she has Anne of Bohemia, Richard's first wife, refer to herself as a girl from the back of beyond coming to the wonderful English court when marrying Richard.
Whuuuhh? Wow. That is some wishful thinking right there.
I mean, it's been waaay too long since I even looked at the period in question, and it was never "my period," so I could be misremembering, but didn't Matilda/Maud, a couple centuries earlier, alienate her English subjects during the civil war by considering herself Empress of the Romans first, and Queen of England/Lady of the English second? Granted a lot can change in a couple centuries, but I don't think England becoming *that* prestigious to Continental Europeans was one.
Matilda/Maud, cahn, was victim of another Pragmatic Sanction (although not called that) situation like MT's. Her father had no surviving male heirs and got all the rival claimants to sign an agreement saying they would recognize her claim as his successor. Five minutes after he died, her cousin Stephen was going, "Agreement, what agreement? That's a WOMAN on the throne," and having himself declared King of England. Civil war ensued.
Unfortunately for her, she was not as successful as MT. She never managed to be formally crowned, and though she contended with him for a long time and had a following, Stephen is the one recognized as king during this period, and she does not get listed as queen in most of the regnal histories, or if so is parenthesized and asterisked. Eventually, she gave up and went back to Normandy (all the rulers of England at this point were descended from Norman William the Conqueror and saw themselves as Normans at least as much, if not more than, rulers of England). Her son continued waging war on Stephen, and eventually there was a treaty in 1153 that recognized Stephen as king until his death, and Matilda's son Henry II as his heir.
Oh, the Holy Roman Empress thing comes in because she was married by her father to Henry V of the HRE when she was young. Very young, as I recall. Okay, Wikipedia says 12. Yep, pretty young. He died about ten years later, and she came home, but she never stopped seeing being empress as her primary claim to fame.
Also, her name is Matilda or Maude, depending on whether you go with the Germanic or French version--both are common in histories--and that's useful, because the name of literally every other woman at the time is also Matilda. Her mother was named Matilda, her father's mother (wife of William the Conqueror) was named Matilda, her cousin Stephen's wife was named Matilda, and it gets really really confusing, really really fast.
Oh, and the one anecdote about her that entered into popular legend that I still remember is that she was being held prisoner by Stephen's forces in a castle, and she made herself a rope out of blankets (??) and lowered herself out the window. It was winter, and everything was covered in snow, so she wore a white nightgown for camouflage, and her escape was successful.
As for Stephen...Wikipedia doesn't have this particular anecdote, but I remember him, aside from being a misogynist, being portrayed as a general softy. Whether you as a historian think this makes him weak or not depends on how much ruthlessness you think is acceptable or necessary in a monarch. But the anecdote I'm remembering, if I'm not thinking of someone else, was that he took a kid hostage and told his father not to do such-and-such in support of Matilda, or he'd kill the guy's son. Bluff called.
Hostage's dad: Fine, kill the kid. I can have another one.
Stephen: Dammit. I can't kill kids. Why did you have to go and put me in this position?
Stephen's supporters: You can't make threats and not follow through! That's what hostages are *for*! What the hell kind of king are you?
Stephen: One that has to sleep at night, dammit.
I feel like this gets contrasted with a case that happened when Stephen was younger and someone else (Henry I?) gouged out two boys' eyes when he had them as hostages? But I'm blanking on names and details.
Oh, man. I went and looked this up. I was right, but it even was worse than I remembered, or in some cases had even learned.
Henry I (Matilda's father, Stephen's uncle) was dealing with a rebellion by his illegitimate daughter Juliana and her husband Eustace. They exchanged hostages, Juliana/Eustace's kids in return for some other important kid belonging to someone on Henry's side. As the dispute went on, Eustace blinded the kid he had as hostage. Henry was then like, "Fine. Fuck it, we're blinding your kids. AKA MY GRANDKIDS."
Moral lesson ensues about how Henry is ruthless enough to be a good king while easy-go-lucky Stephen is not, or alternately how you might invite Stephen to dinner but not Henry. Your role model mileage may vary.
Anyway. This part I learned. Then there's the followup, which I am pretty sure (!!) I did not.
So now Juliana is pissed off and decides to take possession of a castle and put up a fight against Dad. During a truce with her father--a truce!--Juliana fires a bolt from a crossbow at him, but misses. Oops! Henry manages to take the castle from his daughter, but she swims across the moat of freezing water and escapes to join her husband Eustace.
Wow.
See, history is just full of things you never learn in school. And European royals are one big dysfunctional family.
Merrie Olde England
Whuuuhh? Wow. That is some wishful thinking right there.
I mean, it's been waaay too long since I even looked at the period in question, and it was never "my period," so I could be misremembering, but didn't Matilda/Maud, a couple centuries earlier, alienate her English subjects during the civil war by considering herself Empress of the Romans first, and Queen of England/Lady of the English second? Granted a lot can change in a couple centuries, but I don't think England becoming *that* prestigious to Continental Europeans was one.
Matilda/Maud,
Unfortunately for her, she was not as successful as MT. She never managed to be formally crowned, and though she contended with him for a long time and had a following, Stephen is the one recognized as king during this period, and she does not get listed as queen in most of the regnal histories, or if so is parenthesized and asterisked. Eventually, she gave up and went back to Normandy (all the rulers of England at this point were descended from Norman William the Conqueror and saw themselves as Normans at least as much, if not more than, rulers of England). Her son continued waging war on Stephen, and eventually there was a treaty in 1153 that recognized Stephen as king until his death, and Matilda's son Henry II as his heir.
Oh, the Holy Roman Empress thing comes in because she was married by her father to Henry V of the HRE when she was young. Very young, as I recall. Okay, Wikipedia says 12. Yep, pretty young. He died about ten years later, and she came home, but she never stopped seeing being empress as her primary claim to fame.
Also, her name is Matilda or Maude, depending on whether you go with the Germanic or French version--both are common in histories--and that's useful, because the name of literally every other woman at the time is also Matilda. Her mother was named Matilda, her father's mother (wife of William the Conqueror) was named Matilda, her cousin Stephen's wife was named Matilda, and it gets really really confusing, really really fast.
Oh, and the one anecdote about her that entered into popular legend that I still remember is that she was being held prisoner by Stephen's forces in a castle, and she made herself a rope out of blankets (??) and lowered herself out the window. It was winter, and everything was covered in snow, so she wore a white nightgown for camouflage, and her escape was successful.
As for Stephen...Wikipedia doesn't have this particular anecdote, but I remember him, aside from being a misogynist, being portrayed as a general softy. Whether you as a historian think this makes him weak or not depends on how much ruthlessness you think is acceptable or necessary in a monarch. But the anecdote I'm remembering, if I'm not thinking of someone else, was that he took a kid hostage and told his father not to do such-and-such in support of Matilda, or he'd kill the guy's son. Bluff called.
Hostage's dad: Fine, kill the kid. I can have another one.
Stephen: Dammit. I can't kill kids. Why did you have to go and put me in this position?
Stephen's supporters: You can't make threats and not follow through! That's what hostages are *for*! What the hell kind of king are you?
Stephen: One that has to sleep at night, dammit.
I feel like this gets contrasted with a case that happened when Stephen was younger and someone else (Henry I?) gouged out two boys' eyes when he had them as hostages? But I'm blanking on names and details.
Oh, man. I went and looked this up. I was right, but it even was worse than I remembered, or in some cases had even learned.
Henry I (Matilda's father, Stephen's uncle) was dealing with a rebellion by his illegitimate daughter Juliana and her husband Eustace. They exchanged hostages, Juliana/Eustace's kids in return for some other important kid belonging to someone on Henry's side. As the dispute went on, Eustace blinded the kid he had as hostage. Henry was then like, "Fine. Fuck it, we're blinding your kids. AKA MY GRANDKIDS."
Moral lesson ensues about how Henry is ruthless enough to be a good king while easy-go-lucky Stephen is not, or alternately how you might invite Stephen to dinner but not Henry. Your role model mileage may vary.
Anyway. This part I learned. Then there's the followup, which I am pretty sure (!!) I did not.
So now Juliana is pissed off and decides to take possession of a castle and put up a fight against Dad. During a truce with her father--a truce!--Juliana fires a bolt from a crossbow at him, but misses. Oops! Henry manages to take the castle from his daughter, but she swims across the moat of freezing water and escapes to join her husband Eustace.
Wow.
See, history is just full of things you never learn in school. And European royals are one big dysfunctional family.