I have read almost every book on Queen Elizabeth that has been written; necessary research since I have portrayed her over the past 15 years. This is a good book, not the best but an excellent biography. Everyone has distinct opinions about her, her governance and her foibles. The trick in coming to understand QEI is to read everything on both ends of the spectrum and then steer your way somewhere down the middle. This is one of the better biographies, in my opinion

I don't know what the other people who reviewed this book have been reading. This is an excellent biography. It was written over fifty years ago so the style is perhaps a little formal compared to more modern works but it is interesting, learned and insightful. Recommended if you are interested in history. ( )

http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1265072.html

Alas, I was thoroughly spoiled for this by reading David Starkey and Alison Weir on the same subject last year. Though irritated by the writing style I kept hoping that at least I would learn something new; but when I had finished the first quarter of the book without finding anything that had not been covered better by either Starkey or Weir, I decided not to bother with any more. ( )

Reviewed May 1998 My second book dealing with the life history of QE1. Many areas were right on the mark with the first book, this author decided to expound on different areas, ie...Essex, wars and Drake. he tended to downplay Leicester and Cecil. this book was used as a textbook at one time and someone highlighted throughout. I found myself looking forward to those highlighted entries. Dry in parts due to the large quantity of names and places but overall very uninformative. I think the author could have used dates and ages much more often to show passage of time. As your reading suddenly you find that QE1 is an old woman. Also deaths of important figures just seem to happen suddenly and without much notice, make you wonder what happened too... ( )

Considered a classic work in its day; but now, if I understand the current writers correctly, as overrating the role of parliament (which was Neale's specialty) ( )