User Name  Password
Remove ads
Today | Join | Member | Search | Who's On | Chat Room | Help | Shop | Sign In | | | | | Follow Aimoo_Com on Twitter
Title: Regency & Revolt
Hop to: 
Views:354     
New Topic New Poll
<<Previous ThreadNext Thread>>
Page 1 / 1    
AuthorComment
Forever_Amber
 Author    



Rank:Diamond Member

Score: 575
Posts: 575
From: USA

(Date Posted:05/23/2009 9:01 PM)
Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo

I was going to tinker with that poll thing but then I realized everyone would vote for Edward III & what fun would that be ROFL

England has had 6 minor kings (unlike the Scots who do love a good regency):

Henry III (age 9)
Edward III (age 14)
Richard II (age 10)
Henry VI (9 mos old)
Edward V (age 12)
Edward VI (age 9)

That blasted Tudor on the list is why this is in General & not Plantagenets (I do love order). 

Obviously everyone would nod & say E3 best of a bad lot hands down.  H3 was too busy building cathedrals & throwing money at his Lusignan half-siblings & in-laws to pay much attention until Simon de Montfort revolted.  E3 got testy with being pushed around by Roger Mortimer & revolted himself.   RII was in leading strings well past the time he should've gained his majority, kept down by the Lords Appellant, & then Bolingbroke revolted & kicked him out.  H6 was just revolting ROFL king before he was out of nappies & in leading strings his whole miserable life until the Yorkists revolted & tossed him out.  E5 (& why is he even counted, he was never crowned) was shunted aside by Gloucester's revolt & ended up being a PITT.  E6 was a prim & pious little puppet for the religious extremists of the day & so Northumberland didn't have to revolt until he was deceased.

What IS it about boy kings turning out so badly?  Opinions?

usertype:1
Greensleeves
Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo 1# 



Rank:Platinum Member

Score:258
Posts:258
From: USA

RE:Regency & Revolt
(Date Posted:05/24/2009 4:01 PM)

Same reason the Scots loved a good regency & had so many of them....methinks the only "child king" who didn't get screwed was James IV, who was 15 & whose adolescent rebellion led to his being king by causing Dad's demise.  Peeps go awwww lookit the cute lil king let's put strings on him & make him a lil puppet so we can get rich would be my guess.  Mortimer was getting plenty rich off EIII.  I reckon the query here ought to be not why boy kings go bad but why EIII & JIV were the only ones who were able to shake off those pesky leeches?
usertype:1 tt= 0
Support us

Create free forum and click the links below and your donations will make a difference here.

www.dinodirect.com

A Huge Online Store for Various Cool Gadgets, Accessories: Laser Pointer, Bluetooth Headset, Cell Phone Jammer, MP3 Players, Spy Cameras, Soccer Jersey, Window Curtains, MP4 Player, E Cigarette, Wedding Dresses, Hearing Aids, eBook Reader, Tattoo Machines, LED Light Bulbs, Bluetooth Stereo Headset, Holiday Gifts, Security Camera and Games Accessories and Hobby Gadgets.  
Berengaria
Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo 2# 



Rank:Bronze Member

Score:32
Posts:32
From: USA

RE:Regency & Revolt
(Date Posted:05/25/2009 9:04 PM)

John could not have been the best father figure in the world for Henry III, especially as when the child was old enough to take notice of that the king was embroiled in the baronial revolts, and Isabella of Angouleme is generally regarded as indolent and pleasure-loving and not that great of a mother despite how many children she had. 

Edward II gets bad press for his favorites, but nothing to indicate he was disinterested in his offspring or actively disliked by them, and his Isabella was supposedly frequently visited at Castle Rising by all 4 of them and her daughter Queen Joan of Scotland lived with her when her marriage went sour, so there must have been a decent parent/children relationship there. 

Richard II wasn't expected to be the heir until his older brother Edward of Angouleme died, the Black Prince was ill with what was probably stomach cancer for many years and undoubtedly not in much of a position to exert fatherly influence, though I've read Joan of Kent was a doting mother.  It had to have been hard on a child of Richard's young age to see his strong warrior father deteriorate and waste away. 

Catherine of Valois wasn't permitted to exert any influence over Henry VI at all and rarely saw him, and Henry V never saw him at all before he died.  That was sort of like Edward II following Edward I all over again to have to come in after a fearsome warrior king and be nothing like him. 

Edward V basically had no parental influences, either, being sent to establish his household at Ludlow when he was three years old, and probably not a clue about the political situation resulting from his father's death.  I read Greensleeves's most recent book review and would have to agree that Anthony Woodville was the biggest influence on him.  Since Anthony is generally regarded as the best of the Woodvilles, it may not have been the problem Richard III suspected it to be, but again, Edward IV was a mighty warrior and Anthony Woodville more of a scholarly type from what I've read.

I agree with FA about counting him at all and it's only due to Tudor propaganda that he is.  Jane Grey shouldn't be counted, either.  Empress Matilda wasn't.

Edward VI....all I have to say about that one is Henry VIII and a revolving door of stepmothers.

Edward III was the only one with decent parents, I think, and maybe that explains it.
usertype:6 tt= 0
Greensleeves
Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo 3# 



Rank:Platinum Member

Score:258
Posts:258
From: USA

RE:Regency & Revolt
(Date Posted:06/13/2009 12:32 PM)

Hmmm....when ya think of Edward II & Isabella, "good parenting" doesn't really leap to the fore LOL  But when tis summarized like that, I reckon you could consider them to be the best of a bad lot of royal mums & dads.

(Message edited by Greensleeves On 06/13/2009 12:32 PM)
usertype:1 tt= 0
LouiseOC
Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo 4# 



From: United Kingdom

RE:Regency & Revolt
(Date Posted:06/17/2009 3:04 AM)

Well, Edward V didn't get a chance to grow up to be a good king or a bad king, so we can't really know ho whe would have turned out.  His uncle Richard bumped him off.

Likewise, we don't know what Edward VI might have been like as a king, if he had lived.  However, he was a somewhat fanatical Protestant, so perhaps it's as well we never had to find out.

Edward III was heavily involved in the deplorable Hundred Years War, but whether his being king as a boy had anything to do with that I don't know.

Whether the shortcomings of any of those unlucky kings had anything to do with them becoming king at an early age is hard to say.  it may have done.  But other kings who grew up under regencies did all right for themselves.  Louis IX of France for example.

Louise
usertype:5 tt= 0
Greensleeves
Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo 5# 



Rank:Platinum Member

Score:258
Posts:258
From: USA

RE:Regency & Revolt
(Date Posted:07/17/2009 7:00 AM)

Not to start a Ricardian brawl LOL but I have seen stuff that purports Edward V may not have lived long enough to be king for long anyway regardless of who bumped him off.  Apparently the kid had been suffering from some sort of facial pain for months at Ludlow.  No one seems to know what, natch, but jeez, in those days an abcessed tooth could kill ya; Francis II died of a bad ear infection.  Unless Neddie had big-time TMJ (which I doubt due to his age, it takes yonks to get to that stage & gross medical fact, do you know if it does get there all we still got is break & reset the jaw as a treatment? YUCK), the only thing I can think of that might cause severe facial pain is untreated dental or sinus issues, or mayhap a tumor developing.  Mary supposedly had chronic sinusitis & Philip wasn't too fussed with her bad breath.  Can anyone else think of a better reason for severe facial pain or care to speculate on PITT #1s health issues?
usertype:1 tt= 0
<<Previous ThreadNext Thread>>
Page 1 / 1    
New Topic New Poll

" height=86 width=189>
[List Sites] [Random] [Join]
Sign Up | Create | About Us | SiteMap | Features | Forums | Show Off | Faq | Help
Copyright © 2000-2014 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.

Get cheapest China Wholesale,  China Wholesale Supplier,  to be a retailer is easy now.
LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY
LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY LUFFY