Was Catherine Howard Groomed or Abused? Exploring the Evidence
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 2024
- Whenever I write about Catherine Howard, I receive comments expressing sympathy for her, often suggesting she was groomed or sexually abused as a girl. But what does historical evidence really say about Henry VIII’s fifth wife and her relationships with her music teacher Henry Manox and her stepgrandmother’s employee Francis Dereham?
In this video, I delve into primary sources from the 16th century to uncover the truth. Was Catherine Howard a victim of grooming and abuse, or were her relationships consensual within the norms of Tudor society? Join me as I explore this complex and often misunderstood chapter of Tudor history.
#CatherineHoward #HenryVIII #TudorHistory #HistoricalInvestigation #TudorEngland #HistoryMysteries
Maybe she wasn’t “raped” or “groomed” in the legal sense, but Katherine Howard was unquestionably exploited by men. She may have fawned over men who were attracted to her as a fight, flight, freeze, or fawn response. Unfortunately, there is a world full of bad behavior that doesn’t meet the criteria to be considered criminal. That doesn’t make it okay.
I agree
Do you mean mannox or henry?
@@JR47846 - All of them.
I couldn't agree more.
As a Howard she had privilege over some of these men. As the Queen of England she absolutely did. She was seriously naive in her belief that she would never be held to account for her actions. The times were different that those of today and so are people. Be careful that you do not confuse the two.
It's significant that she was essentially a forgotten youngest child with neither a mother or father in her life. Mentally and emotionally vulnerable. An obvious target and also very needy...trying to fill much emptiness and unhappiness. While lacking good advice.
I don't believe she was forgotten. She was very privileged. This was a time when royal children were set up in their own households away from their parents when they were just a few weeks old. They were pretty much brought up by servants. Catherine was of the class where it was normal for children to become wards of influential people from around the age of seven. It was the norm. Children of the lower classes could be sent to become apprentices from that age too. This was a very different time. Catherine was far from forgotten. She was in a wealthy household, with her own servants and surrounded by girls of her own age or similar.
@@anneboleynfiles Her step-grandmother's household at Horsham seems to have been a sort of badly run boarding school for the grandchildren and family connections of the dowager duchess and the previous duke. It also seems that if certain of Catherine's older cousins had caught the king's eye instead of Catherine, they might have found themselves in a similar predicament. If Catherine hadn't caught the king's eye, she almost certainly would have been married off as advantageously as possible to some connection or other of the Howards.
@@tessat338 I don't think it was badly run. Catherine received a fine education there. It was Catherine who stole the dowager duchess's key so that the men could get into the maiden's chamber.
And, yes, a marriage would have been arranged for Catherine by her family, as with all girls of her class.
@@anneboleynfiles The reports say that there were older girls in the maiden's chamber who were also getting up to shenanigans. Catherine appears to have been following their example. There should have been a grown-up "mother" of the maids sleeping in that chamber to supervise them. As with so many insular groups, there was a code of silence while they were young, which didn't break down until they went off to other homes.
After news of Catherine's upbringing came out, the Duchess was in for a bad time of it for quite a while. This elderly lady was held in the Tower of London for detailed questioning.
I definitely feel she was groomed. Anyone who was ever groomed THOUGHT the relationship was consensual, but we know thirteen and fourteen year olds don't even have all of their brain yet and are not emotionally mature enough to consent. Katherine would have been 13 or 14 when the grooming would have began. We now know this would have been traumatic. Victims tend to either shy away from sex after sexual trauma or they become hypersexual as seems to be the case with Katherine. Her feelings about the matter are irrelevant. She wasn't given the tools or the guidance to say no.
Edit to add, furthermore, as an orphan living in a dormitory, we would now consider her an at risk teen. She was vulnerable.
yes, agreed with you. also just because relationships were different then doesn't mean that makes it okay. 13-14 year olds may have been seen as old enough to wed back then, but it doesn't mean they were.
I agree in a sense but these were very different times where they were matured and very different.
@@Loyaltoafault210 Margaret Beaufort had Henry VII when she was 12 or 13. "Maturity" saw her ruined physically and emotionally for the rest of her life.
@@ssh6414when Henry VII was born, his mother was 13 year old widow.
She was old enough to be married. While we think a 13 or 14 couldn’t consent, they could in Tudor times.
The age of consent is a fairly arbitrary age and different cultures chose different ages. In my country it is 16, but I understand this age varies from country to country in Tudor times the age of consent was effectively 12.
One day, one day Claire, your book on Catherine Howard will be completed. We will live in hope 😉📚📖
I'm waiting as well x
I’d like to read it as well! I read Lacey Baldwin Smith’s book a long time ago - he isn’t very sympathetic to Catherine, doesn’t even seem to
like her.
I have trouble with this, I think that just because it wasn’t seen as grooming at the time doesn’t mean that she wasn’t groomed.
THIS! Not having a word for it at the time doesn't mean it wasn't a thing Dr. Kat Merchant has a really great video where she discusses how the development of the human brain probably hasn't changed too drastically in 500 years: things that harmed us mentally are about the same then and now- we just have the ability to study them in the modern day. Further, with Mannox and Henry, she is on the lower end of a power imbalance. Even if she had been a full-grown adult and not a child, King vs Commoner is a power imbalance so huge it is *by its nature* an inappropriate relationship. How can you say no when the person asking you could easily destroy you, your family, and your friends with a few signatures?
Of course it doesn't, but none of the relationships she had bear the hallmarks of grooming.
Except her relationships with Mannox and Dereham stand in sharp contrast with, say, Thomas Seymour's relationship with Princess Elizabeth, which ALSO would have not been seen as grooming at the time, but would DEFINITELY NO QUESTION be seen as grooming today. Katherine Howard did not act like Elizabeth Tudor AT ALL.
@@themisheika yes, that was definitely grooming and abuse.
@@themisheika I 100% agree Elizabeth was abused (if I could punch 3 people in the afterlife, Seymour is one of them). And while it certainly appears Katherine was willingly involved in her dalliances with Mannox and Dereham, she was still just a teenager and teenagers aren't know for rational decision-making skills. Maybe "groomed" isn't the right word, but she was still just a young woman whose brain wasn't yet fully grown. And with Henry I will always hold that a power imbalance that large always makes for an unhealthy relationship.
From the Tudor pov, girls married at 13 or 14 and was considered an adult.
From our modern pov we consider her a victim of grooming and abuse because in our era, minors can't give consent.
I do have great sympathy for her because she was caught between the political ambitions of Protestant faction of the court wanted her removed to put in a Queen more in line with their religious pov. Plus the Howards had a lot of enemies The Catholic faction played the same game with Anne of Cleves.
I was a child of the '80's and remember in my high-school girls in their Freshman year (age 14 or 15) dating guys in their Senior year (age 17-18)
Thank you Claire for your thoughts. I am eagerly awaiting your book on Catherine.
I was thinking pretty much exactly what you wrote. While I feel that older guys took advantage of her frivolous nature, she was not all alone in a home with a lecherous teacher. She was complicit in the bad behaviour to the extent that she was enjoying the attention. She could have stopped any of them at any time.
@@leanie5234But she wasn't taught to stop them. She was raised in a household where loose behavior was encouraged. That's grooming. That's also abuse, considering the consequences for girls of loose virtue. Marrying her to the king after that kind of an upbringing was a death sentence. Abuse doesn't just mean sexual; there are many kinds of abuse.
I think that only thing that people in Tudor England considered was marriageable age. If she was 14, she was seen as ready for marriage and she had to keep her virginity for marriage. She didn't expect to wind up married to King Henry.
I don't believe that loose behaviour was encouraged in that household at all, and there were girls in that dormitory who were shocked at Catherine's behaviour. The dowager duchess certainly did not encourage it.
@@edennis8578I can't imagine Agnes Tilney encouraged looseness; her response to finding Catherine in compromising situations indicates the opposite. Catherine had every opportunity to put a stop to the relationships, as she had chaperones and shared a dormitory with the other girls and must have had to find a way to gain any privacy. Today it would certainly be viewed as abuse and grooming, but in Catherine's time it wouldn't, and we should be careful of viewing the past in light of how we live today.
You’re exactly right. I had a 17-year-old BF when I was 15 and knew full well what I was doing. And, as you said, this was a truly different time.
I remember a friend of mine being really worried because her son was 16 and was going out with a 15-year-old and they were getting intimate. He could have gone on the sex offenders' list if he'd had sex with her and her parents had complained. Trying to tell teens to wait though!!
@@anneboleynfiles there is no way he would go on a sexual offenders then she should too xD what country was that
@@JR47846 England. My parents regularly threatened one of my boyfriends that they didn't like until I turned 16 and it wouldn't hold. We often fought on the topic because I found it hypocritical that they threatened him but were fine with a previous boyfriend that had been about 6 months older than me. He did turn out to be an asshole, hindsight and all that.
@@natashadixon8470 yeah but it was nothing more than empty threats if he was around your age there is no crime xD
@@natashadixon8470 nvm its actually law in uk what a joke xD your country turn out to be the clown of europe thank god for brexit. Serious a 15 cant date a 16??
If the women of the time were not always comfortable with their young daughters having relations with much older husbands and those adult husbands were more than willing to sleep with a 12 year old, I think we can rightfully say that MEN didn't find it unusual to have very very young brides. Women had no say, and if they did, I imagine they would have restricted their daughters from being poached so early. There's a reason why we have an age of consent these days. Because otherwise men would still be marrying children. My great grandmother was married off at 15 and no, she didn't consent to it, but she had no choice.
Catherine was just a headstrong child who was used to having her way. I don’t think she ever imagined the grave danger she was putting herself in. Just thought she was having some fun. I never understood why Jane Boleyn would have helped Catherine in her dalliances. She certainly should have known what the consequences could be. Thanks for another thought provoking video.
I get the sense that Jane Boleyn got caught in the snare of Catherine's teenaged magical thinking and impulsiveness. Jane only would have met Catherine when they were both in the service of Ann of Cleves, and while Jane may have had seniority over Catherine in Ann's quarters, once Catherine became queen, Jane would have lost any authority to curb Catherine and Jane seemed to also lack the force of personality to do so. Catherine told her to come with her and Jane had to go. Jane confessed to nodding off while Catherine and Culpepper were talking together so she claimed she didn't hear what they were discussing. Perhaps she didn't see what she didn't want to see. She was dependent on the king and queen for her position and knew that she could lose it if she displeased either one of them. I get the sense that Jane was under a lot of emotional stress and turmoil because when she was arrested and taken up, she had a nervous break down.
Yes, Catherine had no clue that the king would ever propose to her!
I like to imagine Jane helped Catherine to avenge herself on the king - she knew her husband and sister in law were innocent of the charges. Encouraging Catherine to cheat could have been sweet revenge or Jane may have seen it as bringing justice. We will never know but I like the idea.
I don't really have an opinion on Catherine's downfall, other than King Henry's vengefulness. The tudor rules on marriage and young women being expected to enter into a sexual relationship at an earlier age was the norm. I think I read somewhere that fourteen was considered the appropriate age for sexual initiation within tudor marriages. Although the marriage ceremony could happen at an ealier age. I too puzzle over Jane Boleyn's role in Catherine's downfall. But the true reasons for her actions will most likely never be known.
I think Henry VIII was probably beyond tired of Jane Boleyn anyway. She must have been a constant subconscious reminder to him about Anne and George Boleyn. She knew too much about him anyway for his own comfort I’m sure. As for Jane I think she had some mental issues anyway prior to going to the Tower which probably impacted her decision making. Plus I think she was addicted to the court intrigue and couldn’t resist that as well as the pressures of her Queen telling her what to do.
I don’t fully agree, but I do appreciate the thought-provoking video.
As some others have stated, I’m not comfortable saying definitive things about the character of relationships that are so ambiguous in history. As she was a young girl in a time when women lacked power generally, I tend to view relationships as having a high likelihood of being manipulative to women & with a harmful power imbalance. On the other hand, it’s certainly possible to take that view to an extreme and deny the clear agency some women did exercise. So, I’m left with-I’m not sure. I certainly don’t think she was old enough to be expected to exercise adult judgment, regardless of when she lived.
I appreciate your balanced take. It’s important to remember that even elite women and girls had no power, especially over marriage, so the idea that low age of consent made it not traumatizing is sexist, IMO. Psychologically, a 13 year old is a 13 year old. Men made the decisions, and it was about what was advantageous for them.
I have read 'Young and Damned and Fair', and highly recommend it to anybody interested in the short life of Catherine. It broke down almost all of the misconceptions I had previously held about her. I now agree that she was not groomed. She was also not at all the foolish child I once thought her to be. I think she made a fatal mistake by trying to hide her previous relationships, but it wasn't because of past abuses. She was young, but how much her youth contributed to her decisions, I dont think we can judge. There were so many other factors. Henry's court was a dangerous place. I am fascinated by this lady, and the contrast between her downfall and that of Anne Boleyn before her. I look forward to your book, Claire! 😊
I always wonder if things would have gone differently for her if she had confessed to a precontract with Dereham.
@anneboleynfiles yes, I wonder about that, too.
I think it sounds like you don’t think she was groomed because you don’t want to. A 13 year old does not have a romance with an 18 year old, that is grooming.
I've read and enjoyed "Young and Damned and Fair" as well, but I still consider Katheryn a victim of grooming at the very least.
@@MsJaytee1975not in those days. Sorry not sorry. It’s easy to have the POV we have now but even our grandparents were married by 16-18.
A sensitive subject well handled. I agree that there is no evidence of grooming or abuse when you consider the primary sources and the totally different way relationships were viewed at the time. As someone said previously, the contrast of Elizabeth’s situation really highlights it. Really interesting video, thank you 😊
I think Catherine was a young woman who learned early on that she could use her sexuality to get what she wants.
During a time period where you were considered an old maid if you weren’t married by like 18, a relationship between a 13yr old and 19yr old isn’t atrocious. Yes, but today’s standards it’s gross, but that was pretty common back then for women to be married off by the time they were 13 or 14…. And to men much older than the dudes CH was messing around with before she met Henry VIII.
What’s gross is that Catherine Howard was a teenager who married a man almost 50…that’s the relationship that people should be disgusted by.
It should be noted with this comment that the majority of individuals who are sexually promiscuous at young ages have either witnessed or been victims of sexual abuse, including molestation.
@@mangodelish709 so then explain why Mary Hall and Alice Restwold didn't turn sexually promiscuous at young ages despite being prime witnesses to Katherine's sexual "abuse"? Explain why neither of them made a complaint to the duchess or their own male relatives if they're in danger themselves of grooming or rape (which would in turn damage their own chances at a good advantageous marriage)?
@@themisheika Hello! I assume you intend your comment to be facetious, so thank you! On the off chance that you do not, rereading my statement carefully should assist your understanding.
@@mangodelish709 I did, and stand by my original comment. Please have some perspective and judge Katherine by her peers and contemporaries instead of by your own weird definitions. They were all young women living in the same quarters, exposed to the same young men, and brought up by the same educator. Katherine was literally having sex with Dereham while Alice slept in the same room, but instead of joining in her debauchery Alice requested to move beds. Katherine chose to ignore the duchess'' education and put herself at risk while Mary and Alice didn't.
And unlike Princess Elizabeth, who WAS sexually groomed by Thomas Seymour, Katherine had the power to put an end to both her relationships with Mannox and Dereham. Therein lies the contradiction to your weak and illogical argument, because sexual promiscuity born out of sexual abuse would not have ended in the girl in the relationships ending both by her own decision despite the pleading of her two lovers. A sexual abuse victim would've just assumed she has to endure their attentions until HE grew bored, like Elizabeth endured with Seymour (and as far as we know, Elizabeth was indeed the virgin queen she portrayed herself as to the end of her life, despite Seymour's grooming, unlike what you implied is the natural/most likely conclusion of Katherine's "abuse").
Fiction has cemented the idea that Catherine Howard was victimized and sexually abused by the men in her life through the lens of our current standards. As an avid consumer of Tudor fiction, I certainly believed it. The historical accounts you presented place Catherine Howard in a gray area, if not entirely culpable.
I was always under the impression that Manox was much older than her, not so close in age. By his character, it seems possible that Durham may have pressured her into the "romance", and then pushed it further into a sexual relationship and claiming her as his wife against her wishes. And attentions that may have at first seemed flattering, grew repugnant to the degree she could assert herself and end the relationship. While Catherine's attraction to Thomas Culpeper seems to be genuine, he certainly cared nothing for her welfare (or his own) by recklessly pursuing her when she was married to the king.
As for Henry VIII, the historical accounts of his behavior towards his wives certainly indicts him as egotistical and cruel. But was he overly aggressive in his pursuit of Catherine Howard, not taking no for an answer? It seems possible that Catherine was equally flattered to have the attentions of the king and repulsed by his age and the condition of his body. Enjoyed the perks of being the queen, but unhappy with being the wife of a sickly, ailing man when she would have preferred someone closer to her age.
What we have are reports of what was seen and heard, what was written in letters, and judged by the standards of the time. But we'll never have the knowledge or the nuance of what Catherine Howard experienced and how she felt about it.
It's a shame we don't know anything about Henry's courtship of Catherine. I'd love to know what happened.
@@anneboleynfiles It was a well researched video. Hope, even with the kind disclaimer that you don't get too much harsh feedback.
@@eveywrens thank you!
I found this video very informative, as all of your videos are. You definitely make several very good points. And while I don’t really know that “abused” or “ groomed” would be the appropriate terms, I do think Catherine Howard was taken advantage of repeatedly. While a Tudor era 13 year old might have been counted as near adult, physically and psychologically, she was still an adolescent. And she was behaving like an adolescent girl, giddy with the attention given to her by older males. I think even her exhibitions of “control” are more indicative of her sense of position as a Howard than a sign of emotional maturity and equal standing in the relationships. Also, she just does not seem very well educated or even very intelligent. Certainly her answers about Derham, when questioned by Cranmer seem very child-like. Her change of story is very much like the fumbling and prevaricating of a child caught in a lie. And, compared with writings of other women of her age and social status at that time, her letter to Culpepper is glaringly immature and naive. She may not have been the victim of child sexual abuse, but she certainly doesn’t seem capable of being an equal partner in these relationships either.
I think women were exploited by society at that time.
I agree with you fully.
@@anneboleynfiles Not just at that time. 😬 Unfortunately.
Something that seems missing in most of the assessments that I've read or seen about Catherine is that she may have had abandonment issues. It is easy to label her a headstrong spoiled child, as some in the comments here and elsewhere have, or to think that she was in control and manipulative, but many aspects of her behavior mirror the symptoms of someone who suffered from abandonment as a child. In a child's mind, her mother dying, even though not unusual in those times, could have been construed as being abandoned. Her father clearly abandoned her into a situation that might have been considered advantageous in some ways but wasn't likely an emotionally nurturing or loving way to grow up. Children with abandonment issues often feel insecure, unloved and unworthy of love. They also can be overly eager to please which, for a young girl like Catherine could make her more susceptible to manipulation by an older man or more likely to be the aggressor, to act out sexually, in an attempt to gain "love" and security. Adults and children with abandonment issues can also experience mood swings, jealousy, emotional outbursts, and have relationship issues. Catherine exhibited at least some of those symptoms as well. The times were different but human psyche was still complicated and a child could easily be permanently traumatized leading in this case to eventual disaster for Catherine because of her emotional immaturity and unfortunate marriage to a tyrant king. Not an expert on any of this just offering a slightly different opinion.
It’s an interesting topic and the comparison with Elizabeth’s situation does show a marked contrast.
Sadly, I do feel that she was abused in some way. It seemed also that her step grandmother was complicit because of how little effort she seemed to put into the safety of the girls in her care
Well,she did lock them in at night.
I'm not sure what she could have done. I think if young people are determined to fool around, they will find a way. She locked the girls away at night but Catherine stole the key. She reprimanded Catherine and Manox and Dereham.
It’s so hard to not look at history through our modern lens.
I read Gareth Russell's 'Young and Damned and Fair' and found it really illuminating. Those were different times which is important to be aware of. I listened to a very interesting talk by David Starkey who called Catherine Howard 'the good time girl' who loved fun, dresses and romance, I believe that is how I will always see her. Thank you Anne for being brave enough to discuss this difficult subject with us. I hope you finish the book about Catherine as I would love to read it.
I think she really was just an immature girl who thought things would turn out ok. Dereham sounds like an idiot making much of his relationship with her - he should have realised it could be dangerous for him!
I can't understand what he was thinking--or Lady Rochford either.
I know it's not scientific, but when a 13 year old behaves that way, shouldn't we assume ~something~ is wrong?
It’s nice to get an account solely on the records. Thank You. I’ve noticed many comment off feeling without able to separate it from facts. Abused or not. Being emotionally inclined can be blinding.
I think it's hard for us to wrap our heads around a very different time, a different society.
Considering Dereham's later behaviour, I get the impression he had a forceful personality. He clearly had a hard time taking no for an answer once she was at court, & the way he claimed to "own" her just feels icky to me. He at the very least abused his prior connection with her to get money/status from her.
I've always thought that he was able to convince her to do things in a way that felt romantic to her at the time, but in hindsight made her feel uncomfortable or used. I think it can both be true that this was a fully consensual relationship and that she eventually felt uneasy about the whole thing.
I think he was an arrogant toerag, but not a rapist.
@@anneboleynfiles oh yes absolutely agree on that, not sure I made that clear!
I firmly disagree. Even if it wasn't seen as abuse at the time, her age inherently makes it so, and the way Katherine described these past relationships in her confessions does not sound consensual by any standard
She was not naive, or manipulative, or anything else these comments are trying to frame her as. She was a child.
I can’t say if she was groomed, because not all sexually abusive relationships are grooming, but she was abused
Thanks Claire. The situation was sad. It’s like after she married Henry she was supposed to understand how the court worked with no one to guide her. Cromwell would have stepped in that role.
Catherine Howard's life seems prime for a film adaptation by Sofia Coppola. I'd love to see it!
She was a precocious teenage girl. Having sex at age 12 or 13 was not uncommon back then. You’re not the only historian that points this out. It’s so sad that it was so easy to condemned a woman for premarital sex. I do feel bad for her though. Thank you Claire.
Having sex at that age without being married, especially at that rank in life, was dangerous in several ways. Sex with a husband was legitimate while having sex while unmarried was not. She could have gotten pregnant, in which case there would either be a hasty marriage or life-long disgrace, where she would have been relegated to a house in the country with a servant and nobody would speak to her. Then, after raising her with loose morals and a known "past," they married her to the king! A death sentence was inevitable.
All these men were just horrible. It was a terrible time to be a woman!
Thank you for this video. I have always been under the impression that Mannox and Dereham were much older than Catherine. She will always remain a tragic figure in my mind. I know my own faults and impulsiveness as a teen, the wish to be liked by others, bad decisions. I can't imagine the pressure of being a queen put on top of that. Not just any queen either, but the 5th queen of King Henry VIII!💜
Thank you for using my comment! This was very informative and gave some nuance to this Catherine Howard’s life.
She was abused.
7:50 she could have "consented" but someone on her early teens can't truly consent to an adult, bc she can't fully understand the implications
I think the relationship with Mannox being completely consensual is a bit iffy. He was an adult by the standards of the time, but she wasn’t. Regarding age of consent, just because it was low doesn’t make it OK. Typically this is true when women and girls have no power, as they didn’t in the early modern world. It doesn’t mean it wasn’t traumatic, unless they married someone their own age. A letter survives from Katherine Willoughby begging that her daughter not be married at the age she was, and saying you don’t know what it means to the young girl in that situation. She was an elite woman. They were the only ones we are even able to hear from, and when they had an opportunity to speak, they didn’t indicate it was great. Even Margaret Beaufort didn’t want her granddaughter married at that age. But notice that neither woman can insist, even as the most elite women of their time. Men made the decisions and it was about what they wanted, nothing else. Certainly true for Charles Brandon.
There are cultures in the world today where relationships and marriages of similar ages to Catherine Howard are considered acceptable to that culture. Are those child brides somehow not being abused because their culture allows it?
Domestic violence was also acceptable in Tudor times. Do you not consider its victims abused because society allowed it?
They may not have had the terms in Catherine’s times to describe the sort of abuse she suffered but she was definitely abused.
You're putting words into my mouth somewhat. I never say that Catherine wasn't abused because what happened to her was acceptable, I say that the evidence doesn't point to sexual abuse. I even talk about Elizabeth and her experience in 1548, and how that was grooming.
I agree. How could she "consent" when she was too young to understand the outcome of having sex?
I understand they didn't see as bad back them, they didn't understand the harm it brought, so I don't necessarily blame the men, but that doesn't change what she went trough
@@LenaFerrari I think you underestimate the young women of the era. There was no privacy; everyone knew what everyone else was doing. Many people slept in the same room. The issues that can arise from sexual activity were no secret. Girls and young women would definitely have had the opportunity to see what resulted from sleeping with men.
@@edithengel2284 it's not about "innocence" and not knowing, it's about not having mature enough of a brain to comprehend. At that sge, tje brain is far from mature, specially the frontal cortrx, responsible for complex and rational decisions
@@LenaFerrari Nonetheless, given the average Tudor life span, if one didn't absorb what one saw around one by the mid teens, life was going to be very difficult. No one is saying that Katherine's life or the lives of young people at an elite level were safe or easy, but other teenagers did seem to be able to govern their behavior with a far greater degree of success than did Katherine.
she was too young, that's absolutely grooming if hes 18 and shes 13/14
No, it’s not not back then and I wouldn’t consider that a pedophile
So. Tragic. Great commentary, Claire. Thank you.
well researched and argued. It's easy to look backwards and see Katherine Howard as a victim, but she seems to have understood her status, and been able to stand up for herself when needed.
Hi Claire nice to see your channel again. I bought your coloring book ,so much fun 😊
Oh thank you so much!
Great video, Claire!! Having read Gareth Russell's book on Catherine, your video is a perfect summary.
Thanks for this! I completely agree with you in all aspects!! 🧡👍
Thank you!
I feel like this was victim blaming. Maybe Katherine wasn't groomed or assaulted in the way we would think of it by today's standards. But I feel like she was taken advantage of & learned early on what she could get by using her body to gain attention. And everyone had seen what Henry had done to 4 wives they (the Howard family) weren't going to tell him no when he expressed interest in her. Even if Mannix was only 5yrs older he still was more educated in the world than Katherine. This poor girl didn't deserve the fate she got, none of Henry's wives did.
I'm going to disagree here.. Grooming can absolutely involve gift giving and stuff, it can appear as an innocent romance..
Oh definitely, but from the evidence we have, these relationships do not bear the hallmarks of grooming.
I also look forward to reading your book, and I also thoroughly enjoyed Gareth Russell's book. Meticulous indeed! I also liked the way he presented the known facts and allowed Catherine's personality to shine through on its own, without his nudging the reader one way or the other. I finished reading with a feeling of great sadness for the lives of all involved, Catherine, the men, Jane Boleyn - but I also felt quite impatient with Catherine who seemed to go for whatever she wanted, without first thinking of the consequences. To have met Culpepper in secret was just insane; she had to have known the likely result!
Yes, it was a fabulous book.
Gareth Russell's book was rcommended somewhere else and I managed to get it through the library, it is indeed very good. Katherine's story leaves us all feeling extremely uncomfortable today especially in view of Henry's gruesome revenge for his wounded pride.
This is brilliant, thank you.. straight down the line. She needed safety, protection and love. Which she really appeared not to get from an early age.
Sad though poor girl
Good stuff Claire.
Keep up the good work Claire
I agree with you that by the standards of her time she was not, but I find it hard not to feel the relationships were not quite as consensual as you’re presenting. Teachers & tudors do hold a position of authority, so a young girl being romantically involved with them is inherently problematic. Young women of that age are easily manipulated and the difference in maturity between a 13 and a 19 year old is larger than a mere six year gap later in life.
I agree her time’s standards would be accepting of the men’s behavior… but revisiting the legacy of Catherine Howard with a sympathetic view towards a very young girl is appropriate.
I don't believe I was unsympathetic. She had a terrible end and was yet another victim of a tyrant.
I'd say if she was 13 and Maddox 18 it's still pretty disgusting, at that age 5 years make a huge difference. Maybe she wasn't groomed and raped by today's standards (though I still don't think it was consensual) but she definitely had nobody to teach her better (kids were often left alone in the mansion she was sent to), moreover she probably wasn't very bright and obviously people took advantage of her. Had she been smart and mature enough she probably wouldn't have gotten back with Dereham and rejected Culpeper. She knew that H8 had beheaded a wife already and nobody in their right mind would be that careless. Had she also claimed that she and Dereham were already "married" (even with just a verbal agreement) probably she could have managed to save herself, exiled or sent to a nunnery but alive but she panicked and had nobody to advise her. She was just a kid who was neglected and used by many people, if not groomed and abused.
We don't know that he was 18, that's really the oldest he could have been. Yes, I know I wouldn't want my daughter to be in a relationship like that, but these were very different times.
The relationships certainly don't bear any of the hallmarks of abuse or grooming.
What makes you say that kids were left alone in that household? They certainly don't seem to have been, and Catherine had her own servants.
I remember reading that her grandmother Duchess of Norfolk spent a lot of time traveling between all her properties, obviously I am no expert but it does seem very plausible and yes, servants were there but would they care？But what matters most is that nobody who knew her even tried to help her when she needed it. Again...I respectfully disagree and don't believe that she 100% understood the consequences of her actions, or if she did she must have been somehow blackmailed.
Catherine also moved. The dowager duchess and her household moved between Lambeth and Horsham.
So, a 13-15yr old teen can't be raped unless she was "forced"?? And just because she had the status in the relationship doesn't mean she has the maturity to understand the long-term consequences of her actions. There are very valid reasons why minors can not give consent. Of course, they can feel deeply and passionately. Most abuse couldn't happen without intense feelings it'sthe maturityand perspectivethat hasn't developed.I think this author has spent too much time in the Middle Ages and has adopted a disturbing acceptance of actions that are clearly wrong. I would suggest she spend some time volunteering with SA victims that were groomed and abused by people they loved and trusted, she'd never again claim that just because the minor wasn't "unhappy" with their abuser, it wasn't abuse.
I didn't say that a teen can't be raped, but there's no evidence that Catherine was raped and in an age where girls could be married and having children, we can't judge it by our own standards and our laws regarding statutory rape.
I wish someone would do a video report on the executioners who ended the lives of the royals and nobles and how they were selected and if they were part of the royal guards or military.
I understand it was a different time, but it doesn't sound like the Dowager Duchess did her any favors. Why didn't she dismiss Mannix (sp?) when she discovered them kissing instead of just striking Catherine? Why didn't she keep a closer eye on her behavior after this discovery? It doesn't sound like she was very involved with her wards; but maybe that was how it was back then.
Yes, she really should have got rid of Manox at that point.
I FEEL SHE WAS USED BY THE OLDER PEOPLE IN HER LIFE.
She was abused by the step grandmother. Who probably lost a lot of money when Catherine was married off to Henry
I don't think she lost any money. Catherine was from a debt ridden family when the dowager duchess took her in, so she was the one doing Edmund a favour. She certainly smacked Catherine, but that was normal for the day, corporal punishment was seen as appropriate and needed for discipline.
@@anneboleynfiles I usually love your channel, but it seems like you're making excuses just because something was "normal" back then, i.e. corporal punishment and sex with minors. That doesn't make it okay, just because a lot of people were doing it.
@@luxste I'm not condoning it but I am looking at a 16th century situation with the laws and norms of the time in mind. I have problems with a lot of stuff that happened back then, for example, high class babies being put with wet nurses and separated from their mothers, the death penalty etc etc. There is so much.
I agree with you, Claire. With Henry, times were different. That was very common. I think Catherine was a bit of a foolish girl in her relationships, but that is timeless! She wasn't the first or the last. We believe all men (and women) should act honorably. And they should, but that world does not exist, yet & certainly didn't then. She was young & (from the sounds of it) hot blooded. Usually makes for poor decisions. Does not male it her fault, but doesn't make her completely helpless, either. Great job explaining from the sources.
What a refreshing and balanced account. Thank you
I agree with your assessment.
Yet again another great talk ❤xxx
Very well argued, Claire. Before watching this l was convinced that Katherine Howard was groomed and abused, but now I'm not so sure. Thank you for giving us more information from contemporary sources.
I appreciate your measured analysis of this controversy. I also agree that Gareth Russell's biography of Catherine is terrific.
It's a wonderful read.
Thank you for your impartiality.
I agree with you 💯 Claire! Good video!😂
Hi, Claire, I very much agree with your perspective about Katherine Howard and the analysis of her romantic relationships. As a therapist, I often have to help my clients delineate the boundaries in relationships and although I have much compassion for Catherine, I do recognize that she did not always act in her best protective interest. Her intentions appear benign but actions are different than intentions. Like Henry’s other wives she married a very self centered man and that usually does not end well.
Yes, I have real compassion for her too. Hers is such a sad story.
Having just finished Gareth Russell's 'The Palace', I will certainly take up your recommendation. I often wondered if, when the prospect of a royal marriage was being discussed, Thomas Howard failed to consult with Agnes Tilney regarding Catherine's
character. Had the relationship with Dereham been known to Norfolk - I believe he would have informed Henry. It could have been interpreted as a pre-contract. It seems to me Catherine was obviously infatuated with Dereham - but she was so young and, sadly, gave little thought to the long term consequences. Was Catherine abused? - having listened to your presentation of the primary sources I feel perhaps not. David Starkey affectionately described her as a 'good time girl'. However, no matter her character or intelligence level - she met her end with great dignity. Many thanks Claire for this thought provoking broadcast.
I think she was a bit of an unknown quantity to Norfolk. Agnes Tilney herself despite catching her do stuff, didn't know the full magnitude of what had happened under her roof. She seems to have had a hands off approach to managing the place. Norfolk himself seems not to have had much interest in Catherine before, to him she was probably niece no. 341 and even during her Queenship he didn't interact much with her and whatever interactions they had, they seemed to have argued before her fall. When it all went down, Henry made sure to arrest everyone with a family name starting with the letter H (seriously, he filled the Tower of London with Howards) and Norfolk was quick to distance himself from Catherine, speaking of her as if she were a prostitute. I think the men pressured Catherine (as in social pressure, insisting, not taking no for an answer), but they didn't force her (for it to cross the line into full-blown abuse).
I wonder when the Howards even got to know about the king's relationship with Catherine, perhaps it was all just too late.
@@octavianpopescu4776 After Claire's broadcast I read Starkey's 'Catherine Howard' section from his 'Six Wives'. He described Agnes Tilney's household as a 'slackly run mixed boarding school', as you said, very much a 'hands off' approach. It is interesting you mentioned Norfolk didn't have much interest in Catherine prior to the royal marriage. Claire mentioned about the absence of any primary source indicating Norfolk conspired to have Catherine placed on the throne. It makes me wonder if, perhaps, history has underestimated Catherine's ambition. I guess I really will have to read the Gareth Russell.
@@alancumming6407 I've read Russell's book and yes, I also recommend it. You make a good point about her ambition. I'll try not to give you "spoilers", but the impression I got is she was always a queen bee kind of person. I think she liked the idea of being queen, she's used to being in charge and she's good at it (being a traditional queen, she makes a very good impression). She was neurotic, being a perfectionist, especially under stress. She was kind and generous, but she does have boundaries if someone crossed her. She was especially touchy about respect and her status. She had quite a lot of emotional intelligence from what I could tell. She wasn't book smart, but she was learning quickly and growing into the role.
But in terms of political ambition, she didn't have much of that. Her religious policy seemed to have been: let's get along. Unlike Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour and later Catherine Parr, she doesn't have any personal agenda. That's the impression I got of her.
@@octavianpopescu4776 I feel I have probably overlooked Catherine in favour of the other five wives. However your comments have caught my attention and I will certainly be ordering the Gareth Russell this weekend.
Many thanks for sending this really interesting reply.
We weren't there so we don't know
Yes, she was abused and exploited. But in those times - she was considered ready for marriage and so they didn’t see it that way. Thank God for 500 years of growth, understanding, and awareness.
By modern standards and in modern terms she WAS both groomed and abused, but those were very different times.What is undeniable was that she was shamefully neglected and things would probably have been much different had she been more carefully raised.
It is extraordinarily difficult for us to leave our own contemporary attitudes when looking at prior centuries.
I think that Catherine Howard was very young and not well guided - and men treated her very selfishly.
Yet she was also a member of one of the most powerful aristocratic families of her age, and had a sense of her own importance as a Howard.
The situation is not one we really have in our current society. So I find it difficult to judge. We can see the senseless tragedy without apportioning blame among those who acted.
You seem to forget that children cannot consent to NSFW times.
She wasn't under the age of consent at the time. Even now, the age of consent in England is 16. That doesn't account, however, for the fact that the consequences for loose behavior in a girl weren't made clear to her, nor was her safety ensured in her grandmother's household. Physical intimacy in a time with no birth control, in front of a roomful of girls (witnesses), no less, was fraught with danger of several kinds.
I'm not forgetting anything, but I am putting what happened into the context of her time, her society, and looking at what the evidence says.
From our era pov they are abusers, cus she was child. Childs can’t give consent. And I agree, I believe she was abuse. Also the power of a king can frighten a lot people, she could have felt that she need to marry Henry or she would die or something.
I agree with you entirely. My husband, who taught junior high classes for 37 years, says Catherine reminds him of many girls who were in his classes. We read Mr. Russell's book and enjoyed it very much.
It's such a wonderful book, isn't it?
@@anneboleynfiles It explained many things we had not understood before, although I don't think anyone can explain the stupidity Catherine and Jane Rochford showed during Catherine's marriage. You would think a woman who had had a husband executed would have been extra careful what she did! Catherine was young but Jane Rochford was not. I do hope Catherine's step-grandma was given a hard time at some point. She was responsible for these young people in her household and she was irresponsible in her care of them.
@@dorothywillis1 I'd love to know what really happened with Jane, whether she willingly helped them, whether she got into a situation she felt she couldn't get out of, whether they put pressure on her.... It's so hard to know and understand.
@@anneboleynfiles I have wondered if the stories that her marriage was unhappy was because Jane was not very clever and she and George didn't have much in common. ( I would have said dead average if it were not for getting involved in Catherine's mess. Anyone with any brains would have realized Catherine was heading for trouble and developed some excuse to get as far away as possible -- a sick aunt or having to see that the queen's petticoats were properly laced -- anything.)
Anne and George (I hate first-naming everyone, but it is quick.) were a brilliant pair and they understood each other and played off each other so well that it's very likely their spouses often felt left out. I'm afraid that is one more thing that caused trouble with Anne's marriage. Henry didn't like anyone to be better than he in anything, and I bet A. and G. giggled about some vanity of H.'s and he found out. But I am getting OT.
Thank you Claire, great to hear from you. I agree with everything you said . Hope all the fur ones are well 🐈⬛🐕🙏👵🇦🇺
They're all really well, thank you!
The average lifespan during the Tudor era was 35 years old.
Girls from noble families were often betrothed during babyhood and married young because they didn’t have the life expectancy that we have.
The concept of “teenage hood” is a fairly modern 20th century concept. Our ancestors didn’t have that mindset.
People were told who they would marry from those families.
Children from these families were often sent away to court for opportunities and it was considered an honor. Anne Boleyn and her sister Mary were both sent to court.
By the time a woman was in her thirties, she could easily be a grandmother.
People must not judge our ancestors by our modern day perceptions of what is ok and what is not ok.
I had thought Catherine was groomed until I read Gareth’s wonderful book. I didn’t realise Mannox was so young till then. I agree, I think Catherine was a young girl discovering her sexuality ..unfortunately she picked the worst of men. Dereham was volatile and jealous. I read in Gareth’s book about the fear of the Howards that Catherine’s history would be discovered and how they would try to mitigate any fallout…thinking Catherine would be sent to a nunnery. No one could have anticipated the extent of Henry’s rage and resentment and the tragedy that would unfold. Parliament took some time before approving the Act of Attainder because they were conflicted as to whether Catherine’s indiscretions constituted treason. The Indictment did not accuse Catherine of adultery but rather her taking Dereham into her service as proof she meant to return to her abominable ways. Young and Damned and Fair was a brilliant book. I look forward to reading yours Claire, when you finish it.
Interesting video. Thank you.
You’re kind of vague about the evidence, other than to say that witnesses say Catherine was happy in those first relationships.
But the whole purpose of grooming is to make a victim comfortable, and even happy, with behavior that they otherwise would have resisted. In modern times, we hear the experiences of victims of grooming and abuse who were happy in the “relationships,” or believed they were. I don’t know whether Catherine was groomed, but I don’t think you can use Catherine’s having been happy as evidence.
I feel nothing but sadness for Catherine. She was neglected and used by men. She was pretty and very nieve, surrounded by people who used her for their own good. I think she was guilable and didn't really have the confidence to refuse what people asked of her. So sorry I'm not getting this Clare.
Oooooo - can’t wait for that Catherine book! 🤩 Customer right here 👍
God Bless you Queen Katheryn, may you be at peace. X
The people she was truly used by were Francis Durham and Thomas Culpepper, who manipulated her in a sense almost blackmailed her. If she hadn’t married the king, these past indiscretions would’ve never come to bite her. She was a young passionate teenager who did things that are very normal.it’s a shame that women’s sexuality often be put against them.
Girls get pregnant, which is why the rules have always been more strict. I wouldn't bet that her teenage behavior wouldn't have been held against her if she had married someone of her own station, either. Sex outside of marriage wasn't considered normal for girls. Yes, it happened a lot, but it was a shameful thing. In fact, a girl could be accused of witchcraft for "seducing" a man; women were considered morally inferior and prone to loose sexual morals. Even when I was a teenager, it was usually blamed on the girl. That's why most girls didn't go the police if they were assaulted. They were blamed even for that.
I haven't seen any evidence of blackmail as far as Culpeper was concerned so please do explain a bit more.
I think we are missing the big picture. Did she deserve to die? No. It’s like she was under the Taliban.
Definitely not.
Catherine's adultery was high treason. It could have jeopardized the succession.
I'm not sure primary sources from a time when grooming and sexual abuse of a girl over marriageable age weren't even concepts and women and girls were maligned for any sexuality is the best way to understand the issue I wouldn't even claim that Mannox or anyone else was a "groomer," since it would have been seen as romantic for a young man to pursue a girl with gifts and notes. But, barring an actual psychologist going back in time and interviewing Katheryn, I think there are signs in her ongoing sexual behavior that leads me to consider her groomed and abused. "Hypersexualisation is commonly paired with adultification. This is the erasure of children and their innocence by forcing the caricature of adulthood onto them....As a survivor myself, I have experienced hypersexuality. After an assault, I reacted in a way I had never heard about. Craving male attention and validation that I could only receive with my body. Needing others to touch me so that I could no longer feel my abuser. Wanting to use myself the only way I knew how: for sex. Whilst the sex was consensual, I received no joy as I was simply performing. I was morphing into whatever partner people wanted; unable to act on desires of my own which had become clouded with shame. Being bombarded with flashbacks whilst simultaneously eager to please. I was also greeted by an onslaught of slut-shaming and lack of belief of my assault, as why would a survivor of assault be so sexually active? Due to my response, I started to doubt my own trauma, asking if it was even real." www.empowordjournalism.com/all-articles/hypersexuality-as-a-valid-trauma-response/
Was Katheryn Howard hypersexual? She had multiple partners we know of before her marriage and sought out Thomas Culpepper after her marriage against any logical concern for her own safety. If we are using the mores of the time to define grooming, then a young woman who was societally expected to be a virgin at her marriage and chaste after her marriage, then Katheryn appears to be hyper sexual, seeking validation through sex and acting out the adultification she learned growing up.
Katheryn appearing to consent and to be "in control" does not negate the damage.
Agree. Excusing behavior by claiming it was "a different time" doesn't make it okay. This video makes it seem as if there is possibly some internalized misogyny in dismissing what happened to Catherine, almost similar to people in modern times claiming a girl wearing a short skirt who experiences SA was "asking for it".
Why is Catherine's behaviour hypersexualism? She slept with Francis Dereham and then married the king. After that, she had meetings with Culpeper but both denied sex.
I'm not negating anyone's experience, I'm simply looking at what the primary sources tell us about the nature of those relationships.
I fail to see how anything in my video equates to me saying that a girl with a short skirt today is asking for it.
@@anneboleynfiles Looking through the glass, darkly (which is really all we can do after such a span of time), it seems to me that Katheryn sought validation through sex. Sex, to me, isn't just going all the way. She was in a sexualized relationship with Mannox if he could describe her body parts. I wasn't there, but she and Culpepper went beyond some kisses if Jane Rochford's description of the noises they made is accurate. If we are centering the behavior in the mores of the time, Katheryn would be considered "loose." Seeking attention and validation through sex might be an indicator of early sexual trauma, rather than an indicator of a very young girl in control of her relationships with men. And for someone in Katheryn's dangerous position as wife of a king who has already killed one wife, seeking sexual contact with Culpepper seems compulsive rather than calculated on her part. JMHO.
And, for the record, I don't believe Durham raped her as she claimed.
I wonder why Catherine Howard couldn’t just stay on as a mistress instead of accepting becoming his full wife/queen if she knew she wasn’t ‘virtuous”?
I have 3 theories:
1. She was too naive (less likely)
2. She was pressured by her family and allies
3. Henry knew or at least she tought he knew, bc gossip in court was a big deal - so she assumed he didn't care, and maybe he didn't, until she cheated, so he brought everything up
I would assume that she either did not think it would matter, that she was enjoying the attention, the gifts and wanted the benefits of being Queen of England, or she was afraid to tell Henry the truth. I know I would probably have been afraid to confess something like that to Henry VIII of all people, and I also would not be surprised if Catherine had assumed that his age and his health meant that it would not be a long marriage for her, and she would be a wealthy Queen Dowager at the end. Part of me even speculates if, during that fateful progress, she had begun imagine herself marrying Culpepper after Henry's death, when she was free to do whatever she wanted because I strongly believe she had fallen in love with Culpepper by that point. Had she lived, I can easily see her doing what Catherine Parr did and remarrying for love rather quickly after the kings' death.
I would imagine that her life might have turned out very differently had her mother lived and she not been sent off to live in the rather sketchy situation in which she ended up.
It was normal for children of her class to be sent to other households at that kind of age whether or not their parents were alive. I mean, children further down the social scale could be sent away to be apprentices or servants.
She had her own servants in the dowager duchess's household and was surrounded by other girls of a similar age, so it could well have been better than being at home in a household that was struggling due to her father's debt and all the mouths to feed.
@@anneboleynfilesWhat I wonder is whether her mother might have heard through the grapevine what kind of a mess grandma was presiding over and at least written a concerned letter that might have resulted in better oversight. It’s miraculous she didn’t get pregnant.
I am uncomfortable concluding that Catherine Howard was not groomed, simply because sources at the time do not use the word "groom" to describe those situations, because all interactions appeared consensual, or because many women at that time were groomed/exploited so it could not be grooming. Catherine was privileged and therefore protected in many ways, but it may have also made her a bigger target to certain people. Catherine's early death may have prevented later reflection on these situations.
The aspects of royalty aside, this situation was not uncommon for the time and grooming is very common today, even among individuals who are close in age. We cannot know everything about a relationship between two people unless we are one of those two people. We absolutely should not assume Catherine was groomed--the evidence for that is extremely weak. She is an unfortunate example of the double standard between men and women (Henry had how many mistresses over the years?) and possibly of the belief that her privilege would protect her.
Thank you for this. I am glad to see the men were closer to her age and I agree with you on this..,.
Thank you so much for such excellent food for thought! ❤ I don't think we should apply our contemporary values to the past, as we risk misinterpretation. Where does the romanticization of CH come from? Why have Henry's executed wives been turned into a myth? CH doesn't come across as smart, but maybe it's simply because she's the one who got found out (?)
I’m going to respectfully disagree here. Just because the word pedo didn’t exist or it wasn’t a concept, doesn’t mean that people weren’t committing the act.
It was wrong when Charles did it. It was wrong when Henry did it. And it was certainly wrong when Seymour was acting that way with Elizabeth after Henry’s death.
Regardless of if she wanted the advances or not, she was still groomed and abused. She grew up in a terrible environment.
But did she grow up in a terrible environment? Before she was sent to the dowager duchess's, perhaps yes, as her mother had died and her father was left with a large family and he was debt-ridden, but then he got the post in Calais and she was sent to live with her step-grandmother, a wealthy and influential woman who could provide her with a good education. That was very common for children like Catherine, to be sent as wards to another household from around the age of 7 to be educated and to give them opportunities to advance themselves.
Catherine was in a very privileged position. She had servants and chaperones. She had very inappropriate relationships, and I think the dowager duchess would have removed both men from their positions had she been aware of the extent of them.
Catherine was definitely a victim, treated unjustly, and punished brutally, but not, from the evidence, groomed or abused.
The struggle I have with this video is back then it wasn’t considered grooming and totally consensual but from our modern lense it definitely was, and besides the contemporary perspective would be against Catherine to please Henry like the charges against Anne
I feel you presented this well. It's difficult to remove modern views from the topic.
She was a kid and he was a dirty old man. So glad she affected his ego. Bet that hurt
I agree with your presentation of the facts. The customs of the time period must be factored into a situation to attain an accurate understanding.
While I do appreciate that you are looking at history and not putting modern standards on to these people, she does still sound like she was abused, though. People before us and after the Tudors, put their standard on her and she was made out to be a stupid little tramp. I do like that you show that she had more autonomy than we are seeing.
Her grandmother neglected her and all the girls she were in her charge. The people then knew that there would be trouble because of the neglect. The woman had no problem hitting her. Hitting children still produced pain and tears then and it does now because we still have nerve endings and tear ducts.
These people didn't like Henry Maddox around Katherine. It was seen as inappropriate in some way, even if it's not for the same reasons as us. She broke it off with him after seeing he was a sleazebag. Love to see that autonomy that I was talking about. (But why is it that the records say that Maddox* was 23 or older?)
Francis turned into a jealous and possessive guy. The Dowager Duchess didn't like him either. And even if it's not in the record, jealousy and possessiveness often leads to abuse. Too many real life experiences that tell us this. He was also a stupid opportunist who thought he could use their past as blackmail to get status and money from her. He didn't think that if he spilled the beans that he wouldn't have been in trouble with the volatile King Henry.
King Henry was definitely an abusive man. She didn't expect to marry the guy when she was with Francis. What the King wants, the King gets. How could she or any of the Howards stop him from pursuing her? He could have divorced her instead of beheading her. I also on some level don't blame her for the affair. King Henry was obese and stank because of his leg ulcer that leaked pus. He had the nerve to bash Anne of Cleves for her looks when Henry* was not the attractive, athletic jock people said he used to be. I can't blame her for wanting someone closer to her age that didn't have such a terrible temper. But it was not smart for her to pursue Culpepper. Your husband having the ability to end you without legal repercussions is like domestic violence times a million. And Henry could have just divorced her.
Abuse followed this girl like a long shadow. You are right that these guys were horrible. But she was failed by so many people in her life. She abused by so many people in her life.
I'm not sure that her stepgrandmother can be accused of neglecting her. She couldn't have expected Catherine to have stolen the key, but she perhaps could have been stricter after she'd found out about the relationships. Catherine had a privileged upbringing in that household. She had her own servants, she was given a decent education, and I think the dowager duchess did her best by those in her care. There were certainly failings, and as much as I don't agree with corporal punishment, that was seen as the duty of parents at the time and she was acting as a parent. Different times.
@@anneboleynfiles Yeah, it was expected for parents to do that. "Spare the rod, spoil the child" and all that. I spelled out the very literal things that can be seen by both them and us (pain, crying, and tears) because it stays the same. People then and in modern times, justify them the same way too. We ought to know better. We have science against doing it. What's our excuse?
Her education was decent, especially if she had music teachers (some parents today can't afford those.) But I also heard it not as extensive as her cousin Anne Boleyn.
But I did like you talked about how she had much more autonomy than people are giving her nowadays.
@@Blondegenius3 Anne's education was unusual for her class but then that was because her father, like Thomas More, was a humanist and believed in educating girls to the same standard as boys.
Hi _ Mary Boleyn is my 24th Great Grandmother! I am also related to the Spencers but am I royal? No - I came from a council estate in Liverpool, yet my current relatives have Manor House’s (eg Ingatestone / Petre family) I’d love a real genealogist to do my tree _ my eyes were popping out of my head. I’m linked to most of the Tudor Court and beyond!
I agree with your view. In the mid XIXth century in Mexico, my grandmother's mother was married at 14 to a widow of 40, and that was "normal" for the age. I think the same happened in Tudor's time, and Catherine could be, as you also say, an eager teenager wanting to explore sex, first with intimate touchings and kisses (Mannix), and then with full sexual relations (Derham) before meeting Culpepper, and the King.
I think Catherine was abused, even though she played at sex. She was too young. Just so young to be married off to Henry. As you say though, in those days it was normal. Poor France's Derham going through antagonizing death was unjust and unfair. His relationship was before she met the king.
Yes and yes. That poor girl
I agree with your assessment. I don't think any of these details make Katherine a bad person, nor do I think it makes her death any less tragic. The thing is, facts are facts, and when looking at history we have to set aside our modern sensibilities and view it through the perspectives of the time.
Girls in the time of Henry VIII were considered adults when they began menstruation. They were then women. Therefore, 12-13 was considered acceptable. Also, women died very young then
I agree, don't think she was groomed, sounds like normal, young adolescent behaviour. The boyfriends turned out to be nuisances but she pursued Culpepper Can't have been that great being marred to a much older man like Henry.
@anneboleyn files Alex Trebek was the same age Henry was when he married his wife Jean Currivan. She was 25.
This brings up an interesting question: what was the age of consent in the Tudor period? Was there any legal minimum age back in the period?
You weren't meant to have sex before marriage no matter how old you were, so there was only a legal age for marriage, which was 12 for girls & 14 for boys. It was VERY rare for anyone other than royalty or high nobility to be married that young though, & when people were, they usually waited a few years to consummate the marriage.
@@beth7935 yeah true. Jane Grey was not even 16 when she was married off, wasn’t she?
For lower class girls, getting caught having sex before marriage could just result in a hasty marriage. It was more serious for upper class girls, depending on the situation. Marrying a girl with an upbringing and known past like Katherine's to the king, where sex outside of the marriage bed was treason, was an inevitable death sentence. Horrible.
@@michellecrocker2485 I'm not sure cos her exact date of birth is unknown, but it's probably 1537 so you're right, either 15 or 16. (If I'm wrong, somebody please correct me!)
There wasn't any age of consent. Regarding sex before marriage, records show that many brides were pregnant when they got married in church, but a church wedding wasn't necessary at the time, all that was needed was the exchange of promises and consummation. Some people never went through a church ceremony, although it was advisable as it was public, so prevented either the bride or groom later claiming that they weren't actually married.