regina.

a blog dedicated to queen mary i of england.

[marythequeen]

mary i of england wasn't an old mad evil queen. thanks.

[marythequeen]

Wait whats wrong with Leah Toole's books? I thought about giving her books a try

Reblog by @marythequeen · 1 image

💬 14  🔁 6  ❤️ 24 · update to this she said she read my "wonderful" review, claimed that she wrote her book before watching tsp, said that s

i wrote about her novel in detail. also, after blocking me on tiktok she made a video about me full of lies, claiming that i somehow said that mary didn't have people executed by burning them. (mind you, i never said that. just said that the way leah portrayed it wasn't accurate) i was sooo excited for her novels but they turned out to be such disappointments for me :( i wish she actually tried to make it a bit historically accurate and give mary a character

[marythequeen]

Have you read Anne Whitlock's book Mary Tudor?

yes, it's actually the first biography book i read about mary. it doesn't drown you with "unnecessary" details so it's not overwhelming— a very good way to start reading about her. and i do like anna, some of her vids and debates are so fun to watch. you can also check them for sure

[marythequeen]

Dumb bitch, Bloody Mary literally colonized Ireland, go fuck yourself.

o-okay? 👁️👄👁️

[marythequeen]

Mary once asked Charles V to lead a crusade against England?

short answer yes and no, but we need to dive into it. it's complicated. there’s this common misconception that she asked charles to invade england however the reality is much more nuanced. throughout her eventful life, especially during periods of political and religious crisis, mary either directly or indirectly sought support from charles. like in the 1530s after she was declared illegitimate and imprisoned, or in edward's reign when she was under pressure for practicing her religion. but her intentions were rarely treasonous. on the contrary, they were rooted in fear, survival, and a desperate hope for protection in a veryyyy hostile environment💀 my girl was surviving MULTIPLE assassinations lmao many people were after her.

but did she want to hand england to a stranger's hands? no, she did not. she didn't want a foreign power to rule over england. i'd argue that she was very nationalist and a patriotic woman too. however she did seek his help. in both cases, there were strong rumors and suggestions from people around her that charles should intervene with military force. but again, i don't really believe that mary wanted him to overthrow her father even though she wanted him to intervene.

i hope my answer's enough, have a lovely day dear anon 💐

[marythequeen]

Is this happened or not? Some people said this is true some day it was not. So I'm curious

sorry for the very late answer!!

execution of perotine massey and her family in guernsey was a result of the religious policies of the time. however this event shouldn't be interpreted as a personal act of cruelty or vengeance on mary’s part. (people tend to claim that the executions was the product of vengeance because of what happened to mary and katharine of aragon. they love to portray women are weak creatures who act out of emotion.) quite the opposit by the way, guernsey was a remote island, hundreds of miles from london (where mary was at the moment), where royal control was limited and local authorities SO OFTEN acted independently, without receiving a warrant or order. given the era’s limited communication and transportation, mary had neither the means nor the infrastructure to directly oversee every single trial in the kingdom. because it is fucking impossible.

and as for perotine’s pregnancy, historical sources suggest it was only discovered at the very last moment!!! during the execution itself. at that point, it was too late to delay the sentence. she was already burning in the pile when she "gave" birth. under 16th century law, a pregnant woman’s execution could be postponed, but only if the pregnancy was officially recognized and brought to the monarch’s attention in time. in this case, there’s no solid evidence that mary was even aware of it. while mary’s religious policy created the environment for the executions of protestants, some executions were carried out by local authorities without her direct knowledge or involvement.

it is also crucial to remember that mary’s goal was not simply to destroy protestants, but to restore religious unity and re-establish catholicism in a country torn apart by the policies of her father, and her puppet king baby brother. what may seem like "intolerance" and "hatred" to us today was, in her eyes, a matter of divine order and salvation. in 16th century england, religious diversity wasn’t a sign of tolerance. it was pure chaos. after years of violent shifts between protestantism and catholicism, mary believed that restoring one unified faith would bring peace and stability. to her and many others at the time, a single religion meant a stronger, more orderly kingdom where loyalty to god and the crown were aligned. It wasn’t solely about personal belief, it was about national survival.

and lastly, this particular incident wasn't the result of personal bloodthirstiness on mary’s part. it was shaped by local legal systems, religious conflict, and the limited reach of royal authority in her time. and unless we try to understand historical figures within the context of their own century, we’ll never really understand them at all.

thank you for the question, i did enjoy answering it<3

[marythequeen]

[...] as indicated by a letter Mary wrote to the duchess in April 1547, addressing her as ‘My good Gossip’, reminding her of the time when she was a member of Katherine of Aragon’s household, asking for help for two of her mother’s old servants, and signing herself "Your loving friend during my life." There was real friendship there, and more immediately, other royal women were to give Somerset and the Council more to worry about.

-Mary Tudor by Judith M. Richards

[marythequeen]

And then Mary made her only serious-her fatal-error: she died on 17 November 1558. Reformation monarchs timed their deaths very badly. Henry VIII died when those who most nearly shared his religious views were in disgrace, and when Protestants and politiques controlled Council and Court. Edward VI died when his commissioners were pillaging churches and provoking nostalgia for Catholic ways. Mary died when the political and diplomatic situations made it certain her sister would be queen, and safe for Elizabeth to restore Edwardian Protestantism.

Mary had continued to hope for a child who would succeed her, and had made no other provision.

In 1558 the most plausible Catholic candidate for the throne, Mary Stuart, was disqualified: as queen of Scots and wife of the French dauphin, she warred with England twice over, and Philip could not have permitted a French pawn to take the English crown. At the last, Mary Tudor reluctantly recognized Elizabeth's claim, as their father had determined: there was no realistic alternative, when the realm was at war and a disputed succession unthinkable. Elizabeth Tudor would be queen, and she would be a Protestant queen.

-English Reformations Religion, Politics, and Society under the Tudors by Christopher Haigh

[marythequeen]

A suspicious Spanish agent claimed that church attendance declined after Calais was taken, but there is no convincing evidence that political problems had neat religious consequences. The Marian regime was not falling apart, any more than the Marian Church. Many political malcontents, supporters of the Northumberland regime and survivors of the Wyatt rebellion, had made their peace with Mary: the officer corps of the armies against France and Scotland was a roll-call of former dissidents who had compromised with reality.

-English Reformations Religion, Politics, and Society under the Tudors by Christopher Haigh

[marythequeen]

Henry continued to present Mary visually as his Princess as well. There were only four feast days a year where “wearing of the purple” days was customary at the English court. But Henry purchased and wore this color more often, “making it a colour strongly associated with his personal,” according to Hilary Doda, over and above its ancient signification of royalty. He purchased it for his eldest daughter as well, signing a warrant for clothes for Mary in 1531. Her new clothes were purple, black, crimson, and white. The timing on this warrant is interesting. This was at the height of Henry’s struggle to set aside Katherine, yet he still gave his daughter the trappings of royalty.

-Mary I in Writing Letters, Literature, and Representation

[period-dramallama]

Anyone read this? Should I give it a read? (For better or for worse)

[marythequeen]

i did read it few years ago so i don't remember it well but i believe it deserves a chance. obviously, it's not flawless but definitely not as bad as the rest of the novels that's written about mary. (yes leah toole i am looking at you) it also has some DEVASTATING quotes that kept me awake in the night.

lastly, if you guys are interested in mary novels i could make a recommendation list. i've read plenty them. however most of them sucked.

[the-lily-maid-of-astolat]

I have a weird and possibly dumb question. I had always assumed that, being born on 18 February, Mary I of England was an aquarius, which surprised me because I don't think it fits her personality at all. But it just occurred to me that since Mary was born before the introduction of the Gregorian calendar, her birthday on the Gregorian calendar would be 28 February. Does this mean she was actually a pisces? Do we have to add ten days to the birth date of people who were born before the introduction of the Gregorian calendar in order to determine their astrological signs?

[marythequeen]

oh my god it's definitely not dumb at all. it's a great question and i can't believe none has ever thought of that before. such a great mind!! the gregorian calendar wasn't adopted by the english until the 18th century. and hell yeah her gregorian equivalent birthday would be 28 february which makes her a freaking pisces. this is actually, at least to me, a very important discovery. congrats because i'm gonna be talking about it for the whole weekend and i don't even believe in the astrogeology

[marytudorqueenofengland]

While doing research for my blog, I came across an image of Mary I of England. The original source is attributed to an eBay seller who asserts that the photograph was part of a press article discussing Elizabeth Taylor's pearl necklace, specifically referencing the famous Peregrina pearl. I took the liberty of color editing the image using Photoshop.

[marythequeen]

as you probably have realized- i am currently reading mary tudor by judith m richards. i'm in the latest chapters and mary's (also reginald pole's) beef with the pope is discussed. i've known that paul iv was glad with their deaths and rest but there had been apparently something i missed!

i'm leaving the paragraph here.

Rumour has it that Paul IV rejoiced when he heard of the almost simultaneous deaths of the heretical cardinal and Mary, whom he called the ‘Hapsburg’ queen, in November 1558.

and to me, it's just so ironic that while people still calling mary a religious bigot, pope himself didn't like her because of her (and again, pole too) "liberal" opinions on religion.

it's really funny when you think about it.

[marythequeen]

[...] Mary bade Philip her final farewell at Greenwich. As he sailed away, he stood where he would be most visible, waving his hat to his wife until he was out of view. Mary, again according to the Venetian ambassador, controlled her grief so regally and so well that no one could have guessed its extent. Once she was alone however, he reported, she collapsed into deep sobbing, gazing after Philip’s ship long after it was out of sight. That is the usual image of Mary, grief-stricken at the loss of her husband, but her self-control in public was agreed to be impressive, and by the ambassador’s account there were no witnesses to her weeping. One might wonder how he knew.

-Mary Tudor by Judith M. Richards

[marythequeen]

The Commons debates made it clear that although there was a majority who accepted Mary’s restoration of an older order, there was a significant minority who did not. In the following days various acts of defiance served as a reminder of that; one of the more memorable occurred on the day parliament ended, when a dead dog, tonsured like a Catholic priest, was thrown into Mary’s presence chamber.

-Mary Tudor by Judith M. Richards

[marythequeen]

But quite apart from her own strong convictions, Mary had important elements on her side. Historians have often overlooked how long she had lived at court, and how carefully she had been trained not just in the comportment of a pre-eminent woman, but also in the political complexities of court life. She had already, on several occasions shown a steely resolve, which even the best-connected men had found very difficult to stare down.

-Mary Tudor by Judith M. Richards