tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2977435342136065902024-03-19T01:47:25.403-07:00The Monstrous Regiment of WomenA Women's History DaybookSharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.comBlogger586125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-54006433450239791212024-03-19T00:00:00.000-07:002024-03-19T00:00:00.144-07:00Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain's "Ladyland"<h3 style="text-align: left;"> Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain's "Ladyland"</h3><div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div>Last fall, I read Michael Dirda's <i>Washington Post </i><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2023/10/06/horror-fantasy-novels/" target="_blank">review</a>, "'Tis the Season for Horror and Weird Tales. Here Are Some Favorites." Now, I am not a reader of fantasy, science fiction, or horror, though my son is, and Christmas was coming. I not only read Dirda's review, but I bought some of the books he recommended for Christmas, including Joshua Glenn's <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0262543370/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1" target="_blank">collection of short stories</a>, <i>Voices from the Radium Age</i>. I wrapped it up, put the book under the tree, and never thought about it again. Until a few days ago, when my son handed me the book and told me I needed to read the first story, Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain's “Sultana's Dream,” published in 1905.</div><br /><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsCwsLYFvePtVEvVpG1nbo71Te7NjrrniZsLt6NfCnAZxCpsbC7dpEoNkvxzCafZ8icAEHwJbmxZ3hJMRmuwL_AEVkL6xrtMKVOR7BbddbXNbIgfuJ8iPpedAiRIHzQib1BnBzAy-FUKI91vqeB5dR8k5jCKgjfnW-i-vVAs3XNx61sLaZC7aOi0bDblo/s1275/978-0-230-11881-2.webp" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1275" data-original-width="827" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsCwsLYFvePtVEvVpG1nbo71Te7NjrrniZsLt6NfCnAZxCpsbC7dpEoNkvxzCafZ8icAEHwJbmxZ3hJMRmuwL_AEVkL6xrtMKVOR7BbddbXNbIgfuJ8iPpedAiRIHzQib1BnBzAy-FUKI91vqeB5dR8k5jCKgjfnW-i-vVAs3XNx61sLaZC7aOi0bDblo/s320/978-0-230-11881-2.webp" width="208" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I didn't know what to expect, or why my son wanted me to read it, but now I do! I've spent a lot of time reading, teaching, and writing about a recurring theme in writing by women: the dream of finding or creating a private and secluded retreat from the world of men. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">These imagined “women’s worlds” may be very small, a single room, for example, perhaps most famously <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/p/blog-page_29.html" target="_blank">Virginia Woolf</a>'s "a room of one's own." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But many women writers are much more ambitious, fantasizing about cities (like <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/p/blog-page_29.html" target="_blank">Christine de Pizan</a>'s <i>Book of the City of Ladies</i>), even entire countries (like <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/07/charlotte-perkins-gilman-imagining.html" target="_blank">Charlotte Perkins Gilman</a>'s <i>Herland</i>), created for and inhabited exclusively by women.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I even wrote a <a href="https://sharonljansen.com/reading-womens-worlds/" target="_blank">book</a>, <i>Reading Women's Worlds from Christine de Pizan to Doris Lessing: A Guide to Six Centuries of Women Writers Imagining Rooms of Their Own</i>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And so my son's recommendation to me of Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain's short story, "Sultana's Dream," republished in Glenn's <i>Voices from the Radium Age.</i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the story, which appeared a decade before Gilman's <i>Herland</i>, Rokeya Sahkawat Hossain's narrator, Sultana, is resting on a chair in her bedroom while "thinking lazily of the condition of Indian womanhood." In her dream, she meets a woman whom she takes for her friend, Sister Sara. With "Sara," she walks out of her room and through a garden into the town around them--and it's at this point that she realizes the woman she is with is not her friend, but a stranger.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">She is at first anxious--not only is she with someone she doesn't know, but as she tells the stranger, "as being a <i>purdahnishin</i> woman I am not accustomed to walking about unveiled." But she soon realizes that "there was not a single man visible."</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Sultana finds herself in Ladyland, a place "free from sin and harm," a place where "Virtue herself reigns." And, notably, a place where men are "in their proper places": shut indoors, where they can be kept out of trouble.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">What follows is a delightful overview of a world-turned-upside-down. Women know everything, do everything, create everything, and control everything. . . . And rather than getting and maintaining their position by power, women rule with their brains.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">In reading a bit about Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain, I learned she wrote a novella with a similar theme, <i>Padmarag</i>: "Her novella Padmarag is similarly utopian in its depiction of a women-run school and welfare center, and is both feminist and anti-colonial in its outlook."</div><br /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyZNspdw-rCqT6g_-m1b1Cttg7CXxJnWdVAskLL9PRIPExEDWO92avDARysLHJreQM9N4FfzpWSdVcmIUevVHdbWZ9p23kmnlo6tAF6DkXYLPV0HeimB-x4RJ5fNdH2R8o0gPrM53srVHay67wJE4Je0LZPy0O8USO6fOM1JdhEmlVsaBze3mwJszz4zs/s546/Begum_Rokeya.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="546" data-original-width="400" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyZNspdw-rCqT6g_-m1b1Cttg7CXxJnWdVAskLL9PRIPExEDWO92avDARysLHJreQM9N4FfzpWSdVcmIUevVHdbWZ9p23kmnlo6tAF6DkXYLPV0HeimB-x4RJ5fNdH2R8o0gPrM53srVHay67wJE4Je0LZPy0O8USO6fOM1JdhEmlVsaBze3mwJszz4zs/s320/Begum_Rokeya.jpg" width="234" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Begum_Rokeya.jpg" target="_blank">Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain</a><br />(c. 1880-1932)</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">The novella's focus on the important of education for women and the creation of "a woman-run school and welfare center" puts me in mind of Mary Astell's <i>A Serious Proposal to the Ladies </i>. . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">You can read "Sultana's Dream" online at <i>Other Women's Voices </i>(click <a href="https://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/sultana/dream/dream.html" target="_blank">here</a>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A Penguin edition that contains both "Sultana's Dream" and <i>Pradmarog, </i>edited by Barnita Bagchi and with an introduction by Tanya Agathocleous,<i> </i>is also available (click <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Sultanas-Dream-Padmarag-Rokeya-Hossain/dp/0143137050/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2KK2ZZIN83EVA&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Io_PmLF8PjhYpF_cO5qnWbSo87phiLty67xMYTwZW5khZ7Q5fbMCHQCJiHq1e-sJ5qJ7G_43aIOwgMe23TNTr9ZmiogIBrHvoCSVIRtNgXhsJpo_9kKzBwsr-ANhblf0.sM31CqaDfj27fAzvzkQpWLLbBYHfxc49imjWEIhg0TI&dib_tag=se&keywords=sultana%27s+dream+and+padmarag&qid=1709854531&sprefix=sultana%27s+dream%2Caps%2C224&sr=8-1" target="_blank">here</a>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">An excellent introduction to Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain and her work is by Roushan Jahan, ed. and trans., <i>"Sultana's Dream" and Selections from <u>The Secluded Ones</u>, </i>accessible through the Internet Archive (click <a href="https://archive.org/details/sultanasdreamsel00roke/page/n3/mode/2up" target="_blank">here</a>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For a website dedicated to Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain, you may want to check out the <i>Hossain Memorial </i><a href="https://rokeyamemorialpanihatiwb.in/" target="_blank">website</a>--there you will find a biographical essay, bibliography, photo gallery, letters and speeches, along with a wealth of assorted material. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And if you like science fiction and fantasy, don't forget Joshua Glenn's <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0262543370/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1" target="_blank">collection of short stories</a>, <i>Voices from the Radium Age</i>!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; text-align: left; text-indent: 15px;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-81574059236287624832024-03-05T18:34:00.000-08:002024-03-05T18:34:19.035-08:00Redrawing the Lines of Power--Women's Family Trees<h3 style="text-align: left;"> Redrawing the Lines of Power--Women's Family Trees</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I have just finished hanging a framed poster that was a recent gift from my son: "Matrilineal Dynasties of Europe." It was a perfect present. As the it is described at the <i>UseFul Charts</i> <a href="https://usefulcharts.com/products/matrilineal-dynasties-of-europe" target="_blank">website,</a> "This unique chart views European history in a totally new way by focusing on the female-only lines within royal genealogy. Over 100 queens and empresses shown!"</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAtB7Mku-kDG7nmJ6eI54WixTmO8Zc7O97eZKkpigaxrYFn0P3Mz_ZUX68TBT6cbMfyO1FoqppXdaeUnIShI-SY-X1XohDMzUy4PBz4-6BOunevhLeqzfO6NnNt22HXN2geZ0P9BuNhWbK-xJ26xFdd_ILmpf6PDv8dvc6tvWC4zshBB5yNANv8IcMqlQ/s2370/IMG_3449.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2370" data-original-width="1742" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAtB7Mku-kDG7nmJ6eI54WixTmO8Zc7O97eZKkpigaxrYFn0P3Mz_ZUX68TBT6cbMfyO1FoqppXdaeUnIShI-SY-X1XohDMzUy4PBz4-6BOunevhLeqzfO6NnNt22HXN2geZ0P9BuNhWbK-xJ26xFdd_ILmpf6PDv8dvc6tvWC4zshBB5yNANv8IcMqlQ/s320/IMG_3449.jpg" width="235" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">My really crappy photo of<br /><a href="https://usefulcharts.com/products/matrilineal-dynasties-of-europe" target="_blank">Useful Charts</a>'s beautiful<br />"Matrilineal Dynasties of Europe"<br />(published with permission)</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">It was exactly the kind of family tree I wish I'd had many years ago, when I was researching and writing a book that would eventually be published as <i>The Monstrous Regiment of Women: Female Rulers in Early Modern Europe </i>(2002)<i>. </i></div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the introduction, titled "Redrawing the Lines of Power," I wrote about my frustration with finding so few women on royal family trees. As I now look happily on the new poster hanging on my wall, I thought I might post an early version of my introduction--it was necessarily edited for the book, but I can print here what I originally wrote years ago . . .* </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div>And so, an earlier version of "Redrawing the Lines of Power," written in 1998, is published for the first time:<br /><br /><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i>Let us now sing the praises of famous men, the heroes of our nation's history, through whom the Lord established his renown, and revealed his majesty in each succeeding age. Some held sway over kingdoms and made themselves a name by their exploits. . . . Some led the people by their counsels and by their knowledge of the nation's laws. . . . Some there are who have left a name behind them to be commemorated in story. There are others who are unremembered; they are dead, and it is as though they had never existed, as though they had never been born or left children to succeed them. </i></blockquote><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span><span> </span>--Ecclesiasticus 44:1-3, 4, 8-9 <br /><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Abraham, the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob. Moses and his brother Aaron. David, the father of Solomon, and Solomon of Rehoboam. Like the "praises" of these "famous men" sung by the author of Ecclesiasticus, the historical narrative of western Europe has focused on generations of men. Political histories, biographies, and genealogies trace lines of power from fathers to sons and grandsons, brothers and nephews. </div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">During the period of English history with which I am most familiar, for example, Edward III is followed on the throne by his grandson Richard II; Henry IV is followed by his son Henry V, who is followed, in turn, by his son Henry VI; Edward IV was to have been followed by his son, who would have been the fifth English Edward, but instead is succeeded by his brother, Richard III; Henry VII is followed by his son Henry VIII, who is followed by his son Edward VI. Then something strange disrupts this narrative. At his death in 1553, Edward VI is succeeded by his sister, Mary I.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">The succession of a woman to the throne of England horrified many, including the Protestant reformer John Knox, who concluded that any woman who presumed to "sit in the seat of God, that is, to teach, to judge, or to reign above a man" was "a monster in nature." Women were incapable of effective rule, for "nature . . . doth paint them forth to be weak, frail, impatient, feeble, and foolish, and experience hath declared them to be unconstant, variable, cruel, and lacking the spirit of counsel and regiment."</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Knox published this blistering assessment of female rule, <i><a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/p/about-title-what-does-monstrous.html" target="_blank">The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women</a></i>, in 1558; his bitter indictment of "gynecocracy" was quickly followed in print by a series of pamphlets that echoed and expanded his argument that female rule was unnatural, unlawful, and contrary to scripture. From Knox's point of view, the political situation could hardly seem worse. Not only had Mary Tudor succeeded to the throne of England, but Mary Stuart, wife of the dauphin of France, had become queen of Scotland, while her mother, Mary of Guise, was acting as regent in Scotland on Mary's behalf.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Unfortunately for Knox, though, the political situation could get worse, and did, almost immediately. When Mary Tudor died only a few months after the <i>Blast</i> appeared, her half-sister Elizabeth succeeded her as queen of England. In France, following the death of her husband Henry II, Catherine de' Medici attempted to become regent of France for her son, Francis II. Outmaneuvered in 1559, she succeeded a year later when Francis died and the dowager queen assumed the regency for her second son, Charles IX. Thus, by 1560, England, Scotland, and France were under the direct "regiment" of women.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">I began thinking about this exceptional historical moment after I had the experience of reading, one after another, the arguments against female rule penned by Knox, Anthony Gilby, Christopher Goodman, Jean Bodin, Robert Filmer, and Bishop Jacques Bossuet, among many others, and then, in turn, the defenses of female rule published to counter their extreme, sometimes violent, positions. Much has been written about the political, religious, and cultural factors that shaped this debate, but I was interested in analyzing these texts in a different context. In order to relate theory and practice, I planned to write a series of biographical portraits of the remarkable women whose "regiment" had inspired the debate, exploring the way each of these women achieved, maintained, and manipulated her position even as her right and her ability to do so were contested.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">As I considered my project, I was at first uncertain about how to proceed. Aside from Mary and Elizabeth Tudor, Mary Stuart and her mother, and Catherine de' Medici, I knew of only two other women to include in my project: Margaret of Austria, regent of the Netherlands, and Jeanne d'Albret, the Protestant queen of Navarre, whose son had become Henry IV, hing of France. Would it be possible, I wondered, to find enough female rulers to make a "series" of such profiles possible?</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;">But the more I thought about my project, the more I came to see what had been there all along. These women weren't the first powerful women in early modern Europe. Any analysis of female rulers in the early modern period should really begin by focusing on the lives of four formidable women who died early in the sixteenth century: Isabella of Spain (d. 1504), who inherited the throne of Castile; Lady Margaret Beaufort (d. 1509), who chose not to press her own claims to the English throne in order to promote the cause of her son, Henry Tudor; Caterina Sforza (d. 1509), who seized power in Imola and Forlì to preserve it for her son, Ottaviano; and Anne of France (d. 1522), who acted as a shrewd and politically adept regent for her brother, Charles VIII. The careers of these powerful and successful women seemed to me to provide models for the women who were to follow in the next generation. </div></div><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: justify;">Still, as notable as they were, these weren't the only women to whom Mary Tudor or Catherine de' Medici could look for example. As I searched the indexes of political histories and biographies, I began to find the names of female rulers about whom I knew little or nothing. Despite arguments like Knox's against female rule, and despite the ordinary descent of political power from one man to another, it became clear to me that a whole range of "<a href="https://archive.org/details/womengenderinear0000wies/page/290/mode/2up?q=dynastic" target="_blank">dynastic accidents</a>" in early modern Europe had resulted in a surprising number of women ruling as queens or functioning as regents. It became equally clear that the lives and political careers of these sixteenth-century queens were <a href="https://archive.org/details/medievalqueenshi0000unse_s5h3/page/168/mode/2up" target="_blank">hardly without precedent</a>. </span></p><div style="text-align: justify;">Yet I could find little more than the names of these women at first. How many Blancas of Navarre were there? How many Isabellas of Aragon? Of Castile? Of Portugal? Were Charlotte of Savoy and Bona of Savoy related? If so, how? How did Louise of Savoy fit in? Were Anne of France and Anne of Beaujeu the same woman? What about Mary of Guise and Mary of Lorraine? And why was all this so difficult for me to sort out? I knew that the relationships and connections linking these women couldn't be more complicated than those of the eight Henrys, six Edwards and three Richards I knew so well; the English line of succession from the twelfth through the sixteenth centuries has always been easier for me to recite than the names and dates of American presidents. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But it was hard to find out much about these Isabellas, Annes, and Marys in traditional political history. Like the "unremembered" others in Ecclesiasticus, it was almost as if they "had never existed, as though they had never been born or left children to succeed them." But clearly they had been born, and equally clearly they had left children to succeed them. And despite the familiar narrative of conventional history, they had also had some degree of real "sway" over various kingdoms and principalities. And so, trying to figure out who these women were and whether and how they were related, I began to focus on the family trees in the books I had in front of me. And that's when I began to notice what (or who) was missing.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Like the generations of "famous men" in Ecclesiasticus-- Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David, Solomon, Rehoboam--one Henry or Charles followed another in succession, father and son, springing forth as if by spontaneous generation. I searched, sometimes in vain, for women; wives and mothers were simply absent from many of the genealogies appended to the histories and biographies I was reading. I think my favorite is a Valois "family tree" that charts four branches of the family over the course of nearly four hundred years. It looks as if the <a href="https://archive.org/details/livesofkings00cast/page/100/mode/2up?q=Valois" target="_blank">line of Valois kings</a> (from 1328 through 1547, anyway)--Philip VI, John II, Charles V, Charles VI, Charles VII, Louis XI, Charles VIII, Louis XII, Francis I--managed to do without any wives or mothers at all. Then again, maybe I like best the <a href="https://archive.org/details/risefallofhabsbu0000tapi/page/408/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">Habsburg genealogy</a> that begins in the tenth century and continues through the seventeenth century. There are a few wives among nine generations of Habsburg descendants, but, at least according to this family tree, there were no Habsburg daughters born between 950 and the mid-sixteenth century, when Eleanor and Mary show up on one branch.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj9CBbkDQhMR7f_0cfxwVmDEkf51W6aYsopUn3ccN3lke5M20J97ESaWWB-Yu_8fdeFSro2vC4JKqpBvGwT15uoGeHMIlsTN4ukTfrKiQYYPFJXRr7XarE7Xa_TzHm_C_Me4n4WiyI8d7rtl2qH4pjk6V1YSMEyyu9O1tkXVk23nWvIY7Q2zIwVE65jj9U" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" data-original-height="476" data-original-width="331" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj9CBbkDQhMR7f_0cfxwVmDEkf51W6aYsopUn3ccN3lke5M20J97ESaWWB-Yu_8fdeFSro2vC4JKqpBvGwT15uoGeHMIlsTN4ukTfrKiQYYPFJXRr7XarE7Xa_TzHm_C_Me4n4WiyI8d7rtl2qH4pjk6V1YSMEyyu9O1tkXVk23nWvIY7Q2zIwVE65jj9U=w223-h320" width="223" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"></td></tr></tbody></table></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, in England, the five daughters of Edward III (r. 1327-77) are all too often lumped together at the end of the genealogical line as "daughters," but that at least is an improvement over the tables that chart the descendants of his sons <a href="https://archive.org/details/earliertudors0000jdma_o1t3/page/n683/mode/2up" target="_blank">without noting that he had any "daughters" at all</a>. I imagine that "issue," as it often appears on <a href="https://archive.org/details/kingedwardiii00pack/page/n13/mode/2up" target="_blank">such family trees</a>, could include insignificant males as well as females, but I am suspicious that "other issue" refers exclusively to daughters. I am almost afraid to think of what the disclaimer on one "short genealogical tree" might mean: "The irrelevant branches have been pruned."</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Of course not all the family trees I looked at omitted women. The "Kings and Queens of England" poster that is hanging right next to me as I type indicates the wives of Edwards I through III, Henry IV and V, Henry VII and Henry VIII (all six). But why isn't the wife of Henry VI included, especially since she was the strong and powerful Margaret of Anjou (Shakespeare's "tiger's heart wrapped in a woman's hide")? Edward IV and Richard III are also missing their wives, as are James V of Scotland and his grandson James VI, who becomes James I of England. Then again, to be absolutely fair, while Mary Tudor's husband (Philip II of Spain) is listed, Mary Stuart's husbands, all three of them (Francis, Darnley, Bothwell), are eliminated. Still, this version of the poster is a marked improvement over the previous edition, which left out the wives of Edwards I through III, Henry IV and V as well as Henry VI, and limited Henry VIII to only three of his six wives. If there are rules to determine when women are included and when they are omitted in such genealogies, I haven't been able to figure out what they are.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">I must admit I took unexpected pleasure in some of the inconsistencies I found. The<i> Oxford History of England</i>'s volume of <i>The Earlier Tudors</i> <a href="https://archive.org/details/earliertudors0000jdma_o1t3/page/n683/mode/2up" target="_blank">eliminates</a> all of six of Henry VIII's wives, and while I am, in general, frustrated that so many women have disappeared from royal family trees, I was delighted to see that Henry's entire matrimonial career had been wiped out. Interestingly, his elder brother, Arthur, wasn't given his wife (Catherine of Aragon) either, but his sisters Margaret and Mary are accompanied by their husbands, or at least some of them, at any rate; Margaret has her first two, James IV of Scotland and Archibald, earl of Angus, while Mary has only her second, Charles, duke of Brandon--I don't know why she didn't get to keep her king, Louis XII of France. Henry, for whatever reason, hasn't been allowed to keep a single wife. He looks almost lonely.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Even the most complete family trees, one tracing the Medici family from Giovanni "di Bicci" (1360-1428) and his wife Piccarda Bueri through Giovanni Gastone (1671-1737) and his wife Anne of Saxe-Lauenburg, for example, work patrilineally, tracing descent <a href="https://archive.org/details/themedici02youn/page/n673/mode/2up" target="_blank">through the male line</a>. In so many family trees, men's names are set in capital letters or boldfaced or highlighted, their wives' names, when included, are smaller, underneath the names, dates, and titles of the men to whom they are connected, or off to the side, after "m" or "=" to indicate their status as wives. When women marry into a family, their names suddenly appear--but where did they come from? Who were their grandmothers, their mothers, their sisters? And when women marry out of the family, where do they go? Their names are left dangling on the trees of their families, dead ends on the lines of descent. Are they and their descendants the "irrelevant branches" that have to be pruned?</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">And so, out of frustration, trying to identify the "unremembered" others whose names I had stumbled across, and trying to sort out the connections between them, I set out to draw my own family trees, linking women, generations of mothers and daughters, aunts and nieces. I searched--not always successfully--for the dates of their birth, the dates of their death, the children who succeeded them. As I drew and then redrew my new genealogical tables, I came to see not a series of individual, isolated women who came from nowhere to be swallowed up in the Tudor, Valois, Habsburg, or Medici families, but networks of related women and patterns of connections between them.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">Once I had started to redraw the lines, I began to see something else of significance. Mary Tudor can no longer be portrayed as a "monster in nature" who suddenly, and without precedent, dared to assume political power. Mary Tudor's mother, Catherine of Aragon, was not only Henry VIII's first wife, but a queen who had served as regent of England; Catherine, in her turn, was the daughter of Isabella, queen regnant of Castile, who herself was the niece of Maria of Castile, governor of Aragon, and granddaughter of Catherine of Lancaster, regent of Castile. Isabella's elder daughter, Juana (Catherine of Aragon's sister), inherited the crowns of both Castile and Aragon; Isabella's granddaughters included Isabel of Portugal, regent of Spain; Mary of Austria, regent of the Netherlands; and Catherine, regent of Portugal. Among Isabella's great-granddaughters were Margaret of Parma, regent of the Netherlands, and Joanna of Spain, regent of Spain.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">I also began to see significant connections and relationships I couldn't always indicate on my redrawn family trees: there were "genealogical" links that went beyond blood ties. Margaret of Austria, who functioned as regent of the Netherlands from 1519 until her death in 1530, had been betrothed at age three to Charles, the dauphin of France; in 1483 she had been sent to the French court where, for ten years, her care and education were directed by the extraordinary Anne, who acted as regent of France for her brother. The betrothal didn't result in marriage; instead, in 1497, Margaret was sent to the court of Queen Isabella of Castile, marrying John, heir to his mother's Castile and his father Ferdinand's Aragon. What was the influence of two such politically adept women on Margaret, who would function so successfully as regent for so many years?</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">If all this seems confusing, you can see why I needed to redraw family trees. Instead of genealogies that focused on kings and their sons, making clear their relationships and connections, I wanted to draw links that moved backward and forward, tracing queens and their grandmothers, mothers, aunts, sisters, daughters, nieces, granddaughters, and grandnieces. I have to admit that I enjoyed the process of constructing these new family trees. I made the names of the four women I identified as models big--really big, with bold boxes around them. Isabella of Castile overpowers her husband, Ferdinand of Aragon. She also overshadows him--wherever I could, I put my women on top. I also eliminated every son I could, including Henry VIII's long-desired Edward, as "issue" with which I was not concerned, an "irrelevant branch" I could prune. I kept only those men through whom lines of power descended to a woman. The names of the men who remain on my redrawn genealogies are so tiny I can hardly read them without my glasses. It's somehow very satisfying to see Henry VIII looking so small. Instead of Francis I and Charles V looming so large on the scene, I could see women--generations and generations of women of power.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgno7AKJKd8e-FskYSiulkpsqLg9tGnmJuR3JQfXE_nW0m7YypD2KuxSzRbMYZOhofy15yv8nmmK5gfAe45dVBehR6Sw4qjEAxjD9y6rRWHNpHCiWRDNxyzcmzC4K_FVWXrPtHNeTrW2EDwBR-EhN1ZT9HP6GNPr6t-6Ttn2LCzTxB2W9-Gjqa7nuoWuWI" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img alt="" data-original-height="616" data-original-width="1009" height="390" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgno7AKJKd8e-FskYSiulkpsqLg9tGnmJuR3JQfXE_nW0m7YypD2KuxSzRbMYZOhofy15yv8nmmK5gfAe45dVBehR6Sw4qjEAxjD9y6rRWHNpHCiWRDNxyzcmzC4K_FVWXrPtHNeTrW2EDwBR-EhN1ZT9HP6GNPr6t-6Ttn2LCzTxB2W9-Gjqa7nuoWuWI=w640-h390" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">One of the family trees I drew for <i>The Monstrous Regiment of Women<br /><br /></i></td></tr></tbody></table>I could also see the shifting political alliances of early modern Europe from a very different (and revealing) perspective. As I drew my new family trees, I realized that the narrative of early modern European political history looked very different if I focused women instead of men. Men like John Knox might argue against women's right and fitness to rule, but women had and could and did rule--and rule well--even as they were were being told they could not and should not.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">I began my research, as I said, afraid that I might not find enough female rulers to make the project worthwhile. Instead, as I worked, I found more and more women whose stories should be included in my project, too many women, in fact, to make the project, as originally conceived, practicable. But my redrawn family trees had also suggested a way of redefining the "biographical" essays I had originally planned. Instead of perpetuating the tendency to identify a single, extraordinary woman and to focus on her individual life and "unique" accomplishments, I decided to explore the relationships among women whose lives occupy a place in and perpetuate a continuing, though largely unrecognized, tradition of political rule. Their careers, like their lives, are intertwined.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">The women who assumed political power in succeeding generations in England, Scotland, France, Spain, Portugal, the Holy Roman Empire, the Netherlands, and city-states of Italy were far more numerous--and more successful--than I had imagined, but even more surprising than their numbers and their successes is how completely their names and stories have disappeared from the history of early modern Europe. Aside from Queen Isabella, who funded the voyage of Columbus, "Bloody Mary" and good Queen Bess in England, and the romantic Mary, Queen of Scots, I had learned almost nothing about any of these "monstrous" women in a classroom, through a textbook, or from the pages of the histories and biographies I had read on my own throughout the years.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">The "story" of early modern European political history has been defined by the lists of "famous men" we have constructed, lists that have "revealed . . . majesty in each succeeding age," lists that have told us who "held sway over kingdoms." There are, indeed, some "who have left a name behind them to be commemorated in story," just as there are "others"--primarily women--who have been forgotten. As far as "history" has been concerned, they are dead--it is "as though they had never existed, . . . never been born, or left children to succeed them."</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">I have tried here to read the past in a different way and to narrate the story from an alternative perspective. I hope, in fact, to have presented a counter-narrative here--by focusing on the lives and relationships of women, those "others" who did exist, those others who--like theirs fathers, husbands, and sons--did "hold sway" over kingdoms and make themselves names "by their exploits," who did leave children to succeed them, and who, though dead, should not be "unremembered."</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><span style="text-align: justify;"><div style="text-align: justify;">My efforts here are not intended to be, and could never be claimed to be, definitive and comprehensive. I have crossed too many chronological, geographical, institutional, and theoretical boundaries to speak authoritatively. Instead, I hope they will be regarded as exploratory and suggestive-- summarizing, contextualizing, and drawing together what is known about female rule and rulers in early modern Europe, perhaps best read as an outline for or a rought draft of a counter-narrative that remains to be written.</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;">By the way, after thinking about it for some time, I decided as I redrew my family trees to let Henry VIII keep two of his six wives--Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn, strong and determined mothers whose daughters became queens.</div></div><div><div style="text-align: center;">. . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you've read this far, I hope you can see that I've continued the work I began more than twenty-five years ago. In 1998, I wrote, ". . . as I worked, I found more and more women whose stories should be included in my project, too many women, in fact, to make the project, as originally conceived, practicable."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Now, at this site, also named <i>The Monstrous Regiment of Women</i>, I've been able to write about many of the women whose stories I couldn't tell then.</div> <div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">*For the sake of readability, I haven't linked all the names here to corresponding essays on this site--if you use the search function, you will be able to find posts for all of the women named here.</div><br /></div><div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-11612503991479544832024-02-02T00:00:00.516-08:002024-02-02T10:01:34.677-08:00Costanza Calenda, a Fifteenth-Century Medical Practitioner<h3 style="text-align: left;">Costanza Calenda, One of the Renowned <i>mulieres Salernitanae </i>(practicing medicine in 1422)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In her extended history of women and the practice of medicine, Leigh Whaley <a href="https://archive.org/details/womenpracticeofm0000whal/page/14/mode/2up?q=Clarice&view=theater" target="_blank">notes</a> that during the Middle Ages, "Most commonly, women practising medicine were the daughters of doctors or surgeons, and they were instructed by their fathers of a male relative." Only in exceptional circumstances--if she were living in exactly the right place or at just the right time--could a woman receive any kind of formal medical education.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjMP4amBwRtSx0xOtJul6NCRDGumLyAGP3Jy8lc3jUUbBvAAaX1wzr7SPu6TuCXu89UEDLHZN46B1_aTc-_XLWdkJ4Yx-m73n1JZpUkHttgVpayQqNYCq0fg1JehTr-7EWy0D3-Repx0Se5sPpPpfU1lFkrvzYRWjvVZFCxuDWYTWfkFMpafnZl1zxxOQ/s1182/s3___eu-west-1_wellcomecollection-storage_digitised_b19745588_v1_data_objects_ms_544_0087.JP2%20(1).jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1182" data-original-width="881" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjMP4amBwRtSx0xOtJul6NCRDGumLyAGP3Jy8lc3jUUbBvAAaX1wzr7SPu6TuCXu89UEDLHZN46B1_aTc-_XLWdkJ4Yx-m73n1JZpUkHttgVpayQqNYCq0fg1JehTr-7EWy0D3-Repx0Se5sPpPpfU1lFkrvzYRWjvVZFCxuDWYTWfkFMpafnZl1zxxOQ/s320/s3___eu-west-1_wellcomecollection-storage_digitised_b19745588_v1_data_objects_ms_544_0087.JP2%20(1).jpg" width="239" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Manuscript illustration of <br />a female healer, 14th century<br />(<a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ka9yjtq7/items?canvas=87" target="_blank">MS 544, Miscellanea Medica XVIII</a>,<br />from Wellcome Collection, London)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Costanza Calenda was such a fortunate woman, one of the renowned<i> mulieres Salernitanae</i> ("<a href="https://www.salernoturistica.it/la-scuola-medica-salernitana.htm" target="_blank">women of Salerno</a>") who were known to have been trained in medicine in that Italian city during the Middle Ages. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A reference to this tradition was made by Antonio Mazza, prior of the Collegium Medicorum of Salerno, who wrote the earliest history of the institution. In <i><a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Thesaurus_antiquitatum_et_historiarum_It/_MdeMXsKYgYC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Mazza%20Urbis%20Salernitanae" target="_blank">Urbis Salernitanae Historia et Antiquitates</a> </i>(1681)<i>, </i>Mazza <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Thesaurus_antiquitatum_et_historiarum_It/_MdeMXsKYgYC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=eruditas%20enim%20" target="_blank">noted</a> that there had been "many erudite women" who trained at the school, women who "in many fields surpassed or equaled in ingenuity and doctrine not a few men and, like men, were remarkable in the field of medicine." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Among those women was the "noble" and "erudite" <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Thesaurus_antiquitatum_et_historiarum_It/_MdeMXsKYgYC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Laurea%20etiam%20Doctoralis" target="_blank">Costanza Calenda</a>," whom he describes as having a doctoral degree ("Laurea etiam Doctoralis Constantia Calenda")</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the early fifteenth century, Costanza Calenda was "diligently instructed in medicine" by her father, Salvatore Calenda di Salerno. In his multi-volume <a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/qg7jgv3c" target="_blank">history</a> of the the <a href="https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/scuola-medica-salernitana_(Federiciana)/" target="_blank">Scuola Medica Salernita</a>, historian Salvatore de Renzi <a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/qg7jgv3c/items?canvas=391&query=Calenda" target="_blank">claims</a> that Calenda's father was "called illustrious for his doctrine and for his expert practice" in medicine. With such a reputation, he was lured to Naples in 1415, becoming a professor at the collegio medico di Napoli, and <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/44443265?saml_data=eyJzYW1sVG9rZW4iOiI1MjM3MjllYy0xZGE4LTQ1NDgtODQ0Zi00MjUzNzUxYmNlZTEiLCJlbWFpbCI6ImphbnNlbnNsQHBsdS5lZHUiLCJpbnN0aXR1dGlvbklkcyI6WyIyMWYyYTA5Yy1jMmFhLTQyNTktYTYwYy0xZTg4MDFkZmFjZWYiXX0" target="_blank">by 1423 he was prior</a> (or head) of the college. (There seems to be some scholarly dispute about whether he maintained an official position in Salerno as well as in Naples--it's an interesting debate, but not our focus here.) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Salvatore Calenda also became the personal physician of <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/02/joanna-ii-queen-of-naples.html" target="_blank">Queen Joanna II of Naples</a>. (Since I have no firm dates for the life of Costanza Calenda, I am posting about her today, 2 February, the anniversary of Joanna II's death in 1435). Salvatore Calenda was still head of the medical college in Naples as late as 1430. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In receiving her training from a member of her family, Costanza Calenda is thus like most of the women known to have practiced medicine in the Middle Ages or in Early Modern Europe. But she seems also have have had more formal instruction, an opportunity that was afforded only a very few women</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Citing Mazza's earlier work, Renzi <a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/qg7jgv3c/items?canvas=392&query=Calenda" target="_blank">claims</a> that Costanza Calenda proved so knowledgeable that she earned a medical degree. In Renzi's own examination of contemporary historical documents, he cites two sources identifying Costanza Calenda and her activities: the first, a document <a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/qg7jgv3c/items?canvas=350&manifest=3&query=Calenda" target="_blank">from 1423</a> that refers to her as a doctor of medicine; the second is from 1426, but aside from noting that it refers to Costanza, Renzi includes nothing more about the document's contents.* </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvyi_a8nFkK4lV5oOg2tcSKR8yDyYO76a2-15nbrwSymCgbXZLIat1ZdVuDkKhMGiouBolfEaJ9xXg7W2lTr2E6shkn7f8t684C5s0iH-hotcijCU0-o_HKrmKyFnTjzmnnXwBOKP7u2457PJMja8MP0Qb2xDMHC54FyQcrvkUnCk6LNLm95I7_QT0DYE/s506/Capture.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="506" data-original-width="363" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvyi_a8nFkK4lV5oOg2tcSKR8yDyYO76a2-15nbrwSymCgbXZLIat1ZdVuDkKhMGiouBolfEaJ9xXg7W2lTr2E6shkn7f8t684C5s0iH-hotcijCU0-o_HKrmKyFnTjzmnnXwBOKP7u2457PJMja8MP0Qb2xDMHC54FyQcrvkUnCk6LNLm95I7_QT0DYE/s320/Capture.JPG" width="230" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Detail from <br /><a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ka9yjtq7/items?canvas=87" target="_blank">MS 544, Miscellanea Medica XVIII</a>,<br />from Wellcome Collection, London<br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In 1423, Costanza also received <a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/qg7jgv3c/items?canvas=392&query=Calenda" target="_blank">royal assent</a> to marry Baldassarre di Santo Mango, lord of Santo Mango, a permission necessary to ensure her dowry. There is no further documentation of any kind about the life and career of Costanza Calenda after the reference to her marriage, but I find this <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_School_of_Salernum/4D8zAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Costanza+Calenda&pg=PA37&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">theory</a>, from Henry Ebenezer Handerson (<i>The School of Salernum: An Historical Sketch of Medieval Medicine</i>, 1893) absolutely hilarious: "The silence of history on her subsequent career suggests the pleasing reflection that possibly she may have proved as excellent a wife as she had been brilliant in the <i>rôle </i>of a student of medicine." Poor Handerson! I know he is a man of his time, so I understand his daydream about Costanza Calenda becoming a good little wife, but I don't know what tickles me most--the implications of his use of the word "<i>rôle</i>" to describe Calenda as a medical practitioner or his uncertainty that she might settle down after marriage, signaled by his wonderful phrase "possibly she may have"!!!</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Notably, Salvatore de Renzi doesn't focus on Costanza as a wife, nor even as a daughter. Instead, he provides details about Costanza Calenda in her own separate biographical entry, not including her in her father's entry, which immediately precedes it. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><p style="text-align: justify;">*Renzi lists his documents by number, followed by the year. The two documents Renzi had access to in the nineteenth century were destroyed during World War II, but a modern copy of one of them survives. The moderm copy confirms Costanza Calenda's practice but does not say she had the title of "doctor of medicine."</p><p style="text-align: justify;">In "Trotula and the Ladies of Salerno:
A Contribution to the Knowledge of the Transition between
Ancient and Medieval Physick" (<i>Proceedings of the Royal Medical Society</i>, 1940), H. P. Bayon <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1997791/pdf/procrsmed00654-0015.pdf" target="_blank">claimed</a> that Costanza "lectured on medicine<i> ex
cathedra</i> some time during the reign of Giovanna I of Anjou (1326-82) in the University
of Naples." But there is no citation, and he confuses Joanna <b><u>I</u></b> of Naples (Giovanna of Anjou) with Joanna <u style="font-weight: bold;">II</u>, so I'm not sure about the reliability of this! </p>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-82196994351468925312024-01-25T18:04:00.000-08:002024-01-26T09:18:30.184-08:00Told Ya: These Guys Don't Think Women Are Human<h3 style="text-align: left;">When Women Became No Longer Equal, Part 14: A Veterinarian Knows That Women Are Just Like Livestock</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Get a load of this guy, who has done "thousands of ultrasounds on animals" and says he knows more about "fetal development" than anyone, especially women. (Well, to be fair, he says he "probably" knows more about "mammalian fetal development" than anyone in the room he's addressing--the Wisconsin House Chamber.<span style="text-align: left;">)</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lf2gfi9qjj8" width="320" youtube-src-id="lf2gfi9qjj8"></iframe></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">This is Wisconsin State Representative Joel Kitchens, an expert on the <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2021/12/back-to-future-part-17-are-women-human.html" target="_blank">personhood and humanity of women</a> because. well, he's done "thousands of ultrasounds on animals." I guess it makes sense--for Republicans like him, a woman is just a brood mare.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Also, he knows that "abortion is not healthcare." Tell that to the <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2814274?guestAccessKey=e429b9a8-72ac-42ed-8dbc-599b0f509890&utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=012424" target="_blank">66,000 sexual-assault victims</a> in the fourteen states where abortion has been banned who have, since the 2022 Dobbs decision, suffered "rape-related pregnancies." I'm sure each one of them is feeling better about being forced to give birth to her rapist's child because you did ultrasounds on <a href="https://www.joelkitchens.com/about-joel.html" target="_blank">horses and cows</a>. (Dobbs was decided on 24 June 2022--that's 66,000 "rape-related pregnancies" in the eighteen months since . . . )</div><div><br /></div><div>Way to go, big dude. </div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-6334663454673765342024-01-17T00:00:00.406-08:002024-01-17T10:29:00.354-08:00Clarice de Rothomago, Accused of Illegally Practicing Medicine in Fourteenth-Century Paris<h3 style="text-align: justify;">Clarice de Rothomago (Rouen), medical practitioner (case against her begins 17 January 1312)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In her extended history of women and the practice of medicine, Leigh Whaley <a href="https://archive.org/details/womenpracticeofm0000whal/page/14/mode/2up?q=Clarice&view=theater" target="_blank">notes</a> that during the Middle Ages, "Most commonly, women practising medicine were the daughters of doctors or surgeons, and they were instructed by their fathers of a male relative." Only in exceptional circumstances--if she were living in the right place or at the right time--could a woman receive any kind of formal medical education. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjMP4amBwRtSx0xOtJul6NCRDGumLyAGP3Jy8lc3jUUbBvAAaX1wzr7SPu6TuCXu89UEDLHZN46B1_aTc-_XLWdkJ4Yx-m73n1JZpUkHttgVpayQqNYCq0fg1JehTr-7EWy0D3-Repx0Se5sPpPpfU1lFkrvzYRWjvVZFCxuDWYTWfkFMpafnZl1zxxOQ/s1182/s3___eu-west-1_wellcomecollection-storage_digitised_b19745588_v1_data_objects_ms_544_0087.JP2%20(1).jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1182" data-original-width="881" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjMP4amBwRtSx0xOtJul6NCRDGumLyAGP3Jy8lc3jUUbBvAAaX1wzr7SPu6TuCXu89UEDLHZN46B1_aTc-_XLWdkJ4Yx-m73n1JZpUkHttgVpayQqNYCq0fg1JehTr-7EWy0D3-Repx0Se5sPpPpfU1lFkrvzYRWjvVZFCxuDWYTWfkFMpafnZl1zxxOQ/s320/s3___eu-west-1_wellcomecollection-storage_digitised_b19745588_v1_data_objects_ms_544_0087.JP2%20(1).jpg" width="239" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Manuscript illustration of <br />a female healer, 14th century<br />(<a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ka9yjtq7/items?canvas=87" target="_blank">MS 544, Miscellanea Medica XVIII</a>,<br />from Wellcome Collection, London)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If a woman did receive less formal instruction by a family member, she could present a letter "attesting" to her medical knowledge to authorities, be examined by experienced "physicians and surgeons," and receive a license. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Such was the situation in Paris, for example, where the medical faculty of the University of Paris was <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/1/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">eager to limit and regulate</a> those who could practice medicine and equally intent on prosecuting those who were practicing illegally.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the early fourteenth century, the medical faculty claimed a right to "prosecute unlicensed practitioners" based on "a regulation issued by the bishop's court at Paris" some two centuries earlier--although, as historian Pearl Kibre <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/1/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">points out</a>, "no text of such a pronouncement seems to have been found. There is also no apparent evidence that an organized faculty of medicine was functioning in Paris before 1200." Maybe it was meant "just a figure of speech," she says. Right. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"> Nevertheless, based on this shaky reference to the existence of an ancient statute, the medical faculty pursued its goal of regulating the practice of medicine. <a href="https://archive.org/details/oldtimemakersof00wals/page/198/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">To that end</a>, "An edict of 1311, at the same time that it interdicts unauthorized women from practising surgery, recognizes their right to practise the art if they have undergone an examination before the regularly appointed master surgeons of the corporation of Paris." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In addition to setting medical standards and to controling the licensing of medical practitioners, this law also granted medical faculty of the university the right to prosecute those who practiced without a medical license. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And it is practicing medicine without a license that drew attention to Clarice de Rothomogo in 1312. She was charged with "the illegal practice of medicine." (<a href="https://archive.org/details/womenpracticeofm0000whal/page/42/mode/2up?q=Clarice&view=theater" target="_blank">According to Whaley</a>, the "University of Paris was very active in prosecuting illicit medical practitioners.")</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><a href="https://archive.org/details/bwb_O8-DFE-667" target="_blank">According to surviving records</a>, Clarice received her training from her husband, Peter Faverel, who was himself described as as <i>empeiricus</i>, or an "empiric," that is, a medical practitioner without formal instruction or licensing. Hers was among the earliest cases prosecuted by the faculty of medicine at the university--"armed with laws of its own making," the medical faculty <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/7/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">proceeded</a> in their efforts to secure "enforcement."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Clarice de Rothomago's case took place over the course of several months, from 17 January 1312 until 15 June. Somehow learning of her activities, the dean of the medical faculty ordered her arrest. Her case was brought before the bishop's court--an ecclesiastical court (faculty and students of the University of Paris were clergy, infractions subject to ecclesiastical rather than civil law). She was sentenced to excommunication.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Clarice de Rothomago appealed her sentence, but that did not serve her well--her appeal was denied, and it earned her husband, Peter Faverel a sentence of excommunication as well. The sentence further ordered that both Clarice and her husband were to be "denounced in all churches." Anyone who continued to associate with them was to receive the same treatment, excommunication.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But, as Pearl Kibre <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/7/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">concludes</a>, "The effectiveness of this ban of excommunication and oral denunciation, applied against Clarice and her husband, as a means of frightening off other unlicensed persons from medical practice, appears to have been slight." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">Among the <a href="https://archive.org/details/womenhealersinme0000hugh/page/144/mode/2up?q=Clarice" target="_blank">women in Paris</a> who were punished for the illegal practice of medicine after Clarice were Perronelle <i>l'erbière</i>,<span face="sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #202122; font-size: 14px;"> </span>in 1319, Jeanne Clarisse, in 1322, and her servant, Agn<i>è</i>s Avesot, who seems to have been Jeanne Clarisse's apprentice. Muriel Joy Hughes <a href="https://archive.org/details/womenhealersinme0000hugh/page/92/mode/2up?q=Clarice&view=theater" target="_blank">suggests</a> that a woman charged with the illegal practice of medicine in Paris in 1331 may have been Clarice de Rothomago's daughter. She is <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Dictionnaire_biographique_des_m%C3%A9decins/a27NdFqNqzUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=clarisse" target="_blank">described as</a> "filia Clarisse qui moratur ultra pontes, que est totaliter laica" ("the daughter of Clarice who lives beyond the bridges and who is entirely secular"). And, of course one of the most well-known cases that followed Clarice's is that of <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2023/11/jacoba-felicie-de-almania-fourteenth.html" target="_blank">Jacoba Félicie de Almania,</a> which occurred just a decade later . . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvyi_a8nFkK4lV5oOg2tcSKR8yDyYO76a2-15nbrwSymCgbXZLIat1ZdVuDkKhMGiouBolfEaJ9xXg7W2lTr2E6shkn7f8t684C5s0iH-hotcijCU0-o_HKrmKyFnTjzmnnXwBOKP7u2457PJMja8MP0Qb2xDMHC54FyQcrvkUnCk6LNLm95I7_QT0DYE/s506/Capture.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="506" data-original-width="363" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvyi_a8nFkK4lV5oOg2tcSKR8yDyYO76a2-15nbrwSymCgbXZLIat1ZdVuDkKhMGiouBolfEaJ9xXg7W2lTr2E6shkn7f8t684C5s0iH-hotcijCU0-o_HKrmKyFnTjzmnnXwBOKP7u2457PJMja8MP0Qb2xDMHC54FyQcrvkUnCk6LNLm95I7_QT0DYE/s320/Capture.JPG" width="230" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Detail from <br /><a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ka9yjtq7/items?canvas=87" target="_blank">MS 544, Miscellanea Medica XVIII</a>,<br />from Wellcome Collection, London</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Further ordinances about illegal medical practitioners were drawn up by the medical faculty in 1322, and a <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/11/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">series of appeals</a> were made directly by the faculty of the school of medicine to the pope, "humbly beseech[ing]" his assistance in their efforts--appeals were made in 1325, 1330, 1340, 1347, and 1350. (In 1340, Pope Clement VII threatened not only the illegal practicioners with excommunication, but their patients as well!)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I've linked above to some excellent resources for women medical practitioners in the fourteenth century. They span the decades: Muriel Joy Hughes's <i>Women Healers in Medieval Life and Literature </i>(1943), Pear Kibre's "The Faculty of Medicine at Paris, Charlatanism, and Unlicensed Medical Practices in the Later Middle Ages" in <i>Bulletin of the History of Medicine </i>(1953), Kate Campbell Hurd-Meade's <i>A History of Women in Medicine, from the Earliest Times to the Beginning of the Nineteenth Century</i> (1973), and Leigh Whaley's <i>Women and the Practice of Medical Care in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800 </i>(2011)<i> </i>Enjoy!</div></div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-68109436873637355572023-12-31T00:00:00.010-08:002023-12-31T09:30:07.082-08:00Isabella of Parma: "The Fate of Princesses"<h3 style="text-align: left;">Isabella of Parma, archduchess of Austria (born 31 December 1741)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"> Isabel María Luisa Antonieta was born a princess, the daughter of Felipe de Borbón y Farnesio, a younger son of King Felipe V of Spain, and <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Daughters_of_Louis_XV/RGAxAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1" target="_blank">Marie Louise-Élisabeth</a>, the eldest daughter of King Louis XV of France. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBFtbp2ZvZMvepO8mJhWXkKpGAhygpKlC0EETz5xGq2atGoNr0AfoaSnLKyuWNeRlO220pFtrKMy457v2OEmKyWM1zZEFC5nYxDhiQl5LERMGJUHce_NbV0w6hWYrCeXtyTh43-9MCPoOSNdCAd4bFCF16ixy7fAfLWizwjS0D3looEen31SWyhtUgA34/s330/330px-Isabella_di_Parma_and_Maria_Isabella_di_Neapoli.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="277" data-original-width="330" height="269" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBFtbp2ZvZMvepO8mJhWXkKpGAhygpKlC0EETz5xGq2atGoNr0AfoaSnLKyuWNeRlO220pFtrKMy457v2OEmKyWM1zZEFC5nYxDhiQl5LERMGJUHce_NbV0w6hWYrCeXtyTh43-9MCPoOSNdCAd4bFCF16ixy7fAfLWizwjS0D3looEen31SWyhtUgA34/s320/330px-Isabella_di_Parma_and_Maria_Isabella_di_Neapoli.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Isabella of Parma (right), with her cousin, 1743<br /> <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Isabella_di_Parma_and_Maria_Isabella_di_Neapoli.jpg" target="_blank">detail </a>from a painting by Louis-Michel van Loo)</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">The girl, the eldest child of the Spanish prince and the French princess, was born in a royal palace, the Palacio del Buen Retiro, in Madrid, and spent the first years of her life there. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">She also spent several months of her childhood at the palace of Versailles, pampered by her maternal relatives. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">When her father was awarded the title of duke of Parma and Piacenza, regaining a title that had been lost by his mother's family, Isabella found herself living in the Farnese Palazzo di Colorno and in the Palazzo del Giardino in Parma. As palaces go, they were much less grand than she was accustomed to, more than a bit neglected, but, still, they were palaces.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Before going any further, I should say that Isabella of Parma, as she is best known to English speakers, had something to say about "the fate of princesses" (<i>la sort des princesses</i>), and, according to her assessment, the "fate" of a princess was not good. <a href="https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/Mosta_12/?pg=207&layout=s" target="_blank">In a letter to her sister-in-law, she wrote</a>:</div><div></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">What should the daughter of a great prince expect? Her fate is, without doubt, most unhappy. She is from birth the slave of people's prejudices; she is born only to see herself subjected to the weight of honors, to the innumerable bits of etiquette attached to greatness, although she is thrust into society [<i>le monde</i>] before she can barely stutter. The rank she holds deprives her of knowing the people who surround her--that rank, deprives her of the greatest pleasure of life which is given to all people, the [joy of] society. She often finds many things to make her unhappy, even in her own family. . . . And the many different characters at court and the all to frequent intrigues there put her in constant danger of corruption or of being caught up in some entanglement. [Nothing in such a life] compensates for the time she is obliged to waste on such unwelcome cares or boring ceremonies. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"> This is the portrait and life of a young princess who cannot find even in her own family the resources [she needs to survive] inside her little coterie--she is then forced to live in the middle of the great world, where she has neither acquaintances nor friends.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"> This is not all. In the end, she must be "established." There she is, condemned to abandon everything, her family, her country--and for whom? For an unknown person, for someone whose character and thinking she knows nothing about, for a family that will perhaps view her with jealousy or, at the least, prejudice. A sacrifice to a supposed public good but more likely to the unfortunate policy of a minister who can find no other way for the two dynasties to form an alliance which he pronounces indissoluble--but which, immediately it seems advantageous, is broken off . . . </div></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;">In her <a href="https://www.amazon.com/meurs-damour-pour-larchiduchesse-Marie-Christine/dp/B0BW5JF43C" target="_blank">edition</a> of the letters written by Isabella to her sister-in-law, Marie Christine of Austria, Élisabeth Badinter describes the young woman as "the princess of four cultures" (<i>la princesse aux quatre cultures</i>), dividing her overview of Isabella's brief and difficult life geographically, and I've followed Badinter's fourfold division in what follows.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Isabella's early childhood (<i>une petite enfance espagnole</i>), from her birth, on 31 December 1741, until 26 November 1748, was spent in Spain. As the daughter of the king of France, Louise-Élisabeth was disappointed that she had been compelled to marry a man she considered beneath her, neither a king nor an heir to a throne. She was just twelve when she embarked on the two-month-long journey to Spain in order to join her nineteen-year-old husband and only fourteen when she gave birth to Isabella. And then, j<span>ust two months after the birth, Felipe left his wife and daughter for the battlefield--he did not see his family again until Isabella was eight years old. Left behind, </span>Louise-Élisabeth was consigned to a "<a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Daughters_of_Louis_XV/RGAxAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=melancholy%20existence" target="_blank">melancholy existence</a>," focused on her hope of establishing her Felipe in a "suitable" position outside of Spain.</p><div style="text-align: justify;">Louise-Élisabeth displayed little affection for her daughter. Meanwhile, Isabella's grandmother, Elisabeth Farnese, queen of Spain, sent daily letters to Felipe during his absence, including descriptions of her granddaughter and anecdotes about her behavior and activities. Her only report of the relationship between her granddaughter and the child's mother occurred when the girl was three. The queen wrote that the little girl had thrown some tantrums, and that Louise-Élisabeth had reacted to them with notably harsh discipline (<i>l'éxecution militaire</i>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Isabella would later <a href="https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/Mosta_12/?pg=209&layout=s" target="_blank">describe her childhood</a> in a letter to her sister-in-law, detailing her many "follies":</div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">My childhood was noisy, a hundred thousand games were my invention, I jumped, climbed, made a splash, nothing was safe around me--not the most precious furniture or the most magnificent ornaments., nothing was safe. . . . I broke everything, I smashed whatever presented itself to me.</blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Isabella chased butterflies, rode pretend horses, played at war, turned somersaults, made--and fell off--a rope swing, she sang, she danced, and she was the despair of her "severe" governess. Her head was always filled with "a hundred thousand ideas." But, she writes, "In the end, I learned to be reasonable." </div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdeAEssMyxHQJvKGRz-noc6joZR38sYofUp54paTBuKoagtzanvdOG-Al4TtPvdz4p1E1aJFXjlMLLZVk7Bf_MxxrGqM0qfO4X7uJa8gpytst8YUY-OqmpTVYDgMMuaQyGFs70GWVbU5JEM_DNY3ePETvoGS8Zr0Cib0dNK-T_k-qJ2ar1s4UleJkQkpM/s899/Isabelle_de_Bourbon,_infante_de_Parme_by_Jean-Marc_Nattier_001.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="899" data-original-width="740" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdeAEssMyxHQJvKGRz-noc6joZR38sYofUp54paTBuKoagtzanvdOG-Al4TtPvdz4p1E1aJFXjlMLLZVk7Bf_MxxrGqM0qfO4X7uJa8gpytst8YUY-OqmpTVYDgMMuaQyGFs70GWVbU5JEM_DNY3ePETvoGS8Zr0Cib0dNK-T_k-qJ2ar1s4UleJkQkpM/s320/Isabelle_de_Bourbon,_infante_de_Parme_by_Jean-Marc_Nattier_001.jpg" width="263" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Isabella of Parma, 1749,<br />Versailles, <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Isabelle_de_Bourbon,_infante_de_Parme_by_Jean-Marc_Nattier_001.jpg" target="_blank">painting by</a> Jean-Marc Nattier</td></tr></tbody></table>By the terms of the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, ending the war of the Austrian Succession, Isabella's father regained the duchy of Parma. On their way from Spain to join Felipe, now duke of Parma, Isabella and her mother spent ten months with the French court at Versailles in 1749 (<i>l'impromptu de Versailles</i>). The girl loved France--as she would <a href="https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/Mosta_12/?pg=213&layout=s" target="_blank">write</a> to her sister-in-law, she was "adored" in France, a country "made for gaiety." There she was "received like a gift from heaven."</div><p style="text-align: justify;">But her stay with the French royal family was brief. By 20 November 1749, she was in Parma, meeting her father for the first time. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">About her time in Parma (<i>jeunesse et adolescences italiennes, 1749-60</i>), Isabella is not kind. The climate is either too hot or too cold, she tells Christine, and the people are ignorant, incapable of thought. And those unthinking people did not have a good opinion of the new duke and duchess of Parma. Isabella writes that, although she was still just a child, she was determined to leave right away--her parents compelled her to stay "in spite" of her wishes.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Although she would spend a decade in Parma, Isabella claims she was never reconciled to her life there. Her parents quickly added two more children to the family, a son and heir born in January 1750 and a second daughter born in December of the same year. Isabella mentions neither in the memoir she addresses to her sister-in-law, but she cared for both of her younger siblings, and sent regular reports to her father about their health and well-being--her mother was frequently absent, often in France, while her father lived apart from the children for most of the year. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">Isabella's mother retained her emotional distance from her eldest child--Badinter notes that Louise-Élisabeth's coldness to Isabella was a concern for many of her acquaintances, who commented on the relationship. The duchess of Parma was also on the receiving end of advice to be more loving to her daughter. The marshal of France warned Louise-Élisabeth's that her treatment of Isabella might make arranging a desireable marriage for the girl more difficult, the French ambassador to Parma later writing to the marshall to reassure him that more attention was being paid to the young girl.</p><p></p><div style="text-align: justify;">Fears about Isabella's prospects in the marriage market proved unfounded. In the summer of 1759, Louise-Élisabeth secured a very desireable marriage for her daughter with Joseph, the son and heir of the Holy Roman Emperess Maria Theresa. The marriage was briefly delayed by the untimely death of Louise-Élisabeth on 6 December 1759 (she was just thirty-two years old and had developed a case of smallpox), but Isabella and Joseph were married by proxy in Parma on 7 September 1760, and six days later, the nineteen-year-old Isabella was on her way to Vienna.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">About her departure from Parma on 13 September 1760 (<i>l'archiduchesse d'Autriche</i>), Isabella would later write, "I left Italy without regret" ("Je quittai l'Italie sans regret"). The wedding took place on 6 October, the lavish ceremonies memorialized by a <a href="https://www.habsburger.net/en/chapter/wedding-album-marriage-joseph-ii-isabella-parma" target="_blank">cycle of paintings</a> by Martin van Meytens.</div><p></p><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHlFhJUqpwtHiYKqm6fOEnsn7eMKGtJ7DHrjTdMwa6eCvcMbG3EyTsPJacCHohTudKe3bWrCrLSO1E7Dh24o1yYc6DLVrgz6j-WlR6n2_FWBlwhdZS7TtSIdxxr2sq6vmx08NjmbqfthLyYURcYq6-P7-Cq2VBXzc7N3qcS2VP96rA9u5_L1MwMEBrSzs/s768/Jean-Marc_Nattier_005.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="768" data-original-width="606" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHlFhJUqpwtHiYKqm6fOEnsn7eMKGtJ7DHrjTdMwa6eCvcMbG3EyTsPJacCHohTudKe3bWrCrLSO1E7Dh24o1yYc6DLVrgz6j-WlR6n2_FWBlwhdZS7TtSIdxxr2sq6vmx08NjmbqfthLyYURcYq6-P7-Cq2VBXzc7N3qcS2VP96rA9u5_L1MwMEBrSzs/s320/Jean-Marc_Nattier_005.jpg" width="253" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Isabella of Parma, <br />portrait by Jean-Marc Nattier,<br />dated 1758</td></tr></tbody></table><p style="text-align: justify;">Although her new husband was delighted with Isabella, she was not particularly thrilled with him. Nevertheless, she soon became pregnant. Eighteen months after her marriage and following a difficult pregnancy, on 20 March 1762, Isabella gave birth to a daughter, Maria Theresa. Two more pregnancies quickly followed: Isabella miscarried in August 1762 and again in January 1763. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">In November, once again pregnant, Isabella developed a fever. Suffering from smallpox, the same disease that had killed her mother, Isabella went into labor months early. She gave birth prematurely on 22 November. The baby, a girl, was baptized but died. Isabella lived for a few more days, dying on 27 November 1763. She was just twenty-one. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">Isabella's daughter, the Archduchess Maria Theresa of Austria, born on 20 March 1762, died on 23 January 1770, at the age of seven.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Despite her brief life, Isabella of Parma, archduchess of Austria, has gained a degree of recognition for her writing, notably the two hundred letters addressed to her sister-in-law, Joseph's sister, the Archduchess Maria Christina. For a complete list of Isabella's composition, including these letters, as well as letters to her husband, "divers morceaux interessantes," and "divers morceaux instructifs," click <a href="https://archive.org/details/isabellavonparma0000tamu/page/306/mode/1up?view=theater" target="_blank">here</a>. And for once I'll link you to the Wikipedia entry for Isabella of Parma--it has an excellent chart, describing the topics she writes about, including religion, philosophy, education, and history (click <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Isabella_of_Parma" target="_blank">here</a>). </p><div style="text-align: justify;">Isabella's life has also drawn attention for her passionate love for her sister-in-law, the Archduchess Maria Christina (see the <a href="https://www.makingqueerhistory.com/articles/2019/3/22/princess-isabel-of-parma-and-maria-christina-duchess-of-teschen">entry</a> at <i>Making Queer History</i>, for example, and Victoria Belim-Frolova's <a href="https://boisdejasmin.com/2017/03/im-dying-of-love-for-you-the-letters-of-isabella-von-parma.html" target="_blank">analysis</a> at <i>Bois de Jasmin</i>) and for her complicated mental health issues--her difficult relationship with her mother, her fear of death, and her depression (see <a href="https://www.inspirethemind.org/post/the-mental-afflictions-of-isabella-of-parma-the-melancholic-princess" target="_blank">Emily Zorevich</a>'s "The Mental Afflictions of Isabella of Parma, 'The Melancholic Princess,'" for example). </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Some details of Isabella of Parma's life in English are available in extended biographies of her husband, Archduke Joseph, who later became Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II, and even in biographies of the Empress Maria Theresa. In addition to Badinter's edition of Isabella of Parma's letters (linked above), which has a great biographical introduction, there are two fairly recent biographies: <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Isabella-von-Parma-Gemahlin-Josephs/dp/3215070685" target="_blank">Ursula Tamussino</a>'s <i>Isabella von Parma. Gemahlin Josephs II </i>(1989) and <a href="https://www.amazon.fr/Isabelle-Bourbon-Parme-Princesse-Ernest-Sanger/dp/2873862769" target="_blank">Ernest Sanger</a>'s <i>Isabelle de Bourbon-Parme : La Princesse et la Mort</i> (2002).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you don't read French or German, I recommend Monieck Bloks's three-part biographical essay on Isabella of Parma, available <a href="https://www.historyofroyalwomen.com/isabella-of-parma/isabella-of-parma-the-dignity-of-a-princess-part-one/" target="_blank">here</a>.</div><p style="text-align: justify;"> </p><div></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><br />Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-83645503553347099732023-11-22T00:00:00.118-08:002023-11-24T10:21:13.668-08:00Jacoba Félicie de Almania, Fourteenth-Century Parisian Doctor <h3 style="text-align: left;">Jacoba Félicie, a Medieval Medical Practitioner (verdict issued 22 November 1322)</h3><div><span class="mw-page-title-main"><br /></span></div><div><span class="mw-page-title-main"><div style="text-align: justify;">On 11 August 1322, Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie was cited for illegally practicing medicine by an official of the Bishop of Paris and the proctor of the dean of the medical faculty at the University of Paris.*</div></span><span class="mw-page-title-main"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main">The proceedings took place over the course of the next few months, </span>the <a href="https://archive.org/details/portablemedieval0000ross_d4v2/page/634/mode/2up?q=Jacoba&view=theater" target="_blank">records of her case</a> preserved in the Cartulary of the University of Paris: "Witnesses were brought . . . in the inquisition made at the instance of the masters in medicine at Paris against Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie and others practicing the art of medicine and surgery in Paris and the suburbs without the knowledge and authority of the said masters, to the end that they may be punished, and that the practice be forbidden them. . . ."</div></span><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQFKaEFSWlCF3qtDwi4CJGUOyNTOMuEhtaa6x1QnfH2M1xFv_BWIuLU0LnhCoxxzVtlofoxbcJhyY7D0qPnQW2mE34Bv-aqwHGYusBlQFZ7-4kDShy8q6J1yjmgs8HlObHAbW_2zDatCh4GRA_tLlFUmF7AZqn_Nhv1EmLgJDmB2J8kDulPmZMjwomG28/s1182/s3___eu-west-1_wellcomecollection-storage_digitised_b19745588_v1_data_objects_ms_544_0087.JP2%20(1).jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1182" data-original-width="881" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQFKaEFSWlCF3qtDwi4CJGUOyNTOMuEhtaa6x1QnfH2M1xFv_BWIuLU0LnhCoxxzVtlofoxbcJhyY7D0qPnQW2mE34Bv-aqwHGYusBlQFZ7-4kDShy8q6J1yjmgs8HlObHAbW_2zDatCh4GRA_tLlFUmF7AZqn_Nhv1EmLgJDmB2J8kDulPmZMjwomG28/w238-h320/s3___eu-west-1_wellcomecollection-storage_digitised_b19745588_v1_data_objects_ms_544_0087.JP2%20(1).jpg" width="238" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Manuscript illustration of <br />a female healer, 14th century<br />(<a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ka9yjtq7/items?canvas=87" target="_blank">MS 544, Miscellanea Medica XVIII</a>,<br />from Wellcome Collection, London)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Among those providing evidence for the prosecution of Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie was John of Padua, a physician and one-time surgeon to King Philip IV of France. He <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine" target="_blank">claimed</a> that "penalties and prohibitions" against those practicing medicine illegally had existed for more than sixty years. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">According to his testimony, Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie was "ignorant of the art of medicine," not having been "approved as competent in those things which she presumed to treat." He also asserted that she was "not lettered," presumably unable to read or write.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Evidence presented by the prosecution said that F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie had "visited many sick persons afflicted with grave illness," diagnosed them, promised to make them well again, "visited them often," and prescribed various medications for them. She charged them money for her services. And she did all this despite the fact that "she has not been approved in any official <i>studium</i> at Paris or elsewhere. . . ."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main">A number of witnesses, both men and women, offered testimony on her behalf. One man who was questioned about her said that he had been "suffering from a certain sickness in his head and ears," and that </span>F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie had shown him "great care" and cured him. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main">Another of the witnesses, one who had been treated by many "masters in medicine," consulted Jacoba </span>F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie, who treated him with such "great care" that he was "completely restored to health." She hadn't made any "contract" with him about her services--instead, he "paid as he wished when he got well."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span class="mw-page-title-main"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;">When questioned, a female witness said that she had been "seized" by a terrible fever and sought help from "many physicians." But she became so "weighed down" with her illness that "the said physicians gave her up for dead." But F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie had cured her "of the said illness."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie's defense, her defending counsel also <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/9/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">noted</a> there were many practicing medicine on a daily basis in Paris who did not have licenses--and that the "law" being used against her had no validity, being merely a "mandate" that had been asserted but never a legally established statute. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In an argument that seems as if it may have come directly from Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie herself, her defense asserted that the "prohibitions" and "statutes" that the "masters" were trying to use against her were made for "ignorant women and inexperienced fools"--and that she was clearly neither. She was thus "excepted" from the statutes and prohibitions because she was "an expert in the art of medicine."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">To the prosecution's argument that "penalties of fines and excommunication" had been levied against "ignorant and illicit" medical practioners for more than sixty years, Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie also defended herself. She said that the law was old, that sixty years was long before she was born (according to the record, "she is young, thirty years or thereabouts"), and thus all the "ignorant women" and "inexperienced fools" the law had been aimed at were long dead. She was not one of them. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif1rA11vkx0wjOned2BzO3jnSGxKtGOqijE9RO6HInjXcO5FIZBv0iDSLzRISR6K-cL1dmSmqCFHT0JmROEUEvdzMw08jzAYcDFmXWMvA2TAHTj6QAgjnn6Lf9dQoNs3Xa49jzwrglksJ79Fg93HM_zyHOAOL6Ue8dSxtuLjX4WHSUGgTZWzV-Fk8afF4/s506/Capture.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="506" data-original-width="363" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEif1rA11vkx0wjOned2BzO3jnSGxKtGOqijE9RO6HInjXcO5FIZBv0iDSLzRISR6K-cL1dmSmqCFHT0JmROEUEvdzMw08jzAYcDFmXWMvA2TAHTj6QAgjnn6Lf9dQoNs3Xa49jzwrglksJ79Fg93HM_zyHOAOL6Ue8dSxtuLjX4WHSUGgTZWzV-Fk8afF4/s320/Capture.JPG" width="230" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Detail,<br /><a href="https://wellcomecollection.org/works/ka9yjtq7/items?canvas=87" target="_blank">MS 544, Miscellanea Medica XVIII</a>,<br />from Wellcome Collection, London)</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Moreover, her defense added, it was surely better for a woman to examine and care for female patients than a male doctor--and surely it was also better for a woman to to examine and care for a male patient who "dare not reveal" all the details of his illness to a male doctor. It was altogether a "lesser evil" to allow a woman to "exercise the office of practice" than it was to let sick patients die. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the end, however, the case was decided without any examination of Jacoba's expertise and experience but for an altogether different reason, one that had been <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/7/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">argued by</a> John of Padua: since a woman couldn't practice law, couldn't even provide evidence in a criminal case, it was obvious that she couldn't practice medicine either. This argument by analogy seems to have been what determined the case.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">According to the <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Women_and_the_Practice_of_Medical_Care_i/RiJ-DAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=clarice+de+rothomago&pg=PA43&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">final verdict</a> against her, issued 22 November 1322: "Her plea that she cured many sick persons whom the aforesaid master could not cure ought not to stand, and is frivolous, since it is certain that a man approved in the aforesaid art could cure better than any woman."<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And so, despite the witnesses in her defense and Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie's own arguments, she was found guilty, fined heavily, and threatened with excommunication if she continued to practice medicine. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is all we know of Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie--if she was about thirty years old at the time of her trial, she would have been born in the last decade of the thirteenth-century, but where is unknown. Nor is there information in the surviving documents where she might have gained her medical experience. She was never tested about her knowledge during the proceedings--nor was she ever given the chance to prove whether she was "not lettered."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Nor is it known whether she gave up practicing medicine, remaining in Paris, or moved on. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">I've linked above to the two most substantial articles about Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie, Pearl Kibre's "The Faculty of Medicine at Paris, Charlatanism, and Unlicensed Medical Practices in the Later Middle Ages" (1953) and Monica Green's "Getting to the Source: The Case of Jacoba Felicie . . . " (2006). Both are excellent--Kibre's covers other cases and provides the cases made by prosecution and defense, Green’s focusing on the arguments made in Felicie’sdefense. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div>You may also enjoy <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1694293/?page=1" target="_blank">W. L. Minkowski's</a> "Women Healers of the Middle Ages: Selected Aspects of Their History" (1992) for a brief overview of women as medical practitioners </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*Three other women were <a href="https://archive.org/details/kibre-1953-medieval-medicine/page/11/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">charged</a> (as were two men) and condemned for practicing medicine: Johanna, identified as convert, Margarita de Ypra, identified as a surgeon, and Belota, identified as a Jew. All three women received the same penalty as Jacoba F<span style="text-align: left;">é</span>licie. </div></div><div><span class="mw-page-title-main"><br /></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div><br /></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-66590576828540431962023-11-13T00:00:02.775-08:002023-11-13T09:11:14.429-08:00Eleanor Cobham, duchess of Gloucester: "Beautiful, Intelligent, and Ambitious"<h3 style="text-align: justify;">Eleanor Cobham, duchess of Gloucester (walk of penance, 13 November 1441)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I first came across a reference to Eleanor Cobham in a Shakespeare play--in <a href="https://www.folger.edu/explore/shakespeares-works/henry-vi-part-2/read/1/2/" target="_blank"><i>Henry VI</i>, part 2</a>, she is depicted in a way not unlike Shakespeare's much later Lady Macbeth, tempting her husband to seize the crown for himself:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">But list to me, my Humphrey, my sweet duke:</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Methought I sat in seat of majesty,</div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the cathedral church of Westminster</div><div style="text-align: justify;">And in that chair where kings and queens were crowned,</div><div style="text-align: justify;">Where Henry and dame Margaret kneeled to me</div><div style="text-align: justify;">And on my head did set the diadem. (1.2.36-41)</div></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Her husband, Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, responds to Eleanor by calling her "presumptuous" and "ill-natured," insisting that must "chide her outright" for such ideas and advising her to "[b]anish the canker of ambitious thoughts." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But once her husband is gone and she is alone on stage, Gloucester's "sweet Nell" hints that she may not be as acquiescent as she seems: "Are you so choleric / With Eleanor for telling but her dream? / Next time I'll keep my dreams unto myself / And not be checked" (1.2.53-56).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiL7mnJ5Jz3MX3xD5RxLw3i8qbIeRXT72z-YraVfPOcmnAS75czQAEJJNZErFN1fnRfnnCy1uME4tGSwrFwchymTO3rr0uJdaUvykZ8pckrTDNdili2XIiE75lToF40uCNkW0uyU3p9lZ4RQZXsCqhAUA20LzWClm60kHlB39DONKp6a7YsAugHPUh-IyA/s620/download.png" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="620" data-original-width="432" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiL7mnJ5Jz3MX3xD5RxLw3i8qbIeRXT72z-YraVfPOcmnAS75czQAEJJNZErFN1fnRfnnCy1uME4tGSwrFwchymTO3rr0uJdaUvykZ8pckrTDNdili2XIiE75lToF40uCNkW0uyU3p9lZ4RQZXsCqhAUA20LzWClm60kHlB39DONKp6a7YsAugHPUh-IyA/s320/download.png" width="223" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Eleanor Cobham and her husband,<br />Humphrey, duke of Gloucester<br />(from <i>The Benefactors' Book <br />of St. Albans Abbey,<br /></i><a href="https://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=cotton_ms_nero_d_vii_fs001r" target="_blank">BL MS Cotton Nero D VII</a><br />fol. 154r)</td></tr></tbody></table>In Shakespeare's history play, Eleanor Cobham does not go mad like his Lady Macbeth, endlessly washing her hands because she can't get rid of a damned bloodstain. Instead, the duchess is brought down by her husband's political enemies, who use her and her ambition as a weapon against Gloucester. In the view of the duke of Buckingham, "She's tickled now; her fume needs no spurs; / She'll gallop far enough to her destruction" (1.3.154-5).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although the history in this play is shaky, many of the details in Shakespeare's version of Eleanor Cobham's life do correspond to her biography, including the blame heaped upon her for being too "ambitious."* But I must admit that never thought much more about her until recently, decades after I first encountered her in <i>Henry VI</i>, part 2.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But there she was in Lauren Johnson's <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-King-Life-Death-Henry/dp/1643131281/ref=sr_1_8?crid=12DYZL8W7BOFA&keywords=shadow+king&qid=1696799040&sprefix=shadow+ki%2Caps%2C421&sr=8-8" target="_blank"><i>The Shadow King: The Life and Death of Henry VI</i></a>, which I read not too long ago and which has inspired today's post.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Eleanor Cobham (her name is sometimes given in genealogical sources as "Eleanor de Cobham) was the daughter of Sir Reginald (or "Reynold") de Cobham, third baron Cobham, a knight who <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/44/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Cobham" target="_blank">fought</a> under Henry V in France during the Hundred Years' War, notably <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Surrey_Archaeological_Collections/th5AAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=sir+reginald+cobham+agincourt&pg=PA224&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">taking part</a> in the battle of Agincourt in the "retinue of the Earl of Arundel." He then captained a group of "lances" and "archers" in the duke of Gloucester's "own retinue," taking part in the siege of Cherbourg in 1418.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Eleanor's mother was Reginald Cobham's first wife, Eleanor Culpepper, the <a href="https://www.spurlock.illinois.edu/collections/search-collection/details.php?a=1982.05.0056" target="_blank">daughter</a> of Sir Thomas Culpepper. The pair were married about the year 1400. Eleanor Culpepper gave birth to three or four or five or six children, depending on which source you consult; the <a href="https://archive.org/details/plantagenetances0000rich/page/556/mode/2up?q=Cobham&view=theater" target="_blank">most reliable information</a> I have been able to find indicates that the couple had four children, two sons and two daughters. I can't find any firm dates for the birth of these children, nor any source that details their birth order. According to a <a href="https://www.spurlock.illinois.edu/collections/search-collection/details.php?a=1982.05.0056" target="_blank">brass rubbing</a> in the north chapel of Lingfield church (Surrey) where she is buried, Eleanor Culpepper, the wife of Reginald Cobham, died on 5 November 1420.** (Reginald Cobham would marry Anne Bardolf, widow of Sir William Clifford, in July 1422.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Eleanor Cobham's date of birth is sometimes given as 1400 or "about" 1400 or 1404 or 1410. Nothing is certain, except that she was born after her parents' marriage in 1400 and before Eleanor Culpepper's death in 1420 or 1422. So "about" 1400 seems to be as close as we can get.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Aside from her birth, probably at the family's seat, Starborough, in Kent, Eleanor Cobham makes no mark in the historical record until she appears as a lady-in-waiting in the household of <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2023/10/jacqueline-of-bavaria-heiress-countess.html" target="_blank">Jacqueline of Bavaria</a>, countess of Hainaut, Holland, and Zeeland. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Jacqueline, the would-be duchess of Bavaria, had been married at the age of fourteen, widowed at the age of sixteen, remarried at the age of seventeen, and then subjected to a relentless series of challenges about the validity of her second marriage. She had also been fighting for her inheritance since the death of her father, rejected as a female heir by those who had taken an oath to support her, challenged as an heir by her uncle, and subject to the vagaries of the politics of the Hundred Years' War. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Fed up with the ongoing dispute over her second marriage, Jacqueline herself finally declared it to be invalid in 1420. A year later, just twenty years old, she fled to England, seeking aid in her fight for her inheritance. She not only found support from King Henry V, she found a husband in his younger brother. At the age of twenty-one, Jacqueline married her "third" husband, Humphrey, duke of Gloucester.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Gloucester's decision to marry Jacqueline of Bavaria was widely judged to have been rash--in the <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Collection_of_the_Chronicles_and_Ancie/dDg7AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=and%20not%20without%20cause" target="_blank">words</a><span style="text-align: left;"> </span><span style="text-align: left;">of a contemporary French chronicler,</span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span><a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Waurin,_Jehan" style="text-align: left;" target="_blank">Jean de Wavrin</a><span style="text-align: left;">,</span> Jacqueline already had a husband "who was still living" when she "married" Gloucester in England. "[M]any people were much dismayed" at their marriage, Wavrin claimed, "and not without cause." Although the couple had sought an annulment of Jacqueline's second marriage, they had hastily "married" before receiving any papal decree that would allow them to do so. And Gloucester's actions had also hurt England, damaging the country's interests on the continent: "from this marriage resulted great evils and losses," Wavrin opined.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It was at some point after Jacqueline's arrival in England that Eleanor Cobham joined her retinue. This date may suggest something about Eleanor's birthdate--if she were born about the year 1400, she would have become a member of Jacqueline of Bavaria's household when she was around twenty years old, but if she were born as late as 1410, she would have only been eleven or twelve years old. Possible, but less likely.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The timing also suggests that Eleanor may have come to the English court soon after her mother's death, though how exactly she gained her place in Jacqueline's retinue is not clear. Perhaps her father's earlier association with Gloucester made it possible. However it happened, Eleanor Cobham was with Jacqueline of Bavaria and Humphrey of Gloucester when they returned to the continent in October of 1424--Gloucester was determined to gain control of Jacqueline's inheritance. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But with the validity of his own marriage now being questioned--the status of Jacqueline's second marriage had still not been clarified--and with his campaign to reclaim Jacqueline's titles and territories not notably successful, by April of 1425 Humphrey of Gloucester was back in England, leaving Jacqueline of Bavaria behind--he had begun "to wax weary of her, by whom he never had profit, but loss," <a href="https://archive.org/details/annalsofenglandt00stow/page/n627/mode/2up?q=Cobham&view=theater" target="_blank">explained</a> the sixteenth-century historian John Stowe, who relied on a variety of fiftteenth-century chronicles in compiling his <i>Annals of England.</i> And, when Gloucester left Jacqueline and returned to England, he had brought Eleanor Cobham with him. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div>Once again, the chronicler Wavrin had a <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Collection_of_the_Chronicles_and_Ancie/dDg7AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Cobham" target="_blank">few words</a> to say: </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>. . . the said duke of Gloucester took back to the land of England Eleanor Cobham, a very noble damsel and of grand lineage, whom he afterwards married . . . , and who had come with lady Jacqueline, the duchess his wife, to the country of Hainault by way of diversion, as young damsels are desirous of seeing new countries and foreign regions, for she was also marvellously fair and pleasing, and showed herself of good disposition in various places.</blockquote></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Wavrin didn't quite have the details right. Eleanor Cobham was the daughter of a minor knight, not a "very noble damsel," much less of "grand lineage." Whether she was "marvellously fair and pleasing," who knows? But she must have been fair and pleasing enough to Humprey, duke of Gloucester, because at some point, either before or after he had ditched his wife on the continent, Eleanor Cobham became his mistress. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Despite his liaison with Eleanor Cobham, in 1427 Gloucester briefly considered returning to the continent in aid of Jacqueline of Bavaria, this time at the head of a new force and with full parliamentary support. The death of Jacqueline's second husband in April of that year might have made it possible for Gloucester and Jacqueline to have regularized their union, and popular opinion seemed to support such a reunion. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">As C. Marie Harker <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/41299299" target="_blank">notes</a>, for example, an entry in a "London city letter book record" in March 1427 referred sympathetically to "the miserable state of the most noble Duchess of Gloucester," meaning Jacqueline of Bavaria, while a contemporary report on events in parliament in January 1428 not only recorded support for her but also antagonism to Eleanor Cobham:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><blockquote>Also in this Parliament, a certain woman of Stokes came to Parliament publicly, with whom [came] other women of London respectfully dressed, proffering letters to the Duke of Gloucester . . . and to certain other lords appearing in that same place. The effect of the letters was loudly critical of the Duke of Gloucester, who was unwilling to snatch away his wife from . . . affliction . . . , but, [his] love having cooled, [leaving her] thus to remain perpetually in servitude; and because he held publicly with him another woman, an adulteress.</blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But if in fact such letters were presented to Gloucester, urging him to return to Jacqueline of Bavaria and continue his military pursuits on her behalf, they were useless. In the same month, the pope finally issued <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/202/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Cobham" target="_blank">his decision</a> on Jacqueline of Bavaria's second marriage--it had been a valid union, and even though this husband was now dead, "any marriage contracted by the former [Jacqueline] in the lifetime of the latter [her second husband] was declared to be illegal.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3_yuZwCSQPXx5MxYy18_XJ9TWRJOp2mxvtq20tfZMw_63PF8IUOW6JecFyFWPsYjWuKmXb7pwhVZV9xNIHK050ksy_GHl2Kb1osemoLpjUBfnxYmqAjlhWtmDv8xHzNZVrnOhbwdqXdGU5QlvqX76mVDFkqrjN4RxcxA2FKqS9g78Dj8aQlsJ9DOLq7s/s451/detail,%20cobham.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="437" data-original-width="451" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3_yuZwCSQPXx5MxYy18_XJ9TWRJOp2mxvtq20tfZMw_63PF8IUOW6JecFyFWPsYjWuKmXb7pwhVZV9xNIHK050ksy_GHl2Kb1osemoLpjUBfnxYmqAjlhWtmDv8xHzNZVrnOhbwdqXdGU5QlvqX76mVDFkqrjN4RxcxA2FKqS9g78Dj8aQlsJ9DOLq7s/s320/detail,%20cobham.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Eleanor Cobham and Humphrey of Gloucester,<br />detail, rom <i>The Benefactors' Book<br />of St. Albans Abbey</i></td></tr></tbody></table>And that was that. It's not clear when or where, but at some point <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Humphrey_(1391-1447)" target="_blank">after January 1428 and before July 1431</a>, Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, married Eleanor Cobham. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">(One more bit about Eleanor's age--if she had been born about the year 1400, she was about the same age as Jacqueline of Bavaria, who was born on 15 July 1401. If she became Gloucester's mistress at about the time she returned with him to England in 1425, she would have been about twenty-five to Gloucester's thirty-five. The age gap would obviously have been some twenty years if Eleanor were born in 1410, not out of the question, of course.)</div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Whatever the popular sentiment about her may have been, the "second" duchess of Gloucester seems to have been accepted by her husband's royal family. In July 1431, for example, by which time they had certainly married, Eleanor and the duke were honored as benefactors of the monastery of St. Albans (the occasion is commemorated in the <i>Benefactors' Book</i>,<i> </i>the illustrations from which are used in this essay--for the original, click <a href="https://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=cotton_ms_nero_d_vii_fs001r" target="_blank">here</a> and go to fol. 154r). The next year, at the end of March in 1432, Eleanor became a lady of the Garter when she was <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Order_of_the_Garter_1348_1461/sKapp53K4_MC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=eleanor+duchess+of+gloucester+garter+robes&pg=PA303&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">rewarded</a> with robes of the Garter of St. George. (Interestingly, Jacqueline, Humphrey's first duchess of Gloucester, had received these robes in 1423!)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Her status as duchess of Gloucester seems also to have been acknowledged later that year when, in May, the duke of Orleans, who had been an English hostage since the battle of Agincourt (1415), was <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/248/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Cobham" target="_blank">transferred to the custody</a> of Eleanor's father, Reginald Cobham. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">During these years, Gloucester also <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Summer_s_Day_at_Greenwich/_qBCAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA34&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">began to build</a> in Greenwich on a site he had earlier acquired. In 1433, he "laid the foundations" of a "faire building" that he called "his Manor of Plesaunce." An <a href="https://archive.org/details/annalsoflondonye00rich/page/64/mode/2up?q=1430&view=theater" target="_blank">old abbey</a> on the site became known as "Bella Court," and a new tower of "rose-pink brick" was built alongside, intended to hold his library. The duke and duchess of Gloucester seemed to have spent much of their time at this, his "<a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/444/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Plesaunce" target="_blank">favorite residence</a>," between 1432 and 1437, though Humphrey was called away by business at various times during these years. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">He was on the continent in 1433, for instance, conducting peace negotiations (England was still engaged in the Hundred Years' War). In 1436, he was back on the continent, this time at the head of an army. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In between his various expeditions to the continent, Gloucester's personal situation changed dramatically--in 1435, after the death of his elder brother, the duke of Bedford, Gloucester became heir to the English throne--if anything were to happen to his fourteen-year-old nephew, Henry VI, the crown would fall to Humphrey, duke of Gloucester.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Rather than increasing Gloucester's popularity and ensuring his security, his status as royal heir aroused the jealousy of his political enemies. Even so, after returning from his foray on the continent in 1436, Gloucester had been greeted by Parliament with a vote of thanks, and in 1437, he and Eleanor received <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/256/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Cobham" target="_blank">lavish New Year's gifts</a> from the king. In addition to the glittering jewels received by her husband, Eleanor was given a "brooch made in manner of a man garnished with a fair, great ball," the ornament set with five pearls, a diamond, and three "hangers," or pendants, each with rubies and pearls. In June of that year, Eleanor accompanied her husband to the funeral of his step-mother, Joan of Navarre, widow of Henry IV of England, after which the couple returned to Greenwich.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By the end of 1437, the sixteen-year-old Henry VI was considered old enough to no longer need a protectorship, and he had begun his personal rule. For a while, all seemed well enough for Eleanor and her husband. As late as 1439 the young king seemed to welcome his uncle's advice. In 1440, the duchess received another magnificent New Year's gift from the king: "a Garter of Gold, barred through with bars of Gold, and this reason made with Letters of Gold thereupon, hony soit qui mal y pense, and garnished with a flower of Diamonds on the Buckle, and two great Pearls and a Ruby on the Pendant and two great Pearls with twenty-six Pearls on the said Garter" (qtd. by <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/4048957" target="_blank">James L. Gillespie</a>, "Ladies of the Fraternity of St. George and of the Society of the Garter"). </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But it is clear that Gloucester's enemies were gaining ground in their attempts to deprive him of power. His stance against any kind of surrender in France weakened his position with the king and his more popular advisers, and by early 1440, Gloucester was losing influence with the king's Council. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">No longer so active at court or in France, Gloucester seems to have lived in a kind of retirement with Eleanor at Plesaunce. There Gloucester <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/256/mode/2up?view=theater&q=manuscripts" target="_blank">devoted</a> himself to the "collection" and "study" of "rare manuscripts," and occupied much of his time with his "books of rare antiquity." (For an overview of Duke Humphrey's library, click <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/426/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">here</a>.) Among these books was a "semi-medical, semi-astrological work translated from the original Arabic"--a book that seems to have been given to him by Eleanor.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxGnUaXXwHS5iVxxYSeDEZgvPdSZ8D66p8RDm6euqCaMHdwg4QZnKFT70fzydV3squLucBSToQV1ggy8XuxHx8m5ClBO3dQNYHkElUtPtTSGgn4_ZjzLXDj8VVtU7ySZoQfCoiI-63YMtkAdEEVX9d7y3Nrrt8vXqA1VmLNFdMwXJG2izjHadOSJHGN1E/s1200/1200px-Wyngaerde_London_-_The_Palace_at_Greenwich.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="699" data-original-width="1200" height="186" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxGnUaXXwHS5iVxxYSeDEZgvPdSZ8D66p8RDm6euqCaMHdwg4QZnKFT70fzydV3squLucBSToQV1ggy8XuxHx8m5ClBO3dQNYHkElUtPtTSGgn4_ZjzLXDj8VVtU7ySZoQfCoiI-63YMtkAdEEVX9d7y3Nrrt8vXqA1VmLNFdMwXJG2izjHadOSJHGN1E/s320/1200px-Wyngaerde_London_-_The_Palace_at_Greenwich.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A sketch of Pleasaunce,<br /><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wyngaerde_London_-_The_Palace_at_Greenwich.jpg" target="_blank">Antony van den Wyngaerde, c. 1554-55</a></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It is her interest in such a book--and her husband's continued position as heir to the English throne--that combined to propel the couple to a catastrophic end. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By the time King Henry VI would marry in 1445, Eleanor Cobham had been brutally removed from the scene and Gloucester effectively isolated. By the time Henry's wife, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/03/margaret-of-anjou-tigers-heart-wrapped.html" target="_blank">Margaret of Anjou</a>, at last gave birth to a son and heir in 1453, both Eleanor and Glloucester were gone, their deaths hastened by the ruthless actions of their political enemies.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Eleanor's fall was rapid. According to the account of a <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=avChuXgwg3sC&pg=GBS.RA2-PA30&hl=en_CA" target="_blank">Latin chronicler</a>, the duchess of Gloucester made a glorious entrance into the city of London on 28 June 1441, splendidly attired. She was welcomed by aldermen and the mayor, who escorted her over London Bridge and into the city. Her pride at this moment came right before her fall. She was, as the chronicler notes, "at the height of her fortune," altogether unmindful of the "fallible and deceptive Wheel of Fortune": "On, how wonderful is this change," he cries out, knowing that "this excellent lady" would soon find herself "destitute of all her worldly glory." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">That very night while at dinner, Eleanor received a message that Roger Bolingbroke, for some years a member of Gloucester's household and her personal clerk, had been arrested.*** With him was another cleric, Thomas Southwell, Eleanor's physician. According to a fifteenth-century chronicle, thee <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA56&hl=en" target="_blank">two</a> men had been "taken as conspirators of the king's death," Bolingbroke charged with having attempted "to consume the king's person with necromancy" and Southwell suspected of having "said masses in forbidden and inconvenient places" with "certain instruments" that Bolingbroke, "a great and cunning man" practiced in necromancy, had supplied. A third priest was also accused, John Home, Eleanor's chaplain and the secretary for both Eleanor and her husband. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Under examination about his activities by the king's Council on 12 July, Bolinbroke implicated the duchess of Gloucester--he <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA58&hl=en" target="_blank">confessed</a> that "he wrought the said necromancy at the stirring and procurement of the said Eleanor, to know what should fall of her and to what estate she should come." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">That the duchess might be interested in the succession is not strange--the king, now nineteen years old, did not have a wife, much less a child, his uncle Gloucester was his heir. Eleanor's interest in knowing <i>when</i> and <i>why</i> the king might die was more problematic, especially when horoscopes, magical instrments, and necromancy were involved. The implication of all this was that Eleanor had sought to use witchcraft to <i>bring about</i> the king's death and thus to secure the crown for her husband.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the mean time, after hearing of the arrests, Eleanor had taken sanctuary in Westminster, an action that only served to <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA56&hl=en" target="_blank">increase suspicions</a> of her guilt, at least to contemporary chroniclers. Eleanor was "cited to appear" before "certain bishops of the king"--she could not claim the protection of sanctuary if she were accused of "articles of necromancy, of witchcraft or sorcery, of heresy, and of treason."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And so on 24 July Eleanor. duchess of Gloucester, <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA58&hl=en" target="_blank">was brought</a> before the archbishops of Canterbury and York and the bishops of Salisbury "and others." On that <a href="https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m2930&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS-DOCUMENT.PDF" target="_blank">day</a>, she was "examined on twenty-eight points of felony and treason," and she asserted her innocence. Afterwards, she was allowed to return to sanctuary. She was called again for further examination on 25 July, when Bolingbroke appeared and reiterated his confession that all he had done had been at her "instance." She was the "cause," he said. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">At this point, the matter was turned over to a lay commission comprised of the mayor of London, aldermen, and commoners, as well as some of the aristocratic men who had participated in the Council's examination. This new examining body began a new set of <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA58&hl=en" target="_blank">inquiries</a>, looking into "all manner of treasons, sorcery, and all other things that might in any way touch or concern harmfully the king's person." The danger in handing over the case to a lay power was great, for it could exact a death penalty.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">These further explorations of the "plots" involving Bolingbroke, Southwell, Home, and the duchess of Gloucester uncovered the activities of <a href="https://personales.ulpgc.es/mronquillo.dch/sorcery.pdf" target="_blank">Margery Jourdemayne</a>, "the witch of Eye," a woman who lived near the manor of Eye, belonging to the abbey of Westminster, and whose "sorcery and witchcraft the said Dame Eleanor had long time used." It seems Margery had gotten into trouble for witchcraft ten years earlier, when, from November 1430 until May 1432 she was in royal custody at Windsor for her use of sorcery. She had been released only on the condition that she not involve herself any further in such activities.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The evidence uncovered by the commission indicated that Bolingbroke, Southwell, and Home were all involved in the necromantic treason--they had used the "instruments" of sorcery in order to learn when Henry VI would die. But they had acted on Eleanor's behalf--she was the one who wanted to know when the king would die and, thus, when her husband would become king.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Already examined, Margery Jourdemayne had offered different reasons for Eleanor's interest in the witch's services. She claimed Eleanor had sought love magic--Eleanor wanted potions to bring her Gloucester's love and to ensure that he would marry her. (Various accounts of the examinations of Eleanor and of Margery indicate that they had had dealings for some ten years--if Eleanor had been seeking a love potion from Margery, it must have been before Margery was taken into custody in November 1430, perhaps helping to clarify the datae of Eleanor and Gloucester's marriage.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A contemporary chronicler claimed that Eleanor <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA58&hl=en" target="_blank">pretended to be sick</a> at this point, hoping to be returned to sanctuar. According to this account, Eleanor thought that she would be able to "steal away privily by water" from Westminster Abbey and make her escape. But if she had any such hopes, they were foiled--on 9 August, Henry VI ordered her to appear before the archbishop of Canterbury on 21 October. In the mean time, she was to be held in Leeds Castle.****</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Two months later, on 21 October, Eleanor, duchess of Gloucester was back in London, <a href="https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m2930&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS-DOCUMENT.PDF" target="_blank">hearing</a> once more the articles of "sorcery, witchcraft, and treason" with which she had been charged. Over the course of her examinations, which continued on 23 October, again facing her accusers, she reiterated her innocence against all accusations of treason, though she did admit to having encouraged Bolingbroke and Southwell and to having consulted Margery Jourdemayne. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I find her <a href="https://archive.org/details/brutorchronicles00brieuoft/page/480/mode/2up?q=Eleanor&view=theater" target="_blank">admissions</a> quite touching. When confronted by Bolingbroke and his "instruments," Eleanor "withnayed" (denied) having used them against the king: "it was not so," she said. But she did consult with Margery Jourdemayne: "she did it forto have borne a child by hir lord, the duke of Gloucestre." After being convicted "of the said articles," she was offered the chance to "<a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA58&hl=en" target="_blank">speak against</a>" those who accused her. Eleanor declined, submitting herself "to the correction of the bishops." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Those who were charged with her--Bolingbroke, Southwell, Home, and Jourdemayne--were also convicted. Fortunately for him, Thomas Southwell died on 26 October in the Tower before his execution could take place--one <a href="https://archive.org/details/chroniclesoflond00kinguoft/page/154/mode/2up?q=Cobham&view=theater" target="_blank">chronicler</a> says he died "for sorrow," but he may also have committed suicide.. Margery Jourdemayne was burned as a witch at Smithfield on 27 October. Roger Bolingbroke was hanged, drawn, and quartered at Tyburn on 18 November. John Home was pardoned on the same day--evidently he was judged to have been more of a witness to all the treasonable activity rather than a participant.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for Eleanor Cobham. On 27 October she "abjured" (renounced) the "articles" with which she had been charged. On 6 November, she was "<a href="https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m2930&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS-DOCUMENT.PDF" target="_blank">forcibly divorced</a>" from Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, and three days later, she was judged to be guilty of sorcery and witchcraft but not of heresy and treason. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg89XjaM2VwfAlxNspeQ3uef5HBaZDz8BES8YKSxEQ6UM922EjWrK59DegcLJDqNnSdT8Amr1v87K1J_H5T8GLvEN4CStFk5LEltGeze8AAz9_QqZQfFwNpqn1lSv-ELxBbHyWN3n4FnGiyNgLO_k3hUcI6__jT3jKuRGOu7DlcmwtC4LPg7QC5qrg0YNI/s1024/The_Penance_of_Eleanor_(Abbey).jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="585" data-original-width="1024" height="183" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg89XjaM2VwfAlxNspeQ3uef5HBaZDz8BES8YKSxEQ6UM922EjWrK59DegcLJDqNnSdT8Amr1v87K1J_H5T8GLvEN4CStFk5LEltGeze8AAz9_QqZQfFwNpqn1lSv-ELxBbHyWN3n4FnGiyNgLO_k3hUcI6__jT3jKuRGOu7DlcmwtC4LPg7QC5qrg0YNI/s320/The_Penance_of_Eleanor_(Abbey).jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>The Penance of Eleanor</i>,<br /><a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Penance_of_Eleanor_(Abbey).jpg" target="_blank">E. A. Abbey</a> (1900)</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">The archbishop of Canterbury delivered her sentence: she was to perform a public penance. On <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Px8IAAAAIAAJ&pg=GBS.PA58&hl=en" target="_blank">three separate days</a>, "with a meek and demure countenance" and bearing a taper, she was to walk bare-headed through London. On 13 November she was to walk from Temple Bridge to St. Paul's; on 15 November, she was to walk from the Swan Stairs on Thames Street to Christchurch, Aldgate; on 17 November, she was to walk from Queenhithe to St. Michael's in Cornhill. The tapers she carried were to be "offered up" on each church's altar. According to one contemporary account, she performed her penance "meekly," and "the more part of the people had on her great compassion." (The <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=avChuXgwg3sC&pg=GBS.RA2-PA29&hl=en_CA" target="_blank">Latin chronicler</a> saw a potent lesson in Eleanor's prescribed penance: she had entered the city of London in pomp and circumstance, only "a short time afterwards" having to suffer humbling "through the streets and streets of the same city."<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While witnesses to Eleanor Cobham's acts of penance may have had compassion for her and her great fall, her husband's enemies did not. In addition to her forced divorce and her penance,"she was committed to ward" again "for all her life after." Her "pride, false covetousness, and lechery were the cause of her confusion," sniffed one chronicler. "Other things might be written of this Dame Eleanor," he added, "the which at reverence of nature and of womanhood shall not be rehearsed."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Whether or not Eleanor Cobham's involvement with sorcery was still regarded as a threat to the king's life, she was a valuable hostage. "As a prisoner, she could still guarantee Duke Humphrey's good behaviour," <a href="https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m2930&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS-DOCUMENT.PDF" target="_blank">notes</a> historian Ralph A. Griffiths; "accordingly, elaborate measures were taken to ensure that she remained safely incarcerated for the rest of her life, in the custody of royal Household officials."<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Eleanor Cobham, once duchess of Gloucester, was <a href="https://www.hslc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/85-6-Stewart-Brown.pdf" target="_blank">moved from location to location</a> over the course of the next decade: Cheshire Castle, Kenilworth Castle, Peel Castle, on the Isle of Man (perhaps), and Beaumaris Castle, in Wales. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It's not clear where Eleanor was being held at the time Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, was charged with treason. In February 1447, he was <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/292/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Bury" target="_blank">summoned</a> to a meeting of parliament to be held at Bury St. Edmonds--more than one chronicler claimed he had set out with a large but not "extraordinary" retinue for a man of his status, "hoping that he might procure for his imprisoned wife." Instead, he was arrested for treason. Before he could be tried of this crime, he died three days after his arrest, on 23 February 1447. Rumors circulated that he had been murdered, but historians believe he likely died of a stroke.***** </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Even after Gloucester's death, Eleanor Cobham was not released. Instead, on 3 March 1447, Parliament <a href="https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m2930&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS-DOCUMENT.PDF" target="_blank">deprived</a> her of any "claim to dowry after the recent death of Duke Humphrey, and she continued to be excluded from general pardons thereafter."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">She lived for five more years. Eleanor Cobham, once duchess of Gloucester, died at Beaumaris Castle on 7 July 1452.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As an interesting note, Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, had two illegitimate <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Humphrey_(1391-1447)" target="_blank">children</a>. A son, Arthur, was with Gloucester when he was arrested in 1447 and was condemned for treason along with his father, but he was pardoned. Aside from his name and the fact that he was arrested and pardoned in 1447, nothing more is known of him. Gloucester also had a daughter, Antigone, born before 1424. She married twice, had three children, and died c. 1450. (She has descendants today, including Sophie Rhys-Jones, duchess of Edinburgh, wife of Prince Edward.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There has been much speculation about whether Eleanor Cobham was the mother of these two children, but that is unlikely. While it's not known when Antigone was born, she gave birth to a child in 1436, making 1424 the earliest reasonable date for her own birth. If these two were his children with Eleanor, Gloucester might have had them legitimized after his marriage to their mother (as his grandfather, John of Gaunt, had his children with Katherine Swynford legitimized after their marriage). And if Eleanor had given birth to these two children, why would she having been using a love potion so that she could have conceived Gloucester's child?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*The phrase I've used as the subtitle for this post, "beautiful, intelligent, and ambitious," comes from G. L. Harriss's <a href="https://www.oxforddnb.com/display/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-5742" target="_blank">entry</a> on Eleanor Cobham in the <i>Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. </i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i>**</i>According to G. L. Harriss's <i>ODNB </i>entry, Eleanor Culpepper died in 1422. Genealogical books by Douglas Richardson--<i>Plantagenet Ancestry </i>and <i>Magna Carta Ancestr</i>y<i>--</i>also indicate that the year of Eleanor Culpepper's death is 1422, but I cannot find any source for that date. I am relying here on the date of death on the brass rubbing in Lingfield church.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">***As Ralph A. Griffiths <a href="https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:1m2930&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS-DOCUMENT.PDF" target="_blank">notes</a> in "The Trial of Eleanor Cobham: An Episode in the Fall of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester" (1991), "Every fifteenth-century chronicle written in England" covers the events of the extraordinary events, at least one of which containing what must have been an eye-witness account. But their chronology of these accounts is "confused." I've relied here on the chronology offered by Griffiths, though I have considered as well the series of events as dated and told by K. H. Vickers, Duke Humprey's biographer, to which I've linked in this post many times. Jessica Freeman's much more recent <a href="https://personales.ulpgc.es/mronquillo.dch/sorcery.pdf" target="_blank">essay on Margery Jourdemayne</a> is also extremely detailed on the sequence of events (and far less filled with Griffiths' notable misogyny).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">****The place of Eleanor's detention is notable. In 1419, the widowed <a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/pevensey-castle/history/joan-of-navarre/#:~:text=Accused%20of%20Witchcraft&text=Joan%20was%20still%20receiving%20her,king%20through%20witchcraft%20and%20sorcery." target="_blank">Joan of Navarre</a>--the second wife of Henry IV of England and thus step-mother to Henry V and to Humphrey, duke of Gloucester--had been accused of witchcraft. Her confessor claimed she had used witchcraft to try to kill the king. Joan was imprisoned, first in Pevensey Castle (from December 1419 to March 1420) before being moved to Leeds Castle, where she remained until July 1422. Although accused, Joan of Navarre was never tried, though her wealth was confiscated--after she was released by Henry V, just weeks before his death, her property was restored to her. She died in 1437--her funeral attended by Gloucester and his wife, who would later be imprisoned in the same castle as Joan of Navarre.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*****Although Gloucester never attempted to break Eleanor out of prison, as was feared by some, and never had a chance to ask for her pardon when summoned to Parliament in 1447, if that was he was hoping, he had not forgotten her. Three years before his death, he <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/330/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Eleanor" target="_blank">arranged</a> for masses to be said not only for his soul but for hers. After his death, it was claimed that he had died intestate, though references to the duke's <a href="https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781408613078/page/442/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Eleanor" target="_blank">will</a> had been frequently made--it seems as if the document may have been made to disappear not only so that his great wealth became "plunder which fell to the King on his uncle's death" but also to obviate any claim Eleanor Cobham might make to a dower. This is underscored by Parliament's special act to deprive her of any claim on Gloucester's estate after his death.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div><br /></div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-91499842494820702942023-10-17T15:52:00.007-07:002023-10-18T09:18:26.955-07:00More Post-Dobbs News on Infant Mortality<h3 style="text-align: left;">When Women Became No Longer Human, Part 14: More Post-Dobbs News</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I suppose this is great news for members of the forced-birth crowd, gratified by imposing their benighted views on women and reproduction. Mission accomplished, assholes! You're doing a great job not only in denying <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2021/12/back-to-future-part-17-are-women-human.html" target="_blank">women personhood</a> but also in making sure babies die while you're doing it! </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But I'm sure you're not worried about that unfortunate little side effect of your efforts to control women's bodies . . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXw37bQzktf_17HHbdMHZ_4RAflEJW3kzv1Gh-MsIrYjVOCrb_2b9cKU8nxHP4mlDyQ2P9leYAE4isJfKTC6dYMJg_KWrnlWJJbO7Q01r6y1cMq39kotIXR9JOsurdbWXsFKkfDQXZ7T2G37_ovJEBl5q_2OHGyPKE-0d-1gKvo_TSSG2_y21BWwsHkVA/s1230/Capture.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="457" data-original-width="1230" height="149" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXw37bQzktf_17HHbdMHZ_4RAflEJW3kzv1Gh-MsIrYjVOCrb_2b9cKU8nxHP4mlDyQ2P9leYAE4isJfKTC6dYMJg_KWrnlWJJbO7Q01r6y1cMq39kotIXR9JOsurdbWXsFKkfDQXZ7T2G37_ovJEBl5q_2OHGyPKE-0d-1gKvo_TSSG2_y21BWwsHkVA/w400-h149/Capture.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">A new study, published on 14 October 2023 in the <i>American Journal of Preventative Medicine</i>, reminds readers that "The United States (U.S.) has the highest infant mortality rate among peer countries. Restrictive abortion laws may contribute to poor infant health outcomes. This ecological study investigated the association between county-level infant mortality and state-level abortion access legislation in the U.S. from 2014–2018."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The report--"Abortion Restrictiveness and Infant Mortality: An Ecologic Study, 2014-2018"--is an analysis of <i>pre-Dobbs </i>data. I don't have access to the full report--it's behind a paywall that’s too expensive for me--but the summarized results presented in the <a href="https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(23)00408-7/fulltext" target="_blank">abstract</a> make the link between restrictive abortion laws and increased rates of infant mortality undeniable.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As summarized, "increased IMR [infant mortality rate] was seen in states with . . . restrictive laws, with the most restrictive . . . laws having a 16% increased IMR." And, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2022/12/more-bad-news-on-maternal-mortality.html" target="_blank">as I have noted here</a> in writing about previous studies, "Black IMR . . . was more than twice that of White infants."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for the study's conclusions: "State-level abortion law restrictiveness is associated with higher county-level infant mortality rates. The Supreme Court decision on Dobbs v. Jackson and changes in state laws limiting abortion may affect future infant mortality."<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Since I don't have access to the full study, you may wish to read more from Jessica Valenti's <i>Abortion Every Day </i>analysis--click <a href="https://jessica.substack.com/p/abortion-every-day-101723" target="_blank">here</a>. Valenti's calling-attention to this study is the first I heard of it, which is a goddamn shame.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But, good work, forced birthers. . . . </div><div><br /></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-58670412332956769262023-10-08T00:00:01.426-07:002023-10-08T14:19:22.321-07:00Jacqueline of Bavaria: Heiress, Countess, Duchess, Prisoner, Exile<h3 style="text-align: justify;">Jacqueline of Bavaria, countess of Hainaut, duchess of Touraine, <i>dauphine</i> of France, duchess of Brabant, duchess of Gloucester, lady of Borselen (died 8 October 1436)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the heading of this post, I have listed the many titles Jacqueline of Bavaria acquired (and lost) through her multiple marriages--I've made the list as a tribute to Ruth Putnam's 1904 <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn" target="_blank">biography</a>: <i><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhViwKK5b71GYYcCb5_4EfKKceBpsBOH9ZDjBbTeiRl7XW9GJKyQNGU272Joig9nfLxHhWFNVBO6A1pFjnKPHBbgJjTOcQ2P4-ILCEI7Ho_92ScXy1LSwZN9ws2T6IXU9FlMa2C4LqTEESDlxSyeOTv5jfQljtapa6HNRel_1W2MmAu-NvNcD4xElvlf20/s382/46JacobavanBeieren.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="382" data-original-width="300" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhViwKK5b71GYYcCb5_4EfKKceBpsBOH9ZDjBbTeiRl7XW9GJKyQNGU272Joig9nfLxHhWFNVBO6A1pFjnKPHBbgJjTOcQ2P4-ILCEI7Ho_92ScXy1LSwZN9ws2T6IXU9FlMa2C4LqTEESDlxSyeOTv5jfQljtapa6HNRel_1W2MmAu-NvNcD4xElvlf20/s320/46JacobavanBeieren.jpg" width="251" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jacqueline of Bavaria,<br />16th century <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jacoba_van_Beieren_(1401-1436),_gravin_van_Holland_en_Zeeland.jpg" target="_blank">copy</a> of a portrait<br />from about 1435</td></tr></tbody></table>A Mediaeval Princess, Being a True Record of the Changing Fortunes which Brought Divers Titles to Jacqueline, Countess of Holland . . . </i>"Divers titles"? No kidding.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The title "duchess of Bavaria" should be added to this list, but it was a title she gained not through marriage but claimed from her father. Jacqueline of Bavaria (that's the Anglicization of her name in Dutch, <i>Jacoba van Beieren</i>) was the only legitimate child of Willem van Oostervant, who himself had "divers" titles--William II, duke of Bavaria-Straubing; William VI, count of Holland and Zeeland, and, after his marriage to Jacqueline's mother, William IV, count of Hainaut.* With her father's death, Jacqueline inherited the title duchess of Bavaria, but as historian Gerard Nijsten <a href="https://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/vrouwenlexicon/lemmata/data/JacobaVanBeieren" target="_blank">notes</a>, it was "a title that, except prestige, yielded little."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Jacqueline's mother was <a href="https://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/vrouwenlexicon/lemmata/data/MargarethaVanBourgondie" target="_blank">Margaret of Burgundy</a>, the daughter of Philip II, duke of Burgundy, and his wife, Margaret III, countess of Flanders. She was married to William of Bavaria on 12 April 1385. Theirs was half of a double marriage: on the same day, William's younger sister, <a href="https://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/vrouwenlexicon/lemmata/data/MargarethaVanBeieren" target="_blank">Margaret of Bavaria</a>, was married to one of Philip of Burgundy's sons. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As part of Margaret of Burgundy's marriage settlement, the French king (Charles V, who was Philip II's brother and thus Margaret's uncle) granted her and her new husband the county of Hainaut (now part of France), and throughout the years of her marriage, the new countess resided mainly there, in the castle of Le Quesnoy. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">During the many childless years that followed her marriage, Margaret of Burgundy accumulated land, power, political experience, and independence. Margaret acted in her husband's stead and on his behalf during his frequent, extended absences and, later, his illnesses. On 16 July 1401, sixteen years after Margaret was married to William II, their only child, Jacqueline, was born in the castle of Le Quesnoy. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In his biographical essay on Margaret of Burgundy, Antheun Janse indicates that Jacqueline was "reserved" for marriage to a French prince by her father when she was not yet two years old. For Philip of Burgundy, the <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/John_the_Fearless/dSCA2apwD8IC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Touraine" target="_blank">match</a> he planned for Jacqueline of Bavaria was part of "a fourfold Franco-Burgundian marriage alliance" that he "arranged" just before his own death. According to the complicated set of proposed matches, Jacqueline was to marry Charles, the youngest son of Charles VI of France.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But this "elaborate scheme" was modified, and instead of four marriages, only three were made. And instead of Charles, Jacqueline was betrothed to his slightly older brother, Jean, duke of Touraine, the match celebrated in Paris on 5 May 1403 (when Jacqueline was two years old and Jean was four) and again in Compiègne on 29 June 1406 (when Jacqueline was five years old and Jean was seven). Just after the formalities, the French queen, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/09/isabeau-of-bavaria-wicked.html" target="_blank">Isabeau of Bavaria</a>, was "persuaded" to allow her son to be taken to be taken back to Le Quesnoy in order to be brought up in Hainaut with Jacqueline so that he would know the lands and titles he would be expected to govern--as the French king's fourth son, his future was assumed to be in the territories his wife would inherit, not in France.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">After the betrothal was celebrated, Jacqueline acquired the title duchess of Touraine. In the mean time, while all these marital alliances were being arranged and then confirmed by the celebrations of the betrothals, a three-year-old Jacqueline had awarded an "official" title, "daughter of Holland," in an effort to secure her place as her father's heir. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In Le Quesnoy, the two children were <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/John_the_Fearless/dSCA2apwD8IC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Touraine" target="_blank">raised and educated together</a>. Given their close relationship, a papal dispensation for their marriage was sought and received on 10 May 1411. On 6 August 1415, when Jacqueline was fourteen, she was married to Jean, duke of Touraine, at The Hague. But fortune quickly changed for this newly married pair--just months later, in December, the French <i>dauphin </i>(heir apparent)<i> </i>died, and Jean became the heir to the French throne.** </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJoamwVMx3g3Tk-Ej_GOvjxBiFBtIZkk5lE_9aYPUmiD6B0f0HpMvvlIh1RUYFss7DUX-RuoMJ1Dt9j5DEYPFkhU-Torjn2LW8IshMUhYk8sJ5XvMUvc_zW8YMFs4DhEyd0grnhBV3YWuJdICrg3gZag-4WLEdQjKdfAKYc56ar7CGxCeW4KBV7Vfbw28/s686/Jacqueline%20from%20book%20of%20hours.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="686" data-original-width="426" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJoamwVMx3g3Tk-Ej_GOvjxBiFBtIZkk5lE_9aYPUmiD6B0f0HpMvvlIh1RUYFss7DUX-RuoMJ1Dt9j5DEYPFkhU-Torjn2LW8IshMUhYk8sJ5XvMUvc_zW8YMFs4DhEyd0grnhBV3YWuJdICrg3gZag-4WLEdQjKdfAKYc56ar7CGxCeW4KBV7Vfbw28/s320/Jacqueline%20from%20book%20of%20hours.JPG" width="199" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/n7/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">miniature</a> from a <br />Book of Hours, <br />showing Jacqueline kneeling<br />before the Virgin Mary</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Even though his daughter was now married to the heir of the French king, William of Bavaria "showed," in Putnam's words, "a far greater preoccupation about his daughter's inheritance than about that of his son-in-law [the <i>dauphin</i>, Jean]." In 1416, William met with Sigismund, the Holy Roman Emperor, seeking his support for Jaqueline's position as his heir. When the emperor declined to promise his support, William called a meeting <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/10/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">at the Hague</a>; there, on 15 August 1416, </div><div style="text-align: justify;"></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">did every noble and each representative of the cities ["Harlaam, Delft, Leyden, Amsterdam, Gouda, Rotterdam, Oudewater, Hoorm, Schiedam, Alkmaar, Dordrecht, and ten smaller places, besides the cities of Zeeland"] stretch out the fingers of one hand and place the other hand on saints' relics while swearing solemnly, each and all, to recognise Jacaqueline as their true sovereign, to aid her against her foes with body and health. . . . </div></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;">The same oath was repeated later in Hainaut. William then traveled to Paris to see both the duke of Burgundy (now John I, Philip II's son) and the French king to make his case.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">But it was all for naught. On 4 April 1417, Jean, son and heir to the king of France, died, leaving Jacqueline a widow at age sixteen. And two months later, on 31 May, her father, William of Bavaria, died. Jacqueline was recognized as countess of Hainaut on 13 June but her right to inherit was not accepted elsewhere in the territories that had belonged to her father, and the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund finally made his position clear--he decided the titles and lands belonged not to Jacqueline but to William's younger brother, John, and then he made sure the new duke of Bavaria married <a href="https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/term/AUTH225943" target="_blank">Elizabeth of Görlitz</a>, who just so happened to be Sigismund's niece . . . </p><div style="text-align: justify;">Another marriage for Jacqueline was quickly arranged--her mother's Burgundian family selected the fourteen-year-old John IV, duke of Brabant (son of Antoine of Burgundy, who was Margaret of Burgundy's brother), a marriage contract agreed to and <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/n69/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">signed</a> on 1 August 1417. The young man (boy?) who was to be Jacqueline's second husband was her first cousin, and thus so closely related to her that a papal dispensation was once again needed. The match was also, interestingly, further complicated because John of Brabant was also Elizabeth of Görlitz's stepson (her first husband had been Antoine of Burgundy!)--how could Jacqueline's Burgundian family have thought this match was a good idea? </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIYzncrWDWQOBtaUsCTnOj5ffEOEiOhWeVf7XEEuj3urJRslsx-rnKKcWRt06-bo7pD70MY2KI_KMey69ofaGEEzOHPWwEvO2l-WF9O9lct8qRVjHb7z1hTE-BowHgGbQFpaf1USMSi0A3wsgIK_SImx_ktNefv9FL0KLrAKnhUzLOOemmR55lB2g-Ay4/s262/Count_John_III_and_Countess_Jacqueline_of_Holland_and_Bavaria.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="262" data-original-width="200" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIYzncrWDWQOBtaUsCTnOj5ffEOEiOhWeVf7XEEuj3urJRslsx-rnKKcWRt06-bo7pD70MY2KI_KMey69ofaGEEzOHPWwEvO2l-WF9O9lct8qRVjHb7z1hTE-BowHgGbQFpaf1USMSi0A3wsgIK_SImx_ktNefv9FL0KLrAKnhUzLOOemmR55lB2g-Ay4/s1600/Count_John_III_and_Countess_Jacqueline_of_Holland_and_Bavaria.jpg" width="200" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The rival claimants: <br />John III and Jacqueline<br />(<a href="http://www.flandrica.be/exhibits/show/en-burgundians/expansion/chronique/" target="_blank">illustration</a> by Hendrick von Hessel,<br /><i>Chronique des comtes de Hollande,</i><br />c. 1415)<br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div><div style="text-align: justify;">Whatever the reasoning of those who decided this match would be an advantageous one, the requisite dispensation was sought and granted in December 1417, but it was revoked the next month, in January 1418, at least in part because of the Emperor Sigismund's objections. Nevertheless, the young widow was married for a second time on 10 March 1418. The emperor <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/48/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">ordered</a> that the couple be immediately separated, and as emperor he declared that all of William II's lands, held as a vassal of the Holy Roman Empire, had been rightfully inherited by William's brother, now John.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">And so, of course, <a href="https://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/vrouwenlexicon/lemmata/data/JacobaVanBeieren" target="_blank">war broke out</a>, with Jacqueline's uncle, now John III, declaring war on her husband. Although Jacqueline's forces won an initial battle againt her uncle's, she would not prevail in her claim to be her father's legitimate heir. In the years that followed, her husband turned over territories to her uncle, truces were made and then unmade, and the legitimacy of her marriage continued to be questioned.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Her uncle was eventually willing to recognize the marriage when further concessions were made, another papal dispensation issued in 1419. But Jacqueline's position became even more precarious when the duke of Burgundy was assassinated and the French <i>dauphin</i>--the younger brother of Jacqueline's first husband--was disinherited. (By the terms of the May 1421 treaty of Troyes--Jacqueline's story is set against the background of the Hundred Years' War.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoKSe_y1SxQh5t2oCgZMfKoP1BC1g19BnMsqfUb8IjejXbitj2-F_RjFOtkLORKgGhSmE6BuP4N-NRBezvKniVwsPlrC1bhvp8DSON8WQ21A8yOYPmCBdHsOd3E0ODr7U14v6wOwR5wYVgXYIrhOyxp6YjFRLOVmYndpBIFi71neyv1EFJ90rW9sea3Cs/s611/16th%20c%20Jacqueline.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="611" data-original-width="380" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoKSe_y1SxQh5t2oCgZMfKoP1BC1g19BnMsqfUb8IjejXbitj2-F_RjFOtkLORKgGhSmE6BuP4N-NRBezvKniVwsPlrC1bhvp8DSON8WQ21A8yOYPmCBdHsOd3E0ODr7U14v6wOwR5wYVgXYIrhOyxp6YjFRLOVmYndpBIFi71neyv1EFJ90rW9sea3Cs/s320/16th%20c%20Jacqueline.JPG" width="199" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A sixteenth-century <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/62/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">print</a><br />depicting Jacqueline</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">In April 1420, in what Ruth Putnam calls her "revolt against marital authority," Jacqueline retreated to Hainaut (which seems to have been the only possession left to her), where she declared her marriage to John of Brabant to be invalid and asked for its annullment. She provided four reasons: she and John of Brabant were first cousins; her first husband was a "blood relation" of her second; her mother was John of Brabant's godmother (meaning she and John were "spiritual" brother and sister); and at the time of their marriage, the papal dispensation allowing their marriage had been revoked. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Less than a year later, in March 1421, Jacqueline of Bavaria left for England, hoping to find support for her cause there. She was welcomed by Henry V (who had gained the French throne with the signing of the treaty of Troyes). He provided a monthly grant for her support, and she was a godmother for the English king's heir, son of Henry V and Catherine of Valois.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And Jacqueline found more than support at the English court--she found a third husband, even though she would discover that getting rid of her second would a bit of a problem. Her proposed new husband was the king's brother, Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, a scholar, a soldier, and a statesman. She doubtless saw in him a husband who would fight for her claims; he doubtless saw in her a wife who would bring him valuable territories and titles (in Putnam's <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/98/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">words</a>, "Jacqueline's heritage was a tempting bait enticing him to the continent.")</div></div><div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">While the legality of Jacqueline's marriage to her second husband had been questioned, declared legal and illegal by various parties for their own interests, it was now declared valid by those whose interests were best served by keeping Jacqueline of Bavaria from allying herself to Humphrey, duke of Gloucester. Her uncle, now <i>de facto </i>duke of Bavaria, certainly did not want his niece to marry a powerful man who could defend her claims, her husband (or not-husband) John of Brabant did not want to give up his "wife" and her claims, and the new duke of Burgundy, Philip III, had designs of his own on her territories. And the English king--well, Burgundy was Henry V's ally in the Hundred Years' War. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for Jacqueline, she married her third husband anyway. After the unexpected death of Henry V in 1422, Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, became one of the new king's guardians, and <a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/96/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">at some point</a> in late 1422 or early 1423, he and Jacqueline married--in late October there was a report in Hainaut that Jacqueline had not only married Humphrey of Gloucester but was already pregnant, and a petition to him in March 1423 addressed him as "Duc de Gloucestre, Comte de Hanau, Hollande, and Zeellande." (Although she was pregnant in late 1422, Jacqueline subsequently suffered a miscarriage.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">At first, the two were willing to submit the question of the validity of their marriage and Jacqueline's claims to her inheritance to the judgment of Philip III of Burgundy, her rejected second husband even agreeing to giving up his claims in concession for a life interest in Hainaut. But the many parties ultimately could not come to satisfactory terms. With her husband--and an army--Jacqueline returned to Hainaut in the fall of 1424. In November they were welcomed into Mons, the capital. On 5 December 1424, Humphrey of Gloucester was recognized as count of Hainaut. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I wish I could say Jacqueline had a happy ending with Humphrey, duke of Gloucester and now count of Hainaut, but she did not. Although her uncle, John III, died on 6 January 1425, Jacqueline's rejected husband, John of Brabant, joined forces with the Philip III of Burgundy. In February, the pope issued a decision on Jacqueline's marriage to Gloucester--it was declared invalid, and the two were ordered to separate. Although they did not do so immediately, Humphrey of Gloucester left for England in early April, leaving his wife (or "wife") behind. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By June, the city of Mons surrendered after a brief siege. A treaty between the duke of Burgundy and John of Brabant gave Hainaut to Jacqueline's "husband," while Jacqueline herself was handed over to Philip III of Burgundy for her "protection." She was sent to Ghent, where she was held, for her protection of course, in the old fortress of Grafenstein. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Humphrey of Gloucester didn't quite abandon all hope of gaining Jacqueline's territories, at least not at first. As for Jacqueline, in August she managed to escape from her imprisonment, and by September, Gloucester learned that she was in Gouda. She raised forces from among her supporters, winning a minor skirmish or two in the first part of October. For his part, the duke of Gloucester promised "<a href="https://archive.org/details/mediaevalprinces01putn/page/156/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">speedy aid</a>." The duke of Burgundy was on the lookout for the arrival of the rumored English troops--a small fleet of ships eventually made landing, its fighters winning a small victory. The English joined up with Jacqueline's supporters, but they were defeated on 13 January 1426 at the battle of Brouwershaven.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Jacqueline continued to resist the forces of Philip III. When John IV of Brabant, her second husband, died on 17 April 1427--he was just twenty-three years old--his claims to Holland, Zeeland, and Hainaut, as Jacqueline's husband, did not pass to Jacqueline, however. John had made the duke of Burgundy his heir. (Brabant was inherited by his brother.) And even though his death made Jacqueline an unmarried woman, the pope once again ruled that her marriage to Humphrey of Gloucester was invalid. On 9 January 1428 the pope reaffirmed the validity of her marriage to John of Brabant and declared any subsequent marriage "of no force or moment" (<i>nullius roboris vel momenti</i>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Jacqueline continued to appeal to England, but no aid was forthcoming--and, by this point, Humphrey of Gloucester had taken one of Jacqueline's English waiting women, Eleanor Cobham, as his mistress--he married her after the January 1428 papal decree that his marriage to Jacqueline of Bavaria hadn't really been a marriage.*** By July, Jacqueline was forced into a truce with the duke of Burgundy. She was able to maintain her title of countess of Holland, Zeeland, and Hainaut, but that's it. She had to make Philip III, duke of Burgundy her heir, if she died childless, and any future marriage would be subject to his approval.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLruOmBNB7eR3TWsjT7qn0P-kTHMg0zVHImEAP0pHwBKtUNnSjVbl5Nuj5GdkmZuYX46ngisGGyVnpUy1hCOROCyQCJmZi-HVwFSgsPjXdAQdw1FBYjm9z0ZjEq1uhonLd8ZT44TUQ7lDVv5wKnrn2FZLvCubHJGdlWFGEPv_E2jqaA29x4B-K5ttL6Qs/s1448/Jacqueline%20Jan_van_Eyck_097.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1448" data-original-width="1066" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLruOmBNB7eR3TWsjT7qn0P-kTHMg0zVHImEAP0pHwBKtUNnSjVbl5Nuj5GdkmZuYX46ngisGGyVnpUy1hCOROCyQCJmZi-HVwFSgsPjXdAQdw1FBYjm9z0ZjEq1uhonLd8ZT44TUQ7lDVv5wKnrn2FZLvCubHJGdlWFGEPv_E2jqaA29x4B-K5ttL6Qs/s320/Jacqueline%20Jan_van_Eyck_097.jpg" width="236" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Portrait of Jacqueline of Bavaria,<br /><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jan_van_Eyck_097.jpg" target="_blank">attributed to</a> Jan van Eyck</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">But that still wasn't enough. On 12 April 1433, her financial situation completely impossible, she was compelled to relinquish her titles and transfer the counties to Burgundy. She was left with a few manors and her father's Oostervant for support. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Despite all this, Jacqueline of Bavaria married again. In 1434, she married Frank van Borselen, a nobleman from Zeeland who had been charged with managing her counties of Zeeland and Holland. When he had resisted turning over some of Jacqueline's assets to the duke of Burguncy, who had appointed him, Frank van Borselen had been arrested--and his arrest seems to have precipitated Jacqueline's April 1433 renunciation of her rights. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">This seems to have been a match made for love, but it did not last long. Jacqueline of Bavaria--once an heiress, once a countess, once a duchess, once a prisoner, and now something of an exile--died on 8 October 1436 at Teylingen Castle (in Voorhout). All this and she was just thirty-five years old. Her fourth and final husband was with her at the time of her death, as was her mother, Margaret of Burgundy.**** </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">Unlike many of the women whose stories I have included in this blog, there is a great deal written about Jacqueline of Bavaria, although much of it is in Dutch. A Google search will lead you to many resources. I've linked you here to the wonderful biography in English by Ruth Putnam, who includes many transcriptions of original documentary sources into her story of Jacqueline's life. In addition, the essays published online by the Huygens Institute to which I've linked here are also excellent and accessible. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for me, I first learned about Jacqueline of Bavaria while reading Lauren Johnson's <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-King-Life-Death-Henry/dp/1643131281/ref=sr_1_8?crid=12DYZL8W7BOFA&keywords=shadow+king&qid=1696799040&sprefix=shadow+ki%2Caps%2C421&sr=8-8" target="_blank">The Shadow King: The Life and Death of Henry VI</a>. </i>(Which I was reading to see her interpretation of Henry VI's wife, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/03/margaret-of-anjou-tigers-heart-wrapped.html" target="_blank">Margaret of Anjou</a>.) Johnson paints a very sympathetic portrait of Jacqueline, providing more information about her experienes in England and with Humphrey of Gloucester than I could include here. She regards Jacqueline as determined and courageous but lacking in "political shrewdness," which may well be true. It might be argued, however, that she was politially shrewd but, forced to make choices when all the options were horrible, shrewdness wasn't enough when dealing with so many ambitious, self-interested men who were interested only in their own power . . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*Jacqueline was William's only legitimate child, but he had <a href="https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willem_VI_van_Holland" target="_blank">at least three</a> illegitimate children, including two sons.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">**As an interesting note, the marriage of the <i>dauphin</i> Louis to Margaret of Nevers (the granddaughter of Philip II of Burgundy and thus the niece of Margaret of Burgundy) was one of those in that "fourfold Franco-Burgundian alliance." Margaret of Nevers had first been betrothed to the <i>dauphin</i> Charles, the eldest son of King Charles VI and Isabeau of Bavaria, but when the dauphin died in 1401, she was then matched with the new dauphin, Louis. When Louis died in 1415, the widowed <i>madame la dauphine </i>returned to Burgundy. She eventually married Arthur III of Richmond (very briefly duke of Brittany), a marriage she resisted because it was a step down (or two or three or more) after having been <i>dauphine </i>of France. But married she was, in 1423. She died, childless, in 1442. Arthur of Richmond went on to marry twice more, but neither of his subsequent wives bore any children.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">***Eleanor Cobham came to an unfortunate end. In 1442 she was accused of witchcraft and convicted--as part of her punishment, she was forced to do public penance, divorced from her husband, and sentenced to life imprisonment. She died, still in prison, in 1452. Humphrey of Gloucester "retired" from public life after Cobham was accused of witchcraft, but he was arrested for treason on 20 February 1447--he died three days later. <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">****Margaret of Burgundy would die at Le Quesnoy on 8 March 1441. Throughout her daughter's life, she <a href="https://resources.huygens.knaw.nl/vrouwenlexicon/lemmata/data/MargarethaVanBourgondie" target="_blank">supported her cause</a>. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br />Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-67463158905211861252023-09-26T00:00:01.793-07:002023-09-26T09:32:33.939-07:00Joanna of Flanders Becomes "Jeanne la Flamme": "the Heart of a Lion"<h3 style="text-align: left;">Joanna of Flanders, countess of Montfort and duchess of Brittany, sort of (death of her husband at Hennebont Castle, 26 September 1345)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Born late in the thirteenth century, probably about the year 1295, Joanna of Flanders was the daughter of Louis de Dampierre, the "<a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">largely unsuccessful count of Nevers</a>," a man who was "a disaster in most of his endeavors." Among those disasters was his "notoriously bad marriage" to Joanna's mother, Jeanne of Rethel, who had become countess of Rethel in her own right as her father's sole heir. </div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSdwVOF9tobL522RVpUy2kpXmMk4w91cqmO0_INUIpKzcAhDKjrXfJnqKXG1oyaaXRVWr21Yd4YD-nVeUoqhvc87YLSmt49NsKov0Rj-xYrgfYcK7VPO-C_UAvVrOiKxMu-N8SSgkhqDpswGOh-emC8wH69Q3rZSWCQhP5kJUqYq_6PPu_D3HkVsdUmIg/s898/318px-Jeanne_flamme.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="898" data-original-width="318" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgSdwVOF9tobL522RVpUy2kpXmMk4w91cqmO0_INUIpKzcAhDKjrXfJnqKXG1oyaaXRVWr21Yd4YD-nVeUoqhvc87YLSmt49NsKov0Rj-xYrgfYcK7VPO-C_UAvVrOiKxMu-N8SSgkhqDpswGOh-emC8wH69Q3rZSWCQhP5kJUqYq_6PPu_D3HkVsdUmIg/w141-h400/318px-Jeanne_flamme.jpg" width="141" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption"><div style="text-align: center;">Jeanne Malivel's</div><div style="text-align: center;">1922 <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jeanne_flamme.jpg" target="_blank">woodcut</a>,</div><div style="text-align: center;">in Jeanne Coroller-Danio's</div><div style="text-align: center;"><i>Histoire de notre Bretagne</i></div><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Although Joanna's name is almost always given as Joanna (or Jeanne) of <i>Flanders</i>, historian Julie Sharpy notes that the girl spent her childhood in France: "there is no reason to believe that she had ever
seen Flanders," much less lived there. She was instead raised in the French county of Nevers, which her father had inherited from his mother, Yolande II, countess of Nevers (with Louis' marriage to Jeanne, countess of Rethel, he had become count of Rethel, also in France). Along with her brother, Joanna also spent time at the French royal court of Philip IV.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div>In 1311, as conflict broke out between the king of France and Louis' father, Robert III, duke of Flanders, Louis supported his father, and although war was avoided, his support for his father rather than the French king caused Louis of Nevers irreparable damage. </div><div><br /></div><div>In the next year, 1312, when Joanna was about fourteen years old, Louis decided to return to Flanders and attempted to take his children with him. But his wife protested, and he was arrested, his two children transferred to the custody of the French king. Louis was imprisoned, escaped, and fled to Flanders, and it seems as if he never saw his wife or children again. </div><div><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div>By the terms of the 1320 peace settlement between France and Flanders, the count of Flanders named his grandson, rather than his son, as his heir. The ties between Flanders and France were further strengthened with with his marriage to Margaret, King Philip V's daughter. In the event, however, Louis of Nevers died in July 1329, just months before his father died, and Joanna's brother succeeded his grandfather as count of Flanders without any dispute about his father's right to do so. </div><div><br /></div><div>Having been raised in France--and having never been in Flanders--the new count followed his own pro-French agenda, continuing the very policies that had caused his father so many problems. Meanwhile, Joanna of Flanders disappears from the historical record. She only reappears when she is some thirty years old. </div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqaFDrqS6nRATnYdEcNV-p7FwUR3HZ2jEgZdWYalQgDo2mCnFg0i1NiSWYc7CH_-_Xrsk88wYb39FuklRGl2BLbL8GjhP_qVxkCUqRZHe_cFDZM-DhLY8ELd8t3qbsolS-bZKbWKw6WXU8zeNe40Ge2mPU_9mNqSkahfpYa_7OP1ZW5mByzKNiszDajsY/s1080/927px-Jan_z_Montfortu.gif" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="927" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqaFDrqS6nRATnYdEcNV-p7FwUR3HZ2jEgZdWYalQgDo2mCnFg0i1NiSWYc7CH_-_Xrsk88wYb39FuklRGl2BLbL8GjhP_qVxkCUqRZHe_cFDZM-DhLY8ELd8t3qbsolS-bZKbWKw6WXU8zeNe40Ge2mPU_9mNqSkahfpYa_7OP1ZW5mByzKNiszDajsY/s320/927px-Jan_z_Montfortu.gif" width="275" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jeanne of Flanders and her husband, <br />entering Nantes in 1341,<br />an illustration from Jean Froissart's<br /> <i><a href="https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b84386043/f197.item" target="_blank">Chroniques</a> </i>(BnF 2643, fol. 87r)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In a ceremony performed at Cathédrale de Notre Dame de Chartres on 14 May 1329, in the presence of the French king (now Philip VI, who began his reign in 1328), Joanna of Flanders is married to John de Montfort, the son of Arthur II, duke of Brittany, and his second wife, Yolande of Dreux. (As an interesting note: Yolande's first husband had been Alexander III of Scotland, so for the eight months she was married before he died, she had been queen of Scotland.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Joanna's new husband inherited his title, count of Montfort-l'Amaury, from his mother, and his marriage to Joanna seems to have been a way to improve his financial and political situation--she was the sister of the count of Flanders, and her brother had promised him a considerable dowry from the counties of Nevers and Rethel. (For the details of the ceremony and this dowry, click <a href="https://archive.org/details/b30455194_0001/page/306/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">here</a>.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But the dowry Joanna's brother promised was not paid, and the legal wrangling over the count of Flanders's failure to pay his sister's dowry would last for more than three decades, eventually outlasting all of them--Joanna, her husband, and her brother.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">John de Montfort's dispute with Flanders over his wife's unpaid dowry was a decade old by time Joanna gave birth to her first child, a son, named John, in 1339. A second child, this time a daughter, Joan, was born in 1341. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It was at this point that the couple was plunged into yet another family conflict, now about John de Montfort's inheritance--or potential inheritance--from his father. After the death of Arthur II in 1312, he had been succeeded by his eldest son, John de Montfort's half brother who, confusingly, was also named John. But despite having been married three times, John III, duke of Brittany, died childless on 30 April 1341--and, as historian Sabine Baring-Gould writes, "No sooner was he dead than an explosion ensued."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">John III had hated his father's second wife (John de Montfort's mother) and had spent many years trying to have his father's second marriage posthumously annulled and his half siblings rendered illegitimate. His preferred heir was Jeanne de Penthièvre, his niece, the daughter of his younger brother, Guy, who had died in 1331. In 1340, however, John III seems to have accepted the succession of his half brother and named John de Montfort as his heir in his will. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But the "rights" to succession in Brittany in this instance were unclear. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The question was whose <a href="https://archive.org/details/leguay-martin-fastes-et-malheurs-de-la-bretagne-ducale/page/98/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">claim took precedence</a>? Arthur II of Brittany had had three sons by his first wife, but when John III died, the only surviving heir was Guy's daughter, Jeanne de Penthièvre. Yet Arthur II of Brittany had had another son, John de Montfort, by his second wife, as we have seen. So, could a daughter--in this case, Guy's daughter--inherit her father's rights of succession? That is, did John III's younger brother, Guy, have a right of succession that could be passed to his daughter, Jeanne de Penthièvre? Or did the succession belong to the next eldest male heir in the line? That is, did John de Montfort, as the only surviving son of Arthur II, have a right of succession? With John III leaving no direct male heir, who has the better claim: his half brother or his niece? </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The War of the Breton succession, 1341 to 1365, was fought to resolve this question. It became part of a larger conflict, the Hundred Years' War, which also involved rival claimants to an inheritance, in this case the French throne. The rival claimants to the duchy of Brittany were supported by the king of England and the king of France, interested parties in the succession in Brittany. But the claimants they supported in Brittany were at odds with the claims they made in their own dispute over the legitimate succession to the French crown, one of the issues that had precipitated the conflict now known as the Hundred Years' War.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So: the king of England, Edward III, made his claim to the French throne through a female line--but he supported John de Montfort when it came to who should inherit Brittany. And the king of France, Philip VI, who had come to the throne by putting aside the claims of a daughter in favor of those of a younger son--well, he supported Jeanne de Penthièvre.* (For all of this, see Jean-Pierre Leguay and Hervé Martin's <i>Fastes et malheurs de la Bretagne ducale 1213–1532</i>; click <a href="https://archive.org/details/leguay-martin-fastes-et-malheurs-de-la-bretagne-ducale/page/98/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">here</a>.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Further complicating an already complicated situation, John de Montfort's grandmother, Beatrice of England, was the daughter of King Henry III of England, making John de Montfort and Edward III cousins. And as for Jeanne de Penthièvre's husband--the mother of Charles of Blois was, as we have seen, Margaret of Valois, the French king's sister. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">All of this is an incredibly long and complicated background to the events of 1341, when Jeanne, or Joanna, of Flanders, became Jeanne, or Joanna, <i>la flamme</i>, "the fire." What transformed her, catapulting her from relative obscurity to notoriety?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">At first, John de Montfort's in Brittany succession seemed assured, and the couple entered Nantes, the capital of the duchy, in 1341. As the chronicler Jean Froissart <a href="https://archive.org/details/b24872799_0001/page/86/mode/2up?q=Montfort&view=theater" target="_blank">writes</a>, "he was received as their lord, as being the next relation to the duke just departed." Summoning "all the barons and nobles of Brittany" and the "councils of the great towns," John de Montfort invited them to "do their fealty and homage" to him "as their true lord." And, according to Froissart, "it was done." For good measure, Montfort seized the treasury at Limoges. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">To secure his title, Montfort <a href="https://archive.org/details/b24872799_0001/page/89/mode/1up?q=Montfort&view=theater" target="_blank">moved quickly</a>: "by violent or gentle means," he aimed to "subdue his enemies." He took Brest, Arras, and Rennes before moving on to the town of Hennebont, where he was advised that he could lay seige to the castle "a whole year" and still not take it "by dint of force"--and so he captured it by means of a ruse, at least according to the version of the story that Froissart tells. Although modern historians have noted that Froissart's geography and chronology are confused, Montfort did take control in Brittany. Or most of it.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgECt6-FZoYu75f2USkUa_6f6oA2SeX3B1koN_81x_XJwERTElBh8xRH3WZCuuY5TI85wJ2nesxg6k4OA3BXgiATbyvpJRIToJtgsafB3ZyiDZaBNWvAZf1MKPxlr6zzgqTuIAxBMlF0PIu2uFT4JBkJR8BB_KHvkiFUCEYR7fXAgHVRwFDSNnKS2Mvd4M/s695/Jeanne%20la%20flamme.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="468" data-original-width="695" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgECt6-FZoYu75f2USkUa_6f6oA2SeX3B1koN_81x_XJwERTElBh8xRH3WZCuuY5TI85wJ2nesxg6k4OA3BXgiATbyvpJRIToJtgsafB3ZyiDZaBNWvAZf1MKPxlr6zzgqTuIAxBMlF0PIu2uFT4JBkJR8BB_KHvkiFUCEYR7fXAgHVRwFDSNnKS2Mvd4M/s320/Jeanne%20la%20flamme.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Jeanne la Flamme" defending her castle,<br />illumination from Jean Froissart's <i><a href="https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b60005702/f176.item" target="_blank">Les Croniques</a>.<br /></i>((BnF 2663, fol. 87v)<br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Because not all of Brittany had accepted John de Montfort's claim to the title, and while Montfort sought help from Edward III to enforce his claim, at this point being awarded the title earl of Richmond, Charles of Blois appealed his claim to Brittany, in the right of his wife, to Philip VI, to whom he paid homage. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In August 1341, the two claimants appeared before the parliament of France to make their case--on 7 September, a decision was rendered in favor of Chales of Blois. But by the time the judgement was issued, John de Montfort had fled back to Brittany.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By September of 1341, Charles of Blois had amassed a large army; in October, he laid seige to a chateau at Champtoceaux. Attempting to come overcome Charles and his besieging forces, John de Montfort was defeated. He fled to Nantes, but he was forced to surrender <a href="https://archive.org/details/leguay-martin-fastes-et-malheurs-de-la-bretagne-ducale/page/102/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">after fifteen days</a>, on 2 November. In December, he was taken to Paris under safe conduct, but when he refused to give up his claims to Brittany, he was imprisoned in the Louvre. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Rather than accepting her husband's defeat, Joanna of Flanders assumed the title duchess of Brittany and resumed the fight--she sent for assistance to Edward III in England, and according to the chronicler Jean le Bel, she <a href="https://archive.org/details/le-bel-chronique-de-jean-le-bel-v-1/page/302/mode/1up?q=Montfort" target="_blank">suggested a marriage</a> between her son and one of the the English king's daughters. Meanwhile, she began preparing to defend herself--and Brittany. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Charles of Blois captured Rennes in May 1342 and began his march to Hennebont, where Joanna had withdrawn, preparing for the castle's defense. The chronicler Jean le Bel <a href="https://archive.org/details/le-bel-chronique-de-jean-le-bel-v-1/page/308/mode/1up?q=Montfort" target="_blank">described</a> her actions during the fight: “the valiant countess was armed and rode a great courser from street to street," and while she rode, she was "summoning everyone" to defend the city. Nor was she the only woman to act--she commanded "all the women of the town," regardless of class, to "carry stones and pots full of quicklime to the walls and throw them at their attackers." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzgFNvC04N0EDtFrOIO3vptwiTf9vTuFEnjAs-Gt5A7cS66dG0TgJoJ9Wr3xLODMycORv6-HIxDxov4bh4RF1VdvbTeMWuGOny34w1i4hvJD4b4rb7AKAGpNjITCiFZYCHutR-2_voAlwl3vzpjbfTQGg-csf7Ez7YhO1qFOeuFRUbWXE32_JRfqvOElU/s1200/Hennebont_remparts_dpt_Morbihan_DSC_0020.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="718" data-original-width="1200" height="191" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzgFNvC04N0EDtFrOIO3vptwiTf9vTuFEnjAs-Gt5A7cS66dG0TgJoJ9Wr3xLODMycORv6-HIxDxov4bh4RF1VdvbTeMWuGOny34w1i4hvJD4b4rb7AKAGpNjITCiFZYCHutR-2_voAlwl3vzpjbfTQGg-csf7Ez7YhO1qFOeuFRUbWXE32_JRfqvOElU/s320/Hennebont_remparts_dpt_Morbihan_DSC_0020.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hennebont_remparts_dpt_Morbihan_DSC_0020.JPG" target="_blank">ramparts</a> of Henebont Castle</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">And then, "mounting the towers" and surveying the battle below, "the valiant countess" once again mounted her courser; now "fully armed," she led three hundred men at arms straight into the enemy's camp, where they killed the defenders that had been left behind as guards and set everything on fire.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Seeing no way to safely re-enter the castle, Joanna of Flanders took off, riding to her castle of Brayt, where she was well received. Meanwhile, the besiegers mocked the inhabitants of Hennebont, telling them that their countess was lost and that they wouldn't see her (if my translastion is correct, they <a href="https://archive.org/details/le-bel-chronique-de-jean-le-bel-v-1/page/310/mode/1up?q=Montfort" target="_blank">actually say</a> that they won't see her again in one piece).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But the besieged inhabitants of Hennebont did see their "valiant countess" again--just <a href="https://archive.org/details/le-bel-chronique-de-jean-le-bel-v-1/page/311/mode/1up?q=Montfort">five days later,</a> she was back, accompanied by a well-armed force. She managed to re-enter the city, her return saluted by trumpets, drums, "and other instruments." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">After her triumphant return, the situation becomes more dire. "Twelve great siege engines" were brought to lay waste to the city and the castle, and the defenders began to waver in their resistance. The "valiant countess," however, did not lose heart. She encouraged the town's defenders, "praying, on the honor of Our Lady," that they not do anything rash, asserting her own certainty that help would arrive within three days.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The suffering inhabitants of the besieged city were not so sure. Just as they were about to surrender, submitting themselves to the besieging forces of Charles of Blois, Joanna looked "from out of the castle's windows." "I see the relief that I have coming that I have for so long desired," she <a href="https://archive.org/details/le-bel-chronique-de-jean-le-bel-v-1/page/315/mode/1up?q=Montfort" target="_blank">cried out</a>. It was an English fleet, sent by Edward III to her aid, arriving in August 1342.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbcKEGz4mdpCLZKOq0Q3ZBq1WMx8O5OkGSDxRKZMTMUipkU3d2ozEP-ijGG5c-H8wvLl7c2Zz4IsdBk13TyS7utVMcJ6p3uuSFbWoevjOTBCFp83jba08Au_VXeyoOY_27YHbwsbIT--5hJ1uOklkdHvEw8gJt3Vj4ypcg9SOWri6mOt7OV6KYdfZ7HBU/s597/another%20Joanne%20of%20Flanders.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="597" data-original-width="585" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbcKEGz4mdpCLZKOq0Q3ZBq1WMx8O5OkGSDxRKZMTMUipkU3d2ozEP-ijGG5c-H8wvLl7c2Zz4IsdBk13TyS7utVMcJ6p3uuSFbWoevjOTBCFp83jba08Au_VXeyoOY_27YHbwsbIT--5hJ1uOklkdHvEw8gJt3Vj4ypcg9SOWri6mOt7OV6KYdfZ7HBU/s320/another%20Joanne%20of%20Flanders.JPG" width="314" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Joanna of Flanders greets the fleet <br />sent from Edward III to Hennebont;<br />image from Jean de Wavrin's fifteenth-century<br /><i style="text-align: left;"><a href="https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10528611j/f131.item#">Anciennes chroniques d'Angleterre</a> </i><br style="text-align: left;" /><span style="text-align: left;">(BnF 76, fol. 61r)</span><br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Still, the War of the Breton Succession continued. During a period of truce, Joanna of Flanders traveled to England, seeking additional aid from Edward III. He provided her with men of arms and archers, but while returning to Brittany, the English ships--with the "valiant countess" on board one of them--were attacked by allies of Charles of Blois. Joanna of Flanders fought back. As Froissart wrote, she had "the courage of a man and the heart of a lion"; "equal to a man," <a href="https://archive.org/details/b24872799_0001/page/118/mode/1up?q=Montfort&view=theater" target="_blank">she</a> "combated bravely" with "a rusty sharp sword in her hand." (Although modern historians have questioned whether this sea battle ever occurred, Sharpy <a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">writes</a> that, "because of the greatness of Joan of Flanders it was not out of the realm of possibility.")</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On landing, her forces re-took Vannes, put the city of Rennes under siege, and attempted the relief of Hennebont. But with the English fighters now in Brittany, Joanna of Flanders's remarkable military leadership was done. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Ater the death of Charles of Blois, the claims of Joan of Penthièvre to Brittany collapsed, and with neither the French nor the English able to secure a military victory, a truce was concluded. John de Montfort became duke of Brittany. He was finally released from his imprisonment, and seemed to have been under a kind of house arrest. But he escaped to England, paid homage to Edward III, and placed his children's guardianship in the Englisn king's hands on 20 May 1345. He returned to Brittany but died at Hennebont just months later, on 26 September 1345.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Joanna of Flanders, meanwhile, had been removed from the picture. After finalizing the truce with France on 19 January 1343, Edward III had sailed back to England a month later, on 22 February. When he left, he took with him Joanna of Flanders and her two children. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The crossing was difficult, the king's ship arriving on 2 March. Once in England, Joanna of Flanders was "<a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">abruptly pmoved</a>" to Tickhill Castle in south Yorkshire in October 1343 by the king's order. Her children, meanwhile, were removed from her custody in August, ultimately placed into the care of the king's wife, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/03/philippa-of-hainault-productive-and.html" target="_blank">Philippa of Hainault</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCANDgnoMQEDKP2F8aoMa0OBTQ70yyONRNsIqPCPKSfdjGJzdgFF376dqOf-gqr9BrlpGmuL8p7YVSc6ApbMhZxOGrHx4-6oQLQ7AoAp2cy-gWbIqTdNR1RrwUPPw0WG-Btf-z6gj5U5pm4xEvvrb6k-tZ8t6fzvuqdmDxSAwz12cOcvMnLpOw5mO-RXE/s4053/vm1-46.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2700" data-original-width="4053" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCANDgnoMQEDKP2F8aoMa0OBTQ70yyONRNsIqPCPKSfdjGJzdgFF376dqOf-gqr9BrlpGmuL8p7YVSc6ApbMhZxOGrHx4-6oQLQ7AoAp2cy-gWbIqTdNR1RrwUPPw0WG-Btf-z6gj5U5pm4xEvvrb6k-tZ8t6fzvuqdmDxSAwz12cOcvMnLpOw5mO-RXE/s320/vm1-46.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A sixteenth-century <a href="https://scalar.missouri.edu/vm/vol1plate46-tickhill-castle" target="_blank">print</a> of Tickhill Castle,<br />where Joanna of Flanders spent decades</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">What had happened to Joanna of Flanders? Why was she made to disappear? Indeed, she remained largely out of sight for the next thirty years, under the guardianship of one man or another, until her death. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The answer has largely been that she went mad--a false narrative that, as we have seen in many entries in this blog, is a commonplace excuse.. "She's just crazy" has always been a way to eliminate an inconvenient woman. (The most <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/11/juana-of-castile-not-her-mothers-daugher.html" target="_blank">well-known example</a> of this is Juana of Castile, "la loca," but insanity is <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/09/sophia-dorothea-of-celle-forced.html" target="_blank">just one way</a> to get rid of royal and aristocratic women.) Even in the twentieth century, Edward III's biographers have been content with this explanation--in his 1983 <i>King Edward III</i>, Michael Packe <a href="https://archive.org/details/kingedwardiii00pack/page/130/mode/1up?q=swamped" target="_blank">declares</a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"> that Joanna's "recent energies had swamped her reason." Thirty years later, Ian Mortimer made the same <a href="https://archive.org/details/perfectkinglifeo0000mort/page/219/mode/1up?q=lion-hearted" target="_blank">slighting reference</a> to the fate of Joanna of Flanders: Montfort's "lion-hearted wife had gone mad," he says (<i>The Perfect King: The Life of Edward III, Father of the English Nation</i>). In <i>Edward III </i>(2011), W. M. Ormrod is less explicit but seems to come to a similar conclusion, <a href="https://archive.org/details/edwardiii0000ormr/page/253/mode/1up" target="_blank">indicating</a> that Joanna of Flanders's lived out the rest of her life "in the obscurity of various provincial royal castles" having been "exhausted by her efforts on behalf of her absent husband."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But as Julie Sarpy argues, first in her 2016 <a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">Ph.D. dissertation</a>, "Keeping Rapunzel: The Mysterious Guardianship of Joan of Flanders the Case for Feudal Constraint [sic]" and in <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Joanna-Flanders-Heroine-Julie-Sarpy/dp/1445688549/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3C3EUEUP9XQPK&keywords=Joanna+of+Flanders&qid=1695745494&sprefix=joanna+of+flanders%2Caps%2C295&sr=8-1" target="_blank">her 2019</a> <i>Joanna of Flanders: Heroine and Exile</i>, origins of the story of her madness can be traced to a nineteenth-century historian, Arthur Le Moyne de La Borderie, and his massive three-volume <i>Histoire de Bretagne</i>. With no contemporary evidence to support his conclusion, he nevertheless proclaimed, “. . . Jeanne de Flandre était devenue folle!”</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And so it all began. As Sarpy documents in great detail, there is no evidence at all for the madness of Joanna of Flanders. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Painstakingly examining all the contemporary records, Sarpy finds that, as late as 1346, Joanna of Flanders is still accounting for the money for her expenses, and she still retained her household. But it is also clear that she is being held inTtickhill "under order" <a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">and that</a> her "guardianship was an unlawful action by a king seeking willfully to detain her." Her liberty was "a liability" for him--Edward III "needed her out of the way, and as he was king, no
one challenged him."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The English king's motives were financial--control of the finances of Richmond, for example--as well as political and military, part of <a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">his</a> "broader foreign policy aims" in France. Rather than having succumbed to madness, Joanna of Flanders was a political prisoner. (Edward III's father, Edward II, and his grandfather, Edward III, had both gotten rid of dangerous women by imprisoning them--click <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/09/sophia-dorothea-of-celle-forced.html" target="_blank">here</a> and scroll down.) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div>While the circumstances of her life at Tickhill seem to have been comfortable, befitting her status, Joaana did <a href="https://uh-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/9a18feae-cd81-4310-a7eb-b04e75961613/content" target="_blank">attempt</a> to "escape" in 1347, though whether she left Tickhill willingly or was abducted isn't clear--she was captured and returned. She was ultimately moved to Chester Castle, where on 16 July 1360, she met with her son, John, now duke of Brittany--it was the first time the two had seen one another for seventeen years. They made a pilgrimage to Walsingham the following summer.</div><div><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwBvyzluVBxLj656h1s_euccciFInhydE0aWdFVRLD5zL1kfu9T9QtQ30Zg56YUhX1AHrdbhoSzKjRiJAa4oiZTZ80QaMbz0h8VxMah3a8MvwYWYYq12YyxAhWfB7hjLE9ZUAouhaKuCOTmaHRHcQjJEjPAd3rc5LmCbyp4DUcoCuDKw8AS86AAzGNrJA/s479/Tickhill_Castle_-_geograph.org.uk_-_297181_cropped.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="340" data-original-width="479" height="227" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwBvyzluVBxLj656h1s_euccciFInhydE0aWdFVRLD5zL1kfu9T9QtQ30Zg56YUhX1AHrdbhoSzKjRiJAa4oiZTZ80QaMbz0h8VxMah3a8MvwYWYYq12YyxAhWfB7hjLE9ZUAouhaKuCOTmaHRHcQjJEjPAd3rc5LmCbyp4DUcoCuDKw8AS86AAzGNrJA/s320/Tickhill_Castle_-_geograph.org.uk_-_297181_cropped.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tickhill_Castle_-_geograph.org.uk_-_297181_cropped.jpg" target="_blank">surviving gatehouse</a> of Tickhill Castle</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div>She seems to have been returned to Tickhill Castle, but by 1371, she was being held in High Peak Castle (Derbyshire).</div><div><br /></div><div>She is last mentioned in official records on 14 February 1374, when a payment was made to her custodian. Since no other reference is made to her--and no more payments were recorded on her behalf—she likely died soon thereafter. She would have been in her late seventies.</div><div><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Joanna's son eventually succeeded as John IV, duke of Brittany, first as a minor under the control of Edward III but after 1364, in his own right. He struggled to break free of English influence, however, at one point even forced into exile in England, but for the last decade of his life, he ruled in peace (he died in 1399). He was married in 1361 to Mary of England, Edward III's daughter, but she died just months after their marriage. He was then married to another English bride, Joan Holland, in 1366, but the two had no children before her death in 1384. John's third wife was Joan of Navarre, whom he married in 1386--the couple had a whole bunch of children, including John (b. 1389), who succeeded his father as John V, duke of Brittany, and Arthur, who succeeded two nephews, sons of his elder brother John, as duke of Brittany. (As Arthur III, he was duke from September 1457 to December 1458.) And, by the way, Joan of Navarre, duchess of Brittany, widowed in 1389, became queen of England in 1403 when she married King Henry IV.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for Joanna's daughter, Joan, she remained in England. She married Ralph Basset, third baron Basset of Drayton c. 1380, when she was thirty-nine years old, and she was widowed in 1390. She died on 8 November 1402.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you've read this far, sorry. I got quite involved in the life of Joanna of Flanders! And if you've read this far, you may be interested in the story of <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2023/09/constance-duchess-of-brittany-and.html" target="_blank">Constance, duchess of Brittany and countess of Richmond</a> for a very similar story, played out a hundred hears earlier.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*When Philip IV of France died in 1314, he was followed on the throne by his son, Louis X. When Louis died in 1316, he was survived by a four-year-old daughter, Joan--a son, born posthumously, lived only five days. Rather than Louis' daughter, his brother Philip became king of France as Philip V. In his turn, Philip V had four daughters but no sons--when he died in 1322, his younger brother, Charles, succeeded him. When Charles IV died in 1328, <i>he </i>had one daughter, but no son--a posthumous child was also a girl. And so Charles IV was succeeded on the throne by the son of the younger brother of Philip IV, who became Philip VI. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For his part, Edward III of England claimed to the French throne through his mother, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/02/isabella-of-france-hes-king-but-she.html" target="_blank">Isabella of France</a>--she was the youngest surviving child of King Philip IV. </div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p></p></div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-82912820519903151212023-09-05T00:00:01.022-07:002023-09-05T10:28:05.621-07:00Constance, duchess of Brittany and countess of Richmond: "comitis Conani filia"<h3 style="text-align: justify;">Constance, duchess of Brittany and countess of Richmond (died 5 September 1201)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Born about the year 1161 (according to some sources, she was born on 12 June 1161), Constance was the daughter of Conan IV, earl of Richmond and duke of Brittany. Constance's father <a href="https://archive.org/details/franceinmaking840000dunb/page/330/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Constance" target="_blank">struggled for years</a> to obtain control of his dual inheritance--first, the title of earl of Richmond, after the death of his father, Alan, first earl of Richmond, in 1146; and then, the duchy of Brittany, after the death of his mother, Berthe of Brittany, in 1156.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjowcGEFtgB3ahPoXXahe6o7eYRHU_RZuvVTac8EnYl3UCZhQdNa1IRBvpu_9_VhIuQe0aD4O55rZT-MYwoURVDDc3rw-mtltBe6DXi5pQ_ss4jXu7_pyVRKwleo2jMaD-ns9dyRf5RNCGKJPQu6Oqt6xryrMeWKRfJWJxejkJjzFRDoBWWiQP0yrFnSTI/s500/Constance%20and%20Arthur.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="408" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjowcGEFtgB3ahPoXXahe6o7eYRHU_RZuvVTac8EnYl3UCZhQdNa1IRBvpu_9_VhIuQe0aD4O55rZT-MYwoURVDDc3rw-mtltBe6DXi5pQ_ss4jXu7_pyVRKwleo2jMaD-ns9dyRf5RNCGKJPQu6Oqt6xryrMeWKRfJWJxejkJjzFRDoBWWiQP0yrFnSTI/s320/Constance%20and%20Arthur.jpg" width="261" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A watercolor of <br />Constance of Brittany and <br />her son Arthur<br />(by <a href="https://www.rct.uk/collection/981663-bg" target="_blank">Madame Maria de Hocédé</a>,<br />the French governess of the children<br />of Queen Victoria, dated 19 February 1860)</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">As historian Jean Dunbabin <a href="https://archive.org/details/franceinmaking840000dunb/page/330/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Constance" target="_blank">notes</a>, the "threats" from outside of Brittany "were small": the "real problems lay within the duchy," notably "internal rebellions" among competing lords and a "succession crisis" when Conan III "dispossessed" his male heir and left the duchy to his daughter, Berthe, instead.* </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">After Conan III's death in 1148, his dispossessed son, Hoel, took control of Brittany. Eventually Henry II of England, "presumably in his capacity as duke of Normandy, therefore overlord of Brittany," intervened in the conflict, supporting Berthe, whose son, Conan, was living at Henry II's court. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In September 1156, after Berthe's death, Conan arrived in Brittany, claiming his role as duke. But Conan IV's position was never secure and his control over the duchy never quite settled. As for the English king, he had his own interests in Brittany, and in 1160, as insurance for his continued support, Henry insisted on a marriage between Conan and Margaret of Huntingdon. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The three--Conan IV, Henry II, and Margaret--were related in complicated ways. Conan IV's mother, Berthe of Brittany, had been the illegitimate daughter of the English king, Henry I, who was Henry II's grandfather. (I think that makes Berthe of Brittany the aunt of Henry II, right?) Thus Conan and Henry were cousins. And Margaret of Huntingdon and Henry II were also cousins--Margaret's grandfather, David I of Scotland, was the brother of Matilda (or Maud) of Scotland, Henry II's mother. (Got all that?) Also of note, when it comes to the status of Margaret of Huntingdon, she was the daughter of Henry of Scotland, who died before he could inherit the throne of <i>his</i> father, David of Scotland--instead, after Henry of Scotland's death, Margaret's two brothers, Malcolm, reigned 1153-1165, and William, reigned 1165-1214, succeeded their grandfather as kings of Scotland. (Whew!)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But back to Brittany. Despite the English king's intervention--and the close familial connections among Conan IV, his wife, Margaret, and Henry II--unrest persisted in Brittany, and Conan's own misjudgments and misadventures, along with ongoing interference from the English king, contributed to the unstable situation. In 1166, Henry arranged a betrothal between his eight-year-old son, Geoffrey Plantagenet, and Conan's daughter, Constance--who was only five years old.** Henry also "persuaded" Conan IV to abdicate, and although the little Constance was now nominally duchess of Brittany, the English king "took control of Brittany in his son's name."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, Constance's father, Conan IV, retained only his county of Guingamp, where he would remain until his death in 1171. Her mother, Margaret of Huntingdon, survived another thirty years; she was only twenty-six at the time of Conan's death, and she remarried twice, giving birth to several more children. She died in 1201. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Even though her parents were both still living, Constance spent her childhood in the household of Henry II or in that of his queen, the formidable <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/12/eleanor-of-aquitaine-and-other-women.html" target="_blank">Eleanor of Aquitaine</a>, traveling with the courts as they moved through their vast territories in England and on the continent. We catch a glimpse of her in the next few years; by 1170, she is part of the queen's household in Poitiers, and in the spring of 1174, she travels with Henry from Poitiers to Normandy; later that year, in July, she travels with him to England, where she is sent to the castle of Devizes.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Henry II remained in control of Brittany until July 1181, when the twenty-year-old Constance was at last married to Geoffrey. Geoffrey had already been involved in a rebellion against his father, and two years after his marriage to Constance, he was again in open revolt. Now Geoffrey II, duke of Brittany, he was at the court of the French king, perhaps planning another rebellion, when he died on 27 August 1186. Although accounts vary, the most frequent story about his death is that he was trampled by a horse during a joust.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While <a href="https://archive.org/details/everard-charters-of-constance-of-brittany-1/page/38/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">there is</a> "some evidence" to suggest that Constance had begun to act as duchess of Brittany after her marriage, it is likely that "her exercise of authority" was primarily "subject to her husband." During Geoffrey's lifetime, the pair <a href="https://journals.openedition.org/abpo/4349" target="_blank">jointly issued</a> a number of charters, She had also come into her inheritance as countess of Richmond in 1183. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHG03-K3m7BgvJ-3OHIbR3anq4f3dJ4V9GBRMsMaWThCTEa-IcQXsgc9rxyHFUCph7LtWkaFP3ERZuRBiDApuBBlrBbVquxPqogsNSuHAy-i30xtMMrS2wLbjaCtGyef7CN4aozpv9V4n9wlc9bl7v03nNPkyINVpZRvwLqoVdOC7lyECtl7NQJZbW9NQ/s651/Charter%20of%20Constance.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="551" data-original-width="651" height="169" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHG03-K3m7BgvJ-3OHIbR3anq4f3dJ4V9GBRMsMaWThCTEa-IcQXsgc9rxyHFUCph7LtWkaFP3ERZuRBiDApuBBlrBbVquxPqogsNSuHAy-i30xtMMrS2wLbjaCtGyef7CN4aozpv9V4n9wlc9bl7v03nNPkyINVpZRvwLqoVdOC7lyECtl7NQJZbW9NQ/w200-h169/Charter%20of%20Constance.JPG" width="200" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://archive.org/details/everard-charters-of-constance-of-brittany-1/page/64/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Villeneuve" target="_blank">Charter</a> issued by Constance of Brittany</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Now, as a widow, Constance of Brittany was finally "free to govern in her own right." She was also the mother of two daughters, Eleanor and Matilda, and a son, Arthur, born after Geoffrey's death. But her independence did not last long--on 3 February 1188, Henry II married her off to Ranulf, earl of Chester, one of his most loyal supporters. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDED9xuNXc1PfgYrQE57q55EJKDO4NK-WobCgOF362e276qT_b8VtDEDMPYsFBgFcFyB3vUiYNPgkGIseMGbOi54ldj-n--djruxqDrH9ySdOGswkYdNEffmqJ9opwo-o-HZLokjxGeRhpzjZYCkla5R-YFRqze2SL5SUPpiS49KOO9va-LNfXKvuvMYc/s420/seal.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="420" data-original-width="299" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDED9xuNXc1PfgYrQE57q55EJKDO4NK-WobCgOF362e276qT_b8VtDEDMPYsFBgFcFyB3vUiYNPgkGIseMGbOi54ldj-n--djruxqDrH9ySdOGswkYdNEffmqJ9opwo-o-HZLokjxGeRhpzjZYCkla5R-YFRqze2SL5SUPpiS49KOO9va-LNfXKvuvMYc/s320/seal.JPG" width="228" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Constance of Brittany's <a href="https://www.theheraldrysociety.com/shop/images/brittany-constance-of/" target="_blank">seal</a>,<br />a female figure bearing a flower<br />in her right hand <br />and a bird on her left, c. 1188</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Though Constance's second marriage may have been useful to the king of England, it did not work out particularly well for Constance or Ranulf. He may have "<a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Randulf-de-Blundeville-6th-Earl-of-Chester" target="_blank">styled</a>" himself duke of Brittany and earl of Richmond, but as historian Jacques Choffel <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/La_Bretagne_Sous_L_orage_Plantagenet/MWTEw3GtdYoC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Ranulf" target="_blank">notes</a>, "aucun Breton ne le reconnaîtra comme son sovereign" ("no Breton ever acknowledged him as his ruler"). J. A. Everard <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Brittany_and_the_Angevins/rgQl7wOifdgC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Ranulf" target="_blank">adds</a> that, "[w]hatever Henry II's intentions, Ranulf seems to have had no involvement in the government of the duchy of Brittany or the honour of Richmond." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Just months after the marriage, Henry II died, and the new king, Richard, traveled to Brittany, intending to assert his authority there by assuming control both of the duchy and its heir, Arthur. Faced with the opposition of Constance and of the "Breton barons," the new English king "relented." Constance was allowed to continue governing Brittany as she had been doing, and Richard left Arthur with his mother, but he took custody of Constance's daughter Eleanor in September of 1189, evidently to insure Constance's good behavior. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Richard was soon off on his big crusading adventure, however, and between his departure in 1190 and his return in 1194, Constance was able to govern Brittany without his interference and in the almost complete absence of Ranulf, who seems to have had no role in Brittany other than referring to himself as the duke. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">From 1188, in fact, Constance seems to have acted on her own in Brittany, though her legal claim to do so was not entirely clear. Was she acting as duchess in her own right? She had been her father's heir, but her father had renounced his rights as duke of Brittany to Henry II, who had then granted them to his son, Geoffrey. Had Constance's hereditary rights been somehow reinstated after Geoffrey's? But she was now a married woman, her husband claiming the title duke of Brittany. Could she, as a married woman, be exercising power on her own? Or was she acting as regent for her son, Arthur? </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">During Geoffrey's lifetime, the couple had issued charters jointly, but during her marriage to Ranulf, Constance issued charters <a href="https://archive.org/details/everard-charters-of-constance-of-brittany-1/page/38/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">only</a> in her own name, using her ducal title "Constantia, comitis Conani filia, ducissa Britannie, comitissa Richemondie." She presents herself not as a wife of a duke or a mother of a duke but as the daughter of a duke. As Elodie Chaudet <a href="https://journals.openedition.org/abpo/4349?lang=fr" target="_blank">notes</a>, </div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">Sur soixante-dix-sept chartes, soixante et une ont été émises par Constance seule. . . . Cette pratique d’émission solitaire souligne que l’exercice du pouvoir par Constance s’est effectué sans tutelle. Elle a gouverné seule, certes entourée de conseillers, mais ayant le choix de la décision finale et de l’application effective des décisions. [Of seventy-seven charters, sixy-one were issued by Constance alone. This practice of issuing them independently underscores that Constance's exercise of power is carried out without guardianship. She governed solely, certainly surrounded by counselors, but having the ability to make the final decision and to effect the implementation of her decisions.]</blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">In 1196, Constance <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/La_Bretagne_Sous_L_orage_Plantagenet/MWTEw3GtdYoC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Constance" target="_blank">called together</a> the Breton <i>états</i>--the gathered assembly recognized the nine-year-old Arthur as duke of Brittany. Reaction was swift--Richard of England demanded that Constance place her son, potentially the king's heir, into his custody. With her daughter Eleanor still in the English king's control, Constance refused. Summoned to meet with Richard in Normandy, Constance was taken captive by her husband, Ranulf, as she traveled. He arrested her and imprisoned her in his castle of Saint James en Beuvron. For his part, Richard aimed to march into Brittany to "rescue" Arthur, but the boy was sent to the French court for safekeeping.</div><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: justify;">Because of continuing unrest in Brittany and ongoing opposition to his plans, Richard eventually relented. </span>By 1198, Richard made sure that Constance was released from her captivity--and at some point thereafter, likely after Richard died in April 1199, Constance's marriage to Ranulf was annulled. (About the details of the marriage's end, Chaudet <a href="https://journals.openedition.org/abpo/4349?lang=fr" target="_blank">writes</a> that sources are silent--she suggests that an annullment is most likely, probably on the basis of non-cohabitation or non-consummation.) </p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: justify;">By the fall of 1199, Constance had married once more, this time to Guy of Thouars, probably a match suggested by the French king. She gave birth to at least two more daughters, Alix (b. 1200?) and Catherine (b. 1201?). It may well be that there was a third girl, Marguerite (b. 1201?)--according to some sources, Constance died either giving birth to twins or shortly having given birth to twins. (Other, less favorable accounts of Constance of Brittany, claim she died of leprosy . . . )</span></p><div style="text-align: justify;">Constance of Brittany died on 5 September 1201. She was buried in the Cistercian abbey of la Villeneuve--she had planned for the institution's foundation and issued a <a href="https://archive.org/details/everard-charters-of-constance-of-brittany-1/page/78/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Villeneuve" target="_blank">charter</a> in 1201, endowing it with an annual rent. She also issued an <a href="https://archive.org/details/everard-charters-of-constance-of-brittany-1/page/90/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Villeneuve" target="_blank">agreement</a> with the archbishop of Tours about her burial at the abbey.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjH2NRefK9wIrTl3u7RTN2iz4EGj_KbKn4zJRkP7uWKmWouMCRDs6jxj81BVZkjUwyHaEaAs60TyIE7MTNA-ifjZWCoftOSRaeDILP-ZUBMNgQCXUINM9EjXsB7uvc4CQwJlNMAh9mVJ95EwoOx7bzxRHnRqH6ZfKDQVl-xfWbOHW3ixVVfJxtzabMga7I/s413/375px-Abbaye_Villeneuve.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="413" data-original-width="375" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjH2NRefK9wIrTl3u7RTN2iz4EGj_KbKn4zJRkP7uWKmWouMCRDs6jxj81BVZkjUwyHaEaAs60TyIE7MTNA-ifjZWCoftOSRaeDILP-ZUBMNgQCXUINM9EjXsB7uvc4CQwJlNMAh9mVJ95EwoOx7bzxRHnRqH6ZfKDQVl-xfWbOHW3ixVVfJxtzabMga7I/s320/375px-Abbaye_Villeneuve.jpg" width="291" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b6902017r/" target="_blank">Villeneuve abbey</a>, as it appeared in 1695</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Constance's mother, Margaret of Huntingdon, died in the same year as her daughter. Constance's son, Arthur, survived his mother, but he was captured by King John on 1 August 1202--Eleanor of Aquitaine had taken refuge at the chateau of Mirebeau, and Arthur had laid siege to it. He was imprisoned in the Château de Falaise. He remained there, but after April 1203, he was never seen again. Interestingly, Arthur's elder sister, Eleanor, "the fair maid of Brittany," was also imprisoned by King John in 1202; she remained in captivity throughout the life of King John and after his death in 1216, his son and successor, Henry III, maintained her as a prisoner until her death in 1241. (Family values, huh?)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><p style="text-align: justify;">*For a useful account of Brittany during the time of Conan III and Conan IV, see Jean Dunbabin's <i>France in the Making: 843-1180 </i>(click <a href="https://archive.org/details/franceinmaking840000dunb/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">here</a>)</p><p style="text-align: justify;">**As historian Amy Kelly <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Eleanor-Aquitaine-Kings-Harvard-Paperbacks/dp/0674242548" target="_blank">notes</a> in <i>Eleanor of Aquitaine and the Four Kings</i>, this marriage "was definitely consanguineous, but Henry had been careful to appeal for a papal dispensation to circumvent that difficulty." The occasional detail about Constance's life is found in Kelly's biography of Eleanor ofAquitaine and, similarly, in Alison Weir's <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Eleanor-Aquitaine-Ballantine-Readers-Circle/dp/0345434870" target="_blank">biography</a>, <i>Eleanor of Aquitaine</i>. What both historians make clear is that Eleanor of Aquitaine neither likes nor trusts Constance of Brittany.</p>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-77067128736724711112023-08-19T00:00:00.922-07:002023-09-04T12:30:39.484-07:00Cartimandua, Queen of the Brigantes: Loyal But Treacherous?<h3 style="text-align: left;">Cartimandua, queen of the Brigantes (birth of Emperor Claudius, 19 August 10 BCE) </h3><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Cartimandua's <a href="https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/warwickclassicsnetwork/romancoventry/resources/interactions/civitates/cartimandua/tacitus/" target="_blank">name</a> first appears in the <i>Annals</i> of the Roman historian Tacitus: "after seeking the protection of the Brigantian queen Cartimandua," a rebellious British chieftain named Caratacus "was arrested and handed to the victors, in the ninth year from the opening of the war in Britain." Since Claudius had begun his conquest in 43 CE, this would have been about the year 51 or 52. (With few dates for Cartimandua herself, I have posted about the queen of the Brigantes on the birthdate of the Roman emperor.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: justify;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3AB6od2wdEipFW1cEmCBEWAEJoGXa-G-b7VRFqqp1pTsWPETADAyJX5sBh9i5RzctpUTLQLPBrd394A3odWw73uZaIqDg88HPxIP_yw_M_euJSa5wb0H6AP4d5d5ty1TXcJmTaoo6jwmoDSUUDy_nPVXN0Sqx9wKiWzFL8qJq8UA7p7Tiic5WS9_6vf0/s861/Brigantes.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="756" data-original-width="861" height="281" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3AB6od2wdEipFW1cEmCBEWAEJoGXa-G-b7VRFqqp1pTsWPETADAyJX5sBh9i5RzctpUTLQLPBrd394A3odWw73uZaIqDg88HPxIP_yw_M_euJSa5wb0H6AP4d5d5ty1TXcJmTaoo6jwmoDSUUDy_nPVXN0Sqx9wKiWzFL8qJq8UA7p7Tiic5WS9_6vf0/s320/Brigantes.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Map showing Brigantia,<br />from <a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/women-in-history/cartimandua/" target="_blank">English Heritage</a></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">The Celtic kingdom of Brigantia included territory that is now <a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/women-in-history/cartimandua/" target="_blank">centered in Yorkshire</a>. Cartimandua seems to have <a href="https://archive.org/details/cartimanduaqueen0000howa/page/46/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">inherited</a> her role as queen (her grandfather, Bellnorix, had been king of the Brigantes). In his <i>Histories</i>, Tacitus <a href="https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/warwickclassicsnetwork/romancoventry/resources/interactions/civitates/cartimandua/tacitus/" target="_blank">writes</a> that Cartimandua has attained her position because of the "influence of high birth."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although it is not known when exactly Cartimandua began to rule in Brigantia, it is widely believed that she was among the eleven Celtic rulers who surrendered to Claudius after his invasion of Britain, a victory commemorated in the now-lost Arch of Claudius. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">In his account of Cartimandua in the <i>Annals</i>, Tacitus indicates that the queen was married, her husband a man named Venutius. Although Tacitus may have written more about the origins of Venutius--in his first reference to him, Tacitus refers to the fact that he had "mentioned earlier" Venutius's "Brigantian extraction"--this part of the <i>Annals </i>does not survive. In noting Cartimandua's marriage, historian Nicki Howarth makes it clear that "any claim Venutius made to sovereignty was subordinate to that of his wife." Cartimandua "was the queen and not a consort," and that if her marriage to Venutius was a "dynastic" alliance, either "she came from the more powerful of the two [families]" or "she had succeeded an existing ruler." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Tacitus focuses on two key events in Cartimandua's reign: her handing over of Caratacus, a rebellious British chieftain, to the Romans (mentioned above, in the first quotation from Tacitus), and her ongoing disputes with Venutius, whom she divorces and who rebels against her several times.</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the first case, Queen Cartimandua is rewarded for her loyalty to Rome, receiving <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Cartimandua" target="_blank">support</a> on several occasions from rebellious subjects, notably in 48 CE, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Cartimandua" target="_blank">when</a> "Roman forces intervened for the first time to help her quell these disturbances." In Tacitus's words, Cartimandua "received the protection of the Roman arms." And so, in 51 CE, when a rebellious British chieftain named Caratacus was defeated by the Romans and took refuge in Brigantia, Cartimandua did not offer him shelter, much less support. Instead, according to Tacitus, she "handed him over to the victors [the Romans who had defeated him]." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCikBTwlmfxdz73NN0kUSGvYGrhJUTCw6IYHtH78PRkQhGwEF3CJdwL40HMe4yIF64fxdoMBuo5DkzUfv8QHzj-WQltifmvRSvEqAoue2rqd02dHQ7b0FDNCvutMXc1Yr5qMV4tw9tvtEFX-0uTEswAx3m6XJdupsz6u6W72WkRnTqKeBdAv8WnqvZMmU/s888/arch-of-claudius.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="888" data-original-width="572" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCikBTwlmfxdz73NN0kUSGvYGrhJUTCw6IYHtH78PRkQhGwEF3CJdwL40HMe4yIF64fxdoMBuo5DkzUfv8QHzj-WQltifmvRSvEqAoue2rqd02dHQ7b0FDNCvutMXc1Yr5qMV4tw9tvtEFX-0uTEswAx3m6XJdupsz6u6W72WkRnTqKeBdAv8WnqvZMmU/s320/arch-of-claudius.jpg" width="206" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/women-in-history/cartimandua/" target="_blank">Fragment</a> from the lost<br />arch of Claudius "describing<br />the surrender of 11 native<br />rulers," a number that likely<br />included Cartimandua </td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">In turning over Caratacus, Cartimandua was thus loyal to Rome. But the judgment of Tacitus here is noteworthy. Instead of praising the loyal Brigantian queen, he condemns her--Tacitus regards her treatment of Caracatus as an act of "treachery," and he adds that the rewards heaped on her by the Romans for her act--increased power and wealth--were the source of a "wanton spirit which success breeds."</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In recounting the episode of Caratacus, Tacitus offers no praise for Cartimandua's loyalty to Rome, nor does he provide her with any opportunity to explain the reasons for her actions. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By contrast, he offers a sympathetic picture of the rebellious Caratacus. "Even in Rome," Tacitus writes, "the name of Caratacus was not without honour." And the emperor, by holding a triumph to display the captive Caratacus and his family in chains, has misjudged: "by attempting to heighten his own credit, [Claudius] added distinction to the vanquished."</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And then, while he gives no voice to Cartimandua, Tacitus puts an extended, noble speech into the mouth of the defeated Caratacus. It is so noble and so persuasive that the rebel and his family members are all pardoned, and they live happily ever after in Rome.</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, back in Britain, it's now the turn of Venutius to act up. In this second episode in the life of Cartimandua, Tacitus focuses on Venutius's repeated acts of rebellion against his wife (and the power of Rome). In the years 51 CE and 57 CE, Venutius <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Cartimandua" target="_blank">twice attempts</a> to overthrow Cartimandua and, by extension, Rome. In 51 CE, his rebellion is put down by Roman troops, who defend the queen of the Brigantians. Notably and oddly, as Tacitus describes the rebellion of Venutius in his <i>Histories</i>, Venutius is not condemned for his actions. Rather, Tacitus says that he was inspired not only by "his natural spirit and hatred of the Roman name" (?) but also "by his personal resentment toward Queen Cartimandua." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While the pair are reconciled in 51 CE, Cartimandua and her husband <a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/women-in-history/cartimandua/" target="_blank">separate permanently</a> after his second rebellion against the queen six years later, this one also put down with the assistance of her Roman allies. Finally, in 69 CE, Venutius rebels a third time. In his description of events, Tacitus attributes the break to Cartimandua's lust. According to Tacitus, "She grew to despise her husband Venutius, and took as her consort his squire Vellocatus, whom she admitted to share the throne with her. Her house was at once shaken by this scandalous act." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The opposition between Venutius and Vellocatus is, in the view of Tacitus, stark: "Her husband was favoured by the sentiments of all the citizens; the adulterer was supported by the queen's passion for him and by her savage spirit." But what began as opposition to Queen Cartimandua did not end there--Venutius "extended his hostility to ourselves," writes the Roman historian.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><div style="text-align: justify;">In her more nuanced analysis of the characterizations of Cartimandua and her relationship with Vellocatus, Howarth <a href="https://archive.org/details/cartimanduaqueen0000howa/page/98/mode/2up?view=theater" target="_blank">notes</a> that some modern historians, following Tacitus, have described their alliance as an "affair" or as "adultery." Having taken a former "squire" to share her throne is regarded not only as a scandal but a source of shame. Tacitus also seems to attribute the separation of Cartimandua and her husband to a kind of nobility of action on the part of Venutius. Tacitus suggests that he had only allied himself with Rome because of his wife: "<span style="text-align: left;">He had long been loyal, and had received the protection of the Roman arms during his married life with Queen Cartimandua: then had come a divorce, followed by immediate war, and he had extended his hostility to ourselves" (<i>Annals</i>). </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;">In her analysis of events, </span><span style="text-align: left;">Howarth untangles the chronology of events in Cartimandua's life, a chronology that is confused in Tacitus's accounts. Howarth points out that Cartimandua's difficulties with Venutius had begun by the year 51 CE, and that the couple had <a href="https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/warwickclassicsnetwork/romancoventry/resources/interactions/civitates/cartimandua/tacitus/" target="_blank">divorced</a> in 57 CE, a dozen years before the queen's relationship with Vellocatus in 69 CE. The queen was "perfectly at liberty" to make Vellocatus her consort "without committing any sort of infidelity."</span><span style="text-align: left;"> And while Vellocatus may originally have been an "armour bearer" for Venutius, Howarth notes that this is not an indication of any servile status (if it were, Tacitus would have made that clear, noting it as part of Cartimandua's scandal and shame). As Venutius's "squire," Vellocatus would have been a member of the Brigantian elite, and after careful analysis of what can be known about him, Howarth explores the possibility that he might even have been of Roman origin. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Historian Andrew Roberts <a href="https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/women-in-history/cartimandua/" target="_blank">suggests</a> that the separation between Cartimandua and Venutius in 69 CE was likely not caused by the queen's lust but by "the internal politics of the Brigantes" that "led to differing views on policy, leadership and the Roman alliance." The death of the Emperor Nero, in 68 CE, followed by the uncertainties of "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors" target="_blank">the year of four emperors</a>," in 69 CE, offered Venutius yet another opportunity for rebellion.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Having elided events in Cartimandua's life and reign, Tacitus portrays the rebellion of Venutius in 69 CE in gendered terms. In defending herself, Cartimandua seized members of Venutius's family: "Cartimandua adroitly entrapped the brother and family connections of Venutius." Instead of offering support for what seems to be a reasonable act under the circumstances, or instead of offering "Cartimandua's" view of this decision, Tacitus focuses on the reaction of Venutius: he is, in Tacitus's view, "[i]ncensed at her act, and smarting at the ignominious prospect of submitting to the sway of a woman." </div></div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">When Venutius invaded Brigantia, Cartimandua once more appealed to her Roman allies for aid. But given the unsettled affairs in Rome, sufficient troops were not available. Cartimandua was "rescu[ed] from danger" by Roman troops and fled to the Roman fort at Chester. </div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglN_YpAL4Q23mtRK5_JjyRustdWLWxwv2SuSW1Fh-sucdrUnn9YtEz3NFxYEdvsWGA1tU1pUrvGBGrZGrCxBXJ1CIH4bEoIzIyd2lFR9yjlTzdBHHO2_t_XDzypRuUbbVhA038Xtk6usAcDpPWqT87_g1Xy6aH_HrnU5xsNNuG_evcT5JswHVCl1QvpkI/s750/Cartimandua.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="622" data-original-width="750" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglN_YpAL4Q23mtRK5_JjyRustdWLWxwv2SuSW1Fh-sucdrUnn9YtEz3NFxYEdvsWGA1tU1pUrvGBGrZGrCxBXJ1CIH4bEoIzIyd2lFR9yjlTzdBHHO2_t_XDzypRuUbbVhA038Xtk6usAcDpPWqT87_g1Xy6aH_HrnU5xsNNuG_evcT5JswHVCl1QvpkI/s320/Cartimandua.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Francesco Bartolozzi's imagined delivery by Cartimandua (center) <br />of Caratacus to a Roman general;<br />Bartolozzai's eighteenth-century <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartimandua#/media/File:Cartimandua.jpg" target="_blank">print</a> was first published<br />by Susanna Vivares (fl. 1781-97)<br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Venutius ruled briefly in Brigantia after he forced out Queen Cartimandua, but by 71 CE, under Vespasian, Romans had, in the words of Tacitus, a "more cheerful conclusion." Venutius was defeated, and Brigantia brought fully under Roman rule.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">What happened to Cartimandua after she arrived at the Roman fort is not known. Nothing more is known about her.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It's interesting to note here that, while the story of Cartimandua's contemporary, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/08/boudica-queen-of-iceni.html" target="_blank">Boudica</a>, is widely known today--there's even a sculpture in London--Cartimandua's is much less well known, despite the fact that she ruled successfully in Brigantia, under the most difficult of circumstances, for more than twenty years . . . Tacitus also provides an account of Boudica, her rebellion, and her defeat. Whether an ally of the empire or a rebel against the empire, a woman is not bound to a happy ending. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In addition to Howarth's Cartimandia, Queen of the Brigantes, I recommend <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Ruling-Roman-Britain-Governors-Emperors/dp/0415008042/ref=sr_1_6?crid=1WROP1Y0OSFX4&keywords=David+Braund&qid=1692409931&sprefix=david+brand%2Caps%2C244&sr=8-6&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.18ed3cb5-28d5-4975-8bc7-93deae8f9840" target="_blank">David Braund</a>'s account of Cartimandia in his <i>Ruling Roman Britain: Kings, Queens, Governors and Emperors from Julius Caesar to Agricola.</i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-64265388113916298292023-07-03T00:00:00.748-07:002023-07-04T09:49:46.128-07:00Violant of Bar, "Queen Lieutenant" of Aragon<h3 style="text-align: left;">Violant (Yolande) of Bar, queen of Aragon (died 3 July 1431)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Violant of Bar, or Yolande, as she was then, was born about the year 1365, one of eleven children born to Robert I of Bar, and Marie of France, who was the daughter of John, duke of Normandy, and his first wife, Bonne of Luxembourg.*</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Violant's paternal family controlled the territory of Barrois, in Lorraine. In 1350, a year after the death of Violant's mother, her father became king of France, as John II; in 1354, the new king raised the status of Bar from that of county to that of duchy. King John died in 1364, succeeded on the French throne by his son, Charles. In the same year, 1364, the new king's sister, Marie of France, married Robert, no longer count, but duke, of Bar. Whew.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjelcikFIyuni-RkynG6dkh5UbKPvvEXAWuGrs0URKkkApkS7Ap74TVW8wDVgphIp-9NdlinDi2-BDFp8gbX9dVt_T6tRB3u_CElRlOel9q9bZBGk29XmCZzefMZzHRuRjNF6flOffHIr2owNONmp7M2bYm1CrKdiZ39_JKI1DTlh1mZD272ImCXgTOGwA/s214/Capture.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="172" data-original-width="214" height="172" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjelcikFIyuni-RkynG6dkh5UbKPvvEXAWuGrs0URKkkApkS7Ap74TVW8wDVgphIp-9NdlinDi2-BDFp8gbX9dVt_T6tRB3u_CElRlOel9q9bZBGk29XmCZzefMZzHRuRjNF6flOffHIr2owNONmp7M2bYm1CrKdiZ39_JKI1DTlh1mZD272ImCXgTOGwA/s1600/Capture.JPG" width="214" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><div>Violant, queen of Aragon,</div><div>from <a href="http://bdh-rd.bne.es/viewer.vm?id=0000044776&page=1" target="_blank">Alonso de Cartagena</a>'s</div><div><i>Liber genealogiae regum Hispanie</i></div></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Born the year after her uncle became king of France, Violant spent much of her <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Anti_Jewish_Riots_in_the_Crown_of_Aragon/AqwODQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=violante+de+bar+court+of+Charles+V&pg=PA200&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">first fifteen years</a> at the his court, where she received what seems to have been an excellent education. She was, as Dawn E. Price <a href="https://raco.cat/index.php/CatalanReview/article/view/309457/399438" target="_blank">writes</a>, "literate," "multilingual," and an "ardent" bibliophile; her surviving correspondence not only "forms one of the largest epistolary collections by a woman in medieval Spain" but is a testament as well to Violante's education and to her ongoing interest in religion, philosophy, secular literature, and politics.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 2 February 1380, Violant of Bar was married to Joan, duke of Girona, the eldest son of King Pere IV of Aragon. Despite her royal connections and her own accomplishments, Violant of Bar "entered her husband's family . . . as an unwelcome daughter in law," as one noted <a href="https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=CQ1XAAAAYAAJ&pg=GBS.PA212&hl=en" target="_blank">historian</a> delicately phrases the situation.**</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For Violant's new husband, this was a second marriage. The duke of Girona's first wife, Marta d'Armagnac, had given birth to five children, but only one, a daughter named Joana, survived infancy. Although the young Violant had no choice in the selection of her husband and no role in arranging this marriage, she wrote to her family after her arrival in Aragon that was "well married as a queen" (<i>bon maridada con reyna</i>"). Despite her perceptions, King Pere would, as Price notes, continue to display "ill feeling towards the couple until his death."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Like her husband's first wife, Violant would also "fail" in her most important role as a wife, that of providing her husband with a male heir. Between her marriage in 1380 and the death of Joan, Violant would be pregnant <a href="https://raco.cat/index.php/CatalanReview/article/view/309457/399438" target="_blank">eight times</a>, but only her first-born child, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2019/08/yolande-of-aragon-queen-of-four-kingdoms.html" target="_blank">Yolande of Aragon</a>, born in 1381, would survive. Her second child, a son and heir, was born in 1384, but he died in 1388.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As duchess of Girona, Violant exercised considerable influence and "autonomy" in what Dawn Bratisch-Prince <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Marriage_and_Sexuality_in_Medieval_and_E/CPkAi2tr8KEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Violant%20of%20Bar" target="_blank">describes</a> as "marital diplomacy." She involved herself in arranging marriages of members of her own family, of members of her household, and of those in her her husband's service. Although her son, Jaume, was only four years old at the time of his death, Violant's marriage negotiations for her son were underway with an agreement for him to marry the daughter of the king of Navarre. In 1392, Violant negotiated a marriage for her step-daughter, Joana Daroca, to the count of Foix, and for her own daughter, Yolande of Aragon, to Louis II, duke of Anjou and titular king of Naples (though this marriage was arranged in 1392, Yolande's marriage would not be finalized until 1400).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, in 1387, Joan succeeded to the throne of Aragon after his father's death. Now queen of Aragon, Violant is frequently depicted as something of a fun-loving, frivolous woman. In his extended treatment of Violant in <i>Queens of Aragon: Their Lives and Times </i>(1913), historian E. L. Miron describes "Doña Violante queening it over the Courts of Love," focusing on her love of troubadour poetry, song, and dance. Miron spends sixteen pages describing the Aragonese court's dedication to fashion, food, "extravagant pleasure," dramatic entertainments, and frivolity. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As unlikely as Miron's account of Joan's reign sounds, it may not be far wrong. In his description of the Aragonese court at this time, Donald Kagay <a href="https://archive.org/details/wargovernmentsoc0000kaga/page/54/mode/2up?view=theater&q=temple" target="_blank">calls it</a> a "temple of liberality," noting that the king was devoted not only to pleasure but to hunting and that "much of the revenue the king squeezed from his lands went to pay the salaries of his huntsmen and maintenance of his hawks and horses." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There may have been lots of fun at the court of Aragon, but the years between Joan's accession and his death encompassed more for his wife than fun and games. In his <i><a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/v5QxAQAAMAAJ?gbpv=1&bsq=1395" target="_blank">History of Spain</a></i>, Ulrich Burke notes that, while Joan was known as "the Indolent" or "the Sportsman," he was also quite ill and incapable of governing. And so, from 1388 until 1395, Violant served as "Queen-Lieutenant" for a king who was frequently incapacitated and unable to rule. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Joan's reliance on Violant's political role no doubt <a href="https://archive.org/details/wargovernmentsoc0000kaga/page/56/mode/2up?view=theater&q=waves" target="_blank">contributed to</a> the "waves of complaint" that "rippled across his lands"; according to one ambassador's <a href="https://archive.org/details/wargovernmentsoc0000kaga/page/56/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Violante" target="_blank">account</a> of the situation, "through the influence of his wife [the king] had betrayed himself, the government, and the republic." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The increasing dissatisfaction and resistance to Joan--and to the part his wife played in the kingdom--came to an abrupt end in when Joan died on 13 May 1396. Too ill, too feeble, or too indolent to rule, Joan of Aragon died while he was out hunting--he fell from his horse. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Violant tried to maintain her position in Aragon after her husband's death--perhaps she hoped to become a regent for her daughter, Yolande, who might succeed to the throne. Instead, the crown went to Joan's brother, Martí, the guy who had had no trouble at all marrying his niece. He was kept busy in Sicily, trying to protect his interests there, but his wife, Maria de Luna, was in Barcelona when Joan died. She assumed the role of Queen-Lieutenant for her husband until he could arrive in Aragon.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For her part, Violant claimed to be pregnant, a claim that disrupted a smooth transition to a new king, since the widowed queen might give birth to the dead king's son and heir. Perhaps she was, perhaps she thought she was--or perhaps her claim was an act of desperation. Whatever the case, it did not buy Violant much time. She was put under careful watch, surveilled by several attendants, and her allies and supporters were arrested or expelled from court. And there was no posthumous birth. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But Violant survived. She remained in Barcelona, with her daughter, who would not leave for her marriage to Louis II of Anjou until 1400. Nor did Violant give up her political ambitions. In 1411, when Martí died, Violant hoped to secure the throne for her grandson.*** She lobbied ambassadors and electors, even making the case herself to the <i>Cortes</i>. At least <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Annals_of_the_Queens_of_Spain_from_the_p/MZu1viMvJKkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=violante+de+bar+court+of+Charles+V&pg=PA116&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">one source</a> claims that her cousin, the king of France, offered her troops to help in her efforts. But she did not secure the throne for the boy. Failing that, after her brother's death at Agincourt in 1415, she claimed Bar for her grandson--in this, she was successful. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Violant, queen of Aragon, was long noted primarily for her role as a patron of the arts--she was recognized for her cultural contributions, particular to literature and poetry. But more recent analysis, particularly of her voluminous correspondence, has recognized her political role, particularly in her diplomacy and her ameliorations of some of her husband's excesses and confrontations.****</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKrOnmfzLKU1EzmikKKBGjXzoONtQP0yrSsmH48h--dZCKBWyrH9PuXNx_ZD8bfUv5O0J7k4WDF4MsGGD3wgCvQI2xufEKLc1npUB8TQ3U8pn336sIjNGC42-VrIuH19YX5Xqx0HXxJoBswDN5mrxvxg0rE6M1XKSEsYiV_Ui8OQ1LAURGmPPoycmBrDE/s640/Joan_i_Violant_a_Poblet.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKrOnmfzLKU1EzmikKKBGjXzoONtQP0yrSsmH48h--dZCKBWyrH9PuXNx_ZD8bfUv5O0J7k4WDF4MsGGD3wgCvQI2xufEKLc1npUB8TQ3U8pn336sIjNGC42-VrIuH19YX5Xqx0HXxJoBswDN5mrxvxg0rE6M1XKSEsYiV_Ui8OQ1LAURGmPPoycmBrDE/s320/Joan_i_Violant_a_Poblet.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption"><div style="text-align: center;">The tomb of Violant, queen of Aragon,</div><div style="text-align: center;">and Joan, king of Aragon,</div><div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Joan_i_Violant_a_Poblet.jpg" target="_blank">Royal Abbey of Santa Maria de Poblet</a></div><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Violant, queen of Aragon, <a href="https://raco.cat/index.php/CatalanReview/article/view/309457/399438" target="_blank">remained in Barcelona</a> until her death:</div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">[D]uring her 35 years as a widow, Violant continued to cultivate a larger-than-life image for herself and to demand special treatment from the Aragonese people, government officials, and ruling monarchs, for which she was known as somewhat of a political nuisance. She was fierce in her formal directness to those who crossed her. . . . She is quick to remind the king's servants of their feudal obligations, and even quicker to threaten retribution for wrongs done. . . .</div></blockquote><p>This Queen Lieutenant died on 3 July 1431, at age sixty-six.</p><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*At birth, she was Yolande, but in this post I have tried to follow the conventions for names that conform best to a confusing array of choices made by historians in English. After her marriage, Yolande became Violant; I've used Catalan forms not only for Violant, but also for her husband, Joan of Aragon (John), for her father-in-law, Pere III (Peter, Pedro), and for her brother-in-law, Martí, who will follow Joan onto the throne of Aragon. I apologize for any confusions and for all inconsistencies.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for Yolande/Violant's maternal family--her father's name, Jean, or John, is simple enough. Her mother was named Jutta of Luxembourg; her father was John of Luxembourg, who became king of Bohemia after his marriage to Elizabeth of Bohemia. Although Jutta was born in Bohemia, she is known as Jutta "of Luxembourg," in recognition of her father's membership in the House of Luxembourg. After marriage to Jean/Joan, her name was changed to Bonne. (At one point, by the way, Jutta had been betrothed to Robert of Bar's father, Henry!) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">**King Pere wanted his widowed son to marry Maria de Luna, queen of Sicily--who was his granddaughter and, thus, Joan's niece. Whether or not his close blood relationship had anything to do with Joan's refusal to marry Maria de Luna, Pere's second son, Martí, had no such qualms and married her. Traditional marriage again, huh? </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">***When he died, Martí had no legitimate heirs, and the Aragonese succession was disputed--after a two-year delay, which saw five claimants to the throne, the Compromise of Caspe saw the establishment of the Trastámara line of kings by placing Fernando of Castile, a grandson of Pere IV, on the throne. (Fernando's mother was Eleanor of Aragon, daughter of King Pere. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">****One of the more contentious issues involving Joan (and, thus, Violant) is the situation of the Jews in Aragon, and in particular a pogrom in Valencia in 1391. I particularly recommend Benjamin R. <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Anti-Jewish-Riots-Aragon-Response-1391-1392/dp/1316616398/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1TD9UX52US06V&keywords=anti-jewish+riots+in+the+crown&qid=1688489299&sprefix=anti-jewish+riots+inthe+crown%2Caps%2C283&sr=8-1" target="_blank">Gampel</a>'s <i>Anti-Jewish Riots in the Crown of Aragon and the Royal Response, 1391-1392.</i></div><div><br /></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-51725128760063208212023-06-24T00:00:00.016-07:002023-09-12T16:01:25.346-07:00One Year after Dobbs . . . <h3 style="text-align: left;">When Women Became No Longer Human, Part 13: Women's Lives (and Deaths) One Year After Dobbs (24 June 2023)</h3><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As if <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2022/12/more-bad-news-on-maternal-mortality.html" target="_blank">maternal mortality rates</a> in the United States weren't bad enough before Dobbs, a new study by the Kaiser Family Foundation (now KFF), "National Survey of OBGYNs’ Experiences After Dobbs," provides necessary data about the effect of the <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2022/06/turns-out-women-are-not-human.html">2022 forced birth decision</a> and its impact on medical professionals who specialize in women's healthcare.</div><p style="text-align: justify;">You can access the full report by clicking <a href="https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/report/a-national-survey-of-obgyns-experiences-after-dobbs/" target="_blank">here</a>.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxb-32plGz9r_IROlVS4ggvc8U0QmD6tn6L1Dgq0CQp_KE9giAqprxesRQfFD7cFvrrIIYZ3kABbDI58CgtbSoNrjltsWsVnmEeG_aWAgfoxzVJJ7GN7alyk1c4ewcWCret4UODNKj8_1jg9JVwDpsKHsW4R1s6sCc7X9uAy1t8jP9Wj3NP7XgzFagB-w/s532/Capture.JPG" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="532" data-original-width="412" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxb-32plGz9r_IROlVS4ggvc8U0QmD6tn6L1Dgq0CQp_KE9giAqprxesRQfFD7cFvrrIIYZ3kABbDI58CgtbSoNrjltsWsVnmEeG_aWAgfoxzVJJ7GN7alyk1c4ewcWCret4UODNKj8_1jg9JVwDpsKHsW4R1s6sCc7X9uAy1t8jP9Wj3NP7XgzFagB-w/s320/Capture.JPG" width="248" /></a></div><p style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, here are the highlights (lowlights?):</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Key Findings</b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b><br /></b></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>ABORTION ACCESS AND CONSTRAINTS ON CARE SINCE DOBBS</b></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"><ul style="text-align: left;"><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">Since the Dobbs decision, half of OBGYNs practicing in states where abortion is banned say they have had patients in their practice who were unable to obtain an abortion they sought. This is the case for one in four (24%) office-based OBGYNs nationally.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Nationally, one in five office-based OBGYNs (20%) report they have personally felt c<b>onstraints on their ability to provide care for miscarriages and other pregnancy-related medical emergencies</b> (emphasis added) since the Dobbs decision. In states where abortion is banned, this share rises to four in ten OBGYNs (40%).</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Four in ten OBGYNs nationally (44%), and six in ten practicing in states where abortion is banned or where there are gestational limits, say their decision-making autonomy has become worse since the Dobbs ruling. Over a third of OBGYNs nationally (36%), and half practicing in states where abortion is banned (55%) or where there are gestational limits (47%), say their ability to practice within the standard of care has become worse.</li><li style="text-align: justify;"><b>Most OBGYNs (68%) say the ruling has worsened their ability to manage pregnancy-related emergencies </b>[emphasis added]. <b>Large shares also believe that the Dobbs decision has worsened pregnancy-related mortality (64%) </b>[emphasis added], racial and ethnic inequities in maternal health (70%) and the ability to attract new OBGYNs to the field (55%).</li></ul></ul></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>ABORTION POLICIES AND CONCERN ABOUT LEGAL RISK</b></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"><ul style="text-align: left;"><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">Two-thirds of OBGYNs nationally (68%) say they understand the circumstances under which abortion is legal in the state they practice very well. However, among OBGYNs in states where abortion is restricted by gestational limits the share is lower (45%) compared to those practicing in states where abortion is available under most circumstances (79%) or banned (68%).</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Over four in ten (42%) OBGYNs report that they are very or somewhat concerned about their own legal risk when making decisions about patient care and the necessity of abortion. This rises to more than half of OBGYNs practicing in states with gestational limits (59%) and abortion bans (61%).</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Eight in ten OBGYNs approve of a recent policy change from the FDA that allows certified pharmacies to dispense medication abortion pills.</li></ul></ul></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>ABORTION SERVICES</b></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"><ul style="text-align: left;"><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">Nearly one in five (18%) officed-based OBGYNs nationally say that they are providing abortion services after the Dobbs About three in ten OBGYNs (29%) practicing in states where abortion is available under most circumstances offer abortion care, compared to just 10% in states with gestational restrictions. There were already large differences between states prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Many of the states that have abortion restrictions today had these or similar restrictions in place prior to the Dobbs decision.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Nationally, 14% of OBGYNs say they provide in-person medication abortions, but only 5% say they provide telehealth medication abortions.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">In states where abortion is banned, essentially no OBGYNs offer abortions, except under very limited circumstances. Additionally, nearly half (48%) of OBGYNs in these states only offer information, such as online resources, to help patients seek out abortion services on their own, but 30% do not even offer their patients referrals to another clinician or any information about abortion.</li></ul></ul></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>CONTRACEPTION</b></div></blockquote><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">More than half (55%) of OBGYNs nationally say they have seen an increase in the share of patients seeking some form of contraception since the Dobbs ruling, particularly sterilization (43%) and IUDs and implants (47%).</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Nearly all OBGYNs offer their patients some form of contraceptive care, but only 29% make all methods of contraception available to their patients, including all three methods of emergency contraception (copper intrauterine device (IUD), ulipristal acetate/Ella, and levonorgestrel/Plan B).</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Only one-third of OBGYNs (34%) prescribe or provide all three methods of emergency contraception and one in seven (15%) do not provide any methods of emergency contraception to their patients. A quarter of OBGYNS (25%) only prescribe or provide Plan B, which is available over the counter.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">Availability of care via telehealth expanded greatly after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Today, almost seven in ten OBGYNs (69%) nationally say they provide at least some care via telehealth.</li></ul></ul><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBBpWCEx33J72E3kpGU15FpnC-bk0aX8Xi0wmHhXc-wbPbp1AAnLCZK56WkuGDhosOzaG-JbnT6VFEd5--2nw3EC4rWg9kMEgSRQHjIpAeDUm_0JFCPPpPIwgkXBhVuN4eggsEYYN0eZCrR9zD29L4_XxrB2IhoS_rYgIV_GVqUpSRJQY1TfDZAYmIS6k/s668/Capture%202.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="322" data-original-width="668" height="193" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBBpWCEx33J72E3kpGU15FpnC-bk0aX8Xi0wmHhXc-wbPbp1AAnLCZK56WkuGDhosOzaG-JbnT6VFEd5--2nw3EC4rWg9kMEgSRQHjIpAeDUm_0JFCPPpPIwgkXBhVuN4eggsEYYN0eZCrR9zD29L4_XxrB2IhoS_rYgIV_GVqUpSRJQY1TfDZAYmIS6k/w400-h193/Capture%202.JPG" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://files.kff.org/attachment/Report-A-National-Survey-of-OBGYNs-Experiences-After-Dobbs.pdf" target="_blank">From</a> "A National Survey of OBGYNs' Experiences<br />after Dobbs" (p. 15)</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div>This is our brave new world.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Update, 29 June 2023: </b>Here's a great <a href="https://jessica.substack.com/p/a-year-without-roe-in-the-data" target="_blank">link</a> to Grace Haley's "A Year Without Roe: In the Data," posted at Jessica Valenti's <i>Abortion, Every Day.</i></div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">The data and research that's come out over these last few weeks paint a stark picture of our first year without Roe. We wanted to share with you what people’s lives have looked like by pulling out a few statistics to pay particular attention to. There are three main themes encapsulated by these reports: documenting the harm done by abortion bans, the shifting public view on abortion, and accounting for what the future will look like in the post-Roe world. </blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><b style="font-weight: bold;">Update, 12 September 2023: </b>For ways to address the problem of maternal mortality, see Mara Gay's <i>NYT </i>opinion piece, "America Already Knows How to Make Childbirth Safer" (click <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/maternal-health-childbirth.html#:~:text=Healthier%20pregnancies%20and%20safer%20deliveries,cause%20of%20deaths%20from%20childbirth." target="_blank">here</a>).</div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-90281849557841707272023-06-12T00:00:00.516-07:002023-06-12T10:09:37.194-07:00Gwenllian of Wales, Captive Princess<h3 style="text-align: left;"> Gwenllian, Captive Princess of Wales (born 12? June 1282)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Born on 12 June 1282 (perhaps), Gwenllian of Wales had a glittering royal heritage.* She was the only child of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, prince of Wales, whose grandfather was <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Llywelyn_ab_Iorwerth" target="_blank">Llywelyn ab Iorwerth</a>, "Llewelyn the Great," who fought to consolidate power for decades until he could claim the title of prince of Wales.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAYabE9e546YjpF91_q5Rpv-narZjFDiLu7D3ojuxdRyVwQvnBLuFJzr5n3eTW9_c9kHup3g3jZpGoIzFhTfMLPndVexzd9GryLMHuMtzMF_HEWcSgxkizjCXroYIoUt0gt4qT9eaMggPC6_uN9rjuMThuAdkqWhTYi_gX-ArYAyJZbvFN1rpiXabu/s285/675px-Gwenllian_memorial_Sempringham.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="256" data-original-width="285" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAYabE9e546YjpF91_q5Rpv-narZjFDiLu7D3ojuxdRyVwQvnBLuFJzr5n3eTW9_c9kHup3g3jZpGoIzFhTfMLPndVexzd9GryLMHuMtzMF_HEWcSgxkizjCXroYIoUt0gt4qT9eaMggPC6_uN9rjuMThuAdkqWhTYi_gX-ArYAyJZbvFN1rpiXabu/s1600/675px-Gwenllian_memorial_Sempringham.jpg" width="285" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gwenllian_memorial_Sempringham.jpg" target="_blank">Detail from</a> a memorial to <br />Gwenllian, princess of Wales,<br />noting her date of birth<br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Gwenllian's mother was Eleanor de Montfort (click <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2021/04/eleanor-of-england-countess-of-leicester.html" target="_blank">here</a> and scroll down), who was the daughter of <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2021/04/eleanor-of-england-countess-of-leicester.html" target="_blank">Eleanor of England, countess of Leicester</a> (and of the powerful Simon de Montfort, earl of Leicester). Eleanor de Montfort was the granddaughter of King John of England, making <i>her</i> daughter, Gwenllian, the great great granddaughter of the formidable <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/12/eleanor-of-aquitaine-and-other-women.html" target="_blank">Eleanor of Aquitaine</a>, queen of England. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">(Through her paternal line, Gwenllian was also related to the English monarchy. Her great grandfather, Llywelyn ab Iorwerth, had married a daughter of King John of England, <a href="https://biography.wales/article/s12-JOAN-TYW-1237" target="_blank">Joan</a>, whose mother is unknown.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But, despite Gwenllian’s royal heritage, her life was to be no fairytale. Instead, her life began and ended in blood, death, and deprivation. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Gwenllian's mother died on 19 June 1282, just having given birth to her only child. By the end of the year, Gwenllian's father was dead as well, killed in battle on 11 December 1282. </div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Dafydd ap Gruffydd assumed the title of prince of Wales after his brother's death, and with it he became the guardian of his niece, Gwenllian. But within ten months, he too was dead. On 22 June 1283, he was captured by Edward I of England's forces. The wounded Dafydd ap Gruffydd was transferred to Shrewsbury <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Llywelyn_ap_Gruffudd/yl6uBwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA580&printsec=frontcover&bshm=nce/1" target="_blank">along with other members of his family</a>--his wife, Elizabeth de Ferrers, their daughter, Gwladys ferch Dafydd, their sons, Davydd's six illegitimate daughters, and his niece, Gwenllian, then just about a year old. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 30 September, Dafydd ap Gruffyd was hanged, drawn, and quartered. His sons were sent to Bristol Castle, where they were imprisoned until their deaths (the elder died in 1287, the younger about 1325). Gwladys was sent to <a href="https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/lincs/vol2/pp194-195" target="_blank">Priory of St. Mary's at Sixhills</a>, a convent in Lincolnshire, where she died about 1336. The fate of Davydd ap Gryffyd's illegitimate daughters is unknown, though in his <a href="https://biography.wales/article/s-DAFY-APG-1283" target="_blank">entry</a> in the <i>Dictionary of Welsh National Biography</i>, Thomas Jones Pierce suggests they too may have ended their days in convents: "There are no records of David's marital associations before his alliance with Elizabeth Ferrers; but he had a large number of daughters who appear to have ended their days in various nunneries." Equally unknown is the fate of Davydd's wife, Elizabeth de Ferrers.<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for Gwenllian--after her uncle's capture, she was sent to the <a href="https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/lincs/vol2/pp179-187" target="_blank">Priory of Sempringham</a> in Lincolnshire. According to the English chronicler <a href="https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/ABA2096.0001.001/1:3?rgn=div1;view=fulltext" target="_blank">Robert Mannyng</a>, emphasizing the little girl's tender age, she was delivered to the priory "in her cradle." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Like Sixhills, where her cousin Gwladys had been sent, this foundation had also been established by Ghilbert of Sempringham. About the selection of these two convents in Lincolnshire, historian J. Beverly Smith <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Llywelyn_ap_Gruffudd/yl6uBwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA580&printsec=frontcover&bshm=nce/1" target="_blank">notes</a>, "The choice of nunneries is not readily explained, but the houses were far enough from Wales, and Sempringham was a major house with accommodation for as many as 200 nuns." The accommodations were <a href="https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/lincs/vol2/pp179-187" target="_blank">not luxurious</a>: "the convent was at no time wealthy; though the standard of life seems always to have been simple[,] the revenues were small for the number of inmates."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Whatever the reason for his decision, it was a useful place for inconvenient women and girls. In his history of religious houses in Lincolnshire, William Page <a href="https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/lincs/vol2/pp179-187" target="_blank">notes</a>, "Probably by reason of its position as the head house of a purely English order, Sempringham was in high favour with the three Edwards, who sent thither wives and daughters of their chief enemies." <br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 11 November 1283, just months after he had executed Gwenllian's uncle, Edward I dictated a letter to Sempringham, noting that he had spared the child: "pitying . . . her sex and her age," the king had not condemned "the innocent" to "atone for the iniquity and ill-doing of the wicked." Charging the priory with her maintenance, the king "allowed the acquisition of certain lands" to be held in perpetuity as compensation.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6UloAodhyDElSr-HTNTazKRUsqk0poz_3fruhvQERYVU52QDrxVZV4rRVcXLCuQNnWS_H3v2Tows4vW02hJzhtuTePefx1mub-bRya7M_2zrr7-ZXN9dEAFu7ptnFKS7OvOE-PjQGK1Y0HHg7DzP62oI4dHYXLOlM0AJAps_Ezilhm4a8CXnLvXS8/s894/342328143_546950707585396_4819094248794458539_n.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="894" data-original-width="843" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6UloAodhyDElSr-HTNTazKRUsqk0poz_3fruhvQERYVU52QDrxVZV4rRVcXLCuQNnWS_H3v2Tows4vW02hJzhtuTePefx1mub-bRya7M_2zrr7-ZXN9dEAFu7ptnFKS7OvOE-PjQGK1Y0HHg7DzP62oI4dHYXLOlM0AJAps_Ezilhm4a8CXnLvXS8/s320/342328143_546950707585396_4819094248794458539_n.jpg" width="302" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption"><div style="text-align: center;">The <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/cymdeithasgwenllian/posts/1968553503352018/" target="_blank">Princess Gwenllian daffodil</a>,</div><div style="text-align: center;">"created for Mallt Anderson, </div><div style="text-align: center;">the founder of the Princess Gwenllian Society"</div></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">In 1289, the king <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Normanville,_Thomas_de" target="_blank">arranged</a> for Thomas de Normanville, a Lincolnshire justice, to check on both Gwenllian and her cousin: "he was summoned to a council at Westminster to be held on 13 Oct[ober], and on 2 Sept[ember]. In the following year he was directed to report on the condition of the daughters [sic] of Llywelyn ab Gruffydd." In his mandate, Edward referred to both girls as having "taken the veil." Gwenllian would have been just seven. (Although she would spend her life among the nuns at Sempringham, she does not seem to have taken vows, nor did her cousin Gwladys.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In 1327, Edward III granted £20 a year for Gwenllian, to be paid to the priory for her maintenance. Gwenllian would have been about forty-five years old. This pension was granted in response to a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/cymdeithasgwenllian/" target="_blank">petition from Gwenllian</a>: "Wentliane [Gwenllian], daughter of Lewelyn [Llywelyn] formerly the Prince of Wales prays the king of his grace to remember and aid her since the king . . . promised her when she was put in the house of Sempringham. . . ."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Gwenllian, princess of Wales, died at the Priory of Sempringham on 7 June 1337, just days before her fifty-fifth birthday. The date is noted by the chronicler Mannyng, who referred to her as Lleywelyn's "dear daughter," and as a "daughter of Wales" who had "remained" in England. According to Mannyng, Gwenllian (whom he calls "Wencilian") was "full courteous" (<i>courtly</i>,<i> </i>in the sense of having the manner, bearing, and conduct of a noblewoman), her death was "much lamented" by all.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As a further note about women held captive in convents: After the defeat of Robert the Bruce at the battle of Methven in 1306, his sister and his elder daughter were both imprisoned in Ghilbertine convents, Christian (Christina) Bruce at Sixhills, where Gwladys was confined, and Marjorie Bruce at Watton, in Yorkshire. The two women were freed in 1314 after Bruce's victory at Bannockburn. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Among the <a href="https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/lincs/vol2/pp179-187#fnn79" target="_blank">other aristocratic women</a> sent to Sempringham were Margaret de Clare, countess of Cornwall, who was detained there by Hugh Despenser from 1322 to 1326 during the reign of Edward II; Joan Mortimer, the daughter of Roger Mortimer, sent there in 1324, also during the reign of Edward II; and two of Hugh Despenser's daughters were dispatched to Sempringham--they were still there in 1337. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For a longer list of royal and aristocratic women who were imprisoned for a variety of political motivations, click <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/09/sophia-dorothea-of-celle-forced.html" target="_blank">here</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*Although many sources indicate that the exact date of Gwenllian's birth in June is unknown, the birthdate of 12 June 1282 is inscribed on the memorial to her at Sempringham. Some who weigh in about the date of Gwenllian's birth argue that she was more likely born on 19 June, the day her mother died. Although the date is thus remains uncertain, I've used the date on her memorial as the occasion for today's post.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><br /></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-84210429630006132642023-05-10T21:37:00.024-07:002023-05-11T09:51:58.385-07:00Finding (and Naming) Florence B. Loftus, U. S. Customs Inspector<h3 style="text-align: left;">Florence B. Loftus, First Female U.S. Customs Inspector in Seattle, Washington </h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A few weeks ago, my son sent me a series of texts. "Soooo," he began. "This was unearthed. All the customs inspectors in Seattle 1904-1913."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The "this" he referred to was plaque containing dozens of small photographs. But before I could find my glasses so I could see exactly what he'd sent, there was a second text: "Everybody has a name BUT ONE."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As you might be able to guess from the title of this post, the "ONE" unnamed portrait on the plaque was the lone woman in the group. All the other photos were neatly labeled with the names of the pictured men. The woman, by contrast, was identified only by her job title, "Inspectress."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIooRdt0mA7yAL4X9fLDF1FhdKo7RFb_kz8BbA168yg2I-7u74I_KSwkH0AIuNK_Rkda3ZXcxOk47snA3eQxQzEeCL1y9LcdT0Bd8PLtDuNp37bBjbT8zRXyTpm06P52-jJlQJccuPUW-Iwl7BGKTnPoGNrW8aWEenq9-8rah1wMEDJLld6JccwwuM/s1588/Inspectoress%20cropped.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1588" data-original-width="1491" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIooRdt0mA7yAL4X9fLDF1FhdKo7RFb_kz8BbA168yg2I-7u74I_KSwkH0AIuNK_Rkda3ZXcxOk47snA3eQxQzEeCL1y9LcdT0Bd8PLtDuNp37bBjbT8zRXyTpm06P52-jJlQJccuPUW-Iwl7BGKTnPoGNrW8aWEenq9-8rah1wMEDJLld6JccwwuM/s320/Inspectoress%20cropped.jpeg" width="300" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The unidentified female customs inspector,<br />the only inspector without a name <br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Of course my son was pretty sure of what would happen next. I had to find out who this unnamed "inspectress" was. He knows exactly how to push my buttons.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">My son is a supervisory officer for U.S. Customs, working at the Port of Seattle. He and his colleagues had somehow come across a wood-framed, star-spangled plaque with a shield in the middle identifying the group pictured on it: "Customs Inspectors Stationed at the Port of Seattle, 1904-1913." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Carefully arranged around the central shield and among the silver stars were 45 separate photographs, each one of a customs inspector. Most were identified by their initials and last name: "S. T. Boardman," "R. L. Ballinger," and "J. A. Hock," for example. A few had their first names in addition to their surnames: "Moses Knox," "Perry Stiffler," and "Harry Lehr," among them. One guy's name was abbreviated: "Thos. Jarrett." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But there was that one, crucial exception. It takes a minute to find the single woman in this crowd--the photo of the "inspectress" is just below the point of the shield. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuH0cCANWg-Y6TBsAxRAgUzRFXZV4QMiwYQkpanpbdpf2RuR--sNx3qX3s20b2Nm6IgEFG023pEnZTHElmH7HxNYEIysr3eOD--zKfTdYFdwEK3B1r55NZZ5A135GLOOIkIHsCMBz9fXNekEyoDJ4nSoEGU1PrnZgMUPsHmSwzy1Va_aJOkGiBHKjL/s4032/Plaque.JPEG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="4032" data-original-width="3024" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuH0cCANWg-Y6TBsAxRAgUzRFXZV4QMiwYQkpanpbdpf2RuR--sNx3qX3s20b2Nm6IgEFG023pEnZTHElmH7HxNYEIysr3eOD--zKfTdYFdwEK3B1r55NZZ5A135GLOOIkIHsCMBz9fXNekEyoDJ4nSoEGU1PrnZgMUPsHmSwzy1Va_aJOkGiBHKjL/s320/Plaque.JPEG" width="240" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The plaque identifying 44 (of 45)<br />"Customs Inspectors <br />Stationed at the Port of Seattle,<br />1904-1913"</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">And just like that, I was hooked. I still hadn't finished my morning coffee by the time I found Kit Oldham and Peter Blecha's <i>Rising Tides and Tailwinds: The Story of the Port of Seattle 1911–2011</i> (Port of Seattle, 2011 [to access, click <a href="https://blog.historylink.org/wp-content/themes/POS-040511a.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>]) as well as Padraic Burke's earlier <i>A History of the Port of Seattle </i>(Port of Seattle, 1976, click <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_History_of_the_Port_of_Seattle/_xW3AAAAIAAJ?hl=en" target="_blank">here</a> to preview and search inside). They were fascinating histories, but not really about the Customs Office operating out of the port. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">There were a few interesting references to the operations of the Customs Service in Clarence Bagley's <a href="https://archive.org/search?query=Clarence+Bagley+History+of+Seattle" target="_blank">two-volume</a> <i>History of Seattle from the Earliest Settlement to the Present Time </i>(1916), although I admit I got a sidetracked by the first sentence of the second volume: "The opportunity to prove that Seattle was established on a foundation of law and order, that it was not a child of every passing whim or prejudice, came early in 1896 when the Anti-Chinese craze reached its boundaries."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Once I got myself back on track, I realized that Bagley's book didn't have the kind of information I was looking for either. Turning to an online search, I found the U.S. Customs and Border Protection website--there, in a section under "History," is a question: "Did You Know?" I certainly did not know that in 1927 Anna C. M. Tillinghast was appointed as a district commissioner of immigration (for Boston), becoming "the first woman appointed to this position in the Department of Labor's Bureau of Immigration." But I know now. (For a biographical sketch of Tillinghast at the USCBP website, click <a href="https://www.cbp.gov/about/history/did-you-know/anna-tillinghast" target="_blank">here</a>.)<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">At the <a href="https://customsmuseum.org/history/history-of-customs-enforcement/" target="_blank">website</a> of the National U.S. Customs Museum Foundation, I learned that, in 1829, a woman named Elizabeth Kelly worked as a nurse at the Customhouse in New Orleans and that "she may have been first female employed by Customs." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And I discovered that, after the Civil War, the U.S. Congress passed an "Act Further to Prevent Smuggling and for Other Purposes," providing for the hiring of female customs inspectors, whose duties were the "examination and search" of women, presumably those suspected of some sort of customs violation. (I even tracked down the act--39th U.S. Congress, Session 1, Chapter 201, <a href="https://www.loc.gov/resource/llsalvol.llsal_014/?sp=210&st=image&r=-0.576,-0.021,2.151,0.803,0" target="_blank">18 July 1866</a>: "the Secretary of the Treasury may from time to time prescribe regulations for the search of persons and baggage, and for the employment of female inspectors for the examination and search of persons of their own sex.")</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While I was at the Customs Museum website, I also learned that 1874 was the first time "badges" were used for inspectors "on special service," that is, “District Inspectors. Boarding Inspectors, Coast Inspectors, Frontier Inspectors, Night Inspectors, <b>Female Inspectors </b>[emphasis added], Discharge Inspectors and Special Inspectors."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As fascinating as all this was, it wasn't getting me any closer to finding the identity of the unnamed female inspector working at the port of Seattle between 1904 and 1913. My next move was to head to the digital archives for Seattle's two major newspapers at the time, the <i>Seattle Daily Times </i>(now the <i>Seattle Times</i>) and the <i>Seattle Post-Intelligencer</i>,<i> </i>both of which are made available online through the Seattle Public Library.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><br /></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But before I could begin (not that I knew how I could find the unnamed woman, aside from trawling through decades of newspapers), I got yet another text from my son, this one including yet another photo. And just like that, there she was, with her name, Florence Loftus:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1-YhLLg1KiFur1TPYDEen6QZoNZAEnfPb2SbIy_HqE3mq6BUhQl804Wzwn89DP2_64mzYZCBYRjCIvKKTCak27bTREXDLcnCUAt8itAQUQF-I7tN-fB38S3ClgiEwd33xy8dq9jVJ6AgkSgwcDJ7HQvCJYk4EH_dzfCvJHJOAD7NNVooWyjy8uELN/s3003/Frank%20and%20Florence%20Loftus.JPEG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2898" data-original-width="3003" height="309" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1-YhLLg1KiFur1TPYDEen6QZoNZAEnfPb2SbIy_HqE3mq6BUhQl804Wzwn89DP2_64mzYZCBYRjCIvKKTCak27bTREXDLcnCUAt8itAQUQF-I7tN-fB38S3ClgiEwd33xy8dq9jVJ6AgkSgwcDJ7HQvCJYk4EH_dzfCvJHJOAD7NNVooWyjy8uELN/s320/Frank%20and%20Florence%20Loftus.JPEG" width="320" /></a></div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This photo of a photo came from one of my son's colleagues, a man very interested in the history of the Customs Service in Seattle, the image he captured appearing in a United States Customs Service publication by Harvey Steele,<i> Northern Approaches: The United States Customs Service in Washington, 1851-1997</i> (1998).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As it turns out, Florence's husband, Chief Inspector Frank P. Loftus, was, in Steele's words, "one of the truly legendary figures in the history of U.S. Customs of Washington," and there is an entire section of <i>Northern Approaches</i> dedicated to his career. The only mention of Florence's career, by contrast, is in the caption to this photo (above): taking up her position in 1909, she "discharg[ed] her duties with, in the words of a press account at the time, 'as clear an eye . . . as any of the uniformed men who work beside her.'"</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Having found her name, I could search for Inspector Florence Loftus in the Seattle newspapers. While there were scores of articles chronicling the daring escapades of Chief Inspector Loftus throughout the many decades of his service, I could find very little about Florence's activities. The first reference is from an article in the 29 May 1911 edition of the <i>Seattle Post-Intelligencer</i>, "Woman Inspector Searches Grips."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWjyJ4fOT6CRKJv-kRXg8b-la_oYQq4z8E3Rrv_GEpgfBecd4QTfhm_fRlVkgT9LIFUrSw6zRgOueASddPoDy6bxGRDQSv09HGgJlWk8vZDrNAXilmpPDvRKvcAl_wjPMSu9pxF25YUrHDiKnHDbTj9zJRCVMHxJVKKyGypbm1xZcpC3zxT3WVYm4c/s603/Capture.JPG" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="603" data-original-width="189" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWjyJ4fOT6CRKJv-kRXg8b-la_oYQq4z8E3Rrv_GEpgfBecd4QTfhm_fRlVkgT9LIFUrSw6zRgOueASddPoDy6bxGRDQSv09HGgJlWk8vZDrNAXilmpPDvRKvcAl_wjPMSu9pxF25YUrHDiKnHDbTj9zJRCVMHxJVKKyGypbm1xZcpC3zxT3WVYm4c/w200-h640/Capture.JPG" width="200" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Seattle Post-Intelligencer</i>.<br />29 May 1911, p. 8</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">This piece does mention her status as the wife of Frank Loftus, but it also shows a competent professional woman performing her job. Noting that she is the "first woman customs inspector at this [Seattle's] port," the article adds that she is an experienced inspector, performing her work with a "practiced hand."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is the news story from which Steele has drawn his brief description of Florence. She has "as clear an eye" as her male colleagues, but the description omitted by Steele's ellipses (above) notes that she is "as energetic and devoted to her task" as the men with whom she works. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Florence Loftus dispatches her duties "rapidly," "thoroughly," and "quietly." I also love the description of her professional attire: "a neat-fitting dark blue serge suit without ornamentation."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The article mentions that she sometimes acts as "matron" for female travelers. I am not quite sure what the role of "matron" would entail, though the article suggests that, in addition to her other duties, she offer assistance of some sort: "Sometimes the office of a matron is convenient for the women travelers, and this Mrs. Loftus will perform in addition to that of inspector."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A second article appears in the <i>Seattle Daily Times</i>, dated 20 February 1917, “Woman Arrested as Smuggler of Opium,” again referring to Florence Loftus’s work for the Customs Service—this time, her activities seem more in line with the original role as envisioned in the 1866 congressional act. According to the <i>Seattle Times </i>story, the arrested woman was “turned over to Mrs. Loftus, wife of Chief Inspector Frank P. Loftus, to be searched.”</div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Finally, in 1920, two articles published in the <i>Seattle Daily Times</i> mention Florence Loftus in her professional capacity. The first, from 1 November, is headlined "Women Smugglers to Receive More Attention." According to the <i>Times </i>story, "Miss Alice R. Lyons," has been newly appointed as an inspector in the Customs Service in Seattle. Her "duties will be to search all women who are suspected of trying to bring in narcotics, liquor or contraband merchandise, and to supervise all feminine passengers arriving in Seattle.” As a new female inspector, she “will work with Mrs. F. P. Loftus, the only other woman inspector now in the customs service in this state.”</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A second, longer article about the new hiring in the Customs Office appears in the <i>Seattle Daily Times</i> a few days later, on 7 November, “Women Bootleggers Out of Luck; Woman Customs Officer Named.” What’s interesting here is that the story focuses not on Florence Loftus, who has been working some 10 years by this point, but on Alice Lyons, who is only 21 years old. The article states that “Mrs. F. P. Loftus” has “myriad other duties” that seem to keep her so busy that they “preclude a close watch over women bringing proof of their visits to other countries,” so the hiring of a second female inspector has been made. I wish there was more about Florence Loftus's "myriad other duties." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And that's all I've been able to discover about Florence Loftus's career as a Customs inspector. She does appear several times in the <i>Official Register of the United States Containing a List of the Officers of the Civil, Military and Naval Services</i>, but these volumes only contain her job title and her salary. (Click <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Official_Register_of_the_United_States/PaO5BXSMe5YC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Inspectress+florence+loftus&pg=PA793&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">here</a> for the register from 1919, for example.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The two Seattle papers do contain many more references to the activities of "Mrs. Frank P. Loftus," but these are all in the society columns--tea parties and card parties and costume parties and dinner parties and trips to and fro. They show her involvement with a number of local charities and with many friends, but they reveal little about the inner woman, the kinds of things I'd like to know: why she began working with the Customs Service, what her daily work routine was like, how she saw her role in the Customs Service, and how--or whether--her work was important to her. Was she treated well by her male colleagues? Did they value her contributions to the service? Did they resent her, as the wife of the chief inspector?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">What followed for me, in the next few days, was a long and increasingly single-minded search to track down Florence Loftus on various genealogy sites. I could find a bit more about her, but not much. She first appears as "Flora B. Summers" in the 1880 U.S. Census, when she and her brother, Harry, are living in the home of their grandparents, Abraham and Susanna Summers. She is said to be 9 years old, which would put the year of her birth about 1870 or 1871. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There is no clue about who her parents are--the only reference I could find to her father was on her death certificate, where he is said to be "Frank Sommers [sic]." But no online family history information indicates that Abraham and Sarah had a son named Frank, nor have I been able to track down any man by that name whose details--age, birthplace, marital status, residence, children--conform to those provided in various U.S. Census records where information about Florence's parents is recorded. In the 1880 census, Florence's grandfather reports that her father was born in Ohio. This is the same information Florence herself provides in the 1900 census, but by 1910 she is reporting that her father was born in Pennsylvania. In subsequent years, she goes back and forth in reporting these various places for her father's birth. About her mother, the records are also silent, except that she was born in Scotland. Or Nebraska. Florence's accounts vary.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Despite all the genealogical information available online, I still can't even be sure about Florence's date of birth. I can't find a record of her birth anywhere. In 1880, her grandfather says she is 9 years old, making the year of her birth about 1870 or 1871, as I said. But when Florence herself is reporting the year of her birth, it varies wildly--in the 1900 census, the first where she is providing the information for herself, she does say that she was born in 1870 (in March of that year, to be precise). So far, this confirms her grandfather's information. But after that, there is nothing but confusion: in 1910, she claims to be 34 years old, which would make her birth in 1876; in the 1920 census, she claims to be 38, which would make her year of birth 1882; in the 1930 census, she claims to be 50, which would make her year of birth 1880; according to her death certificate, Florence was born on 17 October 1876—her age is recorded as 63 years, 1 month, and 4 days. Does this solve the question about her year of birth definitively?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Aside from these inconsistencies, Florence and her husband also have trouble remembering the date of their marriage. A society note in the 12 August 1889 <i>Seattle Daily Times </i>reports the arrival of "Mr. and Mrs. Frank P. Loftus" in Seattle in order to attend a "camping party." But, oops, the couple's marriage certificate shows that they weren't married until a month later: on 12 September 1889, Florence Summers, of Pierce County, Territory of Washington, marries Frank P. Loftus, of Jefferson County, Territory of Washington, in St. Leo’s Church, Tacoma, Territory of Washington.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But even with a marriage certificate, these two can't seem to remember when they were married. In the 1900 census, they report that they've been married 10 years, which would be about right, but in the 1910 census, they report they have been married for 15 years. The 1930 census, instead of asking how long a person has been married, asks for age at “first marriage,” which Frank lists as 28 and Florence as 16—if he was born in 1861 (which is what his death certificate says), that would mean Frank married for the first time about the year 1889 which is, in fact, the date on the marriage certificate. If Florence is 50 years old, as she claims in this census, this would mean she married for the first time in 1896 . . . If she were born in 1870 or 1871, as her grandfather reported (and she claimed in 1900), her first marriage would have been about 1886, but if she were born in 1876, as she also reports, her marriage would have been<span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"> about 1892.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">As you can tell, I've spent a lot of time trying to track down and sort through details about Florence Loftus's life. The difficulties she has with dates--her date of birth and her marriage, specifically--have become something of an obsession, and I have tried to figure out whether both she and Frank are simply careless with dates or whether there is some reason for the confusion. All I can say for sure is that <i>if</i> (a big "if") she were born in 1876, as her death certificate indicates, she would have been 13 years old when she married Frank (age 28) in 1889--and maybe some discomfort about that early marriage is the reason behind the discrepancies. Or maybe not--who knows? I have had weeks now to concoct all kinds of fanciful stories and scandals, but the simplest explanation is probably that dates weren't really important to them.</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">And there is no information at all about how Florence B. Summers made her way from Ohio, where she was living with her grandparents in 1880, to California, and then to Washington, where she was married in 1889 to Frank Loftus, who himself came from California. She probably traveled west with her brother, Harry, since his wife (and later, widow) spends time with Florence and Frank in Seattle, and Harry seems to have resided in California and/or in Port Townsend, Washington (accounts vary). According to that 1880 census, the one where Florence and her brother were living with their grandparents, Harry was just a year or two older than his sister. If they traveled west as teenagers, did they travel alone? Who or what were they hoping to find in California? Why did they decide to move on to Washington? </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">So personal information about Florence Loftus remains almost as elusive as details about her role as a Customs inspector. The most personal details of Florence's professional life are revealed when her husband commits suicide on 7 November 1937. I found the death certificate of Frank Loftus well after midnight one night, and I was shocked. I'd become so invested in Frank and Florence that when I saw his cause of death--"Right temple gunshot wound, Suicide, self-inflicted, home"--I found it unexpectedly upsetting. </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">I went back to the digitized archive of Seattle newspapers--I'd stopped searching them when Frank Loftus retired from the Customs Service in 1932. I had read a couple of articles about his retirement, then turned back to searching for genealogical information about Florence. But as I searched now, I found that both Seattle papers had printed big articles on the suicide of Frank Loftus, the storied Chief Inspector whose amazing exploits had filled so many column inches in the decades of his service. </span><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">The front-page story in the </span><i style="text-indent: -0.5in;">Seattle Post-Intelligencer </i><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">was </span><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">particularly lurid ("Maddened by pain from which medical science was unable to offer him any relief," he had "found his peace in his own way" by shooting himself "through the head in his home").</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">The accounts of this terrible tragedy allow us--perhaps--to hear the voice of Florence Loftus. In the <i>Times </i>account of Loftus's death: "He has been suffering for more than two years," Florence is reported to have said, "But to have him go so suddenly leaves me almost stunned. He always has been so cheerful" ("Frank P. Loftus Ends Own Life," <i>Seattle Daily Times</i>,8 November 1937,<i> </i>p. 19). </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;">The <i>P-I </i>quotes Florence as well, but in keeping with its more sensational account of Frank Loftus's suicide, the scene is melodramatic. Informed of her husband's death, Florence reportedly asks, "He--he didn't shoot himself, did he?" And then, when her fears are confirmed, she "wailed." From the article: </span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-indent: -0.5in;"><br /></span></div><div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS_yOuO8go0EmipQnBYYuq4imWpbQRtGhLxq0Vj_Ut4g0yOuM56Zq7nxvPN_QPFfoVfjV2AyNpz6blP663jSmvR_XheWgQHETKP-fz0XOqulK0pWMTMFpLM7jJUj8on2a5N-yvJpWhdXcWh2kKZ5maKd1kR8tkTaViMi-HrycOrKKn_eewzO3XgkJk/s448/FL.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="211" data-original-width="448" height="151" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiS_yOuO8go0EmipQnBYYuq4imWpbQRtGhLxq0Vj_Ut4g0yOuM56Zq7nxvPN_QPFfoVfjV2AyNpz6blP663jSmvR_XheWgQHETKP-fz0XOqulK0pWMTMFpLM7jJUj8on2a5N-yvJpWhdXcWh2kKZ5maKd1kR8tkTaViMi-HrycOrKKn_eewzO3XgkJk/s320/FL.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>"</i>Frank Loftus, Ex-Customs Aid, Suicide, <br />Suffering Leads Invalid to Take Life,"<br /><i>Seattle Post-Intelligencer</i>, 8 November 1937, p. 1</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I say we can "perhaps" hear Florence's own voice, because although her words are put in quotation marks in these stories, we can’t be really sure they are <i>her </i>words--"her" voice is ventriloquized through the newspaper reporters as well as through those who who broke the news of her husband’s death to her. We only "hear" her voice indirectly, transmitted by someone who spoke to her and conveyed "her" words to a reporter, who then included them in the article on Frank's death printed in the paper. They may be her words. Or maybe the news writer made them up. Who can be sure?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But there are a couple of details in these accounts of Frank Loftus's suicide that do give us a bit of insight into Florence Loftus's professional life. First, she was "on duty" when her husband killed himself. Although Frank Loftus had retired 5 years earlier, in 1932, Florence clearly continued to work. She was "at the Great Northern dock, meeting a Japanese ship" when news of her husband's death was given to her. And second, she would continue at the Customs Service. The day after her husband's suicide, in fact, the <i>Seattle Daily Times </i>reports, "Today his bereaved widow prepared to return to her work as a customs inspector." She would work for some time after her husband's death.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although I am still unclear about when Florence Summers Loftus was born, she died two years after her husband, on 21 November 1939. I was gratified to find that both Seattle papers published obituaries--each one noting her independent career as a U.S. Customs Inspector, not relegating her life to her role as the wife of a chief inspector of the Customs Service.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the <i>Seattle Daily Times, </i>her death was noted in the "Obituaries" column:</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwEbtLmU8Zj3FnhKkeHEV6JZWCiivWKrSMsuuqAvHfqerUS4aNmlg7DXN6CZMDXRXd6UXhn4AzIISJsiYPg1MjDLu-Um8pbx67gxy6CcGdoNf14G3l84DOFoasuAV3QTJ1oQSw4gFg_jGtWpJPONHiGfEMDFTyy6R58NQwUJ9BIJZ0HhCWvkuwl79T/s489/Times%20obituary.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="452" data-original-width="489" height="296" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwEbtLmU8Zj3FnhKkeHEV6JZWCiivWKrSMsuuqAvHfqerUS4aNmlg7DXN6CZMDXRXd6UXhn4AzIISJsiYPg1MjDLu-Um8pbx67gxy6CcGdoNf14G3l84DOFoasuAV3QTJ1oQSw4gFg_jGtWpJPONHiGfEMDFTyy6R58NQwUJ9BIJZ0HhCWvkuwl79T/s320/Times%20obituary.JPG" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Seattle Daily Times</i>, 22 November 1939, p. 14</td></tr></tbody></table></div></blockquote><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">In the <i>Post-Intelligencer</i>, a small article noted her death:</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div></div><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjL9iLLdHzzTK4FeV0vw0DcIXG83p7ARGZCwq5MeaahPxZl1lSu80aDlZDh3t_B7inDZGgJEQytZtMZYSss4Vyrmh8Goh55JlWvRmeqFsYA4q680AIebInBTFlfWtQc7RSu2628wCPwgvKZqtEIR3nfPc6z9VCJJ7-c9J-13ZxLk77F71cSifOKISFe/s619/PI%20obituary.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="619" data-original-width="513" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjL9iLLdHzzTK4FeV0vw0DcIXG83p7ARGZCwq5MeaahPxZl1lSu80aDlZDh3t_B7inDZGgJEQytZtMZYSss4Vyrmh8Goh55JlWvRmeqFsYA4q680AIebInBTFlfWtQc7RSu2628wCPwgvKZqtEIR3nfPc6z9VCJJ7-c9J-13ZxLk77F71cSifOKISFe/s320/PI%20obituary.JPG" width="265" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Seattle Post-Intelligencer</i>, 22 November 1939, p. 16</td></tr></tbody></table></div></blockquote><div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">And so here she is, Florence B. Summers Loftus, lost and found. An extraordinary "ordinary" life. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">One final note: I've spent weeks tracking down everything I could find out about Florence Loftus, her family, her movement from Nebraska to Ohio to California to Washington, her career in the Customs Service from 1909 to 1937. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">I know that she and her husband bought a Great Majestic Range in 1904, I know that she contributed to a Christmas charity fund in 1912, I know that she won "first prize" at a "guessing party" she attended in 1924. </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">But I still don't know what the "B" in her name stands for . . . </div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div>
<!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: "Garamond",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"></span>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-26793271991514353922023-04-11T19:25:00.005-07:002023-04-12T09:15:36.469-07:00Iowa Hates Rape Victims and Loves Their Rapists (Back to the Future, Part 19)<h3 style="text-align: left;">Iowa Halts Assistance for Victims of Sexual Assault, Back to the Future, Part 19</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It's hard to know how to classify this post--I decided to put it in with my "Back to the Future" series, but it could work equally well with "When Women Became No Longer Equal," or I guess I could have started a whole new category, "Really Fucked Up Shit." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiw13udhqj_k9PDrSk3QMVBDMFHdK4IJ8Ccd_pqFa3FKOcuZ1Rg_upnMSzBN6t7rjYgb49QGRVWXLSEP1KZUGuuNmuAppMJYtE_EIl0mpZ6HC5pVRT3c6dSccvmB8fveIxXIkWdFX4FsDdyIHCl7YiAz2RobTmvyrcUIW4a5VX9Hj5oQXBIxLEjm2wH/s1048/planb.JPG" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="677" data-original-width="1048" height="207" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiw13udhqj_k9PDrSk3QMVBDMFHdK4IJ8Ccd_pqFa3FKOcuZ1Rg_upnMSzBN6t7rjYgb49QGRVWXLSEP1KZUGuuNmuAppMJYtE_EIl0mpZ6HC5pVRT3c6dSccvmB8fveIxXIkWdFX4FsDdyIHCl7YiAz2RobTmvyrcUIW4a5VX9Hj5oQXBIxLEjm2wH/s320/planb.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But I just read in a CNN news story <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/11/us/iowa-funding-plan-b-abortions-sexual-assault-victims/index.html" target="_blank">posted this afternoon</a> that, in her review of "victim's services," Iowa's Attorney General, Breanna Bird (R, in case that isn't obvious), "has paused funding for emergency contraception and abortions for sexual assault victims." Yeah. Because one way to <b><i>serve</i></b> victims of sexual assault is to withhold essential services from them.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Of course, the Attorney General herself couldn't be bothered to respond to questions personally. Instead, she had her press secretary deliver this mealy-mouthed, pusillanimous comment: "While not required by Iowa law, the victim compensation fund has previously paid for Plan B and abortions. As a part of her top-down, bottom-up audit of victim assistance, Attorney General Bird is carefully evaluating whether this is an appropriate use of public funds."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">No, no, no! It's not cruelty. It's not depraved indifference. It's not about denying a rape victim essential medical treatment <b>if that's what she decides is best for her well-being</b>. It's all about the "appropriate" use of "public funds." Except it's not exactly public funds that are used: "Funds for the program are entirely made up of fines and penalties paid by convicted criminals, rather than general taxpayer money – a point victim advocacy groups emphasize."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And, by the way, "Juveniles accounted for the majority of sexual abuse victim costs paid for by Iowa’s state victim compensation funds, according to a <a href="https://www.iowaattorneygeneral.gov/media/documents/SFY2021_Annual_Report_3D8D04D64B0D6.pdf">2021 Iowa’s Victim Assistance report</a>." So much for all Breanna Bird's "pro-life" horseshit.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For William Morris and Michaela Ramm's report in the <i>Des Moines Register</i>, which includes the history of the program and Breanna Bird's "policies" that "reflect [Bird's] larger anti-abortion push," click <a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/health/2023/04/07/iowa-stops-paying-rape-victims-plan-b-abortions-under-attorney-general-brenna-bird/70082118007/" target="_blank">here</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For more on Plan B, from Whole Woman's Health, click <a href="https://www.wholewomanshealth.com/uncategorized/facts-on-plan-b/" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-80982272837513987592023-03-31T00:00:00.544-07:002023-03-31T09:13:35.145-07:00Charlotte de La Trémoille: A Woman with a "stomach to digest cannon"<h3>Charlotte de La Trémoille, countess of Derby, defender of Lathom House (died 31 March 1664)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Born in December 1599, Charlotte de La Trémoille was the daughter of Claude de La Trémoille, second duke of Thouars, and Charlotte Brabantina of Nassau--who was herself the daughter of William I, prince of Orange, and his third wife, Charlotte of Bourbon.*</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; text-align: justify;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD_Ps0AYOWyIXht33zOZpoX2AJlY5aALrSI2KKggAzSLn97w0T7a6HtkXqjGm6CTVZF_3HAccUxNW4NjrV_2VFJzrvrvEbIgeb5XQ1TVzcJJrY1uARNO1KuXRcJsDlvyz3XjWmjhE_kpPgUbNvlbvii1czK8QyVk4OCIscmFzkfcBi8Ksjxi-65K7D/s500/Charlotte_Countess_derby_crop.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="500" data-original-width="415" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiD_Ps0AYOWyIXht33zOZpoX2AJlY5aALrSI2KKggAzSLn97w0T7a6HtkXqjGm6CTVZF_3HAccUxNW4NjrV_2VFJzrvrvEbIgeb5XQ1TVzcJJrY1uARNO1KuXRcJsDlvyz3XjWmjhE_kpPgUbNvlbvii1czK8QyVk4OCIscmFzkfcBi8Ksjxi-65K7D/s320/Charlotte_Countess_derby_crop.jpg" width="266" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="text-align: start;">Charlotte de La Trémoille, 1641<br /><a href="https://www.artble.com/artists/anthony_van_dyck/paintings/james_seventh_earl_of_derby_his_lady_and_child" target="_blank">Detail</a> from painting by <br />Anthony VanDyke</span></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">On 26 June 1626, the younger Charlotte was <a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/76/mode/2up?q=Charlotte" target="_blank">married</a> to James Stanley, seventh earl of Derby, and the young couple fully enjoyed the gaieties of the Carolingian court, including taking part in masques written by the poet Ben Johnson. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 4 February 1629, Parliament <a href="https://www.british-history.ac.uk/commons-jrnl/vol1/p926" target="_blank">passed an act</a> "Naturalizing of the Right honourable the Lady Charlotte, Wife to the Right honourable James Lord Strange, Son and Heir apparent to Wm. Earl of Derby."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By 1635, however, Charlotte and her husband had retreated from court and its "gloomy politics," turning their attention to their growing family, which by this point included an heir, Charles, born in 1628, and two daughters, Henriette Marie (born in 1630) and Amelia Ann Sophia (born in 1633). </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In his extended history of the Stanley family, Peter Draper writes that the couple lived in "splendid privacy" in <a href="https://www.parksandgardens.org/places/lathom-house-and-park" target="_blank">Lathom House</a> (Lancashire) with James Stanley overseeing the family's properties in Lancashire and the Isle of Man. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">After the civil wars in England began in 1642, James Stanley "<a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Derby,_Earls_of#7th_Earl" target="_blank">devoted himself</a> to the king's cause." There were warnings about his loyalty to the king, however--among the reasons for suspicion was the upbringing of his wife, Charlotte, who had been brought up as a Huguenot and was <a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/86/mode/2up?q=Charlotte" target="_blank">said to have</a> the "principles of the Dutch."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although these suspicions kept King Charles from fully trusting him, "<a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/86/mode/2up?q=Charlotte" target="_blank">Stanley's loyalty</a> rose above any consideration of revenging himself by going over to the enemy." After briefly resigning from his lieutenancy, Stanley was restored to his position and took up arms in defense of the king. When his father died on 29 September 1642, James Stanley became seventh earl of Derby. But by that time, he had already been <a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/88/mode/2up?q=Charlotte" target="_blank">impeached for treason</a> by Parliament. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But this is not the place to pursue the activities of James Stanley during the civil wars. In 1643, after her husband was ordered to the Isle of Man (he had been named lord of Man in 1627, a title his father had also held), Lathom House was left in the the hands of the earl's wife, Charlotte.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">"<a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/110/mode/2up?q=Lathom&view=theater" target="_blank">Almost immediately</a>" after Stanley left for the Isle of Man, the general in charge of parliamentary forces in the north, Lord Thomas Fairfax, expected that the countess of Derby would surrender the castle to him. (Stanley himself knew that was not the case: his wife was a "person of virtue and honour equal to her high birth and quality.")</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWelVPLtva4kkLnUW8gfzLNK1aCQL1JHnbdR6ODqYfA_IKwgdOfJ6yi6PY2WKE5ZESijk-jSAI2gC_NJA1P-tDlxzid9rtl3E5V9zyVtn2YK4o7pRnTZMnf-xxazaXt23zY_QMfFmBCXjx3TQbqTJGNnEc9II0RujO7ytqdfbW-FYnA-SQnn3QwpEO/s1200/cr=w_1200,h_600.webp" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="600" data-original-width="1200" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWelVPLtva4kkLnUW8gfzLNK1aCQL1JHnbdR6ODqYfA_IKwgdOfJ6yi6PY2WKE5ZESijk-jSAI2gC_NJA1P-tDlxzid9rtl3E5V9zyVtn2YK4o7pRnTZMnf-xxazaXt23zY_QMfFmBCXjx3TQbqTJGNnEc9II0RujO7ytqdfbW-FYnA-SQnn3QwpEO/w400-h200/cr=w_1200,h_600.webp" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A nineteenth-century <a href="https://lathomcastle.online/the-place" target="_blank">engraving</a> that "reconstructs"<br />Lathom House, at the time of the civil wars</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Here is a <a href="https://lathomcastle.online/the-place" target="_blank">contemporary description</a> of the castle that the countess of Derby was called upon to defend:</div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">Standing on a flat moorish, springy and spumous ground, was at the time of the siege encompassed with a strong wall, of two yards thick: upon the wall were nine towers, flanking each other, and in every tower were six pieces of ordnance that played three one way and three the other. Without the wall, was a moat eight yards wide, and two yards deep; upon the brink of the moat, between the wall and the graff, was a strong row of palisadoes, and to add to these securities, there was a high tower called the Eagle Tower, in the midst of the house, surrounding all the rest; and the gatehouse was also a strong and high building with a strong tower on each side of it; and in the entrance to the first court upon the tops of these towers were placed the best and choicest marksmen. Before the house, to the south and south-west, there is a rising ground so near as to overlook the top of it, which falls so quick that nothing planted against it on those sides can touch it, further than the front walls. And on the north and east sides there is another rising ground, even to the edge of the moat, and then falls away so quick that you can scarce, at the distance of a carbine shot, see the house over the height.</blockquote></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In 1644, Fairfax demanded that the countess surrender the castle to him, but she refused; "she would neither tamely give up her house, nor purchase her peace with the loss of her honour." She asked that she be allowed a "peaceable abode" in her own home, keeping only a few soldiers who would ensure her preservation from the "outrages" of "common soldiers." Her requests were denied. (A <a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/110/mode/2up?q=Lathom&view=theater" target="_blank">journal account</a> of the events of the siege is included in Peter Draper's <i>The House of Stanley.</i>) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There followed a "continued siege," the countess becoming "a prisoner in her own walls." In addition, she had to suffer the sermons of various "men of God" who inveighed against her as the "scarlet whore" and the "whore of Babylon."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 28 February, Fairfax conveyed to her a parliamentary order to surrender to Lathom. In response, she asked for a week's delay. She had no second thoughts about her actions--according to the journal account of the siege, with her request for a delay, she sought to "gain time by demurs and protractions." She refused an offer to visit Fairfax at New Park, a house just about a quarter of a mile from Lathom; she reminded Fairfax of her husband's honor and "her own birth." Rather than her going to him, it was more "knightly" for Fairfax to come to her, and so she invited him to enter Lathom House as a guest, an invitation that was not <i>quite</i> accepted--on 2 March, Fairfax sent two colonels acting as his representatives with terms for her surrender.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 4 Monday, the countess replied to Fairfax by sending him her own terms. She asked for a month's delay, offering to surrender the castle if Fairfax would allow her, her children, her soldiers, and her household to leave peacefully and asking for him to provide her safe transport to the Isle of Man. She further stipulated that no parliamentary soldiers were be quartered at Lathom after she left and that none of her neighbors or friends to suffer afterward for their connections to her.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Fairfax demanded, instead, that the countess surrender the castle by ten o'clock the next morning. She "refused all their articles" and was "truly happy" that Fairfax had refused her terms, "protesting that she had rather hazard her life, than offer the like again. THAT THROUGH A WOMAN AND A STRANGER, DIVORCED FROM HER FRIENDS, AND ROBBED OF HER ESTATE, she was ready to receive their utmost violence, trusting in God both for protection and deliverance."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">Fairfax expected a "tame surrender," but he found that "her ladyship [was] fearless of . . . empty terrors." Facing "fixedness and resolution" in the countess, he offered her new terms a few days later. For her part, the countess replied that she would rather "preserve her liberty by arms, than to buy a peace with slavery."</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">Fairfax had some 2000 troops, the countess about 300. Under siege, the countess, her family, and her forces suffered bombardment and repeated charges from the parliamentary army. The siege continued through March and April--on 25 April she received yet another demand for submission. She replied to the messenger:</div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">Thou art but a foolish instrument of a traitor's pride. Tell that insolent rebel he shall neither have persons, goods, nor house: when our strength and provisions is spent, we shall find a fire more merciful . . . and then if the providence of God prevent it not, my goods and house shall burn in his sight: myself, children, and soldiers, rather than fall into his hands, will seal our religion and loyalty in the same flame. We will die for his Majesty and your honour! God save the King.</blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;">Because the house was so "well fenced against the shot of cannon," Fairfax came to believe that the defenders would have to be starved out of Lathom. A month later, on 23 May, the countess was once again asked if she would surrender; "they should never have her, nor any of her friends alive" was her response.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">On 25 May, Prince Rupert of the Rhine entered Lancashire with a royalist army, then met and defeated parliamentary forces; he "relieved and revenged the most noble lady, his cousin." On 27 May, the siege of Lathom House was lifted.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The countess of Derby, her children, and her household were able to leave Lathom House and join Stanley on the Isle of Man. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">A second siege of Lathom took place in 1645, when the castle fell to parliamentary forces. In 1649, after the execution of Charles I, James Stanley left the Isle of Man and joined the king's son, the future Charles II, taking part in his invasion of Lancashire in 1651. Stanley was with the king at the battle of Worcester, on 3 September, where royalist forces were defeated. Stanley was captured, tried for treason on 29 September, and condemned to death. He was executed on 15 October.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">On the Isle of Man, meanwhile, the countess of Derby was making every effort to save her husband. By 25 October 1651, a parliamentary fleet descended on the island--the earl had written to advise his wife that she "should no longer resist" a "power so unequal," but she did not receive these letters, nor did she know of her husband's death. The captain who was sent to treat with her referred cruelly to "the <i>late </i>Earl her husband" and informed her he would "take possession" of the island.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">She and her children were thus "betrayed into the hands of their enemies" and "the grand object of the Parliamentarians was attained." She was taken prisoner and held at Rushen Castle, on the Isle of Man, for nine years. After the Restoration of Charles II, the countess of Derby was freed. She had her revenge, at least in part--she made sure the man who had assumed control on the Isle of Man during her imprisonment was tried and executed, and she (unsuccessfully) tried to have the men who had condemned her husband punished. </p><p style="text-align: justify;">She retired to the Stanley family's Knowsley House, where she died on 31 March 1664.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Charlotte, countess of Derby, was later <a href="https://archive.org/details/houseofstanley0000pete/page/232/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Charlotte" target="_blank">memorialized</a> as "the last person in the three kingdoms, and in all their dependent dominions, who submitted to the victorious Commonwealth." (I don't think this is correct--Google tells me that Galway was the last place to fall to the forces of Cromwell, in 1652--but I think it's worth preserving this recognition of Charlotte de La Trémoille.)</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The phrase "stomach to digest a cannon" comes from the journal written by one of the defenders of Lathom House, who noted that the "little ladies" inside the castle "had stomachs to digest the cannon."</p></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I have focused here on the countess of Derby's brave resistance during the English civil wars--you may enjoy Mary C. Rowsell's 1905 biography, <i>The Life-Story of Charlotte de La Trémoille, Countess of Derby </i>(click <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Life_story_of_Charlotte_de_la_Tr%C3%A9mo/Bw5NAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=the+life+story+of+charlotte+de+tremoille+countess+of+derby&pg=PA1&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">here</a>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*William's son by his third wife was Frederick Henry, prince of Orange. Frederick Henry's grandson, William, would marry Mary Stuart--the couple would emerge as king and queen of England after the Glorious Revolution of 1688, when Mary's father, James II, was forced to give up the throne.</div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-40352517780186074182023-03-04T17:15:00.024-08:002023-10-31T14:47:27.067-07:00Wait, What???? The Eyes of God Are Tracking Your Period (But Don't Say "Period") . . . And You're Still Not Getting Equal Pay For All the Work You Do<h3 style="text-align: left;">When Women Became No Longer Equal, Part 12: The New Republic of Gilead Wants to Track Your Period (But Don't Say "Period") . . . And Make Sure You Stay Poor</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I'll give you the great news about keeping your poor first, since it's nothing new, and I've posted about it many times over the years. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Pew Research Center has just published <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/" target="_blank">new data</a> in "The Enduring Grip of the Gender Wage Gap." If you've been living and working and thinking, this clearly comes as no surprise, but even though there is nothing new, this report is still dispiriting:</div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">The gender pay gap – the difference between the earnings of men and women – has barely closed in the United States in the past two decades. In 2022, American women typically earned 82 cents for every dollar earned by men. That was about the same as in 2002, when they earned 80 cents to the dollar. The slow pace at which the gender pay gap has narrowed this century contrasts sharply with the progress in the preceding two decades: In 1982, women earned just 65 cents to each dollar earned by men.</blockquote><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOxIOFt6ASqZGG4mIr2Z3cCczhcRxIsW8MlqmwRdMmPDR1T0v7E1ZnVtyXXPn2NqtQ15g_dB_9IVE_x18VlfyM1McK15jaaOkTvPVnY71e2I4PqbR1d7xknvUe_7R7vCcP2fyjrtivLpaYXlliQ6ZysKwdB4m-i8KpgliECW2byzRDulFUvmPW0i9K/s625/Pew%201.JPG" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="625" data-original-width="319" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOxIOFt6ASqZGG4mIr2Z3cCczhcRxIsW8MlqmwRdMmPDR1T0v7E1ZnVtyXXPn2NqtQ15g_dB_9IVE_x18VlfyM1McK15jaaOkTvPVnY71e2I4PqbR1d7xknvUe_7R7vCcP2fyjrtivLpaYXlliQ6ZysKwdB4m-i8KpgliECW2byzRDulFUvmPW0i9K/w326-h640/Pew%201.JPG" width="326" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From the <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/?utm_source=adaptivemailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=23.03.01%20-%20general%20gender%20pay%20gap&org=982&lvl=100&ite=11219&lea=2319933&ctr=0&par=1&trk=a0d3j000012m6eueay" target="_blank">Pew Research Center</a>,<br />"The Enduring Grip of the Gender Pay Gap"</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And, as the Pew Research Center reports, this gap grows over a woman's lifetime:</div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">Women generally begin their careers closer to wage parity with men, but they lose ground as they age and progress through their work lives, a pattern that has remained consistent over time. The pay gap persists even though women today are more likely than men to have graduated from college. In fact, the pay gap between college-educated women and men is not any narrower than the one between women and men who do not have a college degree. </blockquote><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHQ23HxuK338bINUL1xADYSOQtLWAxD_gMA_cChLo94CxzUEh8-BS6SB_iqY8yWkxNG4KXTRe6fYVoIM1q1J9gkcFFe5Xx6wpTQGD5pDOgypFOyLW8K7bE0daANEa-FiCNhJFBqNFnb0VgGpssaP_2vxHl0FH0ADPUgBBx69aM5IWVK2Qv7XwNo3i2/s981/Pew%202.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="502" data-original-width="981" height="205" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHQ23HxuK338bINUL1xADYSOQtLWAxD_gMA_cChLo94CxzUEh8-BS6SB_iqY8yWkxNG4KXTRe6fYVoIM1q1J9gkcFFe5Xx6wpTQGD5pDOgypFOyLW8K7bE0daANEa-FiCNhJFBqNFnb0VgGpssaP_2vxHl0FH0ADPUgBBx69aM5IWVK2Qv7XwNo3i2/w400-h205/Pew%202.JPG" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From the <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/?utm_source=adaptivemailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=23.03.01%20-%20general%20gender%20pay%20gap&org=982&lvl=100&ite=11219&lea=2319933&ctr=0&par=1&trk=a0d3j000012m6eueay" target="_blank">Pew Research Center</a>,<br />"The Enduring Grip of the Gender Pay Gap"</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">The report is worth a read, of course, particularly for its updated information about the ways race and ethnicity impact pay equity issues for women and for the ways education, motherhood, and marriage, in addition to age, are reflected in the wage gap. But there is really nothing new here--at my age, I feel like I could write these reports without access to any current data at all, so little has changed. And there is nothing hopeful at all in the concluding section, "What's next for the gender pay gap?" (For previous posts on pay equity, click on the label, below.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And why is the "what's next?" section so useless. Because, as the report makes clear, "There is no single explanation for why progress toward narrowing the pay gap has all but stalled in the 21st century." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Well, you can continue to analyze data, educational trends, economic factors, the changing workplace, and even the "<a href="https://www.oecd.org/publications/sticky-floors-or-glass-ceilings-the-role-of-human-capital-working-time-flexibility-and-discrimination-in-the-gender-wage-02ef3235-en.htm" target="_blank">sticky floors</a>" that are underneath the "glass ceilings," but it's clear by now that those factors don't account for the problem. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">No one seems willing to say what seems most obvious to me: women don't count. Regardless of their age, education, race, ethnicity, marital status, or job, they still are <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2021/12/back-to-future-part-17-are-women-human.html" target="_blank">not recognized as full human beings</a>, whose worth is equal to that of men.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Which brings me to my next grim milestone on the path to dehumanizing women. The <a href="https://the-handmaids-tale.fandom.com/wiki/The_Eyes" target="_blank">Eyes of God</a> are watching . . . </div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">I would like to say I was surprised to learn that the state of Florida was thinking about <a href="https://newrepublic.com/post/170192/florida-panel-student-athletes-give-schools-menstrual-history" target="_blank">keeping track of women's menstrual cycles</a>. But I couldn't muster up surprise, much less shock or outrage. After the <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2022/06/turns-out-women-are-not-human.html" target="_blank">Dobbs decision</a>, why the hell not take away one more bit of privacy and autonomy. </div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">To be specific, the Florida High School Athletics Association mandated a requirement for all student athletes--let's be clear, all <i>women </i>athletes--to provide <a href="https://stateofreform.com/featured/2023/02/florida-proposes-mandatory-menstruation-questions-for-athletic-participation/" target="_blank">detailed information</a> about their menstrual history:</div></div><div><blockquote style="text-align: left;"><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>“Have you ever had a menstrual period?”</li><li>“How old were you when you had your first menstrual period?”</li><li>“When was your most recent menstrual period?”</li><li>“How many periods have you had in the past 12 months?”</li></ul></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">This information would no longer be submitted on a paper form, turned in to a coach, but would be submitted in a digital form and <b>submitted to school administrators</b>. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Clearly this information isn't necessary for knowing whether a young woman is in any condition to kick a soccer ball. Rather, as Sophie Haissen notes, </div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">As president of the Palm Beach County Democratic Women’s Club, Joan Waitkevicz, told <i>The Palm Beach Post</i>, requiring students to provide records of their menstrual cycle to play sports is “anti-choice and anti-trans politics rolled into one.” Collecting information on student athlete menstruation may seem innocuous or even standard practice in the best interest of their health, but, in the hands of a state government that has made overt attempts to oppress both cis women and trans folks, this data could cost already marginalized people their lives and mental health.<br /></blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">And there is little hope for keeping such data, once submitted, secure. Haissen reminds us that "we’ve already seen in other states how digital data has played a role in criminalizing young people for getting abortions. . . . States including Texas, Oklahoma, and Idaho have abortion bans enforced by citizens. In the process individuals are allowed to access others’ personal data to help argue their case."</div></div><div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">Now the state of Florida's move was not a complete surprise--women had been warned that this was coming after the Dobbs decision, and American women were advised by many pro-choice groups to delete their period-tracking apps. Even the White House <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/politics/white-house-period-tracker-apps/index.html" target="_blank">told women</a> to be cautious about storing this information on their electronic devices, warning them that such data could be used against them. In fact, after the June decision, the Organization for the Review of Care and Health Apps <a href="https://orchahealth.com/84-of-period-tracker-apps-share-data-with-third-parties/" target="_blank">reviewed the privacy policies of period trackers</a> and found that 24 of the 25 apps examined shared data:</div><div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">84% of the [24] apps allowed the sharing of personal and sensitive health data beyond the developer’s system, with third parties. At 68%, the majority did so for marketing, 40% for research and 40% for improving developer services of the app itself.</blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">So I breathed a sigh of relief when I <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/02/10/florida-female-athletes-report-menstruation/" target="_blank">read</a> that the FHSAA voted to remove the questions about a female athlete's medical forms--and then I nearly choked, because the association decided to <b>require students to provide the biological sex they were assigned at birth</b>, replacing the earlier question simply asking the athlete's sex. Because, you know, Florida. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Now, not to be outdone, Virginia decided to get in on the act. In February 2023, Virginia State Senator Barbara Favola introduced <a href="https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?231+sum+SB852" target="_blank">Senate Bill 852</a>; if enacted the law would have ensured women's privacy and bodily autonomy, shielding their stored menstrual date from law enforcement search warrants. </div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrlMIp43CP9wKJhNU3HcoHr8nlnEPtkk7O_NfsVArHSW8QuiNWF-OANXuOSghbIpS0zwK9N95Qht3oTZtETxfluAnJmRjatHMHV6jqLrRqK_TMcI0ZF2SecIpvwDikrTrO-HPC6nLS6czUEjVPEHzc2Kw-IAiR-MwXze9f83niqdIgBp4OiA-F5xP7/s1240/Handmaids.webp" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="744" data-original-width="1240" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhrlMIp43CP9wKJhNU3HcoHr8nlnEPtkk7O_NfsVArHSW8QuiNWF-OANXuOSghbIpS0zwK9N95Qht3oTZtETxfluAnJmRjatHMHV6jqLrRqK_TMcI0ZF2SecIpvwDikrTrO-HPC6nLS6czUEjVPEHzc2Kw-IAiR-MwXze9f83niqdIgBp4OiA-F5xP7/s320/Handmaids.webp" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">These guys won't be satisfied until<br />we're all in Gilead<br />Photo: Calla Kessler for The Washington Post, via <a href="https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-rise-handmaid-habit-visual-icon" target="_blank">Artsy</a></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">It should come as no surprise that Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin (R) opposed the bill and helped to defeat it. Senate Bill 852 passed in the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 31-9. Half of the Senate's 18 Republican senators supported the bill. But once it reached the Virginia House, dominated by Republicans, a subcommittee voted 5 to 3 to table the bill. For <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/02/14/youngkin-menstrual-data-abortion-virginia/" target="_blank">many in Virginia</a>, this is a "harbinger of plans to prosecute" those who seek abortions.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And let me remind you: in 2019, before the <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2022/06/turns-out-women-are-not-human.html" target="_blank">Dobbs decision</a>, Dr. Randall Williams, director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, testified that his office, using state medical records, had <a href="https://time.com/5713804/missouri-health-official-planned-parenthood-periods/" target="_blank">created a spreadsheet tracking the periods</a> of women who visited Planned Parenthood. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And while the Trump Administration couldn't manage to keep track of the migrant children separated from their parents, they were quite focused on <a href="https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a26985261/trump-administration-abortion-period-tracking-migrant-women/" target="_blank">tracking the menstrual cycles of migrant girls</a> who were in custody, carefully preserving all the details of their periods.</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">So, with four years of history, these precedents, and courts packed with Federalist Society judges, a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/03/01/abortion-pill-ruling-texas/" target="_blank">single one of whom</a> can make yet another decision to deny <b>all</b> women the ability to control their own bodies, <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2017/04/make-margaret-atwood-fiction-again.html" target="_blank">what's next</a>? </div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, just hours after posting: </b>Looks like I was right about <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2017/04/make-margaret-atwood-fiction-again.html" target="_blank">what's next</a>. In his speech to CPAC, Trump promises that, if he is re-elected, "We will support baby bonuses, for a new baby boom! Oh, you men out there are so lucky. You are so lucky, men." This is some real Handmaid shit. Keep them struggling for fair pay, track their periods, deny them control of their reproductive systems, and "boom"! Life will be good, guys--handmaids everywhere! </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you've got the stomach for it, you can listen to it <a href="https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1632173595265835010" target="_blank">here</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 28 March 2023: </b>The Idaho state legislature is on the bring of a draconian new abortion bill. A few days ago, the Idaho House of Representatives passed <a href="https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/2023/legislation/H0242/" target="_blank">House Bill 242</a>, "amend[ing] and add[ing] to existing law to provide for the crime of abortion trafficking." Now it doesn't seem to me as if the bill "provides for" traveling out of the state for an abortion, as in funding it or making it possible. Rather, it is all about making sure a girl cannot be helped if she seeks reproductive care."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">According to <a href="https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/sessioninfo/2023/legislation/H0242.pdf" target="_blank">the bill</a>, "An adult who, with the intent to conceal an abortion from the parents or guardian of a pregnant, unemancipated minor, either procures an abortion, as described in section 18-604,
18 Idaho Code, or obtains an abortion-inducing drug for the pregnant minor to use for an abortion by recruiting, harboring, or transporting the pregnant minor within this state commits the crime of abortion trafficking." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This law makes "abortion trafficking" a felony, punishable by two to five years in prison. The bill's sponsor, State Representative Barbara Ehardt (R, of course) <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/idaho-abortion-bill-trafficking-travel_n_641b62c3e4b00c3e6077c80b" target="_blank">notes</a> that abortion is already illegal in Idaho, so the bill isn't about abortion--the intent is to limit the a minor's travel outside the state. And for now, it's just to limit her travel "without the permission of the parent."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Idaho Senate received the bill from the Senate State Affairs Committee and stands ready to pass it.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">Erhardt claims this is all about parental rights, insisting that "A parent absolutely still has the right to take their child across the border and get an abortion. . . . The parent still has the right to cede that power and authority to someone else, such as a grandparent or an aunt, to take that child, should they be pregnant, across the border and get an abortion.”</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Yeah, right. Wonder how long before they just go ahead and limit the ability of any female of any age whatsoever to leave the state at all . . .</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">"Are you pregnant, Grace? Step out of the vehicle." For a prescient video, published by Meidas Touch back in June, click <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g2CqOrFGak" target="_blank">here</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 5 April 2023: </b>The Idaho Senate <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/06/idaho-abortion-ban-minors-travel/" target="_blank">passed</a> the "abortion trafficking" bill on 30 March 2023, and the Republican governor signed it into law today. (Just the day before, he signed a bill banning gender-affirming care for trans youth and making it a felony "for doctors to provide such care to minors.")</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The governor says its all about how much Idaho wants to "protect" children. In 2023, Idaho "<a href="https://kezj.com/idaho-ranks-as-one-of-the-worst-states-for-education/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20list%2C%20Idaho,32%20in%20quality%20of%20education." target="_blank">ranks</a> 36 [of the 50 states in the U.S.] in terms of education. Idaho is 34 in educational attainment and 32 in quality of education." Idaho's child poverty <a href="https://idahocapitalsun.com/2022/12/26/child-poverty-rates-highest-in-states-that-havent-raised-minimum-wage/#:~:text=Idaho%20also%20has%20a%20%247.25,benefits%2C%20according%20to%20the%20site." target="_blank">rate</a> is 14.4%. In Idaho, 1 of every 8 children <a href="https://idahonews.com/news/local/food-insecurity-in-idaho-an-estimated-one-in-eight-children-suffer" target="_blank">doesn't have</a> enough to eat (in some parts of the state, it's 1 of every 5). Idaho's maternal mortality rate <a href="https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/maternal-mortality-rate-by-state" target="_blank">ranks</a> 36 out of 50 U.S. States, its infant mortality rate <a href="https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/infant-mortality-rate-by-state/#idaho" target="_blank">ranks</a> 34th. Idaho <a href="https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/7243-child-and-teen-death-rate?loc=1&loct=2#ranking/2/any/true/2048/any/17513" target="_blank">ranks</a> 21 [of 50] for child and teen death rate ("child and teen death rate reflects a broad array of factors: physical and mental health; access to health care; community factors; use of safety practices and the level of adult supervision"). Idaho earns a <a href="https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/scorecard/" target="_blank">grade of F</a> for gun safety--ranked 48th of 50 for the strength of its gun laws and 25th for its gun death rate. <a href="https://everystat.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Gun-Violence-in-Idaho-1.pdf" target="_blank">And</a>, hey: "Guns are the 2nd-leading cause of death among children and teens in Idaho. In Idaho, an average of 21 children and teens die by guns every year, of which 84% of these deaths are suicides and 10% are homicides." In point of <a href="https://maps.everytownresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Every-State-Fact-Sheet-2.0-042720-Idaho.pdf" target="_blank">fact</a>, "Firearms are the 3rd-leading cause of death among children
and teens in Idaho." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I can think of lots of legislative action Idaho could take to better "protect" its children. Making up weird new crimes ("abortion trafficking") and criminalizing the actions of those who aid young women in times of personal crisis aren't on my list. Try feeding those hungry kids for starters . . . </div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 7 April 2023: </b>And here we go--a single <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/25/texas-judge-abortion-pill-decision/" target="_blank">nut job judge</a>, appointed in 2019, has <a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-04-08/a-federal-judge-outlaws-an-abortion-pill-thats-safer-than-tylenol-this-is-ridiculous-hold-til-court-ruling" target="_blank">now decided</a> what women--half of the U.S. population--can and cannot do with their own bodies. One guy has all this power over all women . . . Think about it. But he's just protecting you, little ladies: he's done it so "that women and girls are protected from unnecessary harm.” Because, obviously, you're just too stupid to be able tome such decisions yourselves.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 12 April 2023: </b>You just can't make this stuff up. Republicans in Florida want to track girls' periods, but for god's sake, DON'T TALK ABOUT MENSTRUATION! A new bill (House Bill 1069) was passed by the state house late in March and is now in the hands of the lawmakers in the Florida Senate: "The bill proposes banning any form of health education until sixth grade and would prohibit students from asking questions about menstruation, including about their own first periods, which frequently occur before the sixth grade. If passed by Florida's Senate and signed into law by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, the ban will be <a href="https://weartv.com/news/local/legislation-dubbed-dont-say-period-bill-limits-menstruation-talk-in-florida-schools">effective</a> July 1." (For one of just a number of news stories on this, click <a href="https://www.salon.com/2023/04/11/dont-say-period-now-florida-wants-to-ban-students-from-discussing-mensuration/" target="_blank">here</a>.) In other words, "Don't say period, people!" </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Here's the bill, <a href="https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/1069" target="_blank">[Florida] House Bill 1069</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 13 April 2023: </b>Oh, and while they're at it, they need you to have more white babies--and Nebraska Senator Steve Erdman isn't afraid to say it out loud. During debate over a new forced-birth law in Nebraska, he "arg<span style="text-align: left;">ued that abortion had caused slow population growth in the state over the last half-century—and argued that it had hurt Nebraska economically":</span></div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">Our state population has not grown except by those foreigners who have moved here or refugees who have been placed here. Why is that? It’s because we’ve killed 200,000 people. These are people we’ve killed.” </blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;">If women had been forced to give birth, as he was now proposing, then everything would be great, and there would be more people "working and filling some of those positions that we have vacancies.”</p><div style="text-align: justify;">To read Cameron Joseph's report on <i>Vice--</i>and, even better, watch Erdman delivering this oration in all its dumbassery, click <a href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/3akqdy/nebraska-steve-erdman-abortion-great-replacement-theory" target="_blank">here</a>.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 31 October 2023: </b>Welp, that didn't take long. The state of Idaho's "<a href="https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/idaho-abortion-travel-ban/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email" target="_blank">abortion trafficking</a>" law (see above, the 28 March update) went into effect in May of this year--and the first arrests for "abortion trafficking" have now been made. As <a href="https://jessica.substack.com/p/idahos-first-abortion-trafficking" target="_blank">Jessica Valenti</a> reports, </div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">an Idaho teenager and his mother were arrested for bringing the teen’s girlfriend out-of-state for an abortion. The pair were charged with multiple felonies, including second degree kidnapping, for taking a minor under 16 years-old “with the intent to keep or conceal [her] from her custodial parent...by transporting the child out of the state for the purpose of obtaining an abortion.”</blockquote><p></p><div style="text-align: justify;">But, hmmmm, the arrests weren't made under the draconian, Gilead-ish law, which is under appeal. Again, quoting Valenti: "instead of citing the trafficking statute, prosecutors used the <b>exact language of the trafficking law in the kidnapping charge</b>."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">These assholes are sooo slick, huh? Like we wouldn't notice . . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It's a terrible story all around--nobody comes out looking good, but no official seems to have cared about any of the many problems manifested in this case (drugs, coercive control, abuse, totally fucked up families) until a fifteen-year-old traveled to Oregon to have a medical abortion. </div><br /> <p></p></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-34891435824237502762023-01-12T20:40:00.003-08:002023-01-20T23:33:50.729-08:00Time to Cover Up, Ladies . . . <h3 style="text-align: left;">When Women Became No Longer Equal, Part 11: It's Time to Cover Up, Ladies</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I usually write quite a bit when I'm launching into a good rant. But, for once, I'm just gonna put <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/12/missouri-women-dress-code-arms-house/" target="_blank">this</a> out here, in case you missed it:</div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">The Republican-controlled Missouri House of Representatives used its session’s opening day Wednesday to tighten the dress code for female legislators, while leaving the men’s dress code alone.</blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">Women need to wear a jacket over their dress or with their skirt and pants. Cover up those bare arms, you hussies! </div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimIJC6MJE-ILzBsfeUznwAt4IrTEe8-dRqKmZvr6MmiO8EDSdzGzkMAaRZJG9-k__4jzeoAcMQ4siy7IWOzRKtmEWMX9CA6aDI55vXaQIfAPLsJV_QUiC9EOOfn4xjrMg_cO8zIiBVhM7gDVMfBVFxGpsIQG1eqw12FyFFoa-mVj2ZxLXDvQOwU9vy/s1200/Missouri.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="630" data-original-width="1200" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimIJC6MJE-ILzBsfeUznwAt4IrTEe8-dRqKmZvr6MmiO8EDSdzGzkMAaRZJG9-k__4jzeoAcMQ4siy7IWOzRKtmEWMX9CA6aDI55vXaQIfAPLsJV_QUiC9EOOfn4xjrMg_cO8zIiBVhM7gDVMfBVFxGpsIQG1eqw12FyFFoa-mVj2ZxLXDvQOwU9vy/w400-h210/Missouri.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Missouri House, where <a href="https://www.riverfronttimes.com/news/missouri-republicans-have-found-their-post-roe-enemy-cardigans-39259210" target="_blank">women</a> "hold less than a third of the seats," <br />and where this bit of legislation will undoubtedly encourage more <br />women to run to become a state representative . . . </td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">To be honest, I'm sorta shocked women are "allowed" to wear pants. But I notice that the dress code does not say a woman needs to wear a blouse, sweater, or other top under her jacket . . . Hmmmm. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Love <a href="https://www.riverfronttimes.com/news/missouri-republicans-have-found-their-post-roe-enemy-cardigans-39259210" target="_blank">this</a> tweet, from Democratic member Peter Merideth: </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaRe_-bcT-Cb9Cb-geZuXSAQ_FosKC6yK0TmApp5t8Zxr6s06mdZ8Iz1fsmUdX4JNyk0wGpfGudGnnhaMdbj29L1_mMcW0RPrCDfIaF6DvIxVydxyzN1vIcEgKDw89Hq1nL-OQMKYEjHjj-fH-Vw3r5qwIVcSKEHfbUj28mBryeAFkhmiviNOS_zlN/s757/Capture.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="471" data-original-width="757" height="249" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaRe_-bcT-Cb9Cb-geZuXSAQ_FosKC6yK0TmApp5t8Zxr6s06mdZ8Iz1fsmUdX4JNyk0wGpfGudGnnhaMdbj29L1_mMcW0RPrCDfIaF6DvIxVydxyzN1vIcEgKDw89Hq1nL-OQMKYEjHjj-fH-Vw3r5qwIVcSKEHfbUj28mBryeAFkhmiviNOS_zlN/w400-h249/Capture.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">(It is also fun to note that the Republican woman spearheading this drive to ensure her female colleagues were dressed "professionally" was wearing sequins and velvet on the House floor. Yeah. Wonder what kind of job she thought she was going to . . . )</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Here's a great line from <a href="https://www.riverfronttimes.com/news/missouri-republicans-have-found-their-post-roe-enemy-cardigans-39259210" target="_blank"><i>The Riverfront Times</i>:</a> "Missouri Republicans aren't done telling women what to do with their bodies."</div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-24915176577394402152023-01-03T00:00:00.041-08:002023-03-25T10:25:22.170-07:00Women and the 118th U. S. Congress<h3 style="text-align: left;"> Women and the 118th U. S. Congress (convenes 3 January 2023)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There will be a record number of <a href="https://cawp.rutgers.edu/news-media/press-releases/new-records-women-us-congress-and-house" target="_blank">women in the 118th U. S. Congress</a>--149 women, a grand total of two (TWO!!!) more than in the 117th Congress. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Of this total, 124 women will serve in the House of Representatives (91 of them Democrats). And 25 of the 100 U. S. Senators are women (16 of them Democrats). </div><div><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEin1-97599LSWcJYCPGVFuaQctAd_Aa_Y_eClXM5ASCawizHEy0CQVB3JTlGGTMfxY33Or6gHH-oDC1wYW_eEd5rlQgIkZmFJAVKuD9tL7rxDeAOtrdBIbeZcv4kC2NfaZkVIPb4tgR5mn6AnPbwspKC2d44bJliZG7VQWqM0XPLLu5tJOrfs7uDt7F/s669/women%20graph.JPG" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="612" data-original-width="669" height="366" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEin1-97599LSWcJYCPGVFuaQctAd_Aa_Y_eClXM5ASCawizHEy0CQVB3JTlGGTMfxY33Or6gHH-oDC1wYW_eEd5rlQgIkZmFJAVKuD9tL7rxDeAOtrdBIbeZcv4kC2NfaZkVIPb4tgR5mn6AnPbwspKC2d44bJliZG7VQWqM0XPLLu5tJOrfs7uDt7F/w400-h366/women%20graph.JPG" width="400" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From <a href="https://cawp.rutgers.edu/election-watch/2022-election-results-tracker" target="_blank">Center for American Women and Politics</a></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">But before you party too hard, this number represents only 27.9% of the total seats in Congress (535). As Beth Daley <a href="https://theconversation.com/just-over-1-in-4-members-of-congress-in-2023-will-be-women-at-this-rate-it-will-take-118-years-until-there-is-gender-parity-195504">notes</a> for <i>The Conversation</i>: "At this rate, it will take 118 more years – until 2140 – for there to be an equal number of male and female lawmakers in Congress."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And in the broader picture? Again, here's Daley: "While women are underrepresented in governments around the globe, it is a particularly significant problem in the United States. Currently, the <a href="https://data.ipu.org/women-ranking?month=11&year=2022">U.S. ranks 73rd in the world</a> when it comes to female representation in government."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Another revealing graphic, this one <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/23/politics/election-2022-record-women-in-congress/index.html" target="_blank">from CNN</a>: </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4mxtw1fAVC7DjwCt8OPnCltoyuAdWnlwNPi-8W_iB2DMeRRwqucpcLD-mxdIxPRZL56MdaT9oINasO3h79NZZ614b1jyCJ8NoDhL5coJiyqZiORQDXeU9pf7O1ZMjlXhoGnEiNXivnzE1E8Z6GZqDVarl-CFvnUmUZFWQCXO6F811sDEgsbD8vxAG/s923/Capture.JPG" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="659" data-original-width="923" height="285" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4mxtw1fAVC7DjwCt8OPnCltoyuAdWnlwNPi-8W_iB2DMeRRwqucpcLD-mxdIxPRZL56MdaT9oINasO3h79NZZ614b1jyCJ8NoDhL5coJiyqZiORQDXeU9pf7O1ZMjlXhoGnEiNXivnzE1E8Z6GZqDVarl-CFvnUmUZFWQCXO6F811sDEgsbD8vxAG/w400-h285/Capture.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-84855209407599561492022-12-16T00:00:00.687-08:002022-12-16T10:10:38.367-08:00Adelaide of Burgundy, Empress, Regent, Saint<h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">Adelaide of Burgundy, Empress and Regent of the Holy Roman Empire (died 16 December 999)</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div></h3><div style="text-align: justify;">About the women in Adelaide of Burgundy's extended family--among them Adelaide's daughter-in-law, the Empress <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/04/theophanu-empress-and-regent.html" target="_blank">Theophanu</a>, Adelaide's older daughter, <a href="https://epistolae.ctl.columbia.edu/woman/4.html" target="_blank">Emma</a>, queen of the Franks, and her younger daughter <a href="https://epistolae.ctl.columbia.edu/woman/11.html" target="_blank">Mathilda</a>, princess-abbess of Quedlinburg--historian <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Medieval_World/XVzdAAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=pauline+stafford+adelaide+of+burgundy&pg=PA404&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">Pauline Stafford</a> writes, "A group of women played key roles in the last decade of the tenth century. . . ." They "ruled as regents for under-age males." They "met together . . . to debate important questions of succession and dynastic interralations." They were, "in every sense . . . a regiment of powerful women." (If only <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/p/about-title-what-does-monstrous.html" target="_blank">John Knox</a> had known about this "monstrous" regiment!)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkDxnmi6wNDa_gCdnoiQ3IwQleO0mfIMDk_0GpyrU8lzTWc8QOAQSMCpbTuGgrsb6kGJECJoXGYBRLYlUygHGfGBftDImOoudbV-XIVrWD0Im5W1hb40ie_QNoTU6GcpJUBGzvux5qAY_ExADa1fQQ7uvUXkdLzCLYxi0cKHD9-2YsfdDFb_MxUfU0/s899/Abel_Terral_-_Sainte_Adelaide_de_France,_reine_d'Italie,_imperatrice_d'Allemagne.jpg" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="899" data-original-width="672" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkDxnmi6wNDa_gCdnoiQ3IwQleO0mfIMDk_0GpyrU8lzTWc8QOAQSMCpbTuGgrsb6kGJECJoXGYBRLYlUygHGfGBftDImOoudbV-XIVrWD0Im5W1hb40ie_QNoTU6GcpJUBGzvux5qAY_ExADa1fQQ7uvUXkdLzCLYxi0cKHD9-2YsfdDFb_MxUfU0/s320/Abel_Terral_-_Sainte_Adelaide_de_France,_reine_d'Italie,_imperatrice_d'Allemagne.jpg" width="239" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nineteenth-century artist Abel Terral's <br /><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abel_Terral_-_Sainte_Adelaide_de_France,_reine_d%27Italie,_imperatrice_d%27Allemagne.jpg" target="_blank">entirely imagined portrait</a><br />of Adelaide of Burgundy<br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">Chief among these powerful and influential women was Adelaide herself: queen, empress, regent of the empire, and saint.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The daughter of <a href="https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/rodolfo-ii-re-di-borgogna-e-d-italia/" target="_blank">Rudolf II, king of Upper Burgundy</a>, and Bertha of Swabia, Adelaide of Burgundy was born in the Frankish kingdom of Upper Burgundy (now Switzerland) in the year 931.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the decade before Adelaide's birth, Rudolf had intervened in the politics of northern Italy, opposing the current ruler, Berengar I, king of Italy and emperor of the Romans. Invited by disaffected members of the nobility, Rudolf was himself crowned king of Italy in Pavia in 922. He defeated Berengar at the battle of Firenzuola d'Arda on 29 July 923, after which Rudolf ruled in both Upper Burgundy and in Italy (though he never became emperor).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But by 926, sentiment turned against him, and it was the turn of Hugh of Provence, Rudolf's former ally, to be invited by disaffected members of the nobility to intervene in Italian politics. Rudolf was eventually forced back to Upper Burgundy, while Hugh of Provence gained control in northern Italy. In 931, Hugh had his son, Lothair, crowned co-ruler of Italy, and to bolster his position, concluded a treaty with Rudolf--Rudolf gave up his claims in Italy, and Hugh ceded Provence to Rudolf. To secure their alliance, the two agreed to the marriage of Rudolf's daughter, Adelaide, to Hugh's son, Lothair.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But, surprise! After Rudolf's death in 937, his widow (and Adelaide's mother), Bertha, married Hugh of Provence. After her mother's remarriage, Adelaide was raised in Pavia, and on 12 December 947, when she was about fifteen years old, Adelaide of Burgundy was married to her step-brother, Lothair. She bore him a daughter, Emma, about a year later. With the death of Hugh of Provence (c. 948), Lothair became sole king of Italy, Adelaide his queen.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But just three years after their marriage, Lothair was dead (22 November 950), probably poisoned by Berengar II--the grandson of Berengar I. This Berengar had been actively seeking control of Italy for some time. He had fought against Hugh (who died in 947), and then against Lothair. After Lothair's death, Berengar assumed the title of king of Italy, named (and crowned) his son, Adalbert, as co-ruler, and aimed to consolidate his power in the territory by forcing the widowed Adelaide to marry his son.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A hair-raising account of Adelaide's situation is related by the tenth-century writer <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/11/hrotsvita-of-gandersheim-strong-voice.html" target="_blank">Hrotsvita of Gandersheim</a> in her epic poem, <i>Carmen de gestis Oddonis imperatoris (Poem of the Deeds of the Emperor Otto). </i>In <a href="https://archive.org/details/hrosvithaelibert00hrot/page/66/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Adelaide" target="_blank">her words</a>, Adelaide was "a woman illustrious in the comeliness of her queenly beauty and solicitous in affairs worthy of her character." She "possessed . . . pre-eminent natural abilities"--recognized by Lothair, who intended that the kingdom of Italy would be "ruled by the will of the eminent queen" after his death.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But because of their "vile treachery," a "certain faction of the populace, with perverted and hostile spirit," betrayed Lothair and Adelaide; after Lothair's death, they offered the kingdom instead to Berengar II, who had long "nursed" a "hatred" in his "baleful breast." Having seized the throne, he deprived Adelaide of her attendants and <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Adelaide" target="_blank">imprisoned her in Garda Castle</a>. The indomitable young woman resisted, ultimately escaping her confinement--according to Hrostvita's account, Adelaide somehow managed to dig a "secret tunnel under the earth" (Hrostvita says this tunnel was dug "under the guidance of common prayer" and with the "support of the benevolent Christ").</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">However she managed it, by means of a secret tunnel or otherwise, Adelaide escaped from Berengar, avoided pursuit and recapture, and found refuge with <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Atto-Adalbert" target="_blank">Adalbert Atto, count of Canossa</a>. When Berengar attempted to take Canossa by siege, Adelaide appealed to Otto, king of the Franks. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Otto quickly saw the advantages of a marriage with Adelaide. One contemporary source indicates that Adelaide not only appealed to Otto for assistance but sent him a marriage proposal. Hrotsvita, however, <a href="https://archive.org/details/hrosvithaelibert00hrot/page/74/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Adelaide" target="_blank">attributes Otto's interest</a> to his recognition of Adelaide's excellent qualities (and the convenient death of Otto's first wife, Edith of England): "with frequent ponderings of heart Otto remembered the distinguished Queen Adelaide, and longed to behold the queenly countenance of her whose excellence of character he already knew."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Whatever his motivation, Otto invaded northern Italy, entered Pavia, had himself crowned king of Italy, and sent for Adelaide, who left her refuge in Canossa and joined him. They were married on 23 September 951. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_d5aMBMMOeLsNAzm8fInNIWr3v-FLGTKtJdlDGBNoqiaWbg3pwTTs1c-tCqJoZYDGDGDZKzi5P_ADdlqMVH1pCBVqK6iTEBWxH7P2nRUcFEEBgrxPZAdlgfR0NdNvdvPg3DXPwODJEPRBv7f5kWFKHyKXNAzcM0mfz2lErHXIhyEMBSp1K5-trtzO/s1200/1200px-Meissner-dom-stifter.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="767" data-original-width="1200" height="205" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_d5aMBMMOeLsNAzm8fInNIWr3v-FLGTKtJdlDGBNoqiaWbg3pwTTs1c-tCqJoZYDGDGDZKzi5P_ADdlqMVH1pCBVqK6iTEBWxH7P2nRUcFEEBgrxPZAdlgfR0NdNvdvPg3DXPwODJEPRBv7f5kWFKHyKXNAzcM0mfz2lErHXIhyEMBSp1K5-trtzO/s320/1200px-Meissner-dom-stifter.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Thirteenth-century sculptures <br />of Otto I and Adelaide,<br /><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Meissner-dom-stifter.jpg" target="_blank">Meissen Cathedral</a>. <br />I love his worried face!</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Following her marriage, Adelaide, now queen of the Franks and queen of Italy, gave birth to two sons, who did not survive. Her third child, a daughter, was Mathilda, who would eventually become abbess of Quedlinburg. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A third son, Otto, was born in 955. In 961, after the death of his elder step-brother, Otto was recognized as his father's heir and co-ruler. On 2 February 962, Otto was crowned emperor of the Romans as Otto I, and Adelaide herself crowned as empress. Five years later, in December 967, Adelaide's son, Otto (who would succeed his father as Otto II), was <a href="https://download.e-bookshelf.de/download/0009/5643/88/L-G-0009564388-0018335567.pdf" target="_blank">crowned co-emperor</a>. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">During their marriage Adelaide "acted in partnership with Otto"; since he was so often on the battlefield, Adelaide's stable position in Rome seems to have made her a reliable, accessible agent able to act on her husband's behalf, though she seems also to have been able to act independently. As Edward Schoenfeld <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Rise_of_the_Medieval_World_500_1300/f_jLbHTM_zgC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=adelaide+of+burgundy&pg=PA6&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">notes</a> in his discussion of Adelaide, "decisions regarding Italy were made only with her consent," and she "exerted considerable influence on non-Italian affairs." She was greatly interested in <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Adelaide" target="_blank">religious issues</a> as well: "She promoted Cluniac monasticism and strengthened the allegiance of the German church to the emperor, playing an important role in Otto I’s distribution of ecclesiastical privileges and participating in his Italian expeditions."<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The extent of her influence is <a href="https://epistolae.ctl.columbia.edu/woman/19.html" target="_blank">documented</a> by her appearance in contemporary diplomatic records: "Adelaide is named in royal diplomata by both her husbands; during her marriage to Otto I, she intervened in 92 out of 289 extant diplomata, 29 times in Italy, 63 in Germany."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By 972, Adelaide's son, the sixteen-year-old Otto, had married the Byzantine noblewoman <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2015/04/theophanu-empress-and-regent.html" target="_blank">Theophanu</a>. The younger Otto had not yet reached his full majority when Otto I died on 7 March 973, though his succession was uncontested, undoubtedly because of the presence of his mother, now dowager empress. She acted briefly as <a href="https://download.e-bookshelf.de/download/0009/5643/88/L-G-0009564388-0018335567.pdf" target="_blank">regent</a> for the young couple after their accession.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">While there seems to have been some conflict between Adelaide, her son, and her daughter-in-law (Adelaide "retired" to Upper Burgundy in 978), she did act as Otto's <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Medieval_Italy/E2CTAgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PT34&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">"viceroy"</a> in Italy, and following her son's death in December 983, whatever the issues between her and Theophanu may have been, they were put aside. Adelaide supported Theophanu as she acted as regent for <i>her </i>son, another Otto, who at the age of three, succeeded his father as Otto III, Holy Roman emperor.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Theophanu governed as regent until her death in 991, after which the sixty-year-old Adelaide took over the role for her grandson. Four years later, Otto III reached his majority; he was crowned emperor at Rome on 21 May 996.<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizjbU8ltce_pMU-IFbZqGTmmliMCUatuxdHP2Yzp6zUe0nKkVb8GhWeX6jMHBSZpAisuyouNqawUOeS7H2nPYji8BZcu3qiazPaTUYKg_C_L4CaQE2sEmM6RFpOHl04waZGmDdBnqeUeB8wcjzGbj9OeRDAAfyUH6s8uBwkG8jkEkVffBWqtmW6_Wo/s1031/nx8z66q7gx441.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="773" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizjbU8ltce_pMU-IFbZqGTmmliMCUatuxdHP2Yzp6zUe0nKkVb8GhWeX6jMHBSZpAisuyouNqawUOeS7H2nPYji8BZcu3qiazPaTUYKg_C_L4CaQE2sEmM6RFpOHl04waZGmDdBnqeUeB8wcjzGbj9OeRDAAfyUH6s8uBwkG8jkEkVffBWqtmW6_Wo/s320/nx8z66q7gx441.jpg" width="240" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">By <a href="https://i.redd.it/nx8z66q7gx441.jpg" target="_blank">contrast</a>, check out her face!</td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">After resigning her regency, Adelaide focused on founding a number of religious institutions, though her political role was not yet over. After the death of her brother, Conrad I, king of Burgundy, Adelheid traveled to Burgundy to shore up support for her nephew, Rudolf III. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">She died on 16 December 999 at Selz Abbey (Alsace), which she had founded in 991. She was canonized by Pope Urban II in 1097.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I've already linked to several online sources, above. In addition, you can read letters to and from Adelaide at <i>Epistolae: Medieval Women's Latin Letters </i>(click <a href="https://epistolae.ctl.columbia.edu/woman/19.html" target="_blank">here</a>). There are only two letters from Adelaide, but quite a few written to her, including a number from her daughter, Emma, queen of the Franks. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For an academic study comparing Adelaide of Burgundy and <a href="https://www.monstrousregimentofwomen.com/2021/07/matilda-of-tuscany-la-gran-contessa.html" target="_blank">Matilda of Tuscany</a>, I recommend <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Empress-Adelheid-Countess-Matilda-Foundations/dp/1137590882/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2I1F00F5SPFPL&keywords=empress+adelheid&qid=1671153029&sprefix=empress+adelhe%2Caps%2C357&sr=8-1&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.18ed3cb5-28d5-4975-8bc7-93deae8f9840">Penelope Nash</a>'s <i>Empress Adelheid and Countess Matilda: Medieval Female Rulership and the Foundations of European Society</i>. (A great deal of helpful introductory material, including a detailed timeline, is available from the publisher <a href="https://download.e-bookshelf.de/download/0009/5643/88/L-G-0009564388-0018335567.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I'll make special note, too, of the <a href="https://archive.org/details/hrosvithaelibert00hrot/page/84/mode/2up?view=theater&q=Adelaide" target="_blank">edition</a> of Hrotsvita's <i>Deeds of the Emperor Otto</i>, from which I've quoted, above. The English translation is by Sister Mary Bernardine Bergman, her Ph.D. dissertation (St. Louis University, 1942) published in 1943 by the Sisters of St. Benedict of Covington, Kentucky.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By the way, over the centuries, the abbey Adelaide founded suffered from a "millenial flood" (in 1307), was rebuilt, secularized (1481), Protestant-ized (1571), re-converted to Catholicism (1684), dissolved (1692), set on fire by Austrian troops (1793), rebuilt and "recreated" (1801), restored for the "anniversary" of Adelaide's death (1899), almost destroyed in World War II, and restored again in 1958.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggyLmj3MEKcdxeYmh1lP4eZT4a0conk3AnZa_SzlLShDp-ARkbMy95spR7Mtsd112he0-jiTx5i1AyyecPUHmCarLoBATnfXkwSpl3uJjFVyEvaNMykin6N1SM6MWeSxJfTSPI5MEOQdpjIoY_6AsdodXSPrw2_NdzG7mxjqC_3YJ5zPyDgKyQoKq6/s1019/swadelajda.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1019" data-original-width="800" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggyLmj3MEKcdxeYmh1lP4eZT4a0conk3AnZa_SzlLShDp-ARkbMy95spR7Mtsd112he0-jiTx5i1AyyecPUHmCarLoBATnfXkwSpl3uJjFVyEvaNMykin6N1SM6MWeSxJfTSPI5MEOQdpjIoY_6AsdodXSPrw2_NdzG7mxjqC_3YJ5zPyDgKyQoKq6/s320/swadelajda.jpg" width="251" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggyLmj3MEKcdxeYmh1lP4eZT4a0conk3AnZa_SzlLShDp-ARkbMy95spR7Mtsd112he0-jiTx5i1AyyecPUHmCarLoBATnfXkwSpl3uJjFVyEvaNMykin6N1SM6MWeSxJfTSPI5MEOQdpjIoY_6AsdodXSPrw2_NdzG7mxjqC_3YJ5zPyDgKyQoKq6/s1019/swadelajda.jpg" target="_blank">Detail</a> from sculpture,<br />Meissen Cathedral.<br />She looks like she'd be so much fun!<br /><br /></td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /></div>
Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-81892340365543033652022-12-14T17:40:00.014-08:002023-09-12T16:01:58.120-07:00More Bad News on Maternal Mortality (Back to the Future, Part 18)<h3 style="text-align: left;">The "U.S. Maternal Mortality Crisis" (The Commonwealth Fund Report, 14 December 2022), Back to the Future, Part 18 </h3><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">A few days ago, the <a href="https://www.commonwealthfund.org/about-us" target="_blank">Commonwealth Fund</a> published a <a href="https://www.commonwealthfund.org/blog/2022/us-maternal-mortality-crisis-continues-worsen-international-comparison?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Improving+Health+Care+Quality" target="_blank">new report on the status of maternal mortality</a> in the United States. Dated 1 December 2022, the comparative study, authored by Munira Z. Gunja, Evan D. Gumas, and Reginald D. Williams II, had a shocking, but not surprising, title: "The U.S. Maternal Mortality Crisis Continues to Worsen: An International Comparison." </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">I say "shocking" for obvious reasons. I say "not surprising," because maternal mortality rates in the U.S. have long been exceedingly bad. As Gunja, Gumas, and Williams note, "The maternal mortality rate in the United States has for many years exceeded that of other high-income countries. Data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show rates worsening around the world in recent years, as well as a widening gap between the U.S. and its peer nations."* </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Despite the urgency of the findings, I put off writing about the report--it was too depressing. But, today, the Commonwealth Fund has issued an <a href="https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2022/dec/us-maternal-health-divide-limited-services-worse-outcomes" target="_blank">even more urgent report</a>, "The U.S. Maternal Health Divide: The Limited Maternal Health Services and Worse Outcomes of States Proposing New Abortion Restrictions."**</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Together, these two publications present a devastating healthcare reality for women in the United States. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Just one chart from the Commonwealth's "U.S. Maternal Mortality Crisis" is eye-opening: </div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcbP3--63_IZnkSTRhQqKxnE2pH0vQ5F4U5yM3LKnNoCPQSMPbofPzgNhbetrNUFZnhBudi55qs9ye3G8CHaZ7ScF3WOCgfdsWMkDfX8-U_rffe3rWVmutM5CUF0XXcqZFoRLDT8VTJaO8cp4Rgtwq8UEw4soRMu6AIha3iO62Sf5-1KC7OGm14LWW/s900/the_us_maternal_mortality_crisis_continues_to_worsen_an_international_comparison_exhibit_2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="822" data-original-width="900" height="365" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcbP3--63_IZnkSTRhQqKxnE2pH0vQ5F4U5yM3LKnNoCPQSMPbofPzgNhbetrNUFZnhBudi55qs9ye3G8CHaZ7ScF3WOCgfdsWMkDfX8-U_rffe3rWVmutM5CUF0XXcqZFoRLDT8VTJaO8cp4Rgtwq8UEw4soRMu6AIha3iO62Sf5-1KC7OGm14LWW/w400-h365/the_us_maternal_mortality_crisis_continues_to_worsen_an_international_comparison_exhibit_2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And, as the authors of the study note, "Data show that the maternal mortality rate in the United States — more than three times the rate in most other high-income countries — is getting worse, and the rate for Black women is nearly three times higher than for white women."</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0jyBcIkWL8C7fOpWGC-ec19NGCEcAfFG8bjRCTKGD3l88QlFoZPkpUQw6ACDxb1NNR5MsyVbmNnO0NKi_xJGJ0CH_G3VmS4LwjmopB3tX3t4mmXbPgO72phSSepyXkA82LKmndRcLyG8L05AkEJSb_LnVrIuHZPCfUZBtCuOiBPfaNFZ5GcEuClaL/s1088/the_us_maternal_mortality_crisis_continues_to_worsen_an_international_comparison_exhibit_1.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1088" data-original-width="900" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0jyBcIkWL8C7fOpWGC-ec19NGCEcAfFG8bjRCTKGD3l88QlFoZPkpUQw6ACDxb1NNR5MsyVbmNnO0NKi_xJGJ0CH_G3VmS4LwjmopB3tX3t4mmXbPgO72phSSepyXkA82LKmndRcLyG8L05AkEJSb_LnVrIuHZPCfUZBtCuOiBPfaNFZ5GcEuClaL/w331-h400/the_us_maternal_mortality_crisis_continues_to_worsen_an_international_comparison_exhibit_1.jpg" width="331" /></a></div><br /><div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for the "health divide" for women living in the U.S.? It will surprise no one that maternal (and infant) health is far worse in states where abortion has been made illegal or so seriously restricted that it may as well be illegal: "Compared to states where abortion is accessible, states that have banned, are planning to ban, or have otherwise restricted abortion have fewer maternity care providers; more maternity care 'deserts'; higher rates of maternal mortality and infant death, especially among women of color; higher overall death rates for women of reproductive age; and greater racial inequities across their health care systems."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Moreover, "Making abortion illegal makes pregnancy and childbirth more dangerous; it also threatens the health and lives of all women of reproductive age."<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Because of course it does. So much for the "we value every single precious life" forced-birth crowd. What a load of crap.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;">*For data, see this <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021/maternal-mortality-rates-2021.htm" target="_blank">CDC report</a> on maternal mortality rates in 2021. And for earlier discussions of maternal and infant mortality rates in the United States in this blog, click "Global Gender Report" in the labels, below.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">**The Commonwealth Fund report is authored by Eugene Declercq, Ruby Barnard-Mayers, and Laurie Zephyrin, Kay Johnson</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update: </b><a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/12/14/maternal-deaths-dobbs-abortions-us-health" target="_blank">Here's more</a> on maternal health, if you can stand it, from <i>Axios.</i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 16 December 2022: </b>And still <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/12/16/politics-health-relationship/?itid=hp-more-top-stories_p003_f002" target="_blank">more</a>, from the <i>Washington Post</i>, "Can Politics Kill You?" No mystery--the answer to that question is yes. The majority of the piece is about the way COVID has taken a heavy toll on Republicans and conservatives, but there's this:</div><blockquote style="text-align: justify;">With abortion services no longer legal nationwide, university researchers have estimated that maternal deaths could increase by up to 25 to 30 percent, worsening the nation’s maternal mortality and morbidity crisis. Americans live shorter lives than people in peer nations, in part because it is the worst place among high-income countries to give birth.</blockquote><p><b>Update, 17 December 2022: </b>And even more, from the <i>Texas Tribune</i>'s Eleanor Klibanoff, "Why Are Pregnancy and Childbirth Killing So Many Black Women in Texas?" (click <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2022/12/17/texas-maternal-mortality-black-women/" target="_blank">here</a>). Here's just a bit:</p><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;">A decade ago, when Texas first formed the Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee, Black women were twice as likely as white women, and four times as likely as Hispanic women, to die from pregnancy and childbirth.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Those disparities haven’t improved, according to the <a href="https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/c747171ab871dc57cb21eaeb4e1c68ea/2022%20Joint%20Biennial%20MMMRC%20Report%202022_12.15.22.pdf">committee’s latest report</a>, published Thursday.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In 2020, pregnant Black women were twice as likely to experience critical health issues like hemorrhage, preeclampsia and sepsis. While complications from obstetric hemorrhage declined overall in Texas in recent years, Black women saw an increase of nearly 10%.</div></blockquote><p></p><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 19 March 2023: </b>In <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/health/maternal-deaths-increasing-nchs/index.html#:~:text=That%20means%20the%20US%20maternal,the%20nation's%20maternal%20death%20rate." target="_blank">a piece</a> titled "US Maternal Death Rate Rose Sharply in 2021 . . . and Experts Worry the Problem Is Getting Worse, CNN reports on the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021/maternal-mortality-rates-2021.pdf" target="_blank">new data</a> just released by the National Center for Health Statistics (see the link in *, above). According to the CDC's Center for Health Statistics, "The number of women who died of maternal causes in the United States rose to 1,205 in 2021. . . . That’s a sharp increase from years earlier: 658 in 2018, 754 in 2019 and 861 in 2020." Check out the report--the graphs will stun you.</div><br /><div style="text-align: justify;">And CNN refers to the Commonwealth Fund's report (discussed above), published at the end of 2022: "The US has the highest maternal death rate of any developed nation."</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Are we all ready for those "We're Number One" bullshit cheers we here so often? All that "greatest country in the world" claptrap? Yeah, I thought so . . . </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 19 July 2023: </b><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/16/opinion/reduce-maternal-mortality-strategies.html" target="_blank">Here</a> is Veronica Gillispie-Bell's heartbreaking <i>New York Times </i>op-ed, "More Mothers Are Dying. It Doesn't Have to Be This Way." Gillispie-Bell links to the 3 July "Trends in State-Level Maternal Mortality by Racial and Ethnic Group in the United States" (<i>JAMA </i>330, no. 1 [2023]: 52-61; for the online abstract, click <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2806661" target="_blank">here</a>.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><b>Update, 12 September 2023: </b>For ways to address the problem of maternal mortality, see Mara Gay's <i>NYT </i>opinion piece, "America Already Knows How to Make Childbirth Safer" (click <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/maternal-health-childbirth.html#:~:text=Healthier%20pregnancies%20and%20safer%20deliveries,cause%20of%20deaths%20from%20childbirth." target="_blank">here</a>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><p></p> Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-297743534213606590.post-70569728579317946832022-11-27T00:00:00.554-08:002024-03-18T09:41:17.326-07:00Galla Placidia, "the Last Roman Empress"<h3 style="text-align: left;">Galla Placidia, queen of the Visigoths, empress of Rome, regent of the empire (died 27 November 450)</h3><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Galla Placidia, the woman who would become queen of the Goths, then empress of the western Roman empire, and ultimately regent of the empire, was the granddaughter, daughter, sister, and mother of emperors of Rome.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Her father was Theodosius I, "the Great," a Roman soldier who rose through the ranks and eventually became emperor, ruling from 379 to his death in 395. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsMpJ2apbx9GUHJKNP-OL4FmGLFKKB-o-3kj9-OySle__E2TjJKV2DzEyb5IQ8T9GlHUTBNpcCmTwycchzIexV06cXHZGhN5gH6_uM94mF9OOAk6HExpjvC4GDM_1HqzbDo9q6ydeYnZebXAmLjn0erTyQceVV2xDamQMUUlbsfOV5aS_I62o-g--5/s396/Galla_Placidia_coin.png" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="385" data-original-width="396" height="194" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsMpJ2apbx9GUHJKNP-OL4FmGLFKKB-o-3kj9-OySle__E2TjJKV2DzEyb5IQ8T9GlHUTBNpcCmTwycchzIexV06cXHZGhN5gH6_uM94mF9OOAk6HExpjvC4GDM_1HqzbDo9q6ydeYnZebXAmLjn0erTyQceVV2xDamQMUUlbsfOV5aS_I62o-g--5/w200-h194/Galla_Placidia_coin.png" width="200" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A gold tremissis, 5th century,<br /><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Galla_Placidia_coin.png" target="_blank">Galla Placidia</a></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;">Placidia's mother was Emperor Theodosius's second wife, Galla, the daughter of Valentinian I, who had become emperor in 364--Valentinian had split the Roman empire, ruling the western part himself until his death in 375, and appointing his brother, Valens, as emperor in the east. So, Placida is also the great niece of an emperor.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Placidia's half brothers, born to Flavia Flacilla, the first wife of Theodosius, were Arcadius and Honorius. After the death of Theodosius in 395, both men became emperor, Arcadius in the East, Honorius in the West. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Placidia was born during the last decade of the fourth century, her life and career spanning what her biographer Joyce Salisbury calls "the twilight of the empire." (While we have come to think that the "fall of the Roman Empire" occurred in the fifth century, what "fell" then was the western part of the empire--in the east, the empire persisted until 1453, when Constantinople fell to the Turks.) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although the year of her birth is not known, Theodosius and Galla were married in 386 or 387, and a son, Gratian, was born in 388. Galla died giving birth to a son in 394, thus providing the few years between 388 and 394 as the time for Placidia's birth. (Theodosius was campaigning in Italia between 388 and 391, while Galla remained in Constantinople--their separation may indicate more about the possible year of Placidia's birth.)</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">After the death of her mother in Constantinople, Placidia may have been summoned to Milan; whether she was there at the death of her father in 395 isn't certain. But she seems to have spent some time in Ravenna, at the court of her half-brother Honorius. The military commander Stilicho was guardian of the underage Honorius, while Placidia was in the care of Stilicho's wife, Serena, who was Placidia's cousin. Placidia seems also to have been supposed to marry Eucherius, the son of Stilicho and Serena.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Under Serena's guardianship, Placidia resided in Rome while Stilicho campaigned against the Franks, Vandals, and Goths, among other would-be invaders, but he was ultimately brought down by his own troops, who mutinied in 408. Suspicious of Stilicho's intentions, Honorius ordered his execution. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, under Alaric, the Goths invaded the Italian peninsula and began a siege of Rome, which was sacked in August 410. During the siege, Serena was accused of conspiring with Alaric and, with Placidia's consent, Serena was executed in 409. The exact circumstances surrounding Placidia's "consent" are not clear, and contemporary accounts differ.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Equally unclear is what happens next: Placidia is married to Alaric's successor, Athaulf, now king of the Visigoths. Well, the marriage itself is clear enough--Placidia was taken to Gaul, and in 414, she was married "in a Roman wedding ceremony" to Athaulf in Narbonne. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">What is not clear is, once again, the context of Placidia's situation--Placidia was variously said to have been "captured" or "abducted" or taken hostage by Alaric in 410, but then again she may have been <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Galla-Placidia-Roman-Empress-Antiquity/dp/0195379128/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2EFX28L0VW8H8&keywords=Galla+Placidia&qid=1669503564&sprefix=galla+placidia%2Caps%2C357&sr=8-1&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.18ed3cb5-28d5-4975-8bc7-93deae8f9840&asin=0195379128&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1" target="_blank">traded</a> to Alaric by Honorius as part of some kind of deal. In any case, Alaric died in Italy not long after the sack of Rome, and by 412, Placidia was in Gaul.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">As for the marriage. According to some <a href="https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/placidia-galla-c-390-450" target="_blank">sources</a>, Honorius refused to consent to any marriage between Placidia and Athaulf, but Placidia herself "fell in love" with Athaulf and married him. Other sources attribute the match not to love but to power and politics: the marriage took place only after Athaulf captured and killed two rivals claiming Honorius's title as emperor, who then rewarded Athaulf with the alliance. Or maybe it was Placida herself who <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Women_and_War/lyZYS_GxglIC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=galla+placidia&pg=PA215&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">negotiated the treaty</a> between the two men.</div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuTKlnwfeFjmbPsbSiFtaLczSHJWNjr4QYuQLD7S-5sroGHfAYgFmuUY_JNspWOZknIF_W-qRUpJoehGOfGl7DQQC9ytvj69slMwOEVyvH-ue6CXgWLGdwNGVyLG_xbH9oN-Czr__4MFNP15xjjdwnq9YhxD_HQKdTvhDeKizlV9mFuapKneBZTlMI/s992/image02837.jpg" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="988" data-original-width="992" height="319" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuTKlnwfeFjmbPsbSiFtaLczSHJWNjr4QYuQLD7S-5sroGHfAYgFmuUY_JNspWOZknIF_W-qRUpJoehGOfGl7DQQC9ytvj69slMwOEVyvH-ue6CXgWLGdwNGVyLG_xbH9oN-Czr__4MFNP15xjjdwnq9YhxD_HQKdTvhDeKizlV9mFuapKneBZTlMI/s320/image02837.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Gold solidus, <br />Constantinople, 423-29, <br /><a href="https://www.coinarchives.com/a/results.php?search=Galla+Placidia%20" target="_blank">Galla Placida</a></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Whether Placidia is the reason for Athaulf's alliance with Honorius or a prize for Athaulf's dispensing of the rivals to Honorius's imperial title, the marriage did not last long. By 415, Athaulf was assassinated. Athaulf's six children by his first wife were killed, but Placidia, once more a captive, survived. (Placidia was childless. She had given birth to a son, named Theodosius after her father, shortly after her marriage, but the boy had died a few months later.) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">By 416, Placidia was returned to Honorius by Athaulf's successor, Wallia, as part of a peace negotiation. (According to at least <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Encyclopedia_of_Women_in_the_Ancient_Wor/HF0m3spOebcC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=galla+placidia&pg=PA133&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">one account</a>, the desperate Goths exchanged their imperial "hostage" for food, but <a href="https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1105&context=classicalstudies_facpubs" target="_blank">another</a> claims that the Goths held onto Placidia until they received a sizeable payment for their hostage in grain.) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Although she seems to have wished to remain a widow, Placidia was soon compelled by her brother to marry Constantius, the Roman general to whom Wallia had surrendered in 417. She gave birth to two children, a daughter, Justa Grata Honoria (b. c. 418), and a son, Valentinian (b. 2 July 419). </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">On 2 September 421, the childless Honorius named Constantius co-ruler of Rome, but he died just months later, on 2 September. The widowed Galla Placidia, who had been proclaimed <i>augusta </i>when her husband had been given the title <i>augustus</i>, was at first criticized for being scandalously close to her brother. But however close their relationship, scandalous or not, might have been, by 422 Placidia and her children were in Constantinople with her nephew, Theodosius II. Honorius may have been fearful of Placidia's influence with the Goths and sent her to Constantinople or, fearful of her half-brother, Placidia may have fled, finding safety with her nephew. Accounts differ.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Galla Placidia Augusta remained in Constantinople with her two children until the death of Honorius in 423. Before Theodosius could name a successor emperor in the west, a usurper had claimed the title. After the usurping Joannes was defeated in 425, Placidia's six-year-old son, Valentinian, was proclaimed <i>augustus</i>, with Placidia serving as his regent.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Despite the rivalries among the influential generals Flavius Aetius and Bonifacius, Placidia's regency lasted for twelve years, until Valentinian reached his age of majority in 437. Although her power was diminished by Aetius's military and political success and her son's independence, she remained an influential figure in imperial politics until her death. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Galla Placidia is buried in Rome, where she died on on 27 November 450. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUYJtEopEs059ZEv7XwnktX6BfX5fTPE3jqV7AJdeKqXyX0LpuuwTAiNcO9kmCVnqFFTaXaEfYzNuHkObNXgpz_OAqERAGxQ8kTFS1QP5WA1vio1lqJGP_mOeA20BunHQqZYqB6bbf6DycBXmS2ywqBa6VZmZ8HYgOFMM8ApSC_NvJn_Gys5HHH2qR/s680/GallaPlacidiaEle.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="472" data-original-width="680" height="222" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUYJtEopEs059ZEv7XwnktX6BfX5fTPE3jqV7AJdeKqXyX0LpuuwTAiNcO9kmCVnqFFTaXaEfYzNuHkObNXgpz_OAqERAGxQ8kTFS1QP5WA1vio1lqJGP_mOeA20BunHQqZYqB6bbf6DycBXmS2ywqBa6VZmZ8HYgOFMM8ApSC_NvJn_Gys5HHH2qR/s320/GallaPlacidiaEle.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Mausoleum of Galla Placidia,<br /><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GallaPlacidiaEle.jpg" target="_blank">Ravenna</a></td></tr></tbody></table><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Beyond her political role, Placidia was devoted to her faith. She and Constantius played an active role in the papal succession crisis of 418, and she called together a synod of African bishops. (Two of her letters about this synod survive; for analysis of them, click <a href="https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1105&context=classicalstudies_facpubs" target="_blank">here</a>.) An orthodox Catholic, she was "<a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Encyclopedia_of_Early_Christianity/kgRV7QohACcC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=galla+placidia&pg=PA449&printsec=frontcover" target="_blank">vigorous in opposition</a>" to the heresies of Pelagianism and Manicheism. She was also involved in the building of several churches in Rome and Ravenna, including the so-called Mausoleum of Galla Placidia, now a UNESCO World Heritage site, notable for its incredible mosaics. (I've linked <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mausoleum_of_Galla_Placidia" target="_blank">here</a> to the Wikipedia entry--it is the best overview available online.) </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There are two excellent recent biographies, Joyce Salisbury's <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Romes-Christian-Empress-Placidia-Twilight/dp/1421417006/ref=sr_1_2?crid=A1378SO1NVXC&keywords=Galla+placidia&qid=1669508714&sprefix=galla+placidia%2Caps%2C240&sr=8-2" target="_blank">Rome's Christian Empress: Galla Placidia Rules at the Twilight of the Empire</a> </i>and Hagith Sivan's <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Galla-Placidia-Roman-Empress-Antiquity/dp/0195379128/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2EFX28L0VW8H8&keywords=Galla+Placidia&qid=1669503564&sprefix=galla+placidia%2Caps%2C357&sr=8-1&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.18ed3cb5-28d5-4975-8bc7-93deae8f9840" target="_blank">Galla Placidia: The Last Roman Empress</a>--</i>I've used Sivan's subtitle here in the title of my post.<br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But there are also some excellent online sources. I particularly recommend the entry in<i> Women in World History: A Biographical Encyclopedia </i>(available <a href="https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/placidia-galla-c-390-450" target="_blank">here</a>) and the entry from <i>Roman Emperors: An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers and their Families </i>(available <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220410062446/http://www.roman-emperors.org/galla.htm" target="_blank">here</a>).</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div><div style="text-align: justify;">And, given my on-going bitching about the <i>Encyclopedia Britannica </i>and its lack of women, I should note that there is at least a teeny tiny <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aelia-Galla-Placidia" target="_blank">entry</a> for Aelia Galla Placida. It mentions nothing at all about her role as regent. </div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div>Sharon L. Jansenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17872672005659023462noreply@blogger.com0