Poor Catherine. It seems pretty clear it would have been better for everyone if she'd caved - but the fact she didn't is by far the most interesting thing about her.
Protestantism wouldn't have gotten the needed boost...Pope would have reigned in America as well...this broke their stranglehold. Luther already started in Germany, but Henry unintentionally bolstered them.
Her conscience and strong morals wouldn't let her; she knew Henry and she had been married and that Mary was not a bastard. To cave in would be to lie.
You know Queen Catherine was more than just Henry’s wife when he was in France she was regent of England, and while she was pregnant, she led an army to put down an uprising in the north while Henry was in France. There’s a lot more to Catherine than just being Henry’s stubborn wife.
@@hilmaallen1302She did not lead an army. She organized the logistics and visited camps to boost the morals of the soldiers. Not the same as leading an army.
Didn't he already have 1 legitimate son and heir by the time Cleeves came around? He was working with a time crunch when KOA hit the menopause (or whatever made her child bearing years end).
@@One.DeSanctis. Yes but he did offer Katherine a divorce. I really do believe he would have treated her well, as he did Cleves, had she obliged. But Katherine was a warrior queen and would not back down and relinquish her crown, or more importantly, her daughter's title and inheritance. This angered Henry.
Also, it’s somewhat unfair to KOA to say she was overly stubborn - WE know what length Henry was willing to go to, and what England was willing to stomach. She didn’t. Besides which, he wasn’t simply asking for an annulment. He wanted her to admit she’d been living in adultery with him. Why would she do that?
I totally agree! It wasn’t totally about being prideful as many think. She was Henry’s first & lawful wife with whom he dealt treacherously in the eyes of God & man.
No, not adultery. Arthur was dead by the time of her second marriage. The issue Henry put forth was that their marriage was improper because he married his brother’s widow. That is not adultery.
You're right - I used the wrong word. I believe Henry had Wolsey called him to answer the charge of living in sin with his brother's widow (and it being an incestuous union). Either way, I can see why Katherine wasn't so keen on the idea. Perhaps if Henry had approached her with the annulment ala Eleanor of Aquitaine and Mary's legitimacy and rights being assured she might have been more willing to listen, even if she didn't then agree. I think Henry was foolish in how he approached it, basically.
I always wonder if Catherine’s resistance to the annulment had less to do with pride and more to do with what she saw happen to her sister Joanna (Juana) when she became Queen of Castile at the death of Isabella. Was, perhaps, her resistance fear of being isolated and confined because she was inconvenient like her sister who was a Queen regnant, not merely a Queen consort? By 1526, Joanna had already been pushed aside by her father, husband, and son. I’d think that example might be an influence.
Good point! Ive always wondered, whether Juana was "mad" at all, if it wasnt more likely, that the only mad thing about her was the selfish ambitions of the men in her life.
Maybe it had more to do with her own treatment after the death of Arthur. She always strikes me as not very bright. Learned, certainly, but unable to think things through, By acting the way she did, she Guaranteed her return to such treatment and a miserable life. Martyr syndrome. and definite bigotry. A trait inherited from her parents that came to fruition in her daughter,.
Your analysis is excellent! I agree with all of it. F****** fabulous What is forgotten a lot is Katherine's pride. She is the child of 'the Catholic Monarchs' of Castille and Aragon. Mary never forgot where she came. Thus, Katherine would never accept anything else than 'the Queen of England'.
Absolutely! She was the daughter of Ferdinand & Isabella; she was England's leader for the Battle of Flodden. She would never, ever have accepted the deal!
I agree, I’d like to know was there ever any plans for her to go back to Spain after Arthur died? Could she have remarried another European noble/ royal? Is the fact she stayed in England a sign that she saw her destiny and Gods plan for her to be Queen of England? I think understanding their religious viewpoint of the world might have been the reason she didn’t back down. A sort of God ordained this and so I will stick this out no matter how bad this life is because the eternal life is coming and to go against God in this life is a sin? I’m with everyone else who commented saying her refusal makes her more fascinating but I feel for her suffering. I don’t think I’d have had the strength, I’d have taken the deal.
@@jessicaroberts7788There were quite a few issues with her dowry. Ferdinand of Aragon only sent half of the agreed-upon amount. Then Arthur died, and they were at an impasse. Ferdinand wasn't going to send the rest, and Henry VII sure as hell wasn't going to return the portion that he received, so he just stuck Catherine in a castle until he and Ferdinand could come to a satisfactory agreement. Poor girl was in limbo for years As for agreeing to Henry VIII's terms, I think Catherine was more pragmatic than religious. She had everything to lose and nothing to gain by stepping down. There is no place in society for a divorced/retired queen. She was the aunt of the Holy Roman Emperor, who basically had control of the Pope and the Catholic Church, so she had the political backing necessary to stick to her guns. Nobody could have forseen the lengths to which Henry VIII was willing to go to obtain a male heir. It's only in retrospect that we see that it might have been better for her to step down
@jessicaroberts7788 I can totally agree,and if Henry felt he could've gotten away with it politically,Katherine may very well have been the first Queen beheaded instead of Anne Boleyn.
👸 Catherine had a hell of a time with those Tudors. They taught he to fight for her rights- the 7 years she was “forgotten”- she had to fight even if walking away would have been the smarter choice. I always wonder what would Henry think if he knew he was remembered & be famous for his 6 wives. I also wonder if Anne’s decision to withhold sex until she was married was a tactic to escape the king rather than be a conniving way to become queen. It has been said that you can’t refuse the king, yet she did & managed to hold him off for years. I think women in abusive & stalking relationships and how they try to survive- i wonder if there is another layer that we haven’t considered.
Ive had the very same thought regarding Anne! She probably never expected, that he would succeed in getting rid of his wife! And as for Catherine, she really was caught. After the death of Arthur, Henry VII had no use for her, and her parents having already paid her dowry and also not having need to marrying her off to some1 else enough to want to pay again wouldnt take her back. So she was stuck in England, sidelined and mostly forgotten under pitiful conditions. Once Henry VIII inherited and wanted to marry her, that was her only way out, and it also gave her back to position, she had been raised for, and which she considered her right. Between that and Henrys demand to lie, a sin in the eyes of her God, by admitting to even more grievous sins by her faith, she couldnt do, what he demanded. The really sad thing is, I think, there was actually a way, that wouldve worked for both of them, if Henry hadnt been so pigheadedly stubborn and had bothered at some point to actually get to know his wife and understand her. They couldve agree to basically, what was suggested according to Campeggio, only instead of demanding that Catherine lie about their marriage, they couldve agreed, that she would express a public wish to become a nun, which wouldve given him a very valid reason to ask for an annulment, so he could remarry, which he likely wouldve gotten with no problems. Ive read of such arrangements. And she couldve gone to live comfortably in a convent of her choice with Marys future assured and probably with free access to visit Mary.
@@dfuher968 I is such an obvious solution, to us looking back on what we know now ,that it makes you wonder why they never took that route. I firmly believe that Anne's refusals really were an attempt to fend Henry off, and it was only as time went and, that her stance changed Anne appears to have been pragmatic, unlike Katherine, who I will admit is the Queen I have least time and sympathy for. She had the solution in her own hands, yet she insisted on fighting a battle she would never win and causing alot of suffering for others along the way. I even think she was a hypocrite in her faith, a fanatical one , but still a hypocrite. IF she was so pious, you could be forgiven for assuming that the offer of a comfortable ife in a religious order would have been perfect for her. But nwe had the 'I am Queen! I am! Iam!' Violet Elizabeth strop. That makes her guilty of several sins, Pride being foremost. She also presumed to know better than God, in a way. If she believed it was 'His' will that she was Queen, maybe it was also his will that she wasn't? No one was asking her te denounce her beliefs,they were offering her a chance to follow them closer.
Yeah, she couldn't reasonably have expected that turning down the king would make her queen, usually that would just have made him lose interest and go after someone else so it's quite possible thats' what she was trying to do at least initially.
As far as Anne turning Henry down, she certainly would have had a clear example of what her life would have looked like if she *had* acquiesed to him: her sister Mary. If I'm remembering correctly, she was quickly abandoned, and then shunted off into an acceptable-but-not-particularly-impressive marriage. Doesn't sound like a great choice for a woman with ambitions either to a love match, or to a good match. And perhaps she did have sincerely held moral and/or religious beliefs about premarital sex. Catherine isn't the only one who might genuinely have been motivated by conscience.
That ‘one’ change - Catherine acquiescing to Henry’s demand for an Annulment - would/could have SO many impacts upon not only Englands, but the entire Continent’s, existing History … one string pulls another, which pulls another, which - ad infinitum. It boggles the mind! 👑👰🏻
If Henry was really the villain everyone says he was, he would have arranged an accident or case of food poisoning for Katherine. Unlike some other truly evil rulers, Harry always had to worry about his conscience. Always, Henry wanted to portray himself as a man of scruples. Cold-blooded murder was unthinkable Judicial murder, on the other hand , was perfectly acceptable.
@@anthonytroisi6682 Well put and sums it up perfectly. I think that KoA was only protected from some spurious charges because of who she was. It has always interested me that the only Queens who were disposed of in such a way were Henry's Own subjects. There was never any talk of treason about the 2 that weren't. Now why would that be, I wonder?
Hi Dr Kat! I'm so glad you bring up King Louis and Eleanor whose marriage was annulled. The refusal of a capricious pope weren't based in religious doctrine but politics as Katherine was related to the machine of this decision. Imo I find KOA was foolish. She should have struck a deal to have Mary be heir to the throne if no males were forthcoming and be remain powerful in comfort. She cut herself off, she knew Henry was fickle. I think she unwisely thought she was set aside to languish as she had after Arthur died. Her father, his father let her rot for 6 years without funds, few allies. She put herself in that same position but worse bc she was a zealot, was as hard headed as Henry. KOA didn't win, she withered. Nobody was offering her "get real girl" advice. If "God" was on your side, you wouldn't be set aside. She frustrates me bc she dug herself in and then buried herself and set up every woman following to suffering. Anne of Cleves, the smartest of them all.
I disagree. She was certainly no fool, she just had different priorities. And I'm sure she had more than plenty of people, starting with Henry himself, telling her to "get real girl". At some point (if not from the start) she must have been aware of the consequences, and of the fact that she could still change her mind and cut herself a deal. We'll never know if she refused to do so because she was telling the truth and didn't want to risk her soul (according to her beliefs) by lying about her marriage to Arthur, or because she didn't want to be shown for a liar and someone who had lived in sin for so many years, and for her daughter to be forever branded as a bastard, or both (incidentally, if she agreed to the annulment, that would have made Mary officially a bastard, which probably means that a deal making her Henry's successor in the event of no sons would have been impossible). Either way, immediate physical comfort was clearly not her priority. That doesn't make her foolish, even if most of us would likely choose the cold rational way (I'd like to believe, though, that I'd be able to show the same stalwart spirit as she did if something that really mattered to me was at stake). As for Anne of Cleves - clearly, she made the most rational decision, but it has to be said that she was in a very different position and relation to Henry and his court than all the other wives. Unlike Katherine and even Anne Boleyn, she didn't have a long emotional history with Henry; she only knew him for a very short while as an ageing creepy guy who tried to kiss her before even introducing himself, then couldn't perform in bed and blamed it on her lack of beauty and bad smell (and who had at this point banished one wife and killed another). She had no child with him to change the stakes and the lack of consummation of their marriage meant that she could get out of it without any harm to her reputation. And she had not been part of Henry's court, so there must have been less "family influence" plotting around her. Of course she made the only rational choice under the circumstances. Doesn't mean that Katherine's choice was not reasonable according to her own circumstances, personal history and beliefs.
I really don’t think calling her a fool is a good look here. She was a human woman, and like any woman with a backbone, she wasn’t going to step aside and allow herself to be kicked to the curb while her husband brought in a new woman.
I think Katherine of Aragon behaved the way she was brought up to behave. She was an Infanta of Spain👸 & she went through a lot to get to where she was.💪 Her mother was the Queen of Castile🏰 which probably made her think the idea of Queen Mary Tudor wasn't as crazy as the English Court seemed to think & Henry is just fickle. (which was true) Hindsight is 20/20, but it is interesting to speculate. Excellent presentation as always! Thanks, Dr. Kat.
For all of us older (40) ladies, that haven't been able to have a kid, poor poor Catherine! It's good though that almost 500 years later, we hear her story and feel her pain, and she is heard! Thanks Dr. Kat!
The only thing that struck me was that my previous parish would have to be named after a different saint (I used to attend St. Thomas More Catholic Church, before I moved for my job). It’s a small thing, but rather personal.
I thank you for this. I have been in a deep depression, struggled for weeks to recover. I am a massive of you, and found this video 2 days ago, and all sudden i had something to think about, and i’ve got out of bed actually got dressed and im enjoying going to my bookshelf and recapping this subject and enjoying the opportunity to read and think of a different outcome for history. Thank you. ❤
2:21 hello there from Texas! I too, struggle with depression, the " black dog" as Churchill termed it. Sometimes mine lifts on its own accord, but other times, reconnecting with an interest, or being sparked by a new idea ( has to be a pretty big spark!) Or inspired by encountering the stories of strong women, especially when these stories are told by a strong woman like Dr. Kat. Anyway, I basically wanted to say you are not alone. Keep moving forward, even if it's in tiny, inconsequential ways. You will eventually emerge at the other end. Take care and best wishes.
I can’t see Katherine EVER agreeing to an annulment. Not only did she believe deeply that she would have been putting her immortal soul in danger by doing so, but she also believed that the same held true for Henry. She wanted Henry to save himself from damnation, and felt that he’d been misled by advisors, and by Anne Boleyn. Moreover, she said firmly that she « had no calling to the religious life », and that her marriage to Henry was everything it ought to be in Gos’s eyes, and in hers.💍💕
I still believe that the event that changed the personality of Henry VIII for the worst, was the injury he suffered in the jousting accident in January of 1536. I do agree, though, with your assessment that Katherine of Aragon’s life would have been much happier and more comfortable if she had acceded to Henry’s demands. He would probably have even been friendly towards her, as he had been with Anne of Cleves. 💔
Came here to say this. I agree. That injury changed him forever. But Catherine certainly could have mitigated the damage to her daughter if she had capitulated but we have the benefit of hindsight. Catherine was a queen as anointed and destined by God. She could not and would not throw away what God had preordained in her eyes.
@reverie6034 She certainly became a queen (consort) but I'm pretty sure a diety had nothing to do with it. Otherwise, that diety didn't treat her very well.
Just to let you know, those reports were exaggerated/misunderstood. He never hit his head or was unconscious during that episode, but he got injured in his leg. Besides that, he was long before executing ministers and acquaintances, but he did suffer during his whole life from headaches from repeated jousting during his early years
@@gogreen7794But it was her deity. Hard as it is for us to understand, religion was a very serious thing bad then, and by all accounts she was very religious even for those times. She could never have gone against her God. As for the injury, I have to agree with the latter posters, while the leg injury and the health problems and accompanying pain from it following him the rest of his life probably made him much worse, I think, its easy to write off a head injury as the cause for his behavior. As enyo and doria say, the reports of the injury were exaggerated/misunderstood, and there were plenty of red flag b4 the accident. By all accounts he was a spoiled, entitled brat, who grew up to be even worse, especially after becoming king and getting confirmed, how "special" he was. While Im not a psychologist, and its really hard to diagnose historical figures, I would suggest, that he sounds a lot more like a malignant narcissist than a victim of a brain injury.
Counterfactual is a fascinating rabbit hole to go down. What if we had lost the Battle of Britain or if Harold had prevailed at Hastings? Of course the main thing is that by changing one small event you change everything; ie: I wouldn't have just watched this video and you wouldn't be reading my comment. I love your content, keep it up.
Thanks again for another great video. Thanks especially for the discussion of Louis & Eleanor of Aquitaine. Kind of illustrates how easy it was to get an annulment if you were important enough, or if your nephew the Emperor didn't happen to be besieging Rome when the divorce petition arrived!👑
Katherine could have entered a convent or monastery without dishonour. It was the usual thing under the circumstances. But she said her vocation was marriage and not the religious life. I find it ironic that she, in her devotion to the church, helped to usher in the break with Rome.🎯
There are two important elements in this conflict: Catherine sworn to be a virgin when she married Henry, second and most important Catherine of Aragon was the daughter of the mighty Catholic kings, aunt of Charles the emperor, she could never agree to such blow to her dignity. She was a pious and virtuous wife and she knew who she was. Henry never met such a dignified person in his life. All other examples of annulments used are not to be comparable against the case of Catherine. Henry was arrogant, cruel and manipulative, his deeds were beyond what is minimally understood. The killing for consciousness of so many, mainly Sir Thomas Moore is far too wicked.
At any point did anyone mention during KOA's petitions that in the Book of Ruth it mentions the Leverite law which states that if a man dies before having a son, his closest male relative must marry the widow? This should have totally negated Henry's theory.
I think they concluded that Leviticus had precedence over Deuteronomy and the Book of Ruth. This was political expedience and had nothing to do with God's laws or the salvation of one's soul. A lot of nonsense is foisted on the world in the name of religion when it is really people twisting religious teachings for their own purposes.
Because of you, Dr Kat, I have read far more of the 15th and 16th centuries than I thought possible. Reading Anna of Cleves currently. Thank you for your work.
Dr. Kat, this is SOOO fascinating as I've always wondered what would have happened if Katherine had agreed to an annulment!! Thank you for making this cold snowy NYC day a brighter one. 🥰
@bookwyrm2 I do not see Anne Boleyn easily giving in to keeping Mary's precedence though. She's queen, she would want her own son/daughter to take the throne. She would be hoping for/counting on a son who would supplant Mary in the lineage.
@@bookwyrm2011 Possibly, although I think Catherine, from the example of her mother, was hardcore keeping her own rank and privilege. Isabella was a queen in her own right and retained her rank when she married Ferdinand. Not to mention, no wife wants to be shunted aside for one of her staff members. But if she could have taken that option, and Anne Boleyn stood for it, it would have saved a lot of trouble. Of course, Mary might still remained Catholic which might not have gone down well with her father. But that is another tangent!
@@1234cheerful If Kate had done the decent thing, there would have been No Reformation, at least not in the form it took, so England would have been Catholic. Odd to think that the woman who appears to have been a fanatic about her faith actually caused the fissure. Henry remained Catholic at heart; the Real Protestantism took hold under his son. Henry just liked what he gained from it. A foot in both camps Control over both, and of course lots of lovely Loot! Do you know that is said to be the Real reason for AB's downfall? She wanted the money from the Dissolution used to help the people. Schools hospitals, better roads, the usual 'Looney Left' nonsense Cromwell wanted it for the Crown. Guess who won? Nothing changes really.
All else being equal, if Catherine had peaceably capitulated to Henry's desire to end the marriage and Mary had been allowed to spend time with her, I think the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth would have been much less fraught. Henry would not have needed to break from Rome and would have remained Catholic thus negating the religious tension between the sisters. Also, if as you speculated, Mary kept her position as princess, then Elizabeth would not have been usurping her place with their father which would also lessen the rivalry and resentment. While Mary likely still would have had hard feelings toward Anne Boleyn (and Elizabeth by association), probably not to the same degree, especially towards Elizabeth. I believe keeping Mary from her mother, not even being allowed to see her when she was dying, did a world of emotional damage to Mary. She couldn't really take that out on her father, Anne died soon after Catherine, so that left Elizabeth as the embodiment of all the injustice done towards Catherine. Whereas if Catherine had been accepting of the situation, I think Mary's pain and indignation would have been considerably less.
These are interesting because we often fall into the trap of hindsight when looking at history. We know that A leads to B leads to C and so on. But this can give us an idea what people at the time might be pondering and predicting when they thought about what might happen in their future, our past. It can make the reasons for decisions and events more clear.
I think this is fitting : 🕸 - a spider's web. No matter who you place in the middle it connects to so many other issues. The most sad thing we would lose however : "In 1537, King Henry VIII sent the famed artist Hans Holbein to Brussels to paint Christina's [of Denmark] portrait. The picture prompted a marriage proposal, to which Christina is said to have replied: "If I had two heads, one should be at the king of England's disposal." The reverse is blank." Such a wonderful quote to have gone down thru the ages !
💒 I am persuaded by Philippa Gregory's depiction of Katherine's childhood. Her value to her family was the arranged marriage she had. Her identity as Princess of Wales and future Queen of England had to be maintained. She was a pawn in her father's international dealings and had no welcome if she returned to Spain! I continue to be intrigued by the insistence that Henry taking her as his wife contravenes Leviticus, (the quoted passage clearly referring to the taking of a brothers wife while the brother still lives) when in another place a surviving brother is instructed to take his brothers widow in the hope to make a son for him, thus continuing his line. Of course Henry wants his own son, so that would not do!
My community theatre is doing a production 9f Lion In Winter. I am produced also tue costumer for this show. I really enjoy your history. I write this comment because you mentioned Eleanor of Aquitaine and Herry II and Richard and John. You failed to mention Geoffrey. Love history and how you present it.
In seeing this video, I can deduce that Katherine should have agreed to an annulment, on Her terms. In not doing so, she actually made her rivals daughter eventual queen. Thanks so much Dr Kat
Whew! That's a lot to unpack. Great topic! So much of this could have been avoided if it weren't for the paradigm of misogyny. I think the scenarios of Katherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn in The Great Matter were down to the actions/reactions of the women. Henry was in a place of having to react to a scenario, where he thought he should have complete control. He had a tempestuous nature and clearly gravitated towards headstrong, intellectual women. He was willing to have Anne as a mistress. It was she (and/or her family) who put the brakes on that. I don't think that in terms of what he did with his professional duties later, that there would have been too much difference if he had had more situationally supple women competing for queen at that time. I think mainly 2 things drove Henry: his head over heels limerance for women he fancied and his anxiety about England going into a War of the Roses type scenario if he did not have a legitimate heir (son) and a spare (son). I think that his narcissism and volatility was not going to be changed by him having an easier time if Katherine of Aragon went away quietly, and he would have reacted with suppression and violence to those he perceived as enemies, whatever the case. He showed that personality tendency before Katherine of Aragon and I think he was going to be a tyrannical powder keg about something. I think it might have resulted in maybe different victims, but in the end, Henry would have wanted iron-fisted control over everything he surveyed. It might have released the pressure valve a little. I do think that if he had had a male heir and a spare with Anne, (would that have been enough sons, or would, like some oligarchs with money, there would never be enough?), his anxieties about a War of the Roses type scenario could have been alleviated. Doubtless, he could take mistresses, fulfilling his limerance, but the anxiety for sons being gone might have had him a little more relaxed about his lineage and the future of his country. I suspect that whatever new challenges he would have had, he would have blown them out of proportion anyway. It may have resulted in different victims. Could Mary, married earlier, have secured a male heir for England? Possibly. She might have had a uphill battle with fertility, given her reproductive tract health issues. Anne going away quietly? I think it would have looked like what happened with Katherine, but I do think Henry took the expedient way out with Anne because Katherine refused an annulment. He does seem to have had a charm that had the tendency to inspire limerance in others (I would insert a comment on that if it this had been HAD.) Thanks for your inspiring talk!
I think that you nailed it. Henry didn't start out as a jerk. He might have been remembered instead as a decent monarch, maybe not great, but not the way he is. The egos of Katharine and Henry were just too big.
If Catherine would have known what standing firm against Henry would do to her beloved church... I have to wonder if she would have accepted the annulment to "save" it in England.
Oh how I wish I could time travel to the Tudor period. I can only imagine what it was like to see Catherine of Aragon walking around with her little monkey at court. I wish I could see the dresses and the jewels and the artifacts that have survived to today in the full former glory!
The hypothetical question of "what if Katherine of Aragon had agreed to the annulment" has crossed my mind more than a few times. Yes, I DEFINITELY believe that there would have been no "Church of England" as we know it today. If Katherine had realized that her "firmness" would have caused a rift between England and the Vatican, she might have been more willing to capitulate.
👆 Yes, IF Katherine was able to see into the future ~ Force had been used successful up until the 1500s, then it was a combination of Force /Coerce since Council of Trent. Then Ecumenism since Vatican 2. Same agenda ~ Different tactics. Lots of Non-Catholic Believers were dominated for centuries UNTIL the 1500s. It is so interesting that England rejected Papal Rule for reason much different than that of other Areas of Europe, BUT because it was during the same time period. So Interesting! Katherine in limbo for 6 years between 2 marriages is pitiful. She must’ve known about Henry’s other women, other children, BUT to be Rejected from her official position!?!? 😱 😡 😭
Dr. Kat! All of this is very interesting. The only problem I have with this post is that you used the term “holy orders “ a couple of times which would have been incorrect then, or now. Holy Orders, the sacrament was limited to males solely then. The more proper term would have been “ vowed religious” for a woman who would then have been considered a nun. I love your posts! You give thorough information!
In Henry's day, anyone who considered themselves educated had experience with Latin; therefore it amazes me that I've never heard of anyone arguing (😆) with Henry that there is a very real difference between "wife" and "widow" in Latin. Surely that's how the Bible would have read? Does anyone have access to the Bible that Henry would have been reading? I'd love to know what the actual word is in Leviticus.
My assumption is that it was the Vulgate - it is brother’s wife in that (uxorem fratris). However, as we know tenuous interpretations of faith texts have long been used for humans to do / get what they want. She may have been Arthur’s widow but she was once his wife 😉
That is true; however, the sentence is structured in the present, so (IMO) if she IS a wife then it is sinful; if she is, at present, a widow, that's a very different thing. I think. Thanks for your reply. 😘@@ReadingthePast
I think this goes to show that by this point Henry had already started into a Reformer’s mindset of picking certain verses to support his desires while ignoring others that oppose his desires. Deuteronomy 25:5-10 clearly states a brother should take up his deceased brother’s wife.
An interesting question. I think it would have affected Scottish history too in the sense that, had England remained Catholic, it would have likely sided with Mary Queen of Scots and she may never have been forced to abdicate.
I love these "what ifs". Ive slways felt that KOA's refusal (understandable though it was) to agree to favourable terms and annulment led to untold bloodshed, hardships and pain. With so much at stake and only a generation from the Wars of the Roses, its easy to understand Henry's panic at the lack of a male heir and his belief that the country would suffer. Yes, ideally he'd have stayed with Katherine, but once he'd made that decision I feel both sorrow for, and intense irritation at Katherine - just live a peaceful, happy life with access to your daughter and court, otherwise the bloodshed and pain for countless people will be set in motion. She was a formidable woman but up against a man developing into a monster
Totally agree. All this 'she was obeying God's will' stuff does not wash with me .Did it not occur to her that the Anulment may have been 'God's will' and he intended her to do something else? She could have founded her Own religious order perhaps? Then she could have played Queen Bee all she liked, safe in the knowledge that she was obeying 'His'will and being obedient to the Pope.
@@hogwashmcturnip8930 Between her and Henry it seems like every royal involved thought God was on their side with this one, regardless of how it looked to everyone else XD
Yeah, I never understood how she could create a schism in the church and basically lose her daughter without ever wondering if maybe that wasn’t actually the best path to take.
👆”and she could have obeyed the pope.” Yep. That particular pope was under the thumb of Katherine’s nephew, The Roman Emperor. Snapshot of what happens when Religion & Politics compete. WHY didn’t Pope immediately tell Henry “NO” to his annulment ?
👑 Katherine amazes me. Such a strong conviction to face and maintain her place in a strange court, in a strange country, which was surely hostile to her in her refusal to bow down.
What a thought-provoking and interesting intellectual exercise. I had no idea that Katherine had been offered a fairly reasonable, in my opinion, option. Accepting the offer might have also kept Henry from making more and more unreasonable demands as he would not have become more and more frustrated with the situation. It certainly does emphasize the fact that so much of history results from one person's decision at a crucial point in time. In this case, that person was a very important person indeed, a Queen of England. 👑👑👑
Fascinating, fascinating! As you discussed, l wonder if Henry would have treated people better, especially Anne Boleyn, or would it have encouraged how mean he could be once he saw he could get his own way somewhat painlessly. Would it have ameliorated the sense of desperation we see in him, the drive to beget an heir, or would it have made Henry worse? One thing is for certain, Katherine was a strong, resolute woman, more so than Henry ever bargained for.
I am curious on how our perception of Catherine would have changed had she agreed to the annual/took orders. SO MUCH of the popular understanding of Catherine casts her as the “righteously stubborn” one because she refused to submit to Henry’s will. If she’d “gotten thee to a nunnery”, how would that change the way people see her? would she be seen like Anne of Cleves, cleverly getting one over on Henry? Would she be like Katherine Howard, a tragic victim of the men in her life? Or would she simply be a footnote in history like all the women pressured to take orders to get out of the way. 👸👰♀️✝️❓
I feel myself uncomfortable with the (perhaps my own projection of, as I do not presume to think it intentional) message of this thought experiment being that the world would have been a happier and overall more stable place if Katherine had just surrendered. The butterfly effect and all, yes, especially when dealing with royalty in a time when being royal actually made you different/special. But Katherine being the nail that caused the shoe to fall that caused the horse to fall that caused the soldier/king to fall that caused the battle to be lost that caused the kingdom to be lost seems a bit extreme. Mary could likely have had a less bitter life and, if married to a foreign king so that she could not take the throne herself, that could have altered the course of history. The rift with the Catholic Church could have been postponed as long as Henry was getting his way. But I find myself suspecting that a man of Henry's ego would have ended up just as extreme in the end. The number and/or names of wives may have changed, but I could still see Henry following the same blueprint of regicidal insanity, especially if he honestly believed that the lack of a son was some punishment from God.
Henry made up a new title for himself. Given Katherine's background and the fact that she could have wrought havoc upon England via Spain, he should have given her an exulted title (recognizing her as first wife irregardless of Anne), given her lands and treated Mary as she should have been.
This was very interesting. I agree with much of your speculations. I think you're right about the path of Mary if her mother had been agreeable with the annulment. I'm sure her mother didn't mean to ruin her daughters chances at finding an advantageous marriage at an earlier age, and everything else that happened, as a result of her pride. Catherine was fighting for the only life she had ever known and I dont blame her for that. Hindsight is always 20/20.
It is truly so difficult to imagine the mindset of the time. That katherine believed agreeing to an annulment would cast her soul into turmoil in the afterlife, that she would be going against God. Because she could have maintained her dignity and the legitimacy of her daughter if she stepped aside. Which would have been a decent retirment
Brilliant as always. I wonder if Catherine had given in, if the Church of England, as we know it, would even exist. I agree that if events had played out as you hypothesized, it’s doubtful that Henry would have had six wives. 👰♀️
Dr. Kat, I really enjoy these voyages into-a different alternative timelines. One example I think about iis, what would have happened had the future young Henry the IX had lived. Then Henry VIii may just been a foot note in Tudor history, the monasteries would not have been dissolved and England could have ended up being a Catholic country. Just shows that small changes can have massive consequences later on. Keep up the great work! Lead on!
I've been reading some stuff around the Reformation and the English (and the Scots) seem to have got really into it so I'm not sure the country would have stayed Catholic forever, though it would have been later if Henry hadn't found his convenient arguments in favour of his own religious authority.
I have always wondered why Catherine was so dead set on not allowing an annulment. The King needed an heir and it was clear by then I think that she wasn't going to be able to give him one. I get that she actually loved Henry but what did she think was going to happen once Henry died? There would have been another civil war surely
At that point in history a woman ruling in her own right was not exactly commonplace, her thinking Mary would be Queen seems like it would be rather wishful thinking
👆 Yes, Katherine and Mary suffered because husband/father was determined to have a male heir, NO matter what. Certainly, 2nd wife + 2nd child Anne and Elizabeth were both personally & powerfully affected. + Others, of course. BUT this period in history did allow religious power to be examined. (not only England).
Katherine had the notion that her position in life, as Queen of England and Henry's wife, was the will of God, a calling, a vocation. A lot of nonsense, yes, but people thought that way then (and many still do). So giving up that position would have been going against God's will. Odd how God's will so often matches the desire of the one interpreting it.
I love these suppositions! Thank you for the considerations, and it's like you said, the chips would have fallen differently in almost every sense - future wives, children, beheadings.....and future monarchs. Elizabeth might never have been queen. It's mind boggling to consider these possible futures. Imagine a movie about exactly this decision of Katherine's?
I loved this. I think its so sad all these women where at the mercy of Henry and in some ways a host of other men including the pope. Very interesting thank you doc. Cat
💒🤴👸✂ Fabulous video, Dr. Kat. These counterfactual histories serve to illustrate how each event in life is like the tiniest of pebbles being dropped into a lake, yet the ripples created are enormous and far-reaching in time. I love "what-if's," and you are a veritable master at it. Many, many thanks!
The thought of Elizabeth I being a loving and probably very wise aunt to Mary I’s or even possibly Edward VI’s children, if they’d had any, is super interesting to me as is the tomb of Wolsey considering the person he was. 👑
Henry was also probably thinking of the 1498 annulment of King Louis XII of France from his first wife and the annulment his sister Margaret Tudor got from her 2nd husband in 1527. If Katherine hadn't been the aunt of the HRE, I'm convinced the Pope would have given Henry what he wanted, whether she agreed to it or not.
Quite an interesting take. I love supposing about history because wondering what if helps us learn and keeps us from repeating some of those fabulous 'mistakes' made by those in the past.😉
Love these counterfactual histories! So interesting to consider both the shorter term consequences for the individuals, as well as the broader long-term effects.
Always love your videos. You express yourself so clearly and concisely, no ramble. I recommend you to English language learners. Your videos are always insightful. Given everything you explained - may I suggest a video specifically on Henry and 1536? Deaths of both Catherine and Anne Boleyn as well as Thomas More, the jousting accident,, the Grace Succession and the dissolution of the monasteries. Keep up the wonderful work dear lady!
This analysis was excellent. So many lives spared, Mary would have been a completely different person, surely more well adjusted, perhaps more tolerant?Well done Dr.Kat!👑🎓🎺
It gives me shivers up my spine to imagine the many possible outcomes in history that could have happened. I really enjoyed this video! I'd love to see more "what if" scenario videos.
Great analysis. Talking about the what-might-have-beens really helps people understand what actually did happen. If he had just asked for an annulment, and kept the justification quiet, so Katherine wouldn't have been forced to admit to adultery, etc., she might have gone along with it. By that time, it's possible she wouldn't have minded getting out of his immediate sphere, since it was already noted he was getting short-tempered and touchy. But the adultery thing capped it for her, I believe. She knew full well she hadn't committed adultery, and she wasn't going to admit to what she definitely had not done. But Henry wanted what Henry wanted, and he didn't care how he got it. If he had been a little more willing to work with Katherine, she might have been willing to work with him. It was Henry's stubbornness and "I am KING" complex that caused him so much trouble, as much as it was Katherine. Henry wasn't going to sacrifice a millimeter of pride for a better solution for Katherine and the country. He only wanted what benefited him. Katherine has my pity, but also my admiration. History has been much kinder to her than I think Henry thought it would be. 👶
I am about to call my sister with these suggestions. I am concerned for my school age niece this week. Thank you for the reminder. “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”~ Benjamin Franklin
I love when you do these counterfactual videos! They are always so interesting! Id love to see one where you went over a what if Mary Queen of Scots had of been either Mary 1st successor (like Edward had tried to do with Jane Grey) or Elizabeths successor! I think that would be an interesting one! !
Dr. Kat thank you so much for such an interesting ‘What If.’ A different decision by Katherine could have changed the United Kingdom and the world. Who knows Henry’s reign may have been no more than a footnote in history
I wonder if Catherine could have heard this, seen how what she was doing was going to affect her daughter, her adopted country, and even Catholicism would she change her mind? I think she was proud, but I think she thought she was doing the right "best" thing. Many people, including herself & her daughter, would have faired better. I found this very enjoyable. Thank you.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
Poor Catherine. It seems pretty clear it would have been better for everyone if she'd caved - but the fact she didn't is by far the most interesting thing about her.
Protestantism wouldn't have gotten the needed boost...Pope would have reigned in America as well...this broke their stranglehold. Luther already started in Germany, but Henry unintentionally bolstered them.
Her conscience and strong morals wouldn't let her; she knew Henry and she had been married and that Mary was not a bastard. To cave in would be to lie.
You know Queen Catherine was more than just Henry’s wife when he was in France she was regent of England, and while she was pregnant, she led an army to put down an uprising in the north while Henry was in France. There’s a lot more to Catherine than just being Henry’s stubborn wife.
@@hilmaallen1302 Her position as the Spanish ambassador is my personal favourite thing about her.
@@hilmaallen1302She did not lead an army. She organized the logistics and visited camps to boost the morals of the soldiers. Not the same as leading an army.
I think Henry's treatment of Anne of Cleves also proves he would have been lenient towards Catherine had she obliged the anulment.
Henry was pretty generous with those who did what he wanted. And the exact opposite of generous with anybody who defied him.
Didn't he already have 1 legitimate son and heir by the time Cleeves came around? He was working with a time crunch when KOA hit the menopause (or whatever made her child bearing years end).
@@One.DeSanctis. Yes but he did offer Katherine a divorce. I really do believe he would have treated her well, as he did Cleves, had she obliged. But Katherine was a warrior queen and would not back down and relinquish her crown, or more importantly, her daughter's title and inheritance. This angered Henry.
@@maribeld84so do I …
Also, it’s somewhat unfair to KOA to say she was overly stubborn - WE know what length Henry was willing to go to, and what England was willing to stomach. She didn’t. Besides which, he wasn’t simply asking for an annulment. He wanted her to admit she’d been living in adultery with him. Why would she do that?
Exactly 💯
Adultery would cost ya your head back then 😒 🙄 😢
I totally agree! It wasn’t totally about being prideful as many think. She was Henry’s first & lawful wife with whom he dealt treacherously in the eyes of God & man.
No, not adultery. Arthur was dead by the time of her second marriage. The issue Henry put forth was that their marriage was improper because he married his brother’s widow. That is not adultery.
You're right - I used the wrong word. I believe Henry had Wolsey called him to answer the charge of living in sin with his brother's widow (and it being an incestuous union). Either way, I can see why Katherine wasn't so keen on the idea. Perhaps if Henry had approached her with the annulment ala Eleanor of Aquitaine and Mary's legitimacy and rights being assured she might have been more willing to listen, even if she didn't then agree.
I think Henry was foolish in how he approached it, basically.
I always wonder if Catherine’s resistance to the annulment had less to do with pride and more to do with what she saw happen to her sister Joanna (Juana) when she became Queen of Castile at the death of Isabella. Was, perhaps, her resistance fear of being isolated and confined because she was inconvenient like her sister who was a Queen regnant, not merely a Queen consort? By 1526, Joanna had already been pushed aside by her father, husband, and son. I’d think that example might be an influence.
I hadn't considered that, but you bring up a good point. Juana was ill-done-by the many men in her life.
Good point, maybe Katherine feared a fate similar to her sister's.
Good point! Ive always wondered, whether Juana was "mad" at all, if it wasnt more likely, that the only mad thing about her was the selfish ambitions of the men in her life.
KOA was called the Princess of Wales. She was queen of England. That was her identity. Who was she if not Queen?
A truly royal lady.
Maybe it had more to do with her own treatment after the death of Arthur. She always strikes me as not very bright. Learned, certainly, but unable to think things through, By acting the way she did, she Guaranteed her return to such treatment and a miserable life. Martyr syndrome. and definite bigotry. A trait inherited from her parents that came to fruition in her daughter,.
Your analysis is excellent! I agree with all of it. F****** fabulous
What is forgotten a lot is Katherine's pride. She is the child of 'the Catholic Monarchs' of Castille and Aragon. Mary never forgot where she came.
Thus, Katherine would never accept anything else than 'the Queen of England'.
Absolutely! She was the daughter of Ferdinand & Isabella; she was England's leader for the Battle of Flodden. She would never, ever have accepted the deal!
I agree, I’d like to know was there ever any plans for her to go back to Spain after Arthur died? Could she have remarried another European noble/ royal? Is the fact she stayed in England a sign that she saw her destiny and Gods plan for her to be Queen of England? I think understanding their religious viewpoint of the world might have been the reason she didn’t back down. A sort of God ordained this and so I will stick this out no matter how bad this life is because the eternal life is coming and to go against God in this life is a sin? I’m with everyone else who commented saying her refusal makes her more fascinating but I feel for her suffering. I don’t think I’d have had the strength, I’d have taken the deal.
I believe Henry VIi won’t let her return to Spain because he would have to return the dowry and he wanted to keep it. He even thought of marrying her.
@@jessicaroberts7788There were quite a few issues with her dowry. Ferdinand of Aragon only sent half of the agreed-upon amount. Then Arthur died, and they were at an impasse. Ferdinand wasn't going to send the rest, and Henry VII sure as hell wasn't going to return the portion that he received, so he just stuck Catherine in a castle until he and Ferdinand could come to a satisfactory agreement. Poor girl was in limbo for years
As for agreeing to Henry VIII's terms, I think Catherine was more pragmatic than religious. She had everything to lose and nothing to gain by stepping down. There is no place in society for a divorced/retired queen. She was the aunt of the Holy Roman Emperor, who basically had control of the Pope and the Catholic Church, so she had the political backing necessary to stick to her guns. Nobody could have forseen the lengths to which Henry VIII was willing to go to obtain a male heir. It's only in retrospect that we see that it might have been better for her to step down
@jessicaroberts7788 I can totally agree,and if Henry felt he could've gotten away with it politically,Katherine may very well have been the first Queen beheaded instead of Anne Boleyn.
👸 Catherine had a hell of a time with those Tudors. They taught he to fight for her rights- the 7 years she was “forgotten”- she had to fight even if walking away would have been the smarter choice. I always wonder what would Henry think if he knew he was remembered & be famous for his 6 wives.
I also wonder if Anne’s decision to withhold sex until she was married was a tactic to escape the king rather than be a conniving way to become queen. It has been said that you can’t refuse the king, yet she did & managed to hold him off for years. I think women in abusive & stalking relationships and how they try to survive- i wonder if there is another layer that we haven’t considered.
Ive had the very same thought regarding Anne! She probably never expected, that he would succeed in getting rid of his wife!
And as for Catherine, she really was caught. After the death of Arthur, Henry VII had no use for her, and her parents having already paid her dowry and also not having need to marrying her off to some1 else enough to want to pay again wouldnt take her back. So she was stuck in England, sidelined and mostly forgotten under pitiful conditions. Once Henry VIII inherited and wanted to marry her, that was her only way out, and it also gave her back to position, she had been raised for, and which she considered her right. Between that and Henrys demand to lie, a sin in the eyes of her God, by admitting to even more grievous sins by her faith, she couldnt do, what he demanded.
The really sad thing is, I think, there was actually a way, that wouldve worked for both of them, if Henry hadnt been so pigheadedly stubborn and had bothered at some point to actually get to know his wife and understand her. They couldve agree to basically, what was suggested according to Campeggio, only instead of demanding that Catherine lie about their marriage, they couldve agreed, that she would express a public wish to become a nun, which wouldve given him a very valid reason to ask for an annulment, so he could remarry, which he likely wouldve gotten with no problems. Ive read of such arrangements. And she couldve gone to live comfortably in a convent of her choice with Marys future assured and probably with free access to visit Mary.
@@dfuher968 I is such an obvious solution, to us looking back on what we know now ,that it makes you wonder why they never took that route. I firmly believe that Anne's refusals really were an attempt to fend Henry off, and it was only as time went and, that her stance changed Anne appears to have been pragmatic, unlike Katherine, who I will admit is the Queen I have least time and sympathy for. She had the solution in her own hands, yet she insisted on fighting a battle she would never win and causing alot of suffering for others along the way. I even think she was a hypocrite in her faith, a fanatical one , but still a hypocrite. IF she was so pious, you could be forgiven for assuming that the offer of a comfortable ife in a religious order would have been perfect for her. But nwe had the 'I am Queen! I am! Iam!' Violet Elizabeth strop. That makes her guilty of several sins, Pride being foremost. She also presumed to know better than God, in a way. If she believed it was 'His' will that she was Queen, maybe it was also his will that she wasn't? No one was asking her te denounce her beliefs,they were offering her a chance to follow them closer.
Yeah, she couldn't reasonably have expected that turning down the king would make her queen, usually that would just have made him lose interest and go after someone else so it's quite possible thats' what she was trying to do at least initially.
As far as Anne turning Henry down, she certainly would have had a clear example of what her life would have looked like if she *had* acquiesed to him: her sister Mary. If I'm remembering correctly, she was quickly abandoned, and then shunted off into an acceptable-but-not-particularly-impressive marriage. Doesn't sound like a great choice for a woman with ambitions either to a love match, or to a good match.
And perhaps she did have sincerely held moral and/or religious beliefs about premarital sex. Catherine isn't the only one who might genuinely have been motivated by conscience.
That ‘one’ change - Catherine acquiescing to Henry’s demand for an Annulment - would/could have SO many impacts upon not only Englands, but the entire Continent’s, existing History … one string pulls another, which pulls another, which - ad infinitum. It boggles the mind! 👑👰🏻
If Henry was really the villain everyone says he was, he would have arranged an accident or case of food poisoning for Katherine. Unlike some other truly evil rulers, Harry always had to worry about his conscience. Always, Henry wanted to portray himself as a man of scruples. Cold-blooded murder was unthinkable Judicial murder, on the other hand , was perfectly acceptable.
@@anthonytroisi6682 Well put and sums it up perfectly. I think that KoA was only protected from some spurious charges because of who she was. It has always interested me that the only Queens who were disposed of in such a way were Henry's Own subjects. There was never any talk of treason about the 2 that weren't. Now why would that be, I wonder?
@@anthonytroisi6682 If he did that, he will be in conflict with Spain.
@@ericgabrielmadrid8426there would be no conflict with Spain if she died of an “illness” at her age, or a carefully arranged accident.
The Tudors in general were big on judicial murder from beginning to end. I've never liked any of them.@@anthonytroisi6682
Hi Dr Kat!
I'm so glad you bring up King Louis and Eleanor whose marriage was annulled.
The refusal of a capricious pope weren't based in religious doctrine but politics as Katherine was related to the machine of this decision.
Imo I find KOA was foolish. She should have struck a deal to have Mary be heir to the throne if no males were forthcoming and be remain powerful in comfort. She cut herself off, she knew Henry was fickle. I think she unwisely thought she was set aside to languish as she had after Arthur died.
Her father, his father let her rot for 6 years without funds, few allies. She put herself in that same position but worse bc she was a zealot, was as hard headed as Henry.
KOA didn't win, she withered.
Nobody was offering her "get real girl" advice.
If "God" was on your side, you wouldn't be set aside.
She frustrates me bc she dug herself in and then buried herself and set up every woman following to suffering.
Anne of Cleves, the smartest of them all.
You have an interesting take on this. Thanks for giving this side of it.
@@1234cheerfulI agree
Came here to say this . 👏👑🏰🏵️
I disagree. She was certainly no fool, she just had different priorities. And I'm sure she had more than plenty of people, starting with Henry himself, telling her to "get real girl". At some point (if not from the start) she must have been aware of the consequences, and of the fact that she could still change her mind and cut herself a deal. We'll never know if she refused to do so because she was telling the truth and didn't want to risk her soul (according to her beliefs) by lying about her marriage to Arthur, or because she didn't want to be shown for a liar and someone who had lived in sin for so many years, and for her daughter to be forever branded as a bastard, or both (incidentally, if she agreed to the annulment, that would have made Mary officially a bastard, which probably means that a deal making her Henry's successor in the event of no sons would have been impossible). Either way, immediate physical comfort was clearly not her priority. That doesn't make her foolish, even if most of us would likely choose the cold rational way (I'd like to believe, though, that I'd be able to show the same stalwart spirit as she did if something that really mattered to me was at stake).
As for Anne of Cleves - clearly, she made the most rational decision, but it has to be said that she was in a very different position and relation to Henry and his court than all the other wives. Unlike Katherine and even Anne Boleyn, she didn't have a long emotional history with Henry; she only knew him for a very short while as an ageing creepy guy who tried to kiss her before even introducing himself, then couldn't perform in bed and blamed it on her lack of beauty and bad smell (and who had at this point banished one wife and killed another). She had no child with him to change the stakes and the lack of consummation of their marriage meant that she could get out of it without any harm to her reputation. And she had not been part of Henry's court, so there must have been less "family influence" plotting around her. Of course she made the only rational choice under the circumstances. Doesn't mean that Katherine's choice was not reasonable according to her own circumstances, personal history and beliefs.
I really don’t think calling her a fool is a good look here. She was a human woman, and like any woman with a backbone, she wasn’t going to step aside and allow herself to be kicked to the curb while her husband brought in a new woman.
I think Katherine of Aragon behaved the way she was brought up to behave. She was an Infanta of Spain👸 & she went through a lot to get to where she was.💪 Her mother was the Queen of Castile🏰 which probably made her think the idea of Queen Mary Tudor wasn't as crazy as the English Court seemed to think & Henry is just fickle. (which was true) Hindsight is 20/20, but it is interesting to speculate. Excellent presentation as always! Thanks, Dr. Kat.
You make interesting points, however, if hindsight were truly 20/20, humanity would not continue making the same mistakes.
For all of us older (40) ladies, that haven't been able to have a kid, poor poor Catherine! It's good though that almost 500 years later, we hear her story and feel her pain, and she is heard! Thanks Dr. Kat!
The only thing that struck me was that my previous parish would have to be named after a different saint (I used to attend St. Thomas More Catholic Church, before I moved for my job). It’s a small thing, but rather personal.
I thank you for this. I have been in a deep depression, struggled for weeks to recover.
I am a massive of you, and found this video 2 days ago, and all sudden i had something to think about, and i’ve got out of bed actually got dressed and im enjoying going to my bookshelf and recapping this subject and enjoying the opportunity to read and think of a different outcome for history.
Thank you. ❤
2:21 hello there from Texas! I too, struggle with depression, the " black dog" as Churchill termed it. Sometimes mine lifts on its own accord, but other times, reconnecting with an interest, or being sparked by a new idea ( has to be a pretty big spark!) Or inspired by encountering the stories of strong women, especially when these stories are told by a strong woman like Dr. Kat. Anyway, I basically wanted to say you are not alone. Keep moving forward, even if it's in tiny, inconsequential ways. You will eventually emerge at the other end. Take care and best wishes.
So glad to hear you’re both feeling better. Don’t you just love Dr. Kat!
💙from Connecticut USA
The counterfactuals are always so interesting to thing about how one event could possibility change history! 👸
I can’t see Katherine EVER agreeing to an annulment.
Not only did she believe deeply that she would have been putting her immortal soul in danger by doing so, but she also believed that the same held true for Henry. She wanted Henry to save himself from damnation, and felt that he’d been misled by advisors, and by Anne Boleyn.
Moreover, she said firmly that she « had no calling to the religious life », and that her marriage to Henry was everything it ought to be in Gos’s eyes, and in hers.💍💕
I still believe that the event that changed the personality of Henry VIII for the worst, was the injury he suffered in the jousting accident in January of 1536. I do agree, though, with your assessment that Katherine of Aragon’s life would have been much happier and more comfortable if she had acceded to Henry’s demands. He would probably have even been friendly towards her, as he had been with Anne of Cleves. 💔
Came here to say this. I agree. That injury changed him forever. But Catherine certainly could have mitigated the damage to her daughter if she had capitulated but we have the benefit of hindsight. Catherine was a queen as anointed and destined by God. She could not and would not throw away what God had preordained in her eyes.
@reverie6034 She certainly became a queen (consort) but I'm pretty sure a diety had nothing to do with it. Otherwise, that diety didn't treat her very well.
I completely disagree. The red flags were all flying well before this event.
Just to let you know, those reports were exaggerated/misunderstood. He never hit his head or was unconscious during that episode, but he got injured in his leg. Besides that, he was long before executing ministers and acquaintances, but he did suffer during his whole life from headaches from repeated jousting during his early years
@@gogreen7794But it was her deity. Hard as it is for us to understand, religion was a very serious thing bad then, and by all accounts she was very religious even for those times. She could never have gone against her God.
As for the injury, I have to agree with the latter posters, while the leg injury and the health problems and accompanying pain from it following him the rest of his life probably made him much worse, I think, its easy to write off a head injury as the cause for his behavior. As enyo and doria say, the reports of the injury were exaggerated/misunderstood, and there were plenty of red flag b4 the accident. By all accounts he was a spoiled, entitled brat, who grew up to be even worse, especially after becoming king and getting confirmed, how "special" he was. While Im not a psychologist, and its really hard to diagnose historical figures, I would suggest, that he sounds a lot more like a malignant narcissist than a victim of a brain injury.
Counterfactual is a fascinating rabbit hole to go down. What if we had lost the Battle of Britain or if Harold had prevailed at Hastings? Of course the main thing is that by changing one small event you change everything; ie: I wouldn't have just watched this video and you wouldn't be reading my comment. I love your content, keep it up.
What if Elizabeth actually married Eric the xiv of sweden
Thanks again for another great video. Thanks especially for the discussion of Louis & Eleanor of Aquitaine. Kind of illustrates how easy it was to get an annulment if you were important enough, or if your nephew the Emperor didn't happen to be besieging Rome when the divorce petition arrived!👑
I’m just going going home and going back and
Katherine could have entered a convent or monastery without dishonour. It was the usual thing under the circumstances. But she said her vocation was marriage and not the religious life.
I find it ironic that she, in her devotion to the church, helped to usher in the break with Rome.🎯
These "what if" scenarios are always so fascinating in the hands of Dr. Kat's extraordinary wealth of knowledge and her ability to share it with us.
I think the question really is What if Catherine of Aragon had a surviving son to be named King after his father?
I can certainly do that one in the future, thank you ☺️
I love these! Thanks, Dr. Kat! 👸🏼
That's a great question! What if baby Henry had not died after only 52 days?
I think in that case Anne would not have gotten as far as she did.
A great way to pass the day in a snowy central Kentucky... and we don't get much snow in these parts. Thanks, Dr. Kat!
Same here in Nashville
There are two important elements in this conflict: Catherine sworn to be a virgin when she married Henry, second and most important Catherine of Aragon was the daughter of the mighty Catholic kings, aunt of Charles the emperor, she could never agree to such blow to her dignity. She was a pious and virtuous wife and she knew who she was. Henry never met such a dignified person in his life.
All other examples of annulments used are not to be comparable against the case of Catherine.
Henry was arrogant, cruel and manipulative, his deeds were beyond what is minimally understood. The killing for consciousness of so many, mainly Sir Thomas Moore is far too wicked.
At any point did anyone mention during KOA's petitions that in the Book of Ruth it mentions the Leverite law which states that if a man dies before having a son, his closest male relative must marry the widow? This should have totally negated Henry's theory.
I've always wondered why that was never brought up during the negotiations for Katherine of Aragon to step aside.
Question is what took precedence
Scripture or Political power?
(rhetorical question)
I think they concluded that Leviticus had precedence over Deuteronomy and the Book of Ruth. This was political expedience and had nothing to do with God's laws or the salvation of one's soul. A lot of nonsense is foisted on the world in the name of religion when it is really people twisting religious teachings for their own purposes.
@@samanthafordyce5795 Some things never change.
Because of you, Dr Kat, I have read far more of the 15th and 16th centuries than I thought possible. Reading Anna of Cleves currently. Thank you for your work.
Dr. Kat, this is SOOO fascinating as I've always wondered what would have happened if Katherine had agreed to an annulment!! Thank you for making this cold snowy NYC day a brighter one. 🥰
An interesting thought experiment, to be sure. It's so difficult to imagine Katharine doing anything else.
Love hearing about Catherine of Aragon. Perhaps indeed her life would have been much easier than what it was. Thank you.👑
What if Arthur never died
She has a video on this already! It's really neat!@@marcusfridh8489
And many lives spared
@@marcusfridh8489 Kat has done that ,I think?
I believe that Catherine would have been happy to retire IF Mary's place in the succession was guaranteed.
@bookwyrm2 I do not see Anne Boleyn easily giving in to keeping Mary's precedence though. She's queen, she would want her own son/daughter to take the throne. She would be hoping for/counting on a son who would supplant Mary in the lineage.
@1234cheerful Okay, let me rephrase that. Catherine might have gone into retirement willingly if Mary would not lose her rank and privileges.
@@bookwyrm2011 Possibly, although I think Catherine, from the example of her mother, was hardcore keeping her own rank and privilege. Isabella was a queen in her own right and retained her rank when she married Ferdinand. Not to mention, no wife wants to be shunted aside for one of her staff members. But if she could have taken that option, and Anne Boleyn stood for it, it would have saved a lot of trouble.
Of course, Mary might still remained Catholic which might not have gone down well with her father. But that is another tangent!
@@1234cheerful I would have to agree.
@@1234cheerful If Kate had done the decent thing, there would have been No Reformation, at least not in the form it took, so England would have been Catholic. Odd to think that the woman who appears to have been a fanatic about her faith actually caused the fissure. Henry remained Catholic at heart; the Real Protestantism took hold under his son. Henry just liked what he gained from it. A foot in both camps Control over both, and of course lots of lovely Loot!
Do you know that is said to be the Real reason for AB's downfall? She wanted the money from the Dissolution used to help the people. Schools hospitals, better roads, the usual 'Looney Left' nonsense Cromwell wanted it for the Crown. Guess who won? Nothing changes really.
All else being equal, if Catherine had peaceably capitulated to Henry's desire to end the marriage and Mary had been allowed to spend time with her, I think the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth would have been much less fraught. Henry would not have needed to break from Rome and would have remained Catholic thus negating the religious tension between the sisters. Also, if as you speculated, Mary kept her position as princess, then Elizabeth would not have been usurping her place with their father which would also lessen the rivalry and resentment. While Mary likely still would have had hard feelings toward Anne Boleyn (and Elizabeth by association), probably not to the same degree, especially towards Elizabeth. I believe keeping Mary from her mother, not even being allowed to see her when she was dying, did a world of emotional damage to Mary. She couldn't really take that out on her father, Anne died soon after Catherine, so that left Elizabeth as the embodiment of all the injustice done towards Catherine. Whereas if Catherine had been accepting of the situation, I think Mary's pain and indignation would have been considerably less.
These are interesting because we often fall into the trap of hindsight when looking at history. We know that A leads to B leads to C and so on. But this can give us an idea what people at the time might be pondering and predicting when they thought about what might happen in their future, our past. It can make the reasons for decisions and events more clear.
I think this is fitting : 🕸 - a spider's web. No matter who you place in the middle it connects to so many other issues. The most sad thing we would lose however : "In 1537, King Henry VIII sent the famed artist Hans Holbein to Brussels to paint Christina's [of Denmark] portrait. The picture prompted a marriage proposal, to which Christina is said to have replied: "If I had two heads, one should be at the king of England's disposal." The reverse is blank." Such a wonderful quote to have gone down thru the ages !
Clever Christina of Denmark.
💒 I am persuaded by Philippa Gregory's depiction of Katherine's childhood. Her value to her family was the arranged marriage she had. Her identity as Princess of Wales and future Queen of England had to be maintained. She was a pawn in her father's international dealings and had no welcome if she returned to Spain!
I continue to be intrigued by the insistence that Henry taking her as his wife contravenes Leviticus, (the quoted passage clearly referring to the taking of a brothers wife while the brother still lives) when in another place a surviving brother is instructed to take his brothers widow in the hope to make a son for him, thus continuing his line. Of course Henry wants his own son, so that would not do!
My community theatre is doing a production 9f Lion In Winter. I am produced also tue costumer for this show. I really enjoy your history. I write this comment because you mentioned Eleanor of Aquitaine and Herry II and Richard and John. You failed to mention Geoffrey. Love history and how you present it.
I’ve often day dreamed that Katherine and Mary escaped to Spain and were happy.
A wonderful "what if" of extremely educated guesses which follow logic and probability. There's nothing of airy fantasy about this. Great stuff!
In seeing this video, I can deduce that Katherine should have agreed to an annulment, on Her terms. In not doing so, she actually made her rivals daughter eventual queen. Thanks so much Dr Kat
Whew! That's a lot to unpack. Great topic! So much of this could have been avoided if it weren't for the paradigm of misogyny. I think the scenarios of Katherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn in The Great Matter were down to the actions/reactions of the women. Henry was in a place of having to react to a scenario, where he thought he should have complete control. He had a tempestuous nature and clearly gravitated towards headstrong, intellectual women. He was willing to have Anne as a mistress. It was she (and/or her family) who put the brakes on that. I don't think that in terms of what he did with his professional duties later, that there would have been too much difference if he had had more situationally supple women competing for queen at that time.
I think mainly 2 things drove Henry: his head over heels limerance for women he fancied and his anxiety about England going into a War of the Roses type scenario if he did not have a legitimate heir (son) and a spare (son). I think that his narcissism and volatility was not going to be changed by him having an easier time if Katherine of Aragon went away quietly, and he would have reacted with suppression and violence to those he perceived as enemies, whatever the case. He showed that personality tendency before Katherine of Aragon and I think he was going to be a tyrannical powder keg about something. I think it might have resulted in maybe different victims, but in the end, Henry would have wanted iron-fisted control over everything he surveyed. It might have released the pressure valve a little.
I do think that if he had had a male heir and a spare with Anne, (would that have been enough sons, or would, like some oligarchs with money, there would never be enough?), his anxieties about a War of the Roses type scenario could have been alleviated. Doubtless, he could take mistresses, fulfilling his limerance, but the anxiety for sons being gone might have had him a little more relaxed about his lineage and the future of his country. I suspect that whatever new challenges he would have had, he would have blown them out of proportion anyway. It may have resulted in different victims.
Could Mary, married earlier, have secured a male heir for England? Possibly. She might have had a uphill battle with fertility, given her reproductive tract health issues.
Anne going away quietly? I think it would have looked like what happened with Katherine, but I do think Henry took the expedient way out with Anne because Katherine refused an annulment. He does seem to have had a charm that had the tendency to inspire limerance in others (I would insert a comment on that if it this had been HAD.)
Thanks for your inspiring talk!
I find the stories of counterfactual History fascinating. Thank you very much! 👑
I’ve often wondered how things would differ. I enjoy it when you create these “what if” videos.
in my head Catherine of Aragon went back to Spain and lived the rest of her life happily
I think that you nailed it. Henry didn't start out as a jerk. He might have been remembered instead as a decent monarch, maybe not great, but not the way he is. The egos of Katharine and Henry were just too big.
Having a male heir became the driving force; THE GOAL
to reach, No matter what
If Catherine would have known what standing firm against Henry would do to her beloved church... I have to wonder if she would have accepted the annulment to "save" it in England.
Oh how I wish I could time travel to the Tudor period. I can only imagine what it was like to see Catherine of Aragon walking around with her little monkey at court. I wish I could see the dresses and the jewels and the artifacts that have survived to today in the full former glory!
The hypothetical question of "what if Katherine of Aragon had agreed to the annulment" has crossed my mind more than a few times. Yes, I DEFINITELY believe that there would have been no "Church of England" as we know it today. If Katherine had realized that her "firmness" would have caused a rift between England and the Vatican, she might have been more willing to capitulate.
👆 Yes, IF Katherine was able to see into the future ~
Force had been used successful up until the 1500s, then it was a combination of Force /Coerce
since Council of Trent. Then Ecumenism since Vatican 2.
Same agenda ~ Different tactics.
Lots of Non-Catholic Believers were dominated for centuries
UNTIL the 1500s.
It is so interesting that England rejected Papal Rule for reason much different than that of other Areas of Europe, BUT because it was during the same time period.
So Interesting!
Katherine in limbo for 6 years between 2 marriages is pitiful.
She must’ve known about Henry’s
other women, other children, BUT to be Rejected from her official position!?!? 😱 😡 😭
Dr. Kat! All of this is very interesting. The only problem I have with this post is that you used the term “holy orders “ a couple of times which would have been incorrect then, or now. Holy Orders, the sacrament was limited to males solely then. The more proper term would have been “ vowed religious” for a woman who would then have been considered a nun. I love your posts! You give thorough information!
Thank you for pointing this out - I will ensure to keep this fact in mind for the future
Holy Orders or UN-Holy Orders or
Vowed Religious ~ INVOLUNTARY
CAPTIVITY was the result.
That’s a lot of what ifs, Dr. Kat 👑
You're the Best! Can't get enough of your work 😊😊😊❤❤❤
A great way to spend a typically mild winter's night in Taiwan. It's certainly given me plenty to think about.
In Henry's day, anyone who considered themselves educated had experience with Latin; therefore it amazes me that I've never heard of anyone arguing (😆) with Henry that there is a very real difference between "wife" and "widow" in Latin. Surely that's how the Bible would have read? Does anyone have access to the Bible that Henry would have been reading? I'd love to know what the actual word is in Leviticus.
My assumption is that it was the Vulgate - it is brother’s wife in that (uxorem fratris). However, as we know tenuous interpretations of faith texts have long been used for humans to do / get what they want. She may have been Arthur’s widow but she was once his wife 😉
❤
That is true; however, the sentence is structured in the present, so (IMO) if she IS a wife then it is sinful; if she is, at present, a widow, that's a very different thing. I think. Thanks for your reply. 😘@@ReadingthePast
I think this goes to show that by this point Henry had already started into a Reformer’s mindset of picking certain verses to support his desires while ignoring others that oppose his desires. Deuteronomy 25:5-10 clearly states a brother should take up his deceased brother’s wife.
An interesting question. I think it would have affected Scottish history too in the sense that, had England remained Catholic, it would have likely sided with Mary Queen of Scots and she may never have been forced to abdicate.
I love these "what ifs". Ive slways felt that KOA's refusal (understandable though it was) to agree to favourable terms and annulment led to untold bloodshed, hardships and pain. With so much at stake and only a generation from the Wars of the Roses, its easy to understand Henry's panic at the lack of a male heir and his belief that the country would suffer. Yes, ideally he'd have stayed with Katherine, but once he'd made that decision I feel both sorrow for, and intense irritation at Katherine - just live a peaceful, happy life with access to your daughter and court, otherwise the bloodshed and pain for countless people will be set in motion. She was a formidable woman but up against a man developing into a monster
Totally agree. All this 'she was obeying God's will' stuff does not wash with me .Did it not occur to her that the Anulment may have been 'God's will' and he intended her to do something else? She could have founded her Own religious order perhaps? Then she could have played Queen Bee all she liked, safe in the knowledge that she was obeying 'His'will and being obedient to the Pope.
@@hogwashmcturnip8930 Between her and Henry it seems like every royal involved thought God was on their side with this one, regardless of how it looked to everyone else XD
Yeah, I never understood how she could create a schism in the church and basically lose her daughter without ever wondering if maybe that wasn’t actually the best path to take.
@@punkykenickie2408 Good poiint
👆”and she could have obeyed the pope.”
Yep. That particular pope was under the thumb of Katherine’s nephew, The Roman Emperor.
Snapshot of what happens when
Religion & Politics compete.
WHY didn’t Pope immediately tell
Henry “NO” to his annulment ?
I find myself nodding my head along with your suggestions, so I agree. I love your channel!
👑 Katherine amazes me. Such a strong conviction to face and maintain her place in a strange court, in a strange country, which was surely hostile to her in her refusal to bow down.
Thank You! Such interesting videos! 💙💙💙💙💙
If Katherine would have gone quietly it would have prevented a lot of bloodshed, and maybe even the Civil War and regicide.
Fascinating, as always. Leaves us with so many questions
What a thought-provoking and interesting intellectual exercise. I had no idea that Katherine had been offered a fairly reasonable, in my opinion, option. Accepting the offer might have also kept Henry from making more and more unreasonable demands as he would not have become more and more frustrated with the situation. It certainly does emphasize the fact that so much of history results from one person's decision at a crucial point in time. In this case, that person was a very important person indeed, a Queen of England. 👑👑👑
Fascinating, fascinating! As you discussed, l wonder if Henry would have treated people better, especially Anne Boleyn, or would it have encouraged how mean he could be once he saw he could get his own way somewhat painlessly. Would it have ameliorated the sense of desperation we see in him, the drive to beget an heir, or would it have made Henry worse? One thing is for certain, Katherine was a strong, resolute woman, more so than Henry ever bargained for.
IF their (Henry & Anne) child had been male instead of Elizabeth…
I am curious on how our perception of Catherine would have changed had she agreed to the annual/took orders. SO MUCH of the popular understanding of Catherine casts her as the “righteously stubborn” one because she refused to submit to Henry’s will. If she’d “gotten thee to a nunnery”, how would that change the way people see her? would she be seen like Anne of Cleves, cleverly getting one over on Henry? Would she be like Katherine Howard, a tragic victim of the men in her life? Or would she simply be a footnote in history like all the women pressured to take orders to get out of the way. 👸👰♀️✝️❓
I feel myself uncomfortable with the (perhaps my own projection of, as I do not presume to think it intentional) message of this thought experiment being that the world would have been a happier and overall more stable place if Katherine had just surrendered. The butterfly effect and all, yes, especially when dealing with royalty in a time when being royal actually made you different/special. But Katherine being the nail that caused the shoe to fall that caused the horse to fall that caused the soldier/king to fall that caused the battle to be lost that caused the kingdom to be lost seems a bit extreme. Mary could likely have had a less bitter life and, if married to a foreign king so that she could not take the throne herself, that could have altered the course of history. The rift with the Catholic Church could have been postponed as long as Henry was getting his way. But I find myself suspecting that a man of Henry's ego would have ended up just as extreme in the end. The number and/or names of wives may have changed, but I could still see Henry following the same blueprint of regicidal insanity, especially if he honestly believed that the lack of a son was some punishment from God.
@voxangelaemortis
yes!
Yes!
YES!
That man was a menace with every passing year that he drew breath.....
Henry made up a new title for himself. Given Katherine's background and the fact that she could have wrought havoc upon England via Spain, he should have given her an exulted title (recognizing her as first wife irregardless of Anne), given her lands and treated Mary as she should have been.
This was very interesting. I agree with much of your speculations. I think you're right about the path of Mary if her mother had been agreeable with the annulment. I'm sure her mother didn't mean to ruin her daughters chances at finding an advantageous marriage at an earlier age, and everything else that happened, as a result of her pride. Catherine was fighting for the only life she had ever known and I dont blame her for that. Hindsight is always 20/20.
It is truly so difficult to imagine the mindset of the time. That katherine believed agreeing to an annulment would cast her soul into turmoil in the afterlife, that she would be going against God. Because she could have maintained her dignity and the legitimacy of her daughter if she stepped aside. Which would have been a decent retirment
Thanks for doing this! It was really thought provoking how her one decision had such a monumental impact even today 😊
Brilliant as always. I wonder if Catherine had given in, if the Church of England, as we know it, would even exist. I agree that if events had played out as you hypothesized, it’s doubtful that Henry would have had six wives. 👰♀️
Dr. Kat, I really enjoy these voyages into-a different alternative timelines. One example I think about iis, what would have happened had the future young Henry the IX had lived. Then Henry VIii may just been a foot note in Tudor history, the monasteries would not have been dissolved and England could have ended up being a Catholic country. Just shows that small changes can have massive consequences later on. Keep up the great work! Lead on!
I've been reading some stuff around the Reformation and the English (and the Scots) seem to have got really into it so I'm not sure the country would have stayed Catholic forever, though it would have been later if Henry hadn't found his convenient arguments in favour of his own religious authority.
I have always wondered why Catherine was so dead set on not allowing an annulment. The King needed an heir and it was clear by then I think that she wasn't going to be able to give him one. I get that she actually loved Henry but what did she think was going to happen once Henry died? There would have been another civil war surely
At that point in history a woman ruling in her own right was not exactly commonplace, her thinking Mary would be Queen seems like it would be rather wishful thinking
@@Erida526 Katherine and Mary were both subject to a lot of self delusion and a lot of suffering was caused by it.
👆 Yes, Katherine and Mary suffered because husband/father was determined to have a male heir, NO matter what.
Certainly, 2nd wife + 2nd child
Anne and Elizabeth were both personally & powerfully affected.
+ Others, of course.
BUT this period in history did allow
religious power to be examined.
(not only England).
Katherine had the notion that her position in life, as Queen of England and Henry's wife, was the will of God, a calling, a vocation. A lot of nonsense, yes, but people thought that way then (and many still do). So giving up that position would have been going against God's will. Odd how God's will so often matches the desire of the one interpreting it.
I love these suppositions! Thank you for the considerations, and it's like you said, the chips would have fallen differently in almost every sense - future wives, children, beheadings.....and future monarchs. Elizabeth might never have been queen. It's mind boggling to consider these possible futures. Imagine a movie about exactly this decision of Katherine's?
Excellent points...I've often wondered these things myself
Always enjoy these especially based on your extensive understanding of this history
As Queen Isabella's daughter I do not think her mother would have let her back away from the throne
Her mother was already dead, as was her father.
All the more reason to do as her mother taught her, maybe, in her eyes. If Isabella was around would this all have turned out similarly?
Her parents had already died long before she was even married to Henry.
@charlenelundquist3512 Ferdinand lived at least another 7 yrs after she married Henry.
@@janeyant2375 right! Isabella died 1503, Ferdinand 1516.
I loved this. I think its so sad all these women where at the mercy of Henry and in some ways a host of other men including the pope. Very interesting thank you doc. Cat
This is my favorite series!! I love discussing these What Ifs with friends 👑
I love whatiftory! I wonder what the bloody Mary drink would be called if she'd had a better upbringing.
💒🤴👸✂ Fabulous video, Dr. Kat. These counterfactual histories serve to illustrate how each event in life is like the tiniest of pebbles being dropped into a lake, yet the ripples created are enormous and far-reaching in time. I love "what-if's," and you are a veritable master at it. Many, many thanks!
The thought of Elizabeth I being a loving and probably very wise aunt to Mary I’s or even possibly Edward VI’s children, if they’d had any, is super interesting to me as is the tomb of Wolsey considering the person he was. 👑
Henry was also probably thinking of the 1498 annulment of King Louis XII of France from his first wife and the annulment his sister Margaret Tudor got from her 2nd husband in 1527. If Katherine hadn't been the aunt of the HRE, I'm convinced the Pope would have given Henry what he wanted, whether she agreed to it or not.
yep! It is hard to agree to something when you are being held prisoner by the guy who stands to benefit from the status quo!
Quite an interesting take. I love supposing about history because wondering what if helps us learn and keeps us from repeating some of those fabulous 'mistakes' made by those in the past.😉
Love these counterfactual histories! So interesting to consider both the shorter term consequences for the individuals, as well as the broader long-term effects.
Another brilliant video, thank you 👸
Always love your videos. You express yourself so clearly and concisely, no ramble. I recommend you to English language learners. Your videos are always insightful. Given everything you explained - may I suggest a video specifically on Henry and 1536? Deaths of both Catherine and Anne Boleyn as well as Thomas More, the jousting accident,, the Grace Succession and the dissolution of the monasteries. Keep up the wonderful work dear lady!
I truly wish we could know the thoughts of Elizabeth of York on these matters. Or even Elizabeth Woodville!
Thank you so much for sharing such an inspiring video. I, along with many others love Katherine of Aragon to this day. 👑
This analysis was excellent. So many lives spared, Mary would have been a completely different person, surely more well adjusted, perhaps more tolerant?Well done Dr.Kat!👑🎓🎺
I often think about these potentially historical outcomes. Thanks for making it so interesting
It gives me shivers up my spine to imagine the many possible outcomes in history that could have happened. I really enjoyed this video! I'd love to see more "what if" scenario videos.
SO interesting!! Thank you for this!! 😊
Great analysis. Talking about the what-might-have-beens really helps people understand what actually did happen. If he had just asked for an annulment, and kept the justification quiet, so Katherine wouldn't have been forced to admit to adultery, etc., she might have gone along with it. By that time, it's possible she wouldn't have minded getting out of his immediate sphere, since it was already noted he was getting short-tempered and touchy. But the adultery thing capped it for her, I believe. She knew full well she hadn't committed adultery, and she wasn't going to admit to what she definitely had not done.
But Henry wanted what Henry wanted, and he didn't care how he got it. If he had been a little more willing to work with Katherine, she might have been willing to work with him. It was Henry's stubbornness and "I am KING" complex that caused him so much trouble, as much as it was Katherine. Henry wasn't going to sacrifice a millimeter of pride for a better solution for Katherine and the country. He only wanted what benefited him. Katherine has my pity, but also my admiration. History has been much kinder to her than I think Henry thought it would be. 👶
Determined to have a Male heir.
I am about to call my sister with these suggestions. I am concerned for my school age niece this week. Thank you for the reminder. “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”~ Benjamin Franklin
I love when you do these counterfactual videos! They are always so interesting! Id love to see one where you went over a what if Mary Queen of Scots had of been either Mary 1st successor (like Edward had tried to do with Jane Grey) or Elizabeths successor! I think that would be an interesting one! !
Oh I LOVE this!!! Wonderful! 👑
Dr. Kat thank you so much for such an interesting ‘What If.’ A different decision by Katherine could have changed the United Kingdom and the world. Who knows Henry’s reign may have been no more than a footnote in history
Your analysis is great and so compelling! Thank you!
Hi! Dr. Kat ! How I’ve missed your show!❤ ♥️🥰👵🏼happy 2024! 🇺🇸🇬🇧👵🏼
Fascinating to learn about the Lives of Royalty back then. ❤
Please do more of these! Perhaps about Richard the 3rd, Edward the 4th or James the 1st of England and the witch hunts
I loved this episode and I really do enjoy the counterfactual aspect to history, please do more of these! 🎉
I wonder if Catherine could have heard this, seen how what she was doing was going to affect her daughter, her adopted country, and even Catholicism would she change her mind? I think she was proud, but I think she thought she was doing the right "best" thing. Many people, including herself & her daughter, would have faired better. I found this very enjoyable. Thank you.
Today’s video was the best. I love this kind of content.❤ History about Elizabeth is my favorite.🥰
Very well thought out! I truly enjoyed your take on this very valid “what if”.
Fascinating analysis!!! I've wondered the same thing, what could have been.