Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

This is a favorite Regency trope-- the wrongfully divorced woman being remarried by the the divorcing husband but unfortunately certain aspects makes this story way too over the top to even be remotely believable. Especially if your a regular reader of Regencies. There are some spoilers ahead so please be warned. First of all, divorce in Regency England for adultery was incredibly hard to obtain - there are THREE separate trials that must occur -a criminal conversion case, the lover is basically "stealing or trespassing on the husband's property (the wife's uterus for potential pregancy)"; a Church trial in which a Bishop determined the validity of the complaint; and then a civil trial in the House of Lords where any property settlements made during the marriage where sorted out before any divorce was granted. One instance of supposed adultery by a single observer (in this case the harridan evil mum of the H) would have basically been laughed out of court. The supposed transgressor was a commoner, the witness a managing mum and it did not appear that anyone else was called to testify. In a real Regency divorce case, numerous witnesses, including peers, maids and servants would have been compelled to testify that the wife was an adulteress. Sheets would be examined, evidence would be sworn to and almost certainly the doctor treating the h in this story would have been called as well as all the estate staff and the mum's story just wouldn't be credible as there was a logical and reasonable explanation. Secondly there is a continual theme in this story the h needs to remarry. Both the H and the brother of the h try to force her to do so. This would not have been very likely as when a woman was divorced in Regency England an Act of Parliament was required in order for her to be eligible to remarry and usually the woman had to be incredibly wealthy or with a lot of powerful connections for this permission to be granted. When a woman of the peerage in Regency England divorced it meant instant social ostracism. There would never be any invitations to a peerage affair as the woman was now considered part of the world of prostitution. For a divorced male peer it meant probable social exclusion as well and for a novice Duke with no real political power, divorce would have been political suicide. He could keep his title, estate and more than likely if he paid enough, he could get permission to remarry but he would probably be excluded from taking his seat in the House of Lords, be a local magistrate or serve in any kind of government career and he would also be excluded from the most socially desirable of ladies of his rank. Divorce was considered worse than death and most participants in a divorce case left the country for several years. Divorce cases were published in the news publications of the day and for a Duke to divorce was pretty much unheard of. The social and political stigma was just too serious and neither party ever fully recovered from it. Thirdly, it is mentioned several times that there was a marriage settlement made for the h at the time of her marriage in her marriage contract but the H withheld it. This is also wrong because by law he was obligated to pay it at the time of marriage, unless specifically denied in the final divorce decree by Parliament, that money was hers to do with as she wished. If he did not pay it, the H committed fraud. Fourth - the H in this story makes public admission (in a newspaper) that he was wrong about his ex-wife's adultery. This would have never happened because the H would be admitting to perjury in three different courts and thus subject to censure and possible imprisonment. In a divorce case there could never, ever be any public admission of a "mistake" it would be the same as publicly admitting you falsified evidence in a murder trial. The consequences were serious and grave and just too damaging to ever admit to. Research errors aside, the H of this story is completely underwhelming in his lack of regard for anyone other than himself. He is extremely childish and self pitying for most of the story and sadly he never fully seems to understand the full consequences of his actions towards others. This is understandable as the author doesn't seem to understand the consequences of the actions she pushed her characters into. Deportation for a crime was serious, people did not return to England after it. Passage back to England was expensive and more than likely return would not have been allowed if the transported person even survived the sentence to do it. Sadly, this story pretty much lacked any sort of logical plotting. It seemed more like an angsty dramafest where the h falls immediately into bed with a man who destroyed her life, (thus proving she really was a slut), and the H is so busy navel gazing and being sullen over not getting his own way, that any hope for a real romance where two people realize their failings and find a way back to marital bliss will have to be found in another book that isn't this one.