Dylan, much as I enjoy your meanderings on YouTube, I found your comments on Mary Queen of Scots misguided.
The world of that time was profoundly different from ours and we should be very careful not to judge.
There is very little doubt that Mary had some part in the conspiracies against Queen Elizabeth. In that period, the normal practice for such a case would have been a Writ of Attainder, no real trial just straight to the block…
But consider Elizabeth’s position – she really was at risk of terrorist assignation. Many of the plotters wished to use Mary to reinstate the Catholic faith, and to them, Mary was at least a figurehead. They also wished to import the dreaded tercios of Spain to help impose the Inquisition on protestant England.
Another point – Who preceded Queen Elizabeth on the throne? Bloody Mary! No wonder a lot of her courtiers wanted Mary of Scotland dead. Again, who preceded Bloody Mary? The unfortunate Lady Jane Grey, who B Mary had beheaded because some of her relatives resisted B Mary.
For myself, I would have to wonder if Elizabeth’s, in my view remarkable forbearance, regarding Mary of S was due to the necessity of imposing on her, the same dread sentence imposed on her mother Anne Bolyen.
Then you look at the corruption of politics, as practiced today – I live in New South Wales. I would not judge them, and if I had to, well I would be far kinder than you.
judging stuff from history is one of the great pleasures in life
sorry you do not agree with my analysis – thanks for putting you own spin on the same story
I do think it is time we threw in the towel on the Royal Family – however, as an institution I am sure they will outlive KTL
just wait until I get stuck into Scottish history – the auld alliance has been a terrible thing for us English