Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Did Arthur and Katherine of Aragon have sex?

A place to debate issues or to rant about what's on your mind. In addition to discussions about historical fiction, books, the publishing industry, and history, discussions about current political, social, and religious issues and other topics are allowed, so those who are easily offended by certain topics may want to avoid such threads. Members are expected to keep the discussions friendly and polite and to avoid personal attacks on other members. The moderators reserve the right to shut down a thread without warning if they believe it necessary.

Did Arthur and Katherine have sex during marriage?

The marriage was not consummated
18
78%
The marriage was consummated
5
22%
 
Total votes: 23

User avatar
Margaret
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 2440
Joined: August 2008
Interest in HF: I can't answer this in 100 characters. Sorry.
Favourite HF book: Checkmate, the final novel in the Lymond series
Preferred HF: Literary novels. Late medieval and Renaissance.
Location: Catskill, New York, USA
Contact:

Post by Margaret » Thu May 26th, 2011, 1:54 am

Very interesting. The popes did grant dispensations based on political considerations, though they usually tried to disguise it. I'm becoming more interested in Henry's state of mind. It sounds as though, when he married Katherine, he may have needed to believe she was a virgin for reasons that were as much personal and emotional as political, and that by the time he wanted an annulment, his need to believe she had not been a virgin also had personal, emotional roots.
Browse over 5000 historical novel listings (probably well over 5000 by now, but I haven't re-counted lately) and over 700 reviews at www.HistoricalNovels.info

User avatar
Elizabeth
Avid Reader
Posts: 268
Joined: February 2009
Contact:

Post by Elizabeth » Thu May 26th, 2011, 2:21 am

[quote=""MLE""]Everybody argues as though the marriage annulment rested solely on the pope, forgetting that he was secondary. the FIRST impediment was not the pope, but Katherine. If she had agreed, the pope's would have granted Henry's request with great relief. And Charles V would have been relieved, too. Certainly he and Henry 'made nice' before Katherine was cold in her grave.

So the English Reformation essentially came down to one woman's stubborn refusal to say she was not a virgin when she married.

Of course I don't know any more than anyone else. But let's say you had a bizarre lottery where your life depended on you guessing right, and the judge was some being who really knew the truth: which way would you guess?

Given the entire corpus of the lady's works, if I had to stake my life on it, I'd guess that Katherine was telling the truth.[/quote]

You have an excellent point. If Katherine herself had been willing to "retire to a nunnery" and take the veil, I'm sure things could even have been arranged to protect Mary's rights (which was another of the things she was concerned about). But she herself said that she was not called to be a nun, she was called to be queen. (Can't put my finger on the exact quote, but that's a paraphrase.) So it was not only her stubborn refusal to say she was not a virgin, but her stubborn refusal to give up her position in the world. A will of iron, that lady. :)
THE RED LILY CROWN: A Novel of Medici Florence.
THE FLOWER READER.
THE SECOND DUCHESS.

www.elizabethloupas.com

SGM
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 699
Joined: March 2010

Post by SGM » Thu May 26th, 2011, 7:52 am

[quote=""Elizabeth""]A will of iron, that lady. :) [/quote]

Now, that I would agree with.
Currently reading - Emergence of a Nation State by Alan Smith

rebecca
Compulsive Reader
Posts: 798
Joined: July 2011

Post by rebecca » Tue July 26th, 2011, 4:54 am

I am not an historian but from the books I have read which portray Katherine as very devout throughout her entire life I cannot believe this devout woman would endanger her soul by maintaining a lie even on her deathbed. Hell in those times was a very real place would Katherine choose to die knowing that she had sinned with the knowledge that this sin had not been absolved(I think that's the right word?)by a Priest? This is a woman who believed everything that the Church Teaches...Would she endanger her immortal soul by dying with a lie in her heart and on her lips to the end? Somehow I dont think so.

I think that Katherine was telling the truth about Arthur and Henry knew it!

Just my opinion.

Bec :)

Post Reply

Return to “Debate/Rant Forum”