lived, from an early age she was treated as the future sovereign of England. At the age of six she was betrothed to her cousin, the Emperor Charles V., whose son she was destined long afterwards to wed. Carefully educated under the supervision of Catherine, by such tutors as Linacre and Ludovicus Vives, she was intrusted from her birth to Margaret Plantagenet, countess of Salisbury, the mother of Reginald Pole, who exerted afterwards so baneful an influence on the policy of Mary as queen. The match with Charles V., like several others contemplated then and subsequently, came to nothing; and in 1525, if not with the title, at least with all the pomp of princess of Wales, she took up her residence at Ludlow castle, where a court was formed for her. The Mary of this period is described as beautiful and engaging, and of acquirements considerable for her years. When she returned from Ludlow to her father's court, and mingled in its gaieties, she was a favourite of himself as of the people, until the divorce of her mother altered her position and prospects. Disinherited and declared illegitimate after the birth of Elizabeth, Mary refused to acquiesce in the decision, and was punished by contumelious treatment. Her separate establishment was taken from her; she was deprived of the companionship of the countess of Salisbury, and treated more like a prisoner than a princess during her residence at Hunsdon with her infant sister. After the execution of Anne Boleyn, however, she was restored to the paternal favour, and in 1544 was placed by act of parliament in the list of succession to the throne after Prince Edward and his heirs, and Henry's possible children by Katherine Parr or any succeeding wife. Her reconciliation with her father had been preceded by her subscription of a document in which she had acknowledged the king's ecclesiastical supremacy, disavowed the jurisdiction of the pope, and even declared the marriage of Catherine her mother to have been "by God's law and man's law incestuous and unlawful." But this compliance was very far from protestantism. When the Reformation made new strides after the accession of her brother Edward VI., Mary, the heir-presumptive to the throne, was found adhering to the ancient faith and ritual, and her proceedings were a thorn in the side of the king and his councillors. Every attempt to induce her to give up the celebration of the mass was unsuccessful. She became the rallying point both of the extreme catholic party and of those who, while disclaiming with Henry the papal supremacy, viewed with regret the abolition of the ancient ritual. Political circumstances, the distress of the country, the disorganization of the government as administered by Northumberland, gave Mary, towards the close of Edward's reign, a certain popularity even with the masses. It was increased by the last of Northumberland's triumphs, when he induced the dying Edward to alter the succession without an act of parliament, and to bequeath the crown to his own son's wife. Lady Jane Grey. Neither nobility nor people could brook the meditated renewal of Northumberland's supremacy. The reign of the innocent and ill-fated Jane lasted only a few days—(see Grey, Lady Jane)—and on the 17th of July, 1553, amid the acclamations of the people, Mary was proclaimed Queen at Cheapside. The blooming and joyous maiden had grown into a hard-featured woman, on whom vicissitude and obstruction had exerted no chastening influence. Before the year had closed all was changed in England; Gardiner was chancellor, while Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer were prisoners in the Tower. So early as the 24th of August mass was said in St. Paul's church in Latin. Married priests were forced to abandon either their wives or their benefices. The parliament, which met on the 6th of October, was in ecclesiastical matters as subservient as could be desired; and the house of commons, by a majority of three hundred and fifty to eighty, restored the mass and decreed the celibacy of the clergy. Last, not least, in spite of the strong opposition ,both of parliament and people, the queen arranged a treaty of marriage between herself and Philip, afterwards Philip II., the son of Charles V. The discontent of the protestant nobles was aggravated to the uttermost by the Spanish match, and the result was Wyatt's insurrection (January to February, 1554). When Wyatt and his bands entered London they were crushed—the queen herself behaving during the crisis with spirit—and the new régime was strengthened for the time by the insurrection. Mary's vengeance was swift and terrible. On the 12th of February the innocent Lady Jane Grey was beheaded, and the insurgents were hung in London by the hundred. Mary had triumphed, and after a proxy marriage on the 6th of March, she was formally wedded to Philip in person, 23rd July, 1554, in Winchester cathedral. In the following October, another parliament met, which received Cardinal Pole as the pope's legate, and made in the name of England a submission to the see of Rome, only incomplete in this, that the church lands grasped at the Reformation were not surrendered to their original owners. Nothing else was wanting. The act against the Lollards was revived, and the powers of the inquisition were conferred on the Bishops' courts. On the 4th of February, 1555, the proto-martyr Rogers was burned in Smithfield. Yet Mary was not happy. She soon discovered that the husband whom she idolized did not love her. The heir to the throne, whom she was continually expecting, and for whom, more than once, a pompous reception was prepared, failed to arrive. The symptoms which she had misinterpreted were those of dropsical disease. Each disappointment of this kind was a signal for the renewal or the quickened action of what has been called the "Marian persecution." Even Philip, from motives of mere policy, as seems clear from Mr. Froude's researches, was adverse to the course which things were taking, and wearied of his bride, resolved to quit England. The approaching abdication of Charles V. furnished a pretext, and in the August of 1555 he left for the continent. Reports of his infidelity while absent drove the queen still nearer to distraction, and she consented to do all that Pole required. In October Ridley and Latimer were burned, and Cranmer in the following March. Compared with Pole, even Gardiner was a moderate man, and Gardiner died in the November of 1555. The day after the burning of Cranmer, Pole was appointed archbishop of Canterbury, and while he held the see the persecution reached its acmé. To persecution at home was now added disaster abroad. In the March of 1557, Philip paid a brief visit to England, and this country was led to join him in his war with France. The result was that on the 6th of January, 1558, after a siege of five days, the English forces in Calais surrendered to the duke of Guise the last of England's possessions on the soil of France. The blow was felt deeply in England; even an invasion was feared; and the parliament voted a general armament of the country for its defence. Yet even amid these preparations the persecution did not relax. The victim was not now allowed to escape from death by recantation itself. But the end was approaching. The last burning was of two men and two women at Canterbury in the beginning of November. On the 17th of the same month the queen, who in September had added to her constitutional malady a fever then raging, and whose death had for some time been anticipated, expired at St. James'. According to old tradition (unsupported by any authentic evidence) she is reported to have said on her death-bed, that if her body was opened Calais would be found written on her heart.—F. E.
MARY II., of England, born in London in 1662, was the eldest daughter of James II., then duke of York, and of Anne Hyde, daughter of Lord Clarendon. Notwithstanding her father's adherence to the Roman catholic religion, she was educated in protestant principles, and at the early age of fifteen she became the wife of William, prince of Orange; her father's repugnance to her union with so zealous a supporter of the Reformation being overruled by his brother Charles II., who deemed it likely to diminish the duke's unpopularity. She spent the next twelve years of her life in Holland, and the influence which her husband's abilities and force of character acquired over her mind, was associated with an attachment to him which has seldom been surpassed in strength and devotedness. When the infatuated and obstinate despotism of James roused his subjects to deprive him of the English throne, it was in complete accordance with her wishes that William should share the sovereignty with her, and even take precedence of her in its administration; their names were conjoined in the parliamentary votes and the oath of allegiance at the Revolution. She had not accompanied her husband from Holland in 1688, but in the beginning of the next year she arrived in London. On reaching Whitehall she displayed a levity of exultation, which was construed by many as a proof that she had sacrificed her filial affection at the shrine of her conjugal attachment. The little restraint, however, which James experienced, and the ease with which he effected his escape, may be viewed as confirming the report that she stipulated with her husband for his safety; and there is little doubt that her gaiety at Whitehall was artfully assumed for the occasion. The events
