This blog post is inspired by the discussions I have had with my mother in regards to Mary I as well as her importance to Winchester. Then following the portrayal of Mary I in CBBC's Horrible Histories and their 'The Tudors Song' and how this has affected the portrayal of Mary I in public history. All views in this blog post are my own with references to different historians and secondary sources that I have used as part of my interpretation.
Referring to:
Horrible Histories, ‘The Tudors Song’. 2009 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCmogoGpnxg
Secondary sources that are referenced in this blog:
Dr Elena Woodacre’s ‘Queens and Queenship’ 2021
Dr Johanna Strong’s ‘Mary I’s Wedding in Winchester’ episode 10. 2021
Contemporary sources that are referenced:
John Foxe ‘Acts and Monuments’ 1563. https://www.dhi.ac.uk/foxe/
The public perception and knowledge on Mary I (1554-1558)
Mary I is important to the history of Winchester in itself due to her marriage at the cathedral. Though as my mother isn’t a historian her knowledge of Mary is based on the myth of ‘Bloody Mary’. As highlighted previously by my blog post on Mary I’s portrayal in CBBC’s Horrible Histories. Therefore, in this post I shall look into other portrayals of Mary I in Horrible Histories in comparison to Mary I. However, I shall also be discussing her importance to Winchester and how Mary I should not be solely viewed in a black and white light in media but also how public perception is reinforced by this.
The issue with Mary I’s continued portrayal in the horrible histories series means that there his the negative portrayal of Mary whereas the uplifting of Elizabeth I. As in the majority of the early series from 2009-2013. The majority of the program when looking at the Tudor Dynasty focuses on Elizabeth especially in regards to the Tudors song. Mary I gets a brief mention and in this reinforces her persecution of protestants. Yet Elizabeth I in comparison is highlighted by the Spanish Armada 1588.
I realise that this is a children’s TV show but let us not forget the fact that Elizabeth I grew the slave trade and colonialism. Though I know that Elizabeth and England were not the only monarchs nor country to be involved with the discovery of the ‘new world’ then profiteering off of this. Though Horrible Histories choses to use Elizabeth I to narrate the Tudor story through the song which takes the spotlight off her older sister and first queen Mary I. With the spotlight placed on Elizabeth through this song it means that there is reinforcement towards children to prefer Elizabeth I over Mary I. The issue is when a TV show although comedic reinforces a false narrative especially when historians such as Strong have worked so hard to try and change the perception of individuals such as Mary I in academic circles. This should ultimately filter down to public perception.
Mary I was far more than many realise first queen regnant of England she is powerful yet dismissed by the Victorian narrative that most media portrayals including Horrible Histories choose to take.
Mary I’s marriage in 1554 highlights how Winchester as close to the coast was an ideal place for Phillip II of Spain and Mary I due to the fact that it was north of the port at Southampton, as conveyed by Woodacre (2021). The cathedral was an important centre for Mary I as the old centre of Anglo Saxon England. In the cathedral there is still the chair that Mary I used for the feast after her wedding which took place at Wolvesey Castle. Her power and determination is something to be admired due to the fact that despite the Protestant injunctions, as highlighted by Cromwell then the regency council of Edward VI. Despite the injunctions put in place she stayed dedicated to her faith, though this is neglected by Horrible Histories and pushes the narrative that Mary I should be viewed through black and white lenses. Yet in comparison Elizabeth I is debatably viewed through rose tinted glasses. Especially when she is portrayed through Horrible Histories, Mary I is often forgotten rather than having to deal with the legacy of the Henrician Reformation that harmed her religious beliefs which ultimately demonised her. Then Elizabeth I is praised for upholding the legacy of her father (Henry VIII). Whereas Mary I is viewed through the lens that she did so much damage yet it was contemporary sources and their interpretation of her that led to this view. This meant that the country was fearful that another Mary I would happen. Therefore the Bill of Rights 1689.
However, Elizabeth I arguably did more damage for religion even with her use of Adiaphoron and the religious settlement of 1559 with this tolerance did more harm due to the executions that Elizabeth ordered. Though her reign was longer than Mary I’s here imprisonment and execution numbers were larger. Yet people dismiss this due to the fact that she is protestant and most of the contemporary sources used to highlight the positives that historical media portrayal places Elizabeth I in. Though when placed next to each other as highlighted in the Tudors song in Horrible Histories Mary I takes the perception of being inherently bad and Elizabeth I takes the role of being inherently ‘good’ as she is perceived as a saviour for saving the country out of the clutches of catholicism. Which reinforces to children that Mary I is inherently bad which is not the case she was a strong female monarch and deserves to be recognised for her work to preserve her faith and is scapegoated by Protestants for the failures of the Henrician reformation.
This therefore displays how Mary I’s portrayal in comparison to her half sister Elizabeth I means that even childhood shows should display accuracy. This is in regards to not displaying the full story which means that the public perception will still hold these negative attitudes towards Mary I meaning that she will be referred colloquially as ‘Bloody Mary’. When in fact there is much more to her life than these perceptions created by Foxe in Acts and Monuments 1563. Whereas her marriage at Winchester Cathedral highlights a different gender dynamic in regards to early modern women and their role in marriage. This should be the take that shows such as Horrible Histories should take as Mary I was a determined and head strong individual who is lost to the contemporary sources.
I realise that Horrible Histories ‘Tudor song’ is meant to engage children but then if we are teaching them the outdated view on Mary I then they are going to still hold a negative perception of her. Further, the song was performed and written in 2009 and historiography has changed and the perceptions of Mary’s reign has been revised. The recognition that Elizabeth I is not the ‘good’ sister in comparison just for being Protestant, Elizabeth I faced a multitude of economic problems increased persecution and introduced harsh poor laws as highlighted by the 1601 Poor Laws. Though Mary I deserves better recognition than she currently has due to both media portrayals and knowledge of her in public history. Although her reign was only for four years in comparison to the section of Edward VI, this is reinforcing the ‘bad’ influence Mary had in the ‘mid Tudor crisis’. However, it is arguable that Mary I had to deal with the aftermath caused by the regency of Edward VI. This highlights how Mary I is not single handedly accountable for the issues she faced during her reign, though faces blame due to anti-catholic sentiment.
In conclusion, though Horrible Histories is fun there should be some skepticism due to the portrayal of Mary I. Though public history and media portrayal of Mary I reinforces the concept of ‘Bloody Mary’. Especially as this neglects her character as an early modern queen as well as the importance of her marriage in changing the royal narrative towards marriage. Mary I is important to influencing the changes in the perception of queenship which Elizabeth I builds on the foundations of. This being said Horrible Histories is entertaining but is important in critiquing how the public perceive the reign of Mary I. Therefore, public perception and media portrayals in regards to Mary I should be bought forward to represent the current historiography towards her. As well as teaching the new generation of children this perspective on her instead of reinforcing an outdated narrative.
Thank you for reading, I hope you enjoyed :)
The next post will be dedicated to Early Modern Witchcraft!
Comments