#(something first claimed by Anne Crawford who simultaneously claimed that Elizabeth was 'grasping and totally lacking in scruple' so...)

[wonder-worker]

"[Elizabeth Woodville's] piety as queen seems to have been broadly conventional for a fifteenth-century royal, encompassing pilgrimages, membership of various fraternities, a particular devotion to her name saint, notable generosity to the Carthusians, and the foundation of a chantry at Westminster after her son was born there. ['On other occasions she supported planned religious foundations in London, […] made generous gifts to Eton College, and petitioned the pope to extend the circumstances in which indulgences could be acquired by observing the feast of the Visitation']. One possible indicator of a more personal, and more sophisticated, thread in her piety is a book of Hours of the Guardian Angel which Sutton and Visser-Fuchs have argued was commissioned for her, very possibly at her request."

-J.L. Laynesmith, "Elizabeth Woodville: The Knight's Widow", "Later Plantagenet and Wars of the Roses Consorts: Power, Influence, Dynasty"

#historicwomendaily #elizabeth woodville #my post #friendly reminder that there's nothing indicating that Elizabeth was exceptionally pious or that her piety was 'beyond purely conventional' #(something first claimed by Anne Crawford who simultaneously claimed that Elizabeth was 'grasping and totally lacking in scruple' so...) #EW's piety as queen may have stood out compared to former 15th century predecessors and definitely stood out compared to her husband #but her actions in themselves were not especially novel or 'beyond normal' and by themselves don't indicate unusual piety on her part #As Laynesmith's more recent research observes they seem to have been 'broadly conventional' #A conclusion arrived at Derek Neal as well who also points out that in general queens and elite noblewomen simply had wider means #of 'visible material expression of [their] personal devotion' - and also emphasizes how we should look at their wider circumstances #to understand their actions (eg: the death of Elizabeth's son George in 1479 as a motivating factor) #It's nice that we know a bit about Elizabeth's more personal piety - for eg she seems to have developed an attachment to Westminster Abbey #It's possible her (outward) piety increased across her queenship - she undertook most of her religious projects in later years #But again - none of them indicate the *level* of her piety (ie: they don't indicate that she was beyond conventionally pious) #By 1475 it seems that contemporaries identified Cecily Neville as the most personally devout from the Yorkist family #(though Elizabeth and even Cecily's sons were far greater patrons) #I think people also assume this because of her retirement to Westminster post 1485 #which doesn't work because 1) we don't actually know when she retired? as Laynesmith says there is no actual evidence for the traditional #date of 12 February 1487 #2) she had very secular reasons for retiring (grief over the death of her children? her lack of dower lands or estates which most other #widows had? her options were very limited; choosing to reside in the abbey is not particularly surprising. it's a massive and unneeded jump #to claim that it was motivated solely by piety (especially because it wasn't a complete 'retirement' in the way people assume it was) #I think historians have a habit of using her piety as a GOTCHA!' point against her vilification - which is a flawed and stupid argument #Elizabeth could be the most pious individual in the world and still be the pantomime villain Ricardians/Yorkists claim she was #They're not mutually exclusive; this line of thinking is useless #I think this also stems from the fact that we simply know very little about Elizabeth as an individual (ie: her hobbies/interests) #certainly far less than we do for other prominent women Margaret of Anjou; Elizabeth of York;; Cecily Neville or Margaret Beaufort #and I think rather than emphasizing that gap of knowledge her historians merely try to fill it up with 'she was pious!' #which is ... an incredibly lackluster take. I think it's better to just acknowledge that we don't know much about this historical figure #ie: I do wish that her piety and patronage was emphasized more yes. but it shouldn't flip too far to the other side either.