Talk:Amy Robsart

message: Whether or not Dudley killed her, the rumours always claimed that she had shamed him in an argument and that he had decided to "dishonour" her, so anyone who was in alliance with her should watch their back. Isn't this evidence enough to claim some sort of punishment against the 1st Earl??
The evidence also claims that he repeatedly kept her away from court and the true rumours, and constantly lied to her about his relationship with Elizabeth, this shows a cheat and a liar. 
Even though whatever information about Lady Robsart's death today points more to one of Elizabeth's schemes than Dudley's, he treated Amy very wrongly indeed and he should have been punished for that.
But I guess, in a way, he did get punished, since he was ridiculed even more, returned to the background of court, and lost his only opportunity to complete his jigsaw to attaining the Royal Crown.
Sweetlife31 (talk) 06:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death and Dudley 

message: This is interesting:
:Dudley sent a friend to the country estate to check on the circumstances and did not attend the funeral as was proper and expected of the widowed husband in those days.
First I've heard of this custom. What was the basis of it? Drutt (talk) 14:27, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also quite unclear, since from a grammatical point of view this suggests that it WAS proper him for him to attend the funeral, but nevertheless he did not Vikingwoman2 (talk) 21:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It wasn't common or *proper & expected* at all for royalty/nobility to attend the funerals of close family members even as late as the 16th century.  Some may have done so in a private box within the church or cathedral, but not publicly.  Have you ever read where so & so was appointed as *chief mourner* for a royal or noble funeral?  They did the funeral arrangements & led the funeral procession in place of the deceased's family, & were often a relative or close friend, but not in the immediate family circle.  Henry VIII appointed Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk as Henry Fitzroy's chief mourner, & the king did not attend his only surviving son's funeral; does that indicate Henry murdered Henry?  No.  It was how it was done then.  Besides, Dudley was rather busy being held under house arrest at Kew, & even had he not been, it would be another 20 yrs before he dared do something without Elizabeth's permission & approval.   ScarletRibbons (talk) 04:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Funeral

message: I am going to move this page to Amy udley, as she is more known as this, if no one replies within 3 days I wil just move it. This is a place where you can voice your view!
:)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.56.94.13 (talk) 11:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lady Amy Dudley is completely wrong.  She would never have been called this, but simply Lady Dudley.  I have moved the article back to its previous title, the name by which she is best known.  If anyone wants to move it, I suggest you be aware that it is likely to be controversial and follow the procedure at Wikipedia:Requested moves.  Deb (talk) 15:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a period of several yrs when they were first wed that she WAS entitled to be called *Lady Amy Dudley*, as she assumed her husband's status as the son of an earl & later the son of a duke upon marrying.  Once he lost that status with the attainder of his father, he was no longer *Lord Robert Dudley*, but plain old *Master Robert Dudley*, & therefore she was plain old *Mistress Amy Dudley*, like any other untitled commoners.  (The Warwick title was dusted off & returned to Robert's eldest surviving brother Ambrose, not to Robert, so that gave him no status bump.)  Amy's husband was invested as a Knight of the Garter in April 1559, upping his status to *Sir Robert* & that of his wife to *Lady Dudley* for the last 17 mos of her life.  Dudley was not created Earl of Leicester until 1564, so after Northumberland's attainder Amy was not ever Lady Amy again.  Technically, the style of Lady Amy Dudley is correct, but ONLY until her father-in-law's execution.  Then she became Mistress Dudley, followed by Lady Dudley after his small elevation to knighthood.  I do concur that she has become ingrained in history as simply Amy Robsart (& I'd bet that was because of the status flipping; no one could agree on what to call her, though Lady Dudley would have been the right way to go as that is what she was known as when she died).  ScarletRibbons (talk) 04:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Robert Dudley was knighted sometime in 1549, around the time of his first military campaign. It is also wrong to state that Robert Dudley was no longer called "Lord Robert" after his father's attainder in 1553. Technically, they may have lost any "rights" but in reality the family continued their former usage of titles as if nothing had happened. Just read any contemporary chronicle, diary, letter, or ambassadorial report. The same way, his mother continued to be styled the Duchess of Northumberland. Buchraeumer (talk) 11:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to: AmyMove to: Amy Dudley 

message: I have completely overhauled this article and referenced it with more inline citations, as was requested on a template.
Buchraeumer (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Amended Article

message: Is it possible that the portrait miniature located in the "Life" section of this article has an incorrect caption? The same image file appears in the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portraiture_of_Elizabeth_I_of_England and carries the caption "Portrait miniature of Elizabeth as a princess, Levina Teerlinc, c. 1550." I have no special knowledge of this subject, but stumbled upon the inconsistency when researching Elizabeth I and Lord Dudley, and thought it best to bring this to the attention of the contributors.
Ghope (talk) 01:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The identity of this miniature's sitter is unknown, as is made clear in the caption in this article. The caption has a footnote in which the case in favour of Amy Robsart is explained. Roy Strong thinks it is Princess Elizabeth, but this has never been widely accepted, so the caption in the Elizabeth portraiture article should make clear that this is only one art historian's opinion; David Starkey suggested Lady Jane Grey, which has been rejected by Eric Ives and others, and there are apparently still other candidates. Buchraeumer (talk) 10:08, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait miniature caption