Tudor History Lovers discussion

Did Queen Elizabeth I have a secret love child?

Comments Showing 1-48 of 48 (48 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments What do you think, did she or didn't she?

message 2: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments I think she did. Do you think it was Dudley's?

message 3: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments I think she did too and there would be no question that he was Dudley's child. Yes he, I stumbled across a rather interesting website I am reading as we speak (write?). Isn't that irony at it's best? Henry wanted a son more than anything and here his "bastard" daughter pops out a son on the first try.


message 4: by MAP (new)

MAP | 60 comments Uh, no. I don't. I don't think she would have gotten away with keeping it a secret. Somebody would have known, somebody would have blabbed, somebody would have noticed her HUGE GIANT STOMACH for 3+ months. Elizabeth was never out of the public eye for long enough to make a secret pregnancy a possibility.

message 5: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Jul 17, 2009 06:23AM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments MAP wrote: "Uh, no. I don't. I don't think she would have gotten away with keeping it a secret. Somebody would have known, somebody would have blabbed, somebody would have noticed her HUGE GIANT STOMACH for ..."

I should rephrase my last answer. I don't necessarily think that they did but I do think that they might have.

It would have been difficult to hide, yes. But not impossible. The only reason I say so is that we did not find out that my cousin was pregnant until she was 9 months pregnant and a week before she went into labour. Granted, it would be much more difficult to hide in an corset than in sweats but it could happen. It wouldn't be the only hidden pregnancy.

MAP - do you think she was sleeping with Dudley or that she actually was the Virgin Queen? If she was having sex, pregnancy was a possible. Carrying it to term, maybe not, but they didn't have the best birth control pill.

In The Children of England, there is a reference to a potential pregnancy. I have to try to find it again so I can actually comment on it here :)

message 6: by MAP (last edited Jul 17, 2009 06:48AM) (new)

MAP | 60 comments I think she probably remained a technical virgin her entire life, but that she probably was "improper" with Dudley and a couple of other men. I have almost no basis for this in terms of evidence, it's just an opinion.

Elizabeth herself said that she was constantly surrounded by ladies of the bedchamber and ladies in waiting and so on and so on and that she could hardly go sneaking off to meet men without them noticing. And while I think she could certainly have attempted it if she had wanted to, and tried to bribe the ladies into keeping quiet, I don't think it would have worked: somebody would have gossiped.

The "potential pregnancy" relates to Thomas Seymour from the time when Elizabeth was about 13 and Edward was King, not Dudley from when Elizabeth was Queen. All that is known about that is that Katherine Parr found Elizabeth and Thomas "embracing" (which probably means passionately kissing) and soon after Katherine sent Elizabeth off to live with someone else. There were rumors that she was pregnant with Seymour's child, but most of that was done in order to ruin Seymour, since the mucky mucks in power (including his brother) were wanting to cut his head off anyway. Fortunately, Seymour did enough to himself when he tried to kidnap Edward VI.

message 7: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Jul 17, 2009 09:26AM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments MAP wrote: "I think she probably remained a technical virgin her entire life, but that she probably was "improper" with Dudley and a couple of other men. I have almost no basis for this in terms of evidence, ..."

Yes, that is the "potential pregnancy" I was referring to but there was something in the book about a woman being blindfolded and being led to 'a fine lady' or something like that to deliver a child but was not allowed to see her and speculation that it was Elizabeth. That first incident was def. at the time of Seymour. :)

message 8: by Colleen, Mod #3 (last edited Jul 17, 2009 09:11AM) (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments MAP wrote: "Uh, no. I don't. I don't think she would have gotten away with keeping it a secret. Somebody would have known, somebody would have blabbed, somebody would have noticed her HUGE GIANT STOMACH for ..."

Yes but you have to take into account some women don't get huge prego bellies. Also there was a period where she had some bizarre sickness that caused her to be bed ridden for months and the illness made her swollen especially her abdomen. Also how many ladies in waiting concealed pregnancies succesfully for months?

There was some kind of scandal regarding Seymour but what about Dudley? She was very close with him since they were youg, and she did move his living quarters next to her personal apartments. Her dislike of Dudley's wife and the shady circumstances of her death, etc. etc. etc.

message 9: by Wen (new)

Wen (thespoilingone) | 140 comments This is an interesting thread. What books are you refering to? I have so far only read some historical fiction books that have Elizabeth in them so know sometimes the facts are smudged a little. I have seen in these books where they talked about misconduct with Thomas Seymour and that Katherine Parr sent her away after cathing them embracing and another snippet about Seymour going to Elizabeths room early and tickling/wrestling with her while she was still in bed and supposedly nude. There was mention of her being ill after being sent away.
Seemed similar was mentioned in the few books I read. So if these accounts are facts could well have been she was pregnant.
If she was recorded as ill and a symptom was swelling it certainly hints at a pregnancy.
I have not read anything about her and Dudley. So far all have been about her younger years. But I do think she was more of a symbolic 'virgin queen' in order to keep from having to marry. Marrying would have caused her to have to take a back seat to the more suited Male ruler.

message 10: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments The book I'm referring to is The Children of Henry VIII or Children of England in the UK by Alison Weir. (seems to be all I can refer to lately)

AW suggests that she may have had a miscarriage with Seymour in the spring of 1548 as she was quite sick but that there is a massive lack of information about her symptoms, etc. and therefore could have been a cover-up but that there is no actual evidence that there ever was a miscarriage so the 'theory rests on supposition alone'.

I found that part while on my lunch break but still haven't been able to find the other bit about the woman who was blindfolded. Starting to feel a bit like I dreamed it up but I'll find it after work.

Wen - that apparently is fax about the embracing, etc. but at the time when Seymour would visit Elizabeth, KP would also be in attendance and hold E down while her husband tickled her! KP regarded E as a child, TS obviously didn't. It was only after KP became pregnant that TS started visiting E alone and even visited in his pajamas, a big no-no at the time for sure!

message 11: by Wen (new)

Wen (thespoilingone) | 140 comments Jennifer wrote: "The book I'm referring to is The Children of Henry VIII or Children of England in the UK by Alison Weir. (seems to be all I can refer to lately)

AW suggests that she m..."

OK I have that book just have not read it yet. Currently reading AWs Innocent traitor about Lady Jane Grey and am really liking her writing style. I will have to pick up this AW book to read next now.

message 12: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Wen wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "The book I'm referring to is The Children of Henry VIII or Children of England in the UK by Alison Weir. (seems to be all I can refer to lately)

AW su..."

I'm a huge fan. I think you'll really like it!

message 13: by Robin (new)

Robin | 100 comments AW weaves the pregnancy by Seymour into her "The Lady Elizabeth" which is why it isn't at the top of my likes list. I think the blindfolded bit was in this book or in "The Virgin Queen's Daughter" but I'm not too sure which.

Is it POSSIBLE that it could have happened...yes. Do I think it happened? No. I just don't think folks would have been able to keep quiet about it if it had happened. Especially with the political intrigue swirling around Elizabeth throughout her sister's reign.

Do I think she was a true virgin? Eh...not really. But even if she technically was, I'm of the opinion she and Dudley probably did everything BUT that last step.

message 14: by Tanzanite (new)

Tanzanite | 47 comments Do I think she was a true virgin? Eh...not really. But even if she technically was, I'm of the opinion she and Dudley probably did everything BUT that last step.

So, the Bill Clinton definition :)

message 15: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (last edited Jul 17, 2009 03:36PM) (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments I have friends over tonight and need to get back to our bbq and beer but I had to type this out for all of you :)

Throughout the spring and early summer of 1549, gossip about the Admiral and the Lady Elizabeth continued. Jane Dormer remembered a country midwife alleging that around this time a gentleman had called upon her in the middle of the night and taken her blindfolded, riding pillion, to a great mansion that she had never seen before, there to attend to 'a very fair young lady'. When the child was born, the man caused it to be 'miserably destroyed'. Many believed, then and later, that the young mother was none other than Elizabeth, although there is no other evidence for it and the midwife herself could not be sure of the identity of her patient." Alison Weir

FYI - Admiral = Thomas Seymore, Jane Dormer = one of Mary's ladies.

So... am I saying it was Elizabeth? Nope. But really, it could have been. Just as easily as it could not have been. Who would have known in that case to keep it secret? Not many. And I stress in that case because Dudley is a whole other issue. That's all I'm saying. It's a possibility.

And... if she wasn't 'technically' a true virgin, what in the world stopped her? She didn't lack passion, from what I can see. She certainly inherited enough of it from both sides of genes!

message 16: by MAP (new)

MAP | 60 comments Elizabeth had been around enough to see what sex and especially pregnancy did to women. First of all, it would have been unbelievably scandalous for her to get pregnant out of wedlock. But she wasn't about to get married because once that happened all power was out of her hands and in her husband's (like with Mary and Philip).

What had Elizabeth seen? Jane Seymour: Dead from post-birth fever. Catherine Howard: had illicit sex and got herself killed. Katherine Parr: also dead from post-birth fever. (And to round it out, though this is stretching it a bit far: the only one to truly survive was Anne of Cleves, with whom Henry never consumated his relationship.)

She saw what marriage and attempted pregnancies did to her sister. And one can imagine she heard the stories and rumors of what befell her own mother and why.

Elizabeth wasn't about to get married and lose all her independence and power, and she was no fool: she wasn't going to risk her reputation or her health by having sex and getting pregnant without a husband.

People try to make a lot of Freudian interpretations about Elizabeth supposedly connecting "sex and death" together because of her experiences as a child and young woman. I think that's taking it really far, but I do think she was an intelligent, observant young woman who noticed patterns when she saw them and was smart enough not to put herself in situations that could cause her serious damage.

Her cousin Mary Queen of Scots did NOT have this ability, and look what it got her.

message 17: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments MAP wrote: "Elizabeth had been around enough to see what sex and especially pregnancy did to women. First of all, it would have been unbelievably scandalous for her to get pregnant out of wedlock. But she wa..."

Yes but history always repeats itself and people often do not learn from others mistakes or experiences.

I do agree that the reason she never married is because all her power would in effect be gone and she risked living in the shadow of her husband. Never being married though does not by any means mean she truely was a virgin.

"To say it [relationships with Seymour, Dudley:] was a platonic love is to use 21st-Century notions to describe 16th-Century practices," says Doherty. "In the 16th Century, sex was seen as the expression of love, of chivalrous love and I don't think Elizabeth was against that. She would have seen it as a logical conclusion."

Come on, it's like people thinking of the 1950's in America and thinking all girls waited until marriage to have sex. Thinking a time period that we didn't ourselves live through as being innocent and pure is just plain silly. Extramarital sex and babies is but far not a new thing. It has always happened throughout the history of the human race, the past has different taboos than we do now so we can't apply 21st century thinking to 15th/16th thinking.

An interesting article where I got the afore mentioned quote:

message 18: by MAP (new)

MAP | 60 comments Elizabeth made her career learning off other people's mistakes; especially those of her brother Edward, sister Mary and her cousin Mary.

Where does that italicized quote come from, Colleen? (the "says Doherty" quote). Cause it's not from me, and I didn't see it in my quick skim.

And this will sound snobby, but I'll say it: I don't ever trust articles and documentaries like that. These people have to make a living, and the one good way to make a living in history is to come up with new controversial evidence for stuff, or a new spin on an old story. Things like this get churned out 10 times a minute on different historical figures, up to and including Jesus, Napoleon, Henry VIII, Tsar Nicholas II, and Elizabeth, to name a few. When these ideas start being accepted by mainstream, good-head-on-their-shoulders, solid reputation historians, I'll go with it. (and some have, btw.) Otherwise, I just consider it scandal-mongering and someone wanting their name on TV, and I move on.

Yes, I'm a VERY conservative amateur historian. I don't tend to believe new trends and waves of ideas about figures unless I've really seen a lot of solid evidence by people whose integrity I trust. I guess that makes me boring and not very fun. ;)

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1969 comments MAP - I think that's one of the hallmarks of Elizabeth I's entire personality - learning from other people's mistakes.

I'd say that managing to survive not only her father's reign, but those of both her siblings, speaks to that.

message 20: by Colleen, Mod #3 (last edited Jul 20, 2009 04:54PM) (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments MAP, lol I knew you would ask about the Doherty quote. I put the link at the bottom of my last comment, did it not work? The quote is from an article about a documentary shown in the UK about a man's claim to be the love child of Elizabeth I and Dudley, it's an interesting read.

I agree and you don't sound snobby. Sometimes though irregardless of no evidence or a mountain of evidence people will believe what they believe. Like the belief that part of Henry VIII's cause of death being syphillis, then recent scientific evidence proving otherwise. Easy to believe because he was a man-whore but at the same time that nasty ulcer not getting proper medical attention and turning to gangrene or any other infection is enough to kill anyone (ever heard of a bath Henry???).

Another thing, bollocks on that MAP! You are not boring, I look forward to your sensible answers and tirades. ;)

message 21: by Aly (last edited Oct 25, 2009 09:14PM) (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments I'm commenting on another old thread, hurray!!!!! Ok, i personally don't think that Elizabeth was as chaste as she wanted everyone to believe. I think that she entertained thoughts of marrying Dudley, but didn't want to give up her throne. By keeping him at court and away from his wife, she could have her cake and eat it too. As for a secret child with TS... O boy. She might've been pregnant. In fact, even before I read AW's The Lady Elizabeth, I thought that she might have been when she was sent away from KP's household. However, I think if she was pregnant, she would have known about it, and would have done something to get rid of it. She wouldn't have let it come to full term IMO.

message 22: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Horray for Aly reviving another old thread, as you can see I was not quite done with this one :)

Unless it was a child with someone she loved. Besides as I stated earlier it has been documented that she had a "strange" ailment that caused her swelling in the abdomen and confinement to her bed for months. It may have been too dangerous to have a self induced abortion by hand of a well paid doctor or herb-healer.

I think she was sent from KP's household because Dudley the old perv couldn't keep hos hands to himself.

message 23: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Colleen, I think you mean Seymour, not Dudley, right?
In that case I agree. Seymour wanted her and KP figured it out (from all accounts I've read she would have had to have been quite dense not to and I believe she was very intelligent).

If we're talking Seymour's child, I think she would have tried to get rid of it. Robert Dudley's child... well, she did love him. I'm a huge romantic and therefore convinced that they were madly in love :)
She might have wanted to have the child, not saying she was pregnant, just that if she was...

Thanks Aly for bringing back these threads. I forgot about this one and loved it when Colleen had it going the first time!

message 24: by Aly (last edited Oct 26, 2009 11:09AM) (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments I've thought about the possibility of an Elizabeth love child, and I loved that there was a thread on it! I had to say something!

Colleen, that is what made me think she was pregnant. Maybe she had something else, but she was sick for about a year. Which tells me she had a baby growing. I just the read the link you put up! Wow... That is a crazy story! It definitely makes me wonder. I'm still not totally convinced, but now I'm not totally convinced that she didn't have a child with Dudley either.

I almost wonder why KP turned a blind eye for so long. She had to know that something was going on. Maybe she only wanted to acknowledge it when she herself was pregnant and therefore held Seymour's dynastic hopes? I mean, it was her step daughter and her husband. I would have spoken up! But she seems to have joined in for a little bit. Like catching Elizabeth with Seymour and cutting one of her dresses to shreds. Maybe she didn't say something until she knew it had gone too far. I believe that Elizabeth definitely went further with Seymour than she had intended.

message 25: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments What was up with that anyway? Them cutting Elizabeth's dress off of her? I've always found that story more than a bit strange!

message 26: by Robin (new)

Robin | 100 comments Re. Elizabeth's sickness and the swelling...her sister Mary thought (and hoped) she was pregnant and I believe even had a swollen abdomen at some point. Then it slowly went away and everyone realized she hadn't been pregnant. It is also mentioned in many things that I have read that Elizabeth had a problem with swelling up when she was really stressed out and upset. This could have sparked the pregnancy rumors during her reign.

Again, could she have been pregnant at some point? Yes.

Robin Maxwell's book "The Queen's Bastard" focuses on the rumor that she and Dudley did have a child. I believe it is based on the fact that there was a young man that popped up at one point claiming to be Arthur Dudley.

message 27: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments I've wondered about Mary's "pregnancies." There was a girl in my class in high school that wanted a baby so bad, that she actually started thinking that she was pregnant. her body went through everything, swelling, bigger breasts, etc. When she went to the doctor, they told her she wasn't pregnant. But her mind thought she was. She had wanted a baby; she convinced herself she was pregnant. I wondered if Mary had done this to herself as well. Having a baby was the only thing that was going make her life easier: Phillip would stay in England longer, the succession would be assured, and when Phillip did leave, she would have someone to take care of.

message 28: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments I've heard of that happening before as well. It's crazy that you can convince yourself of something to that degree and have your own body actually believe it! Poor Mary. She would have been so happy to be a mother!

message 29: by Marylou (new)

Marylou (loulu) | 164 comments I read in several books that Katherine was with Seymour in the garden (and helped him) when he cut up Elizabath's dress.

message 30: by Colleen, Mod #3 (new)

Colleen (nightoleander) | 1106 comments Jennifer, thanks for the correction, I type too fast sometimes.

False pregnancy is a real phenomenon but not a common one with the woman being so convinced she is preggers and the body exibiting traits it all goes back to what the power of the mind can truely do.

I have always thought the cutting up of Elizabeth's dress (it happening in a garden, KP held her down while he cut her dress to shreds) was extremely bizarre. And him coming to her bedchamber in the morning in his night gown and jumping on her bed to "tickle" her? It just seems twisted and incestuous even if they weren't really realted. She was basically his step-daughter by marriage.

Aly, wasn't that story on that link crazy; makes you wonder. If only they had DNA to test the validity.

I feel so horrible for Mary, what a sad life.

message 31: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Not to mention that when he was tickling her KP actually helped to hold Elizabeth down and in her bed no less. That would be strange if it happened now and there was a lot less leniency then than there is now!

message 32: by Suzanne (new)

Suzanne (chatternyc) | 178 comments Elizabeth had a history of stress-related illness that seemed to manifest itself starting at about puberty and continued for the rest of her life (into menopause). I take her illness at the time of Seymour's arrest as related to that (combined with a diplomatic interest in self preservation.) Interestingly, she was also ill when Mary summoned her to court after Jane Grey's execution, with very similar symptoms. There is a history of what may be porphyria in the family, with a lot of people speculating that Mary Queen of Scots suffered from this. I've never seen it mentioned in connection with Elizabeth, but some of the symptoms do make sense in that connection.

Was she a virgin? I'd tend to suspect she was, whether only technical or not. Privacy, for children of noble birth in the 16th century (or anyone, really) was very hard to come by. It's unlikely Elizabeth ever slept in a room by herself during her entire life. (i.e. maidservants, ladies in waiting, katherine Ashley, etc.) If she had been motivated to do anything, she could have found a way, but nothing in Elizabeth's life suggests she was the kind of person who gave into her instincts (except her temper!) Rather, she governed them and tended to despise Mary Stuart for not doing the same. She tended to be wary and suspicious of those around her, with very few exceptions -- Ashley, Cecil and maybe Dudley (when he wasn't pissing her off). And even as a young girl, she was very conscious of her dignity. Nothing in that suggests to me that she was romping around with the Admiral, particularly when it's clear that one of those she did love and trust was Katherine Parr. More likely that he tried to seduce her and she was so confused by what she felt and what was happening that she couldn't cope.

Did she have a child? I believe not. It's just implausible in the extreme. She would have had to conceal the pregnancy from everyone. Remember, Ashley and her household were taken to the tower; two of her servants confessed to anything they could think of (the Parrys). They might not have known about the pregnancy officially, but living close beside someone day by day, washing their linen (in Mrs Parry's case) and noticing whether they have things like morning sickness, etc... Well, it would be the equivalent of a husband of today being oblivious to a pregnancy for all 9 months.

I would discount anything that Jane Dormer said absolutely. She utterly loathed Elizabeth; after Mary's death, she married a Spanish nobleman and left England. Not a trustworthy witness to anything about Elizabeth.

Had there been serious questions about Elizabeth having a child at this time, I'm sure she would have been examined by matrons to determine whether or not she was still a virgin or had given birth. At this time, remember, she was a far cry from being an obvious heir to the crown; Edward VI was young but reasonably healthy at the time, and then there was Mary. Had those matrons found anything, I imagine that it would have been very much in their interest to disclose it, if not then, later, when Mary was ruling. Remember how easily Catherine Howard's misspent youth came out? And she was only a queen consort, not a prospective queen regnant.

I think the dalliance with Seymour was the only occasion on which Elizabeth could have become pregnant. Once she became queen, she lived in a fishbowl, and with her scandalous public behavior with Dudley, everyone around her was looking for just this kind of thing. No way could she have had a child then.

So, like MAP, i say no way...

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1969 comments I also tend to think it highly improbable - for pretty much the same reasons as Suzanne.

message 34: by Robin (new)

Robin | 100 comments Susanna wrote: "I also tend to think it highly improbable - for pretty much the same reasons as Suzanne."

My thoughts exactly.

message 35: by Marylou (last edited Oct 28, 2009 08:11PM) (new)

Marylou (loulu) | 164 comments Robin wrote: "Susanna wrote: "I also tend to think it highly improbable - for pretty much the same reasons as Suzanne."

My thoughts exactly."

Mary Lou said I also think it was highly improbable. :There would be a lot to hide if that happened.

message 36: by Jennifer, Mod #5 (new)

Jennifer (jennifertudor) | 951 comments Okay, you've all got very good arguments and I have to say I see your points and am now quite convinced that no, she probably didn't have a child. I'm not as convinced that she was actually a virgin though or that she never was pregnant and just 'got rid of it' as was I believe was a relatively common practice with herbs, etc. There were so many rumours of Elizabeth and Robert Dudley and they both seemed pretty conniving. Isn't it possible that they could have snuck off and met somewhere if they both wanted to do so? As for Elizabeth & Seymour... weren't they frequently alone or was someone always with them?

message 37: by Marie (new)

Marie Burton (marieburton2004) So funny when I saw this topic!
No way was it possible & for it not to have been discovered. Elizabeth also mentioned something where she is of "the barren stock lineage" & I doubt she would've said that if she had ever conceived in the first place.
Carrying a baby to term would've been found out, regardless of her age or timeframe that it occurred.

message 38: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments Marie, she might have said that she was of "the barren stock lineage" so that her councillors would stop pushing the matter of marriage on her. If she said she was unable to conceive anyway, what would be the point of getting married?
Jennifer, I think getting rid of babies was common. Herbs could be used, pennyroyal was really common. It made the woman sicker than a dog for weeks, but it worked really well. Pennyroyal nowadays is in a liquid form I don't know about back then. I had to write a paper on abortion history, so I learned a lot about different remedies and pennyroyal was pretty easy to get back in the day. Actually it still is. The herbal store down the street from my house carries it.

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1969 comments I think the "barren stock" remark was her response to hearing Mary Queen of Scots had just had a son, the future James VI/I.

message 40: by Mandy (new)

Mandy | 33 comments I am currently reading The Lady Elizabeth by Alison Weir, and just finished reading the part about Elizabeth getting pregnant by Seymour and having a miscarriage. At the time, she was living with Kat Astley's sister and husband, who kept the pregnancy and miscarriage quiet. The sister's husband (who's name escapes me at the moment) had a midwife brought in blindfolded so she wouldn't know where she was going to, but the blindfold was taken off for the delivery. Once the baby was delivered, the sister's husband threw the remains in the fire to destroy the evidence. The midwife was again blindfolded and taken from the house.

message 41: by Marylou (last edited Nov 03, 2009 02:04PM) (new)

Marylou (loulu) | 164 comments I cannot believe that Elizabeth was pregnant. It would be too difficult to hide. I believe that she did have some loving times with Dudley.

message 42: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments Yes, Mandy, AW said at the end of the book (author's comments) that she took some liberties with this book and added the pregnancy as something that could have happened, but was never proved. I liked that book, but I liked her other HF better (Innocent Traitor).

message 43: by Mandy (new)

Mandy | 33 comments O.k. Thanks Aly. I haven't gotten to the author's comments yet. I do know it's a historical fiction and therefore not entirely accurate.
And I do agree with you about Innocent Traitor. I enjoyed reading that much more than this one.

message 44: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments LOL, I jumped ahead to the Author's comments on both The Lady Elizabeth and Innocent Traitor cuz I wanted to know what she had to say about the books!

message 45: by Mandy (new)

Mandy | 33 comments That would have been a good idea, so I would know what I was reading. I finished The Lady Elizabeth last night. It was pretty good, and has left me wanting to read more about her.

message 46: by Aly (new)

Aly (Alygator) | 854 comments Mandy, have you read The Children of Henry VIII by Alison Weir? It details more about his three kids plus Lady Jane Grey. I also know that David Starkey's book, Elizabeth I is pretty good too. I have Alison Weir's book on Elizabeth but I haven't worked my way to it yet, so I can't comment on that one! I really wanted to read more about Elizabeth after I read The Lady Elizabeth too!

message 47: by Mandy (new)

Mandy | 33 comments I haven't read The Children of Henry VIII, but I did put in a request at my library for it to be borrowed from another branch. Just waiting for it to come in. I'm excited to read it.
My library does have Elizabeth I, which I do plan to read at some point. Now that I've read The Lady Elizabeth, I do want to read more about her reign and also read something non-fiction.

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads (susannag) | 1969 comments I enjoyed Weir's Life of Elizabeth I. It covers her life as queen - the earlier stuff is mostly in Children of Henry VIII, I think.

back to top