Tudor Historians Quotes

My experiences thus far had me planning to throttle the first Tudor historian I met upon my return for gross dereliction of duty.

The ordinary routines of life are never chronicled by the historian, but they make up almost the whole of experience.

I think the day might come, Bess, when all men will know of Dickon is what they were told by Tudor historians like Rous." "Jesú, no!" Bess sounded both appalled and emphatic. "You mustn't think that. Whatever the lies being told about Dickon now, surely the truth will eventually win out. Scriptures does say that 'Great is truth and it prevails,' and I believe that, Grace." Bess straightened up in the bed, shoved yet another pillow against her back. "I have to believe that," she said quietly. "Not just for Dickon's sake, but for us all. For when all is said and done, the truth be all we have.

Even their contemporaries felt that the relationship of Elizabeth and Robert transcended the details on practicality. There had to be some explanation for their lifelong fidelity, and those contemporaries put it down to 'synaptia', a hidden conspiracy of the stars, whose power to rule human lives no-one doubted: 'a sympathy of spirits between them, occasioned perhaps by some secret constellation', in the words of the historian William Camden, writing at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Theirs was a relationship already rooted in history and mythology. And that moment when Elizabeth heard she had come to the throne encapsulated much about their story. If our well-loved picture of Elizabeth's accession is something of a fantasy - if the reality is on the whole more interesting - you might say the same about our traditional picture of her relationship with Robert Dudley.

Anna Komnene, the world's first female narrative historian, is thought to have crafted her history for the sole purposes of giving a stronger voice to women.

Purpose and Perspective: This work, which the author acknowledges is essentially a synthesis drawing upon the results of many other detailed studies, offers a new approach to both the burgeoning study of regions in English history and on the established discussion of the nature of Yorkist and early Tudor government (Foreword by Professor A. J. Pollard, p. iv). The study aims to explore whether a regional approach to late medieval English politics and governance is feasible, with specific reference to south-west England during the later fifteenth century. The relative importance of regions, in comparison to counties, will be explored by examination of the elites, politics, and government of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, and Dorset from 1450 to 1500. But such an undertaking raises the fundamental question of whether a regional approach to the study of the south-western shires (or indeed any grouping of neighbouring counties anywhere in England) is valid–was there anything more to a ‘south-west region’ than simply a set of separate shires? That problem has made it necessary to study the south-west in a longer and broader context, in political terms, across the whole of the later fifteenth century (p.1). Certain aspects of the political history of south-west England have received attention from historians, mostly in the form of family or county studies… (p.19). Despite these admirable and informative studies, therefore, there are still significant lacunae in our understanding of particular aspects of the region’s governance during the later fifteenth century. Consequently, a regional investigation of the south-west political elites spanning the later fifteenth century might draw on earlier research and offer a broader perspective of court–country relations. A regional perspective of the interaction of local and national government would make possible a greater evaluation of the role of the duchy of Cornwall and the impact of the Wars of the Roses in the region (p. 21).

The accounts that emerged in some histories written after Anne Boleyn’s death, accusing Anne of witchcraft and having a child with her brother which was born deformed and secretly burned, are refuted by more thorough historians such as Eric Ives. Disappointingly, the nonsense exists in some very popular historical fiction, though, in actuality, there were no such accusations at the time.

But the misogynistic view of history explains women’s motives as neurotic, even psychotic. It is the get-out clause for lazy historians who cannot account for active, powerful women. Margaret Beaufort; Margaret, Dowager Duchess of York; Elizabeth Woodville; and Jacquetta Rivers have all been labeled as religious fanatics, hysterics, or witches. But in fact they were formidable and persistent politicians, deploying the weapons they had available. It is such a mistake to try to write them out of history! We should try to understand and explain them—rather than explaining them away.

Tudor historians were adept at rewriting history.

Tudor historians were fond of reminding their readers of the horrors of the Wars of the Roses, recounting how the realm had been plunged into the vicious civil war over a disputed crown that lasted more than thirty years.

Koreans have long been known for their capacity to imbibe: at a 2010 lecture to the Royal Asiatic Society, historian Robert Neff recounted that when Western sailors began to show up in Korea in the nineteenth century, Koreans were able to drink them under the table. However, many say that it was not until industrialization in the 1960s and 1970s that the practice of drinking oneself unconscious became commonplace.

The rules of writing history mean that a historian can only speculate about her emotions; but a novelist is allowed, indeed obliged, to re-create a version of them. This is where historical fiction—the hybrid form—does something that I find profoundly interesting—takes the historical record and turns it inside out; the inner world explains the outer record.

D'you think I can't write this and get someone-a drunk married to a fool -to swear to it? Do you think I can't sey up as historian? As storyteller? D'you think I can't write a history which years from now everyone will believe as the truth? I am the king. Who shall write the record of my reign if not me? 'You can say anything you like' I say levelly. 'Of course you can. You're King of England. But it doesn't make it true.