Burghley: William Cecil at the Court of Elizabeth I

I really couldn't get on with this book, try as I might.I found the prose so clunky that it got badly in the way of a fluent read. The author keeps dropping in strange, short statements about Cecil, summarising our man's brilliance. To take an example, chapter 6 begins as follows. "William Cecil came close to treason in the summer of 1553. He had survived by his wits. He had an instinct for survival. He had exceptionally fine judgment. He was able above all to watch his own back. These talents made him the most powerful man in Elizabethan England". To me, this reads like something from a nursery rhyme. Alford might have said, "Will was nimble, Will was quick, Will jumped over the candlestick." At the very least, we seem to be in the Labybird Book of Lord Burghley. Is this how they teach history in Cambridge these days?One of the problems with this style is that because the statements are so facile, they stop you dead in your tracks, wondering why on earth the author is doing this, and then also worrying about when he is going to do it to you again. Which he does. He keeps doing it. Clunk. Clunk. Clunkety clunk. It is really off-putting. What's more, the statements are surprisingly poorly evidenced from the text, and you sometimes start to wonder whether he doesn't really want to go to the trouble of proving his point.The second big problem I had with the book was that it is dire on context. If you don't already have a pretty solid grasp of the period, this book is not going to help you. I think Alford assumes too much not deliberately but without realising he is doing it. There are interesting passages, such as a description of evangelical Cambridge during the period Cecil was there (hence my second star), but they are the exception. The reign of Edward VI was brief, dramatic, and fascinating, but it is not well known. Alford makes no serious attempt to give us a meaningful exposition or overview of it. There is far too of little of the big picture. Why not, for example, outline the reasons for and course of the contest between Somerset and Northumberland? I have heard far better on an amateur historian's podcast.Another obvious example: it was an absolutely astonishing achievement, given the monumental swings in state policy, for Cecil to have been a serious player in the reigns of Edward, Lady Jane Grey, Mary and Elizabeth, and yet Alford conveys very little of how extraordinary his navigation of those tumultuous seas was, or how on earth he managed it. Unless, that is, you count the Ladybird statement quoted above. One disastrous consequence of this is that Alton succeeds in losing all the drama of the story.This really is no way to write the history of one of the central figures in a exceptionally dramatic period of British history. Such a shame.I was deeply disappointed that such a distinguished academic could not do better than this, and I actually feel rather cheated.

I've read a few books about Lord Burghley but I like to read around a subject and this book fills in the blanks. It's a more personal account of the man and his family, his sense of destiny as he serves both the last male Tudor king, Edward VI and Edward's half-sister, Elizabeth. A very good read ( though I just haven't quite finished it yet!

An excellent read. I looked forward to each page.

Very readable, and very evidently superbly researched.

This is very well researched and explains why Burghley was so very influential in Elizabeth 1's court. Well worth the read

Promptly delivered and as described. Thank you.

Brilliant book and excellent English, pleasant change these days.

This is a rich, thoughtful biography I would recommend wholeheartedly to anyone with an interest in Tudor England. Stephen Alford has succeeded in writing an account that is deeply analytical of Burghley and his times while remaining accessible to the general reader. Not least of its virtues is a strong, page-turning narrative.Those with a working knowledge of Tudor history may find the chapters on Burghley's early years particularly revealing: his formative years at St John's College, Cambridge, his rapid rise at the court of Edward VI and his survival under Mary. A surprise to many may be Alford's account of his chameleon-like adaptation to Mary's regime.To tell Burghley's story under Elizabeth is effectively to tell the entire story of Elizabethan government and politics, for, as Alford notes, he was the master of every detail of every policy. Choices need to be made to avoid an overlong and unwieldly account, and I felt Alford's decision to focus primarily on the politics of the succession worked well. It is a clearer, more sharply-focused book as a result.There is much to enjoy here, too, for those who want to understand the man behind the politician. It is no easy task to tease this out at a distance of 400 years, and for a man who was perfectly placed to suppress material unfavourable to him. But Alford is always alive to the telling detail that might illuminate Burghley's character and motivation. Just one example that sticks in my mind was Burghley's passion for cartography, and how we can get a little closer to understanding it from his detailed annotations to a copy of the leading atlas of the day in his library.