Miscalculation

It took me two days rather than one to get to the end of Richard III's reign - but what's one more day when this project has run a week over already? Actually, I'm not quite going to stop yet - though I've finished the 'learning' part of things for now - next stop is Miri Rubin's The Hollow Crown: A History of Britain in the late Middle Ages. Nothing like a bit of immediate consolidation...or it might be procrastination, but I'm not really sure what from, given that my dissertation's going to have its very own University Library Time next week! All this reading is highly relevant to the Medieval Lit Paper we'll be doing next term, but it feels like I'm indulging my fascination with hi-stories (or, in later periods, His-Tories) rather than Proper Books. Still, more than enough time for that, always.

What's got me gripped about this whole thing is the variation in reports of the period (say, mid-13th century till end of the 15th). There are inevitably big gaps in evidence, and so much of what we 'know' is formed by propaganda of the various factions - like the stories about Isabella (Edward II's queen), or Margaret of Anjou (Henry VI's queen), or Joan of Arc. It's not all about the women - Richard III is a weird and wonderful case in point there, and Henry V - but the woman are particularly interesting because they don't often speak for themselves. There are some letters - about which I know very little, and I've no idea how much they say - but the overwhelming majority of the Middle Ages is written by men. The same can be said for later periods, but far less so - from the 16th century aristocratic women start writing and existing (and sponsoring) much more, and though there are serious limitations those women have at least gained a kind of retrospective freedom: we can hear them. Some might have been respected by their contemporaries (Magdalene Herbert, for example - the poet George Herbert's mother, famous in her own right), but many were ignored or ridiculed or excluded (Margaret Cavendish might take some or all of those titles). The difference being that, however they were perceived at the time, their written words have given them a posterity and a chance at being re-evaluated by subsequent generations. The persons of Medieval women are much quieter, and much more dependent on their contemporary menfolk for their reputations. Never a good idea.

A pretty good book for a starting point is Mark Ormrod's The Kings and Queens of England. Each of the royal Houses constitutes a chapter, and each chapter is taken by a different academic. There is some pronoun confusion (is she the sister of him, or of him? Or the daughter of him?), which often happens when a writer knows far more about the subject than their reader. Ho hum - only a minor annoyance, and the gaps have been filled in from elsewhere. It's a densely written book, which is good for saving trees, but less good for a nice casual reading book - not a beach-read, unless you have an elephantine (or professorial) memory!