through our culture so it’s nice to have someone like the author looking at the original stories (in MANY variations) who can put them into their original context, draw out more modern interpretations and then place them within western cultural thought down the ages.  

A goodly portion of the details of the goddesses portrayed here were new to me – despite being pretty familiar with the individual icons themselves – which was a plus and I’ll be following this up with more investigations both in fiction and non-fiction. We do seem to be living through a new revival of all things Greek mythish which is fun. It’s especially good that we’re seeing many of the lessor known or ignored mythic characters (oddly mostly women – who'd have thought it, right?) which I know several of my readers (and I!) have been enjoying. Hopefully at some point we’ll move beyond the Greek world into other areas like Egypt or points East. We’ll see (I hope). Anyway, if you have any interest in Greek gods and goddesses this is definitely the book for you. Full of interesting stories, strange characters and quite a bit of humour. Definitely recommended and much more to come. 

Just Finished Reading: Priests De La Resistance! - The Loose Cannons Who Fought Fascism in the 20th Century by Fergus Butler-Gallie (FP: 2019) [260pp] 

To be honest it was difficult to resist a book with a pun both in the title AND the sub-title. No doubt it helped that the book also covered an odd aspect of WW2 and I’m always looking for the odd nooks and crannies of that particular conflict. I’ve long been interested in resistance movements across the globe and across time with a particular focus on the French resistance in particular. My reading, up to this point, has looked at the political aspects of this resistance especially focusing on the Communists and local Nationalist groups in various European countries. This was something quite different looking instead at the religious (exclusively Christian here) side of things. 

Looking at around 15 examples (all but 2 from occupied Europe during WW2) this was a fascinating, uplifting, harrowing and sometimes honestly funny look at some of the priests, nuns and other religious characters who put everything on the line to fight Fascism. Sadly (showing my lack of knowledge in this area) the vast majority of the people mentioned where completely unknown to me. The only one I recognised was Dietrich Bonhoeffer – not a name easily forgotten once discovered. Naturally one of the things I love about books like this is that they introduce me too a whole new side of things and to fascinating people of which I was previously ignorant. Being an ‘odd-ball’ myself (although generally I don’t think of *myself* that way) I was delighted to see just how ‘odd’ this cast of characters was. I think almost without exception they were outliers in their own faith organisations and all too often barely tolerated by their ecclesiastical hierarchy. Honestly, I liked them instantly! But it didn’t surprise me that someone who was a constant thorn in the side of their bishops or others above them was equally a thorn in the side (and often much more) to the Fascist authorities who tried to control them. Above all else it was their faith that not only sustained them through the years of Occupation but it was their faith that drove their opposition to Fascist ideology and the practical effects of it – from deportation of Jewish populations to the general oppression of the local population. 

Reading these potted biographies its difficult not to be uplifted by their efforts (often valuable, life-saving, inspirational) to fight a very real evil in their midst. I also found it difficult not only to admire these men and women who put their lives a distant second to doing the right thing but to love them for what they did. They were probably ‘difficult’ people in a whole host of ways but I do think they would have been fun – lovely provocative fun – to have in your community and most especially to know them or, if you were very lucky, to be friends with them. Told with a wonderful style I really enjoyed reading about a whole host of people that shouldn’t really be allowed to fade into historic obscurity. Definitely recommended and I’ll be looking out for the authors previous work on the English clergy. 

Just Finished Reading: Witchfinders – A Seventeenth-Century English Tragedy by Malcolm Gaskill (FP: 2005) [286pp] 

After my previous read I was both intrigued and pleased to discover that Manningtree and its witch trial were both real. It’s also where the notorious ‘witchfinder’ Matthew Hopkins (and his less well-known side-kick John Stearne) started his discovery of witches. 

 As far as I’m aware England was unique at that time – around the mid-17th century – in its scepticism of all things witchcrafty, at least in the case of the judges and magistrates who more often than not threw out case after case brought before them. This deep scepticism only grew with time and, as the 17th century moved to its end, getting a witchcraft conviction became very difficult indeed. But around the time of Hopkins and his crusade things were far from normal. England was at war with itself – not only politically but also on the religious stage. The Protestant religion had begun to splinter – indeed shatter – into ever increasing denominations and off-shoots and religious practice, at least in the mainstream, was becoming more Puritan and ever more prescribed. Deviation, especially if it had even the hint of Popery, was denounced and often attacked physically. Any religious imagery or ornamentation was either removed or destroyed. Interestingly both Catholics and witches were both seen as agents of the Anti-Christ. As you might imagine that was pretty inflammatory! 

With everyone under close examination and with little or no understanding of science or disease it’s not surprising that arguments or just vague fears of ‘strange’ neighbours resulted in accusations of witchcraft when livestock or people sickened and died. Most of the time this would have been handled locally and the accused would have ended up in the stocks, but these were not normal times and both tempers and fears were running high. Enter the witchfinders to add their fuel to the fire and, well, we can all guess what happened next. Speaking of fire... It’s a very common misconception that witches were burnt at the stack for their ‘crimes’. Certainly, in England this was not the case – although it was both in Scotland and across the European continent. Generally, in England witches were hung – unless they were convicted of ‘treason’, which included killing their husbands. In that case witches were indeed burnt – although most of them were strangled first. 

With the times being so chaotic and, honestly, dangerous on multiple levels Hopkins and company managed to work their way in-between the official channels to do their work. Only when things started to recover (it took somewhat longer for things to return to normal) did the regular authorities start to clamp down on private operators doing government work. With ever rising scepticism, order returning and the clamp down Hopkins and Stearne faded into obscurity. 

Although I had studied the European witch craze in university my knowledge of the English version had only been picked up in a roundabout way through other reading and the occasional very bad movie. I knew of Hopkins of course. I think everybody of my age learnt about him in school but my ‘knowledge’ was pretty shallow. This interesting book has certainly added to that rough understanding a great deal. It was certainly interesting to see how the relative breakdown of normal society brought on by the Civil War(s) could bring witchcraft accusations and, more importantly, actual convictions on the flimsiest of ‘evidence’ to fruition. The only ‘problem’ I had with the book, and to be honest it was a very minor problem, was that the author thought it necessary to go into detail of each accusation and each process and trials progressed. The actual trajectory from accusation to hangman's rope almost invariably followed the same route so it might have been better to point out the variations rather than the norm. I did find myself skimming over a few of the later cases because of this. But on the whole, this was both an informative and interesting read (again especially as I couldn’t help comparing reality to fiction and finding myself even more impressed by the previous novel). Recommended for anyone interested in the English experience of witches. More to come in both fact and fiction.  

Just Finished Reading: The Undivided Past – History Beyond our Differences by David Cannadine (FP: 2013) [264pp] 

Identity and Identity politics seems to be THE cultural topic these days. People, across the West (is it happening elsewhere?) are either pondering their core identity or proudly proclaiming it to anyone who will listen or just happens to be in the vicinity of the proclamation.   

But such debates are FAR from a new phenomenon – though I’m guessing they’re far more public because of social media, larger media attention and the fact that they quickly became a political football at least/mostly in the USA. Thinking about who you are and what identity defines you is nothing new as the author points out in this excellent book. Covering topics from the Nation, Belief, Class, Gender and Race then beyond to Civilisations and the so-called ‘clash’ between them he shows repeatedly that these terms we throw about in casual conversation have multiple meanings depending on who you (and when you!) speak to them, have meanings that change over time and change between cultures and are all too often blown out of proportion in how they define any individual. 

National identity seems to be a pretty fixed property, right? But when you think about it and start asking questions things start to get a little fuzzy. Nations are not ‘fixed’ entities when looked at over historic periods. Nations come into existence, change size, grow, shrink and, sometimes, disappear – sometimes permanently and sometimes for generations only to reappear later often with different boundaries. National identity also doesn’t always correspond with national boundaries. A person can define themselves and feel themselves to be French, German or other nationalities despite the fact they were not born in those countries but happen to live near enough to their borders and speak the same language as that nation. They define their nationality in cultural terms rather than mere geographic ones.  

Take Race. Does it even exist? The racial groupings we recognise today were an invention of Europeans from the Age of Discovery to account for the ‘strange’ peoples they were encountering for the first time across the world. Inevitably they created a hierarchy with ‘white races’ at the pinnacle given them dominion over ‘lesser races’ to do with as they may. Without any knowledge of genetics and the belief that ‘types’ were immutable they defined peoples on physical characteristics and then ‘ranked’ them. It wasn’t long, of course, until they discovered that ‘inter-breeding’ was absolutely possible – you know, because we’re a single very homogenous species – which quite naturally led to worries over racial ‘purity’ and other nonsense. With definitions of ‘race’ becoming more and more convoluted and self-contradictory the very concept of such a thing came under increasing scrutiny and its long past the time when we should abandon the idea. 

Without attempting to condense the entire work into a few paragraphs (impossible for such a work), I’ll skip onto the idea of Civilisations – opposing and ranked of course. The idea/phrase “Western Civilisation” is much used these days without any clear definition (or more often without any attempt to define such a thing because everyone ‘knows’ what it means, right?), but what DOES it mean? That’s a good question. Often there’s some hand-waving about Ancient Greece and Rome but no mention of slavery, violent ‘entertainments' or the treatment of women. Likewise, the talk of ‘western values’ is left in mid-air often without a single example or explanation or is followed by vague mentions of Democracy, the Rule of Law and Respect for Individuals. Are these *purely* western values? Do we both value them and practice them as our highest ideals? Or are they ‘aspirational’ values? Drilling down a little deeper we can question the very idea of ‘The West’. Where exactly IS that? Western Europe, North America, Scandinavia, Australia, New Zealand & Japan? Plus a few others... Do all of those countries share a set of values? A set of ‘core’ values? A common culture, language, history... ANYTHING? If defining the West is fraught with problems then how can we define ‘civilisations’ outside of the West? 

Identity is definitely an odd one. We use words in common that mean a myriad of different things to different people at different points in history. What makes it ‘worse’ is that individuals not only define themselves in often idiosyncratic ways but those definitions both change over time and rise or fall in priority not only through a person's lifetime but through a person's day. If you’re feeling confused or overwhelmed by the present (often heated) debate on identity and identity politics this slim but dense volume will give you much to mull over (it took a day longer than anticipated to read because there was SO much to think about) and will help you put things into both cultural and historical perspective. I certainly feel less bamboozled by it all and can look at the latest outpourings or ‘scandal’ with a bit more context and a bit more room to breathe and to make informed rational opinions on the matter. Definitely recommended, but leave some additional time to think, muse, ponder and mull things over.  

This raises the question, naturally, of exactly *why* they're prohibited. Presumably because Atheists don't have any "morality"? I was thinking both how essentially nonsensical this was, plus the fact that it would never exist in the UK or the rest of Europe - for the simple fact that it would never occur to do this plus our Anti-Discrimination wouldn't allow it - then I remembered that this is how we, in England at least, used to treat the Catholic minority. Until recently, around the middle of the 19th century, Catholics were not allowed to run for office nor head any of the branches of the Civil Service or the Military - nor indeed VOTE in General Elections. I also remembered reading about an elected MP who refused to swear his oath of office on a Bible sometime around the end of the 19th century. That caused problems for some years, if memory serves, until MPs changed the rules and were allowed to affirm rather than swear. I'm guessing that this had a knock on effect in legal trials were the witness used to have to swear on a Bible but now swear on multiple Holy books or affirm.    

Just Finished Reading: The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius [161pp] 

I’ve had this on my shelves for years – if not over a decade – and thought it was about time I actually read it, especially as I ‘recently’ acquired a companion read (up next) which would make a nice contrast. I think I bought this just prior to my Philosophy degree as it was on the recommended reading list. I ended up choosing an Aristotle related question for my Ancient Philosophy unit, so didn’t ‘need’ to read this so ended up missing it.  

I’d heard of it before (it’s hard to avoid in some circles!) so had some idea of the subject matter and the history of how it came to be written. The author was an early Christian in a position of some power around the end of the Western Roman Empire or shortly after(ish). For a variety of reasons, he ended up annoying other people in power and he ended up in prison where he wrote Consolation. This was essentially a dialogue between the author and the personification of Philosophy about a variety of subjects including why he, as a Good Man, was in prison in the first place. Most of this conversation revolved around ideas of the Good (which was all very Greek, indeed Platonic, in nature) so didn’t float my boat overly much. What I’ve read of Plato (only excerpts so far) hasn’t impressed me much and I’m far more a fanboy of Aristotle. Fortunately, things became more interesting as the author became a bit less self-focused. 

One of the things that did interest me, and made me smile more than once, was the fact that perennial questions, still mentioned today, came up during their conversation – specifically why bad things happen to good people (and why good things happen to bad people!) - and included a very well argued look at Free Will in contrast to God’s omniscience. I have sometimes pondered about the apparent conflict with the idea that if God already knows exactly what we’re going to do in the future how can we possibly have Free Will which HE gave us? I now understand how that particular circle can be squared and it no longer ‘bothers’ me. It’s all about perspective. We, being the limited creatures that we are, live in Linear Time. God, of course, does not and can see Past, Present AND Future simultaneously. Therefore, he can see what we’re doing, see what happens because of that and see the end result. But that doesn’t mean we don’t still have Free Will. I thought about it like this: Imagine you’re reading a non-fiction History book. In it you have people making decisions, and you can see the outcomes of those decisions, maybe even with possible other outcomes (if they’d made different choices) and how things eventually worked out – or not. Did those people have Free Will, even if you KNOW what their future entailed? Of course, they did. Same thing... The debate about the Nature of God kind of went over my head and I honestly skimmed a bit of that, but I did find a brief discussion about the relationship between Providence (AKA God’s Plan) and Fate (the action of said Plan in the world) instructive and interesting.  

Overall, I could see why this work has been so highly praised for so long. Although the God/Christianity aspects didn’t really hold my attention very much, I did manage to clear up a few questions that had been floating in the back of my mind for many years. If you’re interested in how Greek thought especially impacted early Christian philosophy and haven’t read this yet I can certainly recommend it to you.       

Translated from the Latin by Victor Watts  

[Labels Added: 0, Labels Total: 77]  

Just Couldn’t Finish Reading: Wolves and Werewolves by John Pollard (FP: 1964) [178pp] 

ANOTHER DNF!! Thankfully we’re almost at years end, so the fact that I’ve reached my maximum allowed rejections won’t be too much of an issue – I HOPE! Now, I didn’t have any particularly unreasonable expectations for this book, I just expected it to be readable. In that I was disappointed. Despite the author apparently being an Oxford graduate his writing style was terrible. Although I guess that it shows some skill to make a potentially interesting study so tedious and dull. 

The first part of the book – which I failed to complete, ending with page 55 – focused in on numerous wolf related stories and folk tales from throughout Europe going back several hundred years. Although the list of wolf related attacks/interactions was ‘interesting’ in itself, the author failed to weave any kind of narrative to the seemingly endless list which soon became both boring and pointless. Looking into, for example, what the local authorities tried to do about such things – whether they succeeded or not – would've added some depth to the tale. Instead, he seemed to rely on stories clearly copied down without any further thought or analysis. I did actually, after yet another wolf related death, start questioning exactly how SO many wolf attacks were even possible well into modern times. Afterall, the wolf became extinct in England during the reign of Henry VII (1485-1509) and the last wolf was officially killed in Scotland in 1680. Did they last much longer in more areas on Continental Europe? This from Wiki: 

According to documented data, man-eating (not rabid) wolves killed 111 people in Estonia in the years from 1804 to 1853, 108 of them were children, two men and one woman. 

In France, historical records compiled by rural historian Jean-Marc Moriceau indicate that during the period 1362–1918, nearly 7,600 people were killed by wolves, of whom 4,600 were killed by nonrabid wolves. [[That’s on average just over 8 non-rabid wolf related deaths PER YEAR, so not a *huge* amount then.]] 

The most interesting chapter, and the last one I read, was on the fabled ‘Beast of the Gevaudan’ which was credited with around 60 kills in that region over a period of two years. It was either one or (more likely) a pair of wolves responsible which managed to avoid numerous attempts, including the arrival of specialist hunters commissioned by the King himself to end the terror. The interest wasn’t in the sudden improvement of writing (which didn’t happen) but rather the fact that this the base story behind one of – if not the – favourite foreign language movies I’ve seen: Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001), starring Samuel Le Bihan as Knight Grégoire de Fronsac, Vincent Cassel as Jean-François de Morangias, the absolutely gorgeous Émilie Dequenne as Marianne de Morangias, the amazing Mark Dacascos as Mani and  Monica Bellucci as Sylvia. It’s a beautifully filmed and highly entertaining film and should be watched in the original French for its full effect. I highly recommend it. I just don’t recommend this book! Hopefully my other werewolf books will be better. 

[Labels Added: 1, Labels Total: 71] 

Less than half of England and Wales population Christian, Census 2021 shows 

[From By Rachel Russell for BBC News] 

Fewer than half of people in England and Wales describe themselves as Christian for the first time, the 2021 census has revealed. The proportion of people who said they were Christian was 46.2%, down from 59.3% in the last census in 2011. Meanwhile the number who said they had no religion increased to 37.2% of the population, up from a quarter. And people identifying as Muslim rose from 4.9% in 2011 to 6.5% last year. 

The census is carried out every 10 years by the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The ONS said the census question broadly asked "what is your religion" - referring to people's affiliation, rather than their beliefs or active religious practices. Professor Linda Woodhead, head of theology and religious studies at King's College London, said ticking "no religion" could still indicate a number of different beliefs. Some will be atheist, a lot will be agnostic - they just say, 'I don't really know' - and some will be spiritual and be doing spiritual things," she told BBC News. 

Meanwhile, London is the most religiously diverse region of England, with just over 25.3% of people reporting a religion other than Christianity. And south-west England is shown to be the least religiously diverse region, with 3.2% selecting a religion other than Christian. The figures also showed differences in nations - in England alone, 37.2% of people said they had no religion, while in Wales this rose to 46.5% from 32.1% in 2011. 

[Interesting! This has been a very long-running trend which will probably continue for decades to come. I wonder how low the religious numbers will go? 25%? Less? I think it’s HIGHLY unlikely it’ll get anywhere near zero. I’m guessing – with zero information to back it up – that somewhere in the region of 25-30% sounds reasonable. I guess we’ll see in the upcoming ONS results.]  

Just Finished Reading: The King and the Catholics – The Fight for Rights 1829 by Antonia Fraser (FP: 2018) [281pp] 

I remember, after reading the authors previous book on the Gunpowder Plot, how shocked I was at the treatment of Catholics in England after that event. Some of it I knew in passing – for example the fact that (until VERY recently) a British monarch could not marry a Catholic – but most of it came as somewhere between a surprise and a shock. The author goes into a LOT more detail in this often-fascinating book. 

Starting with the infamous Gordon Riots of 1780 (immortalised in Barnaby Rudge by Dickens) brought on by the Catholic Relief Act which incidentally caused property damage in London not surpassed till the Blitz in the 1940’s, the author follows the arguments for and the protests against the idea that Catholics in England should be treated as normal citizens rather than being automatically suspected of being (at the very least potential) traitors to the State. It was long believed (at least by some) that English Catholics had divided loyalties and when there was a conflict between State and Pope that the Pope would always prevail. No protestations of loyalty or even acts proving such counted for much – religion trumped all other interests. In the first quarter of the 19th century a Catholic could not sit in the House of Lords (despite being a Lord), could not be elected as a Member of Parliament, could not be an officer commanding men in battle [I’m not sure how low in rank this went and certainly rank and file Catholics were accepted as long as they were under English Protestant command], Catholic priests could not openly celebrate Mass nor (legally) perform marriages [Side Note: It was long the process that a Catholic marriage had to be registered officially – for a time TWO marriage services had to be performed, one Catholic and one Church of England. As far as I know my parents had to be registered separately as married AFTER they were actually married in a Catholic ceremony. I understand that in these more enlightened times a registrar attends the Catholic ceremony so that the legality of the marriage is assured without the need of anything further], nor were Catholic schools allowed and SO much more. Catholics, even high-ranking ones, were almost second-class citizens and, as far as I know, there was talk/proposals to make Catholics wear distinctive clothing or something obvious to recognise them in public (all the better to discriminate against them – naturally). Oh, and I almost forgot, religious symbols like the Cross could not be displayed or even imported into the country. 

Things were somewhat different in Ireland (not yet independent or partitioned) and there was a LONG running perception of the ‘Irish Problem’ which had strong links naturally to the ‘Catholic Problem’. It was at least technically possible to elect a Catholic MP in Ireland although it was considered highly unlikely with Protestant landowners essentially running things. But it was such an MP, in the guise of Daniel O’Connell, who finally forced the dam to break resulting in the Act of 1829. Of course, he didn’t do this himself despite being a consummate political operator. The tide was, slowly, moving in the direction of Catholic emancipation (which was believed would lead to ever growing emancipation in other areas – which it did) for a whole host of reasons – many of which hadn’t crossed my mind until the author pointed them out. It’s possible that forces within England and the rest of Europe, indeed in what could later be called the ‘West’ meant that all citizens of all religious affiliations would eventually have been treated equally but things would have moved much slower if a number of very had working and persuasive people had not made herculean efforts to make it so. 

Told with exhaustive (but not exhausting) detail this was an absorbing insight into early 19th century British politics which was in the process of modernising itself to more closely reflect the modern age into which it was moving. I really had no idea just how difficult it was being a Catholic before 1829 and it was really enlightening to discover this aspect of my nominal faith. Definitely recommended for anyone interested in British and Irish history or in the confluence of religion and politics.  

Just Finished Reading: Royal Witches – Witchcraft and the Nobility in Fifteenth-Century England by Gemma Hollman (FP: 2020) [275pp]

The accusation of witchcraft has often been used as a weapon directed (for the most part at least) at women. Those accused of such crimes could lose all of their belongings to be distributed by the accuser. It was for some a highly profitable way of removing elderly relatives sitting on valuable land or simply discrediting their perceived enemies. But such accusations were not completely risk free. In England, for most of its history, judges and magistrates were almost universally sceptical about people pointing to witches in their midst. Indeed, even in the midst of the great European witch craze it was in England that accused witches had the greatest chance of surviving the experience. Not surprisingly most witches, the so-called ‘wise women’ and ‘wise men’ within most communities were poor, often living on the margins. But some high-born (or at least high-status) women were also accused of practicing the Black Arts. Here the author tells the tale of four of them and what befell them.

Of the four mentioned women – Joan of Navarre, Eleanor Cobham, Jacquetta of Luxembourg and Elizabeth Woodville – I was only previously aware of the last two by previously reading novels by Philippa Gregory. In each case the accusation was for largely political reasons – to discredit or disinherit the woman herself or to attack another member of her family (usually her husband) by being associated with a witch. Each accusation outlined here resulted in varying consequences. One lost her property and land – essentially a ‘shakedown’ to pay for a war – but a significant part was eventually returned to her, another lost just about everything but kept her life and another merely had people whispering behind her back for the rest of her life. Despite a spell of incarceration – if you can call months spent in rather palatial castles being waited on by servants' ‘incarceration’ - few of these women could be said to have suffered overly much because of their status as ‘maybe witch’. 

Overall, I must admit that I was somewhat less than impressed by this book. Although accusations of witchcraft figured somewhat in the lives of all four women – who were connected by marriage, birth or association – such things were generally peripheral and felt like a rather contrived link to create the book. I wouldn’t say that the title/sub-title was misleading but I think it sometimes flirted with the idea. Whilst generally a reasonable history of the period I often found the focus elsewhere from the women it was supposedly about. The author herself, on multiple occasions, stated that little was known of this period in her life or that incident (a dead giveaway to me is the referencing of bills of payment in lieu of anything else on record) but speculated anyway. But from my perspective the worse ‘sin’ was that I felt that the author spent far too much time speculating on the emotional states of the women filtered through her own feelings of the incidents described – separation from husband/children, loss of property/status, the great unknown of what was going to happen next. Although people living 500 years ago were essentially the same as those living today their culture and upbringing (at any social level) was vastly different. For example, with high infant mortality it was not uncommon for children of poor families not to be named until weeks or months after their birth because there was a greater emotional cost to burying a named child rather than an unnamed one. Such things are practically unthinkable today and such parents would be called ‘unfeeling’ or even ‘monsters’ but 500 years ago it was simply pragmatic. So, assigning unknowable emotional responses based on our present cultures beliefs is questionable at least. Reasonable with caveats.