Customer Reviews
Entertaining - By: Ibrahim Ali, 09 Jul 2007 
Whilst by no means a bad book it is rather poorly organised & the information often repeated. That said the informationin this book is interesting, whilst it's unlikely to satisfy any half serious academic it makes good light reading & is useful for quick reference. The author is unashamedly royalist & refuses to discuss the negatives of having a hereditary monarchy but is quick to praise its few positive points.
Kings, Queens, Bones and Bastards: Who's who in the English Monarachy from Egbert to Elizabeth II by David Hilliam - By: Jane Clement, 09 Jan 2007 
This book is just what I was looking for, Not to deep just enought info for someone with an intrestin history. I have lernt a lot & settled a few debates as well. brill
What a wonderful read.. more where this came from please - By: Mr. Douglas S. Overton, 17 Jan 2002 I am a casual student of history with a particular interestin monarchs & their amusing idiosycnrasys, what a breath of fresh air this book was to read. It is so nice to get to the interesting facts without getting bogged downin a load of political or economic tedium.
What a shame a few pedants have chosen to gripe about a couple of minor errors that pale into insignificance when you look at the vast amount of research that has gone into this book.
A wonderful read, I can whole heartedly recommend it.
Serious historians beware! - By: , 20 Mar 2001 This a fun, lightweight book & is an ideal introduction to the English monarchy. Serious historians should steer clear, however, as it relies heavily on anecdotes & urban myths. Richard I is just one of the kings to be labelled 'gay' without so much as a second thought. The author strikes an irreverent tone until he reaches the House of Windsor. At this point objectivity flies out of the window, to be replaced by a rather nauseating sycophancy. That said, this is an entertaining read & is probably not intended for a serious, scholarly audience.
Lies and false facts - By: , 15 Mar 2001 
I was totally diappointed with this book. It certainly would never deserve a 5-star review & I am loathed to give it even one star. It could have been an interesting reference book but for the consistent mistakes. Henry II was the son of Geoffrey of Anjou not Emperor Henry V. Many kings are listed as having been gay when there is flimsy evidence for William II, Richard I & especially, Richard II. The Lord Protectorin Edward VI's reign was JOHN Dudley not Robert. Elizabeth I is described as a "perhaps willing" (pg. 221) victim of child abuse. These should not be allowed to passin a history book. Please save your money, I wish I had done.
