25 June 1533 – Death of Mary Tudor, Queen of France
Posted By Claire on June 25, 2011
Mary Tudor and Charles Brandon
On this day in history, 25th June 1533, the 37 year old Mary Tudor, sister of Henry VIII and wife of his friend Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, died at her home Westhorpe Hall in Suffolk. Mary was buried first at the local abbey in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, but when the abbey was dissolved her remains were moved to St Mary’s Church, Bury St Edmunds.
Viewers of “The Tudors” series may have come away with a completely warped view of Mary Tudor, or Margaret as she is called in the series, as there are so many inaccuracies regarding her story. You can find out more about the real Mary Tudor, Queen of France (not Portugal!), in the following articles:-
- Princess Mary Tudor
- Mary Tudor Marries Louis XII of France
- Death of Mary Tudor, Queen of France
- Mary Tudor, Romantic Rebel
Trivia: Mary was the grandmother of Lady Jane Grey!
Other articles you might be interested in:
25 June 1533 – Mary Tudor, Queen of France, dies
Death of Mary Tudor, Queen of France
The Birth of Mary Tudor, Queen of France – 18 March 1496
18 March 1496 – Birth of Mary Tudor, Queen of France
18 March 1496 – Birth of Mary Tudor, Queen of France at Richmond Palace
Mary Tudor, Queen of France – Factfile
I always called her Margaret-Mary lol, I thought the ro;e was an insult to the two princesses
I agree, Leslie. The way the Tudors portrayed “Margaret” was its weakest point.
which is odd, cuz there were 2 tudor princesses, margaret and mary tudor.
henry had 2 sisters, margaret and mary tudor
Yes, I’ve written about Margaret at https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/the-death-of-margaret-tudor/6979/
The only reason they called her Margaret in the series is because they didn’t want to have two Princess Marys, and confuse the audience with the Kings sister and daughter. Still, a very weak point. Made for good drama, though. I need to read up on her actual life still, so thanks!
I just don’t understand Michael Hirst’s reasoning when there were lots of Thomases, Edwards and Catherines, makes no sense.
Claire,
I agree, its not a very good reason. Then again, they more often than not referred to people by their surnames (Wolsey, More…). Both Marys were Tudors and princesses. But still, it’s a nonsensical dumbing down. No need to have done it, really.
I agree! I find it a little insulting to my intelligence that given all the other complicated stories to follow, that someone thought we wouldn’t be able to differentiate between the VERY different “two Princess Marys”!!! That’s just rubbish! I would much rather have had a little more “historical accuracy”! I may find it a bit confusing, but after every time I watch the episodes (in reruns) I come away with a bit more understanding of “who’s who in the zoo”!!! I must have watched “Elizabeth R” at least 5 times over the years, but it always seems new and I learn a little more each time.
That they collapsed Henry’s two sisters into one limited “The Tudors” to “Henry VIII” (IMO) They couldn’t go into the reigns of Henry’s children very well because they would have to ignore Mary Queen of Scots (granddaughter of Henry’s older sister, Margaret). This affected, not only Elizabeth’s reign, but also Edward’s reign, as there were still wars with n Scotland trying to bring about a marriage between Edward and his cousin Mary.
Yes and because they killed Margaret/Mary off early she didn’t give birth to Frances Brandon, mother of Lady Jane Grey. I had to laugh when in Season 4 Henry VIII was planning on meeting James V in York – how could James exist when his mother didn’t?!
Which is probably the reason the
Scotch king stood Henry up at York in the Tudors, which was entertaining, but inaccurate in so many ways, particularly the wall to wall carpeting in some scenes and the eighteenth century carriages.
Mary, I think was very much like her brother in some repects, she was confident, passionate,stubborn and was going to do as she pleased, irrespective of the consequences that would follow (to a lesser degree than big brother), maybe this is why he came to accept her marriage to Brandon without too much of a fuss,he saw himself in her.. Thank goodness she didnt develop the personality traits of Henry in his later life. She definately had spirit. Do you think Henry saw his favourite sister’s spirit in Anne and that is what made her so attractive to him? And I often wonder if Mary’s sons had lived, what a turn of events that could have caused when there was a squabble about who was the rightful heir to the throne, could have been exciting stuff. Anyway Mary did her duty first, then did it her way after, good for her. Shame she didn’t have a longer life, but I think she had an eventful one. And I agree she was a beauty. She will always be remembered for the one who defied the King and survived, her husband too. She has my respect. R.I.P. Queen of France.
Was there ever a royal family like this one? They were a stubborn bunch.
Mary, Margaret and Henry eventually followed their hearts. All of them made their own choices after first fulfilling their duty. They bucked the system after there first marriage duties came to an end or were put to an end. Margaret and Henry claimed they married the second and the third times for love. Henry claimed love a few more times.
Mary actually did marry for love.
Rest in peace Mary, Queen of France.
Just my opinion, but I think Michael Hirst wanted to simplify the plot and eliminate some of the characters. I do not think he ever intended to go beyond Henry’s rein. It was a historical drama and he frequently played around with the facts. It is interesting that some of the series was accurate, like Henry almost drowning and being rescued. Or his accident with his visor. It really is an odd mixture of fact and fantasy. But it did make me want to find out more about the real people and find out what historians know about them.
We always referred to her as Mary Rose Tudor not to confuse her with her niece Mary Tudor. Henry named his ill fated ship,after her
The Tudors was not an historical documentary !! Michael hurst states that in his interview it was to make it more interesting !! It was for entertainment I don’t c anything wrong in that !!!
agree with you susan.
There was a lot of dumbing down in that series. It is what we call in America, ‘A Guilty Pleasure.’ If I am not mistaken, Henry VIII’s bastard son (Henry Fitzroy? not sure of his name) lived to his mid-late teens and witnessed Anne Bolelyn’s execution.
The story line with Henry’s sister killing off her husband was ridiculous. I understand that one of his sisters was the Queen of France and her husband died suddenly…but it was the 1500s. This was supposed to be the Tudors, not the Game of Thrones, but I still watched it anyway.
I agree with everyone, The Tudors series is so historically incorrect its laughable, but unfortunately its giving out the wrong information, oh dear what can we do? By the way I love reading the files & am glad that its not just me that has this era obsession.