Hah! This was pretty bad, but surprisingly good for a terrible historical novella. I had some historical issues, as expected - the one which comes to mind is the fact that all the depicted royals have church weddings. NOT ACTUALLY A THING AT THIS STAGE.As a story... I'm actually surprised with how well-paced the narrative was. It felt stilted at first and in a few other places, but for something patched together from Bede, hagiography and the Chronicle, it wasn't bad!What I liked best about it is that I could tell that Caldecott was fascinated with some of the same features of Anglo-Saxon history at this period as I: the complex back-and-forth of conversion; the incredibly interlinked royal politics and family trees producing a cast of interesting characters who crop up everywhere; and the scheming machinations of Archbiship Wilfrid. I don't grok her characterisation of him - my head!canon Wilfrid is older, pricklier, and less soppy about Etheldreda - but hers does fit. I'd have made more of the hilarious back-and-forth Aelfric depicts between Etheldreda, Wilfrid, and Ecgfrid, with the two royals each bribing him to be on their side: but hers does fit.Having said that, the weird not-specifically-christian spiritualist bent was, well, weird. And lead to historically inaccurate theology in places.
