Re: [Richard III Society Forum] RE: Cecily Duchess of York
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] RE: Cecily Duchess of York
2004-01-08 22:13:55
----- Original Message -----
From: marion davis
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: Cecily Duchess of York
Suzanne wrote: If Cecily was involved in Richard's bid
for the throne, could it be because, like Eleanor of
Aquitaine after her son Richard's death, she preferred
an adult son as king to defending the rights of a
grandson who was a minor? A son might be more under
her influence than a grandson ruled by his mother's
family (Eleanor didn't seem to like her
daughter-in-law Constance much either).
***
Your question made me think of another two.
What power did women like Cecily or Eleanor of
Aquitaine have besides the force of their
personalities?
How much influence did Cecily lose when she admitted
to adultery with Edward IV's father? Even if she and
Richard were close, wouldn't that admission have
weakened her influence with the other members of the
house of York?
Marion
To answer part of this question, I think that there were a lot of influential women in this era but none with real power until the next century. In 1553 the four main claimants to the English throne were all female yet there had never been an undisputed Queen before.
Immediately after Bosworth, Warwick was placed under close supervision away from female (breeding) company but his sister (Salisbury) continued as Elizabeth's lady-in-waiting for many years, had several children and was not seen as a threat until she had reached an advanced age, even though she was THE Yorkist claimant from 1499 (and ancestor of the House of Hastings).
To digress, noblewomen were treated very differently to men, in a political way, up until about 1530. For example, hardly any noblewomen were executed before then but two of Henry VIII's Queens, Salisbury, Jane Grey and Mary Stuart all fell after that.
In effect, Cecily would have lost face but I think Richard would have had to rely on her as unravelling the implications of her adultery was a complex matter. The Woodvilles would scarcely be supportive.
Stephen
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
From: marion davis
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: Cecily Duchess of York
Suzanne wrote: If Cecily was involved in Richard's bid
for the throne, could it be because, like Eleanor of
Aquitaine after her son Richard's death, she preferred
an adult son as king to defending the rights of a
grandson who was a minor? A son might be more under
her influence than a grandson ruled by his mother's
family (Eleanor didn't seem to like her
daughter-in-law Constance much either).
***
Your question made me think of another two.
What power did women like Cecily or Eleanor of
Aquitaine have besides the force of their
personalities?
How much influence did Cecily lose when she admitted
to adultery with Edward IV's father? Even if she and
Richard were close, wouldn't that admission have
weakened her influence with the other members of the
house of York?
Marion
To answer part of this question, I think that there were a lot of influential women in this era but none with real power until the next century. In 1553 the four main claimants to the English throne were all female yet there had never been an undisputed Queen before.
Immediately after Bosworth, Warwick was placed under close supervision away from female (breeding) company but his sister (Salisbury) continued as Elizabeth's lady-in-waiting for many years, had several children and was not seen as a threat until she had reached an advanced age, even though she was THE Yorkist claimant from 1499 (and ancestor of the House of Hastings).
To digress, noblewomen were treated very differently to men, in a political way, up until about 1530. For example, hardly any noblewomen were executed before then but two of Henry VIII's Queens, Salisbury, Jane Grey and Mary Stuart all fell after that.
In effect, Cecily would have lost face but I think Richard would have had to rely on her as unravelling the implications of her adultery was a complex matter. The Woodvilles would scarcely be supportive.
Stephen
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] RE: Cecily Duchess of York
2004-01-08 22:59:28
As I understood it there was a claim that Cecily in her anger at Edward's marriage claimed that he was a bastard but the earliest documented of that was in Mancini (1480's). Was there an earlier record of that claim?
Maybe Cecily didn't say he was a bastard but what a little bastard he was for his secret marriage to a "commoner". Gossip does get mangled.
Maybe I'm naive but I think that Edward was York's son. As someone earlier said the result of a passionate reunion between York and Cecily. To me Blaydon the Archer sounds abit too much like those 1930's jokes of Roger the Lodger.
George's eventual death can be accounted for by his continueing plotting and perhaps knowledge of the Eleanor Talbot matter. Remember Stillington's arrest.
Helen
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Personals
- New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time!
Maybe Cecily didn't say he was a bastard but what a little bastard he was for his secret marriage to a "commoner". Gossip does get mangled.
Maybe I'm naive but I think that Edward was York's son. As someone earlier said the result of a passionate reunion between York and Cecily. To me Blaydon the Archer sounds abit too much like those 1930's jokes of Roger the Lodger.
George's eventual death can be accounted for by his continueing plotting and perhaps knowledge of the Eleanor Talbot matter. Remember Stillington's arrest.
Helen
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Personals
- New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time!
Re: [Richard III Society Forum] RE: Cecily Duchess of York
2004-01-09 00:24:07
That's assuming that she ever did claim that she'd committed adultery - we
only have hearsay evidence of it and the allegations that surfaced.
Actually Cecily appears to have had very little political influence at all -
her children appear to have done their duty by her and she certainly appears
to have run her dower holdings in an efficient and orderly manner but that's
about as far as it goes.
> How much influence did Cecily lose when she admitted
> to adultery with Edward IV's father? Even if she and
> Richard were close, wouldn't that admission have
> weakened her influence with the other members of the
> house of York?
>
> Marion
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
only have hearsay evidence of it and the allegations that surfaced.
Actually Cecily appears to have had very little political influence at all -
her children appear to have done their duty by her and she certainly appears
to have run her dower holdings in an efficient and orderly manner but that's
about as far as it goes.
> How much influence did Cecily lose when she admitted
> to adultery with Edward IV's father? Even if she and
> Richard were close, wouldn't that admission have
> weakened her influence with the other members of the
> house of York?
>
> Marion
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
[Richard III Society Forum] RE: Cecily Duchess of York
2004-01-09 17:51:49
I didn't see this come up the first time.
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen LARK
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 10:14 PM
Subject: Re: RE: Cecily Duchess of York
----- Original Message -----
From: marion davis
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: Cecily Duchess of York
Suzanne wrote: If Cecily was involved in Richard's bid
for the throne, could it be because, like Eleanor of
Aquitaine after her son Richard's death, she preferred
an adult son as king to defending the rights of a
grandson who was a minor? A son might be more under
her influence than a grandson ruled by his mother's
family (Eleanor didn't seem to like her
daughter-in-law Constance much either).
***
Your question made me think of another two.
What power did women like Cecily or Eleanor of
Aquitaine have besides the force of their
personalities?
How much influence did Cecily lose when she admitted
to adultery with Edward IV's father? Even if she and
Richard were close, wouldn't that admission have
weakened her influence with the other members of the
house of York?
Marion
To answer part of this question, I think that there were a lot of influential women in this era but none with real power until the next century. In 1553 the four main claimants to the English throne were all female yet there had never been an undisputed Queen before.
Immediately after Bosworth, Warwick was placed under close supervision away from female (breeding) company but his sister (Salisbury) continued as Elizabeth's lady-in-waiting for many years, had several children and was not seen as a threat until she had reached an advanced age, even though she was THE Yorkist claimant from 1499 (and ancestor of the House of Hastings).
To digress, noblewomen were treated very differently to men, in a political way, up until about 1530. For example, hardly any noblewomen were executed before then but two of Henry VIII's Queens, Salisbury, Jane Grey and Mary Stuart all fell after that.
In effect, Cecily would have lost face but I think Richard would have had to rely on her as unravelling the implications of her adultery was a complex matter. The Woodvilles would scarcely be supportive.
Stephen
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
----- Original Message -----
From: Stephen LARK
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 10:14 PM
Subject: Re: RE: Cecily Duchess of York
----- Original Message -----
From: marion davis
To:
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: Cecily Duchess of York
Suzanne wrote: If Cecily was involved in Richard's bid
for the throne, could it be because, like Eleanor of
Aquitaine after her son Richard's death, she preferred
an adult son as king to defending the rights of a
grandson who was a minor? A son might be more under
her influence than a grandson ruled by his mother's
family (Eleanor didn't seem to like her
daughter-in-law Constance much either).
***
Your question made me think of another two.
What power did women like Cecily or Eleanor of
Aquitaine have besides the force of their
personalities?
How much influence did Cecily lose when she admitted
to adultery with Edward IV's father? Even if she and
Richard were close, wouldn't that admission have
weakened her influence with the other members of the
house of York?
Marion
To answer part of this question, I think that there were a lot of influential women in this era but none with real power until the next century. In 1553 the four main claimants to the English throne were all female yet there had never been an undisputed Queen before.
Immediately after Bosworth, Warwick was placed under close supervision away from female (breeding) company but his sister (Salisbury) continued as Elizabeth's lady-in-waiting for many years, had several children and was not seen as a threat until she had reached an advanced age, even though she was THE Yorkist claimant from 1499 (and ancestor of the House of Hastings).
To digress, noblewomen were treated very differently to men, in a political way, up until about 1530. For example, hardly any noblewomen were executed before then but two of Henry VIII's Queens, Salisbury, Jane Grey and Mary Stuart all fell after that.
In effect, Cecily would have lost face but I think Richard would have had to rely on her as unravelling the implications of her adultery was a complex matter. The Woodvilles would scarcely be supportive.
Stephen
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group//
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Richard III on Amazon
As an Amazon Associate, We earn from qualifying purchases.