HistoryExtra
type: channel
link: https://www.historyextra.com
description: The official website for BBC History Magazine
date: 2024-09-06T16:39:28.000Z
update period: hourly
update frequency: 1
update base: 2000-01-01T12:00+00:00
items: Elizabeth I's accession day celebrations
items: How did the world change during Queen Elizabeth II's reign?
items: The state of history in 2021
items: Anna Whitelock's talking points: Friends or enemies?
items: Anna Whitelock's talking points: a history of violence
items: Anna Whitelock's talking points: Foundational stories
items: Anna Whitelock's talking points: Plot twists
items: Mary I: the forgotten trailblazer
items: Anna Whitelock: Confronting slavery’s legacy
items: Elizabeth I’s love life: was she really a ‘Virgin Queen’?

Elizabeth I's accession day celebrations
type: item
date: 2024-03-07T13:16:42.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: Elizabethan
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: HistoryExtra Academy
subject: HistoryExtra Academy Elizabethans course
subject: Tudor kings and queens
description: Anna Whitelock reveals how Elizabeth I used celebrations marking the anniversary of her accession as a weapon in her war against the Catholic threat to her throne
encoded: Queen Elizabeth II’s accession day, celebrated on 6 February 2012, was heralded by Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, with the tribute: “Warm congratulations to Her Majesty on the 60th anniversary of her accession. Here’s to a sparkling diamond jubilee. God Save the Queen!” In offering his felicitations to the Queen, Johnson was following in the footsteps of the lord mayors of the late 16th century who had led the city’s celebrations for the accession of the first Elizabeth on 17 November 1558. However, while their congratulations and pledges of loyalty would be undertaken with considerable solemnity and ceremony, Johnson offered his tribute rather more informally on Twitter. Elsewhere, more traditional rites were observed, including gun salutes at Hyde Park corner, the Tower of London and throughout the UK, while at St Paul’s Cathedral special parts of the accession service from the Book of Common Prayer was sung at Evensong. Public celebrations While the first Elizabeth never made it to her diamond jubilee – she died after 45 years as queen – national exigencies meant that as her reign went on, and the dangers to the realm mounted, increasingly spectacular national celebrations on ‘the Queen’s Day’ became critical, not simply for spectacle and festivity but for security and defence. Elizabeth I had come to the throne on 17 November 1558 following the death of her Catholic sister Mary I. For many it offered the promise of a decisive break with an unpopular popish past and the dawn of a new age with a Protestant young queen. Yet for others, Elizabeth was the ‘little whore’ daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn and the living symbol of the break with Rome and Mary Stuart, the queen of Scotland believed to be the rightful heir to the throne of England. In the years that followed, Mary became the focus of numerous plots against Elizabeth. Twelve years after Elizabeth’s accession, 17 November became the first royal anniversary to be popularly celebrated in England. It…

4-HEXA-Elizabethan-WK1-Accession-Day-GettyImages-804438614-9614687.jpg
width: 1240
height: 826

How did the world change during Queen Elizabeth II's reign?
type: item
date: 2022-11-10T12:42:12.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: 20th Century
subject: 21st Century
subject: Period
description: Throughout her reign, Queen Elizabeth II remained a constant presence in an era of vast social, technological and geopolitical transformation. Anna Whitelock charts an era in which Britain, but not its queen, changed beyond recognition...
encoded: Listen to a version of this article: Never before has Britain changed so dramatically during the reign of one monarch. The second Elizabethan age was defined by unprecedented transformations in every facet of life, the effects of which rivalled those of the industrial revolution more than two centuries earlier. Queen Elizabeth II witnessed significant changes in society, technology, transport and geopolitics, which created what most people would recognise today as the modern British state. The very fact that the monarchy has survived and, indeed, thrived against this backdrop owes much to the late Queen and her constant, unchanging presence over 70 years. Before the Queen’s coronation on 2 June 1953, few people owned a television. The decision to broadcast the ceremony live prompted many to buy their first set, and well over 20 million people in the UK watched Queen Elizabeth II being crowned at Westminster Abbey in London. The BBC, then the only national broadcaster, transmitted on just one (black-and-white) television channel and three radio stations. It approached the coronation filming with reverence and deference. The director general’s views were clear: “There ought to be an absolutely rigid policy that so far as the BBC is concerned [the royal family] can be guaranteed complete privacy.” Over the following 69 years, the media changed beyond recognition. Countless terrestrial television channels are now available, plus many more via streaming subscriptions. At the same time, the media industry has become global, with rolling 24-hour news channels, newspapers viewed online, and social media posts visible almost anywhere on the globe. Much of this was made possible by the world wide web, just one key innovation in an age marked by rapid changes in communication. At the start of the Queen’s reign, communication was primarily via letters, telegrams and newspapers. Just two and a half decades later, in 1976, she sent her first email; she uploaded her first YouTube …

GettyImages-457769040sml-7b51734-e1668075735643.jpg
width: 620
height: 412

The state of history in 2021
type: item
date: 2021-12-26T12:23:32.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: 21st Century
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Education
description: Anna Whitelock looks back on some key moments that made the historical headlines in 2021
encoded: Anna Whitelock looks back on some key moments and trends that made the historical headlines in 2021. Speaking to Ellie Cawthorne, she covers topics including the “history wars”, cuts to university history courses and the best books published this year. How to download the HistoryExtra podcast Download as MP3

Pod-Anna-Whitelock2-bf86b0f.jpg
width: 620
height: 413

Anna Whitelock's talking points: Friends or enemies?
type: item
date: 2021-12-14T16:03:55.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: 21st Century
subject: General History
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Column
description: Recent headlines about diplomatic discord between England and France prompted Twitter historians to consider the two nations’ longer relationship. Anna Whitelock trawled the responses
encoded: Anglo-French rivalry can animate politicians and historians in equal measure – and while the former have been preoccupied with fishing disputes, the latter have been reflecting on the antecedents of this fractious relationship. Ian Dunt (@iandunt) remarked: “Quite apart from Brexit, fish etc, I find the whole Anglo-French rivalry so tiresome. [It] was really striking to me how connected [both nations] were in creating liberalism, and how those who did so – [Benjamin] Constant, [John Stuart] Mill – were so deeply invested in both countries.” Dan Snow (@thehistoryguy) added his take on what he described as his “pet subject”, commenting: “Adam Smith discovered the physiocrats and laissez-faire in Paris; [18th-century scholar] Montesquieu [was] profoundly influenced by his time in Britain. The Duke of Bridgewater [was] inspired to build canals after a France visit. And Wellington learned to soldier as a student not at Eton, but in France.” Arthur Dent (@A4Dent) provided more recent examples, noting that Anglo-French “cooperation” created Concorde and the Channel Tunnel. Elizabeth of Warwick (@oshay moishe1) tweeted: “Sadly it’s a rivalry that goes back to the Norman conquest. Just mention the Hundred Years’ War or Agincourt and the English start to salivate. War against France was the one way people would happily dig into their pockets to fund it.” Listen | John Shovlin describes 18th-century efforts to reset Anglo-French relations – from bitter enemies to economic partners Tyler (@CasperoBull) was perplexed: “It’s all very strange, considering that post-1066, we were ruled by essentially a French dynasty for 400 years and adopted much of their culture and customs that formed our country… odd how some people keep fighting a 200-year-old war in their imagination.” Shelagh Sneddon (@ShelaghSneddon) noted that, “It’s one of the biggest differences between Scotland and England. This animosity doesn’t really exist in Scotland, largely because France were our allies against E…

HEX Voices AnnaWhitelock-811a187.jpg
width: 621
height: 413

Anna Whitelock's talking points: a history of violence
type: item
date: 2021-10-26T08:41:18.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: 20th Century
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Column
description: Events in Afghanistan have dominated the news in recent weeks, with Twitter users debating their historical context and parallels. Anna Whitelock followed the discussion as it unfolded
encoded: Afghanistan’s present and future has been a subject of much discussion, with many lamenting the lack of understanding of the region’s history and its tortured relations with western powers. As historian Olivette Otele (@OlivetteOtele) tweeted, “I wish people had basic info about the history of the place/region… the mess didn’t start with current Taliban and people there have been suffering for a very long time.” Academic Justin Podur (@Justinpodur) sought to provide historical context with a much-applauded thread that set the scene in 1839, the year Britain invaded Afghanistan from India and installed their own candidate, Shah Shuja, on the throne in Kabul. His thread described the process of imposing Shuja, including “rapes, looting, massacres”, and the way in which, after Shuja’s assassination in 1842, “the British regrouped… to get ‘revenge’ against the Afghans for driving them out”. Listen | A panel of expert historians discuss how history can help make sense of current events in Afghanistan Podur asked, rhetorically: “What was the 1839 British war on Afghanistan about?”, following up with his take: “Basically, the British empire – whose primary goal was squeezing what would eventually be $45tn out of India – destroyed Afghanistan to make it a ‘buffer zone’ against any kind of incursion.” Sean R Roberts (@robertsreport) added to the Twitter history lesson: “It is important to remember that there is a long history of Uyghurs in Afghanistan, [including many] refugees who fled the 1949 revolution in China. These are not ‘foreign fighters’ or ‘jihadists’, but the Taliban could claim that they are and deport them to China to win favour with Beijing.” More debate was sparked by an article by Guy Chazan (@GuyChazan) in the Financial Times, arguing that “As one of Nato’s biggest and most costly foreign policy priorities of this century implodes, those lessons will be lost on Beijing. History repeats itself in the tragedy of Afghanistan.” Evan Feigenbaum (@EvanFeigenbaum…

Anna Whitelock's talking points: Foundational stories
type: item
date: 2021-09-25T08:53:06.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: 21st Century
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Column
description: One historian’s trip from the UK to the US sparked much Twitter debate about why the two nations’ histories are each dominated by a single story. Anna Whitelock reviewed the exchanges
encoded: Having made it to the US earlier this summer, American-born historian and author Hallie Rubenhold (@HallieRubenhold) observed on a visit to a bookshop that she “never ceases to be amazed by the American obsession with the ‘founding fathers’. Same stories, told over and over. Much like the UK’s obsession with the Second World War, it really is time to get people interested in other aspects of our rich historical human experience.” An innocuous observation, one might think – but that’s not how it went down on Twitter. Amid genuinely shocking abuse of Hallie, some interesting intercontinental conversation ensued. One strand of the debate considered how helpful it was that the two nations’ histories are dominated by those two stories. Lauren (@starlingspecks) commented: “there are so many myths attached to our involvement that have had and continue to have unhelpful political ramifications and do a disservice to the actual events of the Second World War. It needs to be left alone for a while.” And Kevin Cannell (@Bevni81), wrote: “I’m as interested in the Second World War… as anyone, but what’s really exciting is finding out about new people, places and stories. I don’t need to feel like an expert on a subject before I read about it, I just want to learn about new things.” Read more: Alec Ryrie on our dangerous devotion to the Second World War Looking across the Atlantic, David McNab (@david_mcnab) suggested that, in the US, the founding fathers are akin to “a secular religion. The president is also treated like a demigod who walks through mortals. Similarly, the constitution is treated much like the Bible: a sacred text to be interpreted to support whatever prejudice you enjoy.” Eoin Forde (@EoinFordeeoin) thought it “amazing how so little [attention] in comparison is given over to the history of America before it was the New World, or the subsequent extermination of its peoples”. Other users considered why the stories had come to command such attention. Charles Hoskin…

Anna Whitelock's talking points: Plot twists
type: item
date: 2021-08-30T09:01:23.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: 21st Century
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Column
description: Yet another TV drama about the Tudor dynasty led Twitter users to ask: which other historical stories should be adapted for the small screen? Anna Whitelock went channel surfing
encoded: With Channel 5’s recent Anne Boleyn series retelling the story of the Tudor queen, economic historian Mark Koyama (@MarkKoyama) remarked: “It is crazy how many TV shows and movies retread the same historical ground. How many more times do we need to see Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn? There are so many other interesting historical stories.” Dr Anton Howes (@antonhowes) quickly responded: “I think that Tudor privateers, merchants or explorers are fine. Just nothing that’s about Henry VIII’s or Elizabeth I’s private lives. In fact, a show about Edward VI’s regents would be pretty good,” but he concluded: “It is NOT allowed to include Lady Jane Grey.” Yung Tugwell (@TugwellYung) “would love a biopic about [sixth-century Byzantine empress] Theodora, or… a slow-burn horror film about the battle of Pliska [a ninth-century clash between the Byzantine and First Bulgarian empires]. Got it all: Byzantine arrogance, Bulgars fighting for their nation, guerrilla warfare, skull cups, really incredible stuff.” Listen | A panel of experts tackle the big questions surrounding period drama in the 21st century and ask: what’s next? Pseudoerasmus (@pseudoerasmus) had quite the manifesto: “1. Ban Tudor dramas. 2. Ban fall of the Roman republic dramas. 3. Dramatise the [story of the second-century BC brothers] Gracchi. Land reform is fashionable. 4. A long serial of the wars over the carcass of Alexander [the Great’s] empire. 5. Film Gore Vidal’s Julian [a 1964 historical novel chronicling the life of the fourth-century Roman emperor].” Rustlem (@rustlem) thought that “a series on the life of [ancient Athenian nobleman] Alcibiades is long overdue,” while Jessica Yogini (@JessicaYogini) thought that “a good TV series about the Chinese cultural revolution would be so instructive, once people realised the parallels with their own world”. Tony Addison (@TonysAngle) voted for “Mali’s empire, especially Mansa Musa… who inflated the Egyptian economy by bringing so much gold (on 100 camels) on his p…

Mary I: the forgotten trailblazer
type: item
date: 2019-11-15T15:00:57.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: Membership
subject: Period
subject: Tudor
subject: British queens
subject: Tudor kings and queens
description: Anna Whitelock explains how the popular perception of Mary I, aka 'Bloody Mary' or Mary Tudor, hides a pioneering monarch who achieved great things during her reign
encoded: Mary was the Tudor trailblazer. Never before had a queen worn the crown of England. She won the throne against the odds, preserving the Tudor line of succession and establishing precedents for female rule. Her significance has long been overlooked. Until recently Mary has been the forgotten Tudor – overshadowed by her famous sister, Elizabeth. She has been condemned as one of the most reviled women in history. ‘Bloody Mary’ is regarded as a bigoted, half Spanish tyrant whose reign was an unmitigated failure notable only for the burning of nearly 300 Protestants and her unpopular marriage to Philip of Spain. Read more | Mary I: 8 facts about her life, death and legacy Mary Tudor was of course never meant to be queen, and her father, Henry VIII, had gone to great – infamous – lengths to guard against her accession. While Henry finally acknowledged Mary’s claim to the throne in the last years of his reign, Edward VI ignored his father’s will and, determined to preserve a Protestant church, wrote his Catholic sister out of the succession. Upon his death in July 1553 Lady Jane Grey was proclaimed queen. Ten days later and against extraordinary odds, Mary won her rightful throne. The scale of her achievement is often overlooked. Mary had led the only successful revolt against central government in 16th-century England and was the only Tudor, save for Henry VII, who had to fight for the throne. She had eluded capture, mobilised a counter-coup and in the moment of crisis proved courageous, decisive and politically adept. Setting precedents Yet despite her triumphant accession, Mary's status as England's first crowned queen was a matter of great speculation and uncertainty. Many questioned whether indeed a woman could wear the crown. The language, image, and expectations of English monarchy and royal majesty were unequivocally male. So, in the following months the practice and power of a queen regnant were hammered out. It was a debate over which Mary presided and her decisi…

GettyImages-464447577-3789a33-e1668687073571.jpg
width: 619
height: 412

Anna Whitelock: Confronting slavery’s legacy
type: item
date: 2019-06-12T09:45:11.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: Georgian
subject: Membership
subject: Tudor
subject: Period
subject: Column
subject: Slavery
description: An announcement that Cambridge University will investigate its historical links with slavery has prompted a wealth of discussion. Anna Whitelock examines the reaction on social media
encoded: Britain’s uneasy relationship with its colonial past continues to create headlines, with universities now sharply in focus. Following the announcement of a two-year investigation to determine the extent to which the university “contributed to, benefited from or challenged” slavery and the slave trade, Cambridge has been in the eye of the storm. Many took news that the inquiry will be chaired by a white man, classics professor Martin Millett, as evidence of disingenuous tokenism. Kehinde Andrews (@kehinde_andrews) tweeted to say that the fact the investigation is to be run by "an almost exclusively white centre for 'African' studies" means the initiative is "at best, a publicity stunt". He added that: "The worst outcome of 'decolonising' is that the university is recreating inequalities by giving white scholars more topics to publish and promote on." A brief guide and timeline of the transatlantic slave trade History explorer: the British slave trade Lincoln and slavery: "If I could save the union without freeing any slave, I would" Cecily Jones (@CessjJones) went further, tweeting: "Just wondering why so many 'modern slavery/anti-slavery projects' are either solely or primarily staffed by white academics? Or why senior academics on these projects tend to be white, while black academics are mainly research assistants?" Based at Cambridge University, academic Priyamvada Gopal (@PriyamvadaGopal) called on the university "to co-opt" leading black British scholars to the committee, to "stop tokenising and begin reparations on representation". Writing for The Guardian, David Olusoga (@DavidOlusoga) suggested that by "curing itself of amnesia", Cambridge "might help Britain understand its past". The article, headlined, "Why are so many afraid to confront Britain's historical links with the slave trade?" also prompted others to reflect on the nation's attitude to its colonial legacy. Lord Nelson and slavery: Nelson’s dark side Harriet Tubman and the ‘Underground Railroad’ A…

BE0D65-46b8c83.jpg
width: 5400
height: 3600

Elizabeth I’s love life: was she really a ‘Virgin Queen’?
type: item
date: 2019-01-31T12:00:00.000Z
creator: Anna Whitelock
subject: Elizabethan
subject: Period
subject: Tudor
subject: British queens
subject: Evergreen
subject: Tudor kings and queens
subject: Valentine's Day
description: For a queen known for her alleged virginity, Elizabeth I's love life has long been the subject of great speculation. Here, Dr Anna Whitelock, a reader in early modern history at Royal Holloway, University of London, explores what really went on behind the closed doors of the so-called Virgin Queen
encoded: Over the years, countless books, novels, plays and films have depicted Elizabeth I’s relationships with figures such as Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester; Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, and the Duke of Anjou. In the absence of conclusive proof one way or another, the question ‘did they or didn’t they?’ will always linger. Yet what is clear is that, both at home and abroad, rumours about Elizabeth’s love life – real or imagined – circulated throughout her reign. Far from being the Virgin Queen, for some hostile observers Elizabeth was the ‘whore’ of Europe. Contemporary beliefs about the ‘insatiable’ sexual appetites of women, together with Elizabeth’s failure to marry, fuelled suspicions that the queen was engaged in secret sexual liaisons. Her Catholic opponents challenged her virtue, and accused her of a “filthy lust” that had “defiled her body and the country”. The king of France joked that one of the great questions of the day was “whether Queen Elizabeth was a maid or no”. The courts of Europe were abuzz with gossip as to the queen of England’s behaviour. From the very earliest months of her reign, rumours spread of Elizabeth’s relationship with Robert Dudley, her “sweet Robin” whom she had known since childhood. Within days of her accession, Elizabeth had appointed Dudley as master of the horse – a position that guaranteed almost daily contact. The Spanish ambassador reported to the king of Spain that “Lord Robert has come so much into favour that he does whatever he likes and it is even said that Her Majesty visits him in his chamber day and night”. The pair’s attraction to one another was widely commented upon, and their flirtatious behaviour shocked observers. When in 1560 Robert Dudley’s wife, Amy Robsart, was found with her neck broken at the bottom of a staircase, speculation was rife as to the involvement of the queen and her favourite. In the years that followed, their close relationship continued, but any lingering possibility of a future marriage was…

GettyImages-588379105-234b1f7-e1707484237923.jpg
width: 619
height: 412