We are who we are because of DNA, inclination, environment, role models and education. Sure. But how all these elements could be set in place if not by the events that took place before us?
It is commonly said that a population that doesn't know his history is condemned to repeat his mistakes. Do we actually care about it or we don't bother and keep on going out with friends, drinking aperitives, following fashion, watching movies, if not Big Brother?
Since I moved to Australia I can assure you I noticed the difference of a lack of history and became even more attached to it.
I have recently read a book, the biography of Mary Stuart Queen of Scots, after my visit to Edimburgh last November 2010. I feel it is a compelling reading and would like to share it with you in several "episodes". Mary was a highly controversial character in European history (as we will see she will affect several countries' politics) and this is the most reliable report on her written by John Guy who consulted very old documents left forgotten for over 100 years. Here is the first episode.
Daughter of James V and Mary of Guise she was born in Linlithgow Castle 17 miles west of Edimburgh in one of the coldest of winters of recent years.
Mary was born at a turning point in history. Just 2 weeks before, James V's forces had been thrashed by the English at the battle of Solway Moss. To the Scots, England was the “auld enemy”. Relations between the 2 neighbours had smouldered since Edward I had claimed the feudal overlordship of Scotland and tried to annex the country in 1290s. The Scots sought French and papal support and fostered a hardy patriotism in defence of their country's independence. A score of English invasions after 1296 ushered in a period of hostility that lasted for 5 or more generations.
Border skermish was the norm, outright war was the exception, mainly due to the inequalities of the 2 countries: the main point is that England was more populated, so it was easier to raise taxation and levy troops. The politics of England was centralized with a very powerful king, whereas in Scotland the politics were tribal and the lords had a lot of power in conjunction with the king.
The wars within the British Isles resumed when Henry VIII acceded to the throne: he was very ambitious and aimed at conquering France, but first he realized he had to deal with Scotland, his “auld ally” because it was laying at his backdoor.
James V's battle defeat hit him as a deep psychological blow and due to possible several diseases he died at 30 and Mary was Queen at 6 days “old”. His death was to set in motion a complex chain of events in which political, religious, and factional manoeuvres relentlessy combined. England and France were competing to assert a hegemony over Scotland which became a pawn in the struggle between the 2 larger countries and their dynasties. The aim of every plot from then was either to secure Mary physically or to marry her into the English or French royal family: this because diplomatic alliances were sealed by marriage pacts in the sixteenth century.
Mary's mother, Mary of Guise, was politicaly astute. The Guise were a French family who had risen at the French court through shrewd marriages and military prowess; they were also highly infuential in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.
David Beaton was a powerful cardinal who led the pro-French faction in Scotland and actually MADE UP the testament of James V by saying he would be the regent until Mary would turn 18 (a fucking genius). His competitor, Earl of Arran, was weak and coward but defeated Beaton by gainining the support of the lords and sought Henry VIII approval for setting up a liason between England and Scotland. Ralph Sadler was Henry's ambassador to negotiate a treaty. In order to avoid to be set aside, Mary of Guise started negotiations with Sadler and pretended to play along by promising, with the treaty of Greenwich, to let Mary Queen of Scots marrying the English Prince Edward when she would turn 10. But she never intented to do so because she was French and wanted to keep strong the link with France and protect her own family interests. She moved her daughter to the Castle of Stirling, a fortress on the top of a hill, and there Mary was crowned at the age of 9 months with the crown, sceptre and sword of State, the Royal Jewels still displayed in Edimburgh Castle nowadays and used then for the first time alltogether. Henry VIII was highly disappointed and learnt the lesson of trusting the Scots ever again.
Mary of Guise had to handle 3 lords: Arran, Lennox and Bothwell who all strove to the regency of Scotland and so marrying her. She kept them hoping but offered “nothing but fair words”.
Henry was angry and decided to invade Scotland but only had 3 weeks because he had agreed with Spain to invade France and didn't want to be busy on 2 sides at the same time. Scotland was devastated by these attacks, but at least Mary was kept safe. Cardinal Beaton was then assassinated but contrary to Henry's happiness and belief, his death moved Scotland even more towards a pro-french attitude.
Suddenly Henry VIII (belonging to the Tudor and Stuart family) and Francis I (King of France) both died at the beginning of 1547 after having ruled 2 powerful countries for over 30 years. England (with Edward VI, 9 years old) pursued the willingness to restore the treaty of Greenwich, while France (new King Henry II) was manipulated by the Guise family and declared itself protector of Scotland and promoting the master-plan of a Franco-British empire. England attacked again and Scotland was thrashed again. At this stage Mary, aged 5 years old, was to be sent by ship to France to be raised there.
Hi everybody!
ReplyDeleteHistory is interesting, and one of my favourite subject at all, so I like your text and I found it interesting, but definitely it is not what I’m waiting for opening your blog.
This is not bad at all, on the contrary, the idea surprised me positively at first look.
However, after reading it, I am convinced that the summary of the life of Mary Queen may not have the same appeal for readers than the other kind of topics you usually post.
If you have read a book, and have enjoyed it, it could be an idea to promote it, giving a brief description of the story and, if you like, some (but few) facts the story tell, leaving the reader free to decide whether to read the rest of the book or not.
Moreover, it is difficult to summarize the history books, because they are already full of events.
I think that readers would be more interesting to read your comment on the book, or whatever you like, rather than the summary (even it could be involving, like in the case of Mary Queen).
Hi Epanimonda, thank you so much for your much appreciated comment. I think it definitely makes sense what you are writing. I would like to point out that your surprise related to the kind of topic is related to the very first article I wrote introducing and describing the blog that you must have missed. I know I know, many people believe it is just MY blog and it is JUST about Australia, but it is not. 4 guys are the co-founders, the problem is that only 2 have been writing so far. So the topics will be very varied. It's a good idea to write a review, but I really wanted to do something different, provide material to people interested in the subject to read in let's say, 9 or 10 pages instead of 400, spreading the same knowledge I acquired, because very unlikely people will go and buy the book. Very true that is difficult to summarize and that people would like to know what I liked, more opinion and less facts is definitely an option. I just wanted to differentiate myself and having a different purpose than sharing my opinion. So thank you very much, I will take your comment on board miss/mr Epanimonda (?)
ReplyDeleteLucaaaaaaa!!I think instead that it's accurate reconstruction of the life of Mary Queen of Scots (la nostra vekkia cara Maria Stuarda:).. nice and smooth without too much superstructure style, just like you are :).. leaves the stereotypical to other people .. I really like your sydney Blog!!Bravo good job.. I'll follow more closely..
ReplyDeleteSinceramente parlando....A Me "ME PIACE" (cura pure tu al traduzione per i tuoi english followers)...continua cosi', il tuo blog lo guardo spesso ;)
ReplyDeleteHi Luca,
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing on the web your interest for the biography of Mary Stuart Queen of Scots.
I just wonder why you reported only the story of Mary Stuart, that actually we can read in a written book our self, and you didn’t express your point of view and what you’ve taken from the story.
It would be nice to read your personal opinion of the book along with your comments about the events and maybe a correlation with nowadays, in order to give to this “old story” more charm and to keep on the post even the people not interested in the topic.
At the beginning of your article you said that: “I feel it is a compelling reading”, and so why?
I didn’t read in the article why the book was compelling to you and please don’t tell me I have to wait other 20 posts to figure it out because I will never get there... :)
By the way you are still "Miticissimo"!
Very interesting blog.. thanks to Aeolus! I always read it!! This article maybe is a little bit boring for people who are not interested in history (forgive me Luke!), I suggest writing of more recent events!! I hope to visit Australia soon.. go Australia go!
ReplyDeleteThank you all for your comments! Honesty and constructive comments are always welcome :-) Yes you must all come down under soon! ;-)
ReplyDelete