Why didn’t Mary I execute her heretic half-sister, Elizabeth?

sarah_bolger_mary I have just recently gotten up-to-speed on the second season of The Tudors, having watched the finale yesterday.  While I have enjoyed the whole series tremendously, it does engender a great many questions.

To my mind this is part of the genius of the show; for even when it takes enormous liberties with history, it is still makes for a compelling story.  Much like Frank Miller’s 300, both of them sharing a common conception of historical drama as “one fifth history, and four-fifths something that looks cool”.

Little by little over the course of a season, you will get suckered into researching the actual history behind the flashy events on screen.  And thus I was very glad to discover commenters at TudorHistory.org’s Q&A blog have posited several potential answers to the question of why Mary I didn’t crop her younger half-sister at the neck.

TANGENTIALLY RELATED: James Frain’s portrayal of Thomas Cromwell, 1st Earl of Essex, is all the go.  A strikingly complex and humane portrait of a man that is usually portrayed as a one-dimensional evil henchman.  It will be a shame to see this Cromwell ascend the scaffold.

EVEN MORE TANGENTIAL: Natalie Dormer interviewed in the Daily Mail, with a plethora of fetching pictures.

Image: Sarah Bolger as Lady Mary Tudor.

Category: Historica  Tags:
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
2 Responses
  1. Alan says:

    You forgot one-fifth that has no clothes on.

  2. Chris Taylor says:

    Hah! I think that can be filed under the “four-fifths something that looks cool” part. As long as we’re not seeing an awful lot of the nekkid sovereign.