The New Murrey and Blue blog

The “saintly” “Jane Shore”….?

, ,
, , , , , , ,

 

Well, if you read this you will surely be led to believe she was a saintly woman. She wasn’t, and considering her history with Edward IV, Hastings, the Woodvilles, and heavens know who else, Richard showed her amazing leniency. But then, he didn’t punish troublesome women to the extent they deserved. And yet fingers are pointed at him, and he is accused of cruelty etc. etc.

She could count herself fortunate it wasn’t a Tudor that she conspired against, because her fate would surely have been far, far worse!

 

Subscribe to my newsletter

  1. There’s a dentist in … Hertfordshire | murreyandblue

    […] the church I am curious as to how she is referred to on her tomb. I assume it would not be as Jane Shore as that was an invention a long time after her […]

    Like

    Reply
  2. What were our medieval kings’ voices like….? | murreyandblue

    […] had a sense of humour, not least as proved by his dry comment to that gentleman who wished to marry Jane Shore! Now, when Richard wished to be heard, he could command attention without much effort. He wasn’t […]

    Like

    Reply
  3. Some minor problems with Thomas More’s account. – murreyandblue

    […] the Protector: “You shall all see in what way that sorceress and that other witch of her counsel, Shore’s wife, with their affinity, have by their sorcery and witchcraft wasted my body.” And therewith, he […]

    Like

    Reply
  4. THOMAS GREY MARQUESS OF DORSET – MEDIOCRE AND SHIFTY OR GOOD AND PRUDENT MAN? – murreyandblue

    […] of the times that both Thomas and his stepfather-in-law, Hastings,  shared the same mistress i.e. Elizabeth/Jane Shore née Lambert.   Following the coronation of Richard III in 1483 the Great Chronicle of London recorded that […]

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Some minor problems with Thomas More’s account. – murreyandblue Cancel reply