The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum
 
 User Info & Key Stats   
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
December 18, 2014, 04:04:08 PM
462896 Posts in 9007 Topics by 14527 Members
Latest Member: Scamall
News: We think Pallasart is the best web design company in Austin and for good reason - they make this forum possible! Looking for a website? Call them at 512 469-7454.
+  The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum
|-+  Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty
| |-+  The Tudors (Moderators: Kimberly, Prince_Lieven, BobAtchison, Forum Admin)
| | |-+  The Secret Life of Elizabeth Ist.....Revealed
  0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author
Topic: The Secret Life of Elizabeth Ist.....Revealed  (Read 7060 times)
« on: June 15, 2006, 03:27:04 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

Was the title of the documentary on Channel 5 (UK) last night.
Historian, Paul Doherty, whilst researching the Calendar of State Papers,came across a collection known as The Englefield Letters.These have raised doubts in his mind regarding the purity of the Queen.
Sir Francis Englefield was a blind, exiled English Catholic, living in Spain and he was asked to interrogate a certain Arthur Dudley who had been captured in the Bay of Biscay. This Arthur Dudley was steadfast in his claim that he was none other than the illegitimate son of Elizabeth and Robert Dudley.
The "proof" (as Mr. Doherty claims);
1) In 1559, Elizabeth moved Robert into a bedchamber next to hers.
2) Kat Ashley is distraught at the rumours surrounding the couple.
3) In 1560, Cecil "forsees the ruin of the realm through Robert's relationship with the Queen" repeating the rumour that Dudley plans the murder of his wife, Amy Robsart.
Evidence of a pregnancy;
1) In 1561, the Queen withdraws from the public eye...she is swollen up with Dropsy (" she has begun to swell extraordinarily"- Spanish Ambassador)
2) The rumours of a sexual liason with Dudley persist.
3) Other court ladies managed to conceal their pregnancies.
At the end of 1561, a newborn baby boy was smuggled out of Hampton Court by Robert Southern- a relative of Kat Ashley. He raises the boy as his own with "great care and delicacy"
Elizabeth wrote her own prayers, usually "sonorous, bland and politician-like", according to Mr. Doherty.
But in 1562, she composes a different series of prayers, writing about herself and her sins. Allegedly confessing to a sexual sin?? and a great sacrifice in her life.
Arthur Dudley discovered his "true" lineage from his "father" Robert Southern- his deathbed confession revealing his illegitimacy and adoption and his "true" parentage.
In Salamanca- The National Archives of Spain are kept and Doherty found page after page regarding Arthur Dudley. Letters written by the English spy (code-name B.C.) corroborates the evidence, describes Arthur Dudley in synopsis and everything Englefield says. He states that Arthur does indeed resemble Robert Dudley and is 27 years old or there abouts, giving him a birth date of 1561.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by Kimberly » Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #1
« on: June 15, 2006, 03:36:56 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

Alison Plowden, Maria Perry and Susan Doran (Cambridge uni) also took part in the documentary and were naturally sceptical.
Susan Doran in particular refuted a lot of the claims;
Elizabeth was in full public view during 1561.
Elizabeth's "personal "prayers are actually conventional in form.
Englefield was a Catholic "enemy" of Elizabeth but the documents ARE reported to Philip of Spain who believes their content and keeps Arthur Dudley "safe and secure".
The last will and testament of Robert Southern makes no mention of, or provision for, Arthur Dudley.
It is a huge leap of faith regarding Arthur's parentage and he could have been "a stooge" of the Catholic Empire.
Just thought I would share that with you folks. 8-)
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #2
« on: June 15, 2006, 04:19:21 AM »
ilyala Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
il y a Posts: 2071

View Profile

i sincerely doubt something like this could have been kept a secret from 1561 till 2006  Tongue
Logged

'loving might be a mistake, but it's worth making'
ilya

Reply #3
« on: June 15, 2006, 05:40:09 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

The Englefield papers have been known about for ages, translated from the original Spanish, into English during the Victorian era. Also, Channel 5 can be a little...shall we say, National Enquirer-esque at times Wink. The documentary reminded me very much of a fiction novel I have on my bookshelf called "The Queen's Bastard" by Robin Maxwell. I had a look at the author's photo to see if she bore any resemblance to Mr. Paul Doherty Grin (Its a very good book actually)
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #4
« on: June 15, 2006, 07:38:36 AM »
ilyala Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
il y a Posts: 2071

View Profile

well if these papers have been known how come no-one's discussing them? i'm currently happening to read a book on elizabeth and no-one says a thing about any son... it discusses the possibility of her having sex with leicester but it mentions nothing of a son...  :-/
Logged

'loving might be a mistake, but it's worth making'
ilya

Reply #5
« on: June 15, 2006, 08:00:02 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

Yes, interesting isn't it, thats why I started this thread. I've only read fiction about Arthur Dudley but apparently, Jasper Ridley mentions him in his book-"Elizabeth Ist, The Shrewdness of Virtue".
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #6
« on: June 15, 2006, 08:30:09 AM »
bell_the_cat Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
I am he, who will bell the cat Posts: 1694

View Profile

The thing I find odd about Arthur Dudley is his surname. Normally illegitimate children wouldn't take the surname of their fathers, even if they were recognised (which according to his story he wasn't). Why didn't he call himself Arthur Tudor or Arthur Fitzroy? Even if he could have proved that he was the son of Elizabeth, how could he have proved that he was the son of Dudley without her cooperation. There is the physical resemblence I suppose, but did anyone ever put them together to compare?

My guess is that "Arthur Dudley" was a con-man, and the Spanish were only too happy to listen to his story.

Paul Doherty is the same one who wrote about Edward II and Isabella, isn't he?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by bell_the_cat » Logged

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after tomorrow. (Mark Twain)
Reply #7
« on: June 15, 2006, 08:43:46 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

Yes Bell, I have just "googled" him. His New Novel (there's a surprise) is a "faction" novel about Elizabeth. I haven't read his book on Isabella and Edward II...is it any good?
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #8
« on: June 15, 2006, 09:59:19 AM »
bell_the_cat Offline
Velikye Knyaz
****
I am he, who will bell the cat Posts: 1694

View Profile

Well, when we were discussing the She Wolf of France, Alienore was always saying how inaccurate he was! I think she lays into him some more on her Edward II blogsite (well worth a visit by the way the address is on her profile).

I think he was one of those who thinks that Edward managed to escape!

The name Arthur Dudley makes me want to laugh... don't know why. It may be because when I was little we had two neighbours called Dudley and Arthur.  8-)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 05:00:00 PM by bell_the_cat » Logged

Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after tomorrow. (Mark Twain)
Reply #9
« on: June 15, 2006, 11:08:32 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

If you google "Arthur Dudley" you get a lot of references for the Dudley Moore film...Arthur  Grin
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #10
« on: June 17, 2006, 04:08:19 AM »
ferngully
Guest

interesting theory................
Logged
Reply #11
« on: June 18, 2006, 09:28:01 PM »
Lady_Aurora Offline
Newbie
*
Everything is merely a dream... Posts: 39

View Profile

Well I had never read about Arthur Dudley in any of the books I had to read for my school projects on Elizabeth (I did so many because I love reading about her so much).  But it's been awhile.  It seems odd what you said about the King of Spain taking Arthur in and protecting him? Maybe I read that wrong.  Or maybe I didn't.  I was always under the impression that the Spanish King hated Elizabeth.  Though I don't know anything but what I've read above about Arthur so maybe I just don't have the whole story.  Care to clear it up??

Oh and I find it interesting how many things come out forever after documents have been around.  It seems new theories appear every day for the same old thing.  Most of them are theories though and usually impossible to prove historically.  Though with all the science these days...who knows...
Logged
Reply #12
« on: June 18, 2006, 11:44:51 PM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

Seemingly, Arthur Dudley didnot want to raise an army and "invade" England a la the attempt by Perkin Warbeck in Elizabeth's grandfather's reign. Rather he wanted to live "safe and secure" in Spain. Doherty hinted that Philip of Spain offered Arthur that protection.Who knows what Philip thought, maybe he looked upon Arthur as a wepon he could use had HIS attempts at invading England  been successful.
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Reply #13
« on: June 19, 2006, 12:32:29 AM »
ferngully
Guest

Quote

Oh and I find it interesting how many things come out forever after documents have been around.  It seems new theories appear every day for the same old thing.  Most of them are theories though and usually impossible to prove historically.  Though with all the science these days...who knows...

agreed. i gave a presentation about her being a man 2 years ago, now it turns out children are involved?!!! Grin
selina                  xxxxxxxxx
Logged
Reply #14
« on: June 19, 2006, 01:38:05 AM »
Kimberly Offline
Moderator
Velikye Knyaz
*****
Loyaulte me lie Posts: 3120

View Profile

Quote
Quote

Oh and I find it interesting how many things come out forever after documents have been around.  It seems new theories appear every day for the same old thing.  Most of them are theories though and usually impossible to prove historically.  Though with all the science these days...who knows...

agreed. i gave a presentation about her being a man 2 years ago, now it turns out children are involved?!!! Grin
selina                  xxxxxxxxx
hey, Selina, I remember that one Grin. We talked about it here a while ago. There is a village somewhere in England that claims to have the grave of the "real" Elizabeth who died young and a male child who resembled her (facially one supposes) was the "Elizabeth" who eventually mounted the throne. Roll Eyes
Logged

Member of the Richard III Society
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Website by Pallasart - Austin Web Design