Author Topic: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)  (Read 13097 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ilyala

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2063
  • il y a
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #15 on: September 07, 2005, 09:34:56 AM »
well yes, cause he betrayed henry later ;)
'loving might be a mistake, but it's worth making'
ilya


Offline Kimberly

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Loyaulte me lie
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #16 on: September 07, 2005, 09:53:43 AM »
Oooohhhh you sneaky old thing :P  ;D Actually, it was his brother William who betrayed Henry by supporting Perkin Warbeck, for which he was executed.
So a proper sneaky pair of snakes they were.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Kimberly »
Member of the Richard III Society

Offline Prince_Lieven

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 6570
  • To Be Useful In All That I Do
    • View Profile
    • Edward III's Descendants
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #17 on: September 14, 2005, 05:21:47 PM »
The effect of giving birth to a child aged 13 might have made her sterile.
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
-Sherlock Holmes

"Men forget, but never forgive; women forgive, but never forget."

Offline Kimberly

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
  • Loyaulte me lie
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2005, 03:38:35 AM »
Sterile or not, she didn't have any other children. Maybe she had a secondary infertility or maybe she was sub- fertile in the first place and got lucky (or unlucky depending on your point of view ;))
Member of the Richard III Society

Offline Arianwen

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 642
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #19 on: September 16, 2005, 02:39:15 PM »
Quote
How could that be? there are alot of girls you hear of having children very young and it hasn't made them sterile


The younger you are, the more dangerous giving birth is. Your hips haven't fully grown, so quite simply, they're usually not wide enough. Margaret was also described as short, even for that time period, so most likely, she had a REALLY difficult birth, tore a few things inside, and was unable to have more children afterward. It happened a lot back then, without our wonderful modern medicine. Try looking up the statistics of women surviving childbirth back then. Pretty bloody scary, if you ask me.

Regards,
Arianwen

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Margaret Tudor, Queen Of Scotland
« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2005, 08:16:19 PM »
This plucky, persistent Tudor Princess, was the eldest daughter of Henry VII & his gracious Queen, Elizabeth of York.  She was the namesake & favorite of her Grandmother,  Margaret Beaufort,  Dowager Countess of Richmond.  

She was married to James IV of Scotland as a young girl.
Through the many blows she was dealt during her life, she remained a force in Scotland & proud of her lineage as a daughter of Henry & Elizabeth, and a descendant of Edward IV.

« Last Edit: April 17, 2009, 06:55:51 PM by Prince_Lieven »

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: Margaret Tudor, Queen Of Scotland
« Reply #21 on: October 09, 2005, 08:39:38 AM »
From " The Sisters Of Henry VIII" by Maria Perry pgs 4 & 5:

"Even though Lady Margaret (Beaufort, Countess of Richmond) was descended from the illegitimate Beaufort line, her ancestry had went back to Edward III. She had survived the Yorkist regime and was best friends with Edward IV's daughter, Cecily of York, whom she later sheltered at her own palace of Collyweston, in Northamptonshire.  The Countess was ruthlessly practical, extremely devout, and impeccably aristocratic, and for as lone as she survived, she was determined that no one should accuse the Tudors of being upstarts. A regal figure in a rich gold coronet, she was present on most state occasions, walking proudly, despite appalling rheumatism, just behind the Queen, whom she frequently overshadowed by her sheer by the sheer force of her personality.  She was devoted to all of her grandchildren, but Princess Margaret, who was her godchild, was her favorute and scattered references amid the Countess's papers suggest she took an active part in the little girl's upbringing.

Excerpts from page page 9:

(In 1489) " Three years later, everything had gone perfectly at Margaret's christengin at Westminister Abbey.  When Elizabeth of York had withdrew for her confinement, Lady Margaret had attended her, so she actually witnessed the birth of her granchild on the night of of 28 November 1489.  There was ample opportunity to get the etiquette right, because the whole court was in Londong for the ceremony creating Arthur Prince of Wales.  Cardinal Morton stood as godfather to the infant Princess.  The Queen's sister, carried the chrisom.  Lady Margaret was the principal godmother and the font was sent up from Canterbury, the old silver font in which the children of the Kings of England had been baptized for as long as anyone could remember." "Amid similar ceremonies  Prince Henry was christened at Greenwich in the Church of the Observant Friars, but of Mary's baptism there is no record. Perhaps the panic caused by Perkin Warbeck's attempted invasion obscurred the important event."
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Mgmstl »

Mgmstl

  • Guest
Re: Margaret Tudor, Queen Of Scotland
« Reply #22 on: October 09, 2005, 02:22:15 PM »
From: "The Sisters of Henry VIII" by Maria Perry, pgs. 10 & 11:

(This is in regards to Margaret's proposed marriage to James IV of Scotland)

"When the King of Scotland was not fighting, he was hunting in the mountains.  He was also a notable lover, although continued, Don Pedro, piously recalling his own epsicopal function, it was believed that James had recently given up lovemaking, " as well as from fear of God as from fear of scandal."  This was the man aged twenty four at the time of Don Pedro's dispatch, to whom Henry VII proposed to marry his eldest daughter Margaret, however she was only nine years old and she was small and delicate for her age.  The Scots were keen to have her sent over the Border as soon as possible but Henry had his doubts, and, he confided to Don Pedro, there were two formidabel opponents to the match at the English court: "The Queen and my mother are very much against the marriage."  They say if the marriage were concluded we should be obliged to send the Princess directly to Scotland, in which case they FEAR that the King of Scotland would not WAIT, but injure her and endanger her health."  Henry did not embarrass the ambassador by mentioning something which was widely known in England, though perhaps not often referred to in courtly circles.  The King was Lady Margaret's only child.  In giving birth to him her womb had been damaged; she was "spoyled" and could have no more children."

"The Countess's experience had been traumatic.  Preganant at twelce she had borne her only son during the War of The Roses, three months after her husband, Edmund Tudor, had died of the plague.  He had been Henry VI's lieutenant in a particularly dangerous part of Wales, and was captured and imprisoned by Yorkist retainers.  Although he was ransomed, his health never recovered.  Left alone at Carmarthen Margaret travelled through the winter storms to Pembroke Castle, where Edmund Tudor's brother Japsper had given her shelter.  She was remarried before she was thirteen.  After this experience, it is not surprising that the Queen and the King's mother would not hear of Princess Margaret being sent to Scotland until she was safely into puberty. Their opposition was also fuelled by current gossip about James IV's amorous adventures.  He had two illegitimate children by Marion Boyd, with whom he had commenced a liason shortly after his accession, and by the time De Ayala had arrived in Edinburgh the Kings was said to be simultaneously in love with two ladies, Janet Kennedy and Margaret Drummond.  IF the Queen and Lady Margaret had their way, Henry joked ruefully to Don Pedro, the King of Scotland might have to wait for Margaret for "another nine years."

Offline FaithWhiteRose

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #23 on: May 22, 2007, 08:24:57 PM »
Let's just say that I feel bad for margaret [Tudor ;)] . . . I hate how her son accused her of betraying him, though it sounds like he didn't like her because she was a tudor. It seems she had an awful lot of lovers  ;)

Offline bell_the_cat

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1678
  • I am he, who will bell the cat
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2007, 05:44:15 PM »
Yes, her brother Henry thought she was a bit of a flibbertygibbet! :D
Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after tomorrow. (Mark Twain)

Offline FaithWhiteRose

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #25 on: May 24, 2007, 03:42:49 PM »
lol  :D
but he still should have helped her. she was older when she got married to her second husband but still not mature, no one was there to guide her.
sometimes history can be so cruel.  :-[

Offline bell_the_cat

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1678
  • I am he, who will bell the cat
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #26 on: May 27, 2007, 05:25:27 AM »
She was about the same age as her granddaughter Mary, at the time of the Darnley marriage......

Henry did let her live at the English Court as Queen of Scotland, so it's not as if he didn't help. It was later not his fault that she fell out with her son, so I can't really see what more he could have done for her.

On the other hand it would be wrong to describe the relationship between Henry and Margaret as close.
Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after tomorrow. (Mark Twain)

Offline FaithWhiteRose

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #27 on: May 31, 2007, 04:24:13 PM »
She was about the same age as her granddaughter Mary, at the time of the Darnley marriage......

However, she [Margaret] was only thirteen when she got married to James IV. If you ask me, I think she needed more time to develop . . . just another reason why you shouldn't be a princess.

Offline FaithWhiteRose

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #28 on: May 31, 2007, 04:29:43 PM »
[quote/]

On the other hand it would be wrong to describe the relationship between Henry and Margaret as close.

[quote/]

Yes, Henry's relationship with Margaret was not close, unlike Mary Rose and Henry.


Offline FaithWhiteRose

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
    • View Profile
Re: Margaret Tudor (1489-1541)
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2007, 05:32:23 PM »
Here's a picture of Flodden Field: