Natalie Mears

COUNSEL, PUBLIC DEBATE, AND QUEENSHIP: JOHN STUBBS'S THE DISCOVERIE OF A GAPING GULF , 1579

John Stubbss controversial pamphlet against Elizabeths proposed marriage with Francis, duke of Anjou, The discoverie of a gaping gulf (1579), has conventionally been seen – with Edmund Spensers The shepheardes calendar and Philip Sidneys letter to Elizabeth – as part of a propaganda campaign organized by Leicester and Walsingham to force Elizabeth to reject the marriage. Yet the evidence linking Stubbs with Leicester and Walsingham is thin. This article re-examines that evidence in the light of recent research on court factionalism, men-of-business, and concepts of counsel. It argues that A gaping gulf was an independent initiative taken by Stubbs which expressed very different attitudes to ‘counsel’ from Sidneys letter. It suggests that participants in public debate need to be explored on their own terms, rather than as necessarily catspaws of councillors; that there was an emergent Elizabethan public sphere independent of the court which, in holding different attitudes to counsel than councillors, could bring them into conflict with Elizabeth.

Courts, courtiers and culture in Tudor England.

Geoffrey Eltons model of Tudor politics, which emphasized the importance of political institutions and which dominated our understanding of Tudor politics for much of the second half of the twentieth century, has been challenged by a number of historians for over twenty years. They have re-emphasized the importance of social connections and cultural influences and turned attention away from studying the privy council to studying the court. In doing so, they have gone back to re-examine earlier approaches by Sir John Neale and Conyers Read which Elton had challenged. Yet, these new socially and culturally derived approaches, recently labelled ‘New Tudor political history’, remain varied and its practitioners sometimes at odds with each other. Focusing on both established seminal works and recent research, this review considers the different elements of these approaches in relation to Tudor court politics. It assesses the methodological problems they raise and identifies what shortcomings still remain. It demonstrates that Tudor politics are increasingly defined as based on social networks rather than institutional bodies, making issues of access to, and intimacy with, the monarch central. Our understanding has been further enhanced by exploration of political culture and its relationship to political action. However, the review points to the need to integrate more fully the political role of women and the relationship between the court and the wider political community into our understanding of Tudor politics, as well as place England into a European context.

Love-making and diplomacy: Elizabeth I and the Anjou marriage negotiations, c. 1578-1582.

The marriage negotiations between Elizabeth and Francis, duke of Anjou, have provided an important lens for exploring the nature of the Elizabethan polity. Conyers Read argued that Elizabeth deliberately exploited courtship rituals to gain ascendancy over ministers and foreign princes. Wallace MacCaffrey and Susan Doran argued that Elizabeths commitment to the match was genuine, but that she was prevented from concluding the match because she lacked conciliar support. This article re-examines these arguments in the light of recent research on the language of courtship and archival study into the nature of the political agenda and crown-council relations. It suggests that English interest in the negotiations evolved from growing anxiety about the unresolved succession and that the relationship between Elizabeth and her councillors, especially over her marriage, was more nuanced than has been conventionally thought. Courtship rituals were adopted to express relationships between Elizabeth and her courtiers, but these reflected a revival of chivalric court culture and were not adopted as forms of political action. The article suggests that the twists and turns of the negotiations have to be seen in the context of the active role that Elizabeth took in policy-making, the personal and political issues the marriage raised and Elizabeths own conception of how effectively an alternative (political) resolution would work. Elizabeth was shrewd enough to see that rules framed for chivalrous love-making might very aptly be applied to diplomatic purposes, and very probably for that reason she always liked to mingle an element of love-making in her diplomacy.

Goddesses and Queens: the iconography of Elizabeth I

historic women quoted deserved a work that reflected dynamic responses and provided more support to black feminist consciousness than is offered in the political surveys. In other words, as a pioneering study some of Simien’s findings raise questions about the degree of black feminist consciousness among public black women participants as compared to the resounding voices she uses to enhance her work. Nevertheless, there are notable findings with her exploration into religion and the responses of some black male participants. Interestingly, under certain conditions African American males appear more supportive of a black feminist perspective. Her questions about the influence of the black church and preachers on black feminist consciousness and politics warrants further examination. Simien outlines many compelling questions and offers numerous tables of statistical data throughout this work. Although she clearly explained predictors, hypotheses, operational definitions, measures and data, the numerical entries in most tables are a bit confusing. One wonders if some of the data are outdated. For example, is there more support for black female clergy? Does patriarchy allow black men to be more supportive of black feminist tenets than black women? In some cases the data are at least twenty years old; a new study, specifically geared toward the consciousness of black women and perhaps black feminists, could offer new political insights. One hopes that Simien will play a role in the formation of public opinion surveys in the future. Like the pensive young ladies embodied on the cover photograph of this book, there is hope for the future. Simien highlights an area where more work needs to be done— the impact, role and participation of black feminist voices in politics. The construction of this book, with its nod to well-known activists/feminists, the inclusion of black feminist theory and criticism, and its focus on the interlocking systems of oppression leads one to acknowledge that the interest and influence of this work extends beyond politics and political science.