Tudor Historian Joanne Paul Breaks Down Tudor Films & TV Shows

[@shadowthoughts7959]

I like this historian’s attitude better than most. So many just get angry, but HER attitude is more cheery and playful with the issues.

[@Weirdkauz]

I understand the anger, though. I habe been researching into Caroline Weldon, a political activist of the 19th century, who was dismissed by her temporaries as a nutter bc she thought the American Indians should not only be kept alive, but left alone, to practise and choose their own culture. Even though, the powers that be slowly came around to her view during the next century, Weldon was almost completely forgotten by history. Only to emerge as a perversely warped and silly version of a damsel in distress in "Woman walking Ahead", a film that made me experience true hatred... because of the real damage done to the cause of equality amongst all sexes (and, by the way, races) such a portrayal does. It's really a betrayal, and done by a female director as well. That said: I really love this historians attitude, and think it does much more to help lighten the dark recesses of history than anger can. Wish I could be like her!

[@Mark-nh7zg]

Uhhh, none of them get angry. And you do know the experts are instructed to be as technical and critical as they can, right? They're not like this in normal conversations

[@ladyethyme]

She’s representing Penguin books so…..yeah.

[@antmagor]

I would describe it as a very puritanical attitude. Sometimes it’s warranted (I.e. Rein) sometimes it’s like come on, we give Shakespeare a pass for embellishing but we don’t let modern-day folks do it. Also some of the historians disregard the fact that some of these films are Adapted from historical fiction novels. And as is the way with Hollywood they don’t stay true to the source material. Anyway the whole point of historical fiction is the F word, fiction. It’s not supposed to be a minute by minute account. It’s supposed to be a dramatization of what might have happened explored through the arts rather than through the historical record. And in my opinion it helps inspire people to actually do research and see what the films got wrong. Which is important because you want people to have an imagination and enthusiasm when learning about history, because it makes the subject stimulating.

[@BlainEnoch]

And much more INFORMATIVE and EDUCATIONAL. All these stuck ups who get angry might have a very good reason, but they seem to think that anger itself is sufficient as a pedagogical tool. It isn't. She takes the time to calmly lay out absolute facts, estimated facts, slight variations that have some historical backing, and complete nonsensical blunders. She also mentions the sources and logic to what she finds more or less reasonable. This is how you teach, folks.

[@rosesbellydancers]

“Political murder” best way to describe Anne’s death

[@wenthulk8439]

Indeed

[@velouris76]

To be honest, a better term would be “gross miscarriage of justice”, but that kind of thing didn’t exist under Henry VIII…

[@Trebor74]

Henry needed a son. The country needed a prince,or risk descending into the chaos of civil war. The wars of the roses were not that long ago and featured some of the bloodiest battles on English soil

[@L-mo]

Diana's too.

[@sashaflip7450]

I think Henry got bored of her and was ready to move on

[@0308frank]

23:16 "So everbody in this room ends up executed. It's a bad room to be in." This historian is hilarious. Very witty and entertaining without taking herself too seriously. I'd like to hear her comments on some older Tudor movies like "Young Bess" and "Anne of the thousand days".

[@dancekeb1308]

Her comment is WRONG. Mary Boleyn wasn't executed. She was banished from court for marrying without permission, and died in her early forties.

[@amandac9894]

Exactly, I absolutely love Anne of the Thousand Days so her take on that movie should be very good.

[@501Blonde-dq1ui]

Yes, agree with all of this!

[@victoriaandrzejewska7296]

just stumbled across this and Joanne was one of my lecturers at university, she was great lol

[@theesweetie23ca91]

Did she do a fake accent at school too?

[@segamai]

So I’m not going crazy! Her American accent sounds like a put-on, but I don’t know why she’d need to do that, especially as someone who gives lectures about *British* history

[@ninaschust3694]

I can imagine. She knows her facts and she is funny. Great qualities in a teacher.

[@alyssarh]

Why are people accusing her of doing a fake accent? She's literally just talking. It doesn't sound like she's putting on an accent or pretending in how she speaks

[@mormshaw]

@@theesweetie23ca91 she’s Canadian. I went to school with her.

[@andreaweber8059]

"The other Boleyn girl" may be really inaccurate, but it did make me understand the difference in rank and power between Anna Boleyn and Catherine of Aragon as no more accurate movie ever did. You really see Anne as an upstart who relies almost solely on the favour of the king (which makes for a catastrophic outcome for her once he is displeased with her) while at the same time Catherine is depicted as long-time royalty in her own right, someone who lived all the rules and rights of this class and was a formidable opponent for Henry. He did get rid of her, but it cost him considerably more than it did to get rid of Anne.

[@jenniferbrewer5370]

But at least we got to see David Morrissey in tights.

[@HK-gm8pe]

their outfits were also more accurate than in other movies/shows but overall I hatethat movie :D

[@Queen_G_513]

Lol I loved this movie! Even though I now know how inaccurate it is, it is damn entertaining!

[@cinnow]

So what? In the end he tossed them both aside. Katherine for Anne, Anne for Jane.

[@katherineamelia98]

@@cinnow catherine was still a beloved queen of england by the people of england for the rest of her life after the divorce, whereas anne bolelyn was demonised and mocked by the public after her execution. you can’t say catherine’s royal status did not give her privilege

[@green10wine]

10:34 "If she wanted to have children, she could have married and had children" 100% on point! I hate that part about Mary Queen of Scotts movie. Not every woman's goal in life is to be a mother. I'd expect better from a 2018 movie.

[@coreyboggs2011]

She was very generous to the Mary Queen of Scots movie

[@justicevanpool9025]

The queen is not every woman, for sure. But grafting current values onto women of that time is one of the steps that the story writers could have taken to make it more palatable to some. Conversely, I think they portrayed her in this way to make it seem more "hisorically authentic".

[@stadot1427]

I don't know...I've yet to meet a woman her age who didn't at some point struggle with the idea of motherhood - especially if they were single but wanted to be married. And this in a society that often values career over motherhood! If Elizabeth felt she could not marry and keep her throne, I'd find it very hard to believe she wouldn't struggle at some point with wanting that which she could not have - even if she only wanted it because she could not have it. Men probably only experience it less because marriage and parenthood is not as restrictive historically nor biologically as it is for women. They've generally had less to lose.

[@mzk1489]

In what century? But perhaps she was afraid to marry because of her position but missed motherhood.

[@EM2theBee]

@@justicevanpool9025 I agree. So many times, people today, want to superimpose today's values on historical figures. We see these women as extraordinary for their times, anomalies, but few survived those character traits Anne Boleyn is one of those who did not.

[@catherinetaylor2333]

One thing no-one ever comments on - the lazy stereotype of Catherine being dark haired/eyed because she was Spanish. In fact, she had golden hair and blue eyes.

[@cherrytraveller5915]

I thought she was strawberry blonde?? Definitely blue eyed. All her portraits show that

[@catherinetaylor2333]

@@cherrytraveller5915 yes, could be, she was described as 'golden haired', but that could cover strawberry blonde

[@florallyclover]

she was described as having red-gold hair, which I think we see in a lot of her portraits. I think the casting of Charlotte Hope as Catherine in the Spanish Princess was really perfect, although slightly darker red, not sure if you've seen it so I'll link it here- really so beautiful i.pinimg.com/originals/8a/fd/5e/8afd5ecc41c9b84f43c54724920e49ad.jpg

[@ee1ena]

Spanish princess got it right

[@McCarthy0000]

The two Spanish princesses now, Lenore and Sophia, are both blonde hair blue eyes, pale milky skin

[@cweb234]

Lol when she went “oh, spiderman!”

[@morley364]

I also liked "go back to your rat hole!" ....."Spain is a very nice place"

[@gogreen7794]

Thank you for pointing out that the second Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth film completely ignored Robert Dudley, but then they had to do that since they falsely portrayed him as betraying Elizabeth in the first movie.

[@brontewcat]

Yes - one of the many inaccuracies in those movies.

[@steffikaysince1996]

Thye clearly got him mixed up with his step-son, Robert Earl of Essex, who betrayed her and was excecuted. Plebs...

[@jomc7425]

And at the end of the first movie, it says that Elizabeth never saw Dudley in private again after the fictional betrayal.

[@isthatrubble]

such a weird choice to make in the first movie, I understand why they made some of the choices they made in that movie but the dudley thing was just unnecessary. not to mention lots of people who don't know that much about tudor history have heard of their relationship and might have known it wasn't true

[@PandaMonium92827]

Yeah when she literally had 2 other boyfriends who actually DID betray her. And the last one who did it cost him his head. The writers had plenty to work with and just gave us garbage

[@bretttait5506]

I love this person's attitude to history and film SO much. Please can we have her back for other videos!?

[@dalestreeter341]

It seems unlikely that Mary of Scotland had a Scots accent since she had been raised in France since she was a small child. If she only spoke English with Scots natives then I suppose it's possible, but it seems intended to show she was Scots not English.

[@johnkilmartin5101]

There is a letter from Mary to Elizabeth in which she for her bad English and definitely conforms to Scots pronunciation. The letter appears in Antonia Fraser's biography of Mary.

[@IrishCinnsealach]

Interestingly her being brought up in France and the French language not having the letter W is why the name Stewart became Stuart

[@Ms.Histrology]

Yup, she grew up in France, so likely used French a lot. She could also fluently speak Scots.

[@corayye4099]

It’s for a contemporary audience. The English wouldn’t have been dropping their Rs at that time either.

[@TheLiteralLatest]

I read that MQS spokes scots but not English fluently, she had Scottish tutors in France to keep her aligned (poorly lol imo) with scotland. so Mary would have had a scots accent if she was speaking to her Scottish subjects.

[@sherryb6351]

I'm dying at her reactions to The Other Boleyn Girl--spot on but also super genuine and funny.

[@nd4610]

Natalie Dormer was the best Anne Boleyn in my opinion. She was fantastic in that role. And I know Henry was supposed to be a red head but Reyes-Myers brought Henry to life! Great break down :)

[@barbarapaige]

I agree that Natalie Dormer was the best Anne Boleyn - I understand she has a degree in history - but I thought Rys-Myers was miscast. Not tall or imposing enough, and in the later episodes made no attempt to look like Henry.

[@missyouwish88]

​​@@barbarapaigethe later seasons they did. My guess is that they got a bigger budget for their wardrobe department (& a lot of flack for the inaccuracy)

[@missyouwish88]

Jonathan didn't have the physical representation, but he more than made up for it with his mad acting skills. You don't have to be a 6ft buff red-head to make people say "Oh sh*t, don't mess with this guy" & he played that to a T. - JRM = the best Henry VIII - Natalie Dormer = the best Anne Boleyn. - Cate Blanchett = the best Elizabeth - and Judi Dench is the best older Elizabeth (sorry Helen Mirran!). After all, how many people can win an Oscar for being on screen for 14 minutes? 😅

[@Geo_Babe]

I’m a Tudor historian and I couldn’t agree more!!!

[@fyreflye100]

Natalie was great, but in my book Genvieve Bujold was the best Anne Boleyn.

[@LordofFullmetal]

Thank you for pointing out that Anne was probably innocent! She's always depicted as this evil seductress, but like, we really have no proof she ever did anything wrong. More likely, she was murdered because Henry remembered how sucky getting a divorce was last time, and that it wouldn't go over well if he divorced the woman he tore the country apart to marry. He NEEDED her to have done something wrong, so he could justify getting rid of her.

[@HBOMAXtvmoviesyoutube]

Anne's death was very political as she pointed out. Anne was very progressive and she wanted the reformation to put the interests of woman and the poor at it's forefront which made her many enemies who started accusing Anne of all those charges.

[@kyarden7971]

Yes, but let’s not forget their marriage was annulled 2 days before Anne’s execution, i.e. Anne was not his legal wife then. In the end his only legitimate (from law point of view) were Jane Seymour (who died after childbirth) and Catherine Parr (who survived him), the other four - Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Anne of Cleves and Catherine Howard’s marriages to Henry were all annulled- not divorced, annulled - meaning legally they were never married. That is why Mary and Elizabeth were regarded as illegitimate after the downfall of their mothers.

[@oiooi6460]

She spoke of her husband's death which - especially for a queen- was high treason.

[@pedrosalles9273]

I ADORE this historian. She is one of those cases of "She was born to do this", like, look how excited she is about Elizabeth I !! Got me excited and I haven't watched any of those movies or had any interest in the Tudors.

[@butIwantpewee]

I can't believe we didn't get a Blackadder II clip in here, I'm sure Queenie and Nursie are pretty much spot on for historical authenticity.

[@maribeld84]

Lol I'd have also liked a scene from the show Upstart Crow

[@tommypickles218]

You can't convince me that Lord FlashHeart wasn't a historical figure

[@PPikes]

Yes I loved that 🤣🤣😍

[@BlainEnoch]

So it's settled. We must have a sequel.

[@merchantfan]

Apparently Elizabeth did give her subordinates insulting nicknames ala G.W. Bush

[@RoxanneM-o3t]

There was a letter by, I believe, the Venetian ambassador, that describes him seeing Anne remonstrating with an angry-seeming Henry while holding Elizabeth not long before her downfall. He was looking at them from a window, so did not know what was said. So, this scene in the Tudors is more accurate than we might think.

[@Heresjonnyagain]

Wolf Hall reached a standard of convincing portrayal I’d always wanted from medieval/renaissance period drama and never had

[@joshberkin5567]

Game of thrones

[@Heresjonnyagain]

@@joshberkin5567 what about it?

[@joshberkin5567]

@@Heresjonnyagain convincing portrayal of medieval period

[@Heresjonnyagain]

@@joshberkin5567 I’m sorry to greatly disagree. Game of Thrones was a fantasy series that I would say frankly did more to affirm popular misconceptions about the medieval period than portraying it. Everything is dark and grimy. Clothing, coiffure, and props are fantastical in appearance. The language and manners are something out of a modern Renaissance affaire. I cannot think of anything particularly medieval about it aside from some loose plot inspiration from 15th century events.

[@joshberkin5567]

@@Heresjonnyagain oh. well i liked the show

[@mariemakesstuff]

I love that Dr. Paul's reaction to watching Cate Blanchett go on a tirade about Spain is the same exact reaction I have watching it.

[@jilldesruisseau]

Speaking of historical inaccuracies... I love how every historian despises the Other Boylen Girl. This was a lot of fun :)

[@QueSara1111]

I despised it too... I stopped it about half way through from memory. I never looked into it, but I am so glad this is a shared opinion. I'm also an Historian, but in Australian history. So, while I am woefully unqualified in Tudor history, the Historian in me cringes every time that movie is mentioned. Television series and movies do have to take some liberties to hold the audience's attention, but you can do that without completely compromising the actual story. It scares me how many people see movies like this and think it is an accurate representation.

[@steveniswho9254]

I loved Natalie Domer's performance as Anne Boleyn in the Tudors. Some of the things they did were ridiculous, the thing I hate the most was they switched his sisters names, and had her marry the King of Portugal instead of Louis XII. I would've been fine if they left out Margaret Tudor, but completely fumbling it? Ridiculous.

[@AnSoBri]

C'est pour pouvoir montrer la romance entre le Duc de Suffolk et la soeur de Henry, c'est très télégénique, c'est cool à raconter, mais les dates ne correspondaient pas à la période décrite par le show. Comme cela se passe à l'époque de François 1er (et que Louis 12 était mort depuis longtemps), ils ont créé cette "astuce". Je le comprends, ça aurait été dommage de rater cette histoire "d'amour" et de désobéissance envers le roi (de toutes façons "Les Tudors" contiennent beaucoup d'erreurs historiques).

[@leeannasloan2292]

Or her ridiculous killing of the king...Mary got a long as best she could eith her husband and by all accounts she enjoyed being the queen of France and all the attention she got from that and her looks..but Gabrielle Anwar is a good actress and could have pulled off both enjoying her station as queen and showing respect to her king husband while still pinning for the duke of Suffolk at the same time.

[@steveniswho9254]

@@leeannasloan2292 I know right, King Louis XII was old but very respectable, its unfathomable to think she would try to do anything like that.

[@leeannasloan2292]

@@steveniswho9254 I know right? Like she's going to really kill the Kong with a pillow and not one of his physicians question it..or be in the next room spying...it just makes no sense and so that whole plot annoyed me...and the show warped things so much that they didn't want to include Louis because of the timeline they had going with France in general..so they made up she married the king of Portugal..why do all that? I don't mind when shoes take liberties with some things, I get that, but to make up this whole plot for it to be so far fetched, it almost seems like an insult to the audience..Michael Hurst is no dummy either, he knows his history.

[@steveniswho9254]

@@leeannasloan2292 I know right!!! It is an insult to the audience, they basically called us all stupid. The only think I really liked about the Tudor's was Natalie Dormer's performance, I think she was one of the best Anne Boleyn performances. I like Portman but Dormer was so much better. She should've won an Award.

[@BaronessErsatz]

When pressed to name her heir, Elizabeth reminded her interlocutor of the state of disorder that darkened England at the time of her half-sister Mary's final days, adding that she herself refused to be blinded by a winding-sheet covering her eyes. Argue all you may about her personal life, she was a shrewd leader.

[@kamoshi.9331]

A pet peeve of mine, too, is making Mary, Queen of Scots have a Scottish accent. She was raised in France and yet, every movie or show seems to make her sound Scottish.

[@gogreen7794]

Vanessa Redgrave used her natural speaking voice. No Scottish or French accent. If you haven't seen it, go find the 1971 movie, "Mary, Queen of Scots." Glenda Jackson is once again portraying Elizabeth I.

[@patmc2916]

I LOVE the enthusiasm and freshness of Dr. Joanne Paul to explain to us, the context of the scenes of these movies is so fluid, her explanations are a delight!

[@ShallowApple22]

Thank you another woman who is shedding the lies cast over Anne Boleyn for been nothing more than a woman in a pit of vipers. Anne’s ONLY fault was the failure to produce a living son and to divide factions in court. The fact that Thomas Cranmer was beyond Shocked at the accusations thrown against her and was told to accept them or else his final statement on her was of good character

[@myheartiswriting]

I mean, for the most part the only fault any of Henry's wives commited was that none of them produced sons (emphasis on the plural, Henry technically got one son but one isn't enough) needed multiple).. And, assuming King Henry wasn't the villian in his own story, is that the only thing he did wrong was to fail in marrying a woman who could bore those sons. Eveything else was within his Divine Rights as King.

[@RubyBlueUwU]

It is also said she was quite headstrong and spoke her mind a lot, which I absolutely do not see as a flaw but is important context for her situation. Their “faults” were more their inability to bend to Henry’s every whim and will at a moments notice, including bearing a living male heir, remember that Anne of Cleves not only kept her life but was rewarded greatly and lived fairly comfortably for the rest of her life because she bent immediately to his will and did not fight or argue with him at any point during the process. Henry was a minefield of a man, any foot out of line and he didn’t hesitate, and his wives suffered as a result of not being willing or able to give him his way at all times. Saying it was about sons is oversimplification, he wanted his way and felt he was more than justified to kill for it.

[@Tina-ig3be]

@@myheartiswriting Well, you could also argue that HE didn't produce the sons he needed as Catherine had multiple children/miscarriages that were male. But the fact that NONE of his wives could give him the children he wanted (either they didn't get pregnant or the children didn't survive) point to a possible disease on his side. To me it's highly unlikely that five women (Ann of Cleves doesn't count) couldn't produce the heir(s) he wanted that it was his "fault".

[@myheartiswriting]

@@Tina-ig3be Dude, chill. We are in agreement. I fully acknowledged that I was writing from King Henry's perspective with the note of "assuming Hnery wasn't the villian in his own story," But let me expand on that. It was absolutely Henry's fault that he didn't have any sons. Modern science says it is the sperm that determines the gender of the child. If a man doesn't have boys swimming in his pond, he's gonna get stuck with girl. Like you said, all those miscarriages, someone should have figured that out back in the 1500s. Plus with all of those sport injuries like his jousting horse crushing him as a young adult, the countless head injuries, the weight and the rotting leg who knows what those physcial injuries could have had on his genetic outcomes. Yet! In the 1500s doctors and scientists literally believed a womans parts were inverted male gentials. They believed it was the woman's anatomy that determined gender, so although it was Henry who had the longer list of bad genes, the woman got the blame. Plus, because he was King, he had another unfair element. The Divine Rights of Kings. Basically he was God's chosen one, specifically selected by god to be king and everything he did was ordained by god. That meant he couldn't possibly have weak sperm, because then God had weak sperm. Reproduction was not a choice, it was an obligation. That's not even including needing an heir so the crown doesn't fall to imbecile. As much as I agree that it was his "fault" for not being able to have sons, that's not how anyone saw it back then. In that context, it was the wives "fault". Not because it was, but because it being Henry's "fault" wasn't an option.

[@TheMoonRabbit27]

Totally agree. I mean, Anne Boleyn wasn’t stupid. She had many enemies at court, her only true ally was Henry himself. She wasn’t about to do anything as stupid as betray him.

[@ShoujoJo-us3py]

I’m a linguist and hearing her talk is fascinating to me! She sounds like she has an American accent but also has a bit of either British or Irish intonation and slight pronunciation, so cool!

[@Paulasland]

The the Tudors episode where Anne Boleyn dies I cried A LOT, Natalie was great showing the pain of abandoned and used by men that wanted power, I felt so sad.

[@Summysun624]

I love that this historian has complete knowledge of the entire films and not just the parts clipped, and of the actors and their representations. Also very refreshing to see someone challenging the representation of historical women such as Anne Boleyn and Elizabeth I in TV and film!

[@susanmarie2231]

Man For All Seasons (1966.) The best Tudor era film ever.

[@jamesbutler3960]

Let’s be clear at 9:18, Elizabeth would have never allowed herself to be called inferior by another monarch, or anyone else for that matter with out using her razor sharp tongue to give that person a verbal royal and savage beat down lithe likes of which they had never seen or experienced before.

[@Kermitthebadger]

I get shivers every time I watch that Cate Blanchett scene, incredible

[@scottweber8348]

Wolf Hall is a masterpiece, criminally underrated

[@monkeytennis8861]

Not remotely underrated. Ridiculous comment

[@Mungoteazer11581]

I love that she acknowledges that sometimes scenes that surely did not have happened are important for the plot of a movie. Because only letters are kinda boring. 😁 And I really liked the Tudors back than so I love that they get more points than The other Boleyn girl 😄

[@julietalozano-ramsay8511]

I know it's not a film, but I'd love to see her take on the Six musical! Obviously very imagined but I wonder how accurately they nailed the spirits of the historical figures. Also she's funny I enjoyed this video, maybe just my Canadian sense of humour.

[@meginmd]

Yeah Six is terrible when it comes to historical accuracy.

[@LlamaLlamaMamaJamaac]

I love Six… when I first heard it I want to say it was the video of their performance at the Olivier awards, so I saw the costumes and choreography etc. I went from “This is the cringiest thing I have ever seen in my life!!” to adding the whole soundtrack to my YT library in about 10 seconds. 😆 But I can’t help thinking what a missed opportunity when Jane Seymour says “my son had to grow up without his mother” and Anne Boleyn says something about her body without her head. I know it’s comedy…. But damn, her daughter HAD TO GROW UP WITHOUT HER MOTHER!

[@monkeytennis8861]

"Canadian sense of humour" Huh??

[@Sarmatae1]

The Tudors got most of it right. The thing with the sister ground my gears, because nothing about it was correct. And the age/aesthetic of Henry was so far off as to be ridiculous. Despite that, I think Jonathan Rhys Meyer gave a fairly accurate portrayal of Henry and his steady decline. Best I've seen since Richard Burton. And I like to think Natalie Dormer nailed Anne Boleyn. Neither villainous gold-digger, nor hapless pawn; Miss Dormer struck the perfect note between the two and gave us a picture of Anne that was multi-dimensional and complex, as real women often are.

[@philbecker4676]

The Tudors was just terrified that any teenagers watching would get bored so it had to throw in some tits every 15 minutes.

[@ladyethyme]

Dormer was lovely….everything else in that show was……not accurate.

[@elizabethm7163]

Fell in love with Natalie because of that show! And Henry Cavill. 😍

[@SeanCSHConsulting]

They got most of it wrong, sorry.

[@Sarmatae1]

@@SeanCSHConsulting Nothing to apologise for. My doctorate would disagree with you. They took creative license with a lot because the Wars of the Roses was unbelievably complicated. Everything Henry VIII did was the result of the tumultuous time in which he was raised with zero expectation of being King. Showtime's "Tudors" doesn't go into all that, so they had to take a certain amount of cavalier approach to make it make sense to those who didn't know the history of the era. It was designed for entertainment. With the exception of a handful of minor inaccuracies and only two really glaring ones...they kept it on point with history. No, Henry didn't look like Jonathan Rhys Meyers, but it's entertainment. When you look at the history as compared to Hollywood films, I think the answer to who Henry was falls somewhere between Richard Burton, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, and yes...Charles Laughton in 1933's "The Private Life of Henry VIII". With regards to Queens Catalina de Aragón y Castilla and Anne Boleyn...I still think the most historically accurate portrayal of Catalina de Aragón was Irene Papas in "Anne of the Thousand Days". The look was wrong, but the portrayal was appropriate for the era. Anna Bolina for me will always be almost perfectly portrayed by Natalie Dormer. Whatever else can be said about The Tudors...Natalie did her homework. She refused scenes she thought would be out of character for Anne. She did her research in order to make a connection with Anne, and stood up for who she thought Anne was. The question will always linger...did she or didn't she, really? Until new evidence presents itself, we can only debate. Debate, however, requires education and in-depth knowledge. If you don't have that...don't try to correct people who do. It makes you look like a monkey.

[@maudquilici7309]

this woman is enjoying herself so much talking about all this and it shows, it's really nice to watch and definitely makes the topic of the video even more interesting

[@pardonmfrench]

What a brillant way to promote a book. Props to the author and Penguin UK. Enjoyed every single second of it. 🥳

[@dreamydonno]

I know the historians hate The Other Boleyn Girl but it was the first movie that even got me into the historical movies and dramas and stuff. 😅It also gave me a love of anything to do with Anne Boleyn and the Tudor/York time. 🖤

[@brontewcat]

It is interesting that there is this idea Elizabeth was pockmarked after her bout with smallpox, but no one mentions Mary QOS’s bout with smallpox. Mary also had smallpox as a child. From what I have read from biographies of both women, neither was left with significant scarring.

[@danaglabeman6919]

You're right, but it's difficult to tell so many years later if an omission of unflattering facts about one's ruler is because they just weren't true or because it was smart politics not to mention it. Also, it doesn't take as long for lead to destroy the skin as we think. If Elizabeth was left with temporary marks that would have healed in time, and covered them up with lead makeup while they were healing, it could have been enough time for the lead to pit and blister her skin.

[@brontewcat]

@@danaglabeman6919 Except she did not use lead based makeup when she caught smallpox. She may have used lead based makeup when she was older, but the evidence suggests no lead in her makeup when she was in her 20s. Also no one depicts MQOS with lead based makeup- despite it being the fashion for all women at the time. Also a lot of information we have about Elizabeth and her looks come from ambassadors to her court, not her courtiers. I can assure you had she been concealing scars the ambassadors would have mentioned it. They paid her maids to find out about her menstrual cycles so they could write back to their masters about her child bearing capacity. So I am sure they would have found out about scars etc when she was on the marriage market.

[@albuszx]

Dr Joanne Paul is such a delight to watch, she's fun, informative and makes amazing commentary! I also love that this video is long and covered many portrayals, definitely worth saving to rewatch

[@spencerluster4908]

Watching how absolutely fed up with The Other Boleyn Girl she is before it even begins is hilarious!

[@891Henry]

Nothing beats Keith Michell as Henry VIII or Glenda Jackson as Elizabeth I. Those were the roles of a lifetime for each. A lot of great actors in those series.

[@brontewcat]

There is a source of a man telling Elizabeth much later that he remembered a scene where Anne is standing at a window with Elizabeth. She tries to get Henry’s attention by holding Elizabeth and having her wave to her father. Henry ignores them. I think the scene from the Tudors is referring to that.

[@kenna163]

Yes but it was disproven

[@brontewcat]

@@kenna163 What was disproven- that a older man told Elizabeth this? Also in history things can’t be proved or disproved. Normally we would say stories are probably not true if the first time it emerges is well after all contemporaneous sources have died.

[@brontewcat]

@@kenna163 I have checked the source for the story. It is indeed from a contemporary source. The Calendar of State Papers from 1558 contain a letter from a Protestant refugee to Elizabeth, sent to her on her accession. He told her the story of Anne carrying Elizabeth in her arms. She was in a courtyard at Greenwich Palace, holding Elizabeth as a little baby and entreating Henry. Henry was standing in an open window looking down. Although Henry concealed it, the writer thought from his body language Henry was angry. Elizabeth Jenkins: Elizabeth the Great Panther Books London 1958 p11 So I got the details of who was in the courtyard and who was in the window around the wrong way. Of course the refugee may not have been telling the truth and just trying to curry favour. But in absence of further evidence the story appears to be based on fact.

[@danaglabeman6919]

@@brontewcat If I remember what I've read correctly, I think they say it's disproven because court expense records show Elizabeth was at a totally different residence miles away from Henry and Anne when the gentleman who told this to Elizabeth said it happened. But he would have been very old, and memory will confuse things that happened a long time ago. Elizabeth was often at court when she was little before Anne's death (Henry loved to show her off) and Anne and Henry did quarrel quite a bit even when they were "happy". He could absolutely have witnessed such a scene, and as an elderly man many decades later, not perfectly remembered the date or circumstances.

[@brontewcat]

@@danaglabeman6919 That is the most likely explanation. People often mix up the dates and specifics of incidents, and they do not need to be elderly to do so.

[@jomc7425]

In regards to delays of Anne Boleyn's execution: She was convicted on May 15 and executed on May 19. The swordsman may have been delayed crossing the Channel. However, it would have taken longer than 4 days for the message to be sent from London to Calais asking the swordsman to come to England and for him to return so the message was sent to him before Anne was convicted. Not surprising - her arrest warrant was her death sentence.

[@itsamonkieplanet9367]

I could watch this historian review anything . She’s very charismatic and genuine . Love her I imagine she would be a great teacher.

[@syncmonism]

The acting and overall production quality of Wolf Hall is incredible

[@marianap.h3961]

I love her attitude to the horror that is The Other Boleyn

[@bernig]

This like my favorite video right now. Love this lady. Let’s make this a series ♥️

[@gchecosse]

Would like to have seen more on Wolf Hall, particularly on the accuracy of Cromwell and More themselves. I particularly enjoyed the Elizabeth Barton storyline.

[@mortyjames5897]

One of the best TV series ever produced imo. I heard they're considering making a sequal now that the new book is out, I hope they do.

[@merrymachiavelli2041]

I think she was a bit harsh on Wolf Hall, given she didn't actually point out any inaccuracies other than Clare Foy being too pale (which I think she might have over-egged, Anne was entirely of English descent going back at least 3 generations, and had a pale daughter, so I find it hard to believe she was _that_ much darker than Clare Foy, unless she had bizarre-for-the-period habit of sun-tanning).

[@danaglabeman6919]

@@merrymachiavelli2041 I totally agree with you that harping on skin tone when Wolf Hall is so amazing is very petty. But Anne was not of pure English descent three generations back. Her great grandfather was the Earl of Ormonde, introducing an Irish component. Many people of Celtic and Briton blood can be surprisingly dark, and Anne was referred to as of olive complexion even by her sympathizers. Skin tone genes are weird. In my own family, the only more olive skinned people we know of are a great grandmother of my fathers and a great-great grandfather of my mom's, but my sister gets asked often if she's Hispanic or Italian; she just came out darker. Totally possible Anne got a darker gene that got expressed in her that got pushed out of the way by Henry's pale genes in Elizabeth.

[@merrymachiavelli2041]

@@danaglabeman6919 Hmm, I grant you the Earl of Ormond wasn't English per se, although one great-grandfather is only 12.5% of a person's DNA. Also, Thomas Butler is perhaps better described as 'Hiberno-Norman' rather than Irish in the modern sense of the term, given that the Butlers of Ireland started off as Norman in the 12th century and married other Hiberno-Norman or British nobility almost exclusively thereafter. Although, the Normans were debatably French, so that doesn't support my original point about skin tone! Also, I'm always a bit sceptical of suggestion that there are major genetic differences between Irish/Scottish/English people - for all the Anglo-Saxon migrations changed culture and language, Anglo-Saxons only contributed around 30% of the English genome, and Northwest Europeans were relatively similar in the period to begin with.

[@catherinetaylor2333]

I liked a video by an art expert, commenting on Holstein's portraits of Cromwell and More - made me realise that he regarded More as a good man - Cromwell - not. Of course, both had bad faults, and good sides, but Cromwell plotted the death of a Queen, and profited hugely from the destructions of the monasteries, while More died rather than betray his faith

[@c292r89dvbh]

She seems pretty generous with her ratings...there's no way I would've given Mary Queen of Scots a 5.5, and that movie was very aware it was not being historical

[@floraposteschild4184]

Too bad many of the viewers don't know it's not historical.

[@tlpricescope7772]

Wish you would review “Elizabeth R” with Glenda Jackson, the greatest person to ever portray her, and the most historically accurate of any Tudor production.

[@hk19478]

YES! My favourite portrayal of Elizabeth I.

[@maldenom]

Agree 100%!

[@josephinpdx]

YES!!!

[@Pinky-kc8go]

I LOVE this lady! Her attitude is great. She's so sweet and well-spoken

[@tacitus7797]

Some comments - I suspect Mary Queen of Scotts probably would not have had a pronounced Scottish accent (she lived in France from the age of 4 until she returned to Scotland as an adult.) Also, she was ultimately executed for conspiring to kill Elizabeth.

[@KPC-123]

Whereas it is true that she did agree with a plot to kill 'Lizzy', isn't it also true that the plot was a setup/trap by Walsingham?

[@brontewcat]

@@KPC-123 The plot was monitored by Walsingham, but I am not sure he set it up. It was more he a double agent planted, and he waited for a conspiracy.

[@lamoinette23]

Yes, didn't they wish to remove any doubt to legitimacy on the throne? Mary could not be allowed to live or threaten Elizabeth's reign.

[@brontewcat]

@@lamoinette23 I think it was far more complex than that. Elizabeth kept Mary alive but under lock and key for nearly 19 years. She would have killed Mary far sooner if it was just about removing a threat to Elizabeth’s throne.

[@danaglabeman6919]

Mary spoke French and Scots as a child. She didn't learn English until later, from Scottish people. Randolph, the English ambassador to the Scottish court, said in his dispatches that she spoke bad English with a Scottish accent. Her English in the film is not accented wrongly, but it is far too fluent.

[@nicklepickle666]

Loved this, very entertaining and informative. I always enjoy seeing ‘The Other Boleyn Girl’ being roasted, and so eloquently too!

[@Bollywoodlover100]

love when the other boleyn girls gets called out for the garbage it is! philippa gregory is going to hell for doing so many iconic tudor women dirty! also kudos to historian for giving natalie props she deserves all the love letters she in my opinion managed to give us the most multi faceted and human version of anne even though she was working with a pretty weak writing

[@cherrysubmarine]

oh shit i thought philippa gregory's books were fairly historically accurate! do you have any better suggestions? i'd like to read more about tudor history in a non-textbook kinda way

[@Bollywoodlover100]

@@cherrysubmarine not at all! she is notorious for not giving a fuck about accuracy or facts. not to mention she is a raging misogynist. I would love to help but alas i don’t like historical fiction and most of the books i read are kind of textbooky but if u like anne boleyn theres a really good book called the creation of anne boleyn that talks about her life, legacy, misconceptions, and portrayals in the media.

[@OverDramaticPumpkins]

@@cherrysubmarine I really enjoy Alison Weir's novels. She's covered almost every wife of Henry VIII, with Katherine Parr's book coming soon. There are still inaccuracies (that I could spot), but overall, good reads!

[@KateeAngel]

@@cherrysubmarine read real history

[@yuhyuhariana8064]

The book was good, the movie was…. uhm

[@melissarose7488]

I would love to watch this professor's lectures voluntarily, for fun, in my free time. Such interesting commentary, analysis, and funny!! wish I went to University of Sussex now, but international school would be $$ :/

[@wanderinglizzy]

"I could write a love letter to Natalie Dormer" same dude.

[@lizc6393]

Mary Queen of Scots was a shockingly bad movie from a historical perspective... Saoirse Ronan is a revelation though, as an actor.

[@suswik3682]

I got through 10 minutes...Katherine Hepburn version is better...lol

[@cathryncampbell8555]

@@suswik3682 And the Katherine Hepburn version is *ghastly*. But at least the costume designer for Hepburn didn't dress her in denim....

[@Shan_Dalamani]

@@cathryncampbell8555 The absolute worst depiction of Tudor costuming is in the TV series "Reign."

[@cathryncampbell8555]

@@Shan_Dalamani I absolutely agree with you! But then, *Everything* about "Reign" was insanely off-kilter. The irony is that Mary Queen of Scots had a wildly exotic & strange real backstory. Had that reality been told, her story would make a fascinating film. It has yet to be done.

[@Shan_Dalamani]

@@cathryncampbell8555 I spent 12 years in the Society for Creative Anachronism, learning about medieval/Renaissance history, famous people, daily life, and how much of most period drama is either fudged or outright just made-up crap. About the only parts of Reign that were accurate are that Mary, Elizabeth, Louis, and Catherine d' Medici were real people. The rest of the series is utter bullshit, from the characters to the costumes to how, in the dancing scenes, absolutely _nobody_ is dancing in time to the music, which wasn't accurate either. The only reason I watched as much as I did is because of Megan Follows, who played Queen Catherine. In my view, she's one of the best actresses Canada has ever produced (she's best known for the Anne of Green Gables movies that co-starred Colleen Dewhurst as Marilla).

[@karawigley6231]

I wish I could travel back in time & see what these historical figures really looked like.

[@jackieelizabeth8614]

I think the tudors holds up well generally. Of course it's not accurate most of the time but it's great at telling the whole story and the politic side of henry's rule.

[@juliall255]

Oh please its just Sex and STDs galore while demonising most of his wives by painting them as either useless, insipid or just straight up sluts

[@someonerandom8552]

I quite like it. Though I made the mistake of watching it with my older cousin who just so happens to be a history teacher. Very educational experience let’s just say lmao

[@Bollywoodlover100]

as a history major i agree i could tell they really did their research because they would often include things I have seen in primary and secondary sources and small details many wouldn’t know about. unfortunately when they didn’t stick to the sources like making henry sisters into one it was a disaster!

[@dvictoriadudley]

My husband's last name is Dudley and we have paperwork saying he is a descendant of Robert Dudley. We found them after his father passed. Never looked into if the papers are correct or not.

[@elizabethmcleod246]

How very cool is that!? I’d check to see if they are legitimate.

[@mlady6564]

I love The Tudors, not for the historical accuracy, but the acting, the music, and the drama.

[@nelled6240]

It was Henry's decision not to have a child with Anne outside of marriage because he was so desperate to have a son to prove that he was the rightful king. Nobody manipulated Henry. He was in charge. He always got his own way.

[@SH-sl7lc]

This is fabulous! What a great historian and presenter.

[@kellyfarrar6639]

I love the way she cheers on the strong Tudor women. It makes my heart smile. I just love this

[@lorie76yt]

King Henry is visually such an iconic character. They made a really weird choice with the guy who plays him in the Tudors. It’s one of those choices, because Henry is so well known, that just throws me right out of the story from the jump.

[@Kefka.]

For Wolf Hall, the period authenticity is incredible. Frockflicks raved about this film as one of the best representations of the time period.

[@clayschwartzwalter382]

Very interesting subject and a great expert! Please bring her back!

[@zyxw2000]

Judi Dench won an Oscar for that one short scene in "Shakespeare in Love." She should win one for each of her films.

[@katanaki3059]

Never knew I wanted to learn about this til watching…the whole thing. Great presentation and lecture!

[@kenna163]

Literally agreed with all of the points she made and we have the same haircut and hair colour. Wild!

[@emilyrosesparkes8123]

Dr Joanne Paul is absolutely splendid In this video ! her gorgeous personality shines through

[@katiebecker7683]

As far as Elizabeth and her grieving or jealous over motherhood, I feel that is very plausible as a possibility. Her not wanting to be married because she doesn't want to be controlled or pushed out as well as wanting children and grieving lack of motherhood can both be true at the same time. She sacrificed motherhood for the crown. There could very much be sense of lack and longing.

[@blindbookworm8019]

I have this woman’s book on audible. I’m going to read it soon. Other stuff just got in the way, but I do love reading, and reviewing books on my channel about this time. That’s how I felt in love with history.

[@qbasicmichael]

I'd be interested in seeing your thoughts on "the virgin queen" (2005), "a man for all seasons" (1966), "lady jane" (1986), and perhaps "the white queen" (2013) and its sequels. "The virgin queen" (2005) in particular does feature robert dudley.

[@mythal0620]

The period of the Wars of the Roses has fascinated me since I read the first volume of Rebecca Gablé s Waringham epic. But Joanne Paul made this journey here a special pleasure - many thanks for the competent and entertaining commentary on the "Tudor films"!

[@islaubiles660]

god i love this historian PLEASE bring her back

[@aleksstosich]

3:36 "Spiderman is in this" is fantastic. (Now I have to rewatch Wolf Hall!)

[@Lisa_1111]

"Spiderman is in this!" ... Ha! Dr. Paul is great in this video. Very funny and knowledgably.

[@Lee.na.23]

"Yeah, no. No. Sorry, I'm gonna have to stamp a big 'nuh uh' on this one." Idk why, but I found her reaction very funny. I like how she points out where they've taken creative liberties, and why it works and doesn't work for her. Also, her description of Anne Boleyn's death as "Polticial murder" was spot on. Loved Natalie Dormer as Anne Boleyn! I would also have the same exact reaction as her if I had to watch The Other Boleyn Girl.

[@Sishel]

I deeply share her enthusiasm for Cate Blanchett, my Queen!

[@lucykendall6212]

I would watch this historian's show. She's fantastic. Informative, concise and entertaining

[@SCX2k]

The Wolf Hall is one of the best shows I have ever seen. Well made all around. Felt authentic and quite accurate. Kinda sad that the historian seems to not really know the show.

[@elirien4264]

Elizabeth and Elizabeth the Golden Age are not 100% historically accurate, but so, so good.

[@eamonndeane587]

They certainly helped to make Cate Blanchett a Screen Icon that's for sure.

[@misskitty2710]

I’d read that when word was brought to Elizabeth about the birth of Mary Queen of Scot’s’ baby, she sat down in shock and said “ The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but barren stock…”

[@maureengriffin8536]

This was great. I absolutely would subcribe to a series of videos where you watched the entire movie with asides. I live in the US, but bought your book from book depository because I didn't want to wait for it.

[@michaeljohnangel6359]

That was excellent! Dr Joanne Paul is dynamite!!!!!!!

[@deborahmazza8123]

I just stumbled across this video. This was awesome! Loved your presentation! Now I will have to read your book, and look for other videos you have made.

[@Wmuthoni]

The 1970s series of Mary Queen of Scots with Vanessa Redgrave and Elizabeth R with Glenda Jackson are classics that remain my all time favorite coz the main characters place true acting talent before hyped up costumes and cinematography.

[@velouris76]

Also, regarding the scene with Elizabeth I and Mary, Queen of Scots, from what I learned, though they may have wrote letters, it’s believed that they never, ever met in person…

[@slicksalmon6948]

She obviously didn't watch all of Wolf Hall. If she had, she would have seen all of her comments addressed, including the fate of the dog. Wolf Hall is unique in that it takes facts we know and weaves a different narrative thru those facts. It also directly addresses the fact that what we think we know about that period comes from Thomas More, whose personal reflections on his fate have been perpetuated by the Church as truth. Certain details presented in the show may been altered to accommodate a visual medium, but Wolf Hall is as factual a recounting of that story as has ever been told.

[@ironlionzion5745]

Best one of these I’ve seen! Joanne is brilliant!

[@hgodvilla00]

Why did you guys ignore Keith Mitchell who is best known for his television and film portrayals of King Henry VIII? He played that role perfectly and is still the archetypal actor to portray Henry Tudor at multiple stages throughout his life. Also, where is the film 'A Man For All Seasons' from 1966? Where is the film 'Henry VIII and his Six Wives' from 1972? You can go further and include the older television programme from the early 1970's, as well as those two films.

[@BlainEnoch]

God, that was fun. EDIT: Alright, Penguin. Listen up. This video was so good that I went on to watch almost every other movies review that you made. Many of them were rubbish. The experts didn't really understand what they were supposed to do. They either talked about the artistic quality of the film instead of its accuracy, showed two seconds and then started an endless monologue about their general feelings towards the film as a whole, or elaborated on elements which they claimed were accurate (mostly details that are commonly well-known anyway) but said nothing about the mistakes other than stating "that's wrong". Next time you do one of these videos, please show this one to the expert beforehand and tell them to do exactly what she's doing. 10 out of 10! (Other excellent experts: Judge and Palaeontologist. Good job.)

[@benjamintillema3572]

Anne was a formidable, intelligent woman, so it's easy for people with the benefit of hindsight to look at her example and see a crafty temptress who connived her way to the throne. But if you actually look at the events from her perspective she likely wasn't playing hard to get in order to ensnare Henry, "tempting and withholding" as the expert called it, she was just kindly rejecting him at first. She had no reason to think Henry could or would leave his wife. When he did eventually try to nullify their marriage it took years and he had to go to such lengths as to defy the pope and attempt to sever ties with the catholic church, something no one could have predicted he would do especially because he was was an ardent catholic and declared "defender of the faith" earlier on in his reign. Even if his wife died suddenly and immediately went looking for a new queen, he would have looked for a young foreign princess to make a strategic marriage with, making powerful allies and getting lots of cash. At the time Henry first showed interest in Anne, a woman from a minor noble family, the best she could have hoped for would be to be his mistress and she could look at what happened to her sister and see it was not worth it. It's only after he promised to marry her that she encouraged his affections. If anyone should be seen as a man stealing temptress is should probably be Anne's successor, Lady Jane Seymour, who could look at Anne as an example and could play to Henry in a similar way as she did.

[@gy2gy246]

I've watched this video several times because I love Paul's humor.

[@madhatterline]

I did really like the Tudors & its portrayal of Henry & Anne in particular. Mostly I loved the drama of the show, whilst still keeping the complexities in the main characters. But there were a fair few places they went off course, & once they had done that they had to just keep going, so that it only got worse & harder to watch overtime. Things that were meant to simplify, but ended up tying their hands. Such how they changed things with Henry's sisters. Yes I can understand them changing the timeline, so that they don't have to go too far back yet can still include & the scandalous story between Mary (who they called Margaret in the show, perhaps to avoid confusion between her & Henry's daughter Mary) & Brandon. But it does grate on me. Mary was supposed to be much younger, 18, when she marries the King of France, which she is clearly not. And we lose a lot from the changes. The connection she has with France from marrying the French King (forever calling herself Queen of France), her friendship with king Francis (who helps her marry Brandon secretly in France). Marrying Brandon before she returned to England was mostly her idea, she loved Brandon, & she was terrified Henry would try to marry her off again to his own advantage. Who knows how traumatized she was from her first marriage to a much older man, even if it did only last 3 months. Brandon said he had no choice but to marry her as he "never saw a woman so weep". They may not have always been happy, but at least Brandon was her choice & she could stay in England. I did like that they included that Wolsey intervened to calmed Henry down & convinced him not to execute Brandon (which Brandon clearly soon forgot about). There was their long marriage, which started nearly 20 years before Henry married Anne. Their four children. The fact they lost both their sons, which would have been pretty poignant, particularly with Henry raging about how he can't have any sons, their second son having died age 7 only two years before Henry married Anne. Brandon's two daughters from a previous marriage who Mary raised. Mary's hatred of court & spending a lot of time away, at her home with her children so that she could escape her controlling brother. Her many sicknesses throughout her life. Amongst other things Mary caught sweating sickness during the outbreak where Anne Boleyn got also sick, which Mary she never fully recovered from. There were their two daughters, one of whom is mother to Lady Jane Grey, amongst others. The fact Brandon didn't attend Mary's grand funeral, but stayed with Henry, & her daughter instead was chief mourner. Rivalry at Mary's funeral between her daughters & step daughters. They have Brandon walking around & talking to a son who could not have been alive or that age at that time, which I find hard to bear. His two further sons from his next marriage, which would have been even more poignant considering he lost his first two sons, & the fact that they also died as children/adolescents during a sweating sickness outbreak. It was probably a mercy that Brandon died a few years before them. After the drama surrounding her marriage Mary seems mostly discarded by the storyline, a loose end, when they could have done so much more with her, she did a lot considering she died age 37. They got Mary's rivalry & hatred of Anne right, but even that was left wanting. Mary Tudor first met Anne Boleyn & her sister in France, as they had been some of the maids of honour at her wedding to the king of France, but this had happened maybe 10 years before the show started. It was a very long standing dislike either way, which we don't get a grasp of in the show. She always despised her, & opposed Henry's annulment because of this. And it would have been interesting to have seen Henry's other sister who was actually called Margaret, older than him & who married the Scottish king. Then we could have seen the diplomacy between her & Henry. Her trying to keep the peace between the two countries. Henry's rivalry between himself & his brother-in-law James IV, & afterwards his nephew James V. The death of her first husband leaving her with two very young sons. Her difficult second marriage, the problems it caused her, & her fights with the Scottish parliament during her son's regency. Her escape to England with Henry's help & return to his court. The fact that Margret actually applied for & got a divorce from her second husband, though Henry lectures her against this, which is quite funny considering his later actions. No doubt later he thought, if she can do it, then why can't I. Her return to Scotland & success at helping to end her son's regency when he was 12, bringing him to power. Her letters to Henry pleading for money & support, which he often sent. Her finally becoming so frustrated & alienated at the Scottish court to the point she starts betraying state secrets to Henry. Her attempted escape from Scotland after her 3rd marriage becomes unbearable. The fact when Margaret died there was no further reason for Henry to not go to war with Scotland, which led to James V's death after battle. This would have come across very differently had we known he was Henry's nephew. And then we could also have seen more clearly the connection with Mary Queen of Scots, who was born not long after her father James V died. Henry's 'Rough Wooing' of Scotland where he pushed for a treaty allowing for a betrothal between his infant great niece & his son, creating a union between Scotland & England (for his & his son's gain, not Scotland's). Some foreshadowing could have been cool. As MQS's son eventually became king of England & Scotland, after Henry VIII's children all died, allowing for the union to finally happen. Lots for Henry to have gotten angry & to have shouted about anyway. Henry's sisters are too often ignored, glossed over, or misunderstood so that people have barely heard of them or what they really did, when they lived interesting lives themselves. I understand the writers couldn't have included all of that, but plenty of good meat to be played with, just spice it up a bit, rather than just making stuff up at times that didn't always make sense. Skipping things with little forward thinking about how it would cause awkwardness in the storyline later, or how bigger better storylines could not be included later on. Sometimes the truth in its absurdities is far more entertaining than fiction. I think this contributed to the later decline of the series. This is why I usually stick to the first 3 series.

[@jessie7288]

Would’ve loved to see her talk about Reign…. And the portrayal of Catherine Medici which was awesome btw

[@bethanythatsme]

Cate Blanchett is everything

[@abbycornish8770]

Fun fact: Cardinal Wolsey was ordained in a church I used to work in! (No longer a practicing church, now an events venue/community hub/coffee shop- I’m not religious lol)