I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

I think Henry VIII was probably a sociopath. Elizabeth inherited his brain and his mother's willpower....and somebody else's heart.

I don't know WHO she inherited her steadiness from, though. Edward, her brother, was also a person capable of great equanimity. Perhaps it was the times they lived in. Both were highly intelligent. Mary did not inherit that. She understandably felt alienated after the shabby way in which her father treated her mother.

Oh, those times.

Ok I love the history behind the Tudors too but I have more sympathy for Queen Catherine who was thrown aside for Anne Boleyn.

I'll have to disagree that Mary wasn't intelligent, but after her father's mistreatment of her mother and herself, she became more emotionally driven and unstable, which she inherited from her mother. Her mother could be obsessive and her mother's sister was famously called Juana the Mad. Juana's husband was constantly unfaithful to her, but Juana loved him desperately, and when he died, she refused to have him buried. Instead she travelled around Spain for weeks with his coffin, routinely having it opened so she could kiss him. Finally, she was forcibly separated from him; the body was interred and she was locked up.

I see that same sort of obsession with Mary, both toward her religion (Catholicism, since replaced by the Church of England) and her own famously unfaithful husband. She tried to force England back to Catholicism for what she considered its spiritual salvation, burning hundreds of "heretics" to make her point. She thought herself to be pregnant twice. The first was probably menopause and the second was the abdominal tumor that would kill her. Despite having put her young half-sister, Elizabeth, in the Tower for suspicion of treason, and being extremely unhappy that Elizabeth didn't adhere to the Catholic faith, nonetheless, upon her deathbed, she named Elizabeth as her heir, and the Elizabethan Age began.

Athena - Katharine wasn't even the first royal divorcee. Kings had often "put aside" wives who were infertile or past menopause without a son so that they could marry again. Katharine just refused to go along with the program. Not that I blame her. And I don't blame Anne. Henry was inquiring about divorce years before, before he ever met Anne.

We might be arguing semantics - the previous royal marriages I referred to were "annulled" by the Roman Catholic Church for various trumped-up reasons, as was Katharine's, by the Church of England (that Henry was conveniently the head of!). Had Katharine's nephew not been the Holy Roman Emperor, willing to move militarily against the Pope unless he ruled in Katharine's favor, I think the marriage would have been "annulled" quietly years before and Katharine would have had no recourse. And England may well have stayed Catholic!

I can't "blame" any of his wives because they were powerless in an age when women had no rights. Anne DID try to discourage Henry for years. She left court and he followed her to her home and ordered her back to court. The ultimate in sexual harrassment? What were her choices? Be forced into an honor-ending affair, or take him up on his offer of marriage? Despite Jane Seymour assembling her trousseau and planning her wedding while Anne was still alive, I can't really blame her, either. Henry wanted her to be his mistress as he had previously wanted Anne, and she had refused, as had Anne. And he married her, as he had Anne...

Jane Seymour must have died triumphant that she had given Henry a son and hoped that she had led Henry back to Catholicism. And if not, her son would. But after her death, that son was raised in the Church of England, and he was just as fervent about it as Mary was about the Catholic Church. Irony of ironies that the "Catholic" heir Jane gave her life producing would be hostile to Catholicism.

And the Lady Jane Grey is yet another female victim in a male-dominated game of political chess.

Was scrolling around and the paintings on this thread caught my eye! We went to Paris Dec 2010 and just loved the galleries there. It was off season so...no crowds. We expected to line up for The Louve but walked straight in...

Interesting about The Tudors. I have just bought a DVD set Series 1-4 of the Tudors. Its A BBC production I believe. Has anyone seen it?

I have a friend who is mad about Costco. I've actually never been. I think you have to be a member (about $60.00 yearly here in Aust.) to shop there or you may be able to shop there if you go with a member.

jezza

Welcome, Jezza. I love your avatar.

Hi Jezza - I agree, nice avatar, but your dx is the best!

Riley: you just brought back a long forgotten memory.  My AP European History teacher from 12th grade told the story of Jane the Insane of Spain, with the detail that she refused to bury her husband.  I guess that was  Juana Angolphized. 

Thanks girls re the avatar but it used to look better before they revamped the site a couple of years ago...the steam used to move!!...lol

riley702 I think its a different series...this one has 4 seasons..2007-2010 with 8-10 eps per season. I'll be an expert by the finish of it! The BBC are usually pretty accurate with their history so hope its good. Here is a link.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0758790/

Have any of you read books by Antonia Fraser? Lady Antonia Fraser actually.She has written a lot of historical works including the Six Wives of Henry V111.She may have been mentioned earlier in this thread as I'm pretty new here.

I've put this thread in my favourites so I'll pop in more often. Thanks for the welcomes!

jezza

I have Antonia Fraser's book on Henry's Six Wives. She's quite good, and she doesn't wander into speculation like some others.

Ack! A word of warning about that series - it's produced by Showtime, with emphasis on sex and scandal. It's kind of frustrating, because they got some obscure facts absolutely correct, whilst completely butchering others. For example, they portrayed Kathryn Howard as an actual prostitute, instead of the rather giddy teenager she really was. Her family did an abominable job of raising her, with lax supervision even when it was apparent she was romantically involved with several men in the household as young as 11 or 12. But she was an aristocrat, so her family finagled her into a position at court and when the king noticed her, pushed hard for her to hold out for marriage. She liked the trinkets, but had no clue how to actually behave as a Queen. And when an old lover blackmailed her into appointing him to a position in her household at court, it was the beginning of the end. Then the king was sick for weeks and she started a flirtation with one of Henry's household. It's debatable whether anything actually happened, but then someone from her past talked about the old lover, and when he was questioned, promptly blabbed about her current flirtation. And they all went to the block.

That's a long-winded way of saying enjoy the series, but check it against an actual historian like Fraser or Ives before believing any particular detail. Oh, btw - the series opens with the murder of Henry's uncle - it's entirely fictitious. No uncle, no murder. Ah well...

No, I've had it recommended to me, but haven't been able to find it.  And you're right about Kathryn finding her dignity in the Tower right before her death. There's a rather heart-breaking story that when they told her she would be executed in the morning, she asked them to bring her the executioner's block, so she could practice kneeling and putting her head on it gracefully. The Tudors series of course takes this moment and ruins it by having her practice nude (it was frickin' February!) and had her walk to the block barefoot (WTF?) and wet herself as she waited. *sigh*

jezza, yes, warn DH, or he'll be throwing things at the screen! LOL

Alexandria - there was a recent archaeological discovery in England of what may be Richard III's bones (read about it in the NYT I believe).  If I recall correctly (and my memory sucks, so I may be getting it wrong), the way the remains were treated -- buried with respect and some degree of pomp -- supports the idea that Richard III was, if not an angel, at least respected rather than universally loathed and feared, as Shakespeare's play would have it.

Though I love the play and have seen it twice recently . . . once in an outdoor production in Central Park, which was huge fun.  It was by a small company that does what they call "Shakespeare on the run," meaning it's staged in such a way that the audience has to follow the characters as they move about the park.  Consider the staging possibilities: in a battle scene, the actors can literally charge up and down hills.

The other production was at Stratford, where Richard was played by a woman.  I thought the gender-bending might be gimmicky or distracting, but it wasn't. 

Have any of you Tudor fans read "Wolf Hall"?  Hilary Mantel's books are on my list, but I haven't got to them yet.  With a little urging, I might.  (Or they might have to be a retirement project.)

Welcome, Jezza!

Linda

And of course, ya gotta love Norman Rockwell....especially this time of year!