Podcast appearances and mentions of Helen Castor

I was delighted to talk to the historian Helen Castor (who writes The H Files by Helen Castor) about her new book The Eagle and the Hart. I found that book compulsive, and this is one of my favourite interviews so far. We covered so much: Dickens, Melville, Diana Wynne Jones, Hilary Mantel, whether Edward III is to blame for the Wars of the Roses, why Bolingbroke did the right thing, the Paston Letters, whether we should dig up old tombs for research, leaving academia, Elizabeth I, and, of course, lots of Shakespeare. There is a full transcript below.Henry: Is there anything that we fundamentally know about this episode in history that Shakespeare didn't know?Helen: That's an extremely good question, and I'm tempted now to say no.Helen told me what is hardest to imagine about life in the fourteenth century.I think it's relatively easy to imagine a small community or even a city, because we can imagine lots of human beings together, but how relationships between human beings happen at a distance, not just in terms of writing a letter to someone you know, but how a very effective power structure happens across hundreds of miles in the absence of those things is the thing that has always absolutely fascinated me about the late Middle Ages. I think that's because it's hard, for me at least, to imagine.Good news to any publishers reading this. Helen is ready and willing to produce a complete edition of the Paston Letters. They were a bestseller when they were published a hundred years ago, but we are crying out for a complete edition in modern English.Henry: If someone wants to read the Paston Letters, but they don't want to read Middle English, weird spelling, et cetera, is there a good edition that they can use?Helen: Yes, there is an Oxford World's Classic. They're all selected. There isn't a complete edition in modern spelling. If any publishers are listening, I would love to do one. Henry: Yes, let's have it.Helen: Let's have it. I would really, really love to do that.Full TranscriptHenry: Today I am talking to the historian, Helen Castor. Helen is a former fellow of Sydney Sussex College in Cambridge. She has written several books of history. She is now a public historian, and of course, she has a Substack. The H Files by Helen CastorWe are going to talk mostly about her book, The Eagle and the Hart, which is all about Richard II and Henry IV. I found this book compulsive, so I hope you will read it too. Helen, welcome.Helen: Thank you very much for having me, Henry.Henry: You recently read Bleak House.Helen: I did.Henry: What did you think?Helen: I absolutely loved it. It was a long time since I'd read any Dickens. I read quite a lot when I was young. I read quite a lot of everything when I was young and have fallen off that reader's perch, much to my shame. The first page, that description of the London fog, the London courts, and I thought, "Why have I not been doing it for all these years?"Then I remembered, as so often with Dickens, the bits I love and the bits I'm less fond of, the sentimentality, the grotesquerie I'm less fond of, but the humour and the writing. There was one bit that I have not been able to read then or any of the times I've tried since without physically sobbing. It's a long time since a book has done that to me. I don't want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't read it, but--Henry: I'm sure I know what you mean. That's quite a sentimental passage.Helen: It is, but not sentimental in the way that I find myself objecting to. I think I really respond viscerally to this sentimentalising of some of his young women characters. I find that really off-putting, but I think now I'm a parent, and particularly I'm a parent of a boy [laughter]. I think it's that sense of a child being completely alone with no one to look after them, and then finding some people, but too late for a happy ending.Henry: Too late.Helen: Yes.Henry: You've been reading other classic novels, I think, Moby Dick?Helen: I'm in the middle of Moby Dick as we speak. I'm going very slowly, partly because I'm trying to savour every sentence. I love the sentence so much as a form. Melville is just astonishing, and also very, very funny in a way I hadn't expected to keep laughing out loud, sometimes because there is such humour in a sentence.Sometimes I'm just laughing because the sentence itself seems to have such audacity and that willingness to go places with sentences that sometimes I feel we've lost in the sort of sense of rules-based sentences instead of just sticking a semicolon and keep going. Why not, because it's so gorgeous and full of the joy of language at that point? Anyway, I'm ranting now, but--Henry: No, I think a lot of rules were instituted in the early 20th century that said you can and cannot do all these things, and writers before that point had not often followed those rules. I think what it has led to is that writers now, they can't really control a long sentence, in the sense that Melville and Dickens will do a long sentence, and it is a syntactically coherent thing, even though it's 60, 70 longer words. It's not just lots of stuff, and then, and then. The whole thing has got a beautiful structure that makes sense as a unit. That's just not obvious in a lot of writing now.Helen: I think that's exactly right. Partly, I've been reading some of the Melville out loud, and having just got onto the classification of whales, you can see I'm going very slowly. Those sentences, which are so long, but it's exactly that. If you read them out loud, and you follow the sense, and the punctuation, however irregular it might be in modern terms, gives you the breathing, you just flow on it, and the excitement of that, even or perhaps especially when one is talking about the classification of whales. Just joyful.Henry: Will we be seeing more very long sentences in your next book?Helen: I think I have to get a bit better at it. The habit that I was conscious of anyway, but became acutely so when I had to read my own audiobook for the first time is that I think I write in a very visual way. That is how I read because mostly it's silent.I discovered or rediscovered that often what I do when I want to write a very long sentence is I start the sentence and then I put a diversion or extra information within em dashes in the middle of the sentence. That works on the page because you can see spatially. I love that way of reading, I love seeing words in space.A lot of different kinds of text, both prose and poetry, I read in space like that. If you're reading to be heard, then the difficulty of breaking into a sentence with, whether it's brackets or em dashes or whatever, and then rejoining the sentence further down has its own challenges. Perhaps I ought to try and do less of that and experiment more with a Melvillian Dickensian onward flow. I don't know what my editor will think.Henry: What has brought you back to reading novels like this?Helen: I was wondering that this morning, actually, because I'm very aware having joined Substack, and of course, your Substack is one of the ones that is leading me further in this direction, very inspiringly, is discovering that lots of other people are reading and reading long novels now too. It reminded me of that thing that anyone with children will know that you have a baby and you call it something that you think only you have thought of, and then four years later, you call and you discover half the class is called that name. You wonder what was in the water that led everybody in that direction.I've just seen someone tweet this morning about how inspired they are by the builder next door who, on the scaffolding, is blasting the audiobook Middlemarch to the whole neighborhood.Henry: Oh my god. Amazing.Helen: It's really happening. Insofar as I can work out what led me as opposed to following a group, which clearly I am in some sense, I think the world at the moment is so disquieting, and depressing, and unnerving, that I think for me, there was a wish to escape into another world and another world that would be very immersive, not removed from this world completely. One that is very recognizably human.I think when I was younger, when I was in my teens and 20s, I loved reading science fiction and fantasy before it was such a genre as it is now. I'm a huge fan of Diana Wynne Jones and people like that.Henry: Oh, my god, same. Which one is your favorite?Helen: Oh, that is an impossible question to answer, partly because I want to go back and read a lot of them. Actually, I've got something next to me, just to get some obscurity points. I want to go back to Everard's Ride because there is a story in here that is based on the King's square. I don't know if I'm saying that right, but early 15th century, the story of the imprisoned King of Scotland when he was in prison in England. That one's in my head.The Dalemark Quartet I love because of the sort of medieval, but then I love the ones that are pure, more science fantasy. Which is your favorite? Which should I go back to first?Henry: I haven't read them all because I only started a couple of years ago. I just read Deep Secret, and I thought that was really excellent. I was in Bristol when I read it quite unwittingly. That was wonderful.Helen: Surrounded by Diana Wynne Jones' land. I only discovered many years into an obsession that just meant that I would read every new one while there were still new ones coming out. I sat next to Colin Burrow at a dinner in--Henry: Oh my god.Helen: I did sort of know that he was her son, but monstered him for the whole time, the whole course of sitting together, because I couldn't quite imagine her in a domestic setting, if you like, because she came up with all these extraordinary worlds. I think in days gone by, I went into more obviously imaginary worlds. I think coming back to it now, I wanted something big and something that I really could disappear into. I've been told to read Bleak House for so many decades and felt so ashamed I hadn't. Having done that, I thought, "Well, the whale."Henry: Have you read Diana Wynne Jones' husband's books, John Burrow? Because that's more in your field.Helen: It is, although I'm ashamed to say how badly read I am in medieval literary scholarship. It's weird how these academic silos can operate, shouldn't, probably don't for many, many people. I always feel I'm on horribly thin ground, thin ice when I start talking about medieval literature because I know how much scholarship is out there, and I know how much I haven't read. I must put John Burrow on my list as well.Henry: He's very readable. He's excellent.Helen: I think I can imagine, but I must go into it.Henry: Also, his books are refreshingly short. Your husband is a poet, so there's a lot of literature in your life at the moment.Helen: There is. When we met, which was 10 years ago-- Again, I don't think of myself as knowledgeable about poetry in general, but what was wonderful was discovering how much we had in common in the writing process and how much I could learn from him. To me, one of the things that has always been extremely important in my writing is the sentence, the sound of a sentence, the rhythm of a sentence folded into a paragraph.I find it extremely hard to move on from a paragraph if it's not sitting right yet. The sitting right is as much to do with sound and rhythm as it is to do with content. The content has to be right. It means I'm a nightmare to edit because once I do move on from a paragraph, I think it's finished. Obviously, my editor might beg to differ.I'm very grateful to Thomas Penn, who's also a wonderful historian, who's my editor on this last book, for being so patient with my recalcitrance as an editee. Talking to my husband about words in space on the page, about the rhythm, about the sound, about how he goes about writing has been so valuable and illuminating.I hope that the reading I've been doing, the other thing I should say about going back to big 19th-century novels is that, of course, I had the enormous privilege and learning curve of being part of a Booker jury panel three years ago. That too was an enormous kick in terms of reading and thinking about reading because my co-judges were such phenomenal reading company, and I learned such a lot that year.I feel not only I hope growing as a historian, but I am really, really focusing on writing, reading, being forced out of my bunker where writing is all on the page, starting to think about sound more, think about hearing more, because I think more and more, we are reading that way as a culture, it seems to me, the growth of audiobooks. My mother is adjusting to audiobooks now, and it's so interesting to listen to her as a lifelong, voracious reader, adjusting to what it is to experience a book through sound rather than on the page. I just think it's all fascinating, and I'm trying to learn as I write.Henry: I've been experimenting with audiobooks, because I felt like I had to, and I sort of typically hate audio anything. Jonathan Swift is very good, and so is Diana Wynne Jones.Helen: Interesting. Those two specifically. Is there something that connects the two of them, or are they separately good?Henry: I think they both wrote in a plain, colloquial style. It was very capable of being quite intellectual and had capacity for ideas. Diana Wynne Jones certainly took care about the way it sounded because she read so much to her own children, and that was really when she first read all the children's classics. She had developed for many years an understanding of what would sound good when it was read to a child, I think.Helen: And so that's the voice in her head.Henry: Indeed. As you read her essays, she talks about living with her Welsh grandfather for a year. He was intoning in the chapel, and she sort of comes out of this culture as well.Helen: Then Swift, a much more oral culture.Henry: Swift, of course, is in a very print-heavy culture because he's in London in 1710. We've got coffee houses and all the examiner, and the spectator, and all these people scribbling about each other. I think he was very insistent on what he called proper words in proper places. He became famous for that plain style. It's very carefully done, and you can't go wrong reading that out loud. He's very considerate of the reader that you won't suddenly go, "Oh, I'm in the middle of this huge parenthesis. I don't know how--" As you were saying, Swift-- he would be very deliberate about the placement of everything.Helen: A lot of that has to do with rhythm.Henry: Yes.Helen: Doesn't it? I suppose what I'm wondering, being very ignorant about the 18th century is, in a print-saturated culture, but still one where literacy was less universal than now, are we to assume that that print-saturated culture also incorporated reading out loud —Henry: Yes, exactly so. Exactly so. If you are at home, letters are read out loud. This obviously gives the novelists great opportunities to write letters that have to sort of work both ways. Novels are read out loud. This goes on into the 19th century. Dickens had many illiterate fans who knew his work through it being read to them. Charles Darwin's wife read him novels. When he says, "I love novels," what he means is, "I love it when my wife reads me a novel." [laughs]You're absolutely right. A good part of your audience would come from those listening as well as those reading it.Helen: Maybe we're getting back towards a new version of that with audiobooks expanding in their reach.Henry: I don't know. I saw some interesting stuff. I can't remember who was saying this. Someone was saying, "It's not an oral culture if you're watching short videos. That's a different sort of culture." I think, for us, we can say, "Oh yes, we're like Jonathan Swift," but for the culture at large, I don't know. It is an interesting mixed picture at the moment.Helen: Yes, history never repeats, but we should be wary of writing off any part of culture to do with words.Henry: I think so. If people are reporting builders irritating the neighbourhood with George Eliot, then it's a very mixed picture, right?Helen: It is.Henry: Last literary question. Hilary Mantel has been a big influence on you. What have you taken from her?Helen: That's quite a hard question to answer because I feel I just sit at her feet in awe. If I could point to anything in my writing that could live up to her, I would be very happy. The word that's coming into my head when you phrase the question in that way, I suppose, might be an absolute commitment to precision. Precision in language matters to me so much. Her thought and her writing of whatever kind seems to me to be so precise.Listening to interviews with her is such an outrageous experience because these beautifully, entirely formed sentences come out of her mouth as though that's how thought and language work. They don't for me. [chuckles] I'm talking about her in the present tense because I didn't know her, but I find it hard to imagine that she's not out there somewhere.Henry: She liked ghosts. She might be with us.Helen: She might. I would like to think that. Her writing of whatever genre always seems to me to have that precision, and it's precision of language that mirrors precision of thought, including the ability to imagine herself into somebody else's mind. That's, I suppose, my project as a historian. I'm always trying to experience a lost world through the eyes of a lost person or people, which, of course, when you put it like that, is an impossible task, but she makes it seem possible for her anyway and that's the road I'm attempting to travel one way or another.Henry: What is it about the 14th and 15th centuries that is hardest for us to imagine?Helen: I think this speaks to something else that Hilary Mantel does so extraordinarily well, which is to show us entire human beings who live and breathe and think and feel just as we do in as complex and contradictory and three-dimensional a way as we do, and yet who live in a world that is stripped of so many of the things that we take so much for granted that we find it, I think, hard to imagine how one could function without them.What I've always loved about the late Middle Ages, as a political historian, which is what I think of myself as, is that it has in England such a complex and sophisticated system of government, but one that operates so overwhelmingly through human beings, rather than impersonal, institutionalized, technological structures.You have a king who is the fount of all authority, exercising an extraordinary degree of control over a whole country, but without telephones, without motorized transport, without a professional police service, without a standing army. If we strip away from our understanding of government, all those things, then how on earth does society happen, does rule happen, does government happen?I think it's relatively easy to imagine a small community or even a city, because we can imagine lots of human beings together, but how relationships between human beings happen at a distance, not just in terms of writing a letter to someone you know, but how a very effective power structure happens across hundreds of miles in the absence of those things is the thing that has always absolutely fascinated me about the late Middle Ages. I think that's because it's hard, for me at least, to imagine.Henry: Good. You went to the RSC to watch The Henriad in 2013.Helen: I did.Henry: Is Shakespeare a big influence on this book? How did that affect you?Helen: I suppose this is a long story because Richard II and The Henriad have been-- there is Richard II. Richard II is part of The Henriad, isn't it?Henry: Yes.Helen: Richard II. Henry, see, this is-Henry: The two Henry IVs.Helen: -I'm not Shakespearean. I am. [laughs]Henry: No, it's Richard II, the two Henry IVs, and Henry V. Because, of course, Henry Bolingbroke is in Richard II, and it--Helen: Yes, although I never think of him as really the same person as Henry IV in the Henry IV plays, because he changes so dramatically between the two.Henry: Very often, they have a young actor and an old actor, and of course, in real life, that's insane, right?Helen: It's absolutely insane. I always separate Henry IV, parts I and II, and Henry V off from Richard II because it feels to me as though they operate in rather different worlds, which they do in lots of ways. My story with the Henry ad, now that we've established that I actually know what we're talking about, goes back to when I was in my teens and Kenneth Branagh was playing Henry V in Stratford. I grew up very near Stratford.At 15, 16, watching the young Branagh play Henry V was mind-blowing. I went a whole number of times because, in those days, I don't know how it is now, but you could go and get standing tickets for a fiver on the day. More often than not, if there were spare seats, you would get moved into some extraordinary stall seats at-- I was about to say halftime, I'm a football fan, at the interval.Henry V was the play I knew best for a long time, but at the same time, I'd studied Richard II at school. The Henry IV plays are the ones I know least well. I'm interested now to reflect on the fact that they are the ones that depart most from history. I wonder whether that's why I find them hardest to love, because I'm always coming to the plays from the history. Richard II and Henry V actually have a lot to show us about those kings. They bear very close relationships with a lot of the contemporary chronicles, whereas the Henry IV ones is Shakespeare doing his own thing much more.Particularly, as you've just said, making Henry IV way too old, and/or depending which angle we're looking at it from, making Hotspur way too young, the real Hotspur was three years older than Henry IV. If you want to make Hotspur and how-- your young Turks, you have to make Henry IV old and grey and weary with Northumberland.Back in 2013, the really intense experience I had was being asked to go for a day to join the RSC company on a school trip to Westminster Hall and Westminster Abbey at the beginning of their rehearsal process, so when David Tennant was playing Richard II and Greg Doran was directing. That was absolutely fascinating. I'd been thinking about Richard and Henry for a very long time. Obviously, I was a long way away from writing the book I've just written.Talking to actors is an extraordinary thing for a historian because, of course, to them, these are living characters. They want to know what's in their character's mind. They want to know, quite rightly, the chronological progression of their character's thought. That is something that's become more and more and more and more important to me.The longer I go on writing history, the more intensely attached I am to the need for chronology because if it hasn't happened to your protagonist yet, what are you doing with it? Your protagonist doesn't yet know. We don't know. It's very dramatically clear to us at the moment that we don't know what's happening tomorrow. Any number of outrageous and unpredictable things might happen tomorrow.The same certainly was true in Richard II's reign, goes on being true in Henry IV's reign. That experience, in the wake of which I then went to see Henry IV, parts 1 and 2 in Stratford, was really thought-provoking. The extent to which, even though I'd been working on this period for a long time, and had taught this period, I still was struggling to answer some of those questions.Then I'd just had the similarly amazing experience of having a meeting with the Richard II cast and director at the Bridge Theatre before the Nicholas Heitner production with Jonathan Bailey as Richard went on stage. That was actually towards the end of their rehearsal process. I was so struck that the actor playing Bolingbroke in this production and the actor playing Bolingbroke in the production back in 2013 both asked the same excellent first question, which is so hard for a historian to answer, which is at what point does Bolingbroke decide that he's coming back to claim the crown, not just the Duchy of Lancaster?That is a key question for Bolingbroke in Richard II. Does he already know when he decides he's going to break his exile and come back? Is he challenging for the crown straight away, or is he just coming back for his rightful inheritance with the Duchy of Lancaster? That is the million-dollar question when you're writing about Bolingbroke in 1399.It's not possible to answer with a smoking gun. We don't have a letter or a diary entry from Henry Bolingbroke as he's about to step on board ship in Boulogne saying, "I'm saying I'm coming back for the Duchy of Lancaster." The unfolding logic of his situation is that if he's going to come back at all, he's going to have to claim the crown. When he admits that to himself, and when he admits that to anybody else, are questions we can argue about.It was so interesting to me that that's the question that Shakespeare's Richard II throws up for his Bolingbroke just as much as it does for the historical one.Henry: Is there anything that we fundamentally know about this episode in history that Shakespeare didn't know?Helen: That's an extremely good question, and I'm tempted now to say no.Henry: When I left your book, the one thing I thought was that in Shakespeare, the nobles turn against Richard because of his excesses. Obviously, he really dramatizes that around the death of Gaunt. From your book, you may disagree with this, I came away thinking, well, the nobles wanted more power all the time. They may not have wanted the king's power, but there was this constant thing of the nobles feeling like they were owed more authority.Helen: I think the nobles always want more power because they are ambitious, competitive men within a political structure that rewards ambition and competition. The crucial thing for them is that they can only safely pursue ambition and competition if they know that the structure they're competing within will hold.The thing that keeps that structure rooted and solidly in place is the crown and the things that the crown is there to uphold, namely, particularly, the rule of law because if the rule of law starts to crumble, then the risk is that the whole structure collapses into anarchy. Within anarchy, then a powerful man cannot safely compete for more power because an even more powerful man might be about to roll into his estates and take them over. There have to be rules. There has to be fair competition. The referee is there on a football pitch for a reason.The king, in some senses, whether you want to see him as the keystone in an arch that supports a building or whether he's a referee on a football pitch, there are reasons why powerful men need rules because rules uphold their power. What goes wrong with Richard is that instead of seeing that he and the nobles have a common interest in keeping this structure standing, and that actually he can become more powerful if he works with and through the nobles, he sees them as a threat to him.He's attempting to establish a power structure that will not be beholden to them. In so doing, he becomes a threat to them. This structure that is supposed to stand as one mutually supportive thing is beginning to tear itself apart. That is why Richard's treatment of Bolingbroke becomes such a crucial catalyst, because what Richard does to Bolingbroke is unlawful in a very real and very technical sense. Bolingbroke has not been convicted of any crime. He's not been properly tried. There's been this trial by combat, the duel with Mowbray, but it hasn't stopped arbitrarily, and an arbitrary punishment visited upon both of them. They're both being exiled without having been found guilty, without the judgment of God speaking through this duel.Richard then promises that Bolingbroke can have his inheritance, even though he's in exile. As soon as Gaunt dies, Richard says, "No, I'm having it." Now, all of that is unlawful treatment of Bolingbroke, but because Bolingbroke is the most powerful nobleman in the country, it is also a warning and a threat to every other member of the political classes that if the king takes against you, then his arbitrary will can override the law.That diagnosis is there in Shakespeare. It's the Duke of York, who in reality was just a completely hopeless, wet figure, but he says, and I've got it written down, keep it beside me.Henry: Very nice.Helen: Kind of ridiculous, but here it is. York says to Richard, "Take Herford's rights away and take from time his charters and his customary rights. Let not tomorrow then ensue today. Be not thyself, for how art thou a king, but by fair sequence and succession?" In other words, if you interfere with, and I know you've written about time in these plays, it's absolutely crucial.Part of the process of time in these plays is that the rules play out over time. Any one individual king must not break those rules so that the expected process of succession over time can take place. York's warning comes true, that Richard is unseating himself by seeking to unseat Bolingbroke from his inheritance.Henry: We give Shakespeare good marks as a historian.Helen: In this play, yes, absolutely. The things he tinkers with in Richard II are minor plot points. He compresses time in order to get it all on stage in a plausible sequence of events. He compresses two queens into one, given that Richard was married to, by the time he fell, a nine-year-old who he'd married when he was six. It's harder to have a six-year-old making speeches on stage, so he puts the two queens into one.Henry: You don't want to pay another actor.Helen: Exactly.Henry: It's expensive.Helen: You don't want children and animals on stage. Although there is a wonderful account of a production of Richard II on stage in the West End in 1901, with the Australian actor Oscar Asche in it, playing Bolingbroke. The duel scene, he had full armour and a horse, opening night. It was a different horse from the one he rehearsed with. He gives an account in his autobiography of this horse rearing and him somersaulting heroically off the horse.Henry: Oh my god.Helen: The curtain having to come down and then it going back up again to tumultuous applause. You think, "Oscar, I'm wondering whether you're over-egging this pudding." Anyway, I give Shakespeare very good marks in Richard II, not really in the Henry IV plays, but gets back on track.Henry: The Henry IV plays are so good, we're forgiven. Was Richard II a prototype Henry VIII?Helen: Yes. Although, of course, history doesn't work forwards like that. I always worry about being a historian, talking about prototypes, if you see what I mean, but--Henry: No, this is just some podcast, so we don't have to be too strict. He's over-mighty, his sense of his relationship to God. There are issues in parliament about, "How much can the Pope tell us what to do?" There are certain things that seem to be inherent in the way the British state conceives of itself at this point that become problematic in another way.Helen: Is this pushing it too far to say Richard is a second son who ends up being the lone precious heir to the throne who must be wrapped in cotton wool to ensure that his unique God-given authority is protected? Also describes Henry VIII.Henry: They both like fancy clothes.Helen: Both like fancy clothes. Charles I is also a second son who has to step up.Henry: With wonderful cuffs and collars. He's another big dresser.Helen: And great patrons of art. I think we're developing new historical--Henry: No, I think there's a whole thing here.Helen: I think there is. What Henry does, of course, in rather different, because a lot has changed thanks to the Wars of the Roses, the power of the nobility to stand up independently of the crown is significantly lessened by the political effects of the Wars of the Roses, not at least that a lot of them have had their heads cut off, or died in battle, and the Tudors are busy making sure that they remain in the newly subjected place that they find themselves in.Henry then finds to go back to Hilary Mantel, a very, very able political servant who works out how to use parliament for him in rejecting those extra English powers that might restrain him. I do always wonder what Richard thought he was going to do if he'd succeeded in becoming Holy Roman Emperor, which I take very seriously as a proposition from Richard.Most other historians, because it's so patently ridiculous, if you look at it from a European perspective, have just said, "Oh, he got this idea that he wanted to become Holy Roman Emperor," but, of course, it was never going to happen. In Richard's mind, I think it was extremely real. Whether he really would have tried to give the English crown to Rutland, his favorite by the end of the reign, while he went off in glory to be crowned by the Pope, I don't know what was in his head. The difference with Henry is that the ambitions he eventually conceives are very England-focused, and so he can make them happen.Henry: Is there some sort of argument that, if the king hadn't won the Wars of the Roses, and the nobility had flourished, and their sons hadn't been killed, the reformation would have just been much harder to pull off here?[silence]Helen: I wonder what that would have looked like, because in a sense, the king was always going to win the Wars of the Roses, in the sense that you have to have a king. The minute you had someone left standing after that mess, that protracted mess, if he knew what he was doing, and there are arguments about the extent to which Henry VII knew what he was doing, or was doing something very different, whether or not he knew it was different, but there was always going to be an opportunity for a king to assert himself after that.Particularly, the extent to which the lesser landowners, the gentry had realized they couldn't just rely on the nobility to protect them anymore. They couldn't just follow their lord into battle and abdicate responsibility.Henry: Okay.Helen: That's an interesting--Henry: How much should we blame Edward III for all of this?Helen: For living too long and having too many sons?Henry: My argument against Edward is the Hundred Years' War, it doesn't actually go that well by the end of his reign, and it's cost too much money. Too many dukes with too much power. It's not that he had too many sons, he elevates them all and creates this insane situation. The war itself starts to tip the balance between the king and parliament, and so now you've got it from the dukes, and from the other side, and he just didn't manage the succession at all.Even though his son has died, and it really needs some kind of-- He allowed. He should have known that he was allowing a vacuum to open up where there's competition from the nobles, and from parliament, and the finances are a mess, and this war isn't there. It's just… he just leaves a disaster, doesn't he?Helen: I think I'd want to reframe that a little bit. Perhaps, I'm too much the king's friend. I think the political, and in some senses, existential dilemma for a medieval king is that the best of all possible worlds is what Edward achieves in the 1340s and the 1350s, which is, fight a war for reasons that your subjects recognize as in the common interest, in the national interest. Fight it over there so that the lands that are being devastated and the villages and towns that are being burned are not yours. Bring back lots of plunder. Everybody's getting richer and feeling very victorious.You can harness parliament. When things are going well, a medieval king and a parliament are not rivals for power. An English king working with parliament is more powerful than an English king trying to work without parliament. If things are going well, he gets more money, he can pass laws, he can enforce his will more effectively. It's win-win-win if you're ticking all those boxes.As you're pointing out, the worst of all possible worlds is to be fighting a war that's going badly. To fight a war is a big risk because either you're going to end up winning and everything's great, or if it's going badly, then you'd rather be at peace. Of course, you're not necessarily in a position to negotiate peace, depending on the terms of the war you've established.Similarly, with sons, you want heirs. You want to know the succession is safe. I think Edward's younger sons would argue with you about setting up very powerful dukes because the younger ones really-- York and Gloucester, Edmund of Langley and Thomas of Woodstock, really didn't have much in the way of an estate given to them at all, and always felt very hard done by about that. John of Gaunt is set up very well because he's married off to the heir of the Duke of Lancaster who's handily died, leaving only daughters.Henry: That's the problem, isn't it, creating that sort of impact? John of Gaunt is far too rich and powerful.Helen: You say that, except he's unfeasibly loyal. Without Gaunt, disaster happens much, much, much earlier. Gaunt is putting all those resources into the project of propping up the English state and the English crown for way longer than Richard deserves, given that Richard's trying to murder him half the time in the 1380s.Henry: [laughs] For sure. No, I agree with you there, but from Edward III's point of view, it's a mistake to make one very powerful son another quite powerful son next to-- We still see this playing out in royal family dynamics.Helen: This is the problem. What is the perfect scenario in a hereditary system where you need an heir and a spare, but even there, the spare, if he doesn't get to be the heir, is often very disgruntled. [laughs] If he does get to be the heir, as we've just said, turns out to be overconvinced of his own-Henry: Oh, indeed, yes.Helen: -specialness. Then, if you have too many spares, you run into a different kind of problem. Equally, if you don't have a hereditary system, then you have an almighty battle, as the Anglo-Saxons often did, about who's actually going to get the crown in the next generation. It's a very tricky--Henry: Is England just inherently unstable? We've got the Black Death, France is going to be a problem, whatever happens. Who is really going to come to a good fiscal position in this situation? It's no one's fault. It's just there wasn't another way out.Helen: You could say that England's remarkably-- See, I'm just playing devil's advocate the whole time.Henry: No, good.Helen: You could say England is remarkably stable in the sense that England is very unusually centralized for a medieval state at this point. It's centralized in a way that works because it's small enough to govern. It's, broadly speaking, an island. You've got to deal with the Scotts border, but it's a relatively short border. Yes, you have powerful nobles, but they are powerful nobles who, by this stage, are locked into the state. They're locked into a unified system of law. The common law rules everyone. Everyone looks to Westminster.It's very different from what the King of France has been having to face, which has been having to push his authority outward from the Île-de-France, reconquer bits of France that the English have had for a long time, impose his authority over other princes of the realm in a context where there are different laws, there are different customs, there are different languages. You could say that France is in a much more difficult and unstable situation.Of course, what we see as the tide of the war turns again in the early 15th century is precisely that France collapses into civil war, and the English can make hay again in that situation. If Henry V had not died too young with not enough sons in 1423, and particularly, if he'd left a son who grew up to be any use at all, as opposed to absolutely none-- what am I saying? I'm saying that the structure of government in England could work astonishingly well given the luck of the right man at the helm. The right man at the helm had to understand his responsibilities at home, and he had to be capable of prosecuting a successful war abroad because that is how this state works best.As you've just pointed out, prosecuting a successful war abroad is an inherently unstable scenario because no war is ever going to go in your direction the entire time. That's what Richard, who has no interest in war at all is discovering, because once the tide of war is lapping at your own shores, instead of all happening over there, it's a very, very different prospect in terms of persuading parliament to pay for it, quite understandably.You talk about the Black Death. One of the extraordinary things is looking at England in 1348, 1349, when the Black Death hits. Probably, something approaching half the population dies in 18 months. If you're looking at the progress of the war, you barely notice it happened at all. What does the government do? It snaps into action and implements a maximum wage immediately, in case [chuckles] these uppity laborers start noticing there are fewer of them, and they can ask for more money.The amount of control, at that stage at least, that the government has over a country going through an extraordinary set of challenges is quite remarkable, really.Henry: Did Bolingbroke do the right thing?Helen: I think Bolingbroke did the only possible thing, which, in some senses, equates to the right thing. If he had not come back, he would not only have been abandoning his own family, his dynasty, his inheritance, everything he'd been brought up to believe was his responsibility, but also abandoning England to what was pretty much by that stage, clearly, a situation of tyranny.The big argument is always, well, we can identify a tyrant, we have a definition of tyranny. That is, if a legitimate king rules in the common interest and according to the law, then a tyrant rules not in the common interest, and not according to the law. But then the thing that the political theorists argue about is whether or not you can actively resist a tyrant, or whether you have to wait for God to act.Then, the question is, "Might God be acting through me if I'm Bolingbroke?" That's what Bolingbroke has to hope, because if he doesn't do what he does in 1399, he is abandoning everything his whole life has been devoted to maintaining and taking responsibility for. It's quite hard to see where England would then end up, other than with somebody else trying to challenge Richard in the way that Henry does.Henry: Why was he anointed with Thomas Becket's oil?Helen: Because Richard had found it in the tower, [chuckles] and was making great play of the claims that were made for Thomas. This is one of the interesting things about Richard. He is simultaneously very interested in history, and interested in his place in history, his place in the lineage of English kings, going all the way back, particularly to the confessor to whom he looks as not only a patron saint, but as in some sense, a point of identification.He's also seeking to stop time at himself. He doesn't like to think about the future beyond himself. He doesn't show any interest in fathering an heir. His will is all about how to make permanent the judgments that he's made on his nobles. It's not about realistically what's going to happen after his death.In the course of his interest in history, he has found this vial of oil in the tower somewhere in a locked drawer with a note that says, "The Virgin gave this to Thomas Becket, and whoever is anointed with this oil shall win all his battles and shall lead England to greatness," et cetera. Richard has tried to have himself re-anointed, and even his patsy Archbishop of Canterbury that he's put in place after exiling the original one who'd stood up to him a bit.Even the new Archbishop of Canterbury says, "Sire, anointing doesn't really work like that. I'm afraid we can't do it twice." Richard has been wearing this vial round his neck in an attempt to claim that he is not only the successor to the confessor, but he is now the inheritor of this holy oil. The French king has had a holy oil for a very long time in the Cathedral of Reims, which was supposedly given to Clovis, the first king of France, by an angel, et cetera.Richard, who is always very keen on emulating, or paralleling the crown of France, is very, very keen on this. If you were Henry coming in 1399 saying, "No, God has spoken through me. The country has rallied to me. I am now the rightful king of England. We won't look too closely at my justifications for that," and you are appropriating the ceremonial of the crown, you are having yourself crowned in Westminster Abbey on the 13th of October, which is the feast day of the confessor, you are handed that opportunity to use the symbolism of this oil that Richard has just unearthed, and was trying to claim for himself. You can then say, "No, I am the first king crowned with this oil," and you're showing it to the French ambassadors and so on.If we are to believe the chroniclers, it starts making his hair fall out, which might be a contrary sign from God. It's a situation where you are usurping the throne, and what is questionable is your right to be there. Then, any symbolic prop you can get, you're going to lean on as hard as you can.Henry: A few general questions to close. Should we be more willing to open up old tombs?Helen: Yes. [laughs]Henry: Good. [laughs]Helen: I'm afraid, for me, historical curiosity is-- Our forebears in the 18th and 19th century had very few qualms at all. One of the things I love about the endless series of scholarly antiquarian articles that are-- or not so scholarly, in some cases, that are written about all the various tomb openings that went on in the 18th and 19th century, I do love the moments, where just occasionally, they end up saying, "Do you know what, lads? Maybe we shouldn't do this bit." [chuckles]They get right to the brink with a couple of tombs and say, "Oh, do you know what? This one hasn't been disturbed since 1260, whatever. Maybe we won't. We'll put it back." Mostly, they just crowbar the lid off and see what they can find, which one might regret in terms of what we might now find with greater scientific know-how, and et cetera. Equally, we don't do that kind of thing anymore unless we're digging up a car park. We're not finding things out anyway. I just love the information that comes out, so yes, for me.Henry: Dig up more tombs.Helen: Yes.Henry: What is it that you love about the Paston Letters?Helen: More or less everything. I love the language. I love the way that, even though most of them are dictated to scribes, but you can hear the dictation. You can hear individual voices. Everything we were saying about sentences. You can hear the rhythm. You can hear the speech patterns. I'm no linguistic expert, but I love seeing the different forms of spelling and how that plays out on the page.I love how recognizable they are as a family. I love the fact that we hear women's voices in a way that we very rarely do in the public records. The government which is mainly what we have to work with. I love Margaret Paston, who arrives at 18 as a new bride, and becomes the matriarch of the family. I love her relationship with her two eldest boys, John and John, and their father, John.I do wish they hadn't done that because it doesn't help those of us who are trying to write about them. I love the view you get of late medieval of 15th-century politics from the point of view of a family trying to survive it. The fact that you get tiny drops in letters that are also about shopping, or also about your sisters fall in love with someone unsuitable. Unsuitable only, I hasten to add, because he's the family bailiff, not because he isn't a wonderful and extremely able man. They all know those two things. It's just that he's a family bailiff, and therefore, not socially acceptable.I love that experience of being immersed in the world of a 15th-century gentry family, so politically involved, but not powerful enough to protect themselves, who can protect themselves in the Wars of the Roses in any case.Henry: If someone wants to read the Paston Letters, but they don't want to read Middle English, weird spelling, et cetera, is there a good edition that they can use?Helen: Yes, there is an Oxford World's Classic. They're all selected. There isn't a complete edition in modern spelling. If any publishers are listening, I would love to do one. [chuckles]Henry: Yes, let's have it.Helen: Let's have it. I would really, really love to do that. There are some very good selections. Richard Barber did one many years ago, and, of course, self-advertising. There is also my book, now more than 20 years old, about the Paston family, where I was trying to put in as much of the letters as I could. I wanted to weave the voices through. Yes, please go and read the Paston Letters in selections, in whatever form you can get them, and let's start lobbying for a complete modernized Paston.Henry: That's right. Why did you leave academia? Because you did it before it was cool.Helen: [laughs] That's very kind of you to say. My academic life was, and is very important to me, and I hate saying this now, because the academic world is so difficult now. I ended up in it almost by accident, which is a terrible thing to say now, people having to-- I never intended to be an academic. My parents were academics, and I felt I'd seen enough and wasn't sure I wanted to do that.I couldn't bear to give up history, and put in a PhD application to work with Christine Carpenter, who'd been the most inspiring supervisor when I was an undergraduate, got the place, thought, "Right, I'm just going to do a PhD." Of course, once you're doing a PhD, and everyone you know is starting to apply for early career jobs, which weren't even called early career jobs in those days, because it was a million years ago.I applied for a research fellowship, was lucky enough to get it, and then applied for a teaching job, utterly convinced, and being told by the people around me that I stood no chance of getting it, because I was way too junior, and breezed through the whole process, because I knew I wasn't going to get it, and then turned up looking for someone very junior.I got this wonderful teaching job at Sidney Sussex in Cambridge and spent eight years there, learned so much, loved working with the students. I was working very closely with the students in various ways, but I wasn't-- I'm such a slow writer, and a writer that needs to be immersed in what I was doing, and I just wasn't managing to write, and also not managing to write in the way I wanted to write, because I was becoming clearer and clearer about the fact that I wanted to write narrative history.Certainly, at that point, it felt as though writing narrative history for a general audience and being an early career academic didn't go so easily together. I think lots of people are now showing how possible it is, but I wasn't convinced I could do it. Then, sorry, this is a very long answer to what's [crosstalk] your question.Henry: That's good.Helen: I also had my son, and my then partner was teaching at a very different university, I mean, geographically different, and we were living in a third place, and trying to put a baby into that geographical [chuckles] setup was not going to work. I thought, "Well, now or never, I'll write a proposal for a book, a narrative, a book for a general readership, a narrative book about the Paxton family, because that's what I really want to write, and I'll see if I can find an agent, and I'll see if I," and I did.I found the most wonderful agent, with whose help I wrote a huge proposal, and got a deal for it two weeks before my son was due. At that point, I thought, "Okay, if I don't jump now, now or never, the stars are aligned." I've been a freelance medieval historian ever since then, touching every wood I can find as it continues to be possible. I am very grateful for those years in Cambridge. They were the making of me in terms of training and in terms of teaching.I certainly think without teaching for those years, I wouldn't be anywhere near as good a writer, because you learn such a lot from talking to, and reading what students produce.Henry: How do you choose your subjects now? How do you choose what to write about?Helen: I follow my nose, really. It's not very scientific.Henry: Why should it be?Helen: Thank you. The book, bizarrely, the book that felt most contingent, was the one I wrote after the Paston book, because I knew I'd written about the Pastons in my PhD, and then again more of it in the monograph that was based on my PhD. I knew having written about the Pastons in a very academic, analytical way, contributing to my analysis of 15th-century politics. I knew I wanted to put them at the center and write about them. That was my beginning point.The big question was what to do next, and I was a bit bamboozled for a while. The next book I ended up writing was She-Wolves, which is probably, until now, my best-known book. It was the one that felt most uncertain to me, while I was putting it together, and that really started from having one scene in my head, and it's the scene with which the book opens. It's the scene of the young Edward VI in 1553, Henry VIII's only son, dying at the age of 15.Suddenly, me suddenly realizing that wherever you looked on the Tudor family tree at that point, there were only women left. The whole question of whether a woman could rule was going to have to be answered in some way at that point, and because I'm a medievalist, that made me start thinking backwards, and so I ended up choosing some medieval queens to write about, because they've got their hands on power one way or another.Until very close to finishing it, I was worried that it wouldn't hang together as a book, and the irony is that it's the one that people seem to have taken to most. The next book after that grew out of that one, because I found myself going around talking about She-Wolves, and saying repeatedly, "The problem these queens faced was that they couldn't lead an army on the battlefield."Women couldn't do that. The only medieval woman who did that was Joan of Arc, and look what happened to her. Gradually, I realized that I didn't really know what had happened to her. I mean, I did know what--Henry: Yes, indeed.Helen: I decided that I really wanted to write about her, so I did that. Then, having done that, and having then written a very short book about Elizabeth I, that I was asked to write for Penguin Monarchs, I realized I'd been haunted all this time by Richard and Henry, who I'd been thinking about and working on since the very beginning of my PhD, but I finally felt, perhaps, ready to have a go at them properly.It's all been pretty organic apart from She-Wolves, which was the big, "What am I writing about next?" That took shape slowly and gradually. Now, I'm going to write about Elizabeth I properly in a-Henry: Oh, exciting.Helen: -full-scale book, and I decided that, anyway, before I wrote this last one, but I-- It feels even righter now, because I Am Richard II, Know Ye Not That, feels even more intensely relevant having now written about Richard and Henry, and I'm quite intimidated because Elizabeth is quite intimidating, but I think it's good, related by your subjects.[laughter]Henry: Have you read the Elizabeth Jenkins biography?Helen: Many, many years ago. It's on my shelf here.Henry: Oh, good.Helen: In fact, so it's one of the things I will be going back to. Why do you ask particularly? I need--Henry: I'm a big Elizabeth Jenkins fan, and I like that book particularly.Helen: Wonderful. Well, I will be redoubled in my enthusiasm.Henry: I look forward to seeing what you say about it. What did you learn from Christine Carpenter?Helen: Ooh. Just as precision was the word that came into my head when you asked me about Hilary Mantel, the word that comes into my head when you ask about Christine is rigor. I think she is the most rigorous historical thinker that I have ever had the privilege of working with and talking to. I am never not on my toes when I am writing for, talking to, reading Christine. That was an experience that started from the first day I walked into her room for my first supervision in 1987.It was really that rigor that started opening up the medieval world to me, asking questions that at that stage I couldn't answer at all, but suddenly, made everything go into technicolor. Really, from the perspective that I had been failing to ask the most basic questions. I would sometimes have students say to me, "Oh, I didn't say that, because I thought it was too basic."I have always said, "No, there is no question that is too basic." Because what Christine started opening up for me was how does medieval government work? What are you talking about? There is the king at Westminster. There is that family there in Northumberland. What relates the two of them? How does this work? Think about it structurally. Think about it in human terms, but also in political structural terms, and then convince me that you understand how this all goes together. I try never to lose that.Henry: Helen Castor, thank you very much.Helen: Thank you so much. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

We're still in the 14th century and in this episode, Charlie Higson is looking at the confusion that ensued after Edward III basically had too many sons. His success in the bedroom created a tangled web of family intrigue, thwarted ambition and bitter rivalry that led to Richard II's cousin, Henry Bolingbroke, kicking him off the throne and taking over. Assisting Charlie through this quagmire of power and revenge is Helen Castor, author of The Eagle & The Hart : The Tragedy Of Richard II and Henry IV Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

America is in the midst of a constitutional crisis with a President who clearly wants to be king no matter what the Constitution says and ironically the constitution says nothing about what to do in this kind of crisis. Dr. Helen Castor, medieval historian, sees in America's current situation echoes of a constitutional crisis six hundred years ago in England when King Richard the Second put himself above the law and defied anyone to do anything about it. Give us 44:43 to explain it to you.

‘If ever a book of history was blessed with contemporary relevance, this one is', writes Andrew O'Hagan of Helen Castor's The Eagle and the Hart (Allen Lane). ‘The dumbfounding, delusional, narcissistic King Richard; the white-knuckle ride of Henry IV, dogged all the way by notions of illegitimacy. I feel these men could have been ripped from today's headlines.' Castor, whose 2010 book She-Wolves was adapted for television by the BBC, discussed Richard and Henry with Mary Wellesley, author of Hidden Hands: Lives of Manuscripts and their Makers and co-presenter of the medieval strand of the LRB's Close Readings​ podcast series. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In May 2015, 20 year-old Mhairi Black was the youngest person for more than a century to become a Member of Parliament – and she then remained a Westminster MP until standing down at the 2024 election. A new BBC documentary follows her last six months in that role and looks at what her future could hold in a new career as a stand-up comedian. Now 30, she joins Anita Rani to reflect on her years in Parliament and what she'd like to see change about the way it functions.The Women's Prize was founded thirty years ago and this year Woman's Hour will be talking to longlisted writers along with previous winners. In our first discussion Anita is joined by Helen Castor, longlisted in the non-fiction category for 'The Eagle and the Hart', a psychologically gripping account of King Richard II and King Henry IV, and by Rosanna Pike, longlisted for her novel 'A Little Trickerie', which is set in 1500 and tells the story of an orphaned girl who attempts an audacious hoax.Today at the Royal Albert Hall, Natasha Jonas and Lauren Price will be the first female headliners to box in what will be the venue's first all-female card. Jonas, an experienced fighter, is taking on Price, a rising star who has never lost a round as a pro. With world titles on the line, British sports journalist and presenter Anna Woolhouse joins us to discuss a huge moment in British women's boxing, which emphasises the progress of women in the sport.Presenter: Anita Rani Producer: Laura Northedge

In this captivating episode of History Rage, host Paul Bavill is joined by the esteemed historian and author Helen Castor, known for her works "Blood and Roses," "She Wolves," and "The Eagle in the Heart." Together, they embark on a deep dive into the complex world of mediaeval kingship and politics, challenging the simplistic view of mediaeval nobility as mere overgrown toddlers.Helen Castor's Journey:A lifelong passion for history, from childhood readings of Jean Plaidy to becoming a renowned author and historian.Her academic path from Cambridge to narrative history, focusing on the political history of late mediaeval England.Debunking Myths of Mediaeval Nobility:Challenging the notion that mediaeval lords were unruly toddlers needing constant distraction through war and gifts.Exploring the sophisticated political system and the relationship between kings and barons.Complexity of Mediaeval Politics:The role of the king as a referee in the political game, managing the ambitions and power of the nobility.The impact of external wars, such as the Hundred Years War, on internal stability and politics.The Role of Patronage:Understanding patronage as a crucial component of mediaeval politics, not just a means of keeping nobles in line.The importance of personal relationships and the impact of favourites on political dynamics.Historical Figures and Events:Examining the reigns of Richard II and Henry VI, highlighting their failures as kings and the resulting political turmoil.The significance of figures like Warwick the Kingmaker and the impact of usurpation on royal authority.Helen and Paul engage in a lively discussion, shedding light on the intricacies of mediaeval politics and the human stories behind historical events. Listeners are invited to reconsider the narratives surrounding mediaeval kingship and the true nature of the nobility.Guest Information:Explore Helen Castor's works, including "The Eagle and the Hart," available in the History Rage bookshop.Follow Helen on Twitter: @hrcastor.Join the conversation and express your historical vexations on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook at @HistoryRage or with Paul Bavill at @PaulBavill. Share your thoughts using the hashtag #HistoryRage.Support History Rage on Patreon for early episode access, the chance to submit questions to guests, prize draws, and the exclusive History Rage mug at www.patreon.com/historyrage.Stay Angry, Stay Informed - History Rage Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Imagine the scene. You're the king but through tragic circumstances you have no legitimate male heirs. To maintain the lineage, you agree with those in power that your daughter would become Queen on your death. They all agree. Jobs a good 'un.That is until you die and your daughter's pesky cousin, a bloke, nips in and steals the crown.Farfetched? Not at all and in this episode, Charlie Higson uncovers the life of the woman who had the throne pinched from under her, Empress Matilda. To assist Charlie, he is joined once again by best-selling author and historian Helen Castor, author of She Wolves and last year's acclaimed The Eagle & The Hart - The Biography of Richard II.Oh and if you haven't listened to Episodes 5 & 6 of the first series of Willy Willy Harry Stee, you might want to start there, it tells the story of Matilda's father, Henry I and her throne-stealing cousin, Stephen. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The spectacular downfall of King Richard II, followed by the successors Henry IV and then Henry V, are famously depicted in Shakespeare's plays. The Life and Death of King Richard II is a prequel to what's known as Shakespeare's Henriad plays, or the Henry Plays, consisting of Henry IV Part 1, Henry IV part 2, and Henry V. Richard II is believed to have been written around 1595, and while the plays tow the line in terms of what Tudor monarchs would have wanted you to believe the histories of these men, there are some places where Shakespeare's version conflicts with known history about Richard II and Henry IV. Our guest this week has recently completed a book on both these Kings of England, titled appropriately, THE EAGLE AND THE HART: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV, in which she details the real history of two of the most famous, yet also two of the most often misunderstood (thanks in no small part to Shakespeare) Kings of England. To help us wade into Shakespeare's history plays and sort out fact from fiction, we are delighted to welcome Helen Castor to the show today.   Get bonus episodes on Patreon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At the end of June in 1399 Henry Bolingbroke, son of John of Gaunt and cousin to King Richard II, landed at Ravenspurn with a small force intent on the overthrow of Richard. The King, who had been in Ireland, did not rush to return to England, but when he did, his throne had been lost, and Bolingbroke became King Henry IV. Richard would die in mysterious circumstances not long after. Henry had secured the throne but his would not be a happy reign. Joining to discuss the two grandsons of Edward III is Helen Castor, author of The Eagle and the Hart: the Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV as we delve into the two characters in a fascinating period of medieval history. Helen Castor Links The Eagle and the Hart: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV Helen on X Aspects of History Links Latest Issue out - Annual Subscription to Aspects of History Magazine only $9.99/£9.99 Ollie on X Aspects of History on Instagram Get in touch: history@aspectsofhistory.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I was capital-T Thrilled to interview Helen Castor on her new book, The Eagle and the Hart, on Richard II and Henry IV - in this interview we cover how 16th century historians can learn from this period in history several generations before, the tragedy of Richard, the lessons the Tudors learned, and more. Helen Castor is an acclaimed medieval and Tudor historian. Her first book, Blood and Roses: The Paston Family in the Wars of the Roses, was longlisted for what is now known as the Baillie Gifford Prize for Nonfiction and won the English Association's Beatrice White Prize. Get The Eagle and the Hart wherever you get your books! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Elizabeth I's propaganda images of Gloriana and the Virgin Queen have hugely impacted her reputation as the last Tudor Monarch. Yet the twilight years of her reign were both personally and politically difficult.   In this final episode in our series, Joint Chief Curator Tracy Borman is joined by renowned historian Dr Helen Castor. Together they contemplate which female relationships shaped this time, and ultimately, how Elizabeth I's gender has shaped her historic image.   This is the final Episode in our Elizabeth I series where we explore the women who shaped a queen.  Read about Elizabeth I's life as the last Tudor. 

What happens when a king believes he rules by divine right yet loses the trust of his people through his tyrannical actions? In this episode, acclaimed historian Helen Castor brings us into the world that inspired Shakespeare's most celebrated history plays. Castor's latest book, The Eagle and the Heart: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV, peels back the layers of history to reveal the human drama behind a deadly royal rivalry. From Richard's glittering but ill-fated reign to Henry's reluctant haunted rule, this engaging discussion uncovers the timeless lessons behind the rise and fall of two kings. Packed with historical insight and fresh perspectives, this episode is a must-listen for history buffs, Shakespeare enthusiasts, and anyone curious about the delicate balance between power and duty. Helen Castor is an acclaimed medieval and Tudor historian. Her first book, Blood and Roses: The Paston Family in the Wars of the Roses, was longlisted for what is now known as the Baillie Gifford Prize for Nonfiction and won the English Association's Beatrice White Prize. Her next two books, She-Wolves: The Women Who Ruled England Before Elizabeth and Joan of Arc: A History were both on numerous Best Books of the Year lists and made into documentaries for BBC television, and Joan of Arc was longlisted for the PEN America/Jacqueline Bograd Weld Award for Biography. She has one son and lives in London. From the Shakespeare Unlimited podcast. Published December 3, 2024. © Folger Shakespeare Library. All rights reserved. This episode was produced by Matt Frassica. Garland Scott is the associate producer. It was edited by Gail Kern Paster. We had help with web production from Paola García Acuña. Leonor Fernandez edits our transcripts. Final mixing services are provided by Clean Cuts at Three Seas, Inc.

Right trusty and well beloved, we greet you well!It is my absolute pleasure to announce today's guest - please welcome Helen Castor to the pod, and we talk about her new book The Eagle and the Hart - the Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV.Who were these monarchs? Who was Richard II and Henry IV? Let's see what was their story beyond what Shakespeare told us. Why were their lives so intertwined? Did birthright matter in the end? Buy Helen's New Book:https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/314989/the-eagle-and-the-hart-by-castor-helen/9780241419328Helen's Other Books:https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/280827/elizabeth-i-penguin-monarchs-by-helen-castor/9780141989945https://www.faber.co.uk/author/helen-castor/If you would like to join Natalie on her walking tours in London with Reign of London, please follow the links:https://www.getyourguide.com/london-l57/london-the-royal-british-kings-and-queens-walking-tour-t426011/https://www.getyourguide.com/london-l57/london-unsavory-history-guided-walking-tour-t428452/https://www.getyourguide.com/london-l57/royal-london-georgian-and-windsor-monarchs-walking-tour-t481355 .For more history fodder please visit https://www.ifitaintbaroque.art/ and https://www.reignoflondon.com/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Henry V only had a short reign, but his legacy looms large over the medieval landscape. Remembered as a heroic warrior king, who bested the French at Harfleur then marched his forces to victory at Agincourt, few monarchs have such a distinguished reputation. But 'Prince Hal' wasn't always destined for greatness. Was he really the gadabout youth Shakespeare would have us believe? In the third episode of our three-part HistoryExtra podcast series 'Tyrant, Usurper, Hero', Helen Castor sits down with Dan Jones to learn more about Henry's life beyond the battlefield – and highlight what lessons he learned from the chaos caused by Richard II and Henry IV. (Ad) Helen Castor is the author of The Eagle and the Hart: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV (Penguin, 2024). Buy it now from Waterstones: https://go.skimresources.com?id=71026X1535947&xcust=historyextra-social-histboty&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fthe-eagle-and-the-hart%2Fhelen-castor%2F9780241419328. (Ad) Dan Jones is the author of Henry V: The Astonishing Rise of England's Greatest Warrior King (Bloomsbury, 2024). Buy it now from Waterstones: https://go.skimresources.com?id=71026X1535947&xcust=historyextra-social-histboty&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fhenry-v%2Fdan-jones%2F9781804541937. The HistoryExtra podcast is produced by the team behind BBC History Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Dr Helen Castor is a historian, author and broadcaster who is best known for her work on some of histories most fascinating women, from Eleanor of Aquitaine to Joan of Arc, Isabella of France to Lady Jane Grey, however, her most recent book, published only a few weeks ago breaks the mould, for in it she explores the life of two of medieval England's kings. The eagle and the hart, the tragedy of Richard ii and Henry iv is this book, a remarkable and highly detailed exploration of these very very different kings and how, as the title suggests, their lives and more accurately their reigns descended into tragedy. I am thrilled to welcome Helen onto the podcast today to discuss her book, this is a long episode folks, so buckle in as we hop out of the world of the Tudors and into that of the Plantagenets.

Send us a textLet's seize the throne! Helen Castor joins me to talk her new book The Eagle and the Hart: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV. It's one of the best books of 2024. Come listen!Buy The Eagle and the HartSupport the show

Henry Bolingbroke has gone down in history as the usurper that stole the English crown from the tyrant Richard II – and was later plagued by rebellion and ill health. But what else do we know about the man who later became Henry IV? In the second episode of our three-part HistoryExtra podcast series 'Tyrant, Usurper, Hero', Dan Jones speaks to Helen Castor to reveal more about this chivalric hero who could have made the ideal king – if only he had been born into the royal role. (Ad) Helen Castor is the author of The Eagle and the Hart: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV (Penguin, 2024). Buy it now from Waterstones: https://go.skimresources.com?id=71026X1535947&xcust=historyextra-social-histboty&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fthe-eagle-and-the-hart%2Fhelen-castor%2F9780241419328. (Ad) Dan Jones is the author of Henry V: The Astonishing Rise of England's Greatest Warrior King (Bloomsbury, 2024). Buy it now from Waterstones: https://go.skimresources.com?id=71026X1535947&xcust=historyextra-social-histboty&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fhenry-v%2Fdan-jones%2F9781804541937. The HistoryExtra podcast is produced by the team behind BBC History Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Richard II lacked all the qualities a medieval monarch needed, bar one: birthright. Born believing he was God's representative on Earth, the narcissistic tyrant seems to have done everything wrong. But did Richard just not understand what it meant to be king? In the first episode of this three-part HistoryExtra podcast series 'Tyrant, Usurper, Hero', Dan Jones and Helen Castor chart Richard's eccentricities and the trials of his reign – from the monarch's obsessive addiction to good hygiene to his involvement in the Peasant's Revolt and eventual downfall. (Ad) Helen Castor is the author of The Eagle and the Hart: The Tragedy of Richard II and Henry IV (Penguin, 2024). Buy it now from Waterstones: https://go.skimresources.com?id=71026X1535947&xcust=historyextra-social-histboty&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fthe-eagle-and-the-hart%2Fhelen-castor%2F9780241419328. (Ad) Dan Jones is the author of Henry V: The Astonishing Rise of England's Greatest Warrior King (Bloomsbury, 2024). Buy it now from Waterstones: https://go.skimresources.com?id=71026X1535947&xcust=historyextra-social-histboty&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.waterstones.com%2Fbook%2Fhenry-v%2Fdan-jones%2F9781804541937. The HistoryExtra podcast is produced by the team behind BBC History Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Dan is joined by his friend and mentor, the renowned historian and author of The Eagle and The Hart, Dr Helen Castor, for a rundown of the wildest rivalry in Plantagenet history. Richard is a king, with the ego to match, but none of the political or interpersonal skills that would help in the role. Henry, however, has all the qualities you'd want in a monarch, except the right to rule, and soon they face off in an epic clash. A Sony Music Entertainment production. Find more great podcasts from Sony Music Entertainment at sonymusic.com/podcasts To bring your brand to life in this podcast, email podcastadsales@sonymusic.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Hosted by Dan Jones and Helen Castor Producer - Georgia Mills Executive Producer - Louisa Field Production Manager - Eric Ryan and Jen Mistri Marketing - Kieran Lancini Mixing - Gulliver Lawrence-Tickell and Mattias Torres Sole Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For the Plantagenets, family might be a curse as often as a boon. They could provide invaluable support, or dangerous rivalry. At the end of the 14th century, the relationship between two first cousins rocked England, ruptured the line of succession and had a long legacy.Helen Castor joins Matt Lewis to discuss the fascinating true story of cousins who became deadly rivals.Gone Medieval is presented by Matt Lewis. The editor is Ella Blaxill and the producer is Joseph Knight. The senior producer is Anne-Marie Luff.Gone Medieval is a History Hit podcast.Enjoy unlimited access to award-winning original TV documentaries that are released weekly and AD-FREE podcasts. Sign up HERE for 50% off your first 3 months using code ‘MEDIEVAL' https://historyhit.com/subscriptionYou can take part in our listener survey here: https://uk.surveymonkey.com/r/6FFT7MK

Richard II came to the throne as a young child, only to lose it to his cousin Henry IV in 1399. But why did Henry take such drastic action? And what became of the teenage boy who stood up to a crowd of angry peasants and held his own? This week, Danièle speaks with Helen Castor about these rival cousins, the events that shaped them, and how an anointed king could lose his hollow crown.You can listen to this episode ad-free at https://www.patreon.com/medievalists

For a special run of episodes, Dan Jones is joined by world-class historians and authors. Find out about the sordid history of the Catholic Church, and the erotic musings of mystics with Diarmaid MacCulloch. Hear about the bloody Plantagenet rivalry to end all others with Dan's old University supervisor, Helen Castor. Plus, in our first ever live show: what kind of man was Goeffrey Chaucer, and what on earth is he wearing? A Sony Music Entertainment production. Find more great podcasts from Sony Music Entertainment at sonymusic.com/podcasts To bring your brand to life in this podcast, email podcastadsales@sonymusic.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Written and hosted by Dan Jones Producer - Georgia Mills Executive Producer - Louisa Field Production Manager - Eric Ryan Marketing - Kieran Lancini Sound Design and Mixing - Gulliver Lawrence-Tickell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Sibling rifts, leadership battles in politics and history, philosophical schools of thoughts and their key players all come into our discussion of the way rivalry shapes the world. Roger Luckhurst reflects on the legacy of the American literary critic and philosopher Fredric Jameson who died earlier this week. Plus a report from the Warburg Institute Library which holds over 360,000 volumes available to scholars studying the afterlife of antiquity and the survival and transmission of culture. Matthew Sweet is joined by the journalist Michael Crick, historian Helen Castor, Philosopher David Edmonds and the writer and academic Kate Maltby.Producer: Lisa Jenkinson

Through August, Charlie Higson brings you a summer treat. A series of short daily episodes of Willy Willy Harry Stee which allow you to hear the bits we had to cut from the original series. Interesting facts about all aspects of the monarchy and the country.In today's episode, Helen Castor reveals the origin of the phrase 'Time Immemorial'. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ter ere van de Engelse nederlaag in de EK-finale hebben we het vandaag over hun andere verpletterende nederlaag: die tegen Frankrijk. Niet Lamine Yamal, maar die andere tienerster, Jeanne d'Arc, deed ze toen de das om.De mensen op straat wisten niet of Jeanne nou iets met de Tweede Wereldoorlog of de Franse Revolutie te maken had. In werkelijkheid moeten we een stuk verder terug. Jeanne is namelijk een heldin uit de middeleeuwen. Luister naar het meest krankzinnige verhaal dat we tot nu hebben verteld, over een jong meisje dat stemmen hoort, een honderdjarige oorlog wint en wordt vervolgd voor travestie.Bronnen voor deze aflevering: Joan of Arc: A History, Helen Castor; Joan of Arc, Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark.Ontdek duizenden luisterboeken en e-books op BookBeat. Meld je nu aan met de code geschiedenisinside op www.bookbeat.nl of via de app en probeer 60 dagen gratis.

We asked Helen Castor about the iconic figure in history.

Willy Willy Merry Christmas!In this Christmas Special episode, Charlie Higson takes us through the many connections the Monarchy has had with Christmas over the years.Learn about carols you've been singing incorrectly, how early Christmas trees doubled as incendiary devices and hear Charlie and guest Helen Castor discuss one of the greatest seasonal royal films of all time. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's all downhill from here.

Willy Willy Harry Stee..........actually, we'll stop there for this episode. The lady in question was Queen, but only for 9 days and apart from a small apologetic addendum at the end of some versions of the rhyme, Lady Jane Grey doesn't get a mention. They say a week is a long time in politics. Well, it's nothing compared to 9 days in the Monarchy and as Charlie Higson discovers, her tale is a tragic one. She didn't even want to be Queen!Joining him to unravel the tale is Helen Castor author of She-Wolves who returns for one last time to uncover a story of plotting, religious fanaticism and eventually, violence. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Willy Willy Harry Stee, Harry Dick John Harry Three, One Two Three Neds, Richard Two, Henry's Four Five Six.........then who? King Edward IV that's who!The tale of bloody battles continues as Edward returns for a second stab at the crown as Charlie Higson makes sense of civil wars and the struggle for ultimate power. This episode's proper historian is James Hawes, author of The Shortest History Of England.Plus! A special guest historian returns as Helen Castor brings us the sad postscript to the incredible Margaret Of Anjou Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Willy Willy Harry Stee, Harry Dick John Harry Three, One Two Three Neds, Richard Two, Henry's Four Five Six......... What happens when a King goes wrong? The story of Henry VI and his battles with Edward IV continues as Charlie Higson tells the story of one of history's biggest power struggles. And you thought the Roy family were bad!! Plus we hear about the formidable Margaret Of Anjou as we welcome back Helen Castor, author of She Wolves, Joan Of Arc & Blood & Roses Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Willy Willy Harry Stee, Harry Dick John Harry Three, One Two Three Neds, Richard Two, Henry's Four Five Six.........The story of Henry VI is a tangled one, intertwined with Edward IV and, not something to be rushed. So over the next two episodes, Charlie Higson unpicks the story of a man who became king, then was deposed only to become king again, only to be deposed.....again!It's a fascinating story which takes in a couple of wars, one civil and one against the French and even Joan of Arc makes an appearance.Helping Charlie make sense of all this is the excellent Helen Castor, author of Joan Of Arc and Blood & Roses Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Willy Willy Harry Stee, Harry Dick John Harry Three. One Two Three Neds, Richard Two........ Charlie Higson's canter through the Monarchy takes us to Richard The 2nd. You'd think by now that they'd have got the hang of this whole King thing. What to do. What not to do. Well, they hadn't and Richard II is a good example of the 'What Not To Do' category. Charlie's proper historian this episode sees the return of Helen Castor, author of 'She-Wolves: The Women Who Ruled England Before Elizabeth' who is also working on a new book which looks at Richard II. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Willy Willy Harry Stee, Harry......yes, Charlie Higson reaches Monarch number 5 in the shape of Henry II, a man who fought and married his way to the top only for his wife and sons to rebel against him and start a revolt. What would you do? Well in this episode you'll find out exactly what Henry II did and how he did it. Helen Castor, author of 'She-Wolves: The Women Who Ruled England Before Elizabeth' is Charlie's guest 'proper' historian. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We had the great pleasure to interview Dr. Levi Roach, Prize-winning author and Associate Professor at the University of Exeter about his new book, The Empires of the Normans.. We have encountered the Normans many times in the History of the Germans. This is the chance to get the whole story. It is a tale of ambitious adventures and fierce freebooters, of fortunes made and fortunes lost. The Normans made their influence felt across all of western Europe and the Mediterranean, from the British Isles to North Africa, and Lisbon to the Holy Land. In Empires of the Normans we discover how they combined military might and political savvy with deeply held religious beliefs and a profound sense of their own destiny. For a century and a half, they remade Europe in their own image, and yet their heritage was quickly forgotten - until now. 'In this fascinating, panoramic account, Levi Roach brings an expert eye and page-turning energy to the telling of their extraordinary story' Helen Castor, bestselling author of She Wolves 'A fresh retelling of the story of the Normans . . . written with enthusiasm and brio' Marc Morris, bestselling author of The Anglo-Saxons Publisher: John Murray Press ISBN: 9781529398465 Number of pages: 320 Weight: 540 g Dimensions: 236 x 158 x 30 mm

Apoie o Historia Magister: https://apoia.se/historiamagister ---------------------------------------------------------- Acesse: https://historiamagister.com Compre na Quo Primum: https://quoprimum.com.br ----------------------------------------------------------] Livros recomendados: Joana d'Arc - Heroína, Santa... (Helen Castor) - https://amzn.to/3BvycKi Joana D'Arc (Mark Twain) - https://amzn.to/3mD7glKA Distant Mirror (Barbara Tuchman) - https://amzn.to/3amBCmP The 100 Years War, Volume 4: Cursed Kings (Jonathan Sumption) - https://amzn.to/2YEKGBk Equipamentos usados: Microfone Samson C01U Pro - https://amzn.to/3Dqo5XR

Lauren Prichard is a renowned actress and improviser whose credits include Disney, Upright Citizens Brigade and MADtv. She and Dawn work together as street improvisors in the New York Window element at Universal Studios, Hollywood - and they're mutual fans of one another. Lauren's knowledge of the life of Joan of Arc is limited to her appearance in Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure - and as the namesake of canned beans. Dawn delights in delivering not only the amazing story of this 15th C. heroine, but some of the top-shelf drama that precipitated her appearance in our history books.---00:03:52 - After some initial jib-jab and mutual adoration, Lauren tells the story of how she got the job on MADtv. An incredible rats-to-(comparative) riches story. 00:10:28 - Dawn discusses her lack of prior knowledge about Joan and - as usual - sharing her primary source of research: Joan of Arc, A History by Helen Castor. Among the reasons Dawn chose this book is because it gives a great foundation for the lay of the land before Joan's incredible appearance. 00:13:37 - The HILF of Joan of Arc officially begins in the 92nd year of the 100-Year War, and everyone is fucking exhausted. The fight between the French and the English is further complicated by a Civil War within France between the Burgundies and the Armagnacs. Fractured and on their heels, it appears to many that the English may finally prove victorious and sieze the French throne. 00:23:28 - It is from this depth of despair that the would-be king of France gets news that a girl is there to see him. A girl dressed as a boy who says she is there to do three things at God's command: 1) She is to personally lead his Army, 2) She will get him coronated as the rightful King, 3) She will expel the English from all French lands. Individually, these are preposterous ideas - taken together they are virtually impossible without a miracle... Which Joan assures will materialize. 00:34:50 - After incredibly accomplishing the first two items on her list, Joan begins to suffer defeats and set-backs and loses the confidence of the King. She is soon captured by the Burgundies who instead of turning her over to the Armagnacs as a military prisoner, they hand her over to the English to be tried for heresy. After two escape attempts, her trial begins in 1431 when she is 19. --BREAK--00:38:52 - We pick up with Joan at the beginning of her trial for heresy. The English can not abide the idea that the God they share with France would have told anyone they would lose... Her conviction was a foregone conclusion, but more than that the court wanted Joan to break. Apologize and capitulate and admit she was mad, wrong or full of sin. 00:42:55 - Joan is alone, a teenager, and the only woman present from the guards, to judges to witnesses. She's illiterate and facing some of the most 'learned men' of the age. The trial is led by Bishop Cauchon (not pronounced 'cock-on', unfortunately) a Frenchmen, but a Burgundy Frenchman who has it in for Joan and assembles a stupendous amount of bureaucracy and committees and tedium in order to burn her. She holds her own. Big time.00:50:00 - Joan withstands the trial, refuses to be intimidated by the promise of torture, and ultimately is tied to a stake at the center of town and given ONE MORE CHANCE to sign a confession and save her life... WHICH SHE DOES. In turn, they cut her down and take her back to jail to live another day.  Dawn stops on this point because it came as such a surprise. It doesn't last long, however. Joan misunderstood what was expected of her in exchange for whatever it was she signed (she couldn't read it) and so she returns to the stake 7 days later.00:54:25 - Joan asks for someone to hold a cross in front of her  as the pyre is lit. They do and she watches it as she burns to death. Her ashes are unceremoniously thrown into the Seine. 01:00:16 - Eventually the Burgundies and the Armagnacs make peace and again stand unified against the English. King Charles, now realizing that Joan would forever be tied to his name, appeals to the Pope to reverse her heresy conviction. A second trial begins. This one too has a foregone conclusion, but tells us more about Joan as human being - with family, friends and an identity that predates the shining armor. 01:04:00 - In 1920, she becomes - not just a person who has been acquitted of heresy - but she is canonized as a Saint. It is highly unusual for someone to be canonized by the same Church who martyred them. History, am I right?Dawn concludes with a movie suggestion: The Messenger, starring Milla Jovovich as Joan of Arc. ---THANK YOU so much for listening. Please subscribe, share, rate & review us!NEXT EPISODE drops June 22nd: The Iranian Revolution with (my neighbor, and Iranian immigrant) Zari Faripour.  

Ok now we can talk about Joan of Arc and her influence on the outcome of the Hundred Years War. (Spoiler: she lets them eat cake)Source: Joan of Arc, A History (2014) by Helen Castor

Before we can talk about Joan of Arc, we have to have a 1400s french history lesson, so that's what we did. Lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-yous.Source: Joan of Arc, A History (2014) by Helen Castor

Apoie o Historia Magister: https://apoia.se/historiamagister Acesse: https://historiamagister.com/newsletter Compre na Quo Primum: https://quoprimum.com.br Livros recomendados: Joana d'Arc - Heroína, Santa... (Helen Castor) - https://amzn.to/3BvycKi Joana D'Arc (Mark Twain) - https://amzn.to/3mD7glK A Distant Mirror (Barbara Tuchman) - https://amzn.to/3amBCmP The 100 Years War, Volume 4: Cursed Kings (Jonathan Sumption) - https://amzn.to/2YEKGBk Equipamentos usados: Microfone Samson C01U Pro - https://amzn.to/3Dqo5XR

Se inscreva na newsletter: https://historiamagister.com/newsletter Apoie o Historia Magister: https://apoia.se/historiamagister Acesse: https://historiamagister.com Compre na Quo Primum: https://quoprimum.com.br ---------------------------------------------------------- Livros recomendados: Joana d'Arc - Heroína, Santa... (Helen Castor) - https://amzn.to/3BvycKi Joana D'Arc (Mark Twain) - https://amzn.to/3mD7glK A Distant Mirror (Barbara Tuchman) - https://amzn.to/3amBCmP The 100 Years War, Volume 4: Cursed Kings (Jonathan Sumption) - https://amzn.to/2YEKGBk Equipamentos usados: Microfone Samson C01U Pro - https://amzn.to/3Dqo5XR

Apoie o Historia Magister: https://apoia.se/historiamagister ---------------------------------------------------------- Acesse: https://historiamagister.com Compre na Quo Primum: https://quoprimum.com.br ---------------------------------------------------------- Livros recomendados: Joana d'Arc - Heroína, Santa... (Helen Castor) - https://amzn.to/3BvycKi Joana D'Arc (Mark Twain) - https://amzn.to/3mD7glK A Distant Mirror (Barbara Tuchman) - https://amzn.to/3amBCmP The 100 Years War, Volume 4: Cursed Kings (Jonathan Sumption) - https://amzn.to/2YEKGBk Equipamentos usados: Microfone Samson C01U Pro - https://amzn.to/3Dqo5XR

Aos 13 anos, essa menina estava cuidando de casa com seus pais. Aos 17, ela já havia mudado o curso da história da França. Nesse episodio vamos conhecer o começo da caminhada de uma das maiores mulheres que o mundo já conheceu. Apoie o Historia Magister: https://apoia.se/historiamagister ---------------------------------------------------------- Acesse: https://historiamagister.com Compre na Quo Primum: https://quoprimum.com.br ---------------------------------------------------------- Livros recomendados: Joana d'Arc - Heroína, Santa... (Helen Castor) - https://amzn.to/3BvycKi Joana D'Arc (Mark Twain) - https://amzn.to/3mD7glKA Distant Mirror (Barbara Tuchman) - https://amzn.to/3amBCmPThe 100 Years War, Volume 4: Cursed Kings (Jonathan Sumption) - https://amzn.to/2YEKGBk Equipamentos usados: Microfone Samson C01U Pro - https://amzn.to/3Dqo5XR

In Joan of Arc : A History, media-savvy medievalist Helen Castor goes back to original sources to strip away the myth from the story of Joan of Arc. What emerges from her forensic approach is a fresh take on the remarkable events that led to an illiterate teenage peasant girl being placed in command of the French Army. Castor is bold in her interpretation of Joan’s voices and sheds new light on the significance of what she wore in battle, at court and in her final days in jail. The result is a portrait that is vivid and perplexing and will keep scholars and fans arguing for eternity. This episode is a recording of an outdoor event at Adelaide Writers Week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elizabeth I: A Study in InsecurityIn the popular imagination Elizabeth I is the symbol of monarchical power, the Virgin Queen who ruled over a Golden Age. But the image is as much armour against reality as it is a reflection of the truth. Dr Helen Castor shows England's iconic queen in a revealing new light, shaped by profound insecurity that was a matter of both practical politics and personal psychology. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Joan of Arc is the patron saint of France, and unlike many of the saints…she actually existed! Listen to the episode to learn how an illiterate peasant girl was able to drive out the English and put the French back on the path to reclaim their country during the Hundred Years War. Did she really speak to angels? Was she a bloodthirsty soldier? We know more about her than most Medieval women but there are no easy answers in her story.New episodes on Mondays. You can listen on Apple Podcasts/iTunes, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or Stitcher. Follow on Instagram or Facebook @storicalpodcastJoin Potions and Paperbacks for virtual book club and articles on history, literature and perfume: https://www.facebook.com/groups/247203939797050/Non-fictionJoan of Arc: A History by Helen Castor - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23131105-joan-of-arcOccult Confessions Podcast - https://www.occultconfessions.com/episodes/2018/4/27/lady-magic-2-joan-of-arcOur Fake History Podcast - https://ourfakehistory.com/index.php/season-1/episode-21-how-do-you-explain-joan-of-arc-part-i/Joan of Arc: The Maid of Orléans by Biographics - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVPD5eFihKwFictionThe Maid by Kimberly Cutter - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10713781-the-maidThe Language of Fire: Joan of Arc Reimagined by Stephanie Hemphill - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/41824501-the-language-of-firePersonal Recollections of Joan of Arc by Mark Twain - https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2874/2874-h/2874-h.htmFilmThe Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc (1999) - https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0151137/Joan of Arc - Trailer (OMG Neil Patrick Harris is Charles VII lol) (1999) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nmx5MHfsWPM

Which historical 'facts' should be burned on the fire? How do you comb ancient and recent times for evidence? Rana Mitter is joined by Helen Castor and Laura Thompson to discuss the ways mythmaking can cloud history. Recorded in front of an audience at BBC Radio 3's Free Thinking Festival of Ideas at Sage, Gateshead. All the discussions and essays from the Free Thinking festival are available as Radio 3 Arts and Ideas downloads.

BBC Radio 3's annual Free Thinking festival of ideas continues its summer of activity as it takes up residency at leading summer events across the country. Anne McElvoy chairs a debate from the Daily Mail Chalke Valley History festival to examine how the British have looked to their history to give them a sense of national identity, and explores whether a sense of belonging and citizenship can be found from our past. The guests include historians Michael Wood, Helen Castor and Tom Holland and the MP and writer Kwasi Kwarteng.

BBC Radio 3's annual Free Thinking festival of ideas hits the road this summer as it takes up residency at leading summer events across the country. Rana Mitter chairs a debate from the York Festival of Ideas on the legacy of the War of the Roses with Helen Castor, Sandy Grant and Mark Ormrod reflecting on how the Wars of the Roses shaped the country from the 15th century right up to the present day. In the year that Richard III's remains were identified beneath a Leicester Car Park, why does the Wars of the Roses continue to exert such a hold over our imaginations, from Game of Thrones to new BBC series The White Queen?

Favourite paperbacks discussed by historian Helen Castor and sustainability activist Rob Hopkins, in a programme chaired by Harriett Gilbert. Medieval and Tudor historian Helen Castor chooses an intricately beautiful historical novel by William Golding; Rob Hopkins, who campaigns for community solutions to global problems, opts for the 1940's diary of a city man whose war work takes him into agriculture for the first time. Harriett chooses a contemporary novel set in 1970's Argentina. Producer Christine Hall.