#james iv of scotland

[dailytudors]

TUDOR WEEK 2024

It is baaaaack by popular demand!. We are hosting Tudor Week 2024. This is going to be hosted from Monday the 14th of October to Sunday the 20th of October.

The week will go as follows:

Day 1 - Monday, 14th of October:  Your Favourite Tudor (members of the family that were born Tudors). Day 2 - Tuesday, 15th of October: Favourite Tudor contemporary quote about or said by the Tudor family. Day 3 - Wednesday, 16th of October: Best Tudor What If? Day 4 - Thursday, 17th of October: Fancast Your Favourite Tudor Family Member. Day 5 - Friday, 18th of October: Favourite Tudor Iconography (e.g. Tudor Rose, Anne Boleyn's falcon, Jane Seymour's Phoenix). Day 6 - Saturday, 19th of October: Favourite Tudor Couple (could include unmarried couples, e.g., Elizabeth I and Robert Dudley). Day 7 - Sunday, 20th of October: Favourite Tudor-related location.

This can cover all events and media that a Tudor family member is present, so from Owen Tudor to Elizabeth Tudor, and may include spouses and acknowledged children of direct members of the Tudor family (if unsure who we cover please check our Family page). We have attempted to make it as broad as possible and no pressure if you are late with some of the days, we will still reblog.

Previous Years: 2021, 2022, 2023

Be sure to tag your posts TudorWeek2024 and DailyTudors, looking forward to seeing your posts!

The Team at DailyTudors

[historicconfessions]

[scotianostra]

September 9th 1513 was a sad day for us Scots, we lost our King and thousands more fellow countryman at The Battle of Flodden.

The Battle of Flodden Field was undoubtedly the most famous confrontation between the English and Scots ever fought on English soil. It took place eight miles to the north west of Wooler near the village of Branxton, Northumberland.

The year before sought to renew the ‘auld alliance’ and assist the French by invading northern England, should England wage war on France, which they duly did.

Money and arms were sent to Scotland from France in the following months enabling King James to build up an army for a large scale invasion of England. On the 22nd of August a great Scottish army under King James IV crossed the border.

For the moment the earl of Surrey (who in King Henry ViII.’s absence was charged with the defence of the realm) had no organized force in the north of England, but James wasted much precious time among the border castles, and when Surrey appeared at Wooler, with an army equal in strength to his own.

Now I don't know how accurate this description is so don't shoot me, but it does have a feel of authenticity, it is from Robert White who describes the Scots army, in the Cambridge History of the Renaissance: “The principal leaders and men at arms were mounted on able horses; the Border prickers rode those of less size, but remarkably active. Those wore mail, chiefly of plate, from head to heel; that of the higher ranks being wrought and polished with great elegance, while the Borderers had armour of a very light description. All the others were on foot, and the burgesses of the towns wore what was called white armour, consisting of steel cap, gorget and mail brightly burnished, fitting gracefully to the body, and covering limbs and hands. The yeomen or peasantry had the sallat or iron cap, the hauberk or place jack, formed of thin flat pieces of iron quilted below leather or linen, which covered the legs and arms, and they had gloves likewise. The Highlanders were not so well defended by armour, though the chiefs were partly armed like their southern brethren, retaining, however, the eagle’s feather in the bonnet, and wearing, like their followers, the tartan and the belted plaid. Almost every soldier had a large shield or target for defence, and wore the white cross of Saint Andrew, either on his breast or some other prominent place. The offensive arms were the spear five yards in length, the long pike, the mace or mallet, two-handed and other swords, the dagger, the knife, the bow and sheaf of arrows; while the Danish axe, with a broad flat spike on the opposite side to the edge, was peculiar to the Islemen, and the studded targe to the Highlanders.”

The English commander promptly sent in a challenge to a pitched battle, at Millfield, an area of flat ground three miles north of Wooller, which the king, in spite of the advice of his most trusted counsellors, accepted.

On the 6th of September, however, he instead took up a strong position facing south, on Flodden Edge. Surrey was unhappy for the alleged breach of chivalry. This was at the end of the medieval period, I have pointed out before, battles, in the main, were fought to a code, breaches of which were rare,and so it was a second challenge to fight on Millfield Plain was sent. When Surrey’s herald arrived at the Scottish camp, James refused to meet him and instead sent word that he would not be dictated to by a ‘mere Earl’.

The English commander, at 70 years old was a veteran of many campaigns, then executed a daring and skilful march round the enemy’s flank, and on the 9th drew up for battle in rear of the hostile army.

It is evident that Surrey was confident of victory, for he placed his own army, not less than the enemy, in a position where defeat would involve utter ruin. On his appearance the Scots hastily changed front and took post on Branxton Hill’, facing north. The battle began around 4pm and Surrey’s archers and cannon soon gained the upper hand, the Scots, unable quietly to endure their losses, rushed to close quarters. Their left wing drove the English back, but their reserve corps restored the fight on the auld enemies side.

In all other parts of the field, save where James and Surrey were personally opposed, the English , gradually gained ground. The king’s corps was then attacked by Surrey in front, and by Sir Edward Stanley in flank. As the Scots were forced back, a part of the English reserve force closed upon the other flank, and finally charging in upon the rear of King James’s corps. Surrounded and attacked on all sides, this, the remnant of the invading army, was doomed. The circle of spearmen around the king grew less and less, and in the end James and a few of his nobles were alone left standing. Soon they too died, fighting to the last man.

Among the ten thousand Scottish dead were all the leading men in the kingdom of Scotland, and there was no family of importance that had not lost a member in this great disaster. The “King’s Stone,” said to mark the spot where James was killed, is at some distance from the actual battlefield.

Scottish dead included twelve earls, fifteen lords, many clan chiefs an archbishop and above all King James himself. It is said that every great family in Scotland mourned the loss of someone at the Battle Of Flodden. The dead were remembered in the famous Scottish pipe tune The Flooers o the Forest.

Here is a partial list of those that died, those that know even just a wee bit of our history, through my posts, will recognise the names, if not of the actual knights themselves, but the families that have played such a part in our history.

Sir George Seton, 3rd Lord Seton Sir John Hay, 2nd Lord Hay of Yester George Douglas, Master of Angus Sir David Kennedy, Lord Kennedy and 1st Earl of Cassilis Sir William Graham, 1st Earl of Montrose Sir John Stewart, 2nd Earl of Atholl Sir William Leslie, 3rd Earl of Rothes Sir Archibald Campbell, 2d Earl of Argyll Patrick Buchanan, 16th Chief of Clan Buchanan Sir Robert Erskine, 4th Lord Erskine Sir John Somerville of Cambusnethan John Murray, Laird of Blackbarony Robert Colville, Laird of Hiltoun Sir Matthew Stewart, 2nd Earl of Lennox.

Add to theT, most of their Eelder sons were slain, what is extraordinary though, that of this wee snapshot, none of the lines ended, so there must have been plenty more offspring in Scotland! Let's not forget the thousands of ordinary Scottish soldiers that died on the battlefield that day.

You can read a more detailed account here https://www.britishbattles.com/anglo.../battle-of-flodden/

[xxplastic-cubexx]

how do you accidentally convince someone you're scottish........

was putting on an accent with some friends and a gal overheard since i'd been talking a while and she was like 'omg ive been to scotland where are you from' and i told her my hometown and she was like 'no where are you From.....' like girl ......... jersey .......

[william-shakespeare-official]

Here's THE masterpost of free and full adaptations, by which I mean that it's a post made by the master.

Anthony and Cleopatra: here's the BBC version, here's a 2017 version.

As you like it: you'll find here an outdoor stage adaptation and here the BBC version. Here's Kenneth Brannagh's 2006 one.

Coriolanus: Here's a college play, here's the 1984 telefilm, here's the 2014 one with tom hiddleston. Here's the Ralph Fiennes 2011 one.

Cymbelline: Here's the 2014 one.

Hamlet: the 1948 Laurence Olivier one is here. The 1964 russian version is here and the 1964 american version is here. The 1964 Broadway production is here, the 1969 Williamson-Parfitt-Hopkins one is there, and the 1980 version is here. Here are part 1 and 2 of the 1990 BBC adaptation, the Kenneth Branagh 1996 Hamlet is here, the 2000 Ethan Hawke one is here. 2009 Tennant's here. And have the 2018 Almeida version here. On a sidenote, here's A Midwinter's Tale, about a man trying to make Hamlet. Andrew Scott's Hamlet is here.

Henry IV: part 1 and part 2 of the BBC 1989 version. And here's part 1 of a corwall school version.

Henry V: Laurence Olivier (who would have guessed) 1944 version. The 1989 Branagh version here. The BBC version is here.

Julius Caesar: here's the 1979 BBC adaptation, here the 1970 John Gielgud one. A theater Live from the late 2010's here.

King Lear: Laurence Olivier once again plays in here. And Gregory Kozintsev, who was I think in charge of the russian hamlet, has a king lear here. The 1975 BBC version is here. The Royal Shakespeare Compagny's 2008 version is here. The 1974 version with James Earl Jones is here. The 1953 Orson Wells one is here.

Macbeth: Here's the 1948 one, there the 1955 Joe McBeth. Here's the 1961 one with Sean Connery, and the 1966 BBC version is here. The 1969 radio one with Ian McKellen and Judi Dench is here, here's the 1971 by Roman Polanski, with spanish subtitles. The 1988 BBC one with portugese subtitles, and here the 2001 one). Here's Scotland, PA, the 2001 modern retelling. Rave Macbeth for anyone interested is here. And 2017 brings you this.

Measure for Measure: BBC version here. Hugo Weaving here.

The Merchant of Venice: here's a stage version, here's the 1980 movie, here the 1973 Lawrence Olivier movie, here's the 2004 movie with Al Pacino. The 2001 movie is here.

The Merry Wives of Windsor: the Royal Shakespeare Compagny gives you this movie.

A Midsummer Night's Dream: have this sponsored by the City of Columbia, and here the BBC version. Have the 1986 Duncan-Jennings version here. 2019 Live Theater version? Have it here!

Much Ado About Nothing: Here is the kenneth branagh version and here the Tennant and Tate 2011 version. Here's the 1984 version.

Othello: A Massachussets Performance here, the 2001 movie her is the Orson Wells movie with portuguese subtitles theree, and a fifteen minutes long lego adaptation here. THen if you want more good ole reliable you've got the BBC version here and there.

Richard II: here is the BBC version. If you want a more meta approach, here's the commentary for the Tennant version. 1997 one here.

Richard III: here's the 1955 one with Laurence Olivier. The 1995 one with Ian McKellen is no longer available at the previous link but I found it HERE.

Romeo and Juliet: here's the 1988 BBC version. Here's a stage production. 1954 brings you this. The french musical with english subtitles is here!

The Taming of the Shrew: the 1980 BBC version here and the 1988 one is here, sorry for the prior confusion. The 1929 version here, some Ontario stuff here, and here is the 1967 one with Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor. This one is the Shakespeare Retold modern retelling.

The Tempest: the 1979 one is here, the 2010 is here. Here is the 1988 one. Theater Live did a show of it in the late 2010's too.

Timon of Athens: here is the 1981 movie with Jonathan Pryce,

Troilus and Cressida can be found here

Titus Andronicus: the 1999 movie with Anthony Hopkins here

Twelfth night: here for the BBC, here for the 1970 version with Alec Guinness, Joan Plowright and Ralph Richardson.

Two Gentlemen of Verona: have the 2018 one here. The BBC version is here.

The Winter's Tale: the BBC version is here

Please do contribute if you find more. This is far from exhaustive.

(also look up the original post from time to time for more plays)

[snapheart1536]

Hi! I'm trying to read up on the York princesses' early lives and I can find frustratingly few details on the same. I was specifically curious about their various childhood betrothals that ultimately never came into fruition due to the death of their father, but I can barely find anything online beyond the bare basics (essentially: the names of the people they were betrothed to). I was wondering of any specific details of all their individual betrothals survived, and if they changed across the years of their father's reign?

And in Bridget of York's case - since she's more elusive to find than her sisters - was she destined for a church path since birth? I've seen some sites claim that her grandmother Cecily Neville named her with no actual evidence beyond her piety, but I always assumed it was her parents who was more likely to have done so? Both Elizabeth Woodville and Edward IV were connected to St. Bridget and Elizabeth was also very pious.

You know a lot about this era so I hope it's okay to ask, sorry if the question seems out of the blue!

Hello! Sorry for taking so long to reply, I had to sit down and look up some things because the story of the betrothal of Edward IV's daughters is quite murky. I will talk about the betrothals that were done during Edward IV's reign because after that it's another thing entirely.

Let's talk about Bridget first. Was she destined for a church path since birth? There's no way of actually knowing this, but it's entirely possible she was. On a practical level, as the king's fifth surviving daughter, a competitive dowry to be used in a foreign marriage alliance would be hard to achieve (more about Edward IV and dowries in a second). More concrete evidence though does come from her name. I haven't found many noblewomen named Bridget in late medieval England but the one I did find, Bridget Holland (daughter of Thomas Holland 2nd Earl of Kent, Richard II's half-brother), indeed became a nun. Like Bridget of York, she seems to have been the youngest of 5-6 sisters.

Saint Bridget of Sweden was a very popular saint in England and she was especially revered by the English royal family (who since Henry V's time were patrons of a Bridgettine monastery at Sheen, Syon Abbey). Elizabeth of York and Margaret Beaufort would go on to commission the printing of a list of prayers popularly thought to have been written by St Bridget. For the Yorkists, however, St Bridget held particular importance because one of her prophecies had been used to justify Edward IV's right to rule. Cecily Neville in particular owned a copy of St Bridget's revelations which she later bequeathed to her granddaughter Anne de la Pole who not only also became a nun, but rose to the highest rank of prioress at Syon.

Cecily Neville was Bridget of York's godmother. Traditionally, godparents were the ones to name ('christen') the child at their baptism. Of course, most time the parents had their input too before the child was brought to the baptismal font. Elizabeth Woodville was also devoted to St Bridget. Interestingly, Cecily left her religious books to the two granddaughters who became nuns: Anne de la Pole, which I commented on above, and Bridget. Bridget received Cecily's Legenda Aurea (a collection of saints' lives), a book about St Katherine and another one about St Matilde.

To me, it seems entirely possible that Cecily Neville might have planned Bridget's career as a nun from the very beginning. It's quite likely that Edward IV and his wife Elizabeth vouched for the idea too, considering how important St Bridget's prophecy had been for Edward's legitimisation as king, they might have made a promise/vow to dedicate one of their children's lives to the Church as many catholic people still do today. I've seen the speculation that Bridget was sickly/had some kind of impairment from birth that would make her less desirable in the marriage market but I don't think we need that as a reason for her going into a convent.

Now going into the other princesses. We already know about Elizabeth of York, right? First, she was betrothed to Warwick's nephew and heir, George Neville, as a way to appease him in 1469. Then she was offered to Prince Edward of Lancaster but Margaret of Anjou went on to choose Anne Neville which was probably for the best, as Edward IV's suggestion, at a time when Edward V was about to be born, was probably just a ruse. Elizabeth's hand was also used as bait to bring back Henry Tudor to England in 1476. And again, it most certainly was a ruse as by that time she had just recently been betrothed to the Dauphin of France. She would be known as Madame la Dauphine until France called off the betrothal in late 1482.

Mary of York occupied 'the rather unfortunate position' as Ross describes it, of being her sister's replacement in the marriage alliance with France in case Elizabeth of York died before the wedding took place. It would not be until 1481, by then a time when many doubted the French marriage would even go through, that Mary was betrothed to King Frederick I of Denmark. She would die the next year in 1482.

Anne of York was first suggested to marry Philip, the future Duke of Burgundy, in 1480 as a part of a tentative Anglo-Burgundian alliance against France that Burgundy desperately wanted but that Edward IV only toyed with to pressure France into honouring their marriage alliance and wed Elizabeth of York and the Dauphin Charles. In the words of Charles Ross, Edward IV's biographer:

Edward quite ruthlessly exploited the duke’s desperate need of English support to get Anne’s marriage on the cheap. Maximilian had wanted a dowry of 200,000 crowns with Anne; Edward, on the other hand, regarded paying no dowry as part of the price of signing an alliance with Burgundy. When Maximilian argued that it was quite unreasonable for the bride of one of the wealthiest heirs in Europe to have no dowry at all, he still had small success in persuading her father to release the purse-strings. The original marriage treaty, signed on 5 August 1480, was modified by supplementary agreements on 14 and 21 August, which effectively released Edward from paying any dowry on condition of releasing to the duke the first year’s instalment of the pension of 50,000 crowns which he was demanding from Burgundy.

Here we must remember that Edward IV wanted to marry Elizabeth of York without paying any dowry at all. On the contrary, France was to pay for Elizabeth's upkeeping until she was married to the Dauphin. Edward IV, whilst dealing with Brittany to marry his son Edward to Anne of Brittany, heiress to her father's duchy, established that if the Duke of Brittany had a son before their children married, one of his daughters was to marry the duke's new son, and that Brittany—not him—were to provide his daughter's dowry. Ross cites a Breton scholar that snarkily remarked that ‘to marry his daughters without dowries was the objective which this miser [Edward IV] set before himself in the last years of his life’. Harsh.

However, Edward IV did agree to pay Cecily's dowry! Although admittedly it was much cheaper (20,000 crowns) than Edward IV himself was asking for Anne of Brittany's hand in marriage to his son (100,000 crowns as the heiress of Brittany, 200,000 in case her father had a son). Cecily of York was first betrothed to James III's heir, the future James IV, in 1473 as part of a truce between England and Scotland that allowed Edward IV to go to war against France in 1475. The truce with Scotland fell through by 1480 and by 1481 Edward IV was committed to a war against James. The next year Edward was willing to back James III's brother Alexander against him, with the condition that Alexander was to marry Cecily ‘if the said Alexander can make hymself clere fro all other Women, according to the Lawes of Christian Chyrche’.

Alexander backed down after the English invasion of Scotland, and James III once again suggested Cecily marry his son and heir as part of the peace terms but Edward IV called off the betrothal for good later that year and demanded the repayment of the dowry portion he had already paid to Scotland. It seems Edward had decided to renew the war against Scotland by that time (November 1482) and back Alexander as king again. Amazingly, Alexander would go on to make peace with his brother yet again in early 1483. So by the time Edward IV died, Cecily's betrothal to Scotland's heir was cancelled for good. Richard III would wed her to Ralph Scrope, Baron Scrope's second son and a man that was part of Richard III's northern affinity.

I haven't found anything about Katherine of York's betrothal during her father's reign. She was probably too young, being born in 1479. EDIT: There was a plan for Katherine to marry Isabella of Castille's heir Juan as proposed in 1482. See reblog in the notes.

And that's it! Basically, Louis XI's peace treaty with Burgundy in December 1482 frustrated at least two of Edward IV's marriage plans. The Dauphin of France would marry Margaret of Austria (Mary of Burgundy's daughter) instead of Elizabeth of York. On the other hand, Burgundy, no longer in need of Edward IV's help, was under no obligation to go through with the marriage of Anne of York and the young Philip of Burgundy. Edward IV's falling out with Scotland also meant Cecily's betrothal was called out.

By the time Edward IV died the only betrothal that was likely to go through was Prince Edward's with Anne of Brittany, so whenever I see people saying that if it wasn't for Edward's death Elizabeth of York would be queen of France, Cecily queen of Scotland, Anne duchess of Burgundy etc I can only assume the person saying that doesn't know much about the upheavals of the 1480s — or Edward IV's own disinclination to pay dowries for the marriages of his daughters.

I hope this answer was of some help, and once again, sorry for taking so long to reply.

[isabelleneville]

KINGS & QUEENS REGNANT OF ENGLAND ACCORDING TO STARZ

Henry VI (1 September 1422 - 4 March 1461, 3 October 1470 - 11 April 1471 second reign) as portrayed by David Shelley in The White Queen Edward IV (4 March 1461 - 3 October 1470, 11 April 1471 - 9 April 1483 second reign) as portrayed by Max Irons in The White Queen Edward V (9 April 1483 - 25 June 1483) as portrayed by Sonny Ashbourne Serkis in The White Queen Richard III (26 June 1483 - 22 August 1485) as portrayed by Aneurin Barnard in The White Queen Henry VII ( 22 August 1485 - 21 April 1509) as portrayed by Jacob Collins-Levy in The White Princess Henry VIII (22 April 1509 - 28 January 1547) as portrayed by Ruairi O'Connor in The Spanish Princess Edward VI (28 January 1547 - 6 July 1553) as portrayed by Oliver Zetterstrom in Becoming Elizabeth Jane Grey (10 July 1553 - 19 July 1553) as portrayed by Bella Ramsey in Becoming Elizabeth Mary I (19 July 1553 - 17 November 1558) as portrayed by Romola Garai in Becoming Elizabeth Elizabeth I (17 November 1558 - 24 March 1603) as portrayed by Alicia Von Rittberg in Becoming Elizabeth James I and VI of Scotland (24 March 1603 - 27 March 1625) as portrayed by Tony Curran in Mary & George Charles I (27 March 1625 - 30 January 1649) as portrayed by Samuel Blenkin in Mary & George

[edmundtudor]

Below the cut I have made a list of each English and British monarch, the age of their mothers at their births, and which number pregnancy they were the result of. Particularly before the early modern era, the perception of Queens and childbearing is quite skewed, which prompted me to make this list. I started with William I as the Anglo-Saxon kings didn’t have enough information for this list.

House of Normandy

William I (b. c.1028)

Son of Herleva (b. c.1003)

First pregnancy.

Approx age 25 at birth.

William II (b. c.1057/60)

Son of Matilda of Flanders (b. c.1031)

Third pregnancy at minimum, although exact birth order is unclear.

Approx age 26/29 at birth.

Henry I (b. c.1068)

Son of Matilda of Flanders (b. c.1031)

Fourth pregnancy at minimum, more likely eighth or ninth, although exact birth order is unclear.

Approx age 37 at birth.

Matilda (b. 7 Feb 1102)

Daughter of Matilda of Scotland (b. c.1080)

First pregnancy, possibly second.

Approx age 22 at birth.

Stephen (b. c.1092/6)

Son of Adela of Normandy (b. c.1067)

Fifth pregnancy, although exact birth order is uncertain.

Approx age 25/29 at birth.

Henry II (b. 5 Mar 1133)

Son of Empress Matilda (b. 7 Feb 1102)

First pregnancy.

Age 31 at birth.

Richard I (b. 8 Sep 1157)

Son of Eleanor of Aquitaine (b. c.1122)

Sixth pregnancy.

Approx age 35 at birth.

John (b. 24 Dec 1166)

Son of Eleanor of Aquitaine (b. c.1122)

Tenth pregnancy.

Approx age 44 at birth.

House of Plantagenet

Henry III (b. 1 Oct 1207)

Son of Isabella of Angoulême (b. c.1186/88)

First pregnancy.

Approx age 19/21 at birth.

Edward I (b. 17 Jun 1239)

Son of Eleanor of Provence (b. c.1223)

First pregnancy.

Age approx 16 at birth.

Edward II (b. 25 Apr 1284)

Son of Eleanor of Castile (b. c.1241)

Sixteenth pregnancy.

Approx age 43 at birth.

Edward III (b. 13 Nov 1312)

Son of Isabella of France (b. c.1295)

First pregnancy.

Approx age 17 at birth.

Richard II (b. 6 Jan 1367)

Son of Joan of Kent (b. 29 Sep 1326/7)

Seventh pregnancy.

Approx age 39/40 at birth.

House of Lancaster

Henry IV (b. c.Apr 1367)

Son of Blanche of Lancaster (b. 25 Mar 1342)

Sixth pregnancy.

Approx age 25 at birth.

Henry V (b. 16 Sep 1386)

Son of Mary de Bohun (b. c.1369/70)

First pregnancy.

Approx age 16/17 at birth.

Henry VI (b. 6 Dec 1421)

Son of Catherine of Valois (b. 27 Oct 1401)

First pregnancy.

Age 20 at birth.

House of York

Edward IV (b. 28 Apr 1442)

Son of Cecily Neville (b. 3 May 1415)

Third pregnancy.

Age 26 at birth.

Edward V (b. 2 Nov 1470)

Son of Elizabeth Woodville (b. c.1437)

Sixth pregnancy.

Approx age 33 at birth.

Richard III (b. 2 Oct 1452)

Son of Cecily Neville (b. 3 May 1415)

Eleventh pregnancy.

Age 37 at birth.

House of Tudor

Henry VII (b. 28 Jan 1457)

Son of Margaret Beaufort (b. 31 May 1443)

First pregnancy.

Age 13 at birth.

Henry VIII (b. 28 Jun 1491)

Son of Elizabeth of York (b. 11 Feb 1466)

Third pregnancy.

Age 25 at birth.

Edward VI (b. 12 Oct 1537)

Son of Jane Seymour (b. c.1509)

First pregnancy.

Approx age 28 at birth.

Jane (b. c.1537)

Daughter of Frances Brandon (b. 16 Jul 1517)

Third pregnancy.

Approx age 20 at birth.

Mary I (b. 18 Feb 1516)

Daughter of Catherine of Aragon (b. 16 Dec 1485)

Fifth pregnancy.

Age 30 at birth.

Elizabeth I (b. 7 Sep 1533)

Daughter of Anne Boleyn (b. c.1501/7)

First pregnancy.

Approx age 26/32 at birth.

House of Stuart

James I (b. 19 Jun 1566)

Son of Mary I of Scotland (b. 8 Dec 1542)

First pregnancy.

Age 23 at birth.

Charles I (b. 19 Nov 1600)

Son of Anne of Denmark (b. 12 Dec 1574)

Fifth pregnancy.

Age 25 at birth.

Charles II (b. 29 May 1630)

Son of Henrietta Maria of France (b. 25 Nov 1609)

Second pregnancy.

Age 20 at birth.

James II (14 Oct 1633)

Son of Henrietta Maria of France (b. 25 Nov 1609)

Fourth pregnancy.

Age 23 at birth.

William III (b. 4 Nov 1650)

Son of Mary, Princess Royal (b. 4 Nov 1631)

Second pregnancy.

Age 19 at birth.

Mary II (b. 30 Apr 1662)

Daughter of Anne Hyde (b. 12 Mar 1637)

Second pregnancy.

Age 25 at birth.

Anne (b. 6 Feb 1665)

Daughter of Anne Hyde (b. 12 Mar 1637)

Fourth pregnancy.

Age 27 at birth.

House of Hanover

George I (b. 28 May 1660)

Son of Sophia of the Palatinate (b. 14 Oct 1630)

First pregnancy.

Age 30 at birth.

George II (b. 9 Nov 1683)

Son of Sophia Dorothea of Celle (b. 15 Sep 1666)

First pregnancy.

Age 17 at birth.

George III (b. 4 Jun 1738)

Son of Augusta of Saxe-Gotha (b. 30 Nov 1719)

Second pregnancy.

Age 18 at birth.

George IV (b. 12 Aug 1762)

Son of Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (b. 19 May 1744)

First pregnancy.

Age 18 at birth.

William IV (b. 21 Aug 1765)

Son of Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (b. 19 May 1744)

Third pregnancy.

Age 21 at birth.

Victoria (b. 24 May 1819)

Daughter of Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saafield (b. 17 Aug 1786)

Third pregnancy.

Age 32 at birth.

Edward VII (b. 9 Nov 1841)

Daughter of Victoria of the United Kingdom (b. 24 May 1819)

Second pregnancy.

Age 22 at birth.

House of Windsor

George V (b. 3 Jun 1865)

Son of Alexandra of Denmark (b. 1 Dec 1844)

Second pregnancy.

Age 20 at birth.

Edward VIII (b. 23 Jun 1894)

Son of Mary of Teck (b. 26 May 1867)

First pregnancy.

Age 27 at birth.

George VI (b. 14 Dec 1895)

Son of Mary of Teck (b. 26 May 1867)

Second pregnancy.

Age 28 at birth.

Elizabeth II (b. 21 Apr 1926)

Daughter of Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (b. 4 Aug 1900)

First pregnancy.

Age 25 at birth.

Charles III (b. 14 Nov 1948)

Son of Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom (b. 21 Apr 1926)

First pregnancy.

Age 22 at birth.

[the-jewel-catalogue]

Coronation Ring

Gold coronation ring mounted with a large, flat-cut ruby engraved with the cross of St George with foil behind, surrounded by 26 diamonds set in silver. The ring of polished gold with engraved scrollwork, with engraved shoulders and adjustable shank.

The provenance of this ring remains confused. In 1807, it was bequeathed to George IV, then Prince of Wales, by Cardinal Henry Stuart. At this date it was described in a letter, later transcribed by the Marquess of Abergavenny as 'a ruby ring surrounded by brilliants. On the ruby a cross is engraved. It was used on the coronation day of the Kings of Scotland'.

A second paper listed by Abergavenny apparently described the same ring and proclaimed that it may have been used by James I as well as James II. The ring was certainly used at the coronation of James II since it was clearly drawn among the illustrations of Sandford's publication and described as 'a plain Gold Ring, with a large Table Ruby Violet wherein a plain Cross or Cross of St George, was curiously Enchased'.

~ Royal Collection Trust

[areyougonnabe]

could you explain marie nelson to me... i know that he's tragic and also a misogynist and that's kind of all

well you've got the basics but let's get into the details [cracks knuckles]

edward william nelson was the shore party's biologist, counterpart of lillie who stayed on the ship. like lillie he had been educated at cambridge, however unlike lillie who barely scraped a degree in the end, nelson dropped out lol. he went to work at the plymouth marine biological association, which is where he was when he was hired by wilson (presumably via cambridge connections) for the expedition.

he wasn't as rich as cherry or oates but he came from a landed gentry background, his maternal grandfather was a major landowner in the shetlands in scotland and was, if you believe this random page on the internet, descended directly from King James V of scotland... and his dad was a big deal microscope guy.

anyway by the time nelson was on the expedition his initial nickname was "The Immaculate One" because he was (at first) always wearing a clean collar, and then at some point he became almost universally known as "Marie," short for "Marie Ducas" or "du Car" which nobody ever bothers to explain.

sometimes he was also known as "Antonio" or "Brontë" (that last being a reference to Lord Nelson) and griff often called him "Marie du Car Bronte Antonio Nelson" or another combination of multiple names.

silas wrote in his diary that he "had a taste for gin and bridge" and lots of people remarked on how he wouldn't get out of bed in a timely fashion and was always late to breakfast.

he was kind of seen as dissolute in general or a bit of a slacker. kathleen scott remarked at one point that he "spends all his time on shore being a man about town, which makes him look exceedingly tired" but really i think that was just how his face naturally looked.....

his job at Cape Evans was overseeing his Biological Hole (that's what he's doing in the pic up top) and identifying new antarctic species, taking temperatures, and measuring currents. he had a telephone wire run out to the little igloo he built on the sea ice, and often had company in the form of griff or cherry or whoever wanted to help him keep the ice open and unfrozen at the hole.

he did plenty of science, but that kind of fades into the background in the diaries because most people if they're talking about him at all are mainly giving a running commentary on how much he liked to argue.

his main axe to grind was women's rights... griff seemed to take great joy in calling him a "miserable, cynical reactionary" and goading him into arguments which sometimes descended into pitched physical battle.

from griff's diary, may 30 1911:

Marie Deb & I had a frightful cag in our boudoir about Women’s Suffrage. He is engaged & declares if his wife wanted to exercise her vote (even if she gets one) he will lock her up!

november 3 1911:

We have great cags at meals now. Simpson Deb & I are progressives & Liberals. Nelson is a thorough Reactionary Conservative especially re women & vote & education. However as he said he wished he were a woman (with £500 a year income) we guessed he was abnormal!

nelson probably did the least sledging out of anyone during the first year, not going on a single long-haul trip (even simpson went out on a short spring journey). he mostly just hung out at his igloo i guess? and got really into calculating navigation for fun. also apparently he was the best at chess in the whole hut.

he stayed on for the second year, and did go out sledging on the Search Journey:

there is some great stuff about his midnight poetry and weird moon obsession during the second winter in @worstjourney's very good post here.

i'll also add that it was pretty harsh on everyone else to have Maximum Marie Exposure with no tempering force of griff to allay it.

nelson did contribute heavily to the much-reduced and mildly pathetic Volume IV of the South Polar Times, which featured griff's offcuts from the prior year, deb's illustrations, and poems from nelson including a parody of walt whitman about billiards:

This is the song of billiards:- The tight stretched cloth of green, the serried arches, The cue - faking the cue, the protests from the players, The pyramid, the British Pluck, the Chinese fluke, The click of striking balls, the rattle in the ditch, the grin of joy.

most of the expedition scientists went home on steamers from NZ, but both nelson and lillie stayed on the terra nova as she took the long way round cape horn, in order to do more trawls and marine science.

nelson also took a job as second mate—it was definitely unusual for a scientists with zero navy/sailing experience (except the voyage down) to suddenly become an officer of the watch, but pennell trusted him, and seemingly that trust was not misplaced, as pennell wrote in his diary about how well he took to the job, and to atkinson about how he was by "far & away the most brainy person in the ship."

he got married to the woman he had been engaged to, violet thomas, after returning from the expedition. their only child, a daughter, was born in 1915, but by then he was serving in the royal naval division at gallipoli and then france. his war story is straight up wild and i recommend reading from ice floes to battlefields by anne strathie if you want aaalll the deets. but basically he saw a lot of action, served alongside rupert brooke (among other notables) and came out the other side relatively unharmed... physically.........

after the war he went back to the plymouth marine lab, and was supposed to be working on expedition results, but didn't do much of that.

in 1921 he left his family in plymouth to take a job in scotland working in a lab for the fishing industry, and in 1923 his wife successfully sued for "restitution of conjugal rights" which basically means the court ordered him to return to her....

but that did not end the way she wanted 🙃

shit was sad... he was found with poison injected directly into his leg.

i think there must have been a specific legal reason why the death was declared an accident—maybe something to do with receipt of military pension for the widow? but it obviously was very much on purpose. for whatever reason the thought of having to live with his wife again was so intolerable to him that death was preferable.

so thus ends the Ballad Of Marie Nelson.... here is what deb had to say about him and lillie in 1927, writing to JJ Kinsey:

You heard of Marie Nelson's tragic end no doubt, but I'm inclined to think it was as well. Poor old Lillie is in less happy circumstances, the last I heard of him was that he was never likely to get out of Bedlam, a rather ghastly end up to poor old "Ooze's" brilliant promise.

but much like lillie, nelson's end can't be blamed on his experience in the antarctic as it seems he was relatively content there. occam's razor dictates that A) he clearly had Problems before and B) wartime trauma made those problems worse.

the tragic sequel to this tragic story is the fact that his daughter, barbara, was 93 when she went on a cruise to antarctica to visit Cape Evans and see her father's laboratory... but she died of a fall while on the ship during a storm before they had even gotten there :(

[dailytudors]

Tudor Week 2023

To celebrate our belated three-year anniversary we are hosting Tudor Week 2023. This is going to be hosted from Monday the 31st of July to Sunday the 6th of August.

The week will go as follows:

Day 1 - Monday, 31st of July : Favourite Tudor Rivalry Day 2 - Tuesday, 1st of August : Favourite Female Tudor Family Member Day 3 - Wednesday, 2nd of August : Best Tudor Myth Day 4 - Thursday, 3rd of August : Favourite Male Tudor Family Member Day 5 - Friday, 4th of August : Most Used Tudor Related Resource Day 6 - Saturday, 5th of August : Favourite portrayal of a Tudor Family Member Day 7 - Sunday, 6th of August : Favourite Tudor Mentor and Mentee relationship (can be a Tudor familial relationship, or a Tudor and a courtier relationship)

This can cover all events and media that a Tudor family member is present, so from Owen Tudor to Elizabeth Tudor, and may include spouses and acknowledged children of direct members of the Tudor family (if unsure who we cover please check our Family page). We have attempted to make it as broad as possible and no pressure if you are late with some of the days, we will still reblog.

Previous Years: 2021, 2022

Be sure to tag your posts TudorWeek2023 and DailyTudors, looking forward to seeing your posts!

- The Team at DailyTudors

[english-history-trip]

James IV of Scotland, attributed to Meynart Wewyck, 1507

Dutch artist Meynart Wewyck was a prominent portrait painter at the court of Henry VII, creating some of the few surviving contemporary images of the king and his family, which were subsequently used as the templates for centuries of posthumous portraits.

Wewyck's portraits of Henry VII, Elizabeth of York, and Henry VIII

In 1502, Wewyck was sent to the court of James IV in Scotland with four portraits of the Tudor family: the king and queen, Prince Henry (later Henry VIII), and Princess Margaret, who had been married by proxy to James a few months earlier. While these paintings have not survived, 16th-century archivist Jacques Le Boucq included several portraits from the Scots inventory in his Receuil d'Arras, a collection of sketched copies of portraits from around Europe; Wewyck's may have been among them.

Le Boucq's sketches of portraits of Henry VII, Elizabeth of York*, and Margaret Tudor

*The Elizabeth of York sketch only survives as an imprint on the opposite page; I've approximated it based on the visible lines

Wewyck remained in Scotland for another year before returning to England in 1503, during which time he may have sketched James from life for this later portrait, or else leaving behind sketches to be completed by another artist.

An interesting detail about this portrait: at his wedding to Margaret, James was reported as wearing a gold chain with a ruby and an image of St. George, possibly the chain depicted here.

[scotianostra]

On 10th November, the year 1150 work began on the construction of Dryburgh Abbey in the Scottish Borders.

Standing on an elevated site formed by a loop of the River Tweed about five miles from Melrose, Dryburgh Abbey’s seclusion is part of its undoubted charms that have captivated many souls down the ages. There is little of the original Abbey church left, but the remains of the sacristy and cloisters have survived and the building is well looked after now as it is in the care of Historic Environment Scotland.

At the time of its foundation Scotland was ruled over by the man who many people consider to be Scotland’s greatest king, David I, son of Malcolm Canmore and St Margaret of Scotland. He both ordered and funded the construction of several abbeys and monasteries as part of his Davidian Revolution which transformed the face of Scotland, but Dryburgh was not one of them.

There had been some sort of clerical institution at Dryburgh as far back as the early seventh century as ancient writings show that St Modan, a follower of St Columba, was described as being the abbot of Dryburgh in 622. As with all Scottish history from the Dark Ages and early mediaeval period, almost all records as existed about buildings and personalities have long been lost, and there is no physical evidence of the older establishment whatsoever.

Though approved by King David, Dryburgh Abbey was the foundation of Hugh de Morville or Moreville, a Norman knight who came over from Cotentin to northern England after King Henry I gave that part of northern France to David. He was almost certainly one of the French knights who helped David retain most of southern Scotland on behalf of his brother King Alexander I, known as the Fierce.

David was both the Earl of Huntingdon and the Prince of the Cumbrians which took in the area formerly occupied by the Kings of Strathclyde. David gave de Morville lands in Huntingdon and Westmoreland, so it would make sense that Hugh de Morville came into Scotland and took possession of lands given to him by David. He was also made Constable of Scotland after his predecessor was killed in battle in 1138.

Being allowed to build his own abbey shows how much he was appreciated by David. De Morville took a personal interest in the construction and shrewdly did not make it either as large or as powerful as those abbeys founded by David such as Holyrood and Melrose. With its location by the Tweed and the obviously intricate stonework that still survives,

Dryburgh Abbey was outstandingly beautiful. It was built quite quickly after de Morville was able to attract Premonstratien canons regular – not monks confirmed to a monastery but an order of preachers and pastors.The White Canons, as they were known from their robes, arrived from Alnwick Abbey at Dryburgh in 1152, and were soon joined by a prominent local lord, none other than Hugh de Morville who became a canon and died in the Abbey in 1162. His son, also Hugh, inherited his father’s lands in northern England and became infamous as one of the four knights who assassinated St Thomas a Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1170.

Dryburgh Abbey seems to have thrived until the Wars of Independence when it was burned down by the English army on their humiliating retreat from their 1322 invasion of Scotland under Edward II, loser of Bannockburn. They burned Holyrood and Melrose, too, and an enraged Robert the Bruce was appalled at the actions of supposed Christians, so much so that he gathered an army and charged deep into England in what was known as the Great Raid of 1322, routing the English army at the Battle of Old Byland to further humiliate Edward II who barely escaped with his life.

In 1385, another English army burned Dryburgh again, destroying the western frontage of the Abbey church. This was rebuilt, however, but by the time of King James IV, there was no longer sufficient canons in the Abbey which was handed over to a commendator – an administrator of church buildings appointed by the monarch.

Dryburgh was sacked twice more by the English in 1544, and when the Reformation took place in 1560 there were just 10 canons left, and they were all gone within a few decades. The Abbey was allowed to become a ruin, and passed into the control of various people until it was acquired in 1786 by David Erskine, 11th Earl of Buchan, founder of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. He re-created the ruin, added monuments and generally made the Abbey beautiful again .

Buchan died in 1829 and was buried in the Abbey. At one time the ruin was owned by the Haliburton family and they retained the right of burial within its walls. That is why the graves and memorial stones of Sir Walter Scott and Field-Marshal Earl Haig, both descendants of the Haliburtons, are there along with various members of their family.

Historic Environment Scotland says this about Dryburgh Abbey: “While a greater part of the abbey church is now gone, what does remain – principally the two transepts and west front – is of great architectural interest. The cloister buildings, particularly the east range, are among the best preserved in Scotland. The chapter house is important as containing rare evidence for medieval painted decoration. The whole site, tree-clad and nestling in a loop of the River Tweed, is spectacularly beautiful and tranquil.”

Dryburgh Abbey has become a place of pilgrimage for lovers of Scott in particular, but deserves to be better known because of its history and sheer beauty.

[palecleverdoll]

Ages of English Queens at First Marriage

I have only included women whose birth dates and dates of marriage are known within at least 1-2 years, therefore, this is not a comprehensive list. For this reason, women such as Philippa of Hainault and Anne Boleyn have been omitted.

This list is composed of Queens of England when it was a sovereign state, prior to the Acts of Union in 1707. Using the youngest possible age for each woman, the average age at first marriage was 17.

Eadgifu (Edgiva/Ediva) of Kent, third and final wife of Edward the Elder: age 17 when she married in 919 CE

Ælfthryth (Alfrida/Elfrida), second wife of Edgar the Peaceful: age 19/20 when she married in 964/965 CE

Emma of Normandy, second wife of Æthelred the Unready: age 18 when she married in 1002 CE

Ælfgifu of Northampton, first wife of Cnut the Great: age 23/24 when she married in 1013/1014 CE

Edith of Wessex, wife of Edward the Confessor: age 20 when she married in 1045 CE

Matilda of Flanders, wife of William the Conqueror: age 20/21 when she married in 1031/1032 CE

Matilda of Scotland, first wife of Henry I: age 20 when she married in 1100 CE

Adeliza of Louvain, second wife of Henry I: age 18 when she married in 1121 CE

Matilda of Boulogne, wife of Stephen: age 20 when she married in 1125 CE

Empress Matilda, wife of Henry V, HRE, and later Geoffrey V of Anjou: age 12 when she married Henry in 1114 CE

Eleanor of Aquitaine, first wife of Louis VII of France and later Henry II of England: age 15 when she married Louis in 1137 CE

Isabella of Gloucester, first wife of John Lackland: age 15/16 when she married John in 1189 CE

Isabella of Angoulême, second wife of John Lackland: between the ages of 12-14 when she married John in 1200 CE

Eleanor of Provence, wife of Henry III: age 13 when she married Henry in 1236 CE

Eleanor of Castile, first wife of Edward I: age 13 when she married Edward in 1254 CE

Margaret of France, second wife of Edward I: age 20 when she married Edward in 1299 CE

Isabella of France, wife of Edward II: age 13 when she married Edward in 1308 CE

Anne of Bohemia, first wife of Richard II: age 16 when she married Richard in 1382 CE

Isabella of Valois, second wife of Richard II: age 6 when she married Richard in 1396 CE

Joanna of Navarre, wife of John IV of Brittany, second wife of Henry IV: age 18 when she married John in 1386 CE

Catherine of Valois, wife of Henry V: age 19 when she married Henry in 1420 CE

Margaret of Anjou, wife of Henry VI: age 15 when she married Henry in 1445 CE

Elizabeth Woodville, wife of Sir John Grey and later Edward IV: age 15 when she married John in 1452 CE

Anne Neville, wife of Edward of Lancaster and later Richard III: age 14 when she married Edward in 1470 CE

Elizabeth of York, wife of Henry VII: age 20 when she married Henry in 1486 CE

Catherine of Aragon, wife of Arthur Tudor and later Henry VIII: age 15 when she married Arthur in 1501 CE

Jane Seymour, third wife of Henry VIII: age 24 when she married Henry in 1536 CE

Anne of Cleves, fourth wife of Henry VIII: age 25 when she married Henry in 1540 CE

Catherine Howard, fifth wife of Henry VIII: age 17 when she married Henry in 1540 CE

Jane Grey, wife of Guildford Dudley: age 16/17 when she married Guildford in 1553 CE

Mary I, wife of Philip II of Spain: age 38 when she married Philip in 1554 CE

Anne of Denmark, wife of James VI & I: age 15 when she married James in 1589 CE

Henrietta Maria of France, wife of Charles I: age 16 when she married Charles in 1625 CE

Catherine of Braganza, wife of Charles II: age 24 when she married Charles in 1662 CE

Anne Hyde, first wife of James II & VII: age 23 when she married James in 1660 CE

Mary of Modena, second wife of James II & VII: age 15 when she married James in 1673 CE

Mary II of England, wife of William III: age 15 when she married William in 1677 CE

[world-of-wales]

⋆ William, The Conqueror to William, The Prince of Wales ⋆

⤜ The Prince of Wales is William I's 24th Great-Grandson via his paternal grandmother's line.

William I of England

Henry I of England

Empress Matilda

Henry II of England

John of England

Henry III of England

Edward I of England

Edward II of England

Edward III of England

Lionel of Antwerp, Ist Duke of Clarence

Philippa Plantagenet, Vth Countess of Ulster

Roger Mortimer, IVth Earl of March

Anne Mortimer

Richard Plantagenet, IIIrd Duke of York

Edward IV of England

Elizabeth of York

Margaret Tudor

James V of Scotland

Mary Stewart, Queen of Scotland

James I of England

Elizabeth Stuart, Queen of Bohemia

Sophia, Electress of Hanover

George I of Great Britain

George II of Great Britain

Frederick, Prince of Wales

George III of the United Kingdom

Prince Edward Augustus, Duke of Kent and Strathearn

Victoria of the United Kingdom

Edward VII of the United Kingdom

George V of the United Kingdom

George VI of the United Kingdom

Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom

Charles III of the United Kingdom

William, The Prince of Wales

[indelen]

This is my reread of the Lockwood and Co. Books, organized by @blue-boxes-magic-and-tea, I'll make a general summary of several chapters and then post bits and pieces that jumped out at me.

Part III Chapters 13-16:

I like all the worldbuilding in these chapters, which we get subtly as we get introduced to this alternative London and how it functions day to day with The Problem in the background. Little things like fashion for silver and lavender, no computers or any tech past about the 70s, the economy collapsing because work days were so severely reduced, etc. The other thing that’s shown is how many corporations are really making a lot of money from The Problem and that the only changes the government ever enacts are those that are going to be good business for them. There’s a small bit in Chapter 13 about how running water wards off ghosts but only small wealthy areas of London got runnels put it. The rest rely on iron, which is an expensive commodity you have to constantly maintain and purchase more of. Water is free if, in the interest of public good you put the necessary infrastructure in from the start, it pays dividends in the long run. Iron rusts and is harder to upkeep and maintain, but it’s more providable and so magically the government chose to go with the latter and not the former option even through ghost lamps are less effective. I honestly love that this sort of detail is in a book for kids and teens and I like that the author gives this sort of detail to the young audiences. Especially in this day and age I feel like they would appreciate it.

Odds and Ends Side A:

There is significance in Rotwell’s symbol being a lion and Fittes symbol being a unicorn, because those two symbols are also on either side of the quartered shield that makes up the United Kingdom’s coat of arms. In heraldry they are called “supporters”. Irl the lion is the symbol of England and unicorn is a symbol of Scotland and this symbolism was adopted when James IV of Scotland inherited the throne from Elizabeth I in the 16th century and became King James I. So symbolically this shows how the agency system and the personal rivalries of the agency heads ripped the country apart with no real winner. Fittes is bigger. Rothwell is more popular. Fittes has the reputation. Rothwell has the PR. No one really wins. Children continue to die serving both.

And it's so sinister how agencies develop a “brand” and rally the kids they recruit around it. Kids are of course very susceptible to this, children latch easily to tribal behavior, they love that sense of belonging that comes with being in a clique. This is a manipulation tactic. If you make the kids feel special, give them a cool jacket, a symbol, a membership, a sense of belonging to a group, they will Other anyone not part of that group. They become easier to manipulate when you have their membership to hold over them. You can use them to spy on one another, to ostracize those who break ranks. George saw this in Fittes - he didn’t fit in there because the glamour of the Fittes brand didn’t ensnare him, it just made his more curious. So, he was pushed out.

The famous “catch in the voice” that launched a thousand Quillica ships. I’m kind of split about this. Yes, it seems like there is something there - Kipps speaks with a bitterness that seems to transcend regular dislike. You could argue that Kipps really does think Lockwood is dangerous on top of just thinking he’s a shit but this bit always did seem to telegraph a personal side to the animosity that goes beyond simple rivalry. My issue is, if there was something, why was it never was mentioned in later books? Even in moments where it would be suitable for the narrative. I sometimes wonder if this was an orphaned bit of plot, considered but abandoned by the author for one reason or another. Authors decide to edit out plot points all the time and I do wonder if some tie between Kipps and Jessica was considered early on but passed on because it made things a little too complicated.

George casually interrupts here and redirects the ire of a bully onto himself to protect a friend. Really the whole trio can be pretty verbally vicious but book George is by far the most likely to have a go at someone. This is an interesting difference between George Cubbins of the books and George Karim of the show. Karim is a far gentler soul, Cubbins goes for the jugular every time.

It's interesting that the big conflict of the middle of season 1, the infamous “asset” spat that produced so much delicious angst, pining and yearning (not to mention Six of Crows parallels) – does not really exist in the books. Lucy is fine with being seen an asset to the agency. Proud of it even. She doesn’t care about publicity, but she doesn’t mind it either. Her biggest issues later on actually stem from thinking she's being replaced or not being seen as valuable team member. Because in the books it’s made plain that the kids’ minds are so warped by society to view having Talent and being an agent as the best and most valuable thing about themselves. To the point that they often don’t know what to do with themselves if they have any downtime. It’s why the existential crisis of living long enough to lose your Talent comes as such a brutal knock to many. I can see why they added the “asset” drama into the show, it’s one of those small but crucial themes that would have been hard to put on screen. It takes literal books for Lucy to start seeing herself as an individual, to start casually mentioning having hobbies or wishing he had time to pursue certain interests outside of being an agent. In fact, the most times she puffs up her chest and talk about how great and important it is that she is one is in this book. In the later books this bravado recedes. And without getting too into spoiler territory other characters grapple with this as well. It’s a faint throughline, but it’s there. In the show they made her backstory be a catalyst for her realization that agencies use kids and discard them and her issue with simply being considered one “asset” of many in the agency meatgrinder is more pronounced. And I think with making Quill younger and making him go thought the process of losing his Talent on screen and making him Northern (this bit was pointed out by @womaninwinter to me, credit where it’s due) was done intentionally to draw parallels with Lucy and have them share a bond in Season 2 (IF WE GOT ONE NETFILX WHEN I CATCH YOU-). This sort of thing works better on screen. And of course, provides delicious angst since Lockwood would have gotten immediately jealous of any bond Lucy develops with anyone other than him. Not needed in the books, but fun on screen where you can watch Cameron Chapman’s big sad doe eyes track Ruby Stokes around the room like a compass needle besotted with the magnetic north.

The clever and fun thing about bits like this is that on first read you think this is all to do with the immediate plot but it’s actually laying of the ground work and foreshadowing to future books and the appearance of my precious horny sewer rat baby Skull in a jar.

It's really subtle but all the adults who work as first responders, such those who responded to the Sheen Road fire or the cops in Scotland Yard, already have some kind of body armor. Only the kids don’t. Only agents and nightwatch kids don’t. You’re telling me someone couldn’t scale down chainmail and make a lighter version for the kids? Sew some iron or silver thread into those uniforms? Fittes and Rotwell have an enormous amount of resources and pull. And yet they do nothing. Not even a little investment in safety of literal children. It’s all just so grim the more you think about it.

An enormous imposing building of the mighty Scotland Yard mythologized in a million stories and seen in a million tv shows, full of adults carrying important papers and making important decisions, full of adults in body armor … all guarded by two kids with sticks. It’s so vividly pathetic.

Please turn the cassette over to side B (see reblog for more)