![\"\"](\"https:\/\/ladyjanegrey.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/bookcover-john-dudley-white-cover-purple-light-letters-202x300.jpg\")
I don’t mind if people call her Lady Jane Grey, I do so myself. However, I think it’s also right to also call her Queen Jane, as she was de facto queen. There are documents she signed as Quene Jane. In her own understanding, and that of her council, she was of course de jure queen also, until they changed their minds under military pressure. I think historians should acknowledge that this was a civil war situation, like for example that of Queen Mathilda and King Stephen. In many countries it sometimes happened that there were several contenders for the throne at the same time, and they are usually counted as kings, emperors, or popes, by historians. <\/i> <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Richard Heath<\/b> (author of \u2018Killing Monarchs: Regicide in the Tudor and Stuart Age\u2019)<\/a> <\/p>\n As much as I attach no blame to Jane in the events of July 1553, she was essentially a usurper. That she was pushed into the situation and had never expressed any desire to become queen does not change that basic fact. As such I believe that the widely used name of Lady Jane Grey<\/b> is correct, even though she could be regarded as having been queen for nine days. It is however interesting that many of the references to Mary’s reign give it as commencing in July 1553, without gives a specific date – either 6th July (Edward’s death) or 18th July 9 (her acceptance by the Privy Council). <\/i> <\/p>\n Christine Hartweg (author of \u2018John Dudley: The Life of Lady Jane Grey\u2019s Father-In-Law \u2019) I don’t mind if people call her Lady Jane Grey, I do so myself. However, I think it’s also right to also call her Queen Jane, … Continue reading ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/ladyjanegrey.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/91fRwmHthJL._SY425_-198x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"