Mary I (1516-1558)

[An Ard Ri]

Tudor of Month: Queen Mary I

Britain Magazine | The official magazine of Visit Britain | Best of British History, Royal Family,Travel and Culture - Tudor of Month: Queen Mary I

 

[CyrilVladisla]

I read that Mary I was named after Mary Tudor because she was Henry VIII's favourite sister, but I would need to double check that.

Has any further information been found about the naming of Princess Mary?

 

[An Ard Ri]

A Kingdom in Crisis: Queen Mary I of England

A Kingdom in Crisis: Queen Mary I of England - Tudors Dynasty

 

[Londena]

I'm actually doing a whole series on Mary, as this year marks 500 years since her birth. The series will run for the entire year.


The Year of Mary I

 

[An Ard Ri]

I'm actually doing a whole series on Mary, as this year marks 500 years since her birth. The series will run for the entire year.


The Year of Mary I

How exciting a very complex and controversial figure,needless to say there were probably no celebrations to mark the 500th anniversary of her birth!

 

[Londena]

How exciting a very complex and controversial figure,needless to say there were probably no celebrations to mark the 500th anniversary of her birth!

I guess only on my blog, haha!

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

I'm actually doing a whole series on Mary, as this year marks 500 years since her birth. The series will run for the entire year.


The Year of Mary I

Oo, that sounds interesting. I shall have to have a read of your posts so far later on. I've always been interested in Mary I's life.

 

[An Ard Ri]

I guess only on my blog, haha!

It was very interesting to see stained glass of Mary and Philip from that Dutch Church,miraculously surving the iconoclasm of the Dutch Reformation and subsequent Wars!

 

[Londena]

The Year of Mary I: Mary’s Health

A new article

 

[Londena]

And another one! Follow in Mary's Footsteps

 

[Londena]

Mary’s relationship with Anne Boleyn

 

[Londena]

I was hoping someone could help me to identify this portrait. It's said to be of Mary I, but I can't find any dates or an artist.

 

[Denville]

It looks a bit odd? the face looks longe than Mary T usually does?

 

[An Ard Ri]

Mary I’s phantom pregnancy


Mary I’s phantom pregnancy | History Extra

 

[padams2359]

There had to be some physical sign of a pregnancy, larger waist area, etc. Once the pregnancy was determined to be phantom, did she remain pregnant in appearance? Did she have something removed?

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Was Queen Mary I as free to choose her own husband as she may have thought?

 

[Countessmeout]

She certainly risked her throne in choosing. Her choice of a Spanish husband was extremely unpopular. Her advisors and government were pushing for an English husband, fearing Hapsburg control. It lead to Wyatts rebellion and other issues. She likely did feel some loyalty to her cousin Charles, and yo the memory of her mother, at one point, she was meant to marry Charles when she was a kid. She was also a Catholic queen in a Protestant heAvy country with a popular Protestant sister, and knew having a strong Catholic ally would help.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

From her coronation Mary I walked out carrying an orb and two scepters as she was both King and Queen.


Queen Mary I with her spouse King Philip II in a procession
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ph...pain-16111556-1391598-with-wife-48469831.html

 

[Curryong]

Mary's 'pregnancy' was a false one, I believe. She deluded herself into believing with all her heart that she was going to bear a child. She never bled, never passed anything, just had a swollen stomach and breasts. She calculated her dates, and stated that her baby was to be born around May 9th 1555 and in August of that year was still believing that she would produce a child.

Most courtiers didn't know what to think, and Mary's age and health would make this a very dangerous birth anyway. There seems to have been a fair amount of scepticism all the way through this time that the Queen was in fact pregnant, and a report from her head midwife, a very experienced woman, seems to confirm that those sharing her close confinement (she was in virtual purdah from the court between April and July) had great doubts about there being any baby.

Mary might well have been suffering from pseudocyesis, a rare psychological condition that causes the mimicing of certain signs of pregnancy. Menstuation ceases, (Mary might in fact have also been going through an early menopause) and the breasts become tender and even can produce milk.

Mary longed desperately for a child. She was deeply in love with King Philip, poor woman, devoted to her religion, and believed with all her heart and soul that England must return to Roman Catholicism. To secure all those things there had to be a child, preferably male.

By late August, although her heart was probably broken, Mary realised that there was not going to be a baby. She was always thin and her figure apparently returned to normal.

I actually have experience of something akin to this. When I was living in England as a teenager a family friend, a woman in her thirties, announced to family and friends that she was going to have a baby in the autumn.

She and her husband had been married for four years and he especially wanted a baby. Throughout that summer she was seen in summer dresses, with an enlarged stomach. My aunt was sceptical, stating that her tummy had become very large extremely quickly.

Then one day in the autumn she appeared in a blouse and skirt with no appearance of pregnancy at all. We lived in a small town and the talk was that her mother, with whom the couple lived, had called doctors in because of certain things her daughter had said. Her husband was devastated. They stayed together though, and two years later they did have a baby. Mind over matter!

 

[Feologild]

Is it really fair to only name Mary I as Bloody of the Tudor Monarchs?

I may be wrong but i read some where that she had far less people executed on average in a year than the other Tudor monarchs. So why is Mary I the only one that is called Bloody. I mean based on what i understand the other Tudor monarchs was just as bloody if not even more.
Yes i know she only ruled for 5 years the shortest reign of the Tudor monarchs ( i do not count Lady Jane Grey) But even if we only take one year Mary I had less people executed then what the other Tudors did in a year. I am not saying that Mary I was a good Queen. But i do think that History is a bit unfair on her. Considering that she was far from the bloodiest Tudor. In fact it does not seem like she was any more bloody than other European monarch of that era.

Of course i am not an expert on Tudor England and i admit that. So i may be wrong in what i just wrote. And if i am. I am sure somebody will correct me.

 

[Countessmeout]

The Tudor period was always my favorite in my history days, before I went practical into nursing. It always irritated me, the name Bloody Mary and the inaccuracy at best.

Henry viii executed tens of thousands of people in 36 years. During the reign of Edward over the thousand were executed, though as his regents ruled, he can't really be blamed. In comparison Mary's less than 400 is minimal.

The issue stems from the fact she was a Catholic queen of a Protestant country. During the very popular reign of her Protestant sister, the slandering of Mary started and lives today. What is forgotten is like her mother who was very popular, Mary was popular. Unfortunately she was popular with Catholics abd that was the minority. My English and Scottish Rd,stoves are Catholic, and I can imagine my Nana's reaction when she was alive if you used the term.pur family survived the Catholic persecutions, I know the family home had a priest hole.

Good read

The Elizabeth Files » The Myth of Bloody Mary

 

[Muhler]

Presumably because Protestant England won.
And we can't have the foremost Protestant monarch of England, who on top of that elevated England from a secondary to a more prominent, and wealthier power labeled "bloody". No, no! Better to give such a label to QEI's predecessor.

On top of that there would be a considerable political wish for QEI not only to detract from Queen Mary but also to emphasize her own benign rule. And those around her would have a very big interest in placing QEI on a pedestal.
The Tudors were pretty good at that, just look at Shakespeare's Richard III.

Congratulations on your first post, Feologild.

 

[Al_bina]

The history was/is/will be written by victors. Queen Mary I was not one of them. Queen Elizabeth I, who facilitated regicide, will have a better reputation.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I could not agree more. I agree that the "Bloody Mary" moniker is unfair, especially when compared to the record of Mary's august father Henry VIII(the details of his treatment of the Carthusian monks during the Dissolution of the Monasteries and his suppression of the Pilgrimage of Grace makes my blood run cold).

History is written by the victors.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Elizabeth I does not have a good reputation in Ireland where hundreds of thousands died because of her and her governments policies here during the Tudor re-conquest of Ireland.

The reign of Mary I was largely peaceful here but it was the opposite for her half sister Elizabeth.Most of the Marian Irish RC bishops met with very gruesome deaths unlike their English counterparts who languished under house arrest.The Irish wars almost bankrupted Elizabeth and saw troops from France,Spain and the Papal States landing in Ireland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Rebellions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Desmond_Rebellion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Years%27_War_(Ireland)


Dermot O'Hurley,Archbishop of Cashel was one if the numerous Irish Catholic Martyrs and endured a horrible tortures before his execution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dermot_O%27Hurley#Martyrdom

 

[Al_bina]

Ireland and the Northern Ireland viewed/views holders of the British Crown with caution/distrust/etc because of the planned and well-executed genocide. Represented by various Prime Ministers, the British Crown perpetrated it for many centuries. Queen Elizabeth I was one of the Crown Holders. Even Oliver Cromwell continued ghastly royal policy against Ireland.

 

[An Ard Ri]

The Bishop of Mayo ,Patrick O'Hely

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_O%27Hely



Jesuit Priest Edmund O'Donnell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_O%27Donnell

Margaret Ball,widow of the Lord Mayor of Dublin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Ball



The Wexford Martyrs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wexford_Martyrs

 

[padams2359]

My son recently returned from living in Belfast for 5 months. He said the people there do not trust the English, however so much funding comes from England that the country would go bankrupt if the whole country was reunited and the money from England would stop.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Queen Mary I's marriage to Philip of Spain dragged England into a war against France. Would it have been possible for Mary to have had England not side with Spain in any war? If this had been possible, what would the consequences have been?

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Mary was deeply reliant on Spain it was her mothers country, she was supposed to marry the Emperor as a child and she felt they protected her when she was persecuted by her father. Plus they were helping her re-establish Catholicism. I highly doubt Mary would have gone against Philip who she desperately wanted to love her or her Spanish advisors.

As for Bloody Mary I feel it is a justified nickname. It is based not just on the amount she killed but the way she did it, in a short amount of time, and the context behind it; influenced by the Spanish inquisition and in an increasingly Protestant country.