"All his life, he had but one God and one love."
Just finished reading 'Courtesan' by Diane Haeger about the relationship between Henri II of France and Diane de Poitiers. They are my second-favorite historical couple-- second to John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford, who are my favorite more because of my greater loyalty to all things England than for any other reason-- although the fact that I loved 'Katherine' by Anya Seton much more than this book is possibly another reason.
It was a beautiful relationship; it's a pity the book itself doesn't do justice to it because Diane Haeger is writing for modern, stupid audiences and feels the need to state the obvious a lot and uses completely anachronistic expressions that bother me. Plus I don't agree with her telling of the story in two significant events.
This did confirm me in my hatred of Catherine de Medici I must say. I've never been inclined to like her (after reading Dumas' 'Queen Margot' where Catherine is a decidedly evil character, I've never been able to like her.) Now, knowing more about her, I hate her for real. It's a terrible thing to think but honestly, when I was reading about Catherine's serious bout with measles when her life was feared for, all I could think was that it would have been a good thing if she had died. And could have changed so much history. It's mind-boggling. Not only would Diane de Poitiers very likely have been made Henri's wife and she'd have certainly been there when he died but Mary Queen of Scots would never have had her tragic history; she'd most likely have stayed in France, married Charles, the younger brother of Francis after Francis died and played the role for which she was educated to play, that of Queen Consort of France. But then, come to think of it, if that had been the case, James VI and I would never have been born and God only knows what chaos would have happened in England when Elizabeth I died. After all, I suppose it's best that Catherine de Medici did live-- and I am free to dislike her as much as I choose.
It's quite possibly one of the oddest love-triangles ever, two women, one short, fat and ugly and the other, tall, elegant, beautiful and cultured and the beautiful one, the mistress, went out of her way to ensure that her lover also slept with his wife, thus making one of the most successful royal marriages ever, at least as far as progeny are concerned. Really, if Henry VIII of England had been half as lucky, he wouldn't have been nearly as notorious. But the Tudors suffered from a lack of fertility, it seemed, a problem the Valois dynasty certainly never suffered from (though they had their own misfortunes and health problems.)
In brief: Henri II was not a bad man and not a bad king, certainly he was made a better king through Diane de Poitiers' influence. His great legacies are really in the architectural beauties of Chenonceau and le Chateau d'Anet-- fitting monuments to him and his love for one woman. He didn't have an easy life and for all that I'd like to condemn him for his fling with Janet Fleming, I can't because after all, what more can you expect from a man? And Janet Fleming was a slut, an amazingly bold, brazen and mannerless slut who set out to seduce a king and did it so successfully she got pregnant and proceeded to become even more brazen and mannerless. Diane de Poitiers must have been a wonderfully kind, generous woman to forgive him that, I must say, and we know that she was intelligent and well-educated and had a head for business.
Catherine de Medici was a vindictive shrew, who threw away any hope she had of receiving pity for her many years of hurt pride in her positive cruelty to Henri II on his death-bed. (Cruelty to Diane is incidental because nothing less can be expected of her in that regard, unless you count the obligation in that Diane spared her being put away as a barren, unwanted wife and that Diane saved her life! Ok, I take it back, cruelty to Diane is not incidental.) I don't care what amount of hurt pride you've suffered but when your husband of more than 2 decades who's really been quite nice to you, all things considered, is dying a horrible, excruciatingly painful death and he has but one request, you grant it! Granting a dying person's last wish should almost always be done but especially when it's a wish that will only require you swallowing your pride for the sake of the husband who supposedly love so much. I discount Catherine de Medici's supposed love for Henri because it was a selfish, cold-hearted love (all she was capable of, I suppose, given what kind of mother she was). And the petty, vindictive, positively inhumane cruelty of denying Henri his one last comfort of having the woman he'd loved his entire life beside him when he died-- just to see her one last time since protocol would have forbidden Diane being in the room when he actually did die, I suppose-- but still, to deny him that when he was in horrible pain and dying-- it's inhumane. She knew she was going to win once Henri died-- she knew it! She was his official wife, the mother of the spineless new King. She was the one with the power-- but in her triumph she had no mercy on her dying husband. It's sick! She was always going to be the one to be buried beside Henri-- as she is. She was the one buried beside him in full honors as a Queen of France.
Would it have been too much to grant him one last comfort before he died and she won, for good? Heartless, selfish shrew-- as bad a winner as she was a loser. No, I don't pity her at all. I wonder-- was it worth it given that her reputation in history is not of anything good and Diane de Poitiers, for all that she's remembered as being the notorious/famous mistress of Henri II is also remembered as being beautiful, intelligent and the epitome of elegance?
Ironic, really, and tragic that despite the much-talked-of age difference between the two of them, it was Henri who died first and Diane who outlived him by quite a few years. Of course, Diane was very long-lived for the time but still, any sane person would have predicted that Diane would die first. Then again, most people also predicted that Henri would lose interest in Diane as she got older (and older) and hit the dreaded ages of her 40's and 50's-- but, no, he never did lose interest in her, loved her to the day he died, and he was the one to die first. All women should be so lucky as to be so passionately, deeply loved when they're in their middle-age!
Diane de Poitiers was beautiful. It's usually hard to see in pictures of people from that era, portrait painting and opinions of what is considered beautiful, being what they are-- but Diane de Poitiers was beautiful.
It's no wonder that Henri's love for her was so intense as to border on worship. (For once, from all we know, Diane de Poitiers was just as beautiful on the inside as she was on the outside.) And his wish, at least, came true in that he is remembered primarily for his love of her-- and she is remembered for his love too. (Then again, it's hard to imagine how she would not be remembered given how ubiquitous he made the symbols of their HD cypher)
(I plan to enlarge this picture and put it up in my room. Because I'm a dork like that.)
And their love is hard to forget when it's in such a permanent form as this:
On the wall of Chenonceau
I really HAVE to go see the Chateaux in the Loire Valley. Starting with Chenonceau. And then I want to go see Anet and then Fontainebleau. Forget Versailles-- I want to see Chenonceau and Anet!
You know, if there's one thing I resent the French Revolution for it's in how they desecrated and destroyed so many of the historical monuments/beauties of France. What madness possessed them that they felt it necessary to destroy so much that was so beautiful and so important to their history-- and to be so disrespectful to someone who'd lived and died more than a century before them? Create a new world order, if you must, but there's no call to try to destroy history while you're at it. The English had their Civil War and tried to create a new world order without a monarch but didn't feel the need to go berserk and destroy so much priceless historical artifacts and monuments while they were at it.
It was a beautiful relationship; it's a pity the book itself doesn't do justice to it because Diane Haeger is writing for modern, stupid audiences and feels the need to state the obvious a lot and uses completely anachronistic expressions that bother me. Plus I don't agree with her telling of the story in two significant events.
This did confirm me in my hatred of Catherine de Medici I must say. I've never been inclined to like her (after reading Dumas' 'Queen Margot' where Catherine is a decidedly evil character, I've never been able to like her.) Now, knowing more about her, I hate her for real. It's a terrible thing to think but honestly, when I was reading about Catherine's serious bout with measles when her life was feared for, all I could think was that it would have been a good thing if she had died. And could have changed so much history. It's mind-boggling. Not only would Diane de Poitiers very likely have been made Henri's wife and she'd have certainly been there when he died but Mary Queen of Scots would never have had her tragic history; she'd most likely have stayed in France, married Charles, the younger brother of Francis after Francis died and played the role for which she was educated to play, that of Queen Consort of France. But then, come to think of it, if that had been the case, James VI and I would never have been born and God only knows what chaos would have happened in England when Elizabeth I died. After all, I suppose it's best that Catherine de Medici did live-- and I am free to dislike her as much as I choose.
It's quite possibly one of the oddest love-triangles ever, two women, one short, fat and ugly and the other, tall, elegant, beautiful and cultured and the beautiful one, the mistress, went out of her way to ensure that her lover also slept with his wife, thus making one of the most successful royal marriages ever, at least as far as progeny are concerned. Really, if Henry VIII of England had been half as lucky, he wouldn't have been nearly as notorious. But the Tudors suffered from a lack of fertility, it seemed, a problem the Valois dynasty certainly never suffered from (though they had their own misfortunes and health problems.)
In brief: Henri II was not a bad man and not a bad king, certainly he was made a better king through Diane de Poitiers' influence. His great legacies are really in the architectural beauties of Chenonceau and le Chateau d'Anet-- fitting monuments to him and his love for one woman. He didn't have an easy life and for all that I'd like to condemn him for his fling with Janet Fleming, I can't because after all, what more can you expect from a man? And Janet Fleming was a slut, an amazingly bold, brazen and mannerless slut who set out to seduce a king and did it so successfully she got pregnant and proceeded to become even more brazen and mannerless. Diane de Poitiers must have been a wonderfully kind, generous woman to forgive him that, I must say, and we know that she was intelligent and well-educated and had a head for business.
Catherine de Medici was a vindictive shrew, who threw away any hope she had of receiving pity for her many years of hurt pride in her positive cruelty to Henri II on his death-bed. (Cruelty to Diane is incidental because nothing less can be expected of her in that regard, unless you count the obligation in that Diane spared her being put away as a barren, unwanted wife and that Diane saved her life! Ok, I take it back, cruelty to Diane is not incidental.) I don't care what amount of hurt pride you've suffered but when your husband of more than 2 decades who's really been quite nice to you, all things considered, is dying a horrible, excruciatingly painful death and he has but one request, you grant it! Granting a dying person's last wish should almost always be done but especially when it's a wish that will only require you swallowing your pride for the sake of the husband who supposedly love so much. I discount Catherine de Medici's supposed love for Henri because it was a selfish, cold-hearted love (all she was capable of, I suppose, given what kind of mother she was). And the petty, vindictive, positively inhumane cruelty of denying Henri his one last comfort of having the woman he'd loved his entire life beside him when he died-- just to see her one last time since protocol would have forbidden Diane being in the room when he actually did die, I suppose-- but still, to deny him that when he was in horrible pain and dying-- it's inhumane. She knew she was going to win once Henri died-- she knew it! She was his official wife, the mother of the spineless new King. She was the one with the power-- but in her triumph she had no mercy on her dying husband. It's sick! She was always going to be the one to be buried beside Henri-- as she is. She was the one buried beside him in full honors as a Queen of France.
Would it have been too much to grant him one last comfort before he died and she won, for good? Heartless, selfish shrew-- as bad a winner as she was a loser. No, I don't pity her at all. I wonder-- was it worth it given that her reputation in history is not of anything good and Diane de Poitiers, for all that she's remembered as being the notorious/famous mistress of Henri II is also remembered as being beautiful, intelligent and the epitome of elegance?
Ironic, really, and tragic that despite the much-talked-of age difference between the two of them, it was Henri who died first and Diane who outlived him by quite a few years. Of course, Diane was very long-lived for the time but still, any sane person would have predicted that Diane would die first. Then again, most people also predicted that Henri would lose interest in Diane as she got older (and older) and hit the dreaded ages of her 40's and 50's-- but, no, he never did lose interest in her, loved her to the day he died, and he was the one to die first. All women should be so lucky as to be so passionately, deeply loved when they're in their middle-age!
Diane de Poitiers was beautiful. It's usually hard to see in pictures of people from that era, portrait painting and opinions of what is considered beautiful, being what they are-- but Diane de Poitiers was beautiful.
It's no wonder that Henri's love for her was so intense as to border on worship. (For once, from all we know, Diane de Poitiers was just as beautiful on the inside as she was on the outside.) And his wish, at least, came true in that he is remembered primarily for his love of her-- and she is remembered for his love too. (Then again, it's hard to imagine how she would not be remembered given how ubiquitous he made the symbols of their HD cypher)
(I plan to enlarge this picture and put it up in my room. Because I'm a dork like that.)
And their love is hard to forget when it's in such a permanent form as this:
On the wall of Chenonceau
I really HAVE to go see the Chateaux in the Loire Valley. Starting with Chenonceau. And then I want to go see Anet and then Fontainebleau. Forget Versailles-- I want to see Chenonceau and Anet!
You know, if there's one thing I resent the French Revolution for it's in how they desecrated and destroyed so many of the historical monuments/beauties of France. What madness possessed them that they felt it necessary to destroy so much that was so beautiful and so important to their history-- and to be so disrespectful to someone who'd lived and died more than a century before them? Create a new world order, if you must, but there's no call to try to destroy history while you're at it. The English had their Civil War and tried to create a new world order without a monarch but didn't feel the need to go berserk and destroy so much priceless historical artifacts and monuments while they were at it.