Elizabeth told Robert Dudley she'd never marry when she was EIGHT. The age she was when poor Catherine Howard, the young bubbly stepmother who showered her with treats and affection, was sent to the block by her father. Combine that with her sister and cousin's marriages going belly up and there's ENOUGH reasons there for her to never want to marry. The idea of her having a bastard is ludicrous as she was far too observed and spied upon for that to EVER have happened.
@@ellencook1658 - and until the advent of antibiotics, the number 1 killer of women was childbirth. Either during or from infection in the post-partum period.
10 year old Elizabeth was known to be extremely intelligent, and was fluent and literate in multiple languages. The idea that a random village boy, who had a passing resemblance, could just take her place, is laughable. 🤦🏻♀️
I watched an entire documentary about this specific myth/idea. It was compelling to a point, but mostly ridiculously laughable.. however entertaining. This documentary showed me how easily one can create or suggest evidence and gain an actual following of people who agree or believe, however outlandish or silly. I only mention this because I had never heard this theory before at the time (and was just beginning my [let's be honest and call it an obsession] with Queen Elizabeth I and queens throughout history) and I although I can't remember the exact documentary or its name, the creators were very convincing.. as convincing as one could be about such a notion. Still, so funny though. Cheers to both of you!
@@MrAdryan1603 The problem is these techniques are used by modern politicians and others. To us it is amusing, but not so much when you realise the implications. It is only too easy to make the average person believe whatever you want them to believe.
Great day....she witnessed her father's cruelty of women. She could of married a jerk in disguise and he could of had her done in. One of the bravest women to ever live. I admire her so much. I think she loved but I cannot blame her one bit and I'm so sorry she had to watch all her loved ones die. Thomas Seymore.....I'd like to see him in the coal mines. Traumatized, emotionally abused, surrounded by men who could never understand a great mind like Queen Elizabeth 1.
@@MrAdryan1603 Agreed, there's so many holes in this allegation it beggars belief. Even a preposterous theory can be made to seem plausible if the storyteller is convincing enough and reality sufficiently bent to support a narrative. Add a few outright lies that a number of gullible people will accept with few questions asked and you have a 'conspiracy'.
I think we need to understand the world in which Elizabeth I lived at. It was a man’s world, females were only seen as objects that were only good to procreate and serve men. Having a female in a position of power was horrific for most people, including females. I think One of the reasons Elizabeth I didn’t marry was because by doing so, she would be overshadowed by her husband power wise and also she would have to face the challenges and dangers of motherhood.
I think there was more to it than that. Mary observed as a girl and later as a young woman just how dangerous the monarchy could be. She herself dodged a bullet when she was placed under arrest (or at least detention) for allegations of sedition. She knew that to marry would invite more trouble and intrigue into the Court. As long as she stalled her marriage (intentionally or not) she could keep those political forces who would destabilize her reign away from the levers of power. As an egnimatic personality she kept friend and foe guessing and off balance.
exactly , Elizabeth if she had married would have lost her power , she would never permit any man to have power over her especially after the history in her family , ie her father having her mother murdered on trumped up lies
While I am sure that Elizabeth's childhood traumas were a huge influence, I believe the most convincing reason that she chose not to marry was that she did not want to give up her rule. Honestly, I believe that she was very smart in making this choice.
Yeah, all these strange theories, but as the saying goes, the most obvious answer is usually the correct one. Though also I think it's odd that they come up with stuff like 'she was a man!' and people love playing up the idea of her having tons of lovers she just wouldn't marry, but no one just says... Maybe she was asexual and didn't have an interest in it in the first place, anyway...
That’s sort of what I figured. Back then marriage and having to go through pregnancy/childbirth would suck. But especially going from the most important, powerful person in court that everyone needs to pay attention to second place would be a huge step down. Especially after her childhood. I wouldn’t want to back down either.
I would agree. A queen as ruler instead of King was still a very new concept. I'm sure she knew it would always be a battle to keep her ultimate power over her country if she married, either foreign or domestically.
Elizabeth's refusal to marry also gave her a great amount of power as long as she was of child-bearing years. Every eligible man in Europe was clamoring for her hand and she was able to play one against the other to her advantage.
Granted, Elizabeth had few good examples of married life in her youth. But I think she told us all what her actual position was when she said, "I will have one mistress here and no master! No man shall rule over me." It was political: Elizabeth would not share power.
Henry's daughters were in an unusual position. While any number of European princesses might be shopped around for several years for an advantageous match (look at the girls' own aunt, Anne of Cleves), Mary and Elizabeth had very questionable status--were they legitimate or not? Once they were free of father and brother, they, particularly Mary, were getting a little old to marry. The consequences for Mary we see--she made her own choice, but he did not care for her; his status in England was debatable; she was too old to conceive. Elizabeth, again, might have made her own choice, but marriage would have been distasteful to her for numerous reasons. What does her childhood prove? That if you love a man, he kills you (Boleyn, Howard), threatens to kill you (Parr), shames or repudiates you (Aragon, Cleves), or you die in childbirth (Seymour). Even if he's a wonderful man, what is his rank? Does he rule, reign, advise? Does he get to practice his own religion, or not? See Victoria's reign for several rounds of awkwardness about a Prince Consort's role (Anne's husband was amazingly compliant). For all those reasons, marriage would have seemed the worst choice. She wasn't uninterested in sex and male beauty--but marriage? No.
Great analysis. You pretty much nailed it. It's a wonder so many people adhere to theories about Elizabeth's reluctance to marry that resort to unusual circumstances, when there were numerous mundane reasons for her to avoid a union. Plenty of contemporary examples why she shouldn't have.
In my opinion, Elizabeth the first never married for many reasons all very good ones as well. First, look at her childhood, the killing of her mother, the death of Queen Jane, the death of Katherine Howard, these would have left a lasting impression on the child. Then the nightmare of her stepmother's husband, Thomas Seymour, I personally know what that is like having lived through it myself. Then the business with her brother, her sister.....not so much them, but those close to them who feared her as a replacement ruler. She pretty much had to do battle of the wits through those years. And of course all the reason you mentioned but one other one as well. She knew all too well that if she married she would not know if it was because he loved her or the crown was what he wanted. In a royal court that was the utmost on everyone's mind.....POWER. I think she was right in refusing to marry, she had more than enough to deal with just ruling England. But to have to deal with a husband and possibly facing death because she had gotten pregnant would have too much indeed for any woman to deal with in those days.
Surrounded by ladies-in-waiting her whole life its highly unlikely that if Elizabeth didn't menstruate every month somebody would have said SOMETHING about it. Personally I think Elizabeth wanted to keep every ounce of power she had. She loved Dudley but even he was ambitious and she knew it. And secondary to all this the deaths, natural or otherwiswe made her very wary of the institution of marriage. Bu was she a virgin? Doubtful. I think Dudley relieved her of that. Ans she loved him to the end. She kept his last letter to her by her bedside til she died. I think she and Dudley had a great love affair that lasted for years.She was probably and luckily, barren.
as a child of divorced parents/ abusive parents it has affected me into not being able to have simple friendships , I am sure that Elizabeth's childhood traumas were a huge influence like it is with me
She was shown, first hand, how destabilizing marriage was. That’s all she knew of marriage. Why would she want that? As Queen, she was the only woman around who could choose not to marry.
Elizabeths well attested intelligence was the reason she had no intention of marrying. Her tutor Robert Ascham declared there "were not four men in the realm who could best her". She used her formidable intelligence to avoid the pitfalls of marriage in a terrifying age for women
As a Swede, I can say she really dodged a bullet with rejecting Eric XIV. He became mad, and ended up being poisoned by his own brother, Johan III, and it says a lot when the guy who had his own brother killed was the sanest person in their family.
I like your last theory. I always leaned more on her being afraid of marriage due to her childhood experiences, sexual abuse, and not having authority over her own life.
Although I've always enjoyed the conspiracy theory about Elizabeth being a substituted boy as improbable as it is, your gentle debunking is the most sensible I've ever heard. I've always thought Elizabeth was too strong to hand over her self control and kingdom to a husband. This is a brilliant analysis.
What an excellent video. I love how you discuss the likely reality rather than the romance of history. Honestly, I think her whole life before she became Queen of England was just SO precarious. She could have been imprisoned or assassinated at any time and she knew it. Once Queen, why would she be in a hurry to hand over that power to a man, as her half-sister had done. "This is God's doing. And it is marvelous!" She was there by the Grace of God and decided to rule like her father. Whatever the faults of her reign, she was an amazing woman.
I think for the upbringing that she had (being constantly subjected to other peoples' will) could also have had a lot to do with a determination to maintain her position as the ruler - and not the ruled. A husband, especially a foreign monarch, would have taken a lot of the control that she had fought hard to gain. I don't mean just political power but also the level of control she had of her own fate, even in day to day living. Keeping herself insulated from the immediate demands of a husband seem like a good reason, especially when you consider the lives of women in that period.
I think the trauma of her childhood, added to the fact that her status was changed so much with being legitimate then illegitimate, the emotional trauma her sister Mary inflicted during her short reign, then being told that as a woman she needed a husband to "help" her rule, Elizabeth just decided that enough was enough and she would show everybody that a woman could and would be in charge of her own life and destiny. Which is something I always admired about her.
Not having children was probably a huge motivation for Elizabeth to avoid marriage. So many women in her life/ family, and women in general at that time, died because of childbirth and pregnancy (and from producing female children when the pressure was on for a male heir). No wonder she gave the whole thing a miss.
Your words, Dr. Kat, about Elizabeth I's not marrying move me deeply. All of the possibilities that you mention seem fully plausible-- fully accurate. If the young Elizabeth had been molested by that man, she would have been traumatized by the idea of sex and sexuality all her life long. How could she possibly have worked through that abuse emotionally at that time? Impossible. She loved Dudley, but she could not have him for so many reasons. A foreign match of any kind was simply out of the question. Horrifically, virtually every example of marriage that she saw before her was beyond unbearable. Both choice and circumstance seem to leave Elizabeth with only one option: to remain unmarried in a patriarchal universe that expects and demands that she follow so-called womanly duties: please a man and reproduce. The Queen, however, had to be a King or a Prince, if one will, just to survive, and this Queen-King/Prince (I am thinking of her 'Speech to the Troops at Tilbury') with such a traumatic history is not going to marry another King and further traumatize herself and, very possibly if not likely, lose both her kingdom and her life.
I think also the risk of childbirth was throwing her off... She lost 2 step-mothers and for sure even more women around her due to this issue... I really wonder what she had in mind regarding what will happen to the throne after her death and being the last Tudor... She must have a lot of thoughts about it...
Your videos are a balm to the spirit of an Anglophile. As to the matter of Good Queen Bess, I think you pretty much covered it all. I can only speculate that she suffered of something akin to extreme anxiety disorder as we would call it today.
Katherine K I remember reading years ago that she had "hermaphroditic genitals" but in no way do I present it as fact, obviously it's something I wasn't privy to personally. I've read she had her suitors but have never seen journals by any of them.
I’m pretty sure I read that when her council was desperately trying to marry her off so there could be an heir to continue the Tudor line, they got constant reports on her menstrual periods from her ladies in waiting, maids, and laundresses. They needed to know that she was at least exhibiting the outward signs of fertility as they were basically negotiating matters of state based on her ability to produce an heir! It’s repugnant to a modern woman’s sensibilities that all these people would know the timing of her bodily functions, and that matters of state could be directed by them, but there it is..... it was a different world.
There is also the possibility that, should she marry and have a son, her husband would rule in her stead and she would lose her throne in this way. Thats what ultimately happened to Mary Queen of Scots. She had a son so she was now no longer needed. The fact that she made it easy by marrying Bothwell is just an aside. Elizabeth always said there is one mistress here and no master. If Elizabeth married, that would no longer be the case. If she had a son, Elizabeth was no longer needed.
Mary should have supported her son's claim to the throne instead of trying to take it away from him. She spent way too much time with Catherine de Medici.
How deeply was the concept of Jure Uxoris, King by marriage institutionalised in England? I know it was in Spain where Philips the Fair became king by marriage. Mary needed a strong alley and made Philips of Spain king of England, but was it automatic? Could Elisabeth not just have married and promoted her husband no further then Prince Consort?
Thank you for this thorough analysis! It goads me that a common conception of why she never married is that it must be something pathological, that it couldn't have been something she reasoned out and decided was in her best interest. Your explanations do a phenomenal job of demonstrating what a big deal her choice was and how complex her reasoning may have been. I really enjoyed it!
I feel strongly that that Queen feared the power a husband would have had over her. Her mother was murdered by her husband the King. Charles in Florida USA
I think you're right about Elizabeth not being a virgin and was afraid that everybody would think that she was a loose women. And maybe she would lose her crown, and why should share it. After all she had gone through hell to be crowned. 👍
Even as a child Elizabeth was extremely intelligent and I'm sure that having seen what befell all the queens surrounding her during her upbringing, she saw both marriage and childbirth as threats to her life and crown. She had somehow survived all the seemingly insurmountable obstacles between her and the throne and, I think, wisely decided to avoid marriage altogether.
Thomas Seymour possibly had his way with poor Elizabeth and yes her status and England up for disaster had her virginity been destroyed ! Thank you for sharing Dr Kat🤩
Alison Stephenson I remember biology classes& come from a family with 5 generations of Dr's& nurses. It's long been my understanding that the absence of a Hyman isn't necessarily indicative of the "loss of virginity" (Although its presence is certainly considered "a tamperproof seal" still intact) it seems to me that the average man is in no position to simply infer one way or the other as to whether a gal was a virgin based solely on the existence of a Hyman.
Alison Stephenson PS, I don't at all discount the possibility of molestation at the hands of Seymour, and also imagine that some aspects of feminine physiology were still in the dark ages & that the hymen was considered a like a "notary's seal on a document". Maybe too, both Henry&Seymour's behavior towards women convinced her not to be subservient. I don't know...Coronavirus avoidance made me watch a Utube video&comment.🤗
Excellent! Thanks for this. I believe from all that I've read and viewed that Elizabeth was simply too shrewd to tie herself to any royal marriage. As a single "virgin" queen she was a free agent.
She was an intelligent and wordly woman who had already discovered what men were capable of before coming to the throne of England, and by doing so and in her position and taking into consideration the types she was surrounded by, chose her country above her own desire to procreate or marry. I would also add that she was in fear of dying at child birth knowing the track record of other woman she was surrounded by. You only have to look at the life of our own Queen today to understand the pressures having a husband could put upon her , fortunately for our Queen , she went into her marriage to Philip believing that he and her would have a life together with their kids long before she would ascend to the throne .OR SO SHE THOUGHT !!!
Really enjoying your channel Dr Kat and have been binge watching, it reminds me of the seminars back at uni 25 years ago now! I think many of those theories hold water, aside from the Bisley boy, the illigitimate baby and Trans gender Elizabeth! Yes - someone would have noticed! I also don't think she would have been old enough to be very aware of her own mother's death, as I understand Anne Boleyn didn't see much of her little daughter, as the child had her own household as a todler. I think Elizabeth watched everything, she was incredibly intelligent and shrewd, a bit of a 'tough coookie', I don't think she would ever have let her heart rule her head, although undeniably she did love Dudley. Your first analysis about her choice of suiters is a great and one I didn't know about, and yes - it makes perfect sense that was a big part of her not wanting to marry. PS - would love to see a video about that 'scandalous' Lord you mentioned in your Aphra Behn talk!
I think she had a few reasons not to get married: 1. Her mother was murdered by her father 2. Her stepmother died after giving birth 3. An other stepmother was also murdered by her father 4. She was most likely sexualy abused by Thomas Seymour 5. Her sister's marige to a foreign prince was a complete failure 6. Her cousin's mariges to domestic noblemen were also failures that led to her lossing her power 7. She couldn't marry the man she loved 8. If she got married she would lose her power and be seen as a breeding mashine and nothing more 9. If she got married and it was proven that she wasn't a virgin, then the marige would be annulled and the catholic forces would be able to attack England and take her throne 10. There wasn't anybody abroad or domestically who would be a good match without possing a threat to the country and her rule Overall i think that not getting married was the best thing for her country and her shelf, she was a very powerful woman and sharing that power was simply not an option for her. Most of her young life she felt like she didn't have any control, i think that after taking control of her life for the first time it must have been unthinkable for her to lose this control again. Because that was what it ment to be married back then, at least for women. Also seeing what her father did to his wifes must have been teriffying for her and must have made her mistrust men. As for the rumors of her being a man, misogynistic at best! She ruled a country successfully so she must have been a man! It is utterly ridiculous. Also if you look indo the allegations that she might have had a child with Dudley there might be some truth to it. In 1561 she was confined to bed with a mysterious illness , the Spanish ambassador reported she had a swelling of the abdomen. They say she was suffering from dropsy - now known as oedema - an abnormal swelling of the body due to a build-up of fluid, but many of the ladies-in-waiting at the Queen's court successfully concealed their own pregnancies at the time. There was also a man that was caught at Spain after his ship was wrecked and confesed to being her son. This could very well be a complete lie made by the spanish in order to overthone her but it is very interesting theory. No matter what we believe about her she was and will remain one of England's best rulers!
I think she was her father's daughter in the desire for absolute power. Had she married, her power would have been lessened or even extinguished by her husband. She could have dalliance behind closed doors and never once give up her power to a male. She put on the mask of the virgin queen and it served her well. I think her father soured her on the idea of "kings" and marriage. She was a smart cookie.
Elizabeth was a smart woman, and from this video it seems that there was a combination of factors that weighed against her marrying and not enough compelling reasons why she should marry. Too much to lose and not enough to gain. I think that from a relatively early age she made the decision to remain unmarried and she stuck to it. As a single person myself, I understand that.
There is, I am convinced, a taint of misogyny in so many theories about Elizabeth I. Partially the unwillingness to believe a female monarch can be an impressive as she was, coupled with a reluctance to admit she might be a healthy woman who did not want to marry a man. Hence the convoluted theories about her physical health, about her gender, etc. Me, I think you break it down very well. For obvious personal reasons she would be reluctant to marry. Likewise there wasn't really an appropriate match (although she evidently desired to marry her "Frog" i.e. the brother of the French King, in middle age) coupled with stone-cold assessment of what marriage could mean for herself and her reign. Likewise she had a policy of waiting, putting things off, not rushing in. This showed in her approach to marriage as well as everything else. I suspect she was very reluctant to wed, but willing enough had the exactly right candidate appeared on the stage--which ultimately never happened. Were she not a virgin, which is of course perfectly possible, then the very issues you bring up would be a legitimate point (although frankly lots of women break their hymens in all sorts of ways long before they have sex--my own mother did so horse back riding). You didn't mention another theory I"ve heard put forth, namely that she was a lesbian. While not impossible, it seems strange then the rumor seems to have never cropped up during her lifetime. Or didn't as far as I know. My impression was that all her close favorites were men, and while various ladies were close to the Queen none seemed to behave in the way such royal paramours often do. As far as I am aware, and by this point surely someone would have mentioned this and gone on about it ad nauseum. Mind you, the concept of "homosexuality" as such did not exist in her lifetime, not as we understand it. Perhaps also some would assume that such a powerful, willful woman if she were gay would of necessity be "butch" which is not at all the case. BTW I really enjoyed your review of "MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS" and wonder what you thought of "THE FAVOURITE" as well as your reaction to the upcoming Catherine the Great series "THE GREAT"?
I just stumbled over these and absolutely find them fascinating. You keep the interest in the video viewer and the historical stories are very interesting. Thank you.
Thank you! I love this discussion and all of your other videos. You are so insightful! What a comprehensive list of possibilities you present here, all great explanations of why she didn't marry. Fear of losing her power to rule, more than losing her life, I think, was her main reason. What I truly admire was her ability to dodge all efforts and arguments by her people and her closest advisors to persuade her, and really heavily pressure her, to do otherwise. She was a very strong individual.
Hi Dr Kat! I am delighted to hear your wonderful stories about the Tudors. I believe Elizabeth never married because she was unable to trust man, after realising what her mother went through. All the best and keep yourself safe.
firstly elizabeth was a strong woman...secondly being a queen or king is a political environment in which all decisions are for political advantage..for her it was more advantageous to stay unmarried and parley with thoes looking for political advantages through marriage with a queen...but staying single she keeps the advantage in having the control politicaly. It doesn't help that it was dangerous to give birth in thoes days ....I feel this was more of a political choice rather than a personal one.
Her desicion proved to be wise in the end. I think it's a tricky balance for any leader to comfortably marry political leadership with marriage and children.
Dr. Kat, thanks for these lectures on UA-cam. I studied history in college and have always enjoyed it as a past-time and your lectures are wonderful to listen to as well. I didn't wind up becoming a historian, which was my undergraduate dream, but have spent these last many years in special education in stead. Thanks for brightening my evenings with your work!
I myself think that she looked at the disastrous family she came from and the damage they had created to their own wives, children and the country and didn't want to add to it. She had an heir in James, her cousins son, so she wasn't going to leave her country without a King. Her father was a murderous monster, no matter how you look at it. Her sister had killed her thousands trying to drag the country back to Catholicism. If she did love Dudley and couldn't marry the man she did love, she would have to submit to someone she might not really care for. I think she just simply didn't think it was worth the personal pain to herself. The possible lack of virginity could have been dealt with, with sworn doctors affidavits and payoffs, if she really wanted to deal with it. It doesn't really seem like it would be too hard to have beheaded someone that would later claim it was all a lie. She had plenty of people executed for lots of reasons, I don't think she would have quibbled over this as a reason. She did a good job, and steered England in some hard times and kept England, England.
New subscriber here - just wanted to drop a note to say I’ve adored watching your videos! Your insights are great, and I love the way you express your points so effortlessly. You are an excellent speaker!
I do think there is some merit that the relationship with Seymour went further. Catherine Parr has her removed to a location where trusted people make sure access to her is controlled. I don't think it is a coincidence. If she loved her country, which she did, she would have felt obligated to continue the dynasty. Not just to keep off Scottish rule but also to keep the leftover Plantagenets at bay.
Just found your channel this week, love it. I am from Holland but obsessed with the Tudors, read many books about them . I probably know more about them than about our own royals.
Elizabeth spent the first 25 years of her life at the mercy of other people, subject always to suspicion and political forces beyond her control. When she became Queen, Elizabeth was at last free. How glorious it must have been for her to finally be in charge of her own destiny! I think Elizabeth knew the moment she married she would lose all control over her existence once again. So she resolved never to marry. Also, although she was genuinely fond of many men and LOVED male attention, the only man Elizabeth ever really loved enough to make her contemplate marriage was Robert Dudley. But she could not marry her Sweet Robin and keep her throne. That was the hard truth of the matter. I always feel like Elizabeth saw things the way they really were-not how she would like them to be, and that insight served her well. If she wanted to be the Mistress and have no Master then she could never marry, and that is why she decided to reign alone for 45 years. What a woman.
Elizabeth was wickedly smart and was no fool. She made a decision and she was set on it. The Queen was continually harassed by her advisors, but to no avail. Elizabeth was smarter than them all. She knew how much she had to loose and had seen others loose it disastrously. A marriage was just one step on a slippery slope that she wasn't prepared to take.
You are creating a wonderful series, I appreciate the work you put in researching your topic. As for Elizabeth 1 not getting married, I can see were you think it would be highly doubtful that she is really a man, but being a virgin I don't think she was either. I can agree that there might have been evidence that she was not a virgin and had a child if they did an autopsy on her. That is why she didn't want one. To me she is acting like someone who has been abused, and goodness, I hope she didn't get pregnant from that. Even though it is far fetched, the possibility is there.
I'm guide in the States Musems, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. One of our Dukes, Adolf of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorf (1526 - 86), brother of the Danish king Christian III, ( here we live in the northern part of Germany, which changed from being Danish to German and reverse during the centuries ) asked Elisabeth to marry him. He got no, but a lifelong pension and the Order of the Garter. We learned that the queen as the head of the Church of England wanted to be similar to the Virgin Mary, so she chose not to be married. That's what I tell the museum visitors.
I wonder how much her father’s treatment of his Queens, including her own mother, may have set her on a course of independence. The refusal to marry (if that was what it came down to) was a redemptive gesture for all those women?
Thank you, Ma'am for these great videos. I'm working my through everyone of them 😊🇬🇧. I actually thought I know my Royal history until I started watching your videos lol then realised I've missed out on some parts.
I think she saw the examples of what happened to her mother, her sister, her step-mothers and her cousin when they placed their fates in the hands of men and knew it was far safer to stay unmarried.
I just finished Dame Edith Sitwell's, The Queens and the Hive, about Elizabeth I's reign. A great read, with many epistolary contributions. Sitwell used excerpts of the letters of many contemporaries surrounding the important events of the time to great effect. One of the standouts was Lady Lennox, Lord Darnley's formidable mother. The episode of the Earl of Essex at the later part of her life really troubled her. I held off reading of her death, because I knew how difficult the days leading up to it were, and I didn't want to let her go. I think she was haunted, and had nightmares. She was truly extraordinary.
Thank you so, so much, Dr. Kat. It is a pleasure to hear historical knowledge combined with logic and common sense applied to the contemporaneous gossip of the day as well as to subsequent irresponsible speculation about historical figures. Refreshing!! Your work helps us ground ourselves more firmly in what was more likely to be the objective reality of the day.
I'm in the US and am enjoying learning about British royalty and how the country worked/works. Thank you for such simple but interesting insight. New subscriber
I also think that one reason Elizabeth I didn’t marry was because she wanted to prove that she could rule England as a woman. If she had married, there is potential that a husband would have been seen as the “real” monarch and she would have been pushed aside and not allowed to rule. Also, she may have been frightened of childbirth. Both Jane Seymour and Katharine Parr died as a result of childbirth, and perhaps Elizabeth didn’t want to risk that happening to her, especially since she would have had no control of what happened to her child, if it had survived. What I also find interesting is that she still chose James to be her heir (even though he arguably had the best claim anyway). She had to have known about his homosexual tendencies. At that time, that would have been seen as a political problem. I guess she gave into the guilt for kiilling his mother.
Reading the Past I’dike to know a bit more about how/why she chose this particular man as her heir and how/why meddling may have been an issue for the final choice.
Keeping power in her control is certainly a major part of it. More subtly, she watched her family and courtiers play the marriage game. When ever Henry VIII wanted a war and needed backing, he offered up one of his daughters to seal the deal. Mary drew dangerous political lines with many other courts and her own country by locking in her choice of Phillip. If a potential rival in war thinks they can marry the conflict out rather than fight a costly war, Elizabeth could politically maneuver in a way her sister couldn't.
It might be because of my interest in how early childhood trauma and events shape a person, I think that you’ve hit the nail on the head there with Queen Elizabeth l having witnessed / been exposed to so many bad experiences of people in her life that were all extremely close to her. I think one of those things would stick let alone all of them. Perhaps Elizabeth was an observer and she was able to completely change “the norm”. Her families line would have followed in king James 1st / 6th. It’s interesting to me. I have always thought Anne Boleyn and Elizabeth were very ahead of their time. Perhaps if the Tudor family of the 15th century were to land in our world Anne and Elizabeth would be the least shocked.
The problem about Elizabeth's life is that the official version of it is so rigid. It is known she had affairs with more than one of her noble men, but we don't know how far she went with them. It is evident she knew the risks of accepting a husband. Surely she made the conclusion her loyal ministers would serve her better than a consort king. Dr Kat, please make a video telling exactly what happened during Elizabeth's last days and what happened to her body between her death and her burial. In the 70s I read she had a terrible time dying: hallucinations in which she burnt in hell for all the people she sent to execution. Then, after dying, her body was disrespectfully treated by servants. Years later historians kept quiet about that.
I have questions regarding Elizabeth I. After her death, what happened to to all of her dresses? Were the jewels removed from them? Were her dresses, other articles of clothing and jewelry disposed of by relatives, confidantes , the Council, or did King James dispose of them and to whom? What happened to the Council and her servants and staff? Were they dismissed by King James for his own people? How did the populace react to her death? Was King James well received or was his upcming reign dreaded? Did he make radical changes to the country? Did ge die loved or hayed by the populace? I recently subscribed to your channel and you are so knowledgeable and interesting! You have such a different perspective than other historians! Thank you so much for making these videos!ns!
Can't remember where I read this but according to what i read her cloths were brought to a warehouse for storage and at some point said warehouse went up in flames..as for her jewels they belonged to the royal house so would have been passed down I am assuming at this point but it made sense to me ..
A lot of her clothes were destroyed in the great fire of London in the reign of Charles II. the royal wardrobe burned down. Additional Elizabeth likely had less clothes than contemporary monarchs to begin with as she was a fan of swapping around parts to make new outfits since she was comparatively poor. The jewels would have been recycled into other pieces
Dr. Kat I have just finished watching your June 21,2019 video The Virgin Queen. As with all of your videos, I enjoyed it throughly. As to the question regarding Queen Elizabeth, and her decision not to marry. I believe her reasons were several, and well founded.
I think your analyses of the trauma she experienced as a child is spot on. Her father killing her mother would have been remembered. A clear message deep in her subconscious Marriage ~ Death . Let me give you a personal account. When I was 4 years of age my mother left me with my Grandparents whilst she went to work. They fought like cat and dog. I’m 62 and have never married.
the most plausible explanations to me are either that she didn't want to risk her rule by marrying and that witnessing the disastrous marriages around her probably turned her off of it. I also find it hard to believe that she had a bastard child with Robert Dudley or throught the sexual abuse of Thomas Seymour simply because, as is said many times, people were always watching her and it would have been recorded, especially if she did have a son. Even though in her childhood she was sent away and known as the late king's illegitimate daughter, she still would have been a somewhat high status individual and the birth of a child would have been noted by someone.
I found your channel a few months ago and I love your style. I detect a fondness for the Tudors and am enjoying your insights. I always felt that Elizabeth was cautious because of what she saw growing up. Women of the period didn’t have many rights and once she became Queen why would you want to be subservient ever again to anyone. I’d like to hear more about her relationship with her siblings and why she didn’t allow other women at court such as Amy Dudley. She obviously wanted to be the center of all things. I hope you enjoy hearing our comments and that by exploring our history we can gain insights about ourselves.
Not to mention the times it was suggested that she should have married Edward Courtenay ... He is usually mentioned as weak, mentally unstable, and power hungry. He had already been spoken of as a possible candidate for marriage with Mary I before her marriage to Phillip, and suggested a couple of times for Elizabeth.. He did have some smaller claim to the English throne, and was said to be not unattractive. But the man seems to also have been arrogant and not very bright, many of his personality traits not very desirable in a King Consort. I fully believe that no matter what else was happening or who was part of her dreams and desires, the Queen inside of her knew and acknowledged that there was no way to be a Queen regnant and married, too, without risking the independence of thought and action that she was accustomed to. I think it is valid that strong men she was attracted to would have also been at loggerheads with her and against her if she shared or gave up her power in order to marry. I think that was her ultimate thought on the matter, even though no children, and no permanent partner was the cost. I also believe she was quite sure she would never have a faithful and true lover who would not betray her and to her as woman, and as Queen, that was just unacceptable.
Elizabeth told Robert Dudley she'd never marry when she was EIGHT. The age she was when poor Catherine Howard, the young bubbly stepmother who showered her with treats and affection, was sent to the block by her father. Combine that with her sister and cousin's marriages going belly up and there's ENOUGH reasons there for her to never want to marry. The idea of her having a bastard is ludicrous as she was far too observed and spied upon for that to EVER have happened.
She was tired of men’s sh*t. She saw how disastrous it was for women around her and didn’t want that for herself.
That's my guess too.
or she was butch..
I honestly can’t say I blame her, she had a pretty traumatising upbringing
I don’t care how nurturing a husband would be, childbirth killed the women around her when their husbands didn’t. Why marry, but to bear children?
@@ellencook1658 - and until the advent of antibiotics, the number 1 killer of women was childbirth. Either during or from infection in the post-partum period.
10 year old Elizabeth was known to be extremely intelligent, and was fluent and literate in multiple languages. The idea that a random village boy, who had a passing resemblance, could just take her place, is laughable. 🤦🏻♀️
That was my exact thought as the idea was mentioned in the video!
I watched an entire documentary about this specific myth/idea. It was compelling to a point, but mostly ridiculously laughable.. however entertaining. This documentary showed me how easily one can create or suggest evidence and gain an actual following of people who agree or believe, however outlandish or silly. I only mention this because I had never heard this theory before at the time (and was just beginning my [let's be honest and call it an obsession] with Queen Elizabeth I and queens throughout history) and I although I can't remember the exact documentary or its name, the creators were very convincing.. as convincing as one could be about such a notion. Still, so funny though. Cheers to both of you!
@@MrAdryan1603 The problem is these techniques are used by modern politicians and others. To us it is amusing, but not so much when you realise the implications. It is only too easy to make the average person believe whatever you want them to believe.
Great day....she witnessed her father's cruelty of women. She could of married a jerk in disguise and he could of had her done in. One of the bravest women to ever live. I admire her so much. I think she loved but I cannot blame her one bit and I'm so sorry she had to watch all her loved ones die. Thomas Seymore.....I'd like to see him in the coal mines. Traumatized, emotionally abused, surrounded by men who could never understand a great mind like Queen Elizabeth 1.
@@MrAdryan1603 Agreed, there's so many holes in this allegation it beggars belief. Even a preposterous theory can be made to seem plausible if the storyteller is convincing enough and reality sufficiently bent to support a narrative. Add a few outright lies that a number of gullible people will accept with few questions asked and you have a 'conspiracy'.
I think we need to understand the world in which Elizabeth I lived at. It was a man’s world, females were only seen as objects that were only good to procreate and serve men. Having a female in a position of power was horrific for most people, including females. I think One of the reasons Elizabeth I didn’t marry was because by doing so, she would be overshadowed by her husband power wise and also she would have to face the challenges and dangers of motherhood.
YES YES YES!!!!! I AGREE TOTALLY!!!!!
I think there was more to it than that. Mary observed as a girl and later as a young woman just how dangerous the monarchy could be. She herself dodged a bullet when she was placed under arrest (or at least detention) for allegations of sedition. She knew that to marry would invite more trouble and intrigue into the Court. As long as she stalled her marriage (intentionally or not) she could keep those political forces who would destabilize her reign away from the levers of power. As an egnimatic personality she kept friend and foe guessing and off balance.
That's a very interesting theory. Absolutely that could be right.
I am in complete agreement with this opinion.
exactly , Elizabeth if she had married would have lost her power , she would never permit any man to have power over her especially after the history in her family , ie her father having her mother murdered on trumped up lies
While I am sure that Elizabeth's childhood traumas were a huge influence, I believe the most convincing reason that she chose not to marry was that she did not want to give up her rule. Honestly, I believe that she was very smart in making this choice.
Craftybunny I agree. She had all the power, without the headache of marriage.
Yeah, all these strange theories, but as the saying goes, the most obvious answer is usually the correct one. Though also I think it's odd that they come up with stuff like 'she was a man!' and people love playing up the idea of her having tons of lovers she just wouldn't marry, but no one just says... Maybe she was asexual and didn't have an interest in it in the first place, anyway...
That’s sort of what I figured. Back then marriage and having to go through pregnancy/childbirth would suck. But especially going from the most important, powerful person in court that everyone needs to pay attention to second place would be a huge step down. Especially after her childhood. I wouldn’t want to back down either.
I would agree. A queen as ruler instead of King was still a very new concept. I'm sure she knew it would always be a battle to keep her ultimate power over her country if she married, either foreign or domestically.
I agree. For the same reason, Queen Elizabeth II is married to Prince Phillip - not King Phillip.
Elizabeth's refusal to marry also gave her a great amount of power as long as she was of child-bearing years. Every eligible man in Europe was clamoring for her hand and she was able to play one against the other to her advantage.
Granted, Elizabeth had few good examples of married life in her youth. But I think she told us all what her actual position was when she said, "I will have one mistress here and no master! No man shall rule over me." It was political: Elizabeth would not share power.
I agree. Besides, Elizabeth saw herself as a prince with the weak and feeble body of a woman.
Honestly that was pretty damn smart of her
Henry's daughters were in an unusual position. While any number of European princesses might be shopped around for several years for an advantageous match (look at the girls' own aunt, Anne of Cleves), Mary and Elizabeth had very questionable status--were they legitimate or not? Once they were free of father and brother, they, particularly Mary, were getting a little old to marry. The consequences for Mary we see--she made her own choice, but he did not care for her; his status in England was debatable; she was too old to conceive. Elizabeth, again, might have made her own choice, but marriage would have been distasteful to her for numerous reasons. What does her childhood prove? That if you love a man, he kills you (Boleyn, Howard), threatens to kill you (Parr), shames or repudiates you (Aragon, Cleves), or you die in childbirth (Seymour). Even if he's a wonderful man, what is his rank? Does he rule, reign, advise? Does he get to practice his own religion, or not? See Victoria's reign for several rounds of awkwardness about a Prince Consort's role (Anne's husband was amazingly compliant). For all those reasons, marriage would have seemed the worst choice. She wasn't uninterested in sex and male beauty--but marriage? No.
Great analysis. You pretty much nailed it. It's a wonder so many people adhere to theories about Elizabeth's reluctance to marry that resort to unusual circumstances, when there were numerous mundane reasons for her to avoid a union. Plenty of contemporary examples why she shouldn't have.
She wasn’t prepared to give away her power and control. Props to her ♥️
In my opinion, Elizabeth the first never married for many reasons all very good ones as well. First, look at her childhood, the killing of her mother, the death of Queen Jane, the death of Katherine Howard, these would have left a lasting impression on the child. Then the nightmare of her stepmother's husband, Thomas Seymour, I personally know what that is like having lived through it myself. Then the business with her brother, her sister.....not so much them, but those close to them who feared her as a replacement ruler. She pretty much had to do battle of the wits through those years. And of course all the reason you mentioned but one other one as well. She knew all too well that if she married she would not know if it was because he loved her or the crown was what he wanted. In a royal court that was the utmost on everyone's mind.....POWER. I think she was right in refusing to marry, she had more than enough to deal with just ruling England. But to have to deal with a husband and possibly facing death because she had gotten pregnant would have too much indeed for any woman to deal with in those days.
All true as well as how she saw Mary Queen of Scots and her marriages.
Surrounded by ladies-in-waiting her whole life its highly unlikely that if Elizabeth didn't menstruate every month somebody would have said SOMETHING about it. Personally I think Elizabeth wanted to keep every ounce of power she had. She loved Dudley but even he was ambitious and she knew it. And secondary to all this the deaths, natural or otherwiswe made her very wary of the institution of marriage. Bu was she a virgin? Doubtful. I think Dudley relieved her of that. Ans she loved him to the end. She kept his last letter to her by her bedside til she died. I think she and Dudley had a great love affair that lasted for years.She was probably and luckily, barren.
as a child of divorced parents/ abusive parents it has affected me into not being able to have simple friendships , I am sure that Elizabeth's childhood traumas were a huge influence like it is with me
She was shown, first hand, how destabilizing marriage was. That’s all she knew of marriage. Why would she want that? As Queen, she was the only woman around who could choose not to marry.
Elizabeths well attested intelligence was the reason she had no intention of marrying. Her tutor Robert Ascham declared there "were not four men in the realm who could best her". She used her formidable intelligence to avoid the pitfalls of marriage in a terrifying age for women
I also think that queen Elizabeth 1 did not want to share her power-she was both “king and queen.”
As a Swede, I can say she really dodged a bullet with rejecting Eric XIV. He became mad, and ended up being poisoned by his own brother, Johan III, and it says a lot when the guy who had his own brother killed was the sanest person in their family.
I like your last theory. I always leaned more on her being afraid of marriage due to her childhood experiences, sexual abuse, and not having authority over her own life.
Although I've always enjoyed the conspiracy theory about Elizabeth being a substituted boy as improbable as it is, your gentle debunking is the most sensible I've ever heard. I've always thought Elizabeth was too strong to hand over her self control and kingdom to a husband. This is a brilliant analysis.
What an excellent video. I love how you discuss the likely reality rather than the romance of history.
Honestly, I think her whole life before she became Queen of England was just SO precarious. She could have been imprisoned or assassinated at any time and she knew it. Once Queen, why would she be in a hurry to hand over that power to a man, as her half-sister had done. "This is God's doing. And it is marvelous!" She was there by the Grace of God and decided to rule like her father. Whatever the faults of her reign, she was an amazing woman.
I think for the upbringing that she had (being constantly subjected to other peoples' will) could also have had a lot to do with a determination to maintain her position as the ruler - and not the ruled. A husband, especially a foreign monarch, would have taken a lot of the control that she had fought hard to gain. I don't mean just political power but also the level of control she had of her own fate, even in day to day living. Keeping herself insulated from the immediate demands of a husband seem like a good reason, especially when you consider the lives of women in that period.
I think the trauma of her childhood, added to the fact that her status was changed so much with being legitimate then illegitimate, the emotional trauma her sister Mary inflicted during her short reign, then being told that as a woman she needed a husband to "help" her rule, Elizabeth just decided that enough was enough and she would show everybody that a woman could and would be in charge of her own life and destiny. Which is something I always admired about her.
I love these videos! I'm on a QUARANTINE QUEEN obsession and Dr. Kat is the expert!
Agreed!
Not having children was probably a huge motivation for Elizabeth to avoid marriage. So many women in her life/ family, and women in general at that time, died because of childbirth and pregnancy (and from producing female children when the pressure was on for a male heir). No wonder she gave the whole thing a miss.
Your words, Dr. Kat, about Elizabeth I's not marrying move me deeply. All of the possibilities that you mention seem fully plausible-- fully accurate. If the young Elizabeth had been molested by that man, she would have been traumatized by the idea of sex and sexuality all her life long. How could she possibly have worked through that abuse emotionally at that time? Impossible. She loved Dudley, but she could not have him for so many reasons. A foreign match of any kind was simply out of the question. Horrifically, virtually every example of marriage that she saw before her was beyond unbearable. Both choice and circumstance seem to leave Elizabeth with only one option: to remain unmarried in a patriarchal universe that expects and demands that she follow so-called womanly duties: please a man and reproduce. The Queen, however, had to be a King or a Prince, if one will, just to survive, and this Queen-King/Prince (I am thinking of her 'Speech to the Troops at Tilbury') with such a traumatic history is not going to marry another King and further traumatize herself and, very possibly if not likely, lose both her kingdom and her life.
I think also the risk of childbirth was throwing her off... She lost 2 step-mothers and for sure even more women around her due to this issue...
I really wonder what she had in mind regarding what will happen to the throne after her death and being the last Tudor... She must have a lot of thoughts about it...
Your videos are a balm to the spirit of an Anglophile. As to the matter of Good Queen Bess, I think you pretty much covered it all. I can only speculate that she suffered of something akin to extreme anxiety disorder as we would call it today.
All of the Elizabeth wasn't a real woman theories are hilariously convoluted at best, sexist at worst
yeah, like "oh, she was a great queen? she must be a man"
Katherine K I know....right? Total woman hater BS!
Katherine K I remember reading years ago that she had "hermaphroditic genitals" but in no way do I present it as fact, obviously it's something I wasn't privy to personally. I've read she had her suitors but have never seen journals by any of them.
Katherine K I might add her father gave her little reason to trust men
I’m pretty sure I read that when her council was desperately trying to marry her off so there could be an heir to continue the Tudor line, they got constant reports on her menstrual periods from her ladies in waiting, maids, and laundresses. They needed to know that she was at least exhibiting the outward signs of fertility as they were basically negotiating matters of state based on her ability to produce an heir! It’s repugnant to a modern woman’s sensibilities that all these people would know the timing of her bodily functions, and that matters of state could be directed by them, but there it is..... it was a different world.
There is also the possibility that, should she marry and have a son, her husband would rule in her stead and she would lose her throne in this way. Thats what ultimately happened to Mary Queen of Scots. She had a son so she was now no longer needed. The fact that she made it easy by marrying Bothwell is just an aside. Elizabeth always said there is one mistress here and no master. If Elizabeth married, that would no longer be the case. If she had a son, Elizabeth was no longer needed.
Mary should have supported her son's claim to the throne instead of trying to take it away from him. She spent way too much time with Catherine de Medici.
How deeply was the concept of Jure Uxoris, King by marriage institutionalised in England? I know it was in Spain where Philips the Fair became king by marriage. Mary needed a strong alley and made Philips of Spain king of England, but was it automatic? Could Elisabeth not just have married and promoted her husband no further then Prince Consort?
Thank you for this thorough analysis! It goads me that a common conception of why she never married is that it must be something pathological, that it couldn't have been something she reasoned out and decided was in her best interest. Your explanations do a phenomenal job of demonstrating what a big deal her choice was and how complex her reasoning may have been. I really enjoyed it!
I feel strongly that that Queen feared the power a husband would have had over her. Her mother was murdered by her husband the King. Charles in Florida USA
I agree with you. I believe it had to do with
upbringing, choices, and ruling on her own.
I think you're right about Elizabeth not being a virgin and was afraid that everybody would think that she was a loose women. And maybe she would lose her crown, and why should share it. After all she had gone through hell to be crowned. 👍
Even as a child Elizabeth was extremely intelligent and I'm sure that having seen what befell all the queens surrounding her during her upbringing, she saw both marriage and childbirth as threats to her life and crown. She had somehow survived all the seemingly insurmountable obstacles between her and the throne and, I think, wisely decided to avoid marriage altogether.
Thomas Seymour possibly had his way with poor Elizabeth and yes her status and England up for disaster had her virginity been destroyed ! Thank you for sharing Dr Kat🤩
Alison Stephenson I remember biology classes& come from a family with 5 generations of Dr's& nurses. It's long been my understanding that the absence of a Hyman isn't necessarily indicative of the "loss of virginity" (Although its presence is certainly considered "a tamperproof seal" still intact) it seems to me that the average man is in no position to simply infer one way or the other as to whether a gal was a virgin based solely on the existence of a Hyman.
Alison Stephenson PS, I don't at all discount the possibility of molestation at the hands of Seymour, and also imagine that some aspects of feminine physiology were still in the dark ages & that the hymen was considered a like a "notary's seal on a document". Maybe too, both Henry&Seymour's behavior towards women convinced her not to be subservient. I don't know...Coronavirus avoidance made me watch a Utube video&comment.🤗
Dallas DautermanDallas That’s right, but they placed great store by an intact hymen in those days.
I love her energy. She also has the sweetest and inviting face. Makes me want to go to her house for some warm cookies & a nap.
Dr Cat’s ability to give a clear full summary of historical figures and events is outstanding.
"Or a 5 o'clock shadow'' :D Brilliant!
😉
Excellent! Thanks for this. I believe from all that I've read and viewed that Elizabeth was simply too shrewd to tie herself to any royal marriage. As a single "virgin" queen she was a free agent.
She was an intelligent and wordly woman who had already discovered what men were capable of before coming to the throne of England, and by doing so and in her position and taking into consideration the types she was surrounded by, chose her country above her own desire to procreate or marry. I would also add that she was in fear of dying at child birth knowing the track record of other woman she was surrounded by. You only have to look at the life of our own Queen today to understand the pressures having a husband could put upon her , fortunately for our Queen , she went into her marriage to Philip believing that he and her would have a life together with their kids long before she would ascend to the throne .OR SO SHE THOUGHT !!!
Really enjoying your channel Dr Kat and have been binge watching, it reminds me of the seminars back at uni 25 years ago now! I think many of those theories hold water, aside from the Bisley boy, the illigitimate baby and Trans gender Elizabeth! Yes - someone would have noticed! I also don't think she would have been old enough to be very aware of her own mother's death, as I understand Anne Boleyn didn't see much of her little daughter, as the child had her own household as a todler. I think Elizabeth watched everything, she was incredibly intelligent and shrewd, a bit of a 'tough coookie', I don't think she would ever have let her heart rule her head, although undeniably she did love Dudley. Your first analysis about her choice of suiters is a great and one I didn't know about, and yes - it makes perfect sense that was a big part of her not wanting to marry. PS - would love to see a video about that 'scandalous' Lord you mentioned in your Aphra Behn talk!
I think she had a few reasons not to get married:
1. Her mother was murdered by her father
2. Her stepmother died after giving birth
3. An other stepmother was also murdered by her father
4. She was most likely sexualy abused by Thomas Seymour
5. Her sister's marige to a foreign prince was a complete failure
6. Her cousin's mariges to domestic noblemen were also failures that led to her lossing her power
7. She couldn't marry the man she loved
8. If she got married she would lose her power and be seen as a breeding mashine and nothing more
9. If she got married and it was proven that she wasn't a virgin, then the marige would be annulled and the catholic forces would be able to attack England and take her throne
10. There wasn't anybody abroad or domestically who would be a good match without possing a threat to the country and her rule
Overall i think that not getting married was the best thing for her country and her shelf, she was a very powerful woman and sharing that power was simply not an option for her. Most of her young life she felt like she didn't have any control, i think that after taking control of her life for the first time it must have been unthinkable for her to lose this control again. Because that was what it ment to be married back then, at least for women. Also seeing what her father did to his wifes must have been teriffying for her and must have made her mistrust men.
As for the rumors of her being a man, misogynistic at best! She ruled a country successfully so she must have been a man! It is utterly ridiculous.
Also if you look indo the allegations that she might have had a child with Dudley there might be some truth to it. In 1561 she was confined to bed with a mysterious illness , the Spanish ambassador reported she had a swelling of the abdomen. They say she was suffering from dropsy - now known as oedema - an abnormal swelling of the body due to a build-up of fluid, but many of the ladies-in-waiting at the Queen's court successfully concealed their own pregnancies at the time. There was also a man that was caught at Spain after his ship was wrecked and confesed to being her son. This could very well be a complete lie made by the spanish in order to overthone her but it is very interesting theory.
No matter what we believe about her she was and will remain one of England's best rulers!
One year late, but I'm in love with your channel!
I think she was her father's daughter in the desire for absolute power. Had she married, her power would have been lessened or even extinguished by her husband. She could have dalliance behind closed doors and never once give up her power to a male. She put on the mask of the virgin queen and it served her well. I think her father soured her on the idea of "kings" and marriage. She was a smart cookie.
Elizabeth was a smart woman, and from this video it seems that there was a combination of factors that weighed against her marrying and not enough compelling reasons why she should marry. Too much to lose and not enough to gain. I think that from a relatively early age she made the decision to remain unmarried and she stuck to it. As a single person myself, I understand that.
There is, I am convinced, a taint of misogyny in so many theories about Elizabeth I. Partially the unwillingness to believe a female monarch can be an impressive as she was, coupled with a reluctance to admit she might be a healthy woman who did not want to marry a man. Hence the convoluted theories about her physical health, about her gender, etc.
Me, I think you break it down very well. For obvious personal reasons she would be reluctant to marry. Likewise there wasn't really an appropriate match (although she evidently desired to marry her "Frog" i.e. the brother of the French King, in middle age) coupled with stone-cold assessment of what marriage could mean for herself and her reign. Likewise she had a policy of waiting, putting things off, not rushing in. This showed in her approach to marriage as well as everything else. I suspect she was very reluctant to wed, but willing enough had the exactly right candidate appeared on the stage--which ultimately never happened.
Were she not a virgin, which is of course perfectly possible, then the very issues you bring up would be a legitimate point (although frankly lots of women break their hymens in all sorts of ways long before they have sex--my own mother did so horse back riding).
You didn't mention another theory I"ve heard put forth, namely that she was a lesbian. While not impossible, it seems strange then the rumor seems to have never cropped up during her lifetime. Or didn't as far as I know. My impression was that all her close favorites were men, and while various ladies were close to the Queen none seemed to behave in the way such royal paramours often do. As far as I am aware, and by this point surely someone would have mentioned this and gone on about it ad nauseum. Mind you, the concept of "homosexuality" as such did not exist in her lifetime, not as we understand it. Perhaps also some would assume that such a powerful, willful woman if she were gay would of necessity be "butch" which is not at all the case.
BTW I really enjoyed your review of "MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS" and wonder what you thought of "THE FAVOURITE" as well as your reaction to the upcoming Catherine the Great series "THE GREAT"?
I just stumbled over these and absolutely find them fascinating. You keep the interest in the video viewer and the historical stories are very interesting. Thank you.
Thank you! I love this discussion and all of your other videos. You are so insightful! What a comprehensive list of possibilities you present here, all great explanations of why she didn't marry. Fear of losing her power to rule, more than losing her life, I think, was her main reason. What I truly admire was her ability to dodge all efforts and arguments by her people and her closest advisors to persuade her, and really heavily pressure her, to do otherwise. She was a very strong individual.
Hi Dr Kat! I am delighted to hear your wonderful stories about the Tudors. I believe Elizabeth never married because she was unable to trust man, after realising what her mother went through. All the best and keep yourself safe.
firstly elizabeth was a strong woman...secondly being a queen or king is a political environment in which all decisions are for political advantage..for her it was more advantageous to stay unmarried and parley with thoes looking for political advantages through marriage with a queen...but staying single she keeps the advantage in having the control politicaly. It doesn't help that it was dangerous to give birth in thoes days ....I feel this was more of a political choice rather than a personal one.
@Tigers Wood she was a strong woman!
I think that it’s a little bit of all the points you brought up.❤️😘
This all makes complete sense. Very interesting and well-researched. Our teachers killed any interest in history in the "good old days".
dkdjpage so so true back in the day 🤨
It's hard for me to think of a more traumatizing royal father than Henry VIII. And there's stiff competition!
Her desicion proved to be wise in the end. I think it's a tricky balance for any leader to comfortably marry political leadership with marriage and children.
Maybe she wanted to end the Tudor line to avenge her mother.
I’m so happy I found these videos. I love history and Dr. Kat does a great job.
Dr. Kat, thanks for these lectures on UA-cam. I studied history in college and have always enjoyed it as a past-time and your lectures are wonderful to listen to as well. I didn't wind up becoming a historian, which was my undergraduate dream, but have spent these last many years in special education in stead. Thanks for brightening my evenings with your work!
I myself think that she looked at the disastrous family she came from and the damage they had created to their own wives, children and the country and didn't want to add to it. She had an heir in James, her cousins son, so she wasn't going to leave her country without a King. Her father was a murderous monster, no matter how you look at it. Her sister had killed her thousands trying to drag the country back to Catholicism. If she did love Dudley and couldn't marry the man she did love, she would have to submit to someone she might not really care for. I think she just simply didn't think it was worth the personal pain to herself.
The possible lack of virginity could have been dealt with, with sworn doctors affidavits and payoffs, if she really wanted to deal with it. It doesn't really seem like it would be too hard to have beheaded someone that would later claim it was all a lie. She had plenty of people executed for lots of reasons, I don't think she would have quibbled over this as a reason. She did a good job, and steered England in some hard times and kept England, England.
New subscriber here - just wanted to drop a note to say I’ve adored watching your videos! Your insights are great, and I love the way you express your points so effortlessly. You are an excellent speaker!
I do think there is some merit that the relationship with Seymour went further. Catherine Parr has her removed to a location where trusted people make sure access to her is controlled. I don't think it is a coincidence.
If she loved her country, which she did, she would have felt obligated to continue the dynasty. Not just to keep off Scottish rule but also to keep the leftover Plantagenets at bay.
I just found your channel a few days ago and I'm so glad I did. You truly make me feel very welcome 💕
Just found your channel this week, love it. I am from Holland but obsessed with the Tudors, read many books about them . I probably know more about them than about our own royals.
I like those book cases behind you. It gives me an idea for what I would like in my house
Love Dr. Kat and the themes she explores. Very unique presentations.
Elizabeth spent the first 25 years of her life at the mercy of other people, subject always to suspicion and political forces beyond her control. When she became Queen, Elizabeth was at last free. How glorious it must have been for her to finally be in charge of her own destiny! I think Elizabeth knew the moment she married she would lose all control over her existence once again. So she resolved never to marry. Also, although she was genuinely fond of many men and LOVED male attention, the only man Elizabeth ever really loved enough to make her contemplate marriage was Robert Dudley. But she could not marry her Sweet Robin and keep her throne. That was the hard truth of the matter. I always feel like Elizabeth saw things the way they really were-not how she would like them to be, and that insight served her well. If she wanted to be the Mistress and have no Master then she could never marry, and that is why she decided to reign alone for 45 years. What a woman.
Elizabeth was wickedly smart and was no fool. She made a decision and she was set on it. The Queen was continually harassed by her advisors, but to no avail. Elizabeth was smarter than them all. She knew how much she had to loose and had seen others loose it disastrously. A marriage was just one step on a slippery slope that she wasn't prepared to take.
In my opinion, the only actress who has played Elizabeth convincingly is Glenda Jackson in TV series Elizabeth R.
I have to agree, Glenda gave the role her all.
I loved Ann Marie Duff as Elizabeth.
Amen! 🙌
@@theresapierce3934 I didn't like Glenda's portrayal....Elizabeth was subtle; charming..not strident. Glenda is "too much".
When I picture Elizabeth, Glenda Jackson's portrayal always comes to mind.
You are creating a wonderful series, I appreciate the work you put in researching your topic. As for Elizabeth 1 not getting married, I can see were you think it would be highly doubtful that she is really a man, but being a virgin I don't think she was either. I can agree that there might have been evidence that she was not a virgin and had a child if they did an autopsy on her. That is why she didn't want one. To me she is acting like someone who has been abused, and goodness, I hope she didn't get pregnant from that. Even though it is far fetched, the possibility is there.
I'm guide in the States Musems, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany. One of our Dukes, Adolf of Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorf (1526 - 86), brother of the Danish king Christian III, ( here we live in the northern part of Germany, which changed from being Danish to German and reverse during the centuries ) asked Elisabeth to marry him. He got no, but a lifelong pension and the Order of the Garter. We learned that the queen as the head of the Church of England wanted to be similar to the Virgin Mary, so she chose not to be married. That's what I tell the museum visitors.
I wonder how much her father’s treatment of his Queens, including her own mother, may have set her on a course of independence. The refusal to marry (if that was what it came down to) was a redemptive gesture for all those women?
Thank you, Ma'am for these great videos. I'm working my through everyone of them 😊🇬🇧. I actually thought I know my Royal history until I started watching your videos lol then realised I've missed out on some parts.
Loving your videos - and it takes me just as long to read the interesting comments
Loving your work Dr Kat. I really enjoy this channel
I think she saw the examples of what happened to her mother, her sister, her step-mothers and her cousin when they placed their fates in the hands of men and knew it was far safer to stay unmarried.
I just finished Dame Edith Sitwell's, The Queens and the Hive, about Elizabeth I's reign. A great read, with many epistolary contributions. Sitwell used excerpts of the letters of many contemporaries surrounding the important events of the time to great effect. One of the standouts was Lady Lennox, Lord Darnley's formidable mother. The episode of the Earl of Essex at the later part of her life really troubled her. I held off reading of her death, because I knew how difficult the days leading up to it were, and I didn't want to let her go. I think she was haunted, and had nightmares. She was truly extraordinary.
Thank you so, so much, Dr. Kat. It is a pleasure to hear historical knowledge combined with logic and common sense applied to the contemporaneous gossip of the day as well as to subsequent irresponsible speculation about historical figures. Refreshing!! Your work helps us ground ourselves more firmly in what was more likely to be the objective reality of the day.
And let's call the "Maybe Elizabeth 1 was a man" trope exactly what it was and is: Infuriatingly misogynistic!
Your accounts of these royal monarchs are very entertaining. You are an avid story teller.. Looking forward to hearing more.. 😊
I'm in the US and am enjoying learning about British royalty and how the country worked/works. Thank you for such simple but interesting insight. New subscriber
This is the 3rd video I’ve watched and I’ve subscribed. I love how you talk about history. Always loved our past ❤️
I absolutely LOVE history AND your channel!!!! New subbie here 🥰
I also think that one reason Elizabeth I didn’t marry was because she wanted to prove that she could rule England as a woman. If she had married, there is potential that a husband would have been seen as the “real” monarch and she would have been pushed aside and not allowed to rule. Also, she may have been frightened of childbirth. Both Jane Seymour and Katharine Parr died as a result of childbirth, and perhaps Elizabeth didn’t want to risk that happening to her, especially since she would have had no control of what happened to her child, if it had survived. What I also find interesting is that she still chose James to be her heir (even though he arguably had the best claim anyway). She had to have known about his homosexual tendencies. At that time, that would have been seen as a political problem. I guess she gave into the guilt for kiilling his mother.
If she did chose him, that is? We probably shouldn't rule out more Cecil meddling (from Robert this time)!
Reading the Past I’dike to know a bit more about how/why she chose this particular man as her heir and how/why meddling may have been an issue for the final choice.
Keeping power in her control is certainly a major part of it. More subtly, she watched her family and courtiers play the marriage game. When ever Henry VIII wanted a war and needed backing, he offered up one of his daughters to seal the deal. Mary drew dangerous political lines with many other courts and her own country by locking in her choice of Phillip. If a potential rival in war thinks they can marry the conflict out rather than fight a costly war, Elizabeth could politically maneuver in a way her sister couldn't.
Just discovered your videos and am really enjoying them. Cheers.
It might be because of my interest in how early childhood trauma and events shape a person, I think that you’ve hit the nail on the head there with Queen Elizabeth l having witnessed / been exposed to so many bad experiences of people in her life that were all extremely close to her. I think one of those things would stick let alone all of them. Perhaps Elizabeth was an observer and she was able to completely change “the norm”. Her families line would have followed in king James 1st / 6th. It’s interesting to me. I have always thought Anne Boleyn and Elizabeth were very ahead of their time. Perhaps if the Tudor family of the 15th century were to land in our world Anne and Elizabeth would be the least shocked.
So brilliant, Dr. Kat. Thank you.
The problem about Elizabeth's life is that the official version of it is so rigid. It is known she had affairs with more than one of her noble men, but we don't know how far she went with them. It is evident she knew the risks of accepting a husband. Surely she made the conclusion her loyal ministers would serve her better than a consort king. Dr Kat, please make a video telling exactly what happened during Elizabeth's last days and what happened to her body between her death and her burial. In the 70s I read she had a terrible time dying: hallucinations in which she burnt in hell for all the people she sent to execution. Then, after dying, her body was disrespectfully treated by servants. Years later historians kept quiet about that.
I have questions regarding Elizabeth I. After her death, what happened to to all of her dresses? Were the jewels removed from them? Were her dresses, other articles of clothing and jewelry disposed of by relatives, confidantes , the Council, or did King James dispose of them and to whom? What happened to the Council and her servants and staff? Were they dismissed by King James for his own people? How did the populace react to her death? Was King James well received or was his upcming reign dreaded? Did he make radical changes to the country? Did ge die loved or hayed by the populace? I recently subscribed to your channel and you are so knowledgeable and interesting! You have such a different perspective than other historians! Thank you so much for making these videos!ns!
Can't remember where I read this but according to what i read her cloths were brought to a warehouse for storage and at some point said warehouse went up in flames..as for her jewels they belonged to the royal house so would have been passed down I am assuming at this point but it made sense to me ..
A lot of her clothes were destroyed in the great fire of London in the reign of Charles II. the royal wardrobe burned down. Additional Elizabeth likely had less clothes than contemporary monarchs to begin with as she was a fan of swapping around parts to make new outfits since she was comparatively poor. The jewels would have been recycled into other pieces
Some of her dresses were inherited by King James' wife.
So glad I found your channel. Sick of cable tv
Thanks! I just found the channel and loving getting caught up ! This is an awesome channel !
I’m so pleased you are enjoying the channel, thank you very much ☺️
Dr. Kat
I have just finished watching your June 21,2019 video The Virgin Queen.
As with all of your videos, I enjoyed it throughly. As to the question regarding Queen Elizabeth, and her decision not to marry. I believe her reasons were several, and well founded.
Historic knowledge paired with common sense! Thank you, dr.kat!
I think your analyses of the trauma she experienced as a child is spot on. Her father killing her mother would have been remembered. A clear message deep in her subconscious Marriage ~ Death . Let me give you a personal account. When I was 4 years of age my mother left me with my Grandparents whilst she went to work. They fought like cat and dog. I’m 62 and have never married.
the most plausible explanations to me are either that she didn't want to risk her rule by marrying and that witnessing the disastrous marriages around her probably turned her off of it. I also find it hard to believe that she had a bastard child with Robert Dudley or throught the sexual abuse of Thomas Seymour simply because, as is said many times, people were always watching her and it would have been recorded, especially if she did have a son. Even though in her childhood she was sent away and known as the late king's illegitimate daughter, she still would have been a somewhat high status individual and the birth of a child would have been noted by someone.
I found your channel a few months ago and I love your style. I detect a fondness for the Tudors and am enjoying your insights. I always felt that Elizabeth was cautious because of what she saw growing up. Women of the period didn’t have many rights and once she became Queen why would you want to be subservient ever again to anyone. I’d like to hear more about her relationship with her siblings and why she didn’t allow other women at court such as Amy Dudley. She obviously wanted to be the center of all things. I hope you enjoy hearing our comments and that by exploring our history we can gain insights about ourselves.
Hello, Im so glad i found your video. I was watching Clair Ridgeway. But you are so much more informative and more intertaining. B)
Ive watched 1000s of history docs from 100s or 1000 of presenters/up loaders your posts are awesome
You do a real good job
Kudos
Thank you
Subscribed
Not to mention the times it was suggested that she should have married Edward Courtenay ... He is usually mentioned as weak, mentally unstable, and power hungry. He had already been spoken of as a possible candidate for marriage with Mary I before her marriage to Phillip, and suggested a couple of times for Elizabeth.. He did have some smaller claim to the English throne, and was said to be not unattractive. But the man seems to also have been arrogant and not very bright, many of his personality traits not very desirable in a King Consort. I fully believe that no matter what else was happening or who was part of her dreams and desires, the Queen inside of her knew and acknowledged that there was no way to be a Queen regnant and married, too, without risking the independence of thought and action that she was accustomed to. I think it is valid that strong men she was attracted to would have also been at loggerheads with her and against her if she shared or gave up her power in order to marry. I think that was her ultimate thought on the matter, even though no children, and no permanent partner was the cost. I also believe she was quite sure she would never have a faithful and true lover who would not betray her and to her as woman, and as Queen, that was just unacceptable.
Your videos are quite addictive!!
Elizabeth loved her people, and her people loved her. I believe that was enough for her. No way she was willing to share those affections.
I think she decided to keep all of the power for herself..
You are a treasure! Thanks a million for your stellar videos.