Sunday, March 31, 2019

the month in snapshots

now it's official: we're a family of five!

introducing Naomi to The Walking Dead 
\
the city of Seven Hills from the Cincinnati Art Museum

from the Cincinnati Art Museum

birthday celebrations with my precious girls

the Krohn Conservatory and Eden Park duck pond

she makes weird faces sometimes

Friday, March 29, 2019

family devotions: the Kingdom of God



~ Jesus and the Kingdom ~


In Matthew 4.17, right after facing-off with temptation in the desert, Jesus starts his career by giving a summons: 'Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.' The presence and availability of the kingdom of God is the thesis, or main theme, of Jesus' message. We make a grave mistake when we miss this: Jesus didn't come preaching about how to be a good person, he came preaching the presence and availability of the kingdom of God. 

But what is the kingdom of God? A kingdom can be defined as the territory belonging to a governing authority in which the authority's word and power are the foundation of the rule of law. In Jesus' phrase, God is the governing authority, and his kingdom is the places where his ways are followed. It isn't surprising, then, that his word and power takes on a more robust character where his rule is loved. Putting it another way, the kingdom of God is where God isn't just the de facto ruler but the effective ruler, wherein his way is actively followed and his presence and power are most chiefly known. Jesus makes it clear in many parables that God's kingdom, inaugurated with Jesus, will spread throughout the whole earth. Jesus' proclamation is a linchpin of post-millennial thought: 'We believe the majority of the world will turn to Jesus, and that governments will become Christian in nature, not because it looks like that's what's going to happen, but because Jesus said it would happen.' 

The Jewish people longed for God's kingdom to come. Even the most cursory sweep through the Old Testament prophets reveals a litany of prophecies about God's kingdom coming and what that meant: healing for the hurting, justice for the victims, and a divine dealing with evil. In a text that the Apostle Paul echoes in Romans 8, even creation celebrates the coming of God's kingdom. God's kingdom is portrayed as a kingdom of creativity and power and human flourishing, a kingdom free of all the corruptions due to sin; a kingdom free of anger and bitterness and jealousy and depression. When Jesus says that God's kingdom is 'at hand,' he's saying that what the prophets foretold - what the Jewish people longed for - was about to happen in and through him. 

Numerous Old Testament prophecies point to the Messiah - the Anointed One - being the one through whom God's kingdom comes to bear on the world. Jewish theologians studied these prophecies and became convinced that the coming Messiah would do several things; namely, he would deliver God's people from their enemies, rebuild the Temple (Solomon's Temple was destroyed by the Babylonians, and though it was rebuilt under Persian rule and expanded under Herod, it was but a shadow of what it was in the heyday of the united monarchy), vindicate God's people against their enemies, and rule over the nations. Most theologians interpreted the Messiah's mission in a political nature, but Jesus had a different approach. The Jewish peoples' greatest enemy wasn't the Romans ruling over them but sin and death; indeed, the Romans were in the very same boat themselves! Jesus delivers us from our greatest enemies, sin and death. Jesus didn't rebuild the Temple; indeed, he prophesied its destruction (Roman soldiers destroyed the Temple in AD 70); however, he reconstituted the Temple in God's people indwelt by the Spirit. Vindication will come at the Final Judgment, and as we speak Christ's rule (the kingdom of God) is inexorably spreading through the world - and the gates of hell will not conquer it.

We become partakers of God's kingdom when we put our faith in Jesus, repent of our sins, openly align ourselves with him, and become baptized into his death and resurrection. When this happens, our identity changes: we go from sinner to saint, from God's enemy to God's child, from creatures destined to hell to creatures destined to a new heavens and new earth. We become coworkers with God rather than laborers after our own hearts; we become partakers of a life that is saturated with the divine through the Holy Spirit in us. 



~ The Value of the Kingdom ~


In Matthew 13.44-46, Jesus gives two parables (the pearl of great price and treasure buried in a field) to show that the value of participation in the kingdom of God far surpasses anything else the world has to offer. Jesus doesn't portray the kingdom as a something we must grudgingly interact with in order to escape a fiery damnation; rather, he appeals to the human part of us. As humans we want to flourish precisely as humans, and such flourishing is found in God's kingdom. It is to our benefit, not just in the future but in the here and now, to embrace the kingdom and learn to live in its rhythm.

The benefits of participation in the kingdom are many. Ironically, what's often touted as the best benefit - going to heaven when we die - is simply an outworking of the kingdom's true best benefit: intimacy with God. When God created us as human beings, he designed us to live in an intimate relationship with him. That's the whole point of God walking in the Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve. Outside of Jesus we are enslaved to sin (albeit willingly), and we don't have intimacy with God. When the Teacher in Ecclesiastes tells us God has set eternity in the human heart, he's putting words to the cravings we have for a real, experiential relationship with God. We try to fill this craving through money, pleasure, and power, but these are all poor substitutes. We're designed to be intimate with God, and we flourish when we have it.

Jesus says he came to give us an abundant life in the kingdom: living in rhythm and harmony with God is the gateway to a truly abundant life that begins now and continues into the everlasting future. The word 'abundance' captures the essence of human flourishing; but when we try to flourish outside the bounds God has given us, we experience the opposite of flourishing: dehumanization. Living in sin - enchained to the words of the flesh and doing things God doesn't want us to do - corrupts us to our core. God designed us to be his obedient image-bearers, and in Christ we are enabled to move in that direction. We won't be perfect by any means, and the Bible is very clear about this (1 John 1.9-10); but when we strive after obedience God works in our hearts to conform us to the image of his Son. It is in the kingdom of God - and, most importantly, by being intimate with God - that we find true joy, peace, and contentment.

I've said much about how we are designed for intimacy, or relationship, with God. This is what we see in Eden; but what we see in the Fall is that sin breaks the relationship. The Bible tells us that God can't be a friend to wickedness, but he loved us - and even liked us - so much that he sent his Son to take on the punishment for our sin and to defeat sin's grip over us. The main point of the cross isn't God making a way for us to get into heaven when we die; it's about making a renewed relationship with God available to those who will choose it. The best part of heaven will be having an unbridled, full and flourishing relationship with God, the kind of relationship God designed us to have with him. God is our lifeline, giving us all we need. When we're in relationship with him, we experience life at its fullest, how it was meant to be lived. As we grow in our relationship with God, we get tastes of what heaven will be like - and we crave it all the more.

Jesus announced that the kingdom of God was 'at hand.'
He said that it is to our benefit as humans to seek it.
And he made it available to us through the cross and resurrection.
But it remains something that must be chosen.



~ Choosing the Kingdom ~


In Matthew 13.1-23, Jesus gives us the Parable of the Sower, in which he highlights different ways people will respond to the announcement of the availability of the kingdom (what has come to be called 'the gospel message'). When the Good News about the kingdom is preached, people always respond to it, either negatively or positively. Some disbelieve it, others mock it, and still others believe the truth of the message but refuse to turn away from sin and towards Jesus. In the parable of the sower, Jesus identifies three weak responses to the Good News and one strong one.

When some people hear the gospel preached, it stirs their heart and enlivens something within them, but the evil one moves in and pushes them away from putting their faith in Jesus. The Bible is clear that God has an enemy who is active in the world; his goal is to 'steal, kill, and destroy,' and he does all in his power to keep us from coming to Jesus. If that fails, he will do all he can to keep us from growing in our faith. If he can't keep us from God, it's his goal to make sure our faith is anemic and to prevent us from becoming, in the here and now, the people God wants us to be.

When still others hear the gospel, they receive it with joy, but when troubles come, they turn their backs on it. Jesus is clear that the Christian life is no walk in the park. Troubles will beset us, and though all people have troubles, Christians may have more, if only because many in our culture hate God and stand against him and those who align with him. If you think becoming a Christian and having God on your side will insulate you from troubles, you'll be sorely mistaken. The good news is that in the midst of troubles God is by our side, seeing us through it, and we look forward to a day when the 'troubles of the world' will trouble us no more.

Others respond to the gospel and put their faith in Jesus, but when it becomes clear that repentance and obedience involve forsaking sinful things they hold dear, they backtrack. The Christian faith demands that we turn our backs on the things of the world: money, pleasure, and power are to no longer hold sway over us. Because we are naturally bent towards seeking these things, given our sinful natures, it can be difficult to live the Christian life. Many would prefer a more easygoing life, and they turn their backs on the gospel in order to live how they please.

The fourth response Jesus gives is the one that is commendable. The right response is hearing the gospel, embracing it, and letting is saturate our lives. When we put our faith in Jesus and repent of our sins, we enter the life of the kingdom, and as we persevere, we become more and more integrated with that kingdom. The result is that we bear 'fruit': a changed life that is a testimony to the power and patience and love of God. It's interesting that Jesus speaks of varying degrees of fruitfulness: some bear fruit a hundredfold, others sixty-fold, still others thirty-fold. His point is that while one Christian may be superbly mature in the faith, with a life transformed by God top-to-bottom, still others will be immature, and their fruitfulness will be far less. Jesus doesn't rate our membership in the kingdom by how much we produce; the one who produces thirty-fold is no less a member of the kingdom, and a receiver of its benefits, than the one who produces a hundredfold. This is wonderful news to those of us, such as myself, who often struggle to live within the kingdom. God is gracious and kind and merciful.

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

the year in books [VI]

Chloe and I have started watching AMC's The Walking Dead together. She's been wanting to watch it for a long time, and she was out of her mind with excitement when I told her she'd be allowed to watch it with me. We watch it on Fridays after I get home from work; we just wrapped up the first season, and we're both stoked for season two. It's been close to a decade since I watched these early episodes. In a way The Walking Dead has framed the last ten years of my life; the seasons serve as markers for major events. But enough of that. This post is supposed to be about reading, so I'll get down to it. I've picked up the graphic novels on which the TV show is based, and though comics aren't quite my thing, I've been enjoying the hell out of them. The graphics vary sharply from the television adaption; it's nice to see another story-line of how things went down. Here are the first six volumes:



Days Gone Bye (Issues 1–6) Rick Grimes, a sheriff's deputy from Kentucky, is wounded in the line of duty and emerges from a coma to find the world overrun by the undead. He returns home to find his house ransacked and his wife and son gone. Rick travels to a military evacuation zone in Atlanta to find his family, but finds Atlanta has also been overrun. He is rescued by Glenn Rhee, who takes him to his small camp of survivors. Among them are Rick's wife Lori and his son Carl. Zombies (called Walkers, Roamers, and Lurkers in most of the series) eventually attack the group. Following the attack, Shane Walsh, Rick's friend and former police partner, tries to murder Rick, having had a one-night stand and become obsessed with Lori, and Carl shoots Shane to protect his father.

Miles Behind Us (Issues 7–12) Rick becomes the group's leader. He and the remaining survivors leave Atlanta and travel across hostile territory in search of a safer refuge. The group meets Tyreese, his daughter and her boyfriend. Everyone takes shelter at Wiltshire Estates, a gated community, but are forced to leave when they stumble upon its zombie infestation. The group eventually finds shelter at a small farm after Carl is shot. The farm's owner, Hershel Greene and his family, are in denial about the walkers' nature and have been storing deceased loved ones and neighbors in their barn. Rick's group is asked to leave the farm and stumbles upon an abandoned prison, which they decide to make their home.

Safety Behind Bars (Issues 13–18) The group begins to clear the prison yard and one cell block for living quarters. They meet some surviving inmates when they break into the prison's cafeteria. Rick invites Hershel and his family to come live in the prison and they accept. Two of the group members commit suicide and someone begins to murder other group members. This inmate, a convicted serial killer, is eventually captured and killed. Other inmates stage a rebellion.

The Heart's Desire (Issues 19–24) The group manages to quell the inmates' rebellion and secure the prison. A katana-wielding woman named Michonne arrives at the prison seeking refuge and causes tension among some of Rick's survivors. When another member is bitten on the leg, Rick attempts to save him by amputating his bitten leg; however, despite receiving medical treatment from Hershel, the man dies. Rick and Tyreese get into a fight and the community decides to have a council with four co-leaders instead of Rick as sole leader.

The Best Defense (Issues 25–30) Rick, Michonne and Glenn observe a helicopter crash in the distance and leave the prison to search for it. They find a small town called Woodbury, where a large, well-armed and organized group of survivors has taken refuge. Woodbury's leader is a man called the Governor. The Governor captures Rick's group and interrogates them. He mutilates Rick by cutting off his right hand and rapes and tortures Michonne.

This Sorrowful Life (Issues 31–36) Rick, Glenn, and Michonne manage to escape from Woodbury with the help of others from the town. Michonne tortures the Governor before she leaves. They arrive back at the prison safely, but find that hordes of zombies have broken in. Rick's survivors fight them off. Rick informs the prison's residents of what took place in Woodbury and tells them to prepare for battle.

Saturday, March 23, 2019

"The Divine Conspiracy"

I was in high school when I first came across Dallas Willard's The Divine Conspiracy. Two memories are attached to reading this book for the first time. The first is when I was reading it in English class, and the teacher came by and said that he'd read the book and it changed his life. "Willard's study of the Sermon on the Mount is the best I've ever seen." The second memory is sitting in the back of my Jeep on lunch break at IGA, eating a whole rotisserie chicken and listening to the soundtrack to A Beautiful Mind while pondering Willard's work. The Divine Conspiracy is a sort of magnum opus, the last in a series of books on the availability of God's kingdom and what that means for us. It struck me, in the back of my Jeep, that the Christian life wasn't one of following rules - "Do this and don't do that!" - or of simply abiding by a certain theology while trying to wedge yourself into religious straits. The Christian life is one of participation in something truly grand, something game-changing, and something that changes us from the inside out.

My experience of The Divine Conspiracy is on par with my English teachers praise, for it truly did change the way I approached my faith and, more importantly, the way I related to God Himself. The conviction that I can experience a radically different kind of life - a good and fulfilling and meaningful - paved the way for a more experiential approach to Christianity. It wasn't just that we could be saved by turning to Jesus; we could also become the sort of people we were meant to be, and having that as a motivation is no evil thing. God made us to be human, so it only makes sense that we would naturally tend towards pursuing those things that make us truly human (i.e. as God created us to be). And while the best way to live is in rhythm with God, the best part of that rhythm is our life with God Himself. God isn't just an idea; He isn't just a vague notion; God is an actual Being. He's a personal Being. So many Christians fail to approach God as a Person and approach Him as just another fact (albeit a big one) in their theological beliefs; such an impersonal approach won't deliver the joys of truly knowing Him. The biggest hurdle we need to overcome isn't whether God exists but whether He not only loves us but actually likes us. And I think He does.










Monday, March 18, 2019

the year in books [V]

It’s been difficult finding time to read because of this baby girl (pictured to the left), but I’ve managed to get a few more books under my belt. I’ve stayed true to my goal of focusing predominantly on books from the library. This month I finished a gauntlet of horror, science fiction, and American westerns. Dad came by the house and saw that I was reading The Amityville Horror; he read that one when it first came out. He would’ve been my age then, which is a funny coincidence (but aren’t all coincidences, by their very nature, ‘funny’?). The Enders Game Saga was a spur-of-the-moment library pick. I liked the front cover of Earth Unaware and decided to see what Orson Scott Card can do. His writing is fantastic, and he interweaves science and alien thrashing with brilliant psychological insights. I’d never the movie Ender’s Game, and after finishing the saga (or the first half of it, anyways; the story continues with four more books), I checked it out and was blown away. No wonder so many people have praised it! I discovered Jeff Guinn’s Glorious at the Norwood Library during an outing with our day program, and it was so good I had to see the main character’s story through to the end. 






Tuesday, March 12, 2019

In Search of Peace and Prestige: Henry VII and Foreign Relations

France in 1500

Henry differentiated himself from his predecessors by pursuing a fortuitous peace with France—but this wasn’t his policy from the beginning. France may have sponsored Henry’s seizure of the throne, but he wasn’t their puppet nor them his patron. England and France had set their teeth against each other since the Norman Conquest, and their incessant clashing over English-held territories in France resulted in a number of contested territories shifting allegiances over the centuries. The people in these territories had deep prejudices, against either England or France, but by 1485 France had swallowed up most of these territories and was congealing into a single centralized state. Throughout the medieval period, France had consisted of weak kings struggling to exercise control over numerous semi-independent feudatories that had their own economies and concerns. Ambitious and powerful nobles, some even more powerful than the king, had prevented a unification of France; but the ‘cleansing fire’ of the Hundred Years War and the consequent revolutions in government and arms enabled France to become what her kings had always dreamed her to be. France had become a monster; at the time of Henry’s ascension to the English throne, she had three times England’s manpower and revenue.

France had recovered from the Hundred Years War in glorious fashion, in quite a contrast to the decades of dynastic civil war that had kept England from flourishing. Henry knew his country wasn’t ready to continue his rivals’ pattern of bloodshed; upon taking the throne, he had to concentrate on the inevitable uprisings against his rule. To this end Henry opened his reign by forging a one-year truce with France, which was extended to 1489. This gave him ‘breathing room’ to snuff out the most potent rebellion against him – that of Lincoln and Lovell at Stoke Field – and the timing couldn’t have been better: France was a powder-keg, and that keg blew as France moved to absorb Brittany, the last semi-independent French territory, into her fold.

In the contest between Brittany and France, it wasn’t easy for Henry to take sides. Brittany was governed by the elderly Duke Francis, who had been a generous host to Henry during his exile, and France had been the manpower and money behind his campaign against Richard III. Henry would have preferred to stay out of it – his travails at home were far from over – but to do nothing would be politically worse than throwing in with the losing side. The tension escalated when Anne of Beauajeau, the Regent of France, sought to acquire Brittany by the political bonds of marriage: she proposed arranging the marriage of her eight-year-old brother, the underage Charles VIII, to Francis’ heir to Brittany, the twelve-year-old Anne. The Bretons (the people of Brittany) wouldn’t stand for this; it’d be the death knell of their independence. The time of decision came, and Henry, after much deliberation, threw in with Brittany. His decision was sound, for the Bretons were more keen on protecting their independence than France was on starting a full-blown war in the west. France’s attention was on expanding into northern Italy, and Henry wagered she’d settle by diplomatic means rather than the sword. Henry’s second reason for opposing France was motivated by his quest for securing the English throne: France harbored numerous exiled nobles sympathetic to the Yorkist cause and opposed to the upstart Tudor; if Henry could secure a peace that forced their eviction to elsewhere, his kingdom would be safer.

To this end he adopted an aggressive stance and announced his intention to assert his claim to the French throne (the claim was weak, but there). This wasn’t a message so much to the people of England as it was to France: this was the sort of thing that got the Hundred Years War started, and though France had come out on top, her triumph had been scoured with numerous defeats and secured by pyrrhic victories. Besides, despite her wealth and manpower, she didn’t want to pull resources from the good pickings in northern Italy to defend her western territories. Parliament gave Henry 26,000 men, and he wasted no time transporting them across the Channel in October 1492 and besieging Boulogne. He had to make his threat look good to get France’s diplomatic machinery moving. The French boy-king’s advisers didn’t want to get in a costly and time- and resource-consuming struggle against England and pushed for a diplomatic settlement; the resultant Treaty of Etaples, signed not two months after Henry’s invasion, gave Henry what he wanted in exchange for peace in the west. Charles VIII promised Henry that he’d no longer lend support to any pretenders to the English throne, and the French even agreed to pay the costs of Henry’s invasion: 745,000 crowns paid at 50,000 crowns a year (these annual payments would become five percent of Henry’s yearly income).

As for the Bretons, they didn’t come out favorably in their conflict with France. There was no way they could stand against all France could muster, and in 1491 they were forced to submit. The marriage between the boy-king Charles VIII and Anne of Brittany went ahead as scheduled, and Brittany was swallowed up into the centralized French state.

Henry’s relations with France would be, on the whole, amicable. This sets him sharply against his predecessors, for whom war with France had been a chivalric tradition. It was by war with France that former kings had legitimized their rule and gained public support (or, in defeat, lost it). Henry had a different tact: he wouldn’t justify his rule by continuing the centuries-old wars with France but by promoting an English gospel of ‘health and wealth’ through a policy of peace and trade. Thus it isn’t surprising that England and France would make a landmark deal opening free trade between their two countries.

James IV of Scotland
Henry’s prioritization of peace over war is also seen in his remarkable dealings with Scotland. Though they may not seem particularly newsworthy today, the peace he engineered on England’s northern frontier was a breath of fresh air after centuries of conflict with unruly Scotland. The year of his coronation, Henry signed a three-year truce with the Scots, but in 1488 King James III of Scotland was assassinated and succeeded by the fifteen-year-old James IV. Henry hoped that with a boy on the throne, Scotland’s attentions would be focused on maintaining her internal engines rather than picking a fight with her powerful southern neighbor; but when the Scots made friendly with the rebel Perkin Warbeck, even going so far as to propose a political marriage between Warbeck and James IV’s cousin, Henry knew he couldn’t assume Scotland would play nice.

Margaret Tudor, Queen of Scotland
After Warbeck’s rebellion fizzled out and he was imprisoned in Henry’s court, Henry sought a truce with Scotland; the 1497 Truce of Ayton was signed, and in 1502 it became official when Scotland’s aspirations for Warbeck died with him. The Treaty of Perpetual Peace agreed to end the intermittent warfare that had been a constant thread between the two countries for two hundred years, and though it would be ineffective (the Scots would remain a thorn in England’s flesh for another century), it was nevertheless the first such agreement between England and Scotland in more than 170 years. The treaty was sealed by the marriage of Henry’s oldest daughter, Margaret, to James IV. Their descendants would have a claim to the throne, and after the Union of the Crowns at the turn of the 17th century, they would sit on that throne as the Stuarts.

Henry’s affinity for political marriages reached its apex in his dealings with the burgeoning country of Spain. In the mid-15th century, Portugal, Castile, and Aragon ruled the Iberian Peninsula. Portugal, with one and a half million people, bordered the Atlantic. Aragon, on the eastern part of the Peninsula, was slightly larger than Portugal, and it had three areas: the heartbeat of the kingdom, Catalonia, was a commercial region with Barcelona as its hub; Valencia, an agricultural and fishing area, was just south of Catalonia on the Mediterranean coast; and Aragon was (interestingly) an empty hinterland outside Catalonia. The largest kingdom was Castile, whose sheep farming and size – she had eight million citizens – made it the largest and wealthiest of the three kingdoms. She was the last kingdom still fighting against the Moors (the Muslims of Iberia) on their southern border.

Spain in 1500
The chivalric nobles, directly engaged in this ‘last crusade’ against the encroaching Moors, became heroes in the eyes of the religious population and were, if victorious, endowed with unwritten political power. In 1469 Castile, a war-torn land with hardened warriors, stumbled into an internal war after Princess Isabella, the future Queen of Castile, married Ferdinand, the future king of Sicily – and heir to the throne of Aragon. The war-crazed Castilian nobles, adamant that this political marriage would inherently make Castile inferior to Aragon, launched a ten-year civil war. Isabella didn’t lose her throne, and her husband was a staunch ally; together they were crowned the laurels of victory, and they forged a new political entity by fusing their respective kingdoms: the kingdom of Spain was born. 

The burgeoning Spain won the popular vote with its final expulsion of the Moors from the Iberian Peninsula, and it became apparent how powerful Castile and Aragon could be when united. Because her neighbor Portugal had made her renowned wealth through trade, the joint monarchs decided to turn to conquest and discovery instead. This focus would reap marvelous rewards, and by the middle of the 16th century Spain would be the premiere nation of Europe, cherished, admired, and feared.

Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain
Henry saw promise in the rising star of Spain. He reached out to Ferdinand and Isabella, hoping to forge a political bond through marriage. The joint monarchs saw value in it, too, and talks began—and dragged on. And on. And on. The scheming monarchs were wary of each other, and Ferdinand and Isabella were nervous about their daughter becoming queen in a country renown for its insecure throne. Henry may have crowned his victory at Bosworth and cemented it at Stoke, and the populace may have been growing fond of him, and peace and prosperity were returning to the English land, but Henry’s most threatening rival, Edward Plantagenet, remained alive. In a country where dead men could raise rebellions, just think what a live one could do! Henry had sensed no real threat from the bumbling Edward, so instead of killing him outright after taking the throne he’d imprisoned him in the Tower. Despite constantly affirming the Spanish monarchs of Edward’s imbecility, they were un-swayed. They’d seen dead men with petty claims raise the countryside to arms, so Edward’s legitimacy could be an excellent pawn in the hands of Yorkist conspirators.

Henry knew that Edward simply had to go, but he wasn’t about to incite a rebellion by having him executed forthright. He engineered a plan that would get rid of not one but two thorns in his side and be believable by the public. The humiliated rebel Perkin Warbeck had been granted mercy and confined to the King’s Court where Henry could keep an eye on him, and Warbeck was enticed to ‘rescue’ Edward from the Tower. Warbeck played his role all too well, and after the two escapees were easily recaptured, Henry had them executed. With the blubbering Edward out of the way, peace talks took a better turn, and a deal was struck: the Treaty of Medina del Campo arranged the marriage of Arthur, Prince of Wales, with Princess Catherine of Aragon.

When Arthur turned fifteen, an appropriate marriageable age, wedding plans went into effect. Catherine of Aragon sailed to England in 1501 and was well-received by the English people. Henry and his son waited for her in London. Henry harbored a disquieting fear that the Spanish monarchs had somehow deceived him.

What if Catherine was ugly or deformed or scarred by the pox?
What if she didn’t have all her teeth?

Catherine of Aragon
He and his son went to meet her at Basingstoke, and Henry’s fears were quieted with gladness. She was humble yet regal with a sweet and delightful face crowned by stunning red-gold hair. She performed a number of Spanish dances, much to their delight, and Henry wrote to her parents that he ‘much admired her beauty as well as her agreeable and dignified manner.’ The fifteen-year-old Arthur and sixteen-year-old Catherine (she was just one month shy of her seventeenth birthday) were married at St. Paul’s Cathedral. Catherine was given away by Arthur’s ten-year-old brother, Henry, Duke of York, absent knowledge of their future entanglements that would become an epic tale in English history. Feasts, parties, and jousts were held to celebrate the marriage. King Henry, renowned for his frugality, shocked the court when he left no stone unturned in organizing and financing the ‘wedding of the ages.’ His happiness was ebullient, and he had reason to be: the baby-faced Tudor Dynasty had gained significant prestige and political legitimacy from its new link with Spain.

The newlyweds were sent to Ludlow Castle, on the Welsh Marches, where the Prince of Wales was stationed. That spring the countryside was hit with an epidemic of ‘sweating sickness’, a strange sickness that cropped up numerous times in the 16th century before inexplicably fading away. Both Arthur and Catherine caught it, and though Catherine survived (no small feat), Arthur—who had always been a fragile boy with a litany of health issues—died at Ludlow Castle.

When Arthur died, Henry insisted that Catherine marry his only son Henry, the new Prince of Wales. He mourned his son and, at the same time, scrambled to keep his political arrangements in place. Though Henry’s insistence was certainly an affront to the Spanish monarchs, Henry had the upper-hand in the bargaining: he had Catherine in his kingdom, after all (she was living with a frugal allowance from her father-in-law), and he had half her dowry. Spain was tangled up with France and needed England to give her support, or to at least stay out of it and not make matters worse; it made sense to the Spanish monarchs to try and reach an agreement. The dowry, however, would be the biggest hurdle (money always is). When Ferdinand demanded reimbursement for the first installment of Catherine’s dowry, Henry responded by demanding the rest of it. Henry, recently widowed after the loss of his wife Elizabeth, even suggested that he, an old man, marry the young widower. Isabella recoiled at the idea: ‘It would be an evil thing, the mere mention of which offends the ears.’ The picture of her young daughter marrying the older widowed king made marriage to the young Henry much more appealing, and they reached an agreement that Catherine would marry the second-born Henry, now heir to the throne. It was the same situation, after all, just with different names. The consensus on who would marry whom didn’t settle the prickly issue of Catherine’s dowry, and the monarchs haggled over the issue for the rest of Henry’s reign. At one point the king instructed young Henry to repudiate his betrothed and engaged in alternative negotiations with the Habsburgs; though no suitable agreement was found for Henry’s son, he managed to betroth his eleven-year-old daughter Mary to the Habsburg heir, the ugly and very inbred Charles V. Much to Mary’s delight, the marriage agreement would fall apart on the advice of Thomas Wolsey, and Mary would be married to King Louis XII of France in 1514.

But Henry wouldn’t be alive to see that marriage. The widowed King Henry VII died in 1509. He’d made half-hearted attempts and inquiries into remarriage, but nothing ever came to fruition—and Henry was largely to blame. When he gave ambassadors from Naples a description of what he was looking for in a wife’s physical features, it turned out he wanted a wife that looked like Elizabeth. He was taken by a bout of tuberculosis and buried beside his late wife at Westminster Abbey. The throne passed to his second-born son, Henry, Prince of Wales. The boy was crowned Henry VIII, and he would rule for nearly half a century and usher in a new age of English history.

Monday, March 11, 2019

Henry VII and the Rebuilding of England


Henry had crushed the second Yorkist revolt against his rule, but there remained a third before his grip on the country became one of steel. When Margaret of Burgundy heard of Henry’s victory at Stoke Field, she was beside herself. Lincoln’s maneuverings had been the best bet to reclaim the English throne, and besides that she was out of a lot of money paid to dead mercenaries. Just as Henry wouldn’t back down from the throne, so she wasn’t finished lunging for it. The third uprising, which would last nearly half a decade and was started by Perkin Warbeck in 1491, was yet another case of ‘identity theft’: Margaret coached Warbeck to impersonate the missing Prince Richard, the younger son of Edward IV who had disappeared after being imprisoned in the Tower. Warbeck, impersonating Prince Richard, claimed to have been rescued before his brother was murdered in the Tower.

Perkin Warbeck
Warbeck launched three invasions of England, each time with the support of major foreign powers; at one time or another, he was supported by France, Austria, and Scotland—and all this besides powerful lords and nobles in both England and Ireland. These invasions, however, were scarce more than plunging raids through the English countryside; Warbeck’s forces were small, and he wisely avoided a pitched battle with the king’s men. During one of Warbeck’s R&Rs in Burgundy, Henry demanded Margaret turn him over; when she refused, he severed all trade links with Flanders despite the crippling affect this measure would have on the English economy. Given Henry’s penchant for pursuing peace and prosperity through commercial avenues, his cutting of trade showcases his irritation at Warbeck’s scheming.

Yorkist propaganda painted Warbeck as the returned Prince Richard, and this propaganda seeped through London and even infected Henry’s court. Sir William Stanley, who had been present with Lord Stanley at Bosworth Field, made a grave mistake when he said that if Warbeck was the young Prince Richard, he couldn’t bring himself to raise a hand against him. When word of his comment reached the king, Henry was furious—and worried. If the real Prince Richard had survived, he would be a better claimant to the throne and would arouse support even among Lancastrians. Henry couldn’t bear the thought of Yorkist propaganda undoing his laurels at Bosworth and Stoke, and he plotted Stanley’s demise. When one of his advisors reminded him that it was Stanley’s timely intervention that had saved his life at Bosworth, Henry retorted that it was also Stanley’s timely inactivity that led to him being hemmed in by the late king’s cavalry in the first place. Stanley’s comment couldn’t be forgiven; Yorkist propaganda couldn’t be allowed to take root in his sacred court and spread like a poison through his most ardent supporters: Stanley was arrested and executed in early 1495.

Beaulieu Abbey
Five months after Stanley’s fall, Warbeck launched an invasion of Ireland and besieged Waterford. He couldn’t take the city, so he abandoned the siege and sailed for Scotland where King James IV welcomed him with open arms. The Scottish king forged an alliance with Warbeck and married him to his cousin Lady Katherine Gordon. Together they planned an invasion of northern England, but it never took place. Warbeck returned to Ireland while the Scots raided England’s northern border. Warbeck rallied his supporters and sailed back across the Irish Sea and invaded England. Henry summoned his royal army, and when his army approached, Warbeck lost his nerve and fled, claiming sanctuary in Beaulieu Abbey. He knew what had happened to the Stafford brothers and didn’t feel secure; surrounded by enemies and outnumbered, his only option, short of suicide, was submitting himself to the king’s mercy. He surrendered and threw himself before the king. Henry, who had a reputation for leniency, granted him mercy, but he kept him and his Scottish wife close at hand in his court. Warbeck would yet pay for his treachery.

Perkins Warbeck, and the rebels before him, had found support from Margaret of Burgundy. That support had set off a chain of events culminating in a trade embargo that chafed against Henry’s aspirations for a commercially vibrant England. The greater threat to his reign, however, was Yorkist aspirations, so he sought to strangle Margaret while tabling for later commercial prosperity with the Low Countries.

The Black Death in the late 1300s had ransacked Europe, and though England had suffered, she hadn’t suffered to the extent that those on the continent did. The Black Death’s scourge paved the way to an agricultural depression; as great swathes of people died, the laborers needed for planting and harvest dwindled. Though there were less mouths to feed, there was more than ever a need for labor. England’s population flourished after the plague: though the population in the 14th century had dropped as low as two and a half million, by the turn of the 17th century it would nearly double to four million. England’s needs resulted in an economic revolution as yeoman farmers, sheep growers, and urban cloth manufacturers stepped to the forefront. The Merchant Adventurers, an association of London cloth exporters, controlled the London-Antwerp market. This market was an essential component of English trade, but, as we have seen, it suffered a trade embargo as a result of Henry’s ‘punishment’ of Margaret of Burgundy. He relocated the Merchant Adventurers from Antwerp to Calais and ejected Flemish merchants from England.

The embargo could’ve crippled the English economy, but as Margaret’s power waned, Henry and the Duke of Burgundy started talking peace. The Duke craved trade with England (his territory was suffering grievously from the embargo), and he saw no reason to deprive Burgundy of what she needed in a fruitless bickering over who sat on the English throne. He, unlike Margaret, had no bone in the matter. The same year that Warbeck’s misadventures came to an end at the swift jerk of a rope, Burgundy and England made peace and forged the Intercursus Magnus, a landmark commercial treaty between England and the Low Countries that fostered freer trade. The Intercursus Magnus granted trade privileges to English and Flemings and established fixed duties, which promoted English exports and filled Henry’s treasury. Henry insisted that he wouldn’t sign the document, favorable to both parties, without Margaret of Burgundy’s official acceptance of the legitimacy of his Tudor Dynasty. All her Yorkist schemes had come to nothing, her power had diminished, and she saw no benefit in standing against Burgundy’s prosperity. She acquiesced.

a replica of John Cabot's sailing ship
The Intercursus Magnus was a double victory for Henry: it furthered English trade and prosperity, and it put to rest Margaret’s machinations against the throne. The Magnus was a natural outworking of Henry’s belief that he’d need to be strong in wealth (and in the ability to showcase that wealth) to legitimize his reign and put a cork in the dynastic struggles that had ransacked England’s nobility. If the crown had wealth, it would be less dependent upon parliament and creditors, giving the king a freer hand. To this end he avoided war and reshaped the royal administration: the Royal Council was reborn as the Court of the Star Chamber and tasked with judicial concerns, and order was promoted in Wales and in northern England by the establishment of special councils and broader powers for the justices of the peace. A more efficient handling of governmental bureaucracy would aid in the accumulation of wealth; to this end Henry asserted, almost ruthlessly, his royal fiscal rights (legal fees, fines, and feudal dues), and he had royal revenue paid into the chamber of household, where he and trusted officials could oversee it (it used to go into the Exchequer, but the Exchequer seemed to be filled with ‘holes’ where money liked to disappear). He increased revenue by encouraging exports and protecting the home industry; promoting trade with neighboring countries; and enforcing the Navigation Acts which ensured English goods were carried in English-owned ships. Henry also sponsored the Italian navigator John Cabot and his sons in their voyages of discovery in the New World; he hoped they would find riches like Portugal and Spain had in south and central America, but all he found was a North America densely populated with native Americans. Nevertheless, Cabot’s 1497 sally along the North American coast was the earliest European exploration of North America since the Norse adventures in Newfoundland and the Gulf of St. Lawrence (called ‘Vinland’ by the Norse) in the eleventh century.

Henry’s maneuvers enabled him to leave a fortune to his eventual heir, his second-born son Henry VIII. Furthermore, as one historian notes, “The combined impact of Henry VII’s reforms would increase significantly the power of the King and open the way for medieval rule, with its local laws and customs, to be gradually supplanted by a more centralised Tudor state.”

Sunday, March 10, 2019

Henry VII and Stoke Field


Henry, freshly-married in early 1486, had a pregnant wife, and he was praying it was a boy. A boy would mean a natural heir, and the presence of natural heirs always brought a sense of peace to the realm; disputes over the throne tended towards bloodshed, and the masses of English people just wanted to live their lives in peace. A son would not only be a boom to Tudor propaganda, it would also put a dent in Yorkist insurrections and be a step towards legitimacy before the world powers.

Henry VII's archnemesis, Margaret of
Burgundy/York
His reign, however, was just months old, and propaganda would need time to take root. All he could do now was try to pacify the Yorkist sympathizers and crush any uprisings in the name of the king’s peace. The first uprising, led by the late Richard’s chamberlain, Lord Lovell, was weak and impotent. After Bosworth Field, Lord Lovell and Sir Humphrey Stafford locked themselves in Colchester Abbey, seeking sanctuary from Henry’s scourge of Yorkist high-rollers. Confined to the Abbey, they began plotting how to restore a Yorkist monarchy. Though Henry’s spies kept tabs on the Abbey, the Yorkist leaders managed to escape and began raising support. Henry’s spies informed him of what Lovell was doing, and Henry dispatched a force of soldiers to arrest him. Lovell received word that he was being hunted and sought safety in numbers with a ragtag group of rebels at Furness Falls before seeking sanctuary again, this time across the Channel in Flanders with Margaret of York. Margaret was the Duchess of Burgundy, daughter of Richard, 3rd Duke of York (whose aspirations for Henry VI’s throne set off the Wars of the Roses), and sister to two previous Yorkist kings, Edward IV and Richard III. She wasn’t shy about where her loyalties lie.

Sir Humphrey Stafford and his brother Thomas, still in England, stoked a second uprising in Worcester.  Henry was near York during a tour of his kingdom, and when he heard news of the uprising, he immediately turned his forces towards Worcester to stamp it out. The Stafford brothers lacked the resources to oppose the king, so they, like Lovell, sought sanctuary in an abbey. Lovell was safe across the Channel, and if Henry were to go after him, he’d cause a stink with France; but the Stafford brothers were within his realm, and he’d be damned if he let them cower in a church a second time. Under cover of darkness on 14 May, they were forcibly removed from the abbey and dragged before the King’s Bench, where justices determined that sanctuary wasn’t applicable in cases of treason. Henry ordered Sir Humphrey executed but pardoned the younger, more impressionable Thomas; perhaps he hoped that the young Thomas would become an ally among the pro-Yorkist faction. Pope Innocent III wasn’t happy with Henry’s breaking of sanctuary, and the two got into it for a while, but they smoothed things over. A little tension with the papacy was a speed-bump compared to the price he’d pay if he let rebels take advantage of church rules. Henry was playing for keeps.

The Stafford brothers had been dealt with, but Lovell was still at large – and still plotting. Margaret picked up what he was laying down, and it’d be her hand – and finances – behind the next two Yorkist attempts to reclaim the throne. In 1487 an actor-impostor named Lambert Simnel claimed to be Edward, the earl of Warwick, the closest Yorkist to the throne, whom Henry had locked in the Tower. His was a game of a different sort of propaganda; as news of Edward Plantagenet abroad swept through London, Henry had the real Edward escorted from the Tower and paraded through the city—but all to no avail. In a war of propaganda, people tend to believe that which caters to their tastes. John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln, heard about this impostor and pondered how to use him to his advantage. Lincoln had sworn fealty to Henry and was privileged to be in the king’s court, but his aspirations burned too bright for his loyalty to remain untouched: he, like Henry Tudor, had royal, albeit diluted, blood in his veins, and his childless late uncle Richard III had named him heir to the throne for the House of York. In mid-March he made up his mind, and he fled across the Channel to begin conniving with his aunt Margaret of Burgundy. She provided financial and military support (consisting of two thousand German and Swiss mercenaries), and Lovell, who’d been sheltering in Margaret’s court, threw in with Lincoln’s cause. Lincoln was joined by a number of English lords-in-exile along with a captain of the English garrison at Calais. They turned their backs on the French coast and sailed for Ireland.

Ireland was savagely pro-York, and after landing in early May, Lincoln had no trouble recruiting 4500 Irish mercenaries, mostly light-infantry kerns. In late May he had the pretender Lambert Simnel crowned ‘King Edward VI’ in Dublin. An Irish Parliament was called to legitimize Simnel’s title, but Lincoln wasn’t willing to wait. Henry’s intelligence told him Lincoln was in Ireland, and it wouldn’t be long before news of the faux crown reached him; thus Lincoln and his army crossed the Irish Sea and landed in northern Lancashire in early June, where a number of local gentry led by Sir Thomas Broughton met him. His force now numbered some eight thousand men, and by forced marches they covered two hundred miles in five days. Lord Lovell proved his worth on the night of 10 June when he and two thousand men led a night attack on four hundred Lancastrians; granted the numbers were tipped severely in their favor (just over 4:1), Lovell’s crushing victory sparked a boost in rebel morale.

Henry had dispatched an army under the liberated Earl of Northumberland, and Northumberland was determined to show Henry he could be trusted. He was eager to get into the fray, so it wasn’t difficult for the clever Lincoln to send him astray. Lincoln sent a detachment of rebels against the walled city of York; they banged on the city gates and demanded that the gates be opened ‘in the name of Edward VI.’ The panicked citizens sent urgent messages to Northumberland, begging for his aid. Northumberland turned his army towards York, thinking that was where Lincoln was making his move; when they came into sight of the city, the rebels fled north, and Northumberland gave chase. Lincoln patiently waited until his scouts reported Northumberland had fallen to the trap, and then he continued the march towards his real goal of London.

As they neared the capital, they were harassed by Lancastrian cavalry under the command of Edward Woodville, called ‘the last knight errant’ due to his devotion to chivalrous ideals. Woodville’s cavalry did excellent work, grinding the Yorkists down to a standstill in Sherwood Forest. Yorkist numbers played once again in their favor, and Woodville’s battered and weary force retreated towards Nottingham where they rendezvoused with Henry’s royal army. Northumberland may have been gallivanting to the north, but Henry felt confident that he could crush Lincoln’s rebellion. Woodville’s gallantry in Sherwood Forest had bought the king breathing time to assemble his men, and by 15 June he had gathered close to twelve thousand soldiers, including a number of Welsh fighters under Rhys ap Thomas. Lincoln, who had so far enjoyed numerical superiority, would now have a harder go at it.

Lincoln began crossing the River Trent, and Henry moved to meet him. Around nine in the morning on 16 June, his forward troops – under the command of the Earl of Oxford, who had proved his mettle at Bosworth – encountered the Yorkist army near East Stoke. Lincoln’s forces were assembled in a single formation atop a knoll called Rampire Hill; the hilltop was surrounded on three sides by the River Trent. Lincoln’s right flank was anchored on a high spot known as Burham Furlong; when that height came into Henry’s sight, he determined that he’d have his standard planted on it by the end of the day.

The Battle of Stoke Field is viewed by many historians as the last battle of the Wars of the Roses. Henry had shown he could win a throne – but could he keep it? Winning a battle is one thing; winning two is quite another. So far as the English people were concerned, Henry was just the next player on a wheeling ‘game of thrones.’ He would have to prove his ability to steel that throne against all usurpers. Nearly twenty thousand men – numbers similar to those gathered at Bosworth two years earlier – stood face-to-face, ready to do violence to one another. At Bosworth Henry had been the usurper then; here he was the king defending his crown. For all his machinations toward legitimizing his claim on the throne, from his propaganda to his marriage with Elizabeth of York, nothing would be as valuable as winning a pitched battle against his direct pretenders—and nothing would damage him as much as losing this contest.

Echoing his strategy at Bosworth, he divided his army into three ‘battles’, or groups, and as at Bosworth he entrusted Oxford to lead the vanguard and exercise command over the royal forces. As Henry’s men assembled for battle in the mid-morning glow of the sun, unusual lights were seen in the sky, the identity of which remains unknown. The royal soldiers were unnerved, fearing them to be evil omens, and a number of soldiers deserted. Oxford and the other nobles stoked the waning morale, and soon the soldiers’ heads cleared just in time for battle. Lincoln’s core soldiers were the two thousand mercenaries in the pay of Margaret of Burgundy, and among these mercenaries were Swiss crossbowmen and German gunners. Lincoln, from his perch on the heights, had the upper hand, and he opened the battle by ordering his missile mercenaries forward to harass Henry’s vanguard. The mercenary fire tore through Oxford’s battle, but he remained firm—and then the English longbowmen responded. Crossbows and handguns were slow-loading, and their operators were exposed to a withering fire of volley after volley of arrows. Many of the mercenaries and higher-ranking rebels wore armor that could deflect the arrows, but the rain of steel forced the armored knights to keep their visors down to protect their eyes, reducing their visibility and leaving them half-choking in their helmets. The Irish kerns didn’t wear armor, so they were chewed up by the onslaught.

The English arrows were wreaking havoc on Lincoln’s men, so he urged them forward. They abandoned the high ground and launched into the attack, their whole mass plunging towards Oxford’s vanguard. They hoped their steel-willed resolve, and the sight of them coming like a horde upon the royal forces, would drain enemy morale and send them to flight. Lincoln hoped to break the Lancastrian line and roll up the enemy army, opening his path to London where he could have the pretender enthroned and take the reigns of the government. But Oxford’s men were made of steel, and though they were the only of Henry’s three groups engaged, they fought without breaking. Though the line wavered time and again, Oxford rallied his men over the din of battle. Henry’s uncle, Jasper Tudor, fed reinforcements into the vanguard while the longbowmen loosed relentless volleys into the enemy mass. For three hours a ferocious back-and-forth melee coated the ground with blood and shit; bodies piled up in heaps. The Yorkists, with their backs to the River Trent, didn’t have a route of retreat, and so they fought tooth-and-nail until, one-by-one, their leaders fell by the sword. Lincoln fell fighting, and what remained of the rebel army’s ragged order dissolved. When they finally broke, some of them made for the River Trent, hoping to swim to safety on the far bank; those encased in armor or who were simply exhausted drowned, and those who managed to swim had to do so under a ceaseless rain of arrows. The river, one chronicler tells us, ‘ran red with blood.’ Other refugees were pursued down a ravine (known today as the Bloody Gutter) where they were cornered and butchered.





Casualties between the two force numbered around seven thousand, the lion’s share being suffered by the disintegrated Yorkist army, and Henry planted his standard on Burham Furlong to mark his victory. The pretender Lambert Simnel was captured but pardoned in a gesture of clemency; Henry could clearly see that he had just been a puppet for Lincoln and his coconspirators (Simnel would be given a job in the royal kitchen and would later be promoted to falconer, in charge of the upkeep of the king’s falcons). Henry pardoned the Irish nobles; he needed their goodwill to pacify Ireland, which was hotheaded even in the best of times (he would later convince the papacy to excommunicate the Irish clergy who had supported the rebellion). He had hoped to capture Lincoln alive so as to interrogate him on the true measure of Yorkist support in his kingdom, but with Lincoln dead, all he could do was authorize an inquiry which resulted in ‘relatively few executions and very many fines.’ After the battle he made a ‘triumphant march’ through traditional strongholds of Yorkist supporters to show that he had bested the best of them.

And as for Lord Lovell, who can say what happened to him?
True to his nature, he managed to escape.

Some contemporaries claimed they saw him crossing the River Trent on the back of his horse. He disappeared after Stoke Field and was never seen again. Historians speculate that he may have fled to Scotland, given evidence of a safe pass being granted to him by the Scottish government. In the 18th century, his old house in Oxfordshire was undergoing chimney remodeling when a skeleton was found inside a secret room. Some have conjectured that the skeleton is none other than Lord Lovell, who’d hidden himself in the room and starved to death; however, this isn’t fitting with a character who didn’t seem to give up, and it’s fruitless conjecture that the remains belong to him, anyways. The cause of the entombed skeleton’s death is undetermined.

where we're headed

Over the last several years, we've undergone a shift in how we operate as a family. We're coming to what we hope is a better underst...