#henry darnley

[liviasdrusillas]

PERIOD DRAMAS I'VE WATCHED - MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS (2018)

[dailyreigngifs]

REIGN | 1.08 x 4.06

[unabashedqueenfury]

Reign 2013-17/04-01▪︎01×02

Francis and Darnley

[elizabethboleyn]

@perioddramasource: PERIOD DRAMA APPRECIATION WEEK

Day Four: Favourite Film - Mary, Queen of Scots (2013)

[movedto-spiderrrlegs]

Jack Lowden by Charlie Gray for The Gentleman's Journal

[elizabethan-memes]

No, Derek, I’m not calling you a fuckboi, I’m just sayin’ that you’re a Henry Darnley and I’m in no mood to be your Mary Stuart, capeesh?

[cassandravision]

What most films about Mary Stuart forget to realize is how young her second husband Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley was. He had only recently turned twenty-one when he died. Yet most films/shows cast a much older actor, which changes the dynamic of the character considerably--in fact many adaptations the actor playing Darnley is older than the actress playing Mary, despite her being noticeably older than him in real life, which you bet your life sure did effect their relationship (Mary matured, Darnley did not). 

A lot of films tend to portray Darnley as a creep (Reign) or as a flamboyant gay stereotype (even though there’s no real evidence he was gay so he was at most bisexual, but whatever), ignoring Darnley’s real character: an immature and spoiled young man, unprepared for marriage or kingship. 

Put yourself in Darnley’s shoes for a minute: He was a spoiled young man who suddenly found himself off his parents’ leash and a king before he even turned twenty. He had spent most of his childhood and formative years in and out of house arrest due to his mother, Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox. 

His mother was the daughter of Margaret Tudor, wife of King James V of Scotland--sister of Henry VIII, making him a rightful heir to England, Ireland, AND Scotland should Elizabeth Tudor or Mary Stuart die without children (Darnley neatly solved the later problem by marrying Mary and producing a son with her, which ironically lead to his fall from power since Mary now found him redundant and useless since she had a son). 

Darnley was raised believing he was the rightful heir to two crowns if fortune favored him, so of course he was an arrogant and entitled young man. He was also a pretty boy who couldn’t hold his liquor. At first Mary found him charming (he wrote her poems and songs), the embodiment of so many girlhood crushes, but as soon as they were engaged Darnley’s natural arrogance shined through and Mary quickly realized she made a mistake marrying him--and everyone knew it. Darnley was king, but in name only, and was second in his marriage, which not only would rub many men the wrong way today, but definitely ticked many men off five hundred years ago. His wife was now his rival for attention. 

Her detractors cuddled up next to him in an attempt to sway him to their side against the Catholic Mary. He couldn’t tell who his real friends are and who his real enemies are. The lines between the two started to blur. And at the center of it all is Mary--his wife, his superior, his rival. 

She denied him a lot of power that he, as the Queen’s husband, was thought to deserve, but Mary astutely noticed that any sort of power would corrupt Darnley. But it was too late: Darnley was already mad with power and wanted more. Like for so many trust fund kids, nothing was ever enough for Henry. 

By the end he was paranoid, perhaps convinced that either he or Mary would have to go--there wasn’t enough room in Scotland for both of them. Ultimately, he was right, to his peril. 

Henry was murdered. 

The king of Scotland was MURDERED and his own WIFE was accused of plotting to kill him, then she married another man who was also accused of murdering Darnley, Lord Bothwell, and to top it all off, Mary’s treacherous brother, James, the Earl of Moray, might have also been the one who ordered Darnley’s death. So who killed Henry Stuart Lord Darnley, the bad boy King of Scotland? Everyone it seems had a motive to kill him, but in the end no one knows for sure.

His parents died never seeing any justice or closure for their sons’s death. Within a few decades, Mary was deposed and executed. Bothwell was dead. Moray was murdered in turn. Mary and Henry’s son James Stuart was raised by his mother’s detractors (perhaps even Darnley’s real killers) who told him lie after lie about Mary and Darnley, but James was unsure, wanting to believe his parent’s innocence. Yet the lies persisted beyond his lifetime. 

Mary has been re-evaluated from scheming temptress to innocent victim to martyr to complex heroine. Where is Darnley’s re-evaluation? If Mary is constantly excused for her actions by her young age, then why is it not the same with Darnley, who was even younger than Mary was? 

Does Darnley deserve pity or derision? 

I hope the new Mary, Queen of Scots movie treats Darnley with more respect and portrays him as more than a one-note caricature because, like everyone involved in history, there’s more to Lord Darnley than meets the eye.

[melissa12309]

Reign 2013-2017