What if Arthur had become King of England?

The Tudors are one of the most famous English royal families, into which historians have conducted countless amounts of research, with particular focus upon the wives of Henry VIII, as well as the reigns of both himself and his three children, among various significant events which took place during this momentous period of history. It is therefore, interesting to view certain aspects of this particular time from the perspective of counter-factual history, also known as alternative history. The life of Prince Arthur Tudor, for example, is one of the areas overshadowed by the more decisive and influential aspects of Tudor history. The approach of alternative history could be applied to multiple areas of Tudor history, but in this post I hope to explore the alternative of What if Arthur had become King of England?

Well, the first question one would perhaps wish to ask is; would he have been the great legend his parents had hoped for? Indeed, his place of birth being Winchester – the ‘spiritual home of King Arthur’s Round Table’[1] – implies Henry VII and Elizabeth of Yorke had high hopes for their first born son. Also, would he have been both as famous and infamous as Henry VIII? Considering the view that Henry VIII’s main reason for the Break from Rome was to divorce his first wife – being an incredibly controversial move amongst the English people, it can be argued that Arthur would have been rather different. As, one historian, Gunn argues, that due to his less confrontational nature, Arthur would perhaps not have been so destructive towards the Catholic church as his brother. What is more, any alterations to or replacement of the Catholic Church in England, would, as Gunn suggests, have derived from the grass-roots as a challenge to authority, rather than enforcement by the government or monarchy.

It has also been argued by Kathryn Hadley in her review of Steven Gunn and Linda Monkton’s book Arthur Tudor: Prince of Wales, for the History Today magazine that the English Reformation would have been played out rather differently had Arthur been King of England. This is because it is believed that Arthur was ‘less confrontational’ and therefore would most likely have been more careful like his father. Indeed, when trying to construct an image of Arthur Tudor as king of England, it is helpful to reflect on the attitudes of Henry VII as he would have had a lot of control over his son’s upbringing, such as through choosing his tutors. This point links back to the areas in which the two sons of Henry VII were most educated, in order to prepare them for their duties as English royalty.

Although historians do not have accurate evidence of the nature of the relationship between Prince Arthur and Catherine of Aragon, it has been suggested in Gregory’s historical novel that the two were very much in love and therefore, one can assume that little would have broken their marriage, had they had the opportunity to live as King and Queen of England. However, considering their ages at their time of marriage, any form of relationship can really only be speculation. Also, if we are to consider what we do know, in order to construct an alternative story to the actual succession of the Tudor monarchy, Arthur’s weak health would suggest that producing sons, who would live beyond the age of three, would have been a challenge.

On the other hand though, Referring back to Henry VIII’s first divorce, which, the evidence suggests, was primarily due to the lack of a male heir, it could be argued that things may have planned out differently, had Arthur remained Catherine’s husband. As, although it is hard to tell whether the lack of a male heir would have given him reason to find another wife, having been trained to become a king, unlike Henry, who was trained in the church, as the second son, Arthur may not have been as involved or concerned with the workings of the English church. What is more, the investigations into Henry VIII’s illnesses and their links to his inability to have more than four children – of which only one was a legitimate male heir – could lead to the conclusion that if Arthur had become king, England may have had a more stable line-up of sons. Although, returning to the matter of his health, had Arthur survived the illness which killed him as a young man, it would most likely have weakened him.

But if Arthur, as king, had had to face the same succession crisis as Henry VIII, would he have divorced Catherine and if he had, whom would he have married? This is a question which feels far beyond any reasonable speculations, but being the serious boy he was, it seems likely that had it crossed his mind, Arthur would have made some foreign alliance, through a second marriage, with another European power. But again, there is not enough material to speculate with much accuracy.

One last point I would like to consider in this post, is the amount the Tudor court would have travelled, had Arthur fulfilled his parents hopes’, in becoming the next legendary king of England. If he had demonstrated anything like the character of his father, the court would have remained fairly inanimate and stationary, which combined with his upbringing in the Welsh castle of Ludlow, may have produced a seemingly distant and at times, absent king. Although, again, there is little material for speculation in their area.

To conclude, let us consider what is the significance of counter-factual or alternative history and what can we learn from it? Thinking about the what ifs of a subject or event in history can help us to unravel why history happened the way it did and how these things have had an effect on subsequent events.

Bibliography;

http://www.historytoday.com/blog/news-blog/kathryn-hadley/what-if-arthur-prince-wales-had-been-king

http://www.tudorplace.com.ar/Bios/ArthurTudor.htm

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/prince_arthur.htm

 

---

[1] http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/prince_arthur.htm

 

Interview with Professor Emerita Barbara Yorke, part 4(Final part)

Do you think a historical truth exists? –It’s all sort of multi layered, isn’t it, cause obviously something did happen, it’s hard to, though some people might try to, argue away something like the Second World War, and you can see a series of events that led up to it, but when you then begin to ask why did that happen, that is obviously more difficult. I think that there is something that really has happened, but trying to understand everything is more difficult. For with accidents or something and five witnesses come forward, then they all have slightly different stories depending on their idea of what happened and where they were standing at the time, or their preconceptions if they see a female driver, then men might say; it must be the women driving’s fault, she was hesitating, etc., etc., and thereby people will make those sort of assumptions and built them into how they have interpreted what’s going on, and so than you have to try and reconstruct what have happened, and that is sort of what historians are doing in a way. They are laying out the facts they can be sure of, and then taking different views and interpretations sometimes people at the time, sometimes later, trying to understand why they happened, and from that point of view people contemporaries might think they understand what is going on, but they don’t always, for there are things like baggage they bring with them which influence their understanding of it.  Or that they haven’t gotten the bigger picture, as they think they might, so they can’t see the outcomes like people later can do. So in that sense Historical is something that needs to be tested, undoubtedly something have happened, and you can’t deny that.

If you had a time machine and you could take one trip, either for research or for fun, where would you go, and why? –It would be absolutely fascinating to go somewhere like 8^th century Britain, and do a quick tour around and see if its anything like what one think it would be, and to see people using the items doing things, and see what life was like, and see different monasteries and houses and things like that, I mean that would be absolutely fascinating to do, to see; have we got it right? Or are there all sorts of aspects of life that just haven’t been recorded which we can’t see, so there is all sorts of things like that which would have been wonderful to see,  and King Alfred himself is he an big impressive warrior or just a weedy scholar type, you know is he anything like what one think, and if it is just this small band of people who have produced this picture of Alfred as this scholarly king, when he in the fact only are rolling around on the sofas with his men, drinking, hunting and enjoying himself and saying;’ it would be quite useful if you did this job for me on my personality’, and maybe he turns out in the lines of a traditional Anglo-Saxon kings, just to see what he was really like.

If you could find the one object, text or anything, that you know have existed, or wish that could exist, what would it be? – well, something like a major text from Mercia would be nice, written from a Mercian perspective like the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, or Bede’s Ecclesiastical History just based in Mercia, or something from that area that would open things up. It is difficult with one object, really, maybe another History, written on the same things as Bede but just from a Mercian perspective, or a Life of Offa the Great or something like that, to put along Alfred’s text, which would be extremely interesting.

We would like to thank Barbara Yorke for taking the time to this interview, and we hope that you, our reader, like us in the blog group have gotten to know this distinguished historian better.

Interview with Professor Emirita Barbara Yorke, part 3

Do you personally trust Asser or Bede’s works? – Well you can’t view them as you would modern people, you can’t expect them to be modern historians, and you need to think what their interests are and that is the interesting thing to try to get into the mind of someone else. Bede has a huge mind, so he is quite difficult to get into, and it’s a very theological mind, that’s what he has been trained as, so his way of looking at things is naturally dictated by that, so, truth or trust is a difficult thing to say, but any writer is revealing things about themselves and the times they are living in just by writing. So they are saying things on one level, but behind that are assumptions and trying to get what’s behind what they say is almost more interesting than what they are revealing. So I think if one wants to treat them as a modern history text book that would be wrong, they are not writing in that sort of way.

Do you think history has a future? – oh, it has to, I mean the more things that happen the more history is being created, so it is never going to go away.

I mean as in the discipline, considering the debates that have been with the postmodern attacks etc.  – I think it has, I think it’s too important to ignore, particularly in Europe where history is so deeply rooted, and it is all around us, and it is tied in with everyone’s national identity, it I also tied into the businesses of attractions and tourism so I think it is firmly bedded in the economy. Well I do think it if frightening the way it has been cut back in schools and that people haven’t got that idea of the depth of history that is all around us, for having that knowledge adds hugely to traveling around the country and seeing new places.  I think there is a huge interest out there, especially if you go to lectures in local societies or adult learners, there is a huge interest, for it is sometimes something people grow into, even though they might not have the interest at an earlier age, they can acquire it later in life.

What is your best advice to a student of either history or archaeology who struggles with their work and motivation? – that’s a really difficult question, or I am not very good at motivation, for most people need to able to motivate themselves, it is the most difficult thing to do as a teacher to try and motivate others, and it is one of the most frustrating things as a teacher is that you can’t get people to see what is interesting and to get them going and if one knew how to do it, one would be a huge success. I think one has to accept that you are not going to like everything all the time, particularly as an undergraduate, and concentrate on things you really do like, and always choose courses because they are interesting, not because they are at the best time, or something like that. That can sometimes be a problem, because I am only going to do something that falls between the mid-day period on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, or something like that, cause then you might find yourself doing something you don’t like, and you will not be so well motivated if you do that. It is something that is hard, which often means that if you do get on top of it, you have done a real achievement, and a real leap forward, so it might often be a good sign if some things are hard. So you have to have ambitions, but also leave yourself enough time to do essays, so you can say ‘I am confused now’, and put it to the side, and sleep on it, and then when you wake up the next morning it is all much clearer, that is at least how it works with me and writing, that things sort themselves over night, so you need to allow a certain amount of time to do it. And I suppose to motivate themselves they got to have their bigger goals in mind, though it might be a bit of a struggle, but if you don’t do this you might not get such a good degree, and but if you do, you can get a better degree and a much bigger choice of things you can do in life. And so, whereas the rest of your life doesn’t seem so important when you are young, and that it is such a long way off, and you might by the time you are thirty think why bother, but by the time you are forty you are having a rather different view, and think; ‘Oh my God, I wish I knew, what I know now, and that I would have worked harder when I was twenty so that I wouldn’t be doing this boring job now, but that I could have followed my desire to go on to be a dot, dot, dot, whatever it is you want to do’. So trying to keep that bigger picture in mind and keep yourself at things, even if it is something you are not so interested in, it is usually not wasted in the long run, and sometimes you might come back and find that it is much more interesting later on, even though you didn’t see the point of it earlier. Sometimes you might find that you are working in that particularly area for some reason and it becomes a lot more interesting. It is the same with all knowledge; you have to have the base before you can go on to the more interesting stuff.  If you don’t know how historiography works then you’ll never have that to build upon, and become more interesting.

How has history shaped your life? Or where has it taken you, i.e. where in the world? – Where in the world? Well it certainly has taken me to places which have been good, like you get to go to conferences and things like that, so… that’s good it allows you to travel to places you didn’t think of traveling to, not that I have travelled that much, but I have in Europe and North America,  but not really outside there. Ehmmm, where it have taken me as a person? Yeah… well I suppose the fact of having a bit of expertise in a particular area allows you to go to a conference and someone can come up to you and say that: ‘Thank you so much for your book, it got me interested in that subject’. It is a really nice thing for somebody to say to you, and you think perhaps you have done a little bit of good. It is quite nice to think that you have had an impact in other people’s lives; it is a nice thing to do.

Here ends part III of the interview, but part IV will follow shortly; in part IV which also is the final part Professor Yorke is sharing her thoughts on a Historical truth, and what she would do if she had a time machine.

Interview with Professor Emerita Barbara Yorke, Part 2

You have recently been on television in a programme about the importance of books and the royal line in Anglo-Saxon England. How did you find the programme both as a historian and as a viewer? – I haven’t seen it, I have seen the second one, but not the first one cause I was away at the time, but we have recorded it, I did sneak a look at some of it on Iplayer where I could have it very, very small where I didn’t have to see myself blown up just to check that it was alright. The second programme I thought worked very well, Janina is a presenter who used to do some teaching here at the University, she is an art historian and I think she did it very well. The one I saw last time had some really stunning manuscripts, so I am looking forward to going to the exhibition, so yeah, I am all in favour of that sort of programmes that got sort of a high production value, and it makes what can see as a dreaded subject quite accessible to people, so I think people should contribute to things like this. Else we risk history becoming too narrow and specialized, so we need to get it out there and get people interested, and demanding that their children are taught history and that sort of thing.

What do you think has been the greatest challenge you have faced throughout your career in history and archaeology? – that is one of the more difficult questions, but if you are doing both teaching and research that is quite challenging, because you get pulled in different directions, and you get one load of things to do in respect to teaching and another you are also expected to publish. And keeping up with both areas are quite difficult, since you might be teaching a much broader area than your research, so there is a huge amount being produced, so when I first started here, I was teaching archaeology as well, and there wasn’t much published on Anglo-Saxon archaeology, so it was relatively easy to cover it when you had the background in it, but as the years has gone by there have been so much work in Anglo Saxon Archaeology I could not possibly keep up with that,  and all the historical side I am covering as well, so I did drop some things, which now other lectures are teaching, which made things a bit easier, there are quite a lot of demands upon you when you are working in a university, you have to be a bit firm with yourself not to try to meet all those demands, and say you are going to stop now and say you are not going to do that anymore. Though it is hard to know when to stop, do you come into University from 9 to 5 and that’s it? or? You know you have to go home eventually; I have always tried not to work on the weekend and so on.

To what extent would you say that for the period in which you have specialised in, one needs to understand both archaeology and history to be able to create a fuller picture of the past? – Obviously it is needed, but its quit difficult to be an expert in both of them, so I get a bit worried when I read archaeology things and they do not include or fit in with the written evidence, and you get people working on the 5^th and 6^th century and extrapolating what the social structure might have been like without it bearing any resemblance to the earliest law codes. And I think that is a bit worrying, I think they’ve got to tie up, so you want to do that. And yes you can specialise on an area or another, but if you want to get the whole picture then you have to look upon both, well you will never get the whole picture for a period like that, but you can make a better text if you look at everything that is available. It is difficult to do, for they don’t always lead in the same direction, but that’s what is interesting and stimulating about it.

Would you say that king Alfred really was ‘the great’? – I think he was an quite exceptional person, you know unusual for his time, not afraid to study books which people often would laugh at, and being the boy who only wanted to study not to fight. However, on the other hand he was that sort of fighter as well, and he went out there and he lead the army, and it is very unusual to get someone who does that, but he is a great self-publicist as well, one of the quotes about him is; ‘we know that Alfred is great because he tells us so’.  So there is a bit of that with him, so I think he often gets the credit for things that perhaps should be shared out among a greater range of Anglo Saxon kings, such as his son and brothers.  In a way since he is such a well-known name it sort of snowballs from that, and there are many reasons why his reputation have always been higher than other Anglo Saxon kings. But after all he did choose a different life than what was expected of him, he moves out of the box in a way, for he could have chosen an easy life lying on the sofa taking it easy, but he is rather out there and wanted to find out more and he wanted to study so that’s very stimulating about him, when you look and see all the things that happened in his reign, such as laying the foundations of the Old English state, but it is very hard to see a lot of innovation in his reign. He’s got big ideas, but not always the means to put them into practice.

Part II of the interview ends here, but part III and IV will soon follow, in part III we are will hear what Barbara think of Asser and Bede, and how students might keep their motivation up.

Interview with Professor Emerita Barbara Yorke, Part 1.

It is not often one have the honour of doing interviews with some of the most prominent historians in English history, but on a very quiet afternoon in January 2012, we, Maddie and Karl, were so lucky to have an appointment with Professor Emerita Barbara Yorke, known from her books on the Conversion of Britain, and her interest in the Jubilee of King Alfred celebrated in 1901.

Both of us being students at the University of Winchester knew who Barbara is, seeing that she had been teaching there for many years, until she recently retired in 2011. Due to her recent retirement we found it the right time to approach her about an interview for the blog, and we were very happy when she accepted.  Together with Barbara we approached some questions which we hope can give a good portrait of Professor Yorke.  Dear Barbara, we were wondering where did you study?  –I did a combined-honours degree at the University of Exeter in History and Archaeology, before I went away for a year to do a course in Archive administration at the University of Liverpool, though I did not take to Archives, I did pick up a husband who is an Archivist. Then I went back to Exeter and studied under the supervision of Frank Barlow, who has worked on Edward the Confessor and William Rufus, even though I did not study the same things he still took me on and supervised me through my Post Graduate studies.

How did you find Undergraduate life? Did you find it as you had expected it to be? – I loved it, especially in those days since I grew up in the country, miles from anywhere, so life was a bit restricted on the weekends and so on, so I really loved being in a town with all the people around and it was much more of a rite of passage in those days, than today, with a change between youth and becoming an adult. After all it was quite a big thing going away and mixing with people.

Did you have a history society at the University in those days? – Yes, we did, I ran the archaeology society and a friend of mine ran the history by the time we were in the third year. So yes, I was quite involved in that.

Why did you choose to do History and archaeology? – I wanted to do something that I hadn’t done for my A-level, but were related to my interests, I had always been interested in monuments and things like that, but I didn’t really know much of archaeology, though I liked the idea of something like that, since I was keen not to do what I had done for A-level again.  I had done Tudors and Stuarts for A-level and 19^th and 20^th century for O-level as we had then. I also realised that if I did history and Archaeology I could concentrate on the earlier periods, and do a lot of the medieval history, and I could miss out on a lot of the modern history which I didn’t actually want to do. So… that’s not always the best of reasons for selecting it…

‘Well we think and know that it has gotten you as far as it has, so it must have worked at least’.

What sort of topics are you working on for the moment, without revealing everything, so no-one will steal your great ideas?- Haha…, well I don’t think there would be many people trying to snatch a good idea from me, but I got a number of things going; I am advising on a number of projects, mostly archaeology-based who want a historian to act as an advisor, for instance the Prittlewell Anglo-Saxon burial, which is being written up, and I am doing the history background, whereas other people are doing the archaeological parts of it. We are meeting about it and sharing ideas and then go away and write up each their own part, so I am doing things like that. And then I am writing up a lecture I gave at Manchester, called; the Toller Lecture which I did early last year on King Alfred and his background in traditional English heroic background, and how he relates to that. And then there is something that I am supposed to be working on, which I have told people that I am working on, which I really haven’t done much on yet, which is; the origins of kingdoms in Anglo-Saxon England, why they suddenly appear when they did in the 6^th century, in a way as an extension on the book I have already written on the conversion of Britain, to see if the kingdoms naturally develop or if they were provoked or what stimulated the developments and settlements of the Anglo Saxon societies. And to look at the late Iron Age when the Romans get interested in Britain, and see if some clues to unravelling this mystery might lie there and to look into the stimulation of kingship and settlements under the Roman influence can reflect the development possible in the 6^th century. And if something like that happens due to the growing powers of the Franks, perhaps as well as more of the Roman background as some people think, but I’m also interested in works done on areas like Scandinavia on origins of kingdoms there, and whether there are any kingdoms in places like Norway as early as the fifth or sixth century. If not, then why not, and what do they have instead, and why do kingdoms suddenly appear. So I really want the Anglo-Saxon kings and kingdoms to come out with a broader context and background, both Germanic, European and Roman, to be able to understand better the origins of them as well as why they appear when they did, and compare what happened in Britain in the fifth and sixth century with what happened in the late Iron Age.  So, yes I have wanted to do it for some time, but I haven’t got around to doing it yet, although I might just do some aspects of it, it can still be interesting to see how it all developed.

Is there any topic, if the sources were there, you would have liked to do? – Well I think the origins of kingdoms fall under that, but since there isn’t then that’s why it has to be a kind of comparative approach.

Is that where you would have to draw upon archaeology as well as history? – Yes it would have to build upon archaeological evidence, because that is making the whole period much clearer. And in fact some of the archaeology projects I am involved in are dealing with what is happening in the sixth century. So I’m hoping that being involved with those will encourage me to get on with it.

Have you found this interview interesting so far? More is to come, log back on in a few hours and read the continuation of this interview. Barbara will be talking about King Alfred, challenges as a historian and the need for history and archaeology to work together for the early medieval period.

Interview with David Rymill, Hampshire Record Office, 5/12/2011

After some editing work and much effort putting it all together, finally we have get around uploading the videos from our interview with David Rymill, one of the archivist from the Hampshire Record Office, that took place the 5th of december last year This time it was me, Scott and Sophie (behind the camera) who organised the event and ask all those serious and relatively silly questions.

We hope you enjoy it and get to know more and appreciate the role of local archives in our society!

 

Also, here is the link for those who might not know anything about the HRO:

http://www3.hants.gov.uk/archives

<<W.U Hstry Team>>

Leap year traditions

Happy Valentine’s Day readers,

So it’s that time of year again, the one day they (being the powers that help organise this blog ) let me out of the politics and gender history and allow me to write something comparatively lighter and happier, they let me write about love… about valentine’s day. Ok so maybe they don’t let me instead I offer my services to write about the history behind, what I’m now going to name as the lovers holiday. So I hope you’re all having a fabulous day with your loved ones, if your with someone special, or if your single I still wish you all the best, and hope you enjoy the different kinds of love that are around you today instead; friendship; family and a love of life all of which are great things to have. And so in the words of Beatles and Ewan McGreggor in Moulin rouge, All you need is love, and with that we shall begin.

2012 is a year of many events; in England we have the diamond jubilee and the Olympics, yet this year is special for another reason it is a leap year. Ok I can hear you saying what’s so special about a leap year, we get an extra day in February and that it is, nothing special, nothing romantic … am I right? Well what if I said that this day the 29th of February is very important in the world of romance, in particular for women…., have I given you enough clues yet or are you still reading this thinking that the author has lost the plot and should put you out of your misery. Ok so the important thing that is romantic and can only happen in a leap year is that on the 29th of February a woman can legitimately propose to a man! So to our women readers if there’s a special man in your life that either isn’t getting the hint or you love him so much that you wish to spend the rest of your lives together, now’s your chance to pluck up the courage and get down on one knee and propose to him, and I’m keeping my fingers crossed that all goes well for you.

Leap year traditions date back as far as 5th century Ireland where according to legend St Bridget struck a deal with St Patrick, after some haggling, originally it was going to be one year out of every seven, to allow women to purpose to men on leap day , in order to balance the traditional roles of men and women. Then unexpectedly St Bridget, being single got down on one knee and proposed to St Patrick, to which he refused but gave her a kiss and a beautiful silk gown in consolation. Apparently in 1288 a Law by Queen Margret of Scotland, aged 5 and living in Norway at the time stated that compensation should be given for a refusal to soften the blow. The statue apparently reads;

It is statut and ordainit that during the reine of hir maist blissit Magestie, ilk maiden ladye of baith highe and lowe estair shale hae libertie to bespeak ye man she likes; albiet, gif he refuses to tak her till be his wif, he sall be mulcit in ye sume of ane hundredth poundis or less, as is estait mai be, except and alwais gif he can mak it appear that he is betrothit to ane other woman, then he shall be free.

Rough Transulation by me: It is ordained that during the reign of her blessed majesty that a maiden lady of high and low birth, shall have the liberty to bespeak [propose to] the man she likes, if he refuses to take her as his wife, he shall be [fined] in the sum of an hundred pounds or less as it may be established, execpt and always he can make it appear that he is betrothed to another woman he sahll be free [of the fine].
However the validity of this law and whether it was actually enforced is questionable, considering it was written by a 5 year old.

This tradition of leap day, also known as bachelor’s day, was recognised by the 17th century, even if it’s origins are questionable, as shown by the allusion to the tradition of leap year to have a role reversal, in the play The Maid’s Metamorphosis(1600)

‘Master be contented, this is leape yeare,
Women weare breetches, petticoats are deare.’

And perhaps the tradition can be dated back to the medieval ages with this quote attributed to Chaucer, published in the Collectanea by Vincent Lean (1905);

In Leap Year they have power to chuse
The men no charter to refuse

But men be weary of refusing a women’s proposal on this day, as there were consequences if you refused the woman who proposed to you. The consequences include; a kiss (As stated in the law of Margret of Scotland), paying a fine, buying the woman a gown (to the value of £1 in medieval times); or as in some European countries such as Denmark, buying the woman who proposed 12 pairs of gloves, the idea behind this was that the women would then wear the gloves in order to hide her embarrassment of not having an engagement ring. In Finland, if the man refused he should buy the woman the fabrics for a skirt. Although in Greece it is considered unlucky for anyone to get married during this year and on this day.

So leap year proposals, what do you think? Some people think it’s a sweet old tradition that perhaps doesn’t have any place in a modern society any more, or it has a place as a romantic tradition that celebrates the love in this world, let me know, and in keeping with tradition I’m going to, ask for your favourite love quotes again this year, or your favourite love song, please leave them in the comment box below. Finally, all that’s left for me is to do is wish you a happy Valentine’s day, for the 14th , and good luck for any of our female readers who are brave enough to propose on the 29th. But whatever your relationship, I wish you all the happiness and love in the world.

Sophie, xoxo

p.s check out our gallery for a postcard from 1908 showing leap year tradtions.

Sources

http://www.timeanddate.com/date/chinese-leap-year.html

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/historical/a/leap_year_2.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_year.

What if Oscar Wilde said; No?!?

We have all done it, or I don’t know about you, but I have at least, I mean I’ve often though what if. This idea of experimenting with the what if’s can be very fascinating and also dangerous, fascinating because we can then explore other possible directions history could have taken, dangerous because some might have problems with seeing the difference between truth and fantasy. Or more correctly seeing the difference between the; what if, and the real what.

What if history is also known as Counterfactual history, by which we mean the idea of exploring the course of events that would have , or more correctly is believed to have, come to pass is a certain event would have turn out differently than it actually did. Probably one of the most fashionable or popular ‘what if’s’ is the idea of what if Germany had Won the second world war? Would we all have spoken German by now? And would that have meant that we already would have German economic ideas in place in the European budgets??? In other words could a German victory in the 1940’s have prevented this economic crises Europe is facing now??? Other what if’s that is popular: What if Robert E Lee had won the battle of Gettysburg? Or what if Napoleon had won at Waterloo?, among others. Maybe one of the earliest examples of this counterfactual history method is; Charles Petrie’s ‘If: A Jacobite Fantasy, first publishes on the 3rd of January 1926 in The Weekly Westminster.[1]One of the most famous books in counterfactual history is Philip K Dick’s The Man in the High Castle from 1962[2], the first of the two texts is concerned with what if the Stuart line had been re-established on the throne in 1745, the second is about what if the Axis powers had won World War Two, both are well worth to read, but that is not the main issue of this article.

For those of you who follow the notions of history months, will know that February in many countries is LGBT-history month, and in that instance I want to examine a WHAT IF that I was acquainted with the other day (2^nd of Feb. 2012) at a lecture held by Professor Eric Anderson, what if Oscar Wilde had not had his slip of words and admitted that he was gay, would we then consider flamboyant feminine men as the stereotypical Homosexual? I do not want to judge, but I can say honestly, and I think many with me, that many a Gay man have something slightly feminine with his being. I am not here saying that all homosexual men are feminine or flamboyant, or that all feminine and, or, flamboyant men are gay, please understand me correctly, what I am trying to say is; there are a certain group of men who are both gay, flamboyant and feminine in their way, and this idea of gays being flamboyant and feminine comes from Oscar Wilde.[3] Not from what he wrote, but from his own way of living and our ideas of him.[4] The ideas can be summed up in the words of the Marquess of Queensberry’s words in June 1894 ‘You look it and you pose as it, which is just as bad’[5].on the morning of the 4^th of April 1895 Oscar Wilde’s tongue slipped, and he stated in court: ‘Oh, no, never in my life; he was a peculiarly plain boy’,[6] when he was asked if he had ever kissed a specific servant referred to in the court documents.[7] Then the question is; what if Oscar Wilde had not had his slip of tongue? Would we then have more plays or poems by him? Would we have defined the cliché homosexual man as a masculine man? Or even an average diversity as we now are moving towards? Or would we never have had the acceptance and development with have been seen the last 20 years or so on the topic of LGBT rights?

As you have seen there are many ways to use counterfactual history, sometimes it’s used to enlighten us to real possibilities, other times they can be pure experiments of thoughts, but at least one thing is for certain and that is that the art of Counterfactual history once and for all have proven that history is not a linear chain of positive development is wrong, for we are now aware that so much could have been different if certain things, actions or even words would have been done, said or acted differently.

This is just one of many ways to use the What If ideas while reading or thinking of history, what is your favourite what if in history?

---

[1] http://www.jacobite.ca/essays/if.htm (accessed 17.50 on the 6^th of Feb. 2012)

[2] http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/highcastle.htm (accessed 17.52 on the 6th of Feb. 2012)

[3] A. Sinfield, vii

[4] Ibid, vii.

[5] M. Holland, xix, 2004

[6] Ibid, 207.

[7] Ibid, 207.

Bibliography

Anderson, E., Homohysteria, lecture on the 2nd of Feb 2012.

Holland, M., Irish Peacock & Scarlet Marquess; The Real Trail of Oscar Wilde, (London, 2004)

Sinfield, A., The Wilde Century; Efeeminacy, Oscar Wilde and the Queer Moment, (Chichester, 1994)

http://www.jacobite.ca/essays/if.htm

http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/highcastle.htm