Was ANNE BOLEYN EXECUTED WHILST PREGNANT? | Six wives documentary | Tudor history | History Calling
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 фев 2022
- Was ANNE BOLEYN EXECUTED WHILST PREGNANT? This theory about the second wife of Henry VIII is one which I was asked about in the comments of my recent video on the royal fertility problems of the Tudors and so in this six wives documentary from History Calling, we look at the origins of this theory and whether or not it has any merit. We’ll first examine the comments made by King Henry which some, most notably author Alison Weir, have sometimes used to argue that Anne was pregnant at the time of her death on 19 May 1536. We’ll also study the Queen’s conversations and comments made in the Tower of London during her two week imprisonment there and look at Anne Boleyn’s final speech upon the scaffold. We’ll ask how likely is it, given Henry VIII’s quest for an heir (which for him could only mean a boy), that he would have executed his pregnant wife? Like Catherine of Aragon before her, Anne had thus far failed in the task of producing a male heir, having had two miscarriages, but would Henry really have knowingly killed his potential son just so that he could marry Jane Seymour more quickly? Finally we’ll consider whether the Victorians found any evidence of a pregnancy when Anne Boleyn’s bones were disinterred from beneath the floor of the Chapel of St Peter Ad Vincula in the 1870s. Let’s look at one of the most famous executions in history to see if it was even more tragic and scandalous than has previously been thought.
Patreon: / historycalling
Instagram: / historycalling
SUBSCRIBE with NOTIFICATIONS switched on for new videos every Friday.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE:
THE BIRTH OF ANNE BOLEYN • THE BIRTH OF ANNE BOLE...
THE LIFE OF HENRY VIII, PART 2 | THE STORY OF ANNE BOLEYN • THE LIFE OF HENRY VIII...
DID ANNE BOLEYN HAVE A PSEUDO PREGNANCY IN 1534? • Did ANNE BOLEYN have a...
TUDOR ROYAL FERTILITY PROBLEMS • TUDOR ROYAL FERTILITY ...
ANNE BOLEYN’S EXECUTION: HOLLYWOOD VS HISTORY • ANNE BOLEYN’S EXECUTIO...
DIGGING UP ANNE BOLEYN AND OTHERS • DIGGING UP ANNE BOLEYN...
BUY OR RENT
The Tudors, season 1 amzn.to/3rFmveg (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VCwQ0j (US link)
The Tudors, season 2 amzn.to/3m64HIn (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VMPnHw (US link)
The Tudors, season 3 amzn.to/3wiwPwi (UK link) OR amzn.to/3BijsPB (US link)
The Tudors, season 4 amzn.to/3rNeggF (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z16S58 (US link)
Wolf Hall (2015) amzn.to/2UJ9Mwz (UK link) OR amzn.to/3B70Qlp (US link)
The Other Boleyn Girl (2008) amzn.to/3jhXAgo (UK link) OR amzn.to/3xKvbEg (US link)
Anne of the Thousand Days (1969) amzn.to/3dAIlf9 (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z5xt18 (US link)
Henry and Anne - The Lovers Who Changed History (2014 docu-drama) amzn.to/2Stho5w (UK link) OR amzn.to/2USJc3Z (US link)
Henry VIII and his Six Wives (2016 docu-drama) amzn.to/3jiCkag
Six Wives with Lucy Worsley (2016 docu-drama) amzn.to/3hd93vd (UK link) OR amzn.to/3wH2mr2 (US link)
DVDS
The Tudors complete collection: amzn.to/3gWs4Ty (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z3Ef7n (US link)
Six Wives with Lucy Worsley (2016 docu-drama): amzn.to/3h7Qh8z (UK link) OR amzn.to/3xKuBGA (US link)
READ
[FREE] Eustace Chapuys to Charles V, 15 April 1533
www.british-history.ac.uk/let...
[FREE] Henry VIII to Richard Pate, 25 April 1536 in State papers, published under the authority of His Majesty's Commission. King Henry the Eighth (London, 1849), vol. 7, pp. 683-4. Available at archive.org/details/statepape...
Eric Ives, The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn (Wiley-Blackwell, 2005) amzn.to/3h9efQD (UK link) OR amzn.to/3xLivgr (US link)
Sarah Morris and Natalie Grueninger, In the Footsteps of Anne Boleyn (2013) amzn.to/3y8rt6z (UK LINK) OR amzn.to/2W9oJct (US LINK)
Antonia Fraser, The Six Wives Of Henry VIII (2nd edn, Phoenix, 2009) amzn.to/3atiEfi (UK link) OR amzn.to/36IqD5r (US link)
David Starkey, Six Wives: the Queens of Henry VIII (Vintage, 2004) amzn.to/3k9uD4Z (UK link) OR amzn.to/3wImKIh (US link)
Hilary Mantel, Wolf Hall (Fourth Estate, 2010) amzn.to/3AbIr6D (UK link) OR amzn.to/2UQmA48 (US link)
NB: Links above may be affiliate links. This means if you make a purchase through one of these links, I earn a small commission. It in no way affects the price you pay.
Creative Commons licenses used see creativecommons.org/licenses/
Do you think Anne Boleyn was pregnant at the time of her execution? Let me know below and check out my PATREON site for extra perks at www.patreon.com/historycalling Remember to SUBSCRIBE too.
No, I don't think that she was pregnant. Henry would have known full well when he last had sex with her, and she was imprisoned for 19 days before being executed....they may well have waited for proof of her menses to proceed. (I always thought that Katherine Howard spent so many months at Syon Abbey before she was finally dispatched because they wanted to ensure that she was not pregnant)
I don't think Queen Anne was pregnant because killing a pregnant woman was seen as a mortal sin back then. I don't think Henry would have had her executed if she had been either. I'm not sure how he would have been able to claim the child or what he would have had to make up to try to smooth things over after her arrest, had she been, but I guess we'll never know. Great channel I love all your videos. I wish that the current Queen would allow several of the past monarchs to be respectfully studied now. I know it would seem disrespectful but imagine how many questions could be answered if that were to happen. Maybe in the future.
It has nothing to do with this story but I think Cranmer was in love with Anne Boleyn.
I think it’s very unlikely that she would have been executed if they thought she was pregnant for all the reasons you’ve explained so well.
Were executions of pregnant women usually delayed or commuted at the time?
Henry would have doubted that the child was his if she were pregnant - by the time she was executed he referred to her as “the great whore.”
I don't think Henry would have executed Anne if she was pregnant. He wouldn't have risked killing a potential male heir. He could have dealt with Anne after their child was born.
If Anne had given birth to a boy, she would have reconciled with Henry
I completely agree.
At the very least, Henry would have been careful not to endanger his son's legitimacy. He probably would have left Anne alive and had affairs if she had given him a healthy heir.
@@tammydreamwriter2877 I agree with that too. But even if their marriage was damaged beyond repair Henry would have waited for a possible boy.
I agree, BUT if he believed that Anne HAD been unfaithful- and potentially with more than one man - then perhaps he would have doubted whether the child was actually his or not?
“Pleading the belly” to avoid execution was part of English common law going back to around 1387; even if there was some doubt about the parentage of a pregnancy, the existence of a pregnancy alone might have been enough to save her life. I assume Anne would have chanced it if she thought she might be with child.
Absolutely. The idea that she wouldn't mention it, or that she did and the story somehow never got out is just crazy to me.
Wasn't there a woman pirate who managed to avoid execution due to being pregnant? I think she was even released from prison eventually.
@@Ammeeeeeeer Anne Bonny and Mary Read both pled the belly and had their executions delayed. Mary Read died in prison but Anne Bonny’s execution was delayed multiple times and it’s not clear what eventually happened to her.
Another case a lot of people may have heard of was Elizabeth Proctor (as featured in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible) who was accused of witchcraft in the Salem witch crisis but whose execution was delayed long enough for everyone to calm down a bit and was released.
Edited to add that Bonny and Read were pirates.
Thanks for the date. When I saw the video title, I was wondering if Pleading the Belly wasn't a thing yet in the Tudor era. Honestly, I can't imagine being sentenced to death, thinking I was pregnant, and NOT getting down on my knees to beg for the life of my child.
@@katherineoliver3856 pirates who both individually pretended to be men, and became lifelong Me Hearties after mutual discovery of their secret when working on the same ship. One of my lifelong favourite historic tales 🏴☠️
Simply perfect. Excellent. While I of a mind to think Henry VIII a brute, at best. I think at the very least he would, as you noted, have waited a few months to see what Anne gave birth to. Then decide what to do with her. I also love your humility. It marks you as a proper scholar. Brava.
Thank you very much. Yes, I didn't want to be too harsh on Ms Weir because asI said, she knows she made an error here and hasn't pursued it and mistakes happen to us all.
He only became a brut after head injury
Read my opinion of Allison Weir above. I have read several of her books as I like to get a well-rounded approach on an author and she does not mind making mistakes. I think she only corrected the ones that you're referring to because she was called out on it. I don't take sides on the Richard III issue with his brother's children, but she absolutely shreds him with no evidence. You could almost see the vitral dripping from her pen.
Yes, I absolutely agree. Henry VIII desperately wanted a son and heir. And I believe that, if Anne Boleyn had given birth to a boy, she probably would have survived. But she didn't, and it would be Jane Seymour who delivered the boy baby who Henry so desired. Then, of course, poor Queen Jane died from puerpural fever after having Edward - who was Henry VIII's only legitimate son. Thank you History Calling, you've done another splendid job at debunking mythology and sticking to the facts. ❤❤❤
@@shazzzabanazz4789 Dear shazzza, actually that is debatable too, because some people say that Henry's behaviour didn't change dramatically at all after his accident and that he became more bad tempered gradually, while others claim that his behaviour DID change quickly. Maybe History Calling could do a video about this, or has she done one already??? Love from Amanda in Melbourne, Australia ❤️
Your point about Henry absolutely not killing a potential heir was exactly my first thought upon seeing your video title. Loved hearing you go through the evidence! Thank you!
You're welcome :-)
Assuming of course that he believed himself to be the father, given the charges of adultery brought against her
I'm surprised I've never heard this before. A pregnant Anne in the tower sounds ridiculous given she was executed. Would Henry have risked losing a possible male heir? I can't imagine that. Excellent video, as usual.
I didn’t know there was a question of pregnancy at this time but I must say, I admire you sentiments for Alison Weir pointing out we all make mistakes. I always applaud the knowledge that everyone makes mistakes and, as I tell my students, no one knows everything.
Thank you. Yes, we're all only human and I wouldn't want to be held to some standard of perfection either.
Executing a pregnant Anne would have been mad when Henry was desperate to have a male heir. What if the fetus was male? ? ? ? I've never hear this speculation before and I'm glad that I haven't. Thanks for sorting everything out for us.
I don't think I'd heard it either until people starting asking me about it under another video and then I happened to have a copy of Weir's book that I'd picked up in a charity bookshop but not read yet and was able to look it up.
I agree! There are many reasons Henry would have not executed her if she was with child. If there was even a shadow of a doubt Anne would have shouted it to the rooftops.
Not if she was pregnant of another man or at least suspected of that.
@@amandadunn1238 The only reason Anne would not plead her belly would be the fact that Henry and Anne did not share a bed after her miscarriage. If there was no possibility that Henry was the father, Anne would not announce a pregnancy because a pregnancy would be proof of adultery. If Henry knew Anne was pregnant but that he could not be the father of her, Henry would have no compunction about executing her.
If he hated Anne that much why would he want to have a child with her whether that child was male or not. It is not as if he would have found it difficult to replace her. Waiting for the child to be born meant risking a child that was female or worse another man's child. So execution would make logical sense.
love that you do these deep dives, history calling. while there are a good many history/biography channels out, you're doing something a little different, and as a history grad, i really appreciate your approach (and historical research)!
Thank you. I'm a stickler for the evidence certainly. I've seen other channels that really just skim the surface and even just read out Wikipedia articles and I really hate that. I think it makes history look like a soft option of a subject and doesn't show how much time and effort it takes to really do it properly (which as a fellow history graduate I think you'll understand).
I await all your videos and enjoy them so much! Thank you for taking the time
You are very welcome. Thank you for watching and commenting. :-)
I look forward to your videos each week. Thanks for kicking off my weekend here in College Station Texas USA!
You're very welcome and greetings from all the way over here in Northern Ireland.
I don't think she was pregnant but I do KNOW that picture of Henry scared me to death when it blinked 😆 nice and informative video as always!
Haha, yes, I thought I'd try something a little different with some of the pictures as I know I show the same ones a lot. Don't worry, you're just the latest in a long line of people to be scared by Henry :-)
@@HistoryCalling You do that with the images? You are clever. I thought you downloaded them. Well done. I wouldn't know how.
@@angr3819 There are quite a few artists on YT who create motion images of historical figures from their portraits. Some of them try to reimagine what these people would look like in modern times as well. It's fascinating! And yes, sometimes a little jarring LOL
Yeah! It freaked me too!
@@elainewalsh2058 It doesn't freak me out. I think it's fascinating but I get what you mean, because it's unexpected.
Thank you for this. My only query is that she was imprisoned and executed for adultery and incest. So a supposed pregnancy would very much not be in Henry’s interest, partly because of concerns about the legitimacy of the baby. However, imagine if she’d been allowed to carry the fictional child to term, and it was a boy. What sort of comment would that make on Henry’s manhood? Specially since he’d already voiced that he thought God wouldn’t grant him sons.
I’ve never thought he truly believed the accusations against Ann but he would have thought it important that his people did believe them. There had been a groundswell of doubt and unrest when the split from Rome’s church happened, and when he then divorced Catherine. Or so I’ve read. Far from the ‘common people’ thinking it was all far from their lives, women in particular were concerned, for, after all if divorce was legal what then of the permanence of their own marriages?
So Henry needed the people to believe that Ann was actually a sinner and had committed adultery and incest. If he let her live and announced a pregnancy I can imagine him being scared of ridicule.
However the points you raised are valid, and I think you present a wealth of evidence for her not being pregnant. I’m just imagining what Henry would have felt if he was told she was pregnant. Since he already had Jane Seymour lined up as a replacement he was unlikely to brook any delay. Impulse control wasn’t a gift old Hank had!
ETA I don’t believe she was pregnant mostly because of the law about pregnancy delaying execution. Ann was an intelligent, canny woman who knew her husband well. After all, she was able to keep him at bay for years, whilst still maintaining his interest and attention, which is astounding when you consider, as I’ve mentioned, his lack of impulse control. Imo if there was the slightest chance of Ann being pregnant with Henry’s child she would have ‘shouted it from the rooftops’ and probably paid for the rumour being spread. She would have hoped that delaying her execution might mean him losing enthusiasm for the idea. Maybe she menstruated during her captivity which meant she couldn’t claim to be pregnant. Or they hadn’t had sex during the relevant time, which others have mentioned as a possibility.
Thanks for making me think, which today means I’m off to do a binge on your channel. I like your deep dives! I’m Australian and, most improbably, this is a chilly, very wet Saturday in summer so I’m glad to have the excuse for a doona day.
Hi, thank you for watching and greetings in Australia (it's rainy and windy in Northern Ireland too today, but that makes a lot more sense given that it's winter here). Glad you liked the video and hope you enjoy the binge too :-)
Henry had already ordered a swordsman from France before her trial. He made up the accusations to get rid of her so he could seemingly perfect Jane Seymour who'd been carefully coached for the role. He happily partied until her execution as opposed to his sheer horror in learning Kathryn Howard wasn't a virgin bride (she'd been molested as a child). Anne never wanted to actually marry him or be a mistress, she tried to put him off but that sadly had the oppose affect as he built her up to be a perfect baby boy producing machine.
When Jane Seymour attempted to stand up to him a couple of times, he reminded her what happened to women who defied him.
@@chsparkle Ive read a fictional story where the accusations were on a slip of paper inside H's prayer book, when he went to Mass.
However I think it's probably like Henry 2 and Thomas a Becket. King H wanted something to get rid of Anne. He made that plains to all around him, and someone stepped up and provided evidence.
@@bilindalaw-morley161 The accusations written for Henry to discover was for Katherine Howard, and I believe that really happened. A note was left for him on the pew in the chapel (Henry had his own private pew in the chapel, in a raised gallery at the back, if I recall correctly). So, I think what must have happened is someone confused Adulterous Wife #2 for Adulterous Wife #1, and said it happened with Anne Boleyn.
@@chsparkle Anne did certainly refuse the King at first, but at some unknown point prior to the beginning of the Great Matter she began to reciprocate. We know that she did send him love letters and gifts in return.
I absolutely love your videos!! I just found them about two weeks ago, and this past weekend, I started at the beginning and binged on them. I love British history! Though, I get a bit confused with the hierarchy between dowager’s, earl’s, lord’s, lady’s etc…. Thank you for all the research and for sharing!!
Thanks Joyce. I've debated doing a video on that actually, but there are already quite a few out there and I didn't want to overlap with them. It's basically (after the royal family), Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, Baron, Baronet, Knight. Lords and ladies are the children of Dukes, Marquesses and Earls, or a Lady can be someone married to a Baronet or Knight. Dowagers are women whose husband has died. So the Dowager Duchess of Bedford would be the mother of the current Duke, rather than the wife. It's also possible to have multiple dowagers at once. When Elizabeth II came to the throne, both her mother and her paternal grandmother were still alive and both were dowager Queens. This is very quick and slightly simplified, but I hope it helps.
@@HistoryCalling Thank you Ma’am, though I’ll have to read this several times before I can follow it.
Excellent video as always! Love my Friday evening history lesson!😊 Thank you
My pleasure. Thank you for watching and commenting :-)
Me too!!! I get happy when I see a History Calling upload!!
I just found you and now a new subscriber. I like your soothing voice and thorough research.
The best voice in Tudor podcasting!
Great vid. Just discovered you and I’m thrilled. And I particularly appreciate your graciousness and humbleness towards Allison Weir, who is a great author. I do agree that anyone can make a mistake. And that certainly doesn’t mean that all of their work is ‘bad’.
Absolutely. We all make mistakes.
I’d love to see you do a video on George Boleyn and the trial and conspiracy about him and Anne 💛
Yes, he'd be interesting too. It's a shame there are no images of him though :-(
@@HistoryCalling I agree!
I love the whole mythos around the Boleyn Family at that time. Anne was the one who got me into history when I was 6 so I’m so happy I found your stuff!
I’ve always a had fascination with history and your videos are always a delight!
Glad you like them :-)
Henry was more than ruthless and calculating enough that, if he'd even suspected she was pregnant, he would not have been above keeping her alive until she gave birth and *then* having her killed so he could marry and try to produce more children.
I think so too. He wouldn't have squandered the 10 years he'd spent on Anne right at the last minute as she was about to produce the long awaited son.
@@HistoryCalling King Hank was a lot of things, but stupid was not one of them (not that kind of stupid, at least).
You have such a beautiful voice!!! I could listen to you talk history all day!!!! If you are ever feeling up to it, PLEASE do a nice loooooong video!!! I will listen!!!!
Haha, I think we have different definitions of long. I consider anything over 20 minutes long as those videos take such a long time to research, write up, record and put together :-) My longest two are the Princes in the Tower (45 minutes) and the Disappearance of Benjamin Bathurst (36 minutes) if you're interested. Hardly anyone watches the Bathurst video, but it's actually my favourite out of all the ones I've done.
@@HistoryCalling Lol!!! I have watched your Princes in the Tower video, and I shall give your Bathurst video a watch today!! Thank you for the suggestion!! 😊
I really respect your work, as it is obvious how well you research any topic before making a statement. With all the differing opinions around it is nice to be able to go to a source such as yourself to confirm suspicions. Thank you for your work.
Thank you so much :-)
Another fantastic video, thank you. Look forward to them every week. Will you be doung any on Scottish Kings? Im currently obsessed with King James 1V and what really happened to his body after the Battle of Flodden.
I'd love to do some more on Scotland, though oddly enough my videos on Mary, Queen of Scots didn't do as well as I'd hoped, which was surprising to me given how famous she is ...
I know, you would think people would be interested in her. Seems so much on the Plantagenets and War Of The Roses & The Tudors. Ive read & watched so much on them now but they're still interseting. I'm a bit bias as I'm Scottish & love Scottish history. Making a trip to Holyrood Palace shortly after watching your Darnley Jewel video. Still look forward to your videos though, you have a lovely voice to listen to 😀
I really like this episode. Our gracious historian dispatches the erroneous theory of her contemporary with finesse and compassion. The animated portraits of Anne and Henry are spooky cool. One of your best episodes. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and skills. Appreciate much. Lvya
Thank you. The moving portraits seem to have gone down rather well. It was a bit of an experiment to see what people thought of them.
That blinking portrait of Henry’s head is beyond creepy. 😂 Also, very humble and wise words at the end, rational and even-handed. None of us are perfect. Looking forward, as always, to your next videos.
Yes, I thought the moving portraits would be an interesting avenue to go down, just to give you all something a little different. :-)
Great work!
Thank you :-)
Thanks for this video. I first heard this theory about ten years ago and have been looking for the source since!
No problem. Glad I could help :-)
Love your channel! May I ask your opinion of the author Jean Plaidy?
I enjoy your videos so much 🥰
Thank you so much!! :-)
Really looking forward to this one. It's friday, so .... well, you know the drill by now. 😂 As ever, bless yer ❤ & yer pink cotton socks for all your hard work. I believe it is appreciated more than you can ever guess. 🙂
Thanks Chris. That's especially nice to hear as I'm currently slogging away on a video which will be out in a few weeks time (no spoilers though, you'll have to wait and see what it is) and feeling slightly burnt out.
Haha, I was thinking I'd just watch The Graham Norton Show later on :-)
Thank you so much for the research.
You're welcome. I must do a video at some point that will allow me to look into your namesake in more detail. Walsingham was a fascinating figure too.
After hours mired in the despicable cesspit that is Twitter, it's a blessing to hear your excellent, well researched and non judgemental reportage. Thank you as always HC
You're welcome. Yes, I can imagine Twitter is pretty bleak these days. I deleted my account a while ago after Musk took over.
This video gives me credence to this theory to start with. Out of all my research I've done on Anne Boleyn I've never heard this before.
Thank you for another interesting video 🙂
My pleasure! :-)
I love your research and conclusion!
Thank you :-)
No way Henry would have risked killing a male heir. Maybe executed her after the birth, but not before if she truly was pregnant.
Yes, I think so too.
@@HistoryCalling I always wondered why didn’t he just divorce her? Was it really necessary to have her executed with accusations he knew were false!
You've convinced me and I greatly appreciate your constructive criticism of sources.
Excellent research. Not the first time I've found big holes in Weir's research. At times, if the facts don't fit her theory, she seems to selectively quote out of context. I much enjoyed her book on Katherine de Röet, but feel like I need to check all of her sources.
At any rate, I'm glad to have found your channel and look forward to more. Cheers.
Did anyone else get scared by the one picture of Henry that started moving? I literally had to turn my lights on that was the most horrifying thing i have seen in a long time and then the ann one too omg thats scary.
Haha, yikes I'm sorry about that! :-) I still think it's a good way to do something different with images which I know I show very frequently though. Gotta keep trying to find ways to keep you all interested and on your toes after all :-)
So here I was, overdosing on news of the Ukrainian invasion, seeking solace in the humor of Kimmel and Colbert, when I realized, FRIDAY!
History Calling Day! The ultimate refuge. As I'd never known of this bit of history, the whole presentation was fascinating to me; the breakdown of sources was so clear and refreshing, as usual. I admire your dedication and willingness to admit any mistakes; your criticism of another scholar's work wasn't at all mean spirited, very refreshing these days. Love the animated images. Until next week, be well.
Yes, I've been seeing all that news as well and then remembered at 6.35pm 'Hey, I have a video going live in 25 minutes - I'd better get on RUclips!' I didn't want to be rude or mean to Ms Weir. Yes, she gets a bit carried away sometimes in her efforts to find something new to say about people who have been picked over by historians for centuries now, but none of us are perfect.
Fantastic video!
Thank you :-)
I love your speaking style and videos. You’re a good researcher. Men love women who speak kindly to them, and you could own me. Fortunately someone already does, and she is very kind.
There is no way that an ogre like Henry would have knowingly executed the mother and presumed male heir. A male heir was all Henry lived for - he would have forgiven and forgotten everything until he had that male baby in his arms, and then he would have unleashed his rathe, and Anne would have been no more.
Yes, I think so too. A boy was all he wanted. Jane Seymour would have been consigned to historical obscurity if Anne had produced a son and we might only be talking about the 2 wives of Henry VIII.
He wouldn't have killed Anne if she'd had a boy, because he'd have been proven right to divorce Katharine. Plus, two healthy children, one a male heir would be a good start and he'd have her pregnant again in no time. He was a second son, always good to have a spare. He was angry because after having a girl, she started miscarrying which was too similar to Katherine. Not enough time between pregnancies and the stress.
If he thought it were another mans, he would.
Another strong video! I had never even heard of a possibility of Anne being pregnant while in the Tower. Thank you for bringing, I think, this little known rumor to light.
I think Weir is the only one to ever suggest it and even she backtracked pretty fast in later works. I'd be curious to know how it happened though. I wonder if she actually went to the archives and checked the sources herself or relied on someone else's research and if that's what got her into trouble? We'll likely never know.
I wouldn’t consider this an attack on Weir as you discuss how she recognized an error. People make mistakes. And a small diversion in research can lead someone astronomically off course without realizing the problem right away.
Absolutely. That actually happened to me once when I had a letter which had had an incorrect date written on it a few years after it was written. That then led me to make an incorrect argument in an article I was writing which I only noticed when the thing was in press. Fortunately I was able to get it fixed before publication, but I nearly died when I realised what had happened and the whole thing was incredibly stressful and taught me how easy it can be to make a mistake.
I do think Weir does have a blind spot when it comes to Henry believing in Anne's guilt it really stands out because she's normally very plausible.
Agreed.
@@EmoBearRights I love Alison Weir! Not love love, but you know, her career lol. I want to be like her when I grow up book-wise.
@@zoeeliason7435 suggest you do not follow her biased and badly sourced example
Totally agree with you and the others! If Anne was pregnant and Henry knew about even a remote possibility it would have at least temporarily saved her life or postponed her death. The only ways it could be possible that she was pregnant at the time of her death would be that 1) it was early and she told no one, or 2) No one knew yet. Thanks so much for this video! If Anne's name is in it, I'm on it lol. 👶🍷💕
Thank you. :-)
I love listening to your videos! They are very informative, without being one sided, and you provide plenty of evidence. What I truly enjoy is your voice! I love listening to your vlogs and they help soothe me to sleep at night! Thank you!
Thanks Angela :-) I actually do the same thing (find a RUclipsr with a voice I like and listen to their videos to help me drift off). Great minds think alike :-)
I agree. Ms. Calling has a nice voice. However, I find the subject matter and presentation to be too exciting to sleep to.
I think you’ve proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that she was not pregnant when executed. I just love how thorough you are!
Thank you :-)
The chamber maids and the ladies in waiting would have been paid/forced to report everything. Which would include the Queen's health and if she still had her "monthlies". If there was any indication she was with child, Henry would have been pressured to stay the execution. Even if the baby wasn't his it was still considered a innocent. Plus Anne was smart enough to use that to her advantage if that was the case.
Exactly. There would have been no way of keeping something like that a secret.
I remember reading that in Tudor times, they had learned through experience if you had a miscarriage of a boy infant, any surviving babies after that were likely to be girls. You do touch on this. Thanks for this carefully researched video.
I’ve heard it suggested that Katherine was pregnant at her execution, but not Anne. I think if Henry had slept with her at any point after the miscarriage, he would want to see what the child was. He wanted a son above all, after all.
I've never heard the Katherine theory. She'd been imprisoned for several months before her death so I think had she been pregnant it would have been found out before her death. I think I do remember reading that she put on some weight during her imprisonment, but I always put that down to her not moving about so much.
I have heard that too, Katherine Howard but not Anne. Either way, with Henrys ego he wouldn't have executed either one of them if they were pregnant in my opinion.
But like others on here have pointed out, if (and this goes for both cousins here) either were pregnant, the legitimacy of the child would be in question due to the charges. I don't believe there would be anyway for Henry to let either of them carry a child to term and have it. Too many people would question the legitimacy of the baby. And as far as him not executing a pregnant woman, he went out of his way to execute Jane Boleyn. It was unlawful to execute an insane person. Henry changed the law just to kill Jane Boleyn. He would have executed a pregnant woman who did him wrong.
@@ButtonsCasey If he KNEW that they were not cheating (since he used that as justification for Anne) he would not doubt the legitimacy and no one else would either. People called both Mary and Elizabeth bastards and even questioned Elizabeths legitimacy. KatherineHoward likely was cheating so Henry could honestly doubt legitimacy. Anne, no. He just wanted out of the Marriage and he did not execute Henry FitzRoys mother and he was definitely illegitimate. And I have not heard that Jane Boleyn was ever doing the Hokey Pokey with Henry so he wouldn't have given a flying fez about the fetus, and it wasn't even George Boleyns (her husband) because he had been dead for several years. I have not even heard that Jane Boleyn claimed to be pregnant because she never remarried. Janes execution was likely just spite regarding her alleged involvement with Anne and Katherine, especially since Jane was executed years after her husband and on the same day as Katherine. I have also not heard that Katherine Howard even claimed to be pregnant to avoid the axe.
@Rosa Mery Rojas-DelCerro nobody said Jane boleyn was pregnant?? The comment you replied to said that she was insane, and the law at the time was insane people could not be executed. Henry overruled this so Jane could be executed.
This makes my rainy Saturday morning perfect
I'm glad to hear it :-) Thank you for watching.
What accent is this/where are you from? I love hearing you talk. And I'm excited for the video
Thank you. I'm Northern Irish :-)
It's beautiful!
On behalf of myself and all my fellow countrymen and women, thank you very much :-)
It reminds me of the Appalachian dialect of my long dead ancestors without the poverty
It's funny, it seems to share a lot of things with a lot of different American accents. I had someone tell me just the other day that it sounded like I was from Philadelphia to them. It's probably got something to do with the great Irish diaspora around the time of the Famine in the mid 19th century. We've gone everywhere and taken the accent with us! :-)
Great video History. Thank you. Rip Amen 🙏.
Nobody is perfect, no one is above making mistakes. Well said. Excellent video.
Thank you :-)
I have thought and thought about what turned Henry into the murderer of his queen, wife and mother of his daughter as what he did is incomprehensible. England had had queens who were harmful for the realm in past, even more brutal times, who were not executed. Henry was willing to break tradition and basically open the way for monarchs to be executed. (IMO, we can thank Henry for future executions of Queen Jane Grey, Mary Queen of Scots and Charles I. Perhaps Henry's initial stroke even helped stoke execution of king and queen and nobles during the French Revolution.)
We seem to have ample evidence that Henry was having problems in the bedroom during his marriage to Anne. (If it is true that elaborate armor was made for jousting, and if Henry gave up jousting after 1536, then the suit of armor said to be his shows a large, obese man by that time. Obesity is not good for any healthy activity.) Part of the wedding vows of the time were for the wife to be "buxom at bed and at board", which I take to mean a willing partner in bed and a cheerful companion at dinner. Furthermore, the less than scientific medical knowledge of the time stated that the female had to enjoy the sex act in order to conceive. (Sadly this misinformation trickled down even into the last century when ignorant people believed pregnancy following r*pe meant the woman had "enjoyed" the act!)
My theory is, Henry was having difficulties in the bedroom. If he could not begin the process, or more likely finish the process, then he could blame his wife for not arousing his flame, so to speak, or responding in a way that would guarantee pregnancy. He would certainly have blamed her. Meanwhile, perhaps he was having dreams about Jane Seymour or other women, and had the idea he could impregnate women he found more attractive.
We also have reports that Anne and Henry argued, that she was outspoken and that Henry came to dislike this in a wife. At her own trial, the only thing she admitted was that she had not always shown Henry the respect he deserved.
Anne had cost Henry a tremendous price. He had basically laid his realm at her feet. As we know, measures Henry took to obtain Anne changed British history to the present day.
Until Catherine of Aragon died, Henry needed to keep pushing Anne forward as his lawful wife and queen. If he rejected Anne, he would have been expected to reinstate Catherine. When she died, his slate was almost wiped clean of religious questions and difficulties. To have a totally clean slate he needed to eliminate Anne.
I think Henry never slept with Anne again after the January miscarriage. She would have needed some recovery time and quickly there would have been Lent when, traditionally, sexual relations were not allowed between married couples. If Henry found Anne repugnant, he had a good reason to abstain without her sensing danger. I looked up Easter for that year and as I recall, it was early in April. (God knows what calendar they were using.) However that was, Anne's fate was sealed, certainly by May first.
Therefore Henry knew she was not pregnant with his child. If he has any honesty in his conscience, he probably knew she was not pregnant by any of the men who were also accused. (And since noble women had no privacy, whether or not she had resumed her cycle, would have been noted and reported.)
I assume Jane Seymour excited him enough that a prince was finally born. Henry certainly blamed 22 year old Anne of Cleves for not sparking his physical interests. Maybe Katherine Howard titillated his manhood from time to time. She was executed for adultery* so again we see Henry's insecurity and vanity, IMO. By this time Henry was obese and ill. I do not ever recall reading anything about Katherine Parr having been thought to be pregnant. She was young enough and healthy men can impregnate in their fifties and older.
*(I have a sneaking suspicion that poor Katherine sought information from Henry's men of the bedchamber so that she could better entice him and conceive a prince, the spare, so to speak.)
Anne was officially executed for treason. Perhaps in Henry's poisoned mind he believed she had somehow sabotaged his quest for a son. He believed lack of a son was dangerous for the realm, therefore she would have been a political liability and in a sense, guilty of treason. In my opinion.
Yes, it is interesting to speculate whether Henry's actions paved the way for later royal executions. Of course monarchs had been murdered in the past (Richard II and Henry VI were probably killed for instance), but never publicly executed and once you go down that path, it's very hard to turn back and reacquire the same respect for monarchy again.
@@HistoryCalling There was the religious angle, that royalty was answerable only to God, that royals were divinely set aside from other mortals. There had probably been some murders but those were far different from judiciously killing an anointed queen. On the other hand, Anne Boleyn was not born into the royal class. So, did her coronation and presumably anointing with holy oil, mean anything or not? How much of a line did Henry cross? Some writers say Anne of Cleves was smart to become Henry's "sister" as that saved her head. Personally, I don't think even Henry would've had the nerve to execute a woman born into a royal family.
@@annalisette5897 I agree in that Henry would not have executed a royal because if he executed his first wife, it would upset Spain.
Very well reasoned. Thanks
In reference to your first question, I've always assumed his multiple head traumas changed him completely.
You are so thorough and fine combing the contempary sources, and I agree queen Ann was not pregnant at the time of her death, we all make mistakes but that's part of life, thank you as always HC. 😊
You're welcome. Yes, I think this whole theory was a red herring too.
@@HistoryCalling yes indeed I agree, till next week take care HC.
Outstanding! Thank you:))
Thank you too! :-)
Excellent research.
Thank you! :-)
My girlfriend was sleeping in my room the other day. I turned on one of your videos (the grandmother of the princes of the tower). She woke up at the sound of your voice and said, "Is that History Calling? I love her channel!" I said, "Yes, I love this channel too!"
Haha, first of all tell her I'm sorry I woke her up. Second, thank you both for supporting the channel :-)
Thanks, very well done
I'm convinced by your well reasoned arguments. I can't see Henry giving up the possibility of a male child by executing it's potential mother. By the way, the moving pictures are terrific,
Let me start out with I am in no way absolving Henry of blame in Anne’s death. But Cromwell got this ball rolling. Anne made a huge mistake in making an enemy of Cromwell. Her arrogance toward friends of Henry More, Brandon, etc. did her no favors. She was intelligent, but naive. She underestimated the powerful men that Henry surrounded himself with. She overestimated her power to “control” both Henry and his friends. In many ways she was her own worst enemy. The king is going to win every time. Wrong or right, he held the cards in the end.
I do not believe she was pregnant. It is a sad, tragic tale and I believe Cromwell orchestrated the deaths of her and the seemingly “guilty” men who died with her.
Great job as always and you are right…we are all just human.
Yes, I think after a while she probably did overestimate how much and how long she could control Henry. Then again, until the mid-1530s he'd never been the kind of extreme, murderous villain that he turned into, so she had no reason to see that coming.
Love your disclaimer at the end. Thank you for emphasizing that everyone makes mistakes. Weir’s enthusiasm is enchanting. No one can truly know the past, either. We’re all giving it our best guess based on the perceptions of other people.
We are indeed. :-)
you said this so perfectly. she would’ve certainly mentioned this while in the tower and Henry i’m sure would’ve allowed her to give birth to see if it was a boy. i’ve never thought of this being a possibility but it definitely grabbed my attention! great video!
Yes, I can't imagine for one second she wouldn't have announced this the moment she was arrested too.
@@HistoryCalling right! 🙌🏻🙌🏻
Great information, yeah as you said I don't think Henry would have had her executed if she was pregnant. Also liked how you said we all may make mistakes when doing thing such as researching things.
Oh we absolutely do, which is one reason I didn't want to be too harsh on Ms Weir. I'm far from perfect myself.
I've read a few of Weir's books and what struck me most was the bias she appeared to have for or against certain people. She's a little too prone to project her views as the truth. I read an extract of her book on Isabella, Edward II's queen, where she was talking about the sexual attraction between Isabella and Mortimer. It read like a "bodice ripper." I was actually shocked that that should appear in a book that purported to be an historical biography. I think she finally found her true metier when she turned to writing outright novels.
I believe (and this is just from reading her website) that she actually trained as a teacher with a focus on history, rather than as an historian (which is very different, trust me). I suspect this accounts for some of the issues in her work as to the best of my knowledge she doesn't have a BA degree, Master's and PhD in history which is frankly what you need in order to be able to do this properly. It was only while I was doing my PhD that I got really good at dealing with primary sources and analysing them. You simply don't do that much analysis at undergrad and as MAs are only a year long, there's not much time to do a lot there either. There will be the odd person who is able to teach themselves well enough to write good history without the formal training, but they really are the exception to the rule in my opinion.
Anyone can write history and you don’t need a higher post grad degree...you just need to have a strong love for the truth and not project one’s own opinion into the subject matter.
@@HistoryCalling Just because you have been to university doesn't make you automatically "expert" in this subject. Your bias and snobbery is showing....
@@annhollowell5352 You woudl not think that one needs formal training to learn to read documents and evaluate them, but Weir is very prone to quote dubious sources and seems to have no analytical ability
Thank you for another fascinating and insightful video. The notion of executing a pregnant woman would surely be repellent even to the more ruthless tendencies of Henry VIII. As you clearly make the case for, there is no evidence to back up this theory, which you so comprehensively debunk.
You're welcome. Yes, there is no evidence for this one really. Even Ms Weir seems to accept that now, based on her later work.
I read more about the practice of "begging for the belly" and the sentence was suspended only if the movements of the fetus were heard, when the pregnancy was already advanced.
If Anne had been pregnant recently they might not have understood it, or at least he could be considered the son of her brother and not of the King.
Whether it were true or not, I think it's a question for some interesting reflections.
I can not believe Henry would have executed Anna if he thought she were pregnant. He was certain with every pregnancy that he would soon have a son, and why would this pregnancy be any different.
Exactly. The whole thing is quite daft, but because it's been published a lot of people believe in it and I got not just questions about it under a previous video, but people saying things like 'Didn't you know Anne was pregnant when she died?', so I thought I just had to do a video on it to try to correct this misinformation.
What is so hard to believe is he would bed her, but then execute her just a few weeks later.
I don’t think she was pregnant but what an interesting thought. It never crossed my mind that maybe she could have been. I do agree that Henry would have spared her and to see if she had a son or she would have at least used it as leverage. Great video
Thank you for clarifying the question of Queen Anne being pregnant when she was executed. That being said, I find the story of the end of her life (and other of his wives) depressing. It is too bad that it was not illegal to order the murder of your spouse then I guess if you are king you can do whatever you want.
Thank you so much for this video. I have heard of this theory before but couldn't find any more resources to conclude anything. She wasn't pregnant because she would have used that to save herself. Henry would have kept her if there were any kind of evidence that she was pregnant or atleast postponed her execution. Henry married again and again for a male heir and a spare until Jane Seymor.
You're very welcome :-) Glad you found it useful.
Love your stuff!!!!
Anne Boleyn is one of my favourite females from history
Me too (though I'm not sure I would have liked her if we'd met in person, she's fascinating to research).
@@HistoryCalling she was the first to try and succeed with the whole "no sex untill you agree to marry me and get rid of the ex" poor Katherine
Thank for the well supported arguments in this video. Very thoughtfully researched. I did have a thought, perhaps Henry was optimistically expressing hopes for a male heir once he was rid of Anne and able to make Jane Seymour Queen-since he seemed to already be pursuing her before Anne was tried and executed. Even if not, I don't believe Anne was pregnant at her execution.
Love your videos ! Thanks so much, I have always loved Tudor history and when my history teacher said she was executed on 18 May 1536 of course I had to correct her 😂 when I see movies like The Other Boleyn Girl I cringe.
You’re incredible! Do you have an email address a fan could write to you on?
Thank you.
I got some rest and was finally able to watch! No I definitely do not think she was pregnant! You’re right! Why would Henry execute her knowing she could be carrying his heir this time? She also wouldn’t go to the scaffold whilst pregnant. It doesn’t make sense!
I loved your honesty about Allison Weir although I’ve always wanted to read her books! I also loved how you aren’t afraid to make mistakes but as long as we learn from them is all that matters! Keep learning! Of course I loved your video! I got
Thanks Kimberley. Yes, we're certainly all open to mistakes, myself included, so I didn't want to be too harsh on Ms Weir.
Thank you, I think Anne would have made something of it if she were pregnant. Like a lot of others here I also think that Henry would have delayed her demise in the hope that Anne had a son if she were pregnant. But I think he was ready to move on to Jane and Anne would have been rid of in any case
Yes, I can't imagine her not mentioning it either or Henry potentially killing his boy. The theory she was pregnant just has so many holes in its logic.
History calling ilove your video
4:33 i’m no historian amatuer or pro but Did Charles V have the Hapsburg jaw? The painting shows a weird jaw? Or is just me thinking that
Your last point is what really seals the deal here. Although I nodded in agreement with everything you laid out, the thought that I was keeping in mind the whole time is that there is just absolutely no way Henry would have executed his pregnant wife, given his obsession with his line of succession. Furthermore, Anne's correspondence with Sir William Kingston, Constable of the Tower of London, is fairly well documented and none of it mentions her being pregnant. This literally would have saved her life so there's just no way she would have kept it to herself.
Absolutely. It would have required everyone involved to act completely out of character and against the laws of the time, followed by a massive coverup that was done so successfully we still don't know about it.
The more videos I watch about them and the way you make your videos, the more they feel less like old facts and much more like real human beings. Poor lady 😢
Yeah, history has a way of sneaking up on you like that and making you care a lot about dead people :-)
The timing of her miscarriage, Lent, Easter and her execution that year would also make it very unlikely that she was pregnant. They all came very close together, and it doesn’t seem like there would have been time for her to recover and start sleeping with Henry again before Lent and later the investigations started. Plus I find it incredibly hard to believe that Henry would risk a potential male heir, even if he actually believed the adultery charges and questioned paternity.
It's just absolutely unbelievable that even if they WERE sleeping together despite the very tight timeline, even if there WERE doubts about the paternity, that she wouldn't bring it up even if she thought it was futile. Mentioning you're pregnant when you're about to be executed sure couldn't HURT, it's not like that would've made her get executed even harder. The conclusion that "she was pregnant but didn't bring it up to anyone because there was no point" is just wild for a number of reasons.
This video was very interesting. I'm not sure how, but id never heard of the theory that Anne may have been pregnant when executed.
To be honest, I'd barely heard of it until people starting asking me about it in the comments of another video. Even when I went looking for it, Weir's book is the only one I came across it in.
Running away with ideas that come from single historically documented comments seems to be a trait of Alsion Weir.
Have you read her latest "stories"? In her series of Six Tudor Queens, her 2020 book 'Anna of Kleve: Queen of Secrets', she tells the story of how Anne, whilst still a princess, got pregnant by, if I recall correctly, a cousin and gave birth to a son. The birth was done in secret, and the baby adopted by a childless couple. She wanted to marry the father of her child, but he was an illigitamate branch of the family, and she, as a royal, was expected to marry well for the benefit of her family. I honestly stopped reading halfway through because it annoyed me too much, but the ending where she dies, she has managed to bring her illegitamate son to live with her as a servant and he is beside her when she dies. Oh, and waiting for her when she dies is her 'true love', the cousin who basically tricked a niave teenager, took advantage of her and left her pregnant.
Gosh, doesn't that have Feel-Good movie script written all over it?!
And the kicker? When Weir wrote about why she decided to go down this angle, she pointed to Henry VIII's comments about feeling Anne's belly and breasts and concluding "she be no maid". Can we really trust that comment as fact, especially seeing as Henry VIII's next wife was almost certainly not a virgin when she married him, and he was none the wiser?!
Alison Weir writes good stories, I am not going to lie. But people read Historian in front of her name, and take everything she writes as fact. If you Google "Did Anne of Cleves have a child" you will see articles about how she has sparked a controversial debate, where she acknowledges the claim is inconclusive and speculative. But that didn't stop her writing her book, publishing it and her readers believing it. What's the betting that in a few years time, "Anne of Cleves had an illegitamate child" is going to join the much believed but false lore surrounding the Tudors, such as Anne Boleyn's sixth finger.
What do you make of the theory that Elizabeth I had a baby by Robert Dudley in secret?
@@beberivera7011 Whilst she was queen? As much credence as Henry VIII having Syphilis or that Elizabeth I was really a man. The dresses she wore have really tight bodices and she wore a set of stays, so a pregnant belly would be very noticeable and there would be at least one historical account that mentions if she was was out of the public eye long enough to hide a pregnancy and birth (at least 2+ months).
I too don't believe Henry would have had Anne executed if she was pregnant. Why? Mostly because of something that NO ONE else I've seen is mentioning...
Henry Fitzroy.
Henry Fitzroy was considered by Henry to be the ultimate last resort if he had no male issue. That's why he had done all he could to basically legitimize him with the titles Duke of Richmond and Somerset as well as Earl of Nottingham and by electing him as a Knight of the Garter. Especially note the Double Dukedom because at the time there were only two other Dukes, the Duke of Norfolk and Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk Henry's brother-in Law.
If there was even the smallest possibility of Anne giving him a legitimate male heir, Henry would have taken it.
Yes, Henry Fitzroy died two months after Anne was executed but it wouldn't have mattered if she was pregnant.
Superb think through. I agree Henry would not have killed her even if there was a remote chance she was pregnant
No, it would have been mad given how hard he was fighting for a son.
Gotta say, your accent is beautiful!
Thank you :-)
It looks realistic when the painting comes to light in how it would’ve been if they were around on this century.
I have wondered if Anne got pregnant shortly after the miscarriage in January, 1536. The indications are Henry and Anne were together and Henry seems to have been ok with her as his wife/queen. Yes, he had a wondering eye, but that was nothing new. Then (seemingly) suddenly, he has turned on Anne and executed her -- very quickly. I have wondered if Anne (being "late") suggested to Henry that another child was possible, but when her cycle started, Henry felt betrayed by Anne. I doubt there is any proof of this, but it would explain some things. Then again, it was probably the Seymore's or Jane herself giving similar conditions on Henry and Jane's union as Anne had several years earlier.
Yes, it is terrifying how fast he turned on her, but then I think that's just Henry for you, at least by the mid 1530s. She wasn't the only one who experienced a rapid and fatal fall from grace. Thomas Cromwell springs to mind as well. One minute you're being made Earl of Essex, the next your head's on a block...
I was hoping she wasn't pregnant, and I'm glad to hear that she almost certainly wasn't. Added to that: is there any evidence of Henry and Anne sharing a bed during 1536? Because we know that the allegations of her sharing a bed with Brereton, George, Norris, Smeaton, or Weston predate 1536 if I remember correctly, and even so those allegations are rather dubious to say the least so I'm not even sure if Anne would have had occasion to conceive a child in 1536. Added to that, it seems that Henry's attention was starting to shift to Jane Seymour during that period, so I'm at a loss how a pregnancy theory was even conceived (pardon the terrible pun). Great work and research as always!
I've wondered if they were sleeping together again too. We don't have any evidence one way or another, but I Jane Seymour was already on the scene by the time of the miscarriage, so Henry may have already mentally moved on.
@@HistoryCalling Most unlikely. Henry had given up on Anne once she miscarried her baby, and was planning to move on to Jane Seymour. Why would he sleep with Anne then>
It seems extremely unlikely that the sociopath would have executed Anne, had he had any hope of a male heir.
I agree that it wasn’t possible for Anne to have been pregnant when she was executed. Another reason is that although Henry had broken with Rome a few years earlier, Henry and England were still very religious. If Anne was pregnant, even if Henry really though that the child wasn’t his, ordering her death before the child was born would have gone against his religious beliefs and would have been against his conscience.
Yes, there's just no logic to this so-called theory at all really.
Stephanie Young:Erm,he HAD a conscience???!!!
Yes and no. Since he was raised as a spoiled, momma’s-boy second son he had a sense of entitlement that would make a “me generation” person from the 1980s blush. He may not have had a strong conscience in not wanting to harm others out of empathy. However, he did have a conscience in that he believed in Purgatory and Hell and that his soul could be consigned there depending on his actions. A baby before birth was considered to be innocent therefore causing its death by executing its pregnant mother was unacceptable during Henry’s life.
A quote from an article in the British Library about Henry’s prayer scroll:
“Henry VIII was brought up a devout Catholic. Before he became king, he had in his possession a prayer scroll containing illuminations of the Trinity, the crucified Christ, the Instruments of the Passion and several martyred saints. Latin prayers were placed on each side of the images, together with English rubrics (instructions) that explained how the prayers could offer protection from earthly dangers or the remission of time in Purgatory. Sacred texts of this kind were common as part of the devotional practices of late-medieval England. Owners of the scrolls recited the prayers, contemplated the images and touched the material object so as to become closer to the divine and earn heavenly reward in the afterlife. Henry’s inscription on the prayer scroll suggests that he used it for these holy purposes and accepted the theological teachings that lay behind them.”
www.bl.uk/sacred-texts/articles/henry-viii-and-the-reformation
I agree with your logic for no pregnancy. As usual, impeccable.
Thank you kindly :-)
I'm so glad I wasn't around then. Very interesting video.
Me too and thank you :-)
Great theory and well written as well. I absolutely agree with you on Anne not being pregnant at the time of execution. A point of this being that any prisoner - not just Anne - would have their execution date halted if they were expecting. By law at the time, everyone had to wait until a baby or babies were born. However, if Anne would have been pregnant during her time in the tower, it would’ve been have been likely that she might have miscarried because of all the stress she’d been having in her final moments or because she had a phantom pregnancy.
I’m using this an example for my book I’m writing about Thomas Culpepper with the pregnant prisoner being Catherine Howard instead of Anne Boleyn. Whether it’s true or not, it’ll always remain a mystery. But in conclusion, if it was the case for Anne, I think this theory is debunked.
Sez Francis: Good luck with the book.I write too mostly for pleasure though have had stuff printed.What I wanted to ask was,do you think Culpepper ever loved poor Kat,or just used her?I have read accounts for & against.I wonder if Francis Durham was really the one who loved her.Enough to take a back stand when she was queen.
@@susanmccormick6022 thanks Susan; it is interesting but I had this idea because apparently, he had a twin brother also named Thomas Culpepper who was alive around the same time. So, I decided to make the twins the Angel Thomas and the Devil Thomas where one twin betrays his family and their connections while the other dies as an innocent man. This is my take on this and of course we’ll never know what the truth will be.
Yep. I think you have made the case. Henry would not miss the chance at a having a son. I've wondered if Henry ( I confess I can believe the worst in him.) ever believed any of the charges he dumped on his wives or friends ? Did he ever have any doubts. ? It seems unlikely that a courtier would risk so much with questionable behavior. .. one would know there were always gossipers and spies...and liars around. Thanks again.
I don't think he believed the charges against Anne, but he did seem to believe at least some of what was said about Katherine Howard. It was noted at the time that he wore his supposed 'cuckold's horns' very cheerfully when Anne was accused of cheating on him, but was really down in the dumps about Katherine (indicating he knew Anne hadn't cheated on him, but thought KH had).
@@HistoryCalling Yes Katherine seems (to me ) to have fooled around or at least used really bad judgment . I have to wonder if it was she was just too young or dull to anticipate consequences.
@@od1452 she was molested as a child and had very neglectful guardians who never put in effort with her. So not a virgin bride which really horrified Henry. And every young, only about 16 or 17. She was apparently very kind, helping people with no personal benefit to herself, she ordered warm clothes for an old lady locked in the tower.
I don't think Anne was pregnant or at least she didn't know she was (if she was). If she was, she would have used that as her defence and would have begged Henry to spare her because she was pregnant and may have been a boy. Also, if I am not mistaken, being pregnant spared a woman from execution at least until she gave birth. Henry would have never risked killing what may have been a son.
I have a friend who has an ancestor who was accused of witchcraft during the Salem Witch Trials and only saved from death because she was pregnant. By the time she gave birth she had been found not guilty and freed; they named the baby girl something to do with the fact that she helped save her mother from being unjustly executed.
Yes, I don't think the theory makes any sense either. Both of them would have had to act completely crazy and out of character.