#There's stupidity and then there's willful misreading & rewriting of history according to your own imagination. This fits the latter | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

wonder-worker · 15 days

Text

"[Elizabeth Woodville] was the only member of [Crown Prince Edward of Westminster's] original 1471 council not already on the king’s council and her name headed the list of those appointed as administrators in Wales during Edward’s minority. [She remained on the council after it was expanded in 1473 and granted significant new governing and judicial powers]."

"In 1478 Prince Richard [of Shrewsbury] married the Mowbray heiress. Like his elder brother he had a chancellor, seal, household and council to manage his estates. His council, like that of Prince Edward, comprised the queen [Elizabeth Woodville] and a group of magnates and bishops, few of whom were Woodville supporters [...] It was Elizabeth who mattered, for Richard resided with her and Rivers treated his affairs as their own."

-J.L. Laynesmith, The Last Medieval Queens: English Queenship 1445-1503 / Michael Hicks, Richard III and his Rivals: Magnates and their Motives in the Wars of the Roses

#good👏🏻 for 👏🏻 her #historicwomendaily #elizabeth woodville #15th century #english history #princes in the tower #my post #Reminder that these sort of additional official positions in governance were very unusual (unprecedented) for late medieval English queens #Elizabeth's formal appointment in royal councils (+ authority over her sons) should not be ignored or downplayed in the slightest bit #It should instead be considered one of the most defining aspects of her queenship that spanned over a decade and lasted right till the end #& should also be highlighted as one of the most vital topics of discussion when it comes to broader queenly power in late medieval England #I think it also says a lot about Elizabeth's relationship to Edward IV and the regard he seems to have had for her capabilities #'The only member of the original 1471 council not already on the king’s council' that speaks VOLUMES. Once again: good for her.#It's also really frustrating how some historians (Katherine J. Lewis; AJ Pollard; Laynesmith etc) have incredibly lopsided perspectives on #Elizabeth that fundamentally *do not work* when you remember these actual facts and what they reveal about her power and influence #I'm also still baffled at Lynda Pidgeon's claim that 'Elizabeth's influence with Edward IV was less than with family members who were #part of the king's council or that of her son Edward prince of Wales'. Like???????#First of all - we *already know* that Elizabeth had the most personal influence with Edward and was the one he trusted the most #The case in 1480 & his own will in 1475 (where he referred to her as the one 'in whom we most singularly place our trust') make both clear #Second of all - ELIZABETH WAS LITERALLY ON HER SONS' COUNCILS HERSELF. HER NAME HEADED THE GODDAMN LIST. How have you missed this????????#It's actually bizarre because it completely ignores the fact that 1) Late medieval queens *weren't* generally given positions like this?#If we accept Pidgeon's (false) interpretation we have to claim that NONE of them were influential at all #Which I'm pretty sure nobody agrees with? So why have I seen people agreeing with Pidgeon's FALSE take on Elizabeth based on that lmfao?#2) Elizabeth WAS in fact given such positions. She genuinely was given unusual authority and was an Exception™ rather than the rule #Forget emphasizing her atypical role - Pidgeon has outright erased it in an effort to diminish her #She does the same thing when talking about Elizabeth's role after Edward IV's death and it's equally ridiculous and incorrect #There's stupidity and then there's willful misreading & rewriting of history according to your own imagination. This fits the latter

22 notes · View notes