Did Elizabeth? | Historical Debates | Forum

Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Did Elizabeth?
April 2, 2013
11:57 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Did Elizabeth truly believe she was Barren born or was she truly Barren born?
In those days surely there was no way of telling if there was a problem. I know that here periods were irregular, but then so are my youngest daughters. Doesn’t mean she’s barren.
If Elizabeth truly believed she was barren, what and who made her believe it?

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 2, 2013
5:41 pm
Avatar
LadyPrincess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 63
Member Since:
February 22, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I think there is a scene in the Virgin Queen starring Anne-Marie Duff where her physician checks to make sure she can have children, and he says yes. I’m not sure if this was historical-fiction on their part but I just assumed that they had their ways of knowing who was fit enough to have children.

“How haps it, Governor, yesterday my Lady Princess, and today but my Lady Elizabeth?"- Elizabeth I

April 2, 2013
5:57 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

She never put it to the test! I don’t believe Elizabeth knew or thought she might have been barren. She decided not to get married erego, no children. All of her decisions on marriage and childbirth were due to what she had seen in her lifetime. KP’s death during childbirth and her foolish husband’s flirting ways, KH and her mother losing their lives because of their husband, along with his need for a new wife every few years, and then her sister Mary’s failure to produce a child, put her off childbirth and marriage.

April 2, 2013
8:53 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yes I agree with that Sharon.
Lady Princess yes you are right, that did happen in the film.
You have got to admit it was a very guty decision thart Elizabeth made. in not wanting the husband and the old 2.4 kids bit.
I rather think that by saying she was stagnant I mean barren born it was her way of not only making sure it would chase away any suitors who were just there for what they could get, but it was also her way of telling her council, that. what you see here is what you get I will not be a man’s play thing and I won’t have a child that can steal my thunder. I am the power and the glory. I rule here and I will rule alone, like it or lump it.
In some respects Elizabth in that way was like her father.. Henry Tulip was jealously protective of the limelight and hated it when someone else got more attention than him. For Elizabeth her court was her stage and her reign (brilliant as it was) was really a one woman show from beginning to end. Cecil, Dudley, etc were just bit parts in her show.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 3, 2013
2:22 am
Avatar
LadyPrincess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 63
Member Since:
February 22, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

lol I get that Henry Tulip is a moniker for H8th but what does the Tulip part mean?

“How haps it, Governor, yesterday my Lady Princess, and today but my Lady Elizabeth?"- Elizabeth I

April 3, 2013
12:37 pm
Avatar
DuchessofBrittany
Canada
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
June 7, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said

She never put it to the test! I don’t believe Elizabeth knew or thought she might have been barren. She decided not to get married erego, no children. All of her decisions on marriage and childbirth were due to what she had seen in her lifetime. KP’s death during childbirth and her foolish husband’s flirting ways, KH and her mother losing their lives because of their husband, along with his need for a new wife every few years, and then her sister Mary’s failure to produce a child, put her off childbirth and marriage.

Last year, there was a programme on the history channel called “The Secret Life of…,” which feartured historical figures personal lives from the viewpoint of today’s celebrity culture. The adorable Suzannah Lipscombe was featured. One episode was about Elizabeth I. They joked that the celeb mags would claim Elizabeth never married because she was really a man! Of course, it highlighted the fact of a woman not marrying as cultural obscure. Suzannah did a wonderful job of explaining Elizabeth.

But, if one reads deeper, there are many rumors (all unfounded) that Elizabeth was a baby maker (Thomas Seymour, Robert Dudley, Robert Devereaux, Edward de Vere, who was her own son!). These claims are used to support he Prince Tudor Theory I and II, that claims Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford was really Shakespeare.

I share Sharon’s opinion of Elizabeth’s choice to remain unmarried. It was a brave and bold move, but one which guaranteed her absolute authority. I doubt any man she married would be willing to play second fiddle to her, and she was not going to let anyone take her birthright, again! I am sure this decision was not without its shortcomings, but I often wonder how Elizabeth’s life would have turned out had she married? It did not work out well for her sister.

"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn

April 3, 2013
1:33 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

LadyPrincess said

lol I get that Henry Tulip is a moniker for H8th but what does the Tulip part mean?

Henry Tulip, comes from a comedy programme called Blackadder. In the first series which deals with Richard 3rd demise at the battle of Bosworth in which Edmund Blackadder accidently kills Richard 3rd by chopping his head off, because Richard was trying to steal Edmund’s horse while he was having a wee in the bush. After Edmund realises what he’s done. he drags Richard’s body to a disused barn and dumps it there. Henry Tulip H7 is lying in the barn injured and persuades Edmund to take him back to his castle and look after him in agrrement for a large sum of money..
When Richard’s body is discovered Edmund’s father becomes Richard 4th. When he goes back to the castle to tell his wife etc that Richard 3rd is dead she says “But Henry Tulip can’t come here yet I haven’t had time for a bath or anything.” Richard 4th says “We won my dear” She replies ” Oh well I suppose your’ll want to ravage me now” Richard says “In a minute my dear in a minute”
Later on Edmund finds out that Henry Tulip is the man they are hiding in his room and is thrown into panic, runs upstairs and orders the man to leave but in doing so he gets terrorised by the ghost of Richard 3rd. In the commotion his mother hears the noise of Edmund’s panic striken voice and asked him if he’s ok through the locked door. Edmund says “Yes Mother” his mother says “who have you got in there?” just at that moment Henry Tulip bleats like a sheep. (draw your own conclusion) needless to say Edmund tries to explain to his mother and in the confusion that follows Henry Tulip escapes..
It’s a completely mad series but funny. There are 4 of them in total. The first one deals with Richard 3rd etc.. the 2nd one is Queen Elizabeth, the 3rd one is George the prince regent and the 4th is the 1st world war. There is also a film called Back and Forth which was realeased for 2000 millininum.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 3, 2013
1:55 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

DuchessofBrittany said

Sharon said

She never put it to the test! I don’t believe Elizabeth knew or thought she might have been barren. She decided not to get married erego, no children. All of her decisions on marriage and childbirth were due to what she had seen in her lifetime. KP’s death during childbirth and her foolish husband’s flirting ways, KH and her mother losing their lives because of their husband, along with his need for a new wife every few years, and then her sister Mary’s failure to produce a child, put her off childbirth and marriage.

Last year, there was a programme on the history channel called “The Secret Life of…,” which feartured historical figures personal lives from the viewpoint of today’s celebrity culture. The adorable Suzannah Lipscombe was featured. One episode was about Elizabeth I. They joked that the celeb mags would claim Elizabeth never married because she was really a man! Of course, it highlighted the fact of a woman not marrying as cultural obscure. Suzannah did a wonderful job of explaining Elizabeth.

But, if one reads deeper, there are many rumors (all unfounded) that Elizabeth was a baby maker (Thomas Seymour, Robert Dudley, Robert Devereaux, Edward de Vere, who was her own son!). These claims are used to support he Prince Tudor Theory I and II, that claims Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford was really Shakespeare.

I share Sharon’s opinion of Elizabeth’s choice to remain unmarried. It was a brave and bold move, but one which guaranteed her absolute authority. I doubt any man she married would be willing to play second fiddle to her, and she was not going to let anyone take her birthright, again! I am sure this decision was not without its shortcomings, but I often wonder how Elizabeth’s life would have turned out had she married? It did not work out well for her sister.

There would always be trouble for Elizabeth if she had married. Because whoever she took for a husband, would always want to do something that was a no no. Look at Philip of Spain. Marriage to him was just another notch on his mast. He would have always and did work for Spain and the Catholic cause. England to him was just another bank of money to finance his wars. Elizabeth’s main prority from the start was England.
I agree her decision to not marry or have children was one hell of a risk, but it was a risk that worked. I think if push cme to shove and she was really left with no other option to marry then she would have, but not to produce children. She made her desicion that she wouls never have children when she was still a child herself.Yet I can’t help wonder what type of a mother she would have made?

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 5, 2013
10:00 am
Avatar
The Other Boleyn Boy
London
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 39
Member Since:
February 22, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

April 5, 2013
10:35 am
Avatar
Louise
Hampshire, England
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 611
Member Since:
December 5, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said

She never put it to the test! I don’t believe Elizabeth knew or thought she might have been barren. She decided not to get married erego, no children. All of her decisions on marriage and childbirth were due to what she had seen in her lifetime. KP’s death during childbirth and her foolish husband’s flirting ways, KH and her mother losing their lives because of their husband, along with his need for a new wife every few years, and then her sister Mary’s failure to produce a child, put her off childbirth and marriage.

In other words, you don’t know whether there’s any lead in your pencil unless you try to write with it.Surprised

April 5, 2013
9:39 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Louise said

Sharon said

She never put it to the test! I don’t believe Elizabeth knew or thought she might have been barren. She decided not to get married erego, no children. All of her decisions on marriage and childbirth were due to what she had seen in her lifetime. KP’s death during childbirth and her foolish husband’s flirting ways, KH and her mother losing their lives because of their husband, along with his need for a new wife every few years, and then her sister Mary’s failure to produce a child, put her off childbirth and marriage.

In other words, you don’t know whether there’s any lead in your pencil unless you try to write with it.Surprised

Especially if you haven’t had your ballpoint out for a while.. LOL

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 5, 2013
9:53 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

The same could be said about KH. we all know that Henry and her had loud and noisy sex and yet there was no hint of a pregnancy. Could that be Henry’s fault? maybe, it does seem that could be possible and that tit took a while to get Jane pregnant. Maybe as illness overtook him and bear in mind he wasn’t a young man when he married K.H he could well be he was firing blanks.
However it could be said that K.H was barren, as she admitted as did Dereham, that they had had sex on numerous and sundry occations. It’s open to debate whether she had sex with Mannox or Culpepper personally I don’t think so, Mannox may of tinkered with her and possibly they may have anal sex but this is purely an opinion not a statement of fact with no basis. Culpepper I believe was just her shoulder to cry on and perhaps her advisor on howw to deal with Lard Lad when he was having a hissy fit or a temper tantrum.
K.H may of course used some rudimentary birth control method or even she herself was barren.

As for the words that Elzabeth may or may not of used when she found out that Mary QOS had had James, Hmmm? she might have said it perhaps for pure dramatic emaphasis, and to perhaps hammer home the point that she was never going to marry or have children. Elizabeth was under enormous pressure from her council to marry and produce an heir, I believe that in the court at the time there were several suitors all playing to wed and bed her. It was perhaps her way of telling them all to sod off. In fact I think that Elizabeth breathed a massive sigh of relief that she was probably rather glad that Mary had had James, because at least then she knew that England now had a suitable heir to the throne. James was after all of Tudor blood stock. If Elizabeth had been disappointed over the birth I don’t think she would have agreed to have been his Godmother or sent a costly gift of a silver bowl.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 6, 2013
5:03 pm
Avatar
LadyPrincess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 63
Member Since:
February 22, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

I think in Elizabeth R. Glenda Jackson quotes that same line. Hers is definitely the best portrayal of Elizabeth imho. Who does everyone else think has played the best Elizabeth? (sorry if this has been asked/answered already). A lot of people seem to prefer Cate Blanchett’s portrayal but to me it was just OK – nothing spectacular. But my least favorite was Helen Mirren’s portrayal. She’s a good actress but I felt she was really playing herself and not that of Elizabeth.

“How haps it, Governor, yesterday my Lady Princess, and today but my Lady Elizabeth?"- Elizabeth I

April 6, 2013
7:15 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

I have heard that quote before. The fact that she sank to her knees when she said this, and for me this is a big IF, makes me think that Mary’s joy caused Elizabeth great pain; but her pain IMO stems from the decision she made not to have children. In Elizabeth’s time, women were supposed to marry and have children. It was their duty. Her decision, although final in her mind, did not mean that she never questioned her choice. At times the choice she made not to marry and have children must have been very painful. I can understand her pain when MQS had a son.
Doctors during this time would hardly have been able to tell if a woman was barren. The only way to know for sure was if the woman was married and had no children while her husband had babies with other women. Even that is questionable because some women did not have children in first or even second marriages. Katherine Parr was married to at least two men who had previously had children, and yet she did not get pregnant until she married for the fourth time.

April 6, 2013
8:09 pm
Avatar
LadyPrincess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 63
Member Since:
February 22, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

I have heard that quote before. The fact that she sank to her knees when she said this, and for me this is a big IF, makes me think that Mary’s joy caused Elizabeth great pain; but her pain IMO stems from the decision she made not to have children.

Hi Sharon Smile

If E.R. really did say this then it could very well have been (as you stated) because she regretted not having children of her own.

But, it could also mean that she was afraid for the stability of her kingdom and her own position because Mary had given birth to a male heir.

“How haps it, Governor, yesterday my Lady Princess, and today but my Lady Elizabeth?"- Elizabeth I

April 7, 2013
11:21 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

LadyPrincess said

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

I think in Elizabeth R. Glenda Jackson quotes that same line. Hers is definitely the best portrayal of Elizabeth imho. Who does everyone else think has played the best Elizabeth? (sorry if this has been asked/answered already). A lot of people seem to prefer Cate Blanchett’s portrayal but to me it was just OK – nothing spectacular. But my least favorite was Helen Mirren’s portrayal. She’s a good actress but I felt she was really playing herself and not that of Elizabeth.

Has to be Glenda Jackson for me. Her potrayal in Elizabeth the series and the film Mary Queen of Scots was brilliant I could just see Elizabeth, being like that.. Her mother’s wit and her father’s fire. a dangerous mix but boy was it a good one too.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 7, 2013
8:43 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

LadyPrincess said

Sharon said

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

I have heard that quote before. The fact that she sank to her knees when she said this, and for me this is a big IF, makes me think that Mary’s joy caused Elizabeth great pain; but her pain IMO stems from the decision she made not to have children.

Hi Sharon Smile

If E.R. really did say this then it could very well have been (as you stated) because she regretted not having children of her own.

But, it could also mean that she was afraid for the stability of her kingdom and her own position because Mary had given birth to a male heir.

Hi LadyPrincess,
When the announcement came that Mary was going to have a baby, there was much consternation amongst Elizabeth’s council. The birth added to the long running debate over the succession. She probably knew her council would start badgering her again. She was very angry and gave them hell when they refused to give her funds until she settled on an heir. After her remarks to them, they gave her the funds she wanted and stopped pushing her. Her council seemed to be more upset about the birth of Mary’s son and the succession than Elizabeth was. For Elizabeth, I think it was much more personal.

April 10, 2013
12:06 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said

LadyPrincess said

Sharon said

The Other Boleyn Boy said

when Mary Queen of Scots gave birth to James I/VI, Elizabeth apparently sank to the ground and wailed, ‘The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, and I am but a barren stock’. Some sources say this never happened, others it did, and to be truthful, we’ll never know for sure. But I also agree with ‘Boleyn’ – in those days how would they know?

I have heard that quote before. The fact that she sank to her knees when she said this, and for me this is a big IF, makes me think that Mary’s joy caused Elizabeth great pain; but her pain IMO stems from the decision she made not to have children.

Hi Sharon Smile

If E.R. really did say this then it could very well have been (as you stated) because she regretted not having children of her own.

But, it could also mean that she was afraid for the stability of her kingdom and her own position because Mary had given birth to a male heir.

Hi LadyPrincess,
When the announcement came that Mary was going to have a baby, there was much consternation amongst Elizabeth’s council. The birth added to the long running debate over the succession. She probably knew her council would start badgering her again. She was very angry and gave them hell when they refused to give her funds until she settled on an heir. After her remarks to them, they gave her the funds she wanted and stopped pushing her. Her council seemed to be more upset about the birth of Mary’s son and the succession than Elizabeth was. For Elizabeth, I think it was much more personal.

It’s also been said (whether it’s true or not I don’t know) that when pressured by her council to marry she countered on them just as her father would have done and “If I had been crested instead of cloven you would have never dared to speak to me thus” a somewhat coarse reference to her sex, but effective as they shut up for the moment on the subject of her marriage.
I agree James’s birth was a very personal issue for Elizabeth, it exposed her as being un-natural (loosely worded) in her desicion not to want to have children. whether she was capable of having them or not.
I still feel that he statement of “the queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son and I am but a barren stock” If she did say it and it’s open to debate, it was said for pure dramatic effect., to perhaps tell her council and her suitors both in court at the time and those who were thinking of paying a visit to England, that if they married her there would be no hope of children again whether she was capable or not, and that in short they would be wasting their time.. Sod off was the message I think we can deduce from that.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 10, 2013
3:52 pm
Avatar
LadyPrincess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 63
Member Since:
February 22, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

In the end it seems as if it proved to be both a good and bad decision on Elizabeth’s part not to marry.

Good reasons:
1. No loveless marriage
2. The pressures of producing an heir
3. Having to share responsibilities with a husband

Bad reasons:
1. No companion
2. No children for her to dote on and continue the Tudor reign
3. No one she could truly lean on

Yes she had Dudley. But Dudely was married through must of their courtship. And though I believe she truly loved him and she could rely on him to be frank and provide good council, she could never really trust him to love her for her and not her crown. And I think that’s why she never married him….well that and his reputation and because she wanted her allies and foes from other kingdoms to have hopes of an alliance through marriage with her.

As for her “Frog” I think she liked and was fond of him but I think there was more of a strong friendship that existed between them…that sometimes went too far. But unfortunately for her that friendship could result in nothing save than him becoming her husband. It seems that Francis really took Elizabeth for a fool. But I think she was making him out to be a fool as well.

She used him to gain an alliance with France, to silence her detractors, and I think to make Dudley a little jealous. She did write a poem for Francis so I do think she was very fond of him; perhaps more than she realized at the time. But again, I still do not believe she loved him. If she did she was strong willed enough to ignore her council’s objections and her own qualms and marry him. After all, that’s what Henry and Anne did. And she had many of the same personality traits that they had.

“How haps it, Governor, yesterday my Lady Princess, and today but my Lady Elizabeth?"- Elizabeth I

April 10, 2013
6:02 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Lady Princess said:
She used him to gain an alliance with France, to silence her detractors, and I think to make Dudley a little jealous. She did write a poem for Francis so I do think she was very fond of him; perhaps more than she realized at the time. But again, I still do not believe she loved him. If she did she was strong willed enough to ignore her council’s objections and her own qualms and marry him. After all, that’s what Henry and Anne did. And she had many of the same personality traits that they had.

I agree but at the same time she must have learned what impetious natures could do to a relationship. Mary was determined to marry Philip come hell or high water, and all it earned her was the hatred of the people and the upmost contempt and loathing of Philip who only saw Mary as a money bank.
Henry and Anne’s relationship was all fire and brimstone literely, once they were married all that fire and brimstone slowly fizzled out. Elizabeth would have not know that of course being that she was barely 3 when her father killed her mother, but she would have seen but perhaps not quite understand what the situation was between her father and K.H when K.H’s past caught up with her. One day she would have seen her father playing the ever loving doting lover of a young vivacious vibrant woman. (we don’t really know how old K.H was when Henry killed her but I would place her age at around 18 or 19) The next day of course Elizabeth would have seen a very different attitude in her father one of anger, betrayal humiliation, bitterness, even perhaps jealously at the thought that someone else had soiled his perfect rose first.
I think it’s in Elizabeth the series that Glenda Jackson says “First there is Passion, then there is hatred, then death. She must have remembered that from the time of K.H’s downfall. She didn’t want to fall into the same trap she loved the thrill of the chase just as her father had done but was content to hunt and not capture her prey.
Elizabeth was the fire and brimstone of her father and mother passion for each other but she was also more far sighted then perhaps her mother and father were at the time. Henry’s passion for Anne was more to do with a son and heir. He forgave Anne for baring Elizabeth, only because he was so sure that his next child would be a son. If Anne had, had a son I doubt Henry would have killed her but I feel that Anne would have ended up as K.O.A was largely ignored and only brought out when ceremony dictated it.
Henry had got what he wanted a son.
The sad thing is that Anne truly loved Henry, but Henry’s love for Anne was fickle and was solely dependant on a son an heir.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

No permission to create posts
Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 214

Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Anyanka: 2337

Boleyn: 2285

Sharon: 2115

Bella44: 933

DuchessofBrittany: 846

Mya Elise: 781

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 0

Members: 427592

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 13

Topics: 1712

Posts: 23076

Newest Members:

DennisDorie, vitushatault, oghmaniusVom, Urocchxae, Puimignog, Emma3456

Administrators: Claire: 959