Edward II
A forum to discuss the reign of Edward II and 14th century history |
| | | | Author | Message |
|---|
Mipp
Joined : 08 Apr 2008
Posts : 9
|  Subject: Adulterous Queens  Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:58 am | |
| Queens committing adultery is a common motif in medieval literature, which is to be expected in a society so obsessed with legitimacy and feminine purity. What intrigues me, as a historian, is that accusations of adultery were very common, and yet very few medieval queens seem to have been guilty of adultery. Certainly few took the risks Isabella did by taking up with Mortimer.
From a purely practical standpoint, have an adulterous relationship was next to impossible for medieval queens. They were surrounded at all times by courtiers, and the penalties for both the queen and her lover would've been harsh, even fatal. I highly doubt most of the queens accused of adultery were ever actually guilty of it; it seems to have been a charge leveled against them to discredit them, possibly even to make it easier for a king to divorce a barren queen. Isabelle of Angouleme, the queen of King John, was accused of adultery and incest among other crimes. King John had already dumped one barren wife and may not have done anything to stop such rumors in case he needed a reason to divorce Isabelle.
The Holy Roman Emperor Heinrich IV decided to get rid of his wife, Bertha of Savoy, after a few childless years of marriage. According to Bruno's Buch von Saxonkreig, Heinrich hired a man to seduce Bertha, but she caught onto the scheme and beat Heinrich with a chair-leg in retaliation (!!!!). Heinrich and Bertha remained married and eventually produced several children.
The only example I'm aware of in which a medieval queen bore a child of questioned paternity is that of the unfortunate Eufemia of Kiev, second queen of King Kalman of Hungary. He allegedly caught her with a lover and sent her home in disgrace, where Eufemia gave birth to a son, Boris. She claimed to the last that Boris was legitimate, and he caused plenty of trouble in trying to enforce a claim to the Hungarian throne as an adult.
Everything Isabella would've ever heard regarding the subject of queenly adultery would've been extremely negative -- adulterous queens are cursed, their lovers are killed, their children are disinherited, etc. Not to mention the example of her sisters-in-law! By taking Roger Mortimer as her lover, Isabella was going against everything she would've been taught, and she had to have been aware of the incredible risks. |
|   | | Alianore
Admin
 
Age : 36
Joined : 30 Sep 2007
Posts : 134
Location : NRW, Germany
| | Subject: Re: Adulterous Queens Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:07 pm | |
| Mipp - welcome!!
Who was it who accused Isabelle of Angouleme of adultery, or was it a fairly widespread rumour? I've heard the story that John hanged her lovers from her bed, but I've no idea if there's any truth in that, or if it's only a lurid story.
_________________
"Sans lui n'estoit rien fait, et par lui estoit tous fait, et le creoit li rois plus que tout le monde." Without him nothing is done and through him everything is done, and the king trusts him more than any other: Hugh Despenser the Younger and Edward II |
| | | | Anejre
Joined : 28 Mar 2008
Posts : 152
| | Subject: Re: Adulterous Queens Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:54 pm | |
| | Queens - or any lady from 'good blood', knew their duty was to marry and provide an heir. They knew the danger of being accused of 'polluting' the line of succession, by bearing a child whose legitmacy could be questioned, which would bring shame on their families. I wonder if there were any desperate queens or titled ladies who conceived a child with another man in order to keep their position. |
| | | | Anejre
Joined : 28 Mar 2008
Posts : 152
| | Subject: Re: Adulterous Queens Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:56 pm | |
| As for John's Isabelle, how typical that as well as being accused of adultery, incest was thrown in for good measure. Just add witchcraft to the list, and her reputation would be totally blackened  |
| | | | Anejre
Joined : 28 Mar 2008
Posts : 152
| | Subject: Re: Adulterous Queens Tue Apr 08, 2008 8:59 pm | |
| | To rid himself of Anne Boleyn, Henry VIII accused her of adultery - but by including her own brother, he made her seem so vile that no man was beyond her lust. Of course, with her brother and her supporters included, it wiped out her faction at court. Throw in accusations of witchcraft and threats to poison the King's children, and she was finished. |
| | | | Anejre
Joined : 28 Mar 2008
Posts : 152
| | Subject: Re: Adulterous Queens Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:05 pm | |
| | Mipp wrote: | | Everything Isabella would've ever heard regarding the subject of queenly adultery would've been extremely negative -- adulterous queens are cursed, their lovers are killed, their children are disinherited, etc. Not to mention the example of her sisters-in-law! By taking Roger Mortimer as her lover, Isabella was going against everything she would've been taught, and she had to have been aware of the incredible risks. |
Isabella would surely have turned her unique situation into an 'excuse' for her behaviour - claiming the role of the neglected queen, spurned by her husband who preferred men, and with the disasters that befell Edward's reign, feeling justified she couldn't have been any more cursed than him. As Despencer was drunk on the power he held, and made bold, Isabella was perhaps the same and felt fully justified in her actions. |
| | | | Mipp
Joined : 08 Apr 2008
Posts : 9
| | Subject: Re: Adulterous Queens Wed Apr 09, 2008 8:48 am | |
| | Alianore wrote: | | Who was it who accused Isabelle of Angouleme of adultery, or was it a fairly widespread rumour? I've heard the story that John hanged her lovers from her bed, but I've no idea if there's any truth in that, or if it's only a lurid story. |
Matthew Paris definitely accused Isabelle of adultery -- More Jezebel than Isabelle. The incest charge makes me roll my eyes. The only person she could possibly have committed incest with was her half-brother, Pierre of Joigny, who visited her in England several times. It was probably xenophobia, and the English chroniclers' hatred of grasping foreign relatives, that drove that accusation. I suspect that King John encouraged the rumors, or at least did nothing to stop them, so he'd have grounds to divorce Isabelle if need be.
Isabelle and John's relationship was quite complicated. She was no more than twelve, possibly younger, when they married, and it was seven years before they had a child. He seemed to like to give her wines and beautiful clothes, but allowed her no freedom or power. Her half-brother Pierre was one of the very, very few kinsmen and countrymen allowed to visit Isabelle. In addition, his ex-wife Isabel of Gloucester actually lived with them in Winchester castle until 1207, when Isabelle gave birth to Henry. This is something that seems to have been overlooked by historians until recently, since so many were invested in maintaining that 'evil prince John' legend, and the image of John casting out his barren wife, weeping and barefoot, and replacing her with a kittenish child-bride worked wonderfully with that. But Isabel of Gloucester continued to live with John after their divorce, and he lavished £50-80 a year on her. To put this in perspective, the average baron's annual income of that time was about £200! |
| | | | |
| Page 1 of 1 |
| | Permissions of this forum: | You cannot reply to topics in this forum
| | |
| |
|
