(Untitled)

[modernelegance]

There are many more for members of the community, so if you would like to see more just join the community!

Icon Count for members:
Tudors [26]
Fashion [14]
Anne [8]
Stock [11]
MISC [4]
Userinfo Banners [2]
Friend's Only [1]

Icon Count for Non-Members:Tudors [3

Comments

[iane_grey]

I hated The Tudors, but I love both Anne Boleyn and the actress who played her in that series, so... I will be taking! Will credit of course; thank you very much! Beautiful work btw (so nice when a talented icon maker works with a niche TV show or movie) :)

[modernelegance]

Well I am glad you like them! I am enjoying The Tudors so far. However I am in the Catherine cheering "Catherine, Catherine, Catherine!"

[modernelegance]

LOL, pardon me, I am not actually IN Catherine, I am in the Catherine Corner cheering!

[iane_grey]

*grin* If I'd been there in real life I'd be there with you, but (feeling emotionally removed for various obvious reasons) I prefer Nan for her exciting nature. In addition to that... well... something about Catherine's clingyness bothers me. She may have been Queen once, but (in the absence of God's personal say-so) her duty was still to obey the King, even if she didn't like the consequences.

...and there, ladies and gentleman, is my complete and unsolicited opinion.

[iane_grey]

Ah, don't get me wrong: I sympathize with the woman. However, Catherine's 'marriage' was over long before the divorce came about. I simply cannot understand how, if she sought to act in the best interests of her country, she could reconcile herself to defying her King - Henry was England. Additionally, to have remained silent during all his affairs (because of what we must presume was a sense of propriety), only to make noise when he threatened her title; to my mind, that's not dignity, that's vanity. If I were her, I would have submitted absolutely, knowing I had no right to do otherwise.

All that having been said, I would also defend Mary's title as Princess. In that regard I am entirely partisan :)

:) I readily discuss!

[iane_grey]

As Queen her duty was to obey her husband, regardless of what he may do. It doesn't matter if he's a whoremonger or not! He alone had a divine right to govern her, second only to the right of God, and her sinful pride should have been subject to his will. As to Catholicism, let us not forget that the Pope had no objections to the annulment, but that he was himself governed by Charles V, whose complaint was personal and on his aunt's behalf. Had but she kept quiet there would be no religious objections to begin with. We may quibble over different passages in the Bible, but there is no clear answer in the text, and between King and Queen, King wins by default. Die Gratia etc etc

[iane_grey]

I'm sure, as modern women, these aren't many here who would disagree with you :) But it's all relative; a woman in Tudor times had even few rights then woman of the medieval era that preceded it. You may likewise argue a woman's right to walk about topless in modern northern America, but that doesn't change practically whether or not it's ok to do it, even though men can. As for mentioning her parents! I would have thought that being Ferdinand's daughter would have hammered home her insignificance; he clearly didn't care any more then Henry VII whether or not Catherine wasted away to nothing as an impoverished widow after Arthur died