Started badly with a spelling mistake/typo on page 5 (the 'tony Belgravia district'??), the marriage of convenience that was never properly legalised (marriage without banns or marriage license was deemed an 'irregular marriage', and was only legal in Scotland or Fleet Prison), and a Christian heroine marrying an unbeliever - this book runs the risk of being memorable for all the wrong reasons. The story was very formula Regency Romance - naive virgin meets wearied rake, they agree to a marriage of convenience for mutual benefit, followed by murder attempts and a growing attraction to each other (no mention of heaving bosoms or lustful looks, thankfully). There was a plot point added at the end regarding the hero's parentage that, in my view, was quite unnecessary.It attempted to be something more than stock Regency that it referred to the Luddite rebellion and Waterloo, but it never quite managed to achieve this. Although marketed as a Christian novel, the herooine was a lukewarm Christian at best (much was made of her reading her Bible every night, but no mention of going to church, and no convincing change of heart from the unbelieving hero, either - any rake worth the title can quote Song of Solomon for his own ends). Overall, The Bachelor's Bargain never quite managed to make the grade of secular writers (e.g. Georgette Heyer), or of more recent Christian Regency writers (e.g. Julie Klassen). It wasn't bad, it just wasn't that good either.