Death had a very busy day

February 10th was the date of death of two dukes, a king, one of those treacherous Stanleys, and the worst king-consort ever. Only two of them—maybe two and a half—were worth mourning.
On February 10, 1126, William, the ninth Duke of Aquitaine, also known as the first troubadour duke, died after a long and eventful life. He had a keen sense of humor so he may have been amused that today he is mainly remembered as the grandfather of our Eleanor. But he also had a healthy ego, so maybe not. I would have grieved for him—unless I was one of his wives!
On February 10, 1134, Robert, the Duke of Normandy died after being held prisoner by his not-so-loving younger brother, Henry I, for twenty-eight years. Robert seems to have been a feckless sort, certainly no match for the ruthlessness of Brother Henry, but he probably didn’t deserve nearly three decades of captivity.
On February 10, 1163, Baldwin III, King of Jerusalem, died. He was only in his 33rd year and by all accounts was a very good king, an adroit politician, and a courageous battle commander. He also seems to have been a genuine good guy, charming, affable, and handsome. His death dramatically changed the history of the Holy Land, for he’d not yet had children with his beautiful bride, the seventeen year old Byzantine princess, Theodora, and so the crown passed to his younger brother Amalric, the Count of Jaffa. Amalric had none of Baldwin’s charisma, taciturn and introverted. He proved to be a capable king, though, but he, too, died prematurely, leaving a thirteen year old son as his heir, the boy who would tragically become known to history as the Leper king. Had Baldwin not died so young or had Amalric lived long enough for his queen, also a Byzantine princess, to give him another son, the kingdom’s doomed march to Armageddon might not have happened. There is no doubt that Saladin is one of history’s more fascinating figures, a brilliant politician, but his great victory at Hattin was based in part upon the disunity among his Christian foes, just as the first crusaders took advantage of Saracen discord to carve out the kingdom of Outremer eighty-some years earlier. Baldwin III does not appear as a character in my new novel, being dead by the time the book opens, but Amalric makes a few appearances before dying of dysentery and his son is a major character, of course. Had I lived then, I would definitely have mourned Baldwin.
On February 10, 1495, William, Lord Stanley, was executed by Henry Tudor, accused of treason, irony at its best. Party time!
Lastly, on February 10, 1567, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, was messily murdered, a death that was richly deserved. One of my favorite scenes from the wonderful film, Mary, Queen of Scots, had Elizabeth (the incomparable Glenda Jackson) and Cecil practically falling on the floor laughing upon learning that Mary had been foolish enough to take the bait and marry Darnley.
10 likes ·   •  6 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on February 10, 2014 06:56
Comments Showing 1-6 of 6 (6 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Gin (new)

Gin Tadvick Thanks for the reference to the Glenda Jackson movie - you know I LOVE this movie and I love this scene. I do have to feel sorry for Mary QOS - she was after all, lacking in a strong Scots father figure and sent to live at the French court. And what a French court!!!
Loved your comment about Duke William - don't forget his mistresses!


message 2: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Hill Lord Stanley, in my opinion would have been on better of executed a lot earlier! If I had been king or queen during that time, I would have pushed for his execution, as well as that of Margaret Beaufort for treason. Sigh.. prob a good thing I wasn't there back then!


message 3: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Hill that by the way is my very honest opinion. England would have been much better off without those two!


message 4: by RJay (new)

RJay Rebecca wrote: "Lord Stanley, in my opinion would have been on better of executed a lot earlier! If I had been king or queen during that time, I would have pushed for his execution, as well as that of Margaret Bea..."

If Richard had been half the evil king history has portrayed him, Margaret Beaufort would have lost her head!


message 5: by Sharon (new)

Sharon Very true, Rosemary! Had he been more ruthless, he might not have died at Bosworth


message 6: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Hill I agree with that. Unfortunately he was building his power base but he could have done much better by executing those he could do without and reappropriating their lands to those who were loyal


back to top

Sharon Kay Penman's Blog

Sharon Kay Penman
Sharon Kay Penman isn't a Goodreads Author (yet), but they do have a blog, so here are some recent posts imported from their feed.
Follow Sharon Kay Penman's blog with rss.