#anjous daughter

[wonder-worker]

I got the same ask, so I just want to add what Kristen L. Geaman wrote, which sums it up:

"It is time to stop seeing queens as apolitical or politically active queens as exceptional: "The question is not whether women exercised power; it is how and why."

All three WotR queens were in such wildly different situations, it's frankly impossible to conduct a side-by-side examination to decide which one of them had "the most" power/influence/authority. Theoretically, however, they all had the same social & institutional power and scope of action and used it accordingly.

(To be clear, this includes Margaret of Anjou. We really cannot claim that she had "the greatest power and influence" by any reasonable parameter because her power and influence in itself was really no different from any other 15th or 14th century queen: what was different - or more importantly, was perceived as different - was the situation around her and the manner in which it forced her to use that power and influence (ie: "how" and "why"). This was in the later half of her queenship, not from the beginning. And even then, it's possible that the perception of her activities say more about her husband's position/authority than her own, or may say more about how her enemies wanted her to be perceived rather than an accurate reflection of her actual actions. We just don't know).

This logic applies to a very similar ask I received on the same topic: whether the perception of gender changed across the WotR and late 15th century. "Gender" by itself is too broad a concept (and for who? For women in general? For noblewomen? For queens?), but even if we narrow it down to the four queens in question, it's impossible to form a conclusion and unwise to even try. There are so many wildly different factors that influenced the four queens' activities and perception beyond their gender - their social status, nationality, length of queenship, political opposition and the propaganda it generated (etc) - that to compare them through a solely gendered wavelength feels very limited and rather dishonest. We can perhaps compare some aspects of their queenship (eg: Margaret and EW's roles in their sons' councils - see below) but those are individual elements and should be analyzed across a broader spectrum of late medieval English queens - it shouldn't just be merely limited to the WotR ones.

An example that comes to mind about the circumstantial differences of the three queens is their role in their children's marriages. Margaret was in a rare and unique position to negotiate her son’s dynastic marriage on her own due to the absence of the king, and did a great job; but this cannot by any means be used to judge how she would act in more “regular” circumstances. None of Elizabeth Woodville’s royal children married during her queenship except for her youngest son Richard, who didn't marry a foreign bride but an English heiress for monetary rather than dynastic purposes; she nonetheless played a significant role in his wedding, and her husband’s will specified that she was to "rule and govern" her daughters' marriages. Elizabeth of York’s eldest son and her eldest daughter made grand foreign marriages during her queenship under the most "regular" circumstances; she played an especially vital role in the latter, something that is regularly overlooked by historians. In any case, the situations of all three queens were wildly different: we can't use them to compare who did "the most" or how a WotR English queen's role "evolved". It wouldn't be a fair line of analysis.

For another example, take queenly dowers. We can't compare what Margaret of Anjou got with what Elizabeth Woodville & Elizabeth of York got on a "gendered" or even "queenly" lens (as historians tend to do, often for EoY and occasionally for EW) because Henry VII and Edward IV simply could not logistically endow their queens on the same capacity as Margaret was endowed. It was objectively a practical problem, not an ideological one. Even if they had been kings in regular circumstances, such a dower was financially unwise; as usurpers with a very limited supply of lands, it was completely unfeasible. This unfeasibility is especially true in EW's case because as an English gentlewoman with no dowry/political alliance/prestige of her own, she brought no advantage whatsoever to the king or to England, and marriage to her in fact made them lose an invaluable diplomatic card that could have potentially spelt disaster for their dynasty. It would have therefore been somewhat expected for her to receive a lesser dower in that circumstance - though of course, ultimately speaking, royal supply was limited and she might've probably been given the same high amount if more was available. That's not even getting into how Edward IV himself was running his own household on a significantly lesser budget than both Henry VI and Henry VII did, meaning that EW's dower had nothing to do with queenship and everything to do with royal policy as a whole. (I'm not getting into Henry VII and Elizabeth of York's situation because ik you've already talked about it a lot, but suffice to say, the idea that he was using her dower to somehow "control" her is nonsense. If anyone wants an example of a king of England who actually seized his wife's dower lands, look up Edward II and Isabella of France; if anyone wants an example of a queen consort whose ability to administrate and collect income from her dower lands was neglected and overlooked by her husband, look up Berengaria of Navarre. There are queens who this accusation actually applies to; Elizabeth of York isn't one of them.)

There's also the major problem of historical evidence. To claim that we can "compare" the influence and activities of the three queens is 1) to imply that we have surviving evidence for all their activities as queen, and 2) more importantly, to imply that we have equal surviving evidence for all their activities as queen. We really, really don't. More than *120 letters* have survived for Margaret of Anjou, meaning that we know infinitely more about her "daily" queenship than any other 15th century queen. It doesn't mean that she did more; it merely means that, because evidence has been lucky enough to survive for her, we know more about her activities as queen (patronage, intercession, diplomacy). I would kill to have the same amount of information for Elizabeth Woodville and Elizabeth of York: it would help flesh out their queenships so much. It would also go a long way in further establishing their personalities, their relationships with other nobles, their approaches to lordship, etc. But for now, information is very limited, and that needs to be kept in mind & specified when discussing both the Elizabeths, just like it needs to be kept in mind & specified when discussing Margaret (ie: she shouldn't be singularized). Similarly, there's also a very uneven level of contemporary evidence for late medieval English kings' reigns in general: for example, as Charles Ross has said, "The reign of Edward IV was singularly ill-served by contemporary writers of history". We possess very less strictly contemporary information about his reign, and this massive gap is "only very partially filled by the vernacular city chronicles". His entire chamber records don't survive: imagine how much royal activity has consequently been lost, and how little we know about him & EW compared to Henry VII & EoY as a result. Henry VI's reign also has this major problem when it comes to lack of surviving contemporary information, though like I mentioned, the survival of letters for Margaret of Anjou mean that the lack of information is relatively alleviated when it comes to her queenship and actions specifically. We also have more detailed extant information for Elizabeth of York's diplomatic role & activities compared to her predecessors, from what I understand, thanks to ambaassadorial letters. The point is simply that with such uneven evidence which directly affects the way we perceive their queenly activities, it doesn't really make sense to "compare" them. Rather, I think it would make more sense to analyze them individually and acknowledge their vastly different circumstances when doing so. On a broader theoretical level, like I mentioned, we know for a fact that they all had the same social & institutional power and scope of action. What was different was their circumstances (ie: "how" and "why").

One thing I do want to point out, though, is that Elizabeth Woodville did have unique political authority during her tenure as queen. Her official appointment in royal councils in her own right - for both the crown prince and Richard of Shrewsbury - was unusual & exceptional for late medieval queens, even though historians rarely emphasize it to the extent that they should. Margaret, whose activities with her son's council are often hailed as "extraordinary" and proof of her "superior" political power (I'm putting them in quotes because they're the words I come across), was in fact never actually a part of the council in her own right and never came close to possessing the position, authority or formally acknowledged importance that Elizabeth had. So, I would say that yes, Elizabeth Woodville was undoubtedly given unconventional political authority & formal appointments during her queenship, made even more surprising by the fact that these were not during the King's absence or incapacity but during his presence and the peak of his own power. Historians need to acknowledge and highlight this more than they do. However, any "comparison" (if it can be called that) of this unique and official position of Elizabeth's can't just be limited to her daughter or other WotR queens, and therefore can't be used to judge Elizabeth of York: it was unusual and unprecedented for all 15th century (from what I understand, also 14th century) queens in general and should be discussed accordingly.

What are the differences in the powers of the three queens in wars of the roses? Margaret of Anjou should be the greatest power and influence? Elizabeth Woodville has many formal authorities, and Elizabeth of York is very symbolic?

No because all medieval queens consort had both formal and symbolic authority. Please check my queenship tag to find out more.

[randomfoggytiger]

Collector's Edition: Fox Mulder Is a Father (Fan-Favorites)

In honor of Father's Day, I wanted to collect other fans' favorite "Mulder as a father" fics.

Thank you to all who participated!

Loose chronological order below~

@spooky-jordan's Picks:

rivkat's and MustangSally's Iolokus 3 (Iolokus 03 - Vix te Agnovi 1/3,  Iolokus 03 - Vix te Agnovi 2/3, Iolokus 03 - Vix te Agnovi 3/3) and Iolokus 4 (Iolokus 04 - Res Judicata 1/3, Iolokus 04 - Res Judicata 2/3, Iolokus 04 - Res Judicata 3/3)

"I'm getting really tired of that song, Scully.  Really tired.  You didn't ask to be abducted, you didn't ask to have your ova taken, and you didn't ask for the cancer.  You didn't choose to have Miranda, and when she inconvenienced your life you dumped her with Emerson and Aileen.  You didn't provoke George into stalking you and you certainly didn't *aid* him when he tried to strangle you," I continued, trying to keep my voice under control even though it was crackling like a cheap stereo speaker. "When things don't go your way, you cave like a house of cards." 

Parts 3 and 4 of the infamous Iolokus is stuffed with Mulder and Scully as parents: both of them unpacking their traumas, fighting for custody of their daughter, and settling into the life they're building together.

@calimanc's Picks:

Revely’s The Unfinished Universe (Gossamer) 

They have a private evening ritual - nose to nose on the bed they practice telepathic communication. 

Scully disappears into the motel bathroom for their soft-shelled display of male bonding, shutting the door behind her with aggravating finality - boys' side, girl's side. Mulder immediately stops casting out brain waves and begins to wonder what she's doing in there. She's awfully quiet. The baby just dozes and tries to nurse Mulder's nose until he manages to work one of his fists into his mouth.

AU-- Post-Requiem Mulder is returned a year later, bonding with his lioness partner and months-old son on the drive back to D.C.

Anjou’s (Ao3) Ghosts (mulderscreek), The Ghosts of Christmas Past (mulderscreek), and The Ghosts of Future Past (mulderscreek)

By the time that the running stroller Mulder had purchased arrived, Will had begun to stand up voluntarily. He wanted to walk, but he was still hesitant, afraid that a show of independence would mean he wouldn't get taken care of anymore. To keep William moving forward, Mulder started including him on some of the loops. This time, Scully sat on the steps and read and they waved at her as they ran by. Mulder loved the way Will's tiny hands extended out from the hood of the stroller as he laughed at the wind. By the end of the third day he was demanding "Again!" when Mulder was all tuckered out. Mulder would take him out of the running stroller and sit him on the red earth while he stretched out. By the end of the week, William was mimicking Mulder's movements. When the tiny running shoes that Mulder had ordered for William arrived, Will began to walk around their trailer and demand to dance with his parents before dinner.

Mulder, Scully, and William (who was saved via Skinner's heroic sacrifice) hide away in motels as she tirelessly works to prevent the anticipated invasion.

@samucabd’s Picks:

Donna’s Goodbyes/Hellos (Gossamer)

"Is it safe for you to be here Mulder? I . . . you can't know how much I've missed you, but is it safe?"

"As safe as anywhere Scully. He insisted we come."

Her surprise was obvious at that. "He insisted?"

"He says you're in danger. We've come to get you."

Post-Existence Scully hands William over to Mulder and tells them to go into hiding. Jeremiah Smith, the incoming invasion, and their friends, allies, and family all pitch in for a "happy ending."

Christy’s (mulderscreek)

Interstice (Gossamer | Story: "Interstice 01 - Saturday" by Christy, Gossamer | Story: "Interstice 02 - Sunday" by Christy, Gossamer | Story: "Interstice 03 - Monday" by Christy, Gossamer | Story: "Interstice 04 - Tuesday" by Christy, Gossamer | Story: "Interstice 05 - Wednesday" by Christy, Gossamer | Story: "Interstice 06 - Thursday" by Christy)

Intellectually, he knew her love. He could see it every day, as they tried to coax another bite of puréed peas past Liam's stubborn lips; as they poured through old files in Doggett's cold basement office; as they sat together on the couch at night, each armed with a red pen, wading through stacks of papers and quizzes.

Mulder left the bedroom, his gaze darting around the family room in search of Scully's shirt. Finally he found it, a puddle of light blue silk on the floor beside the couch, and draped it across his shoulder, still smelling her perfume.

He lifted their coats from where they hung over the back of the couch, then hung them in the closet. After snatching his boots up by the laces, he found Scully's shoes, one near the door, the other kicked halfway under the couch. Gathering everything into his arms, Mulder went back into the bedroom.

It's William's first Christmas, with the Scully family (and their issues) in tow.

Song of Innocence (1/3, 2/3, 3/3) and Song of Experience (1/4, 2/4, 3/4, 4/4)

His dad looked like a superhero, tall and dark and dressed all in black like a secret agent. A spy. His voice was magical, Will decided, soft and soothing as he questioned the injured deputy; then, as he said to Will's mom, "Will you just escort Deputy Wetzel to the hospital?" Will was too busy replaying the sound of his dad saying his name to hear the crazy theories that his mom pooh-poohed whenever she stepped out from behind the ambulance door, where she was hiding from the cameras.

But his dad didn't seem to mind the cameras, even laughing at them a few times during the hour-long show. Will smiled as he listened to them discuss the case, and his dad saying that bright pink was his mom's color. Will didn't think his mom owned *anything* pink.

Then it got exciting. His dad breaking the door down and his mom pulling a gun from somewhere inside the back of her jacket, her fingernails shining against the black metal of the gun grip. Then his mom doing an autopsy, something Will had wondered about for forever but had, of course, never been allowed to see.

Then the dawning in his dad's eye when he solved the mystery, dashing off heroically to save the deputy, his mom hot on his heels. They stalked through an old beat-up house, guns and flashlights in hand, and Will thought they were ten times better than Luke Skywalker because they were real.

He had watched the tape twice more that afternoon before his mom arrived, and then once again with her, crawling into her lap when she started crying, when his dad turned to face the camera head-on for the first time.

Will and his mom took the tape home with them that night, watching it together twice before he went to bed. And even after that, Will could have sworn he heard his dad's soft, gentle voice drifting from downstairs and into his room through the vents... although it could just have been the replay of Will's own memories.

He loved to watch how his dad moved -- his long strides, the fluid way he stepped across the screen -- but it was his dad's voice that stuck with him. Not the soft, reassuring tone or the private, teasing voice he used with Will's mom, but the strong, forceful way he spoke to the deputy, begging from the wrong side of a locked door for Wetzel to "cowboy up" and be a man.

Will had heard that same voice in his head ever since then, when he needed a push. "Cowboy up," his dad said, only it was Will he was talking to, not some stranger. "Cowboy up, Will," he mentally spliced together when he needed to borrow some of his dad's courage.

Post-NIHT Mulder returns seven years later with an implant and selective memory loss. As he heals up and tries to figure out what happened with Scully, his son works through the complicated emotions both are feeling.

Vickie Moseley’s Flight Into Egypt Series (Flight into Egypt 01, Flight into Egypt 02 - Making a Home, Flight into Egypt 03 - Making a Life, Flight into Egypt 04 - Games, Flight Into Egypt 05 - New Life, Flight into Egypt - Doing it Right 1/2, Flight into Egypt - Doing it Right 2/2, Flight into Egypt 07 - Going Home 1/2, Flight into Egypt 07 - Going Home 2/2)

Mulder watched Dana take their son's hand and help the little one make the sign of the Cross, then bowed his head as the prayer began. He couldn't help thinking of their conversation of the morning. Yes, he did feel safe in this place, among these people. But maybe Scully was right. They were still very much strangers, very much alone. It felt good to forget all the danger they'd lived for so long, but the danger was still there, waiting for them to slip up.

Mulder and Scully and William hit the road, becoming fugitives in a small mountain town in order to keep their families together. Of course, ghosts from their past will always find them; and, sooner or later, they have to face the complicated present.

Girlie_girl7’s A Day in the Life (A Day in the Life, 05 and A Day in the Life 12 - A Fractured Christmas Story and A Day in the Life, 14 - Christmas and A Day in the Life, 35 - Fox Mantle and A Day in the Life, 30 - The Shooting/A Day in the Life, 31 - Home Coming and A Day in the Life, 36 - Problem Child)

Mulder carries his daughter into his office all the while rubbing her dark, curly, head against his cheek. He pulls out the desk chair and switches on the computer then sits down with Katherine balanced on one knee. Scully has the baby dressed in a light blue, terry tank top and matching shorts, she kicks her white baby shoe against the desk as Mulder absentmindedly reaches down to still her foot. He brings up his email and begins to open and delete messages. He's just opened one from a UFO hotline when Katherine begins pounding the keyboard and jabbering. Suddenly the screen goes black and the computer shuts off.

"Katherine, you shut me down," Mulder says with a frown.

Mulder and Scully, their children, and her family experience the ups and downs of parenthood: be it holidays, illnesses, near-death experiences, grown bullies at school pickups, and restaurant shootouts. (Note: the stories linked above-- for brevity’s sake-- are mostly Mulder-centric. My favorite is "14 - Christmas": touchingly touch-and-go.)

Thanks for reading~

Enjoy!

[winterhalters]

K I N G S I D E, a tale of seven kings

first season 1514-1520. Claude and François finally get married, a vacant seat for Mary Tudor, Louise of Savoy's stubborness to keep her son in check. A new King arises, the New Order, François' quest for glory in Italy. Another crown, another campaign.

second season 1522-1530. The inheritance dispute that leads Bourbon to treason. The pursuit of the italian dream, Claude dies, all is lost in Pavia. Süleyman and the unthinkable alliance, captivity in Spain. The Ottoman fleet. Royal depression. The inheritance dispute that led Bourbon to treason. The ladies' peace, Henry VIII flinching, a price for two princes, a New wife for the King.

third season 1531-1537. Louise dies, tensions between François and Marguerite. The wedding of Catherine and Henri. The rise of Pisseleu, the battle at Court between Charles and Henri and their people. War between Diane and Montmorency. Placards and the anti-heterics frenzy, another war in Italy. Wedding and death of Madeleine.

fourth season 1539-1547. Mending tensions between France and Spain. A very stubborn niece. All eyes on Henri and Catherine's sterile womb. Death of Charles. The duel in Jarnac. The King is dead, long live. Diane de Poitier's absolute triumph over Anne de Pisseleu. The Guises make their move.

fifth season 1553-1559. Diane of France's not so typical royal wedding. Catherine giving birth to the twins, Chenonceau goes to Diane, the cordial hate between the two. Rohan VS Nemours. Montmorency mess and a remarriage for Diane of France. The death of Henri, everything falls down.

sixth season 1560-1564. François II barely hanging on, Catherine's almost giving up, Elisabeth married off, the Guise family's counterpower, Montemorency's political exile, the Amboise conspiracy, preparations for the grand tour.

seventh season 1565-1572. The end of the grand tour, encounter between the royal family and Elisabeth, queen of Spain. The rise of Charles IX, a new queen, Marie Touchet and her bastard boys. Catherine's plans to get a match for Marguerite. Rising tensions between Charles and Henri after Jarnac and Montcontour. Marguerite's nuptials amidst tensions and Coligny's attempted murder.

eighth season 1572-1575. Coligny and the Protestant leaders rallying the troops. The Saint Barthelemew Massacre and the promise of Marguerite to never forgive her family. Catherine finds out Anjou's possible involvement. A new king for Poland. Marguerite's toubled married life. Death of Charles IX. Henri's escape from Poland and slow return to France.

nineth season 1581-1584. Catherine's illusions shatter. New King, no heir. Marguerite returns to Paris. Louise shows some spine against the King's favorites. Quarelling with Anjou, tensions with Elizabethan England, Anjou's election and subsequent death and Catherine's anger. The Guise family veering off the road.

tenth season 1585-1589. The mounting war of the three Henris. All eyes on King Henri who has no sons, Catherine's political exile, the slow burning of the last Valois children. Hunting down Marguerite from stronghold to stronghold, ending with her house arrest in Usson. Assassination of the Guise brothers, the death of Catherine, Henri III breaks down in Diane's arms. Marguerite in exile, Diane the only "true" daughter of Catherine's, as she sets out to (successfully) pacify the kingdom on her own.

[wonder-worker]

Is Elizabeth of York very different from her mother Elizabeth Woodville? The more I read, the more I realize that their queen jobs are almost very similar

Yes and no. I think it depends on what aspect of their queenships you look at.

Right from the get-go, both of them had very different origins and were thus very different choices for queen. As a widowed English gentlewoman "whose origins broke all established conventions of English queenship" (Laynesmith) Elizabeth Woodville was a uniquely unsuitable choice for queen. She only attained the position due to Edward IV's politically unwise love match which "greatly offended the people of England" and was then crowned queen "against the will of all his lords". There were some attempts to soften the scandal (eg: the story of Elizabeth being "deserving" of queenship due to her supposed virtue; her own emphasis on her mother's lineage over her father's), but from beginning to end, she was viewed as an inappropriate and unprecedented choice. Elizabeth of York, on the other hand, was an ideal choice for queen: a royal princess, young, with important connections in the country. Her and Henry's marriage was anomalous in the sense that an English king had never married an English princess before, but in the context of the civil war, it was a necessary and widely supported match. Henry's status as an active claimant against Richard III was entirely dependent on his promise to marry Elizabeth, and contemporaries were clear that the marriage provided a great deal of legitimizing support to both Henry and the children they had together.

If you are referring to their everyday practice of queenship, I would agree that they were generally similar. Both generally tried to uphold the expectations of queenhood/womanhood, Both could be described as "fertile, pious, cultured, and beautiful" (Laynesmith), both were successful intercessors, both were patrons, both participated in ceremony and diplomacy, both administered their lands, both raised their own daughters to be successful queens, etc. Indeed, some of Elizabeth Woodville's actions directly influenced Elizabeth of York's, such as her construction of a chapel after the birth of a son, her patronage of William Caxton, etc.

However, I don't think we should view either of their queenships in isolation. Their "queen jobs" were not just similar to each other - they were also similar to those of Joan of Navarre, Catherine of Valois, Margaret of Anjou and Anne Neville. All of them were operating within the basic requirements and broader expectations of queenship that were established long before they were born. This was the late medieval equivalent of job profiles - of course it would be similar, just like the day-to-day roles of kings would be similar. That's how it worked.

That being said, there were still a few differences between both Elizabeths. For one, Elizabeth of York had a son very soon after her marriage, fulfilling the expectation of an "ideal queen" and providing the Tudor dynasty with legitimacy. On the flip side, Elizabeth Woodville "failed" to have a son across her first queenship: she instead had three daughters in a row and only had a son after Edward IV had already been deposed. Moreover, both of them somewhat differed as landowners: Elizabeth Woodville owned far more land than her daughter which were also more grouped-together, allowing her to have a larger potential sphere of influence. She also actively pursued a policy of increasing her landed interests and involved herself in private land-related transactions. Elizabeth of York did have a focused group of lands in the West Country, but her lands were on the whole fewer and more scattered, and there isn't much evidence of her actively pursuing the same territorial policies that her mother did (certainly not to the same extent).

Both Elizabeths were also Englishwomen as opposed to foreign-born consorts. To an extent, they had similar approaches when it came to their native families - both were involved in arranging marriages within their family, both placed their relatives in their own households, both supported their relatives during difficult times. However, they were were a great deal of differences between them as well. I think the parallel that Michelle Beer tries to draw between them ("Elizabeth of York, like her mother, had a web of family connections that became the focus of her major patronage activities") is far too simplistic. I also think the idea that both Elizabeths acted in the exact same way but were merely perceived differently because of their differing origins and propaganda is even more simplistic and, in many ways, objectively incorrect. Yes, they did play a role in how both queens were perceived, but there was a lot more going on than just that and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

For one, Elizabeth Woodville was the first Englishwoman to be crowned queen after the Norman Conquest. I've said this before, but she was the queen who set the example for this sort of thing - we could even argue she introduced a new construct of queenship in the process. The presence of her Englishborn family in politics was "a unique and largely unprecedented factor of the English political structure" during her time; it became expected and routine during her daughter's precisely because of Elizabeth's own example. Claiming that both mother and daughter were doing virtually the same thing is a major oversimplification of their circumstances, because they weren't. Elizabeth Woodville was creating a precedent, with all the experimentation and controversy that came with it; Elizabeth of York was simply following that precedent after it had already become acceptable. There's a difference.

Moreover, Elizabeth Woodville's natal family were far more active and involved in politics than Elizabeth of York's were. The Woodvilles were primarily responsible for the upbringing and governance of the Crown Prince and his lands, they functioned as the nexus of royal authority in Wales, Richard Woodville was the Lord Treasurer and Constable of England, etc. Nothing Elizabeth of York's family did can be compared to that - they were nowhere near as active or vital to Henry VII's political structure. So it's odd that discussions of both Elizabeths are generally limited to the marriages their families made when they were queens, while everything else gets ignored.

Elizabeth Woodville was also controversially involved in politics in a way that Elizabeth of York was not. When it comes to Edward IV's first reign*, both charters and chronicles support the idea of the Woodvilles and Nevilles having a factional conflict/divide in the late 1460s; even if we ignore Warwick's criticism of her via Luchino Dallaghiexia, it's clear that Elizabeth was a part of it. Her family was directly defined by their relation to her as "the queen's kin", even the pro-Yorkist Croyland Chronicle believed she was influentially involved, and Warwick's attack against her in 1469-70 (he claimed that Edward married her because of witchcraft in an effort to annul her marriage & remove her from queenship) after her father and her husband had already been eliminated or contained made it clear that he had problems with her in her own right. At the very least, it's safe to say that Elizabeth was involved in this conflict/divide alongside her family, considering how closely they worked together in the 1460s. But given how Anthony and Thomas Gray both followed Elizabeth's instructions in 1483, it may well have been more than that. There is no indication of anything of the sort with Elizabeth of York, whose behaviour as queen seems to have been more acceptable and uncontroversial. This in turn does not mean that Elizabeth of York was a doormat - she manifestly wasn't. Nor would anyone have wanted her to be one - queens were expected to "interfere" in politics via intercession/diplomacy/patronage, to the point where Edward I's first wife Eleanor of Castile was criticized for not stepping in to moderate her husband's actions enough. Elizabeth of York's positive reputation owes much to her conventional queenship, yes, but it also indicates that she was known to be good at her role.

Finally, Elizabeth Woodville was given formal governing positions beyond her queenship that no other 15th (and probably 14th) century queen, including her daughter, ever had. She was appointed to royal councils in her own right for both Edward V and Richard of Shrewsbury, which was meant to last across their minorities. This was extremely unusual, as institutional sexism prevented late medieval queens of England from performing these kinds of official political roles that their male counterparts were readily given. Instead, their involvement was generally informal, behind-the-scenes, or visible in a way that didn't affect or "intrude" into the institution itself. For example, we know in Henry VI's reign, his heir's council was described as comprising of "the most honorable, excellent, diligent and experienced men (viros)". Elizabeth's appointment to both her sons' councils, with several new powers that came with it, was thus very unusual and atypical for late medieval queens and women in general. This was not repeated in Elizabeth of York's queenship, as she was not given any kind of official position in the government that her mother was. This certainly doesn't mean that Elizabeth of York had diminished political role (as I said, late medieval queens weren't given such kind of positions in general; Elizabeth of York's queenship was perfectly standard), but it does mean that Elizabeth Woodville had an elevated political role which should be recognized far more than it currently is.

So I wouldn't say it's as simple as Elizabeth Woodville and Elizabeth of York being "The Same" or "Complete Opposites". I think that's a very limiting binary - it wouldn't make sense to ask such a thing for Elizabeth of York and Margaret of Anjou, and it's equally impossible to answer it for Elizabeth of York and Elizabeth Woodville. The general ideals and conventions for queenship were similar for all late medieval queens, and both Elizabeths tried to fulfil them accordingly. But in a more individual sense, their queenships were different in a lot of ways, and it doesn't make sense to deny that. I think Elizabeth of York was a conventional queen and was active and seemingly influential in that capacity. I think Elizabeth Woodville's queenship was far more anomalous (at times controversial) and it's very justified to say that she was unusually powerful.

(I've focused specifically on their tenures as queen consort, as Elizabeth of York predeceased Henry VII and thus never got the chance to be dowager queen.)

*I'm not discussing his second reign here as that's far more speculative.

[royalty-nobility]

Portrait of Queen Jadwiga Anjou

Artist: Marcello Bacciarelli (Italian, 1731–1818)

Date: 1768-1771

Medium: Oil on tin plate

Collection: Royal Castle in Warsaw, Poland

Queen Jadwiga of Poland

Jadwiga (1373 or 1374 – 17 July 1399), also known as Hedwig (from German) and in Hungarian: Hedvig, was the first woman to be crowned as monarch of the Kingdom of Poland. She reigned from 16 October 1384 until her death. Born in Buda, she was the youngest daughter of Louis I of Hungary and Poland, and his wife, Elizabeth of Bosnia.

[lady-corrine]

"Through looking at Princess Rhaenyra and her historical counterpart Empress Matilda, I will argue that both these female characters are seen as having similar ambitions, weaknesses and characteristics as the men in their societies, however, because they are women these traits are represented as being undesirable.

Alicent’s ‘Green Council’ uses Rhaenyra’s gender as being the fundamental reason that she should not be Queen. The council notes how a trueborn son should always take precedence over a daughter. Further, Ser Otto states that Prince Daemon, as the husband of Rhaenyra will have the ultimate authority suggesting that, “we all know that one’s nature. Make no mistake, should Rhaenyra ever sit the Iron Throne, it will be Daemon who rules us, a king consort as cruel and unforgiving as Maegor ever was.” The way that the council is depicting Rhaenyra’s renders her incompetent due to her gender, suggesting that if she becomes Queen, she will be unable to make sound decisions and will be under the control of her husband. Although we see that is untrue throughout the rest of Princess and the Queen and her biography in A World in Ice and Fire, Alicent, Ser Otto and their council ultimately succeed in providing Aegon the support he needs.

[...]

Rhaenyra, though technically the rightful heir to the throne, is ostracized due to her gender and ultimately has few advantages in the war. It is noted in The Princess and the Queen that:

"Some older lords might yet recall the oaths they had swarn when she was made Princess of Dragonstone and named her father’s heir. There had been a time when she had been well loved by highborn and commons alike, when they had cheered her as the Realm’s Delight. Many a young lord and noble knight had sought her favor then…though how many would still fight for her now that she was a woman wed, her body aged and thickened by six childbirths, was a question that none could answer."

Through painting Princess Rhaenyra in this way, it can be seen as an attempt to appeal to the inherently patriarchal social structure they are situated in. Rhaenyra, despite a valiant effort, ultimately fails to access the power and agency she set forth to attain because it is suggested that this world of politics and level of power is ultimately a man’s domain. What is interesting however, is that Alicent succeeds in her effort to crown Aegon as king. As Valerie Estelle Frankie notes, Alicent “operates behind the scenes” and manipulates those around her into seeing Rhaenyra as the villain as she continuously degrades her as a “whore,” “bitch” and other derogatory terms. Alicent’s efforts can, in many ways be seen as more successful than Rhaenyra’s because rather than trying to usurp a male-sphere, she manipulates her way within it and through such, is able to find agency without disrupting social order.

Princess Rhaenyra has been referenced as directly paralleling the 12th century Empress Matilda. Matilda, much like Rhaenyra faced the problem of being a woman seek political agency in an inherently misogynistic society. [...] Like Rhaenyra who was in labour in Dragonstone when Aegon captured the throne, Matilda was in Anjou ‘pregnant and ill’ when her father suddenly died.

[...]

However, since gender renders women unequal, they are seen as significantly more problematic when trying to access power since they are essentially problematizing gender expectations. Matilda, performing as an ‘alternate monarch’ to many of her followers, was criticized by her contemporaries for subverting such gender structures. Frankel notes that, “As Matilda displayed to her subjects her ability to be as ruthless and forceful as her father… [Matilda’s contemporaries” could accept imperious behaviour from a king, but not from a woman, even one taking a king’s role.” Matilda, ultimately wanted to be a king, a position that was previously occupied by men, but as Frankel notes, England was “not ready for a reigning queen.” Therefore, her behaviours. though accepted when performed by a man, are rendered as being “insufferable”. Rhaenyra, similarily gets relegated to being insufferable and as it notes in the text,

“The girl that they once cheered as the Realm’s Delight had grown into a grasping and vindictive woman, men said, a queen as cruel as any king before her. One wit banned Rhaenyra “King Maegor with teats.”

Demonstrating how society has rendered her more monstrous as she has attempted to gain ‘male’ power.

What makes Rhaenyra such an interesting character is how her character is entirely a reflection of the cultural context she is situated in. Like Matilda, she has been given the duty to rule a Kingdom in a society that inherently discourages women to have any kind of personal or social agency. As a result, these women are forced to subvert gender roles and be relegated as cruel, evil and monstrous in their attempts to find agency."

Robin Daprato - Feminism and Misogyny in George R.R. Martin’s ‘The Princess and the Queen, or, The Blacks and the Greens’

[a-turtle-dove-on-my-breast]

Thanks @hilda-dewitt for this great piece of work depicting Louis I of Anjou and Marie of Blois, great-grandparents of Margaret of Anjou. Louis I of Anjou was the founder of the Angevin cadet branch of the House of Valois, and Marie of Blois was the first of a series of powerful women in the House of Valois-Anjou.

I really found their story to be full of fun and drama. After King John II of France was taken prisoner in the Battle of Poitiers, Louis broke the Aragonese marriage contract arranged by his father to marry Marie, the daughter of one major claimant to the ducal throne of Brittany, neighboring his appanage of Anjou. His desire to meet his wife pushed him to end his hostage career in England prematurely on his own, and more or less led to the decision of John II to return to captivity, lol. While Marie's father fell in battle six months after John the Good's death in London, the couple remained close and intimate throughout their lives. Louis served as a leading military commander in his elder brother Charles V's reconquest of southwestern France during the second phase of the Hundred Years' War. He was also a loyal friend and protector of Bertrand du Guesclin, who fought for Marie's father before entering service for the Valois. However, due to his role in the 1378 tax revolts and his overambitious claim to the throne of Naples, Louis remained a controversial figure in France, and his past accomplishments were little appreciated. After Louis's death in the unsuccessful march to Naples, Marie continued their quest for the Neapolitan crown, and, after a tough fight against opposing claimants, secured for their seven-year-old son Louis II the County of Provence, which was in a personal union with the Kingdom of Naples. She acted as regent for Louis II during his minority, and arranged the marriage between him and Yolande of Aragon.

[une-sanz-pluis]

One of the things that interests me the most about Catherine of Valois is her agency.

She's often assumed not to have little to no agency, often in the sense of the stereotypical "pawn to broodmare" pop history narrative about medieval women that in Catherine's case is extended into her widowhood. Her brothers-in-law are said to force her to remain in England, to have denied her the regency of England, to have forbidden her remarriage, and kept her from court. The one piece of agency that Catherine is allowed to possess in these narratives is her decision to form a relationship with Owen Tudor and marry him - but this is always imagined to have been the result of an all-consuming love that she cannot control. Her agency is, therefore, subsumed into a narrative of a woman subject to the whims and passions of her heart, carried away by destiny and fate to marry Owen and, ultimately, found the Tudor dynasty.

It is true that Catherine had little personal choice in her first marriage but that is true for nearly all aristocratic medieval girls and women. But we do them a great disservice to assume that they were therefore born "pawns" and then became "broodmares" and experienced little of life outside of this. Catherine, as Queen of England, would have wielded a great deal of power and influence - if she was not the she-wolf her daughter-in-law was, it is because she did not face circumstances similar to those that forced Margaret of Anjou to step outside the bounds of conventional queenship. It is clear from the scant records of her time as queen-consort that she was taken seriously as queen and expected to wield influence and it is also clear that she was still considered an important figure at court and still exercised power and influence. And while Catherine almost certainly did love Owen, I think it is more interesting to emphasise that it was her choice to marry him and why she might have done that rather than imagining her swept away by love, lust and/or destiny.

[inky-duchess]

If a kingdom wanted an alliance through marriage, did the bride have to be related to the royal family or could she be any noblewoman in good standing? If she had to be directly related to the ruler, how distant could the relation be until it would be seen as an insult? (ie: second or third cousin, cousins removed, etc.)

She could be both but it's better if she's a relative of the royal family as it makes it more of a personal alliance between family rather than countries. A distant relative like a cousin would still be accepted but it would be seen as strange if say there was a daughter or son available - like the marriage of Margaret of Anjou to Henry IV.

[kchasm]

Ryu Number: Jack Jackson

In 1120, the son—and anticipated heir—of King Henry I of England died in a maritime accident. In a time and place where a succession crisis popped off every time a monarch bit it even with preparation beforehand, this was Kind Of Bad.

The only legitimate child Henry I had left was Matilda (also called Maud), who'd been married to the Holy Roman Empire for a while, but was now married to the Count of Anjou, who was Not Popular, especially among the sort of people you wanted to be popular among if you wanted them to be alright with you ruling the kingdom. Henry I tried to go to bat for Matilda, but time ran out, and in 1135, he died. And that's just about when the Anarchy began.

...No, really, that's what the civil war was called: "The Anarchy." I would rather not have a civil war, but you've got to admit that that's a pretty hardcore name for one. Also actually it actually took a few years for Matilda to set up and get to civil-warring, but "and after a few years the Anarchy began" doesn't sound nearly as cool, right?

Matilda's main opponent in this game of thrones was Henry I's nephew, Stephen of Blois, who, having the good fortune to actually be in the area, wasted no time taking the reins. An awful lot of stuff happened after, but eventually everyone got real sick of fighting and in 1153 the big names hammered out the Treaty of Wallingford, that agreed that Stephen would be king, actually, but once he shuffled off Matilda's son—also named Henry, because history isn't hard enough to keep track of already—would take the throne.

...This isn't really about any of these guys, though.

The Pillars of the Earth is a 1989 historical fiction novel by Welsh author Ken Follett. Using the Anarchy and related events as a backdrop, it tells the story of a lot of folks from the priory and village of Kingsbridge, England having a Real Subpar Time. Secrets and Politics happen, a lot of it churchish, and it trickles down to the little people in the worst of ways.

Also there's a bunch about building cathedrals; some folks in the book are Really Deep Into That, especially Jack Jackson, one of the more important characters from the book who gets dealt a rotten hand and makes do nonetheless.

It's not the sort of media you'd expect to get a video game adaptation out of, but it got one anyway.

And I'm definitely not complaining, 'cause that means Jack Jackson has a Ryu Number of at most 3.

...Guess who finally finished studying the newest Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition DLC? Victors and Vanquished features a numbers of historical scenarios, including one where you play as Henry's nephew, Stephen, Stephen's brother, Henry, and Stephen's wife, Matilda, against the armies of Henry's daughter, Matilda, and Matilda's son, Henry.

This is giving me flashbacks back to elementary school when every third girl was named either Ashley or Jessica. I cut the knot by simply remembering no one's name, which worked badly.

Anyway, as a bonus, have this list of characters who—taking into account only the games I have gone through myself—appear only in Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition.

[goodqueenaly]

I wonder whether GRRM might use the marriage of Margaret of Anjou to Henry VI of England as partial inspiration for the betrothal and marriage of Myriah Martell to the future King Daeron II.

I certainly believe, after all, that GRRM has used, and will use, Henry VI as an inspiration for King Baelor (in addition, of course, to the author’s explicitly stated point of reference for the septon-king, Louis IX of France). Both kings had succeeded conquering warriors who had themselves looked to make good on ancestral dynastic claims to foreign kingdoms - and, to some limited and impermanent extent, succeeded in doing so. In turn, however, both Henry VI and Baelor, each later famed for their piety, expressed an interest not into stepping into their predecessors’ shoes but in bringing about peaceable ends to their respective wars. Not only did both peace endeavors include the surrender of important aristocratic hostages - the Duke of Orleans by King Henry, the children of Dorne’s blue blooded families by King Baelor - but these efforts also included royal marriages with high-ranking families in these recently enemy territories - Baelor arranging the marriage of his young cousin Daeron to the Dornish princess Myriah Martell, Henry VI agreeing to a marriage between himself and Margaret of Anjou.

Unfortunately for the idealistic Henry VI, the marriage between himself and Margaret of Anjou neither ended war with France nor provided additional gains for England. Margaret’s cash dowry was relatively small - 20,000 francs - and though her father promised to include Margaret’s maternal claims to Mallorca and Menorca, these territories had been claimed by the crown of Aragon for centuries, and were a practical impossibility for England to occupy. Worse, shortly after Margaret’s coronation, King Henry VI agreed to surrender the county of Maine and abandon English claims to the territory of Anjou, in the hopes of obtaining a truce with France. The king’s aspiration for such a peaceful settlement were, however, in vain: within five years of Margaret’s marriage to Henry, the French king (with Margaret’s father René at his side) had retaken Normandy, and three years later England lost Gascony - its last major holding, besides the tiny toehold of Calais, from the conquests of the Hundred Years’ War and the inheritance of his Plantagenet predecessors. 

In turn, I wonder whether GRRM will look to model Myriah Martell’s betrothal to Daeron. Just as Margaret was a French princess and niece (by marriage, at least) of the King of France - that is, a high-ranking female relative of the ruling family which had so recently opposed the last king’s conquest - so Myriah Martell was a princess of Dorne, daughter of the (unnamed) Prince of Dorne who had bent the knee to Daeron I. Margaret was not her father’s heir, as Myriah Martell certainly was (as the eldest child of the Prince of Dorne), but both princesses saw territorial returns to their paternal families in connection with their marriages to the royal successors of the fathers’ conquerors. Just as Henry VI agreed to surrender Maine (and his claim to Anjou) to Margaret’s father René in the hopes of sealing long-term peace between his realm and that of King Charles VII of France, so Baelor the Blessed agreed to a marriage between Prince Daeron and Princess Myriah as part of an agreement of peace between Dorne and the Iron Throne - with, presumably, a promise that the Iron Throne would not try to assert control over the late King Daeron’s conquered land. Consequently, I wonder whether the same deep unpopularity of the decision to surrender Maine - indeed, the Duke of Suffolk, blamed as the chief architect of this agreement, was impeached by the House of Commons on these grounds, among others, and shortly thereafter murdered - would have extended to this decision by Baelor, and by extension to Myriah herself - a princess whose betrothal, enemies of this decision may have asserted, came not with a rich dowry for a would-be future king but instead a return of lands conquered by the Iron Throne.

[wonder-worker]

Why was empress Mathilda not able to become the ruler?

Hi! There were lots of reasons, and historians have gone back and forth between them over the years. I am not an expert at all, but the way I see it, it was a combination of factors - be it social, structural, or plain bad luck - that resulted in Matilda's inability to claim the throne of England. To list a few I think were relevant:

Misogyny. After his son's death in 1120, Henry I's first instinct doesn't seem to have been to name his daughter his heir but instead to conceive another son with his second wife Adeliza of Louvain. William of Malmesbury wrote that the lords swore to accept Matilda as their sovereign only if Henry I died without a male heir; John of Worcester wrote that Henry designated Matilda as heir as "he had as yet no legitimate heir to the kingdom", implying that Matilda would be the one to provide that heir (ie: a son); and it seems that some of Matilda's supporters like Robert of Gloucester stressed the claims of infant Henry (the future Henry II) from the onset. Some historians have argued that Henry I wished to live long enough to transfer the kingdom and duchy to his eldest grandson, though this is of course mere speculation and Matilda would have been her father's immediate successor for the foreseeable future regardless. So even during Henry I's life, while Matilda was named heir and was expected to inherit & rule England, her exact situation appears to have been complex, and her gender was - directly or indirectly - at the heart of the complication.

Moreover, during the Anarchy, while Stephen technically did not justify or defend his claim to the throne explicitly because of his gender, there was clearly public debate over female succession at that time: for example, Matilda's illegitimate brother Robert of Gloucester was known to reference the Bible, where the Book of Numbers depicted God sanctioning female inheritance when there were no sons. This indicates that Matilda faced opposition from enemy quarters specifically for those reasons. Also, during Matilda's brief assumption of power as a female king, gendered ideals of masculinity/femininity and kingship/queenship entirely dictated public response to her and shaped her negative reputation.

Xenophobia. The Normans and Angevins were historic enemies, and many nobles were incredibly worried about Matilda’s second husband Geoffrey Plantagenet becoming king. I don't think it's a surprise that the Gesta Stephani repeatedly called Matilda "Countess of Anjou" or emphasized the presence of "Angevin knights" among her entourage. This had something to do with gendered expectations as well, but it was also likely meant to highlight Matilda's presumed foreignness, despite the fact that she was a princess of England by birth.

Complicated inheritance patterns. Succession in England, both before and after the Norman Conquest, was incredibly tricky. I'm not even going to get started on the Anglo-Saxons, but going by William the Conqueror's children: his eldest son rebelled against him, his second son inherited while keeping the eldest one imprisoned for life, and was in turn most likely murdered by the third son, who also kept the eldest son imprisoned for life. Hereditary claims were thus overridden in both cases. As Charles Beem points out in the Lioness Roared about Matilda's own father: "Henry I promoted a system of lineal inheritance based on a firm rule of primogeniture [for his children]. However, his own legitimacy as king was not based on this principle, a concept that infiltrated Anglo-Norman inheritance practices during his reign. Instead, he based his self-representation as a legitimate king on a medieval hodge-podge of justifications: porphyrogeniture, or having been “born to the purple” after his father had become king of England, sacralization from his anointing and consecration, and the acclamation of the people: Finally, Henry I secured papal recognition for his title, and convinced Pope Calixtus II to reject the claims of William Clito, the son of Henry’s eldest brother Robert Curthose, in effect dealing a severe blow to the legitimacy of primogeniture." So even in an ideal scenario, the idea of a designated heir and eldest child succeeding without hindrance would have been unusual. Unfortunately, this was not an ideal scenario by any circumstances.

Also, England seems to have functioned with an interregnum at that time, meaning that Matilda would not have been immediately considered ruler upon her father's death. To quote Beem: "To become king of England in the year 1135 required positive, immediate action; although the theory of the king’s two bodies had already begun to develop, the idea that an immediate succession occurred upon the death of a king had not. Instead, an interregnum occurred, which ended only when the crown was placed on the next king’s head. This had been the case with William Rufus’s accession in 1087 and that of Henry I in 1100, both of whom overrode the hereditary claims of William the Conqueror’s eldest son Robert Curthose. Although Matilda had received oaths to support her candidacy, the oaths in themselves did not make her king. Like her uncle and her father before her, Matilda needed to be physically present in London, to receive formal homage from her tenants-in-chief, to accept the acclamation of the people, and to be anointed and crowned in Westminster by the archbishop of Canterbury". I think the first heir to be regarded as king despite not being physically present in the country was Edward I in 1272 - a while away. Which brings me to...

Bad Luck. At the time of her father's death, Matilda wasn't in England or Normandy. She seems to have left her father's court after a disagreement where he refused to be reconciled with William Talvas without punishing him despite Matilda's wishes on the contrary. As Robert of Torigny notes, in the end of 1135, "the empress Matilda, who he [Henry I] had long before appointed heir to his realm, was staying in Anjou with her husband count Geoffrey and her sons"; William of Malmesbury likewise stated that she was staying in France “for certain reasons.” The fact that Matilda wasn't physcally present made it easy for Stephen and the nobles to sideline her and overrule Henry I's appointment.

Matilda was also pregnant at the time, and it's possible that this prevented her for making the crossing, either due to physical reasons (we know she nearly died during her second childbirth) or due to ideological ones (she may have "considered such a state to be a liability in constructing herself as a viable contender for an office essentially gendered male", as Beem speculates).

An insufficient power base: Yet another one of her misfortunes was the fact that Henry I seems to have withheld his daughter's dowry till the end of his life. For example, Torigny writes that "the king was unwilling to do the fealty required by his daughter and her husband for all castles in Normandy and in England". Nor does Henry seem to have associated her with direct kingly governance during his life that could have made the transition to rulership more natural for her and for English & Norman magnates. This meant that Matilda and Geoffrey didn't seem to have had a solid power base to rely on at the time of her father's death with which she could directly launch her claim. It's no surprise that their first move was to try and secure her dowry castles (Exmes, Domfront, Argentan, Ambrières, Gorron, Colmont, etc), and that Matilda installed herself in one of them.

And, of course, Matilda's ultimate bad luck was the existence of a rival claimant (Stephen) with sufficient resources and backing who chose to press his own - theoretically inferior - claim. Ultimately, after the majority of nobles sided with or acquiesced to Stephen, Matilda's doors were shut - without tangible support, she was stuck. It's not surprising that it was only after Stephen began to alienate his followers (particularly Robert of Gloucester, who had initially supported him) a few years later that Matilda got an opportunity to press home her advantage.

Hope this helps!

[royalty-nobility]

Queen Elisabeth of France, on Horseback

Artist: Diego Rodríguez de Silva y Velázquez (Spanish, 1599-1660)

Date: ca. 1635

Medium: Oil on canvas

Collection: Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid, Spain

Elisabeth of France, Queen of Spain

Elisabeth of France, also known as Isabel or Elisabeth of Bourbon (22 November 1602 – 6 October 1644) was Queen of Spain from 1621 to her death and Queen of Portugal from 1621 to 1640, as the first spouse of King Philip IV & III. She served as regent of Spain during the Catalan Revolt in 1640–42 and 1643–44. As the mother of the Queen of France Maria Theresa, wife of Louis XIV, she was the great-grandmother of the Duke of Anjou, who became king of Spain as Philip V. Through her daughter, Elisabeth is the progenitor of the Spanish branch of the House of Bourbon, which still rules over Spain to this day, as all future kings of Spain after the War of Spanish Succession descend from her. She's also the ancestor of the current Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Henri, through both the Bourbon-Parma collateral branch of the Spanish royal family and the main branch of Bourbon dynasty, as he is a descendant of the last Duke of Parma, Robert I, and his mother Louise of Artois, the granddaughter of Charles X of France, through Robert's son Felix.

[exhausted-archivist]

Nice Long Info Dump of Anjou Baskar

I'm just gonna talk about Anjou cause I can't sleep and this has been all the things running through my head the past few days. I can't find a good ask meme for her to riff off of (if you have one do feel free to send it my way.) I'm also writing this with the end point being the start of her cookery journey in 9:44 Dragon.

Anjou Baskar

She/Her Born: 8th of Harvestmere 9:06 Dragon Favorite Colour: Greens and Creme colours Favorite Food: Spiced pears and pomegranates with goat cheese Favorite Drink: Elderflower tea

Family: Daughter to Ottilie and Markus Baskar Sister to Myrtille, Cassi, and Ambra Baskar Cousin to Lichen and Milena "Greenie" Gundaar, Lorena and Eliseo Gunnarr

Home: Anjou grew up on the border to Nevarra, the Anderfels, and Tevinter in a small city between Nessum and Perendale. Honestly, haven't nailed down exactly where, but leaning more towards the river. Her family does finance themselves through being merchants.

This city is where Anjou's family keep their main warehouses, a library, museum, and their estate. Most of the city's population are dwarves, humans, and elves. Grey Wardens are common visitors, partially because the city acts as a small way station and because the Baskar House has strong connections with the Wardens going back to the First Blight.

Anjou grew up on the house estate, being part of the main family line. She would often visit the house farms run by the Gundaar family, where she would take lessons with her cousins Lichen and Greenie as both of them specialized in natural areas of study. Lichen preferring geology and Greenie being focused on botanical studies.

Her cousins Lorena and Eliseo were a branch of the family that focused on the studies of combat and weapons. Eliseo is a skilled smith and Lorena a skilled warrior. Lorena left when Anjou was 16 to join the Wardens, and Eliseo joined her, aiming to be a smith for the Order.

Timeline

At the young age of 17, Anjou set off to study the culinary practices of Nevarran chefs, having taken interest in their attention for food pageantry as well being a hot spot for not only cultural food trades, but a hub for traditional practices of the Mourn Watch. (9:23 Dragon)

At the age of 21, she set off to apprentice with an Orlesian pastry chef; endeavoring to master their various desserts. It was around this time that she started hearing whispers about the Fifth Blight in Ferelden through her friend Silas' letters and other dwarven merchants who came from Orzammar. But she, and many others in western Orlais - as well as the surface in general - expressed a fair bit of doubt. (9:27 Dragon)

At the age of 25, she goes home at her parents request. Their refusal to allow her to continue her studies in Ferelden where the blight just ended the primary reason. Silas' confirmation on there actually having been a blight convinces her to listen.

When she is home, Silas stops by for a visit. This is the first time Silas meets Anjou's parents, who were expecting a nice dwarven man that was suitor trying to woo their daughter. Having heard about him and his good character from Anjou's cousin Lorena, they approved of him as a marriage prospect. They were surprised to be greeted by a very tall human Grey Warden. It was also this visit home, that Silas took Anjou on a date for the first time and Anjou realized that Silas not only had feelings for her but that she was open to the idea of a relationship with him. (9:31 Dragon)

At the age of 26, Silas was sent on a mission to Kirkwall after some curious events there. Anjou took the opportunity to travel with him and then make her way up to Antiva. (9:32 Dragon)

At the age of 28, news of the First Battle of Kirkwall reaches her parents and they urge Anjou to leave Markham and continue to Antiva where they got her a position in a well known kitchen. She relents, and makes the move. (9:34 Dragon)

At the age of 32, she was welcomed into the kitchen of a Fereldan noble, Mila Khans. There she studied fermentation, smoking, and other utilitarian food preparations while also the proper presentation. While in service of the Khans house, Anjou learned a surprising amount of eel and apple recipes - not that many overlapped between the two. (9:38 Dragon)

At the age of 34, the conflict brewing between mages, templars, and the Chantry and the brewing Orlesian civil war cut her Ferelden studies short. Her family worried she'd be trapped there should conflict break out, summoned her home in the summer of 9:40 Dragon. A month after she arrived home, news of the civil war washed through Orlais. (9:40 Dragon)

At the age of 35, the Breach. Anjou was more or less confined to the family estate for the entirety of 9:41, as was most of the children of House Baskar. During that time she spent most of her time working at the Merchant branch. They received word from Weisshaupt they needed supplies and support in the Anderfels and Anjou jumped at the chance to leave as well as go to visit Silas. For the next two years Anjou worked with the Wardens and during this time their romantic relationship deepened, though no formal courtship was started. She was called away by her parents and at Silas' urging as a civil war among the Wardens was brewing and tensions were rising.

At the age of 38, Anjou and a majority of the House Baskar and the offshoot houses met with concerns. Troubling information was pouring in through their contacts was reinforcing the 14 year old rumor of the incoming Blight in the Anderfels, Qun movement in the south, continued disruptions by the Venatori, the weakening grip of the Archon on Tevinter, and many more. The debate to begin the call for mass archive goes on long before the consensus is reached.

With the decision to start the process, Anjou informs her parents of her intention to document the foods across Thedas as well. They implore her to travel with a guard as she's never been without company. While she agrees initially, at dawn the next morning she leaves the family home on her little shetlend pony.

A few months into her journey, she finds herself traversing into the Frostbacks. Making her way up the slops with her pony, solo, she gets herself in a little situation that puts her in need of rescue. Luckily Audur and his sister happen to be traveling by when they see her and her pony get buried in snow from the trees above.

Audur pulls her out the siblings take Audur to their hold. It is from there that she begins her first point of archiving. She asks about and writes down a wealth of recipes over the course of the next two months till the weather clears enough for travel. Audur and Anjou become quite close and since Anjou made it to the hold with more or less sheer luck, Audur offers to escort her down.

But once they reach the base, Audur decides to continue traveling with her. They later meet up with Silas once back on the main road at the first tavern they reach. Silas had been tracking Anjou down since he received word from her parents, they had asked for him to do them the favor of escorting Anjou. More than willing, he started on his way to meet up at the estate, only to find she had a month head start on him. Winter weather and the like slowed him down despite his best efforts, and he was genuinely surprised she had made it to the Frostbacks.

Silas joins Audur in escorting Anjou and this is pretty much where I'm at.

[nrilliree]

https://www.tumblr.com/nrilliree/747663914665459712?source=share

It's really crazy how much TG lives in their own fanfiction.

This person also refuses and seems to understand that it is misogynistic that Rhaenyra ended up with a nickname equivalent to Maegor simply for arguing about taxes. Something that was advised to her by a man on her council, not even her idea. And what else could she do anyway ? There was no more money because the Greens took everything ! But obviously, it's all Rhaenyra's fault. Also, I find it hard to understand how the TG are good sovereigns when we see how they manage money ?

Also, the simple fact that she doesn't seem to accept and understand that Rhaenyra had more than half the kingdom on her side ? That the Greens weren't tied or had a majority ? She almost acts like everyone obviously wants to support them.

She advocates neutrality while she is openly TG, it annoys me.

Anyway, coming from a person who thinks that I can't read and don't know anything about the GRRM universe simply because I told a simple truth ; namely that women could not become Kingsguard. A truth according to her that is false because since Visenya created the Kingsguard, apparently that means that women can be too ? Sorry, but how can we seriously support such a stupid thing ? It's not because Visenya created the Kingsguard that women can become one! In the era of ASOIAF / GOT a woman can't even be a knight ! So Kingsguard in the time of Rhaenyra ?! Make me laugh !

She's also exactly the kind of person who will try to explain to you that Rhaenyra can't be the legitimate heir because apparently there is no legitimate heir under the pretext that the law is vague. Stupid, the only real law that matters is the word of the king. It kills me that they are trying so hard to deny it ?!

I'm not going to talk about our least favorite troll, so I won't refer to her statement, but rather the general attitude among TGs.

Alicent's mistakes and crimes are explained by the fact that it was not her fault, but the evil men around her who coerced and manipulated her. She is a victim of evil men. Rhaenyra's mistakes and crimes are Rhaenyra's mistakes and crimes. The end.

This is what some people think.

This can be extended further to other TG characters: Did Helaena go crazy and commit suicide after her children died? Poor thing, it was completely explainable, the death of murdered children is a huge tragedy that will devastate everyone! Rhaenyra went crazy and paranoid after the death of her children? This is no explanation! You can't explain this to her, she's a terrible tyrant!

Rhaenyra's reign was not good, but there was much more to it than the fact that Rhaenyra "is evil, spoiled, narcissistic and generally yuck." People accuse her of not being a feminist because she didn't decree that from now on all daughters would inherit on an equal footing with sons… Do any of these people even know how emancipation developed in the real world? It didn't work that way. Rhaenyra was to be the first woman in power. It was the first step, and true emancipation often takes generations. In Poland we had Jadwiga of Anjou and guess what? She took the throne as a king, not a queen, so she could rule, and that didn't miraculously result in women being treated equally to men from then on. Rhaenyra listened to her advisors and therefore did not decree that daughters would inherit before sons or cousins, because she knew she could not make too many changes in one moment. She listened to the advisors, but it was still her fault. It's just as much her fault for stealing the Driftmark from Baela and Rhaena… even if Corlys preferred to legitimize his bastard and make him heir rather than give the inheritance to Laena's daughters! Rhaenyra is fully to blame for the riots and dragon slaying, even if the Shepherd was simply looking for a suitable excuse to overthrow the rich and lords. It wasn't even about Rhaenyra, and if Aegon had been on the throne then, there would have been riots anyway. The Shepherd would simply find another reason! For example, the fact that people were starving and Aegon built golden statues of war criminals…

She realizes that Rhaenyra was not a good queen, but that was due to the situation. War, lack of money, riots incited by the Shepherd, and on top of her own emotional problems that resulted from almost her entire family being killed. If someone doesn't see it, he or she is simply a TG pro, not a "neutral" person who, strangely enough, justifies only one side of the conflict.

[heather123fan-blog]

medieval women week day 2: Favorite non-Queen or Queen-adjacent royal woman: Jacquetta of Luxembourg Duchess of Bedford and Mother to Queen Elizabeth Woodville

Jacquetta of Luxembourg was the eldest child of the French Count of St Pol; her family descended from Charlemagne and were cousins to the Holy Roman Emperor. She grew up with war between France and England raging around her.

John, Duke of Bedford was the youngest son of King Henry IV. Having lost his wife to plague in 1432, he arranged to marry the seventeen-year-old Jacquetta, who was his social equal by her birth. Although married for two years they were childless when John died in September 1435. The King instructed Jacquetta to come to England and ordered Sir Richard Woodville, to arrange it.

However, Jacquetta and Richard fell in love, but Richard was a poor knight, far below Jacquetta in social status. Nonetheless, they married secretly thus thwarting any plans King Henry may have had to marry her off to a wealthy English lord. Theirs was a morganatic marriage, where one of the partners, most often the wife, was socially inferior. Henry was enraged and fined the couple £1000. He did however allow their heirs to inherit, which was unusual for morganatic marriages in England.

Being the widow of Henry V’s brother and aunt to the King, royal protocol gave Jacquetta the highest rank at court of any female except Henry’s wife, Margaret of Anjou, to whom Jacquetta was related by marriage. She even ‘outranked’ the King’s mother and was referred to as the ‘Duchess of Bedford,’ retaining the title from her first marriage. Richard and Jacquetta lived in their manor house at Grafton Regis near Northampton producing fourteen children, the eldest, Elizabeth being born in 1437.

In 1448 Richard was created Lord Rivers: his advancement ensured his family supported Henry VI in the dynastic feuding of the Wars of the Roses. The situation changed with the Yorkist victory at the Battle of Towton in 1461 and the seizure of the throne by Edward IV. By the spring of 1464, Jacquetta’s daughter Elizabeth was a widow, her Lancastrian husband having been killed in 1461. Within a few months, Elizabeth was married to the young King Edward IV.

Jacquetta died in 1472 aged 56 and was buried at Grafton, though no record of her tomb survives. Recently, one legacy has come to light. Research by gene specialists indicates that Jacquetta was a carrier of the rare Kell-Antigen-Mcleod syndrome causing impaired fertility and psychotic behavioural changes in the male descendants of the family.

Written by Michael Long. I have over 30 years experience teaching History in schools and examiner History to A level. My specialist area is England in the 15th and 16th centuries. I am now a freelance writer and historian.