History is littered with stories of royal favourites who've clawed their way up from modest roots to dazzling heights of influence - but few did so quite as spectacularly as George Villiers. At the age of twenty, the future Duke of Buckingham had precious little going for him. He was a penniless gentleman, the second son of a second marriage, whose dead father had left everything to the children of his first marriage. In most cases this would have been a one-way ticket to obscure poverty, but George had several key advantages. He had a remarkably tenacious and ruthless mother, Mary Villiers, who recognised potential when she saw it. He had extraordinary good looks, remarkable charisma and intelligence. He (Mary decided) would be the catalyst by which his family dragged themselves to wealth and power - and there was one very obvious way to do that: to catch the king's eye. This is one of British history's great stories of social climbing, and Woolley delves into the detail with relish - even if I felt the book lacked the vivacity and panache that its captivating subject wielded with such ease.

Ambitious parents had been thrusting their daughters under kings' noses since time immemorial, so perhaps it was only fair that, during James I's reign, the boys got a chance. James's predilection for handsome young gentlemen had been apparent ever since his accession, and his passion for particular favourites had already caused political ructions - his beloved Esmé Stuart had been exiled from Scotland, while Robert Carr had aroused envy and loathing at the British court. But the British suspicion of favourites, ironically, made George's path easier. Those who were disaffected with Carr's arrogance thought they might benefit from promoting a new, younger, more pliable favourite, who could be relied upon to advance their own agendas. Of course, this didn't quite happen. As George grew closer and closer to the king, he paid lip service to those who'd supported him, but he also had his own ambitions - and those, as always with the Villiers family, came first. Somehow, using all his guile and charm, he managed to keep James's interest long beyond the point where other favourites had failed.

And then there was George's relationship with James's son, the awkward, sickly, chronically shy Charles. Woolley devotes a lot of space to the issues surrounding Charles's prospective marriage - the 'Spanish Match' - drawing out all the implications of these fraught negotiations. Royal marriages were never simple, but a proposed match with Spain was especially problematic. The British people were horrified at the thought of their royal family having marital ties to a country which had attacked England with the Armada within living memory. To make matters worse, the Spanish were irredeemably Catholic - not a virtue in a fiercely Protestant country. (The future French queen, Henrietta Maria, would make herself desperately unpopular for just the same reason.) The final straw was that the Spanish were implicated in the deeds of the Holy Roman Emperor, who'd recently deposed James's daughter Elizabeth and her husband from the throne of Bohemia. It was very helpful to go over this in such detail, because I find the European politics of this period to be enormously confusing.

Unfortunately, young Charles had rather set his heart on the Spanish Infanta, and this led to the marvellous (and highly irresponsible) escapade in which he and George travelled incognito to Madrid, in the hope of winning over the beautiful princess and convincing her to come back to Britain. Spoiler: it didn't work. (You can read a Spanish take on said escapade in the first Captain Alastriste novel.) But it ultimately did make George's position stronger, because his participation in this madcap scheme made Charles almost as dependent on him as James I had been. And that's where things started to go wrong. The British establishment could just about stomach a favourite, knowing that he or she would fall from grace with the accession of a new monarch. But what if the heir to the throne showed every sign of keeping George on, as adviser and partner in crime?

Having read Woolley's book, I now appreciate several things that I didn't before. I didn't realise exactly how close Charles and George were - not, one presumes, in the same way that George and James had been, but certainly friendly enough that the king began to feel left out. Nor had I realised how indecisive James was, especially in his last years, petulantly wavering on foreign policy and threatening to undo all the goodwill that Charles had managed to earn with Parliament. And that was something new to me as well: the extent to which the young Charles was committed to the role of Parliament, which is rather ironic considering everything that happened later. At the heart of all these stories, one finds George Villiers. Whether or not one believes that he knowingly poisoned James I - and Woolley lays out the facts in so neutral a way that it's hard to know exactly what he thinks - there is no doubt that he exercised astonishing power over British policy in this period. He tried to prove himself as a diplomat during the discussions about the Spanish match, and its French successor, with varying degrees of success. (Woolley seems to accept the rumour that George had a fling with Anne of Austria, which gave me flashbacks to The Three Musketeers.) His desire to live up to his title of Lord Admiral led to a disastrous campaign against Spanish treasure ships, with huge loss of British life. And the decision to bring him to trial, early in the reign of Charles I, seems to have been a major factor in turning Charles against Parliament, which he'd previously championed. It seems that our boy made good from Leicestershire had fingers in every single pie.

I knew little about George Villiers before, so can't judge how Woolley's book measures up against other biographies. He's definitely thorough. There are many quotes from contemporary documents, which really helps to bring the period to life - although on a couple of occasions we're given the same quotes twice in quick succession, which should have been picked up in editing. This jarred with me but isn't the end of the world. For some reason, though, I found the book very tough to get through, and can't ascertain why. The story is full of incident, with some colourful passages, such as those describing a royal hunt in the early part of the book. The narrative doesn't leap around too much; and, as you can see above, I got a good sense of George Villiers as a person. But overall it just felt heavy and I felt that I had to plough through it, rather than being lightly carried along. Maybe there are slightly too many digressions about relatively minor characters, which made the pace feel slower than it should? Maybe the elements of repetition frustrated me more than I thought they did? Maybe I simply wasn't in the right mood?

I find myself in a very odd position in rating the book. While I can't deny that it's a solid biography of a fascinating person, I felt that it was hard work: I can't quite push it up to four stars, despite its intellectual weight and profusion of quotes, of which I feel compelled to approve as a historian. But perhaps that density was the very problem. I felt that I had to read it with one end of the thread constantly in hand, like Theseus, to stop myself from getting lost in the detail. But does that say more about me than about the book? I'd be extremely interested to know how other people found it. Could it be that my brain is beginning to shut down as I approach the brink of middle age? Good heavens, I hope not. I've got far too many Russian novels and history books to get through before my intellect dribbles out through my ears...

[3.5 stars]

For the review, please see my blog:
https://theidlewoman.net/2019/11/06/the-kings-assassin-benjamin-woolley/

For me, this was more a biography of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham that the solving (or positing a reasonable scenario) of a cold case.

It is the tale of the rise of Villiers who was "... just another prcincial urning up in his country weeds .." that caught the attention of the James (and also his current favourite, Carr) whilst he was on progress. He was put forth (by a conspiracy of nobles and the Queen) as a foil to Carr's hold over the King. His rise was swift and his supporters (ie: patrons) assumed he would do their bidding - but they had misjudged by Villiers and his family.

His family life, marriage, and political adventures and rewards are duly covered off before we get the the chapters that actually start to deal with the death of James and the allegations against Villiers. There was, as the author noted, "an abundance of suspicion, little evidence" except for a delirious outburst from James "... will you murder me ..." as he lay on his sickbed. Villiers was in charge of James' treatment and had control over who had access to the ailing King - so the accusation of "poison" was sure to surface, even more so as Villiers was consolidating his hold of james' heir, Charles.

Even so, evidence of an indictment was being collaborated a year following James' death. When Villiers himself become ill that same period, rumours of "poison" reared their ugly heads - but it was at the hands of an assassin that Villiers met his fate.

I was really hoping for more of a cold case style of work than a biography on Villiers, which though essential, dominated when it should have been the entree only. As one reviewer put it "...the author asserts that compelling evidence exists to suggest that Villiers, overcome by ambition and frustrated by James's passive approach to government, poisoned him. Although the book is informed by primary evidence from the likes of pamphlets and letters, the author does not reveal the precise contents of this “compelling evidence.”

Due to my opinion of sexual relations between two men, I could not continue reading this book and therefore will not judge it on the writers talent, historical accuracy or my own pleasure of reading. It has received some attention on Goodread's so perhaps you may judge your own interest in the subject from the other's who have finished the book.
Full Disclosure: I was allowed to read a copy of this book for free as a member of NetGalley in exchange for my unbiased review. The opinions I have expressed are my own and I was not influenced to give a positive review.

Filled with great facts and thoroughly researched this book weaves together the facts to turn an interesting tale of a wonderful topic into a must read.

Many thanks go to Benjamin Woolley, MacMillan, and Netgalley for the free copy of this book in exchange for my unbiased review. Woolley covers the dynamic affair between King James I and George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, and pet extraordinaire. James became King of England after Elizabeth I's death. He was partial to attractive young men. His wife, Anne of Denmark, lived apart from him after having three children. Villiers was pampered and spoiled. The king was wrapped around his little finger. But the biggest question surrounding this relationship (which is not even mentioned until the very end of the book) is whether George had any hand in King James' death. I realize that may be the most dramatic event to possibly occur between these two men, so that's probably why it was picked as the title, but this book is such a fitting tribute to their lives and times. Very detailed, it leaves nothing and no one of any significance out. I was impressed with the time it must have taken to fully research. I wonder if there perhaps have been a more fitting title?

once in a while, I am lucky enough to find a book that truly does offer a fresh viewpoint or new information on an historical topic that seems to have been covered so many times before that it would be impossible to elaborate on it further. I found this with Benjamin Woolley's book, 'The King's Assassin."

While there has been a lot of speculation over the years about the death of James the VI and I and how he died, there has been very little compelling evidence that there ay have been more to it than it first seems. This book explores the entire relationship of George Villiers and King James, from the beginnings to the ill-fated end. The author did a fantastic job of picking out the small nuances in their relationship and thoroughly investigating every remaining document at his disposal to tell a complete tale of politics, romance and intrigue that is stranger than fiction.

This is a very memorable book, with a lot of interesting information in it. I recommend it to all people that are interested in English history and the monarchy. It would be a great start for anyone wanting to know the truth behind the rumours of James and his most trusted servant.

This review is based on a complimentary copy from the publisher, provided through Netgalley. All opinions are my own.

As an avid reader of historical fiction, this book did not disappoint. The rise of George Villiers, a commoner, into the life and love of the Stuart king, James I of Scotland, is fascinating. A very ambitious man, Villiers is a figure of mystery as to how he was able to basically control the king. Very well written and researched.

This book is touted as being about who killed James I of England, but is simply a biography about him. Yes, his death is written about, but this read like any other biography to me. I was disappointed, as I was looking forward into delving further into theories surrounding his death. It was well written, but definitely needs a new title!

The King’s Assassin was an interesting and fascinating read. I liked it and I would give it 4 stars.

James I, King of England, Ireland and Scotland died on March 27, 1625 after an intense and painful bout of gout, malaria, and arthritis. He was attended by the most important physicians of the land and his adviser, friend and lover, George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham.
In the book, The King's Assassin, Benjamin Woolley offers that maybe Villiers was responsible for the Kings death. The examination of the circumstances of the Kings death comes mid way through the book. The treatment of the King's maladies was overseen by the most prominent physicians available and were standard for the time. Villiers, with assistance of his mother, offered a remedy he himself had taken the year before and led to his recovery. The King agreed and received the potion and plasters. His health improved for a few days. A dramatic decline followed and James I died.
The new King, Charles I, continued his close relationship with Villiers. Some rumors circulated that Villiers might have been responsible for James I death. There were never charges issued and Villiers continued assisting the new king. Physicians in attendance to the king claimed to use their best techniques. These facts illustrate the weakness of the book. There was no motive for Villiers to poison the King, The King loved him, pampered him and promoted him to high honors. Neither Charles nor Villiers spoke out against the King or his rule.
The assassination issue encompased about a third of the book. If Woolley's goal was to highlight the cause of James death, he could have examined it in more detail and depth. This was more an examination of the life and times of George Villiers, than an exploration of the death of James I.

The title of this book is a bit misleading - the assassination is barely touched on. It is, however, a highly entertaining biography of George Villiers. At times, the tone is downright gossipy, which I enjoyed tremendously. The meteoric rise of Villiers is fascinating. The fits and starts as he goes from country bumpkin to highly attuned political creature are meticulously laid out. Villiers relationship with James I is kept at the center of the book. Many of James important endeavors, such as the King James Bible are touched on but treated as trivial.
The King's Assassin: The Fatal Affair of George Villiers and James I is an accessible but imperfect introduction to some of the major players and political machinations of James I's reign.

“The King’s Assassin” is essentially the story of the rise of George Villiers from county gentry to the heights of the British aristocracy as the Duke of Buckingham. Villiers, who was handsome and charismatic, was placed in view of King James I with the intention of having the king fall in love with George, which he did. Although married and a father James was homosexual, and had several “favorites,” of whom Villiers was the last and the longest lasting. (James was not the only British king to have favorites, one thinks of Edward II and Piers Gaveston, for example.)

My problem with this book is that it is not concerned for the most part with the death of James I. Yes, he dies at the end, and the author seems to believe that Buckingham, in concert with his mother, killed him, although he does admit the possibility that they might have killed him accidentally by interfering with James’ doctors’ treatments. Woolley makes a reasonable case that Buckingham meant to kill the king in order to save himself. I am undecided about it, but no matter. The problem is that the king’s death takes up only a small portion of the book; most of the book is about Buckingham and his life as the king’s catamite. (Not my word for his lover, but one which was used at the time.)

This is not to say that the book is not interesting, it is, but the emphasis does not live up to the title or the premise. There is a long, detailed telling of the trip to Spain that Villiers and the younger Prince Charles took in furtherance of a match between Charles (by this time his father’s heir due to the death of his elder brother Prince Henry) and a Spanish princess. There is plenty of discussion about the machinations of various courtiers, some pro-George and others anti-George. But the death of the king and the uproar in Parliament about it is almost minor.

I would have liked to have seen either more about the Duke of Buckingham, including a discussion of whether he was bisexual by nature, or merely agreed to relations with the king for the power it brought (which is what I think myself), or more about the life of James I and his death. I think sexuality is fluid, and the book would have greatly benefited from a frank discussion about how homosexuality was considered in the seventeenth-century, especially in relationship with a hereditary monarchy. Woolley hints at a relationship between Buckingham and Prince Charles, and I would have been interested in seeing this further fleshed out. Charles was certainly under Buckingham’s spell, but George Villiers was incredibly charismatic and older enough than the prince to be an attractive mentor.

All in all, I am glad that I read this book. It was a little too much neither fish nor fowl, which is why I cannot give it five stars. It was well-written, not dry, and did eventually get around to the death of King James I and the case against his lover the Duke of Buckingham. Whether or not Buckingham purposely killed his sovereign can never be definitively known at this remove, but Woolley has a good try at convincing his readers that it was Buckingham (and his devoted mother) whodunnit.

You used to have to read old biographies of James I and George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham, and read between the lines about their (quite obviously) sexual relationship, and the way in which British Puritans reacted. Availability of primary sources which make it unavoidable, and changing 21st century mores make it necessary for any work dealing with the Jacobean court to deal with this central political and personal bond. Woolley aims for breathless scandal, although he fills out the larger context of the Villiers as a provincial c-list family with a smart driver (George's mother) clawing into the higher nobility, the diplomatic surround of the unfolding 30 Years' War and balancing Britain between France and the Hapsburgs, and James' dysfunctional ties to his wife and children. The highlight is the use of art to tease out the signals and messages embedded within Rubens and Titian paintings, but the research is aimed at a popular audience and often sloppy, with notes tucked away at the back and almost no engagement with the vast literature behind all the events Woolley just takes for granted as he dishes dirt.

Disclaimer: ARC via Netgalley
If you are like me, you most likely heard about Buckingham via Alexandre Dumas’ Three Musketeers. The real Duke of Buckingham, George Villiers, is paradoxically more and less interesting.
Despite its title, this work of popular history is more of a straight biography then a presentation of what or who could have killed James I of England.
That is part of the problem. Considering the title of the book, the actual thesis of assassination doesn’t raise its head until the very end. This placement makes the title a bit misleading. True, the title isn’t the assassination of King James I, hinting at a biographer of an assassin, but the title does mislead.
As a popular biography of George Villiers, the history works. Woolley writes with energy and vigor, if at times a gossipy tone. He plays attention to the influence of the women in Villers life, but does not do the blame everything on wives and mothers route that some biographers do.
Yet, the fact that you are waiting for an assassination to raise its head does occur.
The book almost works as a biography though the later years of Buckingham’s life get short attention. It is almost as if Woolley is saying “here’s the man before the death of James I; don’t you think that he could have killed the king?”
And a thesis shouldn’t be a question.
Three stars because of the detail about Villiers, but if you want to read a historic mystery involving James I try Bellany or Somerset.

This is 'popular' history written with the verve of a novelist but it lacks the rigour, the judgement and the attention to cultural historicisation that an academic historian would bring.

The blurb hooks us with the idea of assassination and conspiracy as if it's new - but gossip and rumours about Buckingham's possible involvement in the poisoning of James I were rife as soon as the king died. Buckingham was even impeached before the House of Lords in 1626, the year following James' death, though parliament was dissolved before a verdict was reached, adding to the suspicions.

What Woolley brings to the party is an assertion that Buckingham did indeed poison the king with aconite, a verdict delivered by a modern doctor based on Woolley's "dossier of evidence". Unfortunately, he doesn't tell us of what this dossier consists and it's hard to imagine, almost 400 years later, that it's anything more than documentary reports of the king's deathbed - hardly stringent or reliable.

In any case, the issue of poisoning isn't reached until about 75% of the way through the book: the rest is a lively biography of George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham, and an account of the reign of James I and the coming-of-age of his son Charles I.

Woolley writes vividly (though the central section gets a bit bogged down in Anglo-Spanish politics) but there are places where his lack of historical judgement shows through. For example, he dismisses the King James Bible as a 'pet project' of the king, rather than understanding it to be a cornerstone of Reformed Protestantism, allowing anyone to read the Bible, rather than having it only in Latin mediated by a priest.

More pressingly, he pretty much asserts an unequivocal sexual relationship between James and Buckingham, something that we cannot know and which, more importantly, writes out the way in which male/male friendship in the early modern period was frequently articulated in passionate, romantic terms that seem inescapably sexual to us, but which weren't at the time. Disturbingly, there's a subliminal sense throughout that men as 'depraved' as James and Buckingham were almost bound to end up poisoned and poisoner - even if unintentional, there's a whiff of covert homophobia somewhere in the text's arguments.

Anyone interested in a rigorous academic study of the question of James' 'murder' should consult Bellany & Cogswell, 'The Murder of James I, Yale University Press, 2015. But if you're simply interested in a lively biography of Buckingham and his relationship with James I, this is quite a page-turner.