Henry VIII (1491-1547) and Wives

[Menarue]

King Henry VIII was given the title of Defender of the Faith by Pope Leo X as a recognition of his pamphlet "Sacramentorum Adversus Martinum Lutherum" which is "Declaration of the Seven Sacraments against Martin Luther" which of course meant it was meant as a defence of the Catholic religion, Pope Paul III deprived him of this title, which is only natural, when he defied the Church and divorced Catherine of Aragon.
He restored this title for himself and his posterity in 1544, of course the Faith defended was no longer the Roman Catholic Church.
The Anglican Church is still a Catholic church, catholic meaning universal, it is just not
Roman Catholic.
I believe that Henry at the time had purely selfish reasons (as Iowabelle said so well)
and these selfish reasons were the basis for the break with Rome and the Pope´authority, but not a break with the religion he was brought up in

 

[Iluvbertie]

King Henry VIII was given the title of Defender of the Faith by Pope Leo X as a recognition of his pamphlet "Sacramentorum Adversus Martinum Lutherum" which is "Declaration of the Seven Sacraments against Martin Luther" which of course meant it was meant as a defence of the Catholic religion, Pope Paul III deprived him of this title, which is only natural, when he defied the Church and divorced Catherine of Aragon.
He restored this title for himself and his posterity in 1544, of course the Faith defended was no longer the Roman Catholic Church.
The Anglican Church is still a Catholic church, catholic meaning universal, it is just not
Roman Catholic.
I believe that Henry at the time had purely selfish reasons (as Iowabelle said so well)
and these selfish reasons were the basis for the break with Rome and the Pope´authority, but not a break with the religion he was brought up in

I don't regard concern for the future of one's kingdom as selfish.

Remember that Henry didn't have the example we have of successful Queens Regnant that we do and so was concerned that he didn't have a son to inherit the throne. He feared a return to civil war if he couldn't leave a secure heir and a male would be that security. The only previous attempt at a Queen Regnant was Maud/Matilda that led to the Anarchy under Steven. There was also very strong Church teachings about the role and place of woman (that even caused a lot of problems for Elizabeth with, throughout her reign, some preachers arguing against her as Queen simply because she was a woman).

If he had a son I doubt if he would have considered divorcing Katherine. I believe he loved her and would have remained with her if they had had a son.

He feared the destruction that a lack of an heir would bring and so put aside a beloved wife, and a Church he also believed in, for a country he held dear - hardly a selfish act really.

 

[Menarue]

His obsession for Anne Boleyn wasn´t selfish? He wanted Anne and so he said that Catherine couldn´t have a son (actually she did but her children never servived long or she suffered miscarriages) a newer model with the possibility of an heir appeared in the form of the very beguiling Anne, but if you think he made a sacrifice for his country by lusting after Anne I think you are making a mistake, but that is my opinion. With Anne, when she aborted a son, he is supposed to have said "you will have no more sons by me" but she could have had many more but once again Henry made the "sacrifice" of having her beheaded on a trumped up accusation and married Jane, who was said to be already pregnant.

 

[Iluvbertie]

His obsession for Anne Boleyn wasn´t selfish? He wanted Anne and so he said that Catherine couldn´t have a son (actually she did but her children never servived long or she suffered miscarriages) a newer model with the possibility of an heir appeared in the form of the very beguiling Anne, but if you think he made a sacrifice for his country by lusting after Anne I think you are making a mistake, but that is my opinion. With Anne, when she aborted a son, he is supposed to have said "you will have no more sons by me" but she could have had many more but once again Henry made the "sacrifice" of having her beheaded on a trumped up accusation and married Jane, who was said to be already pregnant.

From all accounts that I have read he was in love with Katherine and gave no indication of wanting to give her up until it was clear that she could no longer have any chance of a son.

Once that happened he was able to look at a mistress as a potential wife.

However, don't ignore his own religious beliefs in all this as well. He did see his failure to father a legitimate son as God's judgement on his marriage.

He was also manipulated by his councillors. He wasn't the autocrat that many people see him as but he did trust his councillors and many of them were anti-the Boleyn faction and were able to poison his mind against Anne. Sure he was taken with Jane but again he trying hard to get a son and Anne's failure was also a sign to him that she wasn't right in God's eyes.

This determination to see Henry as some evil monster always annoys me as I have read copious material on him and his daughter from the time and find it more one of a man, who was a product of his time and the demands of his kingdom with strong religious and political considerations and manipulations going on around him. He needed a son and, to him, his first priority - for the good of his kingdom, was to secure the throne and that could only be done with a son so if a few women had to be sacrificed that was a small price to pay for the security of the succession. Just as Elizabeth refused to name a successor, for her own and that successor's safety, Henry insisted on having a son to ensure a secure succession.

 

[Menarue]

I would never brand him as uncaring for his people and kingdom. He was hailed as the perfect prince in looks and deeds when he first came to the throne and I have no doubt that he was in love with Catherine, in fact they say he envied his older brother when she married him and when he was asked to marry her he was more than willing. She was older than he was and I think that took a toll as well, as she started to look more and more matronly and he was still a young man.
Anne Boleyn attracted him so he joined the necessity for an heir to the desire for a younger woman.
Don´t forget he took one look at Anne of Cleves and decided he wasn´t going to have her whether she could potentially give him another heir or not, and it was an insurance for the succession to have another son, obviously the kingdom was important to him but he wanted someone more attractive to make him that patriotic.
I believe that Henry started off as good King and as far as England was concerned he was, and when he died he left a very prosperous country to his successors, but as a man he was selfish and self-righteous but no more than any other king at that time. He gained a bad reputation because of his treatment of his wives, particularly Catherine and then Anne Boleyn. Catherine was very badly treated and if he loved her or even remembered how he loved her he should never have treated her the way he did, especially the way he separated her from her daughter, mainly because of the influence of Anne, who no one could say was a likeable person, which doesn´t mean she deserved the trumped up trial and execution.

 

[Zonk]

Well...this is going to sound mean...but sometimes you get what you sow.

Yes, it does appear (at least to me) that Anne was executed unfairly and without cause. But she was guilty of something!

I say you get what you sow because it does appear that she wanted nothing less than the destruction of Catherine and her daughter. How heartless of both of them to deprieve Mary and Catherine of each other's company? To let Catherine, who was guilty of nothing other than loving her husband and believing in the legitimacy of her marriage, not to mention the daughter of a true King and Queen to live and die in squalor conditions?!

She might have been innocent of adultery but she was certainly guilty of something.

 

[Australian]

Just a random question.......When Anne of Cleves and Henry were divorced, what was Anne's title? I know the King bestowed upon her the title of 'Kings Sister' (i may be mistaken)....but was she given a Duchy or anything?

Or perhaps escaping the chopping block was reward/ compensation enough!!

 

[Lady Ann]

this is the information supplied by Wiki, I hope it answers your question:
The former queen received a generous settlement, including Richmond Palace, and Hever Castle, home of Henry's former in-laws, the Boleyns. Anne of Cleves House, in Lewes, Sussex, is just one of many properties she owned; she never lived there. Henry and Anne became good friends - she was an honourary member of the King's family[7] and was referred to as "the King's Beloved Sister".

 

[Menarue]

I think we can all say "Lucky Anne of Cleves" and from what I have read she knew it and was very happy to be his "sister".

 

[Iluvbertie]

I would never brand him as uncaring for his people and kingdom. He was hailed as the perfect prince in looks and deeds when he first came to the throne and I have no doubt that he was in love with Catherine, in fact they say he envied his older brother when she married him and when he was asked to marry her he was more than willing. She was older than he was and I think that took a toll as well, as she started to look more and more matronly and he was still a young man.
Anne Boleyn attracted him so he joined the necessity for an heir to the desire for a younger woman.
Don´t forget he took one look at Anne of Cleves and decided he wasn´t going to have her whether she could potentially give him another heir or not, and it was an insurance for the succession to have another son, obviously the kingdom was important to him but he wanted someone more attractive to make him that patriotic.
I believe that Henry started off as good King and as far as England was concerned he was, and when he died he left a very prosperous country to his successors, but as a man he was selfish and self-righteous but no more than any other king at that time. He gained a bad reputation because of his treatment of his wives, particularly Catherine and then Anne Boleyn. Catherine was very badly treated and if he loved her or even remembered how he loved her he should never have treated her the way he did, especially the way he separated her from her daughter, mainly because of the influence of Anne, who no one could say was a likeable person, which doesn´t mean she deserved the trumped up trial and execution.

So are you saying that if he had had a son or two with Katherine of Aragon he would have still divorced her to get Anne Boleyn?

I would argue that the answer is absolutely not.

He would not have divorced Katherine if he already had a son to inherit the throne - regardless of how beautiful, sensual etc she was or how lustful he was.

He had had mistresses already and at least one illegitimate son but he needed a legitimate one. He didn't marry that idea to getting Anne - it was the abiding need of his life - to secure the throne and dynasty. To do anything less would be completely to abandon England to an uncertain future and civil war on his death.

No king, who cares about his people and kingdom, would ever plan to leave civil war as their legacy. Henry was such a man. Unfortunately his methods are seen as selfish rather than as a political necessity for the good of the realm.

After Jane died, sure he married Anne of Cleves. However, if, as reported, he wasn't attracted to her then the chances of mating and therefore having a second son is markedly reduced. So again his desire to secure the succession saw him divorce a second wife and marry another young girl - with the aim to have that second son. Her total stupidity cost her the chance to be the mother of a future king - a sensible Catherine Howard would have held off until the son was safely delivered, knowing that Henry would almost forgive her anything with a second son. A cheating Queen is untenable - afterall the succession has to be a pure bloodline and so a King (and a Prince of Wales for that matter) has to be sure that the child being carried is his for the sake of the bloodline hence her stupidity cost her her life. After that he just wanted some companionship and a wife can give that.

Henry was a great king whose desire was a great England secure under Tudor kings and a country in which the English king was in charge rather have an outsider interfere. He achieved most of that, or laid the groundwork for it in the reign of his daughter. The fact that he didn't have any legitimate grandchildren did lead to the succession question raising its head again during Elizabeth's reign (and it was a concern for much of the reign).

 

[Pier Gerlofs Donia]

Does Henry VIII have living decendants that we know of, as of today? I suppose they would be born to his illegimate offspring then, but I always wondered if there were any nowadays...

 

[Lady Ann]

No he does not, He only had three children that lived to adulthood and they all died without issue.

 

[Grace Angel]

It's unlikely but possible he has illegitimate descendents alive today. His bastard son Henry Fitzroy died as a teenager leaving no descendents, but it has been speculated that some of Mary Boleyn's kids might have been his- she was his mistress, although she was married. Anyone know of any descendents of her children? Henry had no other rumored illegitimate children, but he did have mistresses. Obviously, he never had another illegitimate son other than Fitzroy, or he would have acknowledged the child, one thinks, unless the paternity was uncertain.

 

[Lady Ann]

It was Mary's son Henry Carey that was rumored to be Henry VIII's son he was said to look alot like the King but the King never claimed him she also had her daughter Cathreine Carey, she only had two other children from her second marriage Anne Stafford and a son Edward he only lived to about the age of 10 years old I believe. I read somewhere there was decendents of Mary boylen. I know she had grandchildren her grandson Lord Hunsdon got or claimed the Boylen family title of (Earl of Ormonde) but that was around 1597 or so i am not sure after that. I will have to look it up.

Wow I just read that Henry Carey and his wife Ann Mogan had 12 children and his sister Catherine had 15 it seems more and more likely that Mary Bolyen would have some decendents...

 

[Menarue]

I have been looking and I have found quite a few descendants of Mary Boleyn alive today, so there may be descendants of Henry VIII around.

 

[Royal Fan]

When he was having the Affair with Lady Mary was he Married Divorced ect ect

 

[iowabelle]

Married to Catherine of Aragon. After all, having a mistress (or multiples) was de rigeur for a king, wasn't it?

 

[Grace Angel]

I think he had been certain about the paternity of Mary's son he would have said so, but it's still possible he was the father. Lettice Knollys, I believe a descendent of Mary Boleyn was suspiciously a look alike to Elizabeth I. Of course they were cousins through the Mary B and Anne B but still. I'm sure Henry also had mistresses that time didn't record.

 

[iowabelle]

For those of us who want to know apparently there's a new book coming out called Mistresses of Henry VIII by Kelly Hart. I saw it advertised in Majesty magazine today... according to the ad, there were a dozen ladies.

Among the ones listed: Bessie Blount; Mary Boleyn; Lady Anne Stafford; Jane Popincourt, his sisters’ French tutor; poet Mary Shelton; Elizabeth Amadas, a ‘witch and prophetess’; Elizabeth Brooke; Étienette; Anne Bassett, her stepfather was H8's illegitimate uncle; as well as women he kept in secret houses and the wives of two of his close friends. I had never heard of some of these so I can't vouch for the accuracy of the book -- but it should be interesting.

 

[Grace Angel]

Thanks for letting us know! Yes, that book does have a timely topic- as I am quite curious on this issue and so are a number of others. I wonder what if the book considers the issue that he might have had illegitimate children other than Henry Fitzroy, his son with Elizabeth Blount, who died in his teens.

 

[iowabelle]

I don't know... but my guess is, that if Henry had been aware of an illegitimate son, he would have tried some legal maneuvering to get it legitimized. I wasn't aware that he had tried that with Henry Fitzroy, but I guess he did... not that it mattered in the end. (And wouldn't that have messed up the rules governing succession when that came to Charles II and his herds of children??)

 

[Grace Angel]

I agree if he had other illegitimate children, that is sons, he seems not to have been aware of them. Henry Fitzroy died in his teens but I believe Henry had already married him off and would have used him as regards the sucession if Edward had died before Henry. Henry was a man obsessed with sons, yet both his known sons died young, and it was his daughter that saved England, and ruled a long time. Anyway, I look forward to that book.

 

[Menarue]

From what I have read about Henry he was willing to shower honours on his illegitimate chidren but would never ever make them Kings of England. What he wanted was a legitimate heir,he believed that only a legitimate heir would be safe and continue the monarchy.

 

[Iluvbertie]

From what I have read about Henry he was willing to shower honours on his illegitimate chidren but would never ever make them Kings of England. What he wanted was a legitimate heir,he believed that only a legitimate heir would be safe and continue the monarchy.

He not only believed in the necessity of the heir being legitimate he also had to be male, as he believed that only a King could properly rule the country.

 

[Grace Angel]

He did briefly entertain the idea of doing something with Fitzroy and the sucession though. He had Fitzroy be given a title ( Duke of Richmond?) I think and married him off to a member of the nobility. I believe there were observers of the time who thought he might use Fitzroy in the sucession if he had to, but that never came to pass. Still, the idea crossed the minds of contemporaries, and it seens Henry too.

 

[Kotroman]

From what I have read about Henry he was willing to shower honours on his illegitimate chidren but would never ever make them Kings of England. What he wanted was a legitimate heir,he believed that only a legitimate heir would be safe and continue the monarchy.

I agree! I believe that Mary had better chances for being designated heir-presumptive than Fitzroy. Henry VIII wanted a male heir indeed, but I think legitimacy was more important to him. He wanted his children by Anne Boleyn to be legitimate so badly that he broke off with Rome - which is a major decision! Had he not cared about legitimacy, he would have never bothered with establishing a new church in order to marry his mistress.

 

[Grace Angel]

I think he would have prefered a legitimate heir, yes. I think he wouldn't have used Fitzroy as a possible heir unless he had gotten desperate, but I think he had the possibility at the back of his mind. There was the idea of Mary and Fitzroy marrying- but in the end he was married off young to a noblewoman. As it happened, Henry did get a legitimate son so Fitzroy never was used, and Fitzroy died young anyway.

 

[iowabelle]

I think it would have been a very tricky issue to legitimize a bastard son.

To set the chronology straight, Henry Fitzroy died in July 1536, and Edward VI was born in October 1537, so it wasn't a matter of Fitzroy being replaced by Edward VI, Fitzroy was already dead.

 

[Kotroman]

There was the idea of Mary and Fitzroy marrying.

Could you please provide a source for this statement? I find it hard to believe that anyone seriously considered arranging marriage between brother and sister in a 16th-century-Christian-kingdom

 

[iowabelle]

That couldn't have been a serious idea, could it?

Even though I can't give a footnote for it, I think Henry was concerned very early on about the possibility that he might have committed incest by sleeping with his brother's wife (and thus he deserved punishment from God, so no sons), so this would really have been an outrageous idea.