DOCSLIB.ORG

The Pregnancy Portrait of Queen of Elizabeth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Pregnancy Portrait of Queen of Elizabeth THE PREGNANCY PORTRAIT OF QUEEN ELIZABETH AND THE SECRET ROYAL BIRTH OF FRANCIS BACON, CONCEALED AUTHOR OF THE SHAKESPEARE WORKS BY A PHOENIX It is an immense ocean that surrounds the island of truth Francis Bacon If circumstances lead me I will find Where truth is hid, though it were hid indeed Within the centre [Hamlet: 2:2: 159-61] Tempore Patet Occulta Veritas (In Time the Hidden Truth will be Revealed) Francis Bacon 1 The Pregnancy Portrait of Queen Elizabeth at Hampton Court Palace 2 ILLUSTRATIONS 1. The Pregnancy Portrait of Queen Elizabeth at Hampton Court Palace, frontispiece. 2. The Shakespeare Sonnet in the Cartouche in the Pregnancy Portrait of Queen Elizabeth composed by Francis Bacon (with cipher), p. 17. 3. The outer-cover of the Northumberland Manuscript (Bacon‟s collection of MSS) held at Alnwick Castle, Northumberland with the names of Francis Bacon and his pseudonym William Shakespeare scribbled across it and which once contained his two Shakespeare plays Richard II and Richard III, p. 23. 4. Francis Bacon, as a child aged 1-2 years old (c.1562-3), artist unknown held at Gorhambury with a double chain hanging from his shoulders with a larger miniature possibly depicting Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester with the smaller one beneath it concealing an image of Queen Elizabeth, p.52. 5. A Queen [Elizabeth] and her Son by Nicholas Hilliard (British Museum), p. 53. 6. Queen Elizabeth-Vestal Flame Portrait with two children (representing Francis Tudor Bacon and Robert Tudor Devereux) by Adriaen van der Werff in Issac de Larrey, Histoire D‟Angleterre, D‟Ecosse, et D‟Irlande (Amsterdam: Chez Jean Covens et Corneille Mortier, 1723), frontispiece, p.62. 7. Francis Bacon (1578) by Nicholas Hilliard (National Portrait Gallery, No. 6761), p. 70. 8. Queen Elizabeth (1572) by Nicholas Hilliard (National Portrait Gallery, No. 108), p. 71. 9. Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (1576) by Nicholas Hilliard (National Portrait Gallery, No. 4197), p. 71. 3 The mysterious portrait part of the royal collection which now hangs in the Haunted Gallery at Hampton Court Palace had previously been hidden away from public view for centuries only receiving passing comment from an elite cabal of art authorities and a curious silence by its current custodians. Stimulated by an article by Roy Strong the renowned authority on Elizabethan art in his essay „“My Weepinge Stagg I Crowne”: The Persian Lady Reconsidered‟, this enigmatic portrait has in the first two decades of our own twenty-first century finally been placed under the analytical microscope of other critics who have approached it from different perspectives, in particular, by two Oxfordians, Dr Paul Altrocchi in his article „The Queen Elizabeth Pregnancy Portrait: Who designed it and who did the cover ups?‟ (2002), expanded upon in „The Virgin Queen‟s Mysterious Abdominal Swelling‟ (2010), and David Shakespeare in his long and detailed examination of it in „The Pregnancy Portrait of Elizabeth I‟ (2018).1 The enigmatic portrait depicts a pregnant Queen Elizabeth in an extraordinary gown embroidered with branches of foliage incorporating into its design various symbolic birds and flowers. She is wearing a curious headdress with a veil extending down her back standing beneath a large walnut tree bearing its fruit with a stream receding into the distance. Her right hand crowns a weeping stag with a circle of pansies. Three enigmatic Latin mottoes are placed down the trunk of the tree and in the bottom right- hand corner of the picture stands an elaborate cartouche with a special sonnet whose anonymous authorship has never been established. It is also not known who secretly commissioned this allegorical painting of Queen Elizabeth which will be revealed and confirmed here for first time and its coded complex imagery and symbolism, properly contextualised, decoded and deciphered. On the grounds of its draughtsmanship and style the painting is now recognized to be the work of Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger (1561-1636) and shares many similarities with his famous Ditchley portrait of Queen Elizabeth which has a similar cartouche and identical calligraphy.2 The Oxfordians Dr Altrocchi and David Shakespeare date the portrait between 1594 and 1604 (the terminus ad quem presumably determined by the death of the Earl of Oxford in 1604) whereas Sir Roy Strong narrows it down to c.1600-1, which fits rather nicely with his arguments linking Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex to the painting.3 The early whereabouts of the portrait remain unknown or uncertain. In 1613 the Duke of Saxe-Weimer saw a portrait of what he described as „A beautiful Turkish lady‟ at Somerset House,4 but whether this was the portrait by Gheerhaerts of a Persian Lady, or Queen Elizabeth in a Persian dress, is open to doubt and cannot now be resolved. Both Dr Altrocchi and David Shakespeare speculate the portrait was lost to the royal family sometime during the civil war and commonwealth after the beheading of Charles I in 1649. However this may be, the earliest specific reference to the painting is found in the notebooks of the antiquary George Vertue. He saw it in c.1728, describing it as a picture belonging to the crown of Queen Elizabeth, in a flowered gown with a stag by her which she is crowning with flowers, underneath a tree, whereupon there are several Latin inscriptions, and a sonnet in the cartouche.5 A few years later in 1735 Vertue records Sir John Stanley some time ago recovered the picture of „Qu. Elizabeth in a strange fantastick habit‟, while he was deputy to Queen Anne, from a flea market in Moor Fields, which had the mark of Charles I on the back of it,6 that has since been removed. In the reign of Queen Anne I (1702-14) the portrait was recorded at St James‟s Palace in the Blue Room as „Queen Elizabeth in fancy dress‟. It was afterwards removed by Queen Caroline, wife of George II (1727-60), to Kensington Palace where it was recorded by Vertue in 1734.7 The painting resided there for more than a century. It is recorded by W. H. Pyne in The History of Royal Residences as a „Portrait of Queen ELIZABETH‟ in „a fantastic 4 Asiatic dress, seemingly of the Persian character.‟8 It was also noted with some further detail by Walpole: Another picture of Elizabeth, in a fantastic habit, something like a Persian, is in the gallery of Royal personages at Kensington…she is drawn in a forest, a stag behind here, and on a tree are inscribed these mottoes and verses, which as we know not on what occasion the piece was painted, are not easily to be interpreted.9 The painting was moved by Queen Victoria to Hampton Court Palace in 1838 where it now remains, which was described by Ernest Law the official historian at Hampton Court Palace and acclaimed expert on Tudor history, as „Queen Elizabeth in a fanciful dress’: Full-length, facing in front. She wears a long loose dress of thin white material, embroidered all over with flowers and birds, and edged with lace, a high conical headdress, and shoes of blue and white, embroidered with gold, and trimmed with blue braid. She is standing in a forest; on her right is a stag with a garland of flowers round its neck, on which the queen‟s right hand is placed. On wood, 7ft. high, by 4ft. 6in. wide. On a tree by her are inscribed the following mottos or verses:- “Iniusti iusta querela;” beneath that:- “Mea sic mihi,” and still lower:-“Dolor est medecina ed tori (? dolori).” At the bottom of the picture on the other side is a scroll, or rather a tablet, on which are the following verses [here reproduced]. This curious picture, with its fantastical design, enigmatical mottoes, and quaint verses, doubtless had some allegorical meaning which we are now unable to interpret.10 Up to this point for several hundred years the painting had hung in royal palaces as a portrait of Queen Elizabeth until sometime in the twentieth century something rather remarkable occurred when its label at Hampton Court Palace was without explanation changed to a „Portrait of an Unknown Woman.‟ With the portrait of Queen Elizabeth rendered officially anonymous there have been a number of attempts to identify or label her as someone else. In 1914 Sir Lionel Cust, then Director of the National Portrait Gallery and renowned royal art critic stated that „It seems almost certainly to be a portrait of Arbella Stuart‟11 a possible successor to Queen Elizabeth, and believed to be a threat to the throne by James I in the early part of the next reign. This identification by Sir Lionel Cust was dismissed by Roy Strong on the simple grounds that none of her portraits show any resemblance whatsoever to the lady in fancy dress.12 Under the heading of „A Century of Deception Continues‟ Dr Altrocchi more acidly stated „This raises questions as to the motivation of such a highly respected royal art critic as Lionel Cust, who had been Director of the National Portrait Gallery for fifteen years.‟13 Lady Penelope Devereux (later Lady Penelope Rich), the sister of Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex and favourite of Elizabeth, has also been suggested who following her second marriage to Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy was banished from court by James I in 1605. In his long detail work „The Pregnancy Portrait of Elizabeth I‟, David Shakespeare reproduces a known portrait of Lady Penelope when she was a young woman and places it alongside the „pregnancy portrait‟, which clearly shows the latter „does not depict Penelope Rich‟.14 In 1977 the costume historian Janet Arnold suggested that the sitter in the portrait may have been Anne
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Misfortunes of Arthur and Its Extensive Links to a Whole Range of His Other Shakespeare Plays
    FRANCIS BACON AND HIS FIRST UNACKNOWLEDGED SHAKESPEARE PLAY THE MISFORTUNES OF ARTHUR AND ITS EXTENSIVE LINKS TO A WHOLE RANGE OF HIS OTHER SHAKESPEARE PLAYS By A Phoenix It is an immense ocean that surrounds the island of truth Francis Bacon If circumstances lead me I will find Where truth is hid, though it were hid indeed Within the centre [Hamlet: 2:2: 159-61] Tempore Patet Occulta Veritas (In Time the Hidden Truth will be Revealed) Francis Bacon 1 CONTENTS 1. The Silence of the Bacon Editors and Biographers 4 2. The So-called Contributors of The Misfortunes of Arthur 7 3. The Background of The Misfortunes of Arthur 28 4. The Political Allegory of The Misfortunes of Arthur 41 5. Francis Bacon Sole Author of The Misfortunes of Arthur 47 6. The Misfortunes of Arthur and the Shakespeare Plays 57 References 102 2 FACSIMILES Fig. 1 The Title Page of The Misfortunes of Arthur 52 Fig. 2 The First Page of the Introduction 53 Fig. 3 The Last Page of the Introduction 54 Fig. 4 The Page naming Hughes as the Principal Author 55 Fig. 5 The Final Page of The Misfortunes of Arthur 56 [All Deciphered] 3 1. THE SILENCE OF THE BACON EDITORS AND BIOGRAPHERS In normal circumstances any drama with any kind of proximity to the Shakespeare plays however remote or tenuous would ordinarily attract the attention of biographers, editors and commentators in their battalions. Who would individually and collectively scrutinize it for all traces, echoes, parallels, mutual links, and any and all connections to the hallowed Shakespeare canon.
    [Show full text]
  • P.56. Proposed Progresses: P.68
    County Index of Visits by the Queen. Hosts’ Index: p.56. Proposed Progresses: p.68. Alleged and Traditional Visits: p.101. Mistaken visits: chronological list: p.103-106. County Index of Visits by the Queen. ‘Proposed progresses’: the section following this Index and Hosts’ Index. Other references are to the main Text. Counties are as they were in Elizabeth’s reign, disregarding later changes. (Knighted): knighted during the Queen’s visit. Proposed visits are in italics. Bedfordshire. Bletsoe: 1566 July 17/20: proposed: Oliver 1st Lord St John. 1578: ‘Proposed progresses’ (letter): Lord St John. Dunstable: 1562: ‘Proposed progresses’. At The Red Lion; owned by Edward Wyngate; inn-keeper Richard Amias: 1568 Aug 9-10; 1572 July 28-29. Eaton Socon, at Bushmead: 1566 July 17/20: proposed: William Gery. Holcot: 1575 June 16/17: dinner: Richard Chernock. Houghton Conquest, at Dame Ellensbury Park (royal): 1570 Aug 21/24: dinner, hunt. Luton: 1575 June 15: dinner: George Rotherham. Northill, via: 1566 July 16. Ridgmont, at Segenhoe: visits to Peter Grey. 1570 Aug 21/24: dinner, hunt. 1575 June 16/17: dinner. Toddington: visits to Henry Cheney. 1564 Sept 4-7 (knighted). 1570 Aug 16-25: now Sir Henry Cheney. (Became Lord Cheney in 1572). 1575 June 15-17: now Lord Cheney. Willington: 1566 July 16-20: John Gostwick. Woburn: owned by Francis Russell, 2nd Earl of Bedford. 1568: ‘Proposed progresses’. 1572 July 29-Aug 1. 1 Berkshire. Aldermaston: 1568 Sept 13-14: William Forster; died 1574. 1572: ‘Proposed progresses’. Visits to Humphrey Forster (son); died 1605. 1592 Aug 19-23 (knighted).
    [Show full text]
  • County Index, Hosts' Index, and Proposed Progresses
    County Index of Visits by the Queen. Hosts’ Index: p.56. Proposed Progresses: p.68. Alleged and Traditional Visits: p.101. Mistaken visits: chronological list: p.103-106. County Index of Visits by the Queen. ‘Proposed progresses’: the section following this Index and Hosts’ Index. Other references are to the main Text. Counties are as they were in Elizabeth’s reign, disregarding later changes. (Knighted): knighted during the Queen’s visit. Proposed visits are in italics. Bedfordshire. Bletsoe: 1566 July 17/20: proposed: Oliver 1st Lord St John. 1578: ‘Proposed progresses’ (letter): Lord St John. Dunstable: 1562: ‘Proposed progresses’. At The Red Lion; owned by Edward Wyngate; inn-keeper Richard Amias: 1568 Aug 9-10; 1572 July 28-29. Eaton Socon, at Bushmead: 1566 July 17/20: proposed: William Gery. Holcot: 1575 June 16/17: dinner: Richard Chernock. Houghton Conquest, at Dame Ellensbury Park (royal): 1570 Aug 21/24: dinner, hunt. Luton: 1575 June 15: dinner: George Rotherham. Northill, via: 1566 July 16. Ridgmont, at Segenhoe: visits to Peter Grey. 1570 Aug 21/24: dinner, hunt. 1575 June 16/17: dinner. Toddington: visits to Henry Cheney. 1564 Sept 4-7 (knighted). 1570 Aug 16-25: now Sir Henry Cheney. (Became Lord Cheney in 1572). 1575 June 15-17: now Lord Cheney. Willington: 1566 July 16-20: John Gostwick. Woburn: owned by Francis Russell, 2nd Earl of Bedford. 1568: ‘Proposed progresses’. 1572 July 29-Aug 1. 1 Berkshire. Aldermaston: 1568 Sept 13-14: William Forster; died 1574. 1572: ‘Proposed progresses’. Visits to Humphrey Forster (son); died 1605. 1592 Aug 19-23 (knighted).
    [Show full text]
  • Coppage-Coppedge Family
    THE COPPAGE-COPPEDGE FAMILY 1542 - 1955 l . ' ....,.,< ·l· (i, X'. ;.;~~ ·¼~"' ~~f t:9; .· -{.;'. -~}- ... , --,:.,;•: "«) j ''-t'Sr_ ,~, f t'P ·; ',.,.,.-:; ' ...· , ., ' : · ...... ,. -- -··-···~-',_. ; by JOHN E. MANAHAN, BOX 926, RADFORD, VIRGINIA and A. MAXIM COPPAGE, HALE, MISSOURI Photo Engravings by ALLIED ARTS, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. Printed in U.S.A. COMMONWEALTH PRESS, RADFORD, VIRGINIA AUGUST, 1955 THE COPP AGE-COPPEDGE FAMILY 1542 -1955 I nm ID4ynkt i...,. ___ . - • ·•- ..• . .• CHARLES HENRY BROWNING (1846 - 1926) Descendant of the Coppedges, Lewrights, Damerons, Balls, Haynies, Harrises, V eseys, Basyes, Taylors, and Gas­ kinses. Grandson of the Lord l\tlayor of London and Founder of the Baronial OrdeT of Runnemede; Aryan Order of St. George; Author of The True Shakespeare TO ALL THE COPPAGES AND COPPEDGES WHO HAVE PRESERVED THEIR RECORDS AND CONTRIB- UTED SO GENEROUSLY TO MAKE THIS BOOK POSSIBLE TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I - THE COPPEDGE FAMILY OF ENGLAND .................... I Chapter II - EARLY MEMBERS OF EDWARD COPPEDGE'S FAMILY IN MARYLAND ... ........ .. .. .. ... .. .... .. .. .......... ............................. 9 Chapter III - DESCENDANTS OF BENJAMIN COPPAGE OF QUEEN ANNE .................................................................................... 13 Chapter IV - THE COPPEDGES OF NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY, VIRGINIA ....... ................................ ................ ... .... .................. 25 Chapter V - THE LINE OF JOHN COPPEDGE OF FAUQUIER ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Compendium of Common Knowledge 1558-1603
    A Compendium of Common Knowledge 1558-1603 Elizabethan Commonplaces For Writers, Actors, and Re-enactors Written and edited by Maggie Secara 10th Edition Expanded, corrected, and amended incorporating all previous editions & appendices Spring 2010 Designed for the World Wide Web by Paula Kate Marmor http://compendium.elizabethan.org/ MS Word / Adobe PDF Version 10 – Spring 2010 2 Contents A COMPENDIUM OF COMMON KNOWLEDGE .................................................................................1 PREFACE: SHORT ATTENTION SPAN HISTORY..............................................................................................6 Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................................6 PHILOSOPHICAL INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................7 SERVICES AND OCCUPATIONS......................................................................................................................8 NUMBERS & MEASURES, DATES & CLOCKS ..............................................................................................10 Counting up ..........................................................................................................................................10 Reckoning the time................................................................................................................................10 Reckoning the date................................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • If Bacon Is Shakespeare, What Questions Does That Answer?
    If Bacon is Shakespeare, What Questions Does That Answer? By Christina G. Waldman November 27, 2020 (revised from March 8, 2019) Many literary critics seem to think that an hypothesis about obscure and remote questions of history can be refuted by a simple demand for the production of more evidence than in fact exists.—But the true test of an hypothesis, if it cannot be shewn to conflict with known truths, is the number of facts that it correlates, and explains. —Francis MacDonald Cornford 1 “A prudent question is, as it were, one half of wisdom. ”2 —Francis Bacon Much evidence has accumulated over the past four centuries supporting Bacon’s authorship of Shakespeare, 3 though it has largely been ignored by “orthodox Stratfordian” scholars who hold to the “traditional” view that William Shaxpere of Stratford wrote the works that bear the name of William Shakespeare. We know so few facts for certain about Shaxpere’s biography!4 Many who doubt Bacon’s authorship have, I venture to say, never really looked at the matter closely; for the case against Bacon is superficial, a matter of opinion. It seems that there has been such a concerted effort to foist upon the world an imposter, to hide the real author(s) from the world’s eyes. Once the myth became accepted, people became reluctant to question it, as if it were sacrosanct. Yet, there have been doubters of Shaxpere’s authorship on record, even during Shakespeare the poet’s lifetime. 5 In a scientific inquiry, any hypothesis or opinion is subject to reconsideration when new facts are brought to light.
    [Show full text]
  • Court: Women at Court, and the Royal Household (100
    Court: Women at Court; Royal Household. p.1: Women at Court. Royal Household: p.56: Gentlemen and Grooms of the Privy Chamber; p.59: Gentlemen Ushers. p.60: Cofferer and Controller of the Household. p.61: Privy Purse and Privy Seal: selected payments. p.62: Treasurer of the Chamber: selected payments; p.63: payments, 1582. p.64: Allusions to the Queen’s family: King Henry VIII; Queen Anne Boleyn; King Edward VI; Queen Mary Tudor; Elizabeth prior to her Accession. Royal Household Orders. p.66: 1576 July (I): Remembrance of charges. p.67: 1576 July (II): Reformations to be had for diminishing expenses. p.68: 1577 April: Articles for diminishing expenses. p.69: 1583 Dec 7: Remembrances concerning household causes. p.70: 1598: Orders for the Queen’s Almoners. 1598: Orders for the Queen’s Porters. p.71: 1599: Orders for supplying French wines to the Royal Household. p.72: 1600: Thomas Wilson: ‘The Queen’s Expenses’. p.74: Marriages: indexes; miscellaneous references. p.81: Godchildren: indexes; miscellaneous references. p.92: Deaths: chronological list. p.100: Funerals. Women at Court. Ladies and Gentlewomen of the Bedchamber and the Privy Chamber. Maids of Honour, Mothers of the Maids; also relatives and friends of the Queen not otherwise included, and other women prominent in the reign. Close friends of the Queen: Katherine Astley; Dorothy Broadbelt; Lady Cobham; Anne, Lady Hunsdon; Countess of Huntingdon; Countess of Kildare; Lady Knollys; Lady Leighton; Countess of Lincoln; Lady Norris; Elizabeth and Helena, Marchionesses of Northampton; Countess of Nottingham; Blanche Parry; Katherine, Countess of Pembroke; Mary Radcliffe; Lady Scudamore; Lady Mary Sidney; Lady Stafford; Countess of Sussex; Countess of Warwick.
    [Show full text]
  • If Bacon Is Shakespeare…
    If Bacon is Shakespeare… By Christina G. Waldman March 5, 2019 Hypothetically speaking, if Francis Bacon is Shakespeare, or at least, played a major role in the writing and editing of the Shakespeare Works, what questions would that answer? What mysteries might it solve?1 Many literary critics seem to think that an hypothesis about obscure and remote questions of history can be refuted by a simple demand for the production of more evidence than in fact exists.—But the true test of an hypothesis, if it cannot be shewn to conflict with known truths, is the number of facts that it correlates, and explains.2 “A prudent question is, as it were, one half of wisdom.”3 If Bacon is Shakespeare, might it not help explain why there has been such a concerted effort to foist upon the world an imposter, to hide the real author(s) from the world’s eyes? (Before you say no, please read to the end and, if you are so inclined so some reading in the sources I have referenced. I hope you will agree that any hypothesis or opinion is subject to reconsideration when new facts are brought to light. Some have already made up their minds, based on what they have always heard. However, “I think he wrote his own stuff” hides the question: who was “he”? Other candidates include Edward de Vere, Marlowe, John Florio, and others. However, was the case ever closed against Bacon? No. In fact, he won in an actual court case, based on the evidence presented— although the decision was later dismissed, for lack of jurisdiction (authority to decide the matter).4).
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Diary As a Reality Presentation Method. Lady Margaret Hoby’S Self-Portrait (1599-1605)
    © Studia methodologica, ISSN 2307-1222, No. 39. 2014 Studia methodologica 2014; (39) PERSONAL DIARY AS A REALITY PRESENTATION METHOD. LADY MARGARET HOBY’S SELF-PORTRAIT (1599-1605) Bożenna Chylińska Prof. dr habil. Professor of British and American Studies Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw (POLAND), 00-497 Warsaw, Nowy Świat 4, e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Chylińska Bożenna. Personal Diary as a Reality Presentation Method. Lady Margaret Hoby’s Self-Portrait (1599-1605) The paper aims to discuss a Puritan female diary exploring English Puritan female experience at the turn of the seventeenth century. The daily account of the life of Lady Margaret Hoby, the first English woman-diarist, perfectly illustrates the Calvinist ideal of womanhood. Scattered evidence, placed together from brief entries, records the narrow life of a high-status Gentlewoman captured between her two essential callings: large household managerial duties, and elevated religiosity. Lady Hoby’s personalized narrative prominently emphasizes both her spirituality and the daily demands of managing the large manor affairs. Her writing can thus be approached through a wider cultural world in which devotional activities structured female domesticities, following the Calvinist doctrine that the church remain the place of worship, but its performance be extended to the home and family as a center of religious devotion. Lady Margaret Hoby’s self-portrait is here recognized as an almost exemplary image of a Puritan woman’s spirituality, strictly combined with religious zeal, feminine chastity, diligence, and industriousness. Key words: diary, self-portrait, gender, womanhood, English Puritanism Any interpretation of history can be approached through a category of gender; unquestionably, early England Puritan history is also a female history.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Huddersfield Repository
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Huddersfield Repository University of Huddersfield Repository Malay, Jessica L. Elizabeth Russell's textual performances of self Original Citation Malay, Jessica L. (2006) Elizabeth Russell's textual performances of self. Comitatus, 37. pp. 146- 168. ISSN 1557-0290 This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/749/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ ELIZABETH RUSSELL’S TEXTUAL PERFORMANCES OF SELF by Jessica L. Malay Elizabeth Cooke Hoby Russell (b. 1528) was a scholar and courtier whose close association with the powerful Cecils allowed her a great deal of influence in the political arena during the reign of Elizabeth I. Her first husband was Sir Thomas Hoby, a scholar and diplomat.
    [Show full text]
  • A Queenly Affinity? Catherine of Aragon's Estates and Henry VIII's
    2019 VI A Queenly Affinity? Catherine of Aragon’s Estates and Henry VIII’s Great Matter Michelle Beer Article: A Queenly Affinity? Catherine of Aragon’s Estates and Henry VIII’s Great Matter A Queenly Affinity? Cathrine of Aragon’s Estates and Henry VIII’s Great Matter1 Michelle Beer INDEPENDENT SCHOLAR Abstract: Catherine of Aragon’s support during Henry VIII’s campaign to annul their marriage relied on an affinity formed through her estates, specifically through the familial and regional connections between the queen and her local officials, tenants, and councillors. Using receivers’ accounts, land indentures, royal grants, and household accounts, this article traces the legal, administrative, and political activities of the men and women who served the queen. Existing scholarship of early modern queens’ estates has focused on the legal status of the queen’s council and the solvency of her household, but Catherine’s use of her estates demonstrates that their primary importance was as a source of authority, legitimacy, and independent patronage. Keywords: Catherine of Aragon; queenship; Tudor history; Reformation; Henry VIII; divorce n 3 September 1533, the Imperial ambassador Eustace Chapuys reported a rumor to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V that parliament, in its next session, would deprive Catherine of Aragon of the income assigned to her as queen consort. O According to Chapuys, this is the thing which the Queen dreads most, and which causes her most pain and sorrow, more than any other personal annoyance she has hitherto gone through, imagining that as long as she retains the allowance and estate which queens generally enjoy she may consider herself as a queen, and not be dispossessed of her rank and dignity.
    [Show full text]
  • Q&A with Claire Mceachern
    Q&A with CSW u p d atNOVEMBER e 2012 Claire McEachern At Lambeth Palace Library, London, Claire McEachern did research on the “intellectual daughters of Sir Anthony Cooke” 1with support from a CSW Faculty Development Grant. Claire McEachern is Professor of English at UCLA. Her project, “The intellectual daughters of Sir Anthony Cooke, 1526-1609,” is a cultural biography of four sisters whose lives intersected with many of the most formative events of sixteenth-century England. McEachern received a CSW CSW u p d atNOVEMBER e 2012 Faculty Development Grant to support this project in 2011. Q & A WITH Claire McEachern HER RESEARCH FOCUSES ON FOUR SISTERS WHO WERE RENOWNED FOR THEIR OWN SCHOLARLY WORK What drew you to the study of religion in sixteenth- sixteenth-century notions of community were and seventeenth-century British literature? based in the Reformation revisions of religious identity (for instance, the liturgical and In this period, early modern religion is where all linguistic descriptions of community proposed the action is: political, intellectual, emotional, by the Book of Common Prayer) and that to scientific, and of course literary. I came of study political identities in this period meant scholarly age in the moment of new historicism, grappling with the way religion imagined the with an intention to become a Shakespearean bonds between persons, places and polities. scholar. I thought my dissertation, a study of What led you to your current research project on the poetics of nationhood in Shakespeare’s the intellectual daughters
    [Show full text]