What do you think?
Rate this book
Routledge Historical Biographies
Mary Tudor
Mary Tudor is often written off as a hopeless, twisted queen who tried desperately to pull England back to the Catholic Church that was so dear to her mother, and sent many to burn at the stake in the process. In this radical re-evaluation of the first 'real' English queen regnant, Judith M. Richards challenges her reputation as 'Bloody Mary' of popular historical infamy, contending that she was closer to the more innovative, humanist side of the Catholic Church.
Richards argues persuasively that Mary, neither boring nor basically bloody, was a much more hard-working, 'hands on', and decisive queen than is commonly recognized. Had she not died in her early forties and failed to establish a Catholic succession, the course of history could have been very different, England might have remained Catholic and Mary herself may even have been treated more kindly by history.
This illustrated and accessible biography is essential reading for all those with an interest in one of England's most misrepresented monarchs.
Richards argues persuasively that Mary, neither boring nor basically bloody, was a much more hard-working, 'hands on', and decisive queen than is commonly recognized. Had she not died in her early forties and failed to establish a Catholic succession, the course of history could have been very different, England might have remained Catholic and Mary herself may even have been treated more kindly by history.
This illustrated and accessible biography is essential reading for all those with an interest in one of England's most misrepresented monarchs.
296 pages, Paperback
First published July 15, 2008
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
June 19, 2013
A good, readable biography of Mary that works hard to peer behind the black mist of propaganda that has obscured her almost since her death. God, who would want to be a princess? One of the worst gigs on the planet, I think.
She's hard to get a handle on as a person, partly because of what Richards calls her "regal inscrutability," a quality in which she had been drilled from infancy and the utility of which the dangerous shifts through which she lived reinforced, and partly because so little information about her from people who actually knew her exists. Some material would have been destroyed or altered as the Elizabethan propagandists did their work and many who knew and loved her were not free to say anything nice about her so kept their mouths shut. Certainly she wasn't the cartoonish, hysterical bigot she is so often depicted as. She was an intelligent, unusually well-educated Tudor princess with an apparent knack for keeping friends (always a good sign, I think) who lived a horribly restricted and difficult-to-navigate life. As far as the whole Bloody Mary reputation goes, Richards acknowledges the surprising number of burnings of heretics that took place in her short reign and offers some context in which to judge them; in the broader European context, the number of burnings weren't so unusual, she argues, and they took place within a judicial framework that avoided the ultimate punishment far more than it inflicted it. Fair enough, but there's more to be said about the matter, although probably not in a brief biography like this that is meant for a general readership that doesn't know or care all that much about broader matters of sixteeth-century ecclesiastical, social, and legal history. Mary's most important legacy, Richards argues, is that she normalised the existence of a queen regnant in England, giving Elizabeth and the later Stuart queens a firm foundation on which to build.
She's hard to get a handle on as a person, partly because of what Richards calls her "regal inscrutability," a quality in which she had been drilled from infancy and the utility of which the dangerous shifts through which she lived reinforced, and partly because so little information about her from people who actually knew her exists. Some material would have been destroyed or altered as the Elizabethan propagandists did their work and many who knew and loved her were not free to say anything nice about her so kept their mouths shut. Certainly she wasn't the cartoonish, hysterical bigot she is so often depicted as. She was an intelligent, unusually well-educated Tudor princess with an apparent knack for keeping friends (always a good sign, I think) who lived a horribly restricted and difficult-to-navigate life. As far as the whole Bloody Mary reputation goes, Richards acknowledges the surprising number of burnings of heretics that took place in her short reign and offers some context in which to judge them; in the broader European context, the number of burnings weren't so unusual, she argues, and they took place within a judicial framework that avoided the ultimate punishment far more than it inflicted it. Fair enough, but there's more to be said about the matter, although probably not in a brief biography like this that is meant for a general readership that doesn't know or care all that much about broader matters of sixteeth-century ecclesiastical, social, and legal history. Mary's most important legacy, Richards argues, is that she normalised the existence of a queen regnant in England, giving Elizabeth and the later Stuart queens a firm foundation on which to build.
January 26, 2020
The preamble rages against the protestant propaganda slandering Mary, and modern historians finding her boring, but luckily the revisionism doesn't dominate the book, which aims to be balanced rather than a hagiography. It also has a feminist slant, focusing on Mary's position as first queen regnant and the innovations necessary, though these seem to be largely ceremonial for all the attention paid to them in the book.
The most interesting revision to me focused on Mary's marriage to Philip of Spain, and how successful were her actions to restrict the influence of foreign power and maintain her own right to rule (although it provided a rallying cry for her opposition).
The main problem the book has is that Mary's short reign has a lack of sources giving a real insight into Mary as a person, and once she's seen off Lady Jane Grey, it's her personal reaction to events that dominates the story. Maybe not boring, but not as much to work with for the biographer as some more dramatic reigns.
The most interesting revision to me focused on Mary's marriage to Philip of Spain, and how successful were her actions to restrict the influence of foreign power and maintain her own right to rule (although it provided a rallying cry for her opposition).
The main problem the book has is that Mary's short reign has a lack of sources giving a real insight into Mary as a person, and once she's seen off Lady Jane Grey, it's her personal reaction to events that dominates the story. Maybe not boring, but not as much to work with for the biographer as some more dramatic reigns.
April 21, 2023
This is the only book about Mary Tudor you will ever need to read! It dismantles historical myths about her, but not in an apologetic tone. The author is honest about the things she did well, and the bad things she did. I felt that the author remained neutral and was neither trying to defend her actions nor condemn her as hopelessly evil. She skillfully contextualized it. Mary Tudor was not the monster that Protestant propaganda has had us believe for centuries. She was in fact well-loved by her people and had support from the majority of her subjects. She brought back the Catholic faith, which was what most English people wanted at the time! This book was very thorough about every aspect of Mary's life, and was an enjoyable read.
March 6, 2025
it was a magnificent read!
December 26, 2009
The first biography of Queen Mary which I've read for my thesis (on Marian theatre and censorship), Richards has written a wonderfully readable revisionist history of the infamous and so-called 'Bloody Mary.' Full of scholarly analysis which helps to debunk many of the false myths of Mary and her reign (such as her idiocy, the backwards-looking nature of her religion and religious policies, and her bloodthirstiness), as well as plenty of humor and wit that complements Richards' clear, straightforward writing style perfectly. Mary has, since very early on Elizabeth's reign, been painted as a villain-- a backwards step in the progressive and triumphal narrative of English history. Richards, along with a number of other scholars recently, questions the validity of Mary's place in that narrative and the answers she comes up with actually turn it on its head. While all of England certainly didn't rejoice at her ascension to the throne and the re-institution of Catholicism which came with it, there was definitely a significant majority who were happy, or at least content to conform. Furthermore, Richards provides a number of examples of how Mary and her policies actually set precedents which not only eased the transition to another female monarch, but were also gladly used by Elizabeth and her government.
Although I've read the chapters relevant to my thesis so far (the introduction and her reign, 1553-58), I definitely plan on reading the rest of the book once I've graduated and have the time.
Although I've read the chapters relevant to my thesis so far (the introduction and her reign, 1553-58), I definitely plan on reading the rest of the book once I've graduated and have the time.
Read
September 15, 2011Very good biography putting some light ( a feminist light that is, which makes for an interesting point) on one of the most unjustly degraded queen of history.
July 30, 2015
An excellent book. It isn't a rehabilitation of Mary I. It does, however, put her in context.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews