tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post7745277371984182633..comments2024-02-02T06:07:56.982+00:00Comments on LIVING THE HISTORY: ELEANOR OF AQUITAINE'S BIRTH YEAR. (and why it matters to me the writer).Elizabeth Chadwickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16911841862257909703noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-42952638610237390872012-01-05T21:09:51.528+00:002012-01-05T21:09:51.528+00:00Indeed Don, I agree, but it's so annoying when...Indeed Don, I agree, but it's so annoying when some of the documentation by experts that I come across is so obviously sloppy and wrong. They should do their homework better!Elizabeth Chadwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16911841862257909703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-29772643790999865512012-01-04T17:58:21.295+00:002012-01-04T17:58:21.295+00:00It's extremely difficult to "know" w...It's extremely difficult to "know" what is correct when many records were either lost or not kept. I know from doing extensive research for "The Shakespeares and the Crown" that there is much disagreement between "experts" depending on what source material they used, and especially what inferences they make from what information they gather. For example, it's pretty well accepted that Elizabeth I was born on September 7, 1533, but there is extreme controversy over the birthdate of her long-time friend and perhaps lover, Robert Dudley (by as much as a year), and that was at a time when christening dates of peers were rigorously noted! While it may indeed be extremely relevant to a writer regarding the actions and personality of a character, I think that historically such details are still mostly matters of conjecture. A researcher can only do her best to verify any given piece of information, document it as well as possible, then leave it up to those who come afterwards and find better documentation to correct any mistakes that might have been made.Don Makerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03068400437460662849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-38861004232343798992012-01-03T14:57:32.661+00:002012-01-03T14:57:32.661+00:00Thank you so much for this-(I've always taken...Thank you so much for this-(I've always taken all of Weir's books with a grain of salt)- and for the names of such august researchers.<br />I'll have to look for their work. I'm having difficulty trying to pin down who was the Warden--or Castellan-- of York castle during the time of the York Massacre. There's plenty of names, Malebestia the leader of the mob, John Marshall the Sheriff, but I can't seem to find a positive identity on the Warden. <br /> I'm working on a YA novel about the massacre, and I sooo wanted to put Eleanor there, so my Main Character could meet her, if only briefly, but I know she'd already left for Chinon by that time, March 1190.<br />Thank you again for such terrific info and have a wonderful Happy New Year!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-55381067490874581152012-01-01T17:12:31.425+00:002012-01-01T17:12:31.425+00:00Yeah, I have the same problem with Arminius' d...Yeah, I have the same problem with Arminius' death. Our friend Tacitus manages to chose such an obscure phrase that it can have been either 19 AD (the year Germanicus died) or 21 AD, and the moment a writer wants to present the death onstage, you'll have to pick one date and give a reason for it, too. <br /><br />Happy New Year to you.Gabriele Campbellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17205770868139083575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-29855293517879899302011-12-31T18:04:54.724+00:002011-12-31T18:04:54.724+00:00This is a classic example of the sort of detail th...This is a classic example of the sort of detail that may not matter very much to a historical account (and in any case historians can always say honestly 'this is uncertain, the possibilities are X, Y and Z, and the evidence for each is as follows....'), but is critical for a novelist because it will shape the story.<br /><br />Happy New Year!Carlahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11901028520813891575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-66585513958676339262011-12-31T15:31:56.213+00:002011-12-31T15:31:56.213+00:00Helen, thanks for your comment. Yes absolutely re...Helen, thanks for your comment. Yes absolutely re Eleanor and Emma. With Eleanor she gets cast in this powerful, dominant, feminist role and it is so not true. <br />The Akashics - yes, they are very clear indeed that she was only a girl - and that she entered into an abusive marriage and at the time had very little power in the scheme of things.Elizabeth Chadwickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16911841862257909703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24348391.post-74610066301495404282011-12-31T15:05:01.262+00:002011-12-31T15:05:01.262+00:00I don't know much about the historical evidenc...I don't know much about the historical evidence - even less the documented sources mainly because, as this is not my period, I have never looked (there's only so much my brain can take in & my own period is quite enough to struggle with #laugh) What I "learn" is from well written fiction - in this instance, primarily Sharon Penman and yourself Elizabeth, as I feel I can trust both of you to be honest regarding what is accurate and what is fiction.<br />However, for myself I have never thought Eleanore was anything but 13 when she married - for exactly the same reason as I am certain Emma of Normandy was 13 when she was married to Aethelred of England in 1002. And for the same reason as you state Elizabeth - at 15 both girls would have been more confident and self-assured. At 13 they were still on the edge of their self confidence. <br />That and a "gut feeling" of course!<br />Out of interest, have you picked up anything about her age via the Akashic Records?<br /><br />Thanks for this article - one to definitely be put on the bookmark list!Helen Hollickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04292983846350273039noreply@blogger.com