Customer Reviews

Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(22)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Everyone knows "Bloody Mary" from history class or even the famously popular show, "The Tudors" -which although a bit inaccurate I adored- but this book seeks to challenge the mainstream. You will come to know Mary as a strong woman who has learned a lot from her mother. A determined Catholic, oft threatened with treason from her own family. Denied her title as princess by her very father. Denied her mother's marraige to her father and bastardized. Even forced at one point to cater to her father's new wife's baby, Elizabeth, she weathers horrors involving her Mother's public dismissal, isolation and eventual death only to be shunned, threatened with treason by her father until she relents and confesses to his wishes.

I found this stark contrast to her younger sister. Even in death, Elizabeth is buried atop her sister in Westminster Abbey with an inscription that reads - "Regino consortes et urna, hic obdormimus Elizabetha et Maria sorores, in spe resurrectionis." (Partners in both throne and grave, here rest we two sisters, Mary and Elizabeth, in the hope of one resurrection). Yet Elizabeth is seen as the golden ruler and Mary the tyrranous bloodthirsty Catholic. If we are to hope for one resurrection it seems hardly likely considering their polar opposite public perception, doesn't it? Afterall, if it were not for Mary it is doubtful Elizabeth could have attained the throne (Mary could have even had her younger sister killed at the drop of a hat) and both Queens had to fight to rectify social issues their father left behind and their brother's refutal of their father's Rule of Succession. Mary had many enemies in England when she returned to claim her throne just as Elizabeth had enemies to contend with after she succeeded her sister. You could argue that much of Elizabeth's glory is due to her elder, determined and brave half-sister.

This, by far, was the most interesting read I have enjoyed about the Tudors. After seeing a glimpse of Mary in the popular Showtime series "The Tudors" I have craved more about her I believe this book accomplishes its goal - which is to challenge modern opinion of Mary Tudor. Wholeheartedly recommend, especially if you found yourself, like this reviewer, dying for more Tudor after the popular series. This book is richly written with facts that must have taken some time to accumulate and form into a cohesive book.

Be ware that this is a book that may require a little notebook in order to jot down names and connections. Having only access to the galley copy I am unsure if the author planned to form her own index summary of people mentioned in her book and their relation to The Queen, but it would be helpful. If not in the final book then just keep a notepad handy to write some notes lest you forget who is who next time you pick up the book. :)

Mary Tudor is, in my opinion, one of the most fascinating females in English history. She showed unbelievable strength of character and courage at certain points in her life, such as when she fought for her crown or refused to betray her religious ideals. On the other hand, she also had a tendency to be submissive and needy, especially in her relationships with men. A good biography of her life would be an excellent addition to anyone's bookshelf; unfortunately, Anna Whitelock's account of Mary's life leaves more than a little to be desired.

Whitelock's biography is superficial at best, leaving out major parts of Mary's life, important contemporaries, and political and religious background information, in what I can only assume was an attempt to make the book more streamlined and easy to read. While I understand that biographies from this period in history, especially biographies of the Tudor family, can be somewhat overwhelming and readers can become bogged down in the details, Whitelock really went too far in cutting away everything but the barest impression of Mary's life and times. I was especially disappointed by her handling of the religious difference between Protestants and Catholics. This was the key issue of Mary's reign, and in fact her entire life, and yet the author glosses over the history of the conflict between the groups and the differences between the two faiths. It is impossible to truly understand Mary's commitment to her faith or her decisions to act against Protestants (which earned her the nickname Bloody Mary) without a more careful examination of the religious issues of the time.

If you are looking for a relatively brief (for a historical biography) and cursory look at the life of England's first queen regnant, this book might be a good choice for you. If you are interested in an in depth look at Mary's life and the political and religious issues of her life, I strongly suggest you look elsewhere.

I found this to be a very informative, and yet very readable biography of Mary Tudor. It begins with her early years, as her father Henry VIII was reigning. Because of the influence his reign, his battles with the Catholic Church, and his succession of wives, on his daughter, this book has a good bit of information about Henry VIII as well. I found this book to be much better in dealing with both of these rulers than a book I recently read on the Tudors The Tudors: The Complete Story of England's Most Notorious Dynasty.

The author's objective in writing this book was to provide a more fleshed-out portrayal of Mary than is commonly given in the history books of her as "Bloody Mary." He blames that characterization of her on Foxe's Book of Martyrs. However, he does portray the graphicness of the persecution of Protestants under her reign. He simply tries to make us understand why and to also show the great accomplishment of being the first female queen of England.

I felt that I got to know and understand Mary Tudor as a person more than in other books that I've read on the topic. I liked the fact that there were quite a few quotes from Mary herself and other historical figures, along with the requisite footnoting. I would have liked to have been given a bit better of an understanding of her relationship with her sister Elizabeth, but other than that, I felt other areas of her life were developed well enough. And, the author did make me sympathize with her at times, like during her phantom pregnancies.

Overall, this is a very good book on Mary Tudor, with a good bit of valuable information about her father Henry VIII as well. It's very readable and moves right along; it's written more as a popular history than a scholarly treatise. I would recommend it to anyone with an interest in the topic. My 9-year-old son who loves the Tudors (and reads on a 7th-8th grade level) has already grabbed onto it for himself....

Mary Tudor receives considerably less press than her more glamorous younger half-sister. Elizabeth's long reign, fascinating relationships and excellent self-promotion (i.e. Mary's death anniversary is celebrated as "Elizabeth's Accession Day") have been grist historians, novelists and movie directors. In contrast, Mary is often considered interim figure known primarily for her nick-name, deserved or not, "Bloody Mary".

Author Anna Whitelock presents a very sympathetic portrait of Mary. While she is highly persuasive, the sources she's relied on, such as Eusatce Chapuys, the envoy of the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, and The State Papers of the Vatican, I expect, are overly supportive of Mary. It would be interesting to see another bio, more reliant on other less partisan material.

It is clear, that history has not given Mary her due. She took strong, life threatening stands against her father and brother on behalf of herself, her mother and her cause. This sort of chutzpah for a woman of her time is amazing. Mary undoubtedly had leadership qualities; she inspired loyalty among her staff, the nobility and the population in general. On the death of Edward VI, she had great instincts and was decisive. She raised an army and plotted her own successful revolt against a seated monarch. Her first speech as Queen hit just the right note. It seems that once she achieved power, she didn't know what to do with it.

One does have to sympathize with Mary as she suffers the unnecessary stringency of house arrest in her tender years. Quoted material shows Elizabeth to have a cocky attitude, particularly regarding the Wyatt affair. Mary gets lip service but little support from her uncle (and sometime suitor) Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. While it seems that Philip might never have intended to stay in England it's clear he did not intend to honor the marriage treaty that kept him out of its governance.

You can see from Mary's story the lessons that Elizabeth learned. She saw how being the "rising sun" allowed her to escape blame for plots against Mary. She saw how a husband was more hindrance than help.

This is a good book, but it's a once over lightly. I hope future biographers take a closer look at Mary as a person (analyzing her relationship with Philip and her pseudo pregnancies), the Mary-Elizabeth relationship (nicely introduced in Elizabeth's Women: Friends, Rivals, and Foes Who Shaped the Virgin Queen but worthy of its own volume), and Mary's role in the burning of martyrs. At times she seems detached, but in the case of Thomas Cramner, revenge is clearly her motive. In the meanwhile, this is a accessible sympathetic overview of Mary and her reign.

I've read plenty of books on the Tudor Family and have always wanted a definitive history of Mary Tudor. Unfortunately this book doesn't give the detail I graved. It was more a historical about the other Tudors than Mary herself. By attributing Foxe's "Martyrs" as the most probable cause for Mary's bad press is rather a simplistic excuse for Mary's religious fanatacism. Neither did the author give a clear understanding, (or even attemtp to do so) why Mary suffered phantom pregnancies, her possible mental and physical condition from a historical and modern perspective.

In some ways, the most interesting part of this book was the introduction. In it, the author explains that over the last ten years, the academic consensus about Mary Tudor has moved farther and farther away from the popular conception of her reign as a bloody footnote between those of her father and brother who came before her, and the reign of her far more well-known sister who followed her.

The book starts by making the point that Katherine of Aragon (Mary's mother) was not a week-willed victim of circumstance, but a woman raised by a queen regnant to be queen consort of England. Mary learned much from her mother, possibly as much as she did from her far more flamboyant father. Mary herself did what it took to take the throne, despite numerous attempts to disinherit her, ending with her brother's belief that no woman should even hold the throne.

The book also sheds new light on the marriage between Mary and Philip of Spain, as it shows Mary creating the customs and context in which a woman can truly hold the throne of England. Elizabeth adopted Mary's motto and most of her precedents in how the reign of a queen regnant played out, although her religious and political ideas were quite different.

I'd love to have given this book five stars, but I can't. It's hard to describe what's wrong with it, but I think that in the end, the problem is the length. The book is just too short. In order to fit into the length it turned out to be, a lot of explanation was left out. The author explains this as a choice not to provide a complete survey of the political landscape in Europe during Mary's life, but I think she erred a bit on the side of giving too little context for some of the people and events. Still, it's a good book, and well worth reading.

Ultimately I have to disagree with all the blurbs on the back of this non-fiction work on Mary Tudor. Historians such as David Starkey and Antonia Fraser rave about this debut of Whitelock, but I fail to see what all of the hoopla is about. It is a recitation of the known facts and that is all. I don't see where Whitelock uncovered any new material here. In fact, I feel she relies far too heavily on biased sources, such as the Spanish Ambassador of the time who would, of course, be far more sympathetic to Catholic Mary and her mother Katherine of Aragon.

Whitelock clearly has an agenda to "clear Mary's name." But her efforts here are so biased that they accomplish the opposite. While it's true that Mary was a brave and, at times, brilliant woman, Whitelock glosses over her persecutions (you know, all those burnings that led to her nickname "Bloody Mary"?) by passing it off to Mary's admirable religious devotion.

Similarly, only one (very) short chapter was devoted to Mary's first false pregnancy and nowhere does Whitelock even offer an opinion as to it's cause.

In the end, you can't have it both ways. If this was meant to be a "just the facts" kind of book, then the facts have to be presented without biased sources. If it was meant to be interpreted in Mary's favor, then more opinions should have been offered.

What I read here was a mere recitation of the facts the author favored, fairly dry and predictable.

What is it about the British royal families that so excites the rank and file? I confess that it baffles me; even so, at the same time here I am reading a biography of Mary Tudor, one of the lesser figures to rule England. Mary Tudor (1516-1558) was the daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon. Disappointed that she was a girl rather than the hoped for male heir who could take his place as king of England, Henry VIII sought an annulment so he could pursue a legal heir with another woman. When the Catholic Pope refused to grant it, he transformed the church in England into the Church of England where he could control the clergy and quickly obtained a divorce. In all, Henry married six different women, always seeking a male heir. One, Edward VI, was born to Henry and Jane Seymour and he succeeded Henry on the English throne.

Through all of these machinations, Mary was deemed illegitimate, and came to be called "The Lady Mary" rather than Princess because of this status. At the same time her father expelled Mary from Court, and in December 1533 she was sent to serve as a lady-in-waiting to Elizabeth, her younger half-sister who would later become one of the greatest monarchs in English history. In time, this situation improved and Henry set up a line of succession that listed Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth in that order. All would serve, at least for a time.

Edward VI succeeded Henry VIII upon his death in 1547, but served only until 1553 when he died suddenly and Mary, now called Mary I, ascended to the throne. Her reign of only five years has been characterized as one of the most irresponsible in English history--an overstatement--because of her attempt to reinstitute Catholicism in her realm. It was during that reign that she gained the epithet "Bloody Mary" because of her execution of 824 Protestants. Many more fled the country. John Foxe's "Book of Martyrs" published in 1562, only a few years after Mary's death of natural causes codified these stories of Protestant persecutions and her reputation has thereafter been shaped by these stories.

Anna Whitlock's exhaustive biography of Mary Tudor is an excellent modern reinterpretation of her life. She specifically tries to separate fact from myth in the story of "Bloody Mary" and does a reasonable job of rehabilitating the negative stories of her reign. "Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen" is an impressive reappraisal of the life of a little-known English sovereign. I'm not sure that this book helps understand what is it about the British royal families that so excites the rank and file but it is a compelling portrait of a more interesting and complex individual than previously envisioned.

I have been a Tudor History fan for as long as I can remember - mostly through historical fiction at first I must admit. After awhile I began to read the real history of the 'players'.Of course I found the Tudor series thrilling - albeit a slight variation on a theme. I also keep a succinct Tudor history close by when I read a historical fiction work so that I can compare the reality with the fictional book.

Mary Tudor has been, I believe,vilified through the centuries and her commonplace moniker of "Bloody Mary" has always led to the perception people seem to have of this very influential first female British Monarch. Recently I have been reading biographies of British Queens. Katherine Parr and Catherine of Aragon most notably so I was thrilled when I was given the opportunity to review a galley of this book.

Ms. Whitelock's biography of Mary Tudor is thoroughly researched and is very 'readable' to boot.Nothing dry about this work. I find it fascinating to have been offered a slightly different point of view about Mary Tudor. I have always considered all that she experienced in her young years and it is, truly, no wonder that she was. I think, a conflicted soul looking for love, support and comfort in the complicated world of Tudor politics.

This is an excellent book and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in British history, biographies,royalty, the Tudor period - or anyone who wants to to revisit the persona of this much maligned Queen.

Poor Mary Tudor. First she goes from being daddy's little princess to nearly being daddy's latest executed-loved-one. Then after surviving against all odds and every precedent to become England's first queen regnant she keeps upstaged in death by her little sister Elizabeth and nicknamed "Bloody Mary" to boot. No doubt about it, sibling rivalry can be a bitch.

Anna Whitelock has written Mary Tudor: Princess, Bastard, Queen with the stated intention of reclaiming her rightful place in history for this perpetually beleaguered royal. She does this by creating a very accessible biography. The scholarship is evident but the writing style is surprisingly fast-paced. Tudorphiles won't find much new in the two-thirds of the book. This is well-trodden ground and Whitelock focuses simply on Mary's point of view without wringing out tenuous interpretations. She also shows Mary's shift from obedient Catholic girl to a woman for whom faith offered the only constant in her life.

Once Mary becomes queen Whitelock takes great pains to demonstrate how she paved the way (definitely unknowingly) for little sis Elizabeth to become Gloriana. The idea of a woman as ruler was unthinkable prior to Mary. After Mary it was a viable option. Whitelock is less successful in redrawing the portrait of "Bloody Mary" although in fairness to the author that was probably not the intention. Instead of claiming Mary was in thrall to her advisors when she sent hundreds to be burned at the stake, Whitelock points out that Mary was perfectly willing to die for her religious beliefs and thus wasn't too troubled by others dying for theirs. It's not a sympathetic portrait but it strikes me as far worthier for this notable survivor.

Recommended for history readers and Tudorphiles.