In the Shadow of Lions By: Ginger Garrett

In the Shadow of Lions
By: Ginger Garrett

“I am the first writer, The Scribe. My books lie open before the Throne, and someday will be the only witness of your people and their time in this world. The stories are forgotten here, and the Day draws close. I will tell you one of my stories. You will record it.”

So begins the narration of one such angel in this sweeping historical tale set during the reign of England’s Henry VIII. It is the story of two women, their guardian angels, and a mysterious, subversive book . a book that outrages some, inspires others, and launches the Protestant Reformation.

The devout Anne Boleyn catches the eye of a powerful king and uses her influence to champion an English translation of the Bible—Scriptures the common people could read for themselves. Meanwhile, Rose, a broken, suicidal woman of the streets, is moved to seek God when she witnesses Thomas More’s public displays of Christian charity, ignorant of his secret life spent eradicating the same book, persecuting anyone who dares read it.

Historic figures come alive in this thrilling story of heroes and villains, saints and sinners, angels and mortals … and the sacred book that will inspire you anew.

Summary from the back of the book.

Date Started: 2/12/24 – Date Finished: 2/13/24

3 out of 5 stars : Anne Boleyn Story 1 out of 5

The Quick Review – who want a hurry up and tell me yes or no:

If are looking for a story about Anne Boleyn, just walk away. Yes Anne Boleyn is a character in this book, but she is the third “Main Character” and the portrayal of her is different which was nice and refreshing but the other information regarding her story and the time around it well….let’s say it put a bad taste in my mouth. The story to me even with all three people did not come to a satisfying end, I am aware that this is the beginning of a trilogy regarding the “Scribe” portion. The author herself mentions that all the questions you could have will be explained in the future books, but I do not know if I will be able to read them. The premise and idea of the book is excellent, but there need much more cohesion to why all three of them mattered. So again if you wanted a story about Anne Boleyn look elsewhere, if you are interested in a story about the Bible, religious freedom, religious persecution and angels then go ahead and read. But Anne Boleyn diehards, you need an open mind.

** **** **

The Long Review – For people who like to have a lot of information and some spoilers.

Now to inform all of you, I am a HUGE Tudor history nerd. I have said before it is my goal to collect all books regarding Anne Boleyn no matter how terrible they are, or are reviewed. Now with that said, the utter rage that I felt when reading this book was extraordinary. I thought I was going to be pleasantly surprised with a different take on Anne, her more religious side which tends to be ignored in most books. BUT there was nothing to lead us to the character when history describes. There was no captivating Anne, no woman was represented that would lead us to believe that she captured Henry’s heart and held it. And held it for so long. There was no Anne, there was a smidge of Anne….no not quite a smidge, a needle point drop of Anne. The character you are introduced to is a young woman of compassion who helped (unbeknownst to her) Henry when he was injured and depressed. Then he suddenly became obsessed with her? Then locked her up in a room for days. That she was betrothed to Henry Percy and they were all set to marry and it was known to all the court and both their families? Yeaaaah. A no to that too. That Catherine of Aragon would put that much stake in “defending” against witches like she did in the book? That Anne would have no knowledge of witches and what to do against them in England? I am quite sure that the idea of witches was known in France. This Anne upset me, this Anne is not Anne Boleyn.

Now to the second character in the book, Rose. A whore who had a child who died, who turned out to be Cardinal Wolsey’s, which in the end didn’t really seem to matter at all to the story except to get Thomas More (her “savior”) upset, even though he already knew!? She was an experiment to him, which makes sense regarding to Thomas More’s desire to reform heretics and put them to the true Faith. So Rose being his experiment of what faith could do for someone who hit rock bottom and had an immoral life. Not a terrible experiment because it did work. She began to pray and be a good “Christian” woman, but she was turning to the other side of the pillow. She was following Hutchins teachings. (Which by the way was Tyndale. Yes Hutchins was another name his family went by but the author really should have used Tyndale because that is the name that most people with knowledge of the reformation of England would know him as. Maybe it was a choice to make the book more mysterious to us reformation informed? Poor choice because I thought it was the author making a new book entirely) (sorry about the rant back to Rose) So Rose began to lean to Hutchins as well as Thomas More’s daughter Margaret (again could go on a rant but I’ll refrain myself this time) Rose says that the book calls to her, it whispers things and that they need to follow that instead of the other book. Rose is reformed. She is devout and no longer selling her body and being “unchristian” but the book doesn’t really tell us what happened with her in the very end.

The final character. The woman who was awful. I did not like her. There were many questions I had in her part of the story but I honestly could have done without her. She wrote down Anne’s and Rose’s story but that’s about it. She dies and her novel gets “stolen” by one of the nurses that took care of her. I didn’t have any sympathy or investment in this character.

This is also a historically inaccurate story. Elizabeth I was born in September…..NOT winter.

End Rant.

Read at your own discretion.

No questions…..only disappointment.

JUST KIDDING

Why write Anne in such a way that she has no allure to Henry? What captivates him? (she doesn’t captivate the reader)
Why did the author not have Anne read the Hutchins book till closer to the end?
Did the author even research? (Suppressing rant regarding Margaret, errors of Elizabeth’s birth)
Why bother with the Rose story? Should have just picked one and went with that instead.
Did the author just mention Anne Boleyn to get people to read it? (there were plenty of other well known people during this time period she could have wrote about in regard to the reformation like Anne Askew)
Why make the first character we are introduced to, so unlikable?
Why leave the modern era questions unanswered? (so we would have to read the next two?)

I apologize for my salty-ness. This book upset me. If Anne was not in it, and the unlikeable “scribe” would have been fleshed out more it would have definitely been more enjoyable. I will not be reading the next novels.

** **** **