These episodes are being so heavily disrupted by ads that they are rapidly becoming almost unwatchable. I counted the number in this episode, and there shouldn’t be fifteen ad breaks in a 44 minute podcast.
I had heard of Isabella, but had not heard such a clear history so wonderfully told. I really enjoyed it. Thank you. I am not related to her, but I am directly descended from Edward I and Eleanor of Castille by their daughter Elizabeth. So, Edward the II was Elizabeth’s brother.
This is one of the better podcasts I've seen on the topic. It's very well done, balanced and you have a very composed manner which I really like. However, there are some issues in it that merit correction. 1) Isabella did not hate Edward II. There is plenty of evidence that she was very close with Edward II, even as he was simultaneously enamored with Gaveston. Initially she disliked Gaveston for his intrusions in their marriage, but he somehow won her over as well and eventually she got along rather well with Gaveston in spite of their little love triangle. Isabella and Edward understood eachother and certainly there was true mutual affection between them. The dynamics changed for the worse when the arrogant and ambitious Despenser came in between them and for the most part denied Isabella access to her husband. Isabella would hate Despenser with a passion for the rest of her life, but this hate did not extend to her husband. Even as Edward II was imprisoned at Berkeley Castle, she would write him affectionate letters, sending him gifts, food, small luxuries and asking about his health. This is noteworthy as she had no political reason for doing this, only love could explain this. She wanted to see him, but was denied these requests by the authoritarian Roger Mortimer, who had everything to lose if they would be reconciled. Isabella, more than anyone else, cared about Edward II. She knew him better than anyone and understood his vices and virtues and accepted him for who he was, with all his flaws. It's very sad that their relationship is so deeply misrepresented still today. 2) The Isabella-Mortimer relationship This was a practical arrangement, there was nothing romantic about it, and it certainly was not a love match. I don't see how it could have been, knowing Isabellas feelings for Edward. What's more, Mortimer had very obvious reasons for cultivating this alliance. Just like Despenser had with Edward. And just like Despenser, Mortimer copied all his mistakes which eventually cost him his life. The dynamics between Edward II/Despenser/Isabella were almost exactly the same as the dynamics between Isabella/Mortimer/Edward III. They played the same roles as ruler / favourite / ostracized. Note that Mortimer was a ruthless marsher lord, a natural commander. He wasn't the type to give up any of his power and certainly not to a woman. 3) Edward II was almost certainly not murdered. The chroniclers who recorded these events were no more informed about what really happened than the average man on the street. Many people who would have been very well informed about the true state of affairs were certain that he was alive well after he was rumoured to have died. There is some evidence that he was later att Corfe Castle, and from there moved on to Ireland and thence to the continent, finally ending up in a peaceful Italian convent. As crazy as this does sound it is the most likely scenario considering all the actual facts we are aware of. I won't get into it too deeply, but the Fieschi letter is of great significance, as is the fact the a man claiming to be the father of Edward III met with him in Koblenz, Germany years after. In those days, royal impersonators would regularly get executed, but this time... the man was allowed to live and was not persecuted in any way. He didn't even ask for anything, which is telling. Why, then, would Edward II not have tried to regain the throne, had he remained alive? Because of his personality. Kingship was forced upon him, and he had no interest in government. He enjoyed the company of lowborn people. He must have been painfully aware that his reign had been a disaster. He was pious and had always found the company of priests, prelates and monks very pleasant. In his teens, he faced criticism for staying much longer in their company than he would have needed to. He was always criticized for ignoring matters of state, always preferring to do hard work with his own hands. Now he was finally at peace, enjoying a blissful existence in a scenic Italian convent in a mountainous setting. He was among like minded people, an equal to them, allowed to fill his days with physical labour and piety, activities which had always given him joy. Why would he have wanted to return to the hellish existence he endured as a king? This is what I imagine he told his son in Germany, and was thus allowed by all to continue his peaceful existence. He was officially declared dead, but allowed to stay alive far away from England and its politics. It was a win-win situation for everyone. Sources: Books by Kathryn Warner and Ian Mortimer. Strongly recommend them!
your explanations of relationships, and ow they moved history are really helpful. it is unfortunate for Isabella, that she was blamed for the murder of her husband, even if it is very possible that she is innocent of this... that she lost the chance to wear the French crown, or at least get the crown for her child, as she is considered the rightful heir, as her father and three of her brothers were king. The nobility and clergy voted against her because they held her responsible, and even though they claimed that they were considering her gender, usually the real reasons are political rather than gender, as in the case of Mary and Elizabeth Tudor, who regardless of gender were chosen as successors by Parliament. After all, she did have a teenage son who would soon be ready but the french disliked roger mortimer and her relationship to him so much. If she had controlled that situation and remained the main power along with her child, she would have been viewed differently. Monarchs kinda have to put their love lives after their careers. Also, the french might have like her to be available in the future for an advantageous marriage, not with this ambitious Mortimer guy running the show. Other successful women , liked Margaret Beaufort mother of Henry VII, played it "closer to the chest" and protected their children first and had many marriages which she used to help her survive and to advance. She actually still managed to sound like a good wife, and her husbands were instrumental to her success, the last hubby helped win Henry s battles against Richard III, by kinda not showing up to support Richard
I yhink isabela faced the same problem as Diana...the third person of the marige...however that days thay killed the lover ...in our days thety killed the Princes.... and the lover became the queen...
last week at the time this was published May 2020 is the beginning of lockdowns etc. that may be why you have a sudden spike in listeners, which is one small good thing that people are learning about history
that is one of the issues with the relationship of those two men, the king and his pet... they both behaved badly to others and did not do their respective jobs well, which is almost worse than a gay relationship ... it's all a show, and they did not put on the right show...the king does not even need to work, he can appoint trusty advisors who are competent and well liked to run the country, and just stay discreet, and everyone would be just fine with it. after all, Richard II hardly spent time in England at all, and didn't even make much effort to produce an heir, and did let other people run England, and he was one of the most well beloved hero kings... so much so that he was supposedly not all that worried when his brother John rebelled against him, Richard was so loved.
These episodes are being so heavily disrupted by ads that they are rapidly becoming almost unwatchable. I counted the number in this episode, and there shouldn’t be fifteen ad breaks in a 44 minute podcast.
Same with me. It's actually very interesting, but with an ad almost every 3 minutes it's not very enjoyable, sadly.
Jan fastBrownbear Yeah, a really interesting episode otherwise, I just hate seeing it chopped to pieces like this.
watch on desktop computer ( not on the phone) and get a RUclips Ad blocker.
@@TheWildAlexa brave browser on ios comes with an adblock too.
I found that the paid version of RUclips is SO worth the money, at least for me! I was going crazy from the ads as well.
I had heard of Isabella, but had not heard such a clear history so wonderfully told. I really enjoyed it. Thank you. I am not related to her, but I am directly descended from Edward I and Eleanor of Castille by their daughter Elizabeth. So, Edward the II was Elizabeth’s brother.
This is one of the better podcasts I've seen on the topic. It's very well done, balanced and you have a very composed manner which I really like. However, there are some issues in it that merit correction.
1) Isabella did not hate Edward II.
There is plenty of evidence that she was very close with Edward II, even as he was simultaneously enamored with Gaveston. Initially she disliked Gaveston for his intrusions in their marriage, but he somehow won her over as well and eventually she got along rather well with Gaveston in spite of their little love triangle. Isabella and Edward understood eachother and certainly there was true mutual affection between them. The dynamics changed for the worse when the arrogant and ambitious Despenser came in between them and for the most part denied Isabella access to her husband. Isabella would hate Despenser with a passion for the rest of her life, but this hate did not extend to her husband. Even as Edward II was imprisoned at Berkeley Castle, she would write him affectionate letters, sending him gifts, food, small luxuries and asking about his health. This is noteworthy as she had no political reason for doing this, only love could explain this. She wanted to see him, but was denied these requests by the authoritarian Roger Mortimer, who had everything to lose if they would be reconciled.
Isabella, more than anyone else, cared about Edward II.
She knew him better than anyone and understood his vices and virtues and accepted him for who he was, with all his flaws. It's very sad that their relationship is so deeply misrepresented still today.
2) The Isabella-Mortimer relationship
This was a practical arrangement, there was nothing romantic about it, and it certainly was not a love match. I don't see how it could have been, knowing Isabellas feelings for Edward. What's more, Mortimer had very obvious reasons for cultivating this alliance. Just like Despenser had with Edward. And just like Despenser, Mortimer copied all his mistakes which eventually cost him his life. The dynamics between Edward II/Despenser/Isabella were almost exactly the same as the dynamics between Isabella/Mortimer/Edward III. They played the same roles as ruler / favourite / ostracized.
Note that Mortimer was a ruthless marsher lord, a natural commander. He wasn't the type to give up any of his power and certainly not to a woman.
3) Edward II was almost certainly not murdered.
The chroniclers who recorded these events were no more informed about what really happened than the average man on the street.
Many people who would have been very well informed about the true state of affairs were certain that he was alive well after he was rumoured to have died. There is some evidence that he was later att Corfe Castle, and from there moved on to Ireland and thence to the continent, finally ending up in a peaceful Italian convent. As crazy as this does sound it is the most likely scenario considering all the actual facts we are aware of. I won't get into it too deeply, but the Fieschi letter is of great significance, as is the fact the a man claiming to be the father of Edward III met with him in Koblenz, Germany years after. In those days, royal impersonators would regularly get executed, but this time... the man was allowed to live and was not persecuted in any way. He didn't even ask for anything, which is telling.
Why, then, would Edward II not have tried to regain the throne, had he remained alive?
Because of his personality. Kingship was forced upon him, and he had no interest in government. He enjoyed the company of lowborn people. He must have been painfully aware that his reign had been a disaster. He was pious and had always found the company of priests, prelates and monks very pleasant. In his teens, he faced criticism for staying much longer in their company than he would have needed to. He was always criticized for ignoring matters of state, always preferring to do hard work with his own hands.
Now he was finally at peace, enjoying a blissful existence in a scenic Italian convent in a mountainous setting. He was among like minded people, an equal to them, allowed to fill his days with physical labour and piety, activities which had always given him joy. Why would he have wanted to return to the hellish existence he endured as a king?
This is what I imagine he told his son in Germany, and was thus allowed by all to continue his peaceful existence. He was officially declared dead, but allowed to stay alive far away from England and its politics. It was a win-win situation for everyone.
Sources: Books by Kathryn Warner and Ian Mortimer. Strongly recommend them!
Wow! Need more on Isabella! Too cool.. thanks!
your explanations of relationships, and ow they moved history are really helpful. it is unfortunate for Isabella, that she was blamed for the murder of her husband, even if it is very possible that she is innocent of this... that she lost the chance to wear the French crown, or at least get the crown for her child, as she is considered the rightful heir, as her father and three of her brothers were king. The nobility and clergy voted against her because they held her responsible, and even though they claimed that they were considering her gender, usually the real reasons are political rather than gender, as in the case of Mary and Elizabeth Tudor, who regardless of gender were chosen as successors by Parliament. After all, she did have a teenage son who would soon be ready but the french disliked roger mortimer and her relationship to him so much. If she had controlled that situation and remained the main power along with her child, she would have been viewed differently. Monarchs kinda have to put their love lives after their careers. Also, the french might have like her to be available in the future for an advantageous marriage, not with this ambitious Mortimer guy running the show.
Other successful women , liked Margaret Beaufort mother of Henry VII, played it "closer to the chest" and protected their children first and had many marriages which she used to help her survive and to advance. She actually still managed to sound like a good wife, and her husbands were instrumental to her success, the last hubby helped win Henry s battles against Richard III, by kinda not showing up to support Richard
fantastic information, spread and share it for her folks, truth is hard to find in this day and age
My ancestor❤
Isabella was so cool....
Girl, I love a good rant!
Read Katheryn warner
I want a dark purple shirt with vertical cream-colored stripes, a can of shaving cream and a pair of black shoestrings.
I yhink isabela faced the same problem as Diana...the third person of the marige...however that days thay killed the lover ...in our days thety killed the Princes.... and the lover became the queen...
last week at the time this was published May 2020
is the beginning of lockdowns etc.
that may be why you have a sudden spike in listeners,
which is one small good thing that people are learning about history
♥️
Interesting. Thank you!
In italiano
Eat of the people, and bite the foreign tongue and reed from cut off the vine.
that is one of the issues with the relationship of those two men, the king and his pet... they both behaved badly to others and did not do their respective jobs well, which is almost worse than a gay relationship ... it's all a show, and they did not put on the right show...the king does not even need to work, he can appoint trusty advisors who are competent and well liked to run the country, and just stay discreet, and everyone would be just fine with it. after all, Richard II hardly spent time in England at all, and didn't even make much effort to produce an heir, and did let other people run England, and he was one of the most well beloved hero kings... so much so that he was supposedly not all that worried when his brother John rebelled against him, Richard was so loved.
I doubt you have any idea how homophobic your commentary sounded. I quit less than 10 minutes in and am sorry I spent THAT time with you.