On the subject of the Spanish, let us not forget the Spanish Inquisition! Because as of yet, no one has brought up that little footnote.

Who gave no quarter to captured English sailors and tried and convicted them them based on their nationality as being heretics. They were either killed or committed to slavery. They also similarly raided English and Dutch trading vessels. Piracy as you call it was practiced by all seafaring European nations at the time. Available to anyone who requested a letter of Marque and were legalized to go out and plunder enemy nations vessels. The English are only remembered because they were exceptionally good at it and because this is America, former British colony. Who also have engaged in privateering might I add. (Against Cuban fishing vessels cit.”The Paquete Habana”1900) But I’m going to say that at the time the Spanish and the French were doing exactly the same thing. So no, Elizabeth the I did not allow piracy to thrive, it was already thriving.

On the subject of Mary, Queen of Scots as Elisabetta pointed out, received a very gracious end. She was allowed (as was her royal privilege) to request her own swordsman from France to conduct her beheading. (Instead of say receiving the Axe or being drawn and quartered by four angry horses or being set on fire, the accepted method of death for traitors) And her own son was named Elizabeth’s heir and sat on the English throne after her death. Naming his own daughter Elizabeth.

She was a very intelligent woman who mastered court politics, playing the marriage game for the entirety of her 60 year reign and managing power (while staving off both assassination and war) as the only female ruler in Europe at the time. She also spoke I believe at least four languages as well as being highly educated. (Something a little more unique during her time period.) She was balancing the religious fallout from the three previous rulers (and yes, I do count her younger brother Edward, who’s regents attempted to be even more radical in their attempts to make the country protestant.) Her sister, who then went back and tried to forcibly turn the country Catholic. (Not to mention her father, where the entirety of this trouble occurs.) She was forced to play a balancing act between the three sects (Protestant, Anglican, and Catholic), reinstating Anglicanism as the primary religion. There was already incredible amounts of bad blood between the Catholics and the Anglicans. Essentially, her reign was based around trying to fend off invasion from at least two hostile countries while trying to maintain her own independence as queen.

She also inherited a country that was almost virtually broke. (By her father’s excesses and others.) She faced the possibility of war on many fronts, (nearly every catholic country surrounding her nation) all that desired to conquer

She is to this day considered to be one of the finest rulers that England has ever had, celebrated and beloved by the people of during her reign and well after. (Several Shakespeare plays document this, including those written during James’ reign, which play upon the people’s wanting for a return of Elizabeth, if you want a more popular resource.)

Yes, the Tudors were an interesting bunch, yes many people died. (Though, comparatively to other countries at the time not that many.) But on the whole her people did not suffer, she had their love and their respect. She was under pressure even late in her reign to produce an heir to stop an impending fight for the English crown, but she even solved that problem by naming and cementing James as her heir. (Once again fighting off the outside French threat.)

I’ll give you that Ireland was a bad idea for an invasion, but for the most part they drove the English back. Besides, they weren’t being attacked because they were Catholic.

She most certainly was not a saint, but if she had been, she would not have survived. In addition, she and Queen Victoria are both remembered as being the greatest monarchs in English history. And not every part of that has to do with good press.

But I’m rambling and since, Elisabetta has already made these points (except perhaps the Inquisition, because no one expects the Spanish Inquisition) So I’ll stop. And if Elisabetta hasn’t convinced you by this point, I doubt I will.

But I do get the feeling that you do not have a firm grasp on the politics of the time, are judging by the moral values of the 21st century, and seem to be biased towards the Catholics. (Who were their own box of interesting frootloops.) Perhaps you feel they’ve been misrepresented? I don’t know. Anyway, interesting list. Cheerio.