History VS Hollywood: Anastasia

The Lost Princess

The mystery of Anastasia Romanov is one of the greatest mysteries of the 20th century. Although it has been almost conclusively proven that she did die along with her whole family on 17th July 1917, many to this day believe that she may indeed have survived. Perhaps it's a state of denial and hope that miracles do happen. For it is one of the greatest tragedies that leaves one wondering how such innocent lives can be cut short in the name of revolution.

Anastasia Romanova was the youngest daughter of Tsar Nicholas II and his wife, Alexandra. She was descended from the great houses of Europe, granddaughter to the Russian Tsar, great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria, the 'Matriarch of Europe'. She was the life of the party, so to speak, keeping her family cheerful in the last weeks in captivity. She was raised along with her sisters in virtual seclusion at Tsarskoe Selo, her parents, the Emperor and Empress of Russia, preferring the quiet life to the glamour of the court. This was one of the many things that caused a rift among their subjects, many blaming Alexandra for her lack of social etiquette. Where her parents were secretive Anastasia and her siblings desired to step into the spotlight.

Revolution

When the Great War between Germany and Russia was declared, Alexandra and the girls stepped up and underwent the training required for nursing and ran their own wards, proving themselves exceptional carers. Again, not all their subjects were happy to see their royal family among the sick but it was a testament to the characters of these women that they helped the wounded who needed care.

Sadly, just as they were just beginning to flourish in their lives they were brutally murdered in a basement in the outskirts of Siberia. It is a tragedy that has shaped a large part of 20th century history, emphasizing the end of the all powerful Imperial family. Since 1917 it has been hoped and believed by many that not all the Romanov children were murdered; that one survived the traumatic slaughter of her family: Anastasia.

Over the years many women have come forward claiming to be the lost princess, all sadly proving false. The story has become a legend of the 20th century, becoming the subject of films such as the 1956 production of Anastasia starring Ingrid Bergman and the 1997 animated feature Anastasia, released by 20th century fox. Of course Hollywood has always played fast and loose with history over the years with films such as Braveheart and Gladiator falsifying certain aspects of history to heighten the drama. The mystery of Anastasia has been no different over years.

The Film:

One of the most successful films is the animated classic Anastasia released in 1997, featuring an all star cast of voices such as Meg Ryan, Angela Lansbury, Christopher Lloyd, John Cusack, Kelsey Gramer and Hank Azaria. I remember seeing this film in the cinema and loving it from beginning to end. It was fun with entertaining characters, scary villains and catchy songs such as Journey to the Past and Rumour in St. Petersberg.

Released by 20th Century Fox on November 14 1997, this was the studio's first animated release and it grossed $120,541 in its opening weekend before being released world wide and raking in the money. Directed by Don Bluth (The Land Before Time) and Gary Goldman (All Dogs Go To Heaven),  with a screenplay written by Susan Gauthier with  Noni White and Bob Tzudiker, writers of Disney classics The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Tarzan.

The soundtrack is terrific, with a score by David Newman (Serenity), and memorable songs to sing along to at any age. It's a great treat for the whole family that can hold up against any Disney classic as a whole. What makes it stand apart is that it is based on real events, offering a musical romance that gives the kids joy and the adults a sense of hope for the real Anastasia.

Meg Ryan is wonderful as Anastasia/Anya, who leaves an orphanage after living the last 10 years of her life with no memory of her past. Anya proves a fun, sparky heroine who can hold her own against villain Rasputin. She comes to realize she is Grand Duchess and choose between her past as a royal princess and her future with Dimitri, voiced by John Cusack.

The film takes aspects of the real history, showing auditions for an Anastasia lookalike with humorous results to an actress attempting to convince the Dowager Empress herself of her validity. It's a sad reminder that at the heart was an old woman searching for hope that not all her family was lost to her.

The detail in the animation is terrific, with attention paid to the exteriors and interiors of scenes, to costumes and the characters themselves.

Fact vs Fiction:

Age difference: When the Romanov family were brutally murdered the youngest daughter, Anastasia, was 17 years old. In the Fox animation she is depicted as a child of eight when she flees the Winter Palace with her grandmother Maria Feodorovna. So when we see her again 10 years later she is 18 years old.

300 Year Anniversary: When the film begins the Tsar and his family are celebrating the 300th anniversary of the Romanov dynasty. The voice over states that the year is 1916 when in fact the 300th anniversary was on March 6 1913, 3 years earlier than the film depicts. But the anniversary offers an excuse to display the elegance of the Russian aristocracy to the audience and make the scene much more dramatic when the villain Rasputin places his curse on the family on the anniversary of their ascension to the throne.

Rasputin: The movie's central villain is initially killed at the beginning of the film by drowning. In reality he was already dead when the revolution started. Grigori Rasputin was a mystic and a self proclaimed holy man. He was Tsarina Alexandra's confidante, becoming the main healer to her son Alexei who suffered from Hemophilia which he inherited through his mother. Through Rasputin's influence Alexandra became solitary, and many nobles found him a danger to the empire and so on 30 December 1916 he was murdered by Prince Felix Yusupov and Vladimir Purishkevich. After initially being poisoned with cyanide he was shot by Yusupov and Purishkevich before being dumped into the Malaya Nevka River. .The film does have a little nod to his assasination in the song 'Rumour in St. Petersberg' where a black marketeer tries to sell 'Count Yusupov's pajamas! Comrade, buy the pair.'

Together In Paris: One of the main aspects of the story is Anya's journey to Paris to find her family. Although a lovely setting and likely better known to audiences, Maria Feodorovna was Danish royalty, daughter of King Christian IX of Denmark. She married the future Alexander III on 9 November 1866, becoming Empress in March 1881. In 1916 she was involved in a coup d'etat to abdicate her son from the throne in hopes of saving the monarchy, resulting in a family rift. But the Tsar abdicated a year later, abolishing the monarchy and leading to the eventual murder of the entire family in July 1917. In 1919 Maria left Russia, never to return. She visited her sister in London before returning to her native Denmark where she lived out her final years. She died on 13 October 1928 having outlived four of her six children, and her sister Queen Alexandra of England. She was interred at Roskilde Cathedral on the island of Zealand in eastern Denmark.


Dressing the Part: Despite having to spend a lot of time in rags, when Anastasia finally gets to Paris her costumes are stunning. But the best is indeed her Imperial dress, which was so well researched. It has the iconic shape of Imperial Russian dress while also looking modern with beautiful neutral tones to suit Anya, with a little glitz thrown in. It's just sad it had to get ruined. But it has become her iconic dress in the same vein as Belle's yellow gown in Beauty and the Beast.

From Myth to Fairytale

Despite its inaccuracies it is clear a lot of research went into making this film, from costuming to set design to the music. They've taken a dark and tragic event in history and given the story a deeper meaning: of grief (a bold move for an animated feature) and finding yourself on the other side of that dark tunnel. Anastasia herself has become a beacon of hope over the years, that perhaps not all was lost and here they've given her a strong personality with a great sense of sass. She is a strong individual who can hold her own while still being vulnerable, giving her a relatability that perhaps is hard to find in some of Disney's own heroines. And she goes up against her own villain. She is the heroine of her own story. And the myth has become a fairytale that can be enjoyed again and again.

Natalie Wood: Hollywood's Russian Princess

Hollywood has had its share of legendary stars, preserved eternally on the silver screen. Others sadly have been forgotten while others have become more famous for their off screen escapades than their achievements on screen. One of these is Natalie Wood. Today, she is remembered more for her tragic death in 1981 than for her great performances.

At one time Natalie was considered Hollywood Royalty and was indeed an extraordinary actress, one who could rival the likes of Elizabeth Taylor, a fellow child star turned respectable adult actress. She received three Oscar nominations and starred opposite the likes of Orson Welles, James Dean, Steve McQueen and Claudette Colbert. In her prime Natalie was the most sought after actress in Hollywood with fantastic performances in films such as Splendour In The Grass, Gypsy and Love With The Proper Stranger. The majority of her choices involved characters pushed to the limit of their sanity and who claw their way back, much like her own struggle in her own life.

Born Natalia Nikolaevna Zakharenko on 20th July 1938, to Russian immigrants; her fate already decided by her ambitious mother, a former ballerina who fled Siberia after the Russian Revolution. Maria had always had dreams of fame and fortune and upon Natalie's birth worked tirelessly to instill those passions into her daughter. After appearing in Happy Land for a mere few seconds Maria moved the entire family to Los Angeles where Natasha made a screen test. After a year or so she was cast alongside Orson Welles and Claudette Colbert in Tomorrow Is Forever. It was a breakout performance for a seven year old who Welles said 'was so good she was terrifying'.

After this success she was cast in the classic Miracle on 34th Street, as the cynical daughter of Maureen O'Hara. One film historian describes her as being 'very good at not being sentimental and giving [the film] a sense of reality'. This resulted in a slew of movies playing the daughter of great actors such as James Stewart in The Jackpot and Bette Davis' daughter in The Star. But it was in 1955's Rebel Without A Cause that she made the transition from child actress to ingenue. It is an interesting film and Natalie's performance is stunning. Starring alongside James Dean, a member of the new method style of acting, she fought hard to get the role of Judy, a character she felt she could relate to. And this is where her natural abilities to perform come through, instinctual rather than methodical. And it resulted in Natalie's first Oscar nomination and won a Golden Globe for Most Promising Newcomer.

After the success of Rebel, Natalie made her way through many great performances, not all of which were received well by critics, but the public loved her regardless. She appeared in the classic western The Searchers, playing the kidnapped victim in A Cry In The Night and an actress in Marjorie Morningstar. But it was in 1960 that she had her next big success with West Side Story, now a classic musical. Despite not being a professional singer and dancer she held her own within the large cast, but her voice was sadly dubbed by a professional singer.

After West Side Story, Natalie made some of her most successful films acting wise. Splendor In The Grass was a melodramatic but well made film directed by Elia Kazan. She portrayed a high school student torn between being the good girl her mother wants her to be and her desire to be with her high school sweetheart which sadly leads her into a mental institution. It was a complex role that mirrored much of her own life, every bit as dramatic as any role she could've played. Starring opposite newcomer Warren Beatty, Natalie gives a brave and relatable performance that earned her another Oscar and Golden Globe nomination as well as a BAFTA nod for Best Foreign Actress.

This was followed up with Gypsy, another musical, this time the biopic of Gypsy Rose Lee, the famous burlesque performer, resulting in another Golden Globe nomination. She received further acclaim for her performance in Love With The Proper Stranger opposite Steve McQueen, for which she received her last Oscar nod for the film which looks at the subject of abortion at a time when abortions were illegal. It is a great film and Wood has great chemistry with co-star McQueen.

After this Natalie's career slid  downward, her films weren't performing as well and her depression got the worst of her and she attempted suicide in 1966. After receiving help she regained some sense of normalcy, focusing on family life with the birth of her daughter Natasha in 1970. Her career never reached the successes of Splendor or Rebel again and she appeared in more TV dramas in the 70s, winning a Golden Globe for From Here To Eternity in 1979.

It was in 1981 that she signed up for what she hoped would be a movie come-back. Brainstorm was a sci-fi film where she co-starred with Christopher Walken of Deer Hunter. She had filmed the majority of the project when she and her husband Robert Wagner took a trip on their boat, inviting Walken along. No one really knows what happened that night but on 29th November 1981 Natalie Wood was found dead at sea in Catalina. She was 43 years old.

Her death resulted in a global scandal, a mystery that to this day has never been solved. There are many theories about how she died but the one fact that remains is that it was a tragedy. At the time of her death her career was taking an upward turn and she was in the midst of rehearsing the play Anastasia that was to open in February 1982, with Natalie in the titular role; taking her back to her Russian roots. Anastasia was her first foray into the theatre.

Natalie Wood was Hollywood's very own princess. She was a unique beauty, unlike anyone else at that time, and expressed a sense of intelligence that is enviable by today's standards. She was Hollywood royalty, and in the way Anastasia became Russia's lost princess Natalie Wood is perhaps Hollywood's very own Russian Princess, tragically lost before her time.

Further Reading:

Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood; Finstad, Suzanne; Arrow

Rothesay Castle: The First Stewart Stronghold

The Stewarts are forever entwined with the forming of the Scottish nation. They lay the foundations for the Scotland we know today. And the best example of that lasting impression is Rothesay Castle, the first Stewart Stronghold in Scotland. Built in the 13th century by High Steward of Scotland Alan Fitz Walter and completed by his son Walter Stewart, it is one of the oldest surviving castles in Scotland. And with its unusual circular structure the castle proved a great strategic stronghold against their enemies over the centuries.

The Courtyard

Built on the border between Scottish and Norwegian control, the castle became a stronghold in the battles over control of the Western Isles. The Stewarts held Rothesay for their King in the battle of Largs which eventually led to the Treaty of Perth three years later, establishing the Western Isles under Scottish jurisdiction while Orkney and the Shetland Isles remained under Norway's, finally calling a truce between the two nations.

When the Stewarts eventually gained the crown in 1371, Rothesay remained a favourite residence for both Robert II and Robert III who died there in 1406. It was not until James IV though that the castle became popular again, used as a stronghold and royal residence that he enjoyed so much he began restoring the castle and adding new parts to it. Sadly he never lived to see its completion due to his untimely demise in 1513 at the battle of Flodden.

The Gatehouse

The castle's importance didn't end there though, occupied by the Earl of Lennox during the Rough Wooings for the English; garrisoned by Cromwell's men in the 17th century while occupying Scotland, dismantling parts of it upon their departure. It was also used as a prison for a time before it was plundered and burned in 1685, forcing the castle keeper to move elsewhere eventually settling at Mount Stuart.

The Main Hall

The castle itself is unique in many ways; it is one of only a handful of castles still with a moat surrounding it, which offered an extra layer of defense against enemies, as well as its unusual circular structure. When entering the castle you walk across the bridge over the moat, the first part you enter being the gatehouse built by James IV and V, enlarging the original to make accommodations above the entrance for royal guests. And above the entrance you can still see the heraldic arms featuring the lion rampant and unicorn of the royal badge.

Stewart Royal Coat of Arms

Inside the gatehouse a set of stairs lead you to its main hall, the only room still intact today. Used to house and entertain visitors, the hangings on the walls are similar to the tapestries that would have covered the stone walls, including the cloth of estate hanging over the fireplace which would be placed during the King's stay. It is a spacious room with table and benches as well as miniature productions of the castle for the visitors to see what the original buildings once looked like.

The Pigeon Tower

The medieval miniature features several smaller buildings within the courtyard, a stark contrast to the courtyard today with its large open space that once would have been a hive of activity. Today there are only the barest traces of the buildings that once stood there, the foundations of which were revealed in the 1800s through excavations. Of the four towers the most well preserved is today known as the Pigeon Tower. It was used as lodgings for the King before the later gatehouse was built and believed to have been converted in the 1600s to house pigeons during the winter months, the nesting holes still visible within the tower walls.

The Chapel

Of the courtyard buildings the best preserved is the Chapel. Based on analysis, the chapel is most likely to have been built in the 1500s by either James IV or James V. The impressive structure was dedicated to St. Michael the Archangel, who in fact was not a saint in the traditional sense. He is the leader of all angels and the army of God. Due to his place in heaven beside God he is considered above other angels in rank, and is the patron of soldiers, police and doctors, today invoked for protection. So perhaps St Michael was well chosen with the castle's history of defense.

House of Stewart Badge

In its time Rothesay Castle was a formidable structure. Today you can walk around the outside of the grounds to get a better appreciation of its scale, and its place among the town of Rothesay itself. The castle housed the earliest Stewarts long before the crown rested on their heads and became a favourite royal residence to later monarchs. But it has an important place in the formation of Scotland, from defending against Vikings to the English, from housing royalty to prisoners over the centuries, Rothesay Castle has left its mark on Scotland as we know it today, forever entwined with the story of Scotland's most important royal family: the Stewarts.

History VS Hollywood: Annie Laurie

In a recent commemoration of St. Andrews Day the Glasgow Film Theatre (GFT) had a day of films based in Scotland. The theme was called 'Hollywood dreams of Scotland'. The itinerary featured Disney Pixar's Brave, followed by silent film Annie Laurie and ending with cult classic Highlander. But I will focus solely on one film: Annie Laurie.

Originally released on 11th May 1927, the historical drama stars silent icon Lillian Gish in the titular role. Writing credits go to oscar nominated screenwriter Josephine Lovett; the film was directed by John S. Robertson, director of Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde (1920); and the film was well edited by William Hamilton, editor of classics Suspicion (1941) and Top Hat (1935).

The story itself was inspired by a scottish folk song which in turn was inspired by a poem by William Douglas. In typical Hollywood fashion it is a love story set in the Scottish highlands; only all scenes were filmed at MGM Studios, with sets built from scratch. The crew did a great job in creating the 17th century in a studio but it is a bit of a shame that nothing was filmed on location.

The initial story is of a young woman named Annie Laurie who falls in love with Ian MacDonald of Clan MacDonald, rivals of Clan Campbell whom she is affiliated with. This leads to a love triangle with Annie and her two suitors, both of who are from rival clans. What makes it interesting is that it takes place in the lead up to the massacre of Glencoe, an infamous Scottish tragedy where Clan Campbell soldiers massacred many MacDonalds on the orders of King William III.

The build up to the final act is well put together, with some interesting scenes involving Annie looking to help secure Clan MacDonald's safety. But the question is how much of the film is fact and how much is fiction?

The Fiction:

Although the characters are indeed fictional takes on real people there are many instances of genuine emotion. The rivalry for Annie's affections does lead to a face off between the two men; with Ian forced to walk through a crowd of Campbell men who slash his flesh as he makes his way through them, his arms tied as Donald Campbell looks on jeering. It is a great scene to watch; obviously it is easy to see the fakeness of the sword against the flesh of the hero but the scene itself speaks volume of the contempt between the two clans.

And then Campbell's treachery in not telling the MacDonald's the full facts behind the oath that they are to swear to the King. The MacDonalds would have received their original lands as a token of appreciation, but Campbell's desire to be rid of his rival causes the chain of events leading to the massacre.

As a result it is up to Annie Laurie to race to Glencoe to warn her love of the betrayal which leads to the chief races against a heavy snow storm to make it by the first of January to sign the oath of allegiance to the King. This is based on fact as the MacDonalds were delayed by snow storms.

And it is shown in the following scene that it doesn't matter when the oath was signed. Campbell wants blood. So the Campbell soldiers, led by their chief's son, arrive at MacDonald's home seeking shelter. It's a scenario that is somewhat reminiscent of a storyline from current TV drama Game of Thrones involving a certain 'Red Wedding'.

It is once Annie Laurie has left the MacDonalds that the Campbells strike, with Donald Campbell shooting the chief. This leads to a full scale attack of the fortress that is held by the MacDonalds as Annie learns the truth and fights her way to the top of a mountain to light the beacon to signal the other clans to arms. This is intercut with battle scenes in the castle walls as well as the brutal murder of villagers and children. The scenes are really well put together, with everything coming to a head with a faceoff between Ian and Donald, Ian killing his father's killer while proclaiming 'a Campbell for a MacDonald!'

Of course such a scene never took place as far as we know for the real leader of the Campbell party, Robert Campbell lived on for another four years. But for a sword fighting drama it is a good scene to satisfy the audience. It's not reality, but back then especially, the movies were a way of escaping reality. So in the tradition of Hollywood our heroine survived and went on to marry Ian MacDonald, new chief of the MacDonald clan.

The Players:

The movie's heroine is inspired by the Scottish folk song Annie Laurie which in turn was inspired by a poem by William Douglas based on his love for the real Annie Laurie who was born on 16th December 1682 so would have been almost 10 years old when the Glencoe Massacre took place. so in fact she would never have been there when the fued reached its conclusion. The real woman went on to marry an Alexander Fergusson in 1709. But the song itself features in several inter-titles in the film as Donald Campbell attempts to woo her.

As for Donald Campbell, no such man led the attack on Glencoe. The Campbell soldiers were led by Robert Campbell of Glenlyon, a soldier who looked to clear his gambling debts. A man of roughly sixty years old, he in no way resembles the antagonizing Douglas Campbell, son of the Campbell Chieftain, in the film.

The other man after Annie's affections in the film is Ian MacDonald, played by Norman Kerry, who succeeds his father as clan chief at the end of the film. The character's name is actually a shortened version of the real successor John MacIain Macdonald, 13th chief of Glencoe.

The Massacre:

The Massacre of Glencoe took place in the early hours of 13th February 1692. It was a brutal attack that shocked the whole of Scotland. The clan Campbell soldiers were guests under the roofs of the MacDonalds and their people throughout different settlements when they slaughtered 38 unarmed people. They call it Murder Under Trust and was considered a much more heinous crime than any other kind due to Scots law, where you honour the hospitality bestowed upon you under another's roof.

The attack resulted in risings in several settlements in Glencoe, with homes destroyed and burned. As a result many more people perished in the mountains from hunger or the cold, including many women and children. Indeed, in one scene during the film this horror is alluded to when a child is picked up by a soldier and then his lifeless body is placed on top of his dead father. It is a subtle but harrowing way of showing just how monstrous an attack this was.

The Result:

In spite of many inaccuracies the film is an entertaining romp, a historical drama with a love story at its core. Although we wouldn't agree that Ian MacDonald is the epitome of a romantic hero for todays standards, the film does hold up.

And with the recent musical score by Shona Mooney and her band, it made the film so much more memorably entertaining, the soundtrack featuring some beautiful examples of Scottish music at its best. Hopefully a DVD with this soundtrack accompanying it is in the works. A great combination.

Links:

http://www.shonamooneymusic.com/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0017632/

http://glasgowfilm.org/glasgow-film-festival/shows/hollywood-dreams-of-scotland

The Winter Queen: The Story of Elizabeth Stuart

Today when we think of being a princess we imagine a romantic adventure reminiscent of Cinderella who lives happily ever after in a fantastical castle. The life of a woman was precarious at best; with intrigue, war and disease rife throughout the centuries. The prospects of a princess were no different, but sometimes these royal women proved to be more resourceful than the average Disney heroine in their strength of will to survive the harshest obstacles. One of these princesses was Elizabeth Stuart.

Born into Scottish royalty, Elizabeth Stuart was the daughter of King James VI of Scotland and I of England. As such she was given greater advantages than most girls. She was taught to read and write, to play music, to perfect horse riding and etiquette. But she was also a pawn in her father's political prospects, betrothed to the Elector Palatinate of the Rhine without ever having met him. Marriage was a business, love had nothing to do with it.

Yet Elizabeth was lucky for when she finally met her betrothed, Count Frederick, they fell deeply in love. So the couple were happily wed on 14th February 1613. The wedding itself was a beautiful affair, designed to emphasize the wealth of King James VI & I. So the bride was perfectly dressed in white gown embroidered with cloth of silver. It inspired many poems and such, poet John Donne wrote:

Come forth, come forth, and as one glorious flame
Meeting another grows the same,
So meet thy Frederick, and so
To an inseparable union go

The couple left for Germany two months later, where they settled into a happy family life. If not for the changing political climate they may have remained there happily. But fate intervened. 

In March 1619 Ferdinand of Styria was deposed by the Bohemian government, who then elected Frederick to take the crown. After much deliberation he eventually accepted. Upon hearing of his decision King James forbade his subjects from recognizing Frederick or Elizabeth as King or Queen. King James was shrewd enough to recognize the foreseeable troubles that lay ahead. Frederick was crowned on 4th November, followed by Elizabeth's coronation on 7th. 

Despite the triumphant beginning, things soon went downhill. One of the major issues being cultural differences; raised in the Protestant faith, Elizabeth may not have been well informed on Catholic saints. Mere days after her coronation she was presented with flower shaped loves, a commemoration of her name sake, saint Elizabeth of Hungary. Elizabeth didn't get the reference, causing offence. Over time she would become lonely and depressed, as her husband's hectic duties kept them apart for long periods and the Bohemian people coming to slowly resent the outsiders. But Frederick was also naive, resulting in his enemies sacking his Rhine lands and eventually routing his armies forcing the couple to flee from Bohemia, which was doubly dangerous for Elizabeth who was six months pregnant at the time. Despite the situation she remained a source of strength and support for her husband.

In exile she garnered many supporters for this strength, a majority of which would have fought on her behalf. Though whether they would have fought for the cause in Frederick's name alone is questionable. He had become an object of pity, referred to as the 'King of Hearts', meaning no real king. While Frederick was prone to depressive episodes Elizabeth remained optimistic, writing to powerful leaders trying to gain support for his cause. But as the years went on it became more obvious that they would never regain their throne.

Despite their troubles they remained faithful to one another, writing when apart. King James VI died in 1925; Frederick died in 1632. And when her brother Charles I met his untimely death by beheading in 1649 she had no strong support in her corner. But she became something of a protector to Charles' daughter Mary, wife of the Prince of Orange. She remained a strong character in her final years, living to see fortune's wheel turn in her family's favour once again; her eldest son regained the Lower Palatinate that once belonged to his father; and her nephew returned to England in 1660, crowned as King Charles II.

Elizabeth Stuart died on 13th February 1662, with her son Rupert at her side. Prior to her death she had returned to England and upon her death she was interred in the Henry VII Chapel at Westminster Abbey beside her brother Henry, whom she was closest to in life. 

She died with very little in the world but it was through her that her grandson inherited the British crown in 1714, and crowned King George I.

Further Reading:

The Winter Queen: The Life of Elizabeth of Bohemia, by Rosalind K. Marshall

'WHY HIM?': Rape Culture Has To End!

The story of Brock Turner has been all over the media; Facebook is bombarded with constant updates on the story. And it's one we should be using as a cautionary tale for future generations because it has happened too often. A young man with a bright future throws it all away by raping a young woman. It's a story that we see too often. But what came next is worse.

The mother of Brock Turner wrote a letter to the Judge who sentenced him to 6 months in jail, declaring 'please be kind and merciful to my beautiful son'.

Does she understand that her son is a rapist? When she wakes up in the morning she asks herself 'Why him?' Does she see him as the victim?

Brock Turner did have a bright future ahead of him. And quite possibly Olympic glory lay in his future if he worked hard enough, is something any parent would be proud of. Then he was arrested. For rape. He attacked and violated a young woman who will have to live with the trauma of that attack for the rest of her life.

He's already serving a paltry six month sentence that will be shortened to three. To women everywhere that sentence is a joke. So why is his mother begging the judge to be merciful? Because he 'made a mistake'? I don't buy it. And here's why.

All our lives women have been pigeon-holed by their gender; told to smile more - and we do it because it's easier than saying no. We're told by society how we should dress; fashion magazines constantly throwing new trends before our eyes and telling us we need this new dress or these new heels. And when we wear them we're instantly a target for catcalling; if we wear it too short then we're asking for 'it'. What? What are we asking for? To be forced into a situation that we don't feel comfortable with? Women do not get dressed up for the the pleasure of men. We do it because we feel good about ourselves. Why does that suddenly mean we're asking for it? What are we asking for? Humiliation? Degradation? No, no one asks for that.

Today we are still facing horrible stereotypes. No matter how you're dressed you're judged; if you have large breasts you are constantly leered at, often times pretending not to see it because you're scared that you'll cause a scene by standing up to their bullshit.

But these are cultural stigmas that start early. They start with the parents and what they teach their children on the boundaries of respect. And Brock Turner's parents are a huge case and point.

The father can't understand why his son is being punished for '20 minutes of action' and his mother wants to know why this is happening to her son. The '20 minutes of action' was RAPE. The young woman, the ACTUAL VICTIM was assaulted and those 20 minutes of assault will forever haunt her. The mother's reaction is worse in my opinion because she is a woman, she should be aware of the way women are treated in society, yet she writes to the judge as if her son was a victim here.

Yes, his dreams of a bright future are gone. But that is all his own fault. He saw that woman as nothing but a toy; and that is partly down to his parents! How can the mother not be appalled by her son's actions? How can she plead for her son? Because she is a mother? Perhaps. But she is also a woman. She says she knows what a broken heart feels like. So does his victim. And yet people are calling it a mistake. He wasn't in an exam, he was in a position where he had a clear choice of whether to respect that woman's boundaries or gratify his own perverted sense of authority. Because that is what sexual assault is about: Power.

It is time we stopped making excuses. Claiming that they made one mistake is not good enough. If they get away with it once then they'll think they can do it again.

Assault, whether it be full on penetration or someone placing their hands on you in a way that makes you uncomfortable is not acceptable. Women have rights. And it's time authorities respected those rights rather than look for reasons to let the man off the hook. Drink is no excuse. The length of a woman's skirt is no excuse. There needs to be a cultural change within our society, beginning with how parents raise their children; it is a parents responsibility to teach their sons that a woman is a human being worthy of respect. Start here and perceptions can shift over the next generation and our sisters, nieces and daughters will be safer than our own generation is today.

A Forgotten Consort: Margaret of Denmark, Queen of Scots

Queen Margaret

On 14 July 1486, Queen Margaret of Denmark died at Stirling Castle. By her side was her son James, Duke of Rothesay, the future King James IV of Scotland. One source claimed that on her death bed Margaret said to her son, 'I pray you, through your obedience as my son, to love and fear God, always doing good, because nothing achieved by violence, can endure.' If indeed Margaret did speak such words then they would prove tragically prophetic for within two years her son would depose his father, King James III of Scotland, who would die in mysterious circumstances; twenty five years later James IV would meet his own end at the Battle of Flodden against the English in 1513.

Prince James was born on 17 March 1473, four years after Margaret married King James III. The marriage of course was arranged, with the twelve year old Danish princess betrothed to James through the Treaty of Copenhagen. King Christian I of Denmark, founder of the Oldenburg Dynasty, looked to settle old debts and expand his territories, so he agreed to pay 60,000; 10,000 florins upfront before the Scots set sail with his only daughter and a further 50,000 over the next few years. But he only managed to raise 2,000; Already he had agreed to concede the Orkney Islands to Scottish rule as surety for the 50,000 already promised, but now he offered the Shetland Islands as well to satisfy the Scottish envoys. The Danish would never raise the whole amount owed in part of Margaret's dowry and the Orkney and Shetland Isles would become a permanent part of Scotland.

When Margaret finally arrived in Scotland in July 1469 she was married to James at Holyrood Abbey. Over the next couple of years Margaret would settle into her new surroundings well, making Edinburgh her main home. The early years of her marriage to James III were successful; she produced three sons that survived to adulthood. They were both pious, offering homage to Shrines around Scotland such as St. Ninian's in Whithorn. The marriage seemed to be amicable for the most part, with the King granting Margaret wardship of their son and heir James, Duke of Rothesay. Though it appears that James was already under his mother's care from a young age, she would be a strong influence on him as he grew up.

As well as James, she also had her two younger sons, James, Marquis of Ormond and John, Earl of Mar; together they resided in Edinburgh until June 1482 when they were moved to the impregnable Stirling Castle just weeks before the King was taken and later imprisoned in Edinburgh Castle. Held under his uncles, James' nobles aired their grievances with the King - the rise of unknown men among the noble ranks while the true nobility was sidelined; the degradation of the coinage that became known as black money; his casting aside his Queen in favour of less noble company; and the banishment of his younger brother, the Duke of Albany.

Cambuskenneth Abbey

Of course once Albany heard of his brother's incarceration he returned from France, intent on overthrowing his brother and declaring himself King Alexander IV with the help of Edward IV of England. After realising that the nobles would not support him he looked to gain a position through his nephew, the Duke of Rothesay. He visited the Prince and the Queen at Stirling, inquiring about the Duke's education. Afterwards, Albany returned to Edinburgh, recruiting help he lay siege to Edinburgh castle, releasing his brother. But what did happen at Stirling?

Some sources have speculated that Margaret was a great instigator in her husband's release; that she negotiated a deal with Albany, promising a high position if he aided the King. She also had connections within Edinburgh castle through John Stewart, who she had made Keeper of castle during her own stay. Through his position he had regular access to the King. And so the King was released on 29 September 1482 through a successful coup. Afterward, some sources claimed that the relationship between Margaret and James deteriorated even further, despite the likely support she gave him. But there is no proof of this, and the year after her death the King sent an application to the Pope to have Margaret nominated for sainthood.

King James IV

She died at Stirling Castle in July 1486 with her eldest son by her side. The cause of death has been a subject of debate over the years, some believing she was poisoned by the King; others that she likely suffered from ill health for some time before dying. She was buried at Cambuskenneth Abbey, in Stirling, and two years later joined by her husband.

Upon her death her eldest son was left to become a pawn in the political upheaval between James III and his nobles, resulting in the battle of Sauchieburn two years later where James III perished; his murderer was never discovered, and Rothesay was declared King James IV of Scotland.

As for Margaret, her legacy lived on through her son, raised and educated under her supervision. When he did take over the running of his Kingdom, King James IV proved to be an intelligent, and wise ruler. But he tragically died too early in his personal rule, leaving a one year old son to take his place.

Queen Margaret's Coat of
Arms at Stirling Castle

Did the words believed to be spoken by Margaret prove prophetic after all? One source wrote 'Despite his demands', she could 'curb [the King's] unseemly desires by good sense and restraint'. Within two years of her death her husband was dead, and James IV would be haunted by the battle of Sauchieburn for the remainder of his life; he would wear a chain of penance around his waist for the remainder of his life, adding a new link each year. If Margaret had lived it may not have come to such a tragic outcome, likely she may have been the voice of reason in a male dominated world. But it was not to be.

Margaret died at around 30 years old, young by today's standards, but in her short life she proved a successful consort. She provided an heir and two spares for the Scots; participated in saving her husband and the true line of succession through her own intelligence and common sense; and she raised a future King who to this day is considered one of Scotland's better rulers. Sadly, she is often forgotten, with few reminders of her Queenship. The most noticeable tribute to her can be found in her coat of arms set in a stained glass window at Stirling Castle.


Further Reading:

Scottish Queens by Rosalind K. Marshall

James III by Norman MacDougall

James IV by Norman MacDougall