Abstract
Abstract Archbishop Matthew Parker feared that Elizabeth would be ‘strangely chronicled’. From her death to the screening of the film ‘Elizabeth’, the life of ‘Gloriana’ has been a subject for all kinds of imaginative fiction. History, too, has traded as much in myth as fact. Elizabeth's first historian, William Camden, was not responsible for the myth, although his translators were. The nineteenth century invented a ‘whiggish’ Elizabeth who identified herself with the destiny of her people, although the leading Tudor historian, A. J. Froude, was not a fan. Post-J. E. Neale and A. L. Rowse, Froude's critical interrogation of the reign has been revived in the latest Elizabethan historiography.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
