Why do you think Elizabeth might have ended up at Bermondsey Abbey? Let me know below and remember to check out my Patreon at www.patreon.com/historycalling
I honestly think she never stopped plotting to put a York boy on the throne and eventually her own daughter and her husband made the decision for her to go to Bermondsey Abby. And no I don't think it mattered if she had an actual York boy as she had proven that she was previously willing to use an imposter in Perkin Warbeck. I absolutely believe she conspired with Margaret of Burgundy in that entire scam. I love your videos, btw 😂💞🙏
No clue if this has historical basis, but if I'd had a life like that, I would be hypervigilant and quick to take offense. Not necessarily "court" material...
Many Yorkists after the disappearance of Edward and Richard defected to Henry Tudor. Only die-hards like Richard III's heir De La Pole & Lord Lovell continued the fight with the Lambert Simnel fiasco bankrolled by Margaret of York. De La Pole met his end at East Stoke and Lovell only survived by swimming the Trent but disappeared from history. A body was found at his home Lovell Minster in a secret room. "The Cat, the Rat and Lovell the dog, ruled all England under the Hog". Margaret of York was involved with Walter Tyrrel one of the last die-hards and possibly the organiser of the disappearance of the princes was also involved in the Perkin Warbeck outbreak. Why would Elizabeth side with a group that possibly murdered her sons and at the same time sell her daughter out and disinherit her Arthur her grandson? You rightly say it was a stretch. Her ancestry had been Lancastrian on the Grey and Woodville side. They were seen as upstarts by the "old money". Many of her sisters were snapping up eligible bachelors from the old aristocracy. Outside Edward IV his family seem to have distanced themselves from her family. It was Neville v Woodville. She lost her male relations at Kenilworth and Pontefract. Margaret Beaufort had herself called "My Lady the King's Mother, dressed as fabulously as her daughter-in-law and walked only half-a-step behind her. Margaret B gets a bad press but it was survival. She must have had to bite her tongue many times as she ws largely at an enemy court even carrying Anne Neville's train at her coronation while her own son was in exile. It was all or nothing, her uncles killed battle, her husband Edmund died as a prisoner from plague, her second husband killed from wounds received, her relatives the two Lord Welles killed fighting Edward IV. He third husband playing politics with Richard. Has anyone any idea of the effect of that? She had only one child. Elizabeth Woodville seemed to have been very fertile and was giving birth regularly. Can anyone blame Margaret for being protective, she had lost so much. If she had been male she would probably have gone to the block many times. There's no bond on earth like that between a mother and her son especially if he's her only child. Elizabeth had no reason to see a revival of the Neville/De La Pole cause. Meeting Edward at Grafton Regis had traumatic outcomes. The Beaufort/Tudor dynasty was embryonic, perhaps she just felt surplus to requirements. Old Cecily left Baynard's Castle for a life of quiet at Berkhamstead. Catherine de Valois arguably went to Bermondsey Abbey, if for a few days. After her traumatic life perhaps she just felt the call of the cloister. It is the Beaufort badge the "Portcullis" that has gone on to signify the "Mother of Parliaments". Margaret Beaufort won in the end.
@@christinerobbins9376 From the outset it was a Neville v Woodville feud. Only Edward IV of the Neville family ever seems to have got on with the Woodvilles. The Woodvilles had hitherto been Lancastrian and would return to that fold at Bosworth. The House of York was a spent force. Margaret of York had moved her court after her husband's death and kept the flame alive by supporting die-hard Yorkists, De La Pole the Earl of Lincoln and Richard III's designated heir and Lord Lovell in the Lambert Simnel outbreak. It ended at East Stoke. De La Pole was killed. Lovell swam the Trent and was one of few to survive. Margaret personally sent 500 German soldiers who fought to the last, none survived. It was a disaster for Margaret and the Yorkist cause. Lambert Simnel was given a job in Henry VII's kitchen. Margaret did the same with Perkin Warbeck. It too ended in disaster. One of the ring-leaders was a last Yorkist die-hard Sir Walter Tyrrel. Sir Walter Tyrrel confessed to organising the murder of Elizabeth Woodville's sons in the Tower. Why should she support such people or the Nevilles that had killed many of her Woodville family? Don't forget that Cecily Neville was around and left Baynard's Castle for a manor house in Berkhamstead. Margaret Beaufort moved into Collyweston nearby relations said cordial. Perhaps Cecily and Elizabeth Woodville just wanted a quiet life away from the court. Later Anne of Cleves after separating from Henry VIII lived a life in the country. After such traumatic lives with their menfolk killed it was a natural outlet.
I don’t think she fell from grace, I think she just finally felt safe enough and free enough to do what she’d always wanted to, to spend her days in peace, not being bothered by court drama.
I'm sure Henry VII pushed for it a bit, too as there was much back-channel drama over rank and precedence. Under normal circumstances, dowager queen and king's mother were the same person, now both positions were occupied by women who each saw themselves as above the other. And while I don't think it's what she had always wanted, it is possible that, toward the end, Elizabeth Woodville was just weary from a lifetime of schemes and battles and just wanted a bit of peace.
What always amazes me about Tudor times and the events leading up to it is that for such a misogynistic, male dominated era, it was actually the women who played a huge role. And that's true from Margaret Beaufort and Elizabeth Woodville all the way up to Elizabeth I. Connecting, scheming, financing, plotting, planning, leading and advising could be just as important as who swung a sword on which battlefield. Reminds me of something I heard from a study of Japanese history in that daughters were less valued and yet more valuable. Same here. In an era when the birth of a girl was seen as a disappointment, it was the women who married out and tied families together. It was a daughter you could marry into the family of an ally or to make peace with an enemy. Royal houses of Europe are related and tied together through the women. And if you were lucky, a girl could marry up (or at least become a mistress to a powerful man) and bring up her entire family. A man with no daughters was often a man without connections. You can even look at Henry VII's original plan for his children as typical of the time: one son to take the throne, one son in the church and daughters married to kings. He knew the value of that last one.
Two Margarets won the WotR, Queen Margaret of Anjou & Lady Margaret Beaufort by keeping their House in the game while the Nevilles in-fighting destroyed their House. No wonder the males suffered. A third of the nobility died violently. The biggest danger to females was childbirth. Another generation and they too would be victims of the block. Lady Margaret Beaufort was amazing yet vilified by modern "narrative". She had Henry when she was 13 and probably physically damaged not to have more. She was slight being apparently 4ft 8in. Many of her male relatives died violently, uncles and cousins, Dukes of Somerset, Lord Welles senior and Lord Welles junior and her second husband. Her one child was continually under threat from an early age. She was a survivor, you had to be. She pushed the boat out securing her and her son's survival in a very hostile world.
Well done. I think many of us forget the human side of things. She was a woman who went through so much, one minute destitute, then a queen, then stripped of everything, then reinstated but up against another more scheming "queen mother". Quite frankly, maybe she knew that her time was limited (after 12 kids!) and just decided to bow out with a bit of dignity, so she could just have some peace and pray for her dead children. I know that I would have been both mentally and physically worn out after all that. She must have had the strength of an ox to do whatever she had to, in order to survive with as many kids as she had. We should really be calling her a "superqueen" along with Margaret of Anjou.
I certainly hope she opted for a quiet retirement, but I don't know. It seems odd that she had so few possessions. That's quite a comedown for a former Queen.
@@HistoryCalling I agree with some subscribers on the retirement issue. Maybe she was just exhausted (Margaret Beaufort only had 1 child and a pretty easy existence compared to Elizabeth) and probably ill. Getting out of the rat race can be quite compulsive for some people. Even today, you hear of CEOs retiring early so they can live in a luxury beach house somewhere exotic. Maybe Bermondsey was "exotic" enough for Elizabeth, but still close enough if needed. How many posessions do you need to be a nun? When I was at school, eons ago, I was taught by a Spanish nun who we were all convinced was minor royalty. She had next to nothing in the convent.
@@elisabethhopson5639 Lady Margaret "only had" one child because she was probably damaged in giving birth to Henry at 13 evidence suggests. She was also of small stature being about 4ft 8in. Margaret Beaufort at around 10 was one of the most independant wealthy females in England due to her Beaufort landed interests. Her uncles were the Dukes of Somerset. She was struggling looking where the next groat was coming from!
@@elisabethhopson5639 1). A lot of nobles had land. A driver of the WotR was land. Elizabeth Woodville would have had probably a lot of land, all the nobles did, that's what made you a noble. She was a founder of Queens's College, Cambridge with Margaret of Anjou. You have to be fabulously wealthy to do that. Normally you would give up some of your land to provide the college with rental income for day-to-day expenses. So she probably had enough land to spare. Many women if they were widowed, especially noble women, would retire to a Convent. One of the most famous nuns Hildegard of Bingen was from a noble family. It's still the case in continental Europe for women to enter a Beguinage. Even for Bermondsey Abbey, Queen Catherine of Valois had retired there recently, if only for a matter of days.
Correct both Margaret of Anjou and Elizabeth of Anjou has both founded Queens' College. That tells you they were both religious and fabulously wealthy. The idea that they were on their "uppers" is for the birds. They may not have had as much as in former days might he true but compared to Jane Doe They were loaded.
have to say, Edward IV's brothers were a piece of work, Clarence seems almost self destructive in his betrayals and then Richard III's probable murder of his nephews is just dispicable, I can't even imagine how hard it was to deal with loosing so many children
Aww, thank you (though I spend part of my weekend answering TH-cam comments, which I perhaps should have thought of before I chose Friday as my release day!)
@@HistoryCalling oh- well one can always change that lmao but yes. I have been obsessed with history all my life, and to have access to such well researched content feels like a privilege!
I could, but I think a lot of people like the videos as their end of week wind down (which is one of the reasons I selected that day in fact) and I'm used to it now, so I think I'll forbear for the time being. Thank you for your kind words about the research. It's a lot of hard work, so it's always lovely to be appreciated :-)
@@HistoryCalling Ofc! I myself adore spending hours reading chronicle after chronicle, comparing opinions and deciding wich one I believe in, so Ik how hardwork it is! It’s a pity your dms don’t work, it would be nice to chat with you over shared interests!
You mean on Instagram? I opted to keep them off as I just felt it was too much work to deal with messages under videos, plus email, plus DMs. I do debate switching them on sometimes, but honestly I don't think I'd have time to get to them. :-(
I have been really loving and looking forward to these Women of the Wars of the Roses videos! Elizabeth Woodville is one of my favorites. I’d love one on Jacquetta!
I vote for illness or exhaustion with royal life to explain Elizabeth's retirement to Bermondsey Abbey. It's clear that her daughter Elizabeth of York remained extremely loyal to her siblings for the rest of her life, so it's hard to imagine a rift with her mother that she wouldn't have worked hard to smooth over. Given how much Elizabeth of York had to support her sisters throughout Henry VII's reign, it seems entirely possible that her mother, Elizabeth Woodville, was mainly trying to make better provision for her younger children when she retired to Bermondsey. Although as someone who's 56 and about to retire, I find it amazing to think that someone's life was effectively over at around 55!
Agreed. She’d put up with schemes and intrigued her entire adult life, it makes sense why, once she was absolutely assured that her children were finally safe, she’d want to just get away from it all and live a peaceful life elsewhere
I definitely hope it was a voluntary retirement too, but I must confess I'm not sure. I mean she could have retired to a nice manor house somewhere with lots of money and servants, as opposed to near poverty in an Abbey. It's all a bit odd.
I think if you were 30 you were long-lived. Henry V got an arrow in the face at Shrewsbury and lived because he had a top physician. Otherwise? Sadly Henry passed-away in his 30's. Edward IV around 40. He had the best diet, lots of fish. If you were a commoner you would be pressed into service to fight in the battles. They wore little armour unlike the knights and men at arms. Apparently the most common injury was the loss of a right-hand. The hand raised to protect oneself. There was a lot of left-handed shepherds afterwards.
I *HAVE* to ask this question because HC & Titus really do know their history; my 24-year-old son loves to tell me this story about why the middle finger is considered an insult 😂. Is this truly because the archers at Agincourt had their middle fingers removed (the "drawing finger" for an Archer)? He tells me that after they were maimed people would throw up the middle finger to mock the fallen archers from France. But I have zero evidence of this 😂
@@HistoryCalling Not so odd when you consider how Christianity emphasizes poverty as one of the highest virtues. Maybe Elizabeth felt that going to an abbey to live her life in service to God would ensure the health and continued rein of her daughter and grandchildren. After seeing so much horror, and maybe supporting some of it, if she did have any kind of hand in the Duke of Clarence's death, Elizabeth might of thought living a simple, godly life was the best thing for her and her family.
Love my Friday sessions with your videos. Whenever I listen to other history videos I find myself shaking my head at the content knowing full well you have debunked a lot of what they are saying! Thank you for all your hard work. You make my day!
Thanks Jeanne. There is indeed a lot of tripe out there (not that I can't make a mistake here and there myself, but when people are repeat offenders you just know they aren't putting the work in).
Yeah, I agree with you on the efforts to rehab Richard III's reputation. They cite the most specious points to try and portray him as a well-meaning Lord Protector who was manipulated by others into sanctioning the awful things done in his name. Elizabeth Woodville came to terms with Richard because she had no reason to think Richard would ever be successfully deposed.
Yes, I just can't see him as the good guy I'm afraid, though I know that will annoy the Ricardians. There were just far too many dead bodies piled up behind him as he approached the throne to explain away in any manner that leaves him in a good light.
@@HistoryCalling Exactly. Every single one of the people he killed to get to the throne (especially the princes) were what today would be called a State-Level Action. Nobody under Richard was going to take it upon themselves to act unilaterally, not without his express authorization to do act.
@@keiththorpe9571 The remains of Richard got way more respect than they deserved. At best they should have been left where they were. At worst, he should have been quartered like the traitor he was.
The Ricardians 😂😂😂... I'm sorry for a moment my American brain kicked in and I thought I read the Kardashians🤣 I honestly didn't know there was an official name for the Richard supporters... I imagine these are people descended from him and I can understand wanting to rehab the past reputation but the historical record speaks to his ruthlessness... and no I'm not talking about Shakespeare 😂
@@christinerobbins9376 No, not the Kardashians. The Ricardians, I find, are often what I think of as 'Professional Contrarians" and scholars looking to make a name for themselves through deconstructive analysis of history. Bucking conventional wisdom, and all that.
Thank you for this incredibly beautiful story. I think that during that period of time in a very religious England, Elizabeth finally wanted to make peace with the Lord and find some forgiveness for her soul in the final years of her life. After all, her ambitions during her lifetime have caused her to scheme and plot against her enemies to benefit mostly her family and herself. That is how politics were played out back then. I think she went in exile because her work was done and she wanted some peace at last. That was also a respectable thing to do back then.
I've heard a theory floated that Henry VII got tired of essentially supporting two queens and that's why Elizabeth Woodville was sent to the abbey. Given his reputation for being a miser, it may hold water.
I'd need to see the evidence for it, but taking pretty much all her worldly goods off her seems a bit extreme. I kind of hope there was a better reason for it than miserliness (even if that reason was that she'd been naughty and tried to overthrow him!).
Yet he also supported his mother, Margaret of Beaufort, while he lived. One is sure that she didn't swan around Court in mere habits and not in robes proper for the King's Mother.
@@meeeka Margaret Beaufort had been an independently woman from a girl, one of the wealthiest in England. The Beaufort inheritance was mammoth, she was not short of a groat or two. Same as for Elizabeth Woodville. They were all "landed". Land and property was a major "driver" of the WotR. None of them really needed Henry to pay their bills. Queen Margaret of Anjou and Queen Elizabeth Woodville together both founded Queens' College, Csmbridge. (Hence the apostrophe). To do that they had to give up some land to provide a rental income. It also shows both women had religious leanings.
Margaret Beaufort, it seems to me, was very intelligent. I do not think Elizabeth Woodville was her equal. I know everyone wants Richard only to be the huge bad person. The Woodvilles were problems.
I never tire of saying superb, There could be many Reasons why Elizabeth fell from grace in her later years, it's another Tudor mystery HC Thank you as always. 😊👍
Yes, I'd love to have been a fly on the wall as it were, to hear some of the conversations had amongst the royal family in the late 1480s to find out what happened.
with everything that happened in her life you would think she had lived to be 100, but no only 55?! the decisions she had to make in her life, i just even begin to imagine. loved this series!!
Thankyou for interesting reading on the life and times of Elizabeth Woodville. What happened to the other members of her family ie brother's is there any history on their lives going forward?
Haha, thank you. I actually just had to finish dinner quickly too so that I could come back into the office to babysit the video for the first hour :-)
Elizabeth Woodville's life seems like it has so many twists and reversals in it that it should be fiction. It's remarkable what one woman went through. I would very much like to see that video about the apparent illegitimacy of her marriage to Edward (personally, I think it was probably a political lie intended to strip Elizabeth and her sons of any power they did and could have had but I would be interested in seeing the evidence for myself regardless). As always, your work is amazing and highly entertaining.
@@angr3819 Not necessarily a lie. Its entirely possible that the randy Edward had made a marriage promise to another woman prior to his dalliance with Elizabeth. He may well have decided that it was not binding, but the law could have said otherwise. The unfortunate woman gave birth to a child and was then banished to a nunnery where she died soon after. I did wonder why Edward did not secure his family's position by legal means, but it may have been because it was an uncomfortable subject. The lady had been silenced, and the priest had been paid of with bribes (if any of the story was true). It does seem ridiculous that Richard was perfectly fine with everything, until suddenly, his brother's death put the throne was within his reach.
I always enjoy History Calling videos but these two on Elizabeth Woodville are my favourite. So well researched and told. It's so nice to find Tudor vids that I learn new things from instead of the same stuff rehashed yet again.
Thank you. I do try hard to think up new things to talk about for the Tudors (which is why it's so frustrating when people who are too lazy and/or stupid to do the same steal my video ideas, but I digress). I'm glad you enjoyed Elizabeth's videos. She's a fascinating historical figure to study.
Yeah, I agree with your assessment that Elizabeth Woodville didn't trust Richard, but had no way to keep her daughters out of his hands. Forcing him to swear public oaths was about the only power she had, and she would only have that if he didn't take the girls by force. Which makes Philippa Gregory's portrayal of Elizabeth of York and Richard as lovers just 🤢🤢. (Even moreso than the baseline uncle-niece grossness.)
Yes, I don't think there was an affair there, but I'll look at it in my Elizabeth of York videos. For uncle/niece shenanigans you usually have to go to the Habsburgs.
Yeah, ..Phillipa Gregory must be a low key Ricardian because that "love affair" made no sense and was batshit crazy. I didn't read the books but it damn sure nearly ruined the end of White Queen and beginning of White Princess with that foolishness And its no surprise that in any YT videos I see on the subject, the self proclaimed Ricardians in the comments blame Henry Tudor/Margaret B for the boys' deaths even tho it makes no sense and neither would have had access to them.
Lord Stanley is the only reason Elizabeth and Margaret Beaufort’s scheming worked. His betrayal against Richard III won the battle for Henry Tudor. And thus, the crown.
I always look forward to your videos on Fridays, although I still find that family tree an unfathomably tricky web to get my head around. It feels like some kind of rift probably caused her to be effectively banished rather than anything more serious, as Henry would have taken stronger action against her if that had been the case. However, I guess we will probably never know.
I have often been baffled by losing track of two children in the Tower. Not having seen the Tower, it would seem it is not actually large enough for someone to disappear with no trace. It just isn't that large of a place! That has always been an issue with me about the disappearance of the Princes in the Tower.
What a great woman Elizabeth was. To stay upright through all the heartache and troubles she endured. A true queen indeed even if her origins where rather simple.
You have such a beautifully soothing voice and annunciation! I’m afraid if I watch more videos of you I won’t be able to sleep without listening to your voice ! God bless ! I really appreciate and admire your honest hard work. You’ll go very far, as long as you keep up this work ethic !
@@HistoryCalling haha no. Thank YOU! Sooo much. Seriously. I can only imagine how much work you put in. It’s so so appreciated. Truly. Also my mum and her friends don’t quite understand TH-cam but we have a WhatsApp group so I can send them your videos☺
Honestly, I just think Elizabeth Woodville was tired and saw she was no longer needed in court. Her daughter was the Queen now, Margaret of Beaufort was much closer to the king than her, and she had gone through so many tragedies in her life, that the grief might have finally caught up with her and she retired. As for her modest burial, Henry VII was never really the type for lavishness unless absolutely necessary, at least that's how he often came off as, and when Elizabeth stated in her will not to go grand, he ran with that idea.
@@HistoryCalling Purleeeease! All this anti-Beaufiort stuff is simply too much! It's tosh! She was a survivor, a political player, with good reason. She was born wealthy as part of the Beaufort Inheritance, like Anne Mowbray and target for all kinds of political cads. She had to watch her back from infancy. She was also probably damaged giving birth to Henry at 13. When Elizabeth Woodville had 12 children. So no wonder she protected him like she did, her only child. Also she was small in stature physically, about 4ft 8in I think, so give the Lady a break! Too many people put a modern interpretation on her and her son, that she was an arch-manipulator. She just wanted her and her son to survive, her relatives died violently by the drove and she had lost 2 husband's. Was brought up in a largely enemy court, in fact carried the train of Anne Neville at her coronation. Can you even imagine how that felt where every eye was on you? The slightest mistake! God be thanked she was female. If she was male she would have probably died violently. Around a third of the male aristocracy died in battle or were executed in the WotR including her uncles. A generation later being female would not help. The main danger for females was childbirth. It was Russian roulette every time, even for well-to-do women who could afford a physician. Isobel Neville, later Jane Seymour. So for Elizabeth Woodville she was probably on borrowed-time with 12 children. Apparently Lord Hastings was the first to be executed in the Tower of London (?). They hadn't got a "block". They used a "builder's timber" apparently. How gruesome was that! Yet he had been solid with the House of York before that. A battle was normally fought in three "battailes" or columns commanded by three trusted commanders. The enemy would also line up in three "battailes". At Barnet in 1471 Edward IV commanded one, Richard Duke of Gloucester another and Hastings the third. I think Hastings had been particularly loyal to Edward and saw the deposition of his children as a move too far. Shakespeare accords his downfall to Mistress Shore.
If ever a woman was touched by destiny, it was Elizabeth Woodville. She wasn't touched, she was hit by the sledgehammer of it, the blow killing her father, brother, and 2 boys.
Thank you for all of your videos. I find them both enjoyable and educating. Despite reading about, and watching videos about The War of the Roses, and it’s aftermath, I still find myself confused about who did what to whom and why. Thank you again for all of your research and work creating and presenting your superior historical videos.
Jacquetta, Elizabeth and her daughter and extended family..the whole family (especially these women) went through so much, no miniseries could do them justice. Thank you for your lovely videos! As a history nerd, I feel like the War of the Roses should be required reading. 😂
I can’t think of a reason for being removed from court. Her daughter Elizabeth was queen consort of Henry VII. She didn’t have enemies during this time. I like to think she spent her final days in peace.
I really don't know what it is, I'm fairly well versed in the Wars of the Roses but your presentation of it always makes me want to hear it all over. Especially with how you explain your sources and thought process. Keep it up I LOVE all your videos💖 thank you 💖
Oh mercy, I don't think I could count them all :-) That was just a simplified family tree as well. The full thing wouldn't have fitted on the screen! Thanks for watching.
Perhaps she was sent to Bermondsey Abbey due to clashes with Margaret Beaufort over some sort of precedence as Queen mother. Perhaps she argued that she was the real queen mother because her son was the son of a king, or maybe something along the lines of Henry was only able to become a secure king due to the marriage with her daughter which should've given her more power. Maybe she even might've said something about Henry's illegitimacy to the throne which would've been such a big thing for the mother of the king's wife to say, as it condemns his dynasty and its future. Or even conspired to tarnish Margaret's reputation, but we'll never know. Also thanks for clearing up on the reason Elizabeth called a truce with Richard, as many Richardians have brainwashed me into thinking that Elizabeth didn't believe Richard killed the princes, whilst some believe it was because the Princes were still alive and in exile, which makes no sense.
I'd love to know the reason for her apparent banishment too. All the reasons you suggest are certainly possible. If only there was some lost letter or document out there which would show up and clear the whole matter up for us. We can live in hope I suppose :-) Ah, don't even start me on the story that one or both of the boys survived in exile. As you correctly note, it's all tosh. My Professional Historians and Time Traveller patrons actually got a video recommendation this week which deals with that very subject.
Who did harm to the princes? Ricardians point the finger at Lady Margaret Beaufort or even the Duke of Buckingham. Sir Walter Tyrrel confessed to organising it with two accomplices. Confessed under torture? He did come out with a statement that was later to be proved correct if only partly correct. It isn't Netflix, did there have to be a reason? It was very common for noble women should they become a widow to enter a religious institution, Convent/Beguinage. Henry V's widow had already entered Bermondsey Abbey to retire from public life in living memory.
Your videos are always so interesting and well researched - I love them! The way you present them is amazing and I always await your new releases. Thank you for your effort and the joy you are bringing. (Apolo. for my poor English) Greetings from the German Alps :)
@@HistoryCalling Thank you so much for your kindness ❤ When I was a little girl, not even enrolled at school, I heard from Ireland for the very first time in my live. It also was the very first time I got so much empathy and felt compassion for another human being, for someone I did not even know. It was an Irish man, his name was Bobby Sands. Of course I did not understand nor did I know why he was in hunger strike or what was going on in Ireland at all. But knowing that the same time I was playing with my dolls inbetween my loving famile while someone was slowly dying was almost unbearable for me, especially because I could not do anything to change this. I heard about him shortly before my bithday (May 4th) and one day later he was dead. I cried an ocean ... - and I never lost my empathy anymore... Before I was a spoiled brat, the only and long desired child of wealthy parents, but than I changed. He had a complete different impact on me than what he intented, but he really changed my live. Long live Ireland and the Irish people. Much love from Lake Königssee / Bavarian Alps ❤ Anne
She certainly did. It was complicated times with power and life itself ebbing and flowing. Thanks again for bringing this to us in a way that is a joy to follow.
It was common for noble women especially in continental Europe upon widowhood to enter a Convent or Beguinage. It still is. Be careful not to "read" too much into it. Detractors say Margaret Beaufort was domineering like also Margaret of Anjou's detractors claim. Yet Cecily Neville retired gracefully too and was on good terms with Margaret B. One thing Elizabeth Woodville and Margaret of Anjou are famous for are that they are founders of Queens' College Cambridge (hence position of apostrophe). Despite narratives they were both religious women so no surprise Elizabeth Woodville retired to Bermondsey Abbey.
The Duke of Buckingham's Son, the 3rd Duke, was born in Brecon which is a few miles away from me. So his mother would have been Kathryn Woodville. Bit of trivia but in the local Wetherspoons they have a portrait of the 3rd Duke proudly on display! I enjoyed these two videos and look very much forward to the coming ones. Alison
Hi. Great videos, thank you. I do look forward to them on a Friday, unless I'm out, then it's Saturday emmmmm; I'm glad someone can remember his stuff rather than my sieve brain too; your Irish accent is terrific, the broader the better!, please... I'm aware though, these days we are given certificates when we die, not em .... 'Passing Away' certificates. I bet no-one 'passed away' back then either - they could cope with all sorts of stuff then, and they all died well ... one way or another :)
I don’t think she encouraged the King to kill his brother, George had done so much on his own already, she wouldn’t have to encourage anything at that point.
What a wonderful documentary. I am sure that Elizabeth was not happy to see two of her children taken to the Tower by Richard who would eventually usurp the throne as Richard III.
Margaret Beaufort was the 2nd cousin of Edward IV via John of Gaunt as his Mom, Cecily Neville was the 1st cousin of Margaret Beaufort's Dad, John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset...
I nearly sent fan-mail to your Patreon today I was so hyped for this, though I must say: Nothing like one of your videos to make me question how I managed to get a masters when there’s academic skill like this abound! Haha. I never really got the medieval naming system. It makes me wonder if they lost a lot of pages in their copies of ‘names for babies’. :) Though that said I recently visited the Lost Gardens of Heligan, in Cornwall, and that was a nightmare. Only three major people involved were called John! About four or five in a row! Also because I’m a massive man child - teehee I see another hand reveal!
Haha, thank you :-) Regarding the naming system, they were just very big into naming kids after their parents, grandparents, super-important relations etc. which is how we end up with 3 cousins all called Edward at the same time (children of Edward, George and Richard of York). I still find it odd though that Elizabeth Woodville had two sons with the same name who were alive at the same time. It must have been so confusing!
@@HistoryCalling it’s certainly confusing, and I’d hate to be writing their Christmas cards. How many times can one write the same name before losing the will to go on? I do wonder why they got the same name. I wonder if perhaps the one from the older marriage was either quite ill, or if she tried to distance herself from the older two.
I suspect Edward IV just wanted a son named after his own father and his brother (one of their other short-lived sons was called George, no doubt after the Duke of Clarence). As you say though, a nightmare at Christmas time :-)
@@HistoryCalling 😂😂😂 glad to know it's not just me. Anytime I hear "Queen Elizabeth's son Richard" my brain scrambles. Lol, although in relativity to importance I usually assume they're talking about the younger Richard.
"This is where naming gets confusing" Sounds like my dad's family. Go to a family reunion and call for John and you'll have over half the men there standing I front of you. Some of them their name isn't even John, they're middle name is, but they answer to it regardless lol
Fantastic video on EW. I have many family members who served Edward IV and Henry Tudor including the Staffords. I wondered about the Hasting execution as he is also a forefather. Definitely rough times.
Hastings had a ladies sleeve as his coat of arms. He led one of the three wings at Barnet, Edward IV and Richard Duke of Gloucester led the others. His fall was precipitous as was also Buckingham's. Lady Margaret Beaufort's second husband was related to the Buckinghams' and sadly died of his wounds from Barnet after switching sides and fighting for York. Have you heard of the Staffordshire "knot" their emblem?
@@junehead4892 My link to the Staffords of Grafton Hall, the Hastings family and many other noble families starts with the Cope family of Hanwell in Oxfordshire. They were Puritans. My forefather left England for America for religious reasons.
I love your videos and always look forward to them. I would love to know why Elizabeth ended her days in banishment - it must have been for a very good reason, but we will never know.
@@HistoryCalling i would love a video about George, especially your opinion on his unusual form of execution ;). I think his story is a fascinating one
Thank you. I'm Northern Irish and I love yours (and in fact I've been asked many times in life where I'm from in the States, though never by an actual American as you all know better than that) :-)
Hello, I love watching your videos. You're voice always helps me to relax and when you're talking about the Tudors it's like a bonus (that family is my guilty pleasure😂) So I wanted to suggest you an idea. Can you make a video during which you rank every tudor drama you watched? I'm pretty curious to know your oppinion about them :) (Also, sorry if I made any grammar mistakes, english it's not my first language)
Hi Alessia. Don't worry about your English. It's excellent. I'll certainly bear your video suggestion in mind. Thank you so much for watching and commenting :-)
Could you do a video about the stained glass windows you feature regularly in your videos? I find them really interesting and beautifully made and I'd like to know more about them. Who made them and when? How many royal family members are depicted?
Thank you so much for disentagling this very significant period of history. Please note Cardinal Thomas Bourchier Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor you'd think would have his name pronounced the way you pronounced it. Sadly it was pronounced "Bow-cher" as in cow! 😉 English had only been the official language of the court for 84 years and certain anglicisation was taking place.Warwick the Kingmaker's father-in-law Richard Beauchamp saw this, it became pronounced "Beecham". Hastings rise and fall was dramatic. He had fought beside Richard and Edward and commanded their third wing at Barnet. His coat of arms was a famous device a "woman's sleeve". That Council Meeting in the Tower of London, the "Strawberries scene" was attended by Thomas Stanley who was injured in the fracas. Thomas Stanley was enigmatic. He was related by marriage to the Nevilles and was summoned by both sides to attend Blore Heath. He attended and kept on the side without committing to the Earl of Salisbury or Lord Audley. Something he repeated at Bosworth Field. Treachery was a part of the Wars of the Roses. People switched sides ("pre-meditated") during certain battles. Lord Grey of Ruthin did so turning the battle at Northampton at which an earlier Duke of Buckingham was killed. This was the first battle when it was decidedly for the crown. Please note this was a different Grey family than the Greys of Groby to which Elizabeth was related. Thank you so much! 🙂
I looked up the pronunciation of Bouchier and got the pronunciation I used, but I'd be the first to admit that some things are pronounced differently by different people, so you may well be correct. It seems like there's always some old name of a person or place to catch me out in these videos, or foreign words. I have a video coming up in a few weeks which includes a fair few German words and it was misery trying to find examples of German speakers saying them online so that I could copy their pronunciation. :-(
@@HistoryCalling You do well. I would have pronounced it like you but would have probably been thrown in the ancient clink. I pronounced it that way for many moons. Curious figure Cardinal Thomas Bourchier. In those days prelates doubled up as politicians and ambassadors. Go back 23 years. 1460 after Northampton. Richard Duke of York after his victory at Northampton finally makes a play for the crown itself. He walks into Parliament with a servant in front of him with a raised sword. Only a custom accorded to a monarch. He walks straight up to the throne and puts his hand on one of the arms probably expecting a round of applause and "Long live King Richard". Silence! On the next step down from the throne sat the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. Bourchier breaks the silence. "Come to see the King my Lord?" Game Over.
Lady Elizabeth Woodville was a smarter political strategist than the male nobles who controlled the troops. She set an example for the woman who actually became a reigning monarch: Elizabeth I
That was very impressive 👏, it must be a nightmare trying to explain such a complicated story, but I enjoyed this twice. I believe Elizabeth ended up in Bermondsey Abbey, courtesy of Henry, her son inlaw because he didn't trust her
London was an unhealthy place. Westminster Palace was a "fire-trap", warren of corridors and rooms with open fireplaces. It largely burned down shortly after she left, in 1513. London was full of diseases. Her husband died after being on the Thames. London Bridge, the bridge to the South to Bermondsey was full of decomposing bodies, of traitors and criminals, hung, drawn and quartered and heads of traitors. No wonder disease was common. In a hot summer with flies. There were no hospitals only what the religious institutions ran, they had infirmaries in Abbeys. St. Bartholomew's Priory in Smithfield near St. Paul's Cathedral was one and still exists. It was founded during the reign of Henry I by Rahere a courtier. Bermondsey Abbey was similar. Not only religious nourishment but practical help for the sick.
@@English_Dawn wow, yes, Edward had been out on the water, but I didn't realize it was the Thames, and holy crap yes, and to point out the decomposing bodies, I never really thought about that either but it would have been risky anywhere. Thank you for taking the time to put that out there, I enjoyed reading it 😊
If Henry didn't trust her, it was an odd decision to marry her to James IV of Scotland. Successful negotiations had been achieved, and only James' death prevented Elizabeth from being a queen of a second country. Henry wouldn't , it seems to me, have contemplated sending her as queen into Scotland, of all places, if he had mistrusted her.
If I had been through all that and finally got my daughter married to the king I would be quite happy to withdraw to an abbey and live out the rest in peace. It must have been around the time of her menopause too. She probably thought"damn all this. I'm off! Good luck daughter. Bye!!"
John Ashdown-Hill lived not far from me and we shared a mutual friend. John and I argued about Elizabeth. He firmly believed that her marriage to Edward was illegitimate and that Richard was therefore justified in what he did to take crown (i.e. declaring the princes illegitimate and removing them from their mother). I disagreed but he was after all far more learned than me!
I didn't know the man (though he seemed very pleasant in all the TV interviews I saw with him and he did excellent genealogy work tracking down RIII's living relations), but I have read his book on the Princes in the Tower and I'll just say that I think he took a very generous and optimistic view of Richard III's actions. When he argued that Richard didn't need to kill the boys because they were no threat to him once he'd had them declared illegitimate, that was where we really parted ways. They'd always have been figureheads for revolt against Richard; there's just no getting around that. People were trying to break them out of the Tower in the summer of 1483 for instance. I'm jealous that I didn't get to debate this with JA-H myself though, as I think that could have been a fun and fascinating conversation. It's very sad that he's no longer with us. The Woodville marriage might have been invalid (though Edward's supposed wife died before the birth of his two sons by Elizabeth anyway), but it certainly didn't justify the likely murder of R's nephews. Don't be put off by someone who you think is more learned than you. No matter how well educated people are, sometimes they can latch onto an idea and they won't let go of it no matter how much evidence to the contrary is put in front of them. I always advise that you look at the evidence yourself and at other people's interpretations of it, then go from there. There's no reason to assume that you can't come to a well reasoned conclusion yourself, just because you don't happened to have a PhD in history. Yes, it can take a little bit longer, but you don't need a PhD to be smart and plenty of people who have them can be surprisingly thick-headed (I'm just talking generally here and not about John A-H).
I too, think that Richard III's claim was hogwash. Yes, there were *rumors* of Edward secretly marrying another, so it is somewhat disconcerting that he also married Elizabeth in secret. BUT, he certainly did not bring this other woman to court and parade her about and then have her coronated in front of the entire country. And I thought she actually died before Edward and Elizabeth married so it would be a moot point. Warrick wanted him to marry a foreign princess to maintain his hold over Edward IV, so I believe this was a lie cooked up by the people who were currently trying to depose him... and it came back to haunt Elizabeth Woodville in the worst way, years later. I am always amazed at how quickly and eagerly people were willing to accept the story from the Duke of Gloucester with absolutely no evidence of a marriage or pre contract.
@@christinerobbins9376 Eleanor Butler was long dead by the time the alleged marriage came up, which was also rather convenient for Richard. She hadn't died, however, before Edward and Elizabeth married. By no means everyone accepted this story either then or later. As you point out, there was no concrete evidence, although Richard had promised to produce some. How interesting you got to talk with John Ashdown-Hill!
"Gives genealogists nightmares" 😂😂 Sounds about right. There's a couple places in my recent family where my grandmother and her sister married two cousins, a distance aunt married two brothers, and a great-great-great grandfather married two different sisters and another brother married the third sister. Makes me want to cry while trying to detangle all that.
The answer is simple, he was famous for his brutality in war, the colour of his armour and shield, and he died before his father did, black being the traditional colour of mourning, and he’s ‘black’ in that he was someone who was supposed to be king who never became king, he was blotted out of the succession. He was never called that during his life, the first example of that name being used came 165 years after his death.
The clustering of identical names is a problem with all the Richards, Henrys and Edwards during the Wars of the Roses. In my wife's family in Victorian times, there were bunches of Henrys, Johns and Thomases!
Excellent! I had to go back and watch "The White Queen" after the first video you had on her last week! And just wondering, do you have any videos on Margaret Pole? If not I would love to see one from you! Another tragic life from the War of the Roses/Tudor period! Stayed away from the executioner all her life only to end up in death by execution at such a fragile old age! She was always loyal where she needed to be and to die for treason? Makes no since! Anyway thank you again for wonderful accurate accounts from all aspects of history!😀💕
Nothing specific on Margaret (yet), but she does get a mention in my videos on Digging up Anne Boleyn and Memorialising Anne Boleyn (just see the Anne Boleyn playlist and they'll both be there).
@@HistoryCalling If her life is anymore soap operatic than EW, then I'll like her story more. I love all these crazy juicy tidbits that would be good on a soap opera of medieval times. lol Killings due to bogus accusations, illegitimate kids, etc., royal life back then was crazy. That's what I love about it. lol
It was a brutal life in many ways, but actually I don't know if it's more of a soap opera than Elizabeth Woodville's. It's hard to judge. All of them had such crazy lives.
The war of the roses is A fascinating period. Weather Edward V was legitimate or illegitimate-It doesn't matter, the nobility didn't want to follow him because he would be influenced by the Woodville family.
Oh, such a hard question. I suppose Lancaster in the end. The Yorks just kept killing each other, which is frustrating and I actually think Henry VII was (for the time period), actually a pretty decent bloke. I also don't think his mother was the murderous maniac that certain historical fiction writers have made her out to be and from what I know of her, I like her too.
I understand that people want to give Richard a fairer reputation as he did suffer from Tudor propaganda but the way you state the facts of his story make it clear the propaganda wasn’t without basis because jeez he really wanted the throne
He really did. I'm afraid I just can't get on team Richard myself. I think he was a very good and loyal brother up to 1483, but he really tanked his reputation (in my opinion) in those final 2 years.
@@HistoryCalling I have to wonder why he stopped being so loyal because I mean its not like he would be lacking in much power as Lord Protector and uncle to the king. He could've lived as one of the most influential men of his time and gone down in history as a strong and capable man loyal to his family but by choosing the throne over his family he's remembered as an awful king who murders his family thanks to the Tudors and his short reign
What a tangled web these royals weaved, to say nothing of the confusing "system" of naming. At the presentation's conclusion I thought to myself that retreating to an abbey seemed a healthy choice after all her trials and tribulations. I probably would have; take that as evidence Elizabeth was made of stronger stuff than I. 😉Well done, HC. See you next week.
The names are just awful. It's so hard to keep track of almost everyone. Thank goodness for Jacquetta of Luxembourg. Not too many women floating around England with that name!
Outstanding analysis. You get a thumbs up from me for being able to represent the family tree clearly. This is not an easy to understand very well. Also, being a man of faith, I think Elizabeth chose to go into seclusion at the end of her life. We all assume that her punishment and staying at Westminster Abby was fully negative. I don’t believe so. I am sure she gained valuable insight and perhaps comfort at the Abbey. Having that experience while seeing so many things tragically happening outside the walls of Westminster Abby, the retirement to seclusion was probably welcomed. I think she had had enough of the secular world. I think it’s that simple.
She may well have chosen to move to Bermondsey of her own volition. But she was not entirely secluded. She visited her daughter the queen, and was with her when Princess Margaret was born. I believe her daughters also visited her.
I wonder what secrets Elizabeth Woodville took with her to the Abbey. Is it just possible that she, like others before her, took to the monastic life as a penance, an attempt to atone for what she saw as deadly sins? I wonder if she felt she had accomplished all she could for others and devoted herself to the safety of her immortal soul. The afterlife was very real to people of the time.
Not just to "people of the time". She started off as a Lancastrian then married the chief Yorkist. Many of her closest male relatives paid the price. The Nevilles were bad news. I think a Convent was a good place after all that for her.
Man. I keep wanting to put these videos on to fall asleep to, because your voice is so soothing; but there is just way too much death. 😂 (That's not a complaint...or rather, it's not like I'm blaming anyone, because obviously this is history and that's just how things were. But I'm pretty sure I'd wind up with nightmares about people trying to find me and kill me, lol)
The Yorkists were truly one of the proudest, most back-stabbing, scheming royal families in English history. They--in the end--were destroyed as much by internecine murders, assassinations and plots against one another as they were displaced on the throne by the Tudor Dynasty. In fact, Dowager Queen Elizabeth conspired with Lady Margaret Beaufort to replace King Richard III--the last York king of England--with Lady Margaret Beaufort’s son, Henry of Richmond (whose Tudor relatives were maternally descended from the Lancaster Dynasty). 9:169:16 Dowager Queen Elizabeth saw with Lady Margaret Beaufort that uniting Henry’s Tudor right to the Lancastrian claim to the throne, united with Dowager Queen Elizabeth Woodville’s daughter Elizabeth’s York claim to the throne would be a stronger, more unifying royal claim to the Crown than King Richard III’s claim: it would unite the red and the white roses……This marriage led to Richard III’s defeat and death at the Battle of Bosworth Field, where the York Dynasty came to a definitive end.
Who would not want to live in an Abbey? Westminster Palace, York Place etc were "fire-traps". Westminster Palace burned down just after Elizabeth Woodville left! Absolute warren of corridors and rooms. Open fires. It burned down circa 1513. Only Westminster Hall and some medieval stone buildings near St. Stephen's Church survived that and the late fire in the 1800's. Henry VIII never went back to live there. He used Bridewell Palace before he converted Cardinal Wolsey's York Place into Whitehall Palace, which apart from the Banqueting Suite and some vaulting etc disappeared into another fire. He used Nonsuch Palace but preferred Greenwich Palace. The city of London was unhealthy. Plague common. In.the days before the police force people wore knives. Christopher Marlowe was killed over a restaurant bill. Southwark was particularly nasty. It was lawless and didn't come under the jurisdiction, such as it was, of the City of London on the North bank. Some of the great rebellions, The Peasant's Revolt when John of Gaunt' s Savoy Palace was burnt was recent history, Jack Cade's Rebellion and the Cornish Rebellion. The only hospitals/infimaries were ran by monks, canons, nuns and canonesses. Abbeys were havens of peace in a turbulent, violent, sick world. London Bridge, the bridge to the South, Bermondsey, was full of bodies in various stages of decomposition in gibbets and heads of traitors and criminals, hung, drawn and quartered and on pikes. The smell alone must have been suffocating. 100 years before London had been torched and the mob got into the Tower, executed Simon Sudbury the Archbishop of Canterbury and a colleague during the Peasants Revolt. In days before newspapers and tv the mob didn't recognise a fourteen year-old boy walking on his own Richard II. Another 14 year old boy, was his cousin, hiding in a cupboard. Both survived the mob. His cousin, was Henry Bolingbroke the first Lancatrian king.
I don't think she was necessarily being banished or punished. The Woman lost many close relatives (including 3 sons) to straight up murdered (unlawful executions were murder, not K.I.A.s). Even for the times, what she endured was incredibly traumatic and many women today turned to a intensely spiritual mindset to cope with deep traumas. Of course there is no proof, but just imagine the amount of loss that came from her alleviation to Queen. She may have become so deeply spiritual that she willingly gave up many of her worldly goods.
In 'Monarchy' David Starkey suggested Margeret Beaufort wasn't happy 'defering' to Elizabeth as she had been crowned Queen and that was the reason for her being packed off into nunery. Noting she only walked 'half a pace' behind her in protest. Is their any basis for this that you've seen? It did seem a little Jersey Shore to me when I saw it
I should preface this by saying that I haven't watched Monarchy in a very long time, but Starkey is usually very good with his sources and not given to misinterpreting or making things up. I wonder if the 'half a pace' comment was in reference to Elizabeth of York though, as I remember reading that before and when I read your comment it was the younger Elizabeth who popped into my head first? I could be wrong though, as I don't have the primary source to hand. As for Margaret not liking deferring to Elizabeth Woodville, I haven't come across the primary source for that, but if Starkey said it, I would be inclined to believe it until proven otherwise.
@@HistoryCalling Supposedly as Elizabeth was previously a Queen of England and Margeret wasn't (only Queen Mother), Elizabeth was given precendence during public events etc. As such Elizabeth walked ahead of Margeret. According to Starkey, Margeret walked only half a pace behind Elizabeth as she was frustrated that it be presented that Elizabeth was more important than her. In Starkey's words...'Margeret didn't like that one bit' He also commented that she was the 'Mother-in-law from hell' which always makes me giggle
@@HistoryCalling You are right David Starkey meant the younger Elizabeth not Elizabeth the Queen Dowager. I have never seen any report that there was any friction between Magaret and the elder Elizabeth or even between her and Lady Cecily Neville or really between Elizabeth her daughter-in-law. If she engineered the marriage of her only child, her pride and joy, to Elizabeth then she must have had some liking for her. Incidently David Starkey says Chrstopher Urswick a near neighbour of Starkey as a boy though separated by 500 years was a key figure in Margaret's circle. He was one of her confessors along with Saint John Fisher and was one that saved her boy from capture in Britanny. He also was the go-between between Margaret and Polydore Vergil, the one that helped Polydore become part of her entourage. Also you might be interested if you can get the film of the trial of Richard III and the two princes. Filmed as a court scene with lots of evidence, a young David Starkey is called as a witness for the prosecution and was pretty adamant that it looked grim for Richard, citing amongst evidence the trial of Sir Walter Tyrrell. Pretty clear that Sir Walter knew something about it even though In his case torture was probably used. He was condemned anyway so admitting involvement wouldn't have saved him. He was a right-hand man of Richard and his evidence was partly corroborated by events later in the 1600's though NOT known at the time. One of his two accomplices sought sanctuary in the same church in London as Richard did when Richard needed sanctuary when pressing his claim for Anne Neville's property against George. George was a strange figure. He was loaded in his own right, the Clarence estates were vast he didn't need to deny Anne Neville her share of Warwick's inheritance. After Lose-Cote Field Edward found a letter from Warwick and George in Lord Welles' helmet incriminating them both in a plot. Why? Clarence's skull and his wife Isobel's skulls are interred in Tewkesbury Abbey. Also interred is Edward Prince of Wales. He was found wandering alone after the battle and surrendered to Clarence' s men. Possibly he was killed in cold-blood possibly by George.
This "retirement" at Bermondsey Abbey may have been a forced exile by Henry VII due to her marriage with Edward IV which was a legal mess. She probably would have drawn attention away from Henry VII and focus on her. Henry VII's kingship itself was on shaky ground. All we can say -- Elizabeth Woodville's life was a legal mess, and I think this followed her to the grave.
I don't know. I wonder if she thought she had to do penance for being a " bad " mother by giving her sons to Richard's care knowing what a jerk he was . I guess Henry could have learned new things ( from rumors and betrayals by "friends" ) over the years , that made him think her allegiances and maneuvers were un-loyal and so changed his regard for her. . Sadly, I don't know what she could have done. . she had no army to protect her from Richard. I can't agree with the misunderstood Nobel view of Richard. He was responsible legally and morally for the boys welfare .. and they just disappeared ? BTW I like that you try to address at least some viewer comments. I know that is hard and time consuming. Few TH-camrs bother with that...kinda disrespectful to the audience. Thanks for another history trip.
Hmm, penance is an interesting idea, though her sons had been dead (or missing, whatever) for a few years by that point. I wouldn't blame Henry for being suspicious of her, as I think given the life he'd led he was suspicious of a lot of people. Yes, answering the comments does take a lot of time and I sadly can't get to them all. I try to keep up with each new video for the first week that it's live, then I have to move onto the next one. Sometimes even that isn't possible though if there are an awful lot of comments, or I'm having a very busy week and I have to just try to get through the first 24 hours worth. I know that a lot of other creators don't bother, but to me (even aside from the disrespect shown to the audience) that shows a lack of understanding about how the algorithm works and the importance of engagement. I see a lot of creators who don't seem to have bothered doing their research about how to present videos, what to put in the description box and how to deal with comments, then they moan about not growing fast enough. The fact is though that TH-cam is hard work and if you skimp on these things, your growth will inevitably suffer. Sometimes I do get tired answering comments, especially when they're repetitive, but my attitude is that that's just part of the job and I need to suck it up and get on with it. After all you can't build a relationship and trust with your audience if you barely interact with them. Thank you for noticing though that it's hard work, as I think a lot of people don't really think about it and maybe get annoyed if I don't always get to their comment.
Why do you think Elizabeth might have ended up at Bermondsey Abbey? Let me know below and remember to check out my Patreon at www.patreon.com/historycalling
I honestly think she never stopped plotting to put a York boy on the throne and eventually her own daughter and her husband made the decision for her to go to Bermondsey Abby. And no I don't think it mattered if she had an actual York boy as she had proven that she was previously willing to use an imposter in Perkin Warbeck. I absolutely believe she conspired with Margaret of Burgundy in that entire scam.
I love your videos, btw 😂💞🙏
I believe she had a dispute with Margaret Beaufort.
No clue if this has historical basis, but if I'd had a life like that, I would be hypervigilant and quick to take offense. Not necessarily "court" material...
Many Yorkists after the disappearance of Edward and Richard defected to Henry Tudor. Only die-hards like Richard III's heir De La Pole & Lord Lovell continued the fight with the Lambert Simnel fiasco bankrolled by Margaret of York.
De La Pole met his end at East Stoke and Lovell only survived by swimming the Trent but disappeared from history. A body was found at his home Lovell Minster in a secret room.
"The Cat, the Rat and Lovell the dog, ruled all England under the Hog".
Margaret of York was involved with Walter Tyrrel one of the last die-hards and possibly the organiser of the disappearance of the princes was also involved in the Perkin Warbeck outbreak.
Why would Elizabeth side with a group that possibly murdered her sons and at the same time sell her daughter out and disinherit her Arthur her grandson? You rightly say it was a stretch. Her ancestry had been Lancastrian on the Grey and Woodville side. They were seen as upstarts by the "old money". Many of her sisters were snapping up eligible bachelors from the old aristocracy. Outside Edward IV his family seem to have distanced themselves from her family. It was Neville v Woodville.
She lost her male relations at Kenilworth and Pontefract.
Margaret Beaufort had herself called "My Lady the King's Mother, dressed as fabulously as her daughter-in-law and walked only half-a-step behind her.
Margaret B gets a bad press but it was survival. She must have had to bite her tongue many times as she ws largely at an enemy court even carrying Anne Neville's train at her coronation while her own son was in exile. It was all or nothing, her uncles killed battle, her husband Edmund died as a prisoner from plague, her second husband killed from wounds received, her relatives the two Lord Welles killed fighting Edward IV. He third husband playing politics with Richard.
Has anyone any idea of the effect of that? She had only one child. Elizabeth Woodville seemed to have been very fertile and was giving birth regularly.
Can anyone blame Margaret for being protective, she had lost so much. If she had been male she would probably have gone to the block many times.
There's no bond on earth like that between a mother and her son especially if he's her only child.
Elizabeth had no reason to see a revival of the Neville/De La Pole cause. Meeting Edward at Grafton Regis had traumatic outcomes.
The Beaufort/Tudor dynasty was embryonic, perhaps she just felt surplus to requirements. Old Cecily left Baynard's Castle for a life of quiet at Berkhamstead. Catherine de Valois arguably went to Bermondsey Abbey, if for a few days. After her traumatic life perhaps she just felt the call of the cloister.
It is the Beaufort badge the "Portcullis" that has gone on to signify the "Mother of Parliaments".
Margaret Beaufort won in the end.
@@christinerobbins9376 From the outset it was a Neville v Woodville feud. Only Edward IV of the Neville family ever seems to have got on with the Woodvilles.
The Woodvilles had hitherto been Lancastrian and would return to that fold at Bosworth. The House of York was a spent force. Margaret of York had moved her court after her husband's death and kept the flame alive by supporting die-hard Yorkists, De La Pole the Earl of Lincoln and Richard III's designated heir and Lord Lovell in the Lambert Simnel outbreak. It ended at East Stoke. De La Pole was killed. Lovell swam the Trent and was one of few to survive. Margaret personally sent 500 German soldiers who fought to the last, none survived. It was a disaster for Margaret and the Yorkist cause. Lambert Simnel was given a job in Henry VII's kitchen.
Margaret did the same with Perkin Warbeck. It too ended in disaster. One of the ring-leaders was a last Yorkist die-hard Sir Walter Tyrrel.
Sir Walter Tyrrel confessed to organising the murder of Elizabeth Woodville's sons in the Tower.
Why should she support such people or the Nevilles that had killed many of her Woodville family?
Don't forget that Cecily Neville was around and left Baynard's Castle for a manor house in Berkhamstead. Margaret Beaufort moved into Collyweston nearby relations said cordial.
Perhaps Cecily and Elizabeth Woodville just wanted a quiet life away from the court.
Later Anne of Cleves after separating from Henry VIII lived a life in the country.
After such traumatic lives with their menfolk killed it was a natural outlet.
I don’t think she fell from grace, I think she just finally felt safe enough and free enough to do what she’d always wanted to, to spend her days in peace, not being bothered by court drama.
I definitely hope that that was the case.
Sounds plausible.
@@HistoryCalling I cannot imagine that this strong, willful woman would have ignored the murder of her sons and crept away to become a nobody.
I'm sure Henry VII pushed for it a bit, too as there was much back-channel drama over rank and precedence. Under normal circumstances, dowager queen and king's mother were the same person, now both positions were occupied by women who each saw themselves as above the other. And while I don't think it's what she had always wanted, it is possible that, toward the end, Elizabeth Woodville was just weary from a lifetime of schemes and battles and just wanted a bit of peace.
@@leanie5234 What could she do? Nothing would bring them back to life, and the possible murderers were either dead or untouchable at that point.
What always amazes me about Tudor times and the events leading up to it is that for such a misogynistic, male dominated era, it was actually the women who played a huge role. And that's true from Margaret Beaufort and Elizabeth Woodville all the way up to Elizabeth I. Connecting, scheming, financing, plotting, planning, leading and advising could be just as important as who swung a sword on which battlefield.
Reminds me of something I heard from a study of Japanese history in that daughters were less valued and yet more valuable. Same here. In an era when the birth of a girl was seen as a disappointment, it was the women who married out and tied families together. It was a daughter you could marry into the family of an ally or to make peace with an enemy. Royal houses of Europe are related and tied together through the women. And if you were lucky, a girl could marry up (or at least become a mistress to a powerful man) and bring up her entire family. A man with no daughters was often a man without connections.
You can even look at Henry VII's original plan for his children as typical of the time: one son to take the throne, one son in the church and daughters married to kings. He knew the value of that last one.
Two Margarets won the WotR, Queen Margaret of Anjou & Lady Margaret Beaufort by keeping their House in the game while the Nevilles in-fighting destroyed their House.
No wonder the males suffered. A third of the nobility died violently.
The biggest danger to females was childbirth. Another generation and they too would be victims of the block.
Lady Margaret Beaufort was amazing yet vilified by modern "narrative".
She had Henry when she was 13 and probably physically damaged not to have more. She was slight being apparently 4ft 8in. Many of her male relatives died violently, uncles and cousins, Dukes of Somerset, Lord Welles senior and Lord Welles junior and her second husband. Her one child was continually under threat from an early age.
She was a survivor, you had to be. She pushed the boat out securing her and her son's survival in a very hostile world.
Well done. I think many of us forget the human side of things. She was a woman who went through so much, one minute destitute, then a queen, then stripped of everything, then reinstated but up against another more scheming "queen mother". Quite frankly, maybe she knew that her time was limited (after 12 kids!) and just decided to bow out with a bit of dignity, so she could just have some peace and pray for her dead children. I know that I would have been both mentally and physically worn out after all that. She must have had the strength of an ox to do whatever she had to, in order to survive with as many kids as she had. We should really be calling her a "superqueen" along with Margaret of Anjou.
I certainly hope she opted for a quiet retirement, but I don't know. It seems odd that she had so few possessions. That's quite a comedown for a former Queen.
@@HistoryCalling I agree with some subscribers on the retirement issue. Maybe she was just exhausted (Margaret Beaufort only had 1 child and a pretty easy existence compared to Elizabeth) and probably ill. Getting out of the rat race can be quite compulsive for some people. Even today, you hear of CEOs retiring early so they can live in a luxury beach house somewhere exotic. Maybe Bermondsey was "exotic" enough for Elizabeth, but still close enough if needed. How many posessions do you need to be a nun? When I was at school, eons ago, I was taught by a Spanish nun who we were all convinced was minor royalty. She had next to nothing in the convent.
@@elisabethhopson5639 Lady Margaret "only had" one child because she was probably damaged in giving birth to Henry at 13 evidence suggests. She was also of small stature being about 4ft 8in.
Margaret Beaufort at around 10 was one of the most independant wealthy females in England due to her Beaufort landed interests. Her uncles were the Dukes of Somerset. She was struggling looking where the next groat was coming from!
@@elisabethhopson5639
1). A lot of nobles had land. A driver of the WotR was land.
Elizabeth Woodville would have had probably a lot of land, all the nobles did, that's what made you a noble.
She was a founder of Queens's College, Cambridge with Margaret of Anjou. You have to be fabulously wealthy to do that. Normally you would give up some of your land to provide the college with rental income for day-to-day expenses. So she probably had enough land to spare.
Many women if they were widowed, especially noble women, would retire to a Convent. One of the most famous nuns Hildegard of Bingen was from a noble family. It's still the case in continental Europe for women to enter a Beguinage.
Even for Bermondsey Abbey, Queen Catherine of Valois had retired there recently, if only for a matter of days.
Correct both Margaret of Anjou and Elizabeth of Anjou has both founded Queens' College. That tells you they were both religious and fabulously wealthy. The idea that they were on their "uppers" is for the birds. They may not have had as much as in former days might he true but compared to Jane Doe They were loaded.
have to say, Edward IV's brothers were a piece of work, Clarence seems almost self destructive in his betrayals and then Richard III's probable murder of his nephews is just dispicable, I can't even imagine how hard it was to deal with loosing so many children
What makes Fridays is not (only) the upcoming weekend, it’s your videos! History can really hypnotise one.
Aww, thank you (though I spend part of my weekend answering TH-cam comments, which I perhaps should have thought of before I chose Friday as my release day!)
@@HistoryCalling oh- well one can always change that lmao but yes. I have been obsessed with history all my life, and to have access to such well researched content feels like a privilege!
I could, but I think a lot of people like the videos as their end of week wind down (which is one of the reasons I selected that day in fact) and I'm used to it now, so I think I'll forbear for the time being. Thank you for your kind words about the research. It's a lot of hard work, so it's always lovely to be appreciated :-)
@@HistoryCalling Ofc! I myself adore spending hours reading chronicle after chronicle, comparing opinions and deciding wich one I believe in, so Ik how hardwork it is! It’s a pity your dms don’t work, it would be nice to chat with you over shared interests!
You mean on Instagram? I opted to keep them off as I just felt it was too much work to deal with messages under videos, plus email, plus DMs. I do debate switching them on sometimes, but honestly I don't think I'd have time to get to them. :-(
I have been really loving and looking forward to these Women of the Wars of the Roses videos! Elizabeth Woodville is one of my favorites. I’d love one on Jacquetta!
I vote for illness or exhaustion with royal life to explain Elizabeth's retirement to Bermondsey Abbey. It's clear that her daughter Elizabeth of York remained extremely loyal to her siblings for the rest of her life, so it's hard to imagine a rift with her mother that she wouldn't have worked hard to smooth over. Given how much Elizabeth of York had to support her sisters throughout Henry VII's reign, it seems entirely possible that her mother, Elizabeth Woodville, was mainly trying to make better provision for her younger children when she retired to Bermondsey. Although as someone who's 56 and about to retire, I find it amazing to think that someone's life was effectively over at around 55!
Agreed. She’d put up with schemes and intrigued her entire adult life, it makes sense why, once she was absolutely assured that her children were finally safe, she’d want to just get away from it all and live a peaceful life elsewhere
I definitely hope it was a voluntary retirement too, but I must confess I'm not sure. I mean she could have retired to a nice manor house somewhere with lots of money and servants, as opposed to near poverty in an Abbey. It's all a bit odd.
I think if you were 30 you were long-lived. Henry V got an arrow in the face at Shrewsbury and lived because he had a top physician.
Otherwise?
Sadly Henry passed-away in his 30's.
Edward IV around 40. He had the best diet, lots of fish.
If you were a commoner you would be pressed into service to fight in the battles. They wore little armour unlike the knights and men at arms. Apparently the most common injury was the loss of a right-hand. The hand raised to protect oneself.
There was a lot of left-handed shepherds afterwards.
I *HAVE* to ask this question because HC & Titus really do know their history; my 24-year-old son loves to tell me this story about why the middle finger is considered an insult 😂. Is this truly because the archers at Agincourt had their middle fingers removed (the "drawing finger" for an Archer)? He tells me that after they were maimed people would throw up the middle finger to mock the fallen archers from France. But I have zero evidence of this 😂
@@HistoryCalling Not so odd when you consider how Christianity emphasizes poverty as one of the highest virtues. Maybe Elizabeth felt that going to an abbey to live her life in service to God would ensure the health and continued rein of her daughter and grandchildren. After seeing so much horror, and maybe supporting some of it, if she did have any kind of hand in the Duke of Clarence's death, Elizabeth might of thought living a simple, godly life was the best thing for her and her family.
Love my Friday sessions with your videos. Whenever I listen to other history videos I find myself shaking my head at the content knowing full well you have debunked a lot of what they are saying! Thank you for all your hard work. You make my day!
Thanks Jeanne. There is indeed a lot of tripe out there (not that I can't make a mistake here and there myself, but when people are repeat offenders you just know they aren't putting the work in).
Yeah, I agree with you on the efforts to rehab Richard III's reputation. They cite the most specious points to try and portray him as a well-meaning Lord Protector who was manipulated by others into sanctioning the awful things done in his name. Elizabeth Woodville came to terms with Richard because she had no reason to think Richard would ever be successfully deposed.
Yes, I just can't see him as the good guy I'm afraid, though I know that will annoy the Ricardians. There were just far too many dead bodies piled up behind him as he approached the throne to explain away in any manner that leaves him in a good light.
@@HistoryCalling Exactly. Every single one of the people he killed to get to the throne (especially the princes) were what today would be called a State-Level Action. Nobody under Richard was going to take it upon themselves to act unilaterally, not without his express authorization to do act.
@@keiththorpe9571 The remains of Richard got way more respect than they deserved. At best they should have been left where they were. At worst, he should have been quartered like the traitor he was.
The Ricardians 😂😂😂... I'm sorry for a moment my American brain kicked in and I thought I read the Kardashians🤣
I honestly didn't know there was an official name for the Richard supporters... I imagine these are people descended from him and I can understand wanting to rehab the past reputation but the historical record speaks to his ruthlessness... and no I'm not talking about Shakespeare 😂
@@christinerobbins9376 No, not the Kardashians. The Ricardians, I find, are often what I think of as 'Professional Contrarians" and scholars looking to make a name for themselves through deconstructive analysis of history. Bucking conventional wisdom, and all that.
Thank you for this incredibly beautiful story. I think that during that period of time in a very religious England, Elizabeth finally wanted to make peace with the Lord and find some forgiveness for her soul in the final years of her life. After all, her ambitions during her lifetime have caused her to scheme and plot against her enemies to benefit mostly her family and herself. That is how politics were played out back then. I think she went in exile because her work was done and she wanted some peace at last. That was also a respectable thing to do back then.
I've heard a theory floated that Henry VII got tired of essentially supporting two queens and that's why Elizabeth Woodville was sent to the abbey. Given his reputation for being a miser, it may hold water.
I'd need to see the evidence for it, but taking pretty much all her worldly goods off her seems a bit extreme. I kind of hope there was a better reason for it than miserliness (even if that reason was that she'd been naughty and tried to overthrow him!).
Yet he also supported his mother, Margaret of Beaufort, while he lived. One is sure that she didn't swan around Court in mere habits and not in robes proper for the King's Mother.
@@meeeka Margaret Beaufort had been an independently woman from a girl, one of the wealthiest in England. The Beaufort inheritance was mammoth, she was not short of a groat or two.
Same as for Elizabeth Woodville. They were all "landed". Land and property was a major "driver" of the WotR. None of them really needed Henry to pay their bills.
Queen Margaret of Anjou and Queen Elizabeth Woodville together both founded Queens' College, Csmbridge. (Hence the apostrophe).
To do that they had to give up some land to provide a rental income.
It also shows both women had religious leanings.
Margaret Beaufort, it seems to me, was very intelligent. I do not think Elizabeth Woodville was her equal. I know everyone wants Richard only to be the huge bad person. The Woodvilles were problems.
I never tire of saying superb, There could be many Reasons why Elizabeth fell from grace in her later years, it's another Tudor mystery HC Thank you as always. 😊👍
Yes, I'd love to have been a fly on the wall as it were, to hear some of the conversations had amongst the royal family in the late 1480s to find out what happened.
Very good this woman went through so much, how she stayed alive is beyond me.
She was certainly a survivor, that's for sure. Lots of women would have died from all the childbirths alone, never mind the Wars of the Roses.
with everything that happened in her life you would think she had lived to be 100, but no only 55?! the decisions she had to make in her life, i just even begin to imagine. loved this series!!
Yes, not too many long lives in that era or family I'm afraid. Margaret Beaufort did a bit better, but that's a story for another video.
@@HistoryCalling i noticed you slipped in that some videos on her are coming, i’ll be patiently waiting 🙌🏻🤣
@@ns-wz1mx n p pn numbering
Thankyou for interesting reading on the life and times of Elizabeth Woodville. What happened to the other members of her family ie brother's is there any history on their lives going forward?
I just told my husband that we had to finish dinner quickly because the notification came that your video was up.
Haha, thank you. I actually just had to finish dinner quickly too so that I could come back into the office to babysit the video for the first hour :-)
Elizabeth Woodville's life seems like it has so many twists and reversals in it that it should be fiction. It's remarkable what one woman went through. I would very much like to see that video about the apparent illegitimacy of her marriage to Edward (personally, I think it was probably a political lie intended to strip Elizabeth and her sons of any power they did and could have had but I would be interested in seeing the evidence for myself regardless). As always, your work is amazing and highly entertaining.
I know. If someone made it up in a book the reviewers would probably say that it was all too much of a stretch. :-)
It would be an obvious lie to tell but some would still tell it, to at least undermine her and her sons.
@@angr3819 Not necessarily a lie. Its entirely possible that the randy Edward had made a marriage promise to another woman prior to his dalliance with Elizabeth. He may well have decided that it was not binding, but the law could have said otherwise. The unfortunate woman gave birth to a child and was then banished to a nunnery where she died soon after. I did wonder why Edward did not secure his family's position by legal means, but it may have been because it was an uncomfortable subject. The lady had been silenced, and the priest had been paid of with bribes (if any of the story was true). It does seem ridiculous that Richard was perfectly fine with everything, until suddenly, his brother's death put the throne was within his reach.
I always enjoy History Calling videos but these two on Elizabeth Woodville are my favourite. So well researched and told. It's so nice to find Tudor vids that I learn new things from instead of the same stuff rehashed yet again.
Thank you. I do try hard to think up new things to talk about for the Tudors (which is why it's so frustrating when people who are too lazy and/or stupid to do the same steal my video ideas, but I digress). I'm glad you enjoyed Elizabeth's videos. She's a fascinating historical figure to study.
I’m obsessed with your videos! Watching the shows and watching your videos clear so many things up. i can’t stop watching! 👏🏽
Yeah, I agree with your assessment that Elizabeth Woodville didn't trust Richard, but had no way to keep her daughters out of his hands. Forcing him to swear public oaths was about the only power she had, and she would only have that if he didn't take the girls by force. Which makes Philippa Gregory's portrayal of Elizabeth of York and Richard as lovers just 🤢🤢. (Even moreso than the baseline uncle-niece grossness.)
Yes, I don't think there was an affair there, but I'll look at it in my Elizabeth of York videos. For uncle/niece shenanigans you usually have to go to the Habsburgs.
@@HistoryCalling Or the Ptolemys.
Yeah, ..Phillipa Gregory must be a low key Ricardian because that "love affair" made no sense and was batshit crazy. I didn't read the books but it damn sure nearly ruined the end of White Queen and beginning of White Princess with that foolishness
And its no surprise that in any YT videos I see on the subject, the self proclaimed Ricardians in the comments blame Henry Tudor/Margaret B for the boys' deaths even tho it makes no sense and neither would have had access to them.
Lord Stanley is the only reason Elizabeth and Margaret Beaufort’s scheming worked. His betrayal against Richard III won the battle for Henry Tudor. And thus, the crown.
Lmaoo, stay mad
@@anaihilator I let my anger flow through me. 🤣
I always look forward to your videos on Fridays, although I still find that family tree an unfathomably tricky web to get my head around. It feels like some kind of rift probably caused her to be effectively banished rather than anything more serious, as Henry would have taken stronger action against her if that had been the case. However, I guess we will probably never know.
Yes, the family trees are tricky indeed (and the ones I put together are simplified versions - the full trees wouldn't fit on the screen!)
I have often been baffled by losing track of two children in the Tower. Not having seen the Tower, it would seem it is not actually large enough for someone to disappear with no trace. It just isn't that large of a place! That has always been an issue with me about the disappearance of the Princes in the Tower.
What a great woman Elizabeth was. To stay upright through all the heartache and troubles she endured. A true queen indeed even if her origins where rather simple.
You have such a beautifully soothing voice and annunciation! I’m afraid if I watch more videos of you I won’t be able to sleep without listening to your voice ! God bless ! I really appreciate and admire your honest hard work. You’ll go very far, as long as you keep up this work ethic !
I can't wait for you to talk about Margaret Beaufort. She really was an amazing lady, so smart and strong and truly an icon.
This channel has become the highlight of my week
Thank you so much :-)
@@HistoryCalling haha no. Thank YOU! Sooo much. Seriously. I can only imagine how much work you put in. It’s so so appreciated. Truly.
Also my mum and her friends don’t quite understand TH-cam but we have a WhatsApp group so I can send them your videos☺
Honestly, I just think Elizabeth Woodville was tired and saw she was no longer needed in court. Her daughter was the Queen now, Margaret of Beaufort was much closer to the king than her, and she had gone through so many tragedies in her life, that the grief might have finally caught up with her and she retired. As for her modest burial, Henry VII was never really the type for lavishness unless absolutely necessary, at least that's how he often came off as, and when Elizabeth stated in her will not to go grand, he ran with that idea.
I vote for conflict between Elizabeth and Margaret Beaufort over who had precedence and perhaps access to her daughter's family. Another great video.
Thanks Bev. Yes, I could imagine those two struggling to get along in the long term.
@@HistoryCalling Purleeeease! All this anti-Beaufiort stuff is simply too much! It's tosh!
She was a survivor, a political player, with good reason. She was born wealthy as part of the Beaufort Inheritance, like Anne Mowbray and target for all kinds of political cads. She had to watch her back from infancy.
She was also probably damaged giving birth to Henry at 13. When Elizabeth Woodville had 12 children. So no wonder she protected him like she did, her only child.
Also she was small in stature physically, about 4ft 8in I think, so give the Lady a break!
Too many people put a modern interpretation on her and her son, that she was an arch-manipulator. She just wanted her and her son to survive, her relatives died violently by the drove and she had lost 2 husband's. Was brought up in a largely enemy court, in fact carried the train of Anne Neville at her coronation.
Can you even imagine how that felt where every eye was on you? The slightest mistake!
God be thanked she was female. If she was male she would have probably died violently. Around a third of the male aristocracy died in battle or were executed in the WotR including her uncles.
A generation later being female would not help. The main danger for females was childbirth. It was Russian roulette every time, even for well-to-do women who could afford a physician. Isobel Neville, later Jane Seymour. So for Elizabeth Woodville she was probably on borrowed-time with 12 children.
Apparently Lord Hastings was the first to be executed in the Tower of London (?). They hadn't got a "block". They used a "builder's timber" apparently. How gruesome was that!
Yet he had been solid with the House of York before that. A battle was normally fought in three "battailes" or columns commanded by three trusted commanders. The enemy would also line up in three "battailes".
At Barnet in 1471 Edward IV commanded one, Richard Duke of Gloucester another and Hastings the third.
I think Hastings had been particularly loyal to Edward and saw the deposition of his children as a move too far.
Shakespeare accords his downfall to Mistress Shore.
I looooove everything you upload so much!! Thank you for your channel!!!
Thank you so much :-)
If ever a woman was touched by destiny, it was Elizabeth Woodville. She wasn't touched, she was hit by the sledgehammer of it, the blow killing her father, brother, and 2 boys.
Thank you for all of your videos. I find them both enjoyable and educating. Despite reading about, and watching videos about The War of the Roses, and it’s aftermath, I still find myself confused about who did what to whom and why. Thank you again for all of your research and work creating and presenting your superior historical videos.
You're very welcome and don't worry about difficulties following the Wars of the Roses. It's a nightmare for everyone to keep track of.
Oh wow! I’m so glad I’m not the only one lol!!
Great vid has usual.
Thank you for Part 2️⃣❗
You're welcome :-)
Jacquetta, Elizabeth and her daughter and extended family..the whole family (especially these women) went through so much, no miniseries could do them justice. Thank you for your lovely videos! As a history nerd, I feel like the War of the Roses should be required reading. 😂
Happy Friday @History calling.
Thanks Holly. Happy Friday to you too. Have a fantastic weekend :-)
I can’t think of a reason for being removed from court. Her daughter Elizabeth was queen consort of Henry VII. She didn’t have enemies during this time. I like to think she spent her final days in peace.
Interesting follow up video from last week! 👍 I'm amazed at all the background intrigue and power plays
behind the scenes.
Ah, just wait for Margaret Beaufort :-)
Thank you for this! I was waiting for part two! Great as always.
You're welcome. Part 2 probably has more 'juicy' stuff than part 1 actually.
Love these videos... keeps me interested in history... love love love 💓
I really don't know what it is, I'm fairly well versed in the Wars of the Roses but your presentation of it always makes me want to hear it all over. Especially with how you explain your sources and thought process. Keep it up I LOVE all your videos💖 thank you 💖
Also I think we need a final tally of how many Richard, Georges, Edwards, Elizabeths, Annes and Catherines we ended up with by the end🤣
Oh mercy, I don't think I could count them all :-) That was just a simplified family tree as well. The full thing wouldn't have fitted on the screen! Thanks for watching.
Perhaps she was sent to Bermondsey Abbey due to clashes with Margaret Beaufort over some sort of precedence as Queen mother. Perhaps she argued that she was the real queen mother because her son was the son of a king, or maybe something along the lines of Henry was only able to become a secure king due to the marriage with her daughter which should've given her more power. Maybe she even might've said something about Henry's illegitimacy to the throne which would've been such a big thing for the mother of the king's wife to say, as it condemns his dynasty and its future. Or even conspired to tarnish Margaret's reputation, but we'll never know.
Also thanks for clearing up on the reason Elizabeth called a truce with Richard, as many Richardians have brainwashed me into thinking that Elizabeth didn't believe Richard killed the princes, whilst some believe it was because the Princes were still alive and in exile, which makes no sense.
I'd love to know the reason for her apparent banishment too. All the reasons you suggest are certainly possible. If only there was some lost letter or document out there which would show up and clear the whole matter up for us. We can live in hope I suppose :-)
Ah, don't even start me on the story that one or both of the boys survived in exile. As you correctly note, it's all tosh. My Professional Historians and Time Traveller patrons actually got a video recommendation this week which deals with that very subject.
Who did harm to the princes? Ricardians point the finger at Lady Margaret Beaufort or even the Duke of Buckingham.
Sir Walter Tyrrel confessed to organising it with two accomplices. Confessed under torture? He did come out with a statement that was later to be proved correct if only partly correct.
It isn't Netflix, did there have to be a reason? It was very common for noble women should they become a widow to enter a religious institution, Convent/Beguinage. Henry V's widow had already entered Bermondsey Abbey to retire from public life in living memory.
Love the content but why am I seeing campaign ads for Illinois when I live in the SFO Bay Area?? Just curious.
Your videos are always so interesting and well researched - I love them! The way you present them is amazing and I always await your new releases. Thank you for your effort and the joy you are bringing.
(Apolo. for my poor English)
Greetings from the German Alps :)
Thank you so much. Your English is excellent - far better than my German will ever be. Greetings from Northern Ireland :-)
@@HistoryCalling Thank you so much for your kindness ❤
When I was a little girl, not even enrolled at school, I heard from Ireland for the very first time in my live. It also was the very first time I got so much empathy and felt compassion for another human being, for someone I did not even know. It was an Irish man, his name was Bobby Sands. Of course I did not understand nor did I know why he was in hunger strike or what was going on in Ireland at all. But knowing that the same time I was playing with my dolls inbetween my loving famile while someone was slowly dying was almost unbearable for me, especially because I could not do anything to change this. I heard about him shortly before my bithday (May 4th) and one day later he was dead. I cried an ocean ... - and I never lost my empathy anymore...
Before I was a spoiled brat, the only and long desired child of wealthy parents, but than I changed. He had a complete different impact on me than what he intented, but he really changed my live.
Long live Ireland and the Irish people. Much love from Lake Königssee / Bavarian Alps ❤
Anne
Thank you for another superb, well researched and beautifully presented video.
Keep up the good work.
Thanks James. Elizabeth certainly had a fascinating and complicated life.
She certainly did. It was complicated times with power and life itself ebbing and flowing.
Thanks again for bringing this to us in a way that is a joy to follow.
Thanks, HC! Fantastic in detail and presentation as always!
THANK YOU for donating to the channel again Stephen. I'm always bowled over by your generosity. :-)
It was common for noble women especially in continental Europe upon widowhood to enter a Convent or Beguinage. It still is.
Be careful not to "read" too much into it. Detractors say Margaret Beaufort was domineering like also Margaret of Anjou's detractors claim. Yet Cecily Neville retired gracefully too and was on good terms with Margaret B.
One thing Elizabeth Woodville and Margaret of Anjou are famous for are that they are founders of Queens' College Cambridge (hence position of apostrophe). Despite narratives they were both religious women so no surprise Elizabeth Woodville retired to Bermondsey Abbey.
The Duke of Buckingham's Son, the 3rd Duke, was born in Brecon which is a few miles away from me. So his mother would have been Kathryn Woodville. Bit of trivia but in the local Wetherspoons they have a portrait of the 3rd Duke proudly on display! I enjoyed these two videos and look very much forward to the coming ones. Alison
Those Woodvilles got everywhere (not surprising given how many of them there were) :-)
Would love to meet them. They are my cousins.
Hi. Great videos, thank you. I do look forward to them on a Friday, unless I'm out, then it's Saturday emmmmm; I'm glad someone can remember his stuff rather than my sieve brain too; your Irish accent is terrific, the broader the better!, please... I'm aware though, these days we are given certificates when we die, not em .... 'Passing Away' certificates. I bet no-one 'passed away' back then either - they could cope with all sorts of stuff then, and they all died well ... one way or another :)
Thanks Stephen :-) No, no death certificates back then. There might be a church record of your death at best.
You have a great channel!
I don’t think she encouraged the King to kill his brother, George had done so much on his own already, she wouldn’t have to encourage anything at that point.
What a wonderful documentary. I am sure that Elizabeth was not happy to see two of her children taken to the Tower by Richard who would eventually usurp the throne as Richard III.
Margaret Beaufort was the 2nd cousin of Edward IV via John of Gaunt as his Mom, Cecily Neville was the 1st cousin of Margaret Beaufort's Dad, John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset...
Thank you! Lady Margaret Beaufort soon , I hope. Her History is Calling.
Her biography is sitting next to me as I type this, waiting to read as research for her videos :-)
Ooooh yes please
Such an interesting life, and a great video! Thank you!
You're welcome and I agree. Fascinating, but tragic. She lost so much, poor thing.
Very much enjoyed this 2 parter! Hoping for one about E of York next! 💗
Margaret Beaufort and Anne Neville are next in line (as I'm working through the women in birth order), but Elizabeth of York is on the list. :-)
@@HistoryCalling What about Blanche of Lancaster? 🙂
Very good summary of events
Thank you :-)
I nearly sent fan-mail to your Patreon today I was so hyped for this, though I must say:
Nothing like one of your videos to make me question how I managed to get a masters when there’s academic skill like this abound! Haha.
I never really got the medieval naming system. It makes me wonder if they lost a lot of pages in their copies of ‘names for babies’. :)
Though that said I recently visited the Lost Gardens of Heligan, in Cornwall, and that was a nightmare. Only three major people involved were called John! About four or five in a row!
Also because I’m a massive man child - teehee I see another hand reveal!
Haha, thank you :-) Regarding the naming system, they were just very big into naming kids after their parents, grandparents, super-important relations etc. which is how we end up with 3 cousins all called Edward at the same time (children of Edward, George and Richard of York). I still find it odd though that Elizabeth Woodville had two sons with the same name who were alive at the same time. It must have been so confusing!
@@HistoryCalling it’s certainly confusing, and I’d hate to be writing their Christmas cards. How many times can one write the same name before losing the will to go on?
I do wonder why they got the same name. I wonder if perhaps the one from the older marriage was either quite ill, or if she tried to distance herself from the older two.
I suspect Edward IV just wanted a son named after his own father and his brother (one of their other short-lived sons was called George, no doubt after the Duke of Clarence). As you say though, a nightmare at Christmas time :-)
@@HistoryCalling yeah that would make sense. Why would a king give a fig about if another child of that woman already had that name?
@@HistoryCalling 😂😂😂 glad to know it's not just me. Anytime I hear "Queen Elizabeth's son Richard" my brain scrambles. Lol, although in relativity to importance I usually assume they're talking about the younger Richard.
"This is where naming gets confusing"
Sounds like my dad's family. Go to a family reunion and call for John and you'll have over half the men there standing I front of you. Some of them their name isn't even John, they're middle name is, but they answer to it regardless lol
i’ve been looking forward to part 2!🙌🏻
Thank you. It's one of my longer ones, so there's plenty to digest.
love the longer videos too!
If only they didn't take me such a long time to put together... :-)
@@HistoryCalling hahaha very true!!!
Fantastic video on EW. I have many family members who served Edward IV and Henry Tudor including the Staffords. I wondered about the Hasting execution as he is also a forefather. Definitely rough times.
Ahh, you should see my video on memorialising Anne Boleyn and others (if you haven't already), as Hastings is listed on the very same memorial.
Hastings had a ladies sleeve as his coat of arms. He led one of the three wings at Barnet, Edward IV and Richard Duke of Gloucester led the others. His fall was precipitous as was also Buckingham's.
Lady Margaret Beaufort's second husband was related to the Buckinghams' and sadly died of his wounds from Barnet after switching sides and fighting for York.
Have you heard of the Staffordshire "knot" their emblem?
Jane Beatty.. what a fascinating story you must have to tell. Are you able to elaborate.??????
@@junehead4892 My link to the Staffords of Grafton Hall, the Hastings family and many other noble families starts with the Cope family of Hanwell in Oxfordshire. They were Puritans. My forefather left England for America for religious reasons.
@@janebeatty9472 thank you Jane. That must be the tip of the iceberg.
I love your videos and always look forward to them. I would love to know why Elizabeth ended her days in banishment - it must have been for a very good reason, but we will never know.
I hope it was voluntary, but it's all a bit fishy. Sadly I think you're correct that we'll never know the whole truth.
6:38 how to describe the 1460s-70s in one sentence: "George continued to be a problem"
Yup, sometimes simplicity is best :-) Also, I didn't want to get sucked into doing a video on George.
@@HistoryCalling i would love a video about George, especially your opinion on his unusual form of execution ;). I think his story is a fascinating one
I'm American and I love your accent💗
Thank you. I'm Northern Irish and I love yours (and in fact I've been asked many times in life where I'm from in the States, though never by an actual American as you all know better than that) :-)
@@HistoryCalling I thought I recognised your accent, which I also love (I'm British)
Love your videos! Extremely interesting, thank you so much! I look forward to each one! 💙🏵 no...I'M FIRST !
Thanks Pamela. Elizabeth had a very dramatic life, so there's lots to cover in this week's vid.
4
Excellent!
Hello, I love watching your videos. You're voice always helps me to relax and when you're talking about the Tudors it's like a bonus (that family is my guilty pleasure😂)
So I wanted to suggest you an idea. Can you make a video during which you rank every tudor drama you watched?
I'm pretty curious to know your oppinion about them :)
(Also, sorry if I made any grammar mistakes, english it's not my first language)
Hi Alessia. Don't worry about your English. It's excellent. I'll certainly bear your video suggestion in mind. Thank you so much for watching and commenting :-)
@@HistoryCalling thank you as well for responding :)
Good morning to history calling from Bea
Morning Bea :-)
Could you do a video about the stained glass windows you feature regularly in your videos? I find them really interesting and beautifully made and I'd like to know more about them. Who made them and when? How many royal family members are depicted?
They're in Cardiff Castle, but I'm afraid I don't know much more about them. I think the Castle website would have some additional info. though.
Thank you so much for disentagling this very significant period of history.
Please note Cardinal Thomas Bourchier Archbishop of Canterbury and Chancellor you'd think would have his name pronounced the way you pronounced it. Sadly it was pronounced "Bow-cher" as in cow! 😉
English had only been the official language of the court for 84 years and certain anglicisation was taking place.Warwick the Kingmaker's father-in-law Richard Beauchamp saw this, it became pronounced "Beecham".
Hastings rise and fall was dramatic. He had fought beside Richard and Edward and commanded their third wing at Barnet. His coat of arms was a famous device a "woman's sleeve".
That Council Meeting in the Tower of London, the "Strawberries scene" was attended by Thomas Stanley who was injured in the fracas.
Thomas Stanley was enigmatic. He was related by marriage to the Nevilles and was summoned by both sides to attend Blore Heath. He attended and kept on the side without committing to the Earl of Salisbury or Lord Audley. Something he repeated at Bosworth Field.
Treachery was a part of the Wars of the Roses. People switched sides ("pre-meditated") during certain battles. Lord Grey of Ruthin did so turning the battle at Northampton at which an earlier Duke of Buckingham was killed. This was the first battle when it was decidedly for the crown.
Please note this was a different Grey family than the Greys of Groby to which Elizabeth was related.
Thank you so much! 🙂
I looked up the pronunciation of Bouchier and got the pronunciation I used, but I'd be the first to admit that some things are pronounced differently by different people, so you may well be correct. It seems like there's always some old name of a person or place to catch me out in these videos, or foreign words. I have a video coming up in a few weeks which includes a fair few German words and it was misery trying to find examples of German speakers saying them online so that I could copy their pronunciation. :-(
@@HistoryCalling You do well. I would have pronounced it like you but would have probably been thrown in the ancient clink. I pronounced it that way for many moons.
Curious figure Cardinal Thomas Bourchier. In those days prelates doubled up as politicians and ambassadors.
Go back 23 years. 1460 after Northampton. Richard Duke of York after his victory at Northampton finally makes a play for the crown itself.
He walks into Parliament with a servant in front of him with a raised sword. Only a custom accorded to a monarch.
He walks straight up to the throne and puts his hand on one of the arms probably expecting a round of applause and "Long live King Richard".
Silence!
On the next step down from the throne sat the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. Bourchier breaks the silence.
"Come to see the King my Lord?"
Game Over.
Lady Elizabeth Woodville was a smarter political strategist than the male nobles who controlled the troops. She set an example for the woman who actually became a reigning monarch: Elizabeth I
That was very impressive 👏, it must be a nightmare trying to explain such a complicated story, but I enjoyed this twice. I believe Elizabeth ended up in Bermondsey Abbey, courtesy of Henry, her son inlaw because he didn't trust her
Thanks Nancy. Yes, it was tricky deciding what to include/exclude and how much detail to go into. I'm happy with the final two videos though.
London was an unhealthy place. Westminster Palace was a "fire-trap", warren of corridors and rooms with open fireplaces. It largely burned down shortly after she left, in 1513.
London was full of diseases. Her husband died after being on the Thames.
London Bridge, the bridge to the South to Bermondsey was full of decomposing bodies, of traitors and criminals, hung, drawn and quartered and heads of traitors.
No wonder disease was common. In a hot summer with flies.
There were no hospitals only what the religious institutions ran, they had infirmaries in Abbeys.
St. Bartholomew's Priory in Smithfield near St. Paul's Cathedral was one and still exists. It was founded during the reign of Henry I by Rahere a courtier.
Bermondsey Abbey was similar. Not only religious nourishment but practical help for the sick.
@@English_Dawn wow, yes, Edward had been out on the water, but I didn't realize it was the Thames, and holy crap yes, and to point out the decomposing bodies, I never really thought about that either but it would have been risky anywhere. Thank you for taking the time to put that out there, I enjoyed reading it 😊
If Henry didn't trust her, it was an odd decision to marry her to James IV of Scotland. Successful negotiations had been achieved, and only James' death prevented Elizabeth from being a queen of a second country. Henry wouldn't , it seems to me, have contemplated sending her as queen into Scotland, of all places, if he had mistrusted her.
If I had been through all that and finally got my daughter married to the king I would be quite happy to withdraw to an abbey and live out the rest in peace. It must have been around the time of her menopause too. She probably thought"damn all this. I'm off! Good luck daughter. Bye!!"
I certainly hope that's what happened. I like the idea that it was a voluntary retirement.
John Ashdown-Hill lived not far from me and we shared a mutual friend. John and I argued about Elizabeth. He firmly believed that her marriage to Edward was illegitimate and that Richard was therefore justified in what he did to take crown (i.e. declaring the princes illegitimate and removing them from their mother). I disagreed but he was after all far more learned than me!
I didn't know the man (though he seemed very pleasant in all the TV interviews I saw with him and he did excellent genealogy work tracking down RIII's living relations), but I have read his book on the Princes in the Tower and I'll just say that I think he took a very generous and optimistic view of Richard III's actions. When he argued that Richard didn't need to kill the boys because they were no threat to him once he'd had them declared illegitimate, that was where we really parted ways. They'd always have been figureheads for revolt against Richard; there's just no getting around that. People were trying to break them out of the Tower in the summer of 1483 for instance. I'm jealous that I didn't get to debate this with JA-H myself though, as I think that could have been a fun and fascinating conversation. It's very sad that he's no longer with us.
The Woodville marriage might have been invalid (though Edward's supposed wife died before the birth of his two sons by Elizabeth anyway), but it certainly didn't justify the likely murder of R's nephews.
Don't be put off by someone who you think is more learned than you. No matter how well educated people are, sometimes they can latch onto an idea and they won't let go of it no matter how much evidence to the contrary is put in front of them. I always advise that you look at the evidence yourself and at other people's interpretations of it, then go from there. There's no reason to assume that you can't come to a well reasoned conclusion yourself, just because you don't happened to have a PhD in history. Yes, it can take a little bit longer, but you don't need a PhD to be smart and plenty of people who have them can be surprisingly thick-headed (I'm just talking generally here and not about John A-H).
I too, think that Richard III's claim was hogwash. Yes, there were *rumors* of Edward secretly marrying another, so it is somewhat disconcerting that he also married Elizabeth in secret. BUT, he certainly did not bring this other woman to court and parade her about and then have her coronated in front of the entire country. And I thought she actually died before Edward and Elizabeth married so it would be a moot point. Warrick wanted him to marry a foreign princess to maintain his hold over Edward IV, so I believe this was a lie cooked up by the people who were currently trying to depose him... and it came back to haunt Elizabeth Woodville in the worst way, years later. I am always amazed at how quickly and eagerly people were willing to accept the story from the Duke of Gloucester with absolutely no evidence of a marriage or pre contract.
@@christinerobbins9376 Eleanor Butler was long dead by the time the alleged marriage came up, which was also rather convenient for Richard. She hadn't died, however, before Edward and Elizabeth married. By no means everyone accepted this story either then or later. As you point out, there was no concrete evidence, although Richard had promised to produce some.
How interesting you got to talk with John Ashdown-Hill!
"Gives genealogists nightmares" 😂😂 Sounds about right. There's a couple places in my recent family where my grandmother and her sister married two cousins, a distance aunt married two brothers, and a great-great-great grandfather married two different sisters and another brother married the third sister. Makes me want to cry while trying to detangle all that.
@historycalling can you do a video on why Edward Woodstock was called the black prince
The answer is simple, he was famous for his brutality in war, the colour of his armour and shield, and he died before his father did, black being the traditional colour of mourning, and he’s ‘black’ in that he was someone who was supposed to be king who never became king, he was blotted out of the succession. He was never called that during his life, the first example of that name being used came 165 years after his death.
The clustering of identical names is a problem with all the Richards, Henrys and Edwards during the Wars of the Roses. In my wife's family in Victorian times, there were bunches of Henrys, Johns and Thomases!
Excellent! I had to go back and watch "The White Queen" after the first video you had on her last week! And just wondering, do you have any videos on Margaret Pole? If not I would love to see one from you! Another tragic life from the War of the Roses/Tudor period! Stayed away from the executioner all her life only to end up in death by execution at such a fragile old age! She was always loyal where she needed to be and to die for treason? Makes no since! Anyway thank you again for wonderful accurate accounts from all aspects of history!😀💕
Sense not since! Sorry!
Nothing specific on Margaret (yet), but she does get a mention in my videos on Digging up Anne Boleyn and Memorialising Anne Boleyn (just see the Anne Boleyn playlist and they'll both be there).
There is a dvd about Margaret Pole available. You might get it in on Amazon. It's one of a boxed-set of Catholic martyrs, I think about 5 in all.
Bloody cool, the 16th like! Thank you HC for doin this whole WOTR thing. Very interesting sh...stuff. :) lol
Thanks Sean. It'll be Margaret Beaufort next and she's my favourite (I've been looking forward to getting to her videos since I started in fact).
@@HistoryCalling If her life is anymore soap operatic than EW, then I'll like her story more. I love all these crazy juicy tidbits that would be good on a soap opera of medieval times. lol Killings due to bogus accusations, illegitimate kids, etc., royal life back then was crazy. That's what I love about it. lol
p.s. I do find it very very sad...don't think I get frothy at the mouth over these tidbits, they are just fascinating. :)
It was a brutal life in many ways, but actually I don't know if it's more of a soap opera than Elizabeth Woodville's. It's hard to judge. All of them had such crazy lives.
@@HistoryCalling Very true, compared to the royals now. If there were papparazzi back then I'm sure they'd be beheaded instead of just tolerated.
The war of the roses is A fascinating period. Weather Edward V was legitimate or illegitimate-It doesn't matter, the nobility didn't want to follow him because he would be influenced by the Woodville family.
Fascinating, but sooo confusing with all those cousins/Henrys/Richards/Edwards. :-)
@@HistoryCalling And then the Henry name got replaced by the George name.
Exactly. The Hanoverians were a naming nightmare too!
@@HistoryCalling Whoch side do you prefer: York or Lancaster ?
Oh, such a hard question. I suppose Lancaster in the end. The Yorks just kept killing each other, which is frustrating and I actually think Henry VII was (for the time period), actually a pretty decent bloke. I also don't think his mother was the murderous maniac that certain historical fiction writers have made her out to be and from what I know of her, I like her too.
I understand that people want to give Richard a fairer reputation as he did suffer from Tudor propaganda but the way you state the facts of his story make it clear the propaganda wasn’t without basis because jeez he really wanted the throne
He really did. I'm afraid I just can't get on team Richard myself. I think he was a very good and loyal brother up to 1483, but he really tanked his reputation (in my opinion) in those final 2 years.
@@HistoryCalling I have to wonder why he stopped being so loyal because I mean its not like he would be lacking in much power as Lord Protector and uncle to the king. He could've lived as one of the most influential men of his time and gone down in history as a strong and capable man loyal to his family but by choosing the throne over his family he's remembered as an awful king who murders his family thanks to the Tudors and his short reign
What a tangled web these royals weaved, to say nothing of the confusing "system" of naming. At the presentation's conclusion I thought to myself that retreating to an abbey seemed a healthy choice after all her trials and tribulations. I probably would have; take that as evidence Elizabeth was made of stronger stuff than I. 😉Well done, HC. See you next week.
The names are just awful. It's so hard to keep track of almost everyone. Thank goodness for Jacquetta of Luxembourg. Not too many women floating around England with that name!
Thanks!
THANK YOU Shawn for your kind donation to the channel. It's much appreciated. :-)
Is that Archbishop Bourchier you mentioned from the same family as Oliver Cromwell's wife?
It's possible, but the genealogical sites I visited could only trace her as far back as her father, Sir James Bourchier.
Thank you.
You're very welcome :-)
Outstanding analysis. You get a thumbs up from me for being able to represent the family tree clearly. This is not an easy to understand very well. Also, being a man of faith, I think Elizabeth chose to go into seclusion at the end of her life. We all assume that her punishment and staying at Westminster Abby was fully negative. I don’t believe so. I am sure she gained valuable insight and perhaps comfort at the Abbey. Having that experience while seeing so many things tragically happening outside the walls of Westminster Abby, the retirement to seclusion was probably welcomed. I think she had had enough of the secular world. I think it’s that simple.
She may well have chosen to move to Bermondsey of her own volition. But she was not entirely secluded. She visited her daughter the queen, and was with her when Princess Margaret was born. I believe her daughters also visited her.
I wonder what secrets Elizabeth Woodville took with her to the Abbey. Is it just possible that she, like others before her, took to the monastic life as a penance, an attempt to atone for what she saw as deadly sins? I wonder if she felt she had accomplished all she could for others and devoted herself to the safety of her immortal soul. The afterlife was very real to people of the time.
Not just to "people of the time".
She started off as a Lancastrian then married the chief Yorkist. Many of her closest male relatives paid the price. The Nevilles were bad news.
I think a Convent was a good place after all that for her.
Man. I keep wanting to put these videos on to fall asleep to, because your voice is so soothing; but there is just way too much death. 😂
(That's not a complaint...or rather, it's not like I'm blaming anyone, because obviously this is history and that's just how things were. But I'm pretty sure I'd wind up with nightmares about people trying to find me and kill me, lol)
You’re a wonderful storyteller…totally enjoy your videos. Thank you for sharing your talents 🤗
Thanks Kelly :-)
The Yorkists were truly one of the proudest, most back-stabbing, scheming royal families in English history. They--in the end--were destroyed as much by internecine murders, assassinations and plots against one another as they were displaced on the throne by the Tudor Dynasty. In fact, Dowager Queen Elizabeth conspired with Lady Margaret Beaufort to replace King Richard III--the last York king of England--with Lady Margaret Beaufort’s son, Henry of Richmond (whose Tudor relatives were maternally descended from the Lancaster Dynasty). 9:16 9:16 Dowager Queen Elizabeth saw with Lady Margaret Beaufort that uniting Henry’s Tudor right to the Lancastrian claim to the throne, united with Dowager Queen Elizabeth Woodville’s daughter Elizabeth’s York claim to the throne would be a stronger, more unifying royal claim to the Crown than King Richard III’s claim: it would unite the red and the white roses……This marriage led to Richard III’s defeat and death at the Battle of Bosworth Field, where the York Dynasty came to a definitive end.
I don't know. I wasn't there to answer the question of why she ended up in the Abbey.
Who would not want to live in an Abbey?
Westminster Palace, York Place etc were "fire-traps". Westminster Palace burned down just after Elizabeth Woodville left! Absolute warren of corridors and rooms. Open fires. It burned down circa 1513. Only Westminster Hall and some medieval stone buildings near St. Stephen's Church survived that and the late fire in the 1800's.
Henry VIII never went back to live there. He used Bridewell Palace before he converted Cardinal Wolsey's York Place into Whitehall Palace, which apart from the Banqueting Suite and some vaulting etc disappeared into another fire.
He used Nonsuch Palace but preferred Greenwich Palace. The city of London was unhealthy. Plague common. In.the days before the police force people wore knives. Christopher Marlowe was killed over a restaurant bill. Southwark was particularly nasty. It was lawless and didn't come under the jurisdiction, such as it was, of the City of London on the North bank.
Some of the great rebellions, The Peasant's Revolt when John of Gaunt' s Savoy Palace was burnt was recent history, Jack Cade's Rebellion and the Cornish Rebellion.
The only hospitals/infimaries were ran by monks, canons, nuns and canonesses. Abbeys were havens of peace in a turbulent, violent, sick world. London Bridge, the bridge to the South, Bermondsey, was full of bodies in various stages of decomposition in gibbets and heads of traitors and criminals, hung, drawn and quartered and on pikes. The smell alone must have been suffocating.
100 years before London had been torched and the mob got into the Tower, executed Simon Sudbury the Archbishop of Canterbury and a colleague during the Peasants Revolt. In days before newspapers and tv the mob didn't recognise a fourteen year-old boy walking on his own Richard II. Another 14 year old boy, was his cousin, hiding in a cupboard. Both survived the mob. His cousin, was Henry Bolingbroke the first Lancatrian king.
4:23 The portrait of King Edward kind of looks like a young Stephen Fry
Haha, I'm sure they'd both be flattered :-)
@@HistoryCalling oh definitely. I love Stephen x
I don't think she was necessarily being banished or punished. The Woman lost many close relatives (including 3 sons) to straight up murdered (unlawful executions were murder, not K.I.A.s). Even for the times, what she endured was incredibly traumatic and many women today turned to a intensely spiritual mindset to cope with deep traumas. Of course there is no proof, but just imagine the amount of loss that came from her alleviation to Queen. She may have become so deeply spiritual that she willingly gave up many of her worldly goods.
My great-grandmother! She lived through so much heartbreak.
Yes, she's not someone we'd ever envy I think.
In 'Monarchy' David Starkey suggested Margeret Beaufort wasn't happy 'defering' to Elizabeth as she had been crowned Queen and that was the reason for her being packed off into nunery. Noting she only walked 'half a pace' behind her in protest.
Is their any basis for this that you've seen? It did seem a little Jersey Shore to me when I saw it
I should preface this by saying that I haven't watched Monarchy in a very long time, but Starkey is usually very good with his sources and not given to misinterpreting or making things up. I wonder if the 'half a pace' comment was in reference to Elizabeth of York though, as I remember reading that before and when I read your comment it was the younger Elizabeth who popped into my head first? I could be wrong though, as I don't have the primary source to hand. As for Margaret not liking deferring to Elizabeth Woodville, I haven't come across the primary source for that, but if Starkey said it, I would be inclined to believe it until proven otherwise.
@@HistoryCalling Supposedly as Elizabeth was previously a Queen of England and Margeret wasn't (only Queen Mother), Elizabeth was given precendence during public events etc. As such Elizabeth walked ahead of Margeret.
According to Starkey, Margeret walked only half a pace behind Elizabeth as she was frustrated that it be presented that Elizabeth was more important than her.
In Starkey's words...'Margeret didn't like that one bit'
He also commented that she was the 'Mother-in-law from hell' which always makes me giggle
@@HistoryCalling You are right David Starkey meant the younger Elizabeth not Elizabeth the Queen Dowager. I have never seen any report that there was any friction between Magaret and the elder Elizabeth or even between her and Lady Cecily Neville or really between Elizabeth her daughter-in-law. If she engineered the marriage of her only child, her pride and joy, to Elizabeth then she must have had some liking for her.
Incidently David Starkey says Chrstopher Urswick a near neighbour of Starkey as a boy though separated by 500 years was a key figure in Margaret's circle. He was one of her confessors along with Saint John Fisher and was one that saved her boy from capture in Britanny. He also was the go-between between Margaret and Polydore Vergil, the one that helped Polydore become part of her entourage.
Also you might be interested if you can get the film of the trial of Richard III and the two princes.
Filmed as a court scene with lots of evidence, a young David Starkey is called as a witness for the prosecution and was pretty adamant that it looked grim for Richard, citing amongst evidence the trial of Sir Walter Tyrrell.
Pretty clear that Sir Walter knew something about it even though In his case torture was probably used. He was condemned anyway so admitting involvement wouldn't have saved him. He was a right-hand man of Richard and his evidence was partly corroborated by events later in the 1600's though NOT known at the time. One of his two accomplices sought sanctuary in the same church in London as Richard did when Richard needed sanctuary when pressing his claim for Anne Neville's property against George.
George was a strange figure. He was loaded in his own right, the Clarence estates were vast he didn't need to deny Anne Neville her share of Warwick's inheritance.
After Lose-Cote Field Edward found a letter from Warwick and George in Lord Welles' helmet incriminating them both in a plot. Why?
Clarence's skull and his wife Isobel's skulls are interred in Tewkesbury Abbey. Also interred is Edward Prince of Wales. He was found wandering alone after the battle and surrendered to Clarence' s men. Possibly he was killed in cold-blood possibly by George.
She spent so much time in that church ... It's probably where she felt the safest 💖 Another amazing woman
This "retirement" at Bermondsey Abbey may have been a forced exile by Henry VII due to her marriage with Edward IV which was a legal mess. She probably would have drawn attention away from Henry VII and focus on her. Henry VII's kingship itself was on shaky ground. All we can say -- Elizabeth Woodville's life was a legal mess, and I think this followed her to the grave.
Ugh, Richard III. My yorkie dog doesn't like him; He think Richard killed his cousins.
Haha, you know I think he might be right :-)
@@HistoryCalling He loved his cousins.
😂🤣😂
I don't know. I wonder if she thought she had to do penance for being a " bad " mother by giving her sons to Richard's care knowing what a jerk he was . I guess Henry could have learned new things ( from rumors and betrayals by "friends" ) over the years , that made him think her allegiances and maneuvers were un-loyal and so changed his regard for her. . Sadly, I don't know what she could have done. . she had no army to protect her from Richard. I can't agree with the misunderstood Nobel view of Richard. He was responsible legally and morally for the boys welfare .. and they just disappeared ?
BTW I like that you try to address at least some viewer comments. I know that is hard and time consuming. Few TH-camrs bother with that...kinda disrespectful to the audience. Thanks for another history trip.
Hmm, penance is an interesting idea, though her sons had been dead (or missing, whatever) for a few years by that point. I wouldn't blame Henry for being suspicious of her, as I think given the life he'd led he was suspicious of a lot of people.
Yes, answering the comments does take a lot of time and I sadly can't get to them all. I try to keep up with each new video for the first week that it's live, then I have to move onto the next one. Sometimes even that isn't possible though if there are an awful lot of comments, or I'm having a very busy week and I have to just try to get through the first 24 hours worth. I know that a lot of other creators don't bother, but to me (even aside from the disrespect shown to the audience) that shows a lack of understanding about how the algorithm works and the importance of engagement. I see a lot of creators who don't seem to have bothered doing their research about how to present videos, what to put in the description box and how to deal with comments, then they moan about not growing fast enough. The fact is though that TH-cam is hard work and if you skimp on these things, your growth will inevitably suffer. Sometimes I do get tired answering comments, especially when they're repetitive, but my attitude is that that's just part of the job and I need to suck it up and get on with it. After all you can't build a relationship and trust with your audience if you barely interact with them. Thank you for noticing though that it's hard work, as I think a lot of people don't really think about it and maybe get annoyed if I don't always get to their comment.
Thanks for your reply. I can always appreciate trying and failing . Not trying is another thing. :)