Hi, Ingibjorg…

I think part of what I find so fascinating about these women is that they were uncharacteristically strong women for their time period, and I think that what I find so tragic about them is that part of why they were persecuted, for lack of a better term, was because they weren't more demure and accepting of their circumstances.  Does anyone doubt that Anne Boleyn would have survived had she been more like Jane Seymour?  Or that Jane Grey would have avoided execution if she had renounced her faith and returned to the Catholic Church instead of somewhat antagonizing Mary I?  They were surprisingly modern women in a time when women were viewed as practically property, their views and opinions were not valued, and they were expected to remain barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.  Somehow, though, these women made men sit up and take notice.  Henry VIII certainly valued Anne's opinion at least for awhile, and Jane Grey was certainly spoken highly of by tutors and other highly educated men.  As a result, they were very polarizing and I think this typically contributed to their downfall.  It seems that they never really had a huge support base, and when it was clear that their stars were waning that many of their so-called supporters jumped ship.  The Duke of Norfolk, Anne's uncle, even found her guilty of treason and he was certainly involved in her rise.

I like reading this type of fiction because I'm interested in how the characters are portrayed.  Do their actions seem logical to their time period, their circumstances, and with recorded descripions of their behavior in real life?  Sometimes authors are able to make me think of or view a character differently than I had previously.

I don't know enough about Mary to be able to comment–sorry!!

But I'm willing to bet that someone around here does!!

I agree that it is that they were women out of their time. I love to see how they change with hardship and how they fight. Marie Antoinette's a great example too. I don't know why I love these women so much… I like to think of if the outcome would be different if men and women were equal…  My English teacher once commented, 'You seem to like women with unfortunate ends…' She got it quite right!

I think with Mary Queen of Scots it's Elizabeth… She's a great legend and then there is Mary- executed Queen. Not sure, but maybe.

wreckmasterjay said:

I originally found Anne fascinating because she was so innocent and that she shouldnt have been put through the show trail that she was. They didnt even give her a chance to hear her sides of the story as her co-accused were tried and found guilty before she could speak her mind. 

 

Lady Jane Grey was nothing more than a child stuck in an argument that she knew or cared nothing about. She certainly didnt have the enthiusiasm to rule as Queen or fight Mary I for her claim to the throne. This too is an incredible story. 

I'm going to have to disagree with you about Jane. I used to think that she was the child-victim of unscrupulous men and she was thrown aside when the tide changed in Mary's favour.

She may not have wanted to take the throne but she certainly appeared to be making  radical plans for her version of the English church. In fact Jane was writing anti-Catholic rants after she had been convicted. She appeared to have had her own ideas about how she was going to rule since she refused to name Guilford Dudley as king. I think she would have been a good queen had she been allowed to rule.

Again Jane was let down by the men who should have helped and cared for her. Her councillors abandoned her and her father-in-law was incapable of defeating Mary due to Mary's support amongst the people.Her father was the main reason why Jane was eventually executed due to him rebelling against Mary.

ingibjorg said:

Thank you all for your interesting comments

On pg 16 and 17 of the thread, What are we all reading, you can find some opinions of Mary Queen of Scots.
You can also find comments about her @  http://www.elizabethfiles.com/…..ess/#p1045

I'm not sure I'd call myself a follower of tragic Queens.  I love them all. I don't consider them tragic.  I find it fascinating that in a time when women were so repressed, there were Queens who by the strength of their beliefs changed history. 

I read fiction because it gives personality to these women. They were not one dimensional figures.  They loved and they were loved. I am struck by how women who stood up for their beliefs back then, garnered so much hate.  They were all women trying to make something better of their lives and the lives of the people they loved. Not unlike women of today.

I find these women interesting because they were not the norm in society. Their lives were extrordinary where compared to historical and conventional gender norms. Whether by birth (Mary Stuart and to some extent Jane Grey), or a woman like Anne Boleyn who positioned herself in a man's world, they lived outside the normal realm of female gender rules. The ways their lives ended has given them certain fame in posterity, but the contribution of their lives should not be limited to how, when, or under what circumstances they died. Having said that, the posthumous fame of dying as a martyr and/or a anoited Queen lends itself to some fascination, especially for Anne Boleyn.

I am not a fan of Mary Stuart. I've noted my dislike of her a few times both on this forum and at the Elizabeth Files. I don't see the attraction that so many have of her either her contemporaries or now.

I've a new found respect for Lady Jane Grey after reading Eric Ives's book on her. I hope the long held assumptions of her life can continue to be explored and objected to. She was more than a pawn, but I shall leave the reader of Ives's book to determine to what extent.

Anne is a personal hero of mine. Her life and the events of her death are fascinating to me. She was the first anoited Queen to be executed. The way she lived her life continues to fascinate me. Antoinia Fraser called her “curiously modern” and I have to agree. There is something that I, a modern, 21st century feminist, likes about. Perhaps a little of my own determination and rebellious attitude?! I value her for her intelligence and courage, even in the face of her own death did she never waver.

I find Jane fascinating. For so long she was portrayed as nothing more than an innocent child, a victim of her parents schemes and the plotting of those around her. Thankfully she has undergone something of a makeover in recent years. I personally think she is anything but dull.

Jane had an intellect that was comparable, if not superior, to that of Elizabeth. While at first she appeared shocked that she was to be proclaimed queen, she quickly started signed her name “Jane the Quene”, and had a very clear idea of the direction that she wanted her reign to take. She denied Guildford Dudley the crown, something that I think shows just how strong her character was. Not only that, but when she was approached by a priest (I don't remember his name, I'm sorry) sent by Mary to try and convert her to Catholicism she engaged him in debate so competently that he couldn't help but feel respect and admiration for her.

Jane was, without a doubt, a Tudor.

To me personally, when it comes to women like Jane and Anne (Katherine of Aragon as well) I don't think that the interest is so much in 'tragic queens' as it is in women that were far ahead of their times. All three were extremely well educated, devout to their beliefs and ideals, and unafraid to stand up for themselves when push came to shove. I find those qualities, especially considering the period, extremely admirable, and that is where the fascination is for me.

I just love Tragical people, right from childhood when tragic characters always appealed to me, be it Giselle of the ballet or the Lady Shallot. There are so many Tragical Tudors and of course more besides the main ones we think of, such brave Margaret Pole whose head was hacked off her and she swore her innocence even at the Scaffold. ( ok she wasn’t a Queen but she had, in my view more of a claim to the throne than the Tudors)

Makes sense to me. I never think of these historical women as tragic. For me they were all strong, vibrant women. Women who lived at a time when there was little to no chance of them leaving a footprint at all, and yet they did. I think more on their lives than I do on the way they died.

Cultural norms were different then…women’s sphere of influence was expected to be totally domestic. well, amongst the higher classes anyway.

That made the exceptional women who were endowed with power highly visible, then as now. Look at the vemon spewed out at Hillary Clinton and compare it to what was said about Anne Boleyn or Cleopatra IX. The words may have changed but the sentiment is still “get back to your knitting and let the men rule the world”.