Henry VIII (1491-1547) and Wives

[Russophile]

Polly, where did you find that info. on Elizabeth Rex? That is very interesting!

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Russophile

Polly, where did you find that info. on Elizabeth Rex? That is very interesting!

The answer can be found in the Elizabeth I thread.

[windsorbrides1]

Catherine Howard

Catherine's sunny personality coupled with her good looks instantly entranced the king, who, at the time of his first encounter with Catherine in 1540, was married to the strait-laced Anne of Cleves. In contrast to Queen Anne, Catherine, according to French ambassador Charles de Marillac, was "a young lady of extraordinary beauty" and of "superlative grace."

Small and slender, auburn-haired Catherine, then 15, most certainly had sexappeal. Contemporaries describe her as kind-hearted, good-natured, but empty-headed and frivolous -- all she cared for was dancing and merry-making.

The Six Wives of Henry VIII. Meet the Wives. Catherine Howard | PBS

[lexi4]

Polly,
Where does this information come from...This is from your last post:

"The Pope was about to grant Henry's wish for an annulment of his marriage to Katharine of Aragon, but he was surrounded by The Holy Roman Emperor's troops, who forced the Pope to deny Henry's wishes."
Pope Clement was boholden to Catherine's nephew Charles the V I know. What I am unaware of is that the Clement was about to grant Henry an annulment.
Henry got the title defender of the faith because of his writings against Luther. But in the end, Henry separated the Church Of England from the RCC.

[auntie]

Does the Duchy of Cleves exsisit today?

[Avalon]

The County of Cleves probably started its existence in the early 11th century. In 1417 the County became a Duchy.
In 1521 Julich, Berg and Mark (neighbouring cities of Counties) were united with Cleves under the rule of Duke John III (the father of Anne of Cleves).

When the last duke of Jülich-Cleves-Berg died issueless in 1609, a war broke out for the succession. In 1614 the duchy was divided between Palatinate-Neuburg and Brandenburg in the Treaty of Xanten. From 1701 Cleves was part of the Kingdom of Prussia. During the Seven Years' War (1757 - 1762), Cleves was occupied by France.

In 1795 the Duchy of Cleves left of the Rhine and Wesel was occupied by France, and became part of the French département of the Roer. The rest of the duchy was occupied between 1803 and 1805, and became part of the département Yssel-Supérieur and the puppet-state Grand Duchy of Berg.
In 1815, after the defeat of Napoleon, the duchy became part of the Prussian Province of Jülich-Cleves-Berg, except for a few cities, which became part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

[Elspeth]

I've moved the discussion of the movie "The Other Boleyn Girls" to the Royal Library:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...vie-16246.html

[tan_berry]

I would like very much to know what is taught to english children at school about this king that Stefan Zweig considered a man without scruples in his biography of Mary Stuart.

And he did not invent anything, Reformation was in the european Zeitgeist (spirit of times) when he wanted so badly an annulment after 20 years of marriage to Catherine of Aragon.

Either of his three children who reigned left descendants, not at all very successful genes according to the natural laws.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Polly

I think that, in all fairness, there are one or two things about Henry VIII which should not be forgotten.

Thanks for the info Polly, but where do you get the idea that the King actively despised Katherine of Aragon? Quite the contrary, in the early years of their marriage there is evidence that he was very happy with her. He rode in the lists wearing her colors, as her Sir Loyal Heart. He wrote to her father Ferdinand that even if he had been free to marry another, he would choose KATHERINE above all others. He and his gentlemen would disguise themselves as Robin Hood and his Merry Men and burst into her rooms to surprise she and her ladies. The Queen was an excellent rider and would accompany her husband during the hunt.

Obviously his feelings for her soured after her many miscarriages and her failure to provide him with a son, and hardened into downright hatred when she resisted his attempts to get her to say that she had never been his true wife. By then, he had grown wildly infatuated with Anne Boleyn.

If it is true that Katherine had NOT been a virgin when she married the King does anyone believe that this proud conceited monarch would not have had the marriage annulled immediately? He did not. He considered Katherine a virgin when they married as the Queen pointed in in her famous speech at the Blackfriars annullment hearing before the King, his bishops and the Papal nuncio.

Anne Boleyn may have been a fascinating woman, but she was also a very nasty piece of work. She humiliated Princess Mary and forced her to work as a maid to her own child, Elizabeth. She overstepped her boundaries with Henry many times until he finally got tired of her and trumped up charges to get rid of her. Many histories doubt her guilt-I doubt it also-but the bad karma this woman reaped during her years on the rise came back to bite her in the ass in SPADES.

She might have given the English people their great Elizabeth I, but she herself was never loved and respected as Katherine was, never. She was known among Henry's subjects as The Great Whore both during and after his reign.

As for Thomas More, it wasn't necessarily the person of any particular Pope that he was supporting against Henry VIII. There had been and continued to be corrupt and venal Popes , a man of More's brilliance would have understood that. More died because he REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND ACCEPT HENRY VIIII OR ANY KING OF ENGLAND AS HEAD OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, which he knew was contrary to what Christ Himself decreed in the Gospels. He appointed the Apostle Peter and HIS successors as Head of His Church and it was to Peter, the Apostles and THEIR SUCCESSORS that he gave the responsibility of governing the Church, not the King of Britain or France or any other country.

More was the King's good servant, but God's first. And that is why he was martyred.

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by tan_berry

I would like very much to know what is taught to english children at school about this king that Stefan Zweig considered a man without scruples in his biography of Mary Stuart.

And he did not invent anything, Reformation was in the european Zeitgeist (spirit of times) when he wanted so badly an annulment after 20 years of marriage to Catherine of Aragon.

Either of his three children who reigned left descendants, not at all very successful genes according to the natural laws.

I'm not sure I understand you correctly. You have to remember that back in those times life was a lot harsher. Mortality rates were a lot higher. There is rumor that Great Harry had syphilis which led to (IMO) many miscarriages.
Edward wasn't much to write home about dying prematurely but Mary was formidable for her throw back to Catholicism and you can't say that Elizabeth I's reign wasn't spectacular. She had her reasons for not wanting to marry. She liked the power too much and I'd say she did a bang up job of it!

[tan_berry]

I agree, Russophile, about Elizabeth I. She is my favorite british monarch ever. A larger than life character. She truly had the heart of a queen, the love to her subjects and nation. She was brave, intelligent, responsible, smart and sacrificed her personal life, her life as a woman, to become a symbol, a queen in a harsh and male-centered time.

Life is defined like the process of birth, grow up, reproduction and death. And in biology are considered more successful the genes that reproduce themselves before dying. It is true that men are so social organisms, so influenced since birth by social factors, that they should not be evaluated like the other animals.

Elizabeth I´ life was absolutely different to the lives of the other women of her time. Her achievements were huge, far more important that giving birth and successfully raising a bunch of children.

[Princess Alexandra]

Henry's relationship with Elizabeth is quite unknown although in some books it says that he favored her...does anyone have any insight on it?

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Princess Alexandra

Henry's relationship with Elizabeth is quite unknown although in some books it says that he favored her...does anyone have any insight on it?

I think he sort of blew hot and cold with Elizabeth...all the books I have read indicate that there were times when he delighted in her brilliance and took great pride in having her around, especially after his marriage to his sixth and final queen Katharine Parr.

Then there were times when he would become angry at her for no apparent reason and banish her from Court. Those were the times she probably reminded him of her mother Anne Boleyn.

[GlitteringTiaras]

Soooo, 472 years ago today Anne Boleyn lost her head... just...thought you should know. Trivia and stuff.

[Jo of Palatine]

Catherine Howard was given the chance to declare that her former attachment to her first lover (pre-wedding) was not a seduction but the declaration of a contract of marriage. Thus her marriage to the king would have been void and she could have lived. But she denied it and thus was charged with adultery as wife of the king and sentenced to death.

From wikipedia about High Treason:

"A second form of high treason comprehended by the Treason Act 1351 was having sexual intercourse with "the King's companion, or the King's eldest daughter unmarried, or the wife of the King's eldest son and heir." If the intercourse is not consensual, only the rapist is liable, but if it is consensual, then both parties are liable (as Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard, wives of Henry VIII, discovered to their cost). The jurist Sir William Blackstone writes that "the plain intention of this law is to guard the Blood Royal from any suspicion of bastardy, whereby the succession to the Crown might be rendered dubious." Thus, only women are covered in the statute; it is not, for example, high treason to rape a Queen-Regnant's husband. Similarly, it is not high treason to rape a widow of the Sovereign or of the heir-apparent. Diana, Princess of Wales admitted that she had an affair with her riding instructor, James Hewitt, between 1987 and 1992. As she was then the wife of the Prince of Wales, heir to the throne, this fit the definition of high treason, and a national newspaper briefly attempted [1][2] to have Hewitt prosecuted for what was then still a capital offence."

Plus Diana in her Panorama-interview tried to change the line of succession which since 1702 is considered High treason: she was attempting to hinter the line of succession in favour of her own son.

[Al_bina]

At those time wives were much clever as well as poison was available to keep mistresses under control and in order.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

At those time wives were much clever as well as poison was available to keep mistresses under control and in order.

In that case, if as you suggest the wives were clever, how come Anne Boleyn & Catherine Howard were beheaded for Treason?

[Elspeth]

Other people were cleverer in those cases, particularly for Anne Boleyn. The King had some powerful legal minds looking for ways to get rid of her, and I don't know if it's ever really been established that she was committing adultery or whether the confessions under torture by her alleged lovers were false.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

Other people were cleverer in those cases, particularly for Anne Boleyn. The King had some powerful legal minds looking for ways to get rid of her, and I don't know if it's ever really been established that she was committing adultery or whether the confessions under torture by her alleged lovers were false.

I guess Henry would have thought twice if Anne and Catherine had been foreign princesses with a lot of relatives to support them. Just think of how long it took Elizabeth I. to sign the death warrant for Mary Stuart and she really was guilty of working against Elizabeth, which constituted High Treason back then and would still today.

[ysbel]

Mary Stuart wasn't one of Elizabeth's subjects so she couldn't have committed High Treason. She was a sovereign in her own right; that's why Elizabeth dawdled so long before signing her death warrant. Elizabeth weighed the danger that Mary Stuart raised against the dangerous precendence of beheading an anointed sovereign.

Anne Boleyn was Henry's mistress when he was married to Catherine of Aragon; Jane Seymour was his mistress when he was married to Anne Boleyn; Catherine Howard was his mistress when he was married to Anne of Cleves.

Granted Henry's reputation suffered because of so much marrying but it was due to the impression that he had an insatiable appetite - not only in food, but in women - and it seemed a lack of self-restraint for a King back in those days.