|
|
Which English monarch ruled England for the least amount of time?
Question
#40899. Asked by elizabethmc. (Nov 08 03 3:40 PM)
|
MissEmily
|
Lady Jane Grey, for nine days.
|
LadyMacb29
|
But would she really count as a legitimate monarch? She wasn't the next in line to the throne and it was only because of a conspiracy that she was allowed to hold the position.
I just don't know if I'd really count her, if you're looking for someone that the country in general perceived as their ruler.
|
Siskin
|
I agree that the times were confusing, but there is no doubt that Lady Jane Grey was the legitimate monarch, albeit for 9 days.
She was proclaimed Queen in July 1553 after the death of Edward VI. Even though the House of Tudor was before and after her short reign she was not included, but became the only member of the House of Suffolk.
My sources are 2 Handbooks of Kings and Queens plus
 http://www.dudleygenealogy.com/ladyj.html
|
griffinj
|
I probably agree with Siskin, "the New York Times Almanac" lists her. But "Royal Panoply, Brief Lives of the English Monarchs" and my encylopedia do not.
|
mibmob
|
The protestant protectors simply wanted a ruler who would carry on their reforms Mary of course would not. Edward V had the shortest reign if you are talking about direct lines but again he didn't get crowned.
|
griffinj
|
It's a tricky question. The Saxon and early Norman kings always named their successor, and the rule of primogeniture did not exist. So it’s a reasonable assumption that Edward VI had the right to name anyone as his heir (or heiress). If this was under duress, like any contract so signed, it would be invalid. And I believe the accepted rule is that the throne is never vacant. But the War of the Roses kings show that possession is nine points when it comes to being monarch.
Jane was never crowned nor, more importantly, anointed. But neither were Edwards V & VIII and they show up on all rolls. On Jane’s “accession” the Privy Council was divided as to whether she was rightfully queen, and she was never proclaimed by Parliament.
So I’ll vote on the side that Edward did have the right to name his own successor, and that Mary had the right to be Queen once she had shown she had the support (especially armed). But, as I said, these are very gray (or Grey) areas.
|
mibmob
|
Perhaps we should look at who reigned the shortest time who was anointed and crwoned. Richard III 1483-85.
|
Siskin
|
She was the legitimate monarch. There are sites galore for such evidence, as well as numerous books:
Lady Jane Grey was the eldest daughter of Henry Grey, Duke of Suffolk, and she was the great-grand-daughter of Henry VII.
She was proclaimed Queen after the death of her cousin, the protestant King Edward VI. She was actually fifth in line to the throne, but was his personal choice as she was a Protestant.
Edwards’s half-sister, Mary Tudor, who was the next in line for the throne, was out of favour being a devout Catholic.
Edward wanted to keep England firmly Protestant and he knew that Mary Tudor would take England back into the Catholic faith.
John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, was Protector to King Edward VI.
He persuaded the dying young king to will his crown to Lady Jane Grey, who by coincidence just happened to be the Duke’s daughter-in-law.
Edward died on 6th July 1553 and Lady Jane ascended to the throne with her husband Lord Guildford Dudley at her side.
|
mibmob
|
Aha! She was crowned - that makes the difference - I didn't realise that it went as far as that. She should actually be recorded as a Queen if she was actually crowned but mostly I find that she has not been.
|
griffinj
|
No Mibs, she was never formally crowned, there was never time. And the Duke of Monmoth, Bonnie Prince Charlie, and even Perkin Warbeck all had greater support at one time. Yet no-one ever lists them (save for Charlie and the Stuart loyalists). Jane's two advantages were Edward's will and the fact she was in London. If we go by the post-Restoration assumption that the monarch rules by the acceptance of Parliament, then she wasn't Queen.
|
mibmob
|
I found a site which said that she was crowned at the White Tower - seems a bit unorthodox. If she wasn't actually crowned then she falls into the Edward V category and the shortest reigning monarch must surely be Richard III.
|
Siskin
|
The previous link (which I forgot) was from the BBC History site.
This is about her crowning:
The next day (Monday 10th July, 1553) she was transported by barge down the Thames to the Tower of London, the banks of the river crowded with people trying to get a glimpse of their tiny Queen. She was crowned in the White Tower and took up residence in the Royal Chambers at the Tower. Much to Northumberland's displeasure she refused to give Guildford kingship.
http://coco.essortment.com/whowasladyjan_rgkj.htm
|
griffinj
|
According to 'The Children of Henry VII' by Alison Weir, after Jane got to the Tower on 10 July, the crown was brought to her by the Marquess of Winchester. She angrily rebuked him and would not let him place it on her head. "... at length Jane allowed him to place it on her head to see how it fitted." (p. 167) There was never any prelate or anointing. I wouldn't say this amounts to a coronation.
|
sequoianoir
|
Mibs? Not sure what crowning has to do with it exactly.
Re our current queen, Elizabeth II.
Her accession to the throne was on 6 February 1952 following the death of her father.
Her coronation did not take place until 16 months later on 2 June 1953.
If she had died before 2/6/53 would she have never been queen?
If she had died say on 6/2/53 (1 year after accession) would the UK not have had a monarch during this period or would the subsequent accession of Margaret be back-dated assuming she lived long enough to be crowned ?
I think not!
|
gmackematix
|
Other than Lady Grey the only Engish monarchs that have ruled for less than one year were Edmund Ironside, Harold II and the aforementioned Edward V and VIII.
|
Find something useful here? Please help us spread the word about FunTrivia. Recommend this page below!
|
Sign up to see all responses!
