cahn | Historical Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 46

Background: The kids' school has a topic for "Unit" every trimester that a lot of their work (reading, writing, some math) revolves around. These topics range from time/geographic periods ('Colonial America') to geography ('Asia') to science ('Space') to social science ('Business and Economics'). (I have some issues with this way of doing things, but that's a whole separate post.) Anyway, for Reasons, they have had to come up with a new topic this year, and E's 7/8 class is doing "World Fairs" as their new topic.

Me: I know E's teacher is all about World Fairs and I know she is great and will do a good job. But I feel like if we had a different teacher who wasn't so into World Fairs, they wouldn't do such a good job and another topic would be better.
Me: Like... the Enlightenment!
D: Heh, you could teach that! But you'd have to restrain yourself from making everything about Frederick the Great.
Me: But that's the thing! Everyone does relate to each other in this time period! Voltaire -- and his partner Émilie du Châtelet, who was heavily involved in the discourse of conservation of energy and momentum -- well, I've told you Voltaire had a thing with Fritz -- and then there's Empress Maria Theresa, who went to war with him a few times -- and Catherine the Great --
D, meditatively: You know --
Me: *am innocently not warned even though this is the same tone of voice that is often followed by, say, a bad pun*
D: -- it's impressive how everyone from this 'the Great' family is so famous!
Me: *splutters*
D, thoughtfully: But of course there's probably selection bias, as the ones who aren't famous don't get mentioned. You never see 'Bob the Great' in the history books...
Me: *splutters more*

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

selenak

Why did he want revenge on Strafford?

He wanted revenge on Charles and the Stuarts, Strafford was just the means. Remember, the tale of Essex and the House of Stuart:

- argues with Prince Henry to the point where Bob beats Henry with a tennis racket and therefore gets kicked out of the then Prince of Wales' inner circle

- James I and VI supportes his fave's girlfriend Frances divorcing Bob for impotence and marrying James' fave, which is majorly humiliating for Bob

- Bob goes on to serve in the Thirty Years War and thus is one of the few English nobles with war time experience, yet he is only the second in command during Buckingham's rerun of the Elizabethan Age's greatest hits, and the raid of Cadiz becomes a complete fiasco, which Bob watches and blames Buckingham and Charles for

- Bob joins team IMPEACH BUCKINGHAM DIE DIE DIE, but Charles backs Buckingham

- when Buckingham gets murdered by Felton, Charles still doesn't make Bob top military guy

- Bob suspects his second wife to cuckold him with another of Charles' pals

- also Bob of Essex might actually have pro Parliament opinions, I wouldn't exclude that, but he really has it in for the Stuarts in general and Charles (as King) in particular at that point

Btw, when the Civil War has finally and officially started and Essex gets made supreme Commander by the Junto (because he's still one of the few nobles with active war experience, and the actual later winners Fairfax and Cromwell aren't famous yet, though rising in the ranks, at least one of the royal army units marching against Essex supposedly chanted "Hey, Cuckold, here we come - and you can't". But that was after Strafford was already dead.

Okay, sorry, I need it spelled out even more -- is the issue that he thinks if he doesn't sign the death warrant, that they'll go after his wife? (And what is preventing them from going after her anyway?)

Yes to the first, Charles thinks if he keeps refusing to sign the death warrant, it will be his wife's turn next, and given what happened to Buckingham (for which, remember, Charles, not a big believer in the lone assassin theory, but at any rate convinced violent rethoric had to do with what happened and disgusted by Parliament openly celebrating Buckingham's murder), they might not be bothering with legalities in the case of Henrietta Maria. The idea - or at least the excuse he gives to himself - is that if he does sign the warrant, Parliament will let up and be satisfied for now which will give him time to get out of London with his family and raise an army. Now, would Parliament have tried to either execute Henrietta Maria or have her killed if Charles had held firm to his promise? Who knows, but probably not, there were actually royalist voices in the Commons and of course in the Lords, and while there was precedent for the executing of Queens in England, these happened with the support and instigating of the ruling monarch. Otoh, given the Junto really had done their very best to convince the population of London that they were all about to massacred St. Bartholomew's Night style by evil Catholics if Strafford would be allowed to live, I wouldn't exclude the possibility of Londoners storming either the Tower or Whitehall to either kill Strafford themselves or get the royals, not as part of a plan but as the end result of months of deliberate demagogery.

Gosh. I can totally understand thinking that, too -- you promised him! Charles, you had one job! (Okay, fine, he had more than one job, but... still!)

He'd agree with you - like I said, he felt guilty to his dying day and thought that was the reason why the Almighty let it happen. He also advised his son via letter shortly before his death to never not stand by a loyal servant, no matter how hated.

Charles II: Yeah, no. I respected the hell out of Hyde, the later Earl of Clarendon. And he definitely did not do what that nutter Titus Oates accused him of. But when I could smell the scent of bloody riots in the air, I sacked him from his offices and exiled him. This meant a comfortable retirement for him and not having to go on my travels again for me.

From:

luzula

at least one of the royal army units marching against Essex supposedly chanted "Hey, Cuckold, here we come - and you can't"
*snorts out loud*

From:

cahn

Wow, that's pretty hardcore to do all that for revenge!

at least one of the royal army units marching against Essex supposedly chanted "Hey, Cuckold, here we come - and you can't".

OMG, that's amazing.

and while there was precedent for the executing of Queens in England, these happened with the support and instigating of the ruling monarch.

...Henry VIII really has a lot to answer for, doesn't he?
Anyway, that makes sense -- thank you!

But when I could smell the scent of bloody riots in the air, I sacked him from his offices and exiled him.

I mean. That sounds a heck of a lot better than getting beheaded!

From:

selenak

But when I could smell the scent of bloody riots in the air, I sacked him from his offices and exiled him.

I mean. That sounds a heck of a lot better than getting beheaded!

Quite. I mean, the whole Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon saga works as a good parallel and contrast to Thomas Wenthworth, Earl of Strafford. Both Hyde and Wentworth had started out as Parliamentarians who changed their allegiance to Royalist when the Junto became dominant in Parliament. Hyde went into exile with young Charles and became his most important loyal advisor, as Wentworth became Charles I's most important loyal advisor in the years immediately preceding the Civil War. Once the Restoration happened, Hyde then became increasingly one of the most hated people by nobililty and commoners alike, which mostly was not his own fault at all.

It was however partly the fault of future James II, who, remember had managed to secretly marry Hyde's daughter Anne in the year before the Restoration, get her pregnant, then when the Restoration happened immediately disawow the marriage and attempt to weasel out of it by making his mates declare they'd slept with Anne Hyde as well and could be the father until Charles II put an end to these disgraceful shenanigans by declaring Anne his sister-in-law and making James stand by her. He also ennobled her father -t hat's when Hyde becomes the Earl of Clarendon - since now the Hydes were nilly willy a part of the royal family. And of course absolutely everyone, from the nobles to the commoners was convinced Hyde/Clarendon had arranged the whole thing to make that happen, and was an Evil Advisor (tm). Then when Hyde had arranged the marriage between Charles II and Catherine de Braganza and while Charles produced illegitimate children left right and center, Catherine wasn't able to, Hyde was promptly accused of having known that in advance (how he should have known the virginal Catherine would not be fertile, no one ever explained) and having arranged the marriage solely to put his own grandkids on the throne. He was also blamed for the sale of Dunkirk, and the cost of supporting the colony of Tangiers, acquired along with Bombay as part of Catherine's dowry. The windows of Clarendon House were broken, and a placard fixed to the house blaming Hyde for "Dunkirk, Tangiers and a barren Queen".

Then there was the triple disaster of the Plague, the Great Fire and England losing its war against the Dutch, and Hyde was made into a scapegoat for the last one, despite having opposed it. Parliament called for his Impeachment. And as opposed to his father, Charles II then ruthlessly but expediently made it clear he would not defend Hyde, and it was exile time for the poor man, who went to France, where he wrote his famous "History of the Three Kingdoms", the first contemporary account of the English Civil War. When he died in 1675, his body was returned to England and buried in Westminster Abbey, making it clear Charles II had never thought there was any truth in the impeachment charges. Now I wouldn't blame Hyde for feeling bitter, but yes, he lived out a natural life span.

(The Charles II miniseries had Hyde played by none other than Ian "Emperor Palpatine" McDiarmid in a rare good guy role, and his last scene with Charles is great because you can see he's hurting but he's also proud precisely Charles - whom he taught and mentored - unlike his father does the politically smart thing, as opposed to the morally right thing.)

ETA: Oh, and you can say Hyde had the last laugh because his granddaughters, Mary and Anne, not only deposed his no good son-in-law James II but did become Queens of England in succession.

Edited Date: 2023-11-04 08:06 am (UTC)

From:

cahn

how he should have known the virginal Catherine would not be fertile, no one ever explained

*headdesk*

And as opposed to his father, Charles II then ruthlessly but expediently made it clear he would not defend Hyde, and it was exile time for the poor man

Again... still better than being beheaded :) Though I can see if Hyde didn't see it like that.

The Charles II miniseries had Hyde played by none other than Ian "Emperor Palpatine" McDiarmid in a rare good guy role, and his last scene with Charles is great because you can see he's hurting but he's also proud precisely Charles - whom he taught and mentored - unlike his father does the politically smart thing, as opposed to the morally right thing.

AHAHAHA oh gosh I can totally see this. Aw. (Though it might be a lot of cognitive dissonance to watch given that I know him as Palpatine! Sort of like when they cast Hugo Weaving as Elrond when we'd all previously seen him in the Matrix.)

Oh, and you can say Hyde had the last laugh because his granddaughters, Mary and Anne, not only deposed his no good son-in-law James II but did become Queens of England in succession.

Aw, too bad he was dead by then :)

From:

luzula

Sort of like when they cast Hugo Weaving as Elrond when we'd all previously seen him in the Matrix.)
Ha, I totally remember the mental whiplash of that!

From:

mildred_of_midgard

I was spared this by never having seen the Matrix!

From:

mildred_of_midgard

how he should have known the virginal Catherine would not be fertile, no one ever explained

*headdesk*

So I'm reading a medieval history book for French practice, and a few days ago I actually ran into an explanation: there was a medical examination that was performed on prospective brides that was supposed to be able to tell if they were going to be fertile or not.

As had been the tradition for centuries, energetic matrons were called in to determine whether she was physically capable of childbearing. Isabeau got through the ancestral entrance exam without difficulty and was declared fertile.

This was the 14th century, but if it had been traditional for centuries already, I wouldn't be surprised if they were still doing it in the not-much-more-medically-advanced 17th century.

From:

cahn

When I see things like this, I keep thinking things like, "But surely they must have noticed that some of these women ended up not being fertile?" And I have to remind myself that they didn't think that way at that point!

But also I could imagine there being an exam that would actually measure to some extent "physically capable of childbearing" (presumably things like whether you were menstruating and whether your hips were large enough?) which of course isn't the same as being fertile but maybe has a high enough correlation that counterexamples were just, idk, witchcraft or Evil Advisors or something.

From:

mildred_of_midgard

Yeah, but much like bleeding: sometimes you bleed someone and they die anyway, sometimes you say someone is fertile and they're not...but 1) the majority of women are fertile and the majority of people spontaneously recover, 2) you can always blame some other factor! (Remember after AW's death there was the debate about whether he was bled *too much* or *not (soon) enough*? Biostatistics is hard, and it's even harder when you don't have a concept of biostatistics!

But also I could imagine there being an exam that would actually measure to some extent "physically capable of childbearing" (presumably things like whether you were menstruating and whether your hips were large enough?)

Whatever it was, they missed the signs with Paul of Russia's poor first wife, the bone defects that prevented her from passing a baby through her birth canal. :/