I wasn’t able to watch the National Geographic Channel’s “Secrets of the Virgin Queen” but many people have contacted me to let me know what “secrets” it looked at. It sounds like it was a programme concentrating on the salacious rumours and myths that surround Elizabeth and her personal life – can’t they come up with anything new?! Anyway, here are a few articles I have written on these very subjects:-
- The Bisley Boy – Did the real Elizabeth Tudor die and get replaced with a boy?
- Elizabeth I – A Virago, Genetically Male or Simply a Strong Woman? – Did Elizabeth have some kind of condition to explain why she never married and to explain her character?
- The Arthur Dudley Myth – Did Elizabeth and Dudley have an illegitimate child?
- The Case of Amy Robsart: A Tudor Whodunnit – I’ve written a few articles on Amy’s death and the rumours of Robert Dudley’s involvement and we’ve also had plenty of debate on it here.
- Why Didn’t Elizabeth Marry? – Looking at the various possible reasons for Elizabeth remaining the Virgin Queen
- Elizabeth, Seymour and Shakespeare – Was Elizabeth I Shakespeare’s mother? Did Thomas Seymour father her illegitimate child? And such poppycock!
Do let me know what else it covered and why you think they keep regurgitating the old rumours. Have we become a generation of people who like nothing better than celebrity gossip and scandal? I don’t think so.
Related posts:
The Bisley Boy
Elizabeth, Seymour and Shakespeare
The Arthur Dudley Myth
The Marriage of Robert Dudley and Amy Robsart
Did Robert Dudley Murder Amy Robsart?
Elizabeth and Robert: A Dangerous Liaison
The Case of Amy Robsart – A Tudor Whodunnit?
16 January 1549 – Thomas Seymour, the Young King and the Spaniel
The Virgin Queen’s Fatal Affair: Revealed
Thomas Seymour Breaks into the King’s Residence
Did They or Didn’t They?
Elizabeth I Facts
I watched it last night and didn’t learn anything new–not even a new scandal! But they took Arthur Dudley a little more seriously than I’d read before so….I do think they were trying to sensationalize things, though what they said happened as far as Seymour, etc. I seems to me people are still such chauvinists they can’t believe a woman in power would want to keep that power and to marry, even today, means compromise. Our husbands influence us, even though we live in modern times! So, that, plus her fears from childhood, are completely reasonable. I was a little disappointed in that nothing new was discovered or mentioned. But it was still a good show–I just like hearing all that stuff anyway!
It also makes me want to write a novel about Arthur Dudley….explore that mystery a little!:)
Claire, I’ve got a recap coming in an hour or so; it will cover all the things the show discussed. There were indeed some ridiculous “secrets”!
Brilliant, Barb, thanks x
Claire, I don’t think it’s just this generation that are scandal-mongers…remember these stories were around in Elizabeth’s time. As I said on my Facebook post: it’s just the continuing inability of far too many to see a strong woman in a leadership role. Thatcher, Meir, Ghandi, etc., to the contrary, strong female leaders trod on too many long-lived assumptions. I don’t mean to take a feminist view totally, but we see the same attitudes repeated generation after generation. In the U.S., the public treatment of Hilary Clinton and Sarah Palin are but the most recent examples. The attitude is so ingrained I’m not sure it’s not genetic.
And congratulations on a fine series of thoughtful articles lately (and earlier),
Jeane Westin
The Queen’s Lady Spy, Penguin/NAL, TBA, 2012
His Last Letter, Penguin/NAL, Aug. 2010
The Virgin’s Daughters, Penguin/NAL, Aug 2009
Claire, I saw that program the other night. I hadn’t heard about the Bisley boy theory before, but thought they were really reaching on that one. I can’t imagine something like that being kept a secret! i was really annoyed that people just can’t believe that she didn’t want to marry and have children. Many women, myself included, have chosen to remain single and childless. That doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with that. But it was still interesting to see what they wold say about each theory. I don’t know if anyone watched, Inside the Body of Henry VIII, it was really interesting!
I was initially excited to watch Secrets, but as I was watching it I was more dissapointed. I had heard of all of the rumors except the Bisley Boy, but I thought it was more of a sensational show rather than being worth my time. I agree with Sharon above, Inside the Body of Henry VIII following was very interesting. I could see many of the ideas brought up as viable.
Hi, I coudn’t watch the show, and I generally am not so keen on TV history. But as regards rumours and gossip, we must see that there was indeed so much of that sort even without tabloid papers. Historians abide to certain habits of picking and choosing them, dismissing others, mostly without mentioning them in the first place. While this is generally a good thing (you can’t write any history at all without choosing…), we consumers tend to overlook that in this way history aquires certain biases it doesn’t necessarily have in the original sources. In a sense historians create history rather than reconstruct it.
For example there really are quite a lot of people who mention that ER had children, they are not always hostile to the Queen and sometimes believe she was secretly married; it simply reflects that many people believed these things. Of course historians do not take this seriously, as they normally don’t reports that someone died of poison or “sent his wife poison” etc. But if they want to prove Amy Dudley was murdered this gossip suddenly becomes highly significant.
P.S. Re Arthur Dudley, I personally think he was a secret son by Robert D., although not by ER (but she was terribly jealous which would explain a lot).
I watched it after seeing your post and I thought it was bit naff frankly. Didn’t really learn anything new and frankly I think some of the speculation is ridiculous. She died and was replaced by a boy? Puh-lease.