Elizabeth Woodville, Queen of England

I don't think Elizabeth was ever "seeming dumb" either. I think she was a hard-nosed go-getter. (Comparable to Anne Boleyn)

That is true. It sometimes seems that it is women like that that get the criticism..

I think she was a calculating woman, and knew how to manipulate men, especially. But I also think she was a victim of circumstances. I anyways I sorta admire her 

Well, she was quite controversial.  She didn't realize that, unlike some of Henry VIII's queens, be bold was a bad image. Of course, this didn't cost her with her husband, but I believe it did cost her much beyond that.

exactly. Bold women are cool  . But she ended up in a nunnery . . . and all of her daughters were there when she died, with the exception of Elizabeth! (cuz Henry wouldn't let her) 

I've been posting in the other area on Elizabeth Woodville...does anyone know how I can find the material from a contemporary named Mancini( last name)?
Mancini describes Elizabeth Woodville apparently and I'm interested in what he thought of her as a Woman and as a Queen. I would like to find something that is a primary source.... if possible...

 :)i

Mari, you mean Dominic Mancini. Yep, try this;
http://extra.shu.ac.uk/emls/iemls/work/chapters/rich3chp.html

Or one of the best resources that has primary sources is the "Richard III Society", try "googling" them and work your way through what comes up...its fascinating stuff.
Remember that women, even Queens weren't thought to be that interesting so you might not find a great deal that is specifically about The Woodville Queen (possibly just wardrobe accounts and such.) A good book ( and not too expensive ) is "Elizabeth Woodville, Mother of the Princes in the Tower" by David Baldwin. The appendices (sp) at the back are REALLY interesting

I read the above link. Sir Thomas More gives a very vivid description of Katherine Woodville as Queen taking sanctuary with the youngest Son. His description allowed her no choice but to turn the youngest Son over.....the ArchBishop of Canterbury is promising her by his word nothing will happen but threatening her with the Nobles outside determined to take the Child regardless. do you feel that Thomas More has historical accuracy in his text of this matter? I will go into the Richard III site and any other that you can suggest or anyone?
Thank you!

Sigh! I wish I had an edit button but let me add to the above. I realize now that many on line are divided on the value of  More's interpretation of Richard III  but I still would like an opinion on More's version of the Queen and the youngest Son in Sanctuary. Also Dominic Mancini from the bits of text I can find apparently was anti-Ricardian as he was described. If you or anyone feels there are good primary sources to support Richard III I would like to look at those also if they go into Elizabeth Woodville or the death of the two Princes! Although I will persue the Richard III site... I would be very open to dissertations or any translation of letters of the period. I was surprised to read there are apparently some.
 

"Katherine Woodville"?
More was writing during the Tudor reign. (He also talks of Richard being in the womb for two years and being born with teeth and hair . )IMO not credible.
Nicholas Von Peppelau was contemporary as was Dominic Mancini (however, he was only in England for 3 months and was unaware that it was customary to lodge in the Tower prior to Coronation).
The Richard III Society is a good resource as it has many primary sources for you to look at particularly wardrobe accounts that mention Elizabeth Woodville and Elizabeth of York. There is a paucity of information about medieval Queens and Ladies out there.
This is just my opinion by the way

 ;DYes, that's what I mean about an edit button!!!

 I am in the process of reading The Croyland Chronicle...there was a lot of jealousy toward  Elizabeth Woodville and her relatives...and a lot of resentment..they blamed her instead of Edward IV for the positions of favor that they expected...according to my interpretation of  the Chronicle.

You have given me another name to pursue as a Contemporary. Thank You!

....One of the interesting things about history is that each resource is discredited or valued depending on the stance the Historian is taking. Apparently there is doubt on the Chronicle and yet it is mentioned as a resource under everything I pull up.

 ;)Yes, that's what I mean about an edit button!!!

 I am in the process of reading The Croyland Chronicle...there was a lot of jealousy toward  Elizabeth Woodville and her relatives...and a lot of resentment..they blamed her instead of Edward IV for the positions of favor that they expected...according to my interpretation of  the Chronicle.

You have given me another name to pursue as a Contemporary. Thank You!

....One of the interesting things about history is that each resource is discredited or valued depending on the stance the Historian is taking. Apparently there is doubt on the Chronicle and yet it is mentioned as a resource under everything I pull up.

There is also the "Rous Roll", you might find that interesting
Here ya go, this site is fab.
http://www.r3.org/rnt1991/richardsface.html

Didn't Dominic Mancini identify Richard's 'usurpation' as an 'occupation'.

while looking through a Book on Anne Boleyn  titled The Rise and Fall of Anne Boleyn it mentioned that Elizabeth Woodville had been accused of Witchcraft citing other Queens obviously than Boleyn. Does anyone know the actual Accuser who it was? I believe it was over Edward IV being besotted with Elizabeth.