Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
9:48 pm
April 9, 2011
Offline
Random thought for the day – If Jane had remained Queen what title would have been bestowed on Guilford. I know he asked to be officially a King to which Jane said no, and offered him a Dukedom which he apparently refused cause it was King or nothing? I guess what I'm asking is there any possibility that the history books would have recorded him as Prince Guilford like the current Prince Phillip or is that not allowed because he isn't of royal blood. Which means it would have been Queen Jane and Guilford, Duke of Whatever? Just seems strange to me that the Queen's husband wouldn't have a more regal title.
11:59 pm
August 12, 2009
Offline
I guess that would depend on whether or not he managed to wear her down with his constant whining… LOL
Or maybe if they had a child, it wouldn't be as important, since their child would succeed her instead of Guildford, which is what I think he was angling for (the Crown Matrimonial?)
"Don't knock at death's door.
Ring the bell and run. He hates that."
4:51 am
June 7, 2010
Offline
I wonder if Jane would have bestowed him with the title Prince Consort, and given him a valuable Dukedom. I cannot imagine naming him King. However, the Dudleys would be running the show anyway, so I can imagine Guilford being incharge.
As Impish points out, he could have wore Jane down by constant whining, or had his family bully her into it.
When Mary I married Philip, and wanted to name him King, the English people were not happy. Queen Victoria also did not give Albert the title of King, so I am not sure if this was standard protocol, or a personal choice. For a Queen to name their husbands as Prince Consort it does say I am Queen, and he's not a King. I'm in charge.
Just some thoughts…
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
7:28 pm
April 9, 2011
Offline
I would be happy with Prince Consort, and I imagine that's the title Jane would have given Guilford. From what I know of Guilford's little tantrum, it really does sound like his parents told him to ask to be titled King and not to accept anything less. And being a good son, when told no he went a cried to mummy about the situation thinking she would make it better. To me it is obvious that the marriage took place so John Dudley could run England but I think he would have been in for a rude shock when Jane's minority expried. And he would probably regret the day he married his son to Jane.
I know there is lots of sympathy for Jane's story but I often feel that Guilford's story is often overlooked. Now that there is a real tragic story (like Jane's). A boy forced into a marriage just so his father could retain the power after the death of the King and what happens, the son is exected for nothing more than being married to the 'usurper'
Makes me glad I was never a chld in the Tudor Period.
4:21 am
June 7, 2010
Offline
I concur, Bill, with your comments. Guilford's story is overlooked by a sympathetic, yong wife. While I agree that Jane's story is important to know, I wish I knew more about Guilford, and the Dudley's in particular. Robert Dudley survivied the melee of the bloody days of Lady Jane's reign, but I know little about the others. Mind, I've never been a fan of “Sweet Robin,” but would like to know more about his familiy, his father and brother, Guilford.
This stuff makes me wish I was an historian. I hope someone will take up the challenge someday. I'd be first in line to read the book.
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
10:22 pm
April 9, 2011
Offline
Found this article on Facebook (via Lady Jane Grey Reference Guide)
http://erinlawless.wordpress.c…..he-throne/
It briefly examines what would have happened if Jane reigned for more than 9 days. It presented a couple of interesting thoughts that I had never thought about, mainy the Puritanism that would most likely have swept through England and that England and Scotland would probably have never joined together.
5:57 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
This makes interesting reading Bill, and yes I agree Jane’s rule would have been extremely different. In fact I think it would radically different to Eddy’s reign religion wise. In fact I feel that it would be a turbulant as the latter half of H8 reign and Mary’s reign.
As for Guildford from what little I’ve read about him he was a petulant brat, who was rather spoilt. but I do feel that Jane would have found a way to get rid of him, after all her marriage didn’t serve any particular purpose other than the fact Dudley wanted to rule through her. Jane would have known that and divorced Guildford pretty damn quick. She may have married Jimbo of Scots, but to be honest I don’t think so. It possible she may have married Eric of Sweden, certainly a forgien king and it would have been someone who would have stood against the Catholic faction, who viewed Mary as the rightful monarch.
How would Jane have dealt with Mary too. Would she execute her? if so why? and if she did execute her how would she have dealt with her supporters, and again the Catholic monarchs would be outraged at Mary’s death.
Elizabeth is a bit of a difficult matter but I think she would have either been forced into marriage, or maybe even exiled, but there again with respect Elizabeth may have adapted to Jane’s reign and lived quite happily.
I do feel that court life would have been very staid and drab, as Jane would have seen no need for the frills and fancies. would have been very interesting to have seen how her life would have panned out as Queen, and certainly things today would have been very different. I don’t think we would have as many freedoms as we do today.
From little I know of Olly Cromwell (not really read a lot about him) his style of ruling (loosely worded) was very basic and boring.
Thanks for sharing this with us Bill.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
3:40 am
November 18, 2010
Offline
Boleyn said
She may have married Jimbo of Scots, but to be honest I don’t think so.
James V was dead and James VI wasn’t born…..so that marriage market was rather closed unless she fancied a menage a trois with Mary and Francis….
It's always bunnies.
7:32 am
April 9, 2011
Offline
And there is the main plot point for Gregory’s new book – The Forgotten Queen. Except that will all happen in 9 days to make sure it is factual history.
1:44 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
Anyanka said
Boleyn said
She may have married Jimbo of Scots, but to be honest I don’t think so.
James V was dead and James VI wasn’t born…..so that marriage market was rather closed unless she fancied a menage a trois with Mary and Francis….
Quite right Anyanka, sorry got my dates muddled again
There were very few potential candidates available that for sure. Most of the younger English nobility were dead, thanks to H8 rampage with an axe, and the older set were married already. Although I suppose one or 2 of these marriages could be put aside to provide a mate.. I’m sure Duke Poppingjay would have liked to try his luck with Jane, if he had been free from the Tower.
However just for the sheer hell of it, how about Ivan the Terrible, yeah I know but actually he was probably about the only available match, after Eric of Sweden for her. Ivan at one point was tinkering with the idea of a match between himself and Elizabeth when she came to the throne. I believe his ambassaders were sent to her court and sent back a report to Ivan that she was very beautiful clever and with accomplised manners but was very flighty and prone to bouts of acting in an inappropiate manner. I believe it means that she was too flirty with Dudley and other courtiers. Ivan was known to have a terrible temper and was insanely jealous about his wives. I think (if my lousy memory serves) he murdered 2 of his wives and buried another alive due to his jealously. He even killed his son’s wife, because he caught her sat by the fire sat in just her chemise, or so the story goes.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
6:43 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Bill1978 said
And there is the main plot point for Gregory’s new book – The Forgotten Queen. Except that will all happen in 9 days to make sure it is factual history.
We should stop giving her ideas…
It's always bunnies.
7:07 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
Anyanka she’s probably come up with enough mad cap ideas of her own.. I really wouldn’t be surprized if one day in one of her hysterical historical novels, she had pixies and firies n it, or a unicorn which is really a frog, that turns into a duck when kisses and then flies south for the with H8 hanging in a basket below it singing Greensleeves, whilst being accommpanied by Motorhead and Lemmy (lead singer) dressed as A.B.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
10:28 pm
October 28, 2011
Offline
According to Leanda de Lisle Jane actually ruled for 13 days
10:28 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Olga said
According to Leanda de Lisle Jane actually ruled for 13 days
Edward died on June 6th 1553 but Jane wasn’t proclaimed queen until the 9th. Her reign was over by June 19th when Mary was proclaimed as queen.
So both lengths are equally acceptable but the pathos of a nine days queen was the one that captured the imagination of Victorian historians.
It's always bunnies.
1:43 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
It’s strange that history repeated to do with H7/8 and Eddy. When H7 died his death was kept secret for 3 days, then H8 was told he was King, same with H8 his death was kept secret for 3 days then Eddy was told he was king. Then he died and 3 days later Jane was told she was Queen. Was there a reason for this?
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
9:17 am
April 9, 2011
Offline
To make sure they were dead and weren’t going to be reborn as a vampire? There was no internet or phones for insiders to leak information? To assassinate any potential rivals to the throne before they knew about their chances?
