Neil Kemp said:

Hello, an item a little left field, but one I have often thought about: Does the manner of death sometimes alter our perception of a persons life, giving us an over romantic view and allowing misdemeanours in life to be forotten?

The Romanovs met an unnecessarilly violent end in Ekaterinburg in 1918, but does that give us a false romantic view of their dynasy, did they care, for example, about the average starving Russian peasant? Charles 1st is remembered for his dignity and calm at his execution, but his arrogance and faith in his “right” to rule was a large factor in thousands of lives being lost in a civil war, with Cromwell becoming the bad guy in the years that followed (His activities in Ireland didn't help but he gets a better press now). We remember the love affair of Mark Antony and Cleopatra, but do many know of what went before? In “downfall” the seemingly impossible task of making the last days in Hitler's bunker sympathetic are achieved, with the secretary's and Eva Braun, but are we to believe they didn't know what was going on?

I could go on, but you get the picture, do we allow a characters end (sometimes as shown in books or films) to influence our understanding of their lives, overshadow their wrongdoings and alter our perception accordingly?

In the comments on the AB files for the last episode of “The Tudors”, many said they cried and felt sorry for Henry, does his end therefore excuse his misdemeanours in life?

I'm sure many will be able to give examples to denigrate what I have written and I would say it is not true in a lot of cases, but in some I believe it is, it is just a thought for discussion and for members to consider. After all our view on history and the characters in it can change with the generations, I was taught in an era when Henry 8th was just a chap who had a lot of wives, ate a lot and was jolly! Now we seem to edge closer to tyrant rather than any other viewpoint.   

Sorry to have gone on for so long, but other member's views on the changing perception of history will be interesting and appreciated. Thank you.

  Their lives, more than their deaths interest me. Charles I's arrogance along with his belief in 'the divine right of kings' is what brought him to his death. He believed he had supreme power over everyone.  Yet, this was a family man who loved his wife and children.  In studying Charles, I wanted to learn more about his beliefs, his faults, his loves, and his death.  All this led me to Cromwell. (who I do consider a bad guy because of Ireland and his own little power trip)  And that history led me to my favorite king the “Merry Monarch” himself, Charles II. Same with Anthony and Cleopatra. I needed to learn their entire story.  As far as Eva Braun goes, I am not sympatheic to her or any of them who followed Hitler to hell. I believe we must know the history before an opinion can be formed.  Movies and fiction books are the entertainment.  They do, however, motivate people to find out more.

As to Henry, if I said I felt sorry for him in that death scene on The Tudor page, let me correct that.  I do not feel the least bit sorry for that man. He brought way too much pain to people for me to feel anything close to sympathy for him.  I did like the way the series dealt with his death, and if it brought a tear to my eye it was because I felt his life was such a wreck.

I think it is natural for us to want to know what kind of human beings these people were. When I read history, fiction, or even when I watch a movie I am always interested in knowing why a person did what they did.  What lead them to do what they did?  And in Henry's case, was he nuts?    I'm always looking for the reason.  It is a natural reaction, I think.

What a great topic!

I can totally say that it was Anne's death that got me interested in her life.  I visited the Tower of London for the first time when I was 10 and became completely obsessed with Anne (and Lady Jane too!) and yeah, in a way it was the nature of her death that at first coloured my vision of her.  I swear I thought of her as some kind of saint, based on nothing other than the fact she was beheaded!  Fortunately I've since come to learn that she was far more human, complex and interesting than that so that now the manner of her death is far less compelling than her life and what she achieved.  I do think that there's a danger of overly romanticizing some historical figures, especially if they died young; we over-simplify them and say how tragic it all is and tend to forgive them almost anything.  By looking at them through rose tinted glasses we take away all context and build them up to perhaps something completely unworthy.

I also agree with La Belle Creoles views on historical fiction, particularly for entertainment purposes.  The amount of times I've corrected someone after they watched 'The Tudors' and took it as historical fact!  I think there's a real danger of dressing up history like that, coupled with a lack of serious study of the past (here in New Zealand too  ) so that all we're left with is a seriously skewed view of what really happened.  We ignore the past at our own peril.

I definitely fall into the trap over over romanticizing an historical figure if their death is tragic. But I think for me, it is wanting to understand the why which inevitably ends up me wishing there was someway to go back and change events because there really was either no reason for them to die or to help alert them to the danger ahead.

The Romanovs are a great example. To this day, I really don't understand why they really needed to be killed. The revolutionists got what they wanted – the Tsars left the throne for the people to govern themselves. I mean I do understand that while the Tsar family lived, there was the possibility of one day the Royal Family getting back into office but after reading The Romanov Prophecy (a delightful fictional thriller) I really felt for the horrible way the family was executed. The totally taken by surprise taken.

Anne B and Katherine H get my sympathy cause they were either beheaded through lies or were too young to understand what they were truly doing and really if you could go back in time they are people that you could warn and tell them not to do that. Lady Jane I feel sorry for because from what I understand her death was due to other people's lust for power.

Of course their deaths does not mean I wash their hands of any misdemeanours or bad behaviour. But you've got to feel sorry for them, especially when you think if only they went through this today their lives would be spared. Most likely.

What first attracted me to Anne Boleyn's story was, how could a women who Henry moved heaven and earth for, end her life with the executioner's sword. The tragedy of her death made me want to learn more about her life and the circumstances surrounding her death. However, the tragedy of her life was not the staying factor for me. I found Anne to be a woman that I could relate to. She was someone who was intelligent, independent, and capable of holding her own.

I would say that the posterity of a tragic death holds fascination for people. I want to understand how, say the Romanovs, Marie Antoinette, Anne Boleyn, Jane Grey, Catherine Howard, etc. came to meet their ends. Since it was not from disease or war, I become more curious as to what events did these figures find themselves in which lead them to horrific deaths muddled in larger social, political and religious issues. The anthropologist in me is curious as to what this says about the culture of certain times, what contemporary society can learn, and how the “modern” world reflects the past.

Talking of Marie Antoinette ….. I was watching a film about her the other night and it sparked my interest in her life.  I dont know much about her or that time in history so im going to be doing a bit of reading on the internet about her.  But does anyone know of any good fact or fiction books they could recommend about her life and story?

On my drive home today, I had a thought about instances of figures from history where one I find tragic and want to know more about and the other one I view as they had it coming but still want to know more about.

The first is the princes in the tower, one of the greatest unsolved mysteries of English history, if not the world. Now that there is a tragic story due to the large amount of mystery and intrigue involved in their disappearance. I managed to find Alison Weir's book in a bookshop today so I look forward to learning about the history of this event.

The second is the death of Mary, Queen Of Scots. Yes there are elements of sadness in her execution but for some reason I don't feel sad for her because from my understanding she had plenty of opportunities not to go down the path that led to her execution. Maybe I will change my mind after reading Alison Weir's book on her and Antonia Fraser' biography – both of which I found in the same book store.

Guess you can tell why I was thinking about these two stories on the way home. And yay to me for buying my first historical books. Hopefully they are easy to read. I'll start with the Princes, it's the shortest.

 I find Mary's life to be one misstep after another. But you may feel differently after you read the books. I have read Frazer's book.  It is a novel, but it sticks to the historical facts.  Although as I was reading it I kept thinking, “Oh, Mary, don't do that, you'll be sorry.” 

 I can't say enough good things about Elizabeth & Mary, by Jane Dunn.  She develops both characters from childhood to adulthood. Mary's rather lush and lavish lifestyle in France, and Elizabeth's very precarious position in England as Henry's daughter, and as sister to Edward and Mary, are explained very well. You really get to see the two very different worlds these women came from.  Elizabeth's chances of living long enough to be queen was always in question; whereas Mary always assumed she was queen of some country or other.

I hope you enjoy your books.  Amazon is certainly doing well by me.