Margaret Beaufort Facts and Timeline

Margaret Beaufort Facts and Timeline Also see: Margaret Beaufort Biography   Margaret Beaufort Facts Known for:  founder of the (British royal) Tudor dynasty through her support for her son’s claim to the throneDates:  May 31, 1443 – June 29, 1509 (some sources give 1441 as birth year) Background, Family: Mother: Margaret Beauchamp, an heiress. Her father was John Beauchamp, and her first husband was Oliver St. John.Father: John Beaufort, earl of Somerset (1404 – 1444). His mother was Margaret Holland and his father was John Beaufort, first earl of Somerset.Siblings: Margaret Beaufort had no full siblings. Her mother had six children with her first husband, Oliver St. John Margaret’s mother, Margaret Beauchamp, was an heiress whose maternal ancestors included Henry III and his son, Edmund Crouchback.   Her father was a grandson of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, who was a son of Edward III, and of John’s mistress-turned-wife, Katherine Swynford. After John married Katherine, he had their children, given the patronym Beaufort, legitimized through a papal bull and royal patent.   The patent (but not the bull) specified that the Beauforts and their descendants were excluded from the royal succession. Margaret’s paternal grandmother, Margaret Holland, was an heiress; Edward I was her  paternal ancestor and Henry III her  maternal ancestor. In the wars of succession known as the Wars of the Roses, the York party and the Lancaster party were not completely separate family lines; they were much interconnected by family relationships.   Margaret, though aligned with the Lancaster cause, was the second cousin of both Edward IV and Richard III; the mother of those two York kings,  Cecily Neville  was the daughter of  Joan Beaufort  who was the daughter of John of Gaunt and  Katherine Swynford. In other words, Joan Beaufort was the sister of Margaret Beauforts grandfather, John Beaufort. Marriage, Children: Contracted marriage with: John de la Pole (1450; dissolved 1453). His father, William de la Pole, was Margaret Beaufort’s guardian. John’s mother, Alice Chaucer, was the granddaughter of the writer Geoffrey Chaucer and his wife, Philippa, who was the sister of Katherine Swynford.   Thus, he was a third cousin of Margaret Beaufort.Edmund Tudor, Earl of Richmond (married 1455, died 1456). His mother was Catherine of Valois, daughter of King Charles VI of France and widow of Henry V. She married Owen Tudor after Henry V died.   Edmund Tudor was thus a maternal half-brother of Henry VI; Henry VI was also a descendant of John of Gaunt, by his first wife, Blanche of Lancaster.Son: Henry Tudor, born January 28, 1457Henry Stafford (married 1461, died 1471).   Henry Stafford was her second cousin; his grandmother, Joan Beaufort, was also a child of John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford.   Henry was a first cousin of Edward IV.Thomas Stanley, Lord Stanley, later Earl of De rby (married 1472, died 1504) Timeline Note: many details have been left off.   See: Margaret Beaufort biography 1443 Margaret Beaufort born 1444 Father, John Beaufort, died 1450 Marriage contract with John de la Pole 1453 Marriage to Edmund Tudor 1456 Edmund Tudor died 1457 Henry Tudor born 1461 Marriage to Henry Stafford 1461 Edward IV took crown from Henry VI 1462 Guardianship of Henry Tudor given to a Yorkist supporter 1470 Rebellion against Edward IV put Henry VI back on throne 1471 Edward IV again became king, Henry VI and his son both killed 1471 Henry Stafford died of wounds suffered in battle on behalf of the Yorkists 1471 Henry Tudor flees, went to live in Brittany 1472 Married to Thomas Stanley 1482 Margarets mother, Margaret Beauchamp, died 1483 Edward IV died, Richard III became king after imprisoning Edwards two sons 1485 Defeat of Richard III by Henry Tudor, who became King Henry VII October 1485 Henry VII crowned January 1486 Henry VII married Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville September 1486 Prince Arthur born to Elizabeth of York and Henry VII, Margaret Beauforts first grandchild 1487 Coronation of Elizabeth of York 1489 Princess Margaret born, named for Margaret Beaufort 1491 Prince Henry (future Henry VIII born) 1496 Princess Mary born 1499 1506 Margaret Beaufort made her home at Collyweston, Northamptonshire 1501 Arthur married Catherine of Aragon 1502 Arthur died 1503 Elizabeth of York died 1503 Margaret Tudor married James IV of Scotland 1504 Thomas Stanley died 1505 1509 Gifts to create Christs College at Cambridge 1509 Henry VII died, Henry VIII became king 1509 Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon coronation 1509 Margaret Beaufort died Next:  Margaret Beaufort Biography

Interview gone wrong It might be the interviewer. Here’s how to judge.

Interview gone wrong It might be the interviewer. Here’s how to judge. When you stroll out of a good interview, it can feel like you’re walking on air. When you walk out of a bad one, it can feel like you have the weight of the world on your shoulders. Usually, where you land on this spectrum can tell you how good your chances of getting the job are. But sometimes, you can have a â€Å"bad† interview without botching your chances at getting hired. The fault for a bad interview can lie not with the interviewee, but with the interviewer. Bad Interviewers versus tough interviewersWhat you need to understand is that not all businesses are pros when it comes to screening potential employees. Some have had their interview and background check policies in place for years. Others have only recently implemented processes for vetting new people and are working to refine those processes. As a result, it’s more than likely that you will run into at least one or two inexperienced or downright bad interviewers while you are on the job search.The tricky thing is knowing how to distinguish truly incompetent hiring managers from interviewers who are tough but fair. You might be inclined to dislike a tough interviewer if the interview doesn’t go the way you want it to- especially if you have been searching for a job for a while and are running low on patience. Still, knowing how to tell the bad interviewers from the tough interviewers is essential. It can tell you how you should feel about your interview, which steps you need to take to improve your interview technique, and whether you are still interested in the job. After all, a truly bad interviewer might indicate bad management or sloppy administrative organization.The symptoms of an incompetent interviewerSo how can you tell when a hiring manager is really dropping the ball? Below, we’ve listed some of the most common symptoms of bad interviewers and what they might mean for you.Unbalanced conversationsA job interview is a chance for employers to learn more a bout you and for you to learn more about the job opportunity. While interviews are often thought of as glorified QA sessions (with the interviewee giving most of the answers), there should be more back and forth than that. Some interviewers deliberately shift this balance one way or the other. Some talk a lot, rambling about their business, going off on tangents, or putting words in the mouth of the interviewee. Others are borderline silent, relying on the interviewee to drive the conversation.Both techniques can sometimes be employed to test the assertiveness of the interviewee. However, in most cases, they create awkward or combative interview situations. No applicant should be put in the position of having to interrupt their interviewer to get a word in edgewise. Similarly, no candidate should have to meander through a one-sided conversation hoping they say what their passive interviewer wants to hear.Either way, you’re probably dealing with a rude person who doesn’ t respect your time or your right to ask questions of your own. If you still want the job, you need to take control of the conversation. In a situation in which an interviewer talks too much, keep your answers to questions rolling with no pauses or openings for an interruption. In a situation in which your interviewer doesn’t talk, accept the challenge. Answer questions pointedly and concisely, retain eye contact at all times, and don’t ramble. If you finish a response and the interviewer doesn’t engage with you, take the opportunity to ask a question of your own. Even an interviewer with a good poker face won’t outright ignore a direct question.MultitaskingThe business world is busy, but not so busy that interviewers can’t give you their full attention for 20 or 30 minutes at a pre-scheduled time. If your interviewer is multitasking during your interview (e.g. checking their phone, responding to emails, taking calls, flagging down passing coworker s or subordinates, or eating lunch), that’s a huge red flag. These distractions can kill your focus, derail your answers, and keep you from getting in the groove. They also make it seem like the interviewer doesn’t care about what you’re saying.Bottom line, interviewers who multitask could be self-absorbed shmucks who think their time is more valuable than yours. If your interviewer won’t give you his or her full attention, gently ask if there is some sort of emergency going on and whether it would be better to reschedule. This query gives the interviewer the benefit of the doubt, shows your flexibility, and gives you a chance of getting a better interview later if there truly is a fire to put out.Keeping you waitingInterviewers often refuse to see candidates who arrive even five minutes late. They expect interviewees to respect their time. Every so often, though, you’ll run into an interviewer who can’t practice what they preach. Again, eme rgencies do happen, and there might be a good reason for your interview starting 10 or 15 minutes late. However, your time is valuable, too, and if an interviewer makes you wait for 20 or more minutes with no explanation or apology, then that’s probably an indicator of a bad boss.Lack of preparationPreparation is another area in which interviewers and interviewees are often judged based on different standards. As an interviewee, you are expected to know a bit about the company you are applying for and to have good questions prepared about the job. Interviewers can sometimes get away with being unprepared just because they are holding all the cards.If it seems like the interviewer hasn’t ever looked at your resume, that’s a red flag, but not a deal breaker. Interviews in which the hiring manager asks you specific questions about past work history are certainly the easiest and most welcoming. However, they aren’t necessarily standard. Interviewers often mee t with several candidates a day during the hiring process, so it makes sense than resumes could start running together.The key is not to let the interviewer’s obvious lack of preparation throw you off your game. Assume the interviewer knows nothing about you and affirm key details about skills, qualifications, past jobs, and former employers in your responses. Bring a copy of your resume to the interview. Most hiring managers print off their own copies, but it’s never a bad idea to have one you can give to the interviewer if necessary. This act shows your preparedness while also subtly jogging the interviewer’s memory.ConclusionBad interviews are going to happen from time to time. Sometimes, the blame may fall on your lap. Other times, a bad interviewer is to blame. By familiarizing yourself with the symptoms of bad interviewers, you should be able to figure out the truth of the matter. While that bit of knowledge might not change the outcome of the interview, i t can change elements of how you perform, how you feel about the experience, and how you learn from your interviews to improve in the future.About the author:Michael Klazema has been developing products for criminal background check and improving online customer experiences in the background screening industry since 2009. He is the lead author and editor for Backgroundchecks.com. He lives in Dallas, TX with his family and enjoys the rich culinary histories of various old and new world countries.