Kevin's Watch

I had a thought that is actually almost funny. With how TCTC and the Gap cycle take mythologies and things people tend to rely on, and show them as what they don't look to be, maybe it's some subconscious idea that all this history is not something to rely on? Though there may be more prosaic explanation, like that history is boring.

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:I wouldn't say that history is boring; rather, it seems as if new posts happen here only when some news story relevant to history comes along.

The only recent news story I can recall--and I would have to find independent verification of this--was that the small town in France, Anjou (I think that's what it was), had sent out a demand to the British Royal Family to surrender the Crown Jewels as reparation for the murder of the Earl of Warwick in 1499, ending the Plantaganet Line.

The Earl was beheaded due to being a traitor to the Royal Crown! (i.e., he allegedly plotted with some pretender to escape the Tower of London during the reign of Henry VII).

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:I wouldn't say that history is boring; rather, it seems as if new posts happen here only when some news story relevant to history comes along.

The only recent news story I can recall--and I would have to find independent verification of this--was that the small town in France, Anjou (I think that's what it was), had sent out a demand to the British Royal Family to surrender the Crown Jewels as reparation for the murder of the Earl of Warwick in 1499, ending the Plantaganet Line.

Really? I rather think it was the Countess of Salisbury, daughter of George of Clarence who was the last of the line. She was executed by Henry VIII in 1541 aged 63, because she was the last remaining plantaganet.

Others may say that the line ended with the death of Richard III at Bosworth on 22 August 1485, and it was the bloody French who helped Henry Tudor (Henry VII) to do it.

Penny in the swearbox

Well, I don't think the line ended with Richard, but the succession of the Plantaganets certainly did.

--A

Orlion wrote:The Earl was beheaded due to being a traitor to the Royal Crown! (i.e., he allegedly plotted with some pretender to escape the Tower of London during the reign of Henry VII).

He was actually escaping from the Tower himself, but that's irrelevant anyway, although Richard III did name Warwick as his successor after the death of his own son Edward, then changed his mind and named the Earl of Lincoln as his successor. Edward of Warwick was George of Clarence's son, and George was attainted and executed for treason - none of his descendants could have claimed the throne anyway without a reversal by parliament. None of the children of Edward IV could have claimed the throne either as they had all been declared illegitimate by parliament due to the pre-marriage contract between their father and Eleanor Butler, before the secret marriage with Elizabeth Woodville.

The point is that Henry Tudor gained the crown by conquest at Bosworth, but he could not have done so had the French not given him and his supporters harbour and assistance during his years of "exile". All the other possible claimants were got out of the way by Henry Tudor and his son Henry VIII.

Maybe a claim should be made against the town of Anjou for the misery caused by the interference of Margaret of Anjou, wife of Henry VI.

On the whole this is all rather silly. I am not a believer in passing on responsibility for what happened 600 years ago to the present generation. If family history has taught me one thing it is that people who lived in the past cannot be judged by today's standards. This is why it is important to understand the period in which these people lived - why history is so important.

Iolanthe wrote:On the whole this is all rather silly. I am not a believer in passing on responsibility for what happened 600 years ago to the present generation. If family history has taught me one thing it is that people who lived in the past cannot be judged by today's standards. This is why it is important to understand the period in which these people lived - why history is so important.

I like this!

My interest, I think, lies mostly in the evolution of human sociology, and how that evolution came about. History is a record of cause and effect, and that fascinates me.

--A