#historian: amy licence | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

heartofstanding · 7 months

Note

What are the famous rumors about Margaret of Anjou? What's the attack on her? Is there a book that objectively describes her? As for her son Edward, is he really an arrogant and cruel person in the description?

Hello anon, I answered the first part of your question on my Lancastrian history sideblog here.

The book I always recommend on Margaret is Helen Maurer's Margaret of Anjou: Queenship and Power. This is less of a biography and more of an academic study of her queenship so that may not be what you want, but it's pretty much the standard text on her. Maurer writes in her preface that she thought Margaret was a "real bitch on wheels" before she began her research but found a much more complex and sympathetic woman throughout the course of her research so that might count as "objective" in the sense that this is where Maurer's research led her rather than a pre-conceived idea directing her research.

The other books on Margaret are:

Jacob Abbott, Margaret of Anjou. I don't recommend this because it was published in 1877 and is therefore superseded by well over a century of research.

Amy Licence, A Marriage of Unequals: Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou. Licence isn't the best with sources (often giving Victorian historians the same weight/authority as a medieval source) and from memory, she's a bit too forgiving of Margaret but it's fine.

B. M. Cron, Margaret of Anjou and the Men Around Her. I have a copy of this but haven't read it in full; Cron is sympathetic but sometimes judges Margaret harshly. I'm not fond of some of her summations but Cron is one of the leading scholars on Margaret and her stuff is always worth reading.

B. M. Cron and Helen Maurer, The Letters of Margaret of Anjou. This is collection of the surviving letters Margaret wrote, not a biography. Could be interesting for further reading, though.

Joanna Arman, Margaret of Anjou: She-Wolf of France, Twice Queen of England. I haven't read this and I don't have a copy yet so I can't comment fully on it; I believe it's a sympathetic take and I've enjoyed Arman's scholarship on Henry V so I'm cautiously hopeful.

As for Edward of Lancaster...

The truth is we know very, very little about Edward of Lancaster. He was only alive for eighteen years and spent most of his life in exile. The most famous description of him comes from Giovanni Pietro Panicharolla, a Milanese ambassador in France, who wrote:

As the king [Louis XI of France] persisted in his praise of the Earl of Warwick, the duke [of Calabria, Margaret's brother] said that as he was so fond of him he ought to try and restore his sister in that kingdom, when he would make sure of it as much as he was sure at present and even more so. The king asked what security they would give or if they would offer the queen’s son as a hostage. This boy, though only thirteen years of age, already talks of nothing but of cutting off heads or making war, as if he had everything in his hands or was the god of battle or the peaceful occupant of that throne

Panicharolla detested the Angevins (Margaret's birth family and on whom she and Edward were reliant while living in exile in France) so we should hesitate to put too much weight on his testimony. We also have to accept that Edward was living in and had lived in circumstances where this sort of attitude was entirely understandable. From a Lancastrian perspective, the Yorkists were traitors. They had deposed his father, attainted his entire family, disinherited him, and had spread rumours of his mother's adultery and declared him a bastard. They were the reason he had lived pretty much "on the run" since he was a small child and were the reason why he and his mother were living in reduced circumstances and in exile. He was also only twelve years old at the time so he does very much have the excuse of youth.

Chief Justice John Fortescue also gives us a few snapshots of Edward of Lancaster in De Laudibus Legum Angliae. This was a text that appears to be a legal treatise combined with a "mirror for princes" advice text, so whether or not the Edward Fortescue wrote about is the "real" Edward can probably be debated - he might represent an ideal Edward or a figurative Edward who plays the role of studen to Fortescue's teacher. Fortescue includes a wish that Edward would be as

devoted to the study of the laws with the same zeal as you are to that of arms, since, as battles are determined by arms, so judgements are by laws.

But it's impossible to tell if this is a real reflection of Edward's character or a construction of Edward as a student in need of Fortescue's legal knowledge. Here's another snippet:

The prince, as soon as he became grown up, gave himself over entirely to martial exercises; and, seated on fierce and half-tamed steeds urged on by his spurs, he often delighted in attacking and assaulting the young companions attending him, sometimes with a lance, sometimes with a sword, sometimes with other weapons, in a warlike manner and in accordance with the rules of military discipline.

This might sound alarming but it's important to remember that Fortescue seems to be viewing this positively - this is what Edward should be doing (note the reference to "in accordance to the rules of military discipline"). We could also look to the idea that this was something a medieval king or prince was supposed to be doing. Thomas Walsingham criticised the favourites of Richard II by saying:

they were the knights of Venus rather than knights of Bellona [Roman goddess of war], more valiant in the bedchamber than on the field, armed with words rather than weapons, prompt in speaking but slow in performing the acts of war.

We also find a similar comment about Henry V's wild youth, where the Vita Henrici Quinti records that, "although under the military service of Mars, he seethed youthfully with the flames of Venus too". In other words, if Fortescue's criticism of Edward of Lancaster was that he paying too much attention to warfare and not to his legal studies, he at least wasn't neglecting his studies and his military training to become "more valiant in the bedchamber".

Again, this is understandable from an emotional perspective. The only way Edward's family could return to the throne is through warfare so of course he's going to dedicate himself to readying himself for war.

We have very little evidence of anything else. Beyond Panicharolla's account (which, as I've said, is hardly an unbiased account), there is little to suggest that Edward was "arrogant and cruel". Yorkist efforts at denigrating him seemed to focus most on the question of birth and legitimacy. Yorkists (both contemporary and modern) have tended to want to demonise Edward as the head of the Lancastrian resistance, to undercut any support and loyalty he might claim and show him to be the inferior alternative to Yorkist rule. It's not uncommon to see a modern day Yorkist snark about how the Lancastrians were fully aware of their status as illegitimate kings and thus should have stepped down and bowed down to the Yorks. In other words, Edward's arrogance is his refusal to accept that his claim was inferior to the Yorkist claim.

The apparently obvious inferiority of the Lancastrian claim was not obvious at the time, either. There was considerable confusion around the succession throughout the late Middle Ages, no clear-cut answer as to who had the "rightful" claim. And even if there was, the simple fact is that had any Lancastrian king or prince willingly stepped down, they would still be a focal point for resistance to the new king and whether or not they were willing to play that role, they knew this would put them at serious risk. From Edward of Lancaster's perspective, he was the son of the anointed King and Queen of England, his father, grandfather and great-grandfather had all been anointed kings.

We also have to consider the impact of the Ricardian movement on Edward's reputation. Edward, after all, was Anne Neville's first husband and Richard her second. Ricardians generally accept the Yorkist image of Edward as arrogant and cruel, but react to the marriage in two ways, by downplaying the marriage or by insisting on its violence.

In the first option, it is argued that the marriage was never consummated because Margaret wanted to keep Edward free for a more advantageous marriage and intended to get the marriage annulled. Thus, the marriage was never a "true marriage" and Richard III was Anne's one and true husband (with all that entails). Usually, Edward and Margaret treat Anne like dirt - after all, she is not "worthy" of the marriage - to emphasise how horrible this marriage would be for Anne. In the second option, Edward is abusive and rapes Anne, who is generally assumed to be nothing but a tragic pawn forced to reluctantly marry her enemy and bear this abuse as best she can, allowing Richard III to soothe her trauma and show her what love, marriage and sex is really like.

There is absolutely no evidence for either option. It is possible that this is what happened but, imo, unlikely. It would be rather short-sighted, cruel and remarkably stupid to mistreat Warwick's daughter when they were still reliant on Warwick (they did not know of his death until their return to England in 1471) to gain back his throne. They could not risk antagonising him, even if they wanted to - and we don't know that they wanted to. They may have been justifiably angry at Warwick was his past wrongs but Anne was not her father, it doesn't follow that they automatically took their anger out on her as a stand-in for her father. They may have very logically understood that a 14 year old girl was not responsible for her father's actions, and endeavoured to have a positive relationship with her. Hell, they might have even liked her for herself. Edward and Anne could even have become friends or fallen in love! We just don't know because there's no evidence.

We know very little about Anne Neville herself. The fact that Edward was commemorated as her husband in the Beauchamp Pageant (probably commissioned by Anne Beauchamp, Anne Neville's mother, probably made over 10 years since Edward's death) suggests that Anne and her mother's feelings about him were more complex than historians and historical novelists have tended to allow her.

In conclusion: we have no idea but there's not a lot of evidence to support the idea that he was especially arrogant and cruel. This reputation seems to be the result of largely non-contemporary Yorkist and Ricardian narratives and is fairly unevidenced.

#edward of lancaster #margaret of anjou #asks #anon

25 notes · View notes

minervacasterly · 2 years

Text

"Through weakness of character, or naivety, or ineptness, Henry was not able to exercise control over men who were stronger, more experienced and, in actuality, more powerful than him. It is true that Henry was an adult who had been king for most of his life, or as long as he could remember. Temperamentally, he was not suited to kingship but, by an accident of birth, kingship had chosen him. There is no question that he was unaware of the problems this created, in an era when strong leadership was as essential in the council chamber and court corridors as it was on the battlefield. In recent years, Henry had taken advice and attempted to reassert himself; the crises of 1450–2 provoked him to a semblance of strong kingship, with great emotional cost. He was simply not sufficient to meet the challenges that followed, but the alternative was to abdicate his power, certainly resulting in his death and a long minority, which warring magnates would have been able to exploit further. Those historians who see Henry as failing to fulfil his duty miss the point that he was incapable of fulfilling that duty. He could not ‘simply exercise greater personal accountability’ because to do so was not a ‘simple’ matter. The ideal situation, for England, had been the period of the first Protectorate, with the royal family at a symbolic remove and a competent adult male in charge. Had Henry been able to ‘simply’ turn on effective kingship, no doubt he would have done so."

- HENRY VI & MARGARET OF ANJOU: A MARRIAGE OF UNEQUALS by Amy Licence

#Henry VI of England #british monarchy #royalty #lancaster #wars of the roses #richard duke of York #margaret of anjou #non daily tudors #history #book quote

6 notes · View notes

jezabelofthenorth · 3 years

Photo

The Tudors in Love: The Courtly Code Behind the Last Medieval Dynasty, Sarah Gristwood (23 September 2021)

The dramas of courtly love have captivated centuries of readers and dreamers. Yet too often they’re dismissed as something existing only in books and song – those old legends of King Arthur and chivalric fantasy. Not so. In this ground-breaking history, Sarah Gristwood reveals the way courtly love made and marred the Tudor dynasty. From Henry VIII declaring himself as the ‘loyal and most assured servant’ of Anne Boleyn to the poems lavished on Elizabeth I by her suitors, the Tudors re-enacted the roles of the devoted lovers and capricious mistresses first laid out in the romances of medieval literature. The Tudors in Love dissects the codes of love, desire and power, unveiling romantic obsessions that have shaped the history of this nation.

Woodsmoke and Sage: The Five Senses 1485-1603: How the Tudors Experienced the World, Amy Licence (31 August 2021)

Using the five senses, historian Amy Licence presents a new perspective on the material culture of the past, exploring the Tudors’ relationship with the fabric of their existence, from the clothes on their backs, the roofs over their heads and the food on their tables, to the wider questions of how they interpreted and presented themselves, and what they believed about life, death and beyond. Take a journey back 500 years and experience the sixteenth century the way it was lived, through sight, sound, smell, taste and touch.

Usurpers, A New Look at Medieval Kings, Michele Morrical (30 September 2021)

In the Middle Ages, England had to contend with a string of usurpers who disrupted the British monarchy and ultimately changed the course of European history by deposing England\x27s reigning kings and seizing power for themselves. Some of the most infamous usurper kings to come out of medieval England include William the Conqueror, Stephen of Blois, Henry Bolingbroke, Edward IV, Richard III, and Henry Tudor. Did these kings really deserve the title of usurper or were they unfairly vilified by royal propaganda and biased chroniclers? In this book we examine the lives of these six medieval kings, the circumstances which brought each of them to power, and whether or not they deserve the title of usurper

The Boleyns of Hever Castle, Owen Emmerson and Claire Ridgway (1 August 2021)

In The Boleyns of Hever Castle, historians Owen Emmerson and Claire Ridgway invite you into the home of this notorious family.

Travel back in time to those 77 years of Boleyn ownership. Tour each room just as it was when Anne Boleyn retreated from court to escape the advances of Henry VIII or when she fought off the dreaded 'sweat'. See the 16th century Hever Castle come to life with room reconstructions and read the story of the Boleyns, who, in just five generations, rose from petty crime to a castle, from Hever to the throne of England.

Fêting the Queen: Civic Entertainments and the Elizabethan Progress, John Mark Adrian (30 December 2021)

While previous scholars have studied Elizabeth I and her visits to the homes of influential courtiers, Fêting the Queen places a new emphasis on the civic communities that hosted the monarch and their efforts to secure much needed support. Case studies of the university and cathedral cities of Oxford, Canterbury, Sandwich, Bristol, Worcester, and Norwich focus on the concepts of hospitality and space―including the intimate details of the built environment.

Hidden Heritage: Rediscovering Britain’s Lost Love of the Orient, Fatima Manji (12 August 2021)

Throughout Britain's galleries and museums, civic buildings and stately homes, relics can be found that beg these questions and more. They point to a more complex national history than is commonly remembered. These objects, lost, concealed or simply overlooked, expose the diversity of pre-twentieth-century Britain and the misconceptions around modern immigration narratives. Hidden Heritage powerfully recontextualises the relationship between Britain and the people and societies of the Orient. In her journey across Britain exploring cultural landmarks, Fatima Manji searches for a richer and more honest story of a nation struggling with identity and the legacy of empire.

The Dissolution of the Monasteries: A New History, James Clark (14 September 2021)

Drawing on the records of national and regional archives as well as archaeological remains, James Clark explores the little-known lives of the last men and women who lived in England’s monasteries before the Reformation. Clark challenges received wisdom, showing that buildings were not immediately demolished and Henry VIII’s subjects were so attached to the religious houses that they kept fixtures and fittings as souvenirs. This rich, vivid history brings back into focus the prominent place of abbeys, priories, and friaries in the lives of the English people.

Catherine of Aragon: Infanta of Spain, Queen of England, Theresa Earenfight (15 December 2021)

Despite her status as a Spanish infanta, Princess of Wales, and Queen of England, few of her personal letters have survived, and she is obscured in the contemporary royal histories. In this evocative biography, Theresa Earenfight presents an intimate and engaging portrait of Catherine told through the objects that she left behind.

Devil-Land: England Under Siege, 1588-1688, Clare Jackson (30 September 2021)

As an unmarried heretic with no heir, Elizabeth I was regarded with horror by Catholic Europe, while her Stuart successors, James I and Charles I, were seen as impecunious and incompetent, unable to manage their three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland. The traumatic civil wars, regicide and a republican Commonwealth were followed by the floundering, foreign-leaning rule of Charles II and his brother, James II, before William of Orange invaded England with a Dutch army and a new order was imposed.

#book recommendations #books #tudor history #anne boleyn #thomas boleyn #catherine of aragon #elizabeth I

439 notes · View notes

isabelleneville · 3 years

Text

You know what I hate?, the fact historians (or authors ahem) who write about all the wives of Henry VIII having book titles just adding on to the stereotypes that have perpetuated over history.

The worse for me is the fact they just say Anne B is an obsession, Kathryn Howard is a wh*re and tainted or a romanticised victim and Catherine Parr is just the final wife.

Some examples

Alison Weir: Katherine of Aragon is a True Queen whereas Anne B is not even a Queen and is just an obsession, Kathryn Howard is a Queen but is tainted and Catherine Parr is a Sixth Wife. Anne of Cleves being the Queen of Secrets I just cannot.

Amy Licence: Katherine of Aragon is a true wife and Anne B’s tag is Adultery, Heresy and Desire.

Elizabeth Norton: Anne B is Henry VIII’s obsession, Jane is Henry VIII’s True Love, Anne of Cleves is Henry’s Discarded Bride and Catherine Parr is a bit more in depth with Wife, widow, mother, survivor, the story of the last queen of Henry VIII.

And lets not start on the taglines of biographies of Mary I and Elizabeth I.

#thoughts #I do get marketing but it is just reductive #it is also interesting reading some of them back to back and seeing some historians forget what stance they are taking on each queen #do I own some of these books yes #henry viii #katherine of aragon #catherine of aragon #anne boleyn #jane seymour #anne of cleves #anna of cleves #kathryn howard #katherine howard #catherine howard #catherine parr #katherine parr

174 notes · View notes

dailytudors · 3 years

Photo

Celebrating the New King of England & his Queen Consort:

On the 24th of June 1509, Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon were jointly crowned at Westminster Abbey amidst huge pomp, greeted with public acclaim go from their subjects, high and low.

As some historians point out from contemporary sources, the coronation was a success and up to that point, one of the biggest demonstrations of dynastic power of the century. These contemporaries paint not just a portrait of an impressive king but two young monarchs who were both alike in royal dignity. "... the following morning Catherine and Henry processed from the palace into the abbey, where two empty thrones sat waiting on a platform before the altar. A contemporary woodcut shows them seated level with each other, looking into each other’s eyes and smiling as the crowns are lowered on to their heads. It is a potent image of the occasion, intimate in spite of the crowds behind them, suggesting a relationship of two people equal in sovereignty, respect and love. In reality, the positioning of Henry’s throne above hers, and her shortened ceremonial, without an oath, indicates the actual discrepancy between them. He had inherited the throne as a result of his birth; she was his queen because he had chosen to marry her. Above his head the woodcut depicted a huge Tudor rose, a reminder of his great lineage and England’s recent conflicts; Henry’s role was to guide and rule his subjects. Over Catherine sits her chosen device of the pomegranate, symbolic of the expectations of all Tudor wives and queens: fertility and childbirth. In Christian iconography, it also stood for resurrection. In a way, Catherine was experiencing her own rebirth, through this new marriage and the chance it offered her as queen, after the long years of privation and doubt. Westminster Abbey was a riot of colour. Quite in contrast with the sombre, bare-stone interiors of medieval churches today, these pre-Reformation years made worship a tactile and sensual experience, with wealth and ornament acting as tributes and measures of devotion. Inside the abbey, statues and images were gilded and decorated with jewels, walls and capitals were picked out in bright colours and walls were hung with rich arras. All was conducted according to the advice of the 200-year-old Liber Regalis, the Royal Book, which dictated coronation ritual. The couple were wafted with sweet incense while thousands of candles flickered, mingling with the light streaming down through the stained-glass windows. Archbishop Warham was again at the helm, administering the coronation oaths and anointing the pair with oil. Beside her new husband, Catherine was crowned and given a ring to wear on the fourth finger of her right hand, a sort of inversion of the marital ring, symbolising her marriage to her country. She would take this vow very seriously. The coronation proved popular. Henry wrote to the Pope explaining that he had ‘espoused and made’ Catherine ‘his wife and thereupon had her crowned amid the applause of the people and the incredible demonstrations of joy and enthusiasm’. To Ferdinand, he added that ‘the multitude of people who assisted was immense, and their joy and applause most enthusiastic’. There seems little reason to see this just as diplomatic hyperbole. According to Hall, ‘it was demaunded of the people, wether they would receive, obey and take the same moste noble Prince, for their Kyng, who with great reuerance, love and desire, saied and cryed, ye-ye’. Lord Mountjoy employed more poetic rhetoric in his letter to Erasmus, which stated that ‘Heaven and Earth rejoices, everything is full of milk and honey and nectar. Our king is not after gold, or gems, or precious metals, but virtue, glory, immortality.’ In his coronation verses Thomas More agreed with the general mood, explaining that wherever Henry went ‘the dense crowd in their desire to look upon him leaves hardly a narrow lane for his passage’. They ‘delight to see him’ and shout their good will, changing their vantage points to see him again and again. Such a king would free them from slavery, ‘wipe the tears from every eye and put joy in place of our long distress’. " ~The Six Wives and Many Mistresses Henry VIII by Amy Licence In his book on the Wars of the Roses (Wars of the Roses: The Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors), Dan Jones also highlights Henry's good looks and the similarities between him and his maternal grandfather, Edward IV, and the reason for his popular appeal: "Young Henry came to the throne confident and ready to rule. He was well educated, charming and charismatic: truly a prince fit for the renaissance in courtly style, tastes and patronage that was dawning in northern Europe. He had been blessed with the fair coloring and radiant good looks of his grandfather Edward IV: tall, handsome, well built and dashing, here was a king who saw his subjects as peers and allies around whom he had grown up, rather than semialien enemies to be suspected and persecuted." Henry VIII understood the power of propaganda. Like his father, he used powerful imagery to push Tudor propaganda but taking a page from his maternal grandfather, Edward IV, Henry also relied on popular acclaim. He knew how to win the people over and dance his way around every argument; his illustrious court and physical prowess won over foreign ambassadors who like Lord Mountjoy and Sir Thomas More also noted his wife's virtues.

#Henry VIII #Catherine of Aragon #coronation #westminster abbey #Tudor History #British Monarchy

37 notes · View notes

anne-the-quene · 3 years

Note

Gosh, I mean immensely negative and sexist, or victim-blaming takes on Anne Boleyn off the top of my head by historians , I would have to go: Lauren Mackay, David Starkey, Lucy Worsley, Julia Fox, Linda Porter, GW Bernard, Anna Whitelock, Tracy Borman, Amy Licence, John Matsusiak, Nicola Tallis. I don’t think you have to be as sensationalistic or reductive as Hayley Nolan to realize that much of the historiography on Anne Boleyn has been sexist, even in the 21st century. The biographies that attempted to correct the sexist takes of the early 20th century (Ives, Warnicke, Lipscomb to a degree) have basically been met with huge revisionist backlash that insist they’re hogwash. Frankly Mary I has had a much bigger wave of positive revisionism than Anne Boleyn has, at least in the 21st cent.

Yeah I totally agree. Almost everyone who has written about her has portrayed her in a horrendously negative light. Not just in the 20th and 21st centuries but even before that as well.

How many times has she been portrayed as a ruthless scheming shrew? How many authors have implied (or outright stated) that the adultery (and incest) allegations were actually true? How many people have perpetuated the with myth?

I mean, you don’t have to like Anne Boleyn but to say she hasn’t been one of the most maligned women in English history is just ridiculous. There is so much vitriol and hatred for Anne in historiography and it really gets on my nerves when people ignore this or write it off as nothing.

#anne boleyn #historiography #anonymous #ask

18 notes · View notes

marriageandthecrown · 3 years

Text

Can someone please tell me if Amy Licence is someone to be relied upon as a historian? Cos she's doing a new documentary of Jane Boleyn for Channel 5 so I'm worried

#jane boleyn #amy licence #i stg if one more person bashes jane and blames her for everything one more time i will kick my tv out the window and into the pond

4 notes · View notes

richmond-rex · 2 years

Photo

The King’s Mother by @eve-to-adam

For Margaret Beaufort, her son’s victory must have been euphoric. Having borne Henry at such a young age, been separated from him for most of his life and lived in fear for his safety as well as her own, the almost unthinkable had happened. On a personal level, she could now rejoice that her son was to be king and that she would be guaranteed a position of influence at his court, while on a dynastic level, he had successfully restored the Lancastrian line. But the coronation was a bittersweet moment for Henry’s mother. Bishop Fisher later described Margaret’s intense emotion on the day: ‘when the kynge her son was crowned in all that grete tryumphe and glorye, she wept marvelously’, for even when she experienced great joy, life had taught Margaret to be wary: ‘she let not to saye, that some adversyte would follow’ (x).

#a round of applause and thanks to eve-to-adam #everyone go check this artist's incredible work!#<33 #margaret beaufort #historicwomendaily #wars of the roses #fanart #bosworth posting 🌹#historian: amy licence

123 notes · View notes

thebritishmonarchycouk · 5 years

Photo

BOOK OF THE DAY . Today is the wedding anniversary of Edward IV & Elizabeth Woodville, married in 1464. . . Edward IV & Elizabeth Woodville : A True Romance . By Amy license . Book description; . When the tall, athletic Edward of York seized the English throne in 1461, he could have chosen any bride he wanted. With his dazzling good looks, few were able to resist his charm and promises. For three years he had a succession of mistresses, while foreign princesses were lined up to be considered for his queen. Then he fell in love. . Enter Elizabeth Woodville, a widow five years his elder. While her contemporaries and later historians have been divided over her character, none have denied her beauty. When she petitioned the king to help restore her son's inheritance, the young Edward was immediately spellbound. This romance was not to be just another fling. Conscious of her honour and her future, Elizabeth repelled his advances. Edward's answer was to make her his wife. It was to prove an unpopular decision. . Since then, Edward's queen has attracted extreme criticism from hostile chroniclers, her actions interpreted in the bleakest of lights. In this enlightening book, Amy Licence reassesses the tumultuous lives of the real White Queen and the king she captivated. . Visit; http://tidd.ly/50a872fd . or swipe up in our stories post, in association with Book Depository. . . . #EdwardIV #ElizabethWoodville #History #Medieval #EnglishHistory #KingsandQueens #HouseofYork #WarsoftheRoses #Royalfamily #Britishmonarchy #Kingofengland #QueenofEngland #Royalty #Yorkist #historyfacts #Romance #Trueromance #Amylicense #Bookoftheday #instabooks #Historybooks #Instahistory #throne #kingdom #England (at United Kingdom) https://www.instagram.com/p/Bw7U1JRFrM0/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=1hibwh5h7rbm1

3 notes · View notes

fideidefenswhore · 16 days

Text

By the second decade of the sixteenth century, Margaret of Austria, Princess of Asturias and Duchess of Savoy, had become one of the most powerful and influential women in Europe. According to Jean Lamaire, her court historian, Margaret was skilled in 'vocal and instrumental music' having been taught by the organist Govard Nepotis, 'in painting and in rhetoric' and 'in the French as well as Spanish language.' A contemporary visitor described Margaret herself as 'not unpleasant looking and her appearance is truly imperial and her smile full of charm' and Castiglione referred to her as one of the 'noblest' examples of contemporary womanhood, who governed her state 'with the greatest wisdom and justice.' Jean Molinet, her almoner and librarian, praised using the typical symbol of the Marguerite, or daisy, a floral metaphor for the most influential women of the time who bore the name.

Anne Boleyn: Adultery, Heresy, Desire (Licence, Amy)

#margaret of austria #amy licence

4 notes · View notes

heartofstanding · 3 years

Note

Which are, in your opinion, the best novels dealing with Owen Tudor & Catherine de Valois? Which ones would you recommend to a reader that is new to them? What about nonfic on this couple? Thanks xoxo

I'm really sorry to say this but none of them. @beardofkamenev is the Catherine expert so she might have more recs than I do, but...

My problem is that the novels about Catherine all tend to follow the same tropes and I could write a 6000-word essay on them or I could just show you this piechart I made:

The best of them is probably Rosemary Hawley Jarman's Crown in Candlelight, which does avoid some of the more annoying tropes (I mean, Owen kinda has a personality as "hot studly Welsh dude who rapes his wife"?) and gives some nuance to some of the villains of Catherine's life. But Jarman has a penchant for the grotesque and melodrama (@skeleton-richard noped out in the first section) plus "magic is Real and the Welsh are all magical good people". You also have to accept that Owen Tudor rapes Catherine violently and the narrative brushes it off and Catherine doesn't even have a reaction to her own rape.

I would definitely avoid: Joanna Hickson's The Agincourt Bride and The Tudor Bride (a simplistic, manipulative narrative about how Catherine is the best and most tragic woman around, very rapey), Anne O'Brien's The Forbidden Queen (claims she wants to rescue Catherine from the "dumb blonde" stereotype, writes her as being illiterate which is just flat out bizarre and wrong), Dedwydd Jones, The Lily and the Dragon (historical fantasy AU, extremely smutty in a dude-bro fantasy way and highly inaccurate).

As for non-fiction, Terry Breverton has a bio of Owen Tudor but I've been warned off it by @beardofkamenev. Mary McGrigor has a joint-biography of Catherine and her oldest sister, Isabelle de Valois, and that's a horrific mess of mistakes, typos, filler, misogyny and an author who gives the impression that she really wanted to write a bunch of historical romances (she basically follows the piechart but includes "James I of Scotland/Catherine = OTP") instead of a study on Catherine. I quite liked how Amy Licence wrote about Catherine in Red Roses: Blanche of Gaunt to Margaret Beaufort, though Licence isn't the best historian around, and the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry on Catherine is worth a read Hopefully @beardofkamenev will have more recs for you.

*EDIT: If you haven’t already read them, I definitely rec @richmond-rex‘s two fics about Owen and Catherine, Caged Birds Still Sing and Heart Harder Than Stone. I also have one about them called The World Anew.

#catherine de valois #catherine de valois vs historical fiction #tw rape #long post #historical fiction venting #all of the novels treat isabeau of bavaria like shit despite the amount of scholarship pointing out isabeau wasn't actually evil #or a horrific abusive mother

14 notes · View notes

cherylmmbookblog · 2 years

Text

#BlogTour The York King by Amy Licence

It’s a pleasure to take part in the BlogTour The York King by Amy Licence. This is the second book in the House of York trilogy. About the Author Amy Licence is an historian of women’s lives in the medieval and early modern period, from queens to commoners. Her particular interest lies in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century, in gender relations, queenship and identity, female…

View On WordPress

0 notes

minervacasterly · 2 years

Text

5 September 1548: The Death of an Evangelical Royal Consort & Influential Protestant Writer & Defender of her Faith

Six days after Queen Dowager and Baroness of Sudeley had given birth to a daughter she named Mary (after her stepdaughter, the Lady Mary Tudor) Catherine Parr died of puerperal fever. Little before her death, while in a state of delirium she claimed: "Those that are about me care not for me". Her husband, Thomas Seymour, was by her side comforting her the entire time. Jane Grey and other ladies were also with her, reading her the scriptures.

Historian Amy Licence theorizes she could have been infected after the birth by the midwives' unclean hands which would have made possible the passage of bacteria to her body. (The lack of hygiene during childbirth was not uncommon. If she had lived through the same ordeal now she would have been treated right away and saved but as it was, the only medicine then was based on plants and folklore beliefs that Catherine, given her extensive knowledge of the former would have known very well. It is not known if he midwives or she used any of these methods. In any case it was too late, the fever spread rapidly and claimed her on the morning of September fifth).

Her husband was grief-stricken, unable to believe that she was gone that he later said: "I was so amazed that I had small regard to either myself or to my doings".

Catherine was buried days later with full pomp and ceremony, with Jane Grey acting as her chief mourner, walking behind her coffin with Lady Elizabeth Tilney carrying the long train. Catherine Parr was the first Royal and only Queen of Henry VIII's, to have a Protestant Funeral. Miles Coverdale headed the funeral which was in English and concluded it with this eulogy:

"A beautous daughter blessed her arms,

An infant copy of her parents' charms.

When now seven days this tender flower had bloomed

Heaven in its wrath the mother's soul resumed

Our loyal breast with rising sighs are torn,

With saints she triumphs, we with mortals mourn."

Her husband Thomas Seymour, Baron Sudeley and daughter, Mary Seymour, did not survive her for long. Sudeley was arrested at his house while entertaining a guest, and sent to Tower under charges of treason. He was found guilty and beheaded on March 20 1549. Afterwards, their daughter was given over to Catherine Brandon nee Willoughby, Duchess Dowager of Suffolk in whose care she probably died as she disappears from the records a year after.

Despite leaving everything to her husband, the Protectorate took her wealth and this made Sudeley angry, and he ended up conspiring with the Marquises of Dorset (Henry Grey) and Northampton (William Parr -Catherine's brother), against his brother. The Duchess Dowager of Suffolk begged the Council many times to help her with her charge's finances but they never took her pleas seriously until 1550 when Catherine Parr's wealth was given back to her daughter, but by then she was probably sick or dying because she is never mentioned again.

Catherine Parr has gone down in fiction and popular media as nothing more than Henry's nurse and staunch Reformer but she was so much more than that. She and Mary I's mother were the only two of Henry's wives who served as Regents during his absence, and they were two of the most learned women in England who caused great impact on their respective faiths and both were known for being kind and generous. Eustace Chapuys before he left England on the summer 1545, commented that out of all of Henry's Queens, with the exception of Katherine of Aragon, Catherine Parr was the only one who was worthy of her position. She was a good friend with Mary I, who was encouraged by her to translate one of the gospels of the New Testament and who followed her wherever she went.

Sources:

Katherine Parr by Linda Porter

Sister Who Would Be Queen by Leanda de Lisle

In Bed With The Tudors by Amy Licence.

#dailytudors #history #Catherine Parr #Katherine Parr #Tudors #Renaissance #16th century england #religion #death #legacy

1 note · View note