E said:

Hhmm… I am inclined to believe she was not a virgin when she went to Henry- but why would he never talk about it?

Katherine proved to be quite decietul at times- she lied to her father regarding a miscarriage- or was it that she thought she was pregnant but wasn't? Anyway, she neglected for about 3months after the event to tell her father she was not with child..

Indeed, she told Ferdinand several months after her first m/c implying that it had happened recently.

Oke. I am sorry people, i am reading this for the first time. And yes here i go again!

And again i am going to bore you with the education of Katherina of Aragon at the court of Castile, her mother and father (although her father had many affairs and bastard children, who Isabella raised at court), the education Isabella gave to her daughters did not include education in sex, Isabella, her daughters and the ladies in waiting were sleeping all together in the same space, no men were allowed. If there had to come a man in the chamber (for example a doctor when someone was sick), all the woman needed to be dressed to the fullest. Isabella was very prudent, there was no talk in the difference between genitals between man and woman, so you can bet that the talk about sex itself was out of the question. Also Isabella was shocked when Columbus presented her with slaves from the qonqeust he made to be bare naked.

Isabella and Juana were shocked when Juana arrived in Flanders and see so much loose behavior and so much openess. Juana herself held no contact but the ambasadors who reported to Isabel did not know how to tell the Queen about the loose and obscene behaviour Juana was living in.

The woman were raised to bear children, but not how to make children (long live the bio i have read!). To me it makes sense that Arthur was lying, i myself have a son and a brother and nephews and i know how man/ young boys love to bribe about their encounters with woman. Also in the bio on Isabel i have read, there is no talk of sheets that were sent to spain. I believe she was a virgin, as educated as she was in all worldly things the girl had no clue what to do and i think the boy did not eather, but hey he could not say that he did not complete the deed. boys will be boys and if boys are proud on one thing, and especially on that age it is about their “crown jewels” and if that fails, its a problem for a boy,  so for Arthur to confess that he could not perform the deed (maybe because of ignorence or nervousity of just because the boy was not a healthy boy) should be a shame for him. It would make him the laughing stock, i have read that when Katherina told her ladies what did happen the ladies in waiting could not stop laughing about the boy, I mean come on ladies, we all know men and we know what sex means for them.

But again i want to make the point that in the education Katherine recieved from her mother, there certainly was no education on genitals on men or woman. Isabel was much to prudent for that sort of things. She was to chaste and was embarresed if anyone in her court behaved sensualy, that is why she was not that fond of Phillips the handsome when she met with him and his loose behavior, also she was shocked when she heard about her son's Juan obsession with sex with his newly wedded wife, she believed it was to much sex that killed Juan. She closed her eyes for the behaviour of Ferdinand but did he did it in great secresy (hope to spell that one right) and not in openess. So Catherina was in my eyes a virgin. No doubt about that.

I don't think she was a virgin. She and Arthur were both young, and healthy(ish) at the time? I'm sure Arthur knew what to do, people always manage it somehow… sex is still instinctual… otherwise our species would not be here! She lied to her parents, about a pregnancy – so perhaps she wouldn't have trouble lying about something else? For the better of her country – in her eyes? She constantly punished herself for God, maybe that's why? She was making up for it?

I'm sure cavemen didn't need to draw sex education diagrams on cave walls for their 'coming of age' children…

Hannele said

Actually, Catherine’s virginity could have been examined by “wise women” before she married Henry, but unfortunately to her, that was not done. However, Henry believed her to be a virgin in the wedding night.

true..she could have been examined any time after the death of Arthur. . At Arthur’s death, there was no-one who expected Kaherine to be a virgin, the thought was put a couple to bed and the deed will be done. for several months folowing her untimely widow-hood , there were hoes that she may yet be caring a post-houmous child.

In any case, the consummation of her marriage with Arthur would have been no cause to Pope not to give the licence to marry Henry, as demonstrated the case of the sisters. So, Catherine had no cause to tell the what you call “the small lie” in the beginning.

One of the Papal Bulls issued for the HVIII/KoA marriage mentioned that consummtion of the earlier marriage wasn’t a problem under canon law.

It’s a difficult one to judge really whether or not K.O.A was a virgin, but I do find it strange that when H7 decided it would be better all round by and large to betroth Henry to K.O.A, that the Pope issued 2 dispensations to allow the marriage to take place.. In short they were contradictary. 1 dispensation took it for granted that Arthur’s marriage to K.O.A had been consumated whilst the other said it hadn’t.. I actually wonder if that was a tactic by H7 used as a rudimentary medievel form of a get out of marriage free card. H7 allowed the betrothal to go ahead but was all the while on the look out for a better and more profitable marriage for H Junior. If that dream became a reality for H7 he would have used the first dispenpensation to back out of the betrothal. As we know H7 did make H. Junior call into doubt his betrothal with K.O.A a few years after the betrothal, did anything come of that? and more to the point why did H7 make H Junior call it into doubt?
I actually wonder how H.Junior felt about being betrothed K.O.A. Junior wasn’t stupid even though he was only about 11 or 12 when he was told he was to marry K.O.A. Margeret Beaufort saw to it that Junior was well schooled in religious studies, it was said that he attended mass up to 7 times a day and probably in between times read the bible, so he would have been well versed about the Leviticus diatribe even then. In anycase somewhere in the bible there is another passage that says it is the duty of a man to marry his brothers wife so that the bloodline of his brother can continue, or some such fiddle faddle.
The bible anyway is very contradictary in it’s views, I’m not knocking it, for it does bring comfort to many people.
It’s just that when Junior became king in 1509 he would have been very aware of the morals and ethics of what marriage to K.O.A would have meant. If K.O.A was a virgin as she vehemently maintained during the divorce/annulment proceedings then Leviticus has apsolutely no role to play in the whole case. If she wasn’t then the passage (I forget where exactly) stating that it was expected for a man to marry his dead brothers wife also plays no part in the case because she maintained that she was virgin and therefore had done nothing wrong in the eyes of biblical law. H8 whole case as far as I can tell was solely based on the fact that he was desperate for a male child and used the bedroom gossip and snickering from over 20 years before to form the case.
As we know gossip and hearsay is inadmissible in court these days, a court case is based solely on facts and figures, things that can be proved not what is assumed (Dinosaur has a lovely saying about the word assume, “you should never assume anything because it makes an ASS out of U and ME”) and to be honest that is exactly what H8 did, he made a complete ass out of himself. Another thing that blows the “not virgin” crap out of the water with H8 is because of the length of time he was married to K.O.A. If he had brought his so called doubts about the validity of the marriage in 1512 (alledgely the first time his conscious bit his backside about the marriage) the Pope may have listened to his arguement with a little more attention, and perhaps may have agreed that the marriage was invalid and therefore agreed to annul it, but to not bring/voice these doubts until 1527 15 years after the first teeth marks in fat boy’s bum appeared is without doubt a urine take.

The length of time they were married in my opinion rendered their marriage legal anyway. The whole world saw K.O.A as Henry’s wife and Queen, and then suddenly Henry was telling the world “Whoops I may a mistake here Katherine isn’t my wife she’s my wh*re and has been since 1509” that isn’t just insulting it’s very humiliating. Although the humiliation bit is Henry’s, he’s admitting he’s a wh*remonger and a gigelo of sorts. The insult bit does fall on K.O.A as Henry had insulted her by calling her his wh*re. I don’t blame K.O.A in the least for digging her heels in. A strong and determined woman who wasn’t going to allow a fat bastard to push her around. Her stubborn pride about the whole divorce/annulment matter in a way was to try and protect not just her daughter’s rights etc, but also to try a protect Henry’s honour in a way, by calling K.O.A a wh*re he had as I said called himself a wh*remonger and a gigelo. By maintaining she was his true and lawful wife and getting the Pope to enforce that view she not only saved her own reputation but his too. If Henry had backed down and given up on Anne when K.O.A died in 1536 Henry’s reputation at least would have some street cred in the marriage market of the europeon courts, even if he had married J.S, at her death there would perhaps been a bit of a wider choice of euro brides to choose from. Not knocking A.O.C because I feel that if he had given his marriage a chance with her, they may have been quite happy, and there could have been a possibly of a Duke of York and a few spares, but I do feel that Cromwell chose the her because Cleves was a little known province in Germany and perhaps knew next to nothing about the court affairs in England. Certainly we know that Anne was let’s say not exactly enammored by Henry. Basically he was a stinky fat bastard, with a dicky leg and maybe a non working dicky too.

Anyway I digress (Nothing new) I do feel that K.O.A and Arthur had some form of sexual contact with each other, whether that was an attempt at penetrive sex, that didn’t work out too well or just very heavy petting I don’t know, but I think she possibily was a virgin when she married Henry, after all he would have known if she was a virgin or not when they were put to bed on their wedding night.
There is a rumour that Arthur and Katherines bed sheets had blood on them the morning after their wedding night.
I believe she explained that away when it was brought up at the blackfriars trial that she had pricked her heel and smeared blood on the sheets to confirm that she and Arthur had consumated their union. That kind of backs up my theory about the form of sexual contact, Arthur perhaps felt a little embarrassed that he hadn’t been able to do his duty that night and she pricked her hell etc to spare the ridicule he might have got if anyone found out that he couldn’t perform.

I have to admit Katherine’s speech at Blackfrairs was an apsolute wonderful piece of theatre. She is more or less saying to Henry “prove to the whole world I was not a virgin when you married me?” How could he say she wasn’t a virgin without humiliating himself.
Had he actually had a sexual relationship prior to marrying K.O.A and if he had, he would have to explain what gave him the impression that K.O.A wasn’t a virgin in short he would have had to explained why or how she felt different to a previous paramour when he first had sex with her. If he hadn’t and I suspect that he probably hadn’t given how his father and Grandmother kept him very closely confined before he came to the throne.
He may have had the odd dabble fumble as in touching a woman up, but i’m guessing he might just have bragged that he had dabble when in fact he hadn’t, just to make himself look like the real man in front of his pals… If that was the case then he too was a virgin on his wedding night with K.O.A, so he had no basis of comparrison in which to explain why he felt K.O.A wasn’t a virgin…
K.O.A’s blackfriars speech put the tin hat on Henry’s whole case/reasoning for the divorce/annulment, and made Henry look a complete tit.
Well done old girl.

Thank you Aud, the laughable case that Henry presented to the court to rid himself of K.O.A just boils down to one thing at the end of the day. It’s Hogwash..The Leviticus text states something like “If a man should marry his brother’s wife, it is an unclean thing for he has uncovered his brother’s nakedness and they will be childless” He took that entire text and changed it’s meaning to fit what he felt were the facts. To him the whole childless bit meant “no son”. If Mary had died at birth or in infancy then Henry would have had a better chance of perhaps of making his case believable, but even then I think it might have been a little bit on a sticky wicket, as there had been union between Henry and K.O.A it wasn’t her fault or his fault either that as K.O.A put it “By me you have had divers (many) children, although it has pleased God to call them out of this world” that sentence says it all there had been issue between them so they weren’t childless. Mary was very much alive, she may have been a girl but what was wrong with that? She could have given Henry a Grandson (and a few spares just in case) to rule after him. Henry could have married Mary to a man of his own choosing and been happy with a grandson or 2 or 3 to bounce on his knee.
I think the biblical translation actually means that the “brothers wife” would never become pregnant (God had punished them and rendered her infertile) K.O.A became pregnant many times, so therefore she proved that she was fecund, (fertile) the babies may have been lost, either at birth or shortly after or by miscarriage before term, but that was just one of those things back then, it was no-ones fault it just happened.
Child mortality rates were extremely high anyway didn’t matter who you were or how rich you were. Woman were expected to get pregnant as soon as they were able and continue to have babies until they either died themselves or were too old to have anymore. The more babies you had the more chance there was that at least 2 or 3 might make it through to adulthood.
It wasn’t uncommon for a woman to have her first baby at around the age of about 14 or 15, there were some who had them a little earlier Margaret Beaufort was alledgely 13 when she had Henry Tulip who as we know became H7. However the trauma of his birth at such a young age was difficult I believe and she nearly died as a result, which also resulted in her never being able to have further children.

Great post Aud, Welcome to the forum by the way!

This brings me to why was Henry so forgiving of that scoundrel Brandon for marrying Mary? Brandon produced heirs that were rivals to the throne!

Boleyn said

It wasn’t uncommon for a woman to have her first baby at around the age of about 14 or 15, there were some who had them a little earlier Margaret Beaufort was alledgely 13 when she had Henry Tulip who as we know became H7. However the trauma of his birth at such a young age was difficult I believe and she nearly died as a result, which also resulted in her never being able to have further children.

It was only commonish amongst high ranking families to marry and reproduce young.

Your average craftsman had to be a journey-man before he could contemplate marriage making him in his early to mid twenties. Likewise ny male who needed to set up a career in law or as a merchant was in his 20’s too. Pre-teen girls tended to help out at home and in the family business while older girls or rather women often worked outside the home bringing in valuble extra money or goods. Young couples of the lower classes have historically tended to wait for finacial security before marriage.