Well it seems as if it's at least as much the fault of the programme makers, as you say, going by the quotes from Gregory that Kapellmeister put up a page or so back.
It is interesting to see that she has an Executive Producer credit. I wonder how much clout she actually had
I think he conjures up the atmosphere of 16th century England really well and the dialogue doesn't seem too anachronistic. 'Revelation' was my favourite but I thought the last one, 'Heartstone', was quite boring and strung-out.
I can't remember the full details of each one, but I enjoyed them all. The one where the lady had been racked and was then burned at the stake was really good but it had me in tears. That must have been Anne Ayscough (or Askew as it's pronounced). I should really read them again.
I love Alison Weir. Her book Innocent Traitor had me in tears at the end. Is her book fiction or non-fiction?
Almost certain it's non. Although it can be hard to tell sometimes. I take it if I can't see the word "fiction" anywhere and the title is down to earth "Elizabeth of York" as opposed to "Tortured Heart of York" then it's non fiction
Yeah, I do agree on that point. I think it wouldn't be the great love affair as hinted at in the book, but if anything a political move.
I don't think it would have existed in real life in any form, political or otherwise. It was incest, and bearing in mind that you had to apply for dispensation from the Pope to marry a distant cousin, I don't think they'd get dispensation to marry so closely - it's still forbidden. It's all in PG's mind.
I think it possible that Elizabeth might have had a wee crush on her uncle and he might have had a soft spot for her but I can't see there being any real plan to marry or even to have any real physical intimacy. It just wouldn't have been acceptable. (Unless I read the times completely wrong). Anne Boleyn was accused on incest with her brother and that was considered very shocking. Uncle isn't as close but I still think it would have been shocking and a king with a usurper in the wings can't afford unnecessary scandal.
It's fiction but unlike PG's books its very well researched . Innocent Traitor by far is the best historical novel written
I think Gemma was asking me if the imminent book about Elizabeth of York was fiction or not. I think you are telling her that Innocent Traitor is fiction.
I think Gemma was asking me if the imminent book about Elizabeth of York was fiction or not. I think you are telling her that Innocent Traitor is fiction.
I think
The incest story is almost certainly fake. Elizabeth and Henry actually loved each other as records show. Even the Yorkist don't deny that
didn't an expert on PG's The Real White Queen and her Rivals say that Henry Tudor delayed his wedding to Elizabeth by 5 months to make sure she wasn't pregnant by Richard III?
didn't an expert on PG's The Real White Queen and her Rivals say that Henry Tudor delayed his wedding to Elizabeth by 5 months to make sure she wasn't pregnant by Richard III?
Or they could just have been waiting for the dispensation from the Pope. I also read that he didn't want to be seen as having the claim to the throne through his wife, whose claim was much stronger than his really non-existent one, so had himself crowned before the wedding, so maybe that's a reason the wedding was postponed.
I really very much doubt there is any truth in the rumours about Richard and Elizabeth. It would have been seen as even more shocking to them than it is to us I'm sure.
ETA - Was Prince Arthur premature? He was born 8 months after the wedding, so he was either premature or a bit of pre-marital hanky panky was going on
Or they could just have been waiting for the dispensation from the Pope. I also read that he didn't want to be seen as having the claim to the throne through his wife, whose claim was much stronger than his really non-existent one, so had himself crowned before the wedding, so maybe that's a reason the wedding was postponed.
I really very much doubt there is any truth in the rumours about Richard and Elizabeth. It would have been seen as even more shocking to them than it is to us I'm sure.
ETA - Was Prince Arthur premature? He was born 8 months after the wedding, so he was either premature or a bit of pre-marital hanky panky was going on
That was what I heard at school and it makes sense.
Well, if Elizabeth of York indeed was pregnant at the time her wedding to Henry Tudor, it was yet another reason for him to marry her. She's proven herself to be fertile and kings need heirs.
I like Anne Neville . It had to be very nice to her to see Elizabeth Woodville downfall. Remember , how horrible she was to her, when she was her lady in waiting.
There's a Wars of the Roses related Jonathan Foyle documentary on BBC4 tomorrow night about the possible discovery of Henry VII's and Elizabeth's of York's marriage bed:
Am I being blind? I've searched my Sky planner for BBC4 tomorrow (Tuesday) night and I can't see this programme listed anywhere. n Lots of other history programmes on tomorrow night, but not that one - as far as I can see. Like I say, could well be missing something really obvious, but I clicked on the link in the hopes it might give a time of transmission so I could double-check it, but there isn't one given.
Like I said before. They were very much in love , which by those days stanaderd was unusual for an arranged marriage.
I don't know if the were "in love". I definitely don't think they were when they got married. It may well have come later. So I don't think it was relevant to when they married.
Am I being blind? I've searched my Sky planner for BBC4 tomorrow (Tuesday) night and I can't see this programme listed anywhere. n Lots of other history programmes on tomorrow night, but not that one - as far as I can see. Like I say, could well be missing something really obvious, but I clicked on the link in the hopes it might give a time of transmission so I could double-check it, but there isn't one given.
'Secret Knowledge' is showing on the BBC's TV guide for the London region at 20:30 here:
I remember Jonathan Foyle promoting it on his Twitter as being on 6th August a couple of times too. I wonder if it depends on the region you're in as to whether it's on.
*Edit* - From that TV guide it seems it's now showing a repeated Secret Knowledge ep (a Lucy Worsley one) whereas earlier it was showing it as the Jonathan Foyle ep. No idea what's going on. Might Tweet him and try to see if he knows a broadcast date for his own show.
Am I being blind? I've searched my Sky planner for BBC4 tomorrow (Tuesday) night and I can't see this programme listed anywhere. n Lots of other history programmes on tomorrow night, but not that one - as far as I can see. Like I say, could well be missing something really obvious, but I clicked on the link in the hopes it might give a time of transmission so I could double-check it, but there isn't one given.
No I think this poster is querying when the Jonathan Foyle Secret Knowledge documentary that I talked about earlier is going to be on. That's a different show entirely to Tales from the Royal Bedchamber.
This discussion is even more confusing because Lucy Worsley presents both Royal Bedchamber tonight AND the repeated ep of Secret Knowledge which (after some bizarre BBC change) now appears to be on tomorrow night.
Well I've just Tweeted at Jonathan so will report back with any news. Another woman has just Tweeted him about it too.
Like I said before. They were very much in love , which by those days stanaderd was unusual for an arranged marriage.
I've never read anything that said they were very much in love; Henry had to marry Elizabeth as she had more of a claim to the throne than he did. When he repealed Titulus Regius, and if her brothers were dead, she was in fact rightful Queen.
He delayed her coronation so it couldn't be said she was the reason he was king, and he kept her very much under the thumb of his mother, and removed her mother to a nunnery after she plotted against him. He was also the man responsible for the death of her uncle, who she may have had a crush on or may just have known as an uncle, also (possibly) her brothers, also her cousins Warwick and Lincoln and as many other of her relatives he could find, not to mention possibly her brother if he was really Perkin Warbeck.
He wasn't exactly a trusting man, HenryTudor, and I don't think he's ever been accused of being a very loving one! I'd love to see a source for that if there is one, it might shine some light on him.
Comments
It is interesting to see that she has an Executive Producer credit. I wonder how much clout she actually had
The executive producer is usually the person who funds the production, iirc.
I can't remember the full details of each one, but I enjoyed them all. The one where the lady had been racked and was then burned at the stake was really good but it had me in tears. That must have been Anne Ayscough (or Askew as it's pronounced). I should really read them again.
Almost certain it's non. Although it can be hard to tell sometimes. I take it if I can't see the word "fiction" anywhere and the title is down to earth "Elizabeth of York" as opposed to "Tortured Heart of York" then it's non fiction
I don't think it would have existed in real life in any form, political or otherwise. It was incest, and bearing in mind that you had to apply for dispensation from the Pope to marry a distant cousin, I don't think they'd get dispensation to marry so closely - it's still forbidden. It's all in PG's mind.
It's fiction but unlike PG's books its very well researched . Innocent Traitor by far is the best historical novel written
I think
The incest story is almost certainly fake. Elizabeth and Henry actually loved each other as records show. Even the Yorkist don't deny that
That doesn't make AW's new book "fiction" though - possibly inaccurate.
At least with AW she leaves the royals she dislikes alone from her fiction novels, unlike PG.
Can't help but feel sorry for the Plantagenets , especially Anne Neville and King Richard who has received the most of her hatred
Or they could just have been waiting for the dispensation from the Pope. I also read that he didn't want to be seen as having the claim to the throne through his wife, whose claim was much stronger than his really non-existent one, so had himself crowned before the wedding, so maybe that's a reason the wedding was postponed.
I really very much doubt there is any truth in the rumours about Richard and Elizabeth. It would have been seen as even more shocking to them than it is to us I'm sure.
ETA - Was Prince Arthur premature? He was born 8 months after the wedding, so he was either premature or a bit of pre-marital hanky panky was going on
That was what I heard at school and it makes sense.
Like I said before. They were very much in love , which by those days stanaderd was unusual for an arranged marriage.
I reckon he will win
They are all schemers:eek:
apart from the size of the king when older
Do you mean The Stuarts ?
Lizzy will make a comeback
Neither is Poirot:o
Am I being blind? I've searched my Sky planner for BBC4 tomorrow (Tuesday) night and I can't see this programme listed anywhere.
I don't know if the were "in love". I definitely don't think they were when they got married. It may well have come later. So I don't think it was relevant to when they married.
'Secret Knowledge' is showing on the BBC's TV guide for the London region at 20:30 here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/tv/guide/bbc/london/20130806
I remember Jonathan Foyle promoting it on his Twitter as being on 6th August a couple of times too. I wonder if it depends on the region you're in as to whether it's on.
*Edit* - From that TV guide it seems it's now showing a repeated Secret Knowledge ep (a Lucy Worsley one) whereas earlier it was showing it as the Jonathan Foyle ep. No idea what's going on. Might Tweet him and try to see if he knows a broadcast date for his own show.
9 pm - Tales from the Royal Bedchamber:)
No I think this poster is querying when the Jonathan Foyle Secret Knowledge documentary that I talked about earlier is going to be on. That's a different show entirely to Tales from the Royal Bedchamber.
This discussion is even more confusing because Lucy Worsley presents both Royal Bedchamber tonight AND the repeated ep of Secret Knowledge which (after some bizarre BBC change) now appears to be on tomorrow night.
Well I've just Tweeted at Jonathan so will report back with any news. Another woman has just Tweeted him about it too.
I've never read anything that said they were very much in love; Henry had to marry Elizabeth as she had more of a claim to the throne than he did. When he repealed Titulus Regius, and if her brothers were dead, she was in fact rightful Queen.
He delayed her coronation so it couldn't be said she was the reason he was king, and he kept her very much under the thumb of his mother, and removed her mother to a nunnery after she plotted against him. He was also the man responsible for the death of her uncle, who she may have had a crush on or may just have known as an uncle, also (possibly) her brothers, also her cousins Warwick and Lincoln and as many other of her relatives he could find, not to mention possibly her brother if he was really Perkin Warbeck.
He wasn't exactly a trusting man, HenryTudor, and I don't think he's ever been accused of being a very loving one! I'd love to see a source for that if there is one, it might shine some light on him.