Aud
White was certainly the colour of mourning in France and in fact Mary Queen of Scots choice of wedding dress to Francois was viewed as a very bad omen for their marriage as she actually chose to wear White.
I have found an account to do with yellow as the excepted colour for Spanish mourning here. http://onthetudortrail.com/Blog/
That same article also states that it was only Anne who dressed in Yellow Henry and the rest of the court showed a little bit more restraint.
K.O.A did have a lot of influence over Henry.
There is also this article http://renaissanceclothing.blo…..ieval.html
Certainly the colour black was worn a lot in the upper eschelons of sociaty, but it was also the most expensive colour to buy, therefore the richer you were, the more prestige you carried if you wore black.
Black could be worn in any sort of situation, it was usually worn with another colour anyway. Elizabeth was fond of wearing both black and white together, both colours of that were believed solely worn for mourning. If she had worn these colours as a sign that she was in morning for someone and then held a masque and a banquet and generally made merry don’t you think that this behaviour would be seen as highly insulting and inappropiate by the freinds and relatives or forgien dignities of the person she was supposed to be mourning.. Yes it’s well documented that she wore black to advertise (and she did say so at the time) that she was in mourning for Lord Darnley her cousin, who had been recently murdered in Scotland in 1567 alledgely by Bothwell with or without Queen Mary’s knowledge (still open to speculation) Mary by the way did go into mourning to for Darnley and wore White the accepted colour of French mourning, which was viewed by some that she didn’t give a damn that Darnley was dead, and certainly her behaviour signifies that to some that she was glad he was dead. Little titbit here Mary went out and played golf when she heard of Darnley’s death, which was viewed by the Scottish lairds with much amusement, she brought the sport back with her from France in 1561 and played it quite often, even during her captivity in Lockleven and during her long captivity in the various houses she was kept in when she came to England.
Black was perhaps worn more around the time of Lent (when the country was still predometely Catholic) as Lent was seen as a time when people were expected to do without the pleasures, glitz, glamour and magnifient food and entertaiments, due to the fact that the big J.C was persecuted, died and rose from the dead etc. However after Lent there would be a grand celebration, with lots of glitz and glamour and food, with plenty of colour (not just black) and light..and maybe that’s the reason to why black is automatically assumed to be the colour of mourning..
Black was really seen more as the excepted colour of mourning as such in England until the Victorian era, who were a gloomy lot anyway. But again the deepest black colour was only wore by those who could afford to buy it, many people in the lower classes have to make do which maybe where the black armbands came in. certainly many people could’nt afford to buy a black dress specifically just to use as a mourning gown. So they would have to dye one of their better dresses black which didn’t always work terribly well and ultimetely they would probably come out grey, or buy a small scrap of black material and make black armbands for herself and the woman of her family (and servants if they were lucky enough to have any) to wear, as the mark of respect to the deceased.
If I have remembered rightly Black was worn for the first year of Victorian mourning and then there would be a further year of wearing Grey, after which the lady was judged respectable enough to think about remarriage. To marry before the 2 year mourning period for a woman would guarentee her being shunned by everyone as having loose morals and being totally disrepectful woman to her husband’s memory.

I find it hard to except that Henry’s migraines were brought about by his jousting accident in 1524, I not saying that wasn’t the case it’s just that me personally seem to find it a little unlikely, however in the event of not having any other excuse for why he had these migraines we have to accept that this is the case.
The reason I doubt it is because I have suffered all my life with migraines, and some doctors believe it could well be down to genetics, as both my father and my grandmother suffered with them and 2 of my children suffer with them, My brother and his children however have completely escaped them, genetics are a funny thing to get to grips with as any sort of illness can skip many generations without rearing any sign of it, then all of a sudden it pops up out of no where.. This was certainly the case with King George 3rd, although traces of this madness were seen in the Tudor/Valois line. Henry 6th exhibited some very behaviour during his reign, and I certainly think that H7 and H8 did have some very odd traits in their mental behaviour. H7 and H8 were in my opinion both extremely paranoid and acted irrationally and illogically at times. Mary queen of Scots H7’s grand-daughter and her son Jimbo both have medical reports that mention purple or plum coloured urine, both were also said to have bouts of depression and temper Mary was also known to be very weepy at times..
These traits also showed in Mary (Tulip) 1st, she I believe like her Aunt Juana suffered from bouts of clinical depression made worse because of her father’s compulsive, irrational and illogical behaviour.
Edward was perhaps the lucky one here as these issues seemed not to have menefested in anyway, but may have done so if he had lived longer.
Elizabeth too seemed to have escaped the mental issues that he father and grandfather experienced, but she did suffer with headaches and menstual problems just as Mary did
These issues in the Tudor bloodline came about of course through their great (great) grandmother Catherine of Valois, whose father was said to have believed that during one of his many mental breakdown that he believed he was made of glass and would shatter if anyone touched him.

The ulcer that Henry developed on his leg that was healed I don’t believed was ever truly healed. The surface of the skin was healed for sure but the actual ulcer it’s self just kept festering away in affect eating his leg away from the outside in, eventually the pus just got to the point where it couldn’t find anywhere else to go and found the weakest point to burst out in this case where the original hole was in the first place. The germs and bacteria that were in that pus were simply too much for the bodies immune sytem to cope with and as a result no matter what the doctor’s did or however many times they drained it it simply was nothing more than a placibo affect, and gave the germs and bacteria more room to breed in and mutate of course, so as soon as the doctor thought he’d got on top of it, it would simply just be lying low for a while waiting to flair up again..
Henry may have even had a rudimentary form of what we now know as a flesh eating bacterial infection more commonly known as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N….._fasciitis As you will see from the article it wasn’t really discovered or understood until 1952, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t around in Henry’s time or even before.

I agree with you about Henry he is not my favourite of historical more colourful charaters as you have read. He was his own worst enemy and he had no one to blame for what happened to him thoughout his entire reign but himself.. He was such an egotisical bigot and a total hypocrite as well as being a complete lying bastard and murdering sad sack of crap, the only sympathy I would like to give him is to wring his bloody scrawny neck for him, and then hang his traitorous stinking carcass in a gibbet over the walls of the tower till he rotted, bones and all.

Yes I agree the the Bible does say a woman’s role is to act as her husbands help mate, but a little further in it says that woman are to keep silent in the congregation and learn from her husband at home, so by that interpetation in my opinion how can she act as a help mate if she cannot give her opinion on things that she has heard if she has to sit down and shut up. Isn’t the whole point of being a help mate listening to each others opinions, and helping each other to come to a decision which will help or be of benefit all round by and large.
It seems that the whole help meet idea translates as “We are very democratic in this household. He decides, we agree” In sort an entire Oxymoron in my opinion…
The so called equal patnership you talk about in Anne and Henry’s early relationship, never existed as such. Henry let Anne believe she held a little bit of power, in order to manipulate the whole situation with her, remember she had consistely refused to sleep with him and he was desperate to process her in anyway possible, the longer they were together the more the idea of marrying her became an attractive proposal, but only from the standpoint that he was desperate for a son, and that was the only reason he persued her so relentlessly, plus he didn’t want to admit defeat. In short no woman should say no to him. After he had managed to get his way concerning Anne, it had 2 affects on Henry 1 he had got one over on K.O.A and the Spanish party as well as the Pope. 2 he had finally got Anne into bed. If Anne had bore him a son, then in my opinion she would have ended up in more or less the same position tha K.O.A had been. I.e Henry had got what he wanted he didn’t need to hang around her much more except when she was needed for procreation needs or diplomatic purposes, so he would be off doing exactly what he wanted. If that was going off on a pub crawl around France with his mates or chasing the next pretty woman who happened to cross his path.
When Anne was railroaded into the tower on trumped up charges, Henry was already chasing Jane Seymour I don’t believe it was intention to actually marry her but after Anne was murdered he had no choice but to marry her, as many people in court took it forgranted that marriage to her had been his intention to her all along. I think Cromwell certainly believed that. For Henry not to marry would mean a loss of face, as he hadn’t sampled the pleasures of the woman he was lusting after at that time.
Anne of Cleves to him was as about as pretty as Ena Sharples (Coronation Street charather) and about as erotic as Amy Turtle (Crossroads Charater) In short he didn’t fancy her, and even if a angel dropped down on a golden beam of sunshine and changed her to the most beautiful woman in the world, nothing would change his mind. His main trouble was that he took Holbien’s portrait of Anne as sacrosanct, if he had used his brains instead of his ballc*cks, he would have seen and known that, and perhaps adjusted his expectations a little. To be honest I don’t think Anne was that bad, and even though he divorced she earned his respect more because she didn’t appose his will. Both K.O.A and Anne B didn’t give up so easily and vehemently and most admirely defended themselves when he decided to get rid of them.
K.H destruction was purely down to Henry’s spite and ego in short he was just being a vicious jealous bastard. She didn’t need to die, she hadn’t actually done anything wrong. Ok she had been foolish to have a sexual relationship with Dereham, but how was she to know that the King would take an interest in her, and in anycase she really hadn’t got a lot of choice in the matter when it came to Henry. He had made it clear that he wanted her and she couldn’t refuse as I said before no woman says to Henry without causes trouble to her family. The Howards were a big family (Henry was bigger well body wise anyway) If K.H had told him to “get stuffed” Henry could in temper (and remember his temper was getting very unpredictable at this point) order the deaths of the whole Howard clan just because K.H had refused his advantages.
K.P was lucky to survive Henry’s chopping block, but she sailed to close to the wind on one or 2 occations, and I think if Henry had lived a few more years quite apart from not having any children from her, he would have found a way to get rid of her, whether that would be by a amicable freindly divorce (which to be honest he really could afford to do again, either monatary wise or ego wise) or something more drastic. Either having her burnt or chopped up for her religious views or bumped off by poisoning. I’m inclined to think poisoning would have been Henry’s choice that way she could die without any hint of doubt or whispering against Henry. The big old over- inflated Henry Ego thing again.
Anyway best you all lie down in a darkened room with plenty of paracetamol and a gallon of water to take them with on the bedside table. Have a kip and then try to make sence of my post…

Well I believe that H7 had mental issues of a sort.. he was extremly paranoid and I think he saw plots against him around every corner. I also feel that he was capable of cruelity. The hanging of the dogs was in my opinion an act of cruelity, and his treatment towards K.O.A wasn’t really very nice. Yes he said he felt that it wasn’t his place to provide for her duing her widowhood etc.. H7 played a game of cat and mouse with Ferdinand and poor K.O.A in my opinion was the cheese in the mouse trap, and even she didn’t know which way to run. One minute H7 was saying how much he loved her and saw her as his own daughter, then in the next breath was writing to Ferdinand and say “Here I ain’t paying any money out to look after she’s your responsibility cough up” I believe he was in 2 minds on whether to allow K.O.A to meet with her sister Juana when she and her Husband were washed up on the British Coastline, when thry were on the way to take Castille from Ferdinand. I personally feel that if Juana was perhaps a little more Savvy (compus mentus) then H7 wouldn’t have allowed K.O.A to have contact with Juana in case K.O.A said “King Henry is treating me like shit help me Juana” she may or may not have said that but H7 couldn’t take that risk, with Juana mental state a little shaky at the point given the stress of the moment and the death of her mother you can understand it. H7 knew that whatever K.O.A said to Juana, she would just say “Oh look Kathy fluffy clouds, shall we go and pick flowers and roll around on the floor” In short she couldn’t have cared less and perhaps wouldn’t have understood anyway…
H7 in my opinion was fairly good at playing mind games with people always keeping them wondering what he was going to do, and just when they thought they got him figured H7 would do something that blew their theory right out of the water.. H8 learn that skill from his father and in time excelled it.

I see your point, Boleyn, but Henry VII had every reason to be a little paranoid. There were several plots against Henry VII with which he had to deal. He was a down right angel when compared to his son. Henry VIII was more paranoid than his father ever thought of being.

What is the story of the hanging dogs? I do not recall this. All kings could be cruel though. Henry VII was less cruel than many others.

As to why Henry and Anne wore yellow…I find it hard to swallow that they were celebrating Katherine’s life. That’s a nice thought, but I think both of them were relieved. More likely they were celebrating their future life together with no obstructions, such as war looming on the horizon. Maybe they just happened to wear yellow, and it meant nothing of the sort. Like Claire said in the article, Chapuys may have mentioned it because he thought it inappropriate.

I agree with you Aud over Henry and Jane. I don’t think for one minute marriage was on the cards for them. Jane was just seen by him as a pastime.
A quick fling, whilst Anne was pregnant, and just as quickly disgarded, a case of “Ding next one please.”
He hadn’t been looking actively for another wife during the months before Anne’s downfall and the dramatically quick way that Anne was railroaded in her death he hadn’t had time to look around either. He married Jane simply because there was no one better available at the time. A few months after when the hue and cry of Anne’s death died down, the country nobles felt safe enough to send their daughter to court again to find husbands it was always better for these girls if they were perhaps amongst the Queen’s ladies or at least in the Queen’s household to find richer and more worthy husbands. Henry at that time did state around this time that if he had seen these ladies before marrying Jane he would have chosen a little more wisely. He didn’t exactly use those words but that was the general gist of it.

Sharon said the same as you about celebrating life etc. It is a nice thought but with hindsight they probably were celebrating that she was dead.
His treatment toward Mary was diabolical, she and her mother had, had one breif visit with her mother during her time as the outcast child, and even then everything that they said was reported back to Henry.
I do feel however that Mary blamed Anne for her father’s treatment towards her, although certainly Anne did verbally abuse her at times, the “baked Apple” comes to mind. I think Mary believed when she found out of Anne’d ownfall and subsequent death, that her father would once again be the loving father he once was.
However she realised the truth when she wrote a letter to him (via Cromwell) congratulating on his marriage and the answer came back
“Thank you Mary however if you want to be excepted once more you will surrender to my will, you will admit your mother and I were not married and that you are a bastard. Or else I WILL KILL YOU, I mean it Mary submit to me or the next letter you will get is one from Cromwell asking you “how would you like your steak (stake) done?” Submit to me you un-natural brat or you will burn at Smithfield” She realised that it wasn’t all Anne after all. I’ve no doubt Henry would have killed her.
I understand the reasoning behind H7 hanging dogs story but I just find it hard to except that he could be so cruel, but there again the same could be said of Bosworth if he hadn’t have had the ruthless determination to fight against Richard come what may, he would have stayed in Brittany, and become a sheep farmer.. Richard called him a Welsh Milk sop. So he would have been a Welsh milk sop sheep farmer. LOL
I don’t doubt the lance in the joust accident did something to him, and certainly he did have headaches, but whether they were migraines or maybe even something more serious I don’t know. These headaches may have been Meneres disease which is a disorder of the middle ear, when the crystals go all funny causing dizzy spells, blackouts and periods of debility. We will never really know..
It may well be that like the fashions today that seem to constantly go around and reappear every few years or so, that Yellow was perhaps the in colour at that time, K.O.A’s death and the appearence of Henry and Anne dressing in Bright yellow was seem as the fact that they were celebrating, when in fact they were a fashion statement (very loosely worded) The colour yellow went around for many years afterwards and only really went out of fashion in Jimbo’s reign when Robert Carr and Francis Carr along with a lady called Anne Turner (who helped make the yellow ruffs that were worn back then popular) were convicted of Thomas Overbury’s murder. Anne turner was hanged, wearing one of her trademark yellow ruffs after which the colour went out of fashion. Robert and Francis were spared death but were imprisoned in the tower for a while and then exiled to their home Sherbourne Castle and died Francis in 1642 and Robert in 1645.

Aud said

As for Henry and Jane and whether he had intended to marry her all along, I would say no, because she was there during Anne’s pregnancy, and during that time, Henry wasn’t looking to set Anne aside. After the miscarriage of 1536, I wouldn’t know when, but I would say Henry began to look at Jane as a prospective wife.

Anne miscarried in January. Up until that time Jane was accepting gifts (the famous necklace/locket with his picture for one) from Henry. After the miscarriage, the incident with the bag of money from Henry to Jane takes place. She declines this gift. In March Cromwell is booted out of his rooms which are next to Henry’s; and Anne and Edward Seymour are to chaperone Jane in these rooms. Henry would no longer meet her in private without proper chaperones being in attendance. Same thing he had done for Anne. It was Anne’s mother who chaperoned for her. It is my opinion that Henry made up his mind, or at least started thinking about marrying Jane when he moved her into Cromwell’s rooms. Now he has to find a way out of his marriage to Anne. I don’t put anything down to Henry’s having Chapuys acknowledge Anne in April other than his desire for everyone to do what he wanted them to do. It did not matter whether his marriage was close to being ended. In Henry’s book, Chapuys should acknowledge Anne as queen. Unfortunately, it gave Anne a false sense of security, which is what Henry was probably aiming for to begin with.

perhaps the most obvious answer is little to do with the Pope, or Henry VII, or Ferdinand.

is it not more likely that Henry VIII would marry Katherine if he didn’t, for want of a less unpleasant turn of phrase, think he was getting his dead Brothers sloppy seconds?

the dispensation may have covered both options, but it would undeniably be easier for all concerned if her marriage to Arthur had not been consumated – easier for her in starting a new life, easier for Henry in not having a ghost at the feast?

I am still of the opinion that the marriage was more than likely consummated. However, once Arthur was dead, it was in Katherine’s interests and the Spanish Crown’s interests that a marriage with the new Prince of Wales went ahead. Henry made no comment on her virginity or lack of it until it suited his own purposes. However, how much experience did young Henry actually have? There’s a good chance that he was a virgin when he married Katherine. He was young and Henry VII had kept him close, perhaps fearing the loss of his only remaining son, so the opportunity to play boys and girls may have been lacking.

Katherine was not an innocent – she had been brought up at a Court where her mother was a strong ruler – she had very good female role models to follow. She had learned politics at an early age and she was very conscious of her duty. It is not beyond reason that she later lied about her status on marrying Henry. It is often argued that she was religious and would not have lied. However, Catholics could receive absolution for lying especially if there was a very strong reason. If the fear was that Henry would marry another woman with Protestant leanings, then I am sure the Catholic Church would have absolved Katherine if she lied about her first marriage. Katherine would see a greater good in lying to keep Henry safe for the Catholic religion, rather than telling the truth with potentially explosive consequences.

Oh Boy, Aud, I was feeling very alone in my opinion of whether Katherine was a virgin when she married Henry. So, I thank you for yours. I’m sure most everyone here is exhausted by my thoughts that she did retain her virginity with Arthur.

It would have been Katherine’s belief that she could not have confessed, and gone out of the confessional and repeated the sin again. Sorry that is not how confession works. If one believes in one’s faith as it is said she believed, one does not repeat a lie once it has been absolved. The whole purpose of confession was/is to keep your soul from being condemned in the afterlife. As an ex-Catholic, once I confessed a sin, I certainly didn’t think I could walk out of church and repeat the sin again thinking that there would always be a priest to absolve me. No! Are you kidding me? My thoughts were now if I’m hit by a bus, I can get inside those pearly gates. Geez, you can take the girl out of Catholicism, but you can’t take Catholicism out of the girl. Some lessons stick forever.

Living in the 16th century, for me anyway, would be like living in hell. The promise of a heavenly afterlife would be something to look forward to, and I wouldn’t jeopardize that for anything.

We have evidence that she told Compeggio to tell the pope she was not lying. She threw the ball to Henry at Blackfriars asking him to look to his conscience as to whether she was a virgin or not. No comment from the man. When writing to the pope, Katherine said she would give the consent for the annulment if Henry would swear to the pope that she had not been a virgin. Nothing.

And it doesn’t matter if Henry was a virgin when he married her. That’s not an excuse. After 20+ years of marriage and several mistresses later, I think the man would have eventually figured out whether she was one or not. Unless of course, he was a total idiot. (Bessie Blount at 14 or 15 was certainly a virgin) Other than the men called upon to destroy her, what do we have to prove she was not a virgin at the time? All I hear is a modern theory that Katherine and Arthur being 16 and 15, and being out from under the control of a parent, would have been rollicking in bed day and night.

We don’t believe the lies told about Anne, and we don’t believe the lies told about Anne of Cleves, yet we are willing to believe that Katherine lied and that it was okay if she did. That does attack her credibility. I don’t think she was saintly, but I do think she was a devout Catholic. And thinking that one could tell a sin in confession and go out and repeat that lie again, diminishes Catholic beliefs.

There were dispensations for people who went to war and/or for those who had to defend their families with violence. I don’t think those dispensations have changed much. And Henry thought that God spoke through him. Therefore, there was no threat to his afterlife. He could lie like a rug.

I don’t actually think she did lie Sharon. My first instinct is always to believe her side of the story. Once I start trying to unravel things I speculate of course.

I am trying to point out that it is not surprising people think Katherine may have lied, and I don’t necessarily think they judge her either. History is full of liars, and monarchs lied all the time, even Popes lied. Henry forced many of his subjects to lie when they signed his act of succession, he forced his own daughter to lie and discredit her own mother. Lying was not remotely unusual.

And actually I think adultery and incest are far more unbelievable than questioning if a couple had consummated their marriage after six months of living as man and wife. That could be considered unusual, although they were fairly young. People don’t believe the charges against Anne because there is evidence they were fabricated. It is not on the same level.

Anyanka said

One of the thngs I can never get my head around…

Why didn’t KoA tell H7 and Elizabeth that nothing had happened between her and Arthur? But left them waiting to see if she was pregnant following Arthur’s death.
I find it hard to imagine that royal and noble ladies weren’t told what to avoid regarding men given that when hey spent several weeks traveling to thier new husband’s domaines surrounded by men.

re Confession…I know far too many people who think that you confess and it wipes the slate clean…and you an “Go away and sin”…leaving off the “No more'” part… It’s not an either/or state..

She had been ill at the same time Arthur was, but she recovered and he did not. However, she took to her bed after Arthur died and spent weeks sending letters home to her Mother from her bed saying how awful it was at Ludlow. Either way, Tremlett says they knew very shortly that she was not pregnant. Widows were sequestered under these circumstances all the time. (Mary, Queen of France, for instance) Why would it be different here? She could tell them she wasn’t pregnant, but they would still want to be sure.
If that’s what some Catholics believe Confession was/is for, then they are not very good Catholics. I think Katherine was.