ICH DIEN / EICH DYN

Tom | 20s | she/her 👑 history/research sideblog

[ednyfedfychan]

"[in] a letter written to Mary of Guise from Marion, Lady Hume on 28 March 1549, [...] she is complaining about the villainy of the English who ‘dystrow all this cuntre’. Strangely it seems the Spaniards, and ‘the Mour’ behave better, ‘lyk noble men’. [...] There was clearly at least one Moor in Berwickshire in 1549: if it was not Pedro Negro, then who was it? If not Pedro Negro, then perhaps Jacques Granado, another mercenary, knighted by Somerset a week after Negro on 1 October 1547, at Newcastle, whose name suggests he was from Grenada, and whose arms include ‘a Blackamoor’s head couped Sable, wreathed argent’.

There is concrete evidence of a man of African descent serving in the Tudor army twenty-seven years earlier in Exeter, where a Military Survey of 1522 lists in the Parish of St Petrock, as one of the ‘Billmen able for the war’: ‘Peter Blackmore, a moren borne…worth in goods nil’. The evidence I am drawing together for my thesis shows a considerable black presence (of around 300 individuals) in Britain in the period 1500–1640. That only fifteen of these are present in the period 1500–60 is perhaps a reflection of the fact that Parish Registers (the dominant source) only began in 1538, and often do not survive from that early. At the very least Lady Hume’s letter means that we cannot yet entirely dismiss the idea of a mercenary soldier of African descent serving in the Anglo Scottish wars of the mid-sixteenth century."

— Miranda Kaufmann, Sir Pedro Negro: What Colour Was His Skin?

[ednyfedfychan]

"[Ungerer] argues that Negro was more likely to belong to a Genoese family of that name that had settled in Spain and Portugal in the course of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. This contradicts those who have taken this Spanish mercenary, knighted by Protector Somerset in 1548, as evidence that it was possible for a black man to gain prestige and honour in sixteenth-century Britain. The chief protagonist of Negro’s blackness is literary critic Imtiaz Habib, who draws a parallel between Negro and Othello: ‘Shakespeare’s Othello should be considered […] in the context of black military service in Tudor armies and generally, of the unacknowledged blacks of sixteenth century England’. This is not a straightforward academic disagreement. Habib’s rhetoric is infused with the underlying accusation that evidence of black mercenaries serving in the Tudor army has been suppressed by white imperialists: ‘This [black] presence is the site of suppressive inscription that is the modality of empire building’. He has recently remarked: ‘Its also interesting that whenever any claim of historical significance is made for a Black person in early modern Europe, the blackness of the person has to be immediately challenged. It would appear that even though oppressed, and denigrated in life a Black person has to prove her/his blackness for European history to even acknowledge her/his existence, whereas a White person is White by default and all significance is hers/his automatically.’ While this polemic approach is unhelpful, Ungerer’s proof by omission is not sufficient to disprove Negro’s blackness. Contemporary chroniclers may have seen the name Negro as indication enough that the soldier was black."

— Miranda Kaufmann, Sir Pedro Negro: What Colour Was His Skin?

[wonder-worker]

“Elizabeth Woodville took up her predecessor's patronage at Queens' even before her coronation. […] The statutes ascribed to her the appropriate motivation that she was 'specially solicitous concerning those matters whereby the safety of souls and the public good were promoted, and poor scholars desirous of advancing themselves in knowledge of letters, are assisted in their need'. As was the case in the petitions for indulgences, Elizabeth chose to appear specifically as a benefactress to all subjects, in contrast to the more restricted courtly and clerical sphere […].”

— J.L. Laynesmith, The Last Medieval Queens: English Queenship 1445-1503

[edwardslovelyelizabeth]

“Elizabeth Woodville was a keen literary patron, purchasing books from, among others,the chancellor of Cambridge University. Her copy of The Romance of San Graal was passed down to her elder daughter [Elizabeth of York], while Caxton’s History of Jason was dedicated and presented to Prince Edward in 1477 to help him learn to read. Caxton noted Elizabeth Woodville’s encouragement as ‘the supportation of our most redobted liege lady'…Elizabeth of York was also a customer of Caxton’s as well as of his successor, Wynkeyn de Worde. Eneydos was dedicated to Arthur, Prince of Wales, and Caxton’s final book, The Fifteen Oes, an appropriate selection of prayers from St.Bridget of Sweden, was made for Elizabeth and her daughter Margaret. There is thus a connection between Margaret of Scotland’s earliest vernacular commissions and Elizabeth Woodville’s and Elizabeth of York’s patronage of the first english printer, placing the patronage of English royal women at the center of a movement whose impact, during Renaissance, was to be felt all over the world.”

— Queens Consort. England’s Medieval Queens by Lisa Hilton (2008)

[queenmarytudor]

"The most famous portrait of her – everyone knows what this portrait looks like – it’s by Antonius Mor, a Netherlandish artist who worked for Charles V and Philip. Now, a lot of people think oh you know this shows Bloody Mary, she’s cruel, she’s haggard, she’s old, she’s intolerant. Well actually, this portrait shows a lot more than that. Yes, you could have those arguments, but if we actually look closely – and I love this fact about this portrait, I realised it a few years ago – she’s actually the only Tudor to smile in her portrait. It’s a very small smile, but there’s a very subtle smirk. It’s a sort of – she’s enjoying this.

She’s sort of showing her human side obviously [to] the crown because that crown is that hierarchy between the Divine and human. She’s wearing what we like to call a Spanish pendant or La Peregrina, for those that know it that way, so it’s showing her Spanish inheritance. Also her Spanish future. We know this portrait [was] painted after the marriage because she’s wearing her wedding ring, but what’s interesting is that her spousal ring, the diamond ring here, is closer to her heart, it’s on her wedding finger. Because the Tudor belief was that the vein on that finger went directly to the heart. So, the fact that the spousal ring is on there first, shows that she’s not going to just do what Philip says, she’s not doing to be that subordinate wife, she is Queen first and wife second. It’s a beautiful portrait. And then obviously you then have the Tudor rose/red rose, showing her ancestry also show her betrothal, her love for her husband, but what’s interesting is that this portrait was in the ownership of Charles V, so this is the Spanish version of it."

Charles V's portrait

"However there are a couple of English versions which are very interesting. So if we look at the Marquess of Northampton’s collection, most people would think oh it’s the same image, but if you look closer, there’s no wedding ring. It’s been taken out. Why is it not there? I mean, it could just be a mistake, maybe, but it seems quite a weird mistake to make because everything else is basically the same."

Marquess of Northampton's copy of Mary's portrait

"You then have the same in the Isabella Gardiner museum – now this one was Mary’s own copy, this was gifted to Sir [Henry] Jerningham in 1557 by Mary. Again, same image, we think it’s the same – no wedding ring."

Mary's portrait gifted to Henry Jerningham

"The fact that there’s two portraits, contemporary portraits of her, that don’t have the wedding ring, I think that suggested something. It could have been a portrait before the marriage, maybe? But we know Mor wasn’t in the country until November/December 1554, or when Philip arrived, so he would have painted her as a married woman. The fact that the wedding rings aren’t there means that they’re not there on purpose. It’s to show her as a queen. Not as a wife."

- Peter Stiffel, The Iconography of Mary I, Talking Tudors podcast Episode 188

L - R - Spanish close up, English close up. Mary's wedding ring was described as a "plain hoop of gold without any stone in it; for that was as it is said her pleasure, because maidens were so married in old times."

[richmond-rex]

Taken as a whole, Richard III’s Parliament was unexceptional: it was a workmanlike and pragmatic affair. There were no important legislative initiatives comparable to those seen in, for example, the Parliaments of Henry VI in 1429 or Henry VII in 1495. In 1484, Parliament transacted the business the King wished to see transacted, and just enough business of concern to the Lords and Commons to keep them pliant. There is no suggestion of open hostility to the King on the part of Parliament, but nor is there a sense that they were being cowed into submission by an overbearing monarch. The balance of business benefitting King, Lords and Commons respectively was comparatively even, and suggests negotiation, rather than confrontation.

— Hannes Kleineke, Richard III and the Parliament of 1484

[wonder-worker]

"Late medieval English queens consort are seldom represented in ways that are not predominantly focused on their roles as the wife of the ruling king or the mother of the royal children. Margaret of Anjou and Elizabeth Woodville are no exception; their images, be they positive or negative, are fixated on their roles as wives and mothers, and their actions are constantly analysed within those contexts. Both queens, however, were granted substantial economic resources, these material resources being necessary for them to operate as effective queens consort. The fact that significant portions of their material resources, the dominant portion in the case of Elizabeth Woodville, were landed assets means that, at the very least, these queens figured as important players in the economic landscape of their world and society."

-Michele Seah, 'My Lady Queen, the Lord of the Manor': The Economic Roles of Late Medieval Queens", Parergon, Volume 37, Number 2, 2020.

[ednyfedfychan]

"Much like Foxe’s Acts and Monuments, Sander’s volume features entertaining ironic providential twists that justly recompense sinful actions. Thus, Henry Tudor replaces Anne Boleyn with Jane Seymour the day after Anne’s execution, the author noting that “as Anne supplanted Catherine, so Jane supplanted Anne,” and that “the judgments of God are not less marvellous than they are just, rewarding every one accord ing to his works”. Thus, Henry’s actions are placed in a providential framework of judgment against Anne, satisfying the audience’s sense of justice and pity towards Catherine."

— Deborah R. Forteza, The English Reformation in the Spanish Imagination: Rewriting Nero, Jezebel, and the Dragon

[ednyfedfychan]

"In the flurry of celebrations as the Spanish Armada was preparing to leave for England in 1588, the Jesuit Pedro de Ribadeneyra published the first part of his widely read ecclesiastical history of the events that led up to the 'English schism', the Historia eclesiástica del scisma del reyno de Inglaterra. Translating and adapting Nicholas Sander’s Schismatis Anglicano (1585), a Latin text written by Elizabethan Catholic exiles, he contended that Queen Elizabeth was not only illegitimate but also born of an incestuous union – the monstrous culmination of Henry’s lust and pride in taking Anne Boleyn and setting himself up as head of the church in place of the Vicar of Christ. [...] Contrary to what may be expected, Spaniards did not always reproduce Ribadeneyra’s monstrous portrayal of Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn, and Elizabeth Tudor, even when they agreed with the Jesuit."

— Deborah R. Forteza, The English Reformation in the Spanish Imagination: Rewriting Nero, Jezebel, and the Dragon

[ednyfedfychan]

"The apocalyptic atmosphere of the sixteenth century (the tenth in Islam) affected the Middle East as well as Europe. To the east the messianic figure of Ismail Safavi initiated the Safavid regime (1501-1722) with the religious conversion of Iran to Shi’ism. To the West, Muslim reaction to the Spanish Reconquista took the form of prophecies of the end of history. At the center, Ottoman defeat of the Safavis and conquest of the Arab world gave the sultan a new status as World-Conqueror and Shadow of God on Earth, attributes with which Suleyman confidently confronted the world-conquering claims of the Habsburg ruler Charles V. Suleyman’s acquisition of magnificent ceremonial regalia made by Venetian goldsmiths and his advance toward the Habsburg capital of Vienna in 1532, during which the regalia were ostentatiously displayed to the view of the Austrian envoys, were his answer to Charles V’s claim to the title of Caesar and the processions he had organized around his coronation as Holy Roman Emperor. Charles, however, refused the challenge, declining to engage the Ottomans in battle, and the following year he sued for peace. The cultural competition between the two monarchs was an aspect of the geopolitical confrontation of the two empires, the great powers of the sixteenth century."

— Linda Darling, The Renaissance and the Middle East

[ednyfedfychan]

i don’t usually make personal posts on here, i usually just post quotes. but to be clear: any radfem bringing their half-baked nonsense onto my blog can eat shit, actually

[ednyfedfychan]

“Virginity was not just a sexual choice; it also took women out of their gender-defined roles and made them honorary men. [...] The ability of virginity to make women honorary men points to the complexity of the culture of abstinence in the Middle Ages. We cannot reduce the importance placed on a woman’s chastity to Christianity’s being a patriarchal movement aimed at controlling women’s bodies. It may have been women themselves who chose virginity and initiated the movement toward a special status within the church for female virgins. Rather than cutting back on women’s choices, virginity offered them new options. [...] Rejection of sex meant the rejection of the control of a husband. Celibate women could avoid male domination, at least to some degree (the spiritual authority they amassed could help them gain their independence from fathers and brothers as well). [...] Christians understood women’s transcendence of femininity into masculinity in a positive sense: femininity meant being tied to the body and things of the world in a way in which masculinity did not.”

— Ruth Mazo Karras & Katherine E. Pierpont, Sexuality in Medieval Europe: Doing unto Others

[edwardseymour]

"although compassing the death of the king was clearly a treasonous offense, other priests also prophesied the king's death. [in 1537] in london, william barton, a priest, and richard smith reportedly said 'the king was a cuckold and so should worthily die'. barton called the king a traitor to god in presuming to take upon the pope's authority. smith also had a book of prophecies, which he showed to barton, wherein it foretold 'the king's most honourable person should be torn in pieces with his own mule." in addition, smith apparently made a chain composed of precious metals for the purpose of causing the king's death by a fall. barton and smith fared better [...] as the matter appears to have gone no further than the filing of the information."

— jonathan k. van patten, magic, prophecy and the law of treason in reformation england

[beardofkamenev]

[Philippa] Langley does not tire of proclaiming her mission to debunk the Tudor view of the Plantagenets […]. Although the actual Wars of the Roses was fought between two English factions (with varying degrees of non-English lineage), the Ricardian focus on the Wars of the Roses may be code for preserving Englishness and the values of “little England” amid an increasingly multicultural United Kingdom. In ‘Good King Richard?’, published in 1983, Jeremy Potter, then Chairman of the Richard III Society, straightforwardly links his interest in Richard III to Richard’s Anglo-Saxon “blood.”

— Richard Toon and Laurie Stone, ‘Game of Thrones: Richard III and the Creation of Cultural Heritage’ (2017)

“As the genealogical tree of his [Richard III] descents indicates, “the last English king of England” might more accurately be described as the most English of all the sovereign rulers of England for more than a thousand years. Before him there was a dominance of Danish and French blood in the royal family: after him some Welsh and much Scottish and German. The two royal brothers of the house of York alone had four English grandparents and, while Edward IV’s birthplace was in Normandy, Richard was born in Northamptonshire in the heart of England.” (Potter, 1983: 5)

[dwellordream]

“…It was in the twelfth century that Mary’s identity as Queen of Heaven became a popular motif throughout western Christendom, particularly in images of the Coronation of the Virgin. Mariology was influencing and being influenced by the ideology of queenship, which, at this time, according to Honeycutt, was being remodeled by churchmen to consist of the roles of ‘peacemaker, mother, nurse, benefactress, and intercessor’, in contrast to earlier notions of sharer in the king’s authority and head of his household. Although such ideology constructed new differences in kingly and queenly roles, the association with Mariology meant that queens should not necessarily be seen as decreasing in status.

…As Parsons has argued, this association of queenly and Marian intercession was made explicit in thirteenth century England too, shaping coronation ritual and leading to Marian allusions in the rites of royal childbirth. Such Marian associations, no longer necessarily identified with intercession, persisted into the fifteenth century, not only in the words of the pageant scripts quoted above, but also in the painted images of the queens. The most explicit instance of the latter is a picture of Elizabeth Woodville in the records of the Skinners of London, produced in the 1470s to record her membership of their Fraternity of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary - Plate 1.

The red dress beneath a blue cloak with loose blonde hair beneath a crown was a familiar representation of the Virgin Mary - Plate 2. Moreover, the orb and scepter which she held were not the regalia with which a queen was crowned, although queens were commonly depicted carrying them, as were kings and the Virgin Mary. The roses and gillyflowers in the background were both flowers associated with the Virgin; the rose particularly with her virginity and the gillyflower with her purity and motherhood.”

- Joanna L. Chamberlayne, English Queenship 1445-1503

[ednyfedfychan]

“The precise chronology of Catherine’s affair with the king is unclear. A few clues are provided in grants made to her by the royal household, one of which made Catherine a woman of moderate means in her own right – at the end of April, the goods of two condemned criminals, a father and son both called William Lidbeter, who had been convicted of murder, were signed over to her. By modern standards, the second-hand goods of two killers might lack in romance, but the Tudors were incorrigible recyclers. In May, the king bought her twenty-three brand new quilts of sarsenet, a light silk, which was perhaps a welcome choice of fabric given the mounting temperature in the capital.”

— Gareth Russell, Young and Damned and Fair

[ednyfedfychan]

“Legh’s recall from exile [in March 1540] was, therefore, the earliest indication, albeit a heavily veiled one, of King Henry’s interest in Katherine [Howard]. The next clue was less subtle. It came on 24 April 1540, when Henry granted Katherine the goods and chattels of William Ledbeter, a Sussex yeoman, and his son, who had been indicted for murder the previous February. The following month, ‘twenty-three quilts of quilted sarcenet, bought of Baptist Borowne and Guilliame Latremoylle, [were] given to Mrs Haward’ from the royal wardrobe. Since gifts were a recognised part of the ritual of courtship, much might have been read into these awards to a mere maiden of honour.”

— Josephine Wilkinson, Katherine Howard