seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Australia
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from Singapore
seen from Romania
seen from Indonesia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Singapore
seen from Germany
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Ireland
seen from Colombia
michisaccount replied to your post “In his book 'Trinity' Conn Iggulden makes Derry Brewer tell Marguerite...”
Iggulden also has Richard of York seriously suggesting drowning Richard jr for crying too much as a baby, the future Henry VII mistreated by the Herberts, and I am sure there are other such instances I forgot about
Now I’m really convinced that I’m missing nothing by skipping these books.
margarettudor replied to your post: “every post by @michisaccount be like”
this is the opposite of a callout post n i love it. it's also true~
i only call out those who deserve to be called out ;)
michisaccount replied to your post: “every post by @michisaccount be like”
I love you. And I do try.
well, i’d say you succeed especially when you’re routinely called a “hater”
michisaccount replied to your post “Someone reblogged an old TWQ post of mine, and now I’m all nostalgic...”
That reply was mean. Also funny.
My fandom interest only goes so far, lol.
Hello! I hope I`m not bothering you. I just wanted to say that your tags beneath my explanation about Henry 7 not fighting at Bosworth were a thing of beauty. Have a great evening!
Not bothering at all! I can’t stomach anyone trying to paint H7 as a warrior king, given he was responsible for the death and then the disgusting and humiliating treatment of the body of the last English warrior king. In fact, I just find it laughable. H7 was many things but warrior was decidedly not one of them.
By the way, I was reading through your blog earlier. Can you tell me what the source is for an ambassador saying that Elizabeth of York was "always miserable"? I am not an expert on her, yet what I read on here always seems to be she was very happy.
Of course!
It’s from this article; the primary source it references is a report from the Spanish ambassadors in 1498, who arrived to conduct negotiations for the marriage between Arthur Tudor and Catherine of Aragon. They claimed Elizabeth “suffered under great oppression and led a miserable, cheerless life”. The article itself claims Elizabeth was pregnant at the time, but iirc, the actual source reports it was common knowledge she was not (it has been a while since I looked at the primary source, though, so my memory could be foggy). We know Elizabeth gave birth to two children after her fifth child, Mary Rose; Edmund and Katherine, who both died in infancy. Katherine was born in 1503, so this rules her out. Edmund died in 1501 and was believed to have been born c. 1499, making it possible Elizabeth was pregnant with him in 1498. However, people tend to forget the “circa” part of this, and that it’s possible Edmund was born later and Elizabeth wasn’t pregnant at the time.
It’s also been claimed that the Spanish ambassadors, being used to Queen Isabella, a queen regnant, would have found the not as powerful position of Queen consort that Elizabeth occupied to be “miserable”. However, as ambassadors, I doubt Isabella was the only Queen they’d seen, so they’d be familiar with the role of Queen consort and its limitations as opposed to being a Queen regnant. The wording they used was also very clear; Elizabeth wasn’t just feeling bad, she wasn’t living a very happy life. So, I think it’s entirely possible that, especially in the later years of her marriage, Elizabeth felt dissatisfied with the lack of power Henry allowed her. Thank you for asking!
Hello! Forgive me for bothering you. I just wanted to say that I loved your tags on my post!
Ahhh thank you! I loved your post. :) It was so eloquent and on point about a topic that always strikes a nerve with me; thank you for writing it. And you’re not bothering me at all!
michisaccount replied to your post “Ugh”
As much as I am annoyed that apparently they have forgot about Francis, I'm kind of happy Margaret will apparently feature a lot. She wasn't in the book, so more room for a good characterisation
Plus, Joanne Whalley is six kinds of awesome, so that works for me.
The actors they’ve chosen to play Henry and Elizabeth are ridiculously pretty, far more so than the actual historical figures!
michisaccount replied to your post “Ah, gah.”
I have earlier literally seen a post about how Shakespeare!Richard was justified. I will forbear to go into the tag for the next couple of months.
Ah, the sort that justify violence, and terrible behavior simply because they’re sexually attracted to a male...
