In about 1726 there was a woman named Mary Toft who, lived in Goldaming Surrey in England, with her husband and three children. In the Spring of 1726 Mary had had a stillborn delivery. However, at that time she stated that she had seen a rabbit and chased it. She didn’t catch the rabbit at that time. There was a second rabbit in the same place as the first rabbit. She wasn’t able to catch that one either. From that time forward the only thing on Mary’s mind was rabbit. The only thing that Mary wanted to eat was rabbit. This went on until the family was not able to financial support Mary’s rabbit habit.
It was during the time that Mary began to have what can only described as labor pains. She was attended to by her Mother-in-law who was a midwife. Mary delivered parts of a tabby cat and rabbit parts. Her mother-in-law sent the parts that were delivered to a physician in Guilford, named John Howard. John Howard himself didn’t believe that the animal parts that he received had been delivered by Mary. He was called to her home two days later where under his gaze Mary again delivered rabbit parts.
This went on for around two months. Mary’s story was heard by the King who requested that she be brought to London and watched day and night by courtiers and eminent surgeons. On December 7th, after being in bed for close to three months Mary admitted that she and her mother in law had perpetuated the hoax.
This story is so amazing. So when I was offered a review copy of Mary Toft; or, The Rabbit Queen I jumped at the chance. Thank you Pantheon for my review copy.
Synopsis: The fictionalized account of Mary Toft and her rabbit births.
What I liked: Holy crap I loved this book. Palmer took what could have been a very dry story and made it a story that I didn’t want to stop. His writing is lyrical and lends itself beautifully to the time and space that he is writing about. I was very impressed with how he worked Ann’s character into the story. It always worries me when there is someone that has bodily differences in a story. But her character was well written and her bodily difference actually didn’t make her character. It was in addition to her character. Palmer was able to weave a very dark part of London history into a moral lesson. Which was very impressive.
What I didn’t like: There was nothing I didn’t like in this story.
Star Rating: 5 stars
My thoughts: Again I loved loved this book. The liberties that Palmer took fit so well into the narrative that you would have thought that they were actually part of the historical story. That is the sign of a very talented author. One that can weave two time frames together with no issues. Palmer’s research into the time period and the nuances of English culture during this time period shows how much he cared about the book and the story that he was writing.