Christine de Pizan

Christine de Pizan
The Writer Christine de Pizan at Her Desk
Showing posts with label Juana of Castile. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Juana of Castile. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 5, 2020

Leonor Teles, "the Treacherous"

Leonor Teles, queen and regent of Portugal (married 5 May 1372)


History has not been kind to Leonor Teles. The nineteenth-century novelist Alexandre Herculano described her as "the Portuguese Lucretia Borgia," "a species of diabolic phantom, which appears wherever there is a deed of treachery, of blood, or of atrocity."

Leonor Teles, queen and regent,
from a family tree
of the kings of Portugal
(Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal)
The date of Leonor Teles's birth is not certain, but she was probably born about the year 1350, the daughter of Martim Afonso Telo de Meneses, a Portuguese nobleman, and Aldonça Anes de Vasconcelos, the daughter of João Mendes de Vasconcelos, alcalde (mayor) of Estremoz. 

By 1365, Leonor Teles had married João Lourenço da Cunha, lord of Pombeiro, with whom she had two children. But in 1371, while visiting her sister, Maria, at the Portuguese court, Leonor was introduced to the king, Fernando I--who promptly decided to marry her. 

That Leonor already had a husband proved to be no problem to the "weak, fickle" Fernando, "completely blinded by his folly." The husband was "easily convinced" to give up his wife and retire from the scene. Nor did Fernando let his own entanglements stop him--he had just signed a peace treaty with the king of Castile, promising to marry the king's daughter. 

Instead, ignoring the terms of the treaty of Alcoutim, Fernando married Leonor on 5 May 1372. Early in February of the next year, the new queen gave birth to a daughter, Beatriz. (Fernando would later attempt to ensure his daughter's legitimacy--and her ability to inherit his throne--by having Leonor's first marriage annulled.) In 1376, the Portuguese Cortes affirmed Beatriz as her father's heir. Two years later, in his will, Fernando disinherited his half-siblings, removing them from the line of succession. Leonor would give birth to a son in 1382 and another daughter in 1383, but neither survived.

After the marriage of her sister, Maria Teles, to João of Portugal, King Fernando's illegitimate half-brother, Leonor grew fearful of the couple. Despite the terms of Fernando's will, the popular João might claim the Portuguese throne in the case of Fernando's death. Conspiring with her brother, Leonor convinced João that Maria was unfaithful to him--the enraged and suspicious João stabbed Maria and fled the court. (While Leonor could never be forgiven for her perfidy, João was--he was soon reconciled with his half-brother, returned to court, and sought to amend his hopes to succeed to the Portuguese throne by marrying Beatriz . . . Eventually he realized his precarious position and retired to Castile.)

In addition to providing her husband with an heir--and securing her daughter's rights--Leonor assumed a role in government--a role that generated a great deal of discontent among the people. At the time of her marriage, Fernando granted her a large quantity of land, over which she exerted "supreme power," and with her husband, she played an influential role in politics and diplomacy, including the marriage of their daughter, Beatriz, to Juan I, king of Castile, on 17 May 1383. (Beatriz was ten, Juan was twenty-five years old, recently widowed, and the father of three children.)

The young Beatriz's marriage to the king of Castile would forestall any hope that João of Portugal might have of assuming the throne of Portugal. According to the terms of the marriage contract between Portugal and Castile, Leonor Teles was to assume the regency in the case of Fernando's death, maintaining the kingdom for her daughter. And so, when the Portuguese king died just months after his daughter's marriage, Leonor Teles became regent of Portugal, governing in the name of her daughter.

Immediately following Leonor's assumption of the regency, turmoil erupted. Among the many factions, one, fearing the power of Castile, pressured her to marry João of Aviz, the illegitimate son of Pedro I (another of Fernando's half brothers), who would assume the regency in her place, while another, principally the nobility, supported the "pretensions" of the king of Castile. (Their opposition to Leonor seemed to be rooted in their view that a man widely believed to be her lover would become too powerful.) The peasants and merchants, meanwhile, fearful of the power of the Portuguese nobility and of the king of Castile, rose up in revolt.

Facing the prospect of losing control of Portugal and after the brutal assassination of her suspected lover, Leonor appealed to her son-in-law, the king of Castile, to come to her aid. According to a contemporary chronicler,
at the beginning of 1384, [the king of Castile] received a message from Leonor. . . . She asked him to come and so he did. . . . She gave him the fortresses of the town and renounced her rule in favor of the king, which according to the terms of his marriage contract, she had to hold until the king of Castile had a son with Beatri[z].
About Leonor's decision, the nineteenth-century historian Edward McMurdo makes this judgment:
But the desire of revenge dimmed her intelligence, otherwise so bright and penetrative, and she actually supposed that the King of Castille [sic] would undertake to avenge her injuries and return placidly to his own kingdom, leaving her in possession of the royal power. It was a line of thought perfectly inexcusable in a woman who on other occasions had manifested herself such a profound politician, but her whole dreams were now those of revenge. It was principally against Lisbon, whose inhabitants had so often affronted her, that she directed all her vials of bitter wrath.
The decision made, Leonor found that her son-in-law's assistance did not come without a cost: he asked that Leonor Teles renounce her regency, which she agreed to do. Juan of Castile immediately began referring to himself as João, por graça de deus, Rei de Castela, Leão, Portugal, Toledo e Galiza (John, by the grace of God, king of Castile, Leon, Portugal, Toledo, and Galicia)--no reference to the rights of his wife, Beatriz.

Although Leonor agreed to resign her regency, she soon regretted her decision and involved herself in a number of conspiracies, including one to assassinate Juan of Castile. Her plots did not succeed. Instead of regaining her throne, Leonor Teles was exiled from Portugal, sent to Tordesillas, and placed in the convent there. (Many royal women were imprisoned in the fortress of Tordesillas, with its "royal convent," useful for keeping "inconvenient" queens out of sight--Maria of Portugal, queen of Castile; Blanche of Bourbon, queen of Castile, and, most famously, Juana, queen of Castile and Léon, known forever as "la loca.")

Leonor never returned to Portugal. Her son-in-law could not force her to become a nun, but she remained in the Real Monasterio de Santa Clara de Tordesillas until his  death in 1390. 

Although she seems to have left the convent after King Juan's death, the last years of Leonor Teles's life are unclear--the year of her death is uncertain, and the place of her burial is unknown. She does not seem to have reconciled with her daughter.

Leonor's daughter Beatriz, titular queen of Portugal, died in 1420. Beatriz's legitimacy and right to the crown of Portugal seem to have been shadowed by the circumstances of her parents' marriage.

The funeral monument of Beatriz,
titular queen of Portugal,
 convento de Sancti Spiritus de Toro,
Zamora, Spain
Despite the pretensions of Juan of Castile, João of Aviz is regarded as the successor of Fernando, his reign as king of Portugal dated from 1385 until his death in 1433.

There are many resources on the life and political role of Leonor Teles, but most of them are in Portuguese. A good place to start is with Isabel M. Garcia de Pina's Leonor Teles, uma mulher de poder? (There is a good introductory section in English.)

Dated but still useful (and in English!) is Edward McMurdo's History of Portugal from the Commencement of the Monarchy to the Reign of Alfonso III, which includes references to contemporary chronicle accounts of Leonor. 

For good measure, there's an extensive work on Beatriz that's also available online--César Olivera Serrano's Beatriz de Portugal, la pugna dinástica Avís-Trastámara






Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Christina of Denmark, Duchess and Regent of Lorraine

Christina of Denmark, regent of Lorraine (died 10 December 1590)


Those obsessed with all things Tudor might have come across a reference to Christina of Denmark in their reading--before Henry VIII's "great matter" erupted, the young Danish princess was considered (by Thomas Wolsey, at any rate) as a possible match for Henry's illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy. But there was no reason why the girl's uncle, the Emperor Charles V, would find such a match acceptable, and no match was made.

Years later, after the death of his third queen, Jane Seymour, Henry VIII again considered Christina of Denmark, this time deciding that she might make an excellent wife for himself. Rather than being flattered by the English king's interest, the young woman is said to have responded, "If I had two heads, one should be at the King of England's disposal." Henry persisted for over a year until he was convinced by his ambassador that he should "fix his most noble stomach in some other place." (In this case, "stomach" meant "desire," but given Henry's eventual girth, it's an especially funny comment.)

Christina of Denmark,
portrait by Hans Holbein
It's interesting to think about what might have been if the young woman had become Henry's fourth queen.

In 1521, Christina of Denmark was born into a family of politically astute women--she was the great granddaughter of Isabella of Castile and the granddaughter of Juana of Castile. Christina's mother, Isabel of Austria (Juana's daughter) was married to King Christian II of Denmark and Norway--and during the king's absence (he briefly held the throne of Sweden), Queen Isabel served as regent of Denmark.

Christian II never quite gained control in Sweden, and he soon lost Denmark as well. When he was forced off the throne and into exile in 1523, the king, his wife, and his family took refuge in the Netherlands with Margaret of Austria, who was Isabel of Austria's aunt. The young Christina of Denmark thus came under the influence of apolitically experienced woman who governed the Netherlands as regent for twenty years.

After Isabel of Austria's death in 1526, the Danish king eventually made an ill-fated attempt to retake his throne. Christian was "persuaded" to leave his children behind, in Margaret of Austria's care, by the regent's offer of a generous annual payment.*

Under the influence of Margaret of Austria, Christina of Denmark was educated with a generation of women who learned much about politics and power from the Habsburg regent. (Among these young women was, interestingly, Anne Boleyn, who arrived at Margaret's court in 1513 and spent at least a year there.)

After the regent's death in 1530, she was followed by yet another Habsburg regent, Mary of Austria, Christina of Denmark's aunt (her mother Isabel's sister). But Christina's period of tuition was brief--by the time she was twelve years old, she became one more useful pawn in the Habsburg game of using marriage as a way to increase influence.

On 23 September 1533, Christina of Denmark was married in Brussels by proxy to Francesco II Sforza, duke of Milan (he was the son of Beatrice d'Este). When she arrived in Milan in May 1534, a second marriage ceremony was celebrated. By October 1535, her husband was dead, leaving Christina of Denmark, duchess of Milan, a widow at the age of thirteen.

Christina of Denmark returned to the Netherlands and Mary of Austria's court in 1537. A few months after her return, Hans Holbein was in Brussels, painting Christina's portrait for Henry VIII. Now all of sixteen, the young widow was sought by many--among those who hoped to arrange a match (aside from the English king), was William of Cleves, the brother of the woman who would become Henry VIII's fourth wife, Anne. (Another fix for the Tudor fan!)

Christina had her own views--having made a political match, she preferred a love match and wished to marry René of Chalon, Prince of Orange. While her aunt raised no objections, the Habsburg emperor had his own plans, and in 1540 he insisted that René marry Anne of Lorraine and that Christina marry the brother of the woman who married the man she loved--got that? 

On 10 July 1541, Christina of Denmark married Francis, duke of Bar. In 1544, Francis succeeded his father as duke of Lorraine. Despite her hope to marry René of Chalon, Christina found happiness in her marriage to Francis.

But the marriage was not a long one--by 1545, she was a widow again. During the brief years of her second marriage, she had given birth to two children (Charles, in 1543; Renata, in 1544). A third child, a daughter named Dorothea, was born after her husband's death.

Francis of Lorraine left his wife, Christina, as regent for his son and heir. She remained as regent until 1552--despite her efforts to secure assistance from the emperor, Lorraine was invaded by the French king, who took custody of Charles and relieved her of her duties. 

She was eventually exiled from Lorraine and made her way to the court of her aunt, Mary of Austria, regent of the Netherlands. 

Christina of Denmark, duchess (and regent) of Lorraine, remained a very desirable marriage prospect, though she never married again. She was eventually reunited with her son, and in 1560 she once again stepped in as regent of Lorraine, this time for her son. 

After the death of her father in 1559, Christina's childless sister ceded her claim to the Danish throne to her younger sister, and Christina styled herself as "Christina, by the grace of God Queen of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway." She also thought to arrange the marriage of her daughter, Renata, to Frederick II of Denmark (despite Christina's claims to be the rightful queen, he was the reigning monarch of Denmark). 

But none of these plans were to succeed. In 1578, Christina of Denmark left Lorraine for Tortona, a small territory in the duchy of Milan where she had been granted sovereign rights by her first husband, Francesco Sforza. There she "ruled" until 1584, when the Spanish decided she could stay but her role as "sovereign" had to go. 

Christina of Denmark, regent of Lorraine (among many other titles), died in Tortona on 10 December 1590. 

It's hard to believe that there is not a recent biography of Christina of Denmark, but Julia Cartwright's massive 1913 Christina of Denmark, Duchess of Milan and Lorraine, 1522-1590 is available from Internet Archive (click here).


*Christian II of Denmark's efforts failed; he surrendered to his uncle and rival in 1531 and was held in captivity until his death twenty-seven years later, in 1559. Christina and her older sister, Dorotea, petitioned their uncle, Charles V, to negotiate their father's release, but the emperor declined.








Saturday, December 16, 2017

Beatriz Galindo, Humanist Scholar and Teacher

Beatriz Galindo, scholar and tutor (birth of her pupil Catherine of Aragon, 16 December 1485)

Note: My 16 December 2015 post on Beatriz Galindo has somehow been deleted (oops!), and although I've restored it, or tried to restore it, it may not show up in the appropriate spot in the 2015 archive! So I've reposted it here, in 2017, just in case . . . 
Today is the anniversary of the birth of Catherine of Aragon, and so I thought I would post today not about the woman who would become part of Henry VIII's marital misadventures, but instead about the woman who was her tutor, the humanist scholar Beatriz Galindo, known for her scholarly proficiency and mastery of Latin as "la Latina."

A fifteenth-century painting of
Beatriz Galindo, "la Latina"
Beatriz Galindo's date of birth is not known--estimates range generally from 1464 to 1474.

Born in Madrid, she was the daughter of a family of the lesser nobility, and it seems that her parents intended Beatriz for the religious life. 

To further her understanding of the prayers, music, and ritual of the cloister, she began to study Latin, but, given her manifest gifts, she received Latin instruction at the grammar school of the University of Salamanca, where she and Luisa de Medrano were among the first female students. 

Galindo acquired further training from the University of Salerno, where she received diplomas in philosophy and Latin. Although the information I have is fragmentary (and sometimes contradictory), it seems that both Galindo and Medrano lectured at the University of Salamanca, Medrano in poetry and history, Galindo in rhetoric, philosophy, and medicine. Galindo is credited with having written Latin poetry and commentaries on Aristotle, though only a few letters and a will survive.

A sculpture honoring Beatriz Galindo,
Madrid
By 1486, her reputation had brought Galindo to the attention of Queen Isabella of Castile. Well aware of her own educational deficiencies, Isabella brought the scholar to court, where she would tutor the queen in Latin. Galindo seems also to have become something of an advisor to Isabella and perhaps also to have served as her secretary at times. 

In addition, Galindo became the tutor for Isabella's daughters, with most sources focusing on her training of the two youngest, Juana and Catalina (later Catherine). Isabella also appointed Galindo as the director of a school for the children of the nobility that the queen had established at court. 

In 1491, Galindo married the courtier and captain Francisco Ramirez (nicknamed "il Artillero"), her dowry supplied by the Spanish monarchs--sources vary as to whether she had two children or five children. (Or whether the widowed Ramirez had three children, and then the couple added two more, for a total of five.)

The surviving façade of the
Hospital de la Concepción de Nuestra Señora
Widowed after 1501, she retired from the court and dedicated herself to the foundation of charities, notably the Hospital de la Concepción de Nuestra Señora (the Hospital of the Conception of Our Lady), popularly called the hospital of la Latina.

Galindo drafted the organization's constitution and rules for government. (The hospital and adjoining convent were destroyed in the early twentieth century when the streets were widened, though the façade was preserved.) 

She also founded the Convento de la Concepción Jerónima (also called the Convento de La Latina) in 1509 for nuns of the Hieronymite order.

Beatriz Galindo died in Madrid on 23 November 1534.

One of the most reliable sources is an article from a 2006 edition of a supplement to El Mundo, which you can read by clicking here.

Update, 23 March 2021: A comment from a reader, Ana, points to the 2019 essay by Ana María Carabias Torres, "Beatriz Galindo y Lucía de Medrano: ni maestra de reinas ni catedrática de derecho canónico" ("Beatriz Galindo and Lucía de Medrano, Neither a Teacher of Queens Nor a Professor of Canon Law") Investigaciones Históricas, época moderna y contemporánea 39 (2019): 179-208. The piece is in Spanish, but here is the article abstract, in English: 
Study of documentary sources that have lead a majority of researchers to believe that Beatriz Galindo, “La Latina,” was Queen Isabella the Catholic’s teacher, and that Lucía, or Luisa de Medrano, was a professor of Canon Law at the University of Salamanca. In this article we try to prove that none of this has been true, through critical analysis of primary documentary sources. 

A .pdf of the article is available online--to access it, click here

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Beatriz Galindo, "La Latina"

Beatriz Galindo, scholar and tutor (birth of her pupil Catherine of Aragon, 16 December 1485)


Today is the anniversary of the birth of Catherine of Aragon, and so I thought I would post today not about the woman who would become part of Henry VIII's marital misadventures, but instead about the woman who was her tutor, the humanist scholar Beatriz Galindo.

Beatriz Galindo's date of birth is not known--estimates range generally from 1464 to 1474.

A fifteenth-century portrait of
Beatriz Gallindo
Born in Madrid, she was the daughter of a family of the lesser nobility, and it seems that her parents intended Beatriz for the religious life. 

To further her understanding of the prayers, music, and ritual of the cloister, she began to study Latin, but, given her manifest gifts, she received Latin instruction at the grammar school of the University of Salamanca, where she and Luisa de Medrano were among the first female students. 

Galindo acquired further training from the University of Salerno, where she received diplomas in philosophy and Latin. Although the information I have is fragmentary (and sometimes contradictory), it seems that both Galindo and Medrano lectured at the University of Salamanca, Medrano in poetry and history, Galindo in rhetoric, philosophy, and medicine. Galindo is credited with having written Latin poetry and commentaries on Aristotle, though only a few letters and a will survive.

By 1486, her reputation had brought Galindo to the attention of Queen Isabella of Castile. Well aware of her own educational deficiencies, Isabella brought the scholar to court, where she would tutor the queen in Latin. Galindo seems also to have become something of an advisor to Isabella and perhaps also to have served as her secretary at times. 

In addition, Galindo became the tutor for Isabella's daughters, with most sources focusing on her training of the two youngest, Juana and Catalina (later Catherine). Isabella also appointed Galindo as the director of a school for the children of the nobility that the queen had established at court. 

In 1491, Galindo married the courtier and captain Francisco Ramirez (nicknamed "il Artillero"), her dowry supplied by the Spanish monarchs--sources vary as to whether she had two children or five children. (Or whether the widowed Ramirez had three children, and then the couple added two more, for a total of five.)

The surviving façade of the
Hospital de la Concepción de Nuestra Señora
Widowed after 1501, she retired from the court and dedicated herself to the foundation of charities, notably the Hospital de la Concepción de Nuestra Señora (the Hospital of the Conception of Our Lady), popularly called the hospital of la Latina. Galindo drafted the organization's constitution and rules for government. (The hospital and adjoining convent were destroyed in the early twentieth century when the streets were widened, though the façade was preserved.) 

She also founded the Convento de la Concepción Jerónima (also called the Convento de La Latina) in 1509 for nuns of the Hieronymite order.

Beatriz Galindo died in Madrid on 23 November 1534.

One of the most reliable sources is an article from a 2006 edition of a supplement to El Mundo, which you can read by clicking here.

Update, 23 March 2021: A comment from a reader, Ana, points to the 2019 essay by Ana María Carabias Torres, "Beatriz Galindo y Lucía de Medrano: ni maestra de reinas ni catedrática de derecho canónico" ("Beatriz Galindo and Lucía de Medrano, Neither a Teacher of Queens Nor a Professor of Canon Law") Investigaciones Históricas, época moderna y contemporánea 39 (2019): 179-208. The piece is in Spanish, but here is the article abstract, in English: 
Study of documentary sources that have lead a majority of researchers to believe that Beatriz Galindo, “La Latina,” was Queen Isabella the Catholic’s teacher, and that Lucía, or Luisa de Medrano, was a professor of Canon Law at the University of Salamanca. In this article we try to prove that none of this has been true, through critical analysis of primary documentary sources. 

A .pdf of the article is available online--to access it, click here

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Isabella I of Castile, "the Servant of God"

Isabella I of Castile, queen regent of Castile and León, queen consort of Aragon (crowned 13 December 1474)


Isabella of Castile,
a portrait now in Windsor Castle
Isabella of Castile has figured in many of my posts this year, including the one just two days ago on Juana of Castile, her niece (the daughter of Isabella's half-brother, King Enrique IV) and "rival" for the throne of Castile and León.* 

And, next to the Tudor queens, the queen of Castile is probably the most familiar early-modern queen for American readers today--if for no other reason than her association with Christopher Columbus. 

Rather than rehearsing her biography here, I thought I'd write a bit about her crowning, which may be a less familiar story. 

As I wrote in my post on Juana of Castile, when Enrique IV died in December of 1474, the question of who would succeed him was not altogether clear.

When his daughter Juana was born in 1462, both the king and the Cortes had recognized her status as his heir, successor to the crown of Castile if no son were to be born. But in crisis and under duress, the king had been persuaded to name his half-sister as his heir and successor in 1468, disinheriting his daughter. 

Although Isabella had agreed that she would not marry without Enrique's permission, she did so anyway. She wrote to Enrique announcing her intention and seeking his permission. She began by reminding him of their agreement: "I agreed to submit to your wishes . . . in which it was agreed that the true succession of these said your kingdoms would belong to me as your legitimate heir and successor." Then she sought his permission for her proposal, asking that "Your Highness would . . . consent to the marriage with the . . . prince of Aragon." 

Despite the fact that Enrique's permission was not forthcoming, Isabella and Ferdinand were married on 18 October 1469. The terms of the marriage contract ensured Isabella's rights and her independence: Ferdinand would be prince-consort of Castile, not its king. Ferdinand had to promise "virtual obedience" to Isabella; among other "capitulations," he agreed to live in Castile, to seek permission before leaving the kingdom and before taking any children they might have out of the kingdom, to renew none of his father's claims to Castilian possessions, and to make no government appointments without Isabella's consent. Further, he agreed to provide Isabella a sizeable marriage gift and to serve as her military defender. 

By February 1470, Isabella was pregnant. At last, on 26 October, more than a year after his half-sister's marriage, Enrique replied. Declaring Isabella could no longer be considered his heir, he decided Juana was--once more--his legitimate daughter and, therefore, his heir. But, despite Enrique's assertions of Juana's legitimacy, the succession question had not been settled when the king died on 11 December 1474. 

Two days later, on 13 December 1474, Isabella was proclaimed "Queen Proprietess" of Castile. Ferdinand, "as her legitimate husband," was recognized as king. At the church of San Miguel in Segovia, the royal standard raised above her, Isabella took up an unsheathed lance, a symbol of sovereign authority; in the procession that followed, she was proceeded by a rider carrying an upraised naked sword, a symbol of royal justice. Neither ceremony had ever been performed by and for a queen. 

Ferdinand, meanwhile, was in Aragon. On 16 December he received a letter from Isabella telling him of Enrique's death but not of her coronation. The chronicler Alonso Palencia was with Ferdinand when he received a letter three days later, on 19 December, describing his wife's coronation and the ceremonies. 

According to Palencia, Ferdinand was surprised--"I have never heard of a queen who usurped this male privilege." His secretary Gonzalez registered more than surprise, shocked not only by Isabella's "insolent action" but by her appropriation of male symbols. He wondered aloud if there were "in antiquity" any "precedent for a queen to be proceeded by this symbol." "Everyone knows that these are conceded to kings," he continued," "but never was known a queen who had usurped this masculine attribute."

Isabella of Castile,
portrait by Antonio del Rincón
Ferdinand was nevertheless confident that he could assert his rights as king. Palencia wrote that Ferdinand felt he would conquer Isabella "with patience"; he "felt certain he would triumph through satisfying assiduously the demands of conjugal love, with which he could easily soften the intransigence that bad advisors had planted in his wife's mind." Speaking for himself, Palencia judged that Isabella was "after all, a woman." His reading of Castilian law led him to conclude that "in the marriage of a crown heiress, even though the husband be of inferior lineage, he must enjoy the scepter and the title of him together with her as well as all the other priorities accorded to males all over the world." 

Despite Ferdinand's hopes and Palencia's reading of the laws of succession, Isabella and the Castilian nobility persisted in asserting her role as queen regnant and Ferdinand's as king-consort. Isabella herself announced her position in a letter of 16 December to the towns of Castile, "inviting" them to recognize her as "natural queen" and Ferdinand as "the very illustrious and most powerful Prince . . . , [her] lord, . . . [her] legitimate husband." 

Fernando del Pulgar, the queen's secretary and chronicler, assembled historical support for Isabella's succession, citing the precedents of a number of queens regent, including Sancha of León (d. 1067), the wife of Ferdinand I of Castile, who became queen of León in her own right after the death of her father Alfonso V in 1037; Sancha's daughter Urraca of Zamora (1033-1101), who inherited absolute sovereignty over the city of Zamora and the title of "queen" (click here and scroll to the bottom); Urraca, queen of León, Castile, and Galicia (1079-1126), about whom I posted earlier this year; and Berenguela of Castile (1179-1246), who was regent of Castile for her brother, and then succeeded him as queen regent after his death in 1217.

Ferdinand and his allies in Aragon and in Castile, on the other hand, argued that natural and divine law gave precedence to a man over a woman; while law and custom might not exclude women from a throne, in practice, when a woman succeeded, it was her husband who ruled. They also argued that Ferdinand's independent claims to the throne of Castile gave him precedence over Isabella: Ferdinand was the nearest male descendant in the Trastamara line. 

There matters stood, unresolved even when Ferdinand joined Isabella in Segovia on 2 January. The king-consort was further provoked by learning that, should the queen predecease him, the Castilian throne would pass not to him but to their daughter Isabel, who had been born in 1470. Despite Isabella's efforts at conciliation, Ferdinand threatened to return to Aragon. At last the matter was placed before a council in Segovia on 15 January. About this confrontation Isabella's biographer Nancy Rubin writes: "That meeting proved to be one of the most extraordinary examinations of female inheritance rights in prefeminist Europe, one whose highly emotional tone would finally be resolved by Isabella's cool logic."

The subject of the succession, Isabella began, addressing Ferdinand,  "need never to have been discussed because where there is such union as by the grace of God exists between you and me, there can be no difference."  As her husband, Ferdinand was king of Castile: "Already, as my husband, you are king of Castile, and your orders have to be obeyed here. . . . But since it has pleased these knights to open this discussion, perhaps it is just as well that any doubt they have be clarified, as the law of our kingdoms provide[s]." 

Isabella of Castile,
portrait by Jan Flanders
As she reminded him, Castilian law preferred the inheritance of legitimate daughter in the direct line to a male in a collateral line. And beyond law, Isabella also reminded Ferdinand of the vagaries of male inheritance. If Ferdinand were to die, another, more distant, male relative might claim Castile if women were excluded from succession.

In the end, Ferdinand accepted Isabella's arguments, their agreement reflected in the motto, now famous, which they adopted: "Tanto monta, monta tanto, Isabel como Fernando--To stand as high, as high to stand, Isabella as Ferdinand." That he agreed is clear. Why he agreed is another matter. 

Motivated by self-interest, fear, or, perhaps, love, Ferdinand accepted the terms Isabella offered, and the two thus established what historian Rafael Altamira calls a "diarchy," a "joint government by two monarchs." There is a qualification to their shared arrangement, however. As Altamira notes, this equality "existed between husband and wife with regard to the Crown's government of Castile. That co-participation was in no wise reflected in the government of Aragon, which was exclusively Ferdinand's prerogative." 

But, while no similar shared rule was negotiated in Ferdinand's kingdom, he ultimately named Isabella his co-regent in Aragon.
. . . . 

Isabella and Ferdinand, the great monarchs, who succeeded in uniting Spain, were not very successful in their offspring. Isabella and Ferdinand did have one son, Juan, but he died before succeeding his parents on their combined Spanish throne. 

I've already mentioned Isabella's daughters on occasion throughout this daybook, none of whom had a particularly happy or successful life (click the labels below to read more). Their eldest daughter, Isabel, princess of Asturias, was married first to Afonso of Portugal and then, after his death, was forced into a marriage with Afonso's uncle, Manuel of Portugal. Born in 1470, Isabel died in 1496, just twenty-seven years old. 

The Spanish monarchs' second daughter, Maria of Aragon, was married to her dead sister's widower, Manuel of Portugal, in 1500. Born in 1482, she gave birth to ten children (eight of whom survived infancy) before dying in 1517, at the age of thirty-four.

The story of Catalina--Catherine--of Aragon is well known and hardly a happy one. Born in 1485, she married, first, Arthur of England, and then, after his death, Henry VIII. She gave birth to at least six children (and may have suffered miscarriagaes), but only one daughter, Mary, survived. Abandoned by her husband, her marriage disolved, Catherine of Aragon died in 1536, just fifty years old.

I've written a lengthy post here about Juana of Castile, whose bizarre and tragic life was certainly long--she died at the age of seventy-five--but not at all happy. 

I've also written here about Isabella of Castile's daughter-in-law, Margaret of Austria, Prince Juan's wife. His life was short--he died at age nineteen. The formidable Margaret lived a full, successful, and remarkable life, the only one of Isabella's "daughters" who seemed to profit from the model of Isabella of Castile.
. . . . 

Isabella of Castile was a formidable queen, though not entirely an admirable one, at least from a twenty-first century perspective. On 31 March 1492 she issued the Alhambra Decree, an edict of expulsion to be carried out against Spanish Jews, who were accused of posing a great danger to Christians: a "great harm" is enacted on Christians because of the "contact, intercourse and communication which they have with the Jews, who always attempt in various ways to seduce faithful Christians from our Holy Catholic Faith."

Jews were given four months to convert to Christianity or to leave the country; if they left, they necessarily had to leave behind all their property, though they were allowed to take with them what they could carry--except, of course, for gold, silver, or "minted money." The numbers of Jews forced to leave Spain was considerable, though estimates vary from 130,000 to 800,000. For those who "converted," between 50,000 and 70,000, the Inquisition was a constant danger. Added suspicions of the Jewish conversos was an ever-more-rigid view of the "purity" or "cleanliness" of Spanish--that is, not Jewish Spanish--blood.

While the terms of the 1491 Treaty of Granada, ending the Reconquista, had guaranteed rights and religious tolerance to the surrending Moors, there were increasing pressures on the Moors to convert. Revolts in 1499 and 1500 led to a change in policy, with the Spanish Moors, too, forced either to convert to Christianity or to face expulsion. Those who converted and remained in Spain, the moriscos, also faced the persecutions of the Inquisition. (In 1609, Philip III of Spain issued a final expulsion order for all moriscos.)

Despite these unpleasant realities, in 1958, a process of canonization was started for Isabella of Castile. In 1970 the commission of experts examining the case reported that "A Canonical process for the canonization of Isabella the Catholic could be undertaken with a sense of security since there was not found one single act, public or private, of Queen Isabella that was not inspired by Christian and evangelical criteria; moreover there was a 'reputation of sanctity' uninterrupted for five centuries and as the investigation was progressing, it was more accentuated."

In 1972, her case was submitted to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. Isabella of Castile was awarded the title "Servant of God" in 1974. (This title represents the first stage in the canonization process, followed by "venerable," "beatified," and, finally, "saint.")

*Parts of this post have been adapted from The Monstrous Regiment of Women: Female Rulers in Early Modern Europe (Palgrave Macmillan).



Friday, November 6, 2015

Juana of Castile: Not Her Mother's Daughter

Juana of Castile, queen of Castile and Léon, queen of Aragon (born 6 November 1479)


The third child--and second daughter--of the Spanish monarchs Isabella of Castile and Léon and Ferdinand of Aragon, Juana was born in Toledo and received an education that reflected the best of Renaissance humanist training.

Having herself had relatively little opportunities for education, Isabella made sure that, as Giles Tremlett writes, "the education of [her] daughters was taken with an unusual and remarkable degree of seriousness." (The education of the Spanish princesses was undertaken by the remarkable scholar Beatriz Galindo, "la Latina.")

Juana of Castile,
about 1495-96,
the time of her marriage
Juana proved to be an adept scholar, a good student of Latin and contemporary languages, of classical authors as well as of Christian writers, of typically "female" accomplishments like needlework as well as of aristocratic pastimes like hunting, and of music. She was also taught law and trained carefully for her political duties, as a woman: marriage. 

In 1495, the Catholic monarchs signed a treaty with Henry VII of England and with the Holy Roman emperor Maximilian aimed at limiting the power of France.*

Thus, Juana of Castile was married to Philip of Austria, and Catalina of Aragon to Prince Arthur of England. Catalina was transformed into Catherine, and her life was to be spent in England where, after Arthur's death, she married his brother, becoming the first of King Henry VIII's six wives. 

Juana's reputation in history is as notorious as her name--she is Juana la Loca, or "Juana the Mad." As it is generally told, the narrative of Juana's life is fairly simple, a kind of fairytale turned horror story. Married to a handsome prince who is as unfaithful as he is charming, the beautiful princess is tormented by her uncontrollable jealousy. Inheriting a strain of madness from her maternal grandmother (Isabella of Portugal), she descends into madness herself. 

As this fairytale/horror story continues, when Isabella of Castile and Léon dies, Juana becomes queen regnant of Castile and Léon, but she is unable even to care for herself, much less for her country and her people. Her husband, then her father, and finally her son undertake to act for her as regents. The madwoman is locked away, kept company by her youngest daughter (Catherine of Spain) and visited faithfully by her oldest son. In her death, she triumphs--her sons become emperors and her daughters all become queens.  

Juana may well have been mad, or she may have become mad, but her story is at once more complicated and more tragic. Certain elements of her tragedy are clear. Her marriage to Philip of Austria, duke of Burgundy, Philip "the Handsome," was arranged in 1496, and she left Spain in August of that year. When she finally met the waiting Philip on 18 October, he was so struck by her beauty that he demanded they be married that very day so they could consummate their union without delay. The birth of their first child, Eleanor, in 1498 was followed quickly by the birth of Charles, a son and heir, born in the city of Ghent on 25 February 1500.

Despite the initial attraction between the two, their relationship deteriorated quickly. In some accounts, Philip is depicted as a kind of sexual psychopath, a ruthless sadist who "held Juana in a vicious cycle of affection, abuse, and intimidation from which she was constitutionally unable to escape," while Juana is portrayed as a woman so "madly in love" that "she allowed herself to be psychologically abused," unable to free herself from her husband's "domination and sexual magnetism." 

In other versions of their relationship, Juana is a beautiful but fragile hysteric: "a mercurial temperament subject to soaring changes of disposition, scaling the heights of joy one moment and groveling in a bottomless well of self-pity the next." Modern historians thus differ in their views, but their contradictory assessments of the couple are no more incompatible than the views of Philip and Juana's contemporaries.

Those who actually met the pair recorded equally inconsistent views: In 1499, for example, a Spanish priest observed that Juana was "so frightened that she could not hold up her head," while in 1500 the Spanish ambassador judged that "in a person so young I do not think one has seen such prudence."

After the deaths, in rapid succession, of Juana's elder siblings, Prince Juan of Castile in 1497 and Isabel in 1498, and of Juan's infant son, Prince Miguel, in 1500, the crowns of Castile and Aragon fell to Juana as her parents' heir. Isabella and Ferdinand summoned their daughter and her husband to Spain. 

Philip ignored their urgent request and put off the journey at first, preferring to send a representative to Spain to act on his behalf, but Juana refused to sign the document appointing Philip's choice of an ambassador. By 1501 Juana was pregnant for a third time, delaying the trip still longer. The archduchess gave birth to another daughter in July, naming the baby Isabel after her Castilian grandmother. 

When Juana was finally able to travel, she and Philip began their trip to Spain, not by ship, as Ferdinand and Isabella planned, but through France, as Philip preferred. In France, Philip swore fealty as Louis XII's "good neighbor, humble servant, and obedient vassal," but Juana was determined to assert herself as the Infanta of Castile rather than as Philip's archduchess and a vassal of France. 

She refused to kneel to the French king, but she was maneuvered onto her knees forcibly in a gesture of submission by two formidable women: as Juana approached Anne of Brittany, queen of France, she was either shoved or tripped by Anne of France

Later, when she found herself in yet another "compromising position," Juana responded proudly by refusing to accept an offering of gold coins from the French queen. Her refusal earned the hostility of Anne of Brittany and the anger of her husband.

Juana of Castile in 1500,
portrait by Juan de Flandres
By the end of January 1502, Juana and Philip arrived in Castile. On 22 May the couple were formally designated Isabella's heirs in Castile, and in September they traveled to Aragon to be recognized as Ferdinand's.

The Aragonese Cortes recognized Juana as primogenita succesora, heir presumptive to the crown, declaring her the "true and lawful heir to the crown, to whom, in default of male heirs, the usage and law of the land require the oath of allegiance." 

Philip was recognized only as her king-consort. But, if Isabella were to predecease Ferdinand, the Aragonese parliament declared that any male child Ferdinand might have in a subsequent marriage would take precedence over Juana. On 27 October Juana became the first woman to whom the Aragonese Cortes swore an oath of fealty.

By 19 December Philip was gone, leaving Juana--pregnant again--behind with her parents. His departure was followed almost immediately by his betrayal of Juana and los Reyes Catolicos. On 5 April 1503 Philip concluded the treaty of Lyon with France; it provided for the marriage of his son and heir to Louis' daughter and agreed to Ferdinand's renunciation of the kingdom of Naples, which he had just conquered. In 1504 Philip joined his father Maximilian and the French king in yet another treaty against Aragonese interests.

Before Juana rejoined her husband, she gave birth to her fourth child, another son, named Ferdinand after her father, on 10 March 1503. When she finally left Spain in May of 1504, she left this child behind, to be raised by his grandparents. In the meantime, Juana's increasingly erratic behavior, Philip's perfidy, and Queen Isabella's failing health led to a reeevaluation of the Castilian succession. 

When she drew her will in October, Isabella named Juana as her successor: the crown of Castile would be inherited by her "dearly beloved daughter" as "universal heiress of all . . . said kingdoms and lands and lordships . . . , proprietress . . . conformable with what I owe and am obliged by law." Juana and Philip--"as her husband"--were to receive "obedience from her subjects." 

But to exclude Philip from power, Isabella stipulated that Juana appoint no foreigners to office and that she consult the Cortes on all decisions. She further ordered, in the event that Juana as queen "does not desire or is not able to engage in government," the regency of Castile fall not to Philip but to Ferdinand. If Juana were incapacitated by absence or illness, her father was to function as her regent until Juana's son and heir, Charles, "shall be at least twenty."

Isabella died on 26 November 1504, and Juana was immediately proclaimed her successor: "Castile, Castile for our sovereign lady, Queen Juana." But in Brussels, Philip had himself proclaimed "King of Castile, Léon, Granada, archduke of Austria, prince of Aragon and Sicily, duke of Burgundy, [and] count of Flanders." 

What followed was not a smooth succession but a succession crisis. In the new queen's absence, Ferdinand assumed the role of regent of Castile, but his position was vigorously opposed by Juana's husband. Ferdinand convened the Cortes in January 1505, and Juana was recognized as "legitimate and proprietary ruler" of Castile and Philip as her husband and consort. But Ferdinand claimed that, by the terms of Isabella's will, Juana had to return to Castile and prove herself capable of rule. 

In a letter he declared Juana had shown "illness and emotional upheaval" and "disorder" during her previous trip to Castile and that, out of "prudence" and because of "great sorrow," Isabella "did not wish to declare what the impediment was." "Because of the gravity of the situation," he wrote, "it is better that you comprehend the reasons that moved the queen, her mother, to word her will as she did." 

Since the matter "touches the royal person of Queen Juana, you must all swear a solemn oath to keep this matter secret." The Cortes ultimately decided to acknowledge Ferdinand as regent "owing to the incapacity" of Juana. A letter announcing the decision was sent to Philip in Flanders.

In pursuit of his wife's interests, Philip insisted that Juana was capable of ruling and that, as her husband, he had the right to the regency. He was supported by a significant number of the Castilian grandees, who were suspicious of the Aragonese king. 

For his part, Ferdinand solicited a letter from Juana approving of her father's assumption of the regency. But Juana was betrayed by one of her Castilian servants, who turned the document over to Philip. The new Castilian "queen" was forced to substitute a letter in support of Philip. Ferdinand received the letter, along with reports that indicated Juana's signature on it was either forged or coerced.

It may well be that, at this point, Ferdinand decided on another tack to maintain power in Castile; some reports indicate that he sent an emissary to Portugal to negotiate a marriage with his wife Isabella's old rival, Juana la Beltraneja. Through her he could oppose Philip and Juana and claim the crown of Castile for himself. If he did make such an overture, nothing came of it. 

He did, however, sign a treaty with France; instead of a marriage with Isabella's niece and rival for the throne of Castile, he married the French king's niece, Germaine of Foix. In response, Philip attempted to force Juana to sign a denunciation of her father, but once again she refused. Ferdinand's ambassadors at Philip's court objected to the conditions under which Juana was forced to live; they were finally allowed to see her but not to speak with her.

After Juana gave birth on 13 September 1505 to another daughter, named Mary, Philip decided to travel to Castile to claim the throne. Ferdinand, meanwhile, declared that Juana was sane but a prisoner, publishing a proposal to rescue her. He also prepared for a compromise with Philip that would exclude Juana but benefit both of them. 

Philip and Juana arrived in Castile on 26 April 1506; as they traveled toward a meeting with Ferdinand, Philip kept his wife in the background, Philip presenting himself as the king and Juana merely as his consort. Juana resented her husband's efforts, however, and refused to sign documents that Philip prepared for her. The Castilian grandees who supported Philip against Ferdinand were increasingly unhappy with Juana's husband and her position as well, noting her isolation and his disregard for their interests.

Philip and Ferdinand finally met in June. Philip was deeply suspicious of his wife and of his father-in-law; he refused to allow Ferdinand to meet with, or even to see, Juana. But on 27 June the two men finally agreed to a treaty of peace, a "hellish compact" that "sealed the fate" of Juana. The agreement stated that the queen "on no account wishes to have anything to do with any affair of government or other things." 

After this categorical statement, it continued: "and, even if she did wish it, it would cause the total loss and destruction of these realms, having regard to her infirmities and passions which are not described here for decency's sake." Juana, therefore, was excluded from governing, and if she should "of her own accord or at the instance of others . . . attempt to interfere in the government or disturbed the arrangement made between the two kings, they will join forces to prevent it." Ferdinand was willing to declare Juana's unfitness, even though it had been over two years since he had seen her. 

After signing the document, Ferdinand turned around immediately and denounced it, swearing that he had been coerced and that Juana was, after all, quite fit to rule. He swore to "liberate" Juana from her imprisonment and to return to her the government of Castile. Juana managed to assert herself again in July, when she and Philip were in Valladolid. She refused to enter the city following two banners, insisting that she alone was queen and that one of the banners should be removed. 

The Admiral of Castile finally forced Philip to grant him an interview with Juana, and after a two-day meeting with her he reported that "she never gave a random answer." He saw no sign of the insanity that both her father and her husband had, at various times, asserted. On 11 July, under the influence of the Admiral of Castile, the Cortes swore allegiance to her as queen of Castile and to Philip only as her consort. Juana appeared in person on 12 July to receive their oath of allegiance.

In the meantime Ferdinand was forced to withdraw from the struggle with Philip. Facing increased opposition in Castile and having his own interests in Naples to pursue, he retreated to Aragon. But Philip's ascendancy in Castile did not last long. By September he was dead. Although Juana declined any role in the government after her husband's death, Ferdinand, on his way to Naples, would not have her declared incompetent, instead issuing orders that she was to be recognized as obeyed as queen regnant.

Juana refused to assume her role as queen, indicating that her father should act in her stead. In this situation, reports about her mental state vary. According to Ferdinand's secretary, "there is no one, big or little, who any longer denies that she is out of her mind, except Juan Lopez, who says that she is as sane as her mother was."

Another account attributes her withdrawal from the world not as madness but as an almost stoic resignation; she is "a woman to suffer and behold all the things of this world . . . without change of heart or courage." Sane or insane, competent or incompetent, she was watched carefully by her father's supporters; Ferdinand was now as interested in having her confined as Philip had been.

On 17 January 1507, Queen Juana gave birth to her last child, another daughter, who was named Catalina. When Ferdinand finally arrived in Castile at the end of the year, he assumed the regency for Juana. Her father continued as regent of Castile until his death in 1516. He was followed as regent by Juana's son Charles.

It is impossible now to determine with certainty whether Juana was, indeed, mad, but there is no question that she was la Loca. Most scholars assume without question her incapacity and the necessity of husband, father, and son to rule Castile in her stead. 

But not all scholars assume Juana la Loca's madness. The historian S. B. Chrimes, for example, has considered the claims of Juana's discreditors carefully. He notes that in 1507, Henry VII, the widowed king of England, had entered into serious negotiations with Ferdinand for a marriage with Juana. A treaty for the match was signed in 1508, though the marriage never took place.

About the failure of the alliance, Chrimes writes, "the project faded away, not surprisingly because in fact [Juana] was being kept in close confinement, first by Ferdinand and then by [her son Charles], in harsh and sometimes brutal conditions." He continues, "the story of her 'madness' was never, until perhaps towards the end of her long life, more than very successful propaganda put out by her ruthless and unscrupulous father and son."

The royal convent of Santa Clara in Tordesillas

Chrimes indicates that Henry VII, who had met Juana as recently as 1506, "knew or suspected the truth, which oddly enough appears largely to have evaded the serious consideration of modern historians." That Juana was not mad, Chrimes notes, is clear from the "overwhelming weight" of contemporary evidence, which "compels such conclusions."

I will add that the fortress of Tordesillas, with its "royal convent," had been used before to imprison "inconvenient" queens, including Maria of Portugal, queen of Castile; Leonor Teles, queen of Portugal; and Blanche of Bourbon, queen of Castile.

Whether she was mad or not, Juana remained la Loca. For nearly fifty years, from 1507 until her death in 1555, Queen Juana of Castile was confined--as prisoner, as recluse, or as madwoman--in the fortress of Tordesillas.

On a happier note, Juana's daughters (unlike her son, they did not imprison her) included Eleanor of Austria, married first to King Manuel of Portugal and then, as part of the "Ladies' Peace," to the French king, Francis I; Isabel of Austria, queen and regent of Denmark; Mary of Austria, queen of Hungary and regent of the Netherlands; and Catherine of Spain, queen and regent of Portugal. 

If you are interested in reading a careful and thoughtful biography, I recommend Bethany Aram's Juana the Mad: Sovereignty & Dynasty in Renaissance Europe. You may also like a dual biography by Julia Fox, Sister Queens: The Noble, Tragic Lives of Katherine of Aragon and Juana, Queen of Castile.

On the education of the Spanish princesses, I have quoted from Giles Tremlett's Catherine of Aragon: The Spanish Queen of Henry VIII.

The British Library owns a beautiful Book of Hours created for and owned by Juana of Castile--you can view the entire manuscript, which has been digitized, by clicking here.**

There are quite a few historical novels about Juana--please skip them.

*Portions of this post have been adapted from The Monstrous Regiment of Women: Female Rulers in Early Modern Europe (Palgrave Macmillan).

**As a result of a cyberattack, much of the British Library online collection is unavailable, supposedly temporarily. I've kept this link here, just in case . . . 


Friday, September 25, 2015

Arbella Stuart--She Might Have Been Queen?

Lady Arbella Stuart (died 25 September 1615)


The unfortunate Arbella Stuart was born to great potential, but her life ended in great tragedy. She might have become queen of England. Instead, she died in the Tower of London.

Lady Arbella Stuart,
c. 1589 
Hardwick Hall Collection
Arbella was the great granddaughter of Margaret Tudor, Henry VIII's elder sister: queen of Scotland, mother of James V of Scotland and, by her second marriage, mother of Margaret Douglas.*

Lady Margaret Douglas married Matthew Stewart, earl of Lennox, who was himself a descendant of James II of Scotland; when her son Henry, lord Darnley married Mary Stuart, queen of Scots, uniting and reinforcing these claims, Lady Margaret Douglas was imprisoned. 

Undauted, in 1574 Margaret Douglas arranged for her younger son, Charles, earl of Lennox, to marry Elizabeth Cavendish, the daughter of Elizabeth Hardwick, then countess of Shrewsbury; Queen Elizabeth sent Lady Margaret to the Tower once more. She was released by November of the next year, however, when she wrote to her niece Mary Stuart, the queen of Scotland, to announce the birth of a granddaughter, Arbella.

Little is known about the early period of Arbella Stuart's life. Her father died in April of 1576, when she was about six months old; in 1582, when her mother died, she was sent to live with her grandmother Elizabeth Hardwick.

Arbella Stuart aged twenty-three months,
1577, 
Hardwick Hall Collection
Elizabeth Hardwick's fourth husband, George Talbot, had been Mary Stuart's "guardian" while she was imprisoned in England, but there is no surviving evidence about any relationship between Arbella and her aunt, the exiled queen. Even so, Sara Jayne Steen, who has written extensively about her, concludes that Arbella's subsequent "letters and actions suggest that she was influenced by [the queen of Scotland's] trial and execution." Arbella was eleven years old when Mary Stuart was executed in 1587.

Throughout her childhood, Arbella Stuart was "useful" to Queen Elizabeth as a "marrigeable property": "As a claimant who could bring the dowry of a crown, she was a commodity, one of high worth on the matrimonial market," Steen writes, but her status as a claimant "fluctuated with English and European politics and the rise and fall of Elizabeth's favor." 

Margaret Tudor's descendants had been cut out of the succession by Henry VIII and his son, Edward VI, but Queen Elizabeth had also acted to bar the descendants of Mary Tudor, Henry VIII's younger sister, from the throne. In such a complicated situation, James VI of Scotland, Mary Stuart's son, seemed to have the best claim to the English throne: he was the oldest unquestionably legitimate male descendant of Henry VII and Henry VIII. But he was also unquestionably a foreigner, and foreign birth was generally regarded as a bar to the English succession. 

After James VI, Margaret Tudor's daughter, Lady Margaret Douglas, might be considered "next in line" for the English crown. She had been born in England and had spent much of her life at the English court, but as Steen notes, she was older than Elizabeth Tudor and "unlikely to outlive" her. Lady Margaret's oldest son, Darnley, had married Mary Stuart, but he died in 1567; her younger son, Charles, was thus next in line for the throne, after James VI. After Charles's death in 1575, his daughter Arbella would inherit his claim. 

When Arbella was still a child, her grandmother had promised her to the four-year-old son of Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester, who, perhaps fortunately for Bess of Hardwick, died; the queen had been angered by the proposal and took upon herself the task of arranging Arbella's future.

As queen, Elizabeth used Arbella as a "bargaining chip in foreign policy, tantalizing continental nobility with the prospect of marriage accompanied by the declaration of succession." At various times those prospective alliances included Esmé Stuart, who had inherited Arbella's Lennox title and lands after her father's death; the king of Scotland himself, James VI; Rainutio Farnese, the son of the duke of Parma; Henry IV, king of France; the prince of Condé; and the duke of Nevers. Various alliances with members of the English nobility were also proposed, including Robert Cecil.

But none of these marriages ever took place. Arbella came briefly to court in 1587 and again in 1588, but she was sent away in disgrace for some offense. At the time it was rumored, on the one hand, that her presumption had resulted in her dismissal, on the other that a romance with the earl of Essex had precipitated her removal from court. Arbella herself, writing about the incident later, indicated that at first she had enjoyed the queen's approval. Queen Elizabeth had examined the young woman for herself when she arrived at court and "by trial did pronounce me an eaglet of her own kind . . . worthy . . . even yet to carry her thunderbolt." 

It wasn't until 1591 that Arbella was recalled to court, during the period when her marriage to the son of the duke of Farnese was being discussed. She remained with the court into the summer of 1592, but when the duke died and marriage negotiations failed, she was once again dismissed. She was with her grandmother later in that year when a plot to abduct her came to light. A Catholic priest revealed a plan to kidnap Arbella and then marry her to a foreign Catholic noble, who would invade England and claim the throne on the young woman's behalf. Arbella was not implicated in the plot, but neither was she recalled to court by the queen. 

Despite the dazzling array of marriages proposed for Arbella, the queen was no more interested in finding a husband for Arbella than she was in finding one for herself. Instead, she left the young woman in the care of her grandmother. Arbella was well educated, but she was completely isolated, and she came to regard her seclusion as an imprisonment rather than a retirement. 

Life at Hardwick Hall grew intolerable. A twenty-seven-year-old woman, Arbella still slept in her grandmother's bedroom and had her nose "tweaked" for punishment. After a decade of being cut off from court and court contacts, in 1602 Arbella sought permission from Bess of Hardwick to "present" herself to the queen, but even that "small and ordinary liberty" was denied to her, at which she "despaired."

At last she took matters into her own hands. Arbella proposed a marriage with Edward Seymour, Lady Catherine Grey's grandson and thus, himself, a claimant to the English throne--despite the fact that Elizabeth I had declared Catherine Grey's marriage invalid and the children of that marriage illegitimate. On Christmas Day Arbella sent a message to Seymour's grandfather, the earl of Hertford, indicating that she would be interested in an alliance with his grandson. If the earl approved, he should send his grandson to her in disguise so that they could meet one another and, after having met, "see how they could like."

But Arbella's plot failed. The earl of Hertford forwarded her message to Sir Robert Cecil, and within days Henry Brounker was sent to Hardwick Hall to investigate. By January he had cleared things up to his own satisfaction and the queen's. Arbella apologized in a letter to the queen, expressing her sorrow for having given "the least cause of offense"; "I humbly prostrate myself at Your Majesty's feet," she wrote, "craving pardon" and hoping that, out of "princely clemency," the queen would "signify" her "gracious remission" to Arbella's grandmother, whose "discomfort" she, Arbella, would be until then. 

Arbella was "forgiven," but her restrictions were "redoubled." "Educated for command," as Steen notes, Arbella "seemed powerless, politically and personally enclosed: chaste, with no opportunity to be otherwise; silenced, forbidden unmonitored conversations or letters; and obedient, under the very real threat of the Tower or death." Although she acknowledged herself as a "poor silly infant and wretch," Arbella insisted that she had taken as "great care" to preserve the queen's "royal lineage from any blot as any whosoever"; she would, she wrote, have judged herself "unworthy of life" if she had "degenerated from the most reknowned stock whereof it is my greatest honor to be a branch."

Despite her apologies, Arbella's efforts to escape her confinement continued. She fabricated another marriage plot, used her poor health to effect a move to another residence, and ultimately attempted to escape. The escape failed, however, and early in March Arbella was once more at Hardwick Hall, under investigation. This time her apologies were less abject: 
When it shall please Her Majesty to afford me those ordinary rights which other subjects cannot be debarred of justly, I shall endeavor to receive them as thankfully now as if they had been in due time offered.
She would bear her yoke, she wrote, "as long as I think good to convince them that impose it of hardness of heart," and then "shake it off when I think good to take my Christian liberty." If it were "denied" her, the "whole world" would be "made judge upon what cause, or color, or how justly given or taken and by whom." If she could be left to be her "own woman," then everyone's "trouble" would cease.

I thought this was a portrait of
Arbella Stuart . . . but maybe not?
(see comments, below)
Queen Elizabeth died on 24 March 1603, just days after Arbella's letter was written. Arbella acknowledged the authority of the queen's successor, James VI of Scotland, now James I of England, and she was once more welcomed at court.

Again rumors about a prospective marriage for her circulated, but in July two plots against the new king were discovered, one of which included a plan to place Arbella on the English throne. She was cleared of suspicion, and while in the years that followed she was able to exert a certain amount of influence and patronage, she remained both unmarried and without adequate financial support. 

By the end of 1609 she was again under guard; "rumors abounded" about her political plans, her religious preferences, and her marriage prospects. She was investigated once more, cleared of suspicion once more, and restored to favor once more. By 1610 she had taken her destiny into her own hands, secretly arranging to marry. 

Arbella Stuart married William Seymour, Edward Seymour's younger brother, on 22 June. By early July, both were imprisoned and under investigation, Seymour in the Tower and Arbella in a private residence in Lambeth. In a letter to her husband written shortly after their arrest, Arbella wrote that she had heard he was not well, suggesting his illness represented the "sympathy" between them since she herself had been sick at the same time. She looked forward to a return of the king's favor, however, and wanted to make sure that Seymour's "grief of mind" did not "work" upon his body. If they were not "able to live to" the return of the king's favor, she wrote, "I for my part shall think myself a pattern of misfortune in enjoying so great a blessing as you so little a while." 

Arbella's belief that James would restore the pair to favor derived at least in part from her conviction that the king had given her permission to marry a husband of her own choice. In a letter to the king she wrote that his "neglect" of her and her lack of money "drove" her to her "contract" with Seymour before she informed the king of her intentions; nevertheless, she wrote, 
I humbly beseech Your Majesty to consider how impossible it was for me to imagine it could be offensive unto Your Majesty, having few days before given me your royal consent to bestow myself on any subject of Your Majesty's (which . . . likewise Your Majesty had done long since), besides never having been either prohibited any or spoken to for any in this land by your Majesty these seven years that I have lived in Your Majesty's house I could not conceive that Your Majesty regarded my marriage at all.
Despite Arbella's hopes, in January 1611 William Seymour was condemned to life imprisonment, and she was exiled to the north of England, where she was to live out her life guarded by the bishop of Durham. She attempted to fight the decision, at first by law, but when the courts failed her, she again fell ill. As Steen notes, she "became--whether by policy, from illness, or some combination of the two--too weak to travel."

She was sent on her way north on 21 March, but she traveled only six miles before stopping. There she remained until 1 April, when King James had her examined by a physician, who determined that she was, as she claimed, too weak to travel. By the end of April James was insisting that Arbella be forced to leave for Durham, but again she appealed, using her continued illness. She was granted an extension until 5 June, but on 3 June she escaped from custody, dressed in men's clothing

Her husband had escaped from the Tower, and the pair planned to be reunited in France. Arbella reached Calais on 5 June, but she was caught immediately and returned to England, this time to imprisonment in the Tower. Seymour, meanwhile, remained in France. He returned to England five months after Arbella died, restored to the king's favor. 

It is generally claimed that while she was imprisoned in the Tower, Arbella became insane. "The primary source for the idea that Stuart became deranged," Steen writes, "was court observer and letter-writer John Chamberlain, who in 1613 and 1614 repeatedly commented on Stuart's distraction; in April 1613, for example, he wrote that she was said to be 'cracked in her brain.'" The Lieutenant of the Tower, too, described Arbella's "fits of distemper and convulsions." 

Most later historians have accepted the diagnosis that Arbella Stuart "lost her sanity," but Steen effectively disputes the notion that she spent the last years of her life "as a lunatic prisoner." The evidence does "suggest that Stuart indeed was distressed, perhaps even intermittently delusional," suffering from illnesses that were "physiological, strategic, or a combination of the two," but also that Arbella "remained active on her own behalf." 
Definitely a portrait of
Arbella Stuart, c. 1605
National Galleries Scotland

Throughout the period of her supposed madness, Arbella Stuart continued to manage her financial affairs. Her relatives and friends continued to work for her release, and various political supporters continued to focus on her as a replacement for King James. At least one rescue attempt was made, and at least one plot to place her on the throne dates from this period, unlikely efforts if she were "irrecoverably deranged": 
The phrase "went insane" conveniently labels Stuart a female hysteric, a woman exhibiting the mental instability and melancholia often attributed to learned women, thus allowing observers such as John Chamberlain to dismiss her transgressions of the code of appropriate female behavior as "madness," without calling the system into question. Those who were acquainted with and attended Stuart consistently characterized her illnesses either as intentionally deceitful and obstinate or as psychosomatic in origin . . . , as arising from her grief of her unquiet mind.
James and his examiners may well have used "madness" as a way of explaining Arbella's gender "transgressions," but such a determination was an effective political tool. If Arbella Stuart were "cracked in her brain," her continued "imprisonment" in the Tower could be justified, and she could more effectively be eliminated as a rival or as a threat. 

Arbella's story parallels those of other women whose claims to the throne for themselves or their children resulted in their containment as nuns, lunatics, exiles, or prisoners. In Spain, for example, Juana la Beltraneja was discredited as illegitimate and compelled to become a nun, while Juana of Castile was declared insane and secluded (or imprisoned) at Tordesillas. 

In England, Margaret of Anjou had fought to maintain the crown for her son; having lost her son, she was defeated, discredited, and exiled. Lady Jane Grey was imprisoned in the Tower after her brief rule, but no further action was taken against her; it was only after an unsuccessful rebellion against Queen Mary that her imprisonment was not enough, and she was executed. Her sisters Catherine and Mary were both imprisoned in the Tower as well. 

The potential threats offered by such women could be controlled in other ways, however, if they were willing to accept more traditional and subordinate female roles. Elizabeth of York offered no challenge to the new Tudor king because he married her. She became a queen consort rather than a queen regnant, her own claims to the succession united with her husband's in their children. And having worked to secure her son's succession throughout her lifetime, Margaret Beaufort was certainly no challenge to his kingship; she was, as we have seen, able to exert considerable influence in her "natural" role as his mother. 

But Arbella Stuart was either incapable of or unwilling to accept a subordinate role. She died in the Tower of London on 25 September 1615, her death almost certainly complicated by her refusal to eat.  

*This post has been adapted from The Monstrous Regiment of Women: Female Rulers in Early Modern Europe (Palgrave Macmillan).

I have quoted here from Sara Jayne Steen's The Letters of Lady Arbella Stuart, a volume in the Oxford Women Writers in English, 1350-1850 series.