#in the immortal words of Henry Kramer

[trash-shrike]

You asked for requests and idk if you want to do more Acotar, but like... how about fae Tamlin to compare with your beast Tamlin? 👀

Throwing some recent doodles here :^) I'm still figuring out his whole design but this is roughly how I picture him.

Sorry his tits are out... he's busy herding his 10000 sheep and it gets hot

[minervacasterly]

Tudors, the Masters of Propaganda: When the Pen is Mightier than the Sword

The biggest winners of royal history because as far as European dynasties go are the Tudors. Let’s face it. There’s been no dynasty or group more successful in rewriting and shaping the modern world as the Tudor clan. “The story of our past is open to interpretation. Much of British history is edited and a deceitful account of events … The sooner you do a little digging, you discover it is a tapestry of different stories, woven together by whoever is in power at the time.” (Lucy Worsley in “British History’s Biggest Figs) ^This! How we see history is in accordance to our politics. Her first episode focuses on deconstructing the wars of the roses, presenting the facts and the different accounts that have come up of the men and women involved in this conflict, leaving the viewer to decide what might have likely happened. In regards to the Princes, in other pages I administer, some have said that it would be good to have the bodies that were found in the Tower of London examined to find once and for all who ordered their deaths. But assuming that the crown allows for DNA testing, allowing the world to finally know if they are the Princes in the Tower or not, supposing they are, it wouldn’t provide us with an answer. Like with Richard III, science would tell us how they died -and offer us an accurate description (based on facial reconstruction) on how they looked- but it wouldn’t tell us who kill them. Unless we were to discover a letter of Richard, Margaret Beaufort or any other suspect, declaring their guilt, the Princes in the Tower will remain one of history’s greatest cold cases. What is undeniable though is that the Tudors were crafty in making the people believe that they were chosen by God to rule over England. There were prophecies by the Welsh, made up ancestry, and of course a wedding that was promoted as the union between Lancaster and York that would put an end to the war and bring forth a dynasty that would last forever. “The line between fact and fiction often gets blurred.”  (Lucy Worsley in “British History’s Biggest Figs) It’s true. Often fiction becomes the new history. Most of the times, it is because we have great storytellers who give us a simpler version that isn’t too complicated or convoluted, that it is easier for us to accept. The wars of a roses a turbulent period but it wasn’t chaotic. People were tired of civil war, and it might be one of the reasons why they were ready, after Henry VII put many rebellions down, to accept their new overlords. Not only that but fast-forward to the sixteenth century when religious tensions were at an all-time high, when there was divisions among Catholics and even Protestants, the Tudors were more desperate than ever to solidify their power. Henry VIII needed a son to secure a dynasty that many abroad still questioned its legitimacy, while also a tool to make themselves immortal. Henry VIII wasn’t a fan of Protestantism but he liked the idea of Kings being above reproach, subject to no judgment but God’s. Kings were no longer half-divine, in Henry’s mind, English Kings were now completely divine. What their conscience wanted is what God wanted. Going against the King was no longer treason but a sin as well. When Edward VI succeeded his father, his coronation pageant included many religious symbolism, primarily figures of the Old Testament like Josiah and Moses. These powerful visuals were meant to tell the people that their new King was God’s messenger on Earth and that he would turn England into an Evangelical nation. Then there is Mary I. Mary was seen as the great Catholic hope and to some extent she was but she soon proved that she her father’s daughter. And like her father she was determined to be the sole sovereign of her nation. She engaged in theatrics as her mother had done, playing the part of the dutiful wife to her Spanish husband, Prince Philip, King of Naples and Sicily, begging him not to leave, writing to him constantly about how much she needed him. But once he was with her, she proved that she was more like her Tudor ancestors than their Spanish ones. Mary was also compared to religious figures. These matronly figures helped her justify her reign before her subjects who weren’t used to the idea of female monarchy. When her friend, cousin and Archbishop of Canterbury, Reginald Pole, advised her to return Church lands to the Church, she pretended not to listen. Those lands had benefited many powerful subjects she didn’t wish to antagonize, not to mention that some of those lands were now in possession of the crown. Would Mary really give them all up after all the revenue they had provided her family? The answer is obviously ‘no’. When she confronted the rebels that were led by Wyatt, she inspected the troops as a King would, and gave a rousing speech, where she said that she was a mother protecting her children from harm, and that she would be ruled by her people rather than by her needs. Mary ended up pardoning many of the rebels but had no mercy for most of their leaders. At the end of her reign despite her efforts to cleanse the Catholic Church in England of corruption and restore a Humanist curriculum in the universities, as well as re-funding some of them; Mary suffered from Protestant propaganda and her own failure which was not giving the kingdom an heir to continue the Tudor line and her religious ambitions. As soon as Elizabeth I got her sister’s reign, she quoted one of the psalms where she said that “this is the Lord’s doing” and “it is marvelous in our eyes”. Curiously, it is recorded that when she said this, she was next to a royal oak, similar to what her ancestress, Elizabeth Woodville, when she reputedly encountered the Yorkinst King for the first time. As always, another Tudor monarch who employed great rhetoric, and used biblical and classical symbols to justify her reign. As she got older, she continued to dress extravagantly. While many people expected her to marry, she chose to remain a Virgin. Nobody knows the full extent of her relationship with her male favorites but given how strict she was with her ladies, it is safe to say that her religiosity wouldn’t have allowed her to be intimate with them. While supporting many Protestant groups overseas, she was quick to dismiss them when they preached about a Republican government. Elizabeth didn’t like this because that meant that the King was no longer close to God, but another public servant who was under strict scrutiny by his people. In various paintings, one can see Elizabeth being led to victory by classical goddesses, being given the sacred fruit. She is their chosen one, the one who will vanquish all of England’s enemies and is closer to God than anyone else. Using her single status, she became a substitute for the Virgin Mary. One whose virtue was no longer mocked but praised. But, in spite of this, Elizabeth I was also a pragmatist and as previously stated, when she found that some of her councilors were leaning towards more radical branches of Protestantism, she confronted them and fought them hard using her best tool: her words. Turning them against one another, and foiling their plans to institute Evangelical measures. When she died, she was hailed as one of the greatest. This is largely due to nostalgia. James VI of Scotland succeeded her becoming James I of England. He and his wife, Queen Anne were jointly crowned on Westminster Abbey. Despite James’ efforts to be a good ruler, people grew disappointed of him and soon began to look towards the past, transforming it into a place of beauty and mysticism. Despite some writers looking down on Catholic Margaret Beaufort and her son Henry VII, and his granddaughter Mary I, they made figures like Henry VIII and Elizabeth I into national icons. Henry VIII’s split from Rome and Elizabeth I’s defeat of the Armada became legend. What they wrote endured for centuries. Some will argue that it endures today, with many people still buying into the myths that these figures wrote about their reigns, proving that nothing is more powerful than propaganda. The pen is truly mightier than the sword. Recommended reading: Tudor by Leanda de Lisle; Wars of the Roses: Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors by Dan Jones; Armada by Garrett Mattingly, Elizabeth I: The Struggle for the Throne by David Starkey, Henry VII by SB Chrimes, Plantagenet Chronicles by Derek Wilson; Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen & The Queen’s Bed: An Intimate History of Elizabeth’s Court by Anna Whitelock; Blood Sisters & Game of Queens by Sarah Gristwood; The Myth of Bloody Mary & Tudors vs Stewarts by Linda Porter; Inside the Tudor Court by Lauren Mackay; The Anne Boleyn Collection by Claire Ridgway; In Bed With the Tudors & Elizabeth of York & The Six Wives and the Many Mistresses of Henry VIII by Amy Licence; Blood will tell by Kyra Cornelius Kramer; Margaret Beaufort by Elizabeth Norton; The King’s Mother by Elizabeth Norton; 1536: The Year that changed Henry VIII by Suzannah Lipscomb; Private Lives of the Tudors by Tracy Borman; The Woodvilles by Susan Higginbotham; The Wives of Henry VIII & Mary, Queen of Scots by Antonia Fraser.In terms of documentary, there is the source quoted which comes from the first episode of the new documentary series “British History Biggest’ Fibs” presented by Lucy Worsley.I also recommend her six wives documentary which is currently being shown on PBS every Sunday on the US; Suzannah Lipscomb and Dan Jones’ documentary on the six wives and David Starkey’s documentary on them as well. They also have other documentaries that also focus on the wars of the roses and the Tudor era. Bits and pieces of some of these can be found on YouTube, while others you have to buy or watch if you have subscription on Netflix or Hulu.

[minervacasterly]

In his documentary on Henry VIII, historian David Starkey said that Elizabeth of York was a big influence on her youngest son, and this can be seen through their signatures. Certainly, the two were close. It is well documented that after Henry found out about his mother's death and then his baby sister's, he became almost inconsolable. A state his father visibly showed when he was told of Arthur's death and it was up to Elizabeth to remind them that they were still young and could still have more offspring.

In her biographies on the six wives and mistresses of Henry VIII and his mother, historian Amy Licence, writes that Elizabeth of York became a big role model for her son, and the one figure he sought all his wives to take after.

“Henry’s handwriting has always been a bit of a mystery. The ‘Y’s with that little back loop. The ‘R’s look much like ‘z’ in modern handwriting and the ‘H’s are quite unlike the handwriting of Henry’s known teachers. On the other hand, it is rather like this.’ David Starkey motions to show a book listing other primary sources that contains a letter written by none other than Henry’s mother, Elizabeth of York. ‘And this is one of the very few surviving specimens of the handwriting of Henry’s mother. ‘This book is mine. Elizabeth, the King’s daughter.’ It says. It is only eight words and thirty-nine letters. And yet it is characteristic enough in weight, rhythm and letter forms to prove conclusive (I think) that Elizabeth herself was the first teacher of her daughters and her second son, Henry. It’s a charming picture, Henry the little prince and a loving family.” He described this as unusual “for sixteenth century monarchs.” And it certainly is but I think that has to do with the simple fact that he was the second son, the “spare”. Given that Arthur was destined to be King and going to receive a top-notch education, Elizabeth of York probably felt her other children, including Henry, could be more carefree. It must have felt terrible for the young boy when he lost his mother and his father (with good reason) became paranoid. Henry VII felt he had to protect him at all cost and until his father died, there was little indication of what Henry wanted. What Henry VII said, his son did. When he became King, he realized the enormous power that he had and how quickly he could win the people over by showing them that he was the opposite of his father. Like his mother, he was amicable, surrounding himself with people of low and high stature. And like his maternal grandfather, he was eager to be loved.

Elizabeth of York was as handsome as her father, the noted womanizer and first King of the House of York in England, Edward IV, and beautiful as her mother, Elizabeth Woodville. It was a killer combination, but as she got older, she became plumper -something that her second son, Henry VIII also inherited. Henry VIII was eager to be loved, to become immortal and towards the end of his reign, due to his swollen leg and other (possible factors*) he became extremely overweight, paranoid and referred to as a victim of his vices. This is another striking similarity as it was Mancini who referred to Edward IV in the same manner. *It has been suggested by historian Kyra Cornelius Kramer in her book "Blood Will Tell" that Henry VIII might have suffered from Kell Positive Blood disease which, combined with other factors due to his lifestyle and stress, could have attributed to his more violent mood swings later in life. I also recommend In Bed With the Tudors, Elizabeth of York and the Six Wives and the Many Mistresses of Henry VIII by Amy Licence that goes deep into the relationship of Henry and his mother. Images: Elizabeth of York holding the white rose symbolizing the House of York and Henry VIII in his last years.

Sources: 1. Six Wives and the Many Mistresses of Henry VIII by Amy Licence 2. Elizabeth of York by Amy Licence 3. Documentary: Henry VIII the Mind of a Tyrant presented by David Starkey

[minervacasterly]

#Tudor Tuesdays! Tudors, the Masters of Propaganda: When the Pen is Mightier than the Sword “The story of our past is open to interpretation. Much of British history is edited and a deceitful account of events … The sooner you do a little digging, you discover it is a tapestry of different stories, woven together by whoever is in power at the time.” ^This! How we see history is in accordance to our politics. Her first episode focuses on deconstructing the wars of the roses, presenting the facts and the different accounts that have come up of the men and women involved in this conflict, leaving the viewer to decide what might have likely happened. In regards to the Princes, in other pages I administer, some have said that it would be good to have the bodies that were found in the Tower of London examined to find once and for all who ordered their deaths. But assuming that the crown allows for DNA testing, allowing the world to finally know if they are the Princes in the Tower or not, supposing they are, it wouldn’t provide us with an answer. Like with Richard III, science would tell us how they died -and offer us an accurate description (based on facial reconstruction) on how they looked- but it wouldn’t tell us who kill them. Unless we were to discover a letter of Richard, Margaret Beaufort or any other suspect, declaring their guilt, the Princes in the Tower will remain one of history’s greatest cold cases. What is undeniable though is that the Tudors were crafty in making the people believe that they were chosen by God to rule over England. There were prophecies by the Welsh, made up ancestry, and of course a wedding that was promoted as the union between Lancaster and York that would put an end to the war and bring forth a dynasty that would last forever. “The line between fact and fiction often gets blurred.” It’s true. Often fiction becomes the new history. Most of the times, it is because we have great storytellers who give us a simpler version that isn't too complicated or convoluted, that it is easier for us to accept. The wars of a roses a turbulent period but it wasn’t chaotic. People were tired of civil war, and it might be one of the reasons why they were ready, after Henry VII put many rebellions down, to accept their new overlords. Not only that but fast-forward to the sixteenth century when religious tensions were at an all-time high, when there was divisions among Catholics and even Protestants, the Tudors were more desperate than ever to solidify their power. Henry VIII needed a son to secure a dynasty that many abroad still questioned its legitimacy, while also a tool to make themselves immortal. Henry VIII wasn't a fan of Protestantism but he liked the idea of Kings being above reproach, subject to no judgment but God's. Kings were no longer half-divine, in Henry's mind, English Kings were now completely divine. What their conscience wanted is what God wanted. Going against the King was no longer treason but a sin as well. When Edward VI succeeded his father, his coronation pageant included many religious symbolism, primarily figures of the Old Testament like Josiah and Moses. These powerful visuals were meant to tell the people that their new King was God's messenger on Earth and that he would turn England into an Evangelical nation. Then there is Mary I. Mary was seen as the great Catholic hope and to some extent she was but she soon proved that she her father's daughter. And like her father she was determined to be the sole sovereign of her nation. She engaged in theatrics as her mother had done, playing the part of the dutiful wife to her Spanish husband, Prince Philip, King of Naples and Sicily, begging him not to leave, writing to him constantly about how much she needed him. But once he was with her, she proved that she was more like her Tudor ancestors than their Spanish ones. Mary was also compared to religious figures. These matronly figures helped her justify her reign before her subjects who weren't used to the idea of female monarchy. When her friend, cousin and Archbishop of Canterbury, Reginald Pole, advised her to return Church lands to the Church, she pretended not to listen. Those lands had benefited many powerful subjects she didn't wish to antagonize, not to mention that some of those lands were now in possession of the crown. Would Mary really give them all up after all the revenue they had provided her family? The answer is obviously 'no'. When she confronted the rebels that were led by Wyatt, she inspected the troops as a King would, and gave a rousing speech, where she said that she was a mother protecting her children from harm, and that she would be ruled by her people rather than by her needs. Mary ended up pardoning many of the rebels but had no mercy for most of their leaders. At the end of her reign despite her efforts to cleanse the Catholic Church in England of corruption and restore a Humanist curriculum in the universities, as well as re-funding some of them; Mary suffered from Protestant propaganda and her own failure which was not giving the kingdom an heir to continue the Tudor line and her religious ambitions. As soon as Elizabeth I got her sister's reign, she quoted one of the psalms where she said that "this is the Lord's doing" and "it is marvelous in our eyes". Curiously, it is recorded that when she said this, she was next to a royal oak, similar to what her ancestress, Elizabeth Woodville, when she reputedly encountered the Yorkinst King for the first time. As always, another Tudor monarch who employed great rhetoric, and used biblical and classical symbols to justify her reign. As she got older, she continued to dress extravagantly. While many people expected her to marry, she chose to remain a Virgin. Nobody knows the full extent of her relationship with her male favorites but given how strict she was with her ladies, it is safe to say that her religiosity wouldn't have allowed her to be intimate with them. While supporting many Protestant groups overseas, she was quick to dismiss them when they preached about a Republican government. Elizabeth didn't like this because that meant that the King was no longer close to God, but another public servant who was under strict scrutiny by his people. In various paintings, one can see Elizabeth being led to victory by classical goddesses, being given the sacred fruit. She is their chosen one, the one who will vanquish all of England's enemies and is closer to God than anyone else. Using her single status, she became a substitute for the Virgin Mary. One whose virtue was no longer mocked but praised. But, in spite of this, Elizabeth I was also a pragmatist and as previously stated, when she found that some of her councilors were leaning towards more radical branches of Protestantism, she confronted them and fought them hard using her best tool: her words. Turning them against one another, and foiling their plans to institute Evangelical measures. When she died, she was hailed as one of the greatest. This is largely due to nostalgia. James VI of Scotland succeeded her becoming James I of England. He and his wife, Queen Anne were jointly crowned on Westminster Abbey. Despite James' efforts to be a good ruler, people grew disappointed of him and soon began to look towards the past, transforming it into a place of beauty and mysticism. Despite some writers looking down on Catholic Margaret Beaufort and her son Henry VII, and his granddaughter Mary I, they made figures like Henry VIII and Elizabeth I into national icons. Henry VIII's split from Rome and Elizabeth I's defeat of the Armada became legend. What they wrote endured for centuries. Some will argue that it endures today, with many people still buying into the myths that these figures wrote about their reigns, proving that nothing is more powerful than propaganda. The pen is truly mightier than the sword. Recommended reading: Tudor by Leanda de Lisle; Wars of the Roses: Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors by Dan Jones; Armada by Garrett Mattingly, Elizabeth I: The Struggle for the Throne by David Starkey, Henry VII by SB Chrimes, Plantagenet Chronicles by Derek Wilson; Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen & The Queen's Bed: An Intimate History of Elizabeth's Court by Anna Whitelock; Blood Sisters & Game of Queens by Sarah Gristwood; The Myth of Bloody Mary & Tudors vs Stewarts by Linda Porter; Inside the Tudor Court by Lauren Mackay; The Anne Boleyn Collection by Claire Ridgway; In Bed With the Tudors & Elizabeth of York & The Six Wives and the Many Mistresses of Henry VIII by Amy Licence; Blood will tell by Kyra Cornelius Kramer; Margaret Beaufort by Elizabeth Norton; The King's Mother by Elizabeth Norton; 1536: The Year that changed Henry VIII by Suzannah Lipscomb; Private Lives of the Tudors by Tracy Borman; The Woodvilles by Susan Higginbotham; The Wives of Henry VIII & Mary, Queen of Scots by Antonia Fraser. In terms of documentary, there is the source quoted which comes from the first episode of the new documentary series "British History Biggest Fibs" presented by Lucy Worsley. I also recommend her six wives documentary which is currently being shown on PBS every Sunday on the US; Suzannah Lipscomb and Dan Jones' documentary on the six wives and David Starkey's documentary on them as well. They also have other documentaries that also focus on the wars of the roses and the Tudor era. Bits and pieces of some of these can be found on YouTube, while others you have to buy or watch if you have subscription on Netflix or Hulu.