A second daughter... | Anne Boleyn | Forum

Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
A second daughter...
June 20, 2014
6:58 pm
Avatar
Vivian Hester
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 14
Member Since:
May 16, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

So I’m writing this Tudor novel and Anne has just miscarried the Jarnuary 1536 baby. I’m including a small What If-part in which the main character reflects on what would have happened if things hat turned out differently (like, if Katherine of Aragon would have given Henry a living son). The idea just popped into my head that things would have been interesting if Anne had given birth to a girl that year. Would she still have fallen from grace because a girl was certainly not the male heir Henry wanted, or would she have lasted longer, perhaps even long enough to get pregnant again, this time with a living boy? I have this kind of theory that either Anne or Henry had a disease that caused trouble with the male issue: this would also explain why Arthur and Henry Fitzroy were always the sickly type and died young. I find it a little curious that Anne had two or three miscarriages and one daughter: the miscarrriages would have been all boys, if my theory is correct. A living girl would have proven it, haha.

So many questions… very frustrating sometimes that we will never get the answers. What do you think would have happened if another girl had been born?

Anne Boleyn: just a strong woman with incredible dignity who lived in an era that didn't approve of that.

June 21, 2014
9:34 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

K.O.A did have a son, he died at 52 days. As it goes K.O.A had a number of boy children and they either died at birth or shortly after.
Anne miscarried a son in 1536, which played a (small) part in her downfall. In fact if my lousy memory serves after Anne miscarriage, despite H8’s outburst at her they were soon talking of her next pregnancy and how she would bear a son this time for sure, and that with K.O.A now dead there would be no one left to argue about his legitimacy. Anne downfall was rapid, in a matter of weeks she had gone from reigning supreme to being dead, but her downfall only started at the end of April I think. So February, March and the most of April she was still seen as the most beloved etc.
Arthur was H8’s brother not his son of his, and he wasn’t as sickly as some believe. Henry Fitzroy was H8’s son by Bessie Blount, and even after his death in July 1536 H8 always said something like “God bless ye Bessie” whenever he could, for it’s was Fitzroy’s birth that proved he was right in dissolving his marriage to K.O.A. H8 by the way was having doubts of the Validity of his marriage with K.O.A as early as 1512/13. H8’s main arguement in his divorce against K.O.A was a text by Leviticus, which states something like. “If a man marries his brother’s wife it is a sin, and they will be childless” Childless in H8’s case he saw as having no son. A daughter wasn’t of much use. Now maybe his arguement may have worked if not for H8/K.O.A son born in 1511. It wasn’t anyone’s fault that the child died it just happened. The 52 days the child lived for was in my opinion enough to prove that their marriage was ok in the eyes of God.
If Anne had had gone to term in 1536 and given birth to a son her posistion as mother to the next king of England would have been safe, whilst he lived. I would say though that I believe H8 was getting a little tired of Anne’s stormy nature, and I believe that Anne would have perhaps found herself alone quite a bit, and only bothered with when state duty deemed it necessary for them to be together, or when the time was ripe to make another child.
I believe K.O.A’s death did affect H8 more, than he let on, to be honest. Yes he and Anne celebrated K.O.A’s death or so was said by dressing in bright yellow. But actually Yellow was the colour of mourning of the Spanish royalty, and I think that Anne perhaps went a little OTT in her celebrations at the death of K.O.A. Understandable in someways because whilst K.O.A was alive she never really felt that she was the undisputed Queen of England. With K.O.A dead she was now truly Queen in every sence of the word.
I kind of think that Anne’s celebrations of the fact of K.O.A’s death let a bit of a bitter aftertaste in his mouth. He understood her reasoning, don’t get me wrong, but he would have found it a little better if she had at least kept her her joy muted or at least respectful.

Writing a book is never easy, but you really are going to have to do a lot of reading both fictional and factual before putting anything down. We can only give you our opinions on who did what to whom and with what. You are right when you say there are so many unanswered questions but at least with the opinions given here on the forum can give a good marker point for your book. Anyanka, Sharon and Olga are apsolute Goldmines of information. As you seem to have chosen Anne Boleyn’s downfall and death as the basis for your book I suggest you read our benefactress Claire Ridgeway’s book on Anne Boleyn and also the book by again Claire Ridgeway and Claire Cherry called George Boleyn Tudor Poet Courtier and Diplomat. Claire Cherry is also a member of our Boleyn family home. Both these books will help you understand George and Anne’s the brother/sister bond they had with each other. I always see Mary their sister as an outsider, even Jane (a very misunderstood woman) George’s wife as very much the outsider when it came to the bond that Anne and George had. Symbiotic is perhaps not the word to describe it but it comes pretty close to it. Neither of them could bear to live without the other.
The research for any book can be tedious and time consuming and equally as frustrating too, as just when you think you have something concrete in your mind about a certain situation, you find something which blows your theory right out of the water. Fictionally you can to a certain degree allow your mind free rein, but you must remember to double check if the word you are using or the scene you are describing was around in that era. Ie you can’t be using Victorian/modern words for 16th century speech or describing a scene. It’s hard work and at times can be frustrating, but needs to be done.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

June 21, 2014
6:13 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn,
Kiss
The boys, Arthur and Fitzroy were not at all sickly until a few weeks before they died. They did die young, though.
That is a good question Vivian. What if she had gone to term and delivered another girl? Anne’s time was slipping away. Henry was tiring of her and he would have felt more than ever that he needed a new wife. It would have ended badly, I think. She miscarried a boy in 1536. Henry knew this and was still unwilling to give her another chance. Had she carried the baby to term, he probably would have kept her as his wife. Maybe! Wink
Good luck with your book, Vivian.

June 21, 2014
7:46 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yep agreed Sharon, Arthur, Fitzroy and Edward were for all intence and purposes were all fit and healthy right up until a few weeks before their deaths, and their decline was rapid. Shame really excluding Arthur here, it would have been interesting to see how Henry Fitzroy and Edward would have got along together when Edward became King. Would Fitzroy be resentful of the fact that Edward was King and not him?

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

June 22, 2014
3:54 am
Avatar
Anyanka
La Belle Province
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2345
Member Since:
November 18, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said

Yep agreed Sharon, Arthur, Fitzroy and Edward were for all intence and purposes were all fit and healthy right up until a few weeks before their deaths, and their decline was rapid. Shame really excluding Arthur here, it would have been interesting to see how Henry Fitzroy and Edward would have got along together when Edward became King. Would Fitzroy be resentful of the fact that Edward was King and not him?

THanks for the kind words Bo..Kiss

Fotzroy had been a member of the Council of the North at the time when Mary was living as Princess of Walses in Ludlow.He was being groomed to be a politlcal force possibly even regent for a legitimate half-brother in case of Henry’s death leaving a minor as heir.

Fitzroy as regent would have been an intereasting take on history as the balance of the council would have blunted the teeth of either the Boleyn or Seymor factions depending on whoproduced the desired male heir for Henry.

I know in the months preceeding the announcement of Jane’s pregnancy, here were suggestons that Fitzroy should be named as Henry’s hier before his 2 half sisters as a male bastard was preferable to a female one as monarch.

It's always bunnies.

June 22, 2014
4:36 am
Avatar
Anyanka
La Belle Province
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2345
Member Since:
November 18, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said

That is a good question Vivian. What if she had gone to term and delivered another girl? Anne’s time was slipping away. Henry was tiring of her and he would have felt more than ever that he needed a new wife. It would have ended badly, I think. She miscarried a boy in 1536. Henry knew this and was still unwilling to give her another chance. Had she carried the baby to term, he probably would have kept her as his wife. Maybe!

Anither girl…hmmmm..I suspect that Henry would have still removed Anne by fair means or foul . She was approximately the same age as KOA was when she had her last pregnancy. Plus the attractions Anne had..her looks, learning, temperment were suitable as a mistress but less so as a queen.

Henry was tiring of Anne an now KOA was dead, there was no impediment to remoiving Anne and taking Katherine back. Anne was safe while KOA was alive. It was a Katherine or Anne as queen binary state. The death of one meant that the other wasn’t safe. Had Anne died while Katherine was alive..I really don’t know what would have happend…hmmm…new thread me thinks..

With Anne disposed of, Henry could protry himself as a single man looking ofr a wife.A legal wife..the One and Only..The Provider of 100% Legal Heirs..

It's always bunnies.

June 22, 2014
10:24 am
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

If my lousy memory serves. I think at one point there was talk of marrying Mary to Fitzroy. I agree Anyanka I do think that H8 was perhaps getting a little sick of Anne’s nature towards him.
Unlike K.O.A who ignored H8’s indescretions, and didn’t make such as fuss when he spent his time with his mistresses, Anne challenged him and made sure that everyone knew that H8 had mistresses. I believe that H8 always tried to keep his private life away from court and the Queen as secret as possible.
I agree that Anne’s life was really dependant of K.O.A being alive, once she had died Anne’s time was over, her only saving grace in January of 1536 was the fact she was pregnant, and I think she actually knew that, adding more to the stress she was already under with his indifference towards her anyway. There is a kind of Deja Vu moment here. Poor Jane more or less found herself in the same position towards the end of of 1536, when H8 had already started to look around him for another wife, and I believe as I’ve already mentioned that her pregnancy saved her.
I do feel that if Jane had given birth to a daughter or had miscarried as Anne had done then she too would have ended up on the scrapheap.
H8 treated his wives shamefully if you think about it, for the first few months of their marriages it was all tender passion, their whole survival depended on a child I.e a son to be more exact, when no son was forthcomming that was their end. Jane produced a son, granted but died anyway. After Jane came A.O.C who he didn’t like so she was pushed aside, and largely ignored for the most part, Although I do find his later relationship with her most odd, and again as I’ve said before I can’t help feeling if he had given his marriage to her a chance it may well have been quite successful, and maybe there may have been a spare heir or 2 from it. K.H again was all tender passion, but when he found out that she wasn’t as pure and honest as HE believed he had her murdered just as he did Anne B.
Even K.P was abused by him, and very nearly ended up in the Tower. I think her saving grace was his ego in her case, he had made himself look very foolish to the rest of the world when he murdered K.H, and he didn’t want to embarrass himself yet again. Even his marriage to K.P was jittery, as he was looking around for someone better. I think he had his eye on Anne Bassett and his one time daughter in Law Mary Howard as potential mates at one point. You can sort of understand why I want to kick him hard in the middle of the Gentleman’s department his attitude towards woman was infuriating to me at least.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

March 26, 2015
10:28 pm
Avatar
Alexandria
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 38
Member Since:
March 26, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Fitzroy is often said to have died of TB, as did Edward VI and Arthur, all in their teens. However his biographer says that Fitzroy was well until only a few weeks before his death, which is not typical of TB. Henry Carey was quite long-lived and healthy, but was he H8’s son? Many people accept Katherine Carey as H8’s daughter, and she was certainly fit and healthy, but her brother may not be Henry’s child.
I think H8 had a better chance of children with Anne of Cleves than anyone after Jane. She was healthy (she lived a long life by the standards of the time), quite young, and not related to him in any way. I have always thought that the standard historian’s view of her is most unfair. They seem to take Henry’s expressed opinion as gospel, but of course he was concerned to portray her as unattractive to excuse his inability with her without having to admit to impotence. She would have made a far better queen than her successor! I think he bracketed her as his sister to allow him to be kind and indulgent without having to prove anything with her and without her having any expectations of him. She seems to have very sensibly leapt at the chance.

March 27, 2015
3:26 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yes, one more reason to think Henry Carey was not Henry’s son…he lived a very long life. He lived longer than Edward, Fitzroy and even Henry himself.

I agree, Alexandria, Anne of Cleves was an excellent choice for Henry, and she would have been a very good queen. We will never know for sure, but she could have given him a nursery full of children. She was only 24, I think. Younger than both Jane and Anne were when they married Henry.

Gardiner was known to set up meeting places between Henry and Katherine. My current theory is that Henry was already getting busy with Katherine Howard at this time, and when he came to Anne’s bed, he was, I dare say, well spent.

April 4, 2015
9:03 am
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said it would have been interesting to see how Henry Fitzroy and Edward would have got along together when Edward became King. Would Fitzroy be resentful of the fact that Edward was King and not him?

I think you project modern values on the 16th century. At that time, people were used to think from childhood on that there was hierarchy among people. If you were born outside the wedlock, you had no right to inherit anything, although you father could donate your something. In fact, Fitzroy had already got much more than he (or rather his mother) could reasonably expect.

Of course, an ambitious person can always want more – without realizing that he can lose all, including his head.

April 4, 2015
9:09 am
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sharon said I agree, Alexandria, Anne of Cleves was an excellent choice for Henry, and she would have been a very good queen. We will never know for sure, but she could have given him a nursery full of children. She was only 24, I think. Younger than both Jane and Anne were when they married Henry.

Yes, but it takes two to make children. Henry did not got any children with Katherine Howard nor Katherine Parr and at least the latter was fertile with the other partner.

Then there is theories that many miscarriages and stillbirths of Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn were not their fault but Henry had some hereditary illness.

April 5, 2015
10:10 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

But by the same token Hannele neither did K.P or K.H conceive a child during their prior marriages (KP) or sexual relationship (K.H and Dereham)
I think we can exclude K.P from being sterile, as we all know she went on to have a child with TS. But with K.H, it was known that she and Dereham led a very active sexual life together, I believe it was Mary Hall (Lascelles) who mentioned to Cramner, “that at night K.H and Dereham, spend much time huffing and puffing and making many noices that only a man and a woman can make” Or something like that anyway. So I do feel that K.H may well have had fetility problems herself.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 6, 2015
5:40 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2115
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hannele said
Of course, an ambitious person can always want more – without realizing that he can lose all, including his head.

As was proven later in history by James, Duke of Monmouth, Charles II’s illegitimate son. James was well loved and highly placed even though Charles made it clear to him that he would not succeed; but look what he did after his father’s death. Whether it was right or wrong, he felt he would have been the better king than his Uncle James.
It is hard to say how Fitzroy would have felt as he aged. Having been given all the titles as he was, it does make one wonder what he would have done had he lived. Would he have been loyal to Edward? Would he have thought Mary and Elizabeth were both as illegitimate as he was, and therefore, he was as worthy of the crown as they were? I’m not sure. I would like to think he would have been loyal and worked with them, but I can’t say that for sure because it didn’t turn out so well with Monmouth.

April 6, 2015
5:45 pm
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said But with K.H, it was known that she and Dereham led a very active sexual life together, I believe it was Mary Hall (Lascelles) who mentioned to Cramner, “that at night K.H and Dereham, spend much time huffing and puffing and making many noices that only a man and a woman can make” Or something like that anyway. So I do feel that K.H may well have had fetility problems herself.

Katherine Howard said that she knew how to sleep with a man without making a baby. We do not of course know if her method whatever it was was trustworthy or if she only believed so nor how many time she actually slept with Dereham.

What we do know is that Henry had no difficulty to get his first three wives pregnant, that he was impotent with Anne of Cleves and that he did not get his two last wives pregnant. Also, we know that his health in his later years was very poor, he had ulcer and became fat and had difficulty to move. Therefore it is more likely that the reason why Katherine Howard and Katherine Parr did not get pregnant was Henry’s than their own. C. S. Sansom presents in his novel Lamentation an interesting theory that Henry had, among his other illnesses, diabetes.

Karen Lindsay loans in Divorced, beheaded Lawrence Stone’s book Crisis of aristocracy according to which among the nobility of Henry’s generation 19 percent of the first marriages were barren and 29 percent failed to produce living sons. And generally, it did not help to remarry: 48 percent of second marriages in the 16th century were barren and 58 percent sonless.

So Henry’s chances to get “nursery full of sons” seems after 1540 have been not very great. And especially with Anne of Cleves the chances were nill because he neither wanted nor could not do.

April 6, 2015
8:42 pm
Avatar
Anyanka
La Belle Province
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2345
Member Since:
November 18, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hannele said

Boleyn said it would have been interesting to see how Henry Fitzroy and Edward would have got along together when Edward became King. Would Fitzroy be resentful of the fact that Edward was King and not him?

I think you project modern values on the 16th century. At that time, people were used to think from childhood on that there was hierarchy among people. If you were born outside the wedlock, you had no right to inherit anything, although you father could donate your something. In fact, Fitzroy had already got much more than he (or rather his mother) could reasonably expect.

If your father (natch) had money, influence and power, then it was an easy process to legitimatise children..

It's always bunnies.

April 7, 2015
3:33 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hannele said

Boleyn said But with K.H, it was known that she and Dereham led a very active sexual life together, I believe it was Mary Hall (Lascelles) who mentioned to Cramner, “that at night K.H and Dereham, spend much time huffing and puffing and making many noices that only a man and a woman can make” Or something like that anyway. So I do feel that K.H may well have had fetility problems herself.

Katherine Howard said that she knew how to sleep with a man without making a baby. We do not of course know if her method whatever it was was trustworthy or if she only believed so nor how many time she actually slept with Dereham.

What we do know is that Henry had no difficulty to get his first three wives pregnant, that he was impotent with Anne of Cleves and that he did not get his two last wives pregnant. Also, we know that his health in his later years was very poor, he had ulcer and became fat and had difficulty to move. Therefore it is more likely that the reason why Katherine Howard and Katherine Parr did not get pregnant was Henry’s than their own. C. S. Sansom presents in his novel Lamentation an interesting theory that Henry had, among his other illnesses, diabetes.

Karen Lindsay loans in Divorced, beheaded Lawrence Stone’s book Crisis of aristocracy according to which among the nobility of Henry’s generation 19 percent of the first marriages were barren and 29 percent failed to produce living sons. And generally, it did not help to remarry: 48 percent of second marriages in the 16th century were barren and 58 percent sonless.

So Henry’s chances to get “nursery full of sons” seems after 1540 have been not very great. And especially with Anne of Cleves the chances were nill because he neither wanted nor could not do.

I don’t believe that Culpepper and K.H had a sexual relationship, although Culpepper admitted the intent was there. Whether that was a mutual feeling or just Culpeppers intention I wouldn’t like to guess. Their relationship was a very close one.
It is very likely that Henry’s doodle wasn’t working when he married Anne of Cleves, and it did take Jane almost 6 months of marriage to get pregnant. I agree that K.H was skilled enough on how to meddle with a man, but she would have known from the start of her marriage with Henry that she was expected to get pregnant and often, so her meddling with a man would have only extended as far as people like Dereham and Culpepper, and possibly Mannox, My personal belief in her freindship with Mannox, was either oral or anal sex.
I find it difficult to believe that she mearly meddled with Dereham when he so vehmently declared that there was a pre-contract between them. The statement the Duchess came out with makes me suspect that there was some sort of agreement between Dereham and K.H.
The Duchess was said to have remarked that when a messenger came with a letter for K.H and asked where Mistress Katherine Howard was she said “She is likely to be in her chamber having sex with Dereham” or words to that affect. This may or may not be true, but it was believed.
I agree that Lard arse’s health problems didn’t help the situation with doing what was required, but during his marriage to K.H, he began to diet take more exercise and generally began to look after himself. So it may well be that at this time his sperm count was extremely low, but not completely no existant. If his marriage to K.H had continued it may well have been he might have been able to get her pregnant, as his fitness and health improved so would his sperm count, so to speak.
Another thought has struck me here, (Yes it’s another Boleyn mad moment, which you are all used to) King Henri of France and Catherine De Medici were married for a number of years, before she got pregnant, she tried all sorts of quack cures to try and conceived, drinking mules urine and, putting cow dung and ground up stags antlers on her source of life,(It fair boggles the mind) but no baby appeared.
However it was her own doctor Jean Fernel, who cured the problem. The doctor noticed that there was a slight difference in Henri and Catherines sexual organs, and suggested that they try to have sex in a different position, aside from the usual missionary position. They took this advice, and Catherine, concieved straight away. Once she had conceived once she had no trouble to get pregnant again and again.
I wonder if this would have been the case for Henry and K.H.? Henry’s size and weight, may well have played a part in this as perhaps his doodle wasn’t really engaged properly with K.H’s freckle, so that when he did ejactulate the sperm didn’t go where it was supposed to but rather ran down onto the sheets. If K.H had been sat astride him maybe there would have been a better chance for her to get pregnant. I don’t know if any other sexual positions other than missionary was practiced, within royal or gentry households, but certainly I believe there would have been in houses of pleasure.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

April 7, 2015
8:37 pm
Avatar
Hannele
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 129
Member Since:
August 17, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Anyanka said If your father (natch) had money, influence and power, then it was an easy process to legitimatise children..

Then why did not they do it? There are many cases where dukes and earls had only daughter(s) or no legitimate children at all, but they let their daughter(s) or relatives inherit, instead of trying to legitimize their bastard son(s) whom they self-evidently regarded as “second-class”, especially if their mother had no status.

Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 70

Currently Online:
14 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Anyanka: 2345

Boleyn: 2285

Sharon: 2115

Bella44: 934

DuchessofBrittany: 847

Mya Elise: 782

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 0

Members: 426041

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 13

Topics: 1679

Posts: 23600

Newest Members:

franklingo18, HorinadR, estherqw4, enriquebo2, Delaquand, esperanzamt3

Administrators: Claire: 998