Jump to content

Henry Tudor Parallel (it's not Jon Snow)


Recommended Posts

Very well reasoned.

I do have some questions for you about some of the specifics. Would you mind terribly if I messaged you personally about them so I don't pull the thread off on a tangent with my historical wonkiness? :)

I think that you've touched very well on a key elements surrounding those events that translates well to ASOIAF; the sense of mistrust, mis-apprehnsion and mis-communication that surrounded those months in 1483 and how they were the inevitable results of decades (generations really) of internecine warfare and intrigue piled upon intrigue.

I have no trouble whatsoever believing that the plight troth story could have been true. I've actually read a book on Eleanor Butler and its interesting how similar Edward's possible MO with her was to his "secret elopement" with Elizabeth Woodville was. It would have been completely in character for Edward IV to pull something like that. Eleanor Butler died before Edward though and never made any such claim during her lifetime. The whole pre-contract story was dependent upon Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Welles who claimed to have officiated over it. Stilling ton was briefly imprisoned during Edward's reign, one of the reasons for it was rumored to be some kind of association he had with Clarence and years later, he became involved in the Lambert Simnel plot. So again everyone's loyalties are very convoluted.

As for the legitimacy of the pre-contract if it actually had taken place, I remember reading one article on it that detailed steps in canon law that Edward could have taken to rectify the situation and solidify his marriage to Elizabeth if he'd wanted to. Regardless, I guess what I'm getting at is that I don't have any trouble believing that the pre-contract story was true, I just recall always being left with the impression that it wasn't a cut and dry case, there were plenty of holes that could have been punched in the story and ultimately it was up to Richard to decide how big a deal needed to be made over it. Perhaps Richard did feel that a boy king was not in the interest of the realm and this story provided him with an easy way to usurp his nephews.

Another ASOIAF similarity is that Edward IV named Richard regent while on his deathbed. Didn't Robert do the same with naming Ned Joffrey's regent? Also, I like the JFK/RFK comparison, thats really a good one!

Cheers, and by all means. Might be a few days before I get back to you on it, though. I'll be on the move a bit and while I'll have the odd moment to drop in, I won't have too much time for serious thought, which I suspect is what you'll want of me. :) But when that window opens up...presuming the NFL draft isn't underway, I'll give your questions my complete attention.

Iyi geceler,

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Robert do the same with naming Ned Joffrey's regent?

Indeed he did. Both Ned and Richard were named Lord Protector by their kings on their deathbeds. Difference was Ned was actually there in person.

Loving this thread btw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there are reasons aplenty, many of them mirroring ASOIAF characters.

First, like Stannis/Renly, Richard was regarded by many as the primary target of Woodeville animosity, and like Renly he knew he personally stood in serious danger should the Woodeville faction gain control of the throne. Elizabeth had oft and publicly resented Edward's favour leaning towards Richard, and on a couple of occasions resented Richard being awarded grants/titles/commands she was seeking for her kin.

Like Ned, Richard was appointed Regent and charged with the responsibility of protecting and raising Edward's sons. Like Cersei, Elizabeth Woodeville moved to preempt Edward's will and cut Richard out of the process. Unlike Ned, Richard outmanoeuvred the Queen and took control of the situation.

Those are really good points regarding the dynamics between Stannis/Renly, but more spefically Ned and the Lannisters as Robert considered Ned more the "brother" he loved than his own brothers, which Cersei knew and feared.

It's also not lost on me that Ned as the dutiful one also ended up being the one to "clean up" after everyone.

I also agree on the parallels between the Lannisters and the Woodvilles though of course the Lannisters are at this point much more noble though they did come by their "kingdom' by way of a con man named Lan the Clever.

But the prism of hyper paranoia and distrust which they viewed all others besides themselves are very similar, and though most families probably operated under these conditions, those already insecure in their positions felt it most keenly, which later explains the truce that Elizabeth later struck with Richard, and then Margaret.

In a time when blood was the foundation for the power structures of the Medieval society, it also explains why the Martells would also ally with the Lannisters and still remain loyal to the Targaryens though both, and twice now on the part of the Targaryens betrayed them.

But certainly Elizabeth, herself surrounded in controversy about what she really was even down to witchcraft, did appear to be threatened by anyone not her family who was favored by her husband, down to his own brothers, which I always thought was not very wise.

While "The White Queen," was not my favorite adaptation of the story, there is a part where Edward basically asks Elizabeth why "she can't just let it go." It always seemed to me that her insistance that even his own family take a back seat to hers was a little dangerous and could have turned whatever love he had for her into malice.

Some speculate that either her daughter, Elizabeth of York was truly a paragon of gentle virtue, or did see the tactics her mother used and decided to go in a different direction with Henry.

That much is IMO clear. From here there are divergent possibilities. The first aspect is whether or not the plithe troth was a fabrication, the truth, or a fabrication Richard believed to be true.

.

I was always inclined to believe that he knew his brother well enough to know that the situation with Eleanor Butler was likely true. Richard had his own bastards, so the fact that his brother took it to a different level was likely not a surprise. And though his womanizing was legendary, I agree with Lareine that he did in his own way love Elizabeth, so she was the choice of his heart, (what was it Selmy said about treachery and treason for love)? ;)

But I also agree on the both the physical and character resemblence between Edward and his grandson Henry, whom it has been speculated that if they put him on the couch for therapy, his dissatisfaction with his wives was because no one could match the perfection of his mother whom he adored.

That could not be said of Henry, as it seems that Henry didn't like number eight very much. <_<

So unless he invented it himself, I could see Richard finding this entirely believable. More, it would be a perfect solution to both the looming Woodeville threat to himself personally, and to the inevitable struggle for power a Regency always meant to England.

I could also conceive of him inventing it, though. I think this less likely...I do agree that absolute loyalty to Edward IV was his most defining characteristic for most of his life...in some ways he was Bobby to Edward's JFK...but he was also a very intelligent man and politician, and although devout, he seems a realist, so I can see him thinking it a lesser evil for a greater good. I think his entire life had been formed through war and intrigue, and I think he would have maintained the mindset that dangers abounded and enemies awaited weakness in order to strike again, and as such I can see him thinking that York could simply not afford a child King and Woodeville court. But there seems to have been substantial support for the truth of the claim, and much of that support seems to come from outside of Richard's immediate circle.

Knowing the antipathy between the Queen and Richard as he did, Edward's deathbed request that Richard be Regent and Protector and be sent for immediately might have struck Richard as Edward's last minute attempt to undo the damage their ascension at court had caused, or merely that he felt it important that the reins be in Richard's hands as soon as possible because he was who he trusted most to maintain the Yorkist reign.

That Elizabeth Woodeville delayed his receiving the news and meanwhile tried to cut him out of the process and rush the princes to London to be crowned forthwith also strikes ASOIAF notes, and I am sure Richard would have interpreted that in much the same way Ned did; a bid for power in the hands of the Queen Mother herself.

So loyal as he was to Edward, Richard the leader and general would also have been thinking of his own family's welfare, his own power threatened, and the Yorkist kingdom he had helped win endangered. I can see all the rest trumping his loyalty to Edward if he saw the 2 as opposing, and going so far as to cause the plight troth to come into being as a result. Like Bobby Kennedy, Richard had often had to be his brother's hard man...he might indeed have been given the job of killing the Mad King, and may even have had to oversee Edward's death sentence on Clarence...so he could be ruthless when the situation demanded it.

I this comparative analysis between Edward/Richard and JFK/Bobby is brilliant, and spot on.

Certainly one of the forces that drove Richard was loyalty to his brother, and while I don't rule out his being the one behind the murder of his nephews for all the practical reasons you pointed out, I also don't rule out the possibility of others with even stronger or just as strong motivations.

I think the thing that has always impacted me was the portrait of Richard when I was just sixteen. I didn't see a monster, and I didn't even see any deformaties, (though I'm aware that such artists must tread carefully), but a harried, worried man who quite frankly seemed miserable.

Maybe that is why I was always more drawn to him than to the shining Edward, because Richard did not seem to be a man who enjoyed his power, though to be fair to Edward, he was much more accomplised and intelligent when it came to administrative and business affairs than his aSoIaF counterpart, Robert though Edward was indeed lavish in his living.

I joined the Richard III Society five years ago when I was seriously considering a graduate degree in medieval history. Being a society member gives you access to a lot of fascinating research (including lots of Tudor history) and to their online archives which contain a lot of primary and secondary source material. However watching that documentary and seeing Phillippa Langley crying over the curved back issue and the other hostile society members on Skype demanding to know how he could have worn armor if he had such a curved back made me seriously reconsider my membership :uhoh:

I remember reading one British critic who described Phillppa as behaving "as though she was Richard's widow." On the other hand, I've got to give her a certain amount of credit. She really was the driving force behind that dig and if she had been such a full blown loop de loop Richard III fan girl it probably never would have happened. As for the crying well, given how invested a lot of people are in their theories on this forum it wouldn't surprise me if we don't see similar reactions if some of them eventually prove to be untrue.

I agree with you though that ultimately, Richard was responsible for his nephews deaths. Whether he personally ordered them to be killed or it was done behind his back, by usurping their claim and disregarding his brother Edward's will he put those boys in a very vulnerable position that made it possible for whatever did happen to them to occur. And you're right, trying to analyze and ascertain people's motivations in the context of their lives centuries after the fact is definitely dicey and not everyone's cup of tea. However, I really do enjoy it and its one of the reasons I so love history ;)

Don't burn your membership card yet. :D

That Phillipa was passionate about the project is what got it off the ground and certainly we see extremists on these threads as well. ;)

As I said before, I think Richard was more or less a product of his times, marked by fear, war, and political instability. And as I said, while I didn't see a monster, I knew enough that there must have been something beyond his just being "dark and slight."

With my husbands grandfathers scoliosis, he had lost several inches by his senior years, so it wasn't a "huncback" but a literal twisting of the spine that pushed into his organs and made it hard for him to breathe.

Perhaps it wasn't as pronounced in his younger years when he won his first battle at sixteen, (can you imagine sixteen year-olds leading anyone into battle today), but probably got worse as he got older and being in the cold, damp, and living in a saddle all the time, probably didn't help.

Even today, when they studied some of the skeletons of the soldiers at Little Big Horn, the amount of arthritis that had begun to set in at some of their young ages was amazing.

These figures are always steeped in controversy. I had mentioned Vlad Tepes as an example, because according to one of my friends who is from Romania, many still consider him a national hero. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These figures are always steeped in controversy. I had mentioned Vlad Tepes as an example, because according to one of my friends who is from Romania, many still consider him a national hero. :dunno:

He most certainly was one for his people. He fought for their freedom and independence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, :) but sometimes that points gets lost in all the myths given he was quite ruthless as well.

He had to be, he was between a rock and a hardplace. The muslims and Hungarian monarchy on either side. he was caught in the middle and had to be brutal in order to keep his people from being chewed up by either side. Tragic figure to that extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These figures are always steeped in controversy. I had mentioned Vlad Tepes as an example, because according to one of my friends who is from Romania, many still consider him a national hero. :dunno:

An appropriate example, too, as Richard is recorded having expressed admiration and envy of Dracula. More, I think, for his military mind, and the opportunities afforded to fight for Christendom through geography, than the whole "impale everyone" schtick, but all the same. Vlad would have made a reasonable model for The Prince if Machiavelli hadn't been trying to make a point with Cesare Borgia, I think - achieve law and justice through extreme brutality until everyone's too scared to disobey you. So long as you didn't cross him, he was probably a great lord to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are really good points regarding the dynamics between Stannis/Renly, but more spefically Ned and the Lannisters as Robert considered Ned more the "brother" he loved than his own brothers, which Cersei knew and feared.

It's also not lost on me that Ned as the dutiful one also ended up being the one to "clean up" after everyone.

I also agree on the parallels between the Lannisters and the Woodvilles though of course the Lannisters are at this point much more noble though they did come by their "kingdom' by way of a con man named Lan the Clever.

But the prism of hyper paranoia and distrust which they viewed all others besides themselves are very similar, and though most families probably operated under these conditions, those already insecure in their positions felt it most keenly, which later explains the truce that Elizabeth later struck with Richard, and then Margaret.

In a time when blood was the foundation for the power structures of the Medieval society, it also explains why the Martells would also ally with the Lannisters and still remain loyal to the Targaryens though both, and twice now on the part of the Targaryens betrayed them.

But certainly Elizabeth, herself surrounded in controversy about what she really was even down to witchcraft, did appear to be threatened by anyone not her family who was favored by her husband, down to his own brothers, which I always thought was not very wise.

While "The White Queen," was not my favorite adaptation of the story, there is a part where Edward basically asks Elizabeth why "she can't just let it go." It always seemed to me that her insistance that even his own family take a back seat to hers was a little dangerous and could have turned whatever love he had for her into malice.

Some speculate that either her daughter, Elizabeth of York was truly a paragon of gentle virtue, or did see the tactics her mother used and decided to go in a different direction with Henry.

I was always inclined to believe that he knew his brother well enough to know that the situation with Eleanor Butler was likely true. Richard had his own bastards, so the fact that his brother took it to a different level was likely not a surprise. And though his womanizing was legendary, I agree with Lareine that he did in his own way love Elizabeth, so she was the choice of his heart, (what was it Selmy said about treachery and treason for love)? ;)

But I also agree on the both the physical and character resemblence between Edward and his grandson Henry, whom it has been speculated that if they put him on the couch for therapy, his dissatisfaction with his wives was because no one could match the perfection of his mother whom he adored.

That could not be said of Henry, as it seems that Henry didn't like number eight very much. <_<

I this comparative analysis between Edward/Richard and JFK/Bobby is brilliant, and spot on.

Certainly one of the forces that drove Richard was loyalty to his brother, and while I don't rule out his being the one behind the murder of his nephews for all the practical reasons you pointed out, I also don't rule out the possibility of others with even stronger or just as strong motivations.

I think the thing that has always impacted me was the portrait of Richard when I was just sixteen. I didn't see a monster, and I didn't even see any deformaties, (though I'm aware that such artists must tread carefully), but a harried, worried man who quite frankly seemed miserable.

Maybe that is why I was always more drawn to him than to the shining Edward, because Richard did not seem to be a man who enjoyed his power, though to be fair to Edward, he was much more accomplised and intelligent when it came to administrative and business affairs than his aSoIaF counterpart, Robert though Edward was indeed lavish in his living.

Don't burn your membership card yet. :D

That Phillipa was passionate about the project is what got it off the ground and certainly we see extremists on these threads as well. ;)

As I said before, I think Richard was more or less a product of his times, marked by fear, war, and political instability. And as I said, while I didn't see a monster, I knew enough that there must have been something beyond his just being "dark and slight."

With my husbands grandfathers scoliosis, he had lost several inches by his senior years, so it wasn't a "huncback" but a literal twisting of the spine that pushed into his organs and made it hard for him to breathe.

Perhaps it wasn't as pronounced in his younger years when he won his first battle at sixteen, (can you imagine sixteen year-olds leading anyone into battle today), but probably got worse as he got older and being in the cold, damp, and living in a saddle all the time, probably didn't help.

Even today, when they studied some of the skeletons of the soldiers at Little Big Horn, the amount of arthritis that had begun to set in at some of their young ages was amazing.

These figures are always steeped in controversy. I had mentioned Vlad Tepes as an example, because according to one of my friends who is from Romania, many still consider him a national hero. :dunno:

As usual, really excellent points Alia :)

I've always felt too that Edward & Richard's relationship is more closely paralleled in Robert & Ned's relationship than in the relationship between Robert and either of his brothers.

-The Lannisters & the Woodpiles

You really hit on a good point too about the families that were the most insecure in their positions being the most paranoid. In the world of ASOIAF, the Lannisters occupied a much more secure and prominent position than the Woodvilles did in medieval England. Even though the founder of the Lannister dynasty was allegedly a con man, they were one of the older and more prestigious of the Andal houses having been a kingly house before Aegon's Conquest. The Woodvilles were so recently up jumped that they wouldn't have even rated as highly as the Tyrells or the Tullys. Elizabeth Woodville's father was merely a knight when she was born, her grandfather a chamberlain, not to mention that the family affiliation was Lancastrian until her marriage to Edward.

The knives were out for her and her family the moment her marriage was publicly announced and all of the subsequent events that followed only feed her paranoia more and more with each passing year. It's understandable that she trusted no one outside of her own family, but you made an excellent point that it wasn't wise on her part and ultimately only served to undermine her.

-Elizabeth, Cersei & their 'bastard' children

If the pre-contract was true, it would seem that Edward's behavior gave her a very legitimate (no pun intended) reason to be paranoid. In the years leading up to his death, Edward veered between showering Bishop Stillington with honors to imprisoning him at the same time as his brother the Duke of Clarence. This historical record does strongly suggest that Edward was employing a variety of means to try and keep Stillington quiet and that he had managed to keep the bishop in check while he was alive. But if the rumors of Stillington conspiring with Clarence to declare her marriage invalid did manage to reach Elizabeth (which seems possible, especially during Clarence's trial), it could go a long way to explaining her behavior when Edward IV died suddenly. Like Cersei when Robert died, her aggressive actions may have been her way of trying to solidify her son's position before the rumor of her children's illegitimacy came to light. Unlike Cersei though, Elizabeth wouldn't have been the one who put herself or her children in such an awful situation. That would have been all her husband's doing and would have been absolutely FUBAR on his end

-Richard & his deformity

It is really pretty incredible to think about how he managed to fight in all of those battles with that degree of scoliosis. I read an article by one of the specialists who was brought in to identify his condition and they said exactly the same thing you did; that he most likely would have had difficulty breathing and been in near constant pain from the pressure on his organs. It makes it even more amazing to think that despite all of those physical difficulties he managed to fight so successfully in so many battles and from such a young age. Even his enemies at Bosworth credited him with being incredibly brave and dying 'manfully' in battle.

-Dracula

That's really interesting about Vlad the Impaler! My brother spent some time teaching English in Romania and Hungry and became really interested in Romanian history. I'll have to ask him about that :)

Cheers, and by all means. Might be a few days before I get back to you on it, though. I'll be on the move a bit and while I'll have the odd moment to drop in, I won't have too much time for serious thought, which I suspect is what you'll want of me. :) But when that window opens up...presuming the NFL draft isn't underway, I'll give your questions my complete attention.

Iyi geceler,

James

No problem James! It might actually take me a few days to get around to it too. Apologies too for all of the bad grammar and spelling in my last post to you. I shouldn't respond late at night when I'm too tired to proofread :blushing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think the Aegon Blackfyre idea only makes sense from a historical perspective if it's a combination of the two. Legitimized bastard line's scion returns from exile to take the crown (even follows the female line actuality of Henry's claim), on par with Henry, while actually pretending to be a murdered prince, like Perkin.

I get that you obviously want Dany to be Henry VII, but there's only so far you can stretch it. Aegon has far more in common with Henry even if you consider the fakeness aspect. Which again is what makes it so smart on George's part: By blurring the lines between the victor and the fraud, he makes it that much harder to figure out the real outcome.

Well I first found the idea here, but then again it uses the show in examples, and sometimes I like to pretend the show doesn't exist. I definitely don't know as much about English history so the parallels were harder to see at first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An appropriate example, too, as Richard is recorded having expressed admiration and envy of Dracula. More, I think, for his military mind, and the opportunities afforded to fight for Christendom through geography, than the whole "impale everyone" schtick, but all the same. Vlad would have made a reasonable model for The Prince if Machiavelli hadn't been trying to make a point with Cesare Borgia, I think - achieve law and justice through extreme brutality until everyone's too scared to disobey you. So long as you didn't cross him, he was probably a great lord to have.

I did not know that Richard had openly expressed admiration for Vlad, very interesting.:)

And I tend not to stand in judgement of our Medieval ancestors with a lot of modern self righteousness. I'm grateful we live in a time where we don't have to make such "scorched earth" decisions.

But, aside from the mythology, he was a very smart guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are really good points regarding the dynamics between Stannis/Renly, but more spefically Ned and the Lannisters as Robert considered Ned more the "brother" he loved than his own brothers, which Cersei knew and feared.

It's also not lost on me that Ned as the dutiful one also ended up being the one to "clean up" after everyone.

I also agree on the parallels between the Lannisters and the Woodvilles though of course the Lannisters are at this point much more noble though they did come by their "kingdom' by way of a con man named Lan the Clever.

But the prism of hyper paranoia and distrust which they viewed all others besides themselves are very similar, and though most families probably operated under these conditions, those already insecure in their positions felt it most keenly, which later explains the truce that Elizabeth later struck with Richard, and then Margaret.

In a time when blood was the foundation for the power structures of the Medieval society, it also explains why the Martells would also ally with the Lannisters and still remain loyal to the Targaryens though both, and twice now on the part of the Targaryens betrayed them.

But certainly Elizabeth, herself surrounded in controversy about what she really was even down to witchcraft, did appear to be threatened by anyone not her family who was favored by her husband, down to his own brothers, which I always thought was not very wise.

While "The White Queen," was not my favorite adaptation of the story, there is a part where Edward basically asks Elizabeth why "she can't just let it go." It always seemed to me that her insistance that even his own family take a back seat to hers was a little dangerous and could have turned whatever love he had for her into malice.

Some speculate that either her daughter, Elizabeth of York was truly a paragon of gentle virtue, or did see the tactics her mother used and decided to go in a different direction with Henry.

I was always inclined to believe that he knew his brother well enough to know that the situation with Eleanor Butler was likely true. Richard had his own bastards, so the fact that his brother took it to a different level was likely not a surprise. And though his womanizing was legendary, I agree with Lareine that he did in his own way love Elizabeth, so she was the choice of his heart, (what was it Selmy said about treachery and treason for love)? ;)

But I also agree on the both the physical and character resemblence between Edward and his grandson Henry, whom it has been speculated that if they put him on the couch for therapy, his dissatisfaction with his wives was because no one could match the perfection of his mother whom he adored.

That could not be said of Henry, as it seems that Henry didn't like number eight very much. <_<

I this comparative analysis between Edward/Richard and JFK/Bobby is brilliant, and spot on.

Certainly one of the forces that drove Richard was loyalty to his brother, and while I don't rule out his being the one behind the murder of his nephews for all the practical reasons you pointed out, I also don't rule out the possibility of others with even stronger or just as strong motivations.

I think the thing that has always impacted me was the portrait of Richard when I was just sixteen. I didn't see a monster, and I didn't even see any deformaties, (though I'm aware that such artists must tread carefully), but a harried, worried man who quite frankly seemed miserable.

Maybe that is why I was always more drawn to him than to the shining Edward, because Richard did not seem to be a man who enjoyed his power, though to be fair to Edward, he was much more accomplised and intelligent when it came to administrative and business affairs than his aSoIaF counterpart, Robert though Edward was indeed lavish.

Yeah, always found Richard much more interesting. But more interesting still, IMO, is a figure we haven't mentioned and whose shadow hangs over all of these events; Warwick.

Mercurial, brilliant, brave, ambitious, duplicitous, charismatic...you could exhaust words trying to describe the Kingmaker. But significant here for a few reasons.

For one, he was the first real test of Richard's loyalty to Edward. In part because Richard seems to have felt that Warwick was the aggrieved party in his relations with Edward with regards to both the secret marriage and then later using Woodevilles to counter-balance his importance/establish his own kingship out of Neville's shadow. Certainly Richard seems to have replaced the KM as Woodeville Enemy #1, so their minds ran along similar lines at least that far. We know Warwick was in some ways more of a father to Richard than the Duje of York had been, and we know that everyone including Richard were aware that the Yorkist victory might be owed more to Warwick than even Edward. His popularity in London alone was repeatedly crucial (and interestingly served as Edward's role model). And of course his pseudo-father role became father-in-law, reinforcing that bond.

So when Neville and Edward became enemies, Richard could not have felt anything but conflicted, and yet he never seems to have wavered. But it's inconceivable to think that he did not see Edward's marriage and promotion of the Woodeville court as disastrously costly, both personally and politically, even outside of the opportunity cost re: a political alliance marriage.

It must also have occurred to him on occasion that if Edward could favor Elizabeth over the man he owed his crown to, where exactly would he draw that line. Not at Clarence...but Clarence is such a complicated mess it's hard to know who felt what when about him.

The closest parallel to Warwick would have to be Jon Arryn, but the obvious and significant difference being Cersei was his choice, as opposed to his insult/nemesis. Arryn seems too honourable and selfless to pull off what the Kingmaker did, but then again he was never treated as shabbily by Robert. But GRRM does get in the spin at the end where Cersei considers JA her primary danger and seeks his destruction, neatly bow tying with history in principle.

But getting back to my original point, when Edward died, Richard would not just be vying against the woman who had made herself his enemy and weakened the Yorkist control of the court, but also the woman who represented the first and most lasting wedge between the 2 men he most admired and to whom he attributed joint credit for winning the war in the first place. As Richard was apparently pious, he may well have seen her as a kind of cancerous element in his family's body politic, and finding out that the marriage was invalid would probably seem to him to be supported in his God's judgment. I doubt he could think of Elizabeth without thinking of all she had cost him and those he loved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not know that Richard had openly expressed admiration for Vlad, very interesting.:)

And I tend not to stand in judgement of our Medieval ancestors with a lot of modern self righteousness. I'm grateful we live in a time where we don't have to make such "scorched earth" decisions.

But, aside from the mythology, he was a very smart guy.

From what I recall it had much to do with the concept of Crusading, or closest approximation, which was something he was very interested in doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, always found Richard much more interesting. But more interesting still, IMO, is a figure we haven't mentioned and whose shadow hangs over all of these events; Warwick.

Mercurial, brilliant, brave, ambitious, duplicitous, charismatic...you could exhaust words trying to describe the Kingmaker. But significant here for a few reasons.

For one, he was the first real test of Richard's loyalty to Edward. In part because Richard seems to have felt that Warwick was the aggrieved party in his relations with Edward with regards to both the secret marriage and then later using Woodevilles to counter-balance his importance/establish his own kingship out of Neville's shadow. Certainly Richard seems to have replaced the KM as Woodeville Enemy #1, so their minds ran along similar lines at least that far. We know Warwick was in some ways more of a father to Richard than the Duje of York had been, and we know that everyone including Richard were aware that the Yorkist victory might be owed more to Warwick than even Edward. His popularity in London alone was repeatedly crucial (and interestingly served as Edward's role model). And of course his pseudo-father role became father-in-law, reinforcing that bond.

So when Neville and Edward became enemies, Richard could not have felt anything but conflicted, and yet he never seems to have wavered. But it's inconceivable to think that he did not see Edward's marriage and promotion of the Woodeville court as disastrously costly, both personally and politically, even outside of the opportunity cost re: a political alliance marriage.

It must also have occurred to him on occasion that if Edward could favor Elizabeth over the man he owed his crown to, where exactly would he draw that line. Not at Clarence...but Clarence is such a complicated mess it's hard to know who felt what when about him.

The closest parallel to Warwick would have to be Jon Arryn, but the obvious and significant difference being Cersei was his choice, as opposed to his insult/nemesis. Arryn seems too honourable and selfless to pull off what the Kingmaker did, but then again he was never treated as shabbily by Robert. But GRRM does get in the spin at the end where Cersei considers JA her primary danger and seeks his destruction, neatly bow tying with history in principle.

But getting back to my original point, when Edward died, Richard would not just be vying against the woman who had made herself his enemy and weakened the Yorkist control of the court, but also the woman who represented the first and most lasting wedge between the 2 men he most admired and to whom he attributed joint credit for winning the war in the first place. As Richard was apparently pious, he may well have seen her as a kind of cancerous element in his family's body politic, and finding out that the marriage was invalid would probably seem to him to be supported in his God's judgment. I doubt he could think of Elizabeth without thinking of all she had cost him and those he loved.

Ahhhhh Warwick! Even GRRM couldn't create a character as fascinating as the Kingmaker :)

You know for some reason, I'd never really thought about the similarities between Warwick and Jon Arryn until you mentioned them in this thread. I've always thought of Tywin Lannister (wealthiest lord in the kingdom, wants his daughter to be queen, propensity to switch loyalties) as being partially Warwick inspired but you are right, in many ways, Jon Arryn is an even better fit. Guardian and mentor to both Ned and Robert, just like Warwick was to Richard and Edward. Makes me wonder if perhaps Jon Arryn wasn't a lot more ambitious than we've been led to believe. Or perhaps the ambitious part of Warwick was given more to Tywin.

Still, neither Jon Arryn nor Tywin had one tenth of the charisma and popularity that Warwick had. He was incredibly flamboyant and popular always throwing over the top, extravagant feasts that garnered him immense support from all levels of society. One of English history's most interesting men.

I completely agree with you too about Warwick being the first real test of Richard's loyalties to his brother. But as you also pointed out, Elizabeth was Edward's test of Warwick too. Warwick thought Edward was going to be his malleable puppet and that he would be the real power behind the throne. By marrying a women of his own choosing in secret without consulting Warwick, Edward was declaring that he was his own man and his own king. But by allowing Warwick to go to France and to start negotiating a marriage between himself and Bona of Savoy when he was already secretly to Elizabeth Woodville, Edward set up Warwick to be humiliated on an international scale. For a man as proud and ambitious as Warwick, that was a bitter betrayal. Rightly or wrongly, it also made Elizabeth a target for Warwick's animosity and this is truly where the hatred of Edward's queen and the ugly rumors about her and her family began. Perhaps if Edward had handled the issue of his marriage to Elizabeth with Warwick in a more diplomatic way, there wouldn't have been such disastrous consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, always found Richard much more interesting. But more interesting still, IMO, is a figure we haven't mentioned and whose shadow hangs over all of these events; Warwick.

Mercurial, brilliant, brave, ambitious, duplicitous, charismatic...you could exhaust words trying to describe the Kingmaker. But significant here for a few reasons.

For one, he was the first real test of Richard's loyalty to Edward. In part because Richard seems to have felt that Warwick was the aggrieved party in his relations with Edward with regards to both the secret marriage and then later using Woodevilles to counter-balance his importance/establish his own kingship out of Neville's shadow. Certainly Richard seems to have replaced the KM as Woodeville Enemy #1, so their minds ran along similar lines at least that far. We know Warwick was in some ways more of a father to Richard than the Duje of York had been, and we know that everyone including Richard were aware that the Yorkist victory might be owed more to Warwick than even Edward. His popularity in London alone was repeatedly crucial (and interestingly served as Edward's role model). And of course his pseudo-father role became father-in-law, reinforcing that bond.

So when Neville and Edward became enemies, Richard could not have felt anything but conflicted, and yet he never seems to have wavered. But it's inconceivable to think that he did not see Edward's marriage and promotion of the Woodeville court as disastrously costly, both personally and politically, even outside of the opportunity cost re: a political alliance marriage.

It must also have occurred to him on occasion that if Edward could favor Elizabeth over the man he owed his crown to, where exactly would he draw that line. Not at Clarence...but Clarence is such a complicated mess it's hard to know who felt what when about him.

The closest parallel to Warwick would have to be Jon Arryn, but the obvious and significant difference being Cersei was his choice, as opposed to his insult/nemesis. Arryn seems too honourable and selfless to pull off what the Kingmaker did, but then again he was never treated as shabbily by Robert. But GRRM does get in the spin at the end where Cersei considers JA her primary danger and seeks his destruction, neatly bow tying with history in principle.

But getting back to my original point, when Edward died, Richard would not just be vying against the woman who had made herself his enemy and weakened the Yorkist control of the court, but also the woman who represented the first and most lasting wedge between the 2 men he most admired and to whom he attributed joint credit for winning the war in the first place. As Richard was apparently pious, he may well have seen her as a kind of cancerous element in his family's body politic, and finding out that the marriage was invalid would probably seem to him to be supported in his God's judgment. I doubt he could think of Elizabeth without thinking of all she had cost him and those he loved.

Warwick, the Kingmaker.

Very true, and I totally agree with both your and Lareines take on him and the hybrid characters he exists in.

I don't know if he was trying to do that with Arianne and "Queenmaker," but if so, I'm not sure she had the same impact unless I totally miss where he is taking her character.

Many seem to think she will try and marry Aegon, but who knows, maybe she forgoes such an attempt and orchestrates things behind the scenes as he really doesn't need to marry her, but get his mothers family to support him, which I don't know why they wouldn't if the choice is to marry an imposter.

I suppose that Jon Connington could also fulfill the role, but I think that Aegon is going to start giving him problems, as "Aegon" seems to determined to strike out on his own.

It may be that Aegon will die the same way Perkin Warbeck with just the hint of doubt that he could be who he said he was.

I also wonder if Aegon is being prepared for doubt? His temperament does not seem to lend itself to being questioned.

Ahhhhh Warwick! Even GRRM couldn't create a character as fascinating as the Kingmaker :)

You know for some reason, I'd never really thought about the similarities between Warwick and Jon Arryn until you mentioned them in this thread. I've always thought of Tywin Lannister (wealthiest lord in the kingdom, wants his daughter to be queen, propensity to switch loyalties) as being partially Warwick inspired but you are right, in many ways, Jon Arryn is an even better fit. Guardian and mentor to both Ned and Robert, just like Warwick was to Richard and Edward. Makes me wonder if perhaps Jon Arryn wasn't a lot more ambitious than we've been led to believe. Or perhaps the ambitious part of Warwick was given more to Tywin.

Still, neither Jon Arryn nor Tywin had one tenth of the charisma and popularity that Warwick had. He was incredibly flamboyant and popular always throwing over the top, extravagant feasts that garnered him immense support from all levels of society. One of English history's most interesting men.

I completely agree with you too about Warwick being the first real test of Richard's loyalties to his brother. But as you also pointed out, Elizabeth was Edward's test of Warwick too. Warwick thought Edward was going to be his malleable puppet and that he would be the real power behind the throne. By marrying a women of his own choosing in secret without consulting Warwick, Edward was declaring that he was his own man and his own king. But by allowing Warwick to go to France and to start negotiating a marriage between himself and Bona of Savoy when he was already secretly to Elizabeth Woodville, Edward set up Warwick to be humiliated on an international scale. For a man as proud and ambitious as Warwick, that was a bitter betrayal. Rightly or wrongly, it also made Elizabeth a target for Warwick's animosity and this is truly where the hatred of Edward's queen and the ugly rumors about her and her family began. Perhaps if Edward had handled the issue of his marriage to Elizabeth with Warwick in a more diplomatic way, there wouldn't have been such disastrous consequences.

That is a good point on JA ambitions.

Its possible he was more of a benevolent, less flamboyant Warwick, though it does seem that Jon did really care for what was good for the realm. Though to be fair, perhaps Warwick did too until the break with Edward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been re-reading The Sunne In Splendour and came across a great line that really drove home the Edward IV/Robert Baratheon parallel. After hearing her marriage to Edward was pronounced invalid and her children declared illegitimate by Richard III, Elizabeth Woodville unleashes a verbal rant against Edward that would have made even Cersei blush including telling her eldest daughter that:



"Your brother will never wear a crown because his father went through life like a bloody rutting stag!"



I could easily see Cersei happily applying that same moniker to Robert ;)


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been re-reading The Sunne In Splendour and came across a great line that really drove home the Edward IV/Robert Baratheon parallel. After hearing her marriage to Edward was pronounced invalid and her children declared illegitimate by Richard III, Elizabeth Woodville unleashes a verbal rant against Edward that would have made even Cersei blush including telling her eldest daughter that:

"Your brother will never wear a crown because his father went through life like a bloody rutting stag!"

I could easily see Cersei happily applying that same moniker to Robert ;)

I LOVED that part.

That was the first book I read on tWotR, and still remember how painful the story was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished that the other day. Really enjoyed it.

I LOVED that part.

That was the first book I read on tWotR, and still remember how painful the story was.

It's a great book, by far my favorite WOTR novel. I would love to see it made into a high quality series one day. Maybe when GOT is over HBO will take a whack at it :)

I'm not entirely sold on some of its depictions. I don't think Richard III was quite that saintly or that Elizabeth Woodville was quite so sinister. They are sure enjoyable characters to read though, very similar to Ned and Cersei.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...