“Thomas Cranmer, the Architect of the Church of England, [was] burnt at the stake under Mary. Of course I realize Henry couldn’t foresee that Mary would become Queen regnant, yet smart monarchs consider such possibilities.”
“Thomas Cranmer, the Architect of the Church of England, [was] burnt at the stake under Mary. Of course I realize Henry couldn’t foresee that Mary would become Queen regnant, yet smart monarchs consider such possibilities.”
i’m not sure if this is worse than the take that all the burnings under mary i were actually henry’s fault (because she wouldn’t have ‘had to’ … ’had to’, yes….????– if he hadn’t ‘invited heresy in’, as if every single englishman was 1001% catholic until 1533 and then all those messy heretics came pouring in) or just an extension of it (i.e. henry could’ve prevented his execution if he’d just never annulled his marriage in the first place, so really he should’ve thought of that first).
cranmer in his prison cell: i’m so mad at henry for not asking mary to not execute me if she were ever queen before he died; this is all his fault…
i was actually supposed to get a refund for something that never came that a seller (it was for a migraine lavender mask fdhdhfh like an age ago when i still had $) promised me so :+)
but anyways IF she ever does what i want to get with the etsy credit actually is any of these:
I don’t even have a rudimentary knowledge of the Borgias, so you should probably ask someone else?
My impression is that there were rumors that they were; and that the two of them did have a close relationship, perhaps unusually close for siblings of the gentry in that era. Beyond that, I really don’t know, but I don’t think there’s ever been irrefutable “proof” of incest between the two of them.
lucreceborgia said: hi! sorry to jump in, but yes! the borgia family is indeed involved in many rumors, especially lucrezia! she was accused of having an incestuous relationship with cesare, but there is no irrefutable evidence of anything! but there is proof of an affectionate and close relationship!
Thanks! That was my impression as well; I just didn’t want to say anything incorrect. I’ve never done any in-depth reading on them.
“This is the point where the book begins making it painfully clear that the plot is not going to live up to the potential of the premise. Anne begins leaving random bouquets of daffodils around Whitehall in order to induce panic in Henry and the new queen Jane Seymour, but after a night-time visit to Mary Boleyn in the country (during which Anne weirdly rebukes her for not sending a letter while she was in the Tower, like every channel of communication wasn’t locked down) Anne accepts Mary’s evaluation of Jane as a good woman who is “very family-oriented” and decides to leave her alone. Except, wait! The ghost of Katherine of Aragon is lurking in Whitehall as well, leaving the occasional pomegranate as a sign of her presence, and her purpose there is to protect Jane from Anne, who has already decided not to hurt her, except Anne seems to forget that occasionally and is annoyed to see Katherine present even at Jane’s deathbed, guarding her to the last. (I had hopes for Katherine’s character, but unfortunately the only thing she ever says to Anne is “All hail, Anne, the scandal of Christendom” and she promptly vanishes from the story after Jane dies.)”
Hottest take of all time…..Anne clearly excited Henry into signing her death warrant. She should’ve known to keep him calm, obviously Too bad she just…didn’t…know…better.
Actually now that I think of it, the whole condescending “she didn’t know any better” tends to be more commonly said/implied towards Katherine Howard. Not too fond of it then, either.
Worsley focused on COA’s miscarriages, and didn’t even bother to mention Anne’s. There was screentime dedicated to Blackfriars, but none to Anne’s trial. There was screentime dedicated to COA’s last deathbed letter, but none for Anne’s execution speech.
Hm, I don’t remember the context for it (if she was saying that has been the perception of her ever since, or if she was saying it is a declaration), but I do remember finding her take on Anne rather…anemic…and lackluster.
As far as the wives “as you’ve never seen them before” (iirc the tagline/ hook was something like that), I mean…no? Not really? I definitely didn’t watch it feeling like “I’ve never seen them presented in this way before!” There weren’t really any dimensions added, imo.
Anne Boleyn had been sent off to the countryside to get her out of the way, because Henry needed to convince everybody that his reason for wanting to end his marriage was nothing to do with her at all. Katherine knew otherwise, and the Queen insisted on giving evidence in person, in open court.
I mean……it didn’t have nothing to do with Anne, but this implies it also had nothing to do with anything else. That there had been a female heir to the English throne in the last 350 years, or that there had been one that was able to keep their throne…ever.
This is marketed with the title “Secrets of the Six Wives” too and like…what were the secrets, exactly? I didn’t learn anything I hadn’t already known before.
The “new” things it presented were ~flairs that showed a lack of research– COA wouldn’t have insisted a subject call her “Your Majesty” right after the Battle of Flodden, because no monarch in Europe was using that title until Charles V in 1519.
Hottest take of all time…..Anne clearly excited Henry into signing her death warrant. She should’ve known to keep him calm, obviously Too bad she just…didn’t…know…better.
Actually now that I think of it, the whole condescending “she didn’t know any better” tends to be more commonly said/implied towards Katherine Howard. Not too fond of it then, either.
Worsley focused on COA’s miscarriages, and didn’t even bother to mention Anne’s. There was screentime dedicated to Blackfriars, but none to Anne’s trial. There was screentime dedicated to COA’s last deathbed letter, but none for Anne’s execution speech.
Hm, I don’t remember the context for it (if she was saying that has been the perception of her ever since, or if she was saying it is a declaration), but I do remember finding her take on Anne rather…anemic…and lackluster.
As far as the wives “as you’ve never seen them before” (iirc the tagline/ hook was something like that), I mean…no? Not really? I definitely didn’t watch it feeling like “I’ve never seen them presented in this way before!” There weren’t really any dimensions added, imo.
Anne Boleyn had been sent off to the countryside to get her out of the way, because Henry needed to convince everybody that his reason for wanting to end his marriage was nothing to do with her at all. Katherine knew otherwise, and the Queen insisted on giving evidence in person, in open court.
I mean……it didn’t have nothing to do with Anne, but this implies it also had nothing to do with anything else. That there had been a female heir to the English throne in the last 350 years, or that there had been one that was able to keep their throne…ever.
This is marketed with the title “Secrets of the Six Wives” too and like…what were the secrets, exactly? I didn’t learn anything I hadn’t already known before.
Too bad she just…didn’t…know…better.
Site Title 