James 1:21

verseoftheday:

"Get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent, and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you." - James 1:21

 



Top 10 Tudor history podcasts from BBC History Magazine | History Extra

edwardslovelyelizabeth:

 



thorgerdr:

harritudur:

thorgerdr:

yorkishprincess:

thorgerdr:

You’ve just called it fiction. So sit down, “history” buff, and let people enjoy something you don’t like.

There’s no proof Henry VII loved Elizabeth of York anymore than there is or isn’t about Richard. If what some chronicler paid to make Henry look as sympathetic as possible is your only source?

Shame on you.

Really? No proof?

You mean aside from the fact that he spent lavishly on Elizabeth, including on her funeral. That he shut himself away after her death, becoming so ill, people thought he would die. How about the fact that they consoled each other after Arthur died? Where Elizabeth was trusted with state secrets and Henry listened to her advice?

There is actually quite a bit of proof that Henry loved Elizabeth. Meanwhile, the only bit of proof that Elizabeth loved Richard comes from a plagiarist whose supposed letter was only seen by him.

We would not be throwing a fit about this if Philippa Gregory wouldn’t claim her work is 100% fact. She is forever stating that she is a historian and her books follow history. If she would admit it’s fiction, we wouldn’t care nearly as much. But she lives in her own delusions and acts like she is the only “historian” proving how things were. She isn’t.

People don’t throw a fit over the Sunne in Splendor, which has Elizabeth in love with Richard. But we know that it is fiction and the author doesn’t try to be anything more than she is.

That is where our problem comes from.

Here’s some sources:

Amy Licence, Alison Weir, Thomas Penn, Sarah Gristwood, David Starkey, Antonia Fraser.

I’ll start with this: because a man spends a lot on his wife (and only once she’s dead) doesn’t mean he loved her anymore than it says he didn’t. I’m not saying he did or didn’t at all, but I am also not going to say that there was or was not a thing between she and Richard, either.

Chroniclers were paid to make those in power at any given time look as great as possible. So while there can be grains of truth in there, what they ought to be taken with is a large grain of salt. So I neither agree nor disagree with you, but rather stand in the middle.

I did not live in the fifteenth century. I did not know these people. That would be the only way to know for sure, or in the least have some sort of a general idea.

Regardless of what PG tries to say (which I flat-out ignore because it’s vanity and a plain self-serving attempt to make more money) about being a historian. Anyone who can use their head and google should know that she’s not what she says she is, and that her work is that of pure fiction which is only loosely based on some historical events.

But then I subscribe to the notion that any work plainly written in the first person must clearly be fictional unless it is either a memoir or an autobiography. Of which PG’s books are neither.

In the end, though, what does it hurt for people to ship what they enjoy? I don’t think the majority of people who enjoy the ship with Richard truly care if it is real or not. I myself simply like the dynamic as it’s written (and also shown) but I don’t assume it happened, or didn’t. I don’t know and I don’t care because I ship them in a fictional context, and not historical.

Can we try and please separate the real figures from the shipping wars in this fandom? It’s disturbing and really gross. IRL, they married who they married and lived happily or not, we’ll never know the details on the latter. Fictionally, anything goes. And anything can be valid, and so anyone should be free to enjoy the ship at their leisure.

so the absence of evidences is, in fact, an evidence? as we have nothing proving there was something between Richard and Elizabeth of York, it means that there could have been something? The books he offered, or the rumor of marriage are not sign of romance. Like… there is no proof showing the existence of an affair between, i don’t know Isabel Neville and Richard Gloucester, but it doesn’t mean that this relationship didn’t happen. after all they spent time together and knew each other since years, giving each other presents and i wasn’t there so… We could go very far with this kind of logic i think.

There are facts -facts, no accounts or chronicles- that tend to show the affection between Henry and Elizabeth (yes affection, because i know some people dislikes the use of love, so okay: affection, respect, harmony, support…). For example, the fact that they travelled in the company of each other way more than they had to or than other royal couples did, the fact that he spent money for her and not only after her death (a quick look at Elizabeth’s Privy purse expenses is enough) with jewerly or gowns or books or just money for her and her family, the fact that he never remarried (if everything was just a political agreement, why not another marriage?) and mourned her during weeks or his physical collapse after her death, the fact he never had a mistress (perhaps he was very pious or it was not his habbit but at least he didn’t humilate her with rumors or scandals), the fact that Elizabeth could visit the Tower alone, visiting traitors by herself (a proof of the trust Henry had for her imho) or the fact that he publicly showed his esteem for her in banquets or events by offering the most privilegied seat. The facts that he listened to her in political or religious matters -like a letter from the Pope, who was not an Henry VII flatterer i think, proves it.

Official Tudors chronicles and biographies (like Vergil or under Elizabeth’s and later James’ reign with Bacon) in fact, show a quite dark and distant Henry. Not smiling or rapacious, calculating even with his own family. But historians today put a new light on him and other historical figures, able to make the difference between these texts/propaganda, and a more accurate truth. And historians, professors who spent much time in research are agree to say that they had at least a good and affectionate marriage. And i will not have the pretention to contradict them since i am not an historian.

At the end, we cannot dehumanized people that lived back then. Even without living during this period, we can affirm that they were human beings able to feel the same simple emotions that we can today and we can not deny them the basic need of affection. They were both able to feel, to love and during the trials of their marriage, they were always there for each other, surely creating an unique bond. We can discuss the nature of this bond, but definitely affection (and love) for me.

Then, if people ships Richard and Elizabeth as fictional characters, it’s not my cup fo tea but i really don’t care :)

And you’ve completely missed the point in which I said that it hurts no one to let people ship whatever they want to ship. Coming in like this and jumping down one’s throat with ‘evidence’ when I am speaking more in terms of a work of fiction than the real people just proves that this issue is being taken way too seriously.

If you want PG’s books to be a literal documentary of what chroniclers were paid to write back in the day, you’re not going to get it there. regardless of what she says she is, she is a writer of fiction. So you can complain about it and bash on anyone who doesn’t care about that because hey, they happen to like a dynamic between two characters, or you can ignore it and find material you enjoy and focus on that.

I don’t know a thing about Elizabeth of York. Because history has not given her a voice. She is literally silent. She spent money on the poor and her sisters, and was a genuinely nice girl—ok. But what was in her head isn’t known to me or you, or anyone else. Therefore when a book is presented with a first person narrative, it is clearly fictional.

That was my point. Which is ok. PG can claim wtf ever she likes, and really I don’t care. It doesn’t change the quality of her work, which is admittedly dwindling as she gets older. 

My other point is that it doesn’t hurt you to leave people who happen to ship Elizabeth and Richard alone to have their own corner of tumblr to enjoy the pairing. Without feeling compelled to jump in and crow BUT BUT IT’S NOT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE. That fact is obvious. And those who ship it don’t care. I’m not a Henry fan, admittedly. But I won’t bash him (at least in the context of his relationship; I think other facets of him are side-eye worthy) either historically or otherwise. 

Live and let live and leave those who ship it be.

i said that i don’t care if people ship them as fictional characters. which is okay. myself, i ship in a total unhistorical and wrong way Elizabeth Woodville and her brother Anthony just because of The White Queen.

and i didn’t mention PG because it was not my point tbh. i was more answering the “there’s no proof Henry VII loved Elizabeth of York anymore than there is or isn’t about Richard” and i wanted to show that indeed there were proofs Henry had affection and respect for his wife. But yes, it’s true that we know much less about Elizabeth and her feelings, for she was ‘only’ the King’s wife.

 



youngsta-tes:

The hottest things I’ve ever been told.

 



 



gothlolita:

imagine if you woke up and your name was your url and you looked exactly like your icon

 



thorgerdr:

yorkishprincess:

thorgerdr:

You’ve just called it fiction. So sit down, “history” buff, and let people enjoy something you don’t like.

There’s no proof Henry VII loved Elizabeth of York anymore than there is or isn’t about Richard. If what some chronicler paid to make Henry look as sympathetic as possible is your only source?

Shame on you.

Really? No proof?

You mean aside from the fact that he spent lavishly on Elizabeth, including on her funeral. That he shut himself away after her death, becoming so ill, people thought he would die. How about the fact that they consoled each other after Arthur died? Where Elizabeth was trusted with state secrets and Henry listened to her advice?

There is actually quite a bit of proof that Henry loved Elizabeth. Meanwhile, the only bit of proof that Elizabeth loved Richard comes from a plagiarist whose supposed letter was only seen by him.

We would not be throwing a fit about this if Philippa Gregory wouldn’t claim her work is 100% fact. She is forever stating that she is a historian and her books follow history. If she would admit it’s fiction, we wouldn’t care nearly as much. But she lives in her own delusions and acts like she is the only “historian” proving how things were. She isn’t.

People don’t throw a fit over the Sunne in Splendor, which has Elizabeth in love with Richard. But we know that it is fiction and the author doesn’t try to be anything more than she is.

That is where our problem comes from.

Here’s some sources:

Amy Licence, Alison Weir, Thomas Penn, Sarah Gristwood, David Starkey, Antonia Fraser.

I’ll start with this: because a man spends a lot on his wife (and only once she’s dead) doesn’t mean he loved her anymore than it says he didn’t. I’m not saying he did or didn’t at all, but I am also not going to say that there was or was not a thing between she and Richard, either.

Chroniclers were paid to make those in power at any given time look as great as possible. So while there can be grains of truth in there, what they ought to be taken with is a large grain of salt. So I neither agree nor disagree with you, but rather stand in the middle.

I did not live in the fifteenth century. I did not know these people. That would be the only way to know for sure, or in the least have some sort of a general idea.

Regardless of what PG tries to say (which I flat-out ignore because it’s vanity and a plain self-serving attempt to make more money) about being a historian. Anyone who can use their head and google should know that she’s not what she says she is, and that her work is that of pure fiction which is only loosely based on some historical events.

But then I subscribe to the notion that any work plainly written in the first person must clearly be fictional unless it is either a memoir or an autobiography. Of which PG’s books are neither.

In the end, though, what does it hurt for people to ship what they enjoy? I don’t think the majority of people who enjoy the ship with Richard truly care if it is real or not. I myself simply like the dynamic as it’s written (and also shown) but I don’t assume it happened, or didn’t. I don’t know and I don’t care because I ship them in a fictional context, and not historical.

Can we try and please separate the real figures from the shipping wars in this fandom? It’s disturbing and really gross. IRL, they married who they married and lived happily or not, we’ll never know the details on the latter. Fictionally, anything goes. And anything can be valid, and so anyone should be free to enjoy the ship at their leisure.

so the absence of evidences is, in fact, an evidence? as we have nothing proving there was something between Richard and Elizabeth of York, it means that there could have been something? The books he offered, or the rumor of marriage are not sign of romance. Like… there is no proof showing the existence of an affair between, i don’t know Isabel Neville and Richard Gloucester, but it doesn’t mean that this relationship didn’t happen. after all they spent time together and knew each other since years, giving each other presents and i wasn’t there so… We could go very far with this kind of logic i think.

There are facts -facts, no accounts or chronicles- that tend to show the affection between Henry and Elizabeth (yes affection, because i know some people dislikes the use of love, so okay: affection, respect, harmony, support…). For example, the fact that they travelled in the company of each other way more than they had to or than other royal couples did, the fact that he spent money for her and not only after her death (a quick look at Elizabeth’s Privy purse expenses is enough) with jewerly or gowns or books or just money for her and her family, the fact that he never remarried (if everything was just a political agreement, why not another marriage?) and mourned her during weeks or his physical collapse after her death, the fact he never had a mistress (perhaps he was very pious or it was not his habbit but at least he didn’t humilate her with rumors or scandals), the fact that Elizabeth could visit the Tower alone, visiting traitors by herself (a proof of the trust Henry had for her imho) or the fact that he publicly showed his esteem for her in banquets or events by offering the most privilegied seat. The facts that he listened to her in political or religious matters -like a letter from the Pope, who was not an Henry VII flatterer i think, proves it.

Official Tudors chronicles and biographies (like Vergil or under Elizabeth’s and later James’ reign with Bacon) in fact, show a quite dark and distant Henry. Not smiling or rapacious, calculating even with his own family. But historians today put a new light on him and other historical figures, able to make the difference between these texts/propaganda, and a more accurate truth. And historians, professors who spent much time in research are agree to say that they had at least a good and affectionate marriage. And i will not have the pretention to contradict them since i am not an historian.

At the end, we cannot dehumanized people that lived back then. Even without living during this period, we can affirm that they were human beings able to feel the same simple emotions that we can today and we can not deny them the basic need of affection. They were both able to feel, to love and during the trials of their marriage, they were always there for each other, surely creating an unique bond. We can discuss the nature of this bond, but definitely affection (and love) for me.

Then, if people ships Richard and Elizabeth as fictional characters, it’s not my cup fo tea but i really don’t care :)

 



queenwydville:

The White Queen (Starz) UNCUT

Episode 8 - Long Live The King
Henry Tudor and his French mistress

Requested by: harritudur

((just leaving this video there. YOU SAW NOTHING YOU SAW NOTHING))

 



// time to sleep

bonne nuit !

 



yorkishprincess:

twq rewatch: 1x10 - The Final Battle

 



theme