#Imo this is mainly because Elizabeth's negative historiography has always involved both vilification and diminishment in equal measure. | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

wonder-worker · 4 months ago

Text

Wild how we know that Elizabeth Woodville was officially appointed to royal councils in her own right during her husband’s reign and fortified the Tower of London in preparation of a siege while 8-months pregnant and had forces gathering at Westminster “in the queen’s name” in 1483 – only for NONE of these things to be even included, let alone explored, in the vast majority of scholarship and historical novels involving her.

#lol I don't remember writing this - I found it when I was searching for something else in my drafts. But it's 100% true so I had to post it.#elizabeth woodville #my post #Imo this is mainly because Elizabeth's negative historiography has always involved both vilification and diminishment in equal measure.#and because her brand of vilification (femme fatale; intriguer) suggests more indirect/“feminine” than legitimate/forceful types of power #It's still bizarre though-you'd think these would be some of the most famous & defining aspects of Elizabeth's life. But apparently not #I guess she only matters when it comes to marrying Edward and Promoting Her Family and scheming against Richard #There is very lacking interest in her beyond those things even in her traditionally negative depictions #And most of her “reassessments” tend to do diminish her so badly she's rendered utterly irrelevant and almost pathetic by the end of it #Even when some of these things *are* mentioned they're never truly emphasized as they should be.#See: her formal appointment in royal councils. It was highly unconventional + entirely unprecedented for queens in the 14th & 15th century #You'd think this would be incredibly important and highlighted when analyzing late medieval queenship in England but apparently not #Historians are more willing to straight-up INVENT positions & roles for so many other late medieval queens/king's mothers that didn't exist #(not getting into this right now it's too long...)#But somehow acknowledging and discussing Elizabeth's ACTUAL formally appointed role is too much for them I guess #She's either subsumed into the general vilification of her family (never mind that they were known as 'the queen's kin' to actual #contemporaries; they were defined by HER not the other way around) or she's rendered utterly insignificant by historians. Often both.#But at the end of the day her individual role and identity often overlooked or downplayed in both scenarios #and ofc I've said this before but - there has literally never been a proper reassessment of Elizabeth's role in 1483-85 TILL DATE #despite the fact that it's such a sensational and well-known time period in medieval England #This isn't even a Wars of the Roses thing. Both Margaret of Anjou and Margaret Beaufort have had multiple different reassessments #of their roles and positions during their respective crises/upheavals by now;#There is simply a distinct lack of interest in reassessing Elizabeth in a similar way and I think this needs to be acknowledged.#Speaking of which - there's also a persistent habit of analyzing her through the context of Margaret of Anjou or Elizabeth of York #(either as a parallel or a foil) rather than as a historical figure in HER OWN RIGHT #that's also too long to get into I just wanted to point it out because I hate it and I think it's utterly senseless #I've so much to say about how all of this affects her portrayal in historical fiction as well but that's going into a whole other tangent #ofc there are other things but these in particular *really* frustrate me #just felt like ranting a bit in the tags because these are all things that I want to individually discuss someday with proper posts...

86 notes · View notes