Mary I’s reign (1553–1558) was marked by a determined effort to restore Catholicism, leading to widespread persecution of Protestants and significant resistance both politically and socially.
Reasons for Persecution
Mary’s religious policy was driven by a profound commitment to restoring Catholicism in England. Having witnessed her mother Catherine of Aragon’s treatment and the religious schism initiated by her father, Henry VIII, Mary viewed Protestantism as both a spiritual error and a political threat.
Eradication of heresy: The return to Catholic orthodoxy required purging England of Protestant doctrines and heretics, seen as spiritually corrupt and politically destabilising.
Deterring resistance: Public executions served as a warning to dissenters, aiming to reassert authority and suppress further opposition to Catholic restoration.
Ideological conviction: Mary, alongside her chief religious advisor Cardinal Reginald Pole, believed persecution was necessary to save souls and restore divine favour to the nation.
Legislative backing: The revival of the heresy laws in 1554 enabled legal action against Protestants, allowing for trials and executions based on religious belief.
Extent of Persecution
The Marian persecution resulted in an unprecedented number of religious executions, targeting both prominent reformers and ordinary citizens.
Number of executions: Approximately 280 people were burned at the stake between 1555 and 1558, the vast majority being ordinary men and women, not just elite figures.
Demographics:
Many of the martyrs were from urban centres like London, Colchester, and Canterbury.
A significant number were artisans, labourers, and women, demonstrating the broad reach of Protestant belief and opposition to Catholic enforcement.
Local authorities: The persecution often depended on the zeal of local magistrates and bishops.
Some areas, like Kent and East Anglia, saw more executions due to local officials’ enthusiasm.
In contrast, others were more reluctant to prosecute, leading to regional disparities in the scale of persecution.
Key Cases: Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer
The execution of leading Protestant figures had both practical and symbolic importance, reinforcing Mary’s message but also sparking martyrdom narratives.
Thomas Cranmer:
Former Archbishop of Canterbury and architect of the Edwardian religious reforms.
Initially recanted his Protestant beliefs under pressure but dramatically reversed his recantation at the stake, asserting the supremacy of Scripture over papal authority.
His execution in Oxford in 1556 became a powerful symbol of Protestant resistance.
Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer:
Both were prominent bishops under Edward VI and committed reformers.
Burned together in Oxford in 1555, their deaths became famous due to Latimer’s words to Ridley: “We shall this day light such a candle, by God’s grace, in England as I trust shall never be put out.”
These executions were intended to eliminate Protestant leadership, but instead they galvanised opposition.
Impact of Persecution and Propaganda
The Marian burnings produced a deep and lasting impact on public perception, both during and after Mary’s reign.
John Foxe’s Book of Martyrs:
Published in 1563 under Elizabeth I, it became the defining narrative of the persecutions.
Portrayed the martyrs as heroic and devout, and Mary’s regime as cruel and fanatical.
Widely read and illustrated, it shaped Protestant memory for generations and became a staple in English households.
Public opinion:
Initially, some burnings were met with fear and acceptance, but over time, they generated sympathy for the victims and revulsion at the brutality.
Public executions, often intended to deter, instead drew crowds that witnessed the courage of the martyrs, undermining the regime’s goals.
Political ramifications:
The severity of persecution damaged Mary’s reputation and reinforced fears of Spanish and Catholic absolutism.
The association of Catholicism with oppression and foreign influence would endure well into Elizabeth’s reign.
Wyatt’s Rebellion (1554)
This rebellion was one of the most significant uprisings during Mary’s reign, fuelled by a combination of religious discontent, nationalist sentiment, and fear of Spanish domination.
Causes
Marriage to Philip II of Spain:
Seen as a threat to English sovereignty and Protestant interests.
Opposition feared England would become a Spanish satellite state and that Philip would dominate Mary.
Religious concerns:
Many Protestants opposed the Catholic resurgence, fearing further persecution and reversal of reforms.
Foreign influence:
The marriage treaty failed to convince sceptics that Spanish influence would be limited, heightening tensions.
Economic and regional grievances:
Some rebels were motivated by localised economic hardship, especially in Kent, where cloth workers were experiencing decline.
Support Base and Suppression
Led by Sir Thomas Wyatt, the rebellion gained momentum in Kent and posed a serious threat to London.
Wyatt attracted support from:
Protestant gentry and artisans
Nationalists opposed to Spanish intervention
Some factions of the disaffected political elite
Mary responded decisively:
Delivered a firm and rousing speech at the Guildhall, appealing to English patriotism.
Secured the loyalty of key forces and suppressed the rebellion before it reached central London.
Aftermath:
Wyatt was executed, and other conspirators were punished.
Princess Elizabeth, though not involved, was imprisoned in the Tower due to her potential as a Protestant figurehead, highlighting the regime’s paranoia.
Conformity and Resistance
Despite the severity of persecution and official restoration of Catholicism, true religious conformity remained elusive.
Apparent obedience:
Many attended Mass and conformed outwardly, fearing punishment or desiring social stability.
Parish churches restored Catholic practices, altars, and imagery.
Underlying resistance:
Secret Protestant worship continued, especially in areas like East Anglia and London.
Protestant texts were circulated covertly, and exiles abroad sent back writings to sustain the faithful.
Clerical non-compliance: Some priests subtly resisted or only reluctantly implemented Catholic rites.
Persecution created martyrs, but also fuelled underground Protestant identity, laying the groundwork for its resurgence under Elizabeth.
War with France and the Loss of Calais (1558)
Mary’s alliance with Catholic Spain inevitably dragged England into its conflict with France, ending disastrously for English pride and prestige.
Causes
England entered the war on the side of Spain against France as part of Mary’s commitment to her marriage alliance.
The decision was politically and militarily unwise, given:
England’s limited resources
Public resistance to involvement in foreign wars
The fragile internal situation due to religious conflict
Loss of Calais
In January 1558, the French captured Calais, England’s last possession in mainland France.
This was a symbolic catastrophe:
Calais had been in English hands since 1347 and was seen as a key legacy of the Hundred Years’ War.
Its loss represented the final end of England’s medieval continental ambitions.
Economic impact:
Trade with the continent was affected.
English merchants faced disruption, although the long-term economic significance was limited compared to the symbolic loss.
Political and Religious Consequences
The failure in France further damaged Mary’s credibility, reinforcing perceptions of her as:
Overly reliant on Spanish interests
Militarily and diplomatically inept
The timing of the loss, near the end of Mary’s reign, made it one of her defining failures.
Protestants used it as further proof of divine displeasure with Mary’s regime and Catholic policy.
FAQ
Mary I’s revival of the Heresy Acts of 1401 (De heretico comburendo) and 1414 was a strategic and symbolic move designed to emphasise continuity with England’s traditional Catholic past. Rather than draft entirely new laws, which could face resistance in a politically divided Parliament, Mary opted to restore pre-Reformation legislation that had previously legitimised the burning of heretics. This legal framework had fallen into disuse during the Henrician and Edwardian reforms, but remained a potent tool for enforcing religious orthodoxy. By reinstating these acts in 1554, Mary demonstrated her desire to reverse the Protestant innovations of recent decades and return England to the perceived religious stability of the late medieval period. It also allowed her government to prosecute Protestants swiftly and with legal precedent. The use of established statutes gave the persecutions a veneer of legitimacy, reducing accusations of tyranny and portraying her actions as the restoration of rightful law and order.
Marian exile communities played a crucial role in sustaining and shaping English Protestantism during Mary I’s reign. Approximately 800 English Protestants fled abroad, settling in various Protestant cities across Europe, including Geneva, Frankfurt, Zurich, and Strasbourg. These communities became hubs of theological development and resistance, allowing exiles to worship freely, publish Protestant tracts, and debate doctrinal issues. In Geneva, key exiles like John Knox and William Whittingham were influenced by Calvinist theology, which would later affect Elizabethan Puritanism. The exiles produced numerous writings criticising the Marian regime, including pamphlets that were smuggled into England to encourage underground Protestant worship and defiance. These texts reinforced the belief that Mary’s persecutions were a sign of papal corruption and divine displeasure. Upon Mary’s death, many exiles returned, more ideologically hardened and organised, and their experiences abroad shaped the future direction of the English Church under Elizabeth I. Thus, exile strengthened Protestantism rather than extinguishing it.
Cardinal Reginald Pole, as Mary I’s chief religious advisor and Papal Legate, exerted significant influence not only in court and Parliament but also in attempts to reform the English clergy and enforce religious orthodoxy at a diocesan level. His vision for Catholic renewal included raising the educational and moral standards of the clergy, which he viewed as essential to restoring faith among the laity. To achieve this, Pole convened provincial synods, issued pastoral guidelines, and promoted the foundation of seminaries to improve clerical training. He also sought to implement visitations of dioceses, where inspectors would assess the piety and orthodoxy of local priests and enforce liturgical standards. However, despite these efforts, Pole struggled with deeply embedded issues: financial limitations, a shortage of competent Catholic clergy, and inconsistent support from local bishops. His reforms lacked the administrative machinery to achieve nationwide enforcement, limiting their success and contributing to the fragility of Catholic restoration by 1558.
Compared to other European states, religious persecution under Mary I, while severe by English standards, was not unusually extreme for the period. In Spain, the Spanish Inquisition had already institutionalised religious persecution on a much broader scale, targeting not only Protestants but also Jews, Muslims, and conversos. France and the Holy Roman Empire saw brutal conflicts between Catholics and Protestants, including massacres and long-standing religious wars. What distinguished the English case was the visibility and documentation of the burnings. England’s execution of approximately 280 Protestants between 1555 and 1558, while tragic, was far fewer than continental equivalents. However, the relatively peaceful nature of England’s previous Reformation made the sudden violence under Mary especially shocking. Moreover, the detailed recording of these executions in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs gave them outsized cultural impact. The English public, unused to mass persecution, reacted strongly, especially as many victims were ordinary men and women, not just religious leaders.
Yes, regional variations in response to Mary I’s religious policies were significant and reflected England’s diverse religious landscape. Southeastern counties such as Kent, Essex, and East Anglia displayed strong Protestant leanings due to earlier exposure to reformist ideas and networks of Protestant clergy and printers. These areas also saw more frequent executions, partly due to the proactive role of local authorities and bishops committed to the Marian cause. Conversely, northern and western regions, particularly the far north and Cornwall, were more conservative and retained Catholic practices with less resistance, leading to fewer burnings. Urban centres like London and Oxford were more prone to both underground Protestant activity and public attention to high-profile burnings. Additionally, popular participation in religious ceremonies was more enthusiastic in traditionally Catholic areas, while in reformist regions, outward conformity often masked continued resistance. These disparities reveal that Mary’s religious restoration was geographically uneven, limiting its long-term effectiveness.
Practice Questions
‘The persecution of Protestants under Mary I failed to achieve its aims.’ Assess the validity of this view.
The persecution under Mary I aimed to restore Catholic orthodoxy and eliminate heresy, yet it ultimately galvanised Protestant resistance. While public burnings demonstrated state power, they also generated sympathy for victims and fuelled anti-Catholic propaganda, especially through Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. Rather than extinguish Protestantism, persecution created martyrs and a powerful narrative of victimhood. Outward conformity masked inward dissent, and secret Protestant worship persisted. By Mary’s death, Protestantism remained resilient. Therefore, the policy failed in the long term, as it did not secure lasting religious conformity and damaged the Catholic cause in the eyes of the English public.
To what extent did Wyatt’s Rebellion represent significant opposition to Mary I’s rule?
Wyatt’s Rebellion posed a serious, though ultimately unsuccessful, challenge to Mary I’s authority. Motivated by opposition to her marriage to Philip II, religious conservatism, and fear of Spanish dominance, the rebellion united a broad base of discontented factions. Its proximity to London and widespread support in Kent demonstrated deep unease with Mary’s policies. However, the rebellion lacked coherent leadership and failed to attract nationwide backing. Mary’s effective suppression, including her compelling speech at the Guildhall, reinforced her authority. While significant in revealing unrest, the rebellion did not ultimately threaten her reign’s stability, nor alter her religious or dynastic agenda.
