4.5 starsNo one could guess what the soul of a woman was capable of...- Stefan Zweig: Mary Stuart (1935)Aroused by the differing opinions on this controversial queen, Stefan Zweig sought to illuminate the view of the legend, not within the typical frame of researching a historical figure, but by psychological profiling of the protagonist, giving this biography the uniqueness of a dramatic thriller. He would interpret Mary Stuart as a strong-willed person but easily misdirected by her passion and idealized romantic values, who carved out her own destiny with flawed judgement to her ill-fated end.A political pawn from birth, Mary Stuart was used to secure Scotland's and France's alliance. The same year Mary married the dauphin, Elizabeth succeeded Mary Tudor as queen of England. With issues still at hand over Elizabeth's illegitimacy, all the Catholic world thus viewed Mary Stuart the rightful claimant to the throne of England. This put Elizabeth politically on guard, making the most powerful woman in Europe a dangerous adversary of Mary's. Mary Stuart widow of Francis II Zweig perceived the recently widowed Mary's first impression on returning to Scotland like stepping backward 100 years, leaving behind a great civilization rich and luxurious: the sensual, refined and open-minded culture of France, in exchange for a narrow-minded one, ravaged and plundered for years, which kept no palace that could receive her with the dignity befitting her rank. From the moment Mary set foot to Scottish soil, she was made to battle her most formidable religious foe, John Knox, who defied the zealous Catholic Queen's rule over Church. Zweig believed Mary came "to realize that there were limits to her royal power," and, like a heroine from his novels, gave "way to her bitterness of soul in a passion of tears."As the country struggled through religious conflicts, rebellion and civil wars funded to undermine the throne of the Catholic Stuarts by none other than Queen Elizabeth, Mary's survival eventually came down to the war of the cousin-queens. A life or death battle took place between them and only death was able to settle the playing field. Zweig's analysis of the two monarchs uncovered the reasons why Mary lost that struggle.Unlike her royal cousin, Mary rose to power with good fortune, unmarred by scandal, a queen since infancy, and hardly more than a child when she was anointed a second time, anticipating a second throne; whereas Elizabeth fought illegitimacy and charges of treason, barely keeping her own head from being axed while imprisoned, eventually succeeded the throne from the half-sister who first sought to annihilate her.Not only did they differ in their rise as monarchs, but were equally different in feminine traits; their natures "were diametrically opposed." Mary was lighthearted, possessed a surplus of self-assurance, lacked seriousness of mind and lived for her own self-needs; her mind was stuffed with romance and she accepted her queenly position as a God-given right.Nature had not only excluded Elizabeth from motherhood - well, not voluntarily as she purported - but perforce that she remained a "virgin queen." She could neither feel, nor think, nor act unambiguously or naturally and quite incapable of yielding to complete self-abandonment. Elizabeth lived for her country, was a realist, contemplating her position as ruler and looking upon it as a profession. While Mary gave in to primal basic feminine instincts, Elizabeth learned from her past to have dominion and reserve over hers.Passion is needed in order that a woman may discover herself, in order that her character may expand to its true proportions; love and sorrow is needed for it to find its own magnitude.Mary innately succumbed to impulsivity and the passion of love; to be swept off her feet and swallowed up in her desires. For the sake of one moment of passionate accomplishment, she risked kingdom, power and sovereign dignity, setting a trap for herself that was planted with the conception of her husband's murder. When Zweig examined Mary's feverishly penned letter of the night of Darnley's murder, he concluded it was significant evidence of her collusion, written by a guilt- ridden person, wrestling with her conscience.We have a vision of black thoughts fluttering through the darkness like bats. Hatred flames up between the lines; compassion overwhelms it for a moment...it is not written alertly and clearly, but confusedly and stumblingly. It is not Mary's conscious mind that is speaking, so much as an inner self, the voice of trance and fatigue and fever- the subconsciousness with which it is so hard to get into touch, the realm of feeling that knows no shame. Very few documents have been preserved that revealed so admirably as this the hyperexcitability of one who is in the course of committing a crime.He exposed her hand in Darnley's murder like a forensic investigator in a psychological-noir, surmising that her motives were directed by reckless passion and foolhardiness, manipulated by the will of bullish persons - the likes of Bothwell. It is with this same folly and the belief in her infallibility as a sovereign that she later married Bothwell, defended him, maintaining that she could not separate herself from him: "for if she did so, his child, which she bore in her womb, would be a bastard." Regarded by this time as lightminded, she continued to live in a 'cloud', a confirmed romanticist, unable to foresee her doom as an inevitable reality.Conspiracy and intrigue up to the very last, Mary continued to ensnare herself in a net of her own making, while Cecil and Walsingham stood by to reel her in. Mary falls as a result of the impetuosity she imperially wore like a jeweled crown. Queen Elizabeth IAs for Elizabeth's part, Zweig diagnosed her as bipolar, hysterical, excessively theatrical, double-faced in nature; believing unequivocally that she fabricated her ignorance of the death warrant.One of the most remarkable capacities of persons of hysterical disposition is, not only their ability to be splendid liars, but to be imposed upon by their own falsehoods. For them the truth is what they want to be true, what they believe is what they wish to believe, so that their testimony may often be the most honorable of lies, and therefore the most dangerous.Zweig prescribes that from a political standpoint, England was right in ridding the world of Mary Stuart. Morally, however, the execution was an unjustifiable action considered in a time of peace, but more especially from one monarch by another. Although Zweig concluded that Mary Stuart was culpable of criminal actions, having never learned to act with caution or forethought, he praised her nobleness of character and called her a morally superior individual, while he condemned Elizabeth as a dissembling, political murderess. In Zweig's eyes, Mary Stuart achieved victory over Elizabeth in a spiritual sense: martyred, dying a hero's death.We all know the historical facts surrounding Mary Stuart, the most infamous of queens; and at this point, one more biography may not yield much difference than the next, especially one as dated as this. But seldom would we find a biographer such as Zweig whose flair for dramatizing psychological behavior in his characters brought freshness to a legend.Commendable, readable, recommended.Read 2009Reread June 2014
There has been a recent surge in interest of Scotland's infamous queen Mary Stewart. An exhibition is currently on at the national museum of Scotland, two films are currently in production about the life of Scotland's most tragic figure, as well as a TV series starting in October focusing on her years in France. After reading up the 2013 movie it was said that the book that gave the writer the most influence was a biography by playwright/biographer Stefan Zweig.From the moment of her birth Mary had been the centre of attention - queen at just six days old she was a coveted prize for both England and France, with Henry VIII going to war trying to procure her for his own son, Edward;an infamous struggle that became known as the rough wooing. Upon her death she was forever remembered through history as a martyr who died for her faith. Her final comment was said to be 'In my end is my beginning.' A true statement, as her memory is immortal in comparison with any other Stewart monarch before or after. Indeed, Mary's life had all the ingredients of a great drama: passion, danger, intrigue, deception, murder, and of course tragedy. Which is why she has fascinated many historians and film makers and authors over 400 years after her death.Zweig was of Austrian descent and has written numerous books in his lifetime, from fiction to biographies as well as theatrical work. This perhaps makes his biography of Mary Stewart a little different from others. Other biographies include Marie Antoinette: The Portrait of an Average Woman (1932), and Decisive Moments in History (1927).The Queen of Scots was first published in 1935 as Maria Stuart and chronicled the life of Mary, focusing mostly on her time in Scotland, with a little background to her father's reign, King James V. The biography stands out from others as it has more of a curiosity about the personalities of the players on the "stage", and also voices the author's strong belief that Mary was already having an affair with the Earl of Bothwell before the demise of Darnley, and it due to her dependence on Bothwell that she became weak and eventually lost her throne.The writing style differs from many biographies in that Zweig writes about the people as if they are characters in a play, dissecting their personalities to give a wider scope of why they did what they did. Zweig is very particular in using the facts but concentrates on the human aspect of the historical period rather than depending merely on facts to tell the story.Overall, it is an entertaining account of a fascinating and tragic woman, giving a slightly different perspective from other biographies. I recommend this to any fan of history, or those interested in Mary Queen of Scots.
What do You think about Marie Stuart (2001)?
Well, I wish I could say that I read French well enough to have read this French version...but I read the English version. Stefan Zweig was an amazing biographer. "Marie Antoinette" was his best work, in my opinion, and after reading this, the second book of his that I've read, I still think "Marie Antoinette" was better. But, Mary Queen of Scots was an excellent example of Zweig's most amazing talent--his ability to really get the reader inside the heads of his subjects. His writing gives so much insight into Queen Mary that you feel a real sense of knowing this person who died so long ago. Zweig also offered a great deal of insight into Queen Elizabeth I's mind as well--this book focuses on Elizabeth a great deal too. Overall, this was an excellent and insightful story of Mary's life, although the years of Mary's imprisonment were a bit less interesting to read about than the rest of her life. However, not much was happening in her life during those long years, so there was only so much that Zweig could really do with that time period--and to be fair, he did as good a job in making it interesting as anyone could. Overall, a great read, and I'm looking forward to his biography of Magellan, which is on my TBR list.
—Steven
Un libro excelente sobre una de las reinas más trágicas y conocidas del siglo XVI. Zweig presenta a María de Escocia como una mujer refinada, culta, pasiional, encantadora... Pero también incluye sus defectos: su ambición, su egoísmo, su carácter irreflexivo... Es revelador su contraste con su prima Isabel I de Inglaterra, una mujer luchadora y carismática, sacrificada por su pueblo que, pese a sus triunfos, no puede evitar sentir envidia en ocasiones por María Estuardo. Al final Isabel gana la batalla entre estas dos primas rivales. Es el retrato de toda una época, donde Zweig desmonta los falsos mitos de María: ella sabía del asesinato de Darnley; ella ambicionaba la corona inglesa, y su ambición y sus complots contra Isabel le acabaron costando la cabeza.An excellent book about one of the more tragic and well-known Queens in the XVI century. Zweig presents Mary Queen of Scots as refined, cultured, passional, charming... But he also writes about her flaws: her ambition, her selfishness, her thoughtless character... I found illuminating the contrast between Mary and her cousin, Queen Elizabeth I, a charming, fighter monarch who sacrificed herself for her people and who, despite her goals, can't help feeling envious towards Mary Stuart. At the end, Elizabeth won the battle of these rival cousins. This book is the portrait of an age, wher Zweig dismantles the myths about Mary: she was aware of Darnley's murder; she wanted the English crown, and her ambition and her plots against Elizabeth would lead Mary to loose her head
—Igor Garjón sanz
This is an excellent example of how a biographer is influenced by his culture. It was published in 1935, pre-dating not just modern feminism but the earliest stirrings of change in the role of women during WWII. "In spite of their superlative traits these two women remained women throughout, and were unable to overcome the weaknesses inherent in their sex," he says of Elizabeth I and Mary. "If..two kings had been faced by the same circumstances, they would have come to a firmer decision, declared war, countered one threat by another, set courage against courage." He proceeds to present their history as one of romantic gallantry (Mary) versus shrewishness and indecision (Elizabeth). He excuses Mary's conduct with Bothwell as the result of passion resulting in the abandonment of free will--"enthrallment," and attributes Elizabeth's conduct throughout her life to her "feminine infirmity." Regardless of your viewpoint on these two women, it's fascinating to see how this shapes the selection and interpretation of the facts.
—Karen
