Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Stuarts of Scotland => Topic started by: Prince_Lieven on October 21, 2005, 06:18:57 PM

Title: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 21, 2005, 06:18:57 PM
Hi all! Just bringing this Lady Lennox discussion over from the Mary-Darnley thread.

As to your question on there, Bell, I think Lady Margaret was sent to the Tower for marrying (without permission) Lord William Howard.

She was generally a favourite of Henry VIII, though her mother Queen Margaret had little to do with her, and she was brought up in England. She was said to have been the prettiest Tudor girl, aside from Mary, Duchess of Suffolk. In correspondance, she was often referred to as 'the princess of Scotland.'
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on October 22, 2005, 05:23:29 AM
She married Thomas Howard, younger half-brother of the Duke of Norfolk in 1536 (so an uncle to both Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard!). She was thrown in the Tower but, after promising Henry that she had been forced to the marriage and that she was still a virgin, Henry released her and annulled her marriage. Howard was executed the next year.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 22, 2005, 07:05:30 AM
Lady Lennox (http://worldroots.com/brigitte/gifs38/margaretdouglas1515.jpg)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 22, 2005, 09:30:52 AM
Great idea for a thread on this lady!

Anyone know the occasion of her third stay in the tower? My guess-1570s.

A word about the Douglas family. The Douglases were the only other family in mediaeval Scotland capable of rivalling the Stewarts and as such caused problems for all the Jameses from I to VI.

The founder of the family fortunes was Lord James Douglas, sidekick to Robert the Bruce at Bannockburn. Sir James was so trusted by the Bruce, that when he was dying he entrusted Douglas with the task of taking his heart (to Jerusalem!) to be buried. Sir James set off with the heart in a silver case, but only got as far as Spain, where he was killed by the moors.

In the 15th century the main line of the family "the Black Douglases" was wiped out by James II - he had to have them massacred twice, and the lands devolved on the "Red Douglases" the Earls of Angus. One of these Archibald Earl of Angus "Bell the Cat" was instrumental in the downfall of James III (see Margaret of Denmark on the Queen Consorts thread).

"Bell the Cat" was more cooperative with James IV however and supported that king's disastrous expedition to England in 1513. Two of his sons died with James at Flodden, and the old Earl himself died shortly afterward.

It was Bell the Cat's grandson (also Archibald) who inherited the earldom, picking up the widowed Queen Margaret as well. Their daughter was born in 1515 but they soon split up.

Angus proceeded to cause problems for the Stewarts until he died in 1556/7. James V had a major falling out with his stepfather, which resulted in Angus' sister being accused of witchcraft and burnt at the stake (see Mary of Guise on Queen Consorts).




Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 22, 2005, 12:43:58 PM
Thanks for that info Bell!

Her 3rd Tower visit was in 1574, when her son Charles married without royal permission. She was released when he died in 1577 (just as she had been imprisoned in 1566 and relased when Darnley died in 1567) but she died in 1578, just a year later.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 22, 2005, 03:32:38 PM
I've just read that she died on the same evening that she had dinner with Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester. Suspicious or what?
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on October 22, 2005, 03:34:23 PM
those tudors sure had intense lives, didn't they?  ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 22, 2005, 06:16:43 PM
There were three spells in the tower:

1) 1537-8, because of her own "marriage" with Thomas Howard

2) 1565-6, because of her son's marriage to the Queen of Scotland

3) 1575-6, because of her second son's marriage to Elizabeth Cavendish

It seems like she was not a person you should invite to your wedding!





Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 06:47:37 AM
On her second and third spells, she was released both times because the sons in question had died quite young.

BTW, I was reading Dulcie M. Ashdown's 'Tudor Cousins' and she brings up an important question - why was Lady Lennox excluded from the will of her uncle Henry VIII?

Henry made this will in 1546, though he might have also made one in 1544, when the Act of Succession was passed. If he had no problem leaving his Catholic daughter Mary as one of his heirs, why not his Catholic niece Margaret?

Technically, she had a better claim to the throne than her niece Mary, Queen of Scots, though Mary was in the senior line - when Margaret Tudor had married James IV she gave up her succession rights. Lady Lennox had even been born in England. And, most importantly, she was the only member of the younger generation who had a son - Lord Darnley was born in 1545. So why did Henry exclude her? This is perplexing!

Apparently, she and Henry had an argument before he died, but he was not the sort of man to let personal feelings dictate the future of his dynasty.

Any theories?
Title: .Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 07:52:02 AM
Henry's reason for excluding the descendants of his sister Margaret must reflect a desire to avoid a Scottish king inheriting the throne of England. This applied to Margaret as well after her marriage to Lennox who I think was third or fourth in line to the Scottish throne.

Why would he not want this to happen? Maybe he thought they would be too much under French influence, and would undo all his "good" work.

The other possibility is that he regarded his sister's renunciation as irrevocable and considered that it applied to all her descendants.

Maybe it was a bit of both, I can't believe it was anything personal though.

I've always found the will itself to be unusual, as if the kingdom can be bequeathed! Fortunately apart from Northumberland and his cronies, no one thought it was worth the paper it was printed on.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 07:55:29 AM
Quote


Lady Lennox had even been born in England.


She was born at Harbottle in Northumberland which is about 10 miles from the Scottish border.
Title: Re: .Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 02:46:45 PM
Quote
Henry's reason for excluding the descendants of his sister Margaret must reflect a desire to avoid a Scottish king inheriting the throne of England. This applied to Margaret as well after her marriage to Lennox who I think was third or fourth in line to the Scottish throne.

Why would he not want this to happen? Maybe he thought they would be too much under French influence, and would undo all his "good" work.

The other possibility is that he regarded his sister's renunciation as irrevocable and considered that it applied to all her descendants.

Maybe it was a bit of both, I can't believe it was anything personal though.

I've always found the will itself to be unusual, as if the kingdom can be bequeathed! Fortunately apart from Northumberland and his cronies, no one thought it was worth the paper it was printed on.


Well, Matthew Stewart claim to the throne of Scotland was contentious - it was either he or the Earl of Arran who was heir presumptive to Mary Stuart. But why would Henry quibble about this? He didn't mind the idea of Edward VI marrying Mary Queen of Scots, so what had he to fear?

As for him regaring Margaret's renounciation as total and unchangable, I doubt this. Henry wasn't the type to regard anything as irrevocable, except his own authority! And also, Margaret Tudor's renounciation applied only to her descendants by James IV - it did not apply to the children of any subsequent marriage.

As to the will, I think parliament, in the 1530s, voted Henry the right to choose any successor of his blood he wished - poosibly with a view to makin Henry Fitzroy heir. As far as I know, he is the only English king to have been allowed to choose his own successor.

Why he excluded the Lennoxs still perplexes me, especially since they had a son . . .
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 02:55:35 PM
It was the Earl of Arran who was the heir presumptive. Henry wouldn't have minded the Edward/Mary scenario, as this would have been an English takeover of Scotland ( la Edward I), but given the international situation (Henry was at war with France in the early 1540s) he might have objected to a Scottish takeover of England.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 03:03:58 PM
Lennox could contest Arran's claim - Arran was dynastically senior but he came from an unequal marriage, I think.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 03:07:15 PM
Quote
Lennox could contest Arran's claim - Arran was dynastically senior but he came from an unequal marriage, I think.


All the more reason for Henry to write the Lennoxes out of his will. I didn't know that about Arran. I'll have to look it up!
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 03:11:12 PM
Yep, Arran's mother was Janet Beaton, daughter of David Beaton of Creich, just a knight, I think. Lennox's mother, on the other hand, was Elizabeth Stuart, daughter of the Earl of Atholl.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 23, 2005, 03:43:15 PM
This Earl of Atholl being the son of (Queen) Joan Beaufort and her second husband, the Black Knight of Lorne!
Title: Re: .Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on October 23, 2005, 03:47:17 PM
Quote
As far as I know, he is the only English king to have been allowed to choose his own successor.


not really. from the moment people started realizing that elizabeth was not going to have children they asked her to name a successor. she only did that on her deathbed. isn't that one of the two things she said she'd never do? 1. marry 2. name a successor... both in a way inspired by her sister mary's unfortunate life?

the truth is, though, that henry's will was not irrevocable, since james did come to the throne. neither was elizabeth's wish. they didn't choose their successors, they just suggested... or at least that's how all the other people saw it (see northumberland)... i'm sure henry had other ideas :P
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 23, 2005, 04:31:51 PM
I said English king, so I was right.  8)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on October 24, 2005, 02:38:37 AM
henry 1st also named his daughter matilda as his successor in lack of a male heir. that some didn't listen was a different matter, but most of them pledged to recognize her as a successor wihle henry was alive :P
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 08:18:13 AM
Quote
henry 1st also named his daughter matilda as his successor in lack of a male heir. that some didn't listen was a different matter, but most of them pledged to recognize her as a successor wihle henry was alive :P


In fact all kings before the end of the twelfth century were well advised to name their successors. I can't think of many primogeniture successions before John - Henry III. Henry II - Richard I was one.

Henry II had his eldest son Henry crowned while he was still alive to ensure his succession (though he fought against his father and died first).

In Scotland the tradition before Malcolm Canmore (known as Tanism) was for the succession to go to different branches of the royal family alternately.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 12:20:15 PM
Yes, primogeniture only really set in after King John's reign.

It was perhaps fortunate for both Lady Lennox and the Duke of Northumberland that she was in Scotland in 1553. For Northumberland, it meant he didn't have to worry about another potential Catholic heiress running about the country - for Margaret, it may well have saved her life. Northumberland's first priority was to capture Mary and Elizabeth, but afterwards, could he have ignored Margaret's closeness to the throne?

Another question is why didn't Mary I, that most Catholic of queens, make her Catholic cousin Margaret - or indeed the latter's son Henry - her successor? Possibly because to do so, she would have had to overturn Henry VIII's 1544 Act of Parliament, on which her own right of succession hinged.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 01:05:21 PM
Noone would have accepted Margaret Douglas as heir- as Mary knew from the Jane Grey fiasco.

For the first part of the reign Mary was hoping to produce an heir herself.  During the second half ofthe reign an attempt to make Margaret Douglas heir would have produced the very legitimate objection that the Queen of Scots had a better claim (which was being trumpeted at the French court).

In order to avoid the crown going to Mary and Francis, Mary had no choice but to let the throne go to the logical heir (by the laws of primogeniture) - Elizabeth.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 01:07:49 PM
Yes, yes, I certainly agree - Margaret would have shared Jane's fate. The only thing is, Mary was living in such a fantasy world by the time she died, I'm surprised she considered this.

Mary Stuart's claim was in the senior line, but since Margaret Tudor had renounced the dynastic rights of the descendants of her marriage to James IV, Lady Lennox had the better legal claim - but of course such hair splitting would have cut no ice with the King of France.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on October 24, 2005, 01:10:27 PM
Quote
Yes, yes, I certainly agree - Margaret would have shared Jane's fate. The only thing is, Mary was living in such a fantasy world by the time she died, I'm surprised she considered this.

Mary Stuart's claim was in the senior line, but since Margaret Tudor had renounced the dynastic rights of the descendants of her marriage to James IV, Lady Lennox had the better legal claim - but of course such hair splitting would have cut no ice with the King of France.


I really think Mary Tudor was much more intelligent and knew much more of politics that we tend to believe. She knew the only possible heir was Elizabeth and she respected that, even if she did it reluctantly.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 01:12:28 PM
Yes . . . but she had written in her will that the crown was to go to the fruit of her body . . .  ::)

In any case, I think by that time, Lady Lennox hadn't ambitions to become a queen herself - she was more interested in the prospects of her sons . . .
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 01:28:11 PM
Quote

I really think Mary Tudor was much more intelligent and knew much more of politics that we tend to believe. She knew the only possible heir was Elizabeth and she respected that, even if she did it reluctantly.


I agree with Umigon here! I also think that Mary perhaps subconsciously wanted Elizabeth to be her heir, as she was Henry VIII's daughter. I've no evidence for this though!
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on October 24, 2005, 01:35:06 PM


Yes, that is exactly what I mean. No matter that Mary and Elizabeth's relationship had become worse and worse year after year (not Mary's fault, in my humble opinion), Mary always thought that Elizabeth was her heir. And, really, she was the best option she could chose!
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 01:52:23 PM
Quote

Yes, that is exactly what I mean. No matter that Mary and Elizabeth's relationship had become worse and worse year after year (not Mary's fault, in my humble opinion), Mary always thought that Elizabeth was her heir. And, really, she was the best option she could chose!


Agreed. I lose this time.  ;)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 24, 2005, 02:29:22 PM
Back to Mags.

Did she ever express the wish to be queen? She was obviously ambitious for her boys, but as they grew up she probably noticed they were not "king material".
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 03:09:01 PM
I don't think she ever declared a wish to be queen . . .

Oh, BTW, remember the rumour about Elizabeth being tormented by Margaret clashing pots and pans in the room above during Mary's reign?  ;D Margaret catagorically denied that later . . .
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on October 24, 2005, 03:33:19 PM
i think margaret was more of the intrigant sort. not the type to rule but the type to always trouble the rulers ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 04:20:25 PM
LOL, very true ilyala!  ;D ;D

But I just read that she was quoted once as saying that everyone knew either Mary I or Elizabeth I was a bastard, and it clearly wasn't Mary, so she [Margaret] was determined to have her rights some day.  :o
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 24, 2005, 04:22:18 PM
BTW, Margaret and Matthew had a happy marriage - he addressed his letters to her as 'My sweet Madge' or 'Darling Meg' which I think is very sweet . . . ::)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on October 25, 2005, 07:11:21 AM
she was probably the fascinating sort. once you fall for her there's no turning back :)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 25, 2005, 10:24:09 AM
I think she was an amazingly interesting woman . . . does anyone know if she has her own bio?
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 25, 2005, 10:45:20 AM
Her life would make a great historical novel.  ;D

I imagine it written in the first person, as if she put pen to paper during her final stay in the tower! Can anyone think of a good title?
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 25, 2005, 10:47:39 AM
What a wonderful idea!  ;D

Hmm . . . a title . . . ::)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on October 25, 2005, 11:38:54 AM
Maybe:

"The Shadow of the Axe"
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on October 25, 2005, 11:47:16 AM
Love it!  ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Lanie on October 27, 2005, 10:58:13 PM
Ooh, yes, a novel about her would be terrific.  I've always wanted to know more about the woman.

Maybe I can write a novel...  ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on December 31, 2005, 02:40:37 PM


Hi!

I think it hasn't come up earlier, but after reading Alison Weir's biography on Henry VIII, i've discovered that the Lady Margaret was a very flirtatious (how euphemistic) young woman. She was imprisoned in Syon House in 1540 because she became involved with Catherine Howard's brother Charles. She was imprisoned there and Charles was sent to Calais, where he died in late 1542. Margaret would only be released from Syon House in November 1541, when the building was to be used as a prison for a more important person...
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on December 31, 2005, 02:42:21 PM


So, it seems Margaret felt specially attracted to the men of the Howard family: first she became engaged with Thomas Howard, young half-brother of the Duke of Norfolk and thus becoming the uncle of Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard and, of course, Charles Howard, who was also Margaret Douglas's lover!!! :o
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 01, 2006, 05:54:43 PM
i can't say i'm surprised. look at her mother. look at her uncle. ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 01, 2006, 05:55:46 PM
Don't forget Aunt Mary and cousin Elizabeth.  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 01, 2006, 05:59:04 PM
i don't think i can call mary rose flirty. she was determined and wanted charles brandon so she went after him. but she had  a stable and calm family life while her sister also went after her man, then she left him, married another man and then wanted to leave him too  :-/
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 01, 2006, 06:04:58 PM
Ok, point taken.  ;)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 01, 2006, 06:28:19 PM
as a sidenote, i've always found it strange how all of henry 7th's children seemed to take up more from the york side of the family. most especially edward 4th. physically also, henry 8th inherited his huge stature from his maternal grandfather. henry 7th and his wife were both pretty... i don't know what word to use here... both practical and quiet, doing what they had to do... henry 7ths mother was known to be very religious. i don't know much about his father, but i believe that had he been a flirt it would have been known, he surely was old enough to be. maybe catherine of valois and owen tudor were a bit non comformists, but they were more like mary rose, in the 'going after what you wanted and then calm down and have a nice family life' sort of way.

on the other hand, we all know what edward 4th was like :P
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 01, 2006, 06:32:05 PM
Maybe conscientious was the word you needed?  ;)

And of course, Elizabeth Woodville went after what she wanted but didn't settle down to a quiet life!  ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 01, 2006, 06:36:12 PM
exactly. maybe in a more subtle way the yorks did win the wars of the roses. henry was a lancaster, but his children were yorks :)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 01, 2006, 06:38:56 PM
Yes, that's a nice way to put it.  :) Now we're so far off topic we'd better return to Lady M.  ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 01, 2006, 06:41:34 PM
who proved to be worthy of her york predecessors ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on January 02, 2006, 01:24:47 AM
Quote

Hi!

I think it hasn't come up earlier, but after reading Alison Weir's biography on Henry VIII, i've discovered that the Lady Margaret was a very flirtatious (how euphemistic) young woman. She was imprisoned in Syon House in 1540 because she became involved with Catherine Howard's brother Charles. She was imprisoned there and Charles was sent to Calais, where he died in late 1542. Margaret would only be released from Syon House in November 1541, when the building was to be used as a prison for a more important person...


She had two boyfriends (maybe more) before she got married at the age of twenty-nine. Sounds quite normal to me! :D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 02, 2006, 11:07:23 AM
Quote

She had two boyfriends (maybe more) before she got married at the age of twenty-nine. Sounds quite normal to me! :D


Yes indeed, especially considering her good looks.  ;D
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on January 02, 2006, 12:08:28 PM
Quote

Yes indeed, especially considering her good looks. ;D


About her looks... I always read that Margaret was the Tudor beauty, like if she had inherited Mary Rose's place. But then, when confronted with her portraits, I can't really see that beauty she was proclaimed to have.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 02, 2006, 02:58:28 PM
the standards of beauty were different back then... also the portraits were maybe not very accurate...
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on January 03, 2006, 01:59:49 AM
I've never seen a picture of a young Margaret. In her later portraits she looks understandably haggard.

Her son Henry was also supposed to be very good looking.
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 03, 2006, 03:40:35 AM
in the only portrait i know of darnley he looks kind of... girlish... i suppose that's what was appreciated at the time  :-/

(http://www.marileecody.com/darnley-check.jpg)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on January 03, 2006, 04:11:27 AM
Here's a better one with his brother. Still a bit girly though!

(http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b68/bell_the_cat/darnley.jpg)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 03, 2006, 04:26:27 AM
i liked bothwell better... :P
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: bell_the_cat on January 03, 2006, 04:32:09 AM
Your wish is my command..... :D

(http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b68/bell_the_cat/bothwell.jpg)
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 03, 2006, 04:37:47 AM
LOL thanx ;D

now, if i may anticipate prince, and say 'back to margaret' :P
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 03, 2006, 05:54:08 AM
You can read my mind, ilyala.  ::) But if I could get a word in first - I think Darnley was actually called girlish at the time. Didn't an English courtier comment on his beardless, womanish looks?
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on January 03, 2006, 09:39:28 AM
maybe his youthful and sensitive look reminded mary of francis and that's why she fell in love with him ???
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Lorelei_Lee on January 19, 2006, 06:55:35 PM
Have any of you read Dorothy Dunnett's Lymond Chronicles?  Margaret Douglas is a key character ... quite the villainess, unfortunately.  The books are wonderful, though I wouldn't call them historical novels so much as costume dramas a la Dumas.   Well worth reading unless you're a stickler for historical accuracy, in which case you won't care for the portrait of Margaret at all.  She may have been flirtatious before her marriage, but I don't believe there is any evidence that she took lovers afterward.  And that's as much as I will say ....
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on January 20, 2006, 09:40:43 AM
I asked about them on the Stuart books thread. Don't know if I'd be interested in inaccuracy though.  :P
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: carl fraley on March 10, 2006, 12:53:35 AM
Where is at in writing that Margaret renouced her succession rights on her marriage to James IV?  in "the sisters of henry VIII" by Maria Perry (GReat book btw) the book states several times that Henry VII, VIII, and James the IV regarding margaret as the rightful heir if Henry VIII had no children.   In the year of Henry's VIII's successin , on June 29th, when James IV continued the Treaty of perpetual Peace with Henry VIII, it acknowledged Margaret as the putative successor as long has henry had no children.

Henry VIII himself once said when in 1511 james would not give a written promise NOT to invade Enlgand (which pretty much doomed the Treaty of Perpetual Peace) "If only my brother in law would have signed such a documen, he (henry) would have been willing to create james Iv, Duke of York and governor of England, for the heirs of England, must come either of him or of me"

Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 10, 2006, 06:17:21 AM
That's interesting!  :o I'm sure I read the renounciation thing somewhere, but I can't remember where.  :-/ However, if it even was true, from what you say it's obvious that the kings involved - James and the two Henrys - didn't take it very seriously!
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: ilyala on March 11, 2006, 03:21:03 AM
were these things ever taken seriously? that was just for show... just look at louis xiv's marriage... she gave up her rights - yeah right!
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Prince_Lieven on March 11, 2006, 06:19:36 AM
You're probably right - they were pure formality, like the Electress Sophia giving up her rights to the non-existent Palatinate when she married the Duke of Brunswick.  ::)
Title: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: carl fraley on June 11, 2007, 09:45:17 PM
Ok i have several questions about Lady margaret Douglas.

1.)  I know that Margaret was mainly brought up at her Uncle King Henry's court but did Margo spend any time at all with either her mother Queen margaret after being deposited in england by her father the Earl of Angus?  or her brother King James V?  Did she in fact ever meet King James V?

2.) Why didn't margaret inherit any of Angus's properties or the Title Countess of Angus?

3.) Did the Countess of Lennox ever meet her Niece, Queen mary of scots in person?
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: Prince_Lieven on June 12, 2007, 04:25:59 PM
I think the Angus lands were confiscated by the Scots as her father had 'defected' to Henry VIII's side. She did style herself 'Countess of Lennox and Angus' for a time however. I don't think she ever met Mary, Queen of Scots or James V.
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: bell_the_cat on June 13, 2007, 05:07:42 PM
It's a very good question why MD never became Countess of Angus - she was after all the Earl's only daughter. I think that Scottish succession was still abit vague on when daughters could inherit. After all, the issue had only really been settled in England by the Wars of the Roses. After 1603 I'm sure that in Scotland the only daughter would have succeeded automatically, but before that I suspect it happened only if there wasn't a close relative who was a better bet.

In this case the Earldom and the lands went to Archibald's nephew (who died a year later, leaving a two year old son, the eighth earl). I'm sure everyone went along with this, as noone wanted to see the Earl of Lennox made more powerful, especially not Archibald, who had been an enemy of the Lennoxes, and as a Douglas would have hated to see a Stewart get the family lands.

It seems unfair on his daughter, but they were certainly far from being close - I don't know if they met at all after  the early 1520s! What a family..... I agree with PL that Margaret never met James V or Mary Queen of Scots either. She journeyed north in the 1570s and got pretty close to where Mary was staying at the time, which was enough to earn her yet another spell in the Tower of London!
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: aron on July 06, 2007, 03:21:01 AM
I only know three children of Margaret: Henry (b/d 1544), Henry 1545-1567 and Charles 1556-1576. Did she had more children?
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: umigon on July 06, 2007, 10:36:43 AM
She had two more sons and four daughters. All of them died young and their names are unknown.
Title: Margaret, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 16, 2007, 04:05:49 AM
I am always interested in this obsure royal. daughter of Margaret Tudor, Dowager Queen of Scotland and a Scottish subject. She literally grew up in her uncle's court in England. She was close to her cousins (Mary Tudor was one of them). Tried to marry for love but failed (end up in the Tower). She later accepted an arranged marriage and gave birth to Lord Darney (who married Mary, Queen of Scots). I often wondered what history would look under her eyes. Both biographers and fiction writers passed her by. I would love to know more about her.  ;)
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: bell_the_cat on July 16, 2007, 03:25:08 PM
A similar thing happened to Margaret's granddaughter, Arabella Stuart, who many thought should have inherited the Earldom of Lennox from her father. However, the title reverted to her cousin, King James, who proceeded to confer it on one of his favourites!
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: Eric_Lowe on July 16, 2007, 07:45:46 PM
I think a book should be written about her.  ;)
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: bell_the_cat on September 19, 2007, 05:07:17 PM
I read an interesting letter in the Times this week about this very subject. Until 1707 there was a law in Scotland that allowed a nobleman to disinherit his successor. It was calle "Renunciation and Regrant" if I remember correctly. The nobleman would renounce his title and it would be regranted by the monarch with the condition that it would be inherited by the preferred heir. I wonder if this was the device used by the Earl of Angus to disinherit his daughter.

It could go wrong however - sometimes the monarch saw fit to regrant the title with inheritance rights to his own preferred candidate.
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 19, 2007, 08:48:05 PM
Well...It has to be done with Caution. Like The Queen cannot disinheit Charles... ;)
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: bell_the_cat on September 20, 2007, 02:57:09 PM
I t certainly introduced an element of meritocracy into the system! :)
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 21, 2007, 03:32:12 AM
A kind of disturbance to the rule... ???
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: bell_the_cat on September 21, 2007, 06:28:24 PM
But it was a good idea - if you had an idiot elder son, you could disinherit him in favour of the second son for example!
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 24, 2007, 04:26:45 AM
Not a good idea to tamper with the successtion.  :o
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: bell_the_cat on September 25, 2007, 06:12:49 PM
Why not?
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: dmitri on September 25, 2007, 07:37:51 PM
The monarchy only survives if the incumbent is worthy. The current incumbent is but the immediate successor is not. There is a need to skip a generation.
Title: Re: Margaret, Countess of Lennox,
Post by: Eric_Lowe on September 26, 2007, 10:18:18 PM
If these things happen too frequent, the succession would have meant nothing. Just look at the monarchy in Nepal...it is in tatters. If such a thing is allowed, The Queen would have jumped Charles to William. A lot of them still expect that to happen... :(
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: Velasco on September 16, 2010, 06:48:21 AM
I wonder why Henry VIII didn't arrange a good marriage for her? Maybe even with his nephew Henry Brandon, Earl of Lincoln...The whole Howard affair indicates he was quite aware of Margaret's value as a bride and potential heiress to his throne...
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: mcdnab on September 16, 2010, 08:12:42 AM
Henry VII was very aware that in default of his son's line that Margaret's descendants might inherit - he said it didn't matter because the "greater would swallow the smaller" - ie England being richer and more populous would be the dominant partner in any personal union.

Henry VIII's relationship with Margaret's mother was in permanent strain - he continually failed to head her requests for help to retain and regain the regency of Scotland, he preffered instead to listen to both her second and third husbands, failed to understand he reasons for coming to terms with Hamilton (who was seen as pro-french and anti-english), he also ironically believed that her marital traumas were shaming to the whole family. Margaret Tudor was a living example of the adage marry in haste and repent at leisure (something her granddaughter Mary Stuart should have remembered !)
It is hardly surprising that Henry did exclude her descendants from the succession - whilst the young Margaret Douglas was popular with her Uncle her early amorous adventures helped put an end to that and probably contributed to her exclusion from his will. Her eventual marriage was a political one but was seen as a reward to Lennox for his pro-english stance following the death of James V.
Margaret should have at least inherited a portion of her father's estate and she was still making a deal of it decades later.
The Lennox Hamilton rivalry dominates 16th Century Scotland - their claims had nothing to do with unequal marriages many Scots Queen's up to the 16th Century were not of Royal Birth.

Hamilton line:
James II - Mary Stewart married secondly James 1st Lord Hamilton - James Hamilton 1st Earl of Arran - marred 1) Elizabeth Home (divorced 1506 when it was discovered that her first husband was still living) 2) Janet Beaton - James Second Earl of Arran and Duke of Chatelherault. Heir to the throne of Scotland 1542.
Lennox line: James II - Mary Stewart married secondly James 1st Lord Hamilton - Elizabeth Hamilton married Mathew Stewart Earl of Lennox - John 3rd Earl of Lennox - Matthew 4th Earl of Lennox  married Lady Margaret Douglas.

The dispute centred on the legality of the 1st Earl of Arran's marriage to Janet Beaton. They were also rivals in the Clydesdale area and Glasgow which made matters worse.

Margaret remained close to Mary Tudor, her cousin throughout her life and indeed she was well treated by her and often given precedent over Elizabeth Tudor during Mary's reign. At Elizabeth's accession she retired from court to her home in Yorkshire - she was an intelligent woman and doted on her sons - in fact many people believe that had Elizabeth allowed her to travel north to join her husband she might have been able to keep Darnley in check.
Darnley in fairness was a teenager when he went North and Mary fell for him - not surprising that at his first taste of real freedom he went off the rails.
Margaret was pretty well treated by Elizabeth, despite her religion, and incarceration in the tower was a bit of an occupational hazard for people of her rank and closeness to the throne and she wasn't above intrigue
Title: Re: Lady Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox
Post by: CountessKate on April 26, 2011, 08:08:53 AM
I am always interested in this obsure royal. daughter of Margaret Tudor, Dowager Queen of Scotland and a Scottish subject. She literally grew up in her uncle's court in England. She was close to her cousins (Mary Tudor was one of them). Tried to marry for love but failed (end up in the Tower). She later accepted an arranged marriage and gave birth to Lord Darney (who married Mary, Queen of Scots). I often wondered what history would look under her eyes. Both biographers and fiction writers passed her by. I would love to know more about her.  ;)

In fiction, she features heavily in several of Dorothy Dunnett's 'Lymond Chronicles', as the chief villainess in fact.