Editors Weekly Round-up, October 7, 2018

by the EHFA Editors

Enjoy this week's articles from English Historical Fiction Authors, and don't forget to comment on the Giveaway post!

Coronation of Queen Mary I

by Samantha Wilcoxson

Crime and Punishment Under Henry II

by E.M. Powell

A Merchant Visits Waterford in the Summer of 1170

by Ruadh Butler

Giveaway for Delirium 

by Emma Rose Millar

A paperback copy of Delirium by Emma Rose Millar is being offered (UK readers only) - Comment on the original post by 11:59pm (PST) Sunday, Sept. 7,  for a chance to win. 

Coronation of Queen Mary I

By Samantha Wilcoxson

Princess Mary Tudor was crowned Queen Mary I on October 1, 1553, in an event without precedent. After fighting successfully for her birthright, Mary became England's first queen regnant.

Entrance of Queen Mary I with Princess Elizabeth
into London 1553, by John Byam Liston Shaw

The spectacle had actually begun several days earlier when Mary arrived at the Tower of London with her sister, Elizabeth. They were welcomed with music, decorations, and a volley of the Tower guns by the mayor and aldermen of London. Time here was spent rehearsing for the coronation. Mary also met with her councillors and pledged herself, on her knees, to "the task God had been pleased to lay on her to His greater glory and service, to the public good and all her subjects' benefit." It was an emotional moment that left many of the men in tears. Then, on September 30, the sisters rode through the city to the Palace of Westminster, where the coronation ceremony would begin.

Their procession was planned to impress Londoners with the vision of everything they believed their monarch should be, and they were met by cheering crowds. Rich fabrics and vibrant colors glittered with magnificent jewels, silver, and gold. Even the horses were draped in beautifully embroidered cloth. Amid this dizzying array of wealth, Queen Mary was expected to stand out. She rode in an open chariot draped in gold. Her dress of purple velvet trimmed in ermine was complimented by the crimson velvet worn by her ladies and silver cloth-of-gold worn by Princess Elizabeth and Anne of Cleves. The bejeweled crown that Mary wore for the procession was reported to be so heavy that she wearily propped up her head with her hands.

Queen Mary I,  1554
by Hans Eworth

Crowds, pageants, and performers vied for Mary's attention as her procession slowly moved from the Tower to Westminster. Choirs of children sang as wine flowed from fountains. An acrobat even performed atop the weathervane of St Paul's Cathedral. After what must have been an exhausting day, Mary prepared for her coronation.

The next day was certainly one filled with both excitement and anxiety for this woman who had been at various times pampered and bastardized by a tempestuous father. Mary was not necessarily the showman that Henry VIII had been, so to be put on display before crowds would have been stressful, even without the knowledge that she was setting a historical precedent. Setting aside her shyness and timidity, Mary was determined that her coronation be held according to the customs of the kings who had come before her.

Mary wore crimson velvet robes and walked on blue fabric from the porch of Westminster Hall to the Abbey. Her auburn hair was worn loose in the style of a queen, but the orb, scepter, and crown of kingship were carried before her. Inside Westminster Abbey, swathes of cloth-of-gold hung from the choir to the altar and covered the grand chair upon which Mary was seated.

She was presented by the Bishop of Winchester:
"Sirs, here present is Mary, rightful and undoubted inheritrix by the laws of God and man to the crown and royal dignity of this realm of England, France and Ireland, whereupon you shall understand that this day is appointed by the peers of this land for the consecration, inunction and coronation of said most excellent Princess Mary; will you serve at this time, and give your wills and assent to the same."

"Yea, yea, yea. God save Queen Mary," those assembled responded.

Mary gave her offering and lay prostrate upon cloth-of-gold cushions as prayers were invoked above her. After a sermon by the Bishop of Chichester on the obedience owed to kings, Mary was prostrate again to swear her oaths as queen, followed by her anointing. Bishop Gardiner touched holy oil to Mary's forehead, temples, shoulders, and chest as she knelt wearing a sleeveless purple velvet corset. After the anointing, Mary was again regally dressed in a crimson velvet mantle and crimson cloth-of-gold slippers.

Gold coin featuring Queen Mary I, 1555

Trumpets announced the moment each of three crowns was placed upon Mary's head, and the choir sang Te Deum when the coronation ring was placed on her finger. She then received the sword and spurs that would have been presented to a crowned king and received the homage of her clergy and magnates. Finally, another offering was made, and Mary carried the orb and scepters (one traditionally the queen's and the other the king's) to her coronation feast.

She was Queen of England, but she had taken a long road to get there. Her mother's only child, Mary had been raised to believe she would be her father's heir. When Henry VIII broke with both Katherine of Aragon and the Catholic Church in order to disinherit Mary, she may have believed she would never see the throne. Through many trials and tribulations, which did not end once she was queen, Mary endured.

Additional Reading
Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen by Anna Whitelock
The First Queen of England: The Myth of Bloody Mary by Linda Porter


All images in the public domain through Wikimedia Commons

~~~~~~~~~~

Samantha Wilcoxson is the author of the Plantagenet Embers series featuring women of the Wars of the Roses and Tudor England. Her current project is taking her back to the beginning of the Plantagenet dynasty.

An incurable bibliophile and sufferer of wanderlust, Samantha lives in Michigan with her husband and three teenagers. You can connect with her on her blog or on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Goodreads.

Editors Weekly Round-up, November 19, 2017

by the EHFA Editors


Enjoy this week's articles from the blog.

Henry Mayhew and the London Poor: The Streetwalker's Tale 

by Mark Patton

The Counter-Reformation of Mary I

by Samantha Wilcoxson

Common Myths of the Wars of the Roses - Myth #3 - 

Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, the ‘Kingmaker’? Part 2…

by Derek Birks

The Welsh Lords of Deheubarth

by Jean Gill

The Counter-Reformation of Mary I

By Samantha Wilcoxson

Queen Mary I
Portrait by Eworth

Queen Mary I does not enjoy the popularity of her sister or the entertainment value of her father. Her relatively short reign was spent striving toward a goal that few of us understand today. The modern worldview that firmly separates church and state makes it difficult to comprehend how responsible Queen Mary felt for her subjects' salvation and how passionately she believed she was doing the right thing with her attempt at counter-reformation in England.

We look back with the benefit of almost 500 years of hindsight and wonder how Mary failed to realize that her plans to return England to Catholicism after her father's break from Rome twenty years earlier were doomed. The fact that Protestantism flourished after Mary's death indicates to us that Mary should have seen the signs that it was coming or that she should have taken a dose of modern tolerance and embraced her subjects' differences, but to promote either of these ideas is to fail to fully understand the mindset of a 16th century monarch.

As Eamon Duffy states in his Fires of Faith: Catholic England under Mary Tudor, "No sixteenth-century European state willingly accepted or could easily imagine the peaceful coexistence of differing religious confessions." Even Mary's sister, Elizabeth, who would later claim "no desire to make windows into men's souls" was scarcely less active in her persecution of Catholics. In Mary's time, the idea that faith was separate from law or that varying beliefs could thrive within one geographic area was not the progressive thought we believe it to be but something between heresy and treason.

Mary I's Entrance into London
Oil Painting by Shaw

Mary did not go into her reign believing counter-reformation would fail but that she was obligated to give it her best shot. Quite the contrary. When the common people helped secure her crown, which they knew meant a return to the Catholic mass, Mary was certain that most of her subjects shared her ambitions. Not only did she have vast popular support, but she had her cousin, Cardinal Reginald Pole. He had almost been elected to the papacy in 1550, and with his support England's smooth transition to the 'true faith' seemed assured.

During Mary's first Parliament, the marriage of Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon was deemed valid, erasing Mary's illegitimacy if not the scars left from that difficult period of her life. Her brother Edward's religious reforms were also overturned, allowing Mary to reasonably believe the changes she planned to make would occur quickly and easily.

Pole published sermons to be used throughout Mary's kingdom in an effort to reach those too young to remember the old faith that they might embrace it. However, they soon realized that reformed teaching was being perpetrated at some of the highest levels in the church. Heresy is a charge that does not make sense to the modern mind but was more serious than we can imagine in the 16th century. To secure the salvation of her subjects, Mary believed that it was necessary to outlaw Protestant books and teaching. When some reformers resisted, the burnings began.

Procession into St Mary's
Engraving by Myers

The 284 people burned for heresy during the reign of Queen Mary is what she is chiefly remembered for. The most notable, historical figures such as Latimer, Ridley, and Cranmer, did go to the stake with Mary's consent, but many of the other, more controversial convictions occurred under the supervision of local law enforcement who sometimes allowed charges of heresy to be used more to settle scores than root out false teaching. Burning heretics was meant to give them a foretaste of hell in the hope that they would recant and be saved for eternity. Better to suffer a finite time on Earth than forever in hell. However, Mary and her counter-reformers were surprised to find that a shocking number of convicted Protestants held firm to their beliefs, becoming witnesses to their faith rather than examples of recantation.

In the meantime, Mary made what was possibly her most serious mistake. Instead of choosing an eligible Englishman, such as Edward Courtenay or even Reginald Pole, as a husband, Mary fell in love with Prince Philip of Spain. Fear that this would make England a vassal of Spain or the Holy Roman Empire, which Philip's father ruled, caused rebellions and distrust of Mary's queenship much more than her return to Catholicism had. When the two fused into one surge of disillusionment with Mary's reign, the objectives that had seemed within reach fell away from England's first queen regnant.

Illuminated Manuscript of
Mary blessing cramp rings

During her five year reign, Mary suffered two false pregnancies, likely caused by uterine cancer. The marriage that she fought so hard for proved loveless and childless. Finally, her devotion to her people and her faith failed to be enough to see England restored to Rome and what she considered the 'true faith.' She died knowing that Elizabeth, the sister she did not trust but had little choice but to name as her heir, would reverse all of her efforts. Little did she know how stridently that sister would also work to blacken her name in order that the name of Elizabeth I would shine more gloriously.

The auspicious beginning of Mary's reign and the outpouring of love from her subjects would have helped heal the wounds left from a difficult life at the hands of her father and given her hope for the future. However, Mary could not see as clearly as we see today that successful counter-reformation in England was not what God had in mind for her after all.


Additional Reading
Fires of Faith: Catholic England under Mary Tudor by Eamon Duffy
The First Queen of England by Linda Porter


All images in the public domain through Wikimedia Commons

~~~~~~~~~~

Samantha Wilcoxson is the author of the Plantagenet Embers series featuring women of the Wars of the Roses and Tudor England.

An incurable bibliophile and sufferer of wanderlust, Samantha lives in Michigan with her husband and three teenagers. You can connect with her on her blog or on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Goodreads.

Editors Weekly Round-up, November 5, 2017

by the EHFA Editors

Enjoy this week's round up of posts from the blog.

The Reformation: Henry & Luther

by Samantha Wilcoxson

Woodes Rogers - the man who cleaned up the piracy in the Caribbean

by Mike Rendell

History Revealed: The Welsh Highland Railway

by Annie Whitehead

The Reformation: Henry & Luther

By Samantha Wilcoxson

Martin Luther and the 95 Theses
by Ferdinand Pauwels, 1872

On October 31, 1517, a monk named Martin Luther nailed his 'Disputation on the Power of Indulgences' to the door of Castle Church in the village of Wittenberg, Germany. He had no way of knowing that his desire to discuss and debate the Catholic Church practice would cause his name to go down in history. Five hundred years later, Luther's name is boldly emblazoned upon the facades of thousands of churches, and his call for discussion is better known as the 95 Theses.

Some historians have questioned whether Luther really posted his comments on the eve of All Saint's Day, wondering if the meaningful date is correct or whether it is a task that the professor of theology would have carried out himself. However, the events and changes that resulted from Luther's actions and writings cannot be denied, even if the theses nailing to the church door may be myth posing as history. Thanks to the boldness of one German monk and the innovation of the printing press, what it meant to be a Christian changed across Europe.

Because of the Gutenberg printing press, Luther's ideas did not remain quietly within the village of Wittenberg. They were translated from Latin into German, and eventually other languages, and spread like wildfire. Unlike reformers of the past, who were often limited by their own geography, Luther became a voice against the corruption of the Catholic Church far beyond his little corner of the world. By the following year, Luther was charged with heresy and had to return from his hearing in Augsburg under the protection of Friedrich III of Saxony.

Martin Luther's
On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church

In England, Luther's ideas were countered by the king himself. Henry VIII wrote his 'Defense of the Seven Sacraments' in response to Luther's treatise, 'On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church.' It was this work of Luther's more than the 95 Theses that outlined his grievances against the Catholic Church. (Some historians question whether the work in Henry's 'Defense' can be completely attributed to him, but we shall assume here that it can.) In 1521, Martin Luther was excommunicated while Henry was awarded by the Pope with the title of Defender of the Faith.

Excommunication did not slow Luther down. He translated the Bible into German (helping define and unite the common German language), attended the Diet of Worms where he made his famous 'I neither can nor will recant' statement, and got into a bit of an argument with the King of England.

The 'little monk,' as Henry had called him in his 'Defense' did not hesitate to respond to his detractor. Luther was perhaps the first to publicly question Henry's authorship of the treatise, claiming that it should not be taken seriously for the king did not even write it. Soon afterward, Luther apologized for the accusation and attacked Wolsey, 'the scourge of thy kingdom,' instead. This, of course, did not earn Henry's forgiveness, but only spurred him to defend the minister he depended upon so heavily at that time.

Henry VIII's
Defense of the Seven Sacraments

In typical Henry VIII style, the king used Luther's accusation later when he wished to dissolve his marriage with Katherine of Aragon. Claiming that it was Wolsey's hand behind his defense of the sacrament of marriage, Henry appealed for support. Luther, who in his booklet 'Against Henry, King of the English' had been open-handed with insults for the king, gave his support to the devoutly Catholic Katherine. Among other choice words, Luther accused the king of being 'a fool,' 'effeminately querulous,' and 'stupid.'

Henry began as a staunch supporter of the Catholic Church while Luther hoped to reform it. Despite their original intentions, it was Henry who broke with Rome while Protestants took up Luther's name to apply it to their own movement. These two men's motivations were completely different, although they led to the same result. Henry began the Church of England to exert his own authority over that of the pope, while Luther had not intended to start his own church but to correct the corruption in Rome.

Both men took their important places in Reformation history, though neither began with the goal of separating from Rome. With the benefit of 500 years of hindsight, we can see how each of these men helped lead the Protestant movement. Henry set the stage for reformation in England, despite the fact that his faith was Catholic in all tenets besides papal authority, with his 1534 Act of Supremacy. Once the break had been made, it was easy for his son, Edward VI, or advisors acting with his authority, to usher in full Protestantism.

Henry VIII and the Barber Surgeons
by Hans Holbein the Younger

Luther agreed with Henry that the Pope was not the highest or an infallible authority. However, while Henry wished to place himself above all others, Luther preached that the Bible alone - sola scriptura - could offer the authority of God. They would have also agreed upon the true presence of Jesus' body and blood in the sacramental bread and wine. Henry had subjects punished for denying transubstantiation, and it was a point that Luther refused to budge on despite the urging of other reformists. Christians today remain divided on the topic.
These two giants of the early 16th century died less than a year apart, Martin Luther on February 18, 1546, and Henry on January 28, 1547. One can only imagine what they would think of the impact that their ideas and actions continue to have on our society 500 years later.

Additional Reading
Martin Luther: Renegade and Prophet by Lyndal Roper
Various writings of Henry VIII and Martin Luther


All images in the public domain through Wikimedia Commons
~~~~~~~~~~

Samantha Wilcoxson is the author of the Plantagenet Embers series featuring women of the Wars of the Roses and Tudor England.

An incurable bibliophile and sufferer of wanderlust, Samantha lives in Michigan with her husband and three teenagers. You can connect with her on her blog or on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Goodreads.

Editors Weekly Round-up, August 6, 2017 #EHFA

by the EHFA Editors

Enjoy this week's articles from the blog.

The Queen Without a Crown

by Catherine Curzon

The Evidence Against Elizabeth

by Samantha Wilcoxson

The Battle of Otterburn, 5th August 1388

by Annie Whitehead

The Evidence Against Elizabeth

by Samantha Wilcoxson

Elizabeth I: The Coronation Portrait

Queen Elizabeth I has become fabulously more popular in our time than she was in her own, and she is often held up as a shining example of feminism or listed as one of England's greatest monarchs. Whether she was or not is an interesting subject for debate, but we would not be able to have it if Elizabeth's sister, Queen Mary I, had not refused to execute the girl for treason.

What evidence was there against the Lady Elizabeth? More than you might think and certainly more than had doomed many others.

When Mary became queen, many influential people, Bishop Steven Gardiner and Spanish ambassador Simon Renard chief among them, discouraged Queen Mary's naive trust in her younger sister. Mary did not completely ignore their advice, not keeping a close guard on Elizabeth but also not giving her the type of court position enjoyed by others, such as Margaret Douglas and Jane Dormer. Elizabeth was her heir after all, though Mary hoped to soon remedy that situation by having a child of her own.

Elizabeth was in greater danger of losing her position due to charges of treason than by being replaced by a young niece or nephew.

The strongest evidence against Lady Elizabeth was Wyatt's Rebellion. In December 1553, Elizabeth requested to leave her sister's court, and that permission was granted, though many advised Mary to keep Elizabeth close enough to monitor her activity. By January, information about the multi-pronged rebellion were being quickly uncovered. Edward Courtenay was involved in the plot with the goal of stopping Queen Mary's marriage to Prince Philip at minimum, with a higher goal of placing himself on the throne as Elizabeth's husband.

Entry of Queen Mary I with Princess Elizabeth
into London in 1553
by John Byam Liston Shaw, 1910

When Elizabeth was summoned to return to court and give testimony regarding her knowledge and possible involvement in the plot, she claimed poor health made it impossible for her to travel. To make matters worse for Elizabeth, a copy of a letter she had written to the queen was found in the possession of a French spy just as Nicholas Carew, a leader in the rebellion, fled to France to avoid arrest.

The truth of Elizabeth's involvement in Wyatt's Rebellion is one of history's great mysteries, but there is little doubt that she had knowledge that she did not share with her sister, the queen. For her part, Mary rallied the people of London to stand in her defense against the rebels in a speech that proved she was her father's daughter. It was a resounding success, and Wyatt's forces found that their entrance to the city was denied.

The rebellion quelled, several executions took place, including that of Wyatt himself along with Henry Grey and his daughter the 'nine day queen', but Mary hesitated to take such a severe step against her sister and heir. Elizabeth continued to ignore summons to London, and Wyatt testified that he had communicated with Elizabeth through servant William St Loe, though he admitted that Elizabeth's reply had been characteristically noncommittal. Elizabeth denied any connection with Wyatt or the French, but Mary sent an escort to put an end to her sister's excuses to avoid court.

When questioned, Elizabeth gave the sort of evasive and clever responses she has become well known for, at one point even claiming she could not recall if she owned a certain estate. Yet, more concrete evidence of her involvement could not be established, and Mary could not be persuaded to bring charges against her without greater certainty. Mary would not continue the sorts of executions that her predecessors had signed off on against the likes of Edward of Warwick, Edward Stafford, and Margaret Pole. Instead, Elizabeth was left in gilded captivity for two months before being moved to house arrest at Woodstock until she was brought to Hampton Court to wait upon the queen in April 1555.

Mary I of England
by Hans Eworth, 1554

In 1556, Elizabeth's name was tied to rebellion once again. This time, it was Sir Henry Dudley who led the scheming to place Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay on the throne in Mary's place. The conspiracy was found out before it could come to fruition, and servants of Elizabeth were arrested for having knowledge of it. But did Elizabeth herself know of the plot and support it? Once again, Mary could not be convinced with certainty, so Elizabeth remained free though the relationship between the sisters was more strained than ever.

Not only could Elizabeth easily have been charged with treason, she also left herself open to conviction for heresy. In Henry VIII's England, the two crimes were closely tied, but Mary chose to have patience with her sister in this arena as well. Hoping that Elizabeth could be converted to the Catholic faith, the queen brought her sister to mass only to hear her "complain loudly all the way" and make no commitments beyond exploring the faith to determine "if her conscience could allow her to be persuaded" to convert.

Any one of these incidents would have been enough for charges of treason to be brought up against a subject of King Henry VIII. Therefore, we have the mercy of Queen Mary to thank for the reign of Queen Elizabeth.

Additional Reading
Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen by Anna Whitelock
The First Queen of England by Linda Porter
The Children of Henry VIII by Alison Weir

All images in the public domain through Wikimedia Commons
~~~~~~~~~~

Samantha Wilcoxson is the author of the Plantagenet Embers Trilogy featuring women of Tudor England.

An incurable bibliophile and sufferer of wanderlust, Samantha lives in Michigan with her husband and three teenagers. You can connect with her on her blog or on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Goodreads.

Editor's Weekly Round-Up, April 16, 2017

by the EHFA Editors

We are delighted to announce that EHFA is now on Twitter where we will be sharing not only the daily posts and weekly round-ups, but also archive posts. Follow us at: http://twitter.com/EhfaBlog.

We hope you didn't miss a post, but just in case, here are the articles featured on EHFA this week:

Planning a Regency Ball

by Maria Grace

Eustache the Monk - Medieval Outlaw or Hero?

by Lana Williams

(an Editor's Choice from the archives)

Mary I: Her Mother's Daughter

by Samantha Wilcoxson

Mary I: Her Mother's Daughter

by Samantha Wilcoxson

Katherine of Aragon as the Madonna
painted by Michael Sittow

We all inherit a few habits and characteristics from our mothers – for better or worse. This is no less true for Queen Mary I and her mother Katherine of Aragon. The interesting thing about the similarities between these women is that one is remembered rather fondly and with great sympathy, while the other has been branded with the label ‘Bloody Mary.’

Katherine is widely admired for her refusal to back down when Henry VIII decided to set her aside. A bold combination of stubbornness and faith gave Katherine the strength to remain steadfast, regardless of what Henry put her through. She was never disrespectful, often saying that she would honor her husband’s will in all things, save where her conscience demanded that she followed God. Similar words would be used by her daughter. Henry appreciated the sentiment from neither.

Mary stood up to her father, much as her mother had, continuing to proclaim her love and respect for him while at the same time demanding that no title besides Princess was appropriate for her. Henry had long separated Mary from her mother, but she had her governess, Margaret Pole the Countess of Salisbury, at her side to bolster her up (at least until that great lady’s execution in 1541). The two of them refused Henry’s request for Mary’s royal jewels and denied Anne Boleyn’s status as queen.

Henry decided to break up Mary’s household in order to bring her into line. Margaret Pole was crushed to have Mary removed from her care and offered to cover all household expenses if Mary was left with her. Henry refused and instead forced Mary to serve in the household of her infant half-sister. This time may have seemed like the nadir of Mary’s life, but the knowledge of her mother’s courage in even worse circumstances gave her the strength to go on.

Katherine of Aragon
1st Queen of Henry VIII

After Henry’s death, Mary's life changed, but the challenges did not cease. With young Edward VI surrounded by reformist advisors, the faith that had seen Mary through tough times put her at odds with the brother she loved. Katherine had given Mary an example in this as well. When faith was all that Katherine had left, abandoned by her husband and her health failing, she had demonstrated to her daughter that it was all she needed. Mary also clung to her faith, having mass held within her household long after it was outlawed by Edwardian statutes. She was prepared to be a martyr for her faith.

Mary probably had not expected to be queen once she had a brother so many years younger than herself. Yet, when Edward died in 1553, Mary proved that she had inherited the strength of a true queen from her mother. Katherine had never doubted that Mary should be Henry’s heir and that he had no need for a son. Henry had clearly disagreed, but Mary’s chance came anyway.

Both Katherine and Mary could be submissive and pious, believing deeply in the specific roles that God had assigned to them. However, they could each be bold and courageous when they believed God’s will was being thwarted. Katherine proved this when she served as regent for Henry in the war against Scotland and in the battle for her marriage, and Mary proved it in her journey to the throne.

Queen Mary I
Daughter of Katherine of Aragon

Few anticipated any serious challenge from the Lady Mary when the council schemed to place her cousin, Lady Jane Grey, on the throne in her place. Sure, Mary had clung stubbornly to the mass against Edward’s wishes, but she had also done her best to stay away from court and live quietly. Edward’s Devise for the Succession had not had the chance to make its way through Parliament, but it was expected that his sisters could be subdued if necessary. If they thought that they would easily neutralize Henry VIII’s daughters, they were heartily disappointed.

Mary had submitted to many humiliations in her life by this time. She was 37, unmarried and childless, since neither her father or brother wished to legitimize her position or give her the power of a husband at her side. But when it was her turn for the crown, she proved, once again, that she was Katherine of Aragon’s daughter.

As it turned out, she had little opposition. Edward’s councilors may have convinced themselves that Jane would be easily accepted, but the people still had fond memories for the Princess Mary and sympathy for her shoddy treatment. Jane’s reign was ended within a fortnight, and Mary was queen, just as her mother always knew she would be.

Additional Reading
Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen by Anna Whitelock
The First Queen of England by Linda Porter
The Children of Henry VIII by Alison Weir

All images in the public domain through Wikimedia Commons
~~~~~~~~~~

Samantha Wilcoxson is the author of the Plantagenet Embers Trilogy. Queen of Martyrs, the final installment in the series was recently released featuring Queen Mary I.

An incurable bibliophile and sufferer of wanderlust, Samantha lives in Michigan with her husband and three teenagers. You can connect with her on her blog or on Facebook, Twitter, and Goodreads. 

Editors Weekly Round up, February 19, 2017

by the EHFA Editors

We hope you enjoy this week's articles from the blog.

A Valentine Vignette - 

The First and Final Love of Lady Jean Gordon 

by Linda Fetterly Root

A History of the Cuckold's Horns

by Deborah Swift

Prehistoric Orkney: The People of the Stones
by Mark Patton



The Unpopular Tudor
by Samantha Wilcoxson

The Unpopular Tudor

by Samantha Wilcoxson

On February 18, 1516, the Tudor court celebrated the birth of Princess Mary. After struggling to give her husband an heir, Katherine of Aragon was thrilled with the healthy baby regardless of her gender. King Henry VIII was pleased to have evidence of their ability to procreate, even if he would never grow comfortable with the idea of this little girl as a future queen. While Mary is at best ignored and at worst villainized in modern discussions of the Tudor era, she was looked upon more favorably during her own lifetime.

Mary's early childhood was charmed. She was beloved by both parents and praised by those visiting her father's court for her beauty and precociousness. Henry may not have wished for Mary to inherit his kingdom, but he understood her value as a potential wife. He was proud of his daughter and ensured that she received an exceptional education.

Henry VIII's Great Matter and Queen Katherine's fall from favor is often offered as a reason for Mary's actions during her reign. However, this reasoning fails to demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of Mary Tudor. Rather than vengeance, she was motivated by her belief that it was her duty to shepherd her people in the faith.

Queen Mary I has become known as Bloody Mary, and one cannot deny that almost 300 Protestants were burned for heresy during her reign. But there is so much more to this devout woman who endured much hardship and heartbreak during her brief life. She is remembered much less positively than her sister, Elizabeth I, who also executed and imprisoned people over disagreements on faith. Others suffered simply because they had not pleased Elizabeth. Their father ruled in much the same way. Why then has Mary become the unpopular Tudor?

Mary may have struggled to have her father recognize her as legitimate once he had set aside her mother, but her more serious issues began on the accession of her brother, Edward VI. Henry's Church of England had, by and large, been Catholicism with Henry at its head rather than the Pope. Those who advised the young Edward had something rather different in mind. Mary held as steadfastly to her faith as one might expect of the daughter of Katherine of Aragon, causing some to call for her arrest. The most bold encouraged Edward to have her executed, whether for treason or heresy made little difference.

Edward VI's Devise for the Succession

The young King Edward refused to go that far. As his once close relationship with his eldest sister disintegrated, he badgered her about the mass being held on her estates and imprisoned some members of her household, but he would not take legal action against Mary herself. The most significant step he took against her was his Devise for the Succession, written when he suspected that he was dying.

Edward had never taken the step of legitimizing either of his half-sisters. Therefore, Mary and Elizabeth were still legally bastards throughout his reign, though still his heirs based upon the Act of Succession made law by their father's Parliament. Had Edward lived longer, he likely would have had this rescinded with the succession altered to fit his own desires, but when he died in July 1553 only his will had been updated.

Bypassing both sisters and his cousin, Frances Grey, who were the next three in line according to the Act of Succession, Edward attempted to leave his crown to Lady Jane Grey, Frances' daughter. Neither Edward nor his council foresaw the popular support that went to Mary instead. There was little love for Queen Jane, for few knew her. However, many remembered the widely celebrated Princess Mary and saw her as the true heir of her father and brother.

Mary quickly and effectively took the throne with little resistance. Once John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, left London to lead Queen Jane's forces, support fell away as if a dam had collapsed. The people would have Mary as their queen, and many of the older generation among them also welcomed the return to traditional faith and worship. The immediate concern upon Mary's accession was not her religion but her marriage plans.

Many betrothals had been proposed over the years, but Mary remained single at age 37. As queen, the bearing of an heir was paramount, but everyone remembered her mother's sad childbearing history. Mary needed to be married quickly but to the proper spouse. In a country that had never before been ruled by a woman, Mary's choice of husband was a scary prospect. Any English subject she chose to marry raised his family up astronomically, but marriage to a foreign prince could be even worse.

Despite much encouragement for her to accept the suit of Edward Courtenay and the York blood flowing through his veins, Mary chose a cousin from her mother's side of the family, Philip of Spain. Philip's father, Charles V, had long been a great supporter of Mary and her mother, and Mary trusted him more than almost any other. When he offered his son, she quickly accepted, but the rest of the country feared that England would become part of the Holy Roman Empire of which Charles was king.

This outcry against Philip became fused with the younger generation's reluctance to accept the old faith. Had Mary better understood her subjects, she may have made a different decision, for she was as dedicated to serving her country as her sister would later be credited for. Her misjudgment was severe, causing Protestant uprisings against Philip and all he stood for.

It was in the name of ensuring her people's salvation and rescuing them from heresy that Mary reinstituted burnings in 1555. In the 16th century, salvation was not a private issue as it is today. Monarchs saw it as their duty to care for their subjects on this earth and to provide them with worship that gave them the hope of heaven. All across Europe, leaders were struggling with what this meant in the face of the Reformation. Mary was determined that reformist heresy would not damn her people to hell, and her hope was that, by punishing a few, she would save the masses.

Burning as a punishment is horrific to the modern mind. To the 16th century mind, it was a foretaste of the fires of hell that encouraged the sufferer to repent and therefore be saved from the eternal fires. Those punished might be saved at the last minute, and those who witnessed would be forced to reconsider their beliefs. Mary believed that she was doing her duty to her people and her God in her attempts to end heresy.

Her contemporaries, by and large, agreed with her. Some became enraged when local authorities in charge of fulfilling Mary's commands used their power to punish rivals rather than heretics, but Mary's actions were widely accepted. Were it not for the biased writing of John Foxe and efforts of her own sister after Mary's death, the Marian burnings would scarcely be a notable historic event. In truth, fewer were executed by Mary than her fellow Tudor monarchs.

The rejection of Catholicism in England has become connected with the negative view of Queen Mary, so that, even today, people remember her more as Bloody Mary than the first Queen Regnant of England. The lack of sympathy with which she is viewed and misunderstandings of her abound, but Elizabeth significantly benefited from her sister's example.

Lesser known than the persecution of heretics and false pregnancies of Mary's reign are her acts of mercy and ability to inspire loyalty of her people. During Wyatt's Rebellion in 1554, an uprising determined to stop Mary's marriage to Philip, Mary refused to leave London and gave a rousing speech to the people of the city, encouraging them to stand by her and oppose the rebels. They did.

In her speech, Mary used words that would later be employed by her sister.

What I am loving subjects, ye know your Queen, to whom, at my coronation, ye promised allegiance and obedience, I was then wedded to the realm, and to the laws of the same, the spousal ring whereof I wear here on my finger, and it never has and never shall be left off.
I cannot tell how naturally a mother loveth her children, for I never had any, but if the subjects may be loved as a mother doth her child, then assure yourselves that I, your sovereign lady and your Queen, do earnestly love and favour you. I cannot but think you love me in return; and thus, bound in concord, we shall be able, I doubt not, to give these rebels a speedy overthrow.
I am neither so desirous of wedding, nor so precisely wedded to my will, that I needs must have a husband. Hitherto I have lived a virgin, and I doubt not, with God's grace, to live still. But if, as my ancestors have done, it might please God that I should leave you a successor to be your governor, I trust you would rejoice thereat; also, I know it would be to your comfort.

The rebellion failed, but Mary found herself tested. She had thus far shown mercy to Lady Jane, despite the usurpation, but her father had been involved in the rebellion. The Duke of Suffolk was beyond saving, but Mary did not concede to sign Jane's death warrant until she was convinced that Philip would not come until known traitors were dealt with. In a eerie replay of Edward of Warwick's execution to clear the way for Mary's mother, Jane went to her death to please the Spanish. To soothe her conscience and demonstrate mercy where she could, Mary forgave 400 rebels who had been sentenced to hanging.

While this one act of mercy saved more men than all those who had died for heresy, it is not acts such as this that Mary is remembered for. Neither is she given credit for demonstrating to her younger sister that a woman could indeed rule. Elizabeth learned from Mary's mistakes and made many of her own, leading to the end of the Tudor dynasty. She ensured her own reputation as Gloriana, in part by blackening the name of the sister who preceded her. Mary may be the unpopular Tudor, but her story is one that inspired her sister to greater glory and might deserve to be more sympathetically remembered today.

Additional Reading
Catholic England under Mary Tudor by Eamon Duffy
Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen by Anna Whitelock
The First Queen of England by Linda Porter
Edward VI: The Lost King of England by Chris Skidmore

All images in the public domain through Wikimedia Commons
~~~~~~~~~~

Samantha Wilcoxson is the author of the Plantagenet Embers Trilogy. A incurable bibliophile and sufferer of wanderlust, she lives in Michigan with her husband and three teenagers. You can connect with Samantha on her blog or on Facebook, Twitter, and Goodreads.