1st October 1553 – Mary I Crowned Queen

14 thoughts on “1st October 1553 – Mary I Crowned Queen”

1. Happy New Year James and everyone,
   As there are certain parts of your post I can’t quite understand,and maybe I have not made myself as clear as I should have, I will try to reply as best I can
   1. I dont think it is wrong for me to find the psychology of the people more interesting than the politics/religion of the time, and yes I do realise they are inter-twined, but I would like to think that. as big as a part of life these were, there was still a person with their own mind, affected by other things and that you can separate the two.
   2. I would like to say that I do not go with statements such as ‘Bloody Mary’, or Anne Boleyn was a whore’ etc, nor do I believe Mary was a cold hearted, uncaring woman, but I do believe that her judgement became clouded and she made some bad decisions that contributed to her being maligned in history.
   3. I still believe that whether or not there were equal numbers of protestant/catholic members in Mary’s parliment having a different religion to the monarch was dangerous, and would have restrained men from speaking out. I did not say she would ‘mercilessly destroy’ those men and their families, I said it could have serious reprocussions.
   4. As for keeping her Protestant councilors, that could be seen as keeping your friends close, but your ‘enemies’ closer, which is a wise thing to do in these types of matters. Just my opinion, mind, and not meant to offend.
   5. I quite agree that she may not have known of every individual case of these executions,but when such a power as that is given to others to decide for her, it could have/or should have been better monitored to protect her reputation, I am sure she must have known that there would be someone who would take this power to its extreme, she was not inexperienced about the workings of men after all she had seen and experienced at the hands of them. Could this be the case of, I have past the power of these decisions to others, so I cannot be held responsible? therefore blameless.
   6. I did not claim anything, I merely stated that I am interested in the psychology of these interesting people, as a hobby, a beginner, though I have read much on criminal psychology, I thought I would try to use the same principles to try and get a better perspective of Tudor charactors, an experiment if you like…and no I am not suggesting Mary was a criminal, certainly not the sort I was studying anyway. Therefore my knowledge of psychology is oviously not as great as yours, you will have to forgive my inexperience. I come on these sites to learn, discuss, hopefully bring a new concept to think about, as I myself have had changes of opinion on things through reading other peoples ideas on a subject for the better, as you can become single minded in certain areas, and it is refreshing to be able to wided your views.
   7. To say that Mary would not have cared for the blind man/woman/child etc? nor understand the remark of being in contempt.
   8. I did not say ALL churchmen where greedy, and I certainly did not call them pigs. There were a lot of church people who did much good for the people, the monks, the nuns. I was refering to the high ranking church members who had accummulated vast wealth over the years, and I still think that many were corrupt, and did not practise what they preached. Do I blame them, no, not on the whole, as these times were harsh, and it was so easy to be pushed from grace and favour and end up with nothing, or at worst forfeit your life, anyone, I would have thought, would take up the chance to obtain a better place in life then and try to keep it, whatever the cost.
   9. I do not think I strengthen your point in reference to the riots, just added that they were occurrent in all reigns. Though I can not see that the riots against Mary were more personal than against any other monarch. I am sure her father saw the uprisings against him very personal, as did Charles I with Cromwell, King John with the barons and so on. Any Monarch is going to see any uprising in their realm as personal if it disagreeing with what they say or do or want.
   10. I do not think Mary was at all ignorant, far from it. But in her attempt to grasp in later life all she had been denied, love, affection, a husband and children, her concept and judgement to rule in a balanced way became marred, to my thinking, and although Philip had restraints, the worry of Mary changing her mind was still there, and it did not seem to stop him thinking he could maybe rule England through Elizabeth.
   On a final note, although I am sure many subjects did love Mary, at the beginning as their Queen, but how many loved Mary because they were afraid to do otherwise,in later days, no matter what religion they were.There was a very fine line between love, loyalty and fear in those time and hard to distinguish between them. As for harshness I think that is summed up in the treatment of Cranmer and Lady Jane as mentioned above
   I do not consider myself to be arguing, as you suggested, or come on here to argue, just to put a point of view, I understand that it will differ to others, and these differences can be debated in a friendly way, and be fun doing it, and I also realise I am not as knowledgable as a lot of vistitors here and will make mistakes or not explain myself clearly, but at times you are bordering on becoming rude because I see things differently, but still, I do value your opinion. After all these events happened an age ago, can not be changed, though view points and ideas we have of these people can, which is a good thing,especially if they have been the object of ‘bad press’.

   Reply

2. I am very sorry Dawn, in all honesty I did not mean to seem or be rude. Truly I am sorry…I most likely did though. I have been a fan of Mary Tudor for a very long time, and tend to get protective, although most would find that strange.

   I’m not quite sure if you were being sarcastic or not when referring to me being more knowledgeable about psychology…but believe me when I say I am certainly no master nor extremely well knowledged on the subject.

   And what I meant by the statement of her caring for the various peoples was to further add that she most likely did not know of the specifics of most of the cases. Because Mary was an extremely caring, and suprising to most, loving of her subjects. The contempt part was meant to discredit your apparent psychological knowledge of Mary (that was not meant to be offensive, because you do have quite a bit of knowledge of Mary. But there seemed to be a lack in your post)…as you know she wanted to marry and have children more than most people ever would have, in saying so, that she would not care for a child or mother…she wanted a child and wanted to be a mother…just is the exact opposite of her personality and emotional state throughout all of her life. And the blind men, while most do not think her to be merciful at all, I believe she was very merciful, and a blind man and a blind woman, to have killed them would also have been polar to her.

   Sorry for misunderstanding, you made it sound like all of the bishops and such that gained the power to prosecute were greedy pigs. And while I agree some were, by that time most wealthy landowning catholics had been out of power and most died because they were forced into begging during both Henry’s and Edwards (much more so during Edward’s) reigns.

   I would like to point out that I never stated that any other riots during other reigns were not personal. I am just stating that all of those during Mary’s reign were. Most during Henry’s and Edward’s reign were religious; purely. And indeed during Charles reign they were mostly personal. So I never said she was the only one, I am just stating that she, in my opinion, had much right to put down rebellions in whatever way she liked, and most of the time few were executed.

   And of course there was the chance of Mary changing her mind, but by the way she acted towards him after their first year of marriage would have changed many minds. At one point she told everyone in her council that he was not to be updated about the council or parliamentary decisions, and took the very portrait hanging in her council room and threw it out the door. Which is also why many people let the spanish craze die after he left.

   And as for her subjects loving her…like I said the Catholics loved Mary, you can see that by the reports made of her, and the way they acted when she came out in public, hundreds of people would crowd her and scream “Long Live The Queen”. In one account she was washing the feet of poor women, and the man (please excuse my lack of preciseness, most of my books are at my home, and I am not) who was reporting said the queen never stopped for a brake until some 400 women were cleaned. And then at the end she gave the dress she was wearing, jewels and all to the poorest woman there. Of course I do not doubt there were those who did not like the queen. But most all the Catholics did, even a few Protestants(at the beginning of course). But most of all the convictions made about Mary being hated or unloved is coming from the propoganda created by both Elizabeth and her successors.

   But anyways, once again, I am truthfully extremely sorry for seeming rude, I did not mean to. And believe it or not I respect all peoples views whether they match mine or not.

   Reply

3. Thank you James for you apology, and I will apologise to you too as there was a slight hint of sarcasm in my remark about the psychology knowlege…
   I can understand your passion for Mary, we all have our favourites, and that this lets us get a little over protective, plus I dont think it strange that you champion Mary at all, after all one of my favourites, who got me truly interested in this period of history was he father Henry VIII, and he is villified, as much if not more so that his daughter, so we are similar in that respect by finding the so called ‘Baddies’ as having a nicer, kinder and caring side than what is usually written or spoke of them.
   My knowlege of Mary will not be as indepth as yours (no sarcasm, this time) as I have not read as much about her as her dear daddy and Anne Boleyn, but hope to rectify this in the future, and get a better picture of her by visiting this site, and of course A.B.Files.
   So I will leave this debate now, on an agree to differ over certain points, as friends, I hope, and I am sure we will ‘bump’ into each other again. Happy New Year.

   Reply