Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She's certainly not a woman I would envy - she was born into a very tenuous, difficult situation made worse by her poor health, her marriage to Phillip, and ironically her faith. History is written by the victors, and had she been Protestant, or had the Protestant Reformation not happened when and how it did in England, I think we would have been handed a much different portrayal of her over the centuries.
When I visited Westminster Abbey a couple of years ago, I thought it was very poignant to find Mary I's grave in such close proximity to her half sister's grave. Such a tumultuous relationship over the years and yet they have laid so close together now for over 400 years. I was actually quite moved (unexpectedly) as I stood at their graves.
I thought the same when I stood there in November. The two sisters. Only Elizabeth's effigy is there--if I'm not mistaken, Mary is entombed below her.
I always thought of her despair over not being able to bear a child...the one thing that would have given her value in that time and place.
Think it was around 300 who died in the Smithfield fires.
Looking around the internet, the figure seems to be closer to 50 during Mary's reign.
But her father, the young king Edward and Elizabeth all executed Protestants there, and perhaps this would bring the total of Protestants executed for their religion closer to 300.
Looking around the internet, the figure seems to be closer to 50 during Mary's reign.
But her father, the young king Edward and Elizabeth all executed Protestants there, and perhaps this would bring the total of Protestants executed for their religion closer to 300.
Can you provide a link detailing Elizabeth's execution of Protestants at Smithfield (or anywhere else?). I know that a few Puritans were executed during her reign but it seems that was just a handful.
She's certainly not a woman I would envy - she was born into a very tenuous, difficult situation made worse by her poor health, her marriage to Phillip, and ironically her faith. History is written by the victors, and had she been Protestant, or had the Protestant Reformation not happened when and how it did in England, I think we would have been handed a much different portrayal of her over the centuries.
When I visited Westminster Abbey a couple of years ago, I thought it was very poignant to find Mary I's grave in such close proximity to her half sister's grave. Such a tumultuous relationship over the years and yet they have laid so close together now for over 400 years. I was actually quite moved (unexpectedly) as I stood at their graves.
Elizabeth I was originally buried in the tomb of her grandfather, King Henry VII. Upon coming to the throne James I had Elizabeth "dug up" and placed on top of the coffin of Mary I. thus the two childless queens share the same tomb. Tudor Q and A: Question from Nina - Elizabeth and Mary's burial
James I also moved his mother's remains, Mary, Queen of Scots from Peterborough to Westminster and had her reburied (with all due pomp and glory) in a tomb in the south side of Henry VII's chapel across from the north side where Elizabeth I lies (on top of Mary I).
Now the fun begins; James I some say to bolster his claims to the throne gave Elizabeth I a new and grander tomb hence the effigy. But he did *NOT* do the same for Mary I (a Catholic), though he did see to it her name was mentioned in the inscriptions. Hence you only see Elizabeth, and nothing of Mary. James I knew very well the two sisters did not get on (to put it mildly) but never the less that was that. Mary I had commissioned the double tomb because she intended to have her mother, Catherine of Aragon removed her grave and reburied with her, it never happened but since there was space anyway.....
Back to image building; James I gave his mother an equally if not more grander tomb than her executioner (Elizabeth I) across the chapel. Thus you have the two women responsible for the first Stuart on the throne sharing same chapel, closer to each other in death than they ever were in life.
Interestingly despite plans of their daughters who became monarchs themselves, disgraced and discarded queens Anne Boleyn (the former) and Catherine of Aragon (the latter) remained in their original graves.
Yep, it's just Liz 1's effigy and Mary is in the casket below hers.
She had a sad life.
All of Henry VIII's children were affected to some extent by that man's nature. Henry didn't like to be told no, the truth, or that whatever current situation was largely the fault of his own making, this extended to domestic affairs as well.
The king's treatment of his eldest child was especially cruel and wrong sighted in light of how events would play out in the end.
Henry VIII would take no dissent from anyone on the matter of his divorce (and subsequent putting away of) Catherine Aragon, and that included Princess Mary. Henry committed all sorts of mental torture against his own daughter for several years until she relented and wrote a letter agreeing to what he demanded; name herself a bastard, acknowledge the annulment her parent's marriage, and her father now being head of the CofE. It was probably the fact she was his daughter that kept the young princess alive; lord knows Henry executed many others for refusing to do the same. Letter of Princess Mary to King Henry VIII, 1536
Further humiliations followed with Princess Mary at times being pushed behind the daughter of Henry's "goggled eyed *****" (Anne Boleyn) and or forced to share her household with same. Worse Mary would have to watch her stock rise and fall with the demise of AB (and her daughter now also named a bastard) then the birth of Prince Edward.
If Henry had paid more proper attention to Princess Mary early in her life things might have turned out differently. If PM were married earlier she might have had the children she longed for and the Tudor dynasty might not have died out with Elizabeth.
By the time Mary came to the throne she was nearly forty, bitter and thwarted. Whatever romantic notions of marriage to Phillip II of Spain complete with children she must have known stood nil chances of happening. Yes, the marriage would take place but it was another "Spain marries England".
Elizabeth I was originally buried in the tomb of her grandfather, King Henry VII. Upon coming to the throne James I had Elizabeth "dug up" and placed on top of the coffin of Mary I. thus the two childless queens share the same tomb. Tudor Q and A: Question from Nina - Elizabeth and Mary's burial
James I also moved his mother's remains, Mary, Queen of Scots from Peterborough to Westminster and had her reburied (with all due pomp and glory) in a tomb in the south side of Henry VII's chapel across from the north side where Elizabeth I lies (on top of Mary I).
Now the fun begins; James I some say to bolster his claims to the throne gave Elizabeth I a new and grander tomb hence the effigy. But he did *NOT* do the same for Mary I (a Catholic), though he did see to it her name was mentioned in the inscriptions. Hence you only see Elizabeth, and nothing of Mary. James I knew very well the two sisters did not get on (to put it mildly) but never the less that was that. Mary I had commissioned the double tomb because she intended to have her mother, Catherine of Aragon removed her grave and reburied with her, it never happened but since there was space anyway.....
Back to image building; James I gave his mother an equally if not more grander tomb than her executioner (Elizabeth I) across the chapel. Thus you have the two women responsible for the first Stuart on the throne sharing same chapel, closer to each other in death than they ever were in life.
Interestingly despite plans of their daughters who became monarchs themselves, disgraced and discarded queens Anne Boleyn (the former) and Catherine of Aragon (the latter) remained in their original graves.
Cool. I love British history.
It's my understanding that though we know that Anne Boleyn is buried in the Tower chapel, we don't really know for sure which bones are hers, so that's why she's there, along with the tangled bones of many others (buried below the floor of the chapel) including Thomas More, which I find ironic.
It's my understanding that though we know that Anne Boleyn is buried in the Tower chapel, we don't really know for sure which bones are hers, so that's why she's there, along with the tangled bones of many others (buried below the floor of the chapel) including Thomas More, which I find ironic.
During the reign of Queen Victoria work was done (required actually as the place was in great need) of chapel of St Peter ad Vincula Chapel. While lifting of various stones several sets of remains were eventually found. Henry VIII had disposed of several other bodies there besides Anne Boleyn. Namely Edward Seymour, John Dudley, Lady Rochford, and Margaret Pole.
Later on other executed persons were added: Queen (Lady) Jane Grey, Lord Guildford Dudley, Henry Grey, and Duke of Suffolk. There were more burials before this and others afterwards and not all were executed.
Long story short using the best methods of the day remains were identified and reburied in individual coffins (two as a matter of fact, one of lead the other wood), on orders of QV. HM also ordered a railing and memorial for the area where it was believed AB was beheaded.
There is dispute among certain circles (surprise, surprise) if the good Victorian physician got things correct. Never the less without DNA analysis a la the last Czar and his family we will never be sure who is in those coffins. Every British monarch since Queen Victoria including Elizabeth II along with the C of E are satisfied enough as all requests for further exhumations have been flatly turned down. Without such consent the graves cannot be legally opened.
For the record Elizabeth II also refused assent for proper reburial of a Stuart monarch whose remains were found to be hanging half out of his coffin in Westminster abbey. Once again it was workmen going about their business on the place who discovered the state of said remains. Everyone thought surely HM would say "no problem..." but she didn't and the area was sealed up again leaving things as they were found.
She lived in a very paranoid court. It was not her father's court where glamour, parties (in the beginning of Henry's court not the end) happened. Mary lived in constant fear that she would be overthrown and had to take it from her cousin Jane Grey to finally land the crown.
Her childhood started out like a princess life but sadly went somewhat horrific. Mary lived in fear of being beheaded by her father and was torn apart from her mother the last four years of her life (who some say was poisoned) from there Mary saw what happened when a woman tried to cross her father. It had to do some major damage witnessing it and it just seemed to be never easy for Mary.
In my findings, I do not believe Mary was a good queen. One cannot be a good leader that brings with it fear and darkness. I often have read "She only burned 300 people that's not a large number" If people were being burned in your city, what kind of fear would that bring you? She also did not just burn people but also other methods too so I believe the number is much larger.
Her life was hard, depressing and always a struggle. Her reign was the same-and with it, not a leader to remember but childhood rhymes that install fear "I do not believe in Bloody Mary" as you stare in the mirror....
Last edited by DixieLand09; 03-27-2016 at 07:39 AM..
During the reign of Queen Victoria work was done (required actually as the place was in great need) of chapel of St Peter ad Vincula Chapel. While lifting of various stones several sets of remains were eventually found. Henry VIII had disposed of several other bodies there besides Anne Boleyn. Namely Edward Seymour, John Dudley, Lady Rochford, and Margaret Pole.
Later on other executed persons were added: Queen (Lady) Jane Grey, Lord Guildford Dudley, Henry Grey, and Duke of Suffolk. There were more burials before this and others afterwards and not all were executed.
Long story short using the best methods of the day remains were identified and reburied in individual coffins (two as a matter of fact, one of lead the other wood), on orders of QV. HM also ordered a railing and memorial for the area where it was believed AB was beheaded.
There is dispute among certain circles (surprise, surprise) if the good Victorian physician got things correct. Never the less without DNA analysis a la the last Czar and his family we will never be sure who is in those coffins. Every British monarch since Queen Victoria including Elizabeth II along with the C of E are satisfied enough as all requests for further exhumations have been flatly turned down. Without such consent the graves cannot be legally opened.
For the record Elizabeth II also refused assent for proper reburial of a Stuart monarch whose remains were found to be hanging half out of his coffin in Westminster abbey. Once again it was workmen going about their business on the place who discovered the state of said remains. Everyone thought surely HM would say "no problem..." but she didn't and the area was sealed up again leaving things as they were found.
Poor Margaret Pole - what a horrible death she suffered.
It is my understanding that possibly hundreds of bodies are buried beneath the Tower Chapel floor, including three queens. Here's a cool quote from Thomas MacCauley: "In truth there is no sadder spot on the earth than that little cemetery. Death is there associated, not, as in Westminster Abbey and Saint Paul's, with genius and virtue, with public veneration and with imperishable renown; not, as in our humblest churches and churchyards, with everything that is most endearing in social and domestic charities; but with whatever is darkest in human nature and in human destiny, with the savage triumph of implacable enemies, with the inconstancy, the ingratitude, the cowardice of friends, with all the miseries of fallen greatness and of blighted fame. Thither have been carried, through successive ages, by the rude hands of gaolers, without one mourner following, the bleeding relics of men who had been the captains of armies, the leaders of parties, the oracles of senates, and the ornaments of courts."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.