About book Eleanor Of Aquitaine And The Four Kings (1991)
I made it about 270 pages through this 400+-page book before calling it quits, and I experienced a bit of guilt at dropping out when I did. I like this book. Published some 50 years ago, Amy Kelly's history is beautifully written, well-researched and extremely detailed. What made me put it down is not, as avid readers of history may assume, related to its age. For less-than-avid readers of history I'll here point out the modern historiographical conceit to which I refer - as so much else in today's world, in the discipline of history, newer is considered better. Certainly, histories published in the last 5-10 years employ the newest theories and, as such, have found fruitful alternatives to the antiquated "Great Men" treatment of history. History has moved into post-modern waters swimming with anthropological theory, microhistory, post-colonial theory and so forth. Traditional reliance on unproblematized narrative has passed out of vogue in most current schools of historical thought. Modern methodologies pose ontological and epistemological questions to the very project of researching and writing history. They explore the nature of language, ways of generating meaning, and modes of expression. Such methods, as different as they are from each other, share a mistrust of traditional (read: old) linear narrative. That said, older historiography still has a corner on something these theory-laden new methodologies achieve only unevenly - readability. At the time of Kelly's writing history was still, as it had been for centuries, the matter of a well-crafted narrative backed up by sound research. Period. And a well-crafted narrative backed up by sound research is what Amy Kelly provides. Notwithstanding the epistemological problems inherent in narrative, I must admit a strong affection and even preference for it. And Kelly creates compelling narrative history - she pays actual attention to her narrative voice and literary style, she provides end notes instead of footnotes that interrupt the flow of reading, she attempts to keep her reader aesthetically as well as intellectually engaged. She does not, however, offer much of what her title promises - Eleanor of Aquitaine.Naturally, to discuss Eleanor of Aquitaine one must also discuss those "Four Kings", the men whose fortunes were so tied to her own, through amity or enmity (or both, as seems to have been standard in Eleanor's relationships). And perhaps my familiarity with newer histories led me to expect something an historian from 50 years ago could not possibly provide - what the actual woman's life would have looked like, day-in and day-out, how she must have understood her own role vis-à-vis Louis or Henry or her sons, the forces that crafted her own ambitions, which were considerable. Instead, Kelly roots her narrative firmly in the male gaze - i.e., when Henry imprisons Eleanor for 16 years, the narrative does not explore Eleanor's experience of these years, but instead, for chapters on end, follows Henry, as though it were a work solely about him. I should not, I suppose, expect an historian of Kelly's era to fix her lens too firmly on Eleanor who, as a woman, would not have been considered overly important to the history of European nation-building, the primary focus of traditional history. Shifting that focus is the work of later historians who turned their attention from "Great Men" to other groups of people, less mentioned and more difficult to get at. I confess, though, to expecting Kelly's titular figure to play a central role in her own history, if not in traditional History with a capital H. In defense of this expectation - of all medieval women Eleanor of Aquitaine has few rivals for the era's most powerful, influential and commented-upon woman. Surely, even in the 1950s, she merited a work of history all her own. Even Eleanor's contemporaries paid her that sort of attention.
I picked up this book for free at a used book store in Winnipeg earlier this year. I figured that Eleanor of Aquitaine is one of those historical figures that I seem to hear about often enough but I didn't really know much about her. This book is very dense, filled with much historical fact, and yet it's better than any soap opera, I am sure! Eleanor was 83 when she died -- very old considering she lived in the 1100s. She was Queen of France and of England. She went on crusade. She was the mother of King Richard and King John (from the Robin Hood legend ... and while these kings did exist, Robin Hood did not). She was Queen when Thomas Becket was martyred. One cannot help but marvel.Unfortunately, my unfamiliarity with the feudal system of politics left me bewildered from time to time. And, as usual, many of the figures in the book have the same name, but that cannot be helped!So ... read this instead of Pillars of the Earth. It takes place just a little bit later in history, and was a much more rewarding read.
Do You like book Eleanor Of Aquitaine And The Four Kings (1991)?
I got really interested in Eleanor of Aquitaine after reading Regine Pernoud's considerably shorter ALIENOR d'Aquitaine. She mentions in her bibliography Kelly's book which she calls "absolutely remarkable in its scholarship and brilliance" That could well be, but it would take another scholar to make that claim. I do know it's an exhaustively detailed account of the life of Eleanor of Aquitaine which spanned most of the tumultuous 12th century in what is now western France and England. She died in 1204 at the age of 82, having outlived eight of her ten children, the most famous of whom were Richard the Lion Hearted and King John of Magna Carta fame. The "four kings" were Louis VII of France (she was duchess of the vast Aquitaine area) whom she married when she was 15, a marriage designed to cement France Aquitaine, Henry II of England whom she hastily married after her marriage to Louis was annulled, her son, Richard who was to die at age 42, and finally, the other son, the erratic John. She is the only woman to have been queen over both England and France. Why is she signficant? To read about her is to read about 12th century western Europe in all of its political and military intrigues which centered around consolidating power, making individual fiefdoms subservient to a larger kingdom. In a way, I suppose, it is the beginning of the move, away from a feudal society, always threatening to collapse into anarchy, toward nation states in Europe. Eleanor was everywhere. She lived in Paris, she went on a Crusade and spent time in Antioch and Byzantium, she lived in London. She knew the Popes, she was constantly plotting to create dynasties through royal marriages of her children. At the same time, she was sophisticated and the cult of courtly love and the creation of a knightly code of behavior based on the legendary King Arthur flourished at her court in Poitiers. I thought the most interesting part of the book was the conflict between idealistic religious motives and practical financial and political matters. Both crusades that Eleanor was involved in were failures. Huge sums were raised through levies and taxes to drive out the heathen from the Holy Places - the sums disappeared in the Middle East as if they had never existed. Richard the Lion Hearted cut his Middle East campaign short to come home and deal with back-stabbing on the part of his brother, John, who was taking over Richard's lands. On the way back, Richard was captured by German princes and held for an enormous ransom. This, in spite of a Papal "guarantee of safety". When appealed to, the Pope didn't lift a finger to help Richard. Why? Because he had other political constituents to satisfy. Eleanor, now in her 70's, was frantic, trying to obtain Richard's releas. She succeeded, but that in turn had more political reverberations, What must she have thought when she died, weak and withdrawn from the ongoing conflicts - that all of these battles had accomplished little?
—Edward
I read this book many years ago and have fond memories of how great it was. I understand Kelly was not a trained historian which makes it even more remarkable.
—Athena Ninlil
A fantastically researched and beautifully written text. I've been fascinated by Eleanor - Alianor, in her own time - for a long while now and despite it's age, this book added more to my knowledge of this amazing woman than I'd have guessed possible. I've read nearly every book available about Queen Eleanor, yet her story never ceases to amaze me. Having outlived two husbands - both kings - and eight of her ten children, her life is simply fascinating. In a time where women did not have power, she wielded more, and for longer, than any other queen dared dream. I will say this is not the book I'd start with for those who know nothing about Eleanor. It can be a bit dense, particularly in Eleanor's absence as Henry's prisoner all those years. But the stories are all so entwined, it would be impossible to have told hers without her sons' - Richard and John of course. I can't praise this book enough. Don't let the publication date trick you into thinking it's irrelevant; it's wonderfully written and really brings a remarkable woman to life.
—Sarah
