The White Queen

(1000 Posts)
ShadeofViolet Sun 16-Jun-13 17:06:32

Anyone else ridiculously excited?

I know Philippa Gregory's books tend to be a bit Barbara Cartland in places, and I hope the BBC havent increased it, but I still cannot wait to watch it.

Arisbottle Sun 16-Jun-13 17:06:58

I am excited.

Me too!

ajandjjmum Sun 16-Jun-13 17:19:05

It'll be good to have something to watch on a Sunday night!

Tiredemma Sun 16-Jun-13 17:22:47

Im so excited about this!!

Movingtimes Sun 16-Jun-13 17:25:57

Looking forward to it as well.

Essexgirlupnorth Sun 16-Jun-13 17:34:39

I am looking forward to it but sure the chararctees will be nothing like they are in my head

chicaguapa Sun 16-Jun-13 17:36:58

I have been trying to find a family tree to refer to as I'll struggle to keep up otherwise. Can anyone find a good one which includes the characters from this?

CMP69 Sun 16-Jun-13 20:06:44

Sooooo excited, loved all the books, but will have to Sky+ it as DH would rather eat his Owen eyeballs than watch "white like that"
Probably why my box is full of the beebs Tudor stuff that was on a couple of weeks ago blush

CMP69 Sun 16-Jun-13 20:07:05

Own obvs!

MummyMastodon Sun 16-Jun-13 20:20:24

I love the version of 'wicked game' they play over the trailer.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 16-Jun-13 21:04:02

Signing in! It's looking promising...

SESthebrave Sun 16-Jun-13 21:08:09

Signing in here too although I'll also be watching on iplayer as DH has vetoed it. Does anyone know how soon it's available?

saintmerryweather Sun 16-Jun-13 21:13:39

cor the kings very forward isnt he?

Horsemad Sun 16-Jun-13 21:19:13

Lovin' it!! grin

Awizardsstaffhasaknobontheend Sun 16-Jun-13 21:21:27

Hoping it is as good as the book!

Awizardsstaffhasaknobontheend Sun 16-Jun-13 21:26:09

Can recommend the Red Queen as well as the partner book. Follows the life of Margaret Beaufort who was the mother of Henry Tudor who married Elizabeth of York (daughter of this Elizabeth Woodville).

DrMcDreamysWife Sun 16-Jun-13 21:33:10

The king is gorgeous! I'm loving it. Trashy history, fabulous!

i know nothing of this but have just started watching it, can anyone give me a quick precis of what the story is?

Yummy! Just the sort of escapism i needed

Ive just turned it off. I loved The Other Boleyn Girl and keep reading Phillipa Gregory on the hope she'll return to that form but now I just find it all rather predictable.

ravenAK Sun 16-Jun-13 21:39:56

I'm unreasonably irritated by all the intrusive wedging in of the back story at every opportunity, tbh - but better than I thought it'd be.

Might give the book a go; I gave up on Phillippa Gregory years ago because she'd fallen in love with the word 'gleamed' - characters were constantly 'gleaming up at' each other! She might be over that now though grin <---- that's a gleam, I think.

Horsemad Sun 16-Jun-13 21:40:06

Agree DrMcD!

Samu2 Sun 16-Jun-13 21:42:45

Nice sex scenes!!!

RustyBear Sun 16-Jun-13 21:44:37

How on earth did he do that dress up in that time? About 20 buttons from the glimpse we got, and he did them up in the time it takes to do up a zip...

Awizardsstaffhasaknobontheend Sun 16-Jun-13 21:45:15

Ok slight warning if you don't want to know anything of the story...

Elizabeth Woodville, widow of a Lancastrian lord, secretly marries Edward IV. Legend has it that she really did deliberately wait by the roadside and that it was a genuine love match and she is meant to have been a real looker. She is the mother of the future Princes in the tower, Henry VII's wife Elizabeth of York and therefore the grandmother of Henry VIII and every future English monarch.
Lots of intrigue and double dealing to come.

piratecat Sun 16-Jun-13 21:48:42

this is great

saintmerryweather Sun 16-Jun-13 21:49:15

the king is jeremy irons son

was that it?!

KnockMeDown Sun 16-Jun-13 22:00:23

I really enjoyed that - will definitely be watching next week!

Horsemad Sun 16-Jun-13 22:02:00

Well, not sure about the language, sounds a bit modern but I've never read any of the books so maybe I'm being picky?

Love the king, verrrry cute! grin

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 16-Jun-13 22:03:45

Loved it!

(But got stupidly obsessed with what appeared to be zips in her dresses too!)

littlemissnormal Sun 16-Jun-13 22:04:22

Is also based on The Kingmakers Daughter which is about Anne Neville, Warwicks daughter who marries Edwards brother Richard and becomes Queen herself.

Cherrypie32 Sun 16-Jun-13 22:04:31

A touch of Eddie Redmayne about the King I thought. Perfect for Sunday night and I'm not one for period drama usually.

Thank you wizard for the storyline fill in smile

SirBoobAlot Sun 16-Jun-13 22:15:06

Well they translating the characters reasonably well from the books, I think... Which again seem to be reasonably accurate to what we know factually.

This should be good smile

littlemissnormal Sun 16-Jun-13 22:17:34

I thought Jacquetta, Elizabeth and Warwick especially had been well cast.

SirBoobAlot Sun 16-Jun-13 22:23:42

Was incredibly impressed with the casting of Jacquetta. She's perfect!

FullOfChoc Sun 16-Jun-13 22:25:15

Fantastic!

pardonmytits Sun 16-Jun-13 22:33:03

Ooh will need to catch this on iPlayer at some point. I'm really not Philipa Gregory's biggest fan but I love the period it covers and watch anything about it. Plus, it has James Frain in it, who is just great.

Ragwort Sun 16-Jun-13 22:35:06

Bored senseless after the first 20 mins - fell asleep - I did record it, is it worth watching?

DuchessofMalfi Sun 16-Jun-13 22:36:25

Signing into this thread to add my comment. Gorgeous. Max Irons phwoarr!!!!!grin

chicaguapa Sun 16-Jun-13 22:55:39

I hope there's more Warwick in the next episode. I like a good baddie! grin I've read the books and thought it was a good episode and a promising start.

DorisIsWaiting Sun 16-Jun-13 23:10:24

I watched this expectingh to turn it off within a couple of minutes but I loved it!

The casting seemed great, and lots of female focus rather than the men which is quite refreshing.

BadRoly Sun 16-Jun-13 23:20:56

I'm another fan who wasn't disappointed (except by the zipping up bit - perhaps kings have very nimble and speedy fingers though?!) grin

Sleepyfergus Sun 16-Jun-13 23:28:45

I really enjoyed it, and the King is verrrrrrrrry easy on the eye!

Wetwood656 Sun 16-Jun-13 23:39:47

Tbf the king had had lots of practice with dresses so was probably very quick

Ellenora5 Mon 17-Jun-13 00:03:55

I enjoyed it, looking forward to next week, nice to have something decent to watch on a Sunday.

Speaking of the Irons family acting dynasty - The Borgias final series starts on Sky Atlantic tonight. Anyone going to watch? smile

Loved The White Queen, btw.

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 17-Jun-13 08:59:43

It was good, and gosh he's good looking!

Is the lady playing Elizabeth actually English? Once or twice she sounded a bit like a Norwegian friend of mine, accent-wise. She has gorgeous hair.

Sunnymeg Mon 17-Jun-13 10:00:11

I enjoyed it, but DH was bored. I hope they crack on with the narrative in the next episode, that might interest him more.

Hazelbrowneyes Mon 17-Jun-13 10:02:37

Loved it, can't wait until the next episode.

FlamingoBingo1 Mon 17-Jun-13 10:05:37

It would have been laces, not buttons, so would just need tightening then tying.

RustyBear Mon 17-Jun-13 10:16:44

There were definite holes, like button holes, on the side of the opening that you could see -no laces visible but he did it up far faster than would actually have been possible, whether they were laces or buttons!

Liked it a lot and very similar to the books so far. Poor James Frain only seems to get cast as the baddie in historical drama but he is very good at it smile

Agree about the casting of Jacquetta, fantastic. Does she remind anyone else of Charlotte Rampling?

I found that really disappointing - soft porn, mushy, and what does Warwick have on his head? Won't bother next week, even though I loved the books.

LaVolcan Mon 17-Jun-13 11:44:33

Is the lady playing Elizabeth actually English? Once or twice she sounded a bit like a Norwegian friend of mine, accent-wise.

Swedish with an English mother, according to the Guardian, so you are not far wrong with the accent.

tobiasfunke Mon 17-Jun-13 11:54:20

I hated it and I love a bit of history lite. The script seemed really stilted and had absolutely no depth to it. DH and I sat and giggled all the way through. Whats her chops was hilarious when she was having one of her visions.
Warwick went all a bit TOWIE at one point.

Yes yes to Warwick/Towie! grin

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 17-Jun-13 12:26:34

Thank you LaVolcan smile

Wasn't the little blond boy playing Richard sweet? He had lovely curls.

ShadeofViolet Mon 17-Jun-13 13:19:59

Just caught up with it as missed it last night.

I thought it was brilliant and the casting was perfect, Margaret Tudor looks exactly how I would picture her.

I loved it. I was so true to the book too.
Can't wait for next week....did think Elizabeth would have been more stunning though. She is pretty yes, but I had imagined a real stunner to stop a king in his tracks and she is a bit ordinary.
Not that I am a king stopper myself....

bunchamunchycrunchycarrots Mon 17-Jun-13 13:51:53

Just watched it on iplayer. I liked it. I've just finished watching the tudors re-run on BBC2 and can't get my head around Cromwell being in this too grin. Edward looks too young and skinny to be king though. I'm off to see Hampton Court Palace in a few weeks to indulge my new found interest in this sort of thing. And The White Queen fits in nicely with my interest I'm not very good with timelines yet.

JazzDalek Mon 17-Jun-13 13:55:38

I really enjoyed it, perfect for a Sunday evening (and may help to ease my Game of Thrones withdrawal symptoms sad )

I went into it blind - have never read the books and (shamefully) don't know any of the history involved - so have no preconceptions.

So far seems very similar to The Tudors, which I enjoyed for its trashiness and costumes and pretty people grin

Delighted as always to see James Frain. Would take him over the King any day didn't mean that to sound so dirty but what the hell

noblegiraffe Mon 17-Jun-13 13:57:44

My first comment was 'she's not pretty enough'

The MIL scene was fantastic, hope to see plenty more of her.

It's so nice to see a historical drama where we follow the women. Edward goes off to war and we don't have to sit through any boring battle scenes. Hurrah.

DuchessofMalfi Mon 17-Jun-13 14:52:12

I was trying to get to grips with the timeline and work out where she came in history, not being very good at history blush. According to the brief explanation in the Radio Times, she was Henry VIII's grandmother. Her daughter married Henry VII and they were the parents of Henry VIII. So that explains that then grin

Fiderer Mon 17-Jun-13 15:42:51

It was enjoyable tosh - my Toshometer™ hasn't binged so high since Downton finished grin

I found her intonation odd at times and having read here now that she has a Swedish mother, it explains why. Lovely to look at, as are lots of the men.

I really liked her nightgown. I haven't worn one since I was about seven and I don't want it to sleep in. I want it to float about a Tudor garden in looking winsome and then for a knightly chap to dismount his horse and flick back his cloak like the king did.

It looked really good. I thought it might be like GoT, all muddy brown but that strong green and the house and garden were jolly nice. <expat tinted spectacles>

GhostOfTheRobot Mon 17-Jun-13 15:44:18

Agree with all the comments regarding the refreshing change to focusing on the female protagonists of that period for a change.
I loved Janet Mcteer as Jaquetta. What a mother figure! Her exchange with Cecily in particular.

I'm not sure i like the magical aspect of it. It's a bit unintentionally funny, as someone said up thread. Can't they just be intelligent women instead of woo?

KikeriFreedomCastle Mon 17-Jun-13 17:00:03

I thought the casting was perfect too.

NQP - I'll be watching Borgias too. Obviously it has its faults, but I've watched two series so far and have oddly been drawn in.

sugarandspite Mon 17-Jun-13 17:42:57

The thing about the magic though - a few years later when Warwick is fighting Edward, he actually arrests Jacquetta on a claim of witchcraft. He lets her go without charge but there is a record of this, and earlier rumours at the French court too.

Loved the casting of her and Warwick too!

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 17-Jun-13 17:55:43

I think it's superstition more than actual woo. Being descended from a water goddess is a charming after dinner story and makes you seem more interesting grin

And if your children will quite possibly die, or things go against your family that as women you maybe can't do much about, why shouldn't you try and influence tjr world by magic? Other than the possibility of being executed as a witch of course I thought the scrying was OTT though.

hollyisalovelyname Mon 17-Jun-13 20:10:04

It's really good. I'm enjoying it. Isn't Max Irons the spitting image of his mum, with his dad's eye colour.

bunchamunchycrunchycarrots Mon 17-Jun-13 20:20:53

Now you mention Max Iron's mum [doh] I can see his likeness there, 'cos I just couldn't see his dad there at all. James Frain (thanks for the name, I was struggling, hence the 'cromwell' bit) seems a bit less weasily so far in this. A bit more about him, none of the bowing and scraping he did in The Tudors.

waikikamookau Mon 17-Jun-13 20:42:03

planning to watch it tonight, on I player. happy this thread sounds positive

SuburbanCrofter Mon 17-Jun-13 21:08:34

I knew Max Irons ever so slightly when he was a child, and it feels a bit wrong watching him in sex scenes!!

I thought it was good though.

(He seemed a nice, well-bought up kid btw - no gossip!)

MummyMastodon Mon 17-Jun-13 22:07:13

hmm, Elizabeth was very pretty, but not the luminous beauty I'd envisaged. She was a bit too freckly and 'girl next door'.

<of course I myself am flawless and exquisite, oh yes>

Fiderer Mon 17-Jun-13 22:09:43

Mummy me too.

<puts on floaty gown>
<waits at chapel for sunrise>

ShadeofViolet Mon 17-Jun-13 22:39:59

There was plenty at the time who thought Jacquetta was a witch though, and that Elizabeth had put a spell on Edward, so although it may have been played up a bit, there is some historical basis to it.

GhostOfTheRobot Tue 18-Jun-13 09:54:38

Yes, I remember the witchcraft accusations.
I'm sure it's going to crop up later on as part of an attack on the Woodvilles so has relevance I just wish it had been done in a different way.

chicaguapa Tue 18-Jun-13 13:22:59

I wish there had been fewer Henrys, Edwards and Richards in those days as I've been trying to gen up on the War of the Roses and keep getting lost on who is who! Now I know why I didn't do History, even though I find it really interesting.

guineapiglet Tue 18-Jun-13 14:21:55

Well first I would like to rant about the fact that there are two decent dramas on at EXACTLY the same time- why does that always happen - ??

The Returned is really good, but I do love an historical drama, and have always loved this period of history - it is just so underwhelmingly studied at school - if at all, and you would have thought all the interest in Kings and carparks might have resurrected a national interest in the Wars of the Roses. I thought the casting was pretty good, I love Janet McTeer, and the costumes and setting were well chosen. I did have few problems with the script being a bit plodding and obvious, but I haven't read the book so will hope it is improved as the series goes on. I seem to recall Edward's brother/cousin goes on to become Richard IIIrd, the one who murdered (allegedly) the two princes, ( who are Edward and Elizabeth's children?). I have a wonderful book by Antonia Fraser on English Kings and Queens and am going to go and reread that period again.

My absolute dream would be for some wise BBC type to commisson an ongoing history series, going back to the Saxons and logically doing a decent drama through the ages, but a serious, non dumbed down one, ( obviously not dry and boring, )but at least trying to convey a coherent sense of history and how everyone links into everyone else, through family lines, dynasties, clans etc, so we could understand how it all fits together. There are always bits of history skipped over or studied 2 or 3 times over so our kids have no sense of a time line. Horrible Histories has done an amazing job rekindling and stimulating interest in history in a brilliant way, but it would be nice to have something more adult, but just as informative, if that makes sense!

( an aside but does anyone know anything about The Vikings new series/drama? IT looks fab.)

ShadeofViolet Tue 18-Jun-13 14:32:50

I think its only available via LoveFilm sad

SaskiaRembrandtVampireHunter Tue 18-Jun-13 14:42:44

"( an aside but does anyone know anything about The Vikings new series/drama? IT looks fab.)"

Yes, it is fab. Very silly - it is based on a legend - but well made and great fun.

Didn't think much of TWQ though. Elizabeth Woodville came across as a grown up Sansa Stark. And the woo element was embarrassing to watch.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Tue 18-Jun-13 17:23:25

Really? I thought she had far more sexual awareness than Sansa (little that she has!) and far more control about what is going on around her (again, not a great deal of that either!)

whatwoulddexterdo Tue 18-Jun-13 17:59:49

Did anyone notice how lovely Elizabeth's nails were?
Loved her night own, quite fancy one myself.
I find it strange that she has little interest in her sons.

SaskiaRembrandtVampireHunter Tue 18-Jun-13 18:28:59

ShipwreckedAndComatose She has two children so I'd expect her to be more sexually aware, but she still came across as sappy. From what I know about history, I imagined the real Elizabeth to be far more sensible and shrewd; in this she seems a bit of a drip and quite immature.

To be fair though, I haven't read the book, so it's possible it's due to acting/direction, not that actual character was written that way.

slalomsuki Tue 18-Jun-13 18:54:14

Just read the book so found it quite enjoyable if a little soap like. Some of the casting was good but the settings were not like I imagined.

Warwick wasn't as old as I thought nor his daughters quite as present as they seemed in the book

Will stick with it though

WhereMyMilk Tue 18-Jun-13 19:27:20

Have read all three books this is based on:lady of the rivers; White queen and red queen-can't wait for next wk!

ShipwreckedAndComatose Tue 18-Jun-13 19:35:29

I've read the books. I think that Elizabeth grows as a character through the book and that she is relying on her mother's superior experience of court life and intrigue in the early part of the book. her mum is much more high born than her dad. yes, she was married before but this is a whole different level.

However, I also think that Phillipa Gregory takes quite a lot of liberties in her writing! It's difficult to know what many of these real life people were actually thinking and feeling.. We can only guess.

noblegiraffe Tue 18-Jun-13 19:43:20

I don't think the series covers the Lady of the Rivers, that all happened before this. It does include the Kingmakers Daughters so I guess we'll be seeing more of them.

hollyisalovelyname Tue 18-Jun-13 23:34:13

Whatwoulddexterdo- i noticed her nails too. I thought it looked like she had nail polish on!!!

hattymattie Wed 19-Jun-13 21:09:40

I'm also annoyed about the clash with Returned. There is nothing on TV Tuesday and Wednesday. However we streamed the White Queen so all good. Very enjoyable although have spent a lot of time since unravelling and researching the War of the Roses which does indeed seem more complicated than Game of Thrones.

OrangeFireandGoldashes Wed 19-Jun-13 21:36:13

It was okay. Typical soapy Tudory history-lite, bit too clean and 'perfect' (very Merlinesque in that regard) and I'm obviously in the minority as I didn't find Max Irons convincing as Edward IV - he should be taller, blonder, more dazzling, more regal.

I'll stick with it as I love the period; I just have to keep reminding myself it's based on hysterical historical and not always hugely accurate fiction, not historical fact.

CMP69 Thu 20-Jun-13 15:08:25

I loved it, but I love the whole York/Tudor period and Phillipa Gregory's books. Couldn't go wrong really grin

susiedaisy Thu 20-Jun-13 21:18:08

Just marking my place, loved the Tudors, the pillars of the earth etc so hoping I'm going to enjoy this as much.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 20-Jun-13 22:05:42

Marking my place. I enjoyed it.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 23-Jun-13 21:01:16
Awizardsstaffhasaknobontheend Sun 23-Jun-13 21:10:24

Ok, I love the books and a bit of historical trash is always great....but really can the BBC make a bit more effort please to keep to the period? Tudor rose badges for the queens coranation!? Not for another 20-30 years I think!

Awizardsstaffhasaknobontheend Sun 23-Jun-13 21:10:47

*coronation!

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 23-Jun-13 21:16:27

I know!

It's lax beyond belief

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Sun 23-Jun-13 21:17:54

Oh, I love it though.

I'm fidgeting until this week's episode comes up on iplayer.

nipersvest Sun 23-Jun-13 21:18:58

i spotted the zips and clothes pegs last week, am finding the bad costume and set design distracting from the story now, everything is just too clean for the 1400's. it looks like it's been made on a shoestring budget but i have read it's cost the beep millions to put together.

Alconleigh Sun 23-Jun-13 21:32:11

Margaret Beaufort was 13 when she had Henry VII. He is a small boy in this, but that actress is 30 if she's a day, surely.

Arisbottle Sun 23-Jun-13 21:35:01

They are blending both of Gregory's books, red and white queen.

nipersvest Sun 23-Jun-13 21:37:00

those cards with pictures on elizabeth's mother was using looked like they'd been drawn using ye olde felt tip pens.

Ellenora5 Sun 23-Jun-13 21:38:44

I'm getting confused to be honest, James Frain throws me completely, I keep thinking he is Cromwell, why does Margaret Beaufort not live with her son

Ellenora5 Sun 23-Jun-13 21:39:57

And who is his father

His father is Edmund Tudor who is dead. He lives with Jasper Tudor, his uncle and Margaret Beaufort's brother in law. She is remarried to Henry Stafford.
The age of Margaret Beaufort is annoying me as are the very clean white interior walls next to so many candles. Not a trace of soot!

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 23-Jun-13 21:45:19

His father was Edmund Tutor, Jasper Tudor's elder brother. He married Margaret when she was about 13 but died a few years later. Elizabeth had to remarry for political reasons and her son was given over to Jasper to raise.
later on, it became important for Jasper to get Henry out of the country as he was the only Lancaster claimant left

HesterShaw Sun 23-Jun-13 21:51:00

THIS IS SO BAD angry

I adore this period of history. The dialogue is stupid and clunky and clumsy.

Arisbottle Sun 23-Jun-13 21:53:29

It is very badly acted as well

Cherrypie32 Sun 23-Jun-13 21:58:00

Has she now had 3 daughters and if so, and therefore a period of 5 years or so have passed why was Henry Tudor the little boy still the same age? Am I being daft?

MummyMastodon Sun 23-Jun-13 21:58:02

Eh? we saw Margaret Beaufort's son, a little boy. Then several years pass, Elizabeth has three girls, her sons from her previous marriage grow up quite a bit (new actors), but we then see Margaret Beaufort's son again, and he's still the same little boy...

KikeriFreedomCastle Sun 23-Jun-13 21:58:21

I'm guiltily enjoying it. But it is bad, I agree, and lack of attention to period detail. Better than the books, though, which are really not very well written, but also vaguely entertaining.

MummyMastodon Sun 23-Jun-13 21:59:28

x post, Cherrypie, I was thinking I must have missed something, but I'm sure that was what happened.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 23-Jun-13 22:00:20

Classic grin

nipersvest Sun 23-Jun-13 22:01:50

margaret beaufort and her husband travel for miles to visit her son, and while they are there, her husband receives a letter??

it seems horse powered royal mail was very efficient back then?!

Cherrypie32 Sun 23-Jun-13 22:03:13

Glad it's not just me Mummy! Very bizarre continuity error surely smile

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Sun 23-Jun-13 22:03:54

Letter post was very quick, FWIW.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Sun 23-Jun-13 22:06:04

I can't help feeling they really haven't thought this through.

Too sloppy. Nice to look at. But too sloppy.

Ellenora5 Sun 23-Jun-13 22:11:20

Oh thanks girls, think I have it now, well until the little lad that never grew in three years was on again, and Elizabeth had 3 daughters in three years yet it looks like at least two years between each one, hmmm, not sure I will be following this and I was so looking forward to it last week, also I agree it looks like the whole set has been doused in domestos.

AndiPandi Sun 23-Jun-13 22:16:16

And Elizabeth had nail ran ish on?!

AndiPandi Sun 23-Jun-13 22:16:32

Sorry ail varnish

AndiPandi Sun 23-Jun-13 22:17:02

Bollocks! Nail varnish

minnehaha Sun 23-Jun-13 22:26:11

Agree with HesterShaw - this is ABYSMAL
Shocked at the praise for this f**king mess of a programm.e

I was impressed by Elizabeths french manicure & baffled by the non ageing Henry Tudor. I'm glad it's not just me noticing these things!
I kept thinking French & Saunders were going to pop up doing one of their parodies grin.

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 24-Jun-13 00:15:17

I thought that about the children. The youngest wasn't a baby even, when it might have just worked. Also noticed un-aging Henry Tudor (I did wonder whether that had been filmed to put in earlier, but actually, it couldn't have been could it, because he was getting his title back?) and Margaret Beaufort does not look 18/19.

The birth bit confused me too. Wouldn't she have been in confinement rather than wandering around the palace? I was hoping we'd avoid a birth scene...

Sleepyfergus Mon 24-Jun-13 05:33:08

Trying to see past the inconsistencies and the hilarious set/clothes/manicures and yes to whoever said its too 'clean' - I totally get you, it's just all too 'slick'. And I also noticed the children who were born in 3 years yet looked like it was more like a 5/6 year period. And also why wasn't she in a darkened room for ages awaiting the birth? It was very soap style, chat chat twinge = baby! and would they really have had a sponge or did they get that in Ye Olde Boots?

I find her relationship with her mum a bit odd, very chatty like bessie mates like where from Hollyoaks or something.

Still, it's easy going enough for a non brainer on a school night and Max Irons is quite yummy even if he doesn't age.

Awizardsstaffhasaknobontheend Mon 24-Jun-13 07:58:31

Dear God, I found myself thinking that this made mini series The Tudors look good. Now while that over did the sexual content and Henry never really aged, at least the sets, costumes and most of the dialogue felt appropriate. This is a cheap, school production of a drama. Very disappointed.

Gracelo Mon 24-Jun-13 08:41:05

Is anybody else getting worried about the Wolf Hall adaptation the BBC is doing after watching this? If they mess up Wolf Hall I'm going to cry.

susiedaisy Mon 24-Jun-13 08:43:55

I had high hopes for this and was really looking forward to it, so disappointed.

ProfYaffle Mon 24-Jun-13 09:25:00

I agree, I'm getting totally distracted by the inaccuracies. If Elizabeth had 3 children in 3 years, the eldest would be 3 and the youngest a baby, but the youngest looked about 2! confused I'm also spotting far too many concrete steps, modern railings etc The crowd scenes were abysmal, really tight, cheap shots so they didn't have to go the expense of dressing a whole street.

polyhymnia Mon 24-Jun-13 09:35:33

I think it's dreadful - it makes The Tudors and the Borgias look brilliant.

Agree that I'm also getting worried about what they'll do to 'Wolf Hall'.

expatinscotland Mon 24-Jun-13 09:48:17

The second episode was crap. It went downhill fast.

Saltire Mon 24-Jun-13 09:55:04

I quite enjoyed the first episode but the inaccuracies of it all really annoyed me in teh second. Especially the birth of the first child, it was like a scene from one Born Every Minute.

AnonYonimousBird Mon 24-Jun-13 09:56:25

What utter tripe! We gave it the benefit of the doubt after Episode One, so bemused that we thought it can only get better.

Last night's was plain ridiculous. It does not translate into a television programme at all.

nipersvest Mon 24-Jun-13 10:32:49

the bbc made the hollow crown didn't they?, how did they manage to make that good and yet make this sooooooo bad?

BanoffeeSplitz Mon 24-Jun-13 10:40:23

"It's Warwick - he's kingmaking again!"

yy to French & Saunders popping up, I thought it was going to turn into Blackadder just then.

HesterShaw Mon 24-Jun-13 11:09:11

That is actually the worst line in the history of television. At that point my outrage turned to mocking laughter.

GhostOfTheRobot Mon 24-Jun-13 11:21:59

So sorry that this program is turning into a bit of a farce.
I was so looking forward to it but as others have mentioned it's so bright and immaculately clean everywhere, no soot, muck or filth. It doesn't "take you there" at all. Where's the atmosphere? I'm not saying dirt = a great show but it feels so sterile. The language is very simplistic too.
Am I being too demanding?

TBH Game of Thrones might have ruined pretty much every show for me now...now that is one grubby production!

Ps. Max Irons is rather nice though and the moody guy playing Richard too so will probably have watch it out...wink

wigglybeezer Mon 24-Jun-13 11:24:11

I had to get my copy of Katherine by Anya Seton out to look at the family tree in that to make any sense of the plot ( but then I learnt Scottish history in school and am a bit vague on the War of the Roses).

noblegiraffe Mon 24-Jun-13 11:32:52

My DH watching it doesn't have a clue what's going on, and having read the books I can fill him in. When Warwick turned up with Henry he was baffled, and Margaret Beaufort is just completely inexplicably awful.
He spends most of the time going 'who's that?'

Surely a bit more exposition of the history wouldn't hurt?

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 24-Jun-13 11:34:20

I really didn't enjoy this last episode. Agree Margaret Beaufort is terrible.

BanoffeeSplitz Mon 24-Jun-13 12:11:20

Margaret Beaufort being a badly written loon is depressing because a) I love Amanda Hale - she was great in The Crimson Petal and the White, and great fun in Rev and Being Human and b) the real Margaret Beaufort was much more interesting than that.

Though tbf I'm sure the real life versions of everyone in this were a lot less Hollyoaks than they appear in The White Queen.

BanoffeeSplitz Mon 24-Jun-13 12:13:20

And Max Irons' toothy grin reminds me of Prince William, which means I can't take him seriously with a gilt crown on his head, it's like a really dreadful roleplaying game gone wrong.

HesterShaw Mon 24-Jun-13 12:38:32

Margaret Beaufort was a proper, serious scholar. Her depiction here is simply silly.

Has anyone read the Kingmaker's Daughter?

moominmaiden Mon 24-Jun-13 13:28:02

The most baffling thing I've noticed so far is that while the women are manicured, most of the men have dirty fingernails.

How exactly are they getting them dirty?! There is no dirt! Even the forests look landscaped...

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 24-Jun-13 13:30:38

I didn't like the visions bit with MB. Is that based on anything? As you say, hester, I would have thought she'd be much more serious and methodical. But maybe that's an anachronistic attitude.

I did quite like the bit where she says her husband (is that right?) is teaching her Latin, that was nice - though I wondered honestly if it was very likely he'd know more Latin than her, since she ended up knowing enough to follow her prayerbook rubrics and that's as much as a lot of laymen would have known, I reckon.

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 24-Jun-13 13:43:38

I've just bought it Hester, since I'd read the other two, I thought I may as well.

Some of the ages are a bit out though. Not just Margaret Beaufort, but I think Anne Neville is a bit too old as well. She should only be one or two years older than Catherine Woodville (the one getting married).

Saltire Mon 24-Jun-13 14:36:35

I have read the Kingmakers Daughter. It was ok, in pretty much the same vein as the other 2. Theres now another book in the series out
called The White Princess, which is the story of Elizabeth of York.

I much prefer the factual stuff though, I am reading Blood Sisters - the Women behind the War of the Roses.

expatinscotland Mon 24-Jun-13 14:54:34

Beaufort, however, was the MIL from Hell! Elizabeth of York was an obedient wife, however, whom it appears Henry loved.

I have never read any of these books, however, because I dont't care for historical fiction.

polyhymnia Mon 24-Jun-13 15:29:04

Someone asked why the Hollow Crown was so much better (I agree it was wonderful).

Perhaps because the script for that was written by Shakespeare but the script for this by someone who's an even worse writer than Gregory herself (who I don't rate, I'm afraid)??

Tiredemma Mon 24-Jun-13 15:54:47

Im so disappointed. My absolute most favourite period in History - I do not 'recognise' any of the characters.

agree that it makes 'The Tudors' Series look amazing

Fiderer Mon 24-Jun-13 16:17:34

That was even more absolute tosh - blimey. The dialogue is dire, I'd expect better from a 6th form play.

Daftest for me was Isabel rushing to her sister to pant "Daddy only married me to Richard (?) for political reasons". After doing her eyes narrowed act all episode and every mother in the court repeating same to their daughters every 5 mins.

I think it's a hoot though as I know nothing of the time - except for reading Josephine Tey's "The Daughter of Time" and hearing it on what was then Radio 7. Really enjoyed it but could never get my head around the who's who.

Can really understand why those who know more about the people and time are appalled. If it were Wodehouse being massacred (witness the last Blandings disaster) I'd feel the same.

expatinscotland Mon 24-Jun-13 16:52:02

Women of rank expected to have marriages arranged. They were property of men.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Mon 24-Jun-13 17:24:54

Yes, it was the lust love match between Edward and Elizabeth that was frowned upon rather than the idea of a political match.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 24-Jun-13 17:29:59

Why don't you like historical fiction then, expat? (Asking because it seems an odd thing to say on this thread).

OMG this is awful.
I say this as someone who knew all the inaccuracies in The Tudors and still bought the box set confused
I had to turn the TV off and I am afeared too about what the Beeb will do to Wolfhall shock

Fiderer Mon 24-Jun-13 17:48:14

Yes, women were the property of men and they grew up knowing that. Particularly those at court.

That your father planned to overthrow the king by your marriage may admittedly come as a shock but as she simpered, that he didn't think of her when he arranged the marriage was daft.

guineapiglet Mon 24-Jun-13 21:24:11

Well, like most of you , have watched and feel very let down by it it is so one dimensional and obviously done on a very small budget....such a shame as they could have done so much more to make the characters much deeper and more interesting.... With all the research and literature on the period its such a shame they have made it so lifeless.

IF they do this to Wolf Hall we shall demand our licence fee back!

LineRunner Mon 24-Jun-13 21:26:32

What a load of rubbish.

Colyngbourne Mon 24-Jun-13 22:10:00

Eliz of York might have been "obedient" to Tudor but apparently she also racked up huge gambling debts - not quite so pure after all. And she didn't do much to stop her husband reducing her mother's state to penury and essentially confining her. No love lost between those two, I reckon.

Both the books and the TV series are appalling - bad history (Henry Tudor wasn't Henry VI's nephew, Edw wasn't present at half the events they have created; the ages are horrendously wrong (Anne Neville supposed to be 8 yrs old in the first episode, and Richard of Gloucester 12; Tudor is meant to be only four years younger than Richard of Gloucester). And they have made Cecily Neville into an old bag, which she definitely wasn't. Both the BBC and those involved should be ashamed. Poor acting, poor costumes. Only James Frayn and the greyhounds are doing a decent job.

nipersvest Mon 24-Jun-13 22:17:18

i had to go back and watch episode 1 again as someone posted about this previously, and yes, elizabeth's mother does indeed whip out a pair of scissors from the pocket to cut the thread.

pookamoo Mon 24-Jun-13 22:45:55

I'm a bit confused about the Princes in the Tower. I thought they were supposed to be the sons of Edward IV and Elizabeth (later proclaimed illegitemate) but in the White Queen they are Elizabeth's sons from her previous marriage.

Can someone who knows what they are talking about unlike me blush enlighten me?

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 24-Jun-13 22:48:17

I didn't get that from White Queen?

The princes in the tower were Elizabeth and Edward's sons. I don't think the implication with Elizabeth's older sons is that they're those princes, it's just that she is scared for them.

harryhausen Mon 24-Jun-13 22:49:29

Pookamoo, I haven't read the book, but I believe Elizabeth went on to have 10 children to Edward (bit if an amateur history buff). They must be the princes in the tower. Yet to be born in the programme?

Asheth Mon 24-Jun-13 23:12:53

Henry Tudor was Henry VI's nephew. Catherine of France married Henry V and had a son Henry VI. But after Henry V died she had an affair/secret marriage to Owen Tudor. So Jasper and Edmund Tudor were half brothers to Henry VI. But Henry Tudor's claim to the throne came through his mother Margaret Beaufort, who was descended from John of Gaunt.... the family relationships of this period are very confusing! They all seem to be related!

pookamoo Mon 24-Jun-13 23:18:37

AH that would explain it. I've just been looking at Wikipedia, and I can see where I got it from: Her sons from the first marriage were called Thomas and Richard, and the princes in the tower were called Edward and Richard.

They really could have done with a baby names thread, couldn't they? Gets so confusing all having the same names! grin

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 24-Jun-13 23:19:14

Her sons at the moment are from her first marriage, they're Thomas and Richard Grey.

She later has Edward, Richard (clearly short on baby names...) and George (who died as a toddler). Edward and Richard are the princes in the tower.

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 24-Jun-13 23:20:14

And just to confuse you more, Edward, Richard and George are the three York princes. So her and Edward's sons have the same names as their father and uncles grin.

Alconleigh Mon 24-Jun-13 23:25:11

I so enjoyed reading The Sunne in Splendour by Sharon Penman that I was really looking forward to this. I am not bothering with episode 3, it's that bad.

Triumphoveradversity Mon 24-Jun-13 23:37:27

I have recently watched The Tudors on lovefilm, I really didn't think anything could be dafter and less realistic.

It's too clean and when Margaret prostrates on the floor of the chapel the memorial looks like it is from the 18th century.

It's BBC budget cuts, I'm half expecting to see armour made from recycled bits of cybermen.

I actually enjoyed The Tudors, I'm struggling with this.

Gracelo Tue 25-Jun-13 06:46:20

to see armour made from recycled bits of cybermen Now that would make the whole thing a lot more fun. smile
I find most of the acting atrocious, especially Edward, Jeremy Iron's son, based on this I don't think he inherited his parents' talents. In the Hollow Crown everybody was at least very good and some were brilliant. Ben Wishaw as Richard II was great (one of my favourite performances ever but I do like TW rather a lot), Rory Kinnear was very good, Jeremy Irons and Tom Hiddlestone were excellent, no comparison to the performances in TWQ.

Fiderer Tue 25-Jun-13 08:11:38

grin at Triumph's cybermen.

An Ood or two strumming a lyre might cheer things up too. Or some bicycling midwives.

Gracelo Tue 25-Jun-13 08:28:41

Some weeping angels might not look entirely out of place.

guineapiglet Tue 25-Jun-13 08:47:20

Does anyone remember 'the devil's whore'? That was so well done, pretty accurate, dirty and gory and conveyed the sense of 'history' so authentically. Great cast: john simm, michael fassbender, andrea riseborough etc...we rewatch it quite often...cant believe there hasnt been a civil war drama, such an interesting time...

harryhausen Tue 25-Jun-13 09:47:13

Guineapiglet, I watched that recently on 4onDemand. It was great wasn't it. Really fascinating story.

Ellenora5 Tue 25-Jun-13 10:25:58

grin at bicycling midwives, brill, I now have visions of Chummy and Co tearing around the castle looking for babies to be born, at least it's a lot cleaner than the East end was portrayed in Call the Midwife.

Finallygotaroundtoit Tue 25-Jun-13 13:29:03

Loving the Queen's manicure, veneered teeth and ability to give birth to toddlers.

She can also levitate - sometimes her head is level to the King's chest, othertimes his nose.

Perhaps she sometimes wears stilletos ? confused

LineRunner Tue 25-Jun-13 13:46:48

I thought the novel was pushing it a bit, but the tv show (and it is a show) is drivel.

Of the casting, I can only assume that many of them are 'connected', especially the leads.

nipersvest Tue 25-Jun-13 13:50:25

philippa gregory is quoted as saying the tv series is just as she imagined, doesn't say a lot about her books if this is the level she's pitching at.

nipersvest Tue 25-Jun-13 13:52:17

and margaret beaufort is being so overacted it's just cringe making

BanoffeeSplitz Tue 25-Jun-13 13:53:51

Yes - the BBC can do authentically dirty & realistic perfectly well when it wants to, which makes me hmm about what on earth they think they're up to with this one.

If the writing & characterisation was better, I'd wonder if they were going for a painting / stained glass kind of effect (someone earlier mentioned a Holbein painting). Given the quality of the writing I think they're just trying for Chicklit, which is a bit crap.

LineRunner Tue 25-Jun-13 14:08:41

I did read this and also The Kingmaker's Daughter. The latter was particularly a struggle to finish. Such a boring monotone 'voice'.

It's all going downhill.

Aftereightsarenolongermine Tue 25-Jun-13 14:53:37

One word - rubbish.

I can think of several more but I've wasted enough of my life on this drivel as it is.

tobiasfunke Tue 25-Jun-13 15:21:29

Apparently it cost a staggering £25 million to make.
I'm not actually seeing where that was spent. Not on the extras. There appears to be about 2 courtiers and perhaps 1 servant hanging about.
It is one colossal waste of money.
It's of the lets not make it too intellectually taxing school of period drama.
I bet you it was made for the American 'Downton' mass market. God help them.

Oblomov Tue 25-Jun-13 16:36:35

Thought it was good.
Glad that this is a 10 part'er, to get our teeth into.

Fiderer Tue 25-Jun-13 16:44:19

Yes, it's like "Downton with Doublets"

That might not be historically accurate but then again, the doublets may have zips or velcro grin

hollyisalovelyname Tue 25-Jun-13 17:42:51

I think Max Irons, playing Edward is very easy on the eye but not well cast- he is not authoritive enough. He appears a bit weak and watery. The little boy- Henry ( Margaret Beaufort's son) didn't age at all in 2 or 3 years - very strange!!! Very poor work by whoever is in charge of that sort of thing in a production- is it the director's fault? Still I'll keep on watching, at least it doesn't end on a cliff hanger like 'The Fall' !

mehefin Tue 25-Jun-13 17:46:06

Thinking about some people being acted older than they actually were at the time of these events I wondered whether having gone down the road of 'golden lit ' sex scenes for Elizabeth and Edward there was then a certain discomfort that some very young girls were married and having children.

Good point mehefin

nipersvest Tue 25-Jun-13 18:23:11

i can live with them making characters older than the book (and in this case, reality!), game of thrones did the same to make it more palatable.

MummyMastodon Tue 25-Jun-13 20:21:53

*She can also levitate - sometimes her head is level to the King's chest, othertimes his nose.

Perhaps she sometimes wears stilletos*

Yes, I noticed that last week, it was although she sometimes stood on a box.

I like Margaret Beaufort, though, she has amazing pale skin.

ChoudeBruxelles Tue 25-Jun-13 20:23:58

I'm disappointed by it.

chicaguapa Wed 26-Jun-13 07:38:18

I'm really enjoying it and the blurb did say that it wouldn't be accurate in the interests of making it more interesting to watch. I've read the PG books but that's all I know about the War of the Roses so I'm not picking up the things the rest of you are.

But I couldn't watch the Tudors because I knew the period too well and became fixated on the historical inaccuracies. So I can understand why some people are struggling with it. But I like it so far and it's just right for Sunday evening.

HairpinsAndLacquer Wed 26-Jun-13 13:18:48

I'm just hoping we don't see any more births, especially after reading her descriptions of some! Fortunately we won't see Henry Tudor's, since he's already born.

I think you're probably right about the ages, girls getting married at twelve isn't really that good to think about.

moisturiser Wed 26-Jun-13 13:40:18

I'm finding it all a bit clunky but I've still been sucked in. It is funny how beauty is subjective though because whereas some people are saying the actress playing EW is not pretty enough, I can't take my eyes off her. I think she is stunning.

I think I need to read the books now. It might all be tosh but it's fun tosh.

higgle Wed 26-Jun-13 14:00:10

Surely if Henry the 7th to be is aged about five his mother, Margaret Beaufort, should be no older than 19? I must say that to follow it properly (am I very dense?) I need to have Alison Weir's fact book about who lived when and was married to who etc. to hand and a coloured picture book of the kings and queens of England.

comelywenchlywoo Wed 26-Jun-13 14:09:12

SO glad I'm not the only one annoyed by the nail polish and speedy mail service (how were they all writing and sending letters whilst being captured and beheaded?)

I'm-still-enjoying-it-tho

ShipwreckedAndComatose Wed 26-Jun-13 16:06:55

You are right higgle!

I do love the actress who plays Margaret though, she has been fantastic in other things

EasyToEatTiger Wed 26-Jun-13 18:37:00

I had to read a history book to understand what on earth all those people were doing there. The White Queen was the mother of the Princes in the Tower. I don't think the king lasted very long. He got ill. His younger brother put his nephews in the tower and took the throne. Ah, Richard iii. They weren't very nice to each other!

LaQueen Wed 26-Jun-13 18:53:51

I'm enjoying it.

I don't think Margaret Beaufort is over-acted. She was a religious zealot, who desperately had wanted to be a nun, before she was married off at 12 to Edmund Tudor. As an adult she was obsessed with her son becoming king, and moved Heaven & Earth to help him.

There was no official postal service, obviously. However, wealthy magnates used courier riders, riding in relay, swapping horses every 15 miles or so. Hence, why a letter could get from London to Edinburgh in just a few days.

Nail polish was actually know in the 15th century. Anne Neville, who went on to be Richard III's Queen, was reputedly very vain of her 'long enamelled nails' as I recall hmm

sugarandspite Wed 26-Jun-13 19:05:49

Hairpins I don't know how much of it they will show but there is a rather nasty stillbirth / neonatal death coming up shortly, involving the Neville sisters.

(Sorry, trying to avoid obvious spoilers for those who haven't read the books / know the history!)

LaQueen Wed 26-Jun-13 19:07:35

I am slightly annoyed though, at so many scenes of the Elizabeth, wandering alone around various castles, only to be pounced upon by Warwick. She would always have been surrounded by her ladies-in-waiting.

Also a bit hmm at Warwick going to fetch Elizabeth to her own coronation. It wouldn't have happened. He wasn't a servant FFS.

And, yes, the street scenes look very under populated...and Elizabeth carrying her own baby, at a ceremony. It wouldn't have happened.

As to the ages...Jacquetta and her husband, are far too old. Both would have still been in their late 40s, at the time of The White Queen. They look 20 years older.

And, Edward isn't tall enough. He was 6ft 4 (as I recall).

Warwick is the right age though. Only in his early 30s.

Richard and George though, are too old looking. They look like they're in their early 20s. Richard was still only 11/12, when Edward trook the throne, and George only 14, I think?

noblegiraffe Wed 26-Jun-13 19:20:58

If they were all the right ages it would come off a bit Narnia.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Wed 26-Jun-13 19:38:17

I didn't get the 'religious zealot' vibe of Margaret (in this version, I mean), I just get 'overacted'. Sure, she claims she's had a vision but she was ridiculously OTT before that.

I also think wanting to be a nun as a child in late-medieval England is pretty normal, especially if you know the other alternative is early marriage and the possibility of dying in childbirth. I mean, it wouldn't be anything like so indicative of excessive religious devotion as it is today.

RustyBear Wed 26-Jun-13 20:30:31

Richard III was born in October 1452, so he was still only 8 when Edward took the throne, George was 11. They were 11 and 14 when Edward married, Elizabeth's sons by John Grey were about 9 and 8 and the future Henry VII about 7.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Wed 26-Jun-13 21:42:57

grin at Narnia!

Perhaps we could put some of it down to premature ageing due to the hardships of medieval life?

ShipwreckedAndComatose Wed 26-Jun-13 21:44:55

By the time he died, Wasn't Edward supposed to be a bit of a bloated mess I always got the impression that Henry Viii took after him in a big (smile) way

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Wed 26-Jun-13 21:56:22

I think kidney trouble ran in that family - you end up bloated. But I am basing this on Anya Seton, who is incredibly picky about research but also a fiction writer.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Wed 26-Jun-13 22:01:19

'Katherine' is a long held fave! grin

HesterShaw Wed 26-Jun-13 22:38:23

Henry VIII was definitely very similar to Edward in terms of looks, build, gluttony and lustfulness. He was a walking catalogue of the seven deadly sins. Edward was apparently like a reverse bulimic - he would regularly gorge himself, and then make himself sick so he could fill his stomach all over again. No wonder he didn't live long.

sunshinenanny Wed 26-Jun-13 22:38:27

I have not read the books so can't comment but I must admit I thought elizabeth's children all looked older that they were supposed to be. and as someone who is interested in historical costume, I thought putting zips in the dresses was unforgivable. Picky I know! I like my historical writers to do thier research, Anya Seton is good also Norah Lofts/Jean Plaidy.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Wed 26-Jun-13 22:42:01

I love 'Katherine'. I was really annoyed when a bio of Katherine Swynford came out a few years back, claiming to be all new and revolutionary, and basically said what Seton had said ... and what Seton had provided details of her research for ...

TunipTheVegedude Wed 26-Jun-13 22:57:07

Yay Norah Lofts.
So underrated.

Her sons at the moment are from her first marriage, they're Thomas and Richard Grey.

She later has Edward, Richard (clearly short on baby names...) and George (who died as a toddler). Edward and Richard are the princes in the tower.
Just to confuse things further, Edward's brother Richard named his son Edward, and their other brother George called his Richard and Edward!

Margaret Beaufort is FAR too old in the series, she was 13 when Henry was born, and whilst the royal children aged 4 years, Henry didn t age at all!! I'm really enjoying the series, but its little things like this that bug me!

HairpinsAndLacquer Thu 27-Jun-13 14:37:20

sugar I've just read that this morning. I knew it happened, but I was a bit surprised at how much PG has embroidered it. Fingers crossed that isn't shown!

LaQueen Thu 27-Jun-13 16:43:43

I adore Norah Lofts smile

You can order her books from Abe. com, for just a couple of quid, and free P&P.

LaQueen Thu 27-Jun-13 16:46:23

Malnsky no, I meant that IRL Margaret Beaufort had wanted to become a nun, from a very young age and supposedly had a real vocation.

In her later years, when she was the Queen Mother, she eschewed any finery and went about dressed like a nun.

I strongly suspect she wasn't much fun at parties hmm

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 16:50:07

That's normal, though. It's not being a zealot, it's a normal course of life for a woman in her era.

Lots of men and women would effectively 'retire' to a monastery, and the differences between widow's clothes and nun's habits wasn't very marked.

I do know she has a reputation for being devout, but quite a bit of that is based on Fisher's eulogy for her, and of course eulogies do tend to paint a picture of Christian devotion rather than, say, ambition.

She comes across as rather more bloodthirsty when you look at some details - she nicked Richard III's prayerbook that he'd taken with him in his tent at Bosworth field, but couldn't be bothered to cross his name out properly in the prayers. To her it was just a trophy, I guess.

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 17:24:34

Hmm, I think people these days are mostly very bad at being prepared to understand medieval women's religion sensitively on its own terms.
'Zealot' is a very negative word for something that made a lot more sense in the context.
Like your point about widows/nuns' dress, LRD.
Haven't read any of Margaret Beaufort's own writings but I would deffo invite Margery Kempe to a party....

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 17:39:16

That's true ... I think it is really hard for us to see religion in a positive light. And I think we often look at things people did back then that were explicitly related to religion, and assume they were being devout. But they could have been being ambitious - just covering up with some expedient devotion.

I think Cecily Neville was definitely like that.

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 17:49:24

LaQ, have you never met any really entertaining nuns?
I have been to parties which had nuns at who were a hoot. You must be going to the wrong parties wink

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 17:51:59

I want to know the nuns you know! grin

I listened to someone give a paper about piers plowman and rap music in front of two or three nuns who placidly followed through handouts full of less-than-demure language. It was fun.

I think (seriously) that these days you would have to be very calm to be a nun, rather than flying off into visions and passions. Maybe less so then, to be fair.

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 18:14:06

Oh it was years ago LRD. These days I never go to parties.

LaQueen Thu 27-Jun-13 19:03:59

I do agree that some women probably aped excessive piety, just to appear morally superior, and to get others to respect them (for nefarious purposes).

Malenky are you LRD now?

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 19:30:18

Yes, I am! I changed it a little while ago but might change back at some point.

I probably put what I was trying to say badly. I expect there were women who aped excessive piety. But the point is, the sort of piety you're describing wasn't excessive - it was quite normal. And I'm not convinced that MB (or anyone else) would necessarily have seen it as deliberately deceptive to perform pious practices whilst being ambitious in a worldly way. Piety was just so central to people's ordinary lives.

I'm thinking of Margery Kempe because tunip mentioned her - but now, she is excessively pious, and people struggled with her because of it.

Btw this is a minor niggle, but something I find implausible about the whole series is how religious practice just doesn't really feature unless you're on your knees (on the eighteenth-century tombstones hmm) being histrionic. Yet they've gone with Jacquetta doing magic. I find it odd doing one and not the other, if you see what I mean.

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 20:39:53

'Btw this is a minor niggle, but something I find implausible about the whole series is how religious practice just doesn't really feature unless you're on your knees (on the eighteenth-century tombstones ) being histrionic.'

Yes, yes, yes, and it's not minor, it's massive <sinks to knees and gets histrionic>

It's just as symptomatic of what's wrong with this dramatisation as the good-people-don't-wear-hats thing. Behaviour that is alien to us must be WEIRD done by WEIRD people, they can't be normal people doing what's normal to them.

alemci Thu 27-Jun-13 20:44:54

Just out of interest, are the Greys related to Lady Jane Grey.

I suppose Magaret Beaufort didn't have mumsnet so to her prayer was her only outlet.

LaQueen Thu 27-Jun-13 20:48:04

almeci yes, they were.

Elizabeth Woodville's first husband was called John Grey, and his father was Baron Ferrers of Groby, I think? Anyway...their ancestral home was Bradgate Park in Leicestershire.

And, 200 years later that's where Lady Jane Grey grew up. There's an avenue of elms in the park, which are all lopped. An there's a local legend that when Lady Jane Grey was beheaded, the head gardener at Bradgate Park, lopped all the elm trees, in sympathy.

LaQueen Thu 27-Jun-13 20:49:46

Yes, I think you're probably right LRD.

Of course, we can never know. But, I would love to know how many people were truly, genuinely devout in the Middle Ages. And, how many just paid lip service.

alemci Thu 27-Jun-13 20:52:05

also it was probably better to be seen to be overly religious otherwise you may be accused of witchcraft etc even if your heart wasn't really in it.

I do believe though that some people were devout and maybe she was one of them.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 20:55:49

Accusations of witchcraft are pretty rare, TBH. I think being accused of heresy would be more of a real-life worry. But yeah, I'm sure that's true about people needing to toe the line.

It would be absolutely fascinating to know for certain.

Jane was born around 1536 and Elizabeth Woodville died in 1492, so I think Jane would have grown up knowing people who knew Elizabeth quite well.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 20:56:38

Oops, sorry, missed your post tunip - yes, agree absolutely.

Though I am still clinging to the hope this week's ep will be better, because I want to enjoy it.

Portofino Thu 27-Jun-13 21:16:12

Jane Grey wasn't 200 years after Elizabeth Woodville though...

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 21:20:14

But the whole genuinely devout vs lipservice split is a very modern way to think about it.
It was a way of life, and what you did in terms of religious observance and good works mattered more than what you thought about the whole thing in your head.

Portofino Thu 27-Jun-13 21:24:45

They were ALL very religious though, weren't they? Even Anne Boleyn, who has been called a heretic, was in favour of church reform vs lacking catholic faith. All the statements she made before she died indicate she kept her faith. Ditto Katherine of Aragon and Henry VIII

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 21:24:47

Yeah, and that's what bugs me about the Jacquetta witch bits. I know she had that reputation and it's not unthinkable there was something behind it, but it would have been connected into Christian rituals or at least Christian symbols. People were worried witches wanted to use bits of the Eucharist in their spells. Just being indifferent to Christianity doesn't seem that likely, and yet most of the characters are shown that way.

Are the books the same?

Portofino Thu 27-Jun-13 21:28:17

I read the White Queen and the Kingmakers Daughter, and it is all politics and sex. Religion played very little part.

Portofino Thu 27-Jun-13 21:30:27

And it bigs up rumour. Alison Weir can be a bit wordy but she at least does her research and puts forward the most likely hypothesis, based on the written record.

Portofino Thu 27-Jun-13 21:32:39

I do like a Philippa Gregory though. She tells a good tale, though history lite.

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 21:33:56

That reminds me of the bit in Eamon Duffy about holy water being kept under lock and key in case people nicked it and used it for witchcraft.

LaQ - if you're interested in getting into people's heads in this period, read something on religion like The Stripping Of The Altars. It is hefty but fascinating.
I don't think we can understand them at all unless we understand their religion.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 21:35:56

Read Marking the Hours! I love Marking the Hours.

Also, it is just the right size to use as a rest for my laptop when I'm MNing curled up on the sofa.

ShipwreckedAndComatose Thu 27-Jun-13 21:37:21

Elizabeth was Lady Jane Greys Great, Great Grandmother. lady Jane Grey's Great Grandad wa she olde rof her two sons from her first marriage

ShipwreckedAndComatose Thu 27-Jun-13 21:38:44

Wtf! That's not what I typed!

'Was the older of her two sons by her first marriage'

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 21:44:12

Ooh, that made my eyes go funny.

I think they look alike, but maybe that's just me reading into it?

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 21:50:05

OK, let's see if I can get this right;

Eliz Woodville > Eliz of York > Mary Rose who marries Duke of Suffolk > Frances Brandon > Jane

Eliz Woodville > Grey son > Grey grandson > Grey great-grandson marries Frances Brandon > Jane

ShipwreckedAndComatose Thu 27-Jun-13 21:53:07

Yes! And, of course, they were related in more than one way...all that inter marriage grin

Portofino Thu 27-Jun-13 21:58:53

I have family tree software, I often think I should stick them all in to work out the relationships in my head. Then I think about uploading my tree to Genes Reunited or some such and confusing everyone that I am indeed posh.

TunipTheVegedude Thu 27-Jun-13 22:01:48

Ha! There must be someone on Mumsnet descended from Elizabeth Woodville. Probably a few dozen.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Thu 27-Jun-13 22:16:48

Ooh, nicely done.

The names always make me think of Jane Austen so I get very confused.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 13:54:55

We drove through Groby, near Leicester recently, and the secondary school there is called The Elizabeth Woodville School smile

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 13:57:44

Porto - No, you're absolutely correct, of course. There wasn't a 200 year gap between Elizabeth Woodville and Lady Jane Grey - I just wasn't thinking. You have my apologies.

Infact, there's every chance that Jane would have come into contact with plenty of people who had known Elizabeth.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 14:01:54

Mal the books do allude to Jacquetta's scrying quite a lot, but I find Gregory describes it in a bit too Disney kinda way for my liking hmm

I much prefer the way Rosemary Hawley Jarman speaks about it in We Speak No Treason

Also, Jarman goes far deeper into the Melusine legends, etc.

But, then you really can't compare Gregory and Jarman, at all.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 14:04:46

Oooh, sounds good Tunip.

I've just waded through The Bloodline of the Holy Grail, for the second time. Anything else will seem like Biff Chip & Kipper, in comparison grin

Fiderer Fri 28-Jun-13 14:10:29

LeQ "Scrying" is the smokey thing, isn't it?

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 14:11:37

shock

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 14:12:22

Basically, yes Fid.

Jacquetta supposedly had the Sight which meant she had visions of the future, sometimes. They could either come upon her totally unexpectedly, or she could encourage them to come, using smoke, or staring into a bowl of water, a candle flame etc.

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 14:14:05

LOL, I just looked up the Jarman book of which you speak and as well as the sensible-looking edition (with historically correct hat) I found this little beauty: www.amazon.co.uk/We-Speak-No-Treason-Book/dp/0515083380/ref=sr_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1372425140&sr=1-11&keywords=we+speak+no+treason grin

Fiderer Fri 28-Jun-13 14:16:18

I liked the bit by the water with the reeling in, partly perhaps because I wasn't expected any magic stuff. And it was more atmospheric than gazing into smoke in your nightie grin

Though I would still love Elizabeth's nightgown to float about in.

So what's a good read for someone to get into that whole period?

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Fri 28-Jun-13 14:21:54

The water bit was quite pretty, but it dragged on a bit for me. And the little crown-shaped ring just looked tacky.

I am with you on the nightgown though.

Fiderer Fri 28-Jun-13 14:23:48

The ring was a bit "Kinder Surprise".

courgetteDOTcom Fri 28-Jun-13 14:27:31

I loved the books and always said it would be interesting to read them concurrently, but the series is a let down! I can't believe they've had us waiting for 6 months.

they've cut so much out I'm confused about what's happening! and yes, everything everyone else has said too.

Reading what PG said about writing RQ, she found it difficult to change allegiance to write it having already done it to write WQ and get sympathetic to EW and I think out shows, the book isn't sympathetic to her at all. WRT Margaret being religious, she is written so religious she annoys people. Jaquetta's family held Joan of Ark for awhile and Margaret questions her constantly about her, as she's her heroine. She describes herself as having "saint's knees" as she spends her life on her knees in prayer.

Some people have asked about where her son was, it was normal to be sent to a relative as a child.

I love the period so much, I set my wedding around it grin I was reading the books at the same time and getting ideas. We had a lot of Lancaster v York "fights" (the best man is a Yorkist).

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 14:44:58

Tunip eeek...what's with the comedy, Mils & Boon cover-art shock

We Speak No Treason was considered one of the defintive historical texts of the 70s, and won all sorts of awards, I think?

My copy has a very sensible dust jacket with medieval engravings on it [dour]

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 14:51:58

Oh Fid where to start...

Personally, I'd start you on The Sunne In Splendour by Sharon Penman - it's equally weighty (she's a proper historian, and everyfink) but also very engagingly written, so that the characters seem almost touchable.

If you want something a little lighter, than Elizabeth Chadwick is a good read. I'm currently reading her latest The Summer Queen which is about Eleanor Of Aquitaine...and it's good, if a bit fluffy.

I'm more looking forward to reading Eleanor The Queen by Norah Lofts, which is waiting on my bedside table. Norah Lofts is slightly more edgy than Chadwick, and her novels often have quite a sinister/macabre element to them.

But, my all time uber favourite is Rosemary Hawley Jarman. Her books have the power to actually make me cry. And, her writing style is slightly archaic, so I find her books the most atmospheric - and her plain prose is better than a lot of poetry I've read.

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 15:07:04

You're absolutely right about Lofts being edgy. I'd never seen her described as that before, but she is.

Fiderer Fri 28-Jun-13 15:08:34

Thanks LeQ. I like a bit of weight and archaic sounds good. Someone lent me a Philippa Gregory and though I found the period interesting, the writing wasn't my thing.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Fri 28-Jun-13 15:17:03

That cover art seems to be default 'thing we have reprinted this cos it is all, like, trendy now'. It's totally unrelated but the exact same font was used for reprints of Diana Wynne Jones after JK Rowling made that sort of story trendy.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 15:21:17

Tunip yep, there's a certain bleakness in her writing that I really like. A certain emptiness/poignancy - a lot of her books don't end happily, and many of her characters come to very bleak ends.

Read Jassy recently, and loved it, but it made me so sad.

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 16:06:01

Yes, there's absolutely no guarantee the good will be rewarded or the bad punished.
Eg in the Town House trilogy, Martin never finds out the truth about Pert Tom and what happened to Kate, and carries on looking after him for the rest of his life.
And the woman in The House At Sunset who desperately wants to buy The Old Vine back never gets it and has her money stolen.

She's been compared to William Faulkner. And yet when I was young she was more often than not shelved in the Historical Romance section in the library and given covers a bit like the one I linked to.

Jassy - haven't read that one for years but wasn't it filmed with Margaret Lockwood?

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 16:08:33

It's her mastery of historical detail that does it for me most though. In The Town House where Agnes puts the handfuls of wheat on Martin's bed for his marriage to Magda so they'll be fruitful - with that one tiny detail she tells you so much about tradition and belief, character and motivation.
I also love that she writes about working class characters as much as posh ones.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 16:52:13

I haven't read The Townhouse trilogy yet, but I really want to. And, yes I love the tiny details, that just convey so much. She really makes you feel the time.

Haven't seen the film of Jassy - don't think I'd want to.

The first book of her I read was Gad's Hall, and I was reluctant to start it as it sounded like it was going to be dull and trite But before you knew where you were, you were hip-deep in devil worship, satanistic orgies, suicide, infanticide...and I was like WTAF?

And, it's rendered all the more chilling, because she sets her stories in such mundane, rural backgrounds. In this way, she reminds me very much of Gregory's Wideacre trilogy - infact, I often wonder if PG wasn't inspired by Norah Lofts, for this?

And, I actually like the fact so many of her protagonists are fallible, with a peverse streak in them. You're never certain who is really the hero/heroine hmm

Have you noticed there's a really underlying thread of homosexuality in many of her novels, and it's usually unrequited?

Fiderer Fri 28-Jun-13 16:57:06

<makes notes>

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 17:08:08

Yes, I definitely think Gregory was inspired by Lofts in her earlier work, I've noticed it too. If they ever get her on for a webchat that can be my question! When I first read Gregory I thought 'oh wow, a new Norah Lofts' but I'm not sure she's totally lived up to that promise. I feel like she's churning out so many now and they need to be more tightly plotted and edited more ruthlessly. They go on a bit, which I don't think Lofts ever did.

Eek, Gad's Hall! It came as a total shock to me as an innocent teenager. Terrifying! There was a witchy one that was made into a Hammer horror film, too. There's also a dodgy contemporary rape one in which the repressed spinsters quite enjoy being raped hmm

The repressed homosexuality - yes. There's some non-repressed homosexuality in The House At Old Vine, too.

The Town House trilogy is on Kindle. It's my favourite of her work, though The Concubine is very good. I must re-read the Knight's Acre ones, too.

What I absolutely love are the books where she takes the same setting and uses different narrators so you see people through their own eyes and then through someone else's. She's incredible on character development - how people get from A to B in the course of their lives, what made them the way they are. And of course, how physical settings like towns do.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 17:26:02

Yes, I'd agree with you on that one. I thought the Wideacre trilogy was incredibly rich, and detailed...as were her Tudor books.

But, since then I think her books have gone light, I feel like her publishers are pushing her to churn one out every 12 months, and the content is really suffering. There's not the layering anymore, or the richness.

And, I really like her use of different narrators, so you get to see someone from other POV, than their own.

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 17:34:24

Yes, exactly - the layering and the richness isn't there any more.
She should slow down.

LaQueen Fri 28-Jun-13 17:38:51

I was over the moom, when I heard she was writing about the Plantagents because I've been obsessed liked them for 25 years, since I did The Wars of the Roses for A level History.

But, although I enjoyed them, I found them...tepid. None of the passion, or the pathos of her earlier books.

TunipTheVegedude Fri 28-Jun-13 18:13:17

Just did some googling.
Surprisingly:

'Brooklyn, N.Y.: Good Morning,
Who are your favorite historical fiction authors? Did you ever read any of Norah Lofts's work?
Philippa Gregory: I hardly ever read historical fiction now, but when I was young I used to adore the novels of Georgette Heyer and Anya Seton.'

from here

MummyMastodon Sun 30-Jun-13 21:08:34

Here we go. As they neglected to make Little Henry vii grow up at all in four 4 years, I'm rather hoping that he will be slaying Richard iii in the last episode, and that he will still be five years old ;)

courgetteDOTcom Mon 01-Jul-13 01:14:39

I've read three of the four books but was totally lost tonight!

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 08:45:25

LOL MummyMastodon. I like that idea.
Alternatively they'll suddenly switch him to someone in his 50s and it'll be like when the actresses for Lucy kept changing in Neighbours.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 09:07:06

I quite enjoyed last night's episode, anyone else?

Gracelo Mon 01-Jul-13 09:10:50

I liked last night's better than last week but who was the boy Margaret talked into fighting against Edward? I didn't do much English history at school.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 09:16:03

No, because 1. the ship was so implausible and 2. Philippa has just got SUCH a down on poor Margaret Beaufort.
She presents her as so totally self-deceiving as well as devious. And she was in church without a headcovering. <disapproving>

(and btw I only watched because dh was.)

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 09:19:28

I get from the narrative that it was Margaret's brother John, but I admit, I've no clue who he is in the history.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 09:22:41

The ship was implausible. I thought the birth was too - in general, all the shock and squeamishness about !) seeing people about to have sex and !!) childbirth seemed a bit unlikey, you'd have seen it by then.

But yeah ... she does have a down on MB but I found her more likeable in this episode.

I've given up on the headcoverings but could they not FFS find a church for her to pray in that isn't full of post-medieval stuff? It's not like it's that difficult, there are quite a lot of fifteenth-century churches kicking around.

MB would totes have prayed the Lord's Prayer in English, too. Cos mumbling a bit of Latin would have been, what, too difficult for us to cope with? confused

limitedperiodonly Mon 01-Jul-13 11:55:09

"Do not fret, my little muff".

How did James Frain say that with a straight face?

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 12:56:45

LOL. Professionalism.

I quite enjoyed it. I didn't find it implausible at all. I don't think a high born lady like Anne Neville would have necessarily been exposed to sex, or childbirth, and I think the horror at the birth had to do with having to put her hands into her sister!

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 13:12:55

Honestly, she would, though.

There just wasn't that level of privacy. I agree with you she might well have been horrified by having to do that during childbirth, but the idea she'd have been shrinking away a bit of sex and nudity feels unlikely to me.

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 13:13:53

Actually, I think IRL that Isabella did give birth on board ship? The Calais garrison stayed loyal to Edward, despite Warwick being Captain of Calais, and the garrison refused Warwick's ship entry into the harbour.

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 13:18:32

In the books I quite liked the way that Elizabeth and Jacquetta do witchcraft - insofar that they do it very diffidently, almost as though pretending they're not really doing anything wrong, oh no not us, we're just playing at being witches (but, all the while they know damn well what they're doing)...that made it quite eerie IMO.

In the series though, it seems more deliberate.

A young, high born, unmarried girl allowed access to a delivery room? I'm not so sure.
And I think the deal with the sex was the way they flaunted it in her face. Anne was singled out to remain in the room, and they tossed their clothes in her face.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 13:30:52

Mmm. I think so.

I also think the issue with the sex is, given privacy wasn't so big a deal, their flaunting it in her face isn't that likely and her being so overtly disgusted isn't that likely either.

It is partly that I find that actress quite wooden, TBF.

courgetteDOTcom Mon 01-Jul-13 13:32:06

I was thinking that LaQ, especially if you read Rivers too, Jaquetta always seemed to be a little cautious of it, her I can't remember if it was mother or grandmother was the real witch.

courgetteDOTcom Mon 01-Jul-13 13:33:46

Didn't women used to have all their ladies around them during birth?

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 13:33:56

I would hesitate to think that a young noble woman would ever have been an observer at a birth, until after she'd been married, and had children of her own (and then at least, would have some minor knowledge/experience to offer)

As a young, unmarried woman of noble birth there would just be no need for her to be there, in the first place. A noble family could easily afford to pay for very experienced midwives, wet nurses...and, there would have been plenty of other servants on hand, too, to heat water, fetch and carry.

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 13:36:17

But, I do agree with you about the sex Mal - I think it would have been virtually impossible to completely protect a young noble woman from having any knowledge of sex and stuff. Not at that time. People lived in far closer proximity.

And, it was seen as a very natural activity...it was only the Victorians who made us all prudish.

And, yes I find the actress playing Anne very wooden, and bland.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 13:37:27

Yeah, women had ladies in waiting around them at birth.

I think it was one of the normal ways women learned about how birth worked. I could be totally wrong, of course, but my impression was that it was fairly normal - whether you'd be allowed to see a birth if you were unmarried or not, I don't know, but sex wouldn't have been all that private.

As I say, not 100% sure but I think it's really only much later - like Victorian times - that there's this paranoia about unmarried women being shielded from all knowledge of sex and childbirth.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 13:38:05

Cross post! grin

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 13:39:01

[high fives Mal]

As ever, we are in complete accord historically wink

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 13:49:26

Unmarried women definitely weren't allowed in the birthing chamber.

I agree with Saggy, I didn't find the sex bit implausible - it was the flaunting and the rudeness with which they flung the clothes rather than the sex itself.

AFAIK you were supposed to keep your smock on for sex though that doesn't necessarily mean everyone did, and maybe their nakedness would be shocking even if you were fairly familiar with sex.

Elizabeth Woodville's silly sleeveless nightie would probably have been shocking enough, tbh.

I think there are 2 different things here, sex taboos and nudity taboos.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 13:51:51

I stand corrected! Thank you.

I already said that! <<umbrage>>

grin

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 14:25:02

Yes but you weren't firm enough Saggy.
wink

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 14:27:07

Nah, I just need to be told I'm wrong several times before it sinks in.

Gracelo Mon 01-Jul-13 14:33:38

Didn't she give birth on the ship (I got distracted during that bit), maybe there weren't any midwives or other ladies around?
Imagine having a baby on a ship in a storm, I'd be massively seasick on top if it all.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 14:36:49

In the TV they were trying to get into the harbour to find a midwife.

I have to admit, I found the bit where they hear the harbour chains going up properly spooky. I liked that.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 14:41:42

Wouldn't they have made sure she was travelling with someone who knew what they were doing, though? Or was that mentioned?

In the book, IIRC they flee. The storm keeps them at sea for some time, (dont forget, sailing was a risky business back then, and getting trapped in a 'lee shore' in a storm could be fatal.) Edward somehow manages to reach Calais first. The baby is premature and transverse, so Anne has to try and turn it. Its a really unpleasant scene. <<tries to sound more assertive>>

Gracelo Mon 01-Jul-13 15:15:02

Warrick seemed a lot more concerned with getting away than with the safety of his pregnant daughter but maybe there wasn't a real choice there.

The consultant put one hand inside me when I had dd because she thought dd was looking up, not down and I might need forceps (and she was). I hope she's got over the swearing I subjected her to by now. I hadn't been aware I knew that many expletives blush

One of the main themes of The Kingmakers Daughter is that Warwick shows a total disregard for his daughters feelings and safety, and used them as pawns for his own ends. He marries one to York, and One to Lancaster!!

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 15:51:39

angry Yeah, the patriarchal kingmaking bastard!

Gracelo Mon 01-Jul-13 15:55:28

He was covering all his bases, it seems.
I think I might have to start reading up on that era. I have The Sunne in Splendour on my Kindle, I start with that.

Fiderer Mon 01-Jul-13 17:17:21

limited "Do not fret, my little muff" - I thought he said "moth"? Admittedly "My little moth" isn't much of a fatherly endearment either.

Gosh that episode was busy. They're defeated. They're rebelling. They're fleeing. He's defeated. He's won. I need a chess board to keep track of everyone, it fair skipped through.

Did Edward really kill MB's brother? We hardly saw him but he seemed to act out of conscience and I thought the poor lad deserved at least a goblet of wine by flickering candlelight and a chance to tell his tale before being filleted.

limitedperiodonly Mon 01-Jul-13 18:22:20

fiderer It could have been 'moth', I didn't have the subtitles up.

Seeing as I wage a constant battle against the clothes moth it seems even less affectionate to me.

KikeriFreedomCastle Mon 01-Jul-13 18:24:32

I'm quite sure he said moth, too.

limitedperiodonly Mon 01-Jul-13 18:24:34

I mean 'more' affectionate.

<Going to John Lewis for mothballs tomorrow>

He said Moth! Wash yer ears out! grin

limitedperiodonly Mon 01-Jul-13 18:28:58

Oh God, I don't know. But the mothballs I get aren't those stinky naptha ones but are very effective and change to white from orange when they've stopped working.

I recommend them to anyone who's ever been troubled by moths behind the arras.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 18:51:55

I'm sure moths were even more of a problem than now, in horrible damp castles where everything was made out of wool or linen. Seems a funny sort of term of affection.
But then, he's a funny sort of dad.

limitedperiodonly Mon 01-Jul-13 19:06:50

Do you think so? At the risk of derailing a thread about an important televisual event wink I'm quite obsessed by moths and feel that central heating has a lot to answer for.

They never seemed to be a problem when I was living at my parents' and freezing to death every winter and most summers.

But then I never wore ermine back then wink

alemci Mon 01-Jul-13 19:41:53

also when Magaret Beaufort was moaning at her husband for worrying about his neck etc. who can blame him. He just wants a quiet life.
Makes me wonder if she will murder him or he will be killed quite soon.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 19:46:02

They're showing his as pretty sympathetic, aren't they? In a nasty, patriarchial, 'you, woman, are my property' kind of way.

I suppose I could get fed up about how that plays into stereotypes of 'poor long-suffering men with cheating wives', but hey ho.

I'm curious about the moths too. You know, it occurs to me, I've never seen a squished moth or spider in a manuscript. You'd think you would if they were that much all over the place. You get bits of straw and all sorts.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 19:51:40

They were obsessed with moths - there's lots in the Goodman of Paris.
You had to brush your clothes and shake them out weekly if they were stored, as well as packing them up with various herbs. Only luckily as you had fewer clothes it didn't take as long.

Apparently central heating makes them breed all year round. The only time I've ever had trouble was when I've left clothes in attics and sheds, which was why I assumed they like damp, but maybe it was more to do with them being untouched for long enough for the full life cycle of the moth.

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 19:53:02

Edward didn't get to Calais before Warwick - Edward never went. Edward was just very lucky that the garrison was loyal to the him, the king, rather than Warwick who was actually Captain of Calais at the time.

And no, he had very little paternal regard for his daughters. But, then neither did their own mother. I won't write any spoilers (just incase) but later on, the Countess of Warwick completely abandons her daughters to fend for themselves, and buggers off, only making sure that she is okay hmm

I must confess, the role of Margaret Beaufort's brother has been completely hidden from me, until now. I did this period for A level, and have read copious amounts about the Plantagenets ever since...but, I don't recall that Edward, killed Margaret's brother - or that he led a rebellion against Edward hmm

I suspect it may be poetic licence?

Fiderer Mon 01-Jul-13 19:56:20

Poor chap. No goblet, no candlelight - and no heroics. I feel even worse for him.
<may be unsuited to the turmoils of the period>

alemci Mon 01-Jul-13 20:01:48

why did the brother do what he did and go and see the king anyway. didn't get that (there was a lot going on whilst i was watching)

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 20:03:09

Well, I have done extensive and detailed historic research.

<preens self>

Oh, ok, I checked wikipedia.

But no, I'm also still totally lost as to who the historical character is whom Edward killed. Margaret's half-brother who was Wells (which is what they were calling this bloke) died at a different time so far as I can see.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 20:04:52

alem - the brother didn't realize that the battle was a ruse to get Edward into battle, so that Neville and George could turn on him. He thought they were really fighting.

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 20:05:39

Phew...glad you can confirm that Mal.

All through last night's episode, I was annoying DH by muttering 'No, no...I'm sure he didn't do this...no, I'm sure he didn't...oh, come on, there's no way he did that...'

Fiderer Mon 01-Jul-13 20:06:00

I think his sister did the whole "God wants this" spiel which he believed and then Jasper Tudor let on it was all a trick. That Warwick and baddy brother George had set Edward up and so the brother realised "God doesn't want this" and set off to let Edward know.

MalenkyRusskyDrakonchik Mon 01-Jul-13 20:06:18

Well, I'm only confirming I checked wiki ...!

LaQueen Mon 01-Jul-13 20:08:40

alem basically naughty Margaret led her brother to believe that if he led his army in a rebellion against Edward, then he stood a very good chance of either being crowned king himself or at least be the uncle of the new king (Margaret's son Henry).

Wells thought he was fighting for the good of the Lancastrian cause, and for a Lancastrian king...then he realised that actually, another Yorkist (George) would be put on the throne.

Obviously though, all this is complete fantasty...and I don't know why the writer has put it in. I mean FFS, it's not like the War of the Roses isn't already really complicated enough hmm

3littlefrogs Mon 01-Jul-13 20:30:41

I have just watched the BBC2 documentary about Henry VII (recorded it weeks ago) and it filled in the history and the family tree very well.

I read Anya Seton's Kathryn years ago; it was one of my favourite books.

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 01-Jul-13 20:51:08

I think although I'm not sure, that I might have read about him once (but it might not have been him).

I think it might have been in a Horrible Histories book? I'll go and have a scan of the bookcase in a bit.

limitedperiodonly Mon 01-Jul-13 21:04:23

tunip I know more about the life cycle of the clothes moth than the Plantagenets, Tudors etc. It's a combination of having a lot of natural fibres and being married to a clothing retailer.

A serious infestation would be as devastating to us as the Hundred Years' War.

I could tell you things about moths that would be a lot more terrifying, and probably a lot more accurate, than any BBC/ Philippa Gregory mish-mash wink

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 21:21:01

LOL LimitedPeriod!

Imagine if your dh was a medieval clothing retailer, though! shock

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 01-Jul-13 21:26:13

Ah nope, wrong king. That was Henry I. A man had sworn an oath to Henry's brother (and enemy) Robert and then broke it. Henry pushed him off the top of Rouen Castle.

I was going to say I've never read it anywhere else, and I do like the Plantagenets and have read quite a bit about them.

Actually, I was pleasantly surprised with the birth. It was much gorier in the book!

HairpinsAndLacquer Mon 01-Jul-13 21:33:43

Does anybody else find, as they watch this, that it's odd knowing how these 'characters' are going to die when they don't know themselves?

Like I know that Margaret Beaufort is going to see another, what, three coronations before she dies, but some of the others won't see another one.

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 21:36:38

I keep trying to forget what I know. I do the same with Hilary Mantel - I am resolutely pretending there's every chance the third book ends with him settling down to a happy life in the countryside.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 21:43:21

Yes, absolutely.
I was rooting for him to marry Jane Seymour.
You never know. I mean, Mantel is a hugely original writer, she might switch genre to alt hist halfway through smile

LadyClariceCannockMonty Mon 01-Jul-13 21:44:22

I've only watched the first one so haven't read the whole thread, but I wanted to sign in.

I LOVE Janet McTeer as Jacquetta. Not convinced about anyone else yet, esp the King himself he's not pretty enough to keep me interested

Everything and everyone looks suspiciously clean for the fifteenth century. I'm enjoying James Frain though; a bit Blackadder and a bit Malcolm Tucker grin

But I'm really holding out for Wolf Hall.

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 21:45:01

He doesn't?! shock

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 21:45:18

Ooh, yes ... I love Janet McTeer too. So good!

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 21:52:31

Ha LadyClarice, you are SPOT ON re James Frain.

Yes, Janet McTeer is very good. She's a better class of actor than most of them and she's giving it her all.

worriedsick100 Mon 01-Jul-13 22:14:13

enjoying it but finding it all a bit sexed up - all the witchcraft stuff etc

It would be nice Iif Jaquetta had an accent, given that she is from Luxemboug! And it annoys me when the Woodvilles are called commoners. She is from a royal family and married into the British royal family!

I actually met a medieval clothes retailer recently. She was telling me she would need to downgrade her second best dress because of moth damage. It was full of centimetre wide holes all down the front!

And I'm also rooting for Cromwell in Wolf Hall! sad

sugarandspite Mon 01-Jul-13 23:04:58

I'm sure I don't remember the Margaret Beaufort brother Wells bit in any of the books.

Have the BBC basically invented him? Or at least his role in that uprising?

Presumably because the story isn't complicated enough on its own?

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 23:06:52

But would they be commoners because the dad is, right? He was ennobled after marrying her.

I agree about the accent - and what is going on with Jasper Tudor's accent? confused

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 23:09:05

It's signalling 'WELSH!' isn't it? What more do you want?!

Given that we have a Swedish Elizabeth Woodville, I think we're not meant to notice the accents.

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 23:19:39

That is probably true. smile

TBH I just picture him sounding like my grandpa. Anything else isn't a real Welsh accent.

sugarandspite Mon 01-Jul-13 23:23:03

Ah ok so it looks like (from Wikipedia) that he did exist but was older than MB, was her stepbrother with his own adult son and was involved in the Welles uprising / robin of redesdale rebellion and was beheaded by Edward - although under utterly different circumstances than those in last night's episode.

Why bugger about so much with the history when its so unrelated to the story?

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 23:25:43

Because it made Margaret Beaufort look really evil, probably hmm

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 23:26:38

Ok, now my turn to stamp my feet and strop.

I said that upthread already.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 01-Jul-13 23:29:14

And you were right! grin

sugarandspite Mon 01-Jul-13 23:29:26

That's true. I'm glad they are making sure I clearly understand that she is Not A Nice Person.

I thought she can across much more vulnerable and warmer and likeable in the red queen.

LRDLearningDomHome Mon 01-Jul-13 23:30:22

I was.

My knowledge of actual history is pretty shite but my wiki-checking skills are honed.

sugarandspite Mon 01-Jul-13 23:31:13

Sorry LRD!

I got distracted by the moth discussion grin

courgetteDOTcom Tue 02-Jul-13 02:07:25

Jaquetta was the daughter of a count and married Bedford to become pretty much Queen of France, DIL to Henry IV, cousin to the Holy Roman Emperor and a couple of European kings. her marriage was really important because it tied so many threads together. she was too important to not let her get away with her second marriage and they paid a lot for it. they hastily made a title for them (Rivers in honour of her goddess ancestor Melusina) but it wasn't totally all forgiven which is why their children were seen as common.

the scene with Welles is definitely an addition, in the books it's all seen from the woman's perspective.

Shame I've loaned my books out because there's things I keep wanting to look up!

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 08:44:52

Sugar it's the problem with them having to start her story later on in her life, isn't it? If you immediately feel for her as a victim of what we would now see as awful child abuse, you sympathise with her later on and her later personality feels more inexplicable. Whereas leaving that bit out reduces her to Evil Religious Nut caricature.

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 08:45:30

oops
EXPLICABLE not inexplicable

courgetteDOTcom Tue 02-Jul-13 12:52:30

Margaret was 19 when she married Stafford, her third husband, and Henry would have been 6. I have no idea when any of the events are set because they're moving so fast. Edward was born in 1470 though which would make Margaret 27 and Henry 14.

She does appear to be the sort of person who wasn't able to grow up properly.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:05:32

Actually Stafford was Margaret's second husband.

Her third husband was Sir William Stanley - the bloke who changed sides during the Battle of Bosworth, and thereby secured the crown for Henry Tudor.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:16:17

Jacquetta, was born into the royal House of Luxembourg as her father was the Count of St-Pol.

As far as I know she wasn't ever the daughter-in-law of Henri IV? But, her first husband was John, Duke of Bedford, who was the brother of Henry V of England.

And, for a time while John was Regent of France, Jacquetta was the highest ranking woman in France.

This is why it was such a huge scandal that when the Duke of Bedford died, Jacquetta secretly married one of his esquires, Richard Woodville - who although fairly well born, certainly wasn't noble, or anywhere near.

Jacquetta and Richard had to pay a huge fine, for having the temerity to get married. And, they struggled financially all the while Elizabeth was growing up (didn't stop them having 14 children though).

And, this also is why she constantly reminds Elizabeth, that she does have royal blood in her veins (as in the Royal House of Luxemborg) eventhough people mocked her for being a commoner - because at the time inheritance/social standing came down through the paternal line.

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 13:17:45

You're both right. She was married to someone else as a baby but it was dissolved because of consanguinity and it didn't count because she'd been a child when it was contracted.

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 13:19:14

I read it on Wikipedia yesterday blush

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:23:10

I reckon that consangunitiy caused so many almight fuck-ups and confusion during the medieval period.

If I remember rightly, you couldn't be related within the 7th degree, to the person you were marrying? Which made it virtually impossible for any of the nobility to marry another noble...because, they were all distantly related.

One of the reasons given for Eleanor of Aquitaine divorcing Louis was because they were 4th cousins, I think? But, then she went on to marry Henry II, and they were also distantly related, I think?

It was just a mockery, and a convenient excuse to hang a divorce on hmm

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:24:45

Ah, now I must brag confess I'm not Wiki-ing any of this.

I have been obsessed with the Plantagents since I did the War of the Roses for A level. I know them, better than I know my own extended family blush

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 13:25:48

7th degree? shock

I wonder if it was a nice little earner for the church, sorting out all the dispensations they needed.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:27:43

Yeah, course it was...the Pope would get a bung, for granting a dispensation for nobles marrying within the 7th degree (which was just about all of 'em), and then he'd get a bung, for agreeing to disolve the dispensation, when the couple decided they need an excuse for a divorce.

Sorted wink

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:28:52

Yes, WTF is going on with Jasper Tudor's accent??? He doesn't sound Welsh - I think he sounds more Geordie, to be honest?

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 13:29:26

Ha! And if they were royalty the bung would be massive.

courgetteDOTcom Tue 02-Jul-13 13:30:32

She was married before Tudor, it was annulled due to her being under 12.

Henry IV died 20 years before they got married, but he was still Bedford's father. I was posting on the ap (hence the lack of caps) and trying to save myself texters thumb by posting short as my laptop has died.

I didn't say Woodville was anything noble though.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 13:33:25

Ah, I didn't know that courgette thanks.

I've always understood that Margaret Beaufort and Elizabeth Woodville were both ladies in waiting to Margaret of Anjou, when they were both young girls.

Does anyone know if this is true? Margaret would have been about 11, and Elizabeth about 14?

courgetteDOTcom Tue 02-Jul-13 15:44:02

Some cross posts there.

I'm jealous, I'm hoping to do history in September and it's not what I would call history! Anything that has photos is not history (exception of Da Vinci's photo, but then that goes for anything Da Vinci!) but my husband says what I like is too modern to be history!

There is debate if Elizabeth was lady in waiting. There was a lady called Isabel Grey - Isabel is a corruption of Elizabeth and obviously Grey was her first married name - that some argue is Elizabeth. Jacquetta was a lady to Margaret, she was quite popular and second only to her in court. I don't know about Beaufort though.

Talking about how many degrees, there was rumours that Richard and Elizabeth of York were to marry but he denied these.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 16:50:40

It's quite likely that Elizabeth may also have been known as Isabel, as it's often a diminuative of Elizabeth.

I would have thought it highly likely, as Jacquetta was close to Margaret of Anjou, and it was very common practice to introduce you children at Court, from quite a young age. So, it would have been very natural for Margaret to have Elizabeth as her lady-in-waiting, too.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 17:07:32

Ooh ... can I ask, how is Jacquetta related to Marie de Ste Pol, the one in the early fourteenth century who married Aymer de Valance? I know I can look it up but since you lot are here ...

Isabel is a translation of Elizabeth, I think - more usual in Latin documents that I've seen, though I wouldn't know for as late as this as I'm not looking at anything very formal. Might that be why it becomes a diminuative? There's a folk etymology they both come from 'Isis the Beautiful' (cf. Adhaf Soueif), but I don't know if it is true.

I didn't think Jasper Tudor sounded Geordie - but then I can't place it at all. I'm afraid I'm going for 'generic yokel accent', and if that's his natural accent I'll feel bad. It's just I've a feeling he's put on any old accent to stand for Welsh.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 17:08:39

Gah. Diminutive

Ignore my spelling, it's only going to get worse.

alemci Tue 02-Jul-13 17:36:42

I got some old fashioned books out and sat in the library and read up about the wars of the roses and the kings. trouble is I can't remember half of it but interesting family trees etc.

we could do with a starkey series.

found the Phillipa Gregory book about the Rivers? lady of so will have a read of that.

wonder if there are still people out there with the surname Plantaganet or has it been shortened to plant.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 17:44:49

Oh, I can't stand Starkey!

But I know what you mean.

I would also love to know if anyone has plantagenet as a surname.

Fiderer Tue 02-Jul-13 18:13:21

So, historical MNpedia, who was the French relative - the Duke of Burgundy (?) at the wedding who changed Warwick's France strategy?

And what was his France strategy?

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 18:16:09

Hmmm well if my name was Plantagenet I would most definitely have changed it in the reign of Henry VIII, because you wouldn't want to attract his attention as a possible claimant to the throne.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 18:17:21

Well, it's really complicated at this point. The English crown owned territories in France, because basically 'France' with the borders it has now, didn't exist.

So it is to do with what influences people had, and where their lands were.

Fiderer Tue 02-Jul-13 18:22:47

I remember France being like an extension of the Home Counties, and the "really complicated" should warn me not to go there yet grin

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 18:24:27

grin

michelebennett1 Tue 02-Jul-13 18:43:46

Henry Tudor was a half-nephew of King Henry VI. Henry Tudor's father, Edmund Tudor was the half-brother of Henry VI. Henry VI's mother, Catherine de Valois secretly married Owen Tudor after the death of Henry V, and bore him four children - Edmund, Earl of Richmond, Jasper, Earl of Pembroke, Owen (a monk at Westminster Abbey) and a daughter Jacinta.

courgetteDOTcom Tue 02-Jul-13 18:44:24

Peter was 5 th generation descendant of Marie (3 greats?)

not sure who Warwick was talking to, which episode?

Isabel is a corruption, someone had the good idea of corrupting it to Isabeau... of course that didn't work out, but someone realised belle would be a better ending.

Fiderer Tue 02-Jul-13 18:52:04

courgette maybe ep 2?
There was sulking at court by the French because Edward didn't marry the princess and then a hunting/falcon/birdy scene where the Burgundy chap was being wined and dined by the Riversseses.

michelebennett1 Tue 02-Jul-13 19:07:54

Isabel Duchess of Clarence did give birth on board ship in much the same circumstances shown in the programme, in cramped conditions, attended by her mother and probably her sister. In the process of fight from the country, they weren't exactly normal circumstances in which the noblewoman was giving birth, and there was little opportunity for Anne to be protected from what was going on. I don't know how many female attendants were on board ship with them, but probably not many. In any case, Anne was shortly to be married herself.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 19:10:27

I could be wrong, but I think it was the ship that posters thought was a bit Disney, not the plot.

michelebennett1 Tue 02-Jul-13 19:10:43

The Welles, father and son, did foment rebellion against Edward IV at that time. I don't know where this was in the Philippa Gregory books, but there is some historical basis in fact, although not quite as portrayed here.

TunipTheVegedude Tue 02-Jul-13 19:14:52

Yes, the ship was ridiculous. It shook more like the Starship Enterprise in an asteroid storm than a boat, it had that massive grating in the window which they made no attempt to cover, and the ceiling was bizarrely high - it certainly wasn't cramped.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 19:19:45

Can you link?

If the TV series means Margaret's brother Wells, his father died at Towton in 1461. At this time John was 10 years old. He was part of a later rebellion in 1483, but by then his father was long dead. I'm sorry, I'm ignorant - which rebellion were they both participants in?

If it is John we are talking about, it is horrible if he was considered responsible at age 10/11, but not implausible.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 20:24:55

Also, I'm thinking that the Robin of Redesdale rebellion against Edward, caused him to flee England, and take refuge in Burgundy?

Yet, Robin of Redesdale was mentioned in Sunday's episode, wasn't he hmm

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 20:29:27

LRD yes, I think the writers have gone for gruff, generic, yokel accent for Jasper Tudor?

But why? Obviously, in his early years he was raised away from Court. But, as the son of Katherine of Valois and Owen Tudor, he would have been raised as a gentleman...so why the excessive country bimpkin accent hmm

Richard and George, were mainly raised at Middleham, Yorkshire - but the writers don't have them speaking with Yorkshire accents.

LaQueen Tue 02-Jul-13 20:34:46

"If it is John we are talking about, it is horrible if he was considered responsible at age 10/11, but not implausible.

LRD yes, indeed. Don't forget, that Edward's younger brother Edmund, Earl of Rutland, was only just 16 when he was murdered in cold blood, after he was injured during the battle at Sandal Castle.

And, Edward of Lancaster was murdered, aged only just 16...

And, all the children (some as young as 5) that King John had hanged at Nottingham Castle sad

Youth was no protection, in those times sad

courgetteDOTcom Tue 02-Jul-13 22:04:35

I'm rewatching ep2 for you!

I think the man Warwick was taking to is Charles the Bold but I don't know much about him.

Welles is introduced as Margaret's half brother.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 22:22:25

I thought it was unusual to be under age and in charge of an army. But then, of course, I think Richard II was nearly a century before. So yes, might wel be. Scary.

courgette - there is a Wells who was Margaret's half-brother, but I don't follow how he fits this timeline, is all. Or what happened.

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 22:26:06

Oh! Is it Richard, who's Margaret's step-brother rather than her half-brother? He was executed but he was an adult and I think it was formal, or at least semi-formal.

Tunip, I don't know much about ships, but I'm fairly certain that in those days, they had a 'fore castle'. Literally a 'castle' built at the front, which could very well be high, and would have had a window as it is above sea level. Glass would be expensive, and I'm assuming the way a wooden ship would move, easily broken, so a grill wouldn't be improbable?

sugarandspite Tue 02-Jul-13 22:54:18

The imdb cast list for episode 3 lists Richard Welles and no appearance of John.

m.imdb.com/title/tt2618976/fullcredits/cast

So they've fiddled about with his age and made him the son of Margaret's mother rather than the son of Margaret's stepfather.

Richard Welles here:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_de_Welles,_7th_Baron_Welles

alemci Tue 02-Jul-13 22:59:55

yes Turnip I agree a bit like Saxburg Coburg etc suddenly became Windsor around the turn of the 20th century hence wondering if the surname Plant e.g. Robert Plant (may be a stage name) was Plantaganet shortened.

mind you are there any Tudors around in modern day life?

LRDLearningDomHome Tue 02-Jul-13 23:17:15

Thanks sugar!

courgetteDOTcom Wed 03-Jul-13 00:21:41

I know a Tudor.

Plantagenet though was a created name, the first one wore a certain flower in his hat which got him the nickname and it stuck.

If it's anything like toady where the royal family don't have surnames then I doubt there are any as it was a house name, unlike Tudor which was a surname. Last time I looked yournotme was still down so not easy to tell. Although there's always ancestry.

mehefin Wed 03-Jul-13 09:39:36

Plenty of Tudors here in Wales still!smile Also used as a first name.

limitedperiodonly Wed 03-Jul-13 09:46:29

I think the man Warwick was taking to is Charles the Bold

It's only the Mafia that give people nicknames about physical characteristics or personality defects these days.

We've definitely lost something along with the plague and leprosy and that.

Gracelo Wed 03-Jul-13 09:52:55

There is a 9th century Karolinger king called Karl, der Kahle which would be Charles, the Bald in English.
I love those names, it is a pity we don't do this anymore.

Plantagenet comes from the planta genista. It's good old yellow Broom!

limitedperiodonly Wed 03-Jul-13 10:22:35

Charles The Bald is definitely ripe for a comeback, followed by William The Bald and his brother, Harry The Bastard, Though There Is Red Hair In The Spencer Family.

That last one needs a bit of work.

Gracelo Wed 03-Jul-13 10:29:04

There is a list of monarchs by nicknames. Quite a few funny ones.

LaVolcan Wed 03-Jul-13 10:29:36

The surname Plant is a Staffordshire name. I went to school there and knew loads (well, three that I can think of right now.)

Harry could be Harry Rufus - rufus has a good pedigree too, for Kings.

limitedperiodonly Wed 03-Jul-13 10:39:11

Good list. There was a Martin I of Aragon.

I'm going to remember that next time someone says: 'I'd never name my child something you couldn't imagine a High Court Judge or member of the Royal Family being called.'

TunipTheVegedude Wed 03-Jul-13 15:08:52

Saggy - they might well have had a grill (yes, obviously not glass) but they would have battened it down during storms, not left it open for the waves to come in. You could sink your ship like that, honestly.
Yes ships of that date had very high castles at front and back but they had several decks crammed into the height. Space was so precious on board that I don't believe they would have wasted it by having a couple of extra feet of headroom, even in a posh cabin.

courgetteDOTcom Wed 03-Jul-13 16:20:22

LOL limited! Have a look through that line, they all have brilliant names!

Thanks Saggy, I couldn't remember the name and hadn't got my book handy.

Harry is the double of Charles Spencer. I think he is now the better looking of the two, was always Will but Harry has definitely overtaken.

limitedperiodonly Wed 03-Jul-13 16:33:25

It's definitely a tortoise v hare where Harry and William are concerned courgette

Obviously they're both too young for me to think of them like that <cough>

courgetteDOTcom Wed 03-Jul-13 16:45:34

I always thought Will was too young (although I think I'm younger than Catherine) so I agree, far too old to drool over Harry, even in his uniform...

moisturiser Wed 03-Jul-13 16:48:14

I always love these threads on Mumsnet. I kind of don't care if the programme is tosh, it's provoked a great discussion.

I'm still enjoying it, just finding lots of it quite silly. I felt so sorry for the Neville sisters this episode, what a tough life.

limitedperiodonly Wed 03-Jul-13 16:50:28

I like Alfonso III 'the candid'. Or just tactless. Which is like me without the benefit of being regal which would get my head chopped off.

TunipTheVegedude Wed 03-Jul-13 16:57:10

I think we should all namechange actually. LimitedPeriodTheTactless is great (I don't think you are btw.)

Am pondering a suitable epithet for myself.

limitedperiodonly Wed 03-Jul-13 17:03:59

But I am tunip and I've suffered for it most grievously wink

limitedthetactless Wed 03-Jul-13 17:14:24

I'm feeling good about this and I might keep it because it says more about me than anything else could ever say. wink

courgetteDOTcom Wed 03-Jul-13 18:04:27

Shall I go back to confuddledDOTcomwink or maybe theconfuddledDOTcom

TunipTheVegedude Wed 03-Jul-13 18:07:03

Or DotComtheConfuddled

sugarandspite Wed 03-Jul-13 18:42:10

Tunip should be TunipTheSwoonful

ok pretty sure swoonful is a made up word but how satisfying is it?! And Tunip is always fainting when there is any kind of mild peril.

courgetteDOTcom Wed 03-Jul-13 19:17:59

I now have the song a swoonful of sugar in my head! confused blush grin

LaQueen Wed 03-Jul-13 21:03:38

The name Plantagenet, comes from the word Plantagenista which is the Latin name of the broom plant.

Geoffrey, Count of Anjou (also known as Geoffrey le Bel, because he was so beautiful) who was the husband of the Empress Matilda, and the father of Henry II - habitually wore a sprig of broom in his hat...and, that's where he got the Plantagent nickname from.

I think Harry is the dead spit of his dad actually! All this Charles isn't his father stuff is just rubbish!

I've just read a novel which suggests that Henry II might have been the son if Stephen, not Geoffrey. Anyone know if there's actually and historical suggestion behind this or is it just poetic license?

LaQueen Wed 03-Jul-13 21:14:20

Harry is definitely Charle's son...their eyes/nose combo is identical. Infact, Harry looks far more like Charles than William does.

LaQueen Wed 03-Jul-13 21:16:28

I think that's just poetic licence saggy ?

Obviously Matilda was a good 10 years (I think) older than Geoffrey when Henry I insisted she marry him - I think Geoffrey was only 15? But, perfectly capable of fathering a child - infact, I'm pretty sure that he already had illegitimate children when he married Matilda?

courgetteDOTcom Wed 03-Jul-13 23:56:17

I don't think Charles could deny either of his sons but I still think Harry is a Spencer.

I've been picked out by strangers as being the child of both my parents. Not even in a context "I saw your daughter at a bus stop" from someone who didn't know if Mum had children, also had "who's your dad? You're the double of Joy!" (my aunt who died childless) My uncle goes on too much about how like my aunt I am and he can't see Mum's side at all. So I think you can be very both sides.

LaQueen Thu 04-Jul-13 08:40:54

Cour yes, I'm the image of my Auntie - facially, our physique, even our voices sound very similar.

People always assume I'm her daughter...bizarrely, it really annoys my Mum for some reason hmm

alemci Thu 04-Jul-13 08:44:25

I think Harry looks very much like Charles facially and William like Diana

Laqueen I suppose your mum wants you to look like her. My DS looks alot like my sister more than her own children.

Trills Thu 04-Jul-13 09:13:12

I have enjoyed the historical discussion on this thread, but I just want to say that Jasper Tudor is the best looking of the men on the show. Much less boyband than king Edward.

And doesn't Richard (youngest brother of king Edward) look creepy?

LaQueen Thu 04-Jul-13 09:19:53

Alemci but I don't understand why my Mum should want me to look like her? I'm really not bothered if either of our DDs look like me (and, neither do, actually).

alemci Thu 04-Jul-13 10:05:06

I don't know either LaQueen and I may be totally wrong. Does she get on with her sister. does her sister look nothing like your mum.

courgetteDOTcom Thu 04-Jul-13 10:23:06

my mum seems to be the mold in our family, three kids all the double of her, even my my brother. no one can tell mum, my sister and I apart on the phone, even my husband hmm

courgetteDOTcom Thu 04-Jul-13 10:24:15

trills that may be to do with the later storyline with him and Elizabeth of York

LaQueen Thu 04-Jul-13 17:59:52

Alemic it's a love hate relationship...growing up my Mum was the pretty, blonde, clever one who went to grammar school...whereas, my Auntie, was the dark haired, lanky girl who ended up at the secondary modern.

But, 20 years down the line...my Auntie was uber glamourous, married to a very successful business man, and living all over the world.

Whereas my Mum...wasn't.

I never really thought about how alike DD and I are till three of her teachers one parents night correctly identified me in the corridor lineup.
I went home quite excitedly to tell DH, he replied "durr".

Chunderella Sat 06-Jul-13 13:02:16

Jasper Tudor is certainly one hot piece of ass. I have been deeply stung by the criticisms of his accent on this thread, he can take me for a roll in the haystacks any time.

sunshinenanny Sat 06-Jul-13 18:17:07

Will probably watch the next episode tomorrow, But I am a bit worried for my safety as last week I nearly died laughing , when I heard; Not Once but twice, the very modern and I think American Phrase "I'm sorry for your loss" gringringrin Totally innapropriate

Trills Sun 07-Jul-13 17:42:06

What may be to do with later storyline? Jasper's hotness or Richard's creepiness?

Trills Sun 07-Jul-13 17:42:39

Richard looks like Ramsay Bolton/Snow. Not that we should judge a book by its cover.

courgetteDOTcom Sun 07-Jul-13 20:53:26

Richard's creepiness - do you know/ want to know who he nearly married?

courgetteDOTcom Sun 07-Jul-13 21:55:25

Is that a cardboard crown?

KnockMeDown Sun 07-Jul-13 22:00:31

Well, I thought that was fab - I was on the edge of my seat! Can't wait till next week !!!!!!!!!!!!

LRDLearningKnigaBook Sun 07-Jul-13 22:41:23

Is it me or is Margaret of Anjou wearing a dress with a paisley pattern? hmm Like, what was popular out of India in the 18th century?

I'm enjoying it but all the clothes look wrong this episode.

AgnesBligg Mon 08-Jul-13 00:26:26

I was very gripped by tonight's prog. I don't know about dress patterns or whether concrete steps and chrome handrails had been invented yet, so none of these details bother me smile.

I also love the Anne Neville actor. She plays it very naturally ime.

LaVolcan Mon 08-Jul-13 08:06:18

I started to watch last night's episode and fell asleep part way through. I woke up when Jaquetta was being tried for witchcraft, but hadn't a clue how it had ended up like that. Is it worth watching again on i-player to find out what happened in the middle?

Gracelo Mon 08-Jul-13 08:54:05

I never understand why they were all so keen on becoming king/queen or for their children to be king/queen. If that were me I'd try to keep right out of the way of history and the battles and the beheadings and the awful awful strategic marriages. Poor Anne.

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 12:01:53

Getting a bit annoyed about the characters saying a simple Bye to each other hmm

Have to admit, I didn't enjoy last night...I'm losing the love. We're going to miss the next 3 episodes, as we're on holiday...but I'm not actually that bothered?

Also, anyone noticed the complete lack of Warwick's brother, John, in any of this so far? He was integral to much of the shenanigans...no sign of him hmm

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 12:02:59

Anyone else spot the modern looking metal hand rails on staircases, too?

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 12:08:44

LOL, yes. I had it on in the background, glanced up at the screen and saw said handrails.

I was going to read The Kingmaker's Daughter because I would like to know more about her (and we were in Middleham yesterday) but if PG does Richard III as a caricature of evil in the book I think it'll just annoy me too much.

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 12:17:21

Tunip actually it's okay. A bit light like so many of her latest books...but, Richard isn't a caricature, at all...he's actually quite cleverly written, because you're never really sure of his true intentions.

Much of what he does is just expdient at the time, which is probably how most people behaved.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 12:27:23

Ah thanks, I might get it then smile

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 12:33:21

It's worth a read...but, I'm getting more irritated by the actress who plays Anne, she's so wooden...^gottle of gear^ anyone hmm

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 12:34:22

We were in Middleham last...I insisted we mooched round the castle for about 2 hours soaking up the atmosphere...well, I blissfully mooched. DH and the DDs sulked, a bit hmm

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 12:43:41

It's not a bad castle.
When we went last year my 2yo was convinced the tower thing on a Victorian building in the town was the tower where the Princes were killed.
The older 2 are very Ricardian as a result of the Horrible Histories song and went up to the statue and earnestly told it they didn't think it was him that killed the princes.

LadyEnglefield Mon 08-Jul-13 12:48:37

Am I just not paying attention or has Lord Hastings also gone AWOL?

PG doesn't play Richard as evil IIRC. Quite 'normal' but with a few unanswered questions. is that vague enough? grin

Personally I'm a great Ricardian. I think he took the rap for a lot and wasn't to blame for most of it!

Chunderella Mon 08-Jul-13 13:44:53

Gracelo the interesting thing is, that's supposedly what Richard Woodville, Elizabeth's brother did. Officially he didn't have any children, but it was rumoured that he did in fact have one son who was passed off as one of the servants instead, to keep him safe. I don't know whether that's true or not, but would've been tempted to do the same. Can't help thinking that Elizabeth might have been better off if she'd stayed away from the roadside!

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 14:02:49

I suppose the feudal system meant you didn't always have the choice to stay out of things. If the person you owed loyalty to told you to fight you had to even if you thought it was a terrible idea. Like when you have a useless boss and you're convinced you could do the job better.
At least if you were king you would get to make those decisions.

Chunderella Mon 08-Jul-13 14:58:42

True, and if they'd all been ordered to court they'd have had to go- although the feudal system wasn't really in place by the late fifteenth century. But it's one thing doing as you're told when it can't be avoided, quite another to go looking for involvement!

LRDLearningKnigaBook Mon 08-Jul-13 15:03:54

We never really had much of a feudal system anyway, even earlier on. I think it was definitely pretty weak by the fifteenth century, but I think there were other pressures on people to seek protection.

I think what perhaps helps to explain it is just looking at normal life. We're all familiar with the horrible things that happen to kings and queens but you could lead a very unambitious life and still find horrible things happened. So perhaps the relative danger wasn't so great?

Chunderella Mon 08-Jul-13 15:10:31

And ambition, of course.

sunshinenanny Mon 08-Jul-13 15:10:52

Saw a brilliant TV trial a few years ago, BBC I think! Not Sure? Presided over by the present day duke of glocester in which they did a mock trial set in the present day putting forward all the evidence fore and against Richard being Guilty and it was found that in all probability he was not responsible for the death of the Prince's.

Much of his reputation comes from Shakespears play and he would not have wanted to offend the Tudors by presenting Richard as any thing other than a villain and many other things just didn't add up[hhm]

AgnesBligg Mon 08-Jul-13 15:55:02

Laqueen I have been wondering about John Neville too. I thought he took the lead in rebelling against Edward?

I don't really believe a lot of this series I'll admit as the characters are drawn quite differently from what I have read about them before. Eg Cecily as a cold old crone, Margaret B as a frothing beserker etc And Max Irons is all wrong for this. But I still like the Anne Neville actor. <stubborn>

Sunshinenanny, I'm reading Josephine Tey at the minute where a detective sifts through all the known facts to piece together a credible story of what happened to the princes. Similar idea.

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 17:42:30

agnes - John Neville, actually stayed totally loyal to Edward (even after Warwick rebelled) right up until Edward (foolishly) took away John's new title of Earl of Northumberland. He made him a Marquis instead...but John was not happy.

So, he changed sides, and joined his brother Warwick and died at Barnet. There's is a romantic myth, that when John's body was found he was wearing Yorkist livery under his armour...even though he had sided with Warwick and Margaret of Anjou.

But, he was a major player...but no sign of him hmm

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 17:45:01

Yep, no Hastings, either? I wonder if Jane Shore will make an appearance?

Anyone else noted how empty all the castles are...? And, how Elizabeth and Edward wander around on their lonesome?

These castles would have been teeming with people, lots of activity...and Liz and Ed always escorted by servants and attendents...

Did the Beeb try and cut costs by not paying for extras hmm

AgnesBligg Mon 08-Jul-13 19:12:39

aah ok thanks LaQu.

Fiderer Mon 08-Jul-13 19:59:46

LeQ I think the budget went on dogs last week. I noticed more.

This week on soldiers, there were at least 10.

As for the language, Isabella said "Bye husband" to George, didn't she? "Bye husband" hmm

Agnes - I heard the Josephine Tey "The Daughter of Time" on Radio 7 (as was) and then bought the book. Loved the flavour but got lost as had no clue who was who and thus whodunit and whydunit.

I know more now - but from this thread rather than The White Queen grin

ethelb Mon 08-Jul-13 20:42:26

Did anyone else spot the drainpipes? Just before they go down the concrete steps with a national trust style hand rail?

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 21:34:21

Fid yep, this week I spotted oooh, maybe 4 soldiers in the entire castle? Couldn't they have spent less on Elizabeth's manicures, and a few more quid on some more extras FFS?

Josephine Taylor's conclusion in Daughter of Time, was that the Duke of Buckingham had the princes murdered. Lots of reasons why...

He hated the Yorkists

He hated the fact he,d been forced to marry Catherine Woodville, when he was only a child.

He was the highest ranking noble in England, yet Edward never gave him a place on his Council.

He was also a Plantagenet, so had some royal blood, and believed he had a claim to the throne.

He was Constable of the Tower, therefore had access to the princes.

The princes were last seen when Richard was away on progress in England. George, Duke of Buckingham stayed behind in London.

Hang on...I've just typed all that...and now I'm thinking that was Penman's conclusion, wasn't it? In The Sunne in Splendour...

Did Tey conclude it was Henry? He had them killed as soon as he took the throne. So he could marry their sister. But to marry Elizabeth he lifted her Act of Attainder, thereby immediately making the princes legitimate again...and they could claim the throne.

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 21:37:10

Ethel yep, I saw 'em. WTF were the set dressers doing...I'm surprised we didn't spot some naice William Morris patterned tea towels for sale...

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 21:43:08

Yes, Josephine Tey thought it was Henry.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 21:44:14

yes, lovely drainpipes and guttering.
Made me realise how little I know about the history of drainpipes though <heads to Google>

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 21:45:33

Oh ta turnip halfway through typing I suddenly thought hang on...this is when I realise I have read too much on this, and it's all getting wrapped round my neck.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 21:47:28

It's 28 years since I read Daughter of Time but I've been blaming Henry ever since, that's how I remember grin

cornypony Mon 08-Jul-13 21:47:47

I saw a documentary once that put the case forward that Margaret Beaufort murdered the Princes. She's scarily bonkers enough in the White Queen for sure.

Fiderer Mon 08-Jul-13 21:50:26

LeQ I have honestly no idea who Tey's detective thought dunit, will enjoy reading it again though. The radio serialisation helped get me through packing a 5-person household to move house. That and the Pallisers.

Trills Mon 08-Jul-13 21:52:41

I haven't watched this week's yet, but have decided that it's okay to read the books - it's not as if there will be big spoilers!

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 21:57:55

Fid ignore everything I said...it was Henry, it was Henry.

Richard had already had the princes disbarred from the succession, by stating that Elizabeth and Edward hadn't been married.

So, no real need to have them killed. And even if Richard had killed them, it such a stupid, stupid way to go about it. He could so easily have put out they'd died of a fever...

But to say nothing, and leave it open to mass eculation...pretty stupid.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 21:59:24

I also remember her arguing that Richard looked nice and Henry looked kind of shifty, though.

LaQueen Mon 08-Jul-13 22:05:21

Yes, well it wasn't perhaps the most scientific analysis I've heard...

But, I think it was the difference in their appearances that sparked the detective's curiosity, I think?

TunipTheVegedude Mon 08-Jul-13 22:08:01

Yes, I think it was.

Asheth Mon 08-Jul-13 22:38:37

I always thought Tey's argument was flawed anyway. if Henry could lift the act of attainder to marry Elizabeth it would have been just as easy for one of the princes or one of their supporters to do the same and topple Richard. So I've always thought that Richard was the most likely suspect. Although he wouldn't presumably have done the deed himself, so someone acting for him perhaps. or even someone who just thought it was what he'd want.

AgnesBligg Tue 09-Jul-13 22:52:23

Oh thanks for the spoilers chaps I'm on page 50 of Tey's book, so now I know Henry did it...grin

I came upon this book as I've spent a lot of time pondering Richard since the hoo-hah in the car park, and I haven't been able to really see Riii's actual motivation in dispensing of the princes. After all he was Regent (right?), protector of both the boys and England, popular-ish, killing his nephews seems a really idiotic act/ shoot self in foot type moment?

That said blah blah Canon law, 'act f attainder' mentioned above ,wta is that anyway, so I will keep going with Tey.

Fiderer Wed 10-Jul-13 06:34:15

I wondered about avoiding the "spoilery" posts too, Agnes but I think part of the enjoyment (when I read it again) will be that I now know more about who everyone was - and enough to possibly disagree with Tey's conclusions grin

It's 500 odd years old. A bit late for spoilers!

grin

Trills Wed 10-Jul-13 08:08:04

I've also been looking at Wikipedia - hard to avoid "spoilers" there grin

Fiderer Wed 10-Jul-13 08:11:37

FidGirl was watching Horrible Histories yesterday and the Richard III song came on. Made me laugh.

TunipTheVegedude Wed 10-Jul-13 10:59:59

An attainder legally declares you guilty of a crime and takes away your property and titles, not just from you personally, but means you can't pass them on to your heirs. It de-nobles you, effectively. Henry VIII used them a lot.
Henry ordered the utter destruction of some families after the Pilgrimage of Grace. The Tudors tv series took that literally and had him killing kids, but actually it was just the way people talked about an attainder - it 'destroyed' a noble family.
The other advantage of an attainder was that it meant you could torture and execute a nobleman or woman using methods that were only allowed for commoners, because they weren't noble any more.
It was easier to convict someone of treason by attainder than by trying them properly in a court of law.
They were easily reversible though.

LaQueen Wed 10-Jul-13 18:38:36

I just can't bring myself to watch The Tudors...I glimpsed a bit, where Henry's sister Mary marries the King of Portugal, I think...and I thought WTAF hmm

AgnesBligg Thu 11-Jul-13 00:37:15

OK spoilers. Tey is saying now, via helpful nurses/surgeons in the detective's hospital grin that the boys in the tower were still alive after Bosworth.

Really? shock

KnockMeDown Sun 14-Jul-13 22:02:11

Another cracking episode. I know there are a lot of nay-sayers on this thread, but think this series is fab - have been on the edge of my seat, and can't wait till the next episode grin

ILikeToClean Sun 14-Jul-13 22:06:31

I'm a bit lost as to why young Henry Tudor is heir to the throne if Margaret of Anjou had a son who would automatically be heir? (I know he died in this episode, but before that, why did Margaret Beaufort think her son was to be a future king?). Sorry if I have missed something and am being thick!!

SelectAUserName Sun 14-Jul-13 22:24:33

ILikeToClean At this stage, Henry Tudor isn't the official heir to the throne. Margaret Beaufort believed God told her that Henry would rule one day.

AgnesBligg Sun 14-Jul-13 23:02:17

I think his claim to the throne was fairly tenuous even when he got it after Richard's death.

ILikeToClean Sun 14-Jul-13 23:05:30

Oh ok so it's just her believing it rather than him having an actual claim - thank you for clarifying!! This prog is bonkers but quite enjoying it! If only they didn't all have the same names!!

SelectAUserName Sun 14-Jul-13 23:18:38

He had a tenuous claim as he was a descendent - through Margaret herself - of John Of Gaunt, as were Henrys IV - VI, but complicated by illegitimacy.

AgnesBligg Sun 14-Jul-13 23:18:41

This prog is bonkers I agree grin.

I suddenly found Richard rather sexeee to my surprise. hmm

MaryMotherOfCheeses Sun 14-Jul-13 23:23:21

Margaret of Anjou is like a pantomime baddy. I keep expecting people to boo and hiss when she's on.

Cringeable acting.

Henry really had no claim to the throne. His mother was a Beaufort, descendents of John of Gaunt and his mistress Katherine Swynford. Legitimised on their marriage but but barred from the sucession, and his father was half brother to king Henry VI through his French mother Catherine of Valois.
Loads of people had much more claim than Henry, he just got lucky!

MummyMastodon Mon 15-Jul-13 00:56:37

You'd need to be a bit of a horse specialist to notice this, but...

the series is filmed in Belgium...

The battle this week was supposedly in England, but Margaret Beaufort's wagon at the battlefield was pulled by Belgian Ardennes draft horses :D

Sunnymeg Mon 15-Jul-13 07:18:20

I was really impressed with Elizabeth's clear nail varnish
last night.

Trills Mon 15-Jul-13 08:12:39

You can get quite a good shine with buffing if you have the patience (or ladies to do it for you while someone else plays the lute to keep you entertained)

Fiderer Mon 15-Jul-13 08:18:57

It's probably just witchcraft.

SelectAUserName Mon 15-Jul-13 08:30:20

MummyMastodon I noticed that too - those big roan heavies are unmistakeable, aren't they?!

Parts of it are filmed in Bruges, apparently.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 15-Jul-13 08:56:27

Is LaQueen still around on this thread?

I want her to know I've just bought a Rosemary Hawley Jarman book from a second hand bookshop in Hawes!
It's not the treason one - it's something about Owain Tudor & Katherine de Valois.

DontmindifIdo Mon 15-Jul-13 09:47:54

Right, just caught up after recording it last night. Ilike - in this epiosode they said Henry Tudor was the second in line, so after Bad Queen's son prince Edward (too many edwards and Henrys), as his bonkers mother keeps saying he's King Henry's DN, then if Prince Edward died then he'd be next in line, which as bad Prince Edward died this week, then now down the Lancastrian line, it's Henry Tudor next in line - that's assuming it's not bobbins that he's crazy King's DN.

And you can get a really good shine on nails without polish, old style buffing.

Trills Mon 15-Jul-13 12:01:46

Henry Tudor's father is the half-brother of the crazy king.

They are linked by a mother, not a father.

The crazy king's king-ness came from his father, not his mother.

So the Tudors are related to the king, but not via the line that has the king-ness in it.

Henry Tudor's mother is a quite-good relation of a long-ago king, so he claims some king-ness from that line.

But really you just need to have enough people (and their armies) stand up for you and believe you - it doesn't have to actually MAKE SENSE.

alemci Mon 15-Jul-13 13:46:18

Anne s husband is a bundle of laughs. he doesn't seem to very chivalrous or loving.

I think Margaret's husband Stafford talked alot of sense about not seeing god in margot of anjoo

Henry is no way second in line. If the claim comes through his mother she is from an illegitimate line and there is a legitimate with a stronger claim. John of Gaunt was married to Constance of Castile before he married Katherine Swynford and they had a daughter.

Asheth Mon 15-Jul-13 16:06:16

The problem was that Edward III had too many children! Henry VI is descended from John of Gaunt (third son) by his first marriage. Henry Tudor is from the third marriage, which was not a marriage at the time! The York claim comes from the second son of Edward III, but through the female line, and the fourth son through the male line. Stafford and Buckingham are also descended from Edward III from his youngest son, so if Margaret and Stafford had had a son that could have thrown up another claimant!

I think Henry could have been considered second in line to the Lancastrian claim, as any other Lancastrian claimants would have been descended from John of Gaunts daughters rather than his sons.

Asheth Mon 15-Jul-13 16:08:54

Oh and the Yorks were also descended from John of Gaunt through the Beauforts, as Cecily Neville was a daughter of Joan Beaufort!

alemci Mon 15-Jul-13 16:12:38

does Henry VII strengthen his claim by marrying Elizabeth of York - the current king (in WQ) daughter before he claims the thrown?

diddl Mon 15-Jul-13 16:13:08

I'm still quite enjoying it, but they are all "bonkers" & uncaring!

Well, from a 21st Century POV!

titzup Mon 15-Jul-13 17:55:34

I feel the series is missing a certain something I can't quite put my finger on? Not as good as the tudors sad I feel like it barrels along, and all the action happens offstage? We don't get to ever see the battles or enjoy the intrigue, by the time someone's mentioned a plot or a fight, someone's getting a note to say it's all over and so-and-so' back on the throne...have a bit of sex, witness a bit of margaret's handwringing over her son, then it's on to the next offstage plot or battle....

Colyngbourne Mon 15-Jul-13 20:12:11

Henry was disbarred from the throne because although the Beauforts (his mother's family) were legitimised, they were specifically disbarred from the throne by Henry IV. Henry's father was also likely illegitimate since if Edmund Tudor was the son of Owen Tudor and Katherine of Valois, there was a law against married a dowager queen without permission from the King (permission which Owen did not request and he and Katherine supposedly married secretly, something which also sets the legality of the marriage in doubt). Katherine had around the same time wished to marry Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, and very possibly had a liaison with him, and it is possible that Edmund "Tudor" is actually Beaufort's son, therefore not actually a Tudor at all. If so this should have necessitated a dispensation from the Pope in order to marry Margaret Beaufort, who might have actually been his first cousin.

The main problem with the drama (besides trashing the real history of the WotR, and besides some very bad acting, poor scripting, squeaky-clean sets and anachronisms all over the place) - is that it's from the point of view of the three women - none of whom were present during most of the politicking, battles, events, dramas etc of the times. So we have the ridiculous scene of Eliz tiptoing around the Tower in her nightie to see what happens to Henry VI, or Marg Beau visiting the battlefield. The drama has missed out entirely the exile in Burgundy, the horrors of Tewkesbury (Somerset splitting Clifford's head in two with an axe), the terrible battle at Barnet (Warwick actually trying to escape on a horse, and soldiers killing him against Edw's orders; Oxford and Exeter's lines attacking each other because of the fog; John Neville wearing York colours under his armour...) What a waste of real history, just to see Margaret Beaufort wring her hands over her boy for the 30th time, or Eliz Woodville being desperate to bed her Edw again. Tedious anti-history.

alemci Mon 15-Jul-13 20:36:31

yes marg loves hand wringing and being the ultimate pushy parent.

so who could Catherine ask for permission tomarry. wasnt h
the king her baby son as henry v had died. isnt her son henry vi who was killed last night

titzup Mon 15-Jul-13 20:43:30

ah, you're right colyngbourne, I've read the books and I think the woman's-POV-only works better in that somehow?

Trills Mon 15-Jul-13 20:53:31

I have been reading the books and I rather like how they address the same story from 3 different points of view. Still none of them spent much time on the battlefield though.

courgetteDOTcom Tue 16-Jul-13 23:03:23

I think it would have been better done as separate stories than merging them. I don't think there's enough time and you can't gain sympathy for any particular "heroine". it's also mixing the narration, would be fine if it was JUST from the three female perspectives, but we're also getting random scenes from the men. It's just very confused.

titzup Wed 17-Jul-13 10:54:40

Yes I think you're right courgette, and that's how it is in the books, so when you read them you're right on the side of whoever's being featured, but then it all gets reversed when you get on to the next lot so you don't know who to root for in the end! (which I like, because it's kind of the reality of the situation, badguy goodguy not being clearcut like in the movies). The way they've done it here is just like a whirlwind and I end up not sympathising with anyone, so I don't really care, hence the latest episode being left largely unwatched til wednesday which never happened with the tudors hahaha!

alemci Wed 17-Jul-13 11:20:13

i've started reading the first one - the lady of the rivers and it is good to give you the background and I am enjoying it.

FairPhyllis Wed 17-Jul-13 17:57:03

I've been catching up on this. Not super impressed with it as a piece of drama but it is helping me to sort out my Plantagenet history in my head.

One thing I would like to know more about: if Henry Tudor's claim to the throne was in part based on his Plantagenet descent through his mother, why was Margaret Beaufort herself never considered a potential claimant? Or was she at the time and we're just not hearing about it? AIUI Henry's claim to the throne was part descent, part right of conquest - was it the case that male bits + ability to raise an army trumped the fact that the succession would be skipping a generation? Did MB not have a serious prospect of being able to raise a Lancastrian army in her own right?

It just seems to me that seeing as MB was alive all through her son's reign, would it not have been rather awkward for Henry that the person he claimed his right through was still hanging around and very conspicuously hadn't been queen (or even royal)?

courgetteDOTcom Wed 17-Jul-13 18:18:17

titzup, reading the books I got the impression PG was Yorkist, even in RQ she I didn't feel she was very sympathetic to Margaret. She did say she found it difficult to swap to being Lancastrian after writing WQ. Whilst I wasn't feeling very sympathetic to her (don't tell anyone, my wedding was based on Neville's Lancastrian days and our Yorkist best man got a lot of stick) I did get behind the story much more than I can with the series. Tudors was definitely all done from one side so however trashed it got you still knew who you were supposed to be rooting for.

alemci, LR finishes right at the tree scene so it's a good introduction to the series or the rest of the books. It was written third so some of it you read and it makes sense to something that happens later, but you just get it the other way around if you read it first grin

I think no one took her seriously if the book is anything to go by and she was a woman - other women raise armies in the name of a husband or son. She did in the end have two armies that were pivotal to final battle. I think she wanted the quiet life but she wanted the best for her son if she wasn't going to get that.

TunipTheVegedude Wed 17-Jul-13 18:26:40

I don't think queens regnant were considered a serious option at that point. I think the view would have been 'look what happened with Matilda'.

Mama1980 Wed 17-Jul-13 18:31:33

Phyllis- as I understand it Margaret Beaufort was the heir. She was the great granddaughter of john of gaunt and her father Edmund duke of Somerset was the leading Lancastrian noble but he and his four sons died leaving just Margaret.
But She was so young 12 when she was married off to Edmund Tudor to produce a child who would in addition to all this have royal blood through their grandmother Catherine of Valois. Edmund and jasper Tudor were half brothers to Henry vi. As she was too young then to act in her own right, upon the birth of her child he inherited her birthright, and his fathers and became the focus of the Lancastrian cause after the death of Henry vi.

FairPhyllis Wed 17-Jul-13 21:24:12

So being a queen regnant in this period is probably just a non-starter then. Interesting though that that changes relatively quickly - less than a hundred years after Bosworth Field Jane Grey could be named successor by Edward VI. And then Mary had enough personal power and support to be able to claim in her own right.

Perhaps what made the difference by then was the fact that the options for a successor were a bit more constrained? All of the lines of succession from H VIII and H VII led to female successors; and by that point avoiding civil war again or undue influence from overseas had become the most important issue, so perhaps having a queen regnant was the least of everyone's worries as long as she was English.

Whereas in this period, being male, having some (any!) Plantagenet blood and being able to wallop all comers is good enough for pretty much anybody to have a crack at the throne.

Mama1980 Wed 17-Jul-13 21:59:15

Pretty much smile I think in Margaret's case though it was more her age that was the issue, rather than her sex she never had a chance to act for herself she was a mother and widow by 13 her choices were pretty much snatched away from her. Had she been in her 20's unmarried and a presence at court as Mary Tudor was then it may have been different.
The idea of a queen regnant wasn't unheard of Matilda/maud had had enough men willing to fight for her to cause a civil war, and Isabella along with Mortimer had held a good deal of power. I don't think a queen would ever have Been the preferred outcome here though not with so many men willing to claim the throne either for themselves or their kinsmen and fight for either (or both!) sides.

Mama1980 Wed 17-Jul-13 22:00:47

I think your right by the time of Henry viii there were literally no other options, and people wanted a legitimate successor if it had to be a woman then so be it.

courgetteDOTcom Thu 18-Jul-13 02:14:02

anyone watch the documentary tonight? they said, if I followed, because she was underage when Henry was born it passed to him.

they also said breech is fatal, so I'm hoping their history is better.

So margaret B in WQ is actually about 21 or 22? clearly the handwringing hasn't helped her keep her youthful bloom.

Trills Thu 18-Jul-13 08:16:15

Age of Margaret Beaufort:

Amanda Hale was born in 1982, so was 31 or 32 when the filmed the series.

According to Wikipedia Elizabeth/Edward's marriage happened in 1464 - Henry Tudor was born in 1457, so he should have been 7 and Margaret Beaufort was born in 1443 so she would have been 21.

(no idea why he was played by such a little boy at the beginning, unless they were showing scenes non-chronologically)

Obviously a number of years are passing and will continue to pass, and by the end of the series the character will be older than the actor.

For contrast - Dawson's Creek started in 1998, at which point Dawson was 15 but James van Der Beek was 21. The character aged with the actor so he was always 6 years older.

In Buffy the Vampire Slayer Sarah Michelle Gellar was a practically-realistic 19 when playing 15 year old Buffy, but Cordelia was 27 playing a 15 year old and therefore hit 30 before they left high school.

titzup Thu 18-Jul-13 10:38:11

I like amanda as MB, she has that little touch of crazy to her (and she often seems to get cast in these roles as a result!).

Mama Henry VII had vet little actual claim to the throne. Catherine of Valois had no claim to the English throne and her Tudor sons were not royal. Margaret Beauforts claim was not really valid because her royal line was through the Beauforts who had been legitimised but banned from inheriting the throne. There were closer heirs, Henry was the only one who had a pushy mother, and was actually in the country.
Also, when Henry VIII died there were plenty of other heirs. Margaret Tudor his sister had a son, and her daughter had 2 sons, Darnley and the earl of Lennox. There were technically other Beaufort heirs and the legitimate heirs of John of Gaunt through his first marriage.
Henry did murder plenty of people who had a claim to his throne, but there were male heirs.

deepfriedsage Thu 18-Jul-13 10:53:30

So why was Henry VII living with Jasper Tudor and not his Mum?

Because Jasper was his nearest male relative and his mother was underage.

Trills Thu 18-Jul-13 11:50:53

Because he was told to.

courgetteDOTcom Thu 18-Jul-13 11:57:26

I think they've combined a few scenes. I shouldn't have given my books out before the seriessad

Mama1980 Thu 18-Jul-13 12:53:22

Because Jasper was his nearest male relative, and Margaret was underage she was also going to be married Again anyway and they needed to be sure that Henry wasnt influenced by the other side in any way. Jasper was the logical choice.

Elena82 Thu 18-Jul-13 17:09:16

I love The White Queen! Haven't read the books yet, but definitely will now.

https://www.facebook.com/WhiteQueenBBC

courgetteDOTcom Sun 21-Jul-13 21:14:00

So who is subjecting themselves to this week's episode?

SelectAUserName Sun 21-Jul-13 21:15:22

<waves at Courgette>

TunipTheVegedude Sun 21-Jul-13 21:22:11

Me, quite enjoying it apart from getting more and more irritated by the lack of hats and Elizabeth Woodville's Swedish accent which is just soooo distracting.

KnockMeDown Sun 21-Jul-13 21:23:41

Please can you help me? My husband is threatening to take DS from me. We have 4 DDs, and now DS, and he wants to send him to Wales. Also, I walked in on him whilst he was having sex with another woman. What should I say to him? My mother is ill, so I don't want to trouble her...
Perhaps I should post this in Relationships? sad

TunipTheVegedude Sun 21-Jul-13 21:24:32

Leave the bastard.
Go and be a nun.

KnockMeDown Sun 21-Jul-13 21:31:19

What about me? My sister and her husband are ignoring me, but my BIL is showing me some interest - I really like him, but he hasn't said out right that he likes me. Should I trust him? He thinks I should suck up to my sister - should I?

TunipTheVegedude Sun 21-Jul-13 21:34:58

Get yourself some decent headcovering. He's never going to propose if you go around bareheaded like a whore even when you're out hunting.
Those tall pointy hats are very fashionable I hear.

KnockMeDown Sun 21-Jul-13 21:38:37

Tunip I fear it is only you and I..........

SelectAUserName Sun 21-Jul-13 21:49:44

grin

Am I being unreasonable to think my husband should be more supportive when I'm about to give birth, rather than screwing my lady-in-waiting and taking his hounds hunting?

I've just realised who Richard III reminds me of - Edward Scissorhands.

courgetteDOTcom Sun 21-Jul-13 21:51:03

ohh It's the sad scene I've not been looking forward tosad

TunipTheVegedude Sun 21-Jul-13 21:51:21

YABU. He's the king. You sound very entitled.

AIBU to tell my prospective dh I'm not going to shag him?

courgetteDOTcom Sun 21-Jul-13 21:53:19

Only if he doesn't want to shag you toogrin

SelectAUserName Sun 21-Jul-13 21:57:09

That's not looking like such a problem for you now grin Look's like those saint's knees are going to go to waste.

TunipTheVegedude Sun 21-Jul-13 22:00:28

AIBU to be a bit miffed that he doesn't want to shag me after all? I know he said he already had heirs but I didn't think he meant it angry

SelectAUserName Sun 21-Jul-13 22:04:46

YANBU. That's some EA, right there.

Meanwhile, I'm off to confession to repent of my misplaced apostrophe. I need a sign from God that He isn't a grammar pedant.

LaVolcan Mon 22-Jul-13 07:27:29

On a more serious note - I was baffled by last night's episode. Mind you, I never help myself by falling asleep in the middle.

Trills Mon 22-Jul-13 08:13:07

grin

I haven't watched last night's one yet but I have now read the books so I do get what you're talking about!

Ladytron Mon 22-Jul-13 10:18:57

I was waiting for Anne Neville to escape and end up working at an inn in Olde London Town, which is where Richard finds her many months later and THEN they get married, but no...

alemci Mon 22-Jul-13 10:46:17

Rupert Graves reminded me on Lord Melchett last night with that beard. didn't he want to sleep with Magaret? Does she not want marital relations because she is not able to have another child?

diddl Mon 22-Jul-13 10:51:44

It was a marriage of convenience, wasn't it?

courgetteDOTcom Mon 22-Jul-13 11:17:17

If you were forced into a fully functioning marriage at age 12 and been married twice to men you had no say in, would you want a sexual relationship?

Marrying Stanley was a way to get what she wanted politically, and it suited him too, and protect her from future unwanted marriages.

By the way, Stanley was King Edward's uncle, BIL to Cecilly and Richard Neville.

Totally random one, does it annoy anyone else the way Anne goes around shouting "I'm the Kingmaker's daughter!"?

Ellenora5 Mon 22-Jul-13 12:45:33

I gave up a couple of weeks and then decided last night to give it another go, and what do I see, another baby being born, why do we have to see so many births, by the way I thought Margaret Beaufort looked so much better her hair down, I feel sorry for her, her mother was horrible, and as she said to her as she lay dying, "you sent a girl to do a womans job" made me really feel for her, I don't think I would have forgiven my mother either.

On another note did anyone watch the documentary Phillipa Gregory is doing on the three woman, do you know when part two is on, I can't remember what night I watched it.

Vickibee Mon 22-Jul-13 12:50:25

it was thursday night @ 9pm, I recall becuase my DS came down and threw up everywhere so I missed the end.

BTW what did thay use for contraception in 1871, I guess the withdrawal method? Otherwise all the King's mistresses would be PG

Vickibee Mon 22-Jul-13 12:50:51

sorry 1471

TunipTheVegedude Mon 22-Jul-13 12:51:58

I watched a bit of the doc but they were mostly a bit too positivist and 'she must have felt....' for my liking.
We don't know what went on in people's heads most of the time and that's why fiction and tv drama is so good, because it gives you a licence to speculate.

Ellenora5 Mon 22-Jul-13 12:52:36

Thanks Vickibee smile

TunipTheVegedude Mon 22-Jul-13 12:58:44

There were various herbal things that were known about like Queen Anne's Lace and pennyroyal but they tended to function as abortifacients rather than contraception exactly.
Later on people used citrus fruit as a barrier but I don't know if that started this early. Condoms (made out of animal gut) were used but more as a defence against venereal disease. I don't know if medieval people used sponges dipped in vinegar as I think they did in antiquity.
And the withdrawal method, as you say.
Basically there were various methods, none of them totally effective, but they would improve your odds.

alemci Mon 22-Jul-13 12:59:56

i think the documentary was Wednesday night as i recorded it and started to watch it Thurs.

I take your point about Margaret not wanting any sex but what about poor old Rupert/Stanley. mind you I think she would have not had that point of view if Jasper had come back.

don't the Stanleys play apart in the English civil war as well.did they tend to sit on the fence politically.

also reading lady of Rivers where she marries the Uncle, earl of Bedford and the marriage is not consumated. he says he is 'unmanned'. Is that a euphesism for impotent. I hadn't heard of that or had he lost his willy in war (now I am being really silly)

TunipTheVegedude Mon 22-Jul-13 13:01:34

yes, impotent.

AgnesBligg Mon 22-Jul-13 14:20:48

I'm lapping this programme up, realise that doesn't make me very high-brow.

and Richard, phoarrr.

Good to see the appearance of Jane Shore, just to mess with poor EW's head a little.

I think with a show like this they have dispensed with total accuracy I guess that complicates the narrative and drives the thing along at a nice dramatic speed - ie Anne Nevill escaping to the kindly pubbe (did that happen in rl? I wasn't sure) or the nicer warwick brother John Neville fighting for Lancaster in his York underpants.

diddl Mon 22-Jul-13 14:26:32

I'm still enjoying it tbh.

I only "know" the characters of Richard/Clarence from Shakespeare's Richardiii, & love how Clarence seems so awful & symapathy with Richard.

Had to laugh last night when Edward said something like "we are not the same people who met by the roadside (years ago??)" & I'm thinking-funny, they look exactly the same...

TunipTheVegedude Mon 22-Jul-13 14:29:34

I'm enjoying it more now there's more of Anne Neville of less of Mad Margaret and Swedish Elizabeth.
Also it helped that I missed last week because the fact that last night's episode consisted almost entirely of characters explaining things to each other that they already knew was quite helpful.

diddl Mon 22-Jul-13 14:31:34

Who was the baby that died last night?

Wasn't there a daughter after Edward who lived a few months?

amicissimma Mon 22-Jul-13 15:09:31

I'm a bit confused about Elizabeth and Edward's sons. The one she had last night seems to have been George and he seems to have died almost immediately. Although they didn't mention a son between Edward and George, Richard was the second son, who survived to become one of the Princes in the Tower with Edward. The third, George, lived over a year.

So who was supposed to have been born last night and did he actually die?

courgetteDOTcom Mon 22-Jul-13 15:47:42

I haven't got my books to check and I can't remember enough to find it online. He isn't one of the three. According to the book he was born premature and lived a little longer than they show, it also didn't have Jaquetta having a drawn out death, she was cuddling the baby in front of the fire and when Elizabeth found them they had both already died.

orangeandemons Mon 22-Jul-13 15:54:05

I like watching it just to watch Richard

Very dashing in blue velvet. Wish men dressed like that now....

TunipTheVegedude Mon 22-Jul-13 15:55:04

I agree.
Also, bring back the hanging sleeve.

Vickibee Mon 22-Jul-13 15:58:21

were the two prices the ones that mysteriously disappeared from Tower of London. Rumoured that Richard 3 had them murdered so he was next in line to throne? he was acting King or whatever while they grew up

diddl Mon 22-Jul-13 18:03:50

I thought that it was a daughter after Edward who lived a few months.

Sure that the baby last night was a boy & died almost immediately?!

courgetteDOTcom Mon 22-Jul-13 21:15:18

In the book it's a boy but not straight away.

Still18atheart Mon 22-Jul-13 21:26:41

Even though this series is so confusing I've got my old history book out to figure out who's who I'm really enjoying it and loving every episode.

lissieloo Mon 22-Jul-13 21:31:20

Oh god, I'm loving this! It's strange watching something and knowing how it will end and just waiting for it to get there. I've just read The White Queen and am on The Red Queen now. tbh, I'm finding it hard to be sympathetic to Margaret. Her marriage and labour was horrific, but her piety seems to be about vanity.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 22-Jul-13 21:35:02

I don't find PG very sympathetic to medieval religion tbh!

lissieloo Mon 22-Jul-13 21:38:21

Yes, I get that feeling too. It's quite clear that she didnt like Margaret.

stubbornstains Mon 22-Jul-13 21:50:50

In the book, the baby that dies in Jacquetta's arms is a girl. And she doesn't die immediately after birth, she gradually weakens.

courgetteDOTcom Tue 23-Jul-13 01:41:30

it's been awhile since I read it and I have loaned my books out. I knew their deaths took time, I guess too much for a series.

I didn't feel RQ was written sympathetically to their side at all.

courgetteDOTcom Tue 23-Jul-13 01:41:30

it's been awhile since I read it and I have loaned my books out. I knew their deaths took time, I guess too much for a series.

I didn't feel RQ was written sympathetically to their side at all.

Finallygotaroundtoit Tue 23-Jul-13 09:11:07

Bit risky Margaret agreeing to non consummation of marriage - surely if found out it would be annulled?

Why bother with the 'marriage' then confused

alemci Tue 23-Jul-13 09:13:51

I am no reading kingmakers daughter about Anne Neville which helps as you obviously get more detail and it makes more sense. too much going on in tv series and they have left out important bits.

e.g didn't realise john wood Ville had married elderly Neville aunt and gets executed with his father although series showed execution iyswim

Asheth Tue 23-Jul-13 12:22:03

I wonder if the Margaret - Stanley marriage was really non-consummated. I always assumed that the reason Margaret didn't have any more children was because giving birth aged 13 left her too badly damaged to be able have any more. sad

diddl Tue 23-Jul-13 14:16:24

Yes, unless it's recorded somewhere, I wouldn't have thought that it's known for sure!

courgetteDOTcom Tue 23-Jul-13 14:38:47

It's easy to deduce from what we do know that it's a possibility.

diddl Tue 23-Jul-13 15:42:33

I think it might be easy to deduce that she didn't want sex so as to avoid pregnancy.

Whether or not her husband would have gone along with it...

courgetteDOTcom Tue 23-Jul-13 15:48:56

He did allow her to become a nun eventually.

deepfriedsage Thu 25-Jul-13 14:39:53

I didn't realise Margaret lived to see Henry VIII take the throne. BBC2 program with PG was great to watch along The White Queen.

diddl Thu 25-Jul-13 15:15:18

Yes I enjoyed the PG programme.

I guess you can't judge by our standards, can you?

Seems if you were rich & had an army, you could be King!!

And after Edward was dead, no one cared that his son wasn't crowned??-was that because of who his mum was?

Would Richard have killed his nephews on his wife's say so?

courgetteDOTcom Thu 25-Jul-13 15:31:50

Prince Edward did become King, I guess he wouldn't have been crowned until he was older though and ready to take over duties from his uncle.

I think there's a lot of reasons given why Richard wouldn't have killed the boys, but then there doesn't seem to be a good suspect. If you've not read the books, how PG handled this part of the story was an interesting take...

diddl Thu 25-Jul-13 15:48:47

Yes, of course, he was automatically King-although never crowned & I think Richard would have been making any decisions on his behalf anyway.

But then if Richard had managed to convince people that Edward iv's children were illegitimate, he didn't need to kill them as they weren't in his way.

Although I don't know if it was possible that that decision might ever have been reversed & they would have been a threat?

Although surely the fact that Elizabeth's brother & son who were escorting Edward were executed doesn't weigh in Richard's favour?

courgetteDOTcom Thu 25-Jul-13 16:41:05

It couldn't be reversed without the King's say so, so not in Richard's lifetime meaning Edward wasn't a threat. It was eventually done by Henry VIII and all copies were destroyed so we don't even know the actual wording today.

Richard reigned as Lord Protector because Edward was too young, that would have been changed when Edward was eventually crowned, which obviously didn't happen.

LaVolcan Thu 25-Jul-13 18:25:22

Even the programme about the 'real' white queen, was complicated to follow.

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 11:20:04

Yes I am confused by the PG docu too.

henry vii's claim to the throne of England seems mainly because his mother named him Henry.shock

She says that Richard and Anne are a political marriage, not the love match suggested in the show.

She also believes in the Perkin Warbeck story (that he was the actual younger brother of the prince Edward in the Tower) suggesting that elizabeth woodville suspected dastardly doings of Richardiii.

That Richard did for the princes at Anne's prompting - no no no!

deepfriedsage Fri 26-Jul-13 12:17:06

Perkin Warbeck.? Is this supposed to be the second son of Elizabeth and Edward?

courgetteDOTcom Fri 26-Jul-13 12:47:56

Elizabeth voluntarily sent her youngest son to the tower. You could see it as proof she trusted Richard, but Philippa's suggestion is she sent her soon to France and sent another boy into the tower.

FriskyHenderson Fri 26-Jul-13 13:38:57

I was confused by the documenting, but mainly because I was transfixed by PG's face. Was that botox?

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 13:58:48

Why would Elizabeth trust Richard?

He killed her brother & son who were escorting Edwardv!

TunipTheVegedude Fri 26-Jul-13 14:02:53

She certainly does look like she's had work done.
She'll regret it, when someone invents a time machine and they won't let her go back to the 15th century in it because she'd freak them out!

deepfriedsage Fri 26-Jul-13 14:07:17

I noticed that also. I thought boric and fillers, she had the pillow face look.

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 14:20:29

re: Warbeck I don't think anyone believes in that story. Apart from The Phillippa.

alemci Fri 26-Jul-13 14:44:37

it wasn't that Richard who killed her brother and dad, I think it was Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick unless Richard 111 kills another of her brothers later in the story?

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 14:50:05

I thought that Richard killed/had killed one of her brothers & one of her sons(Grey), who were escorting EdwardV from Ludlow?

alemci Fri 26-Jul-13 14:57:08

you may be right Didl. was that in the last episode or to come. so many people dying in this story.

Put it this way the name Richard wasn't her favourite

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 15:02:08

He killed Anthony Woodville, I didn't know about the Grey boy (Thomas?). I think Richard had some tip off about a Woodville/Lancastrian conspiracy against him?

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 15:33:14

Perhaps he was judging them by his standards then-that they'd kill a nephew/brother??!!

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 15:34:54

Sorry, that didn't really make sense.

Wonder why he would think they would support Lancaster against EdwardV-their (half) brother & nephew?

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 15:50:38

Not sure. There was certainly a lot of side swapping.

I don't think Richard was behind the princes disappearance. (or don't want to anyway).

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 16:06:27

Who do you think was?

If Richard didn't want to be King & was happy to "caretake" until Edward was old enough-it would make sense that it wasn't him.

Someone on his behalf who wanted him to be King?

Whoever wanted Henry Tudor to be King?

But then they also had to get Richard out of the way!

Maybe our mindset is just too different now to figure it out!!

alemci Fri 26-Jul-13 16:11:18

also reading the kingmakers Daughter and George thinks Isabelle has been poisoned by Elizabeth and the Neville daughters think she is a witch. do you think there is any truth that Isabelle could have been murdered or do you think she just died?

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:20:26

Mad Madge, I reckon (Margaret Beaufort).

Here's the thing, Henry vi decided to reverse the illegitimacy thingy of the Edward iv offspring when he wed the eldest, Elizabeth, in order to marry a royal princess and strengthen his piss weak hold on the crown. By doing so, he would immediately create the oldest boy Edward King of England. Doh!

So the solution to this conundrum is to dispose of the Princes in the Tower and tell everyone that Richard did it.

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 16:21:41

I thought that she died a few months after childbirth-so complications from that?

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:23:29

Also another horrid henry thing is he claimed the throne from the day before Richard's death at Boswell Fields, and so created hundreds of York traitors who fought on his side. So he could execute them all sad.

Brutal.

FriskyHenderson Fri 26-Jul-13 16:24:42

And since Margaret Beaufort was the winner, she got to write the history books and blame Richard. I think that was what PG was trying to say in the documentary.

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:25:08

Who now? Elizabeth?

ummmm.

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 16:30:08

But by then-were the boys already dead?

Richard needed them illegitimate to take the crown.

But was there always a chance that whilst alive someone would want Edward as KIng?

Why did he hide them in the Tower?

I agree that Henry's need to have them dead was absolute.

But was Richard also falling out of favour by then?

He had a bigger army at Bosworth though, didn't he?

Although it was supposedly the Stanleys who won the day?

So maybe could have gone either way?

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 16:31:28

Sorry, pp was to alemci re Isabelle Neville.

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:33:11

I think MB had the biggest motive and I'm sure I read somewhere she had access to the tower from some nasty turncoat.

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:37:15

Richard buggered up Bosworth certainly.

The Stanley's deserted him - tho he should have guessed they might?

I don't know when the boys disappeared. Josephine Tey has it that they were still alive after Richard copped it at B. But I don't know what research led her to think that.

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 16:45:45

I don't know the order of things either.

Was thinking that the Princes were dead before Richard crowned, but it ain't necessarily so!

I suppose when they died might sway it one way or the other!

Although, the people who had henry 6th depsed-what was their claim for doing so?

Was Henry Tudor his nearest surviving male relative-if so I can see his claim from that point.

Although Mad Mags was saying that his destiny was to be King even when Henry6th son was still alive??

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:47:29

I'm sure he thought the Tower was the safest place in England to keep them in. Wrong again!

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:53:20

The boys were alive at the time of Richard's coronation. Some clergy chap close to Edward 1v Stillington came forward with the bombshell about previous betrothal making the boys illegitimate. This was decided in parliament I think, not just Riii cooking the story up by himself.

So the boys were no threat to Richard's rule.

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 16:57:32

oh I think the Henry 6 claim is weakened because of MB's own line to (busking here sorry) john of Gaunt was illegitimate. A pp explained it properly upthread.

So if the boy Edward could not be crowned as a result of his illegitimacy then one can argue that neither could Henry vi.

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 17:20:52

But when the boys were declared illegitimate, would it not have gone to George of Clarence-or was it whoever parliament decided on?

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 17:42:49

george had already been dropped into a vat of malmsey by then- allegedly. Now that I can imagine Richard having a hand in grin.

So it would be Richard next. Then George's son possibly?

diddl Fri 26-Jul-13 17:52:07

"So it would be Richard next. Then George's son possibly?"

What, in the vat of malmsey??blushgrin

AgnesBligg Fri 26-Jul-13 17:56:32

grin

RustyBear Fri 26-Jul-13 20:15:06
Asheth Fri 26-Jul-13 23:38:38

I think that if Edward's sons had lived they would have had a claim to the throne. They may have been declared illegitiate, but Henry VII is proof of how easy it was to make an illegitimate claim legitate. He claimed the throne (despite the illegitimacy of his ancestors) and made Elizabeth of York legitimate so he could marry her (thus linking the Lancaster and York claims) The princes were not much of a threat to Richard while they were boys, although there was always a risk that someone else would launch a claim in their name. But once they became men, then they would be a big threat to Richard. If they could get a faction and army behind them then they could challenge Richard for the throne and having disposed of Richard they could legitimise their claim as easily as Henry VII did.

They disappeared during Rchard's reign. it seems likely to me that he disposed of them.

Trills Sun 28-Jul-13 19:59:20

Thanks for the link Rusty smile

SelectAUserName Sun 28-Jul-13 21:21:26

A minor point, but would "Izzy" really have been the short form of Isobel in those days? Would it not have been "Belle"?

TunipTheVegedude Sun 28-Jul-13 21:33:51

And Teddy for Edward?

courgetteDOTcom Sun 28-Jul-13 21:42:43

Ye olde regrowth! Elizabeth needs to dye her hair lol

FriskyHenderson Sun 28-Jul-13 21:42:50

So who killed Izzy?

FriskyHenderson Sun 28-Jul-13 21:43:07

So who killed Izzy?

courgetteDOTcom Sun 28-Jul-13 21:43:38

Either consumption or child birth fever.

deepfriedsage Sun 28-Jul-13 22:06:13

Did the Clarence children go to Richard?

diddl Sun 28-Jul-13 22:23:19

It's quite hard to watch.

Witches, sorcerers, curses!

And wasn't Isabelle's firstborn a daughter?

I mean I don't mind dramatising-not all facts are known-but why alter those that are?

eatyourveg Sun 28-Jul-13 22:27:29

George killed her - Is Richard going to turn out to be a baddie too? (off to dig out my ladybird book of kings and queens so I have at least some idea of whats going on)

SelectAUserName Sun 28-Jul-13 22:29:15

Isabel(le)'s daughter was featured in tonight's episode, so that part was correct.

I was under the impression her son didn't survive very long though, and thought they were buried together.

George suspected one of his wife's ladies-in-waiting of being responsible for poisoning her and manufactured a trial to convict her, so that was definitely changed to play up the "Woodville the Witch" element.

diddl Sun 28-Jul-13 22:38:30

She had 4 children altogether.

One on the boat, a daughter, a son & another son who died young (a few months), just after her.

Ankarette Twynhyo was tried and executed for poisoning Isabel, which was George overstepping his powers. The baby was Richard and died about two weeks after Isabel.

Gracelo Mon 29-Jul-13 06:59:12

After watching last nights episode I wouldn't be surprised at all if Margaret Beaufort killed the princes in the tower. Is that what PG is suggesting in the books (which I haven't read).
Why is there no mention of Ankarette Twynyho? I'm reading the Sunne in Splendor atm and this is as far as I got. Found her supposed trial very shocking.

deepfriedsage Mon 29-Jul-13 07:14:11

I googled and found it sad Isobella's surviving son was killed and it was a death, related to the parents of Catherine of Aragon.

They were all so young also, George was 28 when he died. The actors are far too old.

Trills Mon 29-Jul-13 08:29:20

If they had actors the right age they'd have to get n 8 year old and a 13 year old to be Anne and Isabel at the beginning (and Richard was only 12ish too)

Trills Mon 29-Jul-13 08:37:32

Maggie B

(I'm just being ridiculous here, aren't I?)

Margaret Beaufort didn't kill them personally, but she may have implied that she would be happy if they were to die, and someone may have taken it upon themselves to make her happy (and then later realised that they wouldn't ever get rewarded for it because they'd have to admit that it was them).

Chunderella Mon 29-Jul-13 11:28:11

A lot of the acting in this is piss poor- I was laughing at Duchess Cecily's begging attempts last night. Which is odd, because there are some damn fine actors in the cast.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 29-Jul-13 11:41:24

I think the script makes it hard for them.
There's hardly a line that isn't either clunking exposition or dramatic irony.

Gracelo Mon 29-Jul-13 11:47:12

dp just sent me this Game of Thrones

I really don't like Maggie B but I'm not sure if this is because of this particular portrayal. I might have to read up on her a bit.

TunipTheVegedude Mon 29-Jul-13 11:57:34

LOL Gracelo!

My dh is currently not dissimilar to the brain in that. He keeps interrupting my internetting with demands that I find out how old the second Duke of Buckingham was and how Margaret Beaufort was related to John of Gaunt etc etc.

deepfriedsage Mon 29-Jul-13 14:15:59

We were laughing at her hanging off his leg too, chunderella.

Chunderella Mon 29-Jul-13 18:02:25

I was like 'DH, change DDs nappy. I will beg you! I beg of you!' Its going to take a while til that one gets old. At least until next episode.

That said, for all the flaws I'm still really enjoying it. Lots of them are pretty easy on the eye and its entertaining enough, what's not to like?

Ellenora5 Mon 29-Jul-13 18:25:44

I enjoyed last nights episode, really thought I was going to give up on it a couple of weeks ago, the begging mother was ridiculous, did she have George for someone else....anyway I seriously think they should re-name it "One born every minute", or "Elizabeth is having another baby", every week we have to watch a birth scene, why?

Chunderella Mon 29-Jul-13 19:59:53

I suppose because she genuinely did pop another out every year or so. Elizabeth and Edward had 10 in 14 years, believe it or not they've left most of her births out!

Trills Tue 30-Jul-13 17:49:21

She had a lot of children.

Children are important, because heirs.

Medieval gender disappointment (relates to heirs, above)

Births are important because someone might die.

Chunderella Tue 30-Jul-13 19:47:49

It made me laugh when she was so surprised that Jacquetta knew she was pregnant again. I was like, you're always upduffed love, its no great shock!

Ellisisland Wed 31-Jul-13 07:50:26

Caught up on the last episode now and worryingly I am quite liking the look of Richard blush
Also seems they are going pin the death of the princes of Margaret Beaufort. I have read the books but it was ages ok - do the books blame her?

Splatt34 Wed 31-Jul-13 08:04:38

Haven't read the books but there are plenty of historians who think the downfall of the princess in the tower was more the tudours than Richard. The classic Shakespeare view of Richard is Tudours propaganda.

TunipTheVegedude Wed 31-Jul-13 08:09:11

<sings>
We're Tudors
And just like barracudas
We kill with methods foul....

ektorp Wed 31-Jul-13 08:13:48

Henry VII later executed Isabel's son, and Henry VIII executed her daughter (who was an old lady by then).

ektorp Wed 31-Jul-13 08:14:53

I am loving Margaret Beaufort. And Richard III.

Ellisisland Wed 31-Jul-13 11:13:05

Margaret is getting a better character each week. I thought she was great when she was sending her man off to find her a new husband grin
I think the actor playing Richard is actually starting to get pretty good now as well. The series has definitely improved from the start.

diddl Wed 31-Jul-13 11:27:49

It seems as if MB is being set up as the one behind the Princes' deaths, doesn't it?

Her husband said something like "Henry would have to walk behind/past 5 coffins..."

And it was as if she thought-oh!-only 5, well that's doable!

diddl Wed 31-Jul-13 11:29:52

What I forgot to ask-is there any truth in Richardlll wanting to marry his niece?

As surely for that he would be in the same position as Henry-needed edward lVs children to be legitimate and therefore the Princes dead?

Chunderella Wed 31-Jul-13 11:34:38

PG seems to think it was Wor Maggie, she heavily implied it on the documentary the other week. Bitch. I too am loving the character the more the series goes on, and admired the way she fixed herself up with the latest hubz. Its a shame they didn't have any DC, because they'd have been spectacularly clever.

orangeandemons Wed 31-Jul-13 11:35:00

Hmm....yes Richard...worth watching just for him. Very pretty...blush

Chunderella Wed 31-Jul-13 11:35:56

Diddl I think he'd have been ok to marry her provided they got the necessary dispensations etc.

TunipTheVegedude Wed 31-Jul-13 11:52:01

It is amazing, the dispensations they were allowed.
Later on, when Henry VIII was wondering what to do about the succession, the Pope suggested he should marry his illegitimate son Fitzroy to the Princess Mary shock

Ellisisland Wed 31-Jul-13 12:55:41

Was it acceptable though ? In terms of would the average person at the time have thought that it was ok for an uncle to marry his niece ?

In the books they show Elizabeth's daughter returning Richards feelings ;wonder how they will show it on the series.

Ellisisland Wed 31-Jul-13 13:27:08

Tunip - that is crazy!

cornypepper Wed 31-Jul-13 13:30:11

was Isabel's daughter margaret pole?

diddl Wed 31-Jul-13 13:34:47

Sorry-for pp I meant illegitimate.

Would he have married her without making her legitimate (& therefore the Princes also)

Of course, he may not have killed them, but there seems to be little evidence of him being outraged/trying to find out what had happened?

Of course, times were different then.

EdwardlV seemingly did nothing after Neville executed his wife's father & brother!shock

And women on here are told to LTb for much less!grin

TunipTheVegedude Wed 31-Jul-13 13:38:08

Yes Isabel's daughter was Margaret Pole - I looked it up because I noticed they referred to her name as Margaret in a signficant and meaningful way grin

Ellisisland - I would love to know. They would certainly be used to rich people getting dispensations from other religious things, eg Lenten fasting, so perhaps they would see it in those terms?
I think their lives would have been so remote from the royals they probably wouldn't have cared much.

TunipTheVegedude Wed 31-Jul-13 16:01:53
cornypepper Wed 31-Jul-13 17:17:27

So Henry V11 AND V111 did away with Isabel's children to keep the throne. Why wouldn't they have done away with the princes as well? Much easier as no-one would find out whereas Isabel's grown up children were publicly executed.
PG defo thinks it's MB though.
In the red queen she has MB thinking she is Joan of Arc reincarnated (or summat like that ).