Ehhh I would like to read the sources to verify also because I love history and want to see where this narrative is coming from. There are few a things that do not sit well, but it is true calling her Bloody Mary is just plain cruel. Context is taken into account but does not excuse actions. I have my criticisms of Elizabeth I too for sure. Mary had so much on her plate, I respect her for that. She was the best lesson for her half-sister. Also I think the film from Lady Jane Grey in the 70's I think...does have a scene of Mary hesitating and showing her reluctance to execute Lady Jane Grey. I also like Sarah Bolger's portrayal too.
@@lesliea.6440 I never understood that, I guess its bc she was a woman...if she was a man nobody would have ever called her "bloody" cause lets just remind ourselves that James I burned innocent people as witches , this is the king who went totally witchmad but nobody is calling him " Bloody James" orsomething like that
@@lesliea.6440 I mean James I who was protestant b*rned many "witches" who were innocent , not sure how many there was but there was a lot... and nobody is calling him " Bloody James" Elizabeth I for sure yeah executed people but she never b*rned anyone and also all her executions are done for the traitors rather than for religious reasons , Elizabeth must have been in constant fear for her life cause the times were like this... these were very horrific times in English history , nobody was safe
yes but the thing about numbers dont make sense cause Henry VIII reigned for 47 years and Elizabeth I reigned for 45 years , I only agree with Edward and Henry cause Henry indeed was a great tyrant who killed both protestants and catholics , this mad king literally boiled someone alive....thats the kinda brutality thats very hard to find even in tudor England and Edward reigned for such a short time that this number of executions just doenst make sense also for me its just the manner of executions thats so horrible with Henry and Mary.....boiling and b*rning alive is the worst kinda death I can imagine....Elizabeth never executed anyone like this but then again I also agree that James I b*rned "witches" alive that were actually innocent and nobody is calling him Bloody James...so I dont say that this nickname is fair....I just acknowledge that Mary I was a very brutal queen ...she was her fathers daughter
Great video Estelle, as always. I have to say, I really struggle to understand why Jane Rochford helped Catherine Howard. She must have known how dangerous that was, living for years at court. And witnessing the downfall and execution of Anne and Georges. I always found her fate so tragic and sad. Same for poor Catherine Howard.
Great video. LOVE watching your videos. Elizabeth I- Rathlin Island Massacre in Ireland. Over 600 Irish men, women and children killed in one event in regard to the comparison between her and Mary I (there were others in her reign). Lady Jane Grey was more of an ardent Protestant than Mary I was a Catholic. Also, the Protestant faith was more established in the South of England and port cities. In the north, England was still quite Catholic in 1553. So not all of England was accepting of Protestantism. Most misunderstood Tudor figure... That is a hard question- I would have to say Henry VII! We need to look at him before what was probably severe depression set in when he lost his son, Arthur and wife, Queen Elizabeth within a year of one another-that sadly he probably never recovered from.
Enjoyed this very much. Honestly, I don't see how Mary I kept from having a nervous breakdown over not being able to visit her mother or go to her funeral. This cruelty from her father probably affected her health. How could it not?
Clearly, I need to learn more about Francis Walsingham because I knew that all the other people were misrepresented and why but I didn’t know anything about Francis Walsingham being a master spy.
Sorry, this is gonna be long ... Before I changed my mind, I also grew up believing Jane was guilty of plotting against her family, because from the very first books I got about Tudor history, it was always written as fact that she was with no one attempting to debate further. So yessssssss let's hear it for Jane Boleyn/Parker 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻 I will die on the hill that Jane had nothing to do with bringing down her husband and sister-in-law. I will also die on the hill that Jane and George had a good marriage, and that she and Anne did actually get along well. I'm so sick to death of everyone just jumping on the JANE IS BAD bandwagon without even taking a second to think "wait a minute". Because it's repeated ad nauseum throughout centuries (significantly starting in Elizabeth's reign!) to present day, people keep believing it, especially when they're writing fiction or making tv shows. Drive me craaaazy. I would pay good money to see a Jane B/P portrayal done sympathetically and from a different perspective! Someone needs to make a movie or tv show about this woman - but not fall into the tiresome traps that have been polluting her reputation for centuries! Again, can't stress it enough, everyone please read Julia Fox's Jane Boleyn: The Infamous Lady Rochford, and the brilliant fiction The Raven's Widow: A Novel of Jane Boleyn by Adrienne Dillard (it'll make you cry). Thank you Estelle for including Jane in your list!! Where Katheryn Howard is concerned, I just think it's as simple as Katheryn is queen, she's giving her employee Jane an order, Jane has to obey it. Maybe Jane thought Katheryn and Culpeper meeting is only once, she'll arrange it for Katheryn one time and that'll be it ... but Katheryn kept wanting these meetings. And what the queen wants she gets - how could Jane tell her no? It was her job to do as her queen asks. I understand Katheryn was terrified when she was being interrogated by Cranmer, but I hate how she threw Jane under the bus. It doesn't surprise me at all Culpeper would do this as well, given his reputation. Jane was killed and she shouldn't have been (Henry changing the law to specifically have her killed is one of the vilest things he ever did which is saying something), and then to be dragged through the mud forever after is really brutal. I also like the fact you include John Dudley in this list, he also gets a lot of mud slung his way. The portrayal of Mary I by Jane Lapotaire in Lady Jane movie showing how torn she is about executing Jane really cuts into you and I would have loved to have seen Romola Garai in Becoming Elizabeth do the same (we woz robbed).
The Tudors is very bad at history but I will say that I absolutely loved their portrayal of Mary because it was sympathetic and you can’t help but love her. I also loved their portrayal of Anne of Cleves, but that wasn’t surprising since she had always been a favorite.
I agree. Wolf Hall throws Lady Rochford under the bus, also. I haven't seen the sequel or read the third Mantel book. The series hasn't been shown in the US yet. After slugging through the first two books, I decided not the read the last Mantel book.
Is it just the idealistic realist/realistic idealist in me, or is it a given that when reading/listening about or listening to politics and/or religion the words coming from their mouths are only based on well selected facts (at best), flat out manipulative/emotive propaganda (more likely), or vindictive spite or inciteful maliciousness (more common than we realise), but never the actual truth?
How refreshing to hear a fair view on Mary I
Ehhh I would like to read the sources to verify also because I love history and want to see where this narrative is coming from. There are few a things that do not sit well, but it is true calling her Bloody Mary is just plain cruel. Context is taken into account but does not excuse actions. I have my criticisms of Elizabeth I too for sure. Mary had so much on her plate, I respect her for that. She was the best lesson for her half-sister. Also I think the film from Lady Jane Grey in the 70's I think...does have a scene of Mary hesitating and showing her reluctance to execute Lady Jane Grey. I also like Sarah Bolger's portrayal too.
@ there are some excellent biographies by Anna Whitelock, Linda Porter, Melita Thomas etc.
@@lesliea.6440 I never understood that, I guess its bc she was a woman...if she was a man nobody would have ever called her "bloody" cause lets just remind ourselves that James I burned innocent people as witches , this is the king who went totally witchmad but nobody is calling him " Bloody James" orsomething like that
@@lesliea.6440 I mean James I who was protestant b*rned many "witches" who were innocent , not sure how many there was but there was a lot... and nobody is calling him " Bloody James" Elizabeth I for sure yeah executed people but she never b*rned anyone and also all her executions are done for the traitors rather than for religious reasons , Elizabeth must have been in constant fear for her life cause the times were like this... these were very horrific times in English history , nobody was safe
yes but the thing about numbers dont make sense cause Henry VIII reigned for 47 years and Elizabeth I reigned for 45 years , I only agree with Edward and Henry cause Henry indeed was a great tyrant who killed both protestants and catholics , this mad king literally boiled someone alive....thats the kinda brutality thats very hard to find even in tudor England and Edward reigned for such a short time that this number of executions just doenst make sense also for me its just the manner of executions thats so horrible with Henry and Mary.....boiling and b*rning alive is the worst kinda death I can imagine....Elizabeth never executed anyone like this but then again I also agree that James I b*rned "witches" alive that were actually innocent and nobody is calling him Bloody James...so I dont say that this nickname is fair....I just acknowledge that Mary I was a very brutal queen ...she was her fathers daughter
Great video Estelle, as always. I have to say, I really struggle to understand why Jane Rochford helped Catherine Howard. She must have known how dangerous that was, living for years at court. And witnessing the downfall and execution of Anne and Georges. I always found her fate so tragic and sad. Same for poor Catherine Howard.
Great video. LOVE watching your videos. Elizabeth I- Rathlin Island Massacre in Ireland. Over 600 Irish men, women and children killed in one event in regard to the comparison between her and Mary I (there were others in her reign). Lady Jane Grey was more of an ardent Protestant than Mary I was a Catholic. Also, the Protestant faith was more established in the South of England and port cities. In the north, England was still quite Catholic in 1553. So not all of England was accepting of Protestantism. Most misunderstood Tudor figure... That is a hard question- I would have to say Henry VII! We need to look at him before what was probably severe depression set in when he lost his son, Arthur and wife, Queen Elizabeth within a year of one another-that sadly he probably never recovered from.
This is such a good video idea- I will be watching this later!
Enjoyed this very much. Honestly, I don't see how Mary I kept from having a nervous breakdown over not being able to visit her mother or go to her funeral. This cruelty from her father probably affected her health. How could it not?
It was Wyatt's Rebellion that doomed Jane Grey because her father was one of the conspirators.
Great video as always, thanks for sharing information about misrepresented people!
QUEEN MARY 👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐EXCELLENT WORK!! THANK YOU FOR YOUR EXPLANATION.
Damn, another amazing video!!
How do you pull it off everytime???😍😍
Clearly, I need to learn more about Francis Walsingham because I knew that all the other people were misrepresented and why but I didn’t know anything about Francis Walsingham being a master spy.
Sorry, this is gonna be long ... Before I changed my mind, I also grew up believing Jane was guilty of plotting against her family, because from the very first books I got about Tudor history, it was always written as fact that she was with no one attempting to debate further. So yessssssss let's hear it for Jane Boleyn/Parker 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻 I will die on the hill that Jane had nothing to do with bringing down her husband and sister-in-law. I will also die on the hill that Jane and George had a good marriage, and that she and Anne did actually get along well. I'm so sick to death of everyone just jumping on the JANE IS BAD bandwagon without even taking a second to think "wait a minute". Because it's repeated ad nauseum throughout centuries (significantly starting in Elizabeth's reign!) to present day, people keep believing it, especially when they're writing fiction or making tv shows. Drive me craaaazy. I would pay good money to see a Jane B/P portrayal done sympathetically and from a different perspective! Someone needs to make a movie or tv show about this woman - but not fall into the tiresome traps that have been polluting her reputation for centuries! Again, can't stress it enough, everyone please read Julia Fox's Jane Boleyn: The Infamous Lady Rochford, and the brilliant fiction The Raven's Widow: A Novel of Jane Boleyn by Adrienne Dillard (it'll make you cry). Thank you Estelle for including Jane in your list!! Where Katheryn Howard is concerned, I just think it's as simple as Katheryn is queen, she's giving her employee Jane an order, Jane has to obey it. Maybe Jane thought Katheryn and Culpeper meeting is only once, she'll arrange it for Katheryn one time and that'll be it ... but Katheryn kept wanting these meetings. And what the queen wants she gets - how could Jane tell her no? It was her job to do as her queen asks. I understand Katheryn was terrified when she was being interrogated by Cranmer, but I hate how she threw Jane under the bus. It doesn't surprise me at all Culpeper would do this as well, given his reputation. Jane was killed and she shouldn't have been (Henry changing the law to specifically have her killed is one of the vilest things he ever did which is saying something), and then to be dragged through the mud forever after is really brutal. I also like the fact you include John Dudley in this list, he also gets a lot of mud slung his way. The portrayal of Mary I by Jane Lapotaire in Lady Jane movie showing how torn she is about executing Jane really cuts into you and I would have loved to have seen Romola Garai in Becoming Elizabeth do the same (we woz robbed).
The Tudors is very bad at history but I will say that I absolutely loved their portrayal of Mary because it was sympathetic and you can’t help but love her. I also loved their portrayal of Anne of Cleves, but that wasn’t surprising since she had always been a favorite.
Thomas Cromwell is misunderstood, often depicted as a grima wormtongue figure
HBO's the Tudors did a terrible job portraying Lady Rochford. Is there a better historical fiction series that portrays her better?
I agree. Wolf Hall throws Lady Rochford under the bus, also. I haven't seen the sequel or read the third Mantel book. The series hasn't been shown in the US yet. After slugging through the first two books, I decided not the read the last Mantel book.
Is it just the idealistic realist/realistic idealist in me, or is it a given that when reading/listening about or listening to politics and/or religion the words coming from their mouths are only based on well selected facts (at best), flat out manipulative/emotive propaganda (more likely), or vindictive spite or inciteful maliciousness (more common than we realise), but never the actual truth?