I hope this isn’t too off-topic, but I’ve been reading Maurice Druon’s Accursed Kings lately, and had some questions about it. How historically valid are some of the more lurid or conspiratorial events Druon depicts, like Marguerite and Blanche taking lovers; Marguerite being strangled in prison; the poisoning of Guillaume de Nogaret, Louis X, “John I”, Mahaut of Artois, and her daughter Jeanne; and the massive (heh) role the dispute over the Artois inheritance had on the events of the books?

For the most part, Druon as the French academic he was, is quite accurate. But because he was writing historical fiction, he sometimes embellished. 

  • The Tour de Nesle Affair was quite real, and Marguerite was strangled to death by the executioner, according to one account by her own shroud, which is a nice Gothic touch.
  • It’s unclear whether Guillaume de Nogaret was poisoned; we do know that he died “with his tongue horribly thrust out,” which could mean a great many different things.
  • What part of Louis X’s story are you unsure about?
  • As far as Jon I goes, there was a real-life case where an Italian named  Giannino Baglioni claimed to be the true King of France during the reign of Jon II, was briefly given credence by the kings of Hungary, but then was arrested and died in prison. Druon thought it would be more fun if he really was the real Jon.
  • Mahaut’s feud with Robert over Artois was quite real, and not only did it lead to the events of the books, but it also played a quite pivotal role in starting the Hundred Years War.