Discussion: Katherine of Aragon - was she really innocent?

"Many historians have different views on whether Katherine was a virgin when marrying Henry. She assured Henry she was as Arthur was "too ill" not long after they married. I think at the time Henry married her as he loved her, wanted her and her country as an ally against the French (at the time) and believed she was so. But when he became interested in Anne, he thought she was lying as I remember reading a quote from Henry that he had said something like "What, a hot blooded Tudor male?" when he was asked if he thought the marriage was consumated. If Katherine did lie, I think it was just a small white lie. But Henry used that to his advantage. So do you think she was innocent?"

"It's impossible to tell.

On one hand, it seems very strange that the marriage wouldn't be consummated, since it could be annulled if it wasn't - surely both sets of parents would want the deal sealed. Arthur's words after the wedding night would indicate that it was consummated. Katherine never mentioned anything about it not being consummated at the time. There is no record of any of the witnesses saying that it wasn't consummated. After Arthur's death, Katherine was watched for signs of pregnancy. On the other hand, would Katherine be prepared to lie?

It’s possible that she would have felt under pressure to lie; she would have been raised to believe that it was her destiny to be Queen of England and to tie her new country to Spain. If she did, I’d sympathize with her. Once she lied, she wouldn’t be able to take it back, especially after Mary was born. If her first marriage had been consummated, then she wouldn’t have been able to admit it without disinheriting Mary and branding her a bastard, since she wouldn’t be able to argue good faith.

Would Katherine have been prepared to lie and to stick to that lie for her daughter’s sake?"

"You give really good points. It would have been difficult to turn back after saying from the start and why wouldn't be consummated, they weren't particularly young [ not for the times anyway ]. And your right she did always think she was meant to be Queen of England. I think I may have lied if I was in her position, because I would worry what was to become of me and my daughter. "

"With Henry, chances are that he convinced himself that he was cursed. The dispensation alluded to possible consummation in any case."

"I agree that its very difficult to know such a thing, when it happend so long ago(this is my thought in regards to whether Elizabeth I was a virgin or not), however the historical facts seem to point to the fact that the marriage was probably NOT consumated.

The fact that no one reported that any thing was remiss while Katherine and Arthur were married was probably due to the sensitive nature of the subject and the fact that since they were both so young, and Katherine had traveled so far for the wedding(and 1/2 her dowry paid) the young couple may have decided not to say anything thinking the consumation would happen eventually. Also Katherine concieved regularly while she was married to Henry, and there were no signs of pregancy during her 5month marriage to Arthur(but then again, if they had intercourse once or twice...........)

While I could see Katherine lying, because she believed it was her destiny to be Queen of England etc, there were NO guarntees that she would marry Henry after Arthur's death. Also her religious devotion for the rest of her life isnt characteristic of someone who would lie about something so important. However I do agree with you all, that once she told the lie, she would have to stand by it to the end of time, to protect Mary's interests as well as her reputation internationally. It is impossible to know."

"id hate to have that job"

"Since the nobility were so insistent on all of the requirements of the legitimacy of offspring being satisfied, i.e. the virginity of the bride, consummation of the marriage, etc. I am surprised that this issue wasn't raised during the hearings of Henry's "Great Matter" and the testimory of the maid whose job it was to change the beds required. In some places, you know, the sheets were produced (actually displayed) to prove the brides's virginity. There was little expectation of privacy in those matters back then. The fact that Katharine could go down on her knees in front of Henry in public and assert that he knew that she had come to him untouched shows that even she, one of the most modest of women, was not embarrassed by the subject (and also in my opinion is further evidence that in fact, she was a virgin when she married Henry. Facing someone who is trying to use that very ground to divorce you and putting it to his conscience before the court, she had to have been pretty certain he could not deny it. . "

"Without repeating the detailed "points", I agree with every word angelosdaughter wrote concerning the known "facts" pertaining to Katherine's virginity when marrying Henry. There was a very public bedding ceremony after the wedding, which I very much think would have taken place at the marriage of the Prince of Wales and the future Queen. And, as was also written, the sheets were often displayed the morning after to show blood. I've often wondered about why it was believed all virgins bled the first time since they all rode horseback and could easily have broken their hymens long before marriage. And, to be very precise, not all women have complete hymens. They come thin and incomplete, too, which would not result in blood. The fact that the sheets apparently weren't displayed the morning after might be the very proof the marriage wasn't consummated: no blood. It wasn't in anyone's best interests at the time to announce it since it could then be annulled. They then got sick and Arthur died. But, I think the most compelling evidence is the last comment made by a.g, that Katherine would put the matter to Henry's conscience under oath before God and the Realm. He was no virgin when they married and I think he likely would have recognized "experience". That argument can also be used about his first time with Anne, too, when she was later accused of having prior experience. Just don't believe Henry couldn't tell and wouldn't have been paying attention. Even without an intact hymen, the first few times hurts a woman. Gee, I can't believe I wrote all this and am going to put it in public. Are there men on this list? (Hide my head.) I hope this doesn't violate rules about "good taste", but I can't think of a non-graphic way to write the thoughts. Am I in trouble now? Worry Worry"

"I should have stopped posting when I said I would. I need to learn how to use this thing. As soon as I sent that last one, I wanted it back and couldn't find anyway to edit my own post. I thought of a much more delicate way to express my thought about the "price" put on bloody sheets as proof of virginity. I should have said all women are not anatomically the same which means they don't all bleed the first time, as well as the possibility of having the prized part broken while riding a horse. That would have covered it w/o the other words I used which I totally regret and want back. So, I do apologize. If I get over this one and decide to post again, I'll do a practice run, think about it for awhile, and then type it in. This spontaneous response business is going to kill me with writer's remorse. To finish the thought, I wonder how many couples used a quick dagger prick on the finger to provide the much needed evidence that we know not everyone could produce, virgin or not. Otherwise, I stand by what I wrote, which is to agree with everything angelosdaughter wrote. The details she provided correspond with every detail I've read in numerous books. Researchers have the same documents with which to work and Katherine's testimony and plea to Henry re: his conscience is very compelling for me, 600 years later, so I think it must have been to the very religious and superstitious people of that era. Even Henry, who had a flexible conscience and was prone to bend rules to his benefit surely struggled with her plea. Some people have the ability to rewrite history in their heads to the point they believe their own reconstruction. I suspect he was was skilled at this. Is there a way I could have pulled that post I wish I hadn't sent?"