I can't think of just one because I have a number. Here are six. 3 men. 3 women.
Joan Lady of Wales, wife of Llewellyn the Great, who came to my notice years ago on a visit to Anglesey. Yesterday I visited her sarcophagus. Although she was accused of adultery, her alleged lover, William de Braose no V hung, it was a political move by Llewellyn, I think and Joan was back in favour after a year. Illegitimate dtr of King John, she was also sister to Henry iii, the mother of at least 5 children, Joan was deeply mourned by Llewellyn. She was an able negotiator and acted as pacifier and political link between her husband and family but remained loyal to Llewellyn. A lady I admire very much.
Eleanor of Aquitaine. Queen twice over, powerful woman, political mover and shaker, a mother to three Kings, grandmother of Europe, regent for Henry ii, maligned by several male chroniclers, Crusader, rebel and a shrewd operator. Eleanor was the one to keep her husband and sons from killing each other probably. She had powers and status in her own right. She lived into her 80s. Marvellous woman.
Katharine of Aragon, intelligent, international Queen, educational promotor, warrior Queen, passionate, piuos, hard headed the same as Henry, patronising the arts and female artists. Had her children sadly not died, all but her dtr, Mary, Henry wouldn't have abandoned her. She taught him how to rule. She was extremely popular. She was just as passionate and fun loving as Anne Boleyn and the 2 women had the same style Book of Hours from the same printing. She was courageous and she was devoted to the end. She was married to Henry for 24 years and spent 3 years in exile but defiant before her death. People talk about Anne Boleyn as a scholar. Katharine was the real scholar.
3 men. William Marshall was my first history hero. That he survived the threat of hanging as a child is remarkable. Tournament champion and self made knight he built up his service and reputation over several kings and the tournament circuit. He was loyal to Henry ii and his son Henry the Young King and was torn by their troubles. He won his way back into favour and he even unseated the younger Richard the Lionheart, defending Henry against him. He served Richard I for 10 years and King John. It was Marshall and Nicolaa de la Haye who fought off the French in 1217 and he won the Barons over to protect the 10 year old Henry iii. He died in his 80s and is buried in the Temple Church, London.
Ghengis Khan who united the people of the Stepps under the one banner. He rose from obscure beginnings to become ruler of much of the world. He led his armies to conquer China and Persia and, despite the brutality of his warfare he was an enlightened ruler. He was a law giver, he brought together artisans from many nations and advanced his people. When he died he was both feared and revered and is still regarded as one of the world's most remarkable leaders.
Perhaps most predictable...Richard iii, but only in more recently years. I believe he has been maligned but he was by no means a saint and I don't dislike Henry Vii. I think as ruler in the North of England he did a good and effective job. I think he adored his brother Edward but disapproved of certain things Edward did as King. He saw justice done regardless of personal favour or patronage as can be seen in the numerous law suits he sat over. He didn't commit the murders that Shakespeare accused him off, for one of them he was only 2 years old. I don't think the sources support the nonsense some people come out with, I do think Nathen is more than fair when he talks about him.
Yes, I agree the circumstances under which he became King are controversial but I do believe he acted to secure the country. I think we know less about the few months of his Protectorate than we should and there are many ways to interpret the same pieces of evidence. The issue around the fate of his nephews for me is a legal one, not a historic one as there isn't the evidence to support that he did kill his nephews or ordered their deaths, nor is there to support any of the other 101 theories around them, including survival.
I believe the many positive things in Richard iii reign are overlooked. He wasn't a tyrant, in fact he gave too many people second chances and he worked well with his council and Parliament. There are several things in the life of both Henry Vii and Richard iii which are not dissimilar and both have been severely judged by history. If you go to a talk or listen to a podcast by Matthew Lewis and Nathen it is evident that scholars across the divide can find common ground and respect each other without necessarily agreeing on everything. Richard will always draw controversial and passionate views and I find him fascinating.
Thank you for introducing me to a most interesting, inspiring, significant yet largely unknown figure. I can easily understand why you hold him in such high (and well-deserved) regard.
Thomas deserves a book just on his own.
I can't think of just one because I have a number. Here are six. 3 men. 3 women.
Joan Lady of Wales, wife of Llewellyn the Great, who came to my notice years ago on a visit to Anglesey. Yesterday I visited her sarcophagus. Although she was accused of adultery, her alleged lover, William de Braose no V hung, it was a political move by Llewellyn, I think and Joan was back in favour after a year. Illegitimate dtr of King John, she was also sister to Henry iii, the mother of at least 5 children, Joan was deeply mourned by Llewellyn. She was an able negotiator and acted as pacifier and political link between her husband and family but remained loyal to Llewellyn. A lady I admire very much.
Eleanor of Aquitaine. Queen twice over, powerful woman, political mover and shaker, a mother to three Kings, grandmother of Europe, regent for Henry ii, maligned by several male chroniclers, Crusader, rebel and a shrewd operator. Eleanor was the one to keep her husband and sons from killing each other probably. She had powers and status in her own right. She lived into her 80s. Marvellous woman.
Katharine of Aragon, intelligent, international Queen, educational promotor, warrior Queen, passionate, piuos, hard headed the same as Henry, patronising the arts and female artists. Had her children sadly not died, all but her dtr, Mary, Henry wouldn't have abandoned her. She taught him how to rule. She was extremely popular. She was just as passionate and fun loving as Anne Boleyn and the 2 women had the same style Book of Hours from the same printing. She was courageous and she was devoted to the end. She was married to Henry for 24 years and spent 3 years in exile but defiant before her death. People talk about Anne Boleyn as a scholar. Katharine was the real scholar.
3 men. William Marshall was my first history hero. That he survived the threat of hanging as a child is remarkable. Tournament champion and self made knight he built up his service and reputation over several kings and the tournament circuit. He was loyal to Henry ii and his son Henry the Young King and was torn by their troubles. He won his way back into favour and he even unseated the younger Richard the Lionheart, defending Henry against him. He served Richard I for 10 years and King John. It was Marshall and Nicolaa de la Haye who fought off the French in 1217 and he won the Barons over to protect the 10 year old Henry iii. He died in his 80s and is buried in the Temple Church, London.
Ghengis Khan who united the people of the Stepps under the one banner. He rose from obscure beginnings to become ruler of much of the world. He led his armies to conquer China and Persia and, despite the brutality of his warfare he was an enlightened ruler. He was a law giver, he brought together artisans from many nations and advanced his people. When he died he was both feared and revered and is still regarded as one of the world's most remarkable leaders.
Perhaps most predictable...Richard iii, but only in more recently years. I believe he has been maligned but he was by no means a saint and I don't dislike Henry Vii. I think as ruler in the North of England he did a good and effective job. I think he adored his brother Edward but disapproved of certain things Edward did as King. He saw justice done regardless of personal favour or patronage as can be seen in the numerous law suits he sat over. He didn't commit the murders that Shakespeare accused him off, for one of them he was only 2 years old. I don't think the sources support the nonsense some people come out with, I do think Nathen is more than fair when he talks about him.
Yes, I agree the circumstances under which he became King are controversial but I do believe he acted to secure the country. I think we know less about the few months of his Protectorate than we should and there are many ways to interpret the same pieces of evidence. The issue around the fate of his nephews for me is a legal one, not a historic one as there isn't the evidence to support that he did kill his nephews or ordered their deaths, nor is there to support any of the other 101 theories around them, including survival.
I believe the many positive things in Richard iii reign are overlooked. He wasn't a tyrant, in fact he gave too many people second chances and he worked well with his council and Parliament. There are several things in the life of both Henry Vii and Richard iii which are not dissimilar and both have been severely judged by history. If you go to a talk or listen to a podcast by Matthew Lewis and Nathen it is evident that scholars across the divide can find common ground and respect each other without necessarily agreeing on everything. Richard will always draw controversial and passionate views and I find him fascinating.
Thank you for introducing me to a most interesting, inspiring, significant yet largely unknown figure. I can easily understand why you hold him in such high (and well-deserved) regard.