Scan barcode
A review by laileanah
The Two Eleanors of Henry III by Darren Baker
informative
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
3.0
I quite liked this. It was thoroughly researched, very readable/accessible for lay readers of history.
I felt that Baker took a somewhat royalist view of Eleanor & Simon de Montfort. I think that bias, not really bias, more attitude impacted how he views her. There's a time after which, after more than a decade of thoughtless treatment by Henry III, Eleanor can hold up a Treaty with King Louis in exchange for her tardy dowry payments. The author implies this was wrong of Eleanor, but I don't agree. It's not Eleanor's fault that Henry was perpetually broke. Henry found lands & money for their de Lusignon siblings, Eleanor was within her rights to demand the same. She'd already tried asking nicely repeatedly. Her efforts were valid.
It's weird because Baker seems to recognize that historical sexism has colored the public memory of Eleanor of Provence.
I removed a star because of awkward phrasing surrounding antisemitism in Henry III & Eleanor of Provence's Court.
There's an incident at the very end of chapter 6 in which a child's body is found dead in a well. The child's mother claims that Jewish folks ritually sacrificed her Christian child. This is a very common antisemitic claim. There's been no evidence in historical studies that there ever existed a group of Jewish folks that ritually sacrificed xtian kids. This is just how antisemitism operated in society at that time. No doubt the boy was murdered and given what we today know and understand about crime, it was possibly someone in his own family, almost certainly someone in his own community. Violence like this tends to fall along community lines. Often ostracized and deeply oppressed communities are blamed in situations like this. It still happens today, which is why immigration is such a hot-button political issue. Statistically, very little crime is committed by immigrants, but that's not how society chooses to look at these relationships.
Instead, the author chooses to act like, from this great distance, we can't possibly know what occurred. This is true but leaves the impression that Jewish folks might have ritually murdered xtian children. I'm sure the author isn't himself antisemitic and I'm sure he meant no offense. Still, words matter, and it's incumbent on current historians to speak respectfully historically oppressed communities. For me, that includes giving historical context to biased claims.
I felt that Baker took a somewhat royalist view of Eleanor & Simon de Montfort. I think that bias, not really bias, more attitude impacted how he views her. There's a time after which, after more than a decade of thoughtless treatment by Henry III, Eleanor can hold up a Treaty with King Louis in exchange for her tardy dowry payments. The author implies this was wrong of Eleanor, but I don't agree. It's not Eleanor's fault that Henry was perpetually broke. Henry found lands & money for their de Lusignon siblings, Eleanor was within her rights to demand the same. She'd already tried asking nicely repeatedly. Her efforts were valid.
It's weird because Baker seems to recognize that historical sexism has colored the public memory of Eleanor of Provence.
I removed a star because of awkward phrasing surrounding antisemitism in Henry III & Eleanor of Provence's Court.
There's an incident at the very end of chapter 6 in which a child's body is found dead in a well. The child's mother claims that Jewish folks ritually sacrificed her Christian child. This is a very common antisemitic claim. There's been no evidence in historical studies that there ever existed a group of Jewish folks that ritually sacrificed xtian kids. This is just how antisemitism operated in society at that time. No doubt the boy was murdered and given what we today know and understand about crime, it was possibly someone in his own family, almost certainly someone in his own community. Violence like this tends to fall along community lines. Often ostracized and deeply oppressed communities are blamed in situations like this. It still happens today, which is why immigration is such a hot-button political issue. Statistically, very little crime is committed by immigrants, but that's not how society chooses to look at these relationships.
Instead, the author chooses to act like, from this great distance, we can't possibly know what occurred. This is true but leaves the impression that Jewish folks might have ritually murdered xtian children. I'm sure the author isn't himself antisemitic and I'm sure he meant no offense. Still, words matter, and it's incumbent on current historians to speak respectfully historically oppressed communities. For me, that includes giving historical context to biased claims.