Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
1:19 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
We even felt it here in Ohio ! Never had one here 
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
1:31 pm
April 19, 2010
Offline
Well as you have quoted another great figure slain (metaphorically and literally) by history, Marie Antoinette, I suppose that it is the same process: an unpopular figure (made so in the eyes of the people by calumny spread by their enemies at the time) makes its way through the centuries as the figure of evil, the scapegoat, and parents tell it to their children, who in their turn do the same… Often adding a little bit pepper to the story… And of course, if some authors and some movies dont contradict it and make it worse, the vision is never going to change. Especially because a lot of people love to keep their baddies, some they can hate as much as possible.
9:02 am
February 10, 2010
Offline
Well said, Anyelka. I think you're right in both Anne's and Marie-Antoinette's cases in identifying them as scapegoats. If you blamed the woman then you didn't have to go so far as to blame the king.
Chapuys was, of course, very partisan. I quite admire him for his loyalty to Catherine even though that necessarily means he didn't think too much of Anne. Sander, of course, was really attacking Elizabeth and trying to persuade Catholics to overthrow her. One of Elizabeth's weak spots, as it was perceived at the time, was Anne. There are no such excuses for modern-day historians who should be far enough removed from events to be dispassionate. (And now I feel as if I should sign myself as 'aggrieved of Leicestershire'!)
