I do remember from Game of Queens that Mary Queen of Scots was sort of a walking disaster, but to have even that trump the Catholicism...
That, and young Mary Stuart was about to become Queen of France at this point. Against which Mary Tudor, loyally supporting Philip in the last of the Habsburg vs Valois wars, had just sent troops, and had lost Calais to.
Oh nooooo :( (And, he's her dad :( )
Yes, that's the most awful thing. I can understand why this was Mary's breaking point - through all the years of separation from her mother, losing her mother and the non stop bullying, she told herself that her father still loved her, it was just the evil influence of his mistress which caused this, or maybe he didn't even know. But now that excuse was gone and she had to see it had been her father all this time.
BTW, I left something out: Mary's governess while she was still regarded as a princess, before she was declared illegtimate, was Margaret Pole, the last of the Plantagenets (daughter of George of Clarence, niece to Richard III and Edward IV). Margaret and Mary loved each other; when Mary's household was dissolved, Margaret offered to serve her at her own expense, but Henry VIII. wouldn't let her. Because we're talking Tudor, Margaret ended up on the block some years later. She had one of the most gruesome executions of the era (supposedly up to 11 blows with the axe were necessary). To quote the Imperial ambassador, Chapuys, who was one of Mary's and Katherine of Aragon's few friends throughout his time in England, described it thus: At first, when the sentence of death was made known to her, she found the thing very strange, not knowing of what crime she was accused, nor how she had been sentenced" and that, because the main executioner had been sent north to deal with rebels, the execution was performed by "a wretched and blundering youth who literally hacked her head and shoulders to pieces in the most pitiful manner".
See, this is why I feel entitled to compare Mary's childhood and youth and the long term impact all of this had on her to that of Fritz, and FW with Henry.
What are the few things you have in mind?
Well, for starters, if Catherine of Aragorn's son who lived only for a few days or weeks (I forgot which) would have survived. This doesn't mean no reformation in England by necessity, but not one sponsored by the state (as Henry VIII's instincts were pretty conservative), and it means Mary doesn't become Queen of England. She does get married to a suitor of equal or superior rank when young. I think she would have been a very good Queen Consort the same way her mother was, able to be regent and lead a campaign if she had to (as Catherine did against the Scots), yet otherwise happy organizing court life, promoting charities, humanist writers, that kind of thing. We can't know whether or not she would have had children, of course, as she was in her late thirties when marrying Philip in rl, and not in the best of health.
Or: Henry VIII dies before the "Great Matter" is settled. Mary becomes Queen. There are already not-yet-called-that-Protestants in the country, of course, but she's far younger, her mother is still alive, and since no one has been declaring themselves head of the church, compromises between reformers and traditionalists are far less incendiary and possible.
Or: Mary gets married to one of the men she was engaged to for a while, or who were discussed as possible suitors. These included Charles V., who became engaged to her when he weas a teen and she was a child, and later married his other cousin Isabella of Portugal instead. Now, just because Charles was happy with and was a good husband to Isabella (except for the part where he was absent a lot, because gigantic Empire, leaving her as regent in Spain) doesn't mean he'd also been a good husband to Mary, of course. But it's worth considering he did not have a mistress while married, - he had some before and some after his marriage, but not during -, and if Mary had married him, she would have almost certainly ended up ruling over a part of the HRE and/or Spain because Charles used all his female relations and his wife as regents. As long as said part would not have been the Netherlands, I think she'd have been good at it - without the pressure of being the first Queen Regnant and the pressure to marry (she's already married, and she's regent, not Queen Regnant), she would have been respected, and while undoubtedly there would have been political problems as they were everywhere in the Renaissance, they would not have felt as personal to her as the Reformation in England did, and therefore she would have been able to judge with a cooler head.
no subject
That, and young Mary Stuart was about to become Queen of France at this point. Against which Mary Tudor, loyally supporting Philip in the last of the Habsburg vs Valois wars, had just sent troops, and had lost Calais to.
Oh nooooo :( (And, he's her dad :( )
Yes, that's the most awful thing. I can understand why this was Mary's breaking point - through all the years of separation from her mother, losing her mother and the non stop bullying, she told herself that her father still loved her, it was just the evil influence of his mistress which caused this, or maybe he didn't even know. But now that excuse was gone and she had to see it had been her father all this time.
BTW, I left something out: Mary's governess while she was still regarded as a princess, before she was declared illegtimate, was Margaret Pole, the last of the Plantagenets (daughter of George of Clarence, niece to Richard III and Edward IV). Margaret and Mary loved each other; when Mary's household was dissolved, Margaret offered to serve her at her own expense, but Henry VIII. wouldn't let her. Because we're talking Tudor, Margaret ended up on the block some years later. She had one of the most gruesome executions of the era (supposedly up to 11 blows with the axe were necessary). To quote the Imperial ambassador, Chapuys, who was one of Mary's and Katherine of Aragon's few friends throughout his time in England, described it thus: At first, when the sentence of death was made known to her, she found the thing very strange, not knowing of what crime she was accused, nor how she had been sentenced" and that, because the main executioner had been sent north to deal with rebels, the execution was performed by "a wretched and blundering youth who literally hacked her head and shoulders to pieces in the most pitiful manner".
See, this is why I feel entitled to compare Mary's childhood and youth and the long term impact all of this had on her to that of Fritz, and FW with Henry.
What are the few things you have in mind?
Well, for starters, if Catherine of Aragorn's son who lived only for a few days or weeks (I forgot which) would have survived. This doesn't mean no reformation in England by necessity, but not one sponsored by the state (as Henry VIII's instincts were pretty conservative), and it means Mary doesn't become Queen of England. She does get married to a suitor of equal or superior rank when young. I think she would have been a very good Queen Consort the same way her mother was, able to be regent and lead a campaign if she had to (as Catherine did against the Scots), yet otherwise happy organizing court life, promoting charities, humanist writers, that kind of thing. We can't know whether or not she would have had children, of course, as she was in her late thirties when marrying Philip in rl, and not in the best of health.
Or: Henry VIII dies before the "Great Matter" is settled. Mary becomes Queen. There are already not-yet-called-that-Protestants in the country, of course, but she's far younger, her mother is still alive, and since no one has been declaring themselves head of the church, compromises between reformers and traditionalists are far less incendiary and possible.
Or: Mary gets married to one of the men she was engaged to for a while, or who were discussed as possible suitors. These included Charles V., who became engaged to her when he weas a teen and she was a child, and later married his other cousin Isabella of Portugal instead. Now, just because Charles was happy with and was a good husband to Isabella (except for the part where he was absent a lot, because gigantic Empire, leaving her as regent in Spain) doesn't mean he'd also been a good husband to Mary, of course. But it's worth considering he did not have a mistress while married, - he had some before and some after his marriage, but not during -, and if Mary had married him, she would have almost certainly ended up ruling over a part of the HRE and/or Spain because Charles used all his female relations and his wife as regents. As long as said part would not have been the Netherlands, I think she'd have been good at it - without the pressure of being the first Queen Regnant and the pressure to marry (she's already married, and she's regent, not Queen Regnant), she would have been respected, and while undoubtedly there would have been political problems as they were everywhere in the Renaissance, they would not have felt as personal to her as the Reformation in England did, and therefore she would have been able to judge with a cooler head.