Author Topic: "Bloody Mary"? (Mary I)  (Read 87962 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

zackattack

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #120 on: May 25, 2006, 03:31:13 AM »
Quote
Quote
Zackattack, can you provide a figure for the total number of people executed, imprisoned or exiled during Mary's short reign?  Then it would be possible to make a fair comparison with Elizabeth.


I have just finished reading a very interesting book called "The Most Evil Men and Women in Histoy" which includes Mary I. It gives a rough amount on how many people were killed. Here is what it said: "Within her four year reign, Mary ordered the burning and torture of over 300 Protestant heretics, ad her ruthless religious policies drove thousands to flee from England, in fear of their lives".

The David Starkey book "Elizabeth: The struggle for the throne" puts the number at 273 (271?) burned, 100 died in prison, and 800 fled into exile. Do you know where your book got the information?
I"m trying to remember where I read that the death toll from religous persicution during Elizabeth's reign was about 10,000. But this estimate includes all the many unrecorded deaths that occured in prison as well

ilyala

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #121 on: May 25, 2006, 04:00:20 PM »
Quote
Quote
Quote
Zackattack, can you provide a figure for the total number of people executed, imprisoned or exiled during Mary's short reign?  Then it would be possible to make a fair comparison with Elizabeth.


I have just finished reading a very interesting book called "The Most Evil Men and Women in Histoy" which includes Mary I. It gives a rough amount on how many people were killed. Here is what it said: "Within her four year reign, Mary ordered the burning and torture of over 300 Protestant heretics, ad her ruthless religious policies drove thousands to flee from England, in fear of their lives".

The David Starkey book "Elizabeth: The struggle for the throne" puts the number at 273 (271?) burned, 100 died in prison, and 800 fled into exile. Do you know where your book got the information?
I"m trying to remember where I read that the death toll from religous persicution during Elizabeth's reign was about 10,000. But this estimate includes all the many unrecorded deaths that occured in prison as well

10000 was maybe the total number of executions in elizabeth's time, not just religious. i know that someone on this forum also mentioned a simmilar figure on henry 8th's times, but it also included thieves and murderers ...

neverdiplomatic

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #122 on: June 07, 2006, 07:39:46 PM »
I have a fair amount of sympathy for Mary I. I abhor her persecution of the Protestants, but we have to remember that such behaviour was in the blood. Her granny Isabella wasn't very kindly when it came to those she considered heretics either.
I think the reason I sympathise with her is the thought of how much disappointment and uncertainty she suffered in her life. She went from being the Jewel of England, the only heir, to being a bastard, forced to serve her infant half-sister. THEN she had to live under the rule of her fanatical Protestant younger brother, this of course, after living in fear for her life both proir to and after the death of her mother. After this came the travesty that was Queen Jane, and then FINALLY she succeeds to her rightful place, the position of power she was born to. Most likely she expected that all would be well, that she would produce an heir and continue setting England 'to rights'. Imagine what it must have been like for this lady to not only deal with the humiliation and heartbreak of two phantom pregnancies (or whatever phenomenon they were), only to realise that the husband she had fallen in love with against all expectations, had abandoned her and was paying court to her younger half-sister!!
Not to mention how atrocious it must have been for her to realise that so many of her subjects wished to see Anne Boleyn's daughter on the throne!!!

ilyala

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #123 on: June 08, 2006, 09:49:43 AM »
life was not easy for mary, but then again, it wasn't easy for elizabeth either. mary could have dealed with things a lot better

bell_the_cat

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #124 on: June 09, 2006, 01:31:06 AM »
Quote
life was not easy for mary, but then again, it wasn't easy for elizabeth either. mary could have dealed with things a lot better

Mary's life was not bad at all if you look at it closely. Most of the time she had her own household (several hundred people!) with several palaces at her disposal. The only bad really bad time was late 1533 - early 1536. She wasn't allowed to see her mother, and had to live with baby Elizabeth! It must have been maddening, as anyone who has lived with a toddler (especially one who has precedence over you) can tell. However she had the ultimate satisfaction of seeing the baby's mother (her Nemesis!) accused of witchcraft, incest and treason and executed.

Being patronised by Jane Seymour (dear Mary....) at court can't have been fun, but Mary had her own household again. She was one of the richest people in England. Everyone was nice to her, especially after 1544 when she was second in line to the throne. She had a lot of friends who stayed loyal to her for the rest of her life. She was not the misery that is sometimes made out and enjoyed all the usual things (eg dancing).

This continued under Edward. Mary felt she was in a position to stick her neck out over her religion, and she was allowed to continue attending mass in her own palaces. She must have been very nervous about the developments in early 1553, but she had all the aces in her hand, and she knew it. She ascended the throne to general jubilation.

I feel sorry for the way her reign went.

Maybe if her earlier life had been worse (school of hard knocks) she might have been more circumspect about whm she listened to. She failed to present and formulate her policies in a way that would keep the support of her countrymen. It was also sad that her health failed at the time which could have been her greatest triumph.

zackattack

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #125 on: July 06, 2006, 05:51:39 PM »
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Zackattack, can you provide a figure for the total number of people executed, imprisoned or exiled during Mary's short reign?  Then it would be possible to make a fair comparison with Elizabeth.


I have just finished reading a very interesting book called "The Most Evil Men and Women in Histoy" which includes Mary I. It gives a rough amount on how many people were killed. Here is what it said: "Within her four year reign, Mary ordered the burning and torture of over 300 Protestant heretics, ad her ruthless religious policies drove thousands to flee from England, in fear of their lives".

The David Starkey book "Elizabeth: The struggle for the throne" puts the number at 273 (271?) burned, 100 died in prison, and 800 fled into exile. Do you know where your book got the information?
I"m trying to remember where I read that the death toll from religous persicution during Elizabeth's reign was about 10,000. But this estimate includes all the many unrecorded deaths that occured in prison as well

10000 was maybe the total number of executions in elizabeth's time, not just religious. i know that someone on this forum also mentioned a simmilar figure on henry 8th's times, but it also included thieves and murderers ...


I think the total number of those executed was actually much higher..especially if you count rebellions. does anyone know the exact numbers (or close to it) for sure?

zackattack

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #126 on: July 06, 2006, 05:54:01 PM »
Quote
Quote
life was not easy for mary, but then again, it wasn't easy for elizabeth either. mary could have dealed with things a lot better

Mary's life was not bad at all if you look at it closely. Most of the time she had her own household (several hundred people!) with several palaces at her disposal. The only bad really bad time was late 1533 - early 1536. She wasn't allowed to see her mother, and had to live with baby Elizabeth! It must have been maddening, as anyone who has lived with a toddler (especially one who has precedence over you) can tell. However she had the ultimate satisfaction of seeing the baby's mother (her Nemesis!) accused of witchcraft, incest and treason and executed.

Being patronised by Jane Seymour (dear Mary....) at court can't have been fun, but Mary had her own household again. She was one of the richest people in England. Everyone was nice to her, especially after 1544 when she was second in line to the throne. She had a lot of friends who stayed loyal to her for the rest of her life. She was not the misery that is sometimes made out and enjoyed all the usual things (eg dancing).

This continued under Edward. Mary felt she was in a position to stick her neck out over her religion, and she was allowed to continue attending mass in her own palaces. She must have been very nervous about the developments in early 1553, but she had all the aces in her hand, and she knew it. She ascended the throne to general jubilation.

I feel sorry for the way her reign went.

Maybe if her earlier life had been worse (school of hard knocks) she might have been more circumspect about whm she listened to. She failed to present and formulate her policies in a way that would keep the support of her countrymen. It was also sad that her health failed at the time which could have been her greatest triumph.

I have to disagree. Historians still have to do alot of guess work with the life of Mary I during the period of the divorce, so alot of what she went through really can't be proven one way or the other.  

David_Pritchard

  • Guest
Re: HM Queen Mary I
« Reply #127 on: July 07, 2006, 03:51:12 PM »
[size=16]Dear Forum Members:

Since the first day that I read the title of this topic it has disturbed me. The name "Bloody Mary" was a creation of Elizabethan propagandists intent on smearing and colouring the name of Queen Mary I forever. It would seem that they did there job well as the name and false stories of atrocities committed during her reign continue to this day. It was Elizabeth who was the real butcher when compared to her older sister. Why have these lies continued to this day? Because they serve the purpose of anti-Catholic bigots! When I see the name "Bloody Mary", I think of religious bigotry and its continuance to this day. If we can be so careful and politically correct on this forum when answering ridiculous questions, then why can we not stop propagating historical falsehoods meant to re-enforce religious bigotry?

David
[/size]

Offline Prince_Lieven

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 6570
  • To Be Useful In All That I Do
    • View Profile
    • Edward III's Descendants
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #128 on: July 07, 2006, 04:06:16 PM »
I think the reason the thread was titled 'Bloody Mary' was because that is the name she is most widely known as, whether that should be so or not. I'm sure there was no malicious intent in titling the thread thus.
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
-Sherlock Holmes

"Men forget, but never forgive; women forgive, but never forget."

David_Pritchard

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #129 on: July 07, 2006, 06:38:56 PM »
I do not believe that there was any underlying malicious intent either, however since we on this forum fancy ourselves as historians would it not be best if we were more accurate about describing historical figures? We do not describe Nicholas II by the names Nicholas the Bloody or Nicholas the Last because we all know that these names were revolutionary propaganda. The Protestant power structure under Elizabeth I created as many anti-Catholic 'facts' as they could to ensure their hold on government and to retain their ill gotten lands and goods that were appropriated from the Catholic Church.

David

Offline Prince_Lieven

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 6570
  • To Be Useful In All That I Do
    • View Profile
    • Edward III's Descendants
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #130 on: July 08, 2006, 01:54:56 PM »
Oh, I forgot to mention, in his book 'the Last Days of Henry VIII', Robert Hutchinson says that 150,000 people were executed in Henry's reign . . . I think someone asked for the figure earlier??
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
-Sherlock Holmes

"Men forget, but never forgive; women forgive, but never forget."

zackattack

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #131 on: July 09, 2006, 02:36:44 AM »
Quote
Oh, I forgot to mention, in his book 'the Last Days of Henry VIII', Robert Hutchinson says that 150,000 people were executed in Henry's reign . . . I think someone asked for the figure earlier??
I think that was me. So what percentage of the English population did Henry VIII have put to death during his reign? I forget the overall population estimates. Weren't there about 4 to 5 million Englishmen alive at the time?  

Offline Prince_Lieven

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 6570
  • To Be Useful In All That I Do
    • View Profile
    • Edward III's Descendants
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #132 on: July 09, 2006, 05:35:36 PM »
Actually it was 2.5 million. You'll have to do the maths, I'm rubbish at that.  ;)
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
-Sherlock Holmes

"Men forget, but never forgive; women forgive, but never forget."

zackattack

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #133 on: August 06, 2006, 05:06:32 PM »
Actually it was 2.5 million. You'll have to do the maths, I'm rubbish at that.  ;)
So he wiped out 5 percent of his subjects?  So why isn't he known as "Bloody Harry"?

bell_the_cat

  • Guest
Re: Bloody Mary (Mary I)
« Reply #134 on: August 07, 2006, 01:44:18 AM »
because he didn't execute 5 % of his subjects!

Maybe several hundred people a year were executed for various crimes in Tudor England. I don't expect the execution rate varied very much under Henry VIII, Edward, Mary or Elizabeth. Or if it did this had nothing to do with the individual monarchs, as executions for murder were as the result of private prosecutions, and not organised by central government (i.e. the monarch).

Top of the list were probably murder, highway robbery and coin clipping (slicing bits of silver off the edges of coins.

Mary was known as Bloody Mary not because of the thousands of ordinary criminals executed during her reign, nor for the number of rebels hanged after the Wyatt rebellion. This was accepted as normal Tudor behaviour. She was called Bloody Mary solely on the basis of the 2/300 heretics burnt for their beliefs. It was this aspect that offended people at all levels of society, because, while not everyone is a highwayman or a rebel, everyone has beliefs.