She Almost Won

 Henrietta Maria came very close to helping her husband and Prince Rupert win the English Civil Wars. From Atlas Obscura:

Around midday on July 4, 1643, in the countryside just north of Birmingham, Queen Henrietta Maria was in her battle tent. Outside, shells exploded. Musket balls* zoomed past. Anxiously, the Queen of England waited. Taking Burton-Upon-Trent, a strategic town with a river crossing connecting northern and southern England, was her army’s first real challenge. Defeat was not an option. But the fighting had already raged for five hours—how much longer would it take to deliver a victory? Three hours later, the queen got her answer. Her royalist army had finally broken through the town’s defenses. Victory was secured.

Eighteen years earlier, the queen had arrived on English shores as a 15-year-old French bride. And now, at 34, she was a warrior queen. The queen would jokingly call herself “she-majesty generalissima.” Lines from a contemporary poem, its author unknown, portrayed her as not just defeating but unmanning Parliament’s forces, literally: “Tis here a woman leads; but one would swear, the armies did consist of women there.” Her skill garnered wide respect from diplomatic elites; the Venetian ambassador observed, “Without [the queen’s] encouragement and aid the king would never have put himself into a position to resist.” During the English Civil War, Queen Henrietta Maria was, it seems, all that stood between King Charles’s sure defeat at the hands of Parliament. (Read more.)

Henrietta Maria and her household hiding in a ditch during the bombardments at Bridlington in 1643

Henrietta Maria hiding from Parliamentarians during her escape to France in 1644

 

The novel Generalissima is available HERE.

Share

Arthurian Legend for a Disenchanted Age

 From Express:

In a time of tech-bro billionaires, a meaning crisis among an anxious youth and questions surrounding national identity, where better to go than back to the old stories to have one’s heart reenchanted? That’s something poet, scholar and priest Malcolm Guite has become renowned for on his popular self-titled YouTube channel, which has 220,000 subscribers and counting. The real-life waistcoat-wearing hobbit, with wizard-like long silver hair and beard, has charmed millions around the world with his videos from the perspective of a visitor to his cosy, book-lined study. For each typical upload, Guite will settle into his wing armchair, light one of his many pipes, and usually read aloud from a chapter of JRR Tolkien or CS Lewis.

The 68-year-old author of several books, including five collections of poetry, realised that it’s been about a century since there was a proper re-telling of Britain’s great myth, the Arthurian legend. In what could well be his magnum opus, Guite has set about writing Merlin’s Isle: An Arthuriad, a four-volume epic ballad of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.

Beautifully illustrated by Stephen Crotts, the first volume, Galahad and the Grail, is set in the 5th century, after the Romans have departed, leaving Britain in a chaotic mess of savage warlords before the Anglo-Saxon invasion. King Arthur seeks to unite the realm by establishing a kingdom of peace and stability, one led by his chivalric knights who are fierce in battle against the “might is right” pagans, while being gentle and kind to the weak and vulnerable they are sworn to protect. (Read more.)

Share

The Mystery of the ‘Real’ Milady de Winter

  

Yet another descendant of Mary Boleyn. From History Extra:

In the preface to The Three Musketeers, Dumas claims that he was researching Louis XIV in the Bibliothéque nationale de France when he happened upon the first volume of The Memoirs of M. d’Artagnan. This is not entirely true: he found the book in the public library in Marseilles, borrowed it and never returned it.

The Memoirs of M. d’Artagnan is a first-person pseudo memoir written by a former soldier, Gatien de Courtilz de Sandras, and first published in 1700. It tells the story of d’Artagnan, a young man setting out on his journey to become a musketeer. As well as d’Artagnan, Dumas discovered Athos, Porthos and Aramis, who would eventually become major characters in The Three Musketeers. He also found Milady de Winter. Courtilz never gives Milady’s name. Instead, she is referred to simply as ‘Milady’ followed by a dash or asterisks where her name should be. She is introduced as a maid of honour to Henrietta Maria, queen to the executed Charles I of England, whose exile in France Milady shares.

The daughter of an English peer, Milady has as much wit as beauty, and d’Artagnan thinks her the most beautiful woman he has ever seen. He promptly falls in love with her. There then follows a complicated sexual intrigue, one of several for Courtilz’s d’Artagnan. Once it is over, Milady is never heard from again. This is the episode that Dumas adapted for The Three Musketeers. The affair of the queen’s diamonds is absent from Courtilz, but at least part of the story as Dumas told it is supported by several contemporary memoirs. Those of Françoise Bertaut de Motteville, Pierre de La Porte and Henri-Auguste de Loménie, Comte de Brienne – all of whom served at the royal court of France – each provide an account of the Duke of Buckingham’s visit to France in 1625. Buckingham had been sent to escort Henrietta Maria, then Charles I’s new queen, to England. While in France, he ostentatiously courted the queen, Anne of Austria.

None of these memoirs, however, mention the diamonds that Anne was said to have given to the duke. For this part of the story, it is necessary to consult the memoirs of Henri-Auguste's son, an obscure publication known as Recueil A, and the memoirs of François de La Rochefoucauld. Louis-Henri de Loménie, Comte de Brienne served Louis XIV as secretary of state, a position he inherited from his father. He left a memoir, which was published in the early 19th century. Certain editions, particularly that edited by Jean François Barrière, include an account of the queen’s diamonds.

It does not form part of Brienne’s original narrative – he was not even born at the time of the alleged diamond affair. Instead, it is mentioned in an introductory essay, written by the editor, explaining the manners and customs of 17th-century France. It is then related in full in an appendix, Éclaircissements historiques, or ‘historical clarifications’. In this version, the diamond thief is named as Lady Clarik. However, the story was lifted word-for-word from Recueil A, and inserted into the memoir. Recueil A is the first volume of a large collection published in the 18th century. It comprises an assortment of documents, including extracts of memoirs, concerning the history of France. The author of the account of the diamond affair is enigmatically identified as ‘M. le M. de T’. Behind these initials, according to the anonymous editor of the Recueil, is René de Froulay, Comte de Tessé.

The Comte de Tessé was a real person. Born in 1651, he was a military man, diplomat and courtier. He did indeed leave a memoir, but the diamond affair does not appear in it. The story as found in Recueil A and later inserted into the memoir by Brienne is, therefore, unreliable. What then of La Rochefoucauld? In his memoir, the lady who stole the diamonds was not Lady Clarik but the countess of Carlisle. In fact, Lady Clarik did not exist – but Lady Carlisle certainly did. (Read more.)

 

Read about the Countess of Carlisle in my Henrietta Maria novels, HERE and HERE.

Share

Queen Victoria, the Stuarts and Scotland

Victoria and Albert as Catherine of Braganza and Charles II by Winterhalter

Gown worn by Victoria at her Stuart Ball

Tartan dress of Queen Victoria

Royal Family in Highlands

Scotch air, Scotch people, Scotch hills, Scotch rivers, Scotch woods, are all far preferable to those of any other nation in or out of this world.~Queen Victoria, ca. 1849. 

 In the mid-18th century, in an uprising known as "The 45" Prince Charles Edward Stuart tried to reconquer the thrones of England and Scotland for his father James III, known as the "Old Pretender." The thrones had been usurped by the German and Protestant House of Hanover in spite of the fact that the legal Catholic sovereign was alive and well. The Scots in particular did not take well to their rightful sovereign being disinherited because of the English preference for German Protestants. The uprising failed miserably, bringing more hardship and tragedy to the Scottish people for the remainder of the century. Meanwhile many songs, tales and legends of that time imprinted themselves upon the land and the people. Many of those tales and legends found their way into the writings of Sir Walter Scott, one of the first historical novelists, whose Waverley novels of the early 19th century brought the lost Stuart rebellions and their heroes to life for a new generation. The prince Regent, the future George IV, rebelled against his Hanoverian patrimony after reading the Scott novels, and headed for Scotland.

From Peter Harrington:

The romanticisation of Scotland can be most definitively linked in literature with the Waverley novels of Sir Walter Scott. The first of the Waverley novels was published in 1814 and was set during the Jacobite uprising which took place almost a century earlier. The novels were so popular that Scott was propelled to fame, and was invited to dine with King George IV, (then Prince Regent). When, several years later, the Scottish ‘Radical War’ of 1820, inspired by the American and French Revolutions, caused King George to plan the first royal visit to Scotland in over two hundred years in an effort to quell unrest, it was Scott he called on to carefully stage manage the visit. By now a baronet with numerous valuable connections to Scottish nobility, Scott saw the opportunity both to avert an uprising and to promote highland culture. He reasoned that, because of George’s lineage, the king could legitimately claim as much Stuart heritage as Bonnie Prince Charlie and could thus present himself as a Jacobite prince, properly accoutred Royal Stuart tartan. Kilts at this time were no longer generally worn, having been banned by the Dress Act of 1746, which made the wearing of ‘Highland dress’ illegal. Though the act was repealed in 1782, kilts had only come back into fashion with the Scottish gentry, a number of whom set up ‘Highland Societies’.... For the king to appear so attired was not only an attempt to appeal to the heritage of the Scottish people but also to gloss over old wrongs.

George’s visit sparked an interest in Scottish dress, and, in its wake, the demand for kilts grew so high that Scottish weaving mills were unable to cope with the demand. It was in this period that (contrary to the generally assumed belief that individualised tartans are a much older tradition) many of the clan tartans were designated. (Read more.)

 George IV died and was succeeded by his brother William IV, who in turn left the throne to their niece Victoria in 1837. It was the Romantic Era, and Queen Victoria also loved the Waverley novels. In general she found the Stuarts far more romantic than her own Hanoverians and decided to fill her life with tokens of the Stuart homeland of Scotland. Her beloved husband Prince Albert shared her predilection, in spite of being German himself and in the 1840's they began spending as much time as possible in their northern kingdom.

From Quartermile Blog:

The first land to capture the Queen’s heart wasn’t Scotland, but Ireland. Early in her reign, Victoria spent her holidays in. Yet after the potato famine of 1845 irreparable damage was done to the relationship between the British government and the people of Ireland. Despite Victoria’s personal donation of £5,000 to the cause (nearly £600,000 in today’s money) and her visit to the country in 1849, the relationship never recovered....Scotland fared much better in Victoria’s eyes. In fact, Victoria made frequent visits north of the border during her reign despite the fact that Scotland had only been visited twice by reigning monarchs in the previous two centuries.

Victoria and Albert’s love for Scotland drove them to take out a long-term lease on the stunning Balmoral Castle in Deeside in 1848. Later, in 1852, the royal couple permanently purchased the property for £31,500 (£4million today) and had it significantly extended. From this point on, Victoria and Albert spent a section of each summer in Balmoral, thanks to the advances in British rail travel....Victoria’s ever growing affection for Scotland didn’t just stretch to the land itself, but to the culture and fashion too. Through their experience of Scotland, Victoria and Albert both became big fans of tartan, and helped to elevate the status and reputation of the pattern south of the border.

According to accounts from the time, Victoria and Albert enthusiastically redecorated Balmoral Castle with reams of “Balmoral tartan, in red and grey” furnishings. They even included “innumerable stags’ antlers” in their décor. For Victoria, the use of tartan was an outward sign of being connected to her favourite part of the world. (Read more.)

Victoria showed that she not only loved Scotland but cherished the memory of the Stuarts, masquerading as Catherine of Braganza, consort of Charles II, at a ball. She had an Italian sculptor create a marble statue of Princess Elizabeth Stuart, the daughter of Charles I who died in prison at age thirteen, reputedly with her head on her murdered father's Bible. She passed the interest on to her children, as can be seen from a water color of Mary Queen of Scots by the Princess Royal. The Stuarts must have fulfilled Victoria's vision of a monarchy in which the kings and queens did not only reign but ruled, had adventures, tragedies, romances and died for love.

Princess Elizabeth Stuart: "Go ... And see the tomb of Charles's child wet with Victoria's tears"

Carl Haag’s "Luncheon at Cairn Lochan" depicts the royal family picnicking in Scotland.

Balmoral today with flock wallpaper ordered by Queen Victoria

Painting of Mary Queen of Scots by Queen Victoria's daughter the Princess Royal

Share

The Cost of John Dee’s Sorcery

 While Catholic practices were banned in England as being superstitious, Queen Elizabeth I consulted a wizard. From Sebastian Morello:

There is at present an entire revisionist historiography being developed which explains Henry VIII’s break from Rome not by reference to his desire for a divorce from Catherine of Aragon, but to his failure to secure for himself the Imperial throne of the Holy Roman Empire at the election in 1519. Instead, Charles Habsburg was elected, becoming Emperor Charles V, and Henry was intensely bitter about it. He thought he should be Emperor of Christendom, especially as he had demonstrated that he was a most loyal son of the Church amid the rise of Protestantism, even receiving from the pope the title ‘Defender of the Faith’. When he broke with Rome fifteen years later, he was already talking about his kingdom not as a region of a wider civilisation called Christendom, but as its own island empire over which he was both supreme temporal and spiritual lord.

It took the courtier, spy, and wizard John Dee to explain to Henry’s daughter, Queen Elizabeth I, that having broken with that great empire of Christendom, the Kingdom of England (which also included Wales and Ireland) had before it two possible futures: it could fizzle out into obscurity, or it could expand across the seas and make for itself its own empire, a counter-empire if you will. This counter-empire would expand across the whole world. It would be based not on the baptism of nations in fulfilment of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19), but rather on the demands of Mammon. Dee came up with a name which would be lasting: he coined the term ‘the British Empire’.

Dee and the warlock, scryer, and speaker of the secret Enochian language Edward Kelly travelled through Europe. Together they stayed for considerable lengths of time at the Imperial court and other royal courts, uncovering the spiritual and temporal sources of the empire with which Dee’s future creation would compete.

Kelly claimed—and I have no reason to disbelieve him—to have been led by what he described as a ‘spiritual creature’ to a container of red powder hidden in the ruins of Glastonbury Abbey. From this powder, he made a tincture which gave him power to alchemically transmutate base metal into gold without any need of the Philosopher’s Stone. Kelly demonstrated the potency of this tincture on numerous occasions, and by it he deeply impressed Dee. (Read more.)

Share

Chloridia

  

From Tony Riches: "Time travel back to the court of King Charles I with a glimpse of my research - the fascinating full text of Chloridia : rites to Chloris and her nymphs, a Shrovetide masque performed by the queen at Whitehall Palace." (Complete text HERE.)

Costume sketch for masque by Inigo Jones for Henrietta Maria

More on masques, HERE.

Queen Henrietta Maria

 

Share

Henrietta Maria and Her Mother, Marie de’ Medici

 

 My guest post for Tony Riches.

First of all, I would like to thank Tony Riches for opening his popular blog to other historical writers so that we may share our research. I am the author of a biography of Marie-Antoinette as well as six historical novels. The latest two novels are about Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles I and they are entitled My Queen, My Love and Generalissima. They are part of an unfinished trilogy; the third installment Avalon will be out sometime in 2027 or 28. 

In my readings about Henrietta of France, I have found that her mother Marie de’ Medici played an enormous role not only in her upbringing but in her ongoing political decisions, as well as shaping her faith, her love of the arts, of music, theater, and architecture. Queen Marie has ended up playing a much larger role in my novels than I originally would ever have imagined, due to the sheer force of her personality as much as to her real adventures, which included leading rebellions against her son, climbing out of windows to escape the royal guards, and hiding with her entourage of dwarves in a German brewery. All of this followed a glittering career of being Queen Mother Regent of France. Most of the Queen’s life is captured in the spectacular series of twenty-four huge paintings by Rubens, now at the Louvre. (Read more.)

 

Books available HERE.

Share

Our Lady of Scherpenheuvel

Marie de' Medici had great devotion to Mary under her title of Our Lady of Scherpenheuvel, giving a reproduction of the statue to her daughter Henrietta Maria for one of her chapels in London where it was used by the Confraternity of the Most Holy Rosary. From Wikipedia:

Even before the official approbation of the cult of Our Lady of Scherpenheuvel, pilgrims took particles of the oak tree with them as pious souvenirs. Several stories of miracles attributed to the intercession by the Virgin relate of the thaumaturgic power of this Scherpenheuvel or Montague wood. Following the approbation, Archbishop Hovius ordered the tree to be cut down. It was divided in several parts. Some remained with the sanctuary; one particularly large piece was given to Albert and Isabella. Most of this Montague wood was used to make images of the Virgin Mary. Distributed as gifts among princes, nobles and clergy, they helped to disseminate the cult of Scherpenheuvel.^[13]

Quite a few Belgian churches and convents came to possess an image carved in Montague wood. Well known examples remain in the Church of St. Charles Borromeo in Antwerp, the Church of St. Hilonius in Izegem and the chapel of the Capuchins in Enghien. In the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the statue of the national patron saint, Our Lady Comforter of the Afflicted or Our Lady of Luxembourg, is believed to contain Montague wood. A smallish statue of the Virgin and Child in Montague wood was taken by St. Marguerite Bourgeoys to Montreal and stands presently on her tomb in the Notre-Dame-de-Bon-Secours Chapel.^[14]

Some places of worship became closely associated with the cult of Scherpenheuvel. In the vicinity of their château of Mariemont, Albert and Isabella founded the priory of Montaigu in the present day municipality of Morlanwelz. In the town of Gray a statue of the Virgin made out of Montague wood became the object of a regional devotion. Likewise in the Franche-Comté, the statue donated to the priory of Bellefontaine in Brussey came to attract many pilgrims.^[15] In the proximity of the Spanish Court, the Convent of Las Descalzas Reales obtained an altar dedicated to Nuestra Señora de Monteagudo.

The House of Lorraine had a particular devotion for Scherpenheuvel. Cardinal Charles of Lorraine, prince-bishop of Strasbourg, founded a chapel dedicated to Our Lady of Scherpenheuvel in the noviciate of the Jesuits at Nancy. After his death in 1607, his sister Antoinette completed the project with an altarpiece depicting the ducal family venerating Our Lady of Scherpenheuvel. The chapel served as the repository of the embalmed hearts of the members of the House of Lorraine until 1720.^[16] The cult was also greatly favored by the French Queen Marie de' Medici. During her regency, the Discalced Augustinians obtained a statue in Montague wood at their church of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires. During her exile, she donated one statue in Montague wood to the city council of Cologne and another to the monastery of the Discalced Carmelites of that city. While serving the Catholic household of her daughter, Queen Henrietta Maria, the Queen's Chapel of St James's Palace likewise had an altar with a Madonna in Montague wood.^[17] (Read more.)

 

(Image Source) 

A history of the original statue, HERE.

Share

Symbolism and Virtue in the Legend of Lancelot

 From Ancient Origins:

However, his love for Guinevere stood against all else. Lancelot gives himself entirely over into the service of the lady he loves, alas to the detriment of all his knightly ideals and goals. Also, in accordance to the popular trends of the time, Lancelot exhibits towards her the  fine amor , meaning a pure  love that was a major attribute of proper chivalric behavior. 

Nevertheless, throughout the Arthurian cycle, Lancelot is presented with numerous challenges that serve as tests to his chivalry. In one episode, he is seduced and tricked into sleeping with the daughter of the so-called Fisher King, Elaine - while she was pretending to be Guinevere. From this union is born Galahad, another great hero of the Arthurian cycle, who grows up to be an ideal and pure knight.

Throughout the development of the story of Lancelot, it becomes clear that increasingly important  Christian beliefs come to play a big role in the story. Purity, sinlessness, and penitence all come to characterize this tale. Galahad, sinless and pure, replaces his father who succumbed to his passions and love for Guinevere. As the story progresses, Lancelot’s affair with the king’s wife completely tears the royal court apart. The supporters of Lancelot and those of  King Arthur  descend into a bitter and bloody war. (Read more.)

Share

The King's Pearl

Charles I as Prince of Wales

History of a pearl earring. In the 17th century men often wore jewelry. Above is the portrait of Charles which Henrietta Maria received as a betrothal gift. She kept it at her bedside until her death. To quote:

Today pearls are among the most common of precious "jewels." But before the development of cultured pearls and farming in the early 20th c., all pearls were natural pearls. These rare treasures could be discovered only by accident and at considerable peril. Natural pearls had great mystique and luminous beauty as well as value, which made them favorites of queens – and kings.

One of the most famous pearls of the 17th c. belonged to King Charles I of England (1600-1649). While the origins of this single pearl earring are unknown, Charles is first shown wearing it in a miniature...as the fifteen-year-old Prince of Wales. The pearl soon became what fashion-folk today call a "statement piece", and one that he was seldom without.

Charles's large teardrop-shaped pearl – an especially rare and desired shape –was made into a single dangling earring with a tiny gold crown as the cap, topped with an orb and cross that was most fitting for a future king. Since Queen Elizabeth's reign, fashionable English gentlemen had worn single earrings as a sign of courtly swagger and bravado, qualities that the young prince was woefully lacking: Charles was slight and short (only 5'3"), he limped from childhood rickets, he stammered, and he suffered from acute shyness. Perhaps the sizable jewel gave him the confidence that nature had not.

Share

A Guide to the Children of James VI and I and Anne of Denmark

The first Prince of Wales from the House of Stuart was named for his grandfather, Lord Darnley. (Yes, the Lord Darnley.) To quote author Linda Root:

Many historians wrongly refer to Henry Frederick Stuart as the Prince of Wales from the time he arrived in England in 1603.  This is incorrect.  He was not invested with that title until 1610.  His predecessor was Edward Tudor, the boy king Edward VI (1537-1553)  Upon Henry Frederick's  birth in Scotland he was given the customary title of a male Scottish heir apparent, Duke of Rothesay, as well as several lesser grants appropriate to the Scottish heir. However, when he arrived in England he was also conferred the English title Duke of Cornwall.  He had to wait seven more years to become Prince of Wales.  Referring to him as Prince of Wales during his early childhood should be a cause of embarrassment to a any historian or historical novelist who refers to him as Wales prior to 1610 and yet, it is a common mistake.  It is the way he is most often remembered although he only lived two years to enjoy the title. (Read more.)

Share

Five Great-grandchildren of King Edward VII

 From Tatler:

Following the death of King Harald V on 28 August at the age of 89, the sprawling family tree of King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra has grown a little smaller. The late Norwegian monarch was a great-grandson of the British King and Queen, who reigned between 1901 and 1910. Now, just five of their great-grandchildren remain. Scattered across Britain and Norway, they are the last living members of a royal generation. So, who exactly are Edward VII’s surviving great-grandchildren? (Read more.)

Share

Ferne Park

  

 

From Country Life:

From the south terrace of Ferne Park, the double avenue of 400 lime trees lead out towards the hazy distance where, on the rise of Cranborne Chase, a stand of beeches marks the site of the Bronze Age Win Green bowl barrow. This is the highest point in the Cranborne Chase National Landscape, where the ancient ox drove runs east/west, linking the chase to Salisbury in Wiltshire and Shaftesbury in Dorset over the county border. Equally breathtaking is the view from the front steps of the house, which faces north to the rolling greensand hills in the Vale of Wardour. Little wonder that there has been a settlement here since 1225.

The surprise is that the house that commands this view and the gardens and parkland that surround it have only been here for 25 years. When Lord and Lady Rothermere bought the estate, it covered 200 acres and was derelict: there was no house and everything that could be sold had been. Today, the estate encompasses 2,000 acres, of which the garden covers about 28 acres, providing cut flowers, houseplants, vegetables, fruit and eggs. The 100-acre park surrounding the garden has been substantially replanted and is now home to a herd of White Park heritage cattle.

‘When I went with my husband to look at Ferne,’ recalls Lady Rothermere of her first sight of the estate in March 1999, ‘I had no desire to build a house. To create a garden certainly wasn’t in my future plans.’ Yet, as they rolled down the A30 and the landscape opened up before them, they could not help but be smitten. ‘Our decision to move was very impulsive, but we were young.’(Read more.)

 

Share

The Best Film Ever?

In some recent Tudor novels and series there has been an emphasis on St. Thomas More's role in Henry VIII's persecution of religious dissenters. As Chancellor of England, St.Thomas had the morbid task of overseeing the execution of heretics according to the laws of the land. Most countries at the time saw heresy as a capital offense so St. Thomas was not doing anything unusual in carrying out the King's will in such matters. It is the mistake of our post-Enlightenment era to judge the past by our present way of doing things. Just as we are horrified by their burning of heretics, so would they be horrified by our massive numbers of aborted babies. From George Weigel at First Things:

I recently rewatched Fred Zinnemann’s riveting cinematic adaptation of Robert Bolt’s play for at least the sixth time, and the thought occurred: Is A Man for All Seasons the most perfect film ever made? Everything about it seems exactly right.

Bolt’s screenplay keeps the action moving, highlighting the story’s pivotal moments while losing nothing of consequence from the play’s script. Everyone in the cast is terrific, beginning with Paul Scofield’s Thomas More and continuing through Wendy Hiller’s Alice More, Robert Shaw’s Henry VIII (the young Renaissance hero, not the porcine lecher of later years), Orson Welles’s Cardinal Wolsey (embodiment of a Church crippled by its alliance with state power), Nigel Davenport’s rough-and-tumble Duke of Norfolk, Leo McKern’s cynically amoral Thomas Cromwell, and John Hurt’s Richard Rich, corrupted by intellectual arrogance and overweening ambition. Vanessa Redgrave’s lascivious, eighty-second cameo as Anne Boleyn hints at the sorry end awaiting the woman for whom King Henry broke with the Church of Rome.

Ted Moore’s cinematography is both gorgeous and true to history; I once looked out the window in More’s cell in the Tower of London and was struck by how cannily Zinnemann and his cinematographer used that view of the Thames embankment to convey the changing seasons during Sir Thomas’s lengthy imprisonment. Georges Delerue’s score is well-matched to the flow of the film and gives it an authentic Renaissance flavor.

If there is anything awry in A Man for All Seasons, I didn’t notice it. 

I’ve often taken exception to Bolt’s attempt, in the preface he wrote for the 1962 paperback edition of his play, to justify to his secularist peers his esteem for More, an ardent Catholic. In that apologia, the agnostic-bordering-on-atheist playwright positioned Thomas More as a proto-existentialist hero: one who died in defense of “an adamantine sense of his own self,” King Henry’s threat to which caused “this supple, humorous, unassuming, and sophisticated person [to] set like metal, [and be] overtaken by an absolutely primitive rigor”—a man who “could no more be budged than a cliff.” Yet in his screenplay, Bolt could not escape some decidedly Catholic facts: that the More family prayed together; that More, as a theologically knowledgeable consultant, helped Henry VIII win the title “Defender of the Faith” for a book defending the seven sacraments against Martin Luther; and that More, at his trial, insisted that the papacy was a divinely mandated institution. Then, at the end, Bolt’s More confesses that he dies “the King’s good servant, but God’s first”—the God who “will not refuse one who is so blithe to go to him.” (Read more.)

Share

How Medieval Literature Built the Arthurian Legend

  

From Medievalists:

Another story to emerge in the late twelfth century centres on the tragic and adulterous romance between the Cornish knight Tristan and the Irish princess Iseult. The tale survives in several versions, including those written by Béroul and Thomas of Britain, and quickly became one of the most popular romances of the Middle Ages. Early versions contain only limited connections to King Arthur and his court, but later writers increasingly integrated Tristan into the wider Arthurian world, often portraying him as one of the Knights of the Round Table. The legend became a major parallel tradition within medieval Arthurian literature, blending themes of love, loyalty, betrayal, and fate. (Read more.)

 

The changing myth of King Arthur. Also from Medievalists:

After appearing and disappearing for centuries, Arthur’s story is set down in its longest and most widely-read early form in Geoffrey of Monmouth’s The History of the Kings of Britain. In it, he stands for everything that was ideal in the author’s twelfth-century world: unity in a time of near-constant political instability, kingship with wisdom and fortitude, strength of arms with the courage to use it, and Christianity above all. As a historian, although widely discredited even in his own time, Geoffrey of Monmouth emphasized Arthur as worthy of legend because of his political acts: unifying warring kingdoms under one banner and ruling justly over all.

 At nearly the same time, courtly love was all the rage in the literary world. This ideal love was adulterous, courageous, and so passionate moderns might find it marginally embarrassing. It was at this moment that Lancelot rode into the Arthurian mythology, fainting with love over Guinevere, and pushing Arthur to the side as a stodgy, less hip cuckold. Arthur endured this romantic shift as a great but increasingly less-adventurous figure, who stayed behind boringly but brilliantly governing his realm while his knights risked life and limb on their glorious quests. Although this was also the moment in which the quest for the Holy Grail emerged, Arthur, ever-involved in worldly affairs and now tangled up in a love triangle, is not the one to find it. (Read more.)

Share

Remembering the Battle of Mohács

A brilliant article which shows how the European powers' fears over the growth of Habsburg hegemony contributed to the triumph of Islam. From Chronicles:

Hungary’s defeat coincided with larger European developments. The Habsburgs were then emerging as a major European power, considered by many players—and most dishonorably by the French—to be more threatening than the 100,000-strong devastating Turkish host advancing up the Danube Valley. The Habsburgs were able to establish control over the westernmost fifth of Hungary, and from there, 150 years later under the leadership of their brilliant commander Eugene of Savoy, to advance steadily south to the Military Frontier established along the northern banks of the Sava and the Danube east of Belgrade. In the Hungarian heartland under Turkish rule, however, and in  autonomous Transylvania in the east,  because so many Catholic hierarchs and priests died at Mohács, the Hungarian Reformation consolidated its territorial hold.

In 1526 there was a structural imbalance between Europe’s acute political fragmentation, while the Ottomans, under Suleiman, had achieved an impressive level of administrative centralization and military efficiency. The Turkish edifice would start crumbling only decades after Suleiman’s death in 1566, but in the meantime Europe faced immense danger from the east. It loomed just as Europe engaged—during the Thirty Years’ War—in the most destructive episode of self immolation until that time. The Ottoman threat finally retreateed after the second siege of Vienna in 1683.

The battle lost in 1526 has had a defining role in forming Hungarian historical consciousness. The “Mohács Trauma” appeared in the public discourse soon after the battle, and eventually became synonymous with continuing Hungarian misfortune in the public mind. For a long time that trauma was restricted mainly to the upper social stratum. This was in contrast to Serbia and other Serb lands, where the epic saga of the Battle of Kosovo and its mystical transformation of military defeat into moral victory lived on even among illiterate peasants, indeed especially among them. (Read more.)

Share

Mary of Modena: James II's Dazzling Queen

 

There are several cases throughout history of arranged royal marriages in which it was as if God had chosen to favor a particular country by sending a bride who possessed not only virtue but great physical beauty to be the wife of the ruler and the mother of the heir. A few of those alliances ended catastrophically when, for certain reasons, the bride in question was rejected by her adopted people, even when loved by her husband. I am thinking in particular of Henrietta Maria of France, despised for her attachment to her Catholic faith. There is also Marie-Antoinette, hated for her Austrian heritage, made worse by a campaign of vicious slander. The tragic Empress Alexandra, whom Tsar Nicholas married for love, was falsely accused of betraying Russia to her German relatives. Among such consorts, noble and fair to behold, shines Mary Beatrice of Modena, the second wife of James II. Justine Brown, author of The Private Life of James II, has surpassed herself in this comprehensive biography of the last Catholic Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland. I found it engrossing for the detailed descriptions of the pageantry of the final years of the Stuart dynasty before the so-called "Glorious Revolution" in which the true monarch was overthrown by his own daughters. The evidence is compiled to show that James II was driven from his throne not for any tyranny, as is claimed by Whiggish historians, but because his wife had give birth to a Catholic heir. It was hatred of the Faith that disrupted the royal line and led to the weakening of the royal authority, so that in time British sovereigns reigned but no longer ruled.

From the Amazon page:

Mary Beatrice learns governance, defies scandal, and becomes a steadfast beacon for Jacobite resilience amid a turbulent Restoration era.

The 1688 “Glorious Revolution” that toppled James II and VII also veiled his consort in propaganda. Mary of Modena: James II’s Dazzling Queen reveals the extraordinary woman beneath. Lovely and spirited, Mary Beatrice Isabella d’Este is also England’s sole Italian queen. Her father came from an ancient line, while her mother was one of Cardinal Mazarin’s seven famed nieces (the “Mazarinettes”).

Mary Beatrice learned the rudiments of governance at her widowed mother’s knee, and would one day act as regent of the Stuart court-in-exile—first for King James, then for their son, James Francis Edward. “The Queen over the Water” would shine as a beacon for the Jacobite cause.

Once, Mary Beatrice longed to be a nun. Instead, the young woman had to accept a different mission—marriage to James Duke of York, heir to the thrones of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Although James’s conversion to Catholicism made their marriage possible, it set off a firestorm of controversy in the mysterious northern realm.

The story of the British Isles was romantic, but the reality was jarring. Thrown into the frenzy of Restoration politics, Mary Beatrice met each fresh episode courageously. Charles II adored his sister-in-law, but MPs strove to annul the “Italian match” before it could be consummated. She and James fell in love, but his philandering nearly broke her.

Building on Este tradition, Mary Beatrice won over the common folk, inspired poets and painters, introduced Italian opera, and drew talented ladies to court. She also attracted her flamboyant Mazarinette cousin Hortense Mancini to England, where she joined King Charles’s harem.

Ultimately, James and Mary Beatrice were coronated with great ceremony, but their troubles were only just beginning. For the first time in English history, it looked like the birth of a healthy prince might actually destroy the monarchy instead of strengthening it…(Read more.)

In Justine's account, I found Mary of Modena to be inspiring not only as a brave and steadfast Queen but as a Catholic wife and mother dealing with adversity. As a teenage bride she was shattered to discover that the handsome husband she had fallen in love with was a chronic adulterer with a growing number of illegitimate offspring. And while the children of James' mistresses grew and thrived, Mary's children miscarried, or were stillborn or died young. But Mary, who had originally wanted to be a Visitandine nun, followed the teaching of the founder of the Visitation order, St. Francis de Sales. St. Francis de Sales emphasized a loving acceptance of trials as well as complete trust and confidence in God. Queen Mary's spiritual director was the Jesuit St. Claude La Colombière who brought to England the devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, for he had been the confessor of  the Visitation nun who claimed to have visions of the Savior, known to history as St. Margaret Mary. Mary of Modena would help spread the devotion to the Heart of God throughout Europe in her later years of exile. Meanwhile, James II, whose childhood had been disrupted by war, imprisonment and exile, came to learn to live a devout life from his much younger wife, so that he gave up his transgressive lifestyle. I was particularly struck by the happiness of James and Mary when they had lost everything, but had each other and their children. I recommend this biography of a Queen of England who experienced a white martyrdom, yet the more she was diminished, the greater she became.

Share

The England I Knew Is Gone

 From Carl Trueman at First Things:

In retrospect, I see that I grew up at a breaking point in English culture. I was (perhaps symbolically) the last person at my school to study Latin and the last not to take computer science. The ancient disciplines were already on life support, and the technocrats were waiting in the wings. My copy of Lewis and Short, the classic Latin dictionary, is an ever-present symbol of this; it was the school’s copy, given to me when I left as it was of no further use to the institution.  

Earlier this year, I had a strange premonition of how different England has become. A young Dutch politician, Eva Vlaardingerbroek, was barred from entering the U.K. One of my sisters had never heard of her and therefore did an AI Google search to find out what had made her so dangerous. To her surprise, the chatbot told her that this politician was known, among other things, to refer to my work in public lectures, and that we were both outspoken opponents of transgenderism. The same government, of course, has allowed thousands of anonymous young men to enter the country, providing them with accommodation while only last week finding it necessary to advise them of some quaint aspects of British culture, such as the fact that women are allowed to work, that “if you have sex with someone without their consent, this is called rape,” and that if you indulge in such behavior, “it will affect your asylum claim.” Dutch conservatives who think that women cannot have penises are not welcome, while men from countries that consider rape something of a gray area are entering in droves. Well, I suppose the situation could be worse: They could be fans of J. K. Rowling or retweet posts by Graham Linehan.

England exemplifies the political shape a country takes when expressive individualism grips the imagination of its ruling class. It is impossible for any culture to allow everyone to be who they want to be, from transgender activists to traditional Christians. Somebody therefore has to bring order to the potential chaos, and as expressive individualism tends strongly toward the transgressive, with its core notion that personal authenticity lies in breaking with the herd (that is, the social expectations of the past), the culture-makers will typically favor those who want to demolish received ideas and traditions deemed stumbling blocks to self-realization. This turns morality on its head. Yesterday’s virtues have become today’s oppressive vices, as the moral register has shifted in a psychological direction—most notably in the trivialization of trauma, which in some cases has come to mean little more than “somebody somewhere said something hurtful about me.” Sadly, the Church has often proved little different.  (Read more.)

Share

'A Very Regal Look at Palace Intrigue'

A review of My Queen, My Love by Julie Sara Porter at Bookworm Reviews:

This Historical Fiction novel tells of the tumultuous years in English history preceding the Civil War through the eyes of Queen Henrietta Maria of France, the Catholic wife of King Charles I. This book tells of Henrietta Maria’s early years and her marriage to Charles. It also recounts her rivalry with George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham and the king’s best friend. The Queen and the Duke vie for the king’s attention, ear, and heart. 

This book is a chess match between two formidable opponents who differ in personalities, religion, ideologies, and views. Henrietta Maria is motivated by her history as a Medici and her Catholic faith. Her family line taught her about palace intrigue, how to play the court games, and to be wary of potential rivals for influence. Her faith not only gives her solace but gives the British Catholics much longed for representation. 

Villiers also has his own motivations. He had a history of developing connections with Charles’ family. He had been the friend and lover of Charles’ father James I. He thinks of the younger king as a kid brother who needs his influence. He also is incredibly ambitious and wants to move upwards in society. Henrietta Maria and George Villiers are equally matched opponents with Charles and the entire kingdom in the middle. 

My Queen My Love is a very regal look at palace intrigue and the love and loyalties of the monarch and those around them. It begins with a rivalry between two individuals and eventually will escalate into a war that will envelop the whole country. (Read more.)

Share

"Engrossing and Beautiful"

 Charles I and Henriette-Marie de France

 

 

 

George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham

 A most eloquent review of My Queen, My Love.

If you read this book, be prepared to obsess over the characters like you would with any engrossing fictional story . . . only to be reminded that they are, in fact, real.  After doing so, you may just scour the Internet for photos of your new "friends."  Be prepared also to lie awake wondering what REALLY happened regarding a matter of court intrigue, asking your husband when you should be sleeping if he thinks that so-and-so poisoned so-and-so before the story started. While you're at it, you should also expect to wonder whether or not you should really google the villain and behold his countenance.

But, of course, you will. After all, you HAVE to know if he really, truly existed.

Then, once you know that he WAS, in fact, real, you will fervently wish for a time machine so that you can go back to warn everyone about him.

. . . or maybe that's just me. ;)  After all, I was crying over Giuliano de' Medici a few months ago.

MY QUEEN, MY LOVE: A NOVEL OF HENRIETTA MARIA by Elena Maria Vidal reminded me of why I love history (and even revitalized that love): that is to say, it is not a simple list of dates and facts, but, rather, a compelling story, alive with rich "characters" that have the power to stay with you. Vidal masterfully wove together a literary tapestry that tapped into real-life events in a way that inspired the reader to keep turning the page. There was beauty, there was tragedy, there was romance . . . and, much to my surprise, the plot was also layered with key characteristics of a mystery novel. Since I didn't know much about this particular "story" going in, it truly was similar to reading a completely fictional work where there still exists uncertainty and suspense.

Yet, despite the strong elements of intrigue and mystery, at the center of the entire narrative is a love story: that of a king and his queen and the Love that transcends their world.

From early on in the novel, I fell in love with the love story of Henrietta Maria and King Charles I. Rather than compose more coherent sentences, I have decided to instead include my "freak-out" gushing below. Unprofessional or not, it accurately reflects my state of mind when delving into the story and may perhaps best inform potential readers:
------------------------------------------------
HE FELL IN LOVE WITH HER WHEN SHE WAS DANCING---NOT ATTRACTION, BUT REAL LOVE AT FIRST SIGHT WHERE HE SAW THE DEPTHS OF WHO SHE TRULY WAS.
 
BUT SHE DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS THERE AS HE WATCHED FROM AFAR.

And then she fell in love with HIM through his letters, which is SO BEAUTIFUL AND ROMANTIC, too!!! AHHHH. Because she has SUCH a pure heart, like Cinderella and her prince when they first meet in the live action movie.

AND THEN THERE IS THIS EMOTIONAL BUILD-UP OF STORY TENSION because they have to still MEET. And the reader just needs it to happen asap!

And then they meet . . . and it is a Moment with a capital M!

But there be villainy afoot. ;) 
------------------------------------------------
Vidal's writing skill shone through once again in her brilliant introduction of the villain of the story through the eyes of one who regarded him as a close friend. Without going into detail, he could have been mistaken as a flawed comic relief, before his true nature became clear. Not only did this make the story-line more compelling and unpredictable, but it served as a rather profound commentary on evil relevant to today. In the presence of some, evil masquerades as Cool Guy, charming everyone with his jokes. But, when only some are watching, the mask just might come off.

As a Catholic, I was particularly drawn to the historical depiction of events as concerns the persecution those of my faith faced in England at the time. It was important for me to learn more about their plight, and my heart broke for those who suffered, much like that of Henriette, just as it rejoiced at moments when they received better treatment.  Yet the pain and suffering is balanced also with Light, the reason for which they are fighting.  Through vivid and sometimes ethereal descriptions, as well as profound reflections, Vidal was able to illustrate what we love so dearly.

The writing style in general is both detailed and engaging, rich with beautiful imagery that is, at times, quite lyrical. I found a kindred spirit in the romantic way that Vidal chose to describe figures, scenery, and events and likewise enjoyed the sprinkling of Arthurian legend in the novel. It was lovely to see Henrietta and Charles share a mutual love of these old stories, which not only added depth to their relationship and to them as individuals, but also seamlessly tied into the plot and foreshadowing of future events.

In terms of the characters on an individual level, I found myself bonding quite a lot with Henrietta, between her innocent romanticism, deep love of her faith, and moments of wit and humor.  But, on another level, I wondered at times if she were a saint and found her on the whole to be an inspiring figure. While there were moments in which the reader was called to be frustrated with Charles for being blinded as to certain individuals, I came to care a great deal for him and deeply admire his nobility of heart and desire to do what was right. The reader may also sympathize with the long-seated pain that he experienced, which is slowly revealed within this man of a pure and childlike nature yet confident, regal bearing.

While there were difficult moments to read throughout the novel, beginning with the tragic backstory of Henriette's mother, Marie de' Medici, the beauty of the center characters continued to illuminate the pages. Without going into detail, I will say that the intrigue of the novel also remains until the very end. Just like with a true mystery story, there are revelations at the conclusion that truly took me by surprise.  At the same time, the final pages served as a "bookend" in more than one way.  I'll leave it at that.

The reader should bear in mind that there may be occasional phrasings or actions with which he or she may not agree, even concerning supporting characters with a great deal of good.  However, such may also be found in real life, and it is likely that Vidal wished to present people and events with as much historical accuracy as possible while simultaneously putting forth a compelling narrative.  The meticulous research conducted for this book is abundantly clear from the detailed historical facts imbued into the text (as well as the lengthy works cited), although the novel format also allows for some speculation and presumably fleshing out of characters and situations. (Read more.)

Share