 |
Elizaveta I TudorBritish queen
Country:
 Great Britain |
Content:
Queen Elizabeth I: Biography
Queen Elizabeth I of England is one of the most beloved historical figures in British history and world literature. Her 45-year reign is admired for its heroism and grandeur, and her extraordinary life has inspired countless poets, playwrights, and historians. Even during her lifetime, Elizabeth became a literary heroine, with poets of the English Renaissance dedicating countless ballads, poetic cycles, and poems to her, awarding her with elaborate and grandiose names such as Gloriana, Eliza, Belphebe, and the Queen of Fairies. Her literary legacy is vast and has influenced renowned writers such as Shakespeare, Walter Scott, Schiller, Hugo, Mann, Zweig, Brookner, and Ackroyd, among many others.
Elizabeth's reign attracted the avid attention of historians shortly after her death, as her long reign suddenly seemed like a golden age compared to the inept rule of the Stuarts (Kings James I and Charles I). The historical studies of Elizabeth's rule and her era have produced hundreds of volumes, and the opinions of historians and writers about the queen are diametrically opposed. While writers, starting with Schiller, persistently see her as a negative character, unable to forgive Elizabeth for the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, many historians view it as one of her most courageous and justified actions. The relationship between historians and Elizabeth is much more complex. For almost four centuries, it was customary to speak of Elizabeth with unwavering admiration, and there are reasons for this. The first panegyrics in Elizabeth's honor were written by Fulke Greville and William Camden in the early decades of the 17th century. However, their works were not only historical in nature. Elizabeth's new image was merely a political instrument, a way to strike at her incompetent Scottish successors, first James and then Charles. By the 1620s, when the Stuart kings turned out to be a disappointment, Elizabeth was made an example for their reproach and a model for their successors. In the 19th century, British Imperial historians also needed an ideal character to evoke a sense of national pride and testify to the greatness and justice of monarchical power, and Elizabeth's myth, created in the 17th century, proved to be useful. The historiographical tradition of extolling Elizabeth and her rule remained unshakable until recently. In the history of every country, there is a myth about an ideal statesman who personifies the Nation. In ancient Greece, it was Pericles, in the United States - Abraham Lincoln, in Russia - Peter the Great, and in England - Elizabeth. Only recently have British historians begun to question to what extent the panegyrics to the outstanding rule of the Virgin Queen correspond to reality. The conclusions drawn by historians such as K. Hay and C. Erickson are disheartening, but for most people, the "hour H" has not yet come. It is enough to look through the latest history textbooks for schools and even universities, where the same old good myths about Elizabeth's great and powerful reign are circulated.
Early Life and Reign
Elizabeth I was the daughter of King Henry VIII and his second wife, Anne Boleyn. Henry's royal demeanor and his political decisions caused many problems for England throughout the 16th century. In order to marry Anne, the king decided to divorce his first wife, who was the daughter of the King of Spain. This led to a major deterioration in relations with Spain. The Pope, who actively influenced secular affairs in all European states, forbade the divorce, but Henry was not deterred. He went on to break ties with the Holy See, declared himself the head of the Anglican Church, and seized the properties and lands of the monasteries to solve the kingdom's financial problems. Thus, the Reformation began in England. Over time, the Reformation prevailed in the southern part of the island, while Catholicism remained in the north, as the wealthy and influential families of the kingdom, who resided there, did not want to submit to the king's arbitrary rule.
Meanwhile, Henry VIII grew tired of his volatile relationship with Anne Boleyn. On false charges of marital and state treason, she was imprisoned in the Tower and a few months later executed. Three-year-old Elizabeth was declared illegitimate and stripped of her right to the throne. Henry continued to change his decision on his heirs, with the princess being granted and then deprived of her rights to the throne. Nevertheless, after years of deprivation and hardship, Elizabeth finally ascended to the English throne, rightfully, as the successor of her half-brother Edward and half-sister Mary, who died without children.
Elizabeth became queen at the age of 25. She was intelligent, self-assured, and well-educated, although not uniquely so, contrary to popular belief. Her late sister Mary was undoubtedly better educated, and Mary Stuart, her cousin and Queen of Scotland, excelled in languages and sciences. Elizabeth's main disadvantage when she ascended the throne was her absolute lack of experience in state affairs. Like her predecessors, she had to rely on the Privy Council, consisting of the most influential and politically strong individuals in the kingdom.
The authority of the first person in the Council automatically rose to an unattainable height. This first person was William Cecil, Lord Burghley. A talented and incredibly hard-working individual, Cecil did not become Secretary of State by chance. He had been involved in state affairs for over ten years and was already one of the key figures in the previous reign. Much, if not all, of the state's affairs depended on him, rather than on the notorious "royal will." Indeed, if one considers the range of functions that Cecil had to take on daily, the conventional perception of Tudor absolutism (and Elizabeth in particular) quickly loses its value.
During a time when a politician's success depended on being well-informed, Cecil was the king of information. All of the queen's foreign correspondence passed solely through his hands. Hundreds of crown agents dispatched all over the world sent their reports to the Secretary of State. Foreign ambassadors preferred to first consult with Cecil, who provided detailed instructions on what and how to report to the queen during their highest audience. English ambassadors abroad were also given instructions by Cecil. The queen had to make do with only the information deemed appropriate to share with her. Cecil not only selected the information but also presented it in a way that suited the political course established by the council. Since the queen rarely attended council meetings, the emphasis could be shifted, weakening or strengthening certain circumstances. If the queen persisted and the desired decision was not made, Cecil did not hesitate to resort to ordinary blackmail, threatening to resign. Without him, Elizabeth was like a ship without sails, so what absolute power of the monarch are we talking about? - she had to agree.
Of course, Elizabeth was not pleased with the situation. She tried to resist the information blockade by obtaining the necessary information herself, intercepting foreign envoys, or interrogating each advisor individually, and then drawing her own conclusions from what they said. However, in this fierce battle of information, victory was not on her side. It is precisely for this reason, and not just because of Elizabeth's character traits (as is commonly believed), that this strange and extremely obstructive phenomenon of the English court arose - decisions were made extremely slowly, through a series of procrastinations and endless postponements "for later." Elizabeth, feeling the lack of information and not trusting her advisors, preferred not to make any decisions out of fear of making the wrong one. While she double-checked the information, calculated and pondered, her answer to the advisors was always the same: "no answer," and time passed, circumstances changed, requiring a new approach, and the opportunity to do something (and thus, to act!) was irretrievably lost. This did not favor the conduct of state affairs and the public good. Cecil himself lamented the months and even years that went by, regretting missed opportunities. In 1573, he compiled a remarkable document titled "On certain matters where delays and tardiness by Her Majesty have led not only to inconveniences and increased expenses but also to dangers." Elizabeth read Cecil's report, but her behavior did not change at all. Of course, it would be too simple to reduce the problem to just an information war. Elizabeth's unprecedented slowness was her tactic even when all the circumstances of the case were well known to her. Clearly, there was another message. What exactly was it? This question cannot be answered without considering another question: what did Elizabeth base her decisions on? Was there an idea at the core of her power (her reign)? Elizabeth constantly spoke of her divine providence and how her entire reign was dedicated to caring for her beloved people. Her duty, she claimed, was to be the queen and to use her royal power, rather than as a means to achieve higher goals, but as an end in itself. ... Perhaps Queen Elizabeth did serve God, but certainly not her people.
Nevertheless, careful analysis of numerous sources reveals another, more specific, concrete, and purely prosaic goal that guided almost every action of Elizabeth. This goal was the preservation of her own life. The circumstances of Elizabeth's birth (at the time, there was serious discussion at the English court about whether Henry VIII was her real father) and the fact that the king divorced her mother, initially depriving Elizabeth of her right to the throne, made her royal position extremely complex and unstable. Throughout her 45-year reign, there were always those who wished to challenge her right to the throne. Elizabeth quickly realized and accepted the fact that the throne was only a step away from the scaffold, so she constantly feared taking that wrong step and preferred to stay in place for as long as possible. The essence of her procrastination lay in her internal insecurity and fear. Avoiding problems and relying on their self-resolution were a real curse of Elizabeth's long reign. She procrastinated because she was deeply afraid of any decisive measures that could disrupt the illusory, ephemeral, but still balance in her surrounding world. She believed that if she remained silent and motionless, troubles and death would not notice her and pass her by. This was an entirely un-regal, but deeply ingrained female tactic and strategy.
