Elizabeth Woodville Anxious Mother or Calculating Shrew

When Elizabeth Woodville fled into sanctuary, five daughters, one son and a brother, Linnel who joined her later, in tow, reputably with some treasure and cash as well, not because her husband was in exile or her life in immediate danger, but because she was afraid Richard, Duke of Gloucester, now lawfully bringing his nephew, the young king Edward v to the capital would be angry about her attempts to usurp his rightful place as Protector of the Realm, she became the focus of sympathy and debates about the motivation for her actions. Reactions vary from dramatic stories and histories, in More and Shakespeare of a terrified mother, who hearing that her brother Anthony Woodville has been innocently arrested and her son in the power of his wicked uncle, fleeing in the middle of the night to protect her other children, to she may have been afraid but she plotted to stop Richard becoming Protector, although she still engenders sympathy as she remains in sanctuary, hears rumours concerning her sons and fears for the future of her daughters. However, Elizabeth Woodville was also criticized for releasing her younger son and bringing her daughters out of sanctuary after an agreement with Richard.

All very good stufff, but for me recently it has become clear that it was Elizabeth Woodville's own fault that she was in sanctuary, her fears have no foundation, she chose to remain in sanctuary and may have accidentally put her own sons lives at risk by doing so. Elizabeth, according to some sources stole the royal fortune, crown property, her brother, Edward took the fleet, she was going to the nobility and encouraged them to raise arms against Richard, but they refused, she tried to get the council to support her party, crown Edward on 4th May 1483, to ensure Richard was not confirmed as Lord Protector of the Realm and she heard of Anthony Woodville arrest at midnight on 30th April. It seems to me that Elizabeth and co planned their escape in case their plotting went wrong and when it did, via the arrest at Stoney Stafford of Anthony, that they grabbed everything in sight and made their escape, to a well prepared Westminster Sanctuary. It seems odd that Elizabeth was able to move her furniture, clothing and money when she was so desperate that she fled for her life in the middle of the night.

How did Elizabeth know that Anthony Woodville had been arrested during the day of 29th by midnight on 30th, in London, some six hours away, assuming that horses were laid out for the rider every 20 miles? Who brought the news from Stoney Stafford and Northampton in such short notice and how was it that she was almost preparing to flee, as if she expected Richard to arrest her brother? What was Elizabeth about thinking she could seize control of the King and government in the first place? I think she had a spy in the royal retinue who at Richard's greetings to his nephew and revelation that Anthony had been arrested gallopped down to London at speed and raised the alarm. By morning on the next day the Queen Dowager and party were in sanctuary. I also believe that Elizabeth manipulated the fact that she was in sanctuary. Richard was on his way to London with her son, he tried hard to cox her out, she played the frightened victim and chose to remain there. When Richard asked for the young Prince Richard to join his brother in the royal residence in the Tower of London, she played the anxious and mourning mother to perfection. After Richard iii was crowned and away from her, Elizabeth Woodville was indicted as being involved in the alleged plot to replace them.

It could also be seen that Elizabeth plotted with Margaret Beaufort to support Henry Tudor, but sanctuary protected her. She also used her hardship in Sanctuary to negotiate a way out the Sanctuary and manipulated Richard iii into the agreement he made to protect her daughters, find them husbands in order to come out of Sanctuary. The modern thinking is that she had no choice but to come to an agreement with Richard iii after ten months, but her thinkingis uncertain. Elizabeth should be praised for attracting attention as the mother of two lozt Princes, which if she did believe that her sons were killed is sad, for being hiding in fear of her life, yet she moved out of sanctuary, then manipulated and plotted the marriage of Elizabeth of York and Henry Tudor, with her opposite number, Margaret Beaufort for the marriage and future of her daughter and the crown. I think Elizabeth could have come from the sanctuary earlier but chose to remain there until she got the promise of King Richard that gave them all she wanted.

Hi Nico,

Interesting question about Elizabeth of York. Remember, though, she was an unmarried girl and that came, in those days, with a raft of assumptions. I doubt very much that she'd have been included in the full details of any scheming, in fact she probably knew nothing at all about plots her mother may have hatched, in fact. The role of Protector is often misunderstood - see Annette Carson's excellent booklet - and would by no means have precluded a guardianship role for the Queen or Rivers, so if she knew of no plot to attack or exclude Gloucester from the position of Protector then his behaviour at Stony Stratford would have seemed very threatening and she would naturally have gone along with the sanctuary plan. Once there, her access to information would have been decidedly limited and one-sided.

When Elizabeth Woodville fled into sanctuary, five daughters, one son and a brother, Linnel who joined her later, in tow, reputably with some treasure and cash as well, not because her husband was in exile or her life in immediate danger, but because she was afraid Richard, Duke of Gloucester, now lawfully bringing his nephew, the young king Edward v to the capital would be angry about her attempts to usurp his rightful place as Protector of the Realm, she became the focus of sympathy and debates about the motivation for her actions. Reactions vary from dramatic stories and histories, in More and Shakespeare of a terrified mother, who hearing that her brother Anthony Woodville has been innocently arrested and her son in the power of his wicked uncle, fleeing in the middle of the night to protect her other children, to she may have been afraid but she plotted to stop Richard becoming Protector, although she still engenders sympathy as she remains in sanctuary, hears rumours concerning her sons and fears for the future of her daughters. However, Elizabeth Woodville was also criticized for releasing her younger son and bringing her daughters out of sanctuary after an agreement with Richard.

All very good stufff, but for me recently it has become clear that it was Elizabeth Woodville's own fault that she was in sanctuary, her fears have no foundation, she chose to remain in sanctuary and may have accidentally put her own sons lives at risk by doing so. Elizabeth, according to some sources stole the royal fortune, crown property, her brother, Edward took the fleet, she was going to the nobility and encouraged them to raise arms against Richard, but they refused, she tried to get the council to support her party, crown Edward on 4th May 1483, to ensure Richard was not confirmed as Lord Protector of the Realm and she heard of Anthony Woodville arrest at midnight on 30th April. It seems to me that Elizabeth and co planned their escape in case their plotting went wrong and when it did, via the arrest at Stoney Stafford of Anthony, that they grabbed everything in sight and made their escape, to a well prepared Westminster Sanctuary. It seems odd that Elizabeth was able to move her furniture, clothing and money when she was so desperate that she fled for her life in the middle of the night.

How did Elizabeth know that Anthony Woodville had been arrested during the day of 29th by midnight on 30th, in London, some six hours away, assuming that horses were laid out for the rider every 20 miles? Who brought the news from Stoney Stafford and Northampton in such short notice and how was it that she was almost preparing to flee, as if she expected Richard to arrest her brother? What was Elizabeth about thinking she could seize control of the King and government in the first place? I think she had a spy in the royal retinue who at Richard's greetings to his nephew and revelation that Anthony had been arrested gallopped down to London at speed and raised the alarm. By morning on the next day the Queen Dowager and party were in sanctuary. I also believe that Elizabeth manipulated the fact that she was in sanctuary. Richard was on his way to London with her son, he tried hard to cox her out, she played the frightened victim and chose to remain there. When Richard asked for the young Prince Richard to join his brother in the royal residence in the Tower of London, she played the anxious and mourning mother to perfection. After Richard iii was crowned and away from her, Elizabeth Woodville was indicted as being involved in the alleged plot to replace them.

It could also be seen that Elizabeth plotted with Margaret Beaufort to support Henry Tudor, but sanctuary protected her. She also used her hardship in Sanctuary to negotiate a way out the Sanctuary and manipulated Richard iii into the agreement he made to protect her daughters, find them husbands in order to come out of Sanctuary. The modern thinking is that she had no choice but to come to an agreement with Richard iii after ten months, but her thinkingis uncertain. Elizabeth should be praised for attracting attention as the mother of two lozt Princes, which if she did believe that her sons were killed is sad, for being hiding in fear of her life, yet she moved out of sanctuary, then manipulated and plotted the marriage of Elizabeth of York and Henry Tudor, with her opposite number, Margaret Beaufort for the marriage and future of her daughter and the crown. I think Elizabeth could have come from the sanctuary earlier but chose to remain there until she got the promise of King Richard that gave them all she wanted.

Hi Hilary,

I absolutely agree with your analysis of MB and EW. I think in good times EW probably had that sort of cool as a cucumber veneer that film stars do. A typical celebrity catapulted to fame by nothing more than good looks and poise, who'd come to assume that she would always be the centre of attention. Hence the loss of cool and the drama queen act. Like a lot of celebrities of that type, not a lot of intelligence, and that may have been true of some other members of the family. I always see Anthony as a poser, actually, including intellectually.

Margaret Beaufort - a huge intellect, a natural networker, able to inspire loyalty in those she chose to take under her wing and be totally ruthless with those whose support she didn't value. Yes, definitely a headmistress or entrepreneur.

Hi Doug,

Perhaps the main thing that emerges from Annette's book is that Protector was not a synonym for regent as is generally supposed (largely thanks to Mancini, an Italian who did not understand the English system). The job, as we all know, was created for Humphrey Duke of Gloucester as a political compromise when Henry V's nomination of him as regent was found unacceptable, and the arrangement was ratified by parliament. The office of Protector had never existed previously so there was no earlier precedent. The arrangement concluded was for a three-way division of responsibility. The Protector was protector of the country, not of the king's person, i.e. he was responsible for defence matters. He was also the chief member of the council but could not rule it like a king. The third body in the picture was the King's actual guardian, responsible for his upbringing and education. This pattern was adhered to in the 1450s, when parliament rejected QM's bid for the regency and chose York as Protector, with QM keeping control of the King's person. York spent a lot of his protectorate out and about putting down disturbances, which was entirely what the job was about.

I get the impression that it was generally known that Richard had been named by Edward as Protector, but this did not by any means preclude the Queen and her brother retaining their guardianship of the young king.

So Edward IV had almost certainly envisaged a cooperative arrangement, with Richard heading the government but having to work with the Council (which the records show is what happened) and the Woodvilles. It was not to be. Duke Humphrey had been forced to lay down his office in 1429 when Henry VI was crowned, so it seems to have been assumed by the Woodvilles that by getting Edward V crowned before Gloucester got to London they could circumvent a protectorate altogether. On the other hand York had exercised the office of Protector for Henry VI long after his coronation, on the grounds of renewed incapacity, so Richard could have argued that parliament should ratify his tenure of the office until Edward V was properly mature. This was actually the request that the council were planning to put to parliament after Edward's coronation - but that council decision, of course, was made after the Woodville downfall.

I highly recommend Annette's book - it's very cheap and worth its weight in gold.

Marie

Perhaps it was less greed for personal power at this stage than plain and simple paranoia. Whether it was because of the stories of Edward IV's bastardy or whether she'd heard about the precontract I don't know, but she and her family may genuinely have feared that her children would be set aside if any members of the actual House of York got so much as a seat at the ruling table. Evidently Edward IV hadn't feared that or he wouldn't have written that codicil.

But as somebody has already pointed out, by remaining in sanctuary continuing to plot she destroyed any hope of her son being crowned.

Doug

(Who will be ordering Annette's book ASAP)

Hi Doug,

Perhaps the main thing that emerges from Annette's book is that Protector was not a synonym for regent as is generally supposed (largely thanks to Mancini, an Italian who did not understand the English system). The job, as we all know, was created for Humphrey Duke of Gloucester as a political compromise when Henry V's nomination of him as regent was found unacceptable, and the arrangement was ratified by parliament. The office of Protector had never existed previously so there was no earlier precedent. The arrangement concluded was for a three-way division of responsibility. The Protector was protector of the country, not of the king's person, i.e. he was responsible for defence matters. He was also the chief member of the council but could not rule it like a king. The third body in the picture was the King's actual guardian, responsible for his upbringing and education. This pattern was adhered to in the 1450s, when parliament rejected QM's bid for the regency and chose York as Protector, with QM keeping control of the King's person. York spent a lot of his protectorate out and about putting down disturbances, which was entirely what the job was about.

I get the impression that it was generally known that Richard had been named by Edward as Protector, but this did not by any means preclude the Queen and her brother retaining their guardianship of the young king.

So Edward IV had almost certainly envisaged a cooperative arrangement, with Richard heading the government but having to work with the Council (which the records show is what happened) and the Woodvilles. It was not to be. Duke Humphrey had been forced to lay down his office in 1429 when Henry VI was crowned, so it seems to have been assumed by the Woodvilles that by getting Edward V crowned before Gloucester got to London they could circumvent a protectorate altogether. On the other hand York had exercised the office of Protector for Henry VI long after his coronation, on the grounds of renewed incapacity, so Richard could have argued that parliament should ratify his tenure of the office until Edward V was properly mature. This was actually the request that the council were planning to put to parliament after Edward's coronation - but that council decision, of course, was made after the Woodville downfall.

I highly recommend Annette's book - it's very cheap and worth its weight in gold.

Marie

Agreed,

Going back to the death of Henry V, Queen Catherine was just pushed to one side. There's no doubt that feudal society would have held it proper that Edward should be looked after by his paternal kin, members of the ruling house by blood and not just by marriage. But there were other considerations in this instance. Unlike Henry V, Edward IV died leaving only one surviving brother. In 1422 it had not been thought advisable for Duke Humphrey to have control of the King's upbringing (even Henry V doesn't seem to have envisaged this), so it can't be assumed that Edward IV had envisaged all that power being vested in Richard just because he was the only adult prince of the House of York. The sources we have give no indication that Richard was to be anything other than Protector of the realm. This was an addition to existing arrangements, made by codicil rather than in a new will, so whatever arrangements for his son's upbringing Edward had set out in his existing will still stood. Really, I don't see any reason to suppose that Edward IV envisaged anything other than a continuation of Rivers' role as the boy's guardian. This, I suppose, is why Richard and Rivers seem to have agreed to meet up en route in order to enter London together: the new king with his guardian on one side and the new Protector of the realm on the other.

If Mancini is to be trusted, the Queen's family who were in the capital had attempted to assert their dominance over the Council in the period following Edward's death, which would of itself indicate that they didn't want this control snatched away by Gloucester as Lord Protector. The very early coronation planned suggests that they had hoped to use it in order to prevent Gloucester being recognised as Protector (on the basis of the precedent of 1429). Whether they would have felt they wanted Gloucester at the coronation at all is arguable. Both sides had reasons to make a pre-emptive strike at Northampton, but if you ask me which side struck first then I'd say that the failure of Rivers' party to stick to the promised meeting place is suspicious.

As for why: Underlying it all, I suspect, was mutual fear and mistrust, on the Woodville side because of doubts about the legitimacy of Edward IV's line, and on Richard's because of his belief that the Queen had already successfully engineered the execution of his brother Clarence. The fact that Richard's wife was Warwick's daughter may also have made the Queen jittery, or simply cross.

I can't see la Woodville would have had any other motive for rushing pell mell into sanctuary other then the knowledge she had that there had been an assassination plot against Richard onto journey to London..somewhere along the road around Grafton Regis the Woodville stronghold would have been very likely..the Woodvilles...what a nest of vipers,,,! Eileen