"it looks as if it was David Hume who made the term [Tudor] an indispensable part of the historian's vocabulary when, in 1757, he published his History of England under the House of Tudor. It was Hume, too, who seems to have established the modern spelling.
"'Tudor monarchs', then, did not think of themselves as such; still less did 'Tudor subjects'. . . .
". . . one of the most familiar of English historical terms had little purchase in its own era. We must learn to do without the Tudors."
Clifford S. L. Davies, "A rose by another name: why we are wrong to talk about 'the Tudors,'" Times literary supplement, June 13 2008, p. 15 (14-15).
Has this been sustained?