The History Files

Posted By Niki Incorvia on February 24, 2012

As a follow up to my previous article on Mary Tudor salvaging the reputation of her reign, I began to think about the contributing factors leading to her short time as English’s first female queen regent. Mary’s position as the once most sought after princess in all of Christendom came to a heartbreaking end when her father, Henry VIII, turned his back on her, discarded her beloved mother, and declared Mary a bastard in the eyes of Europe, a public shame she would never forget.

Denny (2004) writes, “As a child Mary had been cosseted as princess and heir to the crown. Foreign ambassadors praised the child for her long, red hair, ‘pretty face, a very beautiful complexion, well proportioned physique’” (p. 204). It is no wonder that when her father cast her aside in favor of a marriage to a woman in her twenties in service to her mother, Catherine of Aragon, Mary felt the end of her fairytale childhood and the unyielding love of her father. Denny (2004) then continues to say in support of this:

But when the conflict between her parents took its toll by the time she was in her teens her health and appearance had suffered from stress and her unstable future. She was short and grew very thin, notably difficult about her food and always taking herbal medicines concocted for one illness or another. She had strange, piercing eyes, the result of poor eyesight. (p. 204)

In addition to not being able to withhold her youthful and admired beauty, she most importantly was not able to hold onto her faith, something that would replay in her life like a haunting obsession and compulsion to hold onto the happier times of her childhood.  Her mother, Catherine of Aragon, was a devout Catholic and while her parents were happily married and she was still England’s most precious princess, Catholicism was the dominant religion. With the changes that came about when Anne Boleyn became queen was not only a reformation, but also a reformed Mary Tudor, no longer princess of England and heir presumptive.

In the late years of her adolescence, Mary faced numerous humiliations, whether at the command of her father or Anne Boleyn, her father’s new wife. For a teenager, it is easier to believe that the cause of one’s pain is based on your parent’s new partner, which changed the course of Mary’s life. In her book, “The Anne Boleyn Collection: The Real Truth about the Tudors,” Claire Ridgway (2012) states is it understandable that Mary (and Catherine) blamed Anne for the treatment she endured because she loved her father. Unfortunately, Mary soon realized that even after Anne’s death in 1536, her father’s cruel treatment of her would still continue until she relented (Ridgway, 2012). According to Denny (2004):

On 1 October the King reinforced the status of his new heir[1] by informing his daughter Mary that she could no longer style herself as ‘Princess.’ Mary, now 17, was formally declared illegitimate, to which pronouncement she violently acted, crying there was no princess in England except herself. (p. 204)

Mary’s life would never be the same, whether it was the fault of Anne Boleyn, her own father, or Anne’s hold and influence over Henry.

  Upon the death of her father, Mary then belonged to a minority group in England who were still committed to the Roman faith. “Despite King Henry’s breach with the pope, despite the doctrinal reversals that, with seesaw changefulness, had guided public faith for a decade and more, Mary stood firmly with those who held to the mass, the saints, and the time-honored belief” (Erickson, 1983, p. 59). This princess would never forget the time when she was valued above all, and in addition to losing her mother, the Catholic faith was all Mary had to hold on to as a reminder of a happier time in her life.

Did Mary go too far in her persecutions of the Protestants in England? Yes, most likely. Even in those times, when executions and burnings were common practice, Mary’s revenge on England and her devotion to make England a Catholic country again was far more brutal than I believe she may have even imagined it to be. Mary went to extremes in order to link herself to her happier past. She married her cousin’s son, honoring her Spanish ancestry. She reinstated the Catholic mass and repealed acts labeled as treason under Henry VIII and Edward. And as part of the first parliament of her reign, Mary passed an act that overturned her parents’ marriage, making herself legitimate in the eyes of England (Ridgway, 2012). It would appear that Mary set out to make things right for herself as soon as she ascended to the throne. Her nickname, “Bloody Mary,” or classifying her in a series available on YouTube as “The Most Evil Women in History,” are attempts to put a label on Mary’s actions during her time as queen.

As Totten (2004) writes, “When teaching any piece of history, it is imperative to avoid allowing simple or simplistic answers or notions to serve as an explanation for complex behavior or situations” (p. 20). Those who have made detrimental impacts on history are complex individuals.  Numbered among them could be Catherine de Medici, Mussolini, and Adolf Hitler. There is no straightforward formula as to why these controversial figures did what they did. As history shows us, all four of these people had very different upbringings and different goals in mind when they persecuted a select population. It is unlikely that human nature is that cruel or inhumane. Howard (1983) adds to this assumption by saying, “few of us, probably, would go along with those socio-biologists who claim that this has been[2] because man is so ‘innately aggressive’” (p. 7). So before Mary is labeled as “Bloody Mary” or an evil woman in history books or movies, intended to give a (not always accurate) historical glimpse into the Tudor era, it is important, as Totten (2004) writes, that “teaching about complex human behavior often results in examining multiple aspects of events and deeds” (p. 20). Another possible consideration to take into account is Mary’s mother. Although Mary loved her mother dearly, some historians speculate that she [Catherine] is responsible for the person Mary became and the intolerance that overwhelmed her short reign as queen (Ridgway, 2012). In taking this advice, I made it my business to examine a number of different factors concerning Mary Tudor’s life and upbringing.

I began to look at Mary Tudor as the woman, not the ruler. Popular movies and portrayals of Mary are extremely marked. In the 1986 film, Lady Jane, Mary Tudor is portrayed as an attractive older woman, well spoken, but with some clear insecurities about her past. The 1998 film, Elizabeth, portrays Mary as overweight, friendless, and almost bordering on hysteria. My version of Mary Tudor is closer to the Mary in Lady Jane, a still attractive woman, quick-witted, but never fully recovered from the traumas of her late adolescence.  Knowing that version of Mary might not make a difference in salvaging the reputation of her reign, but it could lend more empathy to our assessment of her historic presence.

 

---

References

• Denny, J. (2004). Anne boleyn: A new life of England’s tragic queen. New York: Da Capo Press.
• Erickson, C. (1983). The first Elizabeth. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Howard, M. (1983). The causes of war. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
• Ridgway, C. (2012). The anne boleyn collection: The real truth about the tudors. CreateSpace.
• Ridgway, C. (2012). The Anne Boleyn Files. Retrieved fromhttp://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/.
• Totten, S. (ed.). (2004). Teaching about genocide: Issues, approaches and resources. Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.

 

Category: TheHistoryFiles
Tags: Genocide, Mary I, Tudors