Jane Grey: Lady or Queen?

Lady Jane Grey
NPG D21393

A recent post of mine brought questions to the forefront regarding Lady Jane Grey's status as a Tudor queen. I included her in my list of monarchs but noted that she is not always included in others. This list, for example, mentions her only parenthetically. Jane is referred to as a ruler by Royal.UK, but is still listed by the name Lady Jane Grey. In fact, we most commonly refer to her as Lady Jane Grey rather than Queen Jane.

Why is that? She had not had a coronation, but there are other examples of monarchs who have been accepted as such despite the lack of this ceremony. Edward V is a notable example quite close to Jane's time. Little Edward is never left out of discussions of England's kings though he ruled even less than his distant cousin Jane did.

Jane was proclaimed and deposed with lightening speed, causing some to refer to her as an unsuccessful usurper rather than a legal queen. Yet she had been accepted by Edward VI's council. They called her before them on July 9, 1553, three days after Edward's death, to inform her that she was her cousin's choice of successor.

On July 10, 1553, Jane was proclaimed queen by her father-in-law, John Dudley duke of Northumberland. Thinking this family affair was neatly wrapped up, they did not count on the bold actions of Mary Tudor. It took only nine days for Mary to proclaim herself queen and defeat the poor resistance put forward by Northumberland on Jane's behalf. Jane was officially deposed on July 19th, causing her to become known throughout history as the Nine Day Queen.

Edward VI's
Devise for the Succession

Edward's Devise for the Succession may have been his will as king, but it was not the law of the land. His father, Henry VIII, had implemented a series of laws that secured the line of succession well beyond his own death. Henry's Third Act of Succession was accepted during the Parliament of 1543/44, reestablishing both Mary and Elizabeth as heirs after their younger half-brother. The Treason Act of 1547 further established this law by making it high treason for anyone, including Edward VI, to interrupt this line of succession. Henry's will again confirmed his desire for these laws to be followed. Both Henry's will and Edward's bypassed Jane's mother Frances in the succession.

The misunderstanding that often takes place is that Henry's will simply took supremacy over that of Edward. That is an oversimplification, however. It was not only Henry's will that created the legal line of succession, it was Parliamentary law. Had Edward acted upon his desire to name Jane as his heir earlier and had time to pass laws to counter those of his father, there is a chance that Jane may have enjoyed a long and happy reign. Simply putting his requests within his will was not enough.

 Queen Mary I
NPG 428

Had the laws been changed, there is still no guarantee that Mary would have been content to let Jane rule. Mary had been raised to rule and had been crushed when her father changed his mind and made her a bastard. Though she had been willing to accept her brother's place above her own, there is no indication that she questioned her own right over Jane's.

So, was Jane a queen? Again, I say yes, and technically I believe I am correct. She was proclaimed and acted as queen officially for nine days. However, history seems to have relegated her to always being simply a Lady, which I suppose is better than the title of usurper.

Read more about Mary and Jane in Queen of Martyrs.

Available in paperback, hardcover, Kindle, and audiobook.

FREE with Kindle Unlimited!

Why Margaret Pole?

I am a guest blogger at The Writing Desk today talking about why I decided to write about Margaret Pole. Her story, Faithful Traitor, is coming out in 10 short days! You can pre-order it to wake up to it on your Kindle on June 14th. Paperbacks will be available the same day. Thank you to everyone who has already ordered! For signed copies, please email me.

Thank you to Tony Riches for welcoming me to his blog.

The Success of the Usurper: Guest Post by Barbara Gaskell Denvil

Today's post is by fellow author Barbara Gaskell Denvil. I am proud to report that we are kindred spirits, passionate about the Plantagenet dynasty and how it crumbled into the Tudor dynasty. In celebration of her new book released TODAY, she is here discussing history's successful usurpers. Welcome, Barbara!

The Success of the Usurper by Barbara Gaskell Denvil

For some years I have set my novels in the last years of Plantagenet reign, or the first years of the Tudor dynasty.

William the Conqueror

Many authors of historical fiction prefer to set their books in the Georgian or Regency periods, but tor me the Plantagenet dynasty was one of the most interesting and longest lasting that has ever ruled in England. Both Plantagenet and Tudor dynasties included amazing figures of mystery, fear and tyranny. Indeed, both dynasties were founded on blatant usurpation. William the Bastard, Duke of Normandy, invaded England and won the throne in 1066. Thus the Plantagenet dynasty was born in murder and brutality.

William’s claims were never valid. Whether or not his story of promises were true, at that time the English throne was never given by right to the man arbitrarily named by the previous king. The English had a different system and chose the man of noble blood whom they considered best suited. Therefore the Plantagenet dynasty had no initial right to rule England, but of course William claimed that by right of conquest. And so William I was followed by many kings of murderous ambition, great renown, courage, responsibility, honest endeavour, and violent determination.

Henry Tudor

The same occurred with the Tudors. Henry VII had no right whatsoever to the English throne. He had barely a single drop of English royal blood. It has sometimes been claimed that he was the true claimant of the Lancaster line (begun earlier by Henry IV, including Henry V, and Henry VI before the Yorkists once again claimed the crown) but even that is inaccurate. Henry VII was descended from a bastard line and barred from the royal inheritance, but even if that major difficulty was ignored, his claim was still only about the 15^th in the Lancastrian line of descent.

Just like William the Bastard, Henry Tudor invaded England with a largely foreign army, and won the English throne by right of conquest. A usurper indeed, but he founded a dynasty of renown including some of the most interesting and fearful of sovereigns. For lovers of English history, it is often the Tudor period that fascinates the most. In those years of the Tudor family monarchy came the first two queens who ever ruled in their own right. A distinct lack of offspring brought the dynasty to an abrupt close, but not until they had sealed their names in history – written in blood.

Amongst the Plantagenets, many kings have gained a terrible and fearsome reputation. However, some of those reputations seem rather suspect when carefully examined. Indeed, there were different expectations in those times and a king had to be a great warrior, do great deeds and win the awe and admiration of his people. Brutality was common, executions were rife and poverty was the common order. It is hard to judge past actions and characters by modern standards.

Most of my historical novels are set during the reigns of Edward IV and Richard III. This was a controversial time, and has become even more controversial since experts argue over the rights and wrongs of York against Lancaster, the Wars of the Roses, and in particular regarding the guilt or innocence of the last Plantagenet king, Richard III. After many years of studious and careful research, I consider Richard III an interesting figure who had too little time to prove himself. I believe that he was no usurper, and was probably innocent of most other accusations hurled against him. But that is the fascination of history for we cannot be positive. Contemporary evidence is scarce, and propaganda was rife.

But my new book, Fair Weather, is set during the reign of King John in the early 13^th century. This was another king plastered with a terrible reputation, and many claim this to be unjust. But he is not a main character in my novel – which has a time-slip plot with an element of the paranormal. I adored writing this book for it combines the freedom and wild exciting escapism of time-travel – the dark threat of murder and alchemy – and the significant atmosphere of the early Plantagenet time period. I love wandering those dark narrow cobbled lanes in my dreams – exploring the markets – the taverns – and the villages. I follow the ordinary folk and I share their lives. So different to my own. London Bridge had only recently been built – one of the greatest stone bridges of the world at that time. And it plays a large part in my story. That’s where I shall go first when my new time-machine is delivered by Amazon right to my front door. In the meantime my novel Fair Weather is almost a time-machine in itself.

So whether you love or hate these old royal houses, it cannot be denied that they fashioned England until the early 1600s, and were families of charisma, colour and threat.

Connect with Barbara Gaskell Denvil

Born in England, I grew up amongst artists and authors and started writing at a young age. I published numerous short stories and articles, and worked as an editor, book critic and reader for publishers and television companies. I broke off my literary career to spend many hot and colourful years sailing the Mediterranean and living in various different countries throughout the region.

When my partner died I needed a place of solace and came to live in rural Australia where I still live amongst the parrots and wallabies, writing constantly, for my solace has now become my passion.

With a delight in medieval history dating back to my youth, I now principally set my fiction in medieval England. I also write fantasy, tending towards the dark. Within these two genres, I now write full time.

Barbara's Website

Amazon Author Page

Barbara on Twitter
Purchase Fair Weather on Kindle or Paperback.

On EHFA for Margaret Pole's Execution Anniversary

I am honored to be a guest blogger on the English Historical Fiction Authors blog for the 475th anniversary of the execution of Margaret Pole. My new book, Faithful Traitor, features Margaret and her attempt to survive the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII. You can get a taste of her story in today's post.

The Unexpected Tudors

Allegory of the Tudor Succession, 1572

Though the dynasty is fabulously popular today, nobody before 1485 would have wagered too much on the chances of England hosting a Tudor dynasty. The roots of the Tudors can be traced back far earlier than that, but, for today, I would like to look at the individual Tudors and just how unexpected each of their reigns were.

Henry VII

Henry Tudor was a minor nobleman from a bastard royal line. On top of that, he had been in exile for years before the crown was unexpectedly found upon his head. Before the death of Edward IV, there was little thought of Tudor becoming the last red rose or final hope of the Lancastrians or any other such poetic title. He was simply one of many on the losing side. His father and grandfather, Edmund and Owen Tudor, had both been killed in the Wars of the Roses. Left with his uncle, Jasper Tudor, Henry had little reason to think he would return to England, let alone as it's king.

Even with the shocking death of Edward IV and rise of Richard III, Tudor counted on foreign mercenaries, betrayal, and a lot of luck to secure his victory. His marriage to Princess Elizabeth of York eased the minds of many Englishmen that York and Lancaster were finally united and paved the way for a relatively peaceful reign. This unity may have brought peace, but it also caused the end of a three century long dynasty. The Plantagenets had gone down in familial infighting. The Tudors arose.

Henry VIII

For the first decade of his life, little Henry Tudor, named for his illustrious father, had no inkling of becoming king. His older brother, Arthur, was loudly and widely proclaimed the future king that would bring England unprecedented glory. Sadly, Arthur's future was cut short, and England received the unexpected heir who became one of the most famous (infamous?) monarchs in English history.

Upon his father's death in 1509, Henry VIII welcomed his extended family in a way that Henry VII had never been quite comfortable doing. William Courtenay was released from the Tower and carried Henry's sword at his coronation. Margaret Pole was raised as Countess of Salisbury. Only the de la Poles originally bore Henry's wrath.

Then his first wife Catherine failed to have a son. Suddenly, Henry was suspicious of each person with a drop of royal blood, and his insecurity saw to the death of many whom he had formerly raised up. The birth of Prince Edward to his third wife, Jane Seymour, did little to ease his paranoia.

This unexpected Tudor caused England's break with Rome, the Dissolution of the Monasteries, and tyranny that remains fertile ground for historians and fiction writers today.

Edward VI

Edward VI is the only Tudor who was expected from the moment of his birth to rule England. In fact, if there is anything unexpected about poor Edward, it is that his reign was unmercifully short. Only nine years old when he became king and not quite sixteen when he died, Edward's story is a tragic one. He was the most staunchly Protestant of the Tudors and made many reforms in the Church of England in his brief reign. The tragedy did not end with his own death. Due to his hope to disinherit his sisters and place a reformist cousin on his throne, Edward inadvertently caused a revived round of family battles and bloodshed.

Jane

Lady Jane Grey is not typically included in lists of England's Kings and Queens. I have seen discussions on why this is, most notably that she did not have a coronation (but neither did Edward V . . . . so that discussion is for another day). I have chosen to include her here because no Tudor ruler was quite as unexpected and controversial as she was.

Despite what you may have read in sensationalist fiction, Edward's decision to disinherit his sisters came long before his death was eminent. Not wishing to leave the future of his country and the reforms that he had made in the hands of sisters who were not only women but were bastards, Edward had begun work on naming a new heir months before his death. His cousin Jane was by all accounts intelligent, devout, and expected to marry a reputable Englishman to assist her in ruling until her future son could do so.

Nobody expected Mary, the middle-aged daughter of Henry VIII to put up much of a fight.

Mary I

Mary had so much working against her when she decided to boldly proclaim herself queen. Jane was in London, already proclaimed and signing documents as 'Jane the Queen.' She had the support of Edward's council and had been named successor in Edward's will. However, Mary was through cowering and accepting the events that had transformed her from princess to bastard. She would be queen, as her mother and governess had always taught her.

As a girl, Mary had been her father's heir and had been raised to be a queen, if not of England than as a consort of another country. Her reality had turned out quite differently. She was content for her brother to reign, despite the religious differences between them. She understood that he outranked her. The same could not be said for the future sons of Jane Grey.

Mary had a surprising amount of support from East Anglian gentry and had little trouble overpowering the sect led by John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland. Jane's nine day queenship was at an end.

Elizabeth I

Elizabeth may be the next most famous Tudor after her father, but she had little reason to believe that she would ever become queen. Bastardized before she would have understood the term, Elizabeth was in line behind a brother and sister who would have each been expected to have sons. Not until the death of a childless Mary in 1558 would Elizabeth's way become clear.

The final Tudor made no plans for the continuation of her dynasty. Though she led many men on for several years, she never married any of them. She failed to name a successor and punished her extended family for daring to marry and have children themselves. While her father had obsessively strove for an heir, Elizabeth avoided them. In doing so, she gave England something even more unexpected than the Tudors: the Stuarts.