Snippets
a Selected snippet from each book
Book 1: The Anglo-Saxons
The destructive impact of continuous conflict with Scandinavian raiders and the frequent struggles between competing groups of supporters of different claimants to the throne cannot be overstated. The accounts of Viking raiding
parties laying waste to the territories they invaded were matched by similar accounts of how some kings exacted revenge on those who opposed them. They simply laid waste to whole cities and counties. The unfortunate citizens had to be prepared to go out and be killed in battles in which they had no real stakes or watch as their homes, crops and animals were destroyed at the whim of anyone who had the power to do it. The conditions the population was constrained to live under could only be described as chaotic.
Book 2: The Conquest
In these latest episodes, the chaos of chance encounters with the weather and the sea and internal royal family disputes
about succession brought tragedy to the doors of households throughout the land. Personal ambition, greed and a preparedness to mete out the harshest imaginable punishment on those who opposed them had characterised many of the leading players in the drama.
To describe this period as anything other than chaotic would be to avoid the obvious. Two of the central figures in our Line of Inheritance, Margaret of Scotland and Edith, were largely away from the core of the action. However, their roles in support of their husbands and sons contributed to the broader picture and, by chance or otherwise, played their parts in continuing the Line of Inheritance through to the present day.
Book 3: The Early Plantagenets
The transition from the autocratic rule of Stephen to the much more constrained role of Edward III took place after a series of rebellions, often involving extreme violence, switching of allegiances and internal family conflicts. In most cases, little mercy was shown by the victors in the treatment of their opponents; summary executions, maiming and property confiscations were the norm. For the most part the English demonstrated considerable harshness and ruthlessness in dealing with their enemies and the populations they fought over.
Governmentally, Stephen had ruled badly as an autocratic absolute monarch but two hundred years later the power of the monarch had been debated, restricted, curtailed and made subject to parliamentary control. By the end of this period, Edward III ruled with the consent of the magnates and a Parliament that had formal tax collection and administrative structures and processes. These provided greater regulation of trade, justice and property holding for most levels of society but also restricted the capacity of the king to act arbitrarily on his own initiative. This should not be taken to imply that kings did not sometimes wilfully kill, maim or confiscate the property of those who opposed them but it did at least provide recourse to some basic judicial processes for most people involved in day-to- day transactions.
Book 4: The Wars of the Roses
The prevalence of greed, treachery, ruthlessness and basic dishonesty casts a shadow over the natural tendency for people to protect themselves and those they love. Moderating behaviour to make the best of difficult situations has to be seen in the context in which people live and the social norms of the times. Where there is widespread lawlessness, corruption on the parts of those charged with administering the law and little concern for individuals shown by those who manage state affairs, it is not surprising that people take liberties. However, perhaps this should not excuse those who deliberately and without provocation attempt to instigate bloody regime change for their own benefit.
.
Book 5: The Scottish Episode
Notably, among the men we encountered in this period, there was a pronounced tendency toward promiscuity. At the same time, neither of the women in our LIne remained without a husband for very long. It cannot be claimed that this was unusual for the times in which they lived. However, when the problems created by poor choices of partner resulted in the need to dispose of them, perhaps by arranging their murder, the political consequences became more serious. If Mary had married a more stable, suitable husband or held back any affection she may have felt for her Secretary, would she have put herself in the position of being accused of murder? Or if she had not married Bothwell, would she have been subjected to the rebellion after which she was arrested and had to flee to England where her troubles became a lot more serious?
Book 6: The Continental Context
The gallant Duke George William, erstwhile fiancé of the lonely Sophia, now devised a plan of his own to remain free to enjoy the life of a single man. To satisfy the demand that he marry, he created an imaginative scheme in which his brother Ernst Augustus would be his surrogate and marry Sophia on his behalf. In return, George William would assign to his brother all his property and other rights and promise that he would never marry. All he asked in return was an income sufficient to enable him to enjoy a reasonable lifestyle.
Once Ernst Augustus had been convinced that this was a good deal and that he, as the fourth son, would unexpectedly enjoy the benefits of being the Duke of Hanover, there remained only the tiny problem of persuading the people of the Duchy, his fiancée and her brother that this was a device that might work. Perhaps surprisingly, everyone involved agreed to go along with the plan and Sophia married her fiancé’s brother in Heidelberg on 17 October 1658.
Book 7: The Hanoverians
It is worth asking whether the Hanoverians did much for the country they were fortunate to come to rule, other than take whatever steps they could to ensure their own security and that of their European possessions at whatever cost it might have been to the people of their adopted kingdom. Were the wars they fought in continental Europe for the benefit of their people? Were the taxes they raised used to enhance public services or to fund those continental wars? Did they set examples of good behaviour and personal responsibility for their people to follow? Did they demonstrate kindness or harshness in the treatment of one another or of those under their command who stepped out of line? Of course, some of them could have answered these questions perfectly well, most notably the much-maligned but misunderstood King George III but question marks must hang over many of the others.
Book 8: The Victorian Inheritance
It would be wrong to suggest that Victoria created chaos for the country or that she displayed any undue ruthlessness in dealing with matters affecting her people. It is true, however,
that in line with almost all previous generations of her family, she did not have a good relationship with her heir. Of course, she did not fear, as her predecessors might have done, that he was about to make a bid to remove her by force. Instead, she had a very poor regard for his apparently low intelligence, laziness and wayward lifestyle, which rendered him potentially unfit to take over the reins when the time came. Following the death of her husband Albert, on whom she depended hugely for assistance in dealing with her heavy workload, she became almost totally reclusive, seen very infrequently in public and only opening Parliament on about four occasions in the nearly forty years before her death. Effectively, she became an absentee monarch.