What do you think?
Rate this book
Bloody Mary: The Life of Mary Tudor
Book by Erickson, Carolly
528 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1978
82 people are currently reading
5908 people want to read
About the author
Carolly Erickson
32 books709 followersDistinguished historian Carolly Erickson is the author of The Hidden Diary of Marie Antoinette, The First Elizabeth, Great Catherine, Alexandra and many other prize-winning works of fiction and nonfiction. She lives in Hawaii.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/caroll...
http://us.macmillan.com/author/caroll...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 105 reviews
May 12, 2017
Erickson lost a lot of my goodwill with her preface to this edition (1998), when she said that she didn't feel the need to update the text from its original form (1978) because none of the scholarship had changed. In fact, it's changed dramatically-- both between 1978 and 1998 and from 1998 to now. Immediately I was worried that this book would just be stale and untimely, but that ended up being the least of its problems.
Also in the preface, Erickson says that she called the books in this series "Bloody Mary," "Mistress Anne," "Great Harry," and "Fair Eliza" because that's how contemporaries knew their respective subjects. With respect to Mary I, that is just... not true. The nickname "Bloody Mary" arose after her death. It isn't a good sign when your readers finish the preface already having noticed two major issues with your work-- and unfortunately that kind of slipshod scholarship permeates this entire book. An egregious and obvious example is Erickson's use of source material; she leans heavily on Foxe's writings, which are about 18 different kinds of unreliable, but never notes for the reader that, e.g.: (1) the writings were published after Mary's death; (2) they were based on secondhand information at best, particularly regarding Mary's personal life; (3) Foxe was an ardent protestant with specific reason to loathe Mary and her policies; and (4) Foxe was furthermore writing during the reign of a monarch (Elizabeth I) at pains to propagandize her reverse of Mary's policies, including a return to protestantism and, eventually, a war with Spain. In fact, most of this book is dedicated to the protestant-catholic conflict that the author suggests (beginning with the very title of the book) defines Mary and her reign. Even if you take that as true, there are frankly far superior books on that conflict. Contributing to my lack of enjoyment was the fact that I happened to be reading one such superior book-- Fires of Faith: Catholic England Under Mary Tudor-- at the same time.
Erickson has a bad habit of implying or even boldly asserting facts with little relation to reality-- and not just about Mary herself. Erickson argues that Henry VIII wrote his "Assertio" for shaky political reasons rather than theological interest, bizarrely suggesting that he did it because he was envious that the French monarch got the title of "Most Christian" and he wanted a title of his own. I've read the "Assertio" and other primary sources myself, and I second the overwhelming consensus in the historiography that Henry actually was a person of deep religious conviction, especially in his youth. Flippantly saying otherwise without substantiation is another credibility blow, to my mind; but then Erickson tops herself with the (equally unsubstantiated) claim that Catherine of Aragon "died of grief," because her heart was blackened and had a large tumor on it when her autopsy was performed. This might hop right over "unscientific" into "anti-scientific." Literally every modern source I have ever read concludes that Catherine probably died of cancer. Erickson's treatment of Mary's ailments is no better; she attributes much of the Queen's ill health to "melancholia" and offers nothing of interest as to why Mary had two false pregnancies. Her lone conclusion is that Mary may have had irregular menstrual periods, like her mother.
Overall, what concerns me about this book is that readers might very well walk away less informed than they were when they opened it. You have to know a bit about Mary already to recognize the problematic use of sources and the ill-founded conclusions that contradict quality scholarship elsewhere. Honestly, anyone looking for a trustworthy but readable exploration of this period would do better to pick up just about anything by Alison Weir rather than this book.
Also in the preface, Erickson says that she called the books in this series "Bloody Mary," "Mistress Anne," "Great Harry," and "Fair Eliza" because that's how contemporaries knew their respective subjects. With respect to Mary I, that is just... not true. The nickname "Bloody Mary" arose after her death. It isn't a good sign when your readers finish the preface already having noticed two major issues with your work-- and unfortunately that kind of slipshod scholarship permeates this entire book. An egregious and obvious example is Erickson's use of source material; she leans heavily on Foxe's writings, which are about 18 different kinds of unreliable, but never notes for the reader that, e.g.: (1) the writings were published after Mary's death; (2) they were based on secondhand information at best, particularly regarding Mary's personal life; (3) Foxe was an ardent protestant with specific reason to loathe Mary and her policies; and (4) Foxe was furthermore writing during the reign of a monarch (Elizabeth I) at pains to propagandize her reverse of Mary's policies, including a return to protestantism and, eventually, a war with Spain. In fact, most of this book is dedicated to the protestant-catholic conflict that the author suggests (beginning with the very title of the book) defines Mary and her reign. Even if you take that as true, there are frankly far superior books on that conflict. Contributing to my lack of enjoyment was the fact that I happened to be reading one such superior book-- Fires of Faith: Catholic England Under Mary Tudor-- at the same time.
Erickson has a bad habit of implying or even boldly asserting facts with little relation to reality-- and not just about Mary herself. Erickson argues that Henry VIII wrote his "Assertio" for shaky political reasons rather than theological interest, bizarrely suggesting that he did it because he was envious that the French monarch got the title of "Most Christian" and he wanted a title of his own. I've read the "Assertio" and other primary sources myself, and I second the overwhelming consensus in the historiography that Henry actually was a person of deep religious conviction, especially in his youth. Flippantly saying otherwise without substantiation is another credibility blow, to my mind; but then Erickson tops herself with the (equally unsubstantiated) claim that Catherine of Aragon "died of grief," because her heart was blackened and had a large tumor on it when her autopsy was performed. This might hop right over "unscientific" into "anti-scientific." Literally every modern source I have ever read concludes that Catherine probably died of cancer. Erickson's treatment of Mary's ailments is no better; she attributes much of the Queen's ill health to "melancholia" and offers nothing of interest as to why Mary had two false pregnancies. Her lone conclusion is that Mary may have had irregular menstrual periods, like her mother.
Overall, what concerns me about this book is that readers might very well walk away less informed than they were when they opened it. You have to know a bit about Mary already to recognize the problematic use of sources and the ill-founded conclusions that contradict quality scholarship elsewhere. Honestly, anyone looking for a trustworthy but readable exploration of this period would do better to pick up just about anything by Alison Weir rather than this book.
March 20, 2014
As a lover of all Tudor non fiction, I was greatly disappointed with this book. In reading it I felt that Erickson wanted to write about about the Tudor reign but felt it too much so she just picked one subject. But for much of the book the information she gives is about other Tudor people instead of telling Mary's stories. She is not very critical of her sources, many of the facts she tells the readers have been disproved by many credible historians. I will never read another of her books.
June 4, 2018
It’s easy to see why Erickson’s books have become so popular. She clearly demonstrates the political dynamics in the context of the culture of the time, while being ultimately sympathetic to her subjects.
As the only early heir to the throne, Mary held a position of privilege and power during her childhood. Katherine,her mother, it seemed was unable to have a male issue, and was having difficulty delivering any live child. Henry, being King, could take any kind of mistress he wished, and had a bastard son by one of his ladies who was rewarded with a marriage to one of his nobles.
Her education was vigorous, if unenlightened. Her teacher Vives, the Spanish humanist designed a plan of study that included Greek, Latin, and for amusement, biographies of self-sacrificing women. Vives had written in his On the Instruction of a Christian Woman that girls needed to remember they were inherently “the devil’s instrument, and not Christ’s.” This idea that women were inherently sinful was to form the foundation of her training with protection of her virginity uppermost in their plans. (Erasmus at first believed educating women was a waste of time, then changed his mind to believe that education would provide them with the knowledge and importance of protecting such an “inestimable treasure.”)
One wonders if her training and preparation for betrothal to the Emperor Charles in all things Spanish, might have colored views and biased her so against Protestantism, but that’s merely speculative on my part. In the four first years of her betrothal (she was only seven and was to depart for marriage to Charles at twelve) she was schooled in everything necessary to make her a perfect Spanish lady. As with so many of these alliances, it didn’t last. Problem for Harry was that a woman’s property, titles, incomes, and dowry all passed to the husband with marriage. The ramifications became more than a little disconcerting. If Henry died without an heir and the crown passed to Mary, who had already been anointed the Princess of Wales, the first time that position had ever been given to a woman, would Charles also inherit the English title?
Given that Katherine would be unlikely to bear another child, and even though Henry was having his way with Thomas Boleyn’s married daughter, Mary Carey, it’s no wonder he began to scheme a way to dispense with Katherine. And who should join the picture but soon-to-be headless, Anne Boleyn.
But back to Mary after the execution of Anne, Mary was gradually restored to the good graces of the King (thanks also to Henry’s new wife, Jane Seymour, who was to bear him Edward. But Mary had to dissemble to worm her way back into court. She signed the certification of submission all the while writing elsewhere and to the Pope that her submission to the King with regard the church and succession was all balderdash. She constantly lied to Henry about it when asked claiming it was all for God, the end justifying the means.
The title is perhaps a bit misleading. The book really focuses little on her persecution of Protestants, although she did encourage their burning at the stake, often gruesomely. It all started to go badly following her marriage to Philip of Spain. The Spanish were generally despised by most of the English and even though Philip made every effort to be conciliatory and on his best behavior, following Mary's false pregnancy, he couldn't wait to move to Flanders where he was more at home as a King, something he wasn't really in England.
I couldn't help but wonder, if Mary, with her obsessive religiosity, wasn't in a bit over her head.
A marvelous read.
As the only early heir to the throne, Mary held a position of privilege and power during her childhood. Katherine,her mother, it seemed was unable to have a male issue, and was having difficulty delivering any live child. Henry, being King, could take any kind of mistress he wished, and had a bastard son by one of his ladies who was rewarded with a marriage to one of his nobles.
Her education was vigorous, if unenlightened. Her teacher Vives, the Spanish humanist designed a plan of study that included Greek, Latin, and for amusement, biographies of self-sacrificing women. Vives had written in his On the Instruction of a Christian Woman that girls needed to remember they were inherently “the devil’s instrument, and not Christ’s.” This idea that women were inherently sinful was to form the foundation of her training with protection of her virginity uppermost in their plans. (Erasmus at first believed educating women was a waste of time, then changed his mind to believe that education would provide them with the knowledge and importance of protecting such an “inestimable treasure.”)
One wonders if her training and preparation for betrothal to the Emperor Charles in all things Spanish, might have colored views and biased her so against Protestantism, but that’s merely speculative on my part. In the four first years of her betrothal (she was only seven and was to depart for marriage to Charles at twelve) she was schooled in everything necessary to make her a perfect Spanish lady. As with so many of these alliances, it didn’t last. Problem for Harry was that a woman’s property, titles, incomes, and dowry all passed to the husband with marriage. The ramifications became more than a little disconcerting. If Henry died without an heir and the crown passed to Mary, who had already been anointed the Princess of Wales, the first time that position had ever been given to a woman, would Charles also inherit the English title?
Given that Katherine would be unlikely to bear another child, and even though Henry was having his way with Thomas Boleyn’s married daughter, Mary Carey, it’s no wonder he began to scheme a way to dispense with Katherine. And who should join the picture but soon-to-be headless, Anne Boleyn.
But back to Mary after the execution of Anne, Mary was gradually restored to the good graces of the King (thanks also to Henry’s new wife, Jane Seymour, who was to bear him Edward. But Mary had to dissemble to worm her way back into court. She signed the certification of submission all the while writing elsewhere and to the Pope that her submission to the King with regard the church and succession was all balderdash. She constantly lied to Henry about it when asked claiming it was all for God, the end justifying the means.
The title is perhaps a bit misleading. The book really focuses little on her persecution of Protestants, although she did encourage their burning at the stake, often gruesomely. It all started to go badly following her marriage to Philip of Spain. The Spanish were generally despised by most of the English and even though Philip made every effort to be conciliatory and on his best behavior, following Mary's false pregnancy, he couldn't wait to move to Flanders where he was more at home as a King, something he wasn't really in England.
I couldn't help but wonder, if Mary, with her obsessive religiosity, wasn't in a bit over her head.
A marvelous read.
October 16, 2021
Prima di questo libro, ho letto la biografia di Anna Bolena scritta dalla stessa autrice e mi aveva molto delusa per quella che mi sembrava una descrizione un po' troppo sbrigativa del personaggio, delusione accresciuta dalla palese disapprovazione dell'autrice per il personaggio.
Questa biografia di Maria I invece ha incontrato molto di più il mio gusto, una biografia completa dalla nascita fino alla morte, molto dettagliata. Dà un po' l'impressione che a parte essere una fervente cattolica, Maria la Sanguinaria non sia poi quel personaggio così interessante da meritare un soprannome così significativo. Sicuramente una testarda, che portava avanti il suo ideale fino alla fine, ma l'interesse alla sua figura deriva dalle vicende dei suoi genitori e dall'essere stata in mezzo tra il regno del padre e quello straordinario della sorella Elisabetta I.
Sicuramente molto interessante è lo spaccato della società inglese in questo periodo che viene disegnato dal libro. Un affresco completo soprattutto per quanto riguarda la religione e i rapporti cattolici-protestanti, probabilmente l'ultimo periodo in cui il cattolicesimo è stato religione di stato in Inghilterra.
Siccome non c'è due senza tre, adesso è il turno della biografia di Elisabetta I, sempre della stessa autrice!
E poi dalla famiglia Tudor, non certo la famiglia del Mulino Bianco, sarà tutto :)
Questa biografia di Maria I invece ha incontrato molto di più il mio gusto, una biografia completa dalla nascita fino alla morte, molto dettagliata. Dà un po' l'impressione che a parte essere una fervente cattolica, Maria la Sanguinaria non sia poi quel personaggio così interessante da meritare un soprannome così significativo. Sicuramente una testarda, che portava avanti il suo ideale fino alla fine, ma l'interesse alla sua figura deriva dalle vicende dei suoi genitori e dall'essere stata in mezzo tra il regno del padre e quello straordinario della sorella Elisabetta I.
Sicuramente molto interessante è lo spaccato della società inglese in questo periodo che viene disegnato dal libro. Un affresco completo soprattutto per quanto riguarda la religione e i rapporti cattolici-protestanti, probabilmente l'ultimo periodo in cui il cattolicesimo è stato religione di stato in Inghilterra.
Siccome non c'è due senza tre, adesso è il turno della biografia di Elisabetta I, sempre della stessa autrice!
E poi dalla famiglia Tudor, non certo la famiglia del Mulino Bianco, sarà tutto :)
February 23, 2014
This may not represent current research, but is still a highly well-written and easily readable biography of Mary Tudor, ill-fated Catholic queen of England.
A very tragic story of a child growing up in the shadow of Henry VIII. She overcomes great odds in her accession to the throne of England, but all her hopes are terribly disappointed and she dies within five years.
Mary is far more complex than the ironically chosen title, "Bloody Mary," would seem to suggest. Over 300 Protestants burned as heretics during her reign, but how did it come to that? Was she truly to blame?
Of course, there's a great deal more to her life than this episode. The Mary emerging in these pages is a very human, gifted, tragically flawed individual whose great vision and hopes seem almost fated for disappointment. Her greatest sin? Perhpas it was falling in love with Philip II of Spain, rather than seeking a less fulfilling but more politically effective marriage. Or maybe it was in defiantly remaining a faithful Catholic, and desiring to correct the abberations and innovations creeping in since her father's divorce from her mother.
A fascinating study that reveals just how complicated moral virtue, fate, freedom, chance, historical/cultural environment can all be in shaping who we are and where we end up.
A very tragic story of a child growing up in the shadow of Henry VIII. She overcomes great odds in her accession to the throne of England, but all her hopes are terribly disappointed and she dies within five years.
Mary is far more complex than the ironically chosen title, "Bloody Mary," would seem to suggest. Over 300 Protestants burned as heretics during her reign, but how did it come to that? Was she truly to blame?
Of course, there's a great deal more to her life than this episode. The Mary emerging in these pages is a very human, gifted, tragically flawed individual whose great vision and hopes seem almost fated for disappointment. Her greatest sin? Perhpas it was falling in love with Philip II of Spain, rather than seeking a less fulfilling but more politically effective marriage. Or maybe it was in defiantly remaining a faithful Catholic, and desiring to correct the abberations and innovations creeping in since her father's divorce from her mother.
A fascinating study that reveals just how complicated moral virtue, fate, freedom, chance, historical/cultural environment can all be in shaping who we are and where we end up.
September 20, 2019
Non è neanche malvagio, nonostante tutto. Non ha il pressapochismo delle biografie popolari che affollano la collana di cui il libro fa parte. Mestiere ce n'è. Ma è troppo lungo, troppo dettagliato nelle faccende private (le meno accertabili, dopo tutto) e troppo veloce sulla attività di governo di Maria.
Utile perchè, pur non essendo lo scopo dell'autrice, il libro fa capire molto bene che 'anche i ricchi piangono' e che, nei secoli scorsi, le vite da re e da principi non erano una passeggiata (figuriamoci le vite di chi re e principe, poi, non era!).
Il non esplicito (ma palese) tentativo di ricollocare e ridimensionare la leggenda nera della sovrana inglese (che negli ultimi decenni la storiografia ha decisamente riabilitato) è condotto con discrezione ma con una certa precisione, pur trattandosi di un libro che ha più di quaranta anni.
Del resto il soprannome postumo di Sanguinaria le fu appiccicato da quelli che 'avevano vinto'. Se avesse vinto lei le cose sarebbero andate in altro modo e non solo per il soprannome.
Utile perchè, pur non essendo lo scopo dell'autrice, il libro fa capire molto bene che 'anche i ricchi piangono' e che, nei secoli scorsi, le vite da re e da principi non erano una passeggiata (figuriamoci le vite di chi re e principe, poi, non era!).
Il non esplicito (ma palese) tentativo di ricollocare e ridimensionare la leggenda nera della sovrana inglese (che negli ultimi decenni la storiografia ha decisamente riabilitato) è condotto con discrezione ma con una certa precisione, pur trattandosi di un libro che ha più di quaranta anni.
Del resto il soprannome postumo di Sanguinaria le fu appiccicato da quelli che 'avevano vinto'. Se avesse vinto lei le cose sarebbero andate in altro modo e non solo per il soprannome.
April 15, 2013
The book is very interesting because objectively demonstrates how the adjective "Bloody" misrepresented the truth about Mary's government, showing instead her uncommon knowledge and political skills for a 16th-Century woman.
Well-written and full of details, the book does not give any room to gossiping or myths that were mostly inherited from a sexist society which struggled to accept the first Queen of England, not just a mere queen consort or regent.
The scope is wider than the title would suggest, since also Henry VIII’s years are included, and it develops as a path from the condition of Catherine of Aragon, repudiated by her beloved husband, through the other wives of Henry VIII (disposed in various fashions), ending with Elisabeth I as the first unmarried Queen of England.
Recommended, before watching any tv show re the Tudors.
Well-written and full of details, the book does not give any room to gossiping or myths that were mostly inherited from a sexist society which struggled to accept the first Queen of England, not just a mere queen consort or regent.
The scope is wider than the title would suggest, since also Henry VIII’s years are included, and it develops as a path from the condition of Catherine of Aragon, repudiated by her beloved husband, through the other wives of Henry VIII (disposed in various fashions), ending with Elisabeth I as the first unmarried Queen of England.
Recommended, before watching any tv show re the Tudors.
January 13, 2016
This book is about the life and times of Mary Tudor, first crowned queen of England. Whenever I read of Tudor times, Mary seemed to be in the background and briefly mentioned, being overshadowed by her father and brother before her and the Golden Age reign of her sister Elizabeth. I was curious to find out more about her than besides her false pregnancies and the burning of Protestant "heretics". This book really helped me more to understand the very troubled and sad life of this queen. Against all odds, she rose to the throne and stood her ground against her father and brother's death threats. She was a woman of turmoil and her life was sprinkled with joyous times, but about all else she was faithful. Faithful to her God, her church, and her adulterous husband. I enjoyed this book because it read so much more like a colorful novel than a book full of black and white information. Wonderful book for any Tudor fan.
July 31, 2017
I probably would have chosen a different bio had I read some reviews first, but this was the only book with an audio version available. It was fine for getting the broad picture of her reign, but Ishould probably pick up something else about her in the future.
November 8, 2011
Mary started as a delicate little girl who overcame many hurdles and became Ruler of England. Carolly Erickson brilliantly illustrates Mary’s life in Bloody Mary.
The life of Mary, daughter to King Henry and Katherine of Argon, was filled with backstabbing, power hungry people and danger around every corner. Throughout her “charmed” childhood Mary was taught to be a “slave” to men. Her tutor, Vives, taught her that all women are inferior to men and that women are “inherently the devils instrument, and not Christ’s”. Mary also saw her dad mistreating her mom while they were going through a “divorce”. When Mary became Ruler she was trying to fix England’s debt, while fighting off many illnesses.
Bloody Mary is a very factual book written about the life of Mary. Although the book tells a lot about Mary’s life fairly, the title does not. I think the title shows the authors opinion and doesn’t reflect positively on Mary. Although the book was filled with mostly facts, there are some opinions scattered here and there in the book. A quote showing the authors opinion, “For Mary the tortuous years of royal divorce were a time of shocks, disillusionment and anguish”. The author didn’t know exactly what Mary was thinking or feelings at the time, didn’t have proof and wasn’t there. Another example, “Charles, who was anything but continent and was by this time, considering marrying someone else…” This shows the authors opinions on Charles, because he only saw Mary as a diplomatic alliance and not as a bride.
Carolly Erickson is known for her nonfiction books about famous historical figures. I think she did a very good job on Bloody Mary. Carolly Erickson tells Mary’s story in third person. The book is sorted into parts and chapters. There are five parts, one for each period of Mary’s life. The chapters begin with a little poem, written in Old English. These poems relate to the chapters written about that time in Mary’s life. The book was very detailed and sometimes droned on and on about facts. It gave descriptions about the wars that went on, but mostly focused on the social aspect of royal life, specifically Mary’s.
“The Lady Mary is proclaimed Queen!” Through all the adversity Mary was exposed to, she still became the First Female Ruler of England”
The life of Mary, daughter to King Henry and Katherine of Argon, was filled with backstabbing, power hungry people and danger around every corner. Throughout her “charmed” childhood Mary was taught to be a “slave” to men. Her tutor, Vives, taught her that all women are inferior to men and that women are “inherently the devils instrument, and not Christ’s”. Mary also saw her dad mistreating her mom while they were going through a “divorce”. When Mary became Ruler she was trying to fix England’s debt, while fighting off many illnesses.
Bloody Mary is a very factual book written about the life of Mary. Although the book tells a lot about Mary’s life fairly, the title does not. I think the title shows the authors opinion and doesn’t reflect positively on Mary. Although the book was filled with mostly facts, there are some opinions scattered here and there in the book. A quote showing the authors opinion, “For Mary the tortuous years of royal divorce were a time of shocks, disillusionment and anguish”. The author didn’t know exactly what Mary was thinking or feelings at the time, didn’t have proof and wasn’t there. Another example, “Charles, who was anything but continent and was by this time, considering marrying someone else…” This shows the authors opinions on Charles, because he only saw Mary as a diplomatic alliance and not as a bride.
Carolly Erickson is known for her nonfiction books about famous historical figures. I think she did a very good job on Bloody Mary. Carolly Erickson tells Mary’s story in third person. The book is sorted into parts and chapters. There are five parts, one for each period of Mary’s life. The chapters begin with a little poem, written in Old English. These poems relate to the chapters written about that time in Mary’s life. The book was very detailed and sometimes droned on and on about facts. It gave descriptions about the wars that went on, but mostly focused on the social aspect of royal life, specifically Mary’s.
“The Lady Mary is proclaimed Queen!” Through all the adversity Mary was exposed to, she still became the First Female Ruler of England”
December 11, 2013
Ho tanta invidia per le anime belle che sono seriamente convinte che Maria sia stata l'unica sovrana 'sanguinaria' della Storia, ma pure solo dell'Inghilterra o della sua famiglia, tanto per restringere il cerchio. Ho invidia di quell'ingenuità d'animo, di quello sguardo vergine sul mondo, della capacità di farsi conquistare dallo slogan e di accettare le verità impacchettate e servite col fiocco. La vita di Maria Tudor, figlia di Enrico VIII e di quella gran donna che fu la sua prima moglie, è una delle cose più tristi, miserabili e miserevoli che si possano leggere. Se avete compassione, vi verrà voglia di cancellare col pennarello tutti i "Bloody" e i "Sanguinaria" che troverete in giro, e di denunciare chiunque abbia chiamato "Bloody Mary" il drink color sangue. Se non avete compassione, da schifosi che siete, ne riderete. In ogni caso, magari, ma dico magari, capirete che a inquadrare la cosa storicamente, il rogo dei protestanti non era niente di diverso da quello che facevano tutti i re e principi e signorotti con un minimo di potere. Cambiava solo, come direbbe Renzi (a proposito di slogan), la squadra in cui giocavano. Maria era ormai sul versante sbagliato della Storia. Chissà com'è che Tommaso Moro è Santo e lei è la Sanguinaria.
February 11, 2008
Despite the sensationalist title, this is a reasoned, well pieced together biography of Henry VIII's eldest child. Most of the book is set during Henry's reign, and Erickson provides far too much detail therein. I don't really need to know the mechanics of battles fought by Mary's father, particularly when Mary's own reign takes up only ~100 pages. Erickson focuses on odd details (she documents pretty much every uprising ever, no matter how small) while ignoring others (Mary's presence in the famous dynastic tapestry, Catherine Parr's attempts to bring the family together, Francis Brandon's close relationship with Mary that led to her pardon and her daughter's execution). Erickson reminded me that Mary loved sumptuous fabrics and jewels (a character quirk often forgetten by dramatists, who love putting her in dour black), but passes over her relationship with Elizabeth and everything to do with religious prosecution on Mary's part. I didn't always agree with her choices, but Erickson's scholarship is good.
April 25, 2019
A humanizing portrait of a complicated and deeply sad woman.
September 1, 2025
Mary Tudor is known as the first reigning queen of England. However, she left behind a black legacy. She has been known in history as Bloody Mary. Yet this biography of Mary Tudor has proven that Mary Tudor was in fact a tragic and pitiful queen. Even though Mary Tudor was intelligent, she was vastly unprepared for her role as queen.
Mary Tudor is greatly disliked in popular culture. Before reading this biography of Mary Tudor, I thought that I would come away with it by liking her less. Instead, I greatly sympathized with her as a person. She was once the favored daughter of King Henry VIII of England and his first wife, Queen Catherine of Aragon. However, King Henry VIII illegitimatized her when he married Queen Anne Boleyn. Mary Tudor experienced many tragedies before becoming queen. Once she was Queen, she still faced many difficulties including her disastrous marriage to King Phillip II of Spain. Mary Tudor was staunched in her Catholic faith, and she strived to make England a Catholic nation. While I greatly abhorred her actions, I could not but feel pity for England’s lonely queen.
Overall, this was a very comprehensive and intimate biography of the infamous Queen Mary Tudor of England. This book took a long time for me to read. I read this periodically over the course of two years. This was because I found the book to be very drawn out and tedious at times. I also found some inaccuracies which bothered me a little. Nevertheless, it was still a very informative and enjoyable read! It made me want to read more biographies of Queen Mary Tudor! I also found Mrs. Erickson’s nonfiction to be more entertaining than her historical fiction novels! I can’t wait to read her biography on Queen Elizabeth I! I recommend this book for fans of David Starkey, Julia Fox, and Leanda de Lisle!
Mary Tudor is greatly disliked in popular culture. Before reading this biography of Mary Tudor, I thought that I would come away with it by liking her less. Instead, I greatly sympathized with her as a person. She was once the favored daughter of King Henry VIII of England and his first wife, Queen Catherine of Aragon. However, King Henry VIII illegitimatized her when he married Queen Anne Boleyn. Mary Tudor experienced many tragedies before becoming queen. Once she was Queen, she still faced many difficulties including her disastrous marriage to King Phillip II of Spain. Mary Tudor was staunched in her Catholic faith, and she strived to make England a Catholic nation. While I greatly abhorred her actions, I could not but feel pity for England’s lonely queen.
Overall, this was a very comprehensive and intimate biography of the infamous Queen Mary Tudor of England. This book took a long time for me to read. I read this periodically over the course of two years. This was because I found the book to be very drawn out and tedious at times. I also found some inaccuracies which bothered me a little. Nevertheless, it was still a very informative and enjoyable read! It made me want to read more biographies of Queen Mary Tudor! I also found Mrs. Erickson’s nonfiction to be more entertaining than her historical fiction novels! I can’t wait to read her biography on Queen Elizabeth I! I recommend this book for fans of David Starkey, Julia Fox, and Leanda de Lisle!
November 7, 2023
“La leggenda narra che se davanti allo specchio ripeti per tre volte il nome di Bloody Mary lei verrà ad ucciderti…”
Io non so chi sia stato il primo a mettere in giro questa credenza popolare ma molto probabilmente fu un protestante spaventato o che voleva spaventare i figli disubbidienti.
A scuola ci insegnano a identificare Maria I Tudor come “la Sanguinaria” molto probabilmente perché non hanno letto questo libro!
Io mi sono innamorata di una donna forte e risoluta, di una degna erede di Edoardo VIII e della più amata sorella Elisabetta I. Questo volume dedicato alla sua vita mi ha appassionato molto di più di quello letto in precedenza su Anna Bolena. Molto approfondito, chiaro, lineare, coinvolgente,accurato. L’autrice a mio avviso riesce pienamente a rivendicare la figura di Maria tant’è che non la definirei più la Sanguinaria, ma la Martire!
Cresciuta in un periodo non proprio felice della storia inglese: in un epoca di guerre, carestie, lotte di classe, epidemie mortali; mentalmente e fisicamente spossata dal divorzio dei genitori e dalla lotta di credo, dal carattere esageratamente forte del padre, dalla sua assoluta devozione alla madre abbandonata ed alla loro religione; soppiantata dal ruolo di erede solo perché donna e sballottata da una promessa di matrimonio all’altra è comunque riuscita a mantenere il suo carattere forte e determinato, la morale alta e la corona (seppur per poco tempo) sulla testa.
Se l’autrice era armata di buone intenzioni per me c’è riuscita a pieno! Ho trovato questo libro scorrevole come quasi un romanzo, accurato ed approfondito in ogni sua parte, qualche spiegazione anche prolissa qualche volta, ma utile per contestualizzare a tutto tondo questa donna e questo periodo storico così affascinante per me.
Io lo promuovo a pieni voti, e sinceramente non mi fermo qui!
Io non so chi sia stato il primo a mettere in giro questa credenza popolare ma molto probabilmente fu un protestante spaventato o che voleva spaventare i figli disubbidienti.
A scuola ci insegnano a identificare Maria I Tudor come “la Sanguinaria” molto probabilmente perché non hanno letto questo libro!
Io mi sono innamorata di una donna forte e risoluta, di una degna erede di Edoardo VIII e della più amata sorella Elisabetta I. Questo volume dedicato alla sua vita mi ha appassionato molto di più di quello letto in precedenza su Anna Bolena. Molto approfondito, chiaro, lineare, coinvolgente,accurato. L’autrice a mio avviso riesce pienamente a rivendicare la figura di Maria tant’è che non la definirei più la Sanguinaria, ma la Martire!
Cresciuta in un periodo non proprio felice della storia inglese: in un epoca di guerre, carestie, lotte di classe, epidemie mortali; mentalmente e fisicamente spossata dal divorzio dei genitori e dalla lotta di credo, dal carattere esageratamente forte del padre, dalla sua assoluta devozione alla madre abbandonata ed alla loro religione; soppiantata dal ruolo di erede solo perché donna e sballottata da una promessa di matrimonio all’altra è comunque riuscita a mantenere il suo carattere forte e determinato, la morale alta e la corona (seppur per poco tempo) sulla testa.
Se l’autrice era armata di buone intenzioni per me c’è riuscita a pieno! Ho trovato questo libro scorrevole come quasi un romanzo, accurato ed approfondito in ogni sua parte, qualche spiegazione anche prolissa qualche volta, ma utile per contestualizzare a tutto tondo questa donna e questo periodo storico così affascinante per me.
Io lo promuovo a pieni voti, e sinceramente non mi fermo qui!
April 30, 2020
While somewhat informative, I’m not sure why the author titled it Bloody Mary. From her writing, I would have thought that she would have preferred Saint Mary, because that’s certainly how she comes across. She can do nothing wrong, and everything she touches turns to gold. Her reign is without parallel, with statements like “Not since the death of Henry VIII had the ruler’s personality, taste and style so dominated court life,” sprinkled throughout the book. No matter that her brother's reign, the only one to reign between Henry VIII and Mary, was only seven years long.
Or the statement regarding Mary’s marriage to Philip, that they were reported to be “bound together by such deep love that the marriage may be expected to be a perfect union.” Erickson describes that statement as being “somewhat inexact.” As the future would show, those words couldn’t have been further from the truth.
Later on, Mary’s burning of Protestant “heretics” is described as her “reputed cruelty to the Protestants.” Even worse, is the author’s use of the trite excuse that “these people were brought to the stake in an age habituated to violence.” That didn’t seem to be the way the people of England saw it, even at the time.
Erickson has written books about other Tudors. I won’t be reading them.
Or the statement regarding Mary’s marriage to Philip, that they were reported to be “bound together by such deep love that the marriage may be expected to be a perfect union.” Erickson describes that statement as being “somewhat inexact.” As the future would show, those words couldn’t have been further from the truth.
Later on, Mary’s burning of Protestant “heretics” is described as her “reputed cruelty to the Protestants.” Even worse, is the author’s use of the trite excuse that “these people were brought to the stake in an age habituated to violence.” That didn’t seem to be the way the people of England saw it, even at the time.
Erickson has written books about other Tudors. I won’t be reading them.
November 2, 2015
A solidly researched book about Mary Tudor that provides an overview of her life from birth to death. I thought that Erickson did a nice job using the results of his research to tell Mary's story. Some of the sentences in the book could have used some editing, but overall, I thought that Erickson did a nice job here.
I also liked the fact that Erickson wove in some good analysis of what it was like to be a woman ruler of a country during medieval times. Interestingly, many of the stereotypes used then (such as, women are weak, emotional and moody) to describe why women make poor leaders still exist today.
Mary Tudor is an important part of both English and world history. Therefore, I recommend that she be included as part of your reading if you have an interest in this area.
I also liked the fact that Erickson wove in some good analysis of what it was like to be a woman ruler of a country during medieval times. Interestingly, many of the stereotypes used then (such as, women are weak, emotional and moody) to describe why women make poor leaders still exist today.
Mary Tudor is an important part of both English and world history. Therefore, I recommend that she be included as part of your reading if you have an interest in this area.
June 2, 2011
Well, I've never really read much non-fiction before, but I picked this up and it was amazing! I loved the way the author used every element of Mary's surroundings to explain how and why she was the way she was. Not only did Erickson take Mary's education into account, but also the divorce of her parents (and more importantly the way each of her parents acted during it), the religious climate of England over the years, and the changing economic situation.
I thought it was a wonderful book, although the flowery descriptions got a little tedious after a while, I would definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in this time period of English history.
I thought it was a wonderful book, although the flowery descriptions got a little tedious after a while, I would definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in this time period of English history.
April 18, 2011
Most of my Tudor reading in the past has focused on Henry VIII or Elizabeth I, and skipped over the sad and bloody reign of Queen Mary. Not anymore! This sympathetic portrait of a woman who survived the vilification of her mother and her religion, an on-again off-again place in the succession, and an unpopular marriage to the younger and uninterested Philip of Spain, is definitely worth reading if you are interested in the Tudor dynasty. Well researched and extremely readable.
November 21, 2011
A fascinating and well-documented biography on a complicated and frequently dismissed royal. Plus the author (one of my favorite popular medievalists) has such a dry witty way of writing it makes it fun to read. I appreciate her ironic humor and insightful perspective on what life was like for people (both individually and collectively) during that period and in that place.
March 16, 2013
This book took me over 3 months to read as I could only take so much at a time. It was well researched and easy to read but I guess I missed converstation and so I would read a bit and then reach for a mystery. It was upsetting to see how women were treated during this time and era and to see how they were able to rise above it.
February 2, 2008
An even-handed, well-researched biography of a woman who was a product of her time and upbringing, and, in her own way, as morally upright and true to her values as her more-lauded sister.
June 4, 2008
This is probably the best researched biography I've ever read. It does take a long time to get through but I'm enjoying it. The details about the clothing and the festivals are very good.
February 1, 2014
Borrring.
February 6, 2025
I don't know why it is taking me so long to finish this book. It's so good, I don't want it to end?
I'm just being a lazy person? Sounds right.
I'm just being a lazy person? Sounds right.
March 20, 2018
Link to my review of this book:
https://flhwnotesandreviews.com/2018/...
https://flhwnotesandreviews.com/2018/...
September 26, 2017
This book is long. And detailed. It is also very engaging and readable. Brilliant, in fact, and well worth the read. I was a bit surprised to find that almost 3/4 of the book was about Mary's life before she became queen. But, this makes sense. Her long complex relationship with her father had much to do with who she was and who she came to be. Imagine being the daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon. Catherine, having been thrown aside by Henry so that he could marry Ann Boleyn. Henry breaking with the Pope and declaring himself God's representative as head of the Church of England. Catherine refusing to give way, withdrawing into her Catholicism and Mary following. Though it went on and on for years, it was as though Mary was a Princess one minute and a bastard the next. It went back and forth over the years, many times at the whim of her father. Ann Bolyn gave birth to Elizabeth who became Mary's rival, not just to be queen, but to control the official religion of England. Mary being Catholic and Elizabeth being Protestant.
Mary did eventually become Queen though her brief reign was constantly under threat. Her attempt to re-establish the Catholic faith in England was thwarted by the fact that the country was almost evenly divided as to their beliefs. Mary's response, though not unusual for her time, was horrific. There were burnings and other atrocities committed by the queen who came to be known as Bloody Mary. As the author points out, the day of Mary's death also marked the accession of Mary's half sister Elizabeth. It was a national holiday for 200 years. But, in no way a celebration of Mary's reign which was considered to be "poor, short and despised." There are no monuments to Mary in England.
It is impossible to think of Mary without recalling the hideous acts that she allowed to be committed during her reign. However, after reading this book, it is also impossible to think of her without remembering the sadness, confusion and extreme uncertainty of her childhood and young adulthood. Sadness and cruelty all around. But with this book, a greater understanding of the tragic character of Bloody Mary.
Mary did eventually become Queen though her brief reign was constantly under threat. Her attempt to re-establish the Catholic faith in England was thwarted by the fact that the country was almost evenly divided as to their beliefs. Mary's response, though not unusual for her time, was horrific. There were burnings and other atrocities committed by the queen who came to be known as Bloody Mary. As the author points out, the day of Mary's death also marked the accession of Mary's half sister Elizabeth. It was a national holiday for 200 years. But, in no way a celebration of Mary's reign which was considered to be "poor, short and despised." There are no monuments to Mary in England.
It is impossible to think of Mary without recalling the hideous acts that she allowed to be committed during her reign. However, after reading this book, it is also impossible to think of her without remembering the sadness, confusion and extreme uncertainty of her childhood and young adulthood. Sadness and cruelty all around. But with this book, a greater understanding of the tragic character of Bloody Mary.
July 3, 2025
"Katherine's baby was born before dawn on Monday, February 18. It was a girl but this disappointment was temporarily outweighed by the fact that it did not immediately die."
Well, that about sums the old girl up then, huh? I had originally intended to use another title for my reading on Mary. Then I stumbled upon a copy of Bloody Mary: The Life of Mary Tudor by Carolly Erickson at a used bookstore and couldn't resist buying it. Although I'm eager to read Anna Whitelock's book, it will have to wait until the next time I venture into Tudor territory. Published in 1978, Erickson's volume is exactly what the title suggests: a biography of Mary I, known as 'Bloody Mary' due to her persecution of Protestants.
This book is thick and a bit dry in sections which is sort of funny when juxtaposed with such a bold title (I also anticipated more discussion about those persecuted during Mary I’s reign.) I did read this over several weeks, mostly because my attention did keep shifting to other things, but that doesn’t mean that I didn’t enjoy the reading experience. I must admit, the first hundred or so pages were a bit difficult to get through, mostly because I was getting tired of having to wait for glimpses of Mary. Erickson does a careful and thorough job of contextualizing Mary and England in history, which is terrific, but there were moments when I wanted to be reading less about Henry VIII.
Erickson’s book does a pretty good job of connecting the dots between the trauma of Mary’s early years and the darkness of her later years. If you remove the bits about burning Protestants, Mary is quite a pitiable character. She was forcibly kept away from her mother, endured abuse, had quite a wicked stepmother in Anne Boleyn, constantly had to defend herself against very real threats, the “pregnancies”, Philip. But then you remember the burning of the Protestants and all that sympathy sort of fades her. She’s justly remembered for the negative aspects of her reign, but I still find Mary I to be one of the more fascinating English monarchs to read about.
February 17, 2020
I agree with some of the other reviewers that mention the shift in scholarship and Erickson's decision not to update the later publications of this book (I read the 1978 version) .... as well as the rather broad scope of Erickson's work (she spends a great deal of time on Henry VIII and Edward). Any good writer should welcome new information that could improve their work, as well as have the discipline required to remain focused on her subject.
However, I did find that Erickson's biography of Mary Tudor did one important thing: it humanized Mary Tudor. Because the Protestants eventually won in England with the ascension of Elizabeth I, they were able to write the history on this period, and quite unfairly Mary Tudor has thus been remembered as "Bloody" Mary. It's unfortunate that Erickson still had to use the epithet for the title of her book, but perhaps without it no one would have had a clear idea who the subject was. But Erickson does a good job of showing Mary in a less harsh light - as a child, a daughter, a sister, a woman, a wife, and a monarch. Where Protestants forever remembered the "martyrs," few people remembered Mary Tudor's charitable works and her unfailing devotion to her faith. (Protestants also forgot that Protestants were not above burning each other at the stake).
Ultimately, this biography was an interesting read and one that is easily accessible for most readers. If you are looking for something which is based on current research trends and of a more scholarly bent, then perhaps look elsewhere. However, I found it was worth the read. In addition, it raised enough questions in my mind and piqued my curiosity enough that I will be looking for those scholarly histories to broaden my understanding of the period.
However, I did find that Erickson's biography of Mary Tudor did one important thing: it humanized Mary Tudor. Because the Protestants eventually won in England with the ascension of Elizabeth I, they were able to write the history on this period, and quite unfairly Mary Tudor has thus been remembered as "Bloody" Mary. It's unfortunate that Erickson still had to use the epithet for the title of her book, but perhaps without it no one would have had a clear idea who the subject was. But Erickson does a good job of showing Mary in a less harsh light - as a child, a daughter, a sister, a woman, a wife, and a monarch. Where Protestants forever remembered the "martyrs," few people remembered Mary Tudor's charitable works and her unfailing devotion to her faith. (Protestants also forgot that Protestants were not above burning each other at the stake).
Ultimately, this biography was an interesting read and one that is easily accessible for most readers. If you are looking for something which is based on current research trends and of a more scholarly bent, then perhaps look elsewhere. However, I found it was worth the read. In addition, it raised enough questions in my mind and piqued my curiosity enough that I will be looking for those scholarly histories to broaden my understanding of the period.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 105 reviews