I read somewhere( I can’t remember where…if I find it I will cite) that the Puritans believed that the female org*sm was essential to conception and that a man had to satisify his wife properly.

How much of that is true and whether the Tudor ear held the same beliefs I do not know.

TMI alert..

There was a BBc series many years ago in shich intercourse was filmed in the v*gina and on org*sm you could see the cervix dip down into the pool of semen in a regular occelation. SO org*sm/conception myth is true to an extent.

I think it’s possible it could have been planned but I think also that she was quite religious and seemed to take religion very seriously so it just seems unlikely to me she would lie.

As we have seen with Henry, there are no misgivings from these people about killing their enemies. They are kings and queens and they are second only to God. Killing an enemy was not considered a sin to them. Kings and queens had an absolute right to vanquish an enemy and then to say that God had been on their side. They would not have even thought of it as a sin. Even popes led armies into battle. She wouldn’t have considered it unchristian at all. It would have been seen as being her duty to destroy the enemy before he destroyed her.

I admit, to us her desire to send part of James or all of him to Henry seems a bit on the bloodthirsty side, but Katherine was brought up on the field of battle at her mother’s knee. She was no different than her mom when it came to defeating an enemy. Maybe this was done in Spain? I don’t know, but she thought little of it. She was proud of her accomplishment. She probably thought the English were a bit prudish when they wouldn’t let her send James’ body to her husband.

The fact that James was her brother in law didn’t seem to enter the equation at all. Then again, did James give it a second thought that he was invading with the thought of conquering his brother in laws lands? He was thinking England was unguarded and vulnerable to attack. He thought he could take England while Henry was gone. Katherine proved him wrong. If it went the other way, James would have celebrated his sister and brother in laws defeat without a qualm.

Why do you think Henry never refuted Katherine’s testimony that he knew she was a virgin when she came to his bed. Cuz more than Katherine’s religious beliefs, which I still think are viable, the fact that he never ever refuted that statement is a big reason why I doubt him about this and not her. (and of course all the many other reasons he tried to use against her and failed.)

There was a copy of the second dispensation in Spain apparently Bo, it’s been a while since I’ve read about it but I remember (vaguely) that Henry was trying to get his hands on it, I can’t for the life of me remember if Katherine produced it. I have read a couple of different historians this year who have mentioned Wolsey was trying to get the marriage annulled because they didn’t have a dispensation for “public honesty”, which meant if Katherine had been married to Arthur and hadn’t consummated the marriage then they needed this separate public honesty dispensation. So technically the marriage was invalid. Which is all a load of hogwash if you ask me, because I find medieval canon law is ridiculously difficult to understand. If we went by all of their laws and clauses no-one would have been technically married. There seems to always be something they can dig up for annulment.

Sharon I didn’t mention her killing James or defending her country as regent, merely the treatment of his corpse as a trophy, and she probably did find the Englishmen a bit prudish. After all they were always happy to stick people’s heads on pikes for display, something I am not fond of either. My point is that Katherine is often looked at as very gentle and unambitious and that is not the case (and another of the six wives stereotypes). She was a strong woman and she came from a family of strong women. Her mother and her daughter thought burning people at the stake was part of their religious duty, which we find horrifying.

I think it is difficult to place people in the context of their times which is probably why we spend 500 years arguing about them. Saying she was too religious to lie is too simple an argument for me personally. I think the issue is far more complex. I don’t think it is “unchristian” to defend your daughter against an enemy either, which is what Henry became. If she did lie to defend her daughter’s honour and try to stop her from being bastardized then I wouldn’t blame her one bit. I’ve never been able to decide one way or another but I have always been a bit doubtful they went on for six months living on their own and never having consummated it.

Also I always make sure to doubt Henry. It’s my hobby

Boleyn said

Olga said

There was a copy of the second dispensation in Spain apparently Bo, it’s been a while since I’ve read about it but I remember (vaguely) that Henry was trying to get his hands on it, I can’t for the life of me remember if Katherine produced it. I have read a couple of different historians this year who have mentioned Wolsey was trying to get the marriage annulled because they didn’t have a dispensation for “public honesty”, which meant if Katherine had been married to Arthur and hadn’t consummated the marriage then they needed this separate public honesty dispensation. So technically the marriage was invalid. Which is all a load of hogwash if you ask me, because I find medieval canon law is ridiculously difficult to understand. If we went by all of their laws and clauses no-one would have been technically married. There seems to always be something they can dig up for annulment.

Sharon I didn’t mention her killing James or defending her country as regent, merely the treatment of his corpse as a trophy, and she probably did find the Englishmen a bit prudish. After all they were always happy to stick people’s heads on pikes for display, something I am not fond of either. My point is that Katherine is often looked at as very gentle and unambitious and that is not the case (and another of the six wives stereotypes). She was a strong woman and she came from a family of strong women. Her mother and her daughter thought burning people at the stake was part of their religious duty, which we find horrifying.

I think it is difficult to place people in the context of their times which is probably why we spend 500 years arguing about them. Saying she was too religious to lie is too simple an argument for me personally. I think the issue is far more complex. I don’t think it is “unchristian” to defend your daughter against an enemy either, which is what Henry became. If she did lie to defend her daughter’s honour and try to stop her from being bastardized then I wouldn’t blame her one bit. I’ve never been able to decide one way or another but I have always been a bit doubtful they went on for six months living on their own and never having consummated it.

Also I always make sure to doubt Henry. It’s my hobby

I think K.O.A was going to send for it, but it either went missing or K.O.A changed her mind about sending for it, knowing that if Henry got his grubby little mitts on it, it would suddenly disappear quite convientely. I’m not sure but I think this dispensation was the only thing that helped prove her case to the Pope for him to finally declare her marriage was legal, something to do with the time it was issued I think. In short the dispensation Henry had was dated say for the sake of arguement 1st of January 2013, and the one that K.O.A was given was 2nd January 2013, Kathy’s one therefore rendered Henry’s one invalid. Henry’s one was the one that said Arthur and Kathy had sex blah blah, and Kathy’s said they didn’t blah blah. The one that Kathy had I believe was found in the belongings of Chapuys or his predessor long after they were all dead, what happened to it then is anyone’s guess. I think a copy of Kathy’s dispensation was sent as prove but Henry wanted the original, that way when it went walkies, no matter how many time Kathy and the Pope said Look Henry old boy you know damn well that you had that dispensation so where is it? Henry would play the outraged martyr unjustly accused etc. and no one or nothing anyone said animal, vegatable or mineral could prove that Kathy’s copy ever existed.

I should imagine if Kathy’s copy does still exist it will be hidden somewhere within the Vatican archives, along with Anne’s letters to Henry. I wonder if anyone has thought to ask about having these letters returned? I can understand the dispensation, but a copy of that could easily be made, but Anne’s letters mean nothing to the Pope etc, but they do mean everything to us Tudorians, and I would love to see Anne’s replies to Henry’s flowery sickly sweet love letters.

Olga said

Saying she was too religious to lie is too simple an argument for me personally. I think the issue is far more complex. I don’t think it is “unchristian” to defend your daughter against an enemy either, which is what Henry became. If she did lie to defend her daughter’s honour and try to stop her from being bastardized then I wouldn’t blame her one bit. I’ve never been able to decide one way or another but I have always been a bit doubtful they went on for six months living on their own and never having consummated it.

I never was implying that it was simple only that for KOA it seems out of character.I’m not in any way saying she was a saint either.But that’s what confessional was for if she did do things that were considered unchristian.I had also read that she had broken seals on confessions to prove she was not lying about certain issues.Which issues they were broken on I am unsure. If she did lie then she probably justified it to herself by saying I’m just trying to protect my daughter or I will go to confession or whatever.Maybe that’s what all praying was about in the first place?Also I believe there is a strong case for the marriage not being consummated because during the 6 months they were married Arthur is reported to have had at best the sweating sickness at the worst testicular cancer.For a time they also couldn’t communicate well as they had learned different forms of latin.I’m sure these things could have complicated the matter or prevented all it together.

I’m not the best person to talk to about Katherine MrsFiennes, because I can never make up my mind. I’m afraid I am fairly useless about deciding whether or not she and Arthur consummated the marriage, once I decide on one thing I begin to argue with myself

Olga said

Sharon I didn’t mention her killing James or defending her country as regent, merely the treatment of his corpse as a trophy, and she probably did find the Englishmen a bit prudish. After all they were always happy to stick people’s heads on pikes for display, something I am not fond of either. My point is that Katherine is often looked at as very gentle and unambitious and that is not the case (and another of the six wives stereotypes). She was a strong woman and she came from a family of strong women. Her mother and her daughter thought burning people at the stake was part of their religious duty, which we find horrifying.
Also I always make sure to doubt Henry. It’s my hobby

I got carried away. Don’t know what gets into me. My point was to add to yours that Katherine was more than one dimensional. I never thought Katherine was gentle. She was strong and ambitious. And I always give the benefit of the doubt to Henry’s victims.

Nothing’s got into you Sharon, most of us get carried away when we talk about Henry’s Queens. I’ve always felt Katherine was a more difficult subject to discuss than his other wives. I don’t think I’ll ever get close to understanding her. I understand her actions in some parts but my modern eyes will never understand how she could still love Henry after what he had done to her.

Sharon said
One more tidbit…When Katherine wrote to the pope, she said she would accept Henry’s word on the subject of her virginity if Henry was ready to swear under oath that she was not virgin when they were first married. She was calling his bluff, well aware that he would not swear to that under oath.
His side argued that Henry was too young to have known whether Katherine was a virgin or not. Story of his life! He seems to always have had trouble knowing a virgin when he had one.

I’d forgotten that. My first instincts are usually to believe her, then I get doubtful again. Most of the evidence points to her telling the truth.

Bo if she did lie it was to protect her daughter as well as her own position. The Catholics never recognised Mary as illegitimate but henry and Edward did their best trying to bastardise both her and Elizabeth. I think we can get a small comfort that Edward and Henry’s subjects ignored their wishes in that respect.

Sharon said

It is amazing to me that Katherine loved Henry right up until the end. Especially after his treatment of her and her daughter. What I find so fascinating about her is that her will power was astounding. I think I would have cracked under the pressure put on her by Henry. The letter that she supposedly wrote to Henry at the end of her life, is so poignant.
Believe it or not, my first instinct was to not believe her. I can be a cynic…honest, I can be. It wasn’t only because of her religious beliefs that changed my mind. It was a total of everything I read about her. And when I think of Henry and his methods, she wins, hands down!
Olga, you so right. If she was lying about this, it was to protect her daughter. She didn’t succeed. We have the wonderful power of hindsight, and it is easy for us to say, wow you did and said some really dumb things, Katherine, but she was trying to save her daughter and her marriage. Everything she did, she did for Mary and Henry. I’ll never know why she wanted to save Henry, but she did.
If it is the case, and she did lie, it wouldn’t diminish her in my eyes one little bit.

I’m inclined to think that Kathy convinced herself he still loved her. She simply wouldn’t or couldn’t see any different. She thought Anne would be like all the other mistresses he had, had, flavour of the month and then cast off, and conviently married off or paid off.
In some ways her obsession (loosely worded) with her love for Henry was a little like Juana’s love for her husband. When Kathy realised that Anne was different to all the other mistresses Henry had, had her stubborn pride took over and in a way it was a kind of “Well if I can’t have him you won’t either.” She believed very firmly believed that if she stubbornly held out he would think that his pursuit of Anne just wasn’t worth the hassle or that Anne would give up and say “This relationship is a joke, I’m off Fat Boy.” pack her bags and leave court for good.
I think towards the end she realised that Henry didn’t love her, but that didn’t make any difference to her love for him. The last line says it all really
” Lastly, I make this vow, that mine eyes desire you above all things.” stubborn to the last, but faithful and true to the love she still had for Lard arse. People assume that him and Anne dressing in Bright yellow was him celebrating the fact she had died. Actually yellow was the colour of mourning in Spain, so he was actually showing her the respect she deserved. I also feel that with her death Lard arse realised just how much Kathy did love him and I also feel that he realised too that he did still love her after all.
After her death Lard Arse looked for someone to take the blame for the guilt he was feeling about Kathy and Lard arse’s victim was Anne. In his mind Anne had stolen him away from Kathy, Anne was determined to replace Kathy. Anne ripped apart the Church, Anne killed Wolsey, Thomas More and John Fisher. Anne made the people hate him. Anne as far as he was concerned was to blame for everything he did. Anne’s only hope was a son, we all know that, so the stress she must have been under must have been tremendous, coupled with the fact that Henry’s eye had caught Jane Seymour, she found herself in the very same position that Kathy once was. Lard arse’s accident was simmply too much for her to bear so it’s hardly surprizing that she miscarried. In the film Anne of a thousand days The duke of Norfolk sums up Anne’s downfall. “She has miscarried of her saviour”