The History of Mary I, Queen of England: as found in the public records, despatches of ambassadors, in original private letters, and other contemporary documentsStone, J. M. (Jean Mary)
History
The History of Mary I, Queen of England: as found in the public records, despatches of ambassadors, in original private letters, and other contemporary documents
Stone, J. M. (Jean Mary)
Great Britain -- History -- Tudors, 1485-1603; Mary I, Queen of England, 1516-1558
Mary, by her courage and great heart, had a second time triumphed over
the revolution. On the first occasion, she had magnanimously thought to
disarm, and win over the factious by an almost universal pardon. Three
victims only suffered the just punishment of their crimes; two were
held over as hostages for the peaceable behaviour of the others; the
rest obtained a full and free forgiveness. Such clemency was a complete
innovation. If Mary cannot be said to have been in advance, or even
abreast of her time, in many ways, she often rose above it, with the
inevitable result that she was misunderstood by some, and repaid by
others with the grossest ingratitude. The world has never been ripe for
a clemency such as she had extended to the insurgents after the first
rebellion. The elementary laws of rewards and punishments were alone
grasped by the people, accustomed to the frequent spectacle of revolt
followed by swift vengeance. The butchery with which Henry VIII. had
replied to the northern rising, though an everlasting blot on his name,
made him feared, and his authority respected. Elizabeth’s ruthless
punishment of the Catholics of the north, after their abortive efforts
to bring back the Mass, resulted in peace for the remainder of the
reign.
Mary’s wholesale forgiveness of the insurgents had been interpreted as
weakness, by a people who had not yet learned that mercy “becomes the
thronèd monarch better than his crown”. Charles V. had insisted that it
should be seasoned with a larger measure of justice, but in this one
point Mary had disregarded his advice. Now her eyes were opened. Had
the rebels been treated with proper severity, there would have been
no second outbreak. Had Suffolk fallen with Northumberland, as the
consequence of his share in Jane’s usurpation, his daughter would not
have constituted a danger to the State six months later. Even those who
had been implicated in the first plot were loud in maintaining that
there would now be no safety for the realm while Jane lived.[412]
Both she and her husband had already been found guilty by Parliament
of high treason, and sentence of death was passed in November 1553,
although but for Suffolk’s action they would undoubtedly both have been
pardoned. Now, however, recognising the disastrous consequences of her
mildness, Mary allowed herself to be guided by those who had from the
beginning advocated a policy of rigid justice; and on the day after
Wyatt’s arrest, she signed the warrant for their execution.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account