On 7 Nov 2014 at 12:00pm TDA wrote:
Hello, historical bonfire query: the Pope gets blown up every year, but not Bloody Queen Mary. Is (was) there ever a reason why?
On 7 Nov 2014 at 12:48pm Ian wrote:
As in Mary Queen of Scots? You little tinker! Fishing are we? 
On 7 Nov 2014 at 1:02pm Curious wrote:
My (related) question is this. Given that the earliest reference to the burning of an effigy of the pope is in 1850, when Pope Pius IX restored the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England, and the effigy that was burned was undoubtedly that of the pope of the time, when was it that the Bonfire Societies started to claim that the papal effigy was, in fact, that of the pope who held the position at the time of the Gunpowder Plot? And who dreamt up this story?
On 7 Nov 2014 at 2:45pm TDA wrote:
Not at all Ian, honest! Maybe I'll ask again when the smoke, er, blows over.
On 8 Nov 2014 at 12:02am POPE wrote:
I thought it was the pope that was in power in 1555-1557, Pope Paul IV, was it the same pope in 1605 then.
On 8 Nov 2014 at 1:29am Curious wrote:
Both versions of the myth are found. The pope at the time of the Marian persecutions and the pope at the time of the Gunpowder Plot. My question is: when did either of these stories first start to be put about, given the undoubted fact that the early papal effigies burnt in the 1850s were effigies of the pope at the time (Plus IX).
I assume that the reason that a "historic" pope was brought into the story was that bonfire boys started to tone down the anti-Catholicism and replace it with a story of historic remembrance. But when was this?
On 8 Nov 2014 at 8:02am Ian wrote:
There is reference to Pope Paul V being burnt in 1679 in Lewes along with all the conspirators. Although it was not in effigy form as we know it, but as cutouts held aloft on sticks or poles. I expect that that reference was where whomever decided to take their lead from in order to tone down the anti Catholicism and make the event more Historical' as you said. The below link may help.
Check it out here »
On 8 Nov 2014 at 9:47am Time keeper wrote:
For an exact time of 1604 that's 4 minuets past four in old money
On 9 Nov 2014 at 8:32am Greg Kaye wrote:
I have long wondered what might have happened regarding chosen effigies if Mary had instead been a male monarch and/or if there had been no blood connection to Henry VIII. I think that actions taken through the Mariam persecutions might well have resulted in a more direct response.
On 9 Nov 2014 at 9:33am Danny Kaye wrote:
If Mary had been a man .Then Marian would of still persercuted him /her . So you can stop your long wondering now . Just look forward to a White Christmas
On 9 Nov 2014 at 10:36am Greg Kaye wrote:
The fact is that two main male figures, Guido and Paul, are burned and while one main female figure, Mary, is not. I think you missed the point of my post.
On 9 Nov 2014 at 9:22pm NF wrote:
Basic history lesson for Ian:
Bloody Mary and Mary queen of Scots were not the same person.
Thanks for playing.