How old was KATHERINE HOWARD? | Queen in her teens | What age was Katherine Howard? History Calling
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 พ.ย. 2021
- How old was KATHERINE HOWARD, the fifth wife of Henry VIII? We know she died in February 1542, but what age was Katherine Howard when she married the King and when he had her executed after a Tudor scandal erupted surrounding her relationships with other men? Estimates have ranged from a birth year of 1518 to one of 1525, but was she really a 14 year old queen, or was Henry VIII’s youngest wife already in her early 20s when she married in July 1540? In this six wives documentary from History Calling, we’ll look at the available evidence to ask, when was Katherine Howard born? This will include the wills of her grandparents from the 1520s and the comments of those who saw her in the 1540s and estimated her age, including the French ambassador, Charles De Marillac.
Katherine came to court as a lady-in-waiting to her predecessor during the brief marriage of Henry VIII and Anne of Cleves and it was at this time that she caught the eye of her soon-to-be husband. If Katherine really was just 14 at the time of her marriage, she may not have been the youngest queen of England ever, but she’ll have been close. She was certainly much younger than her cousin and Henry VIII’s second wife, Anne Boleyn and we’ll examine whether the fact that she never served in Anne’s household can be used as an indicator of her age. Queen Katherine Howard’s death has left many unanswered questions about her life (we can’t even decide how to spell her name - perhaps it should be Queen Catherine Howard), but she remains endlessly fascinating as one of the Tudors’ greatest tragedies.
Patreon: / historycalling
Instagram: / historycalling
SUBSCRIBE with NOTIFICATIONS switched on for new videos every Friday.
BUY OR RENT:
The Tudors, season 1 amzn.to/3rFmveg (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VCwQ0j (US link)
The Tudors, season 2 amzn.to/3m64HIn (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VMPnHw (US link)
The Tudors, season 3 amzn.to/3wiwPwi (UK link) OR amzn.to/3BijsPB (US link)
The Tudors, season 4 amzn.to/3rNeggF (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z16S58 (US link)
Henry VIII and his Six Wives (2016 docu-drama) amzn.to/3jiCkag
Six Wives with Lucy Worsley (2016 docu-drama) amzn.to/3hd93vd (UK link) OR amzn.to/3wH2mr2 (US link)
DVDS:
The Tudors complete collection: amzn.to/3gWs4Ty (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z3Ef7n (US link)
Henry VIII (2003) amzn.to/2ZrjK4U (UK link) OR amzn.to/3z73ndj (US link)
Henry VIII and his Six Wives (2016 docu-drama): amzn.to/3gXU4GH
Six Wives with Lucy Worsley (2016 docu-drama): amzn.to/3h7Qh8z (UK link) OR amzn.to/3xKuBGA (US link)
BOOKS
Gareth Russell, Young and Damned and Fair: The Life and Tragedy of Catherine Howard at the Court of Henry VIII (2017). amzn.to/3xldHhi (UK link) OR amzn.to/2VExTgg (US link)
Josephine Wilkinson, Katherine Howard: The Tragic Story of Henry VIII's Fifth Queen (London, 2016). amzn.to/3x7MxdO (UK link) OR amzn.to/3rbFuPj (US link)
Antonia Fraser, The Six Wives Of Henry VIII (2nd edn, Phoenix, 2009) amzn.to/3atiEfi (UK link) OR amzn.to/36IqD5r (US link)
David Starkey, Six Wives: the Queens of Henry VIII (Vintage, 2004) amzn.to/3k9uD4Z (UK link) OR amzn.to/3wImKIh (US link)
Alison Weir, The Six Wives of Henry VIII (Vintage, 2007) amzn.to/2NzLem2 (UK link) OR amzn.to/3hOcutX (US link)
OTHER VIDEOS YOU MIGHT LIKE:
WHAT DID KATHERINE HOWARD LOOK LIKE?
• WHAT DID KATHERINE HOW...
DEATH OF KATHERINE HOWARD AND JANE BOLEYN
• DEATH OF KATHERINE HOW...
DIGGING UP ANNE BOLEYN AND OTHERS
• DIGGING UP ANNE BOLEYN...
ANNE BOLEYN’S EXECUTION: HOLLYWOOD VS HISTORY
• ANNE BOLEYN’S EXECUTIO...
WAS ANNE OF CLEVES HENRY VIII’S LUCKIEST WIFE?
• WAS ANNE OF CLEVES HEN...
SIX WIVES OF HENRY VIII PLAYLIST • Six wives of Henry VIII
TUDOR MONARCHS PLAYLIST
• Tudor monarchs
Thumbnail: Queen Catherine Howard (Various lithographs from 'The Studio' journal), Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Collection, public domain (detail)
NB: Links above may be affiliate links. This means if you make a purchase through one of these links, I earn a small commission. It in no way affects the price you pay.
Creative Commons licenses used see creativecommons.org/licenses/
![USAB Showcase: Australia vs USA [OFFICIAL STREAM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/keiEr_MOaSQ/mqdefault.jpg)
When do you think Katherine Howard was born? Let me know below and see my PATREON site for extra perks at www.patreon.com/historycalling Don't forget to SUBSCRIBE and check out the DESCRIPTION BOX for more sources on Katherine's life too.
What I find so amazing, whether we are speaking about Anne Bolelyn, Anne of Cleeves or Catherine Howard is why there is a mystery at all. You would have thought all the particulars of a future consort would be nailed down.
@@cherylhayden7363 Good point.
1523,
@@cherylhayden7363 We know more about Anna Cleves in relation to her birth. As far as Anne Boleyn and Katherine Howard are concerned, it's easy. After Henry had them killed he wiped their memory clear. Those who knew them would not dare keep their memory alive as in doing so, might have ended in their deaths. Anne and Katherine's uncle was almost killed himself for his role in Henry marrying the latter. We even know that Anne's own daughter would not speak of her mother publicly due to all the turmoil, her sister (Queen Mary I) did damage control for herself and own mother, while dragging Anne (Boleyn) through the mud. It wasn't a time to hold memories of those deemed to be traitors.
@@ladymeghenderson9337 I, too, believe she was younger rather than older. I just returned from walking to the Bodega for cat food, when I do most of my heavy thinking, and the reason I err on 23 or 24 is 1. Henry went to some lengths besmirching the reputation of Anne of Cleeves. Why? Because she did not recognize him when they first met, shattering his pride. He said she was ugly and questioned her virginity. Shrewd Anne was lucky she got away with her head. 2. If rumors were about Henry was unable to consummate the marriage to Anne, what better than young nubile Catherine Howard to prove he was still a stud muffin. That also makes me wonder if he had foreknowledge of Catherine's previous experiences and hoped that experience might ensure the marriage was consummated. That said, I believe Henry's ability to consummate his 4th, 5th and final marriages should be taken with a grain of salt(petre).
Katherine’s life was so sad. She was killed young for essentially being an abuse victim.
I know. The Tudor era (among others) was a horrible time in many ways.
She never stood a chance. Neglected, groomed in a sexually permissive environment and then (worse!) married to a murderous narcissist who practically obliterated her from existence! I cry for her and other girls like her
Whenever I hear about her "relationships," my first thought is to question just how many men abused this child.
Lol no, she was not an abuse victim
@@joshuaowensjr8694 her music teacher abused her. The age at which that “relationship” happened would have been statutory rape in modern day assuming she even wanted it at all and wasn’t just straight raped.
This poor girl never had a chance. She was sent from pillar to post by nearly every member of her family. I believe she did not have any guidance as to how to conduct herself. Her father passed her off to relations to be raised. Her lack of a loving home may have led her to an acceptance of any attention paid her as “love”. She was probably emotionally immature yet old enough to be physically attractive. She just didn’t stand a chance against powerful, older men, who took advantage of her. It is so sad. Your stories are thought provoking and so well researched. Thank you for your efforts to make us all think and see these people as more than just names in history.
Thanks Amy. I'm glad you liked it. Yes, I agree it must have been hard to develop a proper sense of self-worth under the circumstances Katherine grew up in.
it always shocks me that what we now rightly call grooming and abuse was standard courtship for hundreds of years. If the women grew up controlling and manipulative, who can blame them? They'd been shown by being controlled and manipulated was the only way to autonomy.
You know who acts like that in todays society? Abused children.
The more you think about it, the more horrifying the past for a supposedly privileged woman is.
I've always felt sorry for her. Her family had no interest in her until she caught Henry's eye. She wasn't really raised so much as she grew up. And because she was basically a child she was taken advantage of by multiple men. She didn't deserve to die because of her actions because I truly think she didn't know any better.
I completely agree. It was a pretty sad, short little life and she deserved so much better.
Katherine is such an interesting figure. such a sad short life, i hope for her sake she was at least a bit older when she became involved with Henry, even though we know what we know 😭
Yes, I'd rather she was on the older end of the spectrum too but even if she was, 24 maximum is still SO young. Poor thing.
@@HistoryCalling i agree. excellent video! 🙌🏻
Thank you :-)
@@HistoryCalling Most people agree that Howard was born in 1524 and ever since age 13, she was sexually abused by tons of men until her execution in 1542.
@@billcipherproductions1789 Not tons of men Just 2 before her marriage with Henry, she chose to have a relationship with Culpepper. I believe that Mannox played with her if you get what I mean. Dereham pressurized her to go all the way, but I also feel that her so called friends also pressurized her too. If Catherine had said "No" and told her grandmother what was going on life for Catherine could have gone badly. Her grandmother is also to blame as I feel she didn't do enough to protect the dignity and the virginity of the girls in her care. I heard this somewhere a few years ago that shortly before Catherine went to court a letter arrived for her and when asked where she was, her grandmother replied "Oh she is likely having sex somewhere with Master Dereham" If that was true (Which I doubt) it just goes to show how lax her grandmother was.
As sad and as tragic her death was, she went to it with a calm queenly dignity.
I can only give you a guess. I think she was born anywhere between 1522 and 1524. All I know that she was another victim of Henry’s cruelty. It breaks my heart knowing that on her way to the scaffold she saw Culpepper’s head on a pike. I can’t imagine what she was going through.
Thank you for another great video.
Thank you. Yes, she came to an awful end. Henry doesn't seem to have had any mercy for anyone really.
It’s not certain that she did see culpeppers head, by the time she got to the tower from Richmond it would have taken hours by river, and being February would have been dark by the time she arrived.
I don't think she did see Culpepper's head. It was February. It would have been dark by the time she was on the river. I think it's a myth that she saw his head, rather like the myth that she was sexually abused. She didn't and she wasn't.
@@tracyhodgkins7516
Yes she did. Check out the Anne Boleyn Files on TH-cam. Claire Ridgeway is a Tudor historian. I know she chose to have sex with her music teacher and that other man. I know at her young age she would’ve married at that young age. I still feel bad for her. Maybe if her grandmother took better care of her she would’ve married someone else.
@Oona Craig but I thought it was disproven that Henry ever had that, or any of his children. History Calling did a video a few days ago talking about why Henry didn’t have it in the Tudor Fertility video. He and his children, as well as his partners, didn’t have any of the common symptoms/looks of people who had the disease.
I heard somewhere that Henry had gotten rid of all Katherine's paintings after she was beheaded and tried to cover up the fact she was even a person so that's why we have no confirmed painting because if we did finding her age would be a lot easier
I've heard that story too, but never actually seen any primary evidence for it. I wonder how many portraits there could even have been of her, given her youth and short time as Queen?
Sadly to me the answer to the question of how old she is was is ultimately far, far too young for all of the creeps who took advantage of her including Henry VIII. I am mindful of the time period, but she was manipulated into a position she wasn't ready for into a court of devious sociopaths, and paid the price for it. I do agree with your verdict, however. Impeccable scholarship as always!
And I blame her grandmother who turned a blind eye to the sexual abuse of Catherine and other girls nominally in her charge.
@@cherylhayden7363 Absolutely.
Thank you and I agree, no matter what way we look at it, she was horribly young for what she was going through.
Sadly such things aren't time bound and it's still difficult to protect people failed by structures (such as relying on guardians and there assertion of protection)
@@HistoryCalling She was certainly too young to understand what being Queen entailed. I don't think that she could truly understand what the consequences of her love of Culpeper could be.
I wonder in a hypothetical situation of Henry somehow coming back to life in this time, how he would feel knowing his popularity has only dropped to even more unfavorable, to the point we memorialize his victims while holding them to a much high regard than he himself? I bet he'd be pretty upset knowing how much honor his victims receive even today...and how little he gets for his horrid actions.
Oh definitely. I don't think it would suit his ego to learn that he's most famous because of the women in his life (wives and Elizabeth).
I dream of bringing Henry VIII back in a seance. When he appears before us, we’d just roll our eyes and yell “worst king EVAH” at him. And then dismiss him with a wave of our hand.
@@heathersmith8549 🤣😂
@@HistoryCalling And can't you just see the look on his face,to be told it's the male that decides the sex of a child!He would be ranting mad.Because,as we all know H8 considered himself God's Gift.Wonder if Elizabeth of York would be happy at the way he turned out?I do sometimes wonder if her death helped to shape his personality.
@@heathersmith8549 Fun-ny.
The high point of my week is watching you bring your historian's eye to bear on past lives and events with surgical precision. As I watched and reflected on your other videos about Katherine, I felt nearly overwhelmed by a sense of tragedy over the injustices perpetrated against this young woman. The emotional scars and sense of hopelessness would be no doubt unbearable, especially for one so young. Thank you for helping Katherine come alive through your expertise. Stay safe and be well.
Thank you :-) She is indeed a great tragedy, though this video wasn't as depressing to put together as the one on her execution as it was focused more on events before that time and on her wider family to an extent.
@@HistoryCalling True. I love the highlights you place on the family trees. Makes it easier for detail-challenged people like myself.
"Horrible Histories - Divorced, Beheaded, Died Lyrics
Divorced, beheaded and died.
Divorced, beheaded, survived.
I'm Henry VIII, I had six sorry wives.
Some might say I ruined their lives.
Catherine of Aragon was one
She failed to give me a son.
I had to ask her for a divorce
That broke her poor heart, of course
Young Anne Boleyn she was two,
had a daughter the best she could.
I said she flirted with some other man
And off for the chop went dear Anne.
Lovely Jane Seymour was three,
The love of a lifetime for me.
She gave me a son, little Prince Ed,
Then poor old Jane, went and dropped dead.
Divorced, beheaded and died.
Divorced, beheaded, survived.
I'm Henry VIII, I had six sorry wives.
Some might say I ruined their lives.
Anne of Cleves came as four,
I fell for the portrait I saw.
Then laid on her face and cried, 'She's a horse! I must have another divorce.'
Catherine Howard was five,
A child of nineteen, so alive.
She flirted with others, no way to behave.
The axe sent young Cath to her grave.
Catherine Parr she was last.
By then all my best days were past.
I lay on my deathbed aged just fifty-five,
Lucky Catherine the last stayed alive.
(I mean, how unfair!)
Divorced, beheaded and died.
Divorced, beheaded, survived.
I'm Henry VIII, I had six sorry wives.
You could say I ruined their lives."
Citation link: www.lyricsfreak.com/h/horrible+histories/divorced+beheaded+died_20914069.html
That about sums it up, yes! :-) Just a little heads up (no pun intended) - it's best to avoid putting links into TH-cam comments, at least on my channel, as it causes them to automatically get classed as spam and dropped into the 'Held for review' folder, rather than posting. I do sometimes remember to check in there and manually ok any comments that look fine to me (as I've done here), but not always. I should really mention this issue in a video as it catches a lot of people out. It does stop a lot of actual spam though, so I think it's a good filter to have on the whole.
Akshally his first wife did have at least one son but he died as an I can't. I guess that didn't count
One thing we can say for the lady in the Metropolitan Museum of Art portrait is that the lady is wearing one of the very high French Hoods that came into vogue in the later 1530s and lasted well into the 1540s. The lady is young, as Katherine was, and she is richly dressed, as not many could afford to be, but none of the jewelry she's wearing has been identified as being a queen's. I have my doubts that it's her, my usual guess is Anne Bassett. The museum's website has some very interesting infrared reflectogram and x-radiograph images of the portrait that suggest the lady's face has been much altered over the years, giving her that chocolate tin lid look, much as happened to Isabella de’ Cosimo I de Medici's portrait. Anyway, whoever the lady was, she likely knew Katherine. If only the portrait could talk.
Yes, I've read about that image being altered too. Apparently the pout is exaggerated. I personally think the Windsor/Buccleuch portraits are most likely to be her, but the Met isn't impossible.
@@HistoryCalling A few weeks ago, I would have agreed about the Windsor/Buccleuch portraits but there has been speculation that those are actually Anne of Cleves. I have to confess that when I compare them with the known portraits of Anne, I see a similarity that I didn't notice before. Now I'm on the fence about it.
@@idontwantachannel7542 Thanks for reminding me:) I had meant to comment regarding that on the Katherine Howard portrait video but got distracted. I too see a similarity but I'd really like to see if the straight-on portrait of Anne could be computer generated to be turned to a 3/4 portrait or the features could be measured separately to allow for that difference. Besides, I am rather fond of the Met portrait, despite looking eerily like Scarlet Johanssen:)
@@katjack2780 A computer generated Anne of Cleves to be turned to a 3/4 portrait would be soooooooo cool O.O
Then again, we already have a kinda-sorta 3/4 turn of Anne, the portrait by Bartholomäus Bruyn the elder, the one with the really wild orange and black dress. Looking at that and comparing it to the round portraits . . . yeah, I do see the resemblance.
The Memorial for those executed at the Tower is absolutely beautiful!
I completely agree. It would be nice if it was on the actual scaffold site, but we can't have everything and they wouldn't want it getting in the way of the entrance to the Crown Jewels I suppose.
@ History Calling Are there any photos online of THE actual site? All I can find when I type in a search are pictures of the memorial.
We can't know her age based on her appearance, even if we had a photograph. At eleven I looked like a grown woman. Precocious puberty is rough.
I think she wed Henry at 17, meaning she would have been 18-19 at the time of her tragic execution.
That's definitely a plausible timeline. We'll never know for sure sadly, but no matter what way we look at it, she was tragically young. :-(
Nobody really had her best interests at heart 😔 If she could have been left to become a gentlewoman and find love rather than be married to the king she'd have been happier..
De Marillac worked as a diplomat, but most of all he was a prelate, first a bishop, then an archbishop. I don’t know how much experience he had at judging the ages of female children as a celibate priest. I was commonly mistaken for an adult (18 years or older), when I was as young as 11, men asked me out on dates, I referred them to my father when they didn’t believe me. I didn’t wear adult clothes or makeup. It can happen if a girl grows tall and her figure develops early, as in my case, I had an adult figure and “look” by age 10. I wasn’t let on the grammar-school bus, for example, because the driver insisted I was a “high-schooler”.
So sad. Henry had no business running after Catherine.
Yes, the whole situation (long before we get to her execution) was just very unseemly.
@@HistoryCalling Yes, it was. That's the best , most accurate comment on their relationship I've come across.
the perfect rescue from tech issues at my job today 🙌🏻
Ugh. Tech issues. The bane of the modern world. I live in fear of them affecting my channel (and to a lesser degree, my Instagram). I hope you get sorted out quickly.
@@HistoryCalling i totally know the feeling! it’s such a stress when it happens. thank you!
You're welcome. :-)
I think it's so sad that she died such a horrible death. I believe she couldn't have more than 19 when she died and it seems like Henry had no pity for anyone that upset him.
Yes, I agree he seems to have lacked pity for anyone except himself. He'll have known far better than us just how young she was and for all his protestations that he loved her, he still had her judicially murdered. Horrible man.
Although I am interested in your content, I’d listen to you talk about anything-your voice and accent are just so lovely! Thank you!
Aw, thank you. I wish more people felt that way when I post a non-Tudor video, as those ones tend to tank! :-)
@@HistoryCalling I totally agree with Amber.
I just love your channel. Your thoughts are always so reasoned and well-researched. I find Katherine Howard such a sad figure. I find it difficult to see her as a master manipulator who decieved Henry with the goal of becoming queen.
To me, her story speaks to the grooming of a beautiful young woman who was not appropriately chaperoned and monitored. We can just look to Anne of Cleaves as evidence of the very little these noblewomen understood about what truely involved in bedroom relations. I have never really been able to be swayed one way or the other by accounts of her virtue, or lack thereof. If she was no longer a virgin, did she have true understanding of what had occurred. As a young healthy woman, how did she not find herself with child if she had been intimate with several men numerous times before marriage?
But, when Henry showed his interest in her, her family and supporters were willing to use Katherine to curry favor and titles. I always see these young noblewomen as having no options but to follow the direction of their parents/guardians. They choose a husband, you do your duty.
Henry's narcissism shows in the demonstration that he honestly believed his young nubile wife enjoyed relations with him, a fat, smelly and infection ridden cruel man. How could he have not recognized her lack of virginity (if she was not one) on consummation? Was "proof" of her virginity not demanded either pre-contract or after the wedding night?
I would absolutely enjoy a dedicated video in YOUR thoughts regaurding Katherine and her pre-marital and extramarital relations. Was she a virgin? If not, how did no one notice? Would she REALLY have been so silly as to commit adultery? How could she have not understood the risks?
Thank you for considering that topic.
Thank you :-) A video on whether Katherine was guilty or not is on my list. As for whether Henry could tell if she was as pure as she'd been made out to be, I think in lots of cases, you can't tell that information and I'm unaware of any 'proof' ever being demanded of any English royal bride. Regarding why she didn't fall pregnant, there are a few reasons. Maybe she never went all the way with anyone before Henry. Maybe she or her partner(s) had problems in that area, or maybe she was still too young to get pregnant. Thanks for watching.
I thought by this time, his marriage to Catherine Howard was unconsummated due to his always being in pain from his leg, and of his general impotency, but maybe I just misread. I just thought I had read he couldn't perform anymore.
A sad life for such a young girl.
Agreed :-(
Love your logical thought process! My very uneducated thought is c. 1520. It's very sad she ended up on the wrong end of Henry's wrath. I am LOVING your videos since I first found them several weeks ago. Thank you for your great history insights!!
Thank you :-) Yes, 1520 is certainly possible. It's just sad that we'll never know for sure.
I just found your channel and I have been listening to it nonstop! I am so glad I found it. You do a great job!
Hi Tiffany. Thank you so much and welcome :-)
I agree with your reasoning. You described your process & research clearly in a step by step progression. Well done !
Basically, she was way too young! It’s interesting that considering she was Queen, THE QUEEN Of ENGLAND no less, her details are so unknown. At that time everything was recorded, everything was ‘official’, yet apparently no one took the time to ask and research the Royal backgrounds for an official record as well as the general public’s interest at the time.
I’m wondering if, maybe, it’s because it was rather inconvenient to know too much sometimes, like how young a bride was, who thier real family(skeletons) where, how ‘pure’ they where, so after an ‘unfortunate’ Royal death the records are deliberately lost, destroyed or faked to protect the current King. When you're falsely accusing Queens and members of the court of treason, adultery, incest, being immoral, it’s easier for the on-going Royal history and power if thier real backgrounds are vague. There must be a ton of scandals, mistresses and illegitimate children we’ll never know about that would make the Royal Family Tree far larger and extremely complicated! Speaking of missing information, keeping it vague: Interesting that Royal DNA was used to help identify bodies in the Russian Romanov murders yet the requests to test the remains of the Princes in the Tower have been refused… (roll Eastenders shocker ending: “duff, duff, duff, duff!”)
But I do like the names Isabel & Jocasta. Would also make a good detective duo.🤓😎
Probably people did know things more about ages and background details at the time and that info. just hasn't survived all the way down to us, but you're right that it must have been convenient for some people to edit their family and personal backgrounds to tidy them up a bit.
I dread to think how many illegitimate royal children there have been over the centuries. Too many for any historian to pick apart.
I suppose in the case of the Romanovs, their family no longer control whether the bones are tested or not, but the Queen can control the bones belonging to the so-called Princes in the Tower and indeed to Anne Boleyn. That's just her choice though. Charles may feel differently and obviously George V had no problem allowing the bones to be looked at in the 1930s. We might get some answers yet. Fingers crossed!
By today's standards that is true, but back then it was perfectly normal for girls as young as 12 to be married to much older men.. Margaret Beaufort, the mother of Henry 7th was married and pregnant by the age of 12. However 12 was insanely young to be pregnant and girls back then normally had the first pregnancy by around 15 or 16 and then had a baby on an annual basis. Of course many of these young woman died young wore out by childbearing.
I will also point out Katherine Howard's replacement Queen Catherine Parr first marriage took place when she was just 12.
And Richard 2nd's second Queen was either 6 or 7 when she married the king, she was known as the little queen.
@@mrsdinosaur1009 When I say she was way too young it has nothing to do with the law or what was acceptable to older men. A 12 year old then was just like a 12 year old now.
@@mrsdinosaur1009 I read the list of marriages recorded over some centuries, probably in a certain township or parish, going back to the late middle ages, there were almost no brides under the age of about 16, and even the mid-teens were rare, although the legal age was indeed, 12. The average age of marriage was in the early 20s. This is one of the things that caused British culture to go in a different way than most other places. Young people old enough to be married, waited for various reasons.
@@charlottekey8856 Some marriages weren't always carried out in church or an appropiate building with a member of clegy present. I believe it was common for marriages to happen in Haystacks or in hedge rows right up to the Victorian period. These marriages were considered legal if the right usage of words were used and there were witnesses to hear them say these words. I think the vows would run something like this I.E I take thee Joe Bloggs to be my husband before God and these witnesses etc." It didn't need the blessing of the church to be deemed legal. So many marriages would likely to be missing from the parish records anyway.
Mostly marriages were carried out when the couple were deemed old enough and that is why you see parish records showing older couples marrying.
Royal marriages were different and generally speaking if the bride was very young, she was left to grow up first before consumation took place. A Royal marriage wasn't considered legal until it had been consumated. 15 or 16 was the usual sort of time that first pregnancies happen. It did happen sometimes when the girl was younger and the church imposed heavy penalties for it too.
We really don't know how young Catherine Howard was but many people go with her being around 15 or 16 so she would have been old enough to have sex with her husband. (although we know that she was already sexually experienced at that point)
the Howards almost lost everything by using her - it was Henry's death that spared the Duke's life - it is a great scene in the old BBC series when Henry tells Norfolk to make himself scarce
Yes, they certainly had a dramatic downturn in fortunes given what happened with Anne Boleyn and with Katherine. I really must watch that BBC drama again. It's been too long.
@@HistoryCalling - they were so well acted - Donald Pleasance's daughter played Katherine reasonably well - Keith Michell is still ultimate Henry VIII
I don't feel bad for the Duke. He was playing with people's lives. After Anne Boleyn was beheaded what did he think would happen with little Katherine? I've read so many books and he's always described as cold, calculating, only interested in advancing "the family" (which to me reads as advancing himself and gaining more wealth that he may or may not share). To me the Duke sounds like a sociopath, the Brits on here might have a different view (and I would welcome any correction) but had I been Henry or his son Edward I would have stripped everything I had given the duke from him just because he was willing to let family die to feather his nest.
@@amywebb4586 - Norfolk sat in judgement of Anne her brother George and Smeaton - I doubt he believed any of the ridiculous charges of incest etc - he certainly was pretty conniving but when Katherine blew up in his face it should have been over for him the same as it was for Cromwell - he was lucky to avoid the axe
@@amywebb4586 i am a Brit and i agree with u
I have just found your channel and I love it. You have such a great approach to the subjects. And I appreciate you citing sources for the information. I do love the Tudor dynasty, but I hope you'll branch out a bit more. I can't wait to watch more videos in the future
Awesome, thank you! I'm happy to branch out, it's just about finding something that people will watch. It seems like when I try something non-Tudors, people won't even give it a go :-( Still, there's something Victorian coming and of course, something Christmas related, so we'll see how those videos do.
I have every book there is on Catherine Howard. Forever my Queen.
Thank you so much for this great video on Catherine Howard. I always heard that she was 17 when she married Henry.
You're welcome. 17 is absolutely possible. No one really knows for sure.
Thank you for the upload,your voice is beautiful😍
Thank you so much. Now if only I could get my family and friends to agree :-)
My heart just breaks every time I think about her. So young
You're a assessment of her age is thoughtful, will research and comes to a logical conclusion. As usual, very good job.
The high point of my week is a weekends good sleep, not goin to lie. lol BUT on TH-cam I look forward to your videos every week. Now there's a complement without all the horns blazing. :)
Thank you :-)
Brilliant. Tanks.
Thank you :-)
I'm sorry, but I didn't hear a word that was said. This woman's accent is simply beautiful!!!
Thank you very much.
No worries! :-)
I go for 1521. She was a teenager anyway and not yet accountable for her deeds. Though in those days they were. Poor girl. Another great video.
Thank you. Yes, I agree that she really couldn't be held accountable for the goings on at her grandmothers, what with her youth and the pressure being exerted by the likes of Mannox and Dereham.
Thank you..
Thank you!
You're welcome! :-)
I think it’s so cool you reply to your comments! Anyway I think, based on all of your supplied evidence, that she was likely born in 1523.
Absolutely love your videos!
Thank you so much! :-)
Thanks!
THANK YOU for your generous support Katie. I hope you enjoyed hearing about Katherine's possible birth dates. :-)
I'm not sure how you feel about the musical "Six." It's obviously an artistic retelling of the story, but Katherine's song is so sad. It tells the story of a naiive abuse victim who goes from bad relationship to bad relationship. A lot of Katherine's story might be lost, but what has survived unfortunately shows us that vulnerable women have been being taken advantage of by abusers throughout history.
I heard in a book about Anne of cleves that she was fifteen when she met Henry VIII. It was taken from Anne of cleves writings.
You make a great argument and I think given everything you’ve provided I agree.
Thanks Lora :-)
Itys been said by eminent professors of history that Catherine Howard was 16 when she married. However royal marriages...often took place at much younger ages...as you'll know.
To my knowledge, in Northern and Eastern Europe marrying young was far less common than it was in Southern Europe. In Southern European places like Italy the climate is much warmer and thus there’s far more food, and having more food means that girls can build up the fat stores necessary to start having their periods far quicker. That’s why nowadays so many girls get their periods young, especially girls from underprivileged communities who tend not to have access to foods that aren’t cheap, fatty, and processed. By contrast, in Northern and Eastern Europe, it’s far colder and thus food would be more scarce, meaning it’d take time for girls to build up their fat and so girls would be much older by the time they started having their periods.
I'd opt for the older age, too. Not sure if it's just Hollywood, but it does seem that many interpret their relationship as being quite physically veracious so that would cause me to lean more towards the older age, at least not before 1521. Either way, she was a bag of hormones and was probably so swept up in the fairy tale and then the tragedy, that she probably never had a chance to full absorb and process it, just like Queen Jane. I've always wondered about her age, so very good question, and great research to back it up! Thank you!
You're very welcome. Yes, given where she'd come from (massive family, no money, dumped with a step-grandmother who didn't provide much oversight and abused by some of the men in her life), suddenly becoming Queen of England may well have had fairy tale elements. I'm just sorry for her that it all ended more like a Greek tragedy. Speaking of Queen Jane (I assume we mean Jane Grey?) she's getting her first dedicated video here on History Calling next week! :-)
Many girls who are groomed or otherwise sexually abused experience hypersexuality as a symptom of that abuse.
Another thought, if I may. I don't think Henry would have married Katherine if she were only 14. His own grandmother, Margaret Beaufort, at the age of only 13, nearly died giving birth to his father, Henry VII. Indeed, she was unable to have any more children. Given his marriages were grounded in the need to perpetuate the dynasty, I think he would have wanted a wife whom he felt could safely (as much as possible at the time) give birth.
He had an heir and only needed a spare, and wouldn't have given a rat's ass if his 5th wife died in the process. And if he was so consumed with the need for a 2nd son, why toss aside Queen Anne or marry Catherine Parr, who was 2x widowed without once falling pregnant. No, I think in wives 4-6, Henry VIII had health issues. Anne was a maid and apparently had no idea how a marriage was consummated. By the time Catherine Parr came along, he was looking for a nursemaid, but Catherine Howard was unusual. She was not a virgin and Henry, who had been around the block would have known as much.
@@cherylhayden7363 He got rid of Anne because she'd miscarried at least twice, and was getting older. Of all people, he understood the need for the spare son, and more if he could get them. Remember, he knew his grandmother well; she didn't die until after his father. He would have heard the dangers of breeding a woman too young. And there are certainly ways to fake virginity...he was fooled. She was his "rose without a thorn."
I'd like to think he wouldn't have been interested in a 14 year old either, but with Henry you never quite know. That said, I think she was older for other reasons.
@@HistoryCalling I don't know if she was 14, but with Henry anything was possible. His behavior was always reprehensible. Even marrying is brother's widow was calculation, wanting to tie Spain to England and hold onto her dowry. But his behavior was not without cost. His treatment of his 1st wife sent him down a path which made securing a true political match impossible. His other wives, save Anne of Cleves, were "high born", but not royal born. Many monarchs cast aside wives, but few did it in such a manner as to firmly close that door as Henry had. And even after the death of Jane Seymour had tempered matters, he foolishly cast aside Anne of Cleves. I think she would have been a formidable asset. But he cast her aside for a teenager
@@CooperCapturesGallery if she miscarried twice, how did he argue the marriage was unconsummated? Anne of Cleeves wasn't some disposable English rose. As with his first wife, there were political consequences with Anne.
personally i believe 1523, because of her grandfathers will, and bc the believed portrait of her would put her as 17 as queen, so depending what month was she born she was probably 16 or very newly 17 when married
I have to concur with your theory on her birth year. I think she was about 18 when she was executed,superb as always lady of history. 😊
Thank you :-)
Your chanel is superb, I appreciate Tudor history is popular, I hope you consider doing other history subjects on people and their Histories, example arbella Stuart, lady Hamilton,Charles 2 mistresses, there are so many more that are not on you tube history channels,😊
@@HistoryCalling you have a gift for teaching and passion for history. 😊
I would say possibly 18 or 19 at time of death
@@karahershey I agree kara 18 to 19 😊👍
I think she was very young and that also explains why she behaved so foulish as she did. Compliments and people that was flirting with her and not too experience she is easy target and too young to understand consequences of flirting in the wrong way
Yes, of all the people involved in Katherine's story and ultimate downfall, she's actually the one I would blame the least.
@@HistoryCalling I guess when you are young and queen many took the chance to influence the king though her too and its easy to forget that all attention isn't for your sake. And perhaps not always to react on either. But if was in her age and was married to the king i would perhaps find many men more attractive also . He wasnt in his best shape either. But could she have said no to the king? Must been hard to even try.
Poor Katherine
I know. It's just a very sad story from beginning to end.
Poor little soul
I know. A real tragedy.
Such a tragic life.
I think one of the best scenes that came out of The Tudors series was her dancing before her execution.
I have always believed Katherine was older than people like to assume. It fits our 21st Century sense of outrage to think of her as a child.
That does not lessen the evidence that she Had been abused As a child, and continued to be used and abused until her life was cut tragically short by one of those abusers. 'More sinned against than sinning'
Wasn't Henry 7ths mum 12/13 when she gave birth?
Yup, 12 when she got married and fell pregnant and 13 when she gave birth.
Love your info. Have you ever thought of doing something on Lucy Walter the wife/mistress of Charles II. I have always been fascinated by her.
Better than that, I was just thinking the other day that I'd like to a video on ALL his mistresses. There are so many though, it might need to be a two parter :-)
@@HistoryCalling I will be waiting eagerly. My dream is to go to Wales and stay at Roch castle where she grew up which is a hotel now. I read a book about her when I was 11 and I am now 63 and have never forgotten her. Thanks for what you do!
@@watchforsmiles Didn't the Roundheads destroy Lucy's home & her family?I seem to recall that from a book Love the Stuarts.Especially Charles II(the King who brought back partying as the HH team put it)
I agree with you & Gareth Russell, basically! 1521-1523. He was also more convinced by de Marillac's account than the will- given infant mortality, I can easily see a young child being left out. And the fact that de Marillac distinguished between "she looked about 30" for Anne of Cleves & "she _was_ 18" for Katherine Howard makes it pretty clear that the first was an opinion on Anne's looks, & the second was a statement of what he at least believed to be fact- "18", not "about 18." So I kinda think 1523 is less likely, & looking at the ages of Katherine's fellow ladies-in-waiting, I end up with a best guess of 1522... but realistically, 1521-1523.
Thanks Beth. Yes, I thought Gareth Russell made a good argument and I agreed with him too when I looked at the primary sources.
That and a 24 year old and a 30 year old will probably look more similar than a 14 year old and an 18 year old since teenagers are still growing and experiencing changes in their hormones. Anecdotally, I’m 19 now and I just looked back at some pictures from when I was 14, and I looked like such a baby! Big round chubby cheeks and terrible posture!
I feel terrible for her bc every-time I search up how old she was the age of her keeps getting lower and lower….
As always, an amazing video, Ms History!
I don’t know why but every time I hear about the age of some when when expected to start copulating, I’m shocked. Women really do seem to always get the raw deal.
Thank you. Yes, it was horribly young in some cases. It's Lady Margaret Beaufort (married and pregnant at 12) I feel for the most, though her granddaughter, Princess Margaret Tudor (married at 13) didn't fare much better.
@@HistoryCalling what really gets me is how relatively recently we stopped such a practice, though i suppose that’s from a standpoint of kids being more precious.
I know. The legal for marriage for a girl in Scotland was still 12 right up until 1929!
@@HistoryCalling The room my now wife and I stayed in at Greta Green had a story of a fairly young lady that had been kidnapped by a local man and taken there to get married. Fortunately for her they caught them as the fled south to get to France but she was around 15 if I recall correctly (my mind was admittedly elsewhere though! Haha)
Yes, that sounds about right. Kidnapping heiresses was a real problem in the 18th century (not that this story necessarily happened in the 18th c. but that's the one I know about).
I’ve always been fascinated with the 6th wives but I’d always gravitated more towards Anne Boleyn (coincidentally a cousin on Katherine Howard) but I never really focused on the other wives other than their names and a little basic background however now the more I learn about Katherine Howard the more I just feel so terrible for her. She was a victim and they killed her for it, it’s so tragic
I would say 1521 is the best bet, as someone who actually knew her said she was 18. The evidence for any later is VERY obscure, like portraits who are probably of other people. And as for the step-grandfather thing, she wouldn’t have even been three years old that’s why she was left out. Furthermore, royal marriages with 14/15 year olds would not get consummated until a few years later, so if she was “physically veracious”, she DEFINITELY wasn’t 14 or 15. And as you point out it seems like a fairy tale to go from huge family, no money, and dumped with step-grandmother to queen so fast.
Hello to history calling from Bea
I personally don't think it really matters what age Katherine was when she married Henry VIII. The fact that she was of the Howard family (who BTW are the 'sacrificial lambs' for the Tudor dynasty) is what really matters. Like her cousin Anne Boleyn, Katherine was beheaded for adultery. The Howard blood had to stain the ground for the Tudors. Read Margaret Murray's book "The Divine King in England", it sums it all up.
As for her age, well in Tudor England, I suppose age of first menses usually signifies 'adulthood' in girls. I, personally, am not a Tudor historian, but from what I've read, there is a vast difference between what was considered adult then to what is considered adult now.
Hahaha thinking back to when I was 12 and I constantly got asked if I was 16. No makeup, wearing jeans, a t-shirt and sneakers. I think definitely possible to mistake a 14y.o for 18
It's definitely possible, but I would say you were probably a bit on the unusual side, looking so grown up at 12. When I think back to myself and to all the girls I went to school with, I can't think of any who would have looked 16 at 12. I don't know if you're particularly tall, but Katherine was noted as being very petite, which also makes me think she wouldn't have looked much older than her real age. It's sad that we'll never know :-(
@@HistoryCalling that's a very good point - I'm a bit of a giant 😉
I recently read the book by Josephine Wilkinson, where she presents a case that 1525 was the year of Katherines birth, I was shocked as i had assumed that she was older. I suppose this could fall in line with her saying she was still a young girl when she permitted Henry Mannox to touch her. I appreciate that to modern values even 15 is incredibly young, but would that still be considered so in the Tudor period?, bearing in mind Margaret Beaufort was a widowed mother by that age, and Henry's friend Charles Brandon had married a 14 year old girl a few years earlier.
It's not super unusual to marry that young when you're a princess or a wealthy heiress (which Margaret Beaufort and Katherine Willoughby were). It's less common in my experience when you're talking about girls of other ranks, even if they're in the aristocracy. Think of Mary and Anne Boleyn for instance, or Jane Seymour, who were looking to get married in their 20s (Anne was in her 30s by the time she did wed, but she'd been off the market for years). Catherine Parr was 17 at the time of her first wedding but her father had already died and her mother was perhaps keen to get her girls married so that they would be secure, should anything happen to her. This was a wise course of action as she did indeed die during Catherine's relatively brief first marriage. Personally I think Katherine Howard was a little older than Josephine Wilkinson does, but we'll never know for sure.
@@HistoryCalling This is not the case. Young marriage was the norm in ALL classes and both sexes. This occurred in the Merchant Class too. There are many examples still extant in the Public Records. Probably it was not so crucial in the lowest of people, because there was nothing to inherit and no money, even if it be a shop, a house, a small-hold etc. to increase the combined wealth, but anyone with anything was looking for enlargement.
My friend was pregnant at 11 and gave birth at 12
Still happens.
SO young! My goodness!
I know. She was a real tragedy, poor thing.
Gareth Russell's book is excellent. Very well written and enjoyable.
Yes, he is very good. I read the bit on her age as part of my research for this video.
I personally feel 1521 is a very strong candidate for her birth year. Hear me out..... her father was at the "Field of Cloth and Gold" in June of 1520. That's documented. He was only there a short while by our standards but being uncertain myself of travel times to and from, how long he was REALLY gone is less clear. But, in keeping with the morality of the time (or lack of it in some cases.) He's been gone. He comes home ready for his wife to do her "wifely duty". They do the deed in June/July. 9 months later, Little Katherine arrives. Again this is supposition based on very limited detail.... but it makes sense to me, given that Era.
1521 sounds fine to me. :-) It's really only the extreme ends of the 1518-26 spectrum that I think are unlikely.
@@HistoryCallingYes. Personally I’d go for 1523- 1524 at the latest but I doubt it-. Had she been born in 1523 she would’ve been 10 when Anne became Queen, so too young to be sent to court. Ofc she could have gone once she was old enough, but that would mean she was born in or after 1524 so I don’t think it true…
I'm reading an interesting novel by Alison Weir, part of her Six Tudor Queens series, "Katheryn Howard, The Scandalous Queen", in which she describes Katheryn as 19 years old when she first came to court as one of Queen Anna of Cleves' ladies. Weir also hints that she may have been dyslexic because she found reading and writing so difficult and made frequent spelling mistakes. Her version of Katheryn Howard is that of a little airhead who falls in and out of love so easily and is a sucker for affection from older men, which made it easy for her music master and unscrupulous cousins to take advantage of her. The pity of is that she was genuinely fond of the king, but just didn't have the sense to use her power as queen to get Culpeper exiled from court before he shot his mouth off. I don't know how much of this is true, but Weir's work is well written and thoroughly researched and I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. As for Katheryn, the poor little fool should have eloped with Francis Dereham while she had the chance.
How can she have made frequent spelling mistakes in a time where there was basically no standardized spelling, to the point where people often didn't spell their own names the same way every time?
Alison Weir uses a lot of supposition in her novels i.e Mary Boleyn, cover shows Queen Claude to set the tone. This unfortunate young Tudor Queen was neglected and abused. Teenagers can be seen as 'airheads' but she just did not have the tools she needed to outwit Mannix and Dereham. Dereham followed her to court to blackmail a high position for himself. Culpepper was the fool. He knew what was at risk. I find it strange that Jane Boleyn, George's widow, enabled Katherine to cheat on old King Henry. Was it payback for deaths of innocent Boleyns? None of Queen Anne Boleyn's ladies in waiting ever suffered penalties. Stranger and stranger. Katherine may have became a kind and gracious queen if given the chance.
Thanks for this. Interesting as always. I know it's history and all that, but there's something that always disturbs me with anything to do with Katherine Howard. I'd say she was late teens/early twenties, much too young. I know that times were so very different but think she was so young and naive and abused by terrible men.
Yes, I was just saying to someone else as well that it was really a very short, sad life that she had. She seems to have been a very sweet natured girl as well (not that she would have deserved her fate if she'd been haughty).
I've read various books that at least speculated that she was young as 12 when she married Henry Viii! Though I do think this analysis is fair and that while she was indeed quite young, the year of birth around 1523 would be accurate. Anne of Cleve's btw was born in 1515, making her 24 when she married Henry.
What do I come away with? The Boleyn didn't like to keep birth records 😂 And this caused a heck of a lot of problems for historians. Just think if Anne's mother had bothered to write down the significant dates in her life, her own marriage, the birth of her children, how much better we could nail down these dates.
To be fair, she may well have done so and that family Bible (or whatever it was written in) just hasn't survived.
18-21 is the age I have heard most. I also heard someone asked her when she went out for execution how old she was and she said she was 19 which fits right in that gap.
I've never heard that story (even when I researched my video on her execution), so I wonder if it's something that comes from an historical novel or on-screen depiction? Nevertheless, 18-21 is a solid age range for her marriage.
Very interesting research, thank you. Given that Henry's other wives were not particularly young, in their 20s, except for Katherine Parr, I guess he hasn't a reputation for desiring very young girls. So I'd say poor Katherine Howard would be at the older end of the range you suggest
Bessie Blount was no older than 20 and likely closer to 16 or 17 when she gave birth to Henry Fitzroy, and the relationship had been going on for some time before that, starting when she was no older than 16 and no younger than 12, meaning she was likely around 14 or 15 when the relationship began, the same age as Katherine may have been. Bessie’s birth year is somewhere between 1498 and 1502, and she gave birth to Henry Fitzroy in 1519
The portrait shown at about 4:00 (actually quite small) was at Arundel Castle when I spotted it on a table. This was the home of the Howards, which could be considered as possible evidence of the identity of the sitter.
Interesting. I haven't seen the original. I found it in an out of copyright book online. It's certainly meant to represent her, but whether it's meant to be at all accurate is another matter.
I think you have made a good estimate. Also, you may want to look at King Henry. He was 49 ish. He was approaching 50 and clearly wanting to regain his youth, and therefore a young wife. I don't remember any sources commenting on the King marrying a child. Indeed many kings marry young women to gain an heir, and Henry may have been looking to gain a spare...but he also had enough enemies that at least one of them would have suggested as much if the King were marrying a child of 14. Since they did not, that suggests he was marrying a young woman who was clearly approaching 20, not someone coming out of her girlhood at 14 or 15ish.
Yes, I think had she been at the younger end of the scale, there would have been more comments on the fact that she was just a child. It certainly does seem as though Henry was having his mid-life crisis though, in going for such a young woman. It's interesting that next time around, he went for a widow in her 30s.
I did read his court would call him a cradle snatcher.
@@Oldie699 Thank you for the info.
Very true, a Duke of Burgundy in the 14th century married a 12 year old and everyone made fun of him.
I highly doubt even Henry would have married anyone younger than 16/17. I mean, have you been around someone in their mid-teens when you are a fully-grown adult? They are at times infuriatingly immature which I think may have made a very big dent in any affections Henry may have had in her. Then again, adulthood back then was much younger than we would consider now so who knows. I would like to believe she wasn't that young as well because it would make her fate so much more tragic if she was only 16 when she was murdered.
Haha, yes teenagers can be immature, but then again, so could Henry! :-) For other reasons though, I suspect she was in her late teens, rather than early to mid. Henry had had other teenage mistresses (late teens) when he was much younger himself, but I don't recall any evidence that he was interested in younger girls.
5:14 Make up existet even in ancient egypt. It doesn't need to be "modern" to make a face seem older. Wearing Make up was just not common during Catherine's life time. It was seen as vulgar but that drastically changed a few decades later under Elizabeth I.
I don't know, but I agree with the final conclusion on this.
Katherine is a complex and interesting figure. She had such a sad short life. I do hope she was older when she married Henry VIII and when he had her executed. We will probably never know her exact age when she became involved with Henry VIII.
I know. She's a real tragedy. I want her to be older too, but of course early 20s is still horrifically young. :-(
I think part of the problem with Catherine is her background. Being from an impoverished line of the Howard's, her father always in debt, I think it's unlikely that any portrait that could help to work out how old she might have been exists until she was Queen, and possibly not even then because she was executed and any portrait of her might have been destroyed. A clue from Gareth Russell's book about Catherine is that none of the girls who served with her at court as maids of honour were born before 1521. Anne Bassett was the most senior of the girls and was born that year. Catherine Carey, Catherine Howard's cousin, was born in either 1523 or 1524 .As the book goes on to say, though we don't have precise dates for the others, all the girls who joined the court within 12 months of Catherine were definitely born in the early to mid 1520s, so I think that rules out an early date like 1518. Some recent research suggested she was 15 when she married Henry, on 28th July 1540, the same day Thomas Cromwell was executed. That suggests she was born in 1525 if you take that literally. However, it depends on when her birthday would have fallen,, so I'm going to suggest she might have been born in 1524, which would make 1540 her 16th year; though her birthday could have been later in the year than July. I would therefore suggest she was in her 18th year, or thereabouts,, when she was executed. On another subject connected with Catherine, I think people should actually listen to or read her confessions to Thomas Cranmer before they leap to the conclusion that she was sexually abused. Catherine's first confession no longer exists, unfortunately. Her final confession is often cited as 'proof' that she was sexually abused. The confession that is routinely ignored is her second confession, where she admits her relationship, not abuse, not force; not rape or any other such thing, with Francis Dereham and then proceeds to do the Tudor equivalent of throwing him under a bus by trying to blame him for everything whilst trying to do everything she could to save herself. She did the same to Jane Roachford, who would have had no cause at all to get involved if Catherine hadn't entangled herself with Thomas Culpepper. What happened to Catherine was a tragedy, but I think to think of her as some kind of victim of men or a survivor of sexual abuse is to look at her through modern eyes and I think that's a mistake.
Thanks Tracy. Yes, Gareth Russell's book is very good and one of the sources I used for the research for this video. I agree with him (and you) that the ages of the other ladies in waiting gives us a good estimate of Katherine's birth year. I'll do a video at some point on the accusations against her and how far she could be said to be guilty and dig into the confessions in more detail then.
Cranmer was a time server.
I think your reasoning is probable. A lot of things could be said about Henry the eighth. But he didn’t have the habit of marrying children. All his other wives (before and after) had a polish or edge to them. A child queen wouldn’t have suited (I think) a man like that king. It’s a shame her guardians allowed the marriage to happen. Young as the girl was. And needy as the king was. They had to have known the shipwreck (of the union) was looming and likely.
Can you please do a video about the execution Charles 1st?
He's on the list (as are the Stuarts in general in fact).
Remember though,people seemed to look older than their years,in many cases,before the 20th C.Sometimes the costumes worn,aged them.And often it was life style.I understand Henry had all Anne B's portraits destroyed.If this is so,could he have done the same to Catherine?Poor kid,what a life she had,losing her mother so young,being left to run wild at her step grandmother's, possibly being groomed by Manox.I am not sure Culpeper cared for her for herself I tend to think Francis Derham was truly in love with her.And the greed of her Uncle Norfolk who was so cruel to both his nieces.I hope Anne,Catherine,Francis & Culpepper RIP.Norfolk & Henry are just vile.
I don't know if Henry had portraits of either woman destroyed. Perhaps just the ones he owned? There were confirmed images of them both in private hands during the 16th century, but those originals are long gone sadly. Yes, Henry was a horrible individual in his later years.
I'm inclined to go younger - some time in 1524 - for several reasons, not least that I feel had she even been as young as 14 when her cousin Anne was Queen, it would have been in keeping with the Howards to place Katherine at Court with her to secure family interests. Her 'education', such as it was, would have put her within the grasp of predatory and manipulative men who would have taken full advantage of such a young girl. She didn't stand a chance.
I personally think she was born maybe in 1522/1523, possible at the latest 1524. It was common for a young girl to become a lady in waiting, at age 15. If she was Anna of Cleves lady in waiting, we can put her age at 15/16. I think people nowadays want to say she is younger to vilify Henry even more so. Not like you need to search for it.
Yes, those years are all possible. It's sad that we'll never know for sure.
I often wonder how many of these young ladies got themselves into trouble playing games with men in the hopes it will advance their societal standing only to find themselves in over their heads, especially where the king is concerned. Their standing in society as inferior to men, doesn’t offer much protection. I think the young Elizabeth Tudor had a very near miss with Thomas Seymour and quickly understood how dangerous the game can be. No doubt these young woman were mistreated, relentlessly pursued and probably assaulted and I see life for them as more of survival than comfortable living. In my experience, teenagers and young adults are not often the best decision makers, especially if they are ambitious. The risks may be seen as well worth the rewards until they find themselves on the scaffold or sent to a nunnery.
I think I may have been in trouble a lot if I had lived in Tudor England.
Yes, I think Elizabeth did have a very close call, though I place all the blame for that entirely at Seymour's door. I don't think it was a pleasant time to be female either and that's before we get to the middling and lower orders, who had even less protection, especially if their employer took a fancy to them.
A. I find it interesting we don't know the birth years of queens.
B. The poor girl was just a baby still. She never stood a chance
I struggle to remember beauty standards have changed since the advent of make up . Modern beauty standards make it so I end up thinking they are all ugly and it makes me wonder why someone as powerful as henry viii would settle for such plain looking women.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Genealogy site puts her birth at 1521- death Feb.13, 1542
I wonder what they're basing their information on though, or if they've just taken an average of the year range usually given?
so young 😞poor girl 👑
I know. She's a tragic figure. :-(
👏👏👏
Very well done. I highly doubt she was born before 1522 because if she were 15 in 1536 she would have certainly been at court as a cousin to the female queen as a lady in waiting. The idea of the wills is the best evidence but given the high mortality rates of small children her not appearing in a will suggest either she was not born or less than 2. He being in her grandmother's will suggest she was at least 2 as was her younger sister who also appears. Which to me seems to suggest 1522 to 1524.
Thanks Willie. Yes, that date range is certainly possible. It's just sad that we'll never know even this basic fact about her for sure.
Where marriage records not a thing back then with date of birth on them?
Nope. No state issued birth, marriage or death certificates in England until 1837, though there were parish registers long before that, but Katherine was born even before they were a requirement.
You have done great research. I wish she was older when she endured all the brutality. Poor girl was slaughtered in the name of treason. Henry Viii married six times and countless mistresses but Katherine was beheaded for falling in love once. Ironic.
I know. She's a real tragedy :-(
I wish that the crown would allow the skulls to be artistically rendered to see what these people actually looked like
Katherine's bones no longer exist though (see my video on Digging up Anne Boleyn and others) so it wouldn't help in her case I'm afraid.
@@HistoryCalling If her bones are no longer where they should be,& that they have disintegrated as I have heard,doesn't that show that she was very young?