Lackadaisically Yours

xiao zhan - yuguyao behind the scenes

Today was Not a good day for Aditha Karikalan. First, Sambavaraiyar had tried to harass him into marrying his daughter who had blatantly told him that she had no interest in him. Then, the other chieftains had criticized his decision to give the throne to his younger brother instead of Madhuranthakan, the "rightful" heir. And finally, now, after ten strenuous months, Nandhini had gone into labor and Aditha was stuck in the court. He was going to lose it if he went one more minute without knowing what was happening.

"Manimegalai, go check on Nandhini, please." He whispered to the Kadambur Princess.

His wife's best friend nodded and left, wringing her hands together. Periya Velaar and Periya Pazhuvettarayar brought up yet another topic they couldn't agree on. Oh, Aditha was definitely going to lose it.

… In Nandhini’s Chambers …

Nandini's chest heaved as she struggled to push their child out of her body. Another scream overtook her body and she vaguely registered Manimegalai appearing by her side.

She could hear the maids whispering and the midwife looking on with concern. Nandini might never have given birth before, but she knew it wasn't supposed to be this extreme. Pain dominated her body again, her muscles contracting to try and get it out.

'Krishna,' she begged, 'Whatever good I have done in my life, use it to save my child.'

"Just a little more, Arasi, you're almost there."

Nandhini barely had the energy to nod any longer. She was exhausted and her husband was nowhere to be seen.

"They're not going to make it," she heard someone whisper.

Although she would never admit it, Nandhini was worried about the same. Her mind began to pray over and over again for the well being of her child. She could die for all she cared, but the baby in her womb should not.

With one final push, Nandhini collapsed with the distant chime of the temple, penetrating the silent air.

… 5 years later …

Deivathirumagal darted away from the watchful eyes of the maids her father had employed, crouching behind a large pillar when they passed by. They were all far too involved in their own gossip to notice that the Princess of Kaanchi was not trailing behind them.

Deiva had her eyes set on the set of large golden doors up ahead, which she had seen her father enter enough times to know that it was the throne room. Making sure no one was looking, she entered through the door which had been left ajar.

“Appa!” she giggled, running up to the unsuspecting king and climbing in his lap.

Karikalan absentmindedly stroked her hair, frowning while he listened to Periya Pazhuvettarayar drone on about political alliances.

“We have Siriya Velaar’s daughter, Vanathi, no?” he said, “What’s the harm in getting her married to the Rashtrakuta king?”

Karikalan frowned, looking down at Deiva who was fiddling with his necklace.

“Not now, Deiva.” he said, looking back up at Periya Pazhuvettarayar. “My family has hopes to marry Vanathi to my younger brother as you know.” he reminded, his voice dangerous. He knew that Pazhavur did not want Kodambalur to become the ruling clan, hence their insistence to marry off Vanathi somewhere else.

“Then how do you suggest we appease the Rashtrakutas?” one of the other chieftains spoke up, “By marrying your own daughter to him?”

Deiva looked up when she was mentioned in the conversation, smiling innocently at the man. Karikalan’s eyes darkened and he took Deiva off his lap.

“Aren’t you supposed to be with the maids right now?” he asked her coldly, “Go on, Appa has more important matters to attend to.” Karikalan didn’t want his daughter in the room in case he lost his temper at the chieftains.

Deiva whimpered. “But Appa-”

“Deivathirumagal! Now!”

She caved in on herself and nodded, scurrying out of the room. The maids found her a few moments later, sitting dejectedly outside of the throne room.

“You can’t run off like that! Come, let us take you back to your mother.”

… In Nandhini’s Chambers …

Akka,

I have tried my best to be patient and supportive, but I am afraid that Ponniyin Selvar will be better off without my presence by his side. Let him and Samudra Kumari be happy, I am coming to you in Kaanchi. If Ponni Thai does not want me as her daughter-in-law, will Kaanchi accept me as its daughter instead?

Sincerely,

Kodambalur Ilavarasi Vanathi Devi

Nandhini sighed and rubbed her temples. What had Arulmozhi done now?

She lay back on the bed and rubbed her growing stomach, feeling a wave of nausea overtake her. Should she send for Karikalan? No, he was probably busy with the chieftains right now.

The door opened and her maids carried in Deiva, who was sitting sadly in their arms. Nandhini smiled at her pouting face and reached her arms out for her daughter.

“This one tried to run away from us today, Arasi.” they laughed.

Nandhini kissed her daughter’s forehead weakly. Deiva curled into her side, breathing in her mother’s scent. The Queen of Kaanchi gently hummed to her, ignoring the fatigue she felt. Despite her best efforts, however, a coughing fit took over her body, causing the maids to rush to her and usher Deiva out of the room.

“Best if she doesn’t see this.” they said.

Nandhini reached out for her daughter, whose face she saw fall just before the door closed.

Outside, Deiva curled into a little ball on the floor. Her mother was constantly sick and ailing, too weak to take care of her. Her father, on the other hand, was able bodied but too busy to pay her any attention.

Was there anyone who still needed Deiva?

.......................

Penny for your thoughts?

Here's a teaser for Shivaa.

Ponniyin Selvan + text posts for @foolgobi65​ my beloved

+BONUS

My friend send me this link, is a series on a profile on Ao3 (tumblr) that has different tutorials to insert things to fanfics via html code, I thought I would share bc it’s really cool

Lists of tutorials:

How to make images fit in mobile browsers

This is a tutorial/live example on how to make large images fit on mobile browsers but remain normal size on desktop browsers.

How to mimic letters, fliers, and stationery without using images

This is a tutorial/live example on how to mimic the look of letters, fliers, and stationery (as well as other forms of written media) without using images. For all your epistolary fic needs.

How to make a “choose your own adventure” Fic

This is a tutorial/live example on how to create a "Choose Your Own Adventure" fic. While this has been explained before (see here), this particular tutorial shows you how to use a work skin to hide the next parts from the reader until they click through to get to them.

How to make linked footnotes on Ao3

This is a live example of how an author can create linked footnotes in their work with only a little bit of HTML and no workskins required. This is best viewed by clicking "Entire Work". While I've included the actual coding in bold and italic once you click "Hide Creator's Style", there's a more detailed explanation here.

How to change text on Ao3 when the cursor is hovering over it (or clicked on mobile)

This a tutorial/live example on how to have text change or appear once a cursor is hovering over it. Helpful for pop-up spoilers, language translations, quick author's notes, etc.

How to mimic author’s notes and Kudos/Comment buttons

Anonymous on tumblr: do you have a skin that would mimic the author’s notes and review/kudos buttons section from the end of a fic? the desired effect being that the fic could go on after the “end” of the fic, so after the author’s notes and review/kudos buttons

Here's a tutorial/live example to do just that, with some of the buttons actually functioning. I'll explain more inside!

How to wrap text around images

This is a tutorial/live example on how to align images to the left or right of the screen and have text wrap around them.

How to mimic email windows

This is a tutorial/live example on how to mimic email windows on AO3 without the need to use images.

How to make ios text messages on Ao3

This is a tutorial/live example on how to mimic iOS text messages on AO3 without the need to use images. There's also a chapter on how to have emojis displayed on AO3 as well.

How to make Customized page deviders

Bored with the default page dividers? This is a tutorial/live example on how customize your page dividers with no images needed (though I do show you how you could use images if you wanted to do such a thing).

How to make invisible text (That can be highlighted)

This is a live example how to make invisible text that can only be seen by highlighting the text. Tutorial is included in text, and you can always leave comments about questions you may have.

MOBILE USERS: Sadly, this probably won't work for you, since highlighting in a mobile browser is different than web. I've tried correcting this, but have yet to find a solution.

How to make a rounded playlist

Original coding and design is from layouttest. I make no claims for it, just tweaked it so it will work on AO3.

How to create notebook lined paper on Ao3

This is a live example of my AO3 skin that allows the author to recreate the look of lined notebook paper in their work. To learn more about it, you can find the tutorial here.

Sticky notes on Ao3 without using images

This is a live example of my AO3 skin that allows the author to recreate the look of sticky notes (aka Post-Its) in their fic. To learn more about it, you can find the tutorial here.

How to make deadpool’s thinking thinking boxes on Ao3

This is a live example of my AO3 skin that allows the author to recreate the look of Deadpool's thinking boxes in their fic. To learn more about it, you can find the tutorial here.

How to make newspaper articles on Ao3

Me: We watch the Match in Africa?

Therapist: *nodes* we watch the Match in Africa.

In case anybody needs some self-care, here is the link to watch the full match.

Some higlights: 46:50 for Trevor & Rog competing for the best Rafa impression 50:00 for Rafa making fun of Roger making fun of his grunting 2:16:56 for Roger teasing Rafa about his between leg trick shots (but also admitting that Rafa's really good at trick shots) 2:24:27 for Rafa's horrendous serve 3:22:26 for Rafa lip-synching to Sweet Caroline 3:24:18 for Rafa's outrageous 360 point 3:38:20 for Rog & Rafa being husb- *sbaaf* bros

And for Rafa having the time of his life, just click anywhere.

i still think about this moment a lot. this man is just so endearing and cute whaaaa!

I find a big stumbling block that comes with teaching Romeo and Juliet is explaining Juliet’s age. Juliet is 13 - more precisely, she’s just on the cusp of turning 14. Though it’s not stated explicitly, Romeo is implied to be a teenager just a few years older than her - perhaps 15 or 16. Most people dismiss Juliet’s age by saying “that was normal back then” or “that’s just how it was.” This is fundamentally untrue, and I will explain why.

In Elizabethan England, girls could legally marry at 12 (boys at 14) but only with their father’s permission. However, it was normal for girls to marry after 18 (more commonly in early to mid twenties) and for boys to marry after 21 (more commonly in mid to late twenties). But at 14, a girl could legally marry without papa’s consent. Of course, in doing so she ran the risk of being disowned and left destitute, which is why it was so critical for a young man to obtain the father’s goodwill and permission first. Therein lies the reason why we are repeatedly told that Juliet is about to turn 14 in under 2 weeks. This was a critical turning point in her life.

In modern terms, this would be the equivalent of the law in many countries which states children can marry at 16 with their parents’ permission, or at 18 to whomever they choose - but we see it as pretty weird if someone marries at 16. They’re still a kid, we think to ourselves - why would their parents agree to this?

This is exactly the attitude we should take when we look at Romeo and Juliet’s clandestine marriage. Today it would be like two 16 year olds marrying in secret. This is NOT normal and would NOT have been received without a raised eyebrow from the audience. Modern audiences AND Elizabethan audiences both look at this and think THEY. ARE. KIDS.

Critically, it is also not normal for fathers to force daughters into marriage at this time. Lord Capulet initially makes a point of telling Juliet’s suitor Paris that “my will to her consent is but a part.” He tells Paris he wants to wait a few years before he lets Juliet marry, and informs him to woo her in the meantime. Obtaining the lady’s consent was of CRITICAL importance. It’s why so many of Shakespeare’s plays have such dazzling, well-matched lovers in them, and why men who try to force daughters to marry against their will seldom prosper. You had to let the lady make her own choice. Why?

Put simply, for her health. It was considered a scientific fact that a woman’s health was largely, if not solely, dependant on her womb. Once she reached menarche in her teenage years, it was important to see her fitted with a compatible sexual partner. (For aristocratic girls, who were healthier and enjoyed better diets, menarche generally occurred in the early teens rather than the later teens, as was more normal at the time). The womb was thought to need heat, pleasure, and conception if the woman was to flourish. Catholics might consider virginity a fit state for women, but the reformed English church thought it was borderline unhealthy - sex and marriage was sometimes even prescribed as a medical treatment. A neglected wife or widow could become sick from lack of (pleasurable) sex. Marrying an unfit sexual partner or an older man threatened to put a girl’s health at risk. An unsatisfied woman, made ill by her womb as a result - was a threat to the family unit and the stability of society as a whole. A satisfying sex life with a good husband meant a womb that had the heat it needed to thrive, and by extension a happy and healthy woman.

In Shakespeare’s plays, sexual compatibility between lovers manifests on the stage in wordplay. In Much Ado About Nothing, sparks fly as Benedick and Beatrice quarrel and banter, in comparison to the silence that pervades the relationship between Hero and Claudio, which sours very quickly. Compare to R+J - Lord Capulet tells Paris to woo Juliet, but the two do not communicate. But when Romeo and Juliet meet, their first speech takes the form of a sonnet. They might be young and foolish, but they are in love. Their speech betrays it.

Juliet, on the cusp of 14, would have been recognised as a girl who had reached a legal and biological turning point. Her sexual awakening was upon her, though she cares very little about marriage until she meets the man she loves. They talk, and he wins her wholehearted, unambiguous and enthusiastic consent - all excellent grounds for a relationship, if only she weren’t so young.

When Tybalt dies and Romeo is banished, Lord Capulet undergoes a monstrous change from doting father to tyrannical patriarch. Juilet’s consent has to take a back seat to the issue of securing the Capulet house. He needs to win back the prince’s favour and stabilise his family after the murder of his nephew. Juliet’s marriage to Paris is the best way to make that happen. Fathers didn’t ordinarily throw their daughters around the room to make them marry. Among the nobility, it was sometimes a sad fact that girls were simply expected to agree with their fathers’ choices. They might be coerced with threats of being disowned. But for the VAST majority of people in England - basically everyone non-aristocratic - the idea of forcing a daughter that young to marry would have been received with disgust. And even among the nobility it was only used as a last resort, when the welfare of the family was at stake. Note that aristocratic boys were often in the same position, and would also be coerced into advantageous marriages for the good of the family.

tl;dr:

Q. Was it normal for girls to marry at 13?

A. Hell no!

Q. Was it legal for girls to marry at 13?

A. Not without dad’s consent - Friar Lawrence performs this dodgy ceremony only because he believes it might bring peace between the houses.

Q. Was it normal for fathers to force girls into marriage?

A. Not at this time in England. In noble families, daughters were expected to conform to their parents wishes, but a girl’s consent was encouraged, and the importance of compatibility was recognised.

Q. How should we explain Juliet’s age in modern terms?

A. A modern Juliet would be a 17 year old girl who’s close to turning 18. We all agree that girls should marry whomever they love, but not at 17, right? We’d say she’s still a kid and needs to wait a bit before rushing into this marriage. We acknowledge that she’d be experiencing her sexual awakening, but marrying at this age is odd - she’s still a child and legally neither her nor Romeo should be marrying without parental permission.

Q. Would Elizabethans have seen Juliet as a child?

It wasn’t so uncommon for children of royalty or nobility to be betrothed from birth, or even symbolically married, in order to make alliances. But that doesn’t mean they were engaging in the kind of adult relationship we envision when we think of marriage today.

I. Margaret Beaufort

In my mind, there are few cases that better demonstrate the tensions between medieval norms and medieval realities than that of Margaret Beaufort. Like many other women of her time, she had only one child surviving to adulthood: Henry Tudor (later Henry VII and the founder of the Tudor dynasty). In that, Margaret wasn’t so remarkable: infant mortality made this a common enough outcome, though undoubtedly a tragic one.

Where Margaret’s case was exceptional is that Henry was also her only known pregnancy, without so much as a stillbirth, infant death, or even another pregnancy ever being mentioned in connection to her. In her own time, it was commonly assumed that her experience of childbirth at a very young age was what accounted for her barrenness, and even to us today, it doesn’t seem implausible to assume some kind of physical trauma that prevented later pregnancies from taking place, given all the medical knowledge we’ve accumulated about the risks of childbirth at either extreme of age.

But there was more to this. The vast Beaufort estate that came with Margaret’s young hand were so valuable that, to 15th/16th century English minds, it perfectly explained Edmund Tudor’s motives for having been so reckless with the health of his wife: having an heir of his own would ensure that her lands would stay with him, in the name of any children they might have together, whereas the lands would pass to someone else if she should die before having a child. Of course, most men in that situation would have waited anyway, as a child whose mother died in childbirth was much less likely to survive anyway, so contemporaries portrayed Edmund Tudor’s actions as short-sighted and foolhardy at best, amoral and cruel and worst. But Fate must have a sense of irony, because Edmund died before his son was even born, while Margaret lived, and as aristocratic women tended to do in those circumstances, she was remarried to Henry Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham.

Since Margaret was Stafford’s first (and only) wife, he would have depended on her to give him any heirs at all, to whom he could pass on the lands he already had, let alone any of Margaret’s own (and it would be logical to assume that the Beaufort inheritance would have been no less tempting to Stafford than it was to Tudor). He must have at least hoped for children from her, and at the time, there wasn’t any reason to expect she was totally barren either: there was the traumatic birth to consider, but she was more physically mature when she remarried, and there was room to hope that widowhood had given her time to recover. And yet, despite all this, it seems few people (if any) were surprised that Margaret did not bear any more children. It didn’t seem to doom her relationship with her second husband either: on the contrary, Margaret enjoyed a happy relationship with Stafford for well over a decade until his death, so if there was any bitterness on his part over his lack of heirs, he must have managed it well. Even in the contemporary sources (who don’t tend to be charitable towards female figures), any blame for her barrenness is laid squarely at the feet of the various men who were her guardians in her early life, who clearly abused their authority over her for their own benefit, rather than to safeguard Margaret’s well-being as guardians are supposed to do (one of them being Edmund Tudor himself… he wasn’t supposed to even be in the running for her wardship, but Henry VI actually outright broke a promise he had made to Margaret’s father to let Margaret’s mother be her guardian in the event of his death).

This indicates to me even more strongly that late-medieval / Tudor people would have not only been sympathetic towards what Margaret and women like her had suffered, but also understood that neglectful attitudes towards the health and happiness of dependents have consequences. Shakespeare’s own words make this clear, at the beginning of the play:

Paris: Younger than she are happy mothers made. Capulet: And too soon marr’d are those so early made.

Tudor audiences would have understood these lines as the words of a benevolent father protecting his daughter from the advances of an overeager young suitor, invoking what seems to have been a Tudor-era trope that early marriages do not make for happy endings… not for the woman, not for her family or husband, and certainly not for the children she might otherwise have borne. Because Capulet came off as the “good father” in the beginning of the play, it makes it all the more shocking when his attitude changes and he becomes the all-too-familiar figure of the cold, uncaring patriarch who regards his children only as pawns*. I imagine the juxtaposition would have invited Tudor audiences to feel Juliet’s sense of betrayal as if it were happening to them.

* Jane Grey, the famed “nine days’ queen” was also rumored to be such a victim of her parents’ ambition: they also saw fit to force her into a marriage that she seriously objected to, and historical records point a fairly consistent picture of their callous disregard towards her wishes and genuine happiness.

II. Consent in Medieval Marriages

Twelve and fourteen are actually also important numbers in their own right, and Shakespeare’s choice to place Juliet between those two ages has an important symbolic meaning. Late medieval Catholic doctrine defined marriage as a sacrament, like the Eucharist (Communion), or Holy Orders. Many of the sacraments require those who receive them to understand what they’re getting into for the sacrament to have the desired effect. To guarantee understanding (at least from a theological perspective), you would have to be above “the age of reason”, the age at which you were considered to be able to think for yourself. Conservative definitions of the “age of reason” sometimes defined it as the age of fifteen or fourteen (or older), but was later fixed at twelve. Since marriage was one of these sacraments, a marriage where both spouses had not fully and knowingly given their consent was no marriage at all.* Therefore, twelve was considered the absolute lower age limit at which a person could marry without compromising the very spiritual foundation of the marriage itself, while fourteen was considered a safer age at which to assume the person had full control of their reasoning capacities.

The other side of the “consent” coin when it came to marriage was that consent wasn’t just a necessary condition to finalize a marriage, it was also sufficient condition. If a man and a woman had given their knowing consent to marry one another, and if they had intentionally verbalized this promise to one another and consummated their marriage, then no earthly power could invalidate this pact for any reason (outside of a few very specific ones, like incest) without risking damnation. Witnesses were convenient as a way to prove that the marriage had taken place, if a family member or some segment of society disapproved of the match, but they weren’t needed in order to make the marriage spiritually valid. Basically, the Catholic Church at this stage somehow ended up putting the idea of consent at the very heart of the idea of what made a marriage valid or not, and this had consequences not only because of the threat of hellfire, but also because Church law was secular law when it came to domestic matters like marriage and divorce. And then it came to pass that the English Reformation left this specific area of the doctrine mostly untouched, so the Tudors would have had similar ideas surrounding the question of consent and marriage as did their late medieval forbears.

This theological point is not only the whole raison d’etre for the most central plot device in the play, but also adds an extra note of pathos to Juliet’s situation and an extra layer of moral judgment towards Lord Capulet’s behavior. If she did not insist on keeping her marriage vow, or if she married Paris knowing full well that she had already been married, both of those would be mortal sins for which she would risk damnation. And by extension, because he used duress against Juliet to try to make her comply with his sinful wish, Lord Capulet has also damned himself (albeit unknowingly, but even so, the narrative clearly presents forcing his daughter’s marriage as something he should know better than to do, anyway).

Until this point, Juliet’s marriage is characterized as an impulsive decision such as only foolish youth could make, but ironically, in that confrontation with Lord Capulet, this slip of a young girl is now portrayed as conducting herself with far more spiritual maturity and grace than any of the adults around her. Her parents are failing in their duty towards her by putting their dynastic concerns ahead of her health and happiness (when it’s been made clear they already know this is a Bad Idea), and her Nurse, who actually knows about the secret marriage and all the reasons why it cannot be taken back, is actively pleading with her to just forget it and pretend Romeo never was. Juliet’s choice here is monumental, because it involves not only disregarding her parents, but also an active decision to completely break with the woman who has been with her for literally everything in her life up to that point, a break so thorough that even Nurse herself doesn’t know that it’s happened. This dramatic turning point is a bittersweet portrait of the girl losing her innocence and growing up into an adult, from one angle, and from another angle it’s a paean to the pure-hearted idealism (different from the limpid innocence of childhood in that it’s willful and risk-taking, and fiery in quality) that can only be found in the young. Either way, it does Juliet’s character AND Shakespeare’s dramatic talents a massive disservice to portray her situation as something so simplistic or reactionary as lovelorn pining after an absent boyfriend, or rebelling against her parents, or “staying true to her own heart”.

This wasn’t just a plot device for the stage: many real-life lovers leaned on this feature of the Church’s teachings, when faced with the opposition of their families and communities, and in many cases, the Church was indeed forced to side with the couple, however reluctantly. Margery Paston, the daughter of a genteel landowning family in the 15th century, and Richard Calle, the Paston family’s longtime housekeeper, were one such case of a real-life Romeo and Juliet: they mutually fell in love, and married in secret when they came up against heavy opposition from Margery’s family. The Pastons responded by separating them, firing Calle from his job and having him sent to London, while Margery remained in Norfolk under house arrest. There, she seems to have been subjected to ongoing and intense pressure to walk back her marriage… if the couple had been married formally in church, this would not have been possible, but secret marriages were vulnerable to challenges like this because they were secret. A witness would have helped her and Calle’s case and made it more airtight, but even if the couple had had any, apparently the Pastons had succeeded in intimidating them into silence.

But even though the Pastons seemed to be winning, it’s hard to believe that bystanders wouldn’t have objected to at least some of what the Pastons were doing to try and get their way. Otherwise, Calle could not have written Margery in 1469, during their separation, saying “I suppose if you tell them sadly the truth, they will not damn their souls for us”. Their situation was objectively quite bleak.  For the months they were apart, it was made very clear to both Margery and Calle that, if the couple continued to insist on their marriage, the Pastons would disown Margery and throw her out of the house, therefore leaving her with few options for survival, let alone to find her way to Calle over a distance of a hundred miles. He mournfully acknowledges that their gamble might fail, and their worst fears might come true, but there is also defiance in his resignation, as he concludes, “if they will in no wise agree [to respect our marriage], between God, the Devil and them be it.”

Margery, for her part, was no less determined. When Margery was finally brought before the local bishop, he turned out to be sympathetic towards the Paston family, and gave Margery a long speech about the importance of pleasing her family and community (so much for the theological importance of consent, but then, clerical hypocrisy was nothing new to medieval people). But Margery remained steadfast (in fact, I am inclined to think from her next words that the bishop’s words only goaded her to greater resolve) and when she spoke, she not only continued to insist that she had said what she had said, but according to her mother she “boldly” added, “if those words made it not sure […] she would make it surer before she went thence, for she said she thought in her conscience she was bound [in marriage to Calle], whatsoever the words were.” Her wording left absolutely no room for doubt in the mind of even the most flexible theologian. And when Calle was cross-examined and his testimony found to match that of Margery’s, the bishop of Norfolk had no choice but to rule in the couple’s favor.

Margery’s mother did indeed make good on her word: she did both disown Margery and throw her out of the house. She seemed to have done it more to save face, however, than to actually punish her daughter, since she does seem to have made arrangements behind the scenes for Margery to stay with sympathetic neighbors. In the end, Calle was right, the Pastons were not willing to risk their own souls. Margery and Richard Calle got their happy ending, and had at least three children (and we know about them because we know Margery’s mother left them money in her own will).

* This also meant that Edmund Tudor actually would have been Margaret Beaufort’s first husband, not her second. It was true that she had already been “in a marriage” before being married later to Tudor, but strictly speaking, it was only a precontract (what we today would think of as an engagement) with signficance limited to the secular realm; there are a lot of reasons this would not have really been considered a marriage at the time, but the most theologically pertinent one is that the bride’s consent could not have been involved, because she was too young to be able to give it. Consequently, this paper marriage was easily dissolved as soon as her guardians thought it more politically expedient to marry her to Edmund Tudor. And for all intents and purposes, Margaret Beaufort herself considered Tudor to be her first husband, not John de la Pole.

@thebibliosphere do you know if it’s common for people to know the age of Juliet solidly and then think that the reason everything was dodgy was because Romeo was like 17/18 years old? Cause like…

Full disclaimer: I’m obviously no expert–just a former Shakespearian theater kid with a love of history–but no, Romeo is not eighteen, and nor was he considered an adult.

That’s a very modern perspective, and I suspect it comes from people latching onto the idea that if Juliet was considered legally old enough to be married at fourteen, then Romeo’s slight advantage in years must mean he was considered an adult when this is not at all how a Tudor audience would have viewed it.

Also, I don’t know where the idea that Romeo is eighteen/fully an adult came from, because Romeo’s age is unspecified in the original text, though the consensus is that he’s between the ages of fifteen at a minimum and seventeen at most. Neither an adult by our terms nor by Tudor ones.

As noted above, the minimum legal age for marriage in the Tudor era was twelve years old for noble girls, but what we did not mention was the legal age for boys, which was fourteen. So if we take the stance that Romeo is intended to be fifteen to sixteen, possibly hovering on the verge of seventeen, in the context of the times, he’s still considered barely old enough to marry, same as Juliet. He still needs the permission of his parents to marry because he is not considered legally old enough to make this decision himself.

His behavior isn’t that of a predatory adult pursuing a child (we’ll get to that) but that of a young man in the midst of his teens pursuing someone in both a suitable age range and social class for his standing. And from a thematic standpoint: the age and social class where your family might orchestrate a match to solidify alliances or to end a blood war if only they had their shit together.

This becomes very clear when you take into consideration the added context that most commoners didn’t marry until their mid-to-late-twenties when they’d had a chance to become financially established and also become both physically mature and strong enough to survive childbirth. There were, of course, always exceptions to this rule, but we’re speaking in generalities here. Only the rich married their kids off young, and most of the time there would have been clauses in place to prevent the girl from getting pregnant too young and dying in childbirth.

Basically, the entire Tudor audience, both noble and common, would have been watching this tragedy unfold on stage, clutching their pearls and going “Oh god they’re babies. Where are the parents?!”

To which the answer is “embroiled in a blood feud and not paying attention to the things that are happening under their nose until it’s too late.”

Paris, on the other hand, the suitor Juliet’s father wants to pair her with, and let’s be clear here, the man making it very clear he’s interested in her sexually, is twenty-five.

That line up above about “happy mother’s made”? That’s Paris, a twenty-five-year-old man looking at a fourteen-year-old girl and announcing that he not only wants to bed her but considers it fine for girls even younger than fourteen to become mothers. The man is a one-man parade of red flags, and that’s also what makes Juliet’s father switch so villainous. He’d rather marry his child off to a full-grown man who doesn’t care for her safety in the marital bed than resolve the feud with the Montagues, and the Tudor audience would have been deeply uncomfortable with this narrative, same as us.

So no, Romeo and Juliet isn’t a mess because Romeo was an adult. Romeo and Juliet is a mess because both Romeo and Juliet are functionally children trying to act like adults because no one else is. Not their parents, not the priest. And that’s the root of the tragedy.

It’s not a moral about problematic age gaps–though that is highlighted through Paris–it’s a moral about allowing vengeance to cloud your judgment and letting the children, the innocents who don’t know any better, try to behave like adults because you’ve left a void and would rather seek death than a peaceful resolution.

my favorite daniil being a little shit moments. bonus:

His victory at the US Championships in 1996 is an underdog story if figure skating ever had one. It’s an iconic performance that could easily be the climax of a movie without changing a thing.

In 1996, Galindo arrived at Nationals without having won it since his days as a novice, or even having stood on the podium since he was a junior. (In singles, that is - he and Kristi Yamaguchi also skated pairs and were double national champions together.) He’d had some success as a junior - bronze, then silver, then gold at junior Worlds, the last the year before he and Yamaguchi also took the title in pairs - but once he and Yamaguchi split for good, he spent years without any big international assignments, with a best of fifth place at Nationals. By this competition, he was 26, old enough for people to start remarking on his age.

That wasn’t the only disadvantage he had working against him, though. First, after years of feeling like the judges were biased against him for being too camp and because of his Mexican heritage, he had come out as gay in a book published just days before. It was a bold move in a judged sport rife with homophobia and with very few active competitors who were out at the time.

Second, while skating demands large amounts of money, Galindo was lacking it. In the run-up to 1996, he was given zero funding or encouragement from USFS. He biked to the rink because he couldn’t afford a car; his sister started coaching him for free and helped to cover some of his expenses.

And lastly, he’d been through enough personal tragedy for a lifetime in only a few years. In 1989, his and Yamaguchi’s coach died of AIDS complications. In 1993, his father passed from a heart attack; in 1994, his brother, who he helped nurse, also died of AIDS; and in 1995, yet another coach of his died from AIDS as well. No wonder he needed to take an eight-month break from training after 1995 Nationals.

But the 1996 championships were in his hometown. And Galindo decided that he wanted to give everyone a performance they wouldn’t forget, not one they would cheer for just because he was the local competitor.

Spectators at practice sessions noted a composed confidence in Galindo, and he carried that through his short program. He was not the fastest skater on the ice, but his performance was enough to land him in third place (apparently to boos from the crowd, who thought he should be higher).

For his free skate, he wore a costume that not even the most conservative judge could object to, and skated to one of the most standard pieces of music in all of figure skating: Swan Lake. Galindo’s Swan Lake was unique, though, in that rather than a swan or a prince, he characterized himself instead as the evil wizard Rothbart.

Though he was last to skate, he betrayed no hint of nerves as he started his program, striking a few dramatic poses before landing a smooth 3A3T that made the commentators exclaim aloud. The bombastic opening section merged into a calmer one, where he showed off his flexibility:

And man, remember dramatically held spread eagles in big circles?

The music went light and playful, and Galindo became light with it, completing each jump and then continuing through his choreography with ease and grace:

In the last minute of the program, you can see him begin to smile to himself as his movements become celebratory.

He even took a moment to wave to someone in the audience :)

He finished his program with the traditional spin, showing off his nice layback position while the audience started to cheer and then didn’t really stop. Those who were there say that people were on their feet for him before he was done skating.

As he came off the ice, he hugged his sister, before he turned his head and shouted upward to convey his love to some of those he had lost. When the technical marks were announced, the crowd didn’t just scream their heads off - they started to chant their opinion for the artistic ones: SIX. SIX. SIX. SIX. SIX.

Two of the judges agreed, and the rest placed him high enough to win over the favorite, Todd Eldredge. And Rudy Galindo, the twenty-six-year-old who had never stood on the senior podium at Nationals or been sent to any major competition as a singles skater, who was bearded and Hispanic and gay, was now the US men’s champion.

(He’s often cited as ‘the oldest in 70 years’; however, this number seems to be closer to 60, going back to Roger Turner, and he was only a few months older than Tickner was in 1980. Still an impressive accomplishment!)

His exhibition was a tribute to those he and so many others had lost to the AIDS crisis, the theme made loud and clear by his simple costume consisting only a black suit with a large red AIDS awareness ribbon around his neck.

At his first and only senior Worlds in men’s singles, he won the bronze medal. Following this successful season, he considered making a run for the Olympics, but instead retired to the pro and show circuit, always receiving a very warm welcome from the audience. I highly recommend his pro program to Somewhere Over the Rainbow, which yeah, is pretty gay and always makes me tear up at this moment: