“We had always been inevitable. For the rest of our lives, we would be as dusk and dawn; one’s ascendancy would cause the other’s fall. Perhaps, in that way, we could never truly part.”

SOLOMON’S CROWN is an achillean historical romance set in medieval Europe, retelling the rumored-to-be-gay relationship of King Philip of France and Richard, Duke of Aquitaine and future King of England. Despite the gorgeous writing and sweeping rivals-to-lovers romance, this really didn’t work for me, for a few reasons (some spoilers ahead). The romance happened so quickly, I didn’t find it believable; I also never got a good sense of what Philip and Richard liked about each other. Furthermore, I did not care about either of them as individuals and they didn’t have much character development. While the author acknowledges that “they were not good men by any modern standard”, they didn’t seem like good men in the context of the novel either. Richard is constantly at odds with his brothers, making his grief at their deaths seem false. Richard and Philip both are obsessed with land, either maintaining ownership or conquering more. I found them to be dangerously self-absorbed and uninterested in challenging anything about the power and responsibility they were born with, except to be together romantically. And yes, seeing queer love conquer in a homophobic world is a beautiful thing, but I felt there was a lot more the author could have done to make me want to root for them as leaders and as a couple (especially since she wasn’t trying to make a historically accurate narrative). This made the plot really drag on for me, as I couldn’t care less who won which wars and who kept which lands. The ending was very anti-climatic. The saving grace was Philip’s wife Isabella, who I liked quite a bit - but she was mostly relegated to being his emotional support and wanting to have a child. Again, the writing was really lovely, and I did get pulled into some aspects of their forbidden love story, but the more I read the more irritated I became. Thanks to Dell for the eARC; this novel is out 3/14.

Content warnings: animal cruelty (boar hunt), death of a family member, imprisonment (side character), grief, anxiety/possible panic attack, homophobia, injury, war

Good story, queerness a focal point of story, historical setting interesting in its exploration of strategic relationships.

First off if you are looking for a historically accurate book this is not it. The author told us this prior to the book starting so I went in looking for a fun story not something to learn from. The love story of Phillip and Richard in this book is truly beautiful and one that will stick with me. If you are looking for a MM Romance that is very g rated this is a great one.

I loved the story, the world building and meeting the different characters. I felt completely immersed in the story and couldn't stop reading it.

A wistful and compelling historical rivals-to-lovers with incisive court intrigue and a royal romance that will leave you swooning. Perfect for those who want the intense passion and dreamy prose of The Song of Achilles, but with less tragedy. I can't wait to see what Natasha Siegel writes next!

5 stars

This book is low on historical accuracy but very high on vibes. It was such a compelling read and I could not put it down. It has some truly beautiful moments in it despite it being about two very problematic medieval kings getting it on throughout various castles and manors. I probably could have done without the political gambits and all the people dying in the background (or foreground in a few instances) so they could be together but it was also the 1100s so, like, stuff was weird. Honestly the less you think about this book and the more you vibe along with it the better off you'll be.

I LOVED this book. I don't think it's going to be everyone's cup of tea, especially if you're a history buff because liberties were taken with the story. The author does include author's notes in the front AND back of the book (this is included in the audiobook as well) where she says she did her own reimagining with the characters, so you can't be surprised when this book doesn't follow exactly to events in history? I would say a lot of what sticks to history is in name only and the events of how certain characters die still seems similar to what is assumed to have happened in real life, but everything else is very, very much fiction.

I knew nothing about the characters on which this story was based and only read the Wikipedia entries about halfway through this book, and I had a great time with this story. But yeah, everyone involved or mentioned in this book sounds to be pretty awful people in real life, so I would recommend skipping learning about the real life people the characters are based on and treat this book like the fiction that it is instead for maximum enjoyment.

Content notes include animal death (boar during a hunt), blackmail, parental deaths, sibling deaths, abuse, marriage with an underage child takes place (but nothing sexual happens for many years), illness, battle scenes, murder, and scene with a childbirth scare.

In this story, we follow Richard, Duke of Aquitaine (more famously known as Richard the Lionheart), and King Philip II of France. They meet as young men, and slowly fall for one another through the years. I thought this was a lovely story and I loved both characters in this book.

I don't know if this is for everyone, but what I loved most is that this book doesn't shy away from a little battle strategy and mentions of war. Not necessarily even between the two, but England and France were never friends, especially not in those days. We don't see a lot of battle scenes, but enough where I realize how much I miss reading fantasy and AU history stories with lots of battle strategies and sword fighting. I MISS IT SO MUCH.

I am confused why early comps for this book compared it to The Song of Achilles and I'm not sure if that's still happening. If you're after The Song of Achilles here, I don't think you'd find it. Sure, it's a kind of historical setting and this has a m/m romance in it, but I don't think it gives TSOA vibes. This is more...Captive Prince without all the problematic bits. You have the heads of rival kingdoms, a slow burn romance, and a lot of political intrigue. This book has its sad moments, but some one-off funny parts as well that helps break up the tension.

On the whole, I think this book was lovely and ends with a very satisfying HFN where you can believe that the characters are very much in love and happy as they are at the end of the book. And I feel very okay with that and love the book. Even though this is a standalone book, I think this book still manages to capture the feel of a slow burn romance just because so much time passes between meetings. You can only travel so fast on horseback across the country, you know?

I think one thing the book was missing (or at least in the e-ARC and audiobooks I had) is a map. We get a family tree with the text, but I'm whatever about the family tree being included honestly. I think the most important thing we needed with this story is a map of all the places mentioned in this book and what the countries looked like back in the day this story is based on, because current maps obviously don't work here and boundaries have shifted in the time since. I spent ages baffled at the significance of Richard having Aquitaine and why his father (King Henry II, otherwise known as Henry Plantagenet) was so pissed Richard had that piece of land before I saw a map and realized how large the land was compared to even England and France at the time. So, yeah, maps would've been nice with this book.

THE weirdest part in this book, and I don't see it mentioned enough, is the beginning chapter where Richard narrates his own birth. Is it necessary? I THINK NOT. First-person POV of your own birth is very weird. Add in the fact that this is part of the prologue, and for the most part I find prologues extraneous, and the whole thing could have been cut out and nothing would be lost. The whole prologue leaves me baffled and should've been on the chopping block during edits. I listened to the final version of this book on audio, and the prologue remains.

This book is mostly centered around Philip and Richard's romance, while Philip is married to his wife Isabella. Is it cheating? The way this story handles Philip and Isabella's relationship is fine to me, but might not be for others. They are a marriage of convenience and it's not like Richard didn't sleep with others while he was away from Philip. Richard is suggested to be bisexual in this book, and Philip is gay and doesn't actually feel sexual attraction towards his wife. But, you know, royalty and duty and heirs is a thing that must happen, and does happen in this book. So, just thought I'd mention that. I actually do love Isabella a lot and this is yet another book where I'm like, WHAT IF THIS BOOK WAS POLYAM and Richard was attracted to Isabella as well as being attracted to Philip? But alas, no such luck.

One thing I am sad about is that there weren't any special editions made of this book by any book boxes or online retailers. The physical paperback of this is so plain. WHERE IS THE FOIL? The French flaps? The paperback is very basic and I was disappointed seeing it in person and the publisher should've done more. I'm still going to buy the book because I loved the story, but I'm also going to be annoyed the publisher did nothing fancy for this book.

I prefer this book on audiobook more than reading it in text, although I will buy a physical copy of this book too. This book is told in first-person and not quite alternating chapters, but they switch out when the story calls for it. And the thing is, I found that reading this book by text, it was hard to tell who's chapter was whose if I put the book down and picked it back up awhile later. The voices for the characters just seemed too similar from the text alone.

The audiobook narration is very well done. It actually has two narrators, Ben Allen as Philip and Steve West as Richard. I've listened to Steve West and had no issues with his narration. I quite love his narration actually. I was under the impression he only used this name while narrating with an American accent but apparently not. But I did find myself having trouble with Ben Allen at first because the sound seemed to go in and out at random times (I listen with headphones if that makes a difference). The volume seems to fix itself in later chapters so it winded up not bothering me as I listened to more of the audiobook, but the quality of the sound was very weird at the beginning. I came to really like his narration by the end of the book and look forward to checking out more of his audiobooks! I feel like I should point this out since this almost NEVER happens, but at the end of the audiobook, they do mention which audiobook narrator voiced which character and I think that's fun. Audiobooks usually leave you guessing who voiced which character and never tell you.

This book is Natasha Siegel's debut novel, and I look forward to any new books she writes in the future! This book was a joy to read and I enjoyed the story and reimagining of the characters in this book, and I can't wait to see what other books she comes out with!

***Thanks to the publisher for giving me a copy of the e-ARC and audiobook for review!!***

This takes history and adds a fictionalized relationship between two of the most powerful Kings/heir at the time. And according to the internet that is a theory so why not. They may not have been making the right choices for their country but they were on opposing sides trying to best their fathers and brothers. This is a story from over 1,000 years ago and I am for sure certain there were queers in medieval times. This book follows the historical timeline interspersing fictional missives, conversations and alliances.
Went into a Google rabbit hole and found a translation from their time
"Richard, [then] duke of Aquitaine, the son of the king of England, remained with Philip, the King of France, who so honored him for so long that they ate every day at the same table and from the same dish, and at night their beds did not separate them."
I mean they could've just been really close friends having bro time. This was a very romantic reimagining of that time. Even though in the game of thrones, crusades and land wars love isn't always what prevails.

Thank you ballantine and penguinrandomhouse

Not exactly historical fiction, but the author straight-up says that. I am not sure how I feel about it being basically a historical fanfic. I was hoping for more truth in it than I got I guess.

I'm on the fence about this. I do appreciate that there's an author's note in the beginning mentioning that historical accuracy just doesn't apply here but... some of this is just so unbelievable that the warning doesn't help. This author clearly has a lot of love for this story and the fictionalized versions of the characters present, but I'm really unsure why Siegel needed to use actual historical figures if she was going to take so many liberties with them.

That being said, this was easy to read and was overall enjoyable. Once I set it realized just how many liberties were being taken with the actual figures and totally removed them from the equation, it was honestly a pretty fun read. I think it's just necessary to really know what you're getting into before reading this.

Solomon's Crown by Natasha Siegel was not a wow for me. I had high expectations going in but those were not met. Why do authors and publishers keep saying this is a romance novel when there was clearly a lack of romance?!? Very frustrating to the reader. Nothing grabbed hold of me while reading. The characters or the plot, for the entirety of the story, was just blah to me. I love historical books but when you change the reality of what happened, it's hard for me get into. I'll definitely give this author another try.

Solomon's Crown is a story about the weight of history, but also about the spaces for joy. Siegel does a fantastic job at exploring these moments of power and betrayal mixed with these pockets of individuality and glimpses of happiness. So often the power struggles of families play out across miles and with casualties. With chemistry from the beginning, I enjoyed the characters in Solomon's Crown. Siegel connects these characters, these leaders, with their pasts, troubled families, but also with their potential to be seen anew.

I’m trying to grapple my feelings on this book.

First- good things! It’s well written and the author does a great job with the alternate history she makes. I think for someone who doesn’t know the details of the history, it’s really enjoyable. I can’t fault her on her craft.

But, for me, I think it was fine. I guess I prefer my rewritten history to be more in the vein of My Lady Jane. More comedic and farther from history.

The author does clearly state this is a deviation from history. And I do appreciate the clear line she has drawn. But also I think there is still enough of it to make me almost sad in a way? Maybe I know too much and how the history books end.

Overall, if you can separate the truth from the fantasy better than I can- you should definitely pick this book up!

Thanks to NetGalley and Dell for this eARC!

This book is blurbed by Tamora Pierce AND Rainbow Rowell, do I need to say more? Plus, made me want to read after a few weeks in a slump. There's a mid-book section of scmoopy letters that I loved, AND it is making me want to watch the fox robin hood just to remind myself what that Richard and John looked like. ANYWAY, overall I really enjoyed this historical romance set outside the regency. Will be very interested to see what Siegel does next.

At the beginning and end of the book, Natasha Siegel is upfront about how little historical influence is involved in this book. Unfortunately, I found the reimagined history (aside from the long battle scenes, which I don't like to read in most books) to be the most interesting part of the story, which is probably because of Siegel's beautiful, descriptive writing. The actual romance between Richard the Lionheart and Philip II of France is...fine. There are a few moments of vulnerability between them, but they go from strangers to lovers quickly without much in the way of banter or emotional intimacy, so it was tough for me to be invested in their relationship. There's also a lack of tension that makes the narrative drive stall.

Again, the prose itself is lovely, but for a romance this isn't very...romantic.

Heat Factor: Much is implied, little is on the page

Character Chemistry: Falling at first conversation

Plot: Romeo & Juliet, Medieval Kings Edition

Overall: Somehow I couldn’t put this book down, even though it’s not presented in a particularly suspenseful way

I cut my romance eyeteeth on the romantic storylines of historical fiction when I was younger, and when I saw that Solomon’s Crown is a romance between Philip the Godgiven of France and Richard the Lionheart, how could I possibly not read it? I couldn’t not read it. What you should know before reading it yourself, however, is that it’s like history fanfic: a sweeping romance that has a happy ending that 1000% did not happen in real life. So if you’re worried that this is not actually a romance, I can assure you that it is; but if you’re a stickler for historical accuracy, you probably need to keep moving.

If you are not a history buff, here’s the TL;DR: Medieval Europe was a decentralized system of feudal alliances, with borders and states shifting between kingdoms as treaties were signed and battles were won. Because Billy the Conq came from Normandy, on the northern coast of now-France, there was a great deal of finagling control of duchies on the north and west coasts of now-France between the French and English crowns, especially after Eleanor of Aquitaine left Louis VII and married Henry II. Henry II of England had four adult sons, two of whom outlived him and became kings of England in their own right: Richard the Lionheart (Richard I) and John Lackland. If you’ve seen Robin Hood, you know these guys.

Philip Dieudonne was the only son of Louis VII of France. Louis was a hot mess and did not handle the dissolution of his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine well; he ended up ceding significant quantities of French land to Henry II in various marriage alliances and treaties. I hope it is becoming clear that France and England have a rivalry about which crown can claim which duchies as vassals, and that rivalry extends well before and after the reigns of Philip II and Richard I and embroils Philip and Richard in its clutches. Philip II was significantly less of a hot mess than his father and spent most of his reign trying to build France up again.

These guys fought a lot. But also, politics were complicated, so it’s not like they never spent time together, either.

Okay. So. Romance between a king of France and a future king of England. How’s that gonna work?

In the 20th century, historians began to discuss the idea that a sexual relationship existed between Richard and Philip on account of a few things that are spectacularly inconclusive, namely: Richard’s lack of relationships and children (he had one wife and one illegitimate child), public confessions that have been interpreted to be for the sin of sodomy, and records of bed-sharing with Philip. There are many explanations for these things, but one could be that they did have a sexual/romantic relationship, so Siegel’s imagination took hold, and now we have this book.

I appreciate that Siegel has both a historical note and an author’s note bookending the story itself, because if you look at the actual historical record, it’s impossible to imagine a HEA for these two men. In the historical note at the beginning of the book, Siegel acknowledges that she’s departed so much from the historical record that “Philip and Richard have been made entirely distinct from their historical counterparts; they aren’t intended to reflect the real-life Philip and Richard in any meaningful way, except their political positions and family ties.” That said, she holds to the truth enough that Philip is married when he meets Richard; we’ve got some messy medieval polyamory going on, with Isabela and Philip married so young that they end up being best friends rather than lovers (except for that pesky begetting an heir situation). We’ve also got the entirety of the tension of the second half of the narrative hinging on the political conflict and intrigues between these two kingdoms. Philip must do what’s best for France, even if that means betraying Richard.

I found it interesting that Siegel presented Richard as probably bisexual and Philip as probably gay given that Philip is the one who (IRL) married multiple times and had many children, but in terms of the story being told, it almost must be this way or Philip never would have unbent enough to allow himself to pursue Richard. The beginning of the book is a slow burn as we are first introduced to the characters and the political situation, and then as we see Philip trying to control himself while Richard tries not to take things farther than Philip wants. The whole will-they-won’t-they followed by a solid can-we-make-it-work is angst central.

When all is said and done, I probably couldn’t put the book down because I couldn’t conceive of how this story could end happily. Richard’s father and brothers stir up trouble constantly, and both Richard and Philip are responsible for administering their lands, so they can’t simply move in together and unobtrusively live happily ever after. It would be much simpler to create a romance for two medieval men who don’t have such significant responsibilities and visibility, but who wants simple when we could have drama and sweeping romance that overcomes impossible obstacles?

I voluntarily read and reviewed a complimentary copy of this book. All thoughts and opinions are my own. We disclose this in accordance with 16 CFR §255.

The best kind of historical fiction. Fact and fantasy wonderfully intertwined. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

I will preface this review by stating I am not a historian, amateur or otherwise, so I cannot attest to the accuracy of the events depicted in this book in a historical context. From the author's note, I gather there were liberties taken to allow for the development and flourishing of these characters. As someone who do not read much history, I did find my dip into these historical (fiction) waters to be quite refreshing; an embattled sunshine/grumpy duo forced into various games of thrones, what's not to like? That said, I did find myself feeling a bit unsatisfied upon finishing, and looking back a few weeks later, only a few scenes really stand out in my recollections of the plot. Nevertheless, I enjoyed my time with Philip and Henry and am grateful for the publisher in allowing me access to this ARC.

As a history nerd, reading about medieval Europe was intriguing. Now, make it a romance with queer protagonists and I cannot wait to see where Natasha Siegel takes the story. In Solomon's Crown, King Philip is the freshly crowned ruler of France and Richard, Duke of Aquitaine, is feuding with his father, King Henry of England. Their attraction is immediate and confusing. How can two men who were born as rivals be close friends and possibly lovers? The battle portions of the book were frustrating as I wanted to get back to the relationship. Romances always have some sort of issue that appears to prevent a "happily ever after" but a multigenerational struggle over land and power is much larger than the regular tropes of a missed phone call or overheard conversation. Siegel turns the romance genre upside down with her debut novel. I look forward to what she writes next.

3.5 stars

This was an intriguing idea, and I honestly didn't care about historical accuracy and read it more as a "what-if" story rather than as Richard and Philip being real people in history. I thought their romance was sweet, especially in the times they were in, but I didn't really feel the "danger" that I think would have been present if they had really been in the relationship they were. I absolutely loved Philip's wife and liked the true friendship she and Philip developed, as well as her friendship with Richard. While many years passed during this story, I didn't really feel like it did, perhaps because in some ways, Richard was still the same in terms of his temperament and Philip did as well. I would have preferred a lot more character development for them both. In many ways, Isabella was my favorite side character, and I was hoping the book would at least reveal a love interest for her that would work with their little group.

I enjoyed this and can recommend this for those who like period romances, with the caveat that this is NOT historically accurate, so you shouldn't try to make connections to historical characters or events. Honestly, I think she probably would have done just fine to have made this a period romance with fictional characters, but I think she wanted to create the tension between the Duke of Aquitaine and his 3 brothers, as well as Eleanor of Aquitaine being imprisoned away from her home. But for those of us who are not fully versed in this history, it would have been fine if she had made up the characters in the first place, giving her even more freedom to develop the characters in whatever way she wanted.

There were moments in the book where I was honestly moved to tears because of the moment that was being written about, as well as the writing itself. I see a lot of promise in this author and suspect she will continue to try new things and develop her writing style and I would be interested in reading more in the future.

I received an advance review copy from NetGalley and the publisher for free, and I am leaving this review voluntarily.