So you’d rather live in the 16th century?
The 16th century was bad news if you were a Protestant, Catholic or neither of the above. It was hard work trying to keep track. You’d just convinced the religion police that you were a Catholic by hiding your hair vest behind a life size picture of the pope and throwing rosary beads all over your furniture when a text message would come through - ‘can u start burning Catholics again m8′. You would groan and hope that Henry VIII got the hots for a Catholic before the flames had reached your vital organs.
As you can see, the favoured mode of mass murder this century was religion. The sensible option would appear to be the atheist route, but, as in the American south today, religion was compulsory. You had to believe in something, but whatever that was changed from day to day. It kept a half nation on its toes and the other half on a pyre. It meant Sundays were never boring.
The King, Henry, does an Elvis
The other popular form of mass murder if you were monarch was lopping off the heads of women who no longer gave you a kingly arousal. Unfortunately, this was before the invention of Viagra or else Anne Boleyn might have kept her head attached to her neck. And to think all those Catholics were burned because Henry VIII had wanted to get his leg over with Anne and the killjoy pope wouldn’t let him. Not that Henry VIII had always been an overweight serial killer. In his younger days, before he did an Elvis, Henry had been quite a dashing athlete, striding about the place hitting tennis balls and killing alligators with his bare hands. Then he started eating meat by the cow and his health declined.
The 16th century was also bad news if you were a hot blooded daughter of Henry VIII. Just when you should have been getting your leg over with Robert Dudley and Walter Raleigh you were busy being the virgin Queen, clamped firmly into a chastity belt, skin as pale as an overexposed photograph of snow. Your only outlet being the destruction of hapless Spanish fleets, which did cheer the nation up for a moment.
Of course the 16th century wasn’t all bad, the Tudors knew how to throw a party, the world hadn’t started beating us at all the games we invented yet and there were more independent shops on the high street. But waking up every morning trying to guess whether you should go to mass or wear black became wearisome. Are you sure you’d rather live in the 16th century?
Person to be in the 16th century - Henry’s pal
Person not to be in the 16th century - Henry’s ex-pal
Posted: June 9th, 2005 under Living in the Past.
Comments: 10
Comments
Comment from Scott
Time: June 9, 2005, 10:32 pm
I love your blog and on this topic, the guy making the most money……the Executioner!
Comment from Ophir’s Razor
Time: June 10, 2005, 12:00 am
Atheists like Joseph Stalin have killed far more people than religious types ever have. By his own admission at Yalta, he killed over 20 million. Thrown in Mao and Pol Pot, and you can chalk up another 18 million to Atheism.
Besides losing the body count game, your article seems mutually (and quite fallaciously) to wish to blame the deaths caused by any one religion on all the others. This would be like blaming democrats today for the invasion of Iraq — by first blaming it all on “politics” and then noting that the Democrats are just as political as Republicans.
More logic, less rant.
Comment from Marlowe
Time: June 10, 2005, 10:39 am
Thanks Scott, glad you enjoy it.
Ophir’s Razor, a ‘rant’? I hardly think so. It was about the 16th century, if I was going to rant about anything I’d try to be a bit more topical. Anyway, I don’t follow your logic or see how what you say has anything to do with my post.
Comment from Scott
Time: June 10, 2005, 1:48 pm
Ophir’s Razor’s comment has lost the plot, I think he has taken what happened 4 hundred years ago rather personally. Perhaps with a name like Razor, his family were executioners and he is trying to divert our attention to his family’s macabre past…lol
Comment from Marlowe
Time: June 10, 2005, 6:58 pm
I expect to have Henry VIII fans on my back next, Scott.
Comment from lingling
Time: June 18, 2005, 8:33 pm
“as in the American south today, religion was compulsory”
Too true!!!! and funny as hell, your whole blog.
Comment from Marlowe
Time: June 18, 2005, 10:53 pm
Thanks lingling! It’s good to get a message like yours after spending ages deleting all the spam messages someone decided to attack my site with while I was on holiday. Over 200 of them!
Comment from Sheikela
Time: March 8, 2006, 5:27 pm
I think when you live in the 16th century you should be treated the same as every bodyelse and it dont matter if you are a catholic or not it shoyuldnt of been hard for any of the people who lived in the 16th century.
when you get presure put onto you it aint nice so why should the people in the 16th century have to put up with more then presure
Comment from shnatle
Time: March 8, 2006, 5:43 pm
In the 16th century it was hard 4 a lot of people, in the 16th century evey person was treated different for who they were if you were a catholic you were treated bad, if ou were not a catholic you were treated bad.
what happened to the peaople in the 16th century how they were treated was how people felt people should have been treated for not bein the same.
this was cariied on for centurys but someone some where put a stop to it. Now days you would get treated different for who you are but you wouldnt be punished and in danger.
Comment from Blighty
Time: April 29, 2006, 9:11 pm
Sheikela and shnatle, you two should get together.
Write a comment