Sarah Hodder (author of ‘The Woodville Women: 100 Years of Plantagenet and Tudor History’)
I think Jane has become known to history as Lady Jane Grey and that should remain; it takes nothing away from her story, and the fact that she did become queen of England. Queen Jane makes me think of Jane Seymour, Henry VIII’s third queen, and I think Jane Grey deserves the individual recognition that her name, Lady Jane Grey, brings her.
Gemma Hollman (author of Royal Witches: From Joan of Navarre to Elizabeth Woodville)
In my personal opinion, I think for the second question that she should be Lady Jane Grey. Although there are other monarchs without a coronation who are considered monarchs (looking at you, Edward V and Edward VIII), these were theoretically less contentious accessions, and whilst for example Edward V was not crowned, he was the clear heir and was considered and proclaimed king for months, so I think a lack of coronation in his case is not enough to warrant him not being considered a king. For Jane, however, the line of succession was not clear cut, with multiple different complications and potential claimants (thanks for your messy history, Henry) and Jane was just one of those, who made a claim, but was swiftly knocked aside. True, she was proclaimed queen, but I don’t think in her case this is enough to consider her a queen, considering how short-lived and contentious this was. But I certainly think it is an interesting argument, and I can understand those who think she should be considered a queen!
