the great experiment england real

Smart News | May 5, 2023

The Real History Behind ‘Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story’

The new spinoff follows the royal matriarch as she falls in love with George III and navigates his worsening mental illness

Meilan Solly

Senior Associate Digital Editor, History

When Princess Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz first met George III in 1761, she “threw herself at his feet” in supplication, prompting the English king to raise her up, embrace her and lead her through the garden “up the steps into the palace,” as one observer recounted . Just a few hours later, the German princess married George, becoming England’s newest queen.

In poor health following a rough voyage at sea, Charlotte was so thin she could barely support the weight of her diamond-adorned wedding gown. As art collector and author Horace Walpole wrote in a letter the following day, “Her violet-velvet mantle and ermine [were] so heavy that the spectators knew as much of her upper half as the king himself.”

Despite this somewhat inauspicious start, Charlotte and George enjoyed an affectionate, fruitful partnership that endured until the king’s mental illness violently transformed his personality in the late 1780s. Now, a new spinoff of Netflix’s popular historical drama “ Bridgerton ” is revisiting the royal couple’s love story. Titled “ Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story ,” the six-episode limited series stars India Amarteifio as the young queen and Corey Mylchreest as her husband.

Golda Rosheuvel, who played an older Queen Charlotte in “Bridgerton,” reprises her role in a parallel storyline set in the 1810s. Today, these years are known as the Regency period , named for the window in which Charlotte’s son, the future George IV, ruled as regent in lieu of his father, whom Parliament had deemed mentally unfit .

Black Britons in “Bridgerton”

Like its sister show, “Queen Charlotte” takes substantial liberties with the historical record, portraying Charlotte as a Black woman whose marriage opened doors for people of color in 18th-century England. (In truth, most historians reject the theory that Charlotte was Black.) As Black aristocrat Lady Agatha Danbury says in “Bridgerton,” “We were two separate societies divided by color until a king fell in love with one of us.”

The new series expands on this imagined movement toward racial equality, explaining that George’s mother, Princess Augusta, hastily bestowed titles upon wealthy Black families in order to “remake the nobility in her [new daughter-in-law’s] image,” as Alison Herman writes for Variety . Dubbed the “ Great Experiment ,” the integration attempt isn’t immediately successful. Herman notes, “There’s some resistance from the old guard, though it’s never explicitly racist, again begging some follow-ups about the preexisting status quo.”

Racial relations in Georgian England were far more complicated than “Bridgerton” and “Queen Charlotte” suggest. According to Historic England , around 15,000 Black people lived in the country during the second half of the 18th century. The majority of these individuals worked in the domestic service as either paid or enslaved servants. Though Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807—in no small part due to the efforts of Black abolitionists like Ignatius Sancho and Olaudah Equiano —slavery remained legal in the British colonies until 1833 , and an exploitative practice in which newly freed adults were forced to work as apprentices for years remained in place until 1838.

“Bridgerton” takes place at a time when “diversity as we know what the word means did not exist,” historian Marlene Koenig tells Insider ’s Mikhaila Friel and Ayomikun Adekaiyero. While the show’s producers and stars have framed its inclusion of Black characters as a form of escapism and fantasy , the fact remains that slavery not only exists in the “Bridgerton” world but is also directly responsible for generating much of the wealth on display.

“You can’t say race isn’t of consequence when the world these characters inhabit was created in part through racism,” wrote critic Carolyn Hinds for the Observer in 2021. “Yes, slavery exists in this world, so how could race not matter? Having Black people strolling around in the background doesn’t erase that, and it’s not enough.”

The debate over Charlotte’s Black ancestry

The idea that Charlotte was Black stems from research conducted by historian Mario de Valdes y Cocom. Writing for PBS Frontline in 1997, he argued that Charlotte was “directly descended” from Margarita de Castro y Sousa, a 15th-century Portuguese noblewoman who was herself related to the 13th-century ruler Afonso III and his Moorish lover Madragana. Valdes further pointed to “the African characteristics evident in so many of the queen’s portraits ” as proof of his theory, noting that “artists of that period were expected to play down, soften or even obliterate features in a subject’s face, especially a woman’s, that were not considered to meet the standards of beauty for the times.”

Other scholars are skeptical of Valdes’ claims . As historian Lisa Hilton told Insider ’s Yoonji Han last year, the term “Moorish” was used to refer to anyone who lived in the Moorish Empire , regardless of their race. Even if Madragana was a Black woman, Hilton added, “after 500 years, it is extremely unlikely that traces of the genetic makeup would have appeared in the features of an 18th-century princess.” To put it another way, as Stuart Jeffries did for the Guardian in 2009, “[Historians] argue the generational distance between Charlotte and her presumed African forebear is so great as to make the suggestion ridiculous.”

While Charlotte probably wasn’t Black, this doesn’t mean the aristocracy was wholly white. Dido Elizabeth Belle , the mixed-race daughter of an enslaved woman and a Royal Navy captain, is widely considered to be Britain’s first Black aristocrat . Born in 1761, she was raised alongside a white cousin by her father’s uncle, the Earl of Mansfield, at his lavish London estate. By all accounts, Belle was treated as a member of the family, though she didn’t eat with the rest of the household when Massachusetts Governor Thomas Hutchinson stopped by for dinner in August 1779. “[She] has been educated by [the earl’s] family,” Hutchinson wrote in his diary. “He calls her Dido, which I suppose is all the name she has. He knows he has been reproached for [showing] a fondness for her.”

A century later, Queen Victoria agreed to serve as the godmother of Sarah Forbes Bonetta , a young girl born into a prominent Yoruba family. In the late 1840s, King Ghezo of Dahomey (most recently portrayed on the silver screen in The Woman King ) defeated Bonetta’s tribe, killed her parents and enslaved her. After a British captain failed to convince Ghezo to abandon his role in the slave trade in 1850, the king gifted Bonetta to him as consolation. Upon the pair’s arrival in England, Victoria agreed to take the girl “under her protection,” paying for her education and looking out for her throughout her life, wrote historian Caroline Bressey in a 2005 journal article .

George and Charlotte’s relationship

Born on May 19, 1744, Charlotte was the youngest daughter of the Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, a territory in what is now northern Germany. When Charlotte was 17, the new king of England, 22-year-old George III, sought her hand in marriage. According to History Extra ’s Catherine Curzon , George “needed a queen—and an heir—as a matter of urgency,” so he chose Charlotte from a “shortlist of eligible and suitable Protestant ladies.” Not a traditional beauty, she nevertheless had a “lively but equable temper,” in the words of one contemporary.

Charlotte landed in England on September 8, 1761, and married George that same night, within six hours of her arrival. Two weeks later, the couple held a joint coronation ; it ran so long that members of the congregation started eating during the sermon. Within a year of her wedding, Charlotte gave birth to the future George IV—the first of the couple’s 15 children , 13 of whom survived to adulthood.

Though they married for political gain rather than love, Charlotte and George held each other in high esteem. In a 1778 letter to her husband, the queen wrote :

You will have the benefit by your voyages to put spirit in every body, to be more known by the world, and if possible more beloved by the people in general. That must be the case, but not equal to the love of her who subscribes herself your very affectionate friend and wife Charlotte.

Both Charlotte and George were heavily involved in their children’s upbringing. While George is most often remembered for his mental illness and role in the Revolutionary War , “he was also a guy who was capable of a great deal of empathy,” historian James P. Ambuske told Smithsonian magazine ’s Sara Georgini in 2016. “He was very concerned, as any parent would be, about the well-being of his children and their education. He was well aware that he was raising potential future sovereigns, but he also wanted them to be good people.”

The king and queen shared a love of music , often playing duets together, with Charlotte on the harpsichord and George on the flute. While both preferred the informal, simple lives they led at home, the court they presided over—as seen in “Bridgerton”—was a fashionable , glittering one.

George suffered his first major bout of mental illness in 1788. The king suffered both physical pain and mental distress, including periods of “ incessant loquacity ” in which he talked until he foamed at the mouth. Unable to sleep, he spoke out of turn, accusing his wife of adultery and making inappropriate advances toward her attendants. On one occasion, George even physically assaulted his oldest son, George, Prince of Wales.

Doctors had few explanations for George’s sudden deterioration in health. (In the 1960s, a pair of historians attributed his behavior to a genetic blood disorder called porphyria, but more recent analyses suggest he had bipolar disorder.) Physician Francis Willis , a central figure in the 1994 film The Madness of King George , treated George with a combination of harsh methods, like coercion and physical restraints, and more humane strategies. “It’s likely that the king recovered in a few months despite, rather than because of, his treatment (which included leeching and cold baths),” notes Historic Royal Palaces on its website .

George’s illness took a toll on his wife and children, too. As novelist and court attendant Fanny Burney recorded in her diary , Charlotte repeatedly asked, “What will become of me?” Her “desponding” words “implied such complicated apprehensions,” Burney wrote . By 1789, Charlotte’s hair had turned white from stress. She clashed with Prince George as he rallied to be appointed regent in his father’s stead and only reconciled with her son in 1791, by which point the king had recovered.

George’s recovery wasn’t permanent. He continued to suffer from periodic bouts of mental illness, and in 1811, his son officially took control of the kingdom, serving as regent for the next nine years. During this Regency period, Charlotte presided over court in place of her son’s estranged wife, Caroline of Brunswick . She cared for the king faithfully but took care to never be alone with him. As Curzon writes, Charlotte “watched him fade away until he no longer recognized her.” The queen died of pneumonia in 1818 at age 74, predeceasing her husband by two years. They are buried near each other in the royal vault at Windsor Castle.

Reflecting on the loss experienced by Charlotte, the wife of Philip Lybbe Poyse, who had watched the couple’s coronation procession in 1761, remarked , “Never was anyone to be more pitied than her majesty, as no couple had ever been happier than they were before this greatest of all misfortunes.”

Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Meilan Solly | | READ MORE

Meilan Solly is Smithsonian magazine's senior associate digital editor, history.

Was the "Great Experiment" Actually a Thing in England or Just 'Bridgerton' Fiction?

Published May 22 2023, 3:50 p.m. ET

Young Queen Charlotte (India Ria Amarteifio) didn't sign up to be the symbol of the " great experiment " when she was betrothed to young King George III ( Corey Mylchreest ) in Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story .

However, she ends up fully embracing her role in order to make her new country's upper class far more diverse than it had been in the past.

So, what is the "great experiment" anyway? Was it something that actually occurred in England during the reign of the real King George III and Queen Charlotte ?

Here's everything we know.

What is the "great experiment"? Did it really happen in England?

Unfortunately, there was no real life historical precedent for the "great experiment" that occurs in Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story .

While there was no such thing as the great experiment in England during the reign of the real King George III and Queen Charlotte, there has been some ongoing historical debate over whether or not the real Charlotte has Black ancestry.

However, historically speaking, slavery was still unfortunately very much a thing in England when the real King George III ascended the throne in 1760.

England wouldn't officially abolish slavery until 1807, when parliament passed the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act.

What happens with the "great experiment" in 'Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story'?

Warning: The following section contains spoilers for Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story on Netflix.

Let's just say we like the version of history that Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story went with a lot better than the real thing (thanks Shonda Rhimes )!

In the show, young Agatha Danbury (Arsema Thomas) quickly realizes that the successful integration of titled Black nobility into the English ton rests entirely on Charlotte's shoulders.

At one point, Agatha even calls out Charlotte for being so obsessed with George that she can't see the bigger picture — the great experiment was doomed to fail if Charlotte didn't pull it together and embrace her role as queen of all of her people, not just rich white nobles.

Of course Agatha had a huge stake in the "great experiment" too — even though she's technically far more royal than a lot of the ton (being descended from the royal bloodline of the Kpa-Mende Bo Tribe in Sierra Leone).

However, in England, Agatha still has to fight tooth and nail for her title, especially after her husband dies. So while Agatha wants to great experiment to work for the sake of others, she also does have a huge personal reason why she gets so frustrated with Charlotte for failing to see that her walls were too high.

In the end, the "great experiment" is a success when Charlotte finally realizes that she has the most powerful platform in the country to unite her people — so she finally decides to do something about it.

The effects of Charlotte's actions are still seen during each and every season of Bridgerton .

What Happened to Reynolds in 'Queen Charlotte'? Author Julia Quinn Says... (EXCLUSIVE)

'Queen Charlotte': Author Julia Quinn on Writing 'Bridgerton' Prequel with Shonda Rhimes (EXCLUSIVE)

Queen Charlotte Is a Larger-Than-Life Character — Is She in the 'Bridgerton' Books?

Latest Bridgerton News and Updates

• About Distractify
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Connect with Distractify
• Link to Facebook
• Link to Instagram
• Contact us by Email

Opt-out of personalized ads

© Copyright 2024 Engrost, Inc. Distractify is a registered trademark. All Rights Reserved. People may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.

• Entertainment
• The True Story Behind Netflix’s <i>Queen Charlotte</i>

The True Story Behind Netflix’s Queen Charlotte

T he first episode of the Bridgerton prequel series, Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story, opens with a disclaimer from none other than the notorious Lady Whistledown. In her note, she states that the royal’s story “is not a history lesson,” but instead, “fiction inspired by fact,” where “all liberties taken by the author are quite intentional.” While the show, which released this week on Netflix , definitely takes many liberties while spinning the tale of the epic romance between Queen Charlotte and her beloved husband, King George III of England , the characters were actually inspired by the real-life British monarchs of the same names.

In the series, which jumps between the early years of Charlotte and George’s marriage during the early Georgian period (around the 1760s) and the Regency era (the early 1800s) of Bridgerton , viewers get a glimpse of two different Charlottes: the dynamic and grandiose Queen Charlotte (Golda Rosheuvel) they know from previous installments of Bridgerton seasons, and the fiercely independent 17-year-old German Princess Charlotte (India Amarteifio), who’s set to wed George III, the King of England (Corey Mylchreest). Both Charlottes face challenges—the older Charlotte, despite having given birth to 13 living heirs, has no legitimate grandchildren to ensure that their bloodline endures, while the younger Charlotte must navigate a new country, the mysteries of marriage with a contrary husband, and perhaps most pressing, the tensions that arise with her interracial marriage, which not only makes her the first Black royal, but also leads to the integration of the “ton,” or British high society.

Read more: From Bridgerton to Sanditon , We Can’t Quit the Regency Era

While Bridgerton , with its colorblind casting, rarely centered racial issues, Queen Charlotte, a true Shonda Rhimes joint , doesn’t shy away from making race an integral part of multiple story lines, addressing everything from colorism to segregation and integration . But while these important themes help to make the show a captivating and thought-provoking watch, there’s definitely a liberal blurring of the lines between history and fantasy in the series.

With that in mind, here’s a breakdown of what’s fact and what’s fiction in Queen Charlotte.

Was Queen Charlotte really Black?

One of the major storylines of Queen Charlotte is how the protagonist navigates the trials and triumphs of being the first Black queen of England. However, in real life, it’s debatable whether or not the monarch was actually Black. The character of Charlotte is based on Princess Sophie Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, a figure whose racial identity has been in question for decades. Initial speculation about Charlotte being Black or of mixed-race descent began in the 1940s, after the Jamaican-American journalist and historian J.A. Rogers theorized in his book Sex and Race: Volume I that because of the facial features she was depicted with in portraits, which he identified as “broad nostrils and heavy lips,” she may have been part Black.

While Rogers posited this to confront the problematic belief in a “pure white race,” the theory was revisited by historian historian Mario De Valdes y Cocom in a 1997 piece for PBS Frontline (which was later edited due to outdated and offensive language), where he makes the case that Charlotte was Black because she was a direct descendant of Margarita de Castro y Sousa, a Black branch of the Portuguese royal house through Margarita de Castro e Souza, whom The Guardian reports was “a 15th-century Portuguese noblewoman nine generations removed, whose ancestry she traces from the 13th-century ruler Alfonso III and his lover Madragana, whom Valdes takes to have been a Moor and thus a black African.”

However, other historians are doubtful that this proves that Charlotte was Black or of mixed-race descent. In an interview with The Philadelphia Inquirer , academic Ania Loomba said that the assumption that Charlotte was Black because her ancestry included descriptions of “moors” relies on an inaccurate understanding of history.

“The word ‘blackamoor’ in Shakespeare’s time meant Muslim,” Loomba said. “It didn’t mean Black necessarily. Moors could be white from North Africa.”

Did “The Great Experiment” really exist?

In the series, Charlotte’s visibility as the first Black queen of England leads to the crown giving titles to other people of color and inviting them to join the then-segregated court and the “ton,” including a young Lady Agatha Danbury (Arsema Thomas,) who becomes one of the queen’s ladies-in-waiting. The reasoning behind this racial integration, which the powers at court dub “the Great Experiment,” is that it showed support for Charlotte and reinforced the power of the crown in setting the tone and practices for its court and subjects.

In reality, however, “the Great Experiment” never happened—in fact, nothing even close to it even existed. While there were many Black and mixed-race people in England during this time, British society was still heavily segregated. Even by the Regency era, this would have been wildly unrealistic; while slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1807, slaves weren’t fully free in the British colonies until 1838 and its repercussions are still felt to this day.

Did Queen Charlotte and King George III really have a loving marriage?

In Queen Charlotte , an arranged marriage between the young German princess and the King of England turns into a tumultuous and then passionate meeting of the minds and a true love match. In real life, the actual Charlotte and George had by all accounts a truly loving marriage despite its having been arranged, one that was certainly viewed as successful at that time because of their many children. The couple was married for 57 years, with Charlotte holding the record for Britain’s longest-serving female consort and the second longest-serving consort in British history (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, is the first). The couple ran into challenges because of George’s mental health issues, which caused him to have episodes of mania, increasingly as he got older. Despite this, Charlotte remained a loving and loyal wife, advocating for the king, until his bouts grew so violent in the early 1800s, that that they were forced to live separate lives for her safety.

What to know about George III’s “madness”

While history may remember George III as the mad king who lost the American colonies, Queen Charlotte depicts him as a complex yet loving man with a deep interest in science and astrology, whose very real struggles with mental health change the scope of his life. In reality, George III’s life paralleled this experience. He was a devoted and loving husband and a ruler known for his interest in and support for culture, science, astronomy, and agriculture. He was responsible for buying what is now known as Buckingham Palace and opened up a library that was free for scholars to use, but his legacy as a king has largely been defined by his mental health struggles.

According to the British Royal Family’s official site , George III had serious episodes of “illness” in 1788-89 and in 1801, before becoming permanently deranged in 1810, rendering him completely mentally unfit to rule in his last decade as the king; during this time, his eldest son, George, acted as the Prince Regent, beginning in 1811. Starting in the 1960s, some medical historians posited that his mental illness may have been caused by a hereditary physical disorder , called porphyria, that mainly affects the skin or nervous system. However, in the years since, other historians and medical researchers have made the case that George III’s behavior is consistent with having bipolar disorder, which can include bouts of mania.

How many children did Queen Charlotte and King George III really have?

In real life, Queen Charlotte and King George III did have a large family. The couple had fifteen children during their six-decade marriage, thirteen of whom lived to adulthood (both Prince Octavius and Prince Alfred died in childhood). Of their children, two went on to rule England—George, The Prince of Wales (later King George IV) and Prince William (later King William IV).

The dilemma of securing a legitimate heir that Queen Charlotte faces later in life in the show was a very real problem in reality for the actual Charlotte. When her granddaughter Princess Charlotte died in childbirth, she was the only legitimate grandchild and heir in the family, despite the many children that George and Charlotte had. Following Princess Charlotte’s death, Queen Charlotte’s sons, who were infamous for fathering illegitimate children with their mistresses, sought suitable matches for royal wives—producing multiple legitimate heirs, including a girl named Victoria, who would eventually become the queen and the second-longest reigning monarch in British history.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• How Kamala Harris Knocked Donald Trump Off Course
• Introducing TIME's 2024 Latino Leaders
• George Lopez Is Transforming Narratives With Comedy
• How to Make an Argument That’s Actually Persuasive
• What Makes a Friendship Last Forever?
• 33 True Crime Documentaries That Shaped the Genre
• Why Gut Health Issues Are More Common in Women
• The 100 Most Influential People in AI 2024

Write to Cady Lang at [email protected]

We need your support today

Independent journalism is more important than ever. Vox is here to explain this unprecedented election cycle and help you understand the larger stakes. We will break down where the candidates stand on major issues, from economic policy to immigration, foreign policy, criminal justice, and abortion. We’ll answer your biggest questions, and we’ll explain what matters — and why. This timely and essential task, however, is expensive to produce.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

The real history of Queen Charlotte, and the problem with Netflix’s Bridgerton spinoff

Shonda Rhimes’s new show imagines an interracial romance that remakes Regency England. That sure didn’t happen.

by Nylah Iqbal Muhammad

The first time I heard someone call Charlotte, Queen Consort to King George III, the “first Black queen of England,” I thought they were taking the piss. But even though the evidence for Charlotte’s Black heritage is weak, many do genuinely believe it. And now, millions more will believe it too.

The premiere of Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story, a Shondaland production based on the romance novels by Julia Quinn, tries to cement the public image of the monarch as an undeniably Black woman. The prequel series gives Queen Charlotte (India Amarteifio in youth and Golda Rosheuvel in her later years) the spotlight. Here, she is a Black teenager whose interracial marriage to the mentally ill King George III (Corey Mylchreest in youth; James Fleet as the older version) led to an event called “the Great Experiment.” In Queen Charlotte and the original Bridgerton series, the Great Experiment refers to Britain’s (clearly fictional) decision to fully integrate Black people and other people of color into their society, including the noble class. In Queen Charlotte , the stakes of the Great Experiment are most vocally echoed by Lady Danbury (Adjoa Andoh in her later years and Arsema Thomas as a young woman), who is revealed to be African royalty with wealth that exceeds that of most of the British nobles but has to fight to be accepted among British nobility.

Most people know this didn’t happen. It’s common sense that Black people were not accepted into all levels of British society in the 18th and 19th centuries. And, if Meghan Markle’s experiences as part of the royal family are any indication, they’re not accepted among British nobility now. Although people widely understand this element of the story is fantastical, many do consider the real Queen Charlotte to be Black. And Netflix and Shondaland are fanning that flame. Netflix even threw a royalty-themed event with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) to celebrate the premiere. The messages Queen Charlotte sends about the politics of wealth, interracial relationships, representational politics, and empire are dangerous. At the core of its danger is the choice to double down on the likely false idea that Queen Charlotte was Black.

The weak evidence for Queen Charlotte’s Blackness

Although Charlotte and George did not have an interracial relationship that changed the course of history, there was public debate about Charlotte’s appearance. Some accounts and portraits of her suggested that she had fair skin and “European” features, others showed her having slightly darker skin and “African” features. She was also often called ugly and plain . In A Tale of Two Cities , referring to George and Charlotte, Charles Dickens wrote: “There was a king with a large jaw, and a queen with a plain face, on the throne of England.” Her physician reportedly described her as “small and crooked, with a true mulatto face.” Sir Walter Scott wrote that she was “ill-colored.” A prime minister once said: “Her nose is too wide and her lips too thick.”

The show reconstructs the vague reports of her appearance into Charlotte experiencing both racism and ties of kinship with other Black people; King George III’s mother Princess Augusta (Michelle Fairley) complains about Charlotte’s skin being “very brown” and a minister meekly replies, “I told you she had Moor blood.” Her brother admits that no one who “looked like” them had ever married into the British royal family (even though Charlotte and George in real life were related), wedding guests murmur in shock at Charlotte’s jewel-encrusted Afro, and Lady Danbury has a wide-eyed look of joy upon seeing the new Queen is “on our side.”

Even though Queen Charlotte’s contemporaries made it clear that they thought her face didn’t meet their beauty standards, there are almost no records of anyone explicitly saying that Charlotte, born into the royal family of the northern German duchy of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, had Black parents, Black siblings, Black cousins, or Black ancestors on either side. In 1997, historian Mario de Valdes y Cocom claimed his research showed she was descended from the “illegitimate son of King Alfonso I of Portugal and his Moorish mistress [Madragana].”

However, King Alphonso I was born in 1109 or 1111, and Queen Charlotte was born in 1744. That’s more than 600 years of distance between Queen Charlotte and her rumored African ancestor Madragana — who cannot conclusively be proven to be Black or related to Queen Charlotte, as art historian Amanda Matta explains on her podcast , Art of History . Some amount of inbreeding might account for these features to endure for a few generations, but not enough to be significant. And with King George III and Charlotte sharing close ancestors, it’s poor logic because it would mean that swaths of British and European royalty, including Prince Harry and Mary, Queen of Scots, would now have to also be considered Black. Are we prepared to say that Charles, who will be crowned King on May 6, is also Black? Should we say that any royal with full lips or wide nostrils is presenting evidence of Madrigana’s endlessly enduring genes? It sounds ridiculous, but that’s the road that race science and faulty genealogical methods lead us down.

Also, while both Madragana and Queen Charlotte were called “Moors,” the word had a vast range of meanings. Originally, it meant the Muslim inhabitants of the Maghreb, the Iberian Peninsula, Sicily, and Malta during the Middle Ages. But it also meant someone with darker skin, sometimes referring to people who would be considered Black today and sometimes referring to people who would be considered European, Middle Eastern, South Asian, or Latinx today. Steven Pincus, historian of the Global British Empire and professor of history at the University of Chicago, tells Vox that the term “Moor” as a static racial or ethnic category “is subject to much dispute,” adding that Sephardic Jews were sometimes also called Moors.

Even though the real Charlotte was, at best, ludicrously removed from Blackness, Queen Charlotte leans heavily into representational politics while still making egregious errors of substance. It’s especially hard to feel good about shallow representation when we spend three episodes watching Lady Danbury be raped by the husband she was forced to marry as a child, sometimes multiple times in a single episode. This means that the only characters to have been raped in Netflix’s Bridgerton universe are both Black .

For some Black women, this all makes the series feel emotionally manipulative. “Shonda [Rhimes] is probably playing very heavily into the correlation between what’s currently happening with Harry and Meghan Markle, and what she would like us to envision was happening back then, even though it’s not historical,” says April Morris, editorial director of Off Colour magazine.

What it means — and meant — to force a narrative of Blackness onto Queen Charlotte

So, if Charlotte most likely wasn’t Black, why did the theory become so popular? The rapid expansion of the slave trade in the late 17th century through to the end of the 18th century plays a role. Pincus says of this time period, “Slavery became a much more prominent feature of the British empire. It was also increasingly the source of unbelievable accumulation of wealth.”

Slavery is notably absent from the world of Bridgerton, although vague mentions of “the colonies” are peppered in so quickly that you’d likely miss it. In the Bridgerton universe, none of the Black people are concerned about human or civil rights. Rather, they want to host balls and be invited to hunts. They want to marry white people without sassy comments from the ton and be given noble titles and more land. They don’t even want money — they just want the opportunity to be treated like the monied people they already are. For Morris, these questions of wealth and assimilation are part of “parallels that [Shonda Rhimes] is trying to draw for the Black upper-middle class of today.” Pincus, although he says he enjoys the show as a relaxing watch, points out that “it is clearly a show which is targeted to the wealthy.”

This is perhaps the most salient and cohesive political framework undergirding the Bridgerton universe: the love of money. And the love of money is also what defined the British Empire’s relationship to Black people. By the time Queen Charlotte became consort, the British Empire was struggling with slave revolts in all its colonies, and economic concerns (which outweighed the moral arguments) pushed more people to become interested in ending the slave trade. The heightened discussion of slavery, slave rebellions, and abolition fueled debate about Queen Charlotte. “In the time period in which she was Queen, there was increasing concern regarding abolitionism,” Harris explains. “And one of her portrait painters [Allan Ramsay] was a noted abolitionist who may well have been interested in exploring these ideas that she had African ancestry within the context of discussing and debating slavery.”

When Lady Danbury finally wins her battle to host the ball of the season, it takes a while for the crowd to thaw, with white people on one side and Black members on the other. Then, after seeing Charlotte and George dance, more and more interracial dancing pairs join the floor, to the tune of Alicia Keys’ “If I Ain’t Got You” on the violin. After the ball, George and Charlotte are in her bedroom and George declares in wonder, “With one evening, one party, we have created more change, stepped forward more, than Britain has in the last century,” adding that with Charlotte by his side, he can do anything. And of course, in the original Bridgerton show, interracial marriages are now so commonplace due to George and Charlotte’s example that no one even considers race or ethnicity something worth mentioning.

Again, even though the series is obviously ahistorical, these messages we receive matter; they stick with us. Viewers may logically know that this scenario didn’t occur, but it functions as a nod toward an incredibly deep-seated belief, one that says Britain and King George III ended slavery out of moral concerns and altruism. When really, it was the resistance of slaves and colonized people that led to abolition and the withdrawal of British troops from the colonies.

According to Gerald Horne, professor of history and African-American Studies at the University of Houston, slave rebellions were rising during the Georgian and Regency eras, which had a tremendous impact on Britain finally ending slavery in 1834. “The Haitian Revolution was decisive in abolition’s fortunes ... London felt they could either move to circumscribe the slave trade in 1807, three years after Haiti’s triumph, or ... [run] the risk of having enslavers liquidated physically. Wisely, they sought the option of delimiting the slave trade, then abolition by the 1830s.”

This is a rich and complicated history. Reducing it to “interracial love saved the world,” even for a romance, feels cheap and intellectually bankrupt. It’s necessary to point out that Julia Quinn’s Bridgerton novels — save the one she questionably decided to write about Queen Charlotte post-Netflix series — feature white people only. During a panel , Quinn once said she only wanted to write happy stories and chose not to have Black characters because their “unhappy” stories weren’t the kinds she wanted to tell. Given that she and other writers on the show evidently couldn’t tell Lady Danbury’s story without a shocking amount of marital rape proves perhaps she should have steered clear.

To not want to write about racism is not a morally depraved stance or even an illogical one. To not write about people with identities you can’t relate to is perhaps a wise choice. But to refuse to write Black characters for most of your career because you can’t imagine them happy, and then rake in momentous amounts of money by emotionally manipulating Black people with shallow representation years later does feel morally bankrupt. If Netflix and Shondaland wanted to portray Black people being happy during the Regency era, Beverly Jenkins is just one example of an author of steamy, loving Black romances set in the 17th-20th centuries. Why do studios not invest in developing her stories for the screen?

The answer is clear, if depressing. Queen Charlotte was never about representation for Black people or telling Black stories. It was about money, and about reifying empire and wealth, and placating Black people by claiming that we too can have a place among the most powerful. To recast a queen who — whether she was sympathetic toward enslaved people or not — presided over a vast empire and lived a life built on genocidal labor as a Black woman fighting for her people is a coherent and abhorrent neoliberal political statement. It seeks, above all, to protect the institution.

Most Popular

• A thousand pigs just burned alive in a barn fire
• Who is Ryan Wesley Routh? The suspect in the Trump Florida assassination attempt, explained.
• Sign up for Vox’s daily newsletter
• Take a mental break with the newest Vox crossword
• The new followup to ChatGPT is scarily good at deception

Today, Explained

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

This is the title for the native ad

More in Culture

Please pay your respects to the new queen of TV killer thrillers.

The right thinks that hot girls can “kill woke.” What?

The truth behind the ongoing controversy over the highly memeable dancer.

The highly coveted endorsement comes after a year of paranoid speculation.

From prebiotic sodas to collagen waters, beverages are trying to do the most. Consumers are drinking it up.

Why the new luxury is flip phones and vinyl LPs

Fact check: The real history behind 'Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story'

Spoiler alert! The following contains significant details from Netflix's "Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story."

Romantic? Yes. Sexy? For sure. Historically accurate ? No, not really.

Netflix's "Bridgerton" spinoff "Queen Charlotte" (now streaming) has captured our hearts and binge-watching hours since its May 4 premiere on the streaming service. And while it's a great romance and soap opera, it's not a very good history lesson. The series' narrator, Lady Whistledown (Julie Andrews), says as much herself in the opening moments, calling it "fiction inspired by fact."

Amid all the fiction in "Charlotte" – which tells the origin story of a real British queen but takes extensive liberties – there are a few facts sprinkled in here and there. We separate the history from the fantasy in the six-episode Netflix series.

Was Queen Charlotte a Black woman?

The consensus is no. In the series, Charlotte (played by India Amarteifio in one timeline and Golda Rosheuvel in a later one and in "Bridgerton"), is described as "very brown" by her mother-in-law and of the "Moorish race" (Amarteifio identifies as mixed race ).

In real life, there is no evidence that this Queen Charlotte, the wife of King George III (whom you remember from your seventh-grade textbook on the American revolution), was Black or descended from Black people. There is a historical myth about her that persists (read more here ), that was part of what inspired the depiction of the character in both series.

Review: 'Queen Charlotte' is sexier than 'Bridgerton'

Did King George III have a mental illness?

Yes. Historians and scientists have different theories about his diagnosis , but George III (played by Corey Mylchreest) had documented bouts of mental illness, and eventually his eldest son George took over ruling for his incapacitated father as Prince Regent. That is what gives the period setting of "Bridgerton" and part of "Charlotte" the name "Regency era." Prince George later became King George IV when his father died.

One of George III's lines repeated in the series is an actual quote from the King: "I am born for the happiness or misery of a great nation, and consequently must often act contrary to my passions." 

Was there ever a 'Great Experiment' in the English aristocracy?

No. "Charlotte" offers a historical "what if" in its story called "The Great Experiment," in which rich Black families were made a part of the nobility by George's mother, Princess Augusta (Michelle Fairley), as a way to smooth over the arrival of a Black queen.

But this isn't based on history. In fact, during the period in which "Charlotte" takes place, England still participated in the trans-Atlantic slave trade and ruled over colonies with a vested interest in enslaving African people (colonies that would later become the United States).

Did Charlotte and George really have such a romantic love story?

As far as historians can tell, they really did love each other. George is quoted as saying , "The queen is my physician, and no man can have a better; she is my friend, and no man can have a better." George was the first monarch in his family not to take a mistress.

The couple did meet for the first time on their wedding day, as in the series. Whether Charlotte was trying to climb over a wall when they met, we'll never know.

Did George and Charlotte really have 15 children? Did they have their own children?

The royal couple had nine sons and six daughters, although their two youngest sons died as children. Many of Charlotte and George's brood had children of their own that were either ineligible to accede the British throne (because they were born out of wedlock) or came after the events depicted in "Charlotte" and "Bridgerton." Charlotte and George's son George had one daughter and heir, Princess Charlotte, who died while giving birth, as shown in the first episode of "Charlotte." After Princess Charlotte's death, there was a rush among the family to parent an heir to the throne, somewhat as is shown in the series.

One of Charlotte's sons is expecting a baby at the end of the series. Is that baby anyone we know?

Yes, indeed. Eventually, Charlotte and George's fourth son, Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn, and his German wife Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, would have a daughter, Victoria. And you guessed it, she would go on to be that Queen Victoria. Unlike the bumbling young adult portrayed in the series by actor Jack Michael Stacey, Edward was 51 when Victoria was born and died when she was still an infant.

(To read more about the rush for an heir, pick up any biography of Queen Victoria , there are a quite a few.)

What Is the “Great Experiment” in Netflix’s Queen Charlotte ?

The Bridgerton prequel series reimagines Queen Charlotte and King George III’s early years of marriage.

Netflix’s Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Love Story transports viewers to 1761 London, as Sophia Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (India Amarteifio) marries King George III (Corey Mylchreest) and swiftly becomes monarch of Great Britain and Ireland. The Bridgerton prequel series chronicles the young king and queen’s early days of marriage, from their first meeting, whirlwind wedding (seriously, it took place within six hours of Charlotte’s arrival in London), and the birth of their first child, George IV .

While the series is based on real royals, the interpretation of Queen Charlotte and King George III’s love story and Georgian-era London is not entirely historically accurate. “Dearest gentle reader, this is the story of Queen Charlotte from Bridgerton ,” a title card, narrated by Lady Whistledown, reads at the start of episode 1. “It is not a history lesson. It is fiction inspired by fact.”

The six-episode spin-off centers around “The Great Experiment,” a concept established by Princess Augusta (King George’s mother) and the House of Lords in the premiere episode . Prior to the marriage between Charlotte, a Black woman, and King George III , a white man, the British noble class was entirely white. Their interracial relationship and Charlotte’s role as Britain’s first Black queen signaled a turning point in societal structure, and the “Great Experiment” was the palace’s attempt to desegregate the Ton and grant more land and status to people of color.

Lady Agatha Danbury and her husband, Lord Danbury, are bestowed their titles at Charlotte and George’s wedding in episode 1, and later, are given a new, bigger home by the palace and host the first ball of the season. As the series progresses, Queen Charlotte’s responsibilities as the face of the “Great Experiment” grow more and more evident, as she and Lady Danbury advocate for continued, lasting desegregation of the Ton.

As evident by the diverse aristocracy seen in Bridgerton , which takes place five decades after the events of Queen Charlotte , the “Great Experiment” is considered a success in the Bridgerton universe. “The politics of England in this particular period of time, and the politics of most of the world, were complicated,” executive producer Betsy Beers told Netflix, per Tudum . “And one of the things which Shonda [Rhimes, showrunner] has threaded through the story in this incredibly brilliant way is the idea that the arrival of this woman made it possible for other people of color to rise up through the ranks in English society.” But in truth, racial equality was not achieved as such in 1700s Britain.

Did the “Great Experiment” actually happen?

No, the “Great Experiment” did not happen in real life. Although based on actual monarchs, Queen Charlotte reimagines the events of Georgian-era London. Historic England writes that although there were around 15,000 Black people living in England in the late 18th century, a majority worked in domestic service, “both paid and unpaid.” Slavery wasn’t abolished in the British Empire until 1807, according to the UK Parliament , and Queen Charlotte takes place in 1761.

Some historians think that Queen Charlotte was Black, but her racial identity has never been confirmed. Back in 1997, Mario de Valdes y Cocom, historian of the African diaspora, believed to have found evidence that Queen Charlotte was Black, per PBS Frontline , but again, her genealogy has not been substantiated.

Leah Campano is an Associate Editor at Seventeen, where she covers pop culture, entertainment news, health, and politics. On the weekends, you can probably find her watching marathons of vintage Real Housewives episodes or searching for New York City’s best almond croissants. 

Movies & TV

"Stranger Things" Fans Will Love These Gift Ideas

Everything We Know About ‘Emily in Paris’ Season 4

Watch Out for this 'Stranger Things' Catfish Scam

The Meaning of Margot's Yellow Dress in Barbie

Here's the Deal With the 'Snow White' Discourse

Is Prince Henry Based on British Royalty IRL? 👀

Will "The Summer I Turned Pretty" Be Back For S3?

Here's Why Jeremiah Narrated an Episode of ‘TSITP‘

Zendaya Honors Angus Cloud’s Life

Family of Mallory Beach Gets $15M in Lawsuit

43 of the Best '80s Horror Movies

35 Funny Christmas Movies That Will Make You LOL

What is the Great Experiment in 'Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story'?

It's the catalyst of that royal marriage, but exactly what is the Great Experiment in 'Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story' on Netflix?

• Sign up to our newsletter Newsletter

It's the cause of much drama in the Bridgerton  spinoff , but is the Great Experiment in Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story ?

The Netflix miniseries, which premiered on Thursday, May 4, acts as a Bridgerton prequel , centering on the real-life royal Queen Charlotte (played by India Amarteifio and Golda Rosheuvel at different points in the monarch's life) and her marriage to the King of England, George III ( Corey Mylchreest and James Fleet).

Their pairing prompts the so-called Great Experiment, a sociopolitical integration whose effects are felt decades later, well into the original Bridgerton series. (The prequel series takes place about 50 years prior to the Regency action of that series.) But what exactly is the Great Experiment from Queen Charlotte , and did it actually happen IRL? Here's what to know. 

*Warning: spoilers ahead!*

One of the standout features of the Bridgerton universe is the multiracial casting of the royals throughout the Ton, including dukes like Regé-Jean Page 's Simon Hastings, Arsema Thomas 's Lady Agatha Danbury and Her Majesty herself, Queen Charlotte.

That diversity is no accident—it is the result of the Great Experiment, a desegregation movement enacted by King George III's mother, Princess Augusta (played by Game of Thrones great Michelle Fairley). Upon finding out that the complexion of her son's betrothed is darker than expected, she worries about how an interracial marriage will affect high society. 

“The politics of England in this particular period of time, and the politics of most of the world, were complicated,” Queen Charlotte 's executive producer Betsy Beers told Netflix  Tudum . “And one of the things which Shonda [Rhimes, showrunner] has threaded through the story in this incredibly brilliant way is the idea that the arrival of this woman made it possible for other people of color to rise up through the ranks in English society.”

Princess Augusta decides to invite prominent people of color to the big royal wedding as a way of ushering in Britain's first Black queen and integrating the Ton. The princess bestows official titles to the likes of Lord and Lady Danbury, who also get a status boost from a new, larger estate, invites to important events and the chance to host the first ball of the season. 

The Great Experiment does get complicated, however, when Lord Danbury dies . As the first member of his family to reach nobility, Danbury's young widow worries that their newfound wealth and standing in society will not be passed down to the lord's kin as in other noble families. Lady Danbury leverages her close friendship with Queen Charlotte to secure not only her family's rank but also the future integration of Black aristocracy in the Ton. 

Was the Great Experiment real?

Though the monarchs at the center of it all were very much real, the Great Experiment of Regency England was not. 

“This is not a history lesson. This is fiction inspired by fact. It’s very important to me that people understand that,” show creator Shonda Rhimes told Netflix. “I’m telling the story of Queen Charlotte of Bridgerton , not of Queen Charlotte of England.” 

“We asked, ‘What if society embraced those differences in diversity and elevated people of color to prominent positions and ranks?’ ” Queen Charlotte director Tom Verica told Tudum. “The Great Experiment allows us to reimagine what that world could have looked like if that part of Charlotte’s identity had been embraced.” 

Was Queen Charlotte black in real life?

Rumors of Queen Charlotte's racial identity have swirled for hundreds of years, with many historians speculating if the monarch was of mixed-cultural heritage, potentially being both of German descent and also having African ancestry. 

Per PBS , Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz is thought to be directly descended from Margarita de Castro y Sousa, a Black branch of the Portuguese royal house. However, that lineage has been disputed by historians and Buckingham Palace even reportedly shot down the Black queen theory: "This has been rumored for years and years. It is a matter of history, and frankly, we've got far more important things to talk about," a palace spokesperson said, per  The Independent .

The Queen Charlotte creative team clearly took the Black queen theory and ran with it, casting Guyanese-British actress Golda Rosheuvel as the monarch in the original Bridgerton series and India Amarteifio, who has Ghanaian and German heritage, as the queen's younger counterpart in the prequel. 

To portray the royal, both actresses frequently sported natural hair, braided 'dos and afro wigs, a key element in reflecting Black beauty onscreen. "Charlotte’s wigs and costumes are all set in 1813, when England was coming to the end of the Georgian era,” said Rosheuvel to The Los Angeles Times . “We wanted to do this to keep her and the audience rooted in the time frame but also celebrate Black hair in its natural form.” (Want more makeup and hair scoop? Bridgerton 's lead beauty artist gives a peek at what it takes to create the Ton's elaborate looks .)

Catch Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story , now streaming on Netflix.

Christina Izzo is the Deputy Editor of My Imperfect Life. 

More generally, she is a writer-editor covering food and drink, travel, lifestyle and culture in New York City. She was previously the Features Editor at Rachael Ray In Season and Reveal , as well as the Food & Drink Editor and chief restaurant critic at Time Out New York . 

When she’s not doing all that, she can probably be found eating cheese somewhere. 

As a self-proclaimed blush connoisseur, I swear by ILIA's cheek and lip stick and hopefully, when my work is done, you will too.

By Naomi Jamieson Published 28 September 23

If you've been looking for a new, signature hair look for fall, Emma Chamberlain may have just come *through* for you...

Useful links

Stuff we love.

• Best Olaplex products
• Sephora sale dates 2023
• How to get on Raya
• Most popular MAC lipsticks

Tried & Tested

• Best app-controlled vibrators
• Crystals for anxiety
• Best non-comedogenic foundations
• Best hair dryers for curly hair
• Boyfriend air
• When is the next new moon?
• How to build a capsule wardrobe
• Best Love Island UK seasons
• Contact Future's experts
• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Cookies policy

My Imperfect Life is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site . © Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury, Bath BA1 1UA. All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.

Things you buy through our links may earn  Vox Media  a commission.

The Fact and Fiction of Queen Charlotte ’s Royal Romance

Queen Charlotte opens by telling us, “It is not a history lesson. It is fiction inspired by fact,” a fair warning for history purists, who are encouraged to think of this Bridgerton spinoff as history adjacent . While the reality of King George III and Queen Charlotte does not exactly match the show, recorded history does tell us that they were two people who loved each other very much, had 15 children together, and even slept in the same bed when that was quite outside the norm for their class. The facts of their relationship may not include a societal shift regarding race (unfortunately), but 18th-century England was a gossipy, funny, inventive place, and the more you read about it, the more Queen Charlotte ’s world will feel familiar. Here’s what history tells us about the points in the series where fact and fiction meet.

A Black Queen and the Great Experiment

What we see : Charlotte’s “very brown” skin comes as a surprise to George’s mother despite being told the queen-to-be has “Moor blood.” (Charlotte and her brother, the ruler of Mecklenburg-Strelitz in Northern Germany, are played by actors who identify as Scottish Nigerian and mixed-race .) So Princess Augusta scrambles to bring some other Black people to court, kicking off the series’ “Great Experiment” and introducing us to our beloved Lady Danbury and her husband, originally from Sierra Leone.

What history tells us: There is no real evidence that Charlotte or her family were Black or had any even semi-recent ancestors who were (although if you’d like to read about the shaky theory behind this, here you are ). While Lady Danbury and the Great Experiment are fictional, England did have a relationship with Lord and Lady Danbury’s home country — it’s just an extremely bad one. In the 18th century, more than 400,000 people were abducted from Sierra Leone and sold by enslavers, many of them to British colonists. When the British did not want to deal with Black refugees from the American Revolution, they sent many of them to Sierra Leone, despite a large number having been born in America.

Bridgerton ’s alternate reality has danced around the existence of the British transatlantic slave trade — which wasn’t abolished until 1807 , and colonial enslavement wasn’t banned until 1833 — but it’s worth noting that England and Europe have always had Black residents of varying social status. During George III’s reign, Dido Elizabeth Belle , the daughter of a rear admiral in the British navy and an enslaved African woman, came to live in London. Her cousin was a British aristocrat, but Dido herself was not out in society. Other known Londoners of the time included writers and abolitionists Olaudah Equiano and Ottobah Cuguano , as well as composer Ignatius Sancho . To read more about the presence of Black people in Europe, check out Black and British by David Olusoga, Black Tudors by Miranda Kaufmann, and African Europeans by Olivette Otele.

An Unexpected Royal Marriage

What we see : George and Charlotte are made to marry, courtesy of Augusta and Charlotte’s brother, and Charlotte has no idea why the king of England wants to marry her, a princess from a “tiny province in Germany.” He could marry anyone, she says! Her brother tells her there is no good reason, although we learn it’s part of the Great Experiment.

What history tells us : Regarding Charlotte’s befuddlement, I SPUTTERED during this show revelation. “Doesn’t know why??” I exclaimed. (1) George chose Charlotte from a list . Was she initially his last choice on that list? Sure, but he decided correctly in the end, and no one made him. (2) George had to marry a princess, which means no one from England, and a Protestant , so that basically left Germany (and Scandinavia, but we’re not getting into that). George is part of the Hanover dynasty , which is when Queen Anne of The Favourite fame died and left no heirs, despite going through 17 pregnancies (can you imagine ), so her second cousin from now-Germany came over and became king. That was George I. His son George II also grew up in Germany, and when George II died, here we have George III. So in brief, no, marrying a German princess was not a surprise .

George III’s Mother and That Man Who’s Always Hanging Around

What we see : In the show, Lord Bute is constantly there , hovering around Augusta and dictating the terms of the Great Experiment. His relationship with Augusta is never clearly defined.

What history tells us: George’s mother Augusta, a.k.a. Princess Augusta of Saxe-Gotha (I’m telling you, the German connection is strong!) married Frederick, the Prince of Wales, who died when George was 13. John Stuart, Third Earl of Bute , was a Scottish peer who was close friends with Frederick and who became George’s tutor, exposing him to “ natural philosophy ,” architecture, botany, and culture. Bute became prime minister for one year soon after George became king, and while we’ve established the Great Experiment was sadly not real, he did help end the Seven Years’ War. So that’s something! As for his relationship with Princess Augusta, there were lots of rumors at the time, but accounts point to him being happily married with 11 children . Maybe he just liked power. And maybe Augusta was fun to hang out with, who knows.

Shirtless Farmer George

What we see : George spends a good amount of time shirtlessly farming and calls himself “Farmer George.” The implication is he would rather live a quiet life as a farmer instead of leading an empire. Makes sense.

What history tells us : George III did love farming! He, along with many English landowners, took part in an “ agricultural revolution ,” and his interest lasted at least until his mental health severely deteriorated. (More on that in a moment.) He also did have the nickname Farmer George, but this was maybe meant as an insult to his royal dignity. (I’m not sure he would have taken it as one.) As one source notes , while Marie Antoinette and her court were pretending to be shepherdesses at Versailles, George was “writing about cabbages, crop rotation, and manure, introducing new strains of sheep into England and pioneering modern practices.” George took his duties as king very seriously, but they tended toward the paternal, hence his viewing of the United States as wayward children who needed to be brought back in line (which didn’t work out so well for him ).

I dunno about the shirtless part.

Charlotte’s Love of Pomeranians

What we see : After George gifts her a Pomeranian, Charlotte calls it a “deformed bunny” and only comes to love it when she realizes its significance. In later years, we see her constantly with a Pomeranian, similar to the late Elizabeth II and her corgis.

What history tells us : When Charlotte initially came to England, she brought Pomeranians with her . Pomerania bordered the duchy she came from (it’s now Poland and Western Germany), and the dogs were bred there. Fun fact : They are basically miniature sled dogs! Also, they are sometimes known as “Zwergspitz,” which is very fun to say with a pronounced German accent.

George and Charlotte’s 13 Useless Children

What we see : When the series’ “present-day” timeline kicks off, 13 of Charlotte and George’s 15 children have made it to adulthood, managing to produce one legitimate heir between all of them. When that heir dies, Charlotte orders them to shape up, get married, and start reproducing. As the series ends, Charlotte’s fourth son Edward and his wife Victoria announce they’re having a baby (spoiler: It’s eventual country-grabber Queen Victoria).

What history tells us : Charlotte and George had nine sons and six daughters, but their two youngest sons died at ages 1 and 4. (When George’s mental-health condition took hold in force in later years, he would have conversations with these children.) As for the surviving children, one was in a 20-year relationship with an actress and had ten children with her, but none with his legal wife; one became queen of Württemberg ; one was king of Hanover when Victoria became queen; one seems like he just kind of noodled around but had some positive social views; and one ended up having three children while married to a German (of course) princess, but they were born after Victoria, so no dice, Prince Adolphus. Of the six princesses, two never married, which is generally attributed to George wanting to keep them at home. Check out Princesses: The Six Daughters of George III by Flora Fraser to learn more about them.

It’s true that only the prince regent had a legitimate heir, who then died. Princess Charlotte was the only child of the prince regent and his hated (by him) wife, Caroline of Brunswick. Her death did indeed spark a panic, as there were no other direct legitimate Hanoverian grandchildren until Victoria was born. (Side note: Charlotte died in childbirth; reproductive health is important!) The eventual Queen Victoria was born two years after Princess Charlotte passed and was her parents’ only child together, as her father died the year after she was born ( her mother had two children from a previous marriage). It’s also worth noting that Victoria’s father, Prince Edward, was 51 at the time of her birth, and not the callow youth with poet hair he appears as in the show.

The Madness of King George

What we see : George is exhibiting symptoms of a mental-health condition well before his wedding in 1761, when he is at most 23 years old. This illness recurs with such frequency that he cannot be seen in public, avoids his new wife, and suffers physical torture from Dr. John Monro in an attempt to be “cured.” Charlotte is determined to find out what’s going on and responds to George with care and compassion when she does.

What history tells us : Doctors and mental-health professionals try to be careful now when diagnosing someone directly in front of them, so it’s certainly difficult to armchair-diagnose a king who has been dead for over 200 years, but George III definitely lived with something that resulted in acute mania. The people of his time tried to do their best (after all, he was the king), but they were limited in their knowledge of how to treat him. For a long time, people thought that condition was porphyria, but that has recently been disputed to the point of dismissal . Now it is thought that his symptoms more closely align with bipolar I disorder. His acknowledged manic episodes took place starting when he was 50, and again at ages 63 and 66, with the final episode that triggered the Regency occurring in 1810 when George was 72. However! There was a suspected episode just five years after his coronation. Very little is known about it, but it seems to have been more on the depressive side of manic-depression. There’s nothing to indicate, though, that he had any other major episodes until he was in his 50s.

While it’s unclear how Charlotte reacted to George’s potential first episode early in their marriage, George’s first truly manic episode in 1788 terrified Charlotte , who refused to sleep in the same bed with him for the first time in their marriage and had him locked out of their room. The doctors blistered his scalp and legs and bled him with leeches, but it wasn’t until Francis Willis started treating him that he showed signs of improvement (these two events are not necessarily linked). Willis, like Monro in the series, kept George from Charlotte and demanded total control of his treatment. It does not appear, however, that it was anywhere close to as bad as what the series shows — that’s closer to what previous doctors had done. Willis did use gags and straitjackets at times (now tranquilizers would likely be used instead), but he promoted calm and stopped the emetics and purgatives, as well as the leeches. George was also encouraged to study Latin and do things like take apart and then reassemble watches, which he found helpful. George died of pneumonia in 1820, suffering from dementia, cataracts, and the condition he dealt with in the last decades of his life.

As for Dr. John Monro of Bethlem Hospital, that person did indeed exist! He and his son were asked in later decades to advise on the king’s condition, but there is no evidence they privately treated him. Bethlem is more infamously known as Bedlam and acquired its dubious reputation during Monro’s leadership, where he continued the wisdom of the time, which included bleeding, purging, and vomiting treatments, as well as cold baths (which we do see in the series). This is a time when people were committed for being Methodists . So. Y’know. Not great.

A Royal Love Story

What we see : George and Charlotte meet, immediately marry (at the Royal Chapel in St. James’s Palace), and soon fall in love, remaining as devoted to each other as they can for the rest of their lives.

What history tells us : Excuse me as I weep into my handkerchief, because it’s TRUE, IT’S ALL TRUE. Okay. Well. The basic facts are: George was the first in his family to never take a mistress, and barring some aberrations that were a result of his mental health, from the time of his marriage he exhibited no interest in any other woman besides Charlotte. Early on in his first collapse, he told one of the queen’s ladies that “The queen is my physician, and no man can have a better; she is my friend, and no man can have a better.” They both loved music, books, and theater, and while Charlotte loved botany, George loved astronomy. The only thing he is said to not love about her was her addiction to snuff. More than 20 years into their marriage, George was seen frequently kissing Charlotte on the cheek, and as noted before, even though they had separate apartments, they slept in the same bed for decades. This stopped at the start of the 19th century when George’s symptoms became more permanent and acute. Charlotte was named his guardian and remained so even during the Regency, up until her death in 1818. George died 14 months later.

Bonus Questions

What was the background music during the royal wedding? Great question! It is “Quartet No IV in G Major,” by Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges. Saint-Georges was a Creole man of color born in Guadeloupe who moved to France and became a champion fencer and officer of the king’s bodyguard for Louis XVI. This music was an excellent Easter egg, and I was delighted by it.

Did Mozart play for Queen Charlotte? Eight-year-old Mozart gave his first performance in England at Buckingham House in 1764 when Charlotte was 20. She commissioned six sonatas from him.

Did Queen Charlotte bring the Christmas tree to England? She did! Her granddaughter Queen Victoria’s husband Prince Albert is typically credited for popularizing the whole “bringing a tree inside the house” thing as a Christmas tradition in England, but Charlotte is the first English royal we know of who had one. Both Charlotte and Albert, of course, came from German duchies, and Christmas trees were seen in Germany starting around the 18th century.

When did we learn the distance from the Earth to the sun? In one of George’s many looks through the telescope, he tells us that an astronomical event is occurring that will allow the English to calculate the distance from the Earth to the sun. This actually occurred in 1653 by Dutch astronomer Christiaan Huygens (who also invented the pendulum clock!). But he guessed for some of the answer, so history credits Giovanni Cassini in 1672, still well before George’s lifetime. Great job on the pendulum clock, though, Huygens.

More From This Series

• Let Us Bask in the Majesty of Bridgerton ’s Music-Box Hair
• Queen Charlotte ’s Arsema Thomas Supports Lady Danbury’s Life of Solitude
• Alicia Keys’s ‘If I Ain’t Got You’ Orchestral Version Plucks Heartstrings
• vulture section lede
• queen charlotte
• queen charlotte: a bridgerton story
• fact vs fiction
• history lessons

Most Viewed Stories

• Cinematrix No. 175: September 17, 2024
• The Highs, Lows, and Whoas of the 2024 Emmys
• Sean “Diddy’ Combs Arrested in Manhattan Hotel Lobby
• Industry Recap: You Got Daddy’s Attention Now
• How The Bear Lost the Best Comedy Emmy to Hacks

Editor’s Picks

Most Popular

What is your email.

This email will be used to sign into all New York sites. By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy and to receive email correspondence from us.

Sign In To Continue Reading

Create your free account.

Password must be at least 8 characters and contain:

• Lower case letters (a-z)
• Upper case letters (A-Z)
• Numbers (0-9)
• Special Characters (!@#$%^&*)

As part of your account, you’ll receive occasional updates and offers from New York , which you can opt out of anytime.

Den of Geek

Bridgerton: The Real History of Queen Charlotte, and King George III’s Illness

How much does Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story borrow from the real life monarchy? More than you might think.

• Share on Facebook (opens in a new tab)
• Share on Twitter (opens in a new tab)
• Share on Linkedin (opens in a new tab)
• Share on email (opens in a new tab)

This article contains spoilers for all episodes of Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story .

Netflix’s new limited series Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story is being described by many as a spinoff but in fact, the six-episode season can be considered a fully developed interlude bridging the gap between Bridgerton seasons 2 and 3. The show is set as a prequel to cover the early days of Charlotte and George’s marriage combined with a view of how their family is faring in the current series timeline. 

Showrunner Shonda Rhimes has combined some elements of the actual Queen’s history with explanations of how the world of Bridgerton ’s Ton is different than the historical record. Folks interested in history should keep in mind the focus of the miniseries is to explain the character development and politics of the characters Bridgerton fans are already familiar with. Anyone claiming the miniseries is “erasing history” refuses to understand why diverse period drama depictions exist and are missing the point. 

The Royal Court & The “Great Experiment”

Officially, King George III ascended the throne in 1760 and married Sophia Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (a territory in northern Germany) in 1761. Queen Charlotte’s brother Adolphus exists as well but he is known by Federick Augustus in history. Charlotte speaks perfect English in Queen Charlotte but in real life, she did not and had to learn English and the customs of a new country. 

Ad – content continues below

The Dowager Princess Augusta and Lord Bute were prominent figures in the early days of King George III’s reign. However,  The conversational references to wars and taxation line up with the Seven Years’ War against the French during this time period and the beginnings of the American Revolution . The concern about King George III and Queen Charlotte having heirs as quickly as possible is also out of history. This is why their marriage was arranged in the first place. 

Since Bridgerton has fully embraced the theories that Queen Charlotte has possible African ancestry , Queen Charlotte takes time to clarify the Bridgerton season 1 reference to Charlotte and George’s marriage unifying the white members of the Ton and the BIPOC elites. Events such as Lord Danbury mentioning that he was initially denied entrance to the gentleman’s club reveal that equity and inclusion were not an overnight process. White Ton members in particular had to make changes in their mindset and actions. These developments not only explain to viewers the way the world of Bridgerton works but also justify current and future culturally conscious and racebent character casting.

The Danbury family and their title are entirely fictional but there is one grain of truth in their story: the Kpa-Mende Bo is a clan of the Mende people . Queen Charlotte however uses Sierra Leone as the name of the country which was not officially in existence until the UK set up their colony in the region in 1808. An argument can be made that this anachronism is designed to give viewers an easy modern-day reference and another can be made that Bridgerton ’s world-building picks and chooses which aspect of the UK’s empire history to highlight based on story expedience. 

There is no historical example of a person of color in Lady Danbury’s position defending the right to inherit royal titles in this era, however, we do know Black British people were allowed to inherit goods and property. As other period drama series like Sanditon depict , Black heirs and heiresses who inherited money or property from the Caribbean and other colonies could very well have white relatives legally challenge the wills which declared them heirs. 

The uneasiness of the white members of the Ton had with beginning to interact with BIPOC Ton members shares thematic similarities with the end of legal and social segregation in the US and social segregation in the UK but this storyline is also entirely only in the annals of Bridgerton history. 

King George’s Illness

Bridgerton fans have already seen King George III in a confused way. Queen Charlotte shows how George suffered from hearing voices in his head even before Charlotte was sent to marry him. Dr. John Monro from the Bethlem Hospital existed in history and so did the institution he represented. Monro advocated cold water baths for patient treatment and other forms of hydrotherapy. The Bethlem Royal Hospital was first founded as a Catholic church priory in 1247 but didn’t evolve into a place specializing in the treatment of the mentally ill until the mid-1400s. After the Reformation, the leadership of the hospital was turned from control by church officials over to control by the City Of London. Management positions were appointed by the Crown and were frequently used to reward wealthy patrons. 

In terms of the plot, the first recorded instance of King George III’s illness was around 1765, well after he was married. It is historically plausible earlier episodes were hidden from public knowledge. Experts today believe King George III had bipolar disorder . Rhimes’ depiction of repeat dunkings in cold water and other treatments are dramatizations of the fact that medical professionals of the age didn’t know how to treat mental illness.

Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox!

Where the series definitely veers toward fiction is depicting Charlotte as a wife who advocated against the medical establishments’ more radical methods of treating the mentally ill. There is not enough historical evidence to support whether Queen Charlotte ever personally confronted Monro or other doctors who attempted to treat King George III.

“Deformed Bunny”

Charlotte’s beloved Pomeranians in Bridgerton have an interesting backstory. Queen Charlotte puts forth that the first one was the result of George taking one of Dr. Monro’s animal test subjects from the laboratory to give as a gift to Charlotte. Pomeranians are indeed German in origin but they were bred from bigger sled dogs thousands of years after wild wolves evolved into domestic dogs. This version of the history of pomeranians is clearly about highlighting George and Charlotte learning to trust and love each other. 

The Succession Crisis

Charlotte in the current timeline fears for the future of the royal family. Her daughters refuse to marry and her sons have had many babies outside of wedlock. This is indeed based on history.

Queen Charlotte finally introduces viewers to the person the Regency Era was named after Prince George IV. He was installed as Regent in 1811 after King George was ruled too ill to continue to rule Britain. In fact, Queen Charlotte also introduces to the audience Queen Victoria’s parents : Prince Edward and Princess Victoria. She inherited the crown in the first place because her father was not the firstborn son and was the first legitimate descendant of King George III.

Queen Charlotte will be far from the last period drama to draw from biographies to create an alternate historical timeline for the purposes of entertainment. Good period dramas encourage the audience to do their own research. On the other hand, people who spend all day researching history should try to enjoy period dramas despite their imperfections with the facts.

All six episodes of Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story are available to stream on Netflix now.

Amanda-Rae Prescott

Amanda-Rae Prescott is a long time Outlander fan, period drama enthusiast and cosplayer. Her previous season Outlander commentary can be found at Blacklanderz and Nerdeek Life. When she's not…

• Latest Latest
• The West The West
• Sports Sports
• Opinion Opinion
• Magazine Magazine

Queen Charlotte: The true story behind ‘Bridgerton’ and Charlotte’s marriage to King George

Learn what ‘queen charlotte: a bridgerton story’ is based on and more about the real story of queen charlotte and king george.

By Natalie Issa

Whether or not you’re watching, Netflix’s “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” has taken the world by storm. An extension of the “Bridgerton” universe, “Queen Charlotte” delves into Queen Charlotte and King George’s marriage and the expectations placed on the young queen.

The show has garnered more interest than other “Bridgerton” stories — namely due to the fact that “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” is rooted in a real, historical story. But how accurate is “Queen Charlotte”? And what liberties did the creators take?

Here’s everything you need to know about Queen Charlotte, King George, and their incredible true story.

Who was Queen Charlotte in ‘Bridgerton’ based on?

Queen Charlotte was only 17 years old when she married King George III and became queen of England and Ireland, according to National Geographic .

Charlotte was born in 1744 in a German duchy called Mecklenburg-Strelitz, which is now northern Germany. Per National Geographic, Charlotte had an “unremarkable childhood” in a “mediocre and provincial dukedom.”

But this was all regarded as beneficial to George’s — who took the throne in 1760 — political advisers. Charlotte was relatively unknown and, as a result, likely had “no political connections or aims,” according to National Geographic.

An emissary “proposed marriage on (George’s) behalf,” even though the pair never met, and Charlotte accepted. King George and Queen Charlotte were married in 1761, even though “she spoke no English and had never met her husband before her wedding day,” per National Geographic .

Was Queen Charlotte Black in real life, as in ‘Bridgerton’?

While “Bridgerton” creators are known for casting actors of color in stereotypically white roles, casting a Black actress as Queen Charlotte wasn’t out of left field. Rumors have been swirling around Queen Charlotte’s race for years.

Queen Charlotte was a direct descendent of Margarita de Castro y Sousa, which was, according to PBS , “a Black branch of the Portuguese royal house.” It is this Portuguese lineage that has caused historians to debate — did Queen Charlotte have brown skin or not?

According to National Geographic , some historians point to Charlotte’s portraits, which they believe depict the queen with having “African” features. They argue that Charlotte was a light-skinned person of color, but was likely hiding her race to “conform with the era’s Eurocentric beauty ideals.”

But other historians argue that Charlotte’s Portuguese lineage was “so distant” that it most likely didn’t impact her physical appearance. Per National Geographic, these historians “argue that modern conceptions of race are what’s driving the belief that Charlotte was Black.”

Descriptions of Charlotte’s physical appearance at the time were varied. According to Vox , “A Tale of Two Cities” described Charlotte as “a queen with a plain face.” Charlotte’s physician called her “small and crooked, with a true mulatto face.” According to a prime minister, “Her nose is too wide and her lips too thick.”

While the debate continues, according to National Geographic , we’ll probably never know if Queen Charlotte was Black. “Since it’s impossible to determine how Charlotte really looked in real life, the argument will likely never be settled.”

Was Queen Charlotte loved by King George?

By all accounts, King George and Queen Charlotte had a very loving relationship. According to National Geographic , “the king and queen had an unusually happy marriage, and George III was a devoted father and husband.”

Speaking of Charlotte, King George said , “The queen is my physician, and no man can have a better; she is my friend, and no man can have a better.”

The king and queen reportedly slept in the same bed, which was unusual for the time, until King George’s madness separated them, according to a paper published in the London Review of Books .

Queen Charlotte’s wedding and the early years of her marriage to King George

As depicted in “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story,” Queen Charlotte and King George met on the day they were married.

Charlotte arrived in London in 1761 after a rough voyage from Germany — the trip included “three storms at sea” — and Queen Charlotte and King George were married six hours later, according to the the Royal family’s official website . Charlotte was 17 and George was 22 at the time.

Charlotte was reportedly violently ill after her voyage and “was so thin” that she could barely walk under the weight of her “diamond-adorned wedding gown,” according to Smithsonian Magazine .

Per the royal family’s website , Queen Charlotte had her first child “less than a year after their marriage.” That baby was the future King George IV.

While Queen Charlotte and King George enjoyed a happy marriage — until George’s madness — not all was well in the royal family. Much like in “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story,” Charlotte’s relationship with her mother-in-law, Princess Augusta, was strained.

According to People , their relationship was especially tense in the early years of Charlotte and George’s marriage. Augusta allegedly “appointed many of Charlotte’s staff, who then reported to Augusta about Charlotte’s behavior.”

What caused the madness of King George and how did it affect Queen Charlotte?

In 1765, King George underwent a mental affliction “so serious” that “his ministers proposed having Charlotte temporarily take the throne while the king was incapacitated,” according to National Geographic .

The king recovered quickly, but continued to have multiple relapses. King George would experience “mania, depression, hallucinations, and convulsions,” per National Geographic, and even attacked and sexually assaulted members of his family.

Francis Burney, one of Queen Charlotte’s attendants, wrote, “The queen is almost overpowered with some secret terror. I am affected beyond all expression in her presence, to see what struggles she makes to support serenity.”

Over time, George’s manic episodes turned lengthy, forcing him to be “isolated and even incarcerated.” After his son, George, took over the throne as king regent, King George “would remain ill for the rest of his life,” according to National Geographic .

But what caused George’s madness? Historians have offered a few theories.

Some historians had suggested that George suffered from porphyria — a physical and genetic blood disorder with symptoms such as “aches and pains, as well as blue urine,” according to BBC .

But researchers have disputed the theory. “The porphyria theory is completely dead in the water,” Peter Garrard, a researcher studying King George, told BBC. “This was a psychiatric illness.”

Bipolar disorder

On the other hand, researchers suggest that George experienced mania — potentially bipolar disorder. In a paper published in Clinical Medicine , researcher Timothy Peters said that recent studies and research implies that “the King suffered four/possibly five episodes of bipolar disorder.”

In a research paper , Garrard and his fellow researchers came to the same conclusion, saying that “in the modern classification of mental illness acute mania now appears to be the diagnosis that fits best with the available behavioural data.”

Did Queen Charlotte have 15 children?

Queen Charlotte and King George had 15 children, according to Today . Thirteen survived to adulthood — and two died as children. Here’s the complete list, per Today:

• George, Prince of Wales (1762).
• Prince Frederick, Duke of York and Albany (1763).
• Prince William, Duke of Clarence (1765).
• Charlotte, Princess Royal (1766).
• Prince Edward, Duke of Kent (1766).
• Princess Agusta Sophia (1768).
• Princess Elizabeth (1770).
• Prince Ernest, Duke of Cumberland (1771).
• Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex (1773).
• Prince Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge (1774).
• Princess Mary, Duchess of Gloucester (1776).
• Princess Sophia (1777).
• Prince Octavius (born 1779, died 1783).
• Prince Alfred (born 1780, died 1782).
• Princess Amelia (1783).

Prince George of Wales took the throne from his father at 48 in 1811 due to King George’s mental illness, according to the royal family’s official website . He was the uncle of Queen Victoria, who took the throne in 1837 at 18, per the Royal Family — which makes Queen Charlotte Victoria’s grandmother.

Is Queen Charlotte related to Queen Elizabeth?

According to People , Queen Charlotte is Queen Elizabeth’s great-great-great-great-grandmother.

How did Queen Charlotte die?

According to Historic Royal Palaces , Queen Charlotte died of pneumonia in November 1818 at the age of 74. Per Smithsonian Magazine , King George died two years later. Charlotte and George are buried close together at Windsor Castle in the royal vault.

How accurate is ‘Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story’?

While “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” gets some historical facts right, the series makes no promise of historical accuracy. In fact, the opening credits of the show set the record straight about its tale of Queen Charlotte, saying, “It is not a history lesson. It is fiction inspired by fact.”

As mentioned, the show gets a few things right — most notably the portrayal of George’s madness and the mention of George and Charlotte’s 15 children. The pair also did meet on their wedding day and were married six hours after Charlotte arrived in England, according to National Geographic .

Also, more endearingly, George was known as “Farmer George” because of his “agricultural interests,” and he had “a love of botany and plants,” per National Geographic.

Unsurprisingly, “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” takes some liberties. Charlotte is played by a Black actress, but there is no historical evidence that indicates that Queen Charlotte was Black in real life. Therefore the “Great Experiment,” which is a major plot point in the show, never happened, according to.

Where can I watch ‘Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story’?

All six episodes of “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” can be found on Netflix.

What is ‘Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story’ rated and why?

According to Common Sense Media , “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” is for those aged 16 and up, but it might be best for adults only. The series is TV-MA, according to IMDb . The show contains:

• Intense sexual situations (simulated sex scenes, etc.)
• Discussions of sex.
• Sexual innuendos.
• Mild language.

Screen Rant

Was queen charlotte black shocking theory & true story of bridgerton's queen.

Your changes have been saved

Email is sent

Email has already been sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

Star Wars: Who's Abeloth, & Why Is She Important To Ahsoka Season 2?

Stephen amell addresses heels season 3 chances as netflix adds wrestling show with 94% rt score, lotr: rings of power season 3’s status reportedly clarified after season 2’s ratings decline.

Was Queen Charlotte actually black? Bridgerton and Queen Charlotte may be works of fiction, but their portrayal of Queen Charlotte is surprisingly true to history - and she may well have been Black. Inspired by a series of novels by Julia Quinn, Bridgerton and Queen Charlotte tell the interweaving stories of Regency and Georgian era powerful families. Romances blossom, power plays sweep through social events, and everyone looks stunning. Intriguing, Bridgerton never explored the issue of Queen Charlotte's ethnicity, as it was merely part of an established alternate world of racial equality.

Unlike Bridgerton , Queen Charlotte directly addresses issues of race, no doubt drawing uneasy parallels between the real world story of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry for some viewers (particularly in terms of questions over skin tone). This is an important change, and one handled very smartly by drawing Charlotte's ethnicity into a wider story about power and society: particularly as it never arises as an issue even once between King George and Queen Charlotte themselves. But even with that blindspot, Charlotte is asked to realize her importance to racial equality - a question that sits as prominently in 2023 as it does in the 1780s in-universe.

Was The Real Queen Charlotte Black? Theory Explained

It's important to note that Shonda Rhimes has never claimed that Queen Charlotte is a true history - in fact, quite the opposite. But that hasn't stopped speculation, including questions of whether the real Queen Charlotte was black. Somewhat surprisingly, there is an enduring theory that King George III's wife may indeed have been dark-skinned.

Historians are actually divided about whether or not Queen Charlotte was Black. The theory was popularized by Mario De Valdes y Cocom, who believes Charlotte was descended from a Black branch of the Portuguese royal family: Alfonso III and his concubine, Ouruana. " Alfonso III of Portugal conquered a little town named Faro from the Moors ," Valdes told The Washington Post . " He demanded [the governor’s] daughter as a paramour. He had three children with her. " According to Valdes, one of these children married into Queen Charlotte's family. And he points to portraits suggesting Charlotte was indeed Black, although frequently he believes artists whitewashed her appearance, as Queen Charlotte itself depicts through Princess Augusta.

On the other side of the argument, modern historian Lisa Hilton told the Express that the theory is bunk: “ There is not and has not been any evidence that Queen Charlotte was black. No, there was no black branch of the Portuguese Royal Family. Queen Charlotte was not black and I can keep repeating it .”

Evidence For The Theory That Queen Charlotte Was Really Black

Further supporting evidence that Queen Charlotte was black may come from the critical way in which she was treated. " She was famously ugly, " Desmond Shawe-Taylor, surveyor of the Queen's pictures, told The Guardian . " One courtier once said of Charlotte late in life: 'Her Majesty's ugliness has quite faded.' There was quite a miaow factor at court. " It's quite possible these criticisms actually reflected racist attitudes in British society, because certainly some of the insults sound like racial slurs. Sir Walter Scott described Queen Charlotte and her siblings as being " ill-colored, orang-outang looking figures, with black eyes and hook-noses. "

Historians are divided about Valdes' theory, with many dismissing it outright. There's actually quite a generational distance between Queen Charlotte and her Black ancestor, so many argue she would not have inherited any so-called " African characteristics. " More to the point, the British Museum holds a number of popular caricatures of Queen Charlotte, and none of these portray her as Black. Still, in spite of the criticisms, the theory can't really be disproven and the question remains unsettled.

Bridgerton and Queen Charlotte are, therefore, fascinating windows into a what-if world; what if Queen Charlotte really was Black? How would Regency England have reacted to that, and would Charlotte have taken advantage of the opportunity to elevate others who were Black as well - notably Simon, Duke of Hastings ? " Putting that person at the top of the triangle, as a person of color, allows you to expand the boundaries, " Rosheuvel explained in an interview with Insider . " The possibility for Black characters to love, to be passionate, to be seen in high status. You allow all that space to happen if you have somebody, who was ruling the country as a person of color. "

Whatever the truth may be in this matter, Queen Charlotte isn't potentially even the first mixed-race Queen in British history. Another theory suggests Philippa of Hainault (1314-69), consort of Edward III, had African ancestry as well. Bridgerton certainly suggests British history books have been whitewashed a whole lot more than people may think.

What Is The Great Experiment - Did It Really Exist?

Queen Charlotte introduces the idea of a Great Experiment as a politically motivated move to unite all races of people in the ton, in the name of strengthening the country. Along with Charlotte's betrothal to George - which is not based on her skin color but the value of alliance with her country - Princess Augusta orchestrates peerages for each of the powerful black and other minority race families in the ton (including Simon Bassett's parents and the Smythe-Smiths). This is essentially the first steps to ending racism and racial inequality in Bridgerton 's universe - something the original show established as fact without explaining.

There is no evidence to suggest that there was a Great Experiment in the United Kingdom's Regency Era in the same way Queen Charlotte depicts. While slavery may have been abolished in the UK in 1807 (within the Bridgerton timeline), racial equality was a distant hope. It is important, however, to acknowledge London's black community, which - according to author Vanessa Riley's research - amounted to at least 20,000 people in the era. The idea of peerages given out by the Crown to solidify relationships and remove divide may have been the right answer to speed up real world progression, but it is the stuff of fiction, written for Bridgerton and Queen Charlotte .

• Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story

What is the Great Experiment in Bridgerton?

Warning: This article contains spoilers for Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story.

Shondaland and Netflix’s Bridgerton series (based on the romance novels by Julia Quinn) take some plays from real history, but there are some major differences.

This is one key difference between the television drama and the book series as well as real life. 

The diversity is a breath of fresh air for period-piece enjoyers who are tired of seeing white-washed romances with little to no people of color, especially when the people of color pictured aren’t the main characters and are instead portrayed as servants. 

From the very beginning of Bridgerton Season 1, we saw that this was not going to be the case for this series as Queen Charlotte is a Black woman, and Simon, the handsome Duke of Hastings , is a Black person of nobility as well. 

This diversity is explained in the Queen Charlotte prequel spin-off through a process called the great experiment, which brought diversity to the fictional Ton.

What is the Great Experiment?

Arsema Thomas, who played the young Agatha Danbury in the spin-off series, told Netflix that the House of Lords came up with a plan to integrate the Ton and give titles to non-white members of their society in an attempt to save face. 

As seen at the beginning of the prequel, the aristocracy was white until Charlotte showed up, her “very brown” skin shocking King George’s mother as Charlotte is a princess from Germany. 

Coming up with the idea of the Great Experiment and creating an integrated nobility made it so that Charlotte being chosen as Queen “was intentional and not a mistake.”

Plus, casting Queen Charlotte as a Black woman pays tribute to some theories about the real Queen Charlotte, though the Great Experiment remains fictional.

Was Queen Charlotte Britain’s first Black queen?

“Many historians believe that Queen Charlotte was of mixed cultural heritage. We wanted to take that in a different direction than what the history books have said happened — which was basically to bury that and not deal with it,” Queen Charlotte director Tom Verica revealed.

As previously reported by The Guardian , Queen Charlotte’s race in real life is a big “what if” as she has been portrayed both as white, Black, or perhaps biracial. 

Historian Mario de Valdes v Cocom believes that Charlotte is of African descent based on her features shown in royal paintings. He also claims that the German queen was a direct descendant of a Black branch of the Portuguese royal family. 

While it is possible that Charlotte had African ancestors, many historians find this theory skeptical as there is apparently little evidence to support her Black ancestry and that, even if Charlotte did have African ancestry, the generations between the two would essentially nullify any Blackness to her. 

Although we can’t be sure of Queen Charlotte’s exact race or lineage, we think Netflix and Shondaland did a great job casting her both in Queen Charlotte and in the flagship series . 

Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story is now streaming on Netflix.

7 editor-picked Amazon essentials: Plus an exclusive Color Wow deal

• Share this —

• Watch Full Episodes
• Read With Jenna
• Inspirational
• Relationships
• TODAY Table
• Newsletters
• Start TODAY
• Shop TODAY Awards
• Citi Concert Series
• Listen All Day

Follow today

More Brands

• On The Show
• TODAY Plaza

The true story of Queen Charlotte and how it compares to the Netflix show

Netflix's "Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story " takes streamers back to the "ton" and its world of advantageous matches and stolen glances. This time, the Shonda Rhimes-created series adds a twist.

While Julia Quinn’s romance novels inspire the past seasons, the new spinoff series, which debuts on May 4, pulls us into the story of the original “Bridgerton” recurring character, Queen Charlotte.

Previously played by actor Golda Rosheuvel, the Queen Charlotte of this semi-sequel / prequel winds back the clock to when the monarch was 17 years of age. Actor India Amarteifio stars as the young Charlotte in this story that follows her marriage to King George III (Corey Mylchreest).

More 'Queen Charlotte'

• Golda Rosheuvel and India Amarteifio on sharing 'Queen Charlotte' role

"Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story" blends fiction and history, leaving plenty of questions about the liberties the show's creators took while producing the series.

Below, find all of those questions about the series main character asked and answered.

Who was the real Queen Charlotte?

Queen Charlotte in "Bridgerton" is based on the real-life Charlotte, Queen Consort of Great Britain and Ireland.

Born Sophia Charlotte, the queen was born into nobility on May 19, 1744 far from the British Isles she would one day rule.

According to the British Royal Family 's official website, Queen Charlotte was the daughter of Duke Charles Louis Frederick of Mecklenburg, Prince of Mirow and his wife Princess Elisabeth Albertine of Saxe-Hildburghausen who reigned over Mecklenburg-Strelitz a north German dukedom.

Charlotte found herself on the path to queendom when she was 17 years old and her future husband, 22-year-old George III, ascended to the British throne in 1760. In 1761, after a long journey from her home in Germany, Charlotte arrived in England and married the new king within six hours of her arrival.

The queen ultimately became Britain’s longest-serving female consort and second to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh , the longest-serving consort in British history.

Did Queen Charlotte love King George?

In the latest Netflix series, Queen Charlotte and George III have a match made in enemies-to-lovers territory. Ultimately though, things turn for them. They go on to have 15 children .

In reality, the actual Queen Charlotte and George III, who were married for nearly 60 years, demonstrated a successful marriage by their era's standard: Their heirs. With 15 children in total, the queen and king secured their legacy, and they certainly proved seemed to love each other's company, at the very least in certain settings.

Martin Warren, a professor of biochemistry at the University of Kent and expert on George III’s mental health, told TODAY.com in an interview that some interpretations of history claim that the couple was not in love.

“As I understand it better, the king was very much in love with his wife. But if you read some of the more frightening approaches to history, it was claimed that (George III) had married one of the ugliest of the German-born, available Protestant princesses and that this actually exacerbated his condition because it affected his mental well-being,” he explains. “This, of course, is total nonsense because he produced (15) children with his wife.”

Still, if their 15 children aren't enough proof, a letter might seal the deal of their mutual affection. A correspondence from Queen Charlotte to George III , dated April 26, 1778, shows her writing to her husband with affection.

"How glad do I feel to know that You are pleased and enjoy good health a Board Your Yacht," she writes. "There is a pleasure in doing What is right to do, and You will have the benefit by Your voyages to put Spirit in every Body, to be more known by the World, and if Possible more beloved by the People in general. That must be the case, but not equal to the love of her who subscribes herself, Your very (affectionate) Friend and Wife Charlotte."

Was the real Queen Charlotte Black?

"Bridgerton" is set in a world where people of all races mingle in society's upper crust. "Queen Charlotte" is a prequel to that world, showing how George III's marriage to a Black woman laid the groundwork for it to be possible, calling their marriage "The Great Experiment."

In the spinoff, Queen Charlotte is a Black teen who slowly becomes aware of what her new status means for the ambitious people of color within her ranks, including the young Lady Agatha Danbury (Arsema Thomas).

Whether or not the real Queen Charlotte was Black or not has long been debated by history experts.

Depictions of the queen painted during her time have been a cornerstone of those questions of whether or not she was Black. Mario de Valdes y Cocom, a historian of the African diaspora, argued this in a 1997 article for PBS , pointing to a portrait of the queen painted in 1762 by Allan Ramsay .

“Artists of that period were expected to play down, soften or even obliterate undesirable features in a subject’s face," he writes. "(But) Sir Allan Ramsay was the artist responsible for the majority of the paintings of the queen, and his representations of her were the most decidedly African of all her portraits.”

According to Valdez, Queen Charlotte was a direct descendant of Margarita de Castro y Sousa, who came from a Black branch of the Portuguese monarchy. Valdez wrote that Queen Charlotte is also believed to be related to Martin Alfonso de Sousa Chichorro, the illegitimate son of King Alfonso of Portugal and a Moorish woman who was his mistress.

Alex Portée is a senior trending reporter at TODAY Digital and is based in Los Angeles.

‘Queen Charlotte’ Is the Best ‘Bridgerton’ Yet: TV Review

By Alison Herman

Alison Herman

• A Humdrum Emmys Are Weighed Down by Sparse Crowds and Sponsored Content: TV Review 1 day ago
• ‘Industry’ Star Marisa Abela on That Slap and Yasmin’s Shocking Decision: ‘It’s Too Far Gone’ 1 day ago
• Shailene Woodley’s ‘Three Women’ Improves on the Bestseller With a Candid, Searching Look Into Female Sexuality: TV Review 4 days ago

Related Stories

Virtual Production Growth in Focus at IBC Event

Nate Bargatze to Host CBS Primetime Special Taped at Grand Ole Opry

Popular on variety.

It’s a narrow line to walk. Charlotte’s arrival in England occasions what courtiers deem “the Great Experiment”: the sudden, dramatic bestowal of titles, lands and privileges on select people of color. As with all previous attempts to explain exactly how race works on “Bridgerton,” every detail prompts as many questions as it answers. The actual Queen Charlotte, some historians believe, may have had some African ancestry, which here leads her future mother-in-law Princess Augusta (Michelle Fairley) to make comments about Charlotte’s skin tone clearly inspired by real-life royal drama . But Augusta quickly resolves to remake the nobility in her new family member’s image, though it’s unclear exactly how they’re selected or from what pool of candidates. There’s some resistance from the old guard, though it’s never explicitly racist, again begging some follow-ups about the preexisting status quo.

Inquiring minds will be appeased by the chemistry between Amarteifio and Mylchreest, built through a more interesting conflict than the typical will-they-won’t-they. The question is not if these two will get together, but how they’ll navigate the inevitable obstacles now that they’re bonded for life. Shows like “Catastrophe” have explored this idea in the modern day; “Queen Charlotte” takes unrelatable opulence and infuses it with emotion, even as there’s plenty of eye candy. George struggles with what we’d now call mental illness, and was then deemed fits of madness. His shame, her indignation at being shut out and their palpable attraction power a roller coaster we can instantly invest in.

The Queen Charlotte of “Bridgerton” is a peripheral presence, only descending from her royal perch to issue proclamations and make cutting remarks in over-the-top outfits, to viewers’ delight. On a weaker show, our knowledge of how her life turns out would sap a prequel of suspense, or worse yet, dilute the impact of Rosheuvel’s fabulously regal performance. Instead, Amarteifio credibly finds the roots of Charlotte’s willful, self-centered, sometimes petulant charm in her teenage self. (After all, that combination of traits is normal in any teen girl, whether or not she’s a queen.) Rosheuvel’s role underscores the continuity between the two actors while also giving adult Charlotte her first real subplot as she pressures her 15 children to produce a legitimate heir.

The “Bridgerton” project is, at its core, to give a conservative genre a reformist sheen while keeping the underlying structures intact. (This is a show that can make Americans root for the very man we declared independence from, give or take some casual mentions of the colonies.) Whether or not you approve of that aim, “Queen Charlotte” is as close to a flawless execution as its franchise has gotten yet. Netflix is eager to expand some of its biggest homegrown hits — “Stranger Things,” “Squid Game,” and yes, “Bridgerton” — into full-blown universes. But in its clear understanding of what makes “Bridgerton” work, and where it can improve, “Queen Charlotte” feels organic rather than cynical. 

It also offers an ideal metaphor for what the best spinoffs can do. In a scene that epitomizes the show’s frothy, often funny, insightful tone, Violet and Agatha euphemistically refer to their libidos as a “garden”: something that can go dormant or grow lush, depending on the season. “ Everyone has a garden,” Agatha says, an objective truth and a statement of purpose. Anyone can love and be loved, and so anyone can star in a love story. “Bridgerton” is already a more inclusive romance than most, but even its seasons end with the birth of a baby or a walk down the aisle. “Queen Charlotte” keeps going, and suggests “Bridgerton” could, too.

“Queen Charlotte” premieres on Netflix on May 4.

More from Variety

‘Rings of Power’ Director Charlotte Brändström Explains Sauron’s Origins in Season 2 Premiere, Why Celebrimbor Is Like Oppenheimer and Directing 200 Orcs (EXCLUSIVE)

Dissatisfied With Its Rate of Erosion, DVD Biz Fast-Forwards 2024 Decline

‘The Perfect Couple’ Killer Confesses! [SPOILER] Spills on Playing the Villain, the Show’s ‘Surreal’ Tone and Joining the Rebellion Against That Dance

New York Comic-Con Sets ‘Star Trek,’ ‘School Spirits’ Panels, ‘Dexter’ Experience (EXCLUSIVE)

4D Movie Tech Lacks Consumer Awareness: Survey

‘The Perfect Couple’ Ending Explained: How the Netflix Series Changed the Book’s Killer Finale

More from our brands, sean combs arrested after grand jury indictment.

Artist JR Just Designed a New Suite for the Venice Simplon-Orient-Express

Coffey Talk: Ares Sports Chiefs Affolter, Miller on NFL Investing

The Best Loofahs and Body Scrubbers, According to Dermatologists

Charlie Hunnam to Star in Monster Season 3 as Serial Killer Ed Gein

‘Queen Charlotte’ Review: Netflix’s ‘Bridgerton’ Prequel Course-Corrects Mistakes From the Original

The Shonda Rhimes-created spin-off fills in the gaps of how the titular ruler rose to power while navigating politics and race

In the first season of the hit Netflix series “Bridgerton,” Lady Agatha Danbury (Adjoh Andoa) proclaims: “We were two separate societies divided by color until a king fell in love with one of us.” It is the first time race is ever overtly mentioned on the show. Since then, many have wondered to what extent race factored into the fictional Regency-era series, especially as it relates to Queen Charlotte (Golda Rosheuvel).

“Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” not only fills in the gaps of how “Bridgerton’s” Queen rose to power, but it also shares how she navigated that rise through the hazardous terrain of politics, royalty, mental illness and race. It achieves this through a humanizing character portrayal that delivers a surprising emotional punch. In addition, Shonda Rhimes’ six-episode prequel gives agency to supporting characters of the Bridgertonverse .

The series transitions back and forth from the Georgian period, where a Young Queen Charlotte (India Amarteifio) and Young Lady Agatha (Arsema Thomas) begin their friendship (and Violet Bridgerton is a child), to the familiar Regency era in the winter following the events of “Bridgerton” Season 2 . Here, the older versions of the characters fill in exciting moments from their lives over expository walks and tea.

Although the character of Queen Charlotte did not exist in the Bridgerton novels, she did live in real life during the Georgian era of England’s history. The real Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz was of mixed heritage and was betrothed to King George III of England, a monarch who suffered from porphyria , a rare hemoglobin disorder that can result in confusion, hallucinations and even seizures.

But “Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” is not a history lesson. Lady Whistledown’s first words of the series describe the story as “fiction inspired by fact.” However, where previous “Bridgerton” narratives waltzed around the concept of race , queerness and colorism , “Queen Charlotte” weaves it into the bejeweled brocade of her story.

We first meet young Princess Charlotte while she’s on a carriage ride leaving her estate. Her brother, Prince Adolphus (Tunji Kasim), has just signed her life away to a man and country she doesn’t know. Although Charlotte has grown up with a title in Germany, she has no designs on royalty, queendom and, least of all, England.

It’s quickly apparent that a decision was made to marry the new King off as soon as possible and that a foreign bride seemed the most suitable option. However, someone forgot to inform the English Royals of Queen Charlotte’s Moorish heritage.

Shocked by how “brown” Princess Charlotte is, the King’s mother, Princess Augusta (Michelle Fairley), is the bride-to-be’s harshest critic. Concerned, but not wanting to postpone the wedding, the Dowager Princess devises a plan she dubs “The Great Experiment.” She hastily bestows titles on many of the ton’s Black and brown residents, and then invites them to the royal wedding seated across the aisle from white members of the aristocracy.

Her separate but equal plan is not a commentary on race relations, but rather an act of charity to acknowledge the future queen’s heritage, unite the kingdom and impress Parliament — even if only temporarily. Overnight, Agatha and her husband become Lord and Lady Danbury, placing Young Lady Danbury on the path to becoming Bridgerton’s second most powerful woman.

On the day of her wedding, Charlotte is so distraught that no one will tell her anything about the man she is to marry that she runs away. Her escape is thwarted by Young King George (Corey Mylchreest) of all people, just as she contemplates scaling the palace garden wall and making a run for it. George and Charlotte are instantly smitten with each other, their love seemingly written in the stars.

Secrets and deception plague the newlyweds’ relationship from the start, as George pushes Charlotte away to keep her from finding out his secrets. Those secrets come to the surface eventually, while the couple juggles producing an heir with figuring out their future as couple and the fate of all involved in the “Great Experiment.”

The future Queen Charlotte faces a similar dilemma in the Regency era after her only granddaughter, and heir to the throne, dies in childbirth along with her mother. While the queen found a way to fulfill her royal duties and produce 13 children, she spends most of the season trying to get her young adult kids to marry and provide a legitimate heir for the royal family line to live on.

In the past, Charlotte’s loneliness and confusion lead her to confide in Lady Danbury. The pair become fast friends, which Princess Augusta attempts to exploit by demanding Danbury pump the queen for information in an effort to maintain control over her son.

The parallels and intersections of Young Lady Danbury and Young Queen Charlotte drive most of the plot. Danbury was a toddler when she was promised to her husband after she came of age. As a consequence she endures unfulfilling sex and a relatively loveless marriage out of a sense of duty. Meanwhile Charlotte and George, although physically attracted to each other, can’t move past the walls George has erected to protect his secret. But in true “Bridgerton” fashion, the couple still manages to have hot angry sex every other day in an attempt to produce an heir.

“Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” has all the trappings of the flagship series’ fare, including steamy bathtub sex, orchestral pop remakes (Beyonce’s “Halo” included), and stunning period costumes, bustled up and dripping with jewels. And although the series offers just six episodes, multiple chapters sport long pearl-clutching run times.

However, unlike previous installments, the tone of the prequel is more deliberate, with less of the frivolity found in the main series. Is “Bridgerton” still a world of heteronormative wealthy European privilege? Absolutely. But Rhimes should be commended for providing context and purpose to Queen Charlotte’s origins, as well as a proper backstory for how the Regency era’s more inclusive ton came to be.

Amarteifio does an outstanding job playing Young Queen Charlotte, and exudes both Rosheuvel’s confidence and the feeling of a young girl entirely out of her depth. Her chemistry is palpable with Mylchreest, who does a beautiful job wandering through the wilderness of King George’s mind without being campy.

And it’s hard to believe that Young Lady Danbury is one of Thomas’ first roles out of acting school. Her acting ability belies an actress with much more experience. The only character that seems out of place is her husband, the gratingly cartoonish Lord Danbury, who at some 40 years older than Agatha, is more concerned with social climbing than with actually spending time with any of his children, preparing them for their future or respecting his wife.

Ultimately, Charlotte and George carve out an unbreakable bond within a world with little privacy and a society that refuses to accept them as they are. Their love story is emotional and challenging, but they triumph on their terms.

“Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story” premieres Thursday, May 4, on Netflix.

• by Smriti Kannan
• Film Fugitives

Similar News

• by Laxmi Rajput

• by Ruth Kinane
• Tudum - Netflix

• by Lily Ford
• The Hollywood Reporter - Movie News

• by Naser Nahandian

• ScreenDaily

• by Max Goldbart
• Deadline Film + TV

• ComicBookMovie.com

• by Amanda Lauren
• TV Shows Ace

• by Jennifer Gardiner
• Daily Soap Dish

More to explore

Recently viewed.

Who was the real James Herriot? The true story behind All Creatures Great and Small

The anecdotal works of the veterinarian James ‘Alf’ Wight have captivated readers for decades, been turned into a popular television series and even a must-see tourist attraction. Lauren Good explores the life and career of the man behind James Herriot, from his life in Thirsk, Yorkshire, to going AWOL during the Second World War and a struggle with mental illness

• Lauren Good
• Share on facebook
• Share on twitter
• Share on whatsapp
• Email to a friend

Since his book If Only They Could Talk was published in 1970, James Herriot – the pen name of James Alfred ‘Alf’ Wight – has delighted generations with endearing stories of his life as a veterinarian in North Yorkshire from the 1930s-50s.

The charm of a country vet going about his rounds has since brought Wight global fame, from his first appearance in If Only They Could Talk (1970) to films ( All Creatures Great and Small (1975) and It Shouldn’t Happen to a Vet (1976)) and television adaptations (the original from 1978-1990, and the Channel 5 series 2020-present). Yet, in his heart, he always favoured the quiet life in Yorkshire over the glare of the spotlight.

Where was James Herriot born?

Wight was born on 3 October 1916 at his mother Hannah Wight’s family home in Sunderland in the north of England. Having visited Sunderland to give birth, Hannah returned to Glasgow when Wight was just three weeks old, which is where he spent his early years – and explains the lilting Scottish accent that many associate with his literary alter-ego, James Herriot.

An only child, Wight attended Yoker Primary School and Hillhead High School, before taking a place at veterinary college at the age of 17.

James Herriot’s career as a vet

Since he was a young boy, Wight had always loved animals and spent much of his time walking with his dog, an Irish Setter. His interest blossomed into a desire to be a vet – so that he could care for all kinds of creatures – when he read an article in Meccano Magazine about veterinary surgeons. Two years later, when a vet visited his school to give a lecture, his mind was made up; that was what he wanted to do with his life.

More like this

Wight joined Glasgow Veterinary College and graduated just over six years later, in 1939 at the age of 23. It should have taken him five years, but he suffered from gastrointestinal problems and had to miss lectures, causing him to fail many of his modules on the first attempt.

Still, Wight’s progress at the college was impressively swift when compared to some of his contemporaries. There were students who took 14 years to finish the five-year course; for many, training as a vet meant little work and lots of play.

Following graduation, Wight’s professional career got underway – in Sunderland and not Thirsk, as is often assumed due to the setting of the James Herriot books. His mother’s family were still based in Sunderland, so he happily made use of the free accommodation.

Though, it wasn’t long before he felt the pull of a rural life and headed to the Yorkshire countryside, where he joined Donald Sinclair’s veterinary practice at 23 Kirkgate, Thirsk. This would become the famous Skeldale House in the books and television adaptations, with Sinclair immortalised as the eccentric Siegfried Farnon.

Who did James Herriot marry in real life?

In his books, Wight’s alas James Herriot marries a farmer’s daughter named Helen Alderson, but her real-life counterpart was a secretary, Joan Danbury.

Wight and Danbury married on 5 November 1941 at St Mary’s Church in Thirsk. Sadly, his parents didn’t approve of the match as they hoped he would marry someone of higher status. Their absence from the wedding haunted Wight throughout his life.

• Read more | The history of York: a northern powerhouse of many names

Unable to afford any time away from work, the newlyweds could not enjoy a traditional honeymoon, but instead spent it in the village of Carnaby. Wight tested cattle for tuberculosis while his wife took notes.

The couple then settled into married life in the attic of 23 Kirkgate. “It would have been spartan,” their daughter, Rosie, told PBS America. “They had hardly any furniture. When we lived in that house, as we did until I was six, that bit at the top was never seen as anything but the attic. We kept a pig down the garden [and] they used to hang the hams on hooks up in that same attic!”

How many children did James Herriot have?

Wight and his wife Joan had two children: James (better known as Jim) and Rosemary (Rosie). Jim would replace his father as a partner in the veterinary practice upon Wight’s death, while Rosie became a GP.

As a child, however, she had wanted to follow in her father’s footsteps. “He encouraged Jim, but not me,” she told PBS America. “I think predominantly because in those days vets were mostly men, particularly country vets. And I don’t think dad wanted his little girl lying in cow byres in the middle of the night, flat on her face. He kept saying, ‘No, you’d rather be a doctor, wouldn’t you?’

“And I have to say, I don’t regret it. I was happy being a doctor. I don’t think either of us thought of anything else to do apart from doctors and vets.”

What did James Herriot do in the war?

Although his profession exempted him from military service, Wight joined the Royal Air Force in November 1942 and trained to be a pilot. Proving his skills in the air, as well as on the farms of Yorkshire, he was one of the first in his unit to fly solo and would achieve the rank of leading aircraftman.

Yet Wight wasn’t an exemplary RAF pilot, and did break the rules. On two occasions, he went absent without leave (AWOL), the first time while Joan was pregnant with Jim and the second when she was due to give birth. Luckily, he was never caught.

H2: How long did James Herriot go to war for?

Wight’s RAF career was cut short by health issues, specifically surgery for an anal fistula that left him unfit for combat missions.

The condition had plagued him since his days at veterinary college. After just a year of service, he was discharged in November 1943.

Are the characters in All Creatures Great and Small based on real people?

Many of the beloved characters in Wight's stories were inspired by real people in his life, although he used pseudonyms to protect their identities.

Herriot’s wife Helen Alderson was based on Joan Danbury. And while it is true that she was engaged to another man before marrying Wight, the real Joan ended this relationship before walking to the altar – unlike Helen in the television series.

Siegfried Farnon – who owns the Skeldale House veterinary practice – and his brother Tristan are the fictional counterparts of the Sinclair brothers, Donald and Brian. The real brothers shared a complex relationship, with Donald often exasperated by his younger brother’s laid-back approach to life: Brian took a decade to complete his course at the Royal Veterinary College in Edinburgh, and at Donald’s expense.

A character who plays a prominent role in the most recent All Creatures Great and Small series is Mrs Hall, the housekeeper who keeps Skeldale House running. She represents various women who assisted Wight and the Sinclairs with domestic tasks at the practice.

Then there is Mrs Pumphrey and her Pekingese, Tricki Woo, who were inspired by socialite Marjorie Warner and her dog Bambi.

Like in the stories, she did indeed send luxury hampers to the practice as tokens of thanks.

What was James Herriot’s relationship like with Siegfried and Tristan Farnon in real life?

Much like in the books and television adaptations, Wight had close relationships with both Donald (the real-life Siegfried) and Brian (Tristan). The brothers were affectionately known as ‘uncle’ to his children, and when Brian left Thirsk to work at the Ministry of Agriculture in Leeds, Wight and his wife Joan visited him regularly.

However, while Brian was said to have been fond of his portrayal in Wight’s books, Donald disliked his fictional counterpart, believing himself to be dissimilar to the inconsistent and sometimes explosive Siegfried. He even told Wight that his debut novel was “a test of our friendship”.

That said, Donald was always eager to welcome avid fans of Wight's work on a tour around the surgery at 23 Kirkgate whenever they showed up, according to Wight’s son Jim.

When did James Herriot start writing?

It was only in his fifties that Wight began writing seriously, thanks to encouragement from Joan.

It might be a surprise that his earlier works were not about his career as a vet, but about sport. He hoped that his love of football might make the writing process easier; in fact, his famous pen name of James Herriot was inspired by a Scottish goalkeeper.

Wight’s first book If Only They Could Talk , took 18 months to write, and would be turned down by all the publishers he sent it to.

A key moment came when he received a piece of advice from a reader at a publishing firm to write his anecdotal stories in first person rather than third, leading Wight to revise his manuscript.

• Read more | Pet cemeteries: where have beloved animals been laid to rest through the centuries?

He then found a publisher and If Only They Could Talk was released, first as a serial in the London Evening Standard before full publication in April 1970. A total of 3,000 copies were distributed around the UK.

This was followed by It Shouldn’t Happen to a Vet in 1972, the same year that both books were compiled and published under the title All Creatures Great and Small in the US. These proved a great success, quickly outstripping the initial run of 3,000.

According to Macmillan Publishers, more than 80 million copies of Wight’s books have since been sold worldwide – and they have never been out of print.

In what order were James Herriot’s books published?

How did james herriot feel about his fame.

Wight was astonished by his success, telling the Daily Mail in 1981: “I was dumbfounded by the reaction to that first book, absolutely dumbfounded. The most I had hoped for was that someone would publish it and a few people quite enjoy reading it.”

Despite his growing notoriety, he changed little in his life and rarely spoke about his literary achievements, according to his family.

The financial success of his books meant he no longer had to work, yet he continued to practise veterinary medicine in some capacity for pretty much the rest of his life.

Wight insisted that the farmers in the Dales didn’t treat him any differently either, once famously exclaiming: “If a farmer calls me with a sick animal, he couldn’t care less if I were George Bernard Shaw.”

Of course, another star of the books was 23 Kirkgate, which became something of a tourist hotspot for fans. By the late 1970s, with James Herriot a household name, hordes of people would queue outside the practice to have books signed by Wight. He agreed in return for donations to a dog sanctuary, later claiming that this brought in around £100 each time.

Today, 23 Kirkgate houses the popular museum, The World of James Herriot.

James Herriot’s struggles with mental illness

Wight struggled with depression for much of his life, beginning during his time at Glasgow Veterinary College. He once wrote in his diary: “I have been getting intermittent fits of the blues of late, but I don’t know what’s up.”

His mental health issues carried on into later life. Jim said in a 2010 interview with the Daily Mail that his father would describe his depressive episodes as a feeling of “overwhelming melancholy”.

Wight had a nervous breakdown in 1960, which plagued him for two years. He even resorted to electroconvulsive therapy.

How did James Herriot die?

Diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1991, Wight died at his home on 23 February 1995, aged 78. He left behind an estate valued at more than £5 million and his share of the practice passed to Jim, according to his will.

The name James Herriot has lived on, as new generations of fans come to Wight’s books and watch the highly popular Channel 5 series All Creatures Great and Small .

Lauren Good is the digital content producer at HistoryExtra. She joined the team in 2022 after completing an MA in Creative Writing, and she holds a first-class degree in English and Classical Studies.

• Visit us on Twitter

STUDENT OFFER - Get access to our Collector's Edition when you try 5 issues for £5

Sign up for the weekly HistoryExtra newsletter

Sign up to receive our newsletter!

By entering your details, you are agreeing to our terms and conditions and privacy policy . You can unsubscribe at any time.

Student offer - 5 issues for £5

+ Access to a trove of study aides

USA Subscription offer!

Save 76% on the shop price when you subscribe today - Get 13 issues for just $45 + FREE access to HistoryExtra.com

HistoryExtra podcast

Listen to the latest episodes now

• Latest news
• UCL in the media
• Services for media
• Student news
• Tell us your story

Large-scale experiment brings real world into lab to design better spaces

16 September 2024

The real world was brought into the laboratory on a scale never seen before, for an experiment where over 100 people were tracked walking through a custom-built network of moveable ‘walls’, in a UCL-led research project investigating how people move through spaces.

The project attracted participation from professionals in architecture, hospitals, transport, AI, property, video game design, dance, and museums.

The research team, led by academics from neuroscience, architecture, and civil engineering, are seeking to develop comprehensive data about how people navigate and experience spaces, that could aid the design of better buildings to improve health, learning, and living.

At a launch event and live experiment, over 100 people wearing a range of sensors walked through a maze-like environment, set up as an art gallery at UCL’s PEARL (Person Environment Activity Research Laboratory) facility, a unique space in East London created to explore how people interact with their environment.

The research project is set up to bridge the gap between tightly controlled lab experiments and field-based experiments with uncontrolled variables. The academics are hoping their findings, over the course of numerous experiments, will yield valuable insights for designing spaces such as transport hubs, hospitals, or offices, including making them more inclusive, while also informing AI and simulation software.

Lead researcher Professor Hugo Spiers (UCL Experimental Psychology) said: “To study how people navigate their environments and how their brains support this, we can do that in a research lab – but that’s not very realistic – or we can do that in the real world – but that’s harder to control or modify. Here, we are bringing the real world into the lab, in a massive space that could be set up as anything from a train station to a hospital or school, to facilitate research.”

Co-lead researcher Dr Fiona Zisch (UCL Bartlett School of Architecture) said: “When designing buildings and other spaces, you need to understand how people will move around the space, which can be surprisingly difficult in practice. Many spaces leave visitors lost, confused, or stressed, or lack accessibility for people with different mobility levels, health issues, or neurodiversity.

“If people cannot easily navigate a space, this can affect care outcomes in hospitals, efficiency in transport or logistics, or safety, particularly in the case of emergency evacuation, so it’s vital that we do more research to understand diverse requirements to make design more equitable.”

The study space, measuring 15 metres squared, has eight-metre-high curtains, acting as moveable ‘walls’, and was designed by the lead researchers alongside Professors Stephen Gage and Sean Hanna (both UCL Bartlett School of Architecture), to see how changes to the space alter how people move within it.

In the initial setup, the ‘art gallery’ includes projects on display from UCL Design for Performance and Interaction MArch students, that study participants perused at their own pace while wearing a cap containing a tracking device and a barcode for camera tracking, with the latter developed by George Profenza and Jessica In (UCL Bartlett School of Architecture). Some participants wore additional monitoring devices, such as mobile electroencephalography (EEG) systems to measure brain activity, made possible by Professor Klaus Gramann (Technische Universität Berlin). During the experiment, participants were given instructions at different points to complete tasks such as finding specific displays, congregating in groups, or evacuating the space.

Counsellor for Science and Innovation at the Embassy of Sweden in UK, Marika Amartey, spoke at the launch event about the importance of this research under a bilateral agreement between the UK and Sweden. The lead researchers, together with Carina Carlman, Director of Research and Business Development at the Research Institutes of Sweden (RISE), and neurodesigner and brain researcher Isabelle Sjövall (UCL Experimental Psychology and RISE), are establishing a new joint Centre for NeuroArchitecture and NeuroDesign.* This new centre will explore how the human brain interacts with built environments, and how understanding this can help design spaces that enhance people’s health and wellbeing.

The experiment at UCL PEARL forms an important step in the creation of this new Centre. Isabelle Sjövall said: “Our research at PEARL is important because it can generate highly rigorous new discoveries that change policies guiding the design for healthy cities.”

Carina Carlman added: “We are delighted at RISE to bring our experience with research and innovation to together with UCL to tackle some of the most important challenges we face in society.”  

The project received funding from the UK Government Higher Education Innovation Fund, alongside technical equipment supplied and run by Ubisense, Pupil Labs, Brain Products, and Artinis . Support for the launch event came from sustainable development consultancy Arup, who are exploring potentials in using the research to help design more accessible and inclusive spaces for business, governments, and other clients.

Brett Little, Arup’s People Movement Leader, said: "There are countless problems different people might experience when trying to find their way around anything from a train station to a museum. At Arup we're excited that this research will help us make huge leaps forward in understanding how to design buildings, cities, and spaces that solve those problems.

"This is the start of a journey that will take our understanding of how people move in the real world to another level and enable us to help create spaces that are accessible and work for all - no matter their background."

Professor Nick Tyler (UCL Civil, Environmental & Geomatic Engineering), Director of UCL PEARL, commented: “We built UCL PEARL with a vision to create a better world with infrastructure that works for everyone, by facilitating research that fuses arts and sciences, and cuts across disciplines and sectors. By recreating large spaces like train stations, hospital wards, and town centres, but also trains, buses, streets, parks, supermarkets, concert halls, or theatres, and modifying them systematically, we can investigate people’s reactions to them in detail to transform research in design, engineering, and neuroscience, through a greater understanding of the brain in its ecological world.”

• Professor Hugo Spiers’ academic profile
• Dr Fiona Zisch’s academic profile
• UCL Experimental Psychology
• UCL Psychology & Language Sciences
• UCL Bartlett School of Architecture
• * More about UCL and RISE collaboration in NeuroDesign and NeuroArchitecture

Photos of the live experiment which took place on Wednesday 11 September. Credit: Sandra Ciampone.

Media contact

tel: +44 20 7679 9222  / +44 (0) 7717 728648

E: chris.lane [at] ucl.ac.uk