Dillards 49: Dull Dillards Dulling

[Glasgowghirl]

Queen Victoria as a queen was amazing but I think once Albert died the deep depression she fell into affected her emotional ability to be a good mother. It is acceptable now to accept help for depression but then it wasn't understood. Mental illness ran in her family and Leopold having haemophilia was the first indication that it ran in the family too. Her children marrying into European Royal families meant it spread into other dynasties. Alexai having haemophilia lead to Alexandria seeking healers, and her relationship with Rasputin, was a main cause of the revolution and their deaths.

 

[BabyBottlePop]

Spoiler

21 minutes ago, Glasgowghirl said:

Queen Victoria as a queen was amazing but I think once Albert died the deep depression she fell into affected her emotional ability to be a good mother. It is acceptable now to accept help for depression but then it wasn't understood. Mental illness ran in her family and Leopold having haemophilia was the first indication that it ran in the family too. Her children marrying into European Royal families meant it spread into other dynasties. Alexai having haemophilia lead to Alexandria seeking healers, and her relationship with Rasputin, was a main cause of the revolution and their deaths.

 

 

Another one of her granddaughters married into the Spanish royal house and was a carrier for hemophilia as well. It pretty much destroyed her marriage. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Eugenie_of_Battenberg

[libgirl2]

1 hour ago, Carm_88 said:

 

Or if Henry and Catherine's sons who died lived to adulthood. Henry definitely wouldn't have been as nutty! 

I don't think he would have set aside Catherine and broken away from the church for Anne Boleyn and an heir if Catherine would have produced even one son. And Mary would probably have had a much better life than she did, a life as a royal princess and probably queen consort somewhere. 

2 hours ago, Georgiana said:

Victoria was an interesting figure.  While I like her well enough in terms of historical figures, she was an INSANELY needy mother and person.  She FULLY expected her daughters to primarily be attentive to her and her needs...even after moving away to foreign courts and starting their own families!  Or rather, I should say IF they moved away...she attempted to prevent one of her daughters from ever getting married in order to keep her around as a companion, and only consented on the condition that "Baby" (the Princess Beatrice) and her husband reside in Victoria's court.  If you did manage to move away AND could somehow avoid her frequent request-orders to visit her for extended periods, she was an incredibly prolific correspondent who expected her frequent letters to be responded to immediately.  She was exhausting for many of her daughters, and they often struggled to disentangle their lives from hers.    

Don't kill me, but as a mother, Victoria reminds me of Jill Rodrigues.  

This is understandable as her childhood with her own mother was dysfunctional.  She had a LOT of emotional needs that she needed OTHERS to attend to, and while Albert was alive he was seemingly able to do so successfully.  But once he died, everything kind of fell apart for her.  Of course, what else was she going to do?  It's not like she could have gone to therapy or addressed how the issues with her own mother created emotional deficits in her as an adult.  That knowledge wasn't available for her.  She just did the best she could.

But if you read her letters from the perspective of her daughters, you can see the significant burden she presented to them.  

I think that is why she took so well to John Brown and later Abdul. They dedicated themselves to her. She also liked a well formed man. 

[Iamtheway]

1 hour ago, libgirl2 said:

I think that is why she took so well to John Brown and later Abdul. They dedicated themselves to her. She also liked a well formed man. 

Who doesn’t? 

[Mela99]

This brings me up to an interesting discussion point about the Tudor era. Which of Henry the 8ths wives got the most screwed over by him and by history?

[singsingsing]

7 minutes ago, Mela99 said:

This brings me up to an interesting discussion point about the Tudor era. Which of Henry the 8ths wives got the most screwed over by him and by history?

Either Anne Boleyn or Catherine Howard, imo. So I guess the two that he killed. Anne’s character assassination was almost as bad as her actual death. Catherine Howard was very foolish but she was also very young and in no way shape or form deserved her fate.

[justoneoftwo]

I would say Catherine Howard.  People still admire Anne Boleyn, but who has much good to say about Catherine?  You could say Anne knew what she was getting into, but it never seemed like Catherine really went after it like Anne did.  All in all I say she was most screwed.  

[Georgiana]

I also have to go with Kitty Howard. She was essentially a child forced to marry a fat old man who smelled terribly and likely repulsed her.  It's pretty understandable that she would go after a handsome man her own age, especially since she needed to conceive a child and even at the time people wondered if Henry wasn't the source of his own problems in that regard.   Her only sin was having more beauty than sense, though she might have matured into a reasonable woman if given the chance.  

2 hours ago, Glasgowghirl said:

Queen Victoria as a queen was amazing but I think once Albert died the deep depression she fell into affected her emotional ability to be a good mother. It is acceptable now to accept help for depression but then it wasn't understood. Mental illness ran in her family and Leopold having haemophilia was the first indication that it ran in the family too. Her children marrying into European Royal families meant it spread into other dynasties. Alexai having haemophilia lead to Alexandria seeking healers, and her relationship with Rasputin, was a main cause of the revolution and their deaths.

 

If you've never read his work, I HIGHLY recommend Robert K. Massie's books on the downfall of Imperial Russia. Massie is also the father of a hemophiliac child, and the compassion and insight he provides to Nicholas, Alexandra, and Alexei is incredibly unique and really humanizes them.  

He's also a great writer.  His Catherine the Great biography is amazing as well.  

[tabitha2]

But see Anne of Cleves had the common sense to not fight Henry and thus got a manor, a nice income  and plum spot at court as the “Kings Sister”.  She always seems like a nice person as well.

[VelociRapture]

1 hour ago, Mela99 said:

This brings me up to an interesting discussion point about the Tudor era. Which of Henry the 8ths wives got the most screwed over by him and by history?

Hmm... my personal rankings:

1. Catherine Howard - hands down, she got the worst deal out of them all. She was young, naive, and likely didn’t fully understand what she was getting into. What she lacked in common sense she made up for in beauty and, unfortunately, she attracted the attention of the wrong men. I’m sure she was given pretty terrible advice by the people who were supposed to be protecting her. She was failed by almost every single adult in her life from the moment she was born until the day she died.

2. Tied - ironically, Anne Boleyn and Katherine of Aragon 

Anne Boleyn - she had a decent idea what she was getting into, but I don’t think anyone could have anticipated just how spectacular her rise and fall would be. Henry loved her intensely until she was no longer useful and then he couldn’t wait to be rid of her. I can’t even imagine how horrific it had to have been to know the father of your child and the man who once worshipped the ground you walked on was signing your death warrant. 

Katherine of Aragon - he didn’t have her killed, but he publicly humiliated her by casting her aside in the manner he did and he pretty much made it clear he wished she were dead. He blamed her for not bearing him a son who survived to adulthood, despite the fact that it wasn’t her fault. Not only that, but he separated her from her only child to punish them both for refusing to bend to his will. She died far away from her husband and daughter. 

3. Jane Seymour - I think Jane knew exactly what she was signing up for when she first caught Henry’s eye. Everyone at court had witnessed how Anne managed to rise so high - Jane would have known what she was doing when she refused Henry's gifts, advances, and propositions. He furiously screamed at her once for daring to intervene on some political matter (I think speaking up in favor of a Catholic was wanted dead or something) and threateningly told her to remember what happened to her predecessor - obviously, pretty terrifying. She had the pure dumb luck to give birth to the son Henry longed for, but died as a result. 

4. Catherine Parr - she was already smitten with Thomas Seymour when Henry noticed her. She and Thomas didn’t have much choice other than to suck it up and let Henry have his way. She was nearly arrested because she dared to playfully challenge Henry on theological matters and that must have been absolutely terrifying for her. She ultimately survived him and married Seymour, but it still sucked she had to wait for that happiness (as brief as it was.)

5. Anne of Cleves -  I like to think of her as the ultimate survivor and winner out of the wives. Not only did she not have to sleep with Henry (because he found her repulsive), but she was smart enough to agree to a divorce the second he suggested it. She enjoyed a long life of wealth and privilege as his honorary “sister.” I don’t know if she ever wanted marriage and children - if she did then he may have screwed her over there because he so publicly made his disgust with her clear and that possibly drove away suitors. Otherwise, she absolutely made out the best among the wives. 

ETA: If I had to break the tie between Boleyn and Aragon, I’d rank Boleyn more screwed over. The only reason for this would be because Katherine at least had some happy years of marriage to Henry. Anne really didn’t have that many happy years with Henry. Katherine also had more time with her daughter, whereas Elizabeth turned 3 about four months after her mother was executed. 

[SweetJuly]

I think you summed it up perfectly, Velocirapture.

I first wanted to move Katherine of Aragon even further down on the list of screwed-over wives, as I am not sure if Katherine of Aragon got that screwed over by history. From what I understand, many people in England and beyond admired, loved and supported her even during her lifetime, and felt that she was being treated abominably. Furthermore, nowadays she has been very much vindicated, as evidenced by the admiration many posters here, myself included, have for her.

But then there is no discussion that the way Henry treated her, and the separation from her only child, must have been utterly devastating to her. I guess it doesn't in the end matter how much other people love you if your ex-husband treats you like garbage and you can't be with your daughter....

[ViolaSebastian]

Hmm. I'd go with Catherine Howard, too. She had little chance of conceiving with Henry at that point, a fact that he was sure to take out on her, being the woman and therefore responsible for fertility stuff. She was young and naive. Although Anne was manipulated by her father and brother, to a certain extent she knew what she was getting involved in and that the results could be potentially dangerous. The whole character assassination is rough, too. I wouldn't want to go down in history and the witch who messed around with her brother. 

[CarrotCake]

I like how all of you know so much about the Tudor dynasty. I just read a book recently that touched some parts of it but I don't know much. Did you guys learn this at school or is it just your own interest?

I should read more into it.

[just_ordinary]

The Tudors are general a very popular part of history. I graduated in history from university so I love it when people show interest in it. Sadly lots of people can’t see the difference between a popular biography, a very well researched popular biography and real scientific research. So you get lots of opinions which are wrong but people refuse to believe you because they read a book. There are only few biographies which fulfill a scientific standard and are written well enough to please an unprofessional audience. I am very happy that there is now a bigger effort in science to publish well written dare I say interesting written publications.

Not saying that the last thread thrift was full of BS- because the Tudors weren’t a big part of my own study focus. 

I love history thread thrifts, especially as depending on where you from the resources you have access to, have different takes on things, concentrate on different issues. On an international forum those different perspectives are really really interesting. 

[SweetJuly]

Personally, I find that the Tudors are too much and too popular a part of history

Now don't get me wrong - I have watched and read and will watch  and read anything made about them that I can get my fingers on, and I fully understand that they are simply history and royalty to which the British and Americans (who produce most of the best and most well-funded series with the widest impact and distribution within the Western world) relate the most and find the easiest access.

However, there is so much other history that is absolutely fascinating and would deserve a treatment in form of brilliant movies and series that exist about the Tudors ad nauseam.

For example, the Habsburg dynasty has so many interesting characters and so much interesting material spanning centuries and half of Europe. I would love to see something big made about this.

Other families that would be amazing to explore as well: The Rothschilds. The Romanovs.

[HermioneSparrow]

2 hours ago, SweetJuly said:

Personally, I find that the Tudors are too much and too popular a part of history

Now don't get me wrong - I have watched and read and will watch  and read anything made about them that I can get my fingers on, and I fully understand that they are simply history and royalty to which the British and Americans (who produce most of the best and most well-funded series with the widest impact and distribution within the Western world) relate the most and find the easiest access.

However, there is so much other history that is absolutely fascinating and would deserve a treatment in form of brilliant movies and series that exist about the Tudors ad nauseam.

For example, the Habsburg dynasty has so many interesting characters and so much interesting material spanning centuries and half of Europe. I would love to see something big made about this.

Other families that would be amazing to explore as well: The Rothschilds. The Romanovs.

The Wittelsbachs were cray-cray and the Bourbons were (are) very very interesting too.

[HarleyQuinn]

I think I learned more from @VelociRapture's post than I did in school about the Tudors. I only remember Henry and Anne Boleyn, and that's mostly from watching The Other Boleyn girl.  

I should find a book on them to read. 

[FluffySnowball]

3 hours ago, SweetJuly said:

Personally, I find that the Tudors are too much and too popular a part of history

Now don't get me wrong - I have watched and read and will watch  and read anything made about them that I can get my fingers on, and I fully understand that they are simply history and royalty to which the British and Americans (who produce most of the best and most well-funded series with the widest impact and distribution within the Western world) relate the most and find the easiest access.

However, there is so much other history that is absolutely fascinating and would deserve a treatment in form of brilliant movies and series that exist about the Tudors ad nauseam.

For example, the Habsburg dynasty has so many interesting characters and so much interesting material spanning centuries and half of Europe. I would love to see something big made about this.

Other families that would be amazing to explore as well: The Rothschilds. The Romanovs.

One of the all time most popular movies in the German language are about a Habsburg Empress, Elisabeth. Although quite a lot of the plot is based on fiction, many aspects of the three “Sissi”-movies (which were made in the 1950s) are historically correct. 

[singsingsing]

3 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

The Tudors are general a very popular part of history. I graduated in history from university so I love it when people show interest in it. Sadly lots of people can’t see the difference between a popular biography, a very well researched popular biography and real scientific research. So you get lots of opinions which are wrong but people refuse to believe you because they read a book. There are only few biographies which fulfill a scientific standard and are written well enough to please an unprofessional audience. I am very happy that there is now a bigger effort in science to publish well written dare I say interesting written publications.

Not saying that the last thread thrift was full of BS- because the Tudors weren’t a big part of my own study focus. 

I love history thread thrifts, especially as depending on where you from the resources you have access to, have different takes on things, concentrate on different issues. On an international forum those different perspectives are really really interesting. 

I'm reading one of Alison Weir's biographies right now. She's a great writer and I'm really enjoying it, but I'm finding a pet peeve I have with her is that she can be a tad too credulous. Like, "So-and-so said 'X', and other things he wrote were accurate, and he had no reason to lie, so we can accept that 'X' is probably true." Welllll.... no. I'm not sure if she has a formal education in history, but reading her book, while it's good, I keep coming across various statements and thinking, "No, no, no! Don't just take his word for it!!!" 

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

Most education thread drift I've read in a long time.  See Jill & DeWreck are teaching people. Not exactly WHAT they would have taught others but it is more useful than anything either of them have done in recent memory.

[Scrabblemaster]

I learn definitely more on this thread right now than I ever learned about english history in my history AND english classes in school! Thanks to each one of you! 

 

[SweetJuly]

1 hour ago, FluffySnowball said:

One of the all time most popular movies in the German language are about a Habsburg Empress, Elisabeth. Although quite a lot of the plot is based on fiction, many aspects of the three “Sissi”-movies (which were made in the 1950s) are historically correct. 

But they were made 70 years ago. We need more now!!!

[freealljs]

Wasn't Derick substitute teaching at one point? He can do that to earn some money that way. It's honest, hard work.  It's not humiliating, like begging/grifting for money.

 

[SweetJuly]

2 minutes ago, freealljs said:

Wasn't Derick substitute teaching at one point? He can do that to earn some money that way. It's honest, hard work.  It's not humiliating, like begging/grifting for money.

 

He could, but does he want to?

Plus, he would be working for someone, and that is not considered good enough for a proper headship in fundie circles. Grifting and pretending to be a missionary/preacher is apparently more respected than providing for your family through honest, hard employed work.

[Feministe9000]

10 minutes ago, SweetJuly said:

He could, but does he want to?

Plus, he would be working for someone, and that is not considered good enough for a proper headship in fundie circles. Grifting and pretending to be a missionary/preacher is apparently more respected than providing for your family through honest, hard employed work.

Yeah it's really astounding to me.
The lack of self-awareness, being somehow seen as more "Godly" for begging and grifting, rather than a good honest paying job?

Nope. And again, this is one area where I can say the Bates husbands win 1000000x times over. Plus, Derick is too arrogant, he would have never worked for Jboob like Ben has, he isn't humble enough. No no, he had to go and do it DIFFERENT, drag them here there and everywhere, searching for his purpose.

I'm stopping myself there. I don't have the energy for another Derick rant.
But in the context of fundie husband world, he really isn't very good is he? He actually fucking sucks.