Anna of Kyiv, Queen and Regent of France

Anna of Kyiv, queen and regent of France (married 19 May 1051)

Anna of Kyiv was the daughter of Yaroslav I Vladimirovich, grand prince of Kyiv. If you read that he was called "the Wise," the source for that soubriquet is not to be found among his tenth-century contemporaries but, as historian Christian Raffensperger notes, in the nineteenth century, part of a "nation-building scheme" by academics. And it wasn't only Ukrainian academics who burnished Yaroslav's reputation--in his 1878 Histoire de la Russie, French historian Alfred Rambaud called him "the Charlemagne of the Russians" (les Charlemagne des Russes).

A "portrait" of Anna of Kyiv, 

(detail, MS NAL 779, fol. 176r

Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale)

Anna of Kyiv's mother was Ingegerd Olofsdotter, a Swedish princess, the daughter of Olof Skötkonung, king of Sweden, and his Slavic wife, Estrid of the Obotrites (the Obotrites were members of a West Slavic confederation). Estrid's family and history are not known. According to the Saga of St. Olaf (Óláfs saga helga), Estrid had been kidnapped and brought back to Sweden, where she was "lawfully" married to Olof about the year 1000. That's important to note, because while Estrid became Olof's queen, another Slavic woman became his concubine. Like Estrid, Edla had also been captured and taken to Sweden, but she was Olof's "slave woman" (and mother of two of Olof's sons and two of his daughters).*

Unlike many of the women in this blog, whose lives are difficult to trace, much has been written about Anna of Kyiv, though very little is known about her childhood. The exact date of her birth is unknown; as Emily Warden notes in her recent work on Anna of Kyiv,  "the best estimates have still only succeeded in narrowing it down to sometime between 1024 and 1032."

Anna was one of nine children born to Yaroslav I and Ingrid Olofsdottir. (Ingrid may have beenYaroslav's second wife; as the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy notes, the existence of a first wife is possible--there does seem to have been a son, Iliya Yaroslavich, born before Yaroslav's marriage to Ingrid, though the existence of this child seems also uncertain.)

Nothing is known about Anna's education either, though something of it has been inferred. Anna was born during the period, from 988 to 1244, identified as the "golden age" of Kyivan Rus´. Under her father's rule, Kyiv "became eastern Europe’s chief political and cultural center." Yaroslav I expanded his territories, supported arts and artists, and built St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv. In addition to territorial expansion and the "embellish[ing]" of his capital, Anna's father "collected books" and sponsored their translation. He also founded schools. 

At least one modern historian has speculated that, given her father's interest in education, his daughter would have been well educated. Anna is known to be literate--what may be her autograph signature survives, in Cyrillic script, which suggests she learned to write before her marriage. And she presumably learned French before her marriage in order to converse with her husband. (As Joel Rosenthal notes, there is no evidence that the man Anna would marry, Henry I, king of the Franks, was literate, and "no direct evidence which testifies to any appreciable education.")

The life of Anna of Kyiv emerges more fully after her marriage. A fair amount of analysis has focused on the making of the marriage between the daughter of the grand prince of Kyiv and the king of the Franks. As Talia Zajac notes, "Over two hundred articles and books exist on the reign of the princess who left her Eastern Orthodox cultural environment of Kyiv (Kiev) and travelled some 2,000 kilometres across Europe to become the wife of the French king."

The fourteenth-century family tree

(arbre généalogique) showing

Anna of Kyiv, on the right; 

Henry I's first wife, Matilda,

is just to Anna's left 

(MS NAL 779, fol. 176r,

Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale)

Much of the analysis about Anna's marriage reflects the need for the Capetian king, grandson of Hugh Capet, to avoid his father's marital disasters. Hugh Capet had looked to the east to find an appropriate bride for his son, Robert "the Pious"--reflecting the concern of the king of the Franks about arranging a marriage that would not violate clerical injunctions against spouses who were too closely related by blood. Hugh Capet had first sought a bride for his son and heir from the Byzantine emperor.** When it came time for Hugh's grandson, Henry I, to seek a wife, these worries about consanguinity were still significant. (And the Church's strictures about such marriages will be important later in Anna's life too . . . )

For Henry, this would be a second marriage. He had been betrothed to Matilda of Franconia, daughter of the Holy Roman Emperor Conrad II and Gisela of Swabia, but the girl died in 1034, before any marriage could take place. (By the way, Matilda was just six years old in 1033 when she was betrothed to the twenty-five-year-old Henry.) In 1034, "little Matilda was replaced by 'another Matilda,'" who was also quite young. The king of the Franks married Matilda of Frisia (b. c. 1025-27), daughter of Liudolf, the marquis of Frisia, and Gertrude of Egesheim.*** Matilda of Frisia gave birth to a daughter about the year 1040. Within four years, both mother and child had died. 

And so, after 1044, Henry needed a wife--or, rather, he needed an heir--but it wasn't until 1049 that his envoys reached Kyiv in search of a woman who would bear him children. 

Meanwhile, Anna's father had been securing significant marriages for his own sons and daughters throughout the continent. The identity of the wife of Yaroslav's son Vladimir of Novgorod (b. 1020) is not clear, but Yaroslav's daughter Anastasia of Kyiv (b. c. 1023) married Andrew I, king of Hungary; his son Iziaslav of Kyiv (b. 1024) married Gertrude of Poland, daughter of Mieszko II, king of Poland; his daughter Elisiv of Kyiv (b. c, 1025) married Harald II, king of Norway****; Sviatoslav (b. 1027) married Killikiya (or Cecilia) of Dithmarshen, daughter of Etheler, count of Dithmarshen, and then, after Killikiya's death, he married Oda of Stade, the daughter of Liudolf of Derlingau and Ida of Elsdorf (who, by the way, was the sister of Matilda of Frisia, Henry I's first wife--yikes!)--Oda had also been a nun, and she was the sister of the bishop of Trier; Vsevolod of Kyiv (b. c. 1030) married a Byzantine  princess whose name was Irina (or maybe Anastasia), and after her death, he was married a second time, to Anna, the daughter of a khan of the Kumans (or Cumans); Igor Yaroslavich (b. c. 1034-6) was married to the countess of Orlamünde (whose name may have been Konigunda); and then there may have been Agatha (b. before 1030), about whose parentage nothing is known, but who has been suggested (by some scholars) as a daughter of Yaroslav, and who was married to Edward the Exile (Edward Ætheling), an unsuccessful claimant to the English throne.

A map showing the "dynastic connections"
of Yaroslav's "ruling family"
and the rest of medieval European royalty
in the eleventh and twelfth centuries
(Ukrainian Research Institute,
Harvard University)

I've listed all these marriages in order to show the range of Yaroslav's politcal connections, alliances secured by the marriages of his children. (I've also included the dates of birth for Anna's siblings here to demonstrate possibilities for her date of birth.) As for Anna, in 1043, Yaroslav had sent an envoy to the Holy Roman Emperor, seeking to arrange a marriage between his daughter and the emperor, Henry III. As Raffensperger lays out the advantages for the emperor, Yaroslav's daughters "were the queens of much of Europe, ruling [in] the German Empire, Hungary, Norway, and Poland in the mid-eleventh century." But the emperor declined the invitation, most likely because he needed to secure alliances on his western, rather than his eastern, "frontiers." (The emperor wound up marrying Agnes of Poitou, daughter of the duke of Aquitaine.)

Anna of Kyiv,
miniature from the fourteenth-century
Grandes Chronices de France
MS Royal 16 G VI, fol. 269v
(British Library)--
I love the hesitant expression 
on Anna's face!

And so, when Henry I sent two bishops to Kyiv in 1049, seeking a bride from among Yaroslav's daughters, there were political advantages for both men. Raffensberger notes that there are no surviving records of the negotiations, but their success is clear: in 1050, Anne Yaroslavna arrived in France with the bishops and some unspecified gifts. On 19 May 1051 she was married to the king of the Franks in a ceremony in Rheims and consecrated as queen. The king was forty-two years old, and Anna between nineteen and twenty-seven.

The new queen of the Franks quickly fulfilled her most important role, at least in Henry's eyes: she had children. She gave birth to a son and heir, Philip, in February of 1052 (though there is some uncertainty about this date). His birth was followed by Robert (b. before 1054), whom chronicles say died young, and then Hugh (b. 1057). A daughter, Emma, may have been born about 1054, between the births of Robert and Hugh. 

As was the practice for Capetian kings, Henry had his heir crowned in Rheims on 23 May 1059, when the boy was about seven years old. And then, having secured the succession, Henry died a year later, on 4 August 1060.

Recent scholarship has revisited Anna's role as queen consort, arguing her active role during Henry's reign rather than relegating her to a role as a producer of heirs. In Emily Joan Ward's words, nineteenth- and early twentieth-century historians' views of Anna of Kyiv, reducing her to a "pious" queen and "dutiful" wife,  were "limited by a refusal fully to recognize the evidence with which they were presented." Historians also focused on her foreignness, identifying Anna as an "alien" queen, unable to play a significant role as queen. As Talia Zajac notes, Anna was dismissed for her "inability" to exercise her public abilities as queen" or for her lack of preparation to do so.

I will not rehearse their arguments here--I've linked you to two great sources, readily available online, and you can access these materials if you are interested. In brief, royal charters demonstrate Anna's role in royal power, as does her presence in the royal court (curia regis) when important disputes were heard and resolved. Along with her husband, Anna also extended patronage to numerous ecclesiastical institutions.

After Henry I's death, Anna's son, Philip, became the sole king of the Franks. Since he was still a minor, the young king had two regents, his mother and his uncle Baldwin V of Flanders (Baldwin was Henry I's brother-in-law, married to the king's sister, Adela of France--both Henry and Adela were the children of their father's third marriage). Anna's role as co-regent has also been discounted in the past, though contemporary chronicles emphasize the queen's significance in her son's reign. Just a few months after Philip became king, in a document dated 25 November 1060, the bishop of Chartres addressed Anna and Philip jointly "our most serene lords, the kings" (dominos nostros serenissimos reges)--though the document has only the young king's seal affixed, with the notary acknowledging Baldwin's acceptance. The young king also acknowledges the role of his mother in a charter from 1061:  "I, Philip, his [Henry's] son I, when still very young, assumed the kingdom together with my mother" (ego, Philippus, filius ejus [Henrici] admodum parvulus, regnum unacum matre suscepissem).

But quite soon after her son became king of France, the dowager queen married again. Her "hasty marriage" to Raoul, count of Crépy-en-Valois, encountered some difficulties because of Raoul's complicated marital history. But whatever scandal this second marriage may have caused among her contemporaries, it did not alienate Anne from the royal court, nor did it end her active role as co-regent. Recent scholarship, like that of Ward and Zajac, has emphasized, in Ward's words, Anna's ongoing "maternal power in the minority kingship of Philip I of France."

And now, we are back to the Church's views of what constituted a valid marriage and what did not--and what role these views played in the judgments made of the dowager queen's second marriage. Before Raoul of Crépy's marriage to Anna, he had been married twice. He first married Adèle of Bar-sur-Aube (he was her fourth husband), and after her death (about 1053-4), he married a woman possibly named Eleanor (or Alienor), who was also derisively referred to as "La Haquenée" (or "the mare"), supposedly a great heiress. But Raoul repudiated his second wife, accusing her of adultery, and then married Anna.

Aside from the obvious charge of bigamy (as if that weren't enough), another problem for this marriage was the relationship between Anna's first and second husbands. The two men were second cousins, both descendants of Herbert of Vermandois, this connection falling well within the prohibited degree of consanguinity (blood relationship). In the words of one outraged chronicler, "Count Raoul, [the king's] cousin, married his widow, which was contrary to human law and divine law [contre jus et fas]" (comte Raoul, son cousin, épousa sa veuve, ce qui était contraire au droit humain et à la loi divine [contre jus et fas]). Raoul's repudiated second wife may have gone to Rome to appeal her case, and Raoul may have been threatened with excommunication or even excommunicated. sources on all this vary. 

But surviving evidence suggests that Anna continued her role as co-regent for her son despite whatever "scandal" may have been the result of her marriage. She continued to play a role at court and her name continues to appear in numerous royal charters. She was described as the queen throughout her second marriage. As well, Anna arranged for the marriage of her son, Hugh, with Raoul's granddaughter, Adela of Vermandois. And Raoul's son, Gautier, fought with his father at the siege of Vitry, both men serving King Philip. Anna's role as co-regent did not end with her remarriage: as Zajac observes, "it was not when Anna remarried in 1061 that her status as queen changed." Anna remained a strong presence in her son's life even after he began his personal rule in 1066. Her significance only diminished "when her son Philippe married in 1072 and hence had a queen of his own."*****

Anna of Kyiv's second husband died in 1074. In the mean time, Anna had devoted herself to the restoration of the abbey of St. Vincent in Senlis, where she had dower lands. According to the charter of foundation, her support was "a gift from my goods and those which king Henry, my husband, gave me at our marriage, all of which, with the favour of my son Philip, by the grace of God king, and the counsel of all the magnates of his kingdom, I granted to be assigned to it." Anna's further contributions are documented in two surviving charters signed by Philip, one of which was issued after his mother's death.

The last documented evidence of Anna of Kyiv is in a charter of 1075. There is no record of her death--but in 1079, her son made a donation to the Church of Saint-Martin-des-Champs (Paris) for the remission of his own sins and for "those of my father and mother and of all the kings of the Franks, my ancestors" (Facio autem hanc donationem pro remissione peccatorum meorum et genitoris gentricisque meę et omnium regum Francorum, antecessorum meorum). Her place of burial is unknown.

The monastery at Senlis dedicated an annual memorial service for Anna of Kyiv every year, on 5 September, which suggests she may have died on that date. The memorial was held until the French Revolution.

Mykola and Valentyn Znoba's
bronze statue of Anna of Kyiv
at Senlis (Ouse, France),
unveiled in 2005 as a gift from Ukraine

A selection of letters from Anna of Kyiv can be found at Epistolae: Medieval Women's Latin Letters. Letters come from both Anna and Henry, from Anna and her son, Anna and her second husband, and Anna alone. Also included there is a letter to Anna of Kyiv from Pope Nicholas II. 

I've linked to so many of my sources above that I will not add any further suggestions for reading here. As I have noted, there is a great deal written about Anna of Kyiv, so an interested reader will have no trouble finding a wide range of online sources as well as books and articles to be accessed through libraries. 

By the way, Anna of Kyiv can be linked to Olga of Kyiv, a woman whom I've written about before in this blog. Olga was the grandmother of Vladimir the Great, while Anna was the granddaughter of Vladimir the Great--Vladimir the Wise was Vladimir the Great's son.

*For an extended exploration of marriage during this period, and of how Olof's relationship to Edra might have been understood at the time, I recommend Caroline Wilhelmsson's The Queens and Royal Women of Sweden, c. 970-1330: Their Lives, Power, and Legacy.

**Poor Robert "the Pious" had a disastrous marital career. To read about his first wife, Rozala of Italy, click here. To read about his second, Bertha of Burgundy, click here. And to read about his third, Constance of Arles, click here.

***Little is known about this "other Matilda," but what is known is carefully articulated in Szabolcs de Vajay's "Mathilde, Reine de France Inconnue, Journal des Savants 1971, no. 4 (1971): 241-60 (full text availble here). Vajay undertakes extensive genealogical research, a research that leads to this rather startling claim: in marrying Anna of Kyiv, Henry I is "united" with the "sister-in-law of the niece of his dead wife, who was, herself, the niece of [the woman to whom he was first betrothed]." (See especially the family tree on p. 259.) Yikes! Is it any wonder it was hard to find a royal alliance that didn't challenge ecclesiastical "laws" about marriage!

****This Harald is the Harald who invaded England, landing in the north, on 25 September 1066, while William of Normandy invaded on 28 September, landing in Sussex. Elisiv and her children may have landed in England with her husband. 

*****Anna's son had his own marital scandals. He repudiated his first wife, who had given him an heir, and then "remarried" a woman who may or may not have still been married to her first husband . . . The king of France was excommunicated--more than once, since he kept going back to the woman from whom he was supposed to separate. I'll let  you follow up on all this on your own, but you can start by clicking here . . . 

Rozala of Italy, Countess and Regent of Flanders, and Queen of the Franks

Rozala of Italy, countess and regent of Flancers, then queen of the Franks (married 1 April 987)

The year of Rozala of Italy's birth is not certain--she seems to have been born near the middle of the tenth century, likely between 950 and 960. She was the daughter of Berengar II of Ivrea, who ruled as king of Italy during this same decade. Her mother was Willa of Tuscany, daughter of Boso, margrave of Tuscany.*

Detail from a late-fifteenth
century manuscript portrait
of the counts of Flanders
and members of theirfamilies
buried in St. Peter's Abbey,
Ghent

According to at least one contemporary chronicle, Rozala and her sister were "brought up in the imperial palace by the empress after being brought to Germany." (Although it seems clear that Berengar and his wife had two daughters, the name of Rozala's sister is unknown.)

Given the dates suggested for Rozala's birth, the Holy Roman Emperor would have been Otto I. As a younger man, Berengar, then margrave of Ivrea, had led a revolt against his uncle, who was king of Italy--the unsuccessful Berengar had been forced to flee, winding up in then King Otto of Germany's court, where he spent several years. Thus Berengar's decision to send his daughters to Otto's imperial court makes political sense.

According to several contemporary chroniclers, it was the emperor who arranged Rozala's marriage to Arnulf II, count of Flanders. Again, however, the dates of this marriage are not clear. According to the Annales Elnonenses Minores (Minor Annals of Elnon, Latin chronicles of the Abbey of Saint-Amand), the marriage took place about 968. By contrast, in his history of medieval Flanders, the historian David Nicholas claims that the marriage took place in 976, when Arnulf reached the age of majority. (Arnulf had been born c. 960, making him sixteen in 976). 

Before Arnulf's death on 30 March 987, Rozala had given birth to two children, a son named Baldwin, born in 980, and a daughter, Mathilde, whose date of birth is unknown. After Arnulf's death, Baldwin succeeded his father as count of Flanders, with Rozala acting as regent for her minor son. 

Early in 988, Rozala was married for a second time, to Robert the Pious, the son and "co-ruler" of Hugh Capet, king of the Franks. (To reinforce his kingship, Hugh Capet advocated for his son's "co-kingship," a way of reinforcing the legitimacy of this new dynasty.) The marriage was evidently a way of rewarding the Flemish for their support when Hugh seized power in 987. As for Rozala--hstorian Jean Dhondt has argued that the widowed Rozala would likely have been "pushed" (poussée) into this marriage by her Flemish advisors, fearing that Flanders, assailed on all sides by more powerful neighbors, would crumble.

Fifteenth-century manuscript
containing portraits of
the counts of Flanders
(Ghent, Ghent City Museum
 [STAM], Inv. 779)

At some point, Rozala's name seems to have been changed, never mind all the variations in the spellings of Rozala (Rozela, Rosala, Rosela, for example). 

According the author of the contemporary Vita Sancti Bertulfi (Life of Saint Bertulf), after her marriage to Robert, Rozala became Suzanne (or Susanna or Susanne): "after the death of Prince Arnulf, she married Robert, king of the Franks, and was called Susanna" (post mortem Arnulfi . . . principis, Roberto Regi Francorum nupsit et Susanna dicta). As research by the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy illustrates, however, contemporary records refer to Rozala as "Susanna" before her marriage to Robert.

No matter when Rozala became Suzanne, her second marriage would not turn out well for her. By 991, Robert had separated himself from Rozala/Suzanne. During the brief years of their marriage, Rozala/Suzanne had not borne a child, and according to Robert (and many accounts of Robert's complicated marital disputes), that was because she was too old.

Here's where Rozala's date of birth becomes crucial. The exact birth date of Robert "the Pious" (got to love his soubriquet) is also unknown--if you look at the entry in Wikipedia, for example, the date is given as "c. 972." This date reflects the conclusions of many historians, including the nineteenth-century Chrétien Pfister, in his Études sur le règne de Robert le Pieux (996-1031): while Robert's exact date of birth is not clear, he was known to be "about sixty" when he died on 20 July 1031, suggesting he was born about 970. Pfister also claims that, when Robert separated from Rozala/Suzanne (Pfister says this occurs in 989), the young man was "in his nineteenth year." 

But how old was Rozala when Robert decided he had to get rid of her? She had married Arnulf of Flanders (born c. 960) in 976, when he was about sixteen. Would Rozala have been similarly aged (born c. 960), or a decade older (born c. 950)? In other words, would Rozala have been about sixteen years old, like her husband, when she was first married, or would she have been twenty-six?

More critically for Rozala/Suzanne, how old would she have been when Robert claimed that she was too old to bear children? In his Histories, the monk Richerus of Reims says that poor Robert is "in the prime of his youth" when he marries, while his wife was "too old" (and also Italian . . . ). For his part, Pfister sniffs at the marriage between Rozala, "the old widow" (la vieille veuve), and Robert. The young king hasdbeen tied to an aged crone, a woman who was much older than he (beaucoup plus âgée que lui) while he is a man "in the springtime of youth" (dans le printemps de sa jeunesse). By the mid-twentieth century, historian Alexander Vasiliev would casually refer to Rozala as an "elderly widow" at the time of her marriage. 

What can we say about the characterizations of Rozala/Suzanne and her marriage? If we use the earliest suggested date for Rozala's birth, 950, she would be some twenty years older than Robert, who was born in 970. If she was born around the year 960, she would have been about ten years older than he was. If Robert was eighteen or so when he married, Rozala could have been anywhere between twenty-eight and thirty-eight. 

More recently, Dhondt has suggested a likely date of around 962 for Rozala's birth: "She was at least ten years older than Robert, perhaps fifteen" (Elle avait aux moins dix ans de plus que Robert, peut-être quinze). In Dhondt's view, the age difference was not a relevant consideration for Robert's father, Hugh Capet, who had arranged his son's marriage solely for its political advantage, the alliance giving the Franks a level of influence and authority in Flanders. Interestingly, Dhondt suggests that the union may never have been consummated. 

But whatever Rozala's age at the time of her second marriage (and whether it was ever consummated), once Robert's father, the "senior" king, Hugh Capet, died in 996, Robert formally repudiated Rozala and divorced her. Even though he had ended their marriage, Robert kept a significant part of her dowry, including the castle of Montreuil in Ponthieu.** 

According to Richerus of Rheims, when Robert wouldn't return the castle to her, Rozala built another one nearby. (I really hope Richerus is right about this.) After her separation from Robert, she returned to Flanders, where she was reunited with her son, Baldwin IV, who had by now reached his age of majority. Although Robert managed tp lee[ Montreuil-sur-Mer, Baldwin managed to recover several of the territories that had been given to his mother on the occasion of her marriage, including Artois and Ostrevant. Rozala also became one of Baldwin's "principal advisors." A charter dated 26 June 995 notes that, along with her son Baldwin, "Queen Susanna" (Susanna regina) made donations to St. Peter's Abbey (Ghent), for the soul of her daughter, Matilda. On June 1003, she made several grants of land to St. Peter's. 

In the Annales Elnonenses, Rozala's death is recorded in 1003. A Latin poem in memory of her death says that she died on 7 February, but if the date of the charter granting land to St. Peter’s Abbey is correct, then Rozala cannot have died in February. A date of 13 December 1003, recorded in another contemporary annal, is also possible. As with her birthdate, then, the exact date of Rozala’s death is uncertain. 

Rozala of Italy, countess of Flanders (and briefly queen of the Franks) is buried in St. Peter's Abbey, Ghent, next to her first husband. 

By the way, after repudiating Rozala, Robert "the Pious" had a long and sordid marital career. He entered into an incestuous marriage with Bertha of Burgundy, then repudiated her, then married Constance of Arles--who was eighteen when he was thirty-two. Hmmm. Although she did give him children, he wanted to get rid of her too . . .  

You may also be interested in reading a bit about Rozala's father, Berengar II, who had his own adventures in marriage, attempting to force the widowed Adelaide of Burgundy whom he was holding captive, into marrying his son, Rozala's brother Adalbert. 

All I can say is: traditional marriage! Yikes!

*One of the most reliable sources I've found is the genealogical information made available by the Foundation for Medieval Genealogy, which I've linked to several times throughout this post. 

**In "Sept femmes et un trio de rois," Dhondt examines why this marriage would have been politically advantageous for Hugh Capet. He also provides documentary evidence for why Rozala was likely born before 962 (when her father was dethroned), and he suggests that it would have been highly unlikely, even given his political considerations, that Hugh would have forced his son into a marriage with a woman who was too old to bear an heir.  

Susannah Arne Cibber, "the Priestess of Sensibility"

Susannah Marie Arne, "the Celebrated Mrs. Cibber" (born 14 February 1714)

Susannah Marie Arne, born in Covent Garden, was the daughter and granddaughter of members of the Worshipful Company of Upholsterers. Her father and grandfather both held numerous offices in the guild and in their parish, St. Paul's. But, while members of the Arne family were at times quite successful tradesmen, they also gambled, suffered from bankruptcy, and found themselves in debtors' prison.

Susannah's father was Thomas Arne, described as "a wily naive man with a taste for the exotic." Although he had followed in his father's profession, there does not seem to have been much family feeling--in her biography of Susannah Cibber, Mary Nash notes that, while Thomas Arne "kept a rich Christmas" with his wife and small son (named Thomas Arne) in 1713, Arne's own father--another Thomas Arne--was "dying of cold and hunger nearby, a debtor in Marshalsea prison."

An ivory medallion (c. 1729)
with a portrait of Susannah Arne,
about age fifteen 
(National Portrait Gallery, London)

Susannah's mother, born Anne Wheeler, was a midwife. Less than two months after the death of the elder Thomas Arne in debtors' prison, Anne gave birth to his granddaughter. Susannah was born on 14 February 1714. (Anne Wheeler Arne had eight children between 1710 and 1718--or, at least, eight babies were baptised during these years. Only three survived: Susannah, her elder brother, Thomas, and a younger brother, Richard.)

Despite Thomas Arne's status as a man of trade, he had "audacious and visionary" plans for his children--for his son, another Thomas Arne, he planned a university education and a career in law, for his daughter, education as a gentlewoman and a "brilliant marriage" that would be made possible by the "huge dowry" he would be able to provide.

While her older brother went to Eton, Susannah was educated at home, where she was instructed in French, drawing, penmanship, and music. More surprisingly, she was also instructed in Latin. And Susannah was reared by her mother in the Catholic faith. 

By 1729, her father's finances were faltering. The younger Thomas Arne had to leave Eton, and instead of the university education his father had planned, he was apprenticed to a lawyer. But the younger man did not see a future in law for himself--he preferred music and set about cobbling together a musical education that would lead to a different life. 

With a rich dowry no longer a possibility for Susannah--and seeing his son's successes as he pursued a career in music--Thomas Arne seemed to regard his daughter's musical talents as the best means not necessarily to a successful career but to a successful marriage. 

With the musical and theatrical contacts the younger Thomas Arne had developed--and some funding from his father--Susannah's brother and his new associates, John Frederick Lampe and Henry Carey, rented the New Theatre in Haymarket in 1732 and set about presenting their own "New English opera," Amelia, featuring Lampe's music and Carey's libretto. Thomas Arne arranged for his sister's professional debut, with the eighteen-year-old Susannah playing the title role in the production--set in a Turkish harem, the opera tells the story of a faithful Christian woman who saves her husband, somehow, by pretending to sacrifice her virtue to the sultan who has captured and enslaved him. 

Detail from the playbill for Amelia

Although a critical notice described Amelia as a production "by a set of Performers that never appeared before upon any Stage," it was a success. In Nash's words, Amelia "exceeded anything its composers or even old Arne could have foreseen." 

Most important to Amelia's success was Susannah Arne's voice. Her technique as a singer would later be much criticized, but the noted composer and musician Charles Burney was able to articulate her particular effectiveness as a performer. Her voice was, he said, a "mere thread," and her "knowledge of Musick" was "inconsiderable," but "by a natural pathos, and perfect conception of the words, she often penetrated the heart, when others, with infinitely greater voice and skill, could only reach the ear." And she was also, in his estimation, "the most enchanting actress of her day": 

he considered [Susannah] as a pattern of perfection in the tragic art, from her magnetizing powers of harrowing and winning at once every feeling of the mind, by the eloquent sensibility with which she portrayed, or, rather, personified, Tenderness, Grief, Horror, or Distraction.

Such success and recognition were still to come. After Amelia, Susannah Arne appeared in her brother's "pirated version" of Handel's Acis and Galatea.* This seemed to be taken as something of a betrayal by Lampe and Carey. They continued presenting works in the Haymarket theater, while the younger Thomas Arne, with his father's support and his sister on stage, moved to Lincoln's Inn Fields. He staged two English operas; the first, Teraminta, closed after three nights, the second, Britannia, after four. Undaunted, Thomas Arne proclaimed himself "Proprietor of English Opera" and began staging his own work, beginning with Rosamond, a setting of Joseph Addison's 1707 libretto, and then his own works, the Opera of Operas and Dido and Aeneas.

By 1733, Susannah Arne had met George Frederick Handel, and she performed the role of Jael in his English oratorio, Deborah. She had also met the actor and theater manager Theophilus Cibber, son of the actor-manager, playwright, and poet laureate, Colley Cibber. Handel and the Cibbers would play significant roles in Susannah's life and career.

A long friendship and musical relationship developed between Susannah and Handel, who took great pains with the young woman. Susannah did not read music, so he instructed her in every note. Their partnership would continue for many years--she performed in his Acis and Galatea, Esther, and Alexander's Feast. She also sang solos at the premiere Messiah on 13 April 1742. She would perform the role of Jael in Deborah, the role of Micah in Samson, and various roles in Hercules, Saul, and L'Allegro. 

Susannah would marry Theophilus Cibber, but their partnership was much less successful. As manager of the Drury Lane theater, he would seem to have been an attractive match for Susannah Arne--it was certainly one her father promoted. But the younger Cibber's physical presence--in Nash's words, his "pitted cheeks, skewed nose, cabriole legs, squints, grimaces, eye-poppings, and sour ambiance of last night's debauchery"--all "horrified her."

By all accounts, Theophilus Cibber was as horrible a man as his unfortunate physical appearance suggests. He was cruel and debauched, but he pursued Susannah Arne, and her father pressured her to become Cibber's (second) wife. In an extraordinary act of foresight, Susannah's mother, Anne, and her brother, Charles Wheeler, had pre-nuptial articles drawn up that would protect Susannah and her earnings. Her uncle would act as Susannah's executor, her salary paid into a trust in her name that he would invest for her. If she predeceased her husband, the trust would pass to her children and be administered for them; if she had no children, it would go to her family. And Cibber signed them. The two were married when Susannah Arne was just twenty years old. (Theophilus Cibber had been born in 1703, so he was only a decade older than Susannah, as objectionable as their pairing might have been otherwise.)

John Faber the Younger's drawing
of Susannah Cibber, c. 1736?
(British Museum)

Now performing under the name of "Mrs. Cibber," Susannah found in her husband's father another mentor. Colley Cibber saw in her "the makings of a great tragic actress" (Donnelly); with his training and support, she had "one of the most famous careers as a tragedienne in the 18th century." She made her debut as a tragic heroine at the Theater Royal, Drury Lane in 1736, under her father-in-law's tutelage. (And, happily for her brother, he became the house composer there.)

A scandalous disruption in her personal life soon overshadowed Susannah Cibber's success and popularity on stage. There are various accounts of her relationship with a wealthy (and married) man named William Sloper. Did her husband, Theophilus, "pimp his wife" to Sloper? (Cibber was known to encourage his wife to be "more friendly" to "gentlemen-admirers" like Sloper who helped support his household.) Were the three engaged in some sort of ménage à trois? (At some point, they seemed to have lived in the same house, though William may have taken rooms there as a kind of border, since Theophilus Cibber needed the money--during this period he was in and out of debtors' prison.) Or did Sloper, "a friend of the family and a man of good position," sympathise with a desperate Susannah Cibber, and things just happen? (Sloper had asked Cibber's permission to teach Susannah backgammon, and Susannah was supposedly his wife Catherine's favorite actress.) 

Whatever brought the pair together initially, Theophilus Cibber sued William Sloper in 1738, accusing him of "Assaulting, Ravishing and carnally knowing Susannah Maria Cibber, the plaintiff's Wife." Because of Sloper, Cibber had "lost the Company, Comfort, Society, Assistance, & etc. of his Wife." In her biography of Susannah Cibber, Mary Nash offers an extended account of the relationship between Susannah, Sloper, and Theophilus Cibber as well as a thorough analysis of the court case (click here). You can also read the documents in the case for yourself, The Tryal of a Cause for Criminal Conversation between Theophilus Cibber, Gent., Plaintiff, and William Sloper, Esq., Defendant (this account was published soon after the verdict was delivered, but it continued to be republished for decades; click here for an edition from 1749). 

Cibber was "successful" in his case--but awarded only the paltry sum of £10 instead of the £5000 he had sought. Because Susannah Cibber would neither leave Sloper nor return to the stage, Theophilus sued again, nine months later, this time seeking £10,000--again, he "won" his case, but was awarded only £500. 

In the mean time, Susannah Cibber had given birth to Sloper's child. Susannah and Sloper eloped with their daughter, Susannah Maria, withdrawing from society. In Nash's words, "Susannah, Sloper, and their child had disappeared for two years." 

Susannah Cibber, 1749
portrait by Thomas Hudson
(National Portrait Gallery, London)

Susannah Cibber made a triumphant return in November 1741--in Dublin. There, at his invitation, she joined Handel. In December, she appeared on stage in a production of The Conscious Lovers--and over the course of the next few months, appeared in fifteen productions. 

More important, though, she began rehearsals with Handel. His Messiah would premiere in Dublin--and Susannah Cibber's performance of "He Was Despised" seemed to have been so powerful as to begin the restorationn of her reputation. One listener, a clergyman, is said to have exclaimed, "Woman, for this thy sins be forgiven thee." As Nash notes, the "soloists" in the Messiah "are not given identities," but "everyone" who heard Cibber sing identified her with Mary Magdalene. Handel had "put the account of Christ's degradation and physical suffering into the mouth of a fallen woman."

By 1742, Susannah Cibber was back in London and once more on stage. Theater historian Elaine McGirr claims that Cibber carefully crafted her return, by the roles she chose to perform, playing characters "designed to strengthen public opinion in her favour," roles that would "reinforce her reputation as a woman more sinned against than sinning." 

She marked her return to the stage on 22 September playing Desdemona. Her career from that point on was a success, and she made something of a specialty in playing wronged wives. From 1744 through 1765, Susannah Cibber was, after actor-producer-writer David Garrick, the highest paid actor in London (Donnolly). And on 17 March 1752, she presented her own work, an adaptation of Germain-François Poullain de Saint-Foix's one-act comedy, L'Oracle, on a benefit night at Covent Garden. (During the two years that she was "out of sight," Susannah and Sloper may have been in Paris--Saint-Foix's play debuted there in 1740-41.)

After the season that ended in 1763, Garrick left the Drury Lane theater for a respite, and Susannah Cibber retired with William Sloper and their daughter to West Woodhay, Sloper's estate. Garrick returned to England and the Theatre Royal in 1765. He endeavored to get Cibber to return the stage, even visiting her and Sloper at West Woodhay. Despite her failing health, she promised Garrick she would. She left West Woodhay on 29 November and reached her London home the next day. 

On 5 December, Susannah Cibber played opposite Garrick in John van Bruh's The Provoked Wife. An old friend saw her performance that night: "it was the last, and I am sorry to say, the worst performance in her life." 

After the end of the play, she returned to her home. She died there on 30 January 1766 and was buried in the cloisters of Westminster, not far from Aphra Behn. 

After Susannah's death, William Sloper returned to West Woodhay with their daughter. Although many sources have nothing to say about Susannah's daughter, Susannah Maria, called Molly, Nash notes that the young woman inherited her mother's fortune and, at age twenty-eight, married a clergyman. She died in 1765.

As for William Sloper. He was elected to parliament in 1747 and again in 1754. He resigned in 1756 when he was appointed Lord of Trade, a position he held until 1761. He died three years after his daughter, in July 1768. 

By the way, William Sloper's wife, Catherine, was still alive when he died. After her husband's death, as his widow, she moved back to West Woodhay. Along with her daughter-in-law (married to William and Catherine's's son, Robert), Catherine "destroyed every letter, picture, every momento, every piece of evidence of the thirty-year incumbency of Susannah Cibber." She lived until she was ninety years old, dying in 1792. Can't say I blame her for this . . . But then she had William Sloper's grave opened and buried herself at his side. That's creepy.

There are many sources, printed and electronic, for Susannah Cibber's life and work. I've linked to some of them here, including Mary Nash's biography, The Provoked Wife: The Life and Times of Susannah Cibber. Published in 1977, it is available through the Internet Archive. 

*Through my university, I have access to Molly Donnelly's biographical essay on Susannah Cibber in Grove Music Online, quoted here. 

Mary of Guelders, queen and regent of Scotland: "nubilus et formosa"

Mary of Guelders, queen and regent of Scotland (born 17 January 1433)

The woman who would become queen of Scotland on 3 July 1449, Marie de Gueldres, or, in English, Mary of Guelders, was the daughter of Arnold, duke of Guelders, and Catherine of Cleves. Through her mother, Mary of Guelders had close ties to the Burgundian court--Catherine of Cleves was the daughter of Marie of Burgundy (who became duchess of Cleves through her marriage to Adolph I, duke of Cleves). 

Through her maternal line, then, Mary of Guelders was connected to Burgundy. The duchy of Burgundy was a wealthy and powerful state, one of the most culturally advanced in western Europe. Marie of Burgundy, Mary of Guelders’s grandmother, was the daughter of Philip the Fearless, duke of Burgundy, and the elder sister of Philip the Good, who succeeded his father of duke of Burgundy--thus Philip, duke of Burgundy was Mary of Guelders's maternal great uncle. 

(The Cleves connection is also interesting, in particular to those who love Tudor history, because of one of her descendants--Mary of Guelders's mother, Catherine of Cleves, was the great aunt of Anne of Cleves, Henry VIII's third wife--the one he divorced.)

Although Guelders was a vassal state of the Holy Roman Empire during this period, it also had critical ties with Burgundy, and Philip of Burgundy offered the duke of Guelders not only his support but a bride, his great niece Mary. Despite these marital ties, Arnold of Guelders would have an uneasy relationship with Burgundy, and Duke Philip eventually turned against him. 

In 1442, during this period of conflict, the nine-year-old Mary of Guelders left her father's court and was sent to Burgundy, where she was placed in the care of Isabel of Portugal, Philip of Burgundy's third wife. There, under the supervision of the remarkable duchess, Mary of Guelders received not only an excellent education, but she could also witness and learn from the political acumen and administrative experience of Isabel of Portugal. 

A possible marriage for Mary of Guelders with Charles, count of Maine, was suggested when she was about twelve years old. A member of the cadet branch of the ruling Valois family, Charles was the son of Yolande of Aragon, daughter of the king of Aragon and duchess of Anjou--the alliance was most likely proposed by the younger Charles's cousin, Charles VII of France. But after Arnold of Guelders informed the duke and duchess of Burgundy that he could not provide the dowry required for his daughter, that match failed to be made. 

But in in 1446, the possibility of a marriage to the king of Scots, James II, arose. While this suggested alliance has been ascribed to the king of France, Charles VII, historian Rosalind K. Marshall notes that "it seems much more likely that the original idea and the initial delicate negotiations were achieved through a network of female connections." 

A sixteenth-century depiction
of the marriage of 
Mary of Guelders and
James II of Scotland
(Lambeth Palace MS 316);
in the manuscript, Mary
is misidentified as "Margaret,"
though she is correctly said to 
be the daughter of the
"Duke of Gelders"

The king of Scotland's mother, Joan Beaufort, was related to Isabel of Portugal (I can't work out the exact relationship--Isabel of Portugal's mother, Philippa of Lancaster, was John of Gaunt's daughter by his first wife, Blanche of Portugal, while Joan Beaufort was the daughter of John of Gaunt's son, John Beaufort, by his third wife, Katherine Swynford.) 

Joan Beaufort, queen of Scotland, died in 1445, however, though it was "not long after" her death that "soundings were being taken" about the potential of an alliance between Scotland and Burgundy. 

By June of 1446, Scottish ambassadors were in Guelders, when Mary of Guelders may have been visiting her father. The next year, Arnold of Guelders was known to be discussing the possibility of the marriage. 

In 1448, James II of Scotland wrote to Charles VII of France, asking the king for advice about a bride--and the king of France suggested Mary of Guelders. But, as Marshall claims, "[n]o doubt" the king of Scotland already knew that Mary was "the chosen bride." 

I have examined the political connections among royal and aristocratic women in the late-medieval and early-modern periods myself, and although I love the idea that the marriage between Mary of Guelders and the Scottish king is the result of the "delicate negotiations" between women, there really is no evidence. One of Isabel of Portugal's great interests as duchess of Burgundy was arranging influential marital alliances, but Marshall notes only that the queen of Scotland and the duchess of Burgundy "were almost certainly in touch with each other." While the potential of a marriage might have been raised by the two women, the death of Joan Beaufort in 1445 would seem to make her role in bringing the alliance to fruition unlikely. 

Meanwhile, as Scottish historian Callum Watson notes, the French king was "a kind of international marriage broker for the Scots during the 1440s":  

It was thanks to King Charles that James II's other sisters were married off to such luminaries as the Duke of Brittany, the Archduke of Austria, the Lord of Veere, and the Count of Geneva. When the time came, Charles also encouraged Philip to apply pressure to Mary's father to accept a match between his eldest daughter and the Scottish king. The union was hugely appealing to the Scots as it provided the royal administration with connections to the courts of Burgundy (through her uncle), Gueldres (through her father), and Cleves (through her mother).

Whoever was responsible for the marriage, the treaty for the marriage was was agreed upon by Philip of Burgundy and James II on 1 April 1449. (And Philip of Burgundy paid the dowry for Mary of Guelders.) In the treaty, Mary of Guelders is described as "young and beautiful" (or, in the Latin of the document, nubilus et formosa). Suitable preparations for Mary of Guelders's wedding to James II of Scotland were soon made. She left for Scotland on 9 June 1449, arriving in Leith, just north of Edinburgh, on 18 June. Her marriage to the nineteen-year-old king took place on 3 July 1449.

Not much is known about Mary of Guelders for more than a decade after her marriage. As the Scottish antiquarian David Laing wrote in the nineteenth century, "During the eleven years that intervened between the . . . marriage of Mary of Gueldres in Scotland with James II in July 1449, and her husband's death, her name is not so much as once mentioned in connexion with any public event."

During this period, as James II's queen, Mary of Guelders received gifts and grants. She made charitable donations. As queens were expected to do, she appeared in parliament to intercede with her husband for those seeking his favor and forgiveness. She gave birth to a short-lived son in 1451, then to another son and heir, who would become James III, in 1451. Two daughters and three more sons followed. So, between her marriage and her husband's death in 1460, Mary of Guelders gave birth to seven children. 

The ruins of Roxburgh Castle
(photograph from 1936)

Mary of Guelders may have been present when her husband besieged and took Blackness Castle in 1453 (the siege and recapture of the castle occurred during the king's conflict with the Douglas clan). 

But the queen was not present in 1460, when James II attempted to retake Roxburgh Castle, held by the English. Nor was he so lucky. He was injured by a piece of shrapnel, but it wasn't from a weapon belonging to the English forces--he was standing too close to one of his own cannons, which backfired. He died on 3 August as a result of his injury.

Nevertheless, the siege of the castle continued. On learning of her husband's death, Mary of Guelders, traveled with her nine-year-old son from Edinburgh to Kelso, near Roxburgh, making sure that the Scots "finished her late husband's work." The castle fell on 8 August, and  James III was crowned at Kelso Abbey on 10 August. Mary of Guelders had Roxburgh Castle razed.

Mary of Guelders, queen of Scotland, would die just three years after her husband, but during this brief time, she was regent for her son, now James III, with the advice of a regency council. Although these men seemed to believe there was "little good" in handing over the "keeping of the kingdom  a woman," the new regent acted ably. 

Later historians would conclude that she was feeble-minded and/or promiscuous--these are assessments of female rule that have appeared consistently throughout my entries on female rulers in this blog. But the reality is (see here and here, for example) that she acted competently in her role as regent, despite disruptive factions in Scotland and pressures from the contending parties in the Wars of the Roses in England. 

Notably, Mary received Margaret of Anjou, in 1460, after Henry VI's queen was forced to flee England. The two women may have considered a marriage between the Lancastrian heir, Edward, and Mary, the eldest daughter of Mary of Guelders. Mary of Guelders again offered shelter to Margaret of Anjou and Henry VI after their defeat at the battle of Towton in 1461, and the Lancastrian pair stayed in Scotland for a year before the political situation in England made the situation too difficult for the dowager queen. 

At this point, Mary of Guelders arranged for the deposed English king and queen to leave Scotland--she paid them to go. At the same time, she seems to have entertained the possibility of a marriage with Edward IV, the Yorkist king who had replaced Henry VI. But nothing came of that, and when Margaret of Anjou returned to Scotland once more, in 1463, the Scottish queen assisted her again before Margaret left in July of that year, seeking assistance in Burgundy.

Mary of Guelders, queen of Scotland, died soon after Margaret of Anjou's departure--according to Bishop Leslie, the queen died on 16 November of 1463--she is known to have become ill in the fall--but the date is recorded by the Exchequer Rolls of Scotland as 1 December 1464, with the year clearly an error. (Her funeral was not held until June 1464.) The December date is conventionally given for her death.

In addition to her political roles, as regent, Mary of Guelders undertook a "programme of building works" that would "articulate and define her power and status." As part of this her architectural program, she founded a hospital on Castle Hill in Stirling and founded the Trinity College Church and hospital in Edinburgh: 

Queen Mary dedicated her foundation to the praise and honour of the Holy Trinity, the Virgin Mary, St Ninian—to whom she appears to have had an especial dedication—and all saints. . . . The buildings included a perpetual college, or collegiate church, which was designed to secure masses for the souls of the queen, her deceased husband, and their families in perpetuity. Mary chose the church as her preferred burial location. 

Her intention was to be buried at her foundation rather than with her husband at Holyroodhouse. As Rachel Delman and Jill Harrison note, this decision "demonstrated that she had ample wealth to afford an impressive burial site indicative of her queenly status": 

It was also a tangible expression of a woman’s personal choice and agency over where and how she and her family were to be remembered at a time when female agency was limited due to the patriarchal power structures of medieval society. The foundation demonstrated Mary’s charity on a grand, public scale through its sophisticated architectural design and its prominent original location on a busy thoroughfare frequented by pilgrims and visitors travelling to and from the continent.

Unfortunately, Mary of Guelders's collegiate church was dismantled in 1954 in order to make way for a railway--the "buildings’ royal significance and the feelings of their nineteenth century supporters appear to have been ignored," and the "powerful narrative" of Mary of Guelders "was forgotten."

For a bit of a happier note, see Rachel M. Delman and Jill Harrison, "Reviving the Trinity: Making Mary of Guelders’ Fifteenth-Century Built Legacy Relevant in Twenty-First Century Scotland," Royal Studies Journal 12, no. 1 (2025), here. I've linked to quotations from this article, above. If you have access, I also recommend Rachel M. Delman's "Mary of Guelders and the Architecture of Queenship in Fifteenth-Century Scotland," Scottish Historical Review 102, no. 2 (2023),  https://doi.org/10.3366/shr.2023.0611. 

I've also linked here to Rosalind Marshall's Scottish Queens, 1034–1714, published in 2003. For what seems to be a revised version of this book, click here.

Fiona Downie's 2006 She is But a Woman Queenship in Scotland 1424–1463 is also forthcoming in a new edition.