The Anne Boleyn Files and Tudor Society
The Anne Boleyn Files and Tudor Society
Hello and welcome to The Anne Boleyn Files & Tudor Society channel. I'm Claire Ridgway, author, historian, speaker and blogger, and a self-confessed Tudor history nut! For me, there's nothing better than talking Tudor. I love sharing my Tudor history research and bringing past events and people to life.
On this channel, I'll be delving into the lives of our very favourite Tudors, as well as those who are usually forgotten. There are tales of ambition and vain glory, murder and mayhem, executions and martyrdom, love and hate, all sorts...
I've been running this channel since 2009 so there are plenty of Tudor history goodies to keep you occupied.
I usually upload videos twice a week, late on a Thursday GMT and late on a Monday GMT, plus some occasional specials and livestreams. Please subscribe and hit the bell icon to be notified when my videos go live.
You can find Claire at:
linktr.ee/claireridgway
Пікірлер
Thanks Honorable Lady 🙂 always appreciate your presentations 😘
What a refreshing and balanced account. Thank you
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.
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.
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.
Silly Katherine! I think she loved all of them! What happened to Manox?
He escaped without any punishment.
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 her 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 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.
oh I just watched the first season of BECOMING😄 ELIZABETH...I cant wait for the second one..
I don't believe they're planning on a second.
I'm just dying to know why Tudor women tucked their long, chain/pearl/jeweled necklaces into their bodices? Perhaps similar reasons why in the early 2000's long sleeves under spaghetti straps and leggings under skirts were popular... it was a fashion choice because they liked it. 🤷🏻♀️ Still drives me crazy not being able to find a definitive answer on the topic.
I don't think you can apply 21st-century courtship and marriage ideas to the 16th century. It was an entirely different era.
Yes, a different world entirely.
you are an amazing historian....I love the Tudor dynasty...
I agree with you. She sounds like a gadfly who liked the boys.
what is padded or padded?
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.
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 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.
God Bless you Queen Katheryn, may you be at peace. X
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 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 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.
IMO, too much is judged by age at this time. Some who would control public policy, try to pound into the heads of the general public that because the human brain does not reach maximum growth until about age 25 or 26, young people of those ages or younger are still "children". Another biological fact is that the best time for a woman to bear children is between the ages of 18 and about 28. After 30, many women have found that their biological clocks are already winding down. If it is true that 18 to 28 is the ideal time for a woman to become a mother, surely neither evolution nor Creation intended that the next generation be produced by "children". Friends from other countries have said the U.S. is preoccupied with issues of age, compared to other nations. This is especially so in recent years when any couple with much of an age difference is considered immoral. Our laws quantify what is legal for an age gap between young people if one half of the couple is under 18. Even when both parties are adults, a wide difference in ages is considered nasty. I myself married very young to a much older man and it was a successful marriage which ended with his death. Circumstances in our lives made this a good choice for both of us. I would fear to give details as a lot of people today would declare such a relationship to be nasty! Meanwhile, young people I know today "hook up" -- basically live together -- for a few weeks or months and then get other partners for the same experience. These youth do not speak of long term relationships, happily ever after or true love. To criticize this behaviour is to bring down accusations of intolerance, etc. I am no prude but I feel sad thinking of these young people with apparently no concept of loving partner for a lifetime. Until the second half of the last century, very young people frequently worked adult jobs in order to provide for their families. My own grandfather worked in a logging camp when he was 11, stoking a donkey boiler that powered steam driven equipment. In his case such work was not a matter of poverty. Everyone in the family worked and provided. Many other very young people worked long hours at adult jobs. Concerning Katherine Howard=> In my day, even though I was a teen in the sex, drugs & rock N' roll 60's, the woman bore the brunt of misbehaviour. This was not entirely fair. On the other hand, females get pregnant and males can easily dodge responsibilities. When I was young, girls who were "too loose" got certain labels. It is hard for me to read about Katherine and not apply a few of these labels. She did not deserve to be executed. That is certainly a tragedy. But she should have known the dangers of risky behaviour. Especially as the cousin of Anne Boleyn, even though those adultery charges were false, Katherine should have known that 'the wages of sin (adultery or the appearance of adultery) is death'. I cannot get past, "How could she be so stupid?" In my youth, women were judged by society and other women. It was part of society's way of limiting single motherhood through shaming. Sadly, offspring of such affairs were also punished. Lots of things in the today's world are better but sexual relations are still poorly understood and steeped in hypocrisy. It is very acceptable for young teens, ages as low as 13 or 14, to "hook up" for a week or two. The goal of a lifelong partnership with a spouse does not seem to be part of the equation. When Katherine's activities in the dowager duchess' house were discovered, the duchess struck her. On one hand, that is not fair because men were half of the equation. On the other hand, society then, and until recent times, made the woman bear the brunt of unplanned pregnancy. Katherine should have learned at that point, that that is the way society works, the woman receives the punishment and women must enforce the morals because men are allowed to escape responsibility. Had she absorbed this lesson from the dowager duchess, she may have avoided losing her head a few years hence. My comment is long but a shorter comment would miss the point. In Tudor times, right up through the 1960's, Katherine's behaviour was loose, immoral and incredibly stupid. She was queen, married to the king, and she threw away everything to behave like a very cheap woman, so to speak, in my opinion. In the U.S.
Catherine Howard's life seems prime for a film adaptation by Sofia Coppola. I'd love to see it!
I feel bad for the hate comments you're bound to get. Still, the fundamental reason this fight even exists is because (much like the Victorians) society today is compelled to enforce its standards on the past, and doesn't think its decedents won't do it to them. Was Catherine Howard too young to be having young men in her bed? Not by the LAW of her day. Does that make her shenanigans okay? Well, by my own morals, no! But when I was 14 I couldn't walk down my high school corridors without seeing people going all the way to third base between class. Icky? Yes. But people got handsy anywhere they could and did a lot more after the last bell of the day! Teens have sex, and they've been having sex with older people since the beginning of time! Personally, I think people outraged about what happened 500 years ago should be more concerned about what kids do now!
It was only a few years ago that the country in which I live now raised the age of consent from 13 to 16, and I do have real problems with thinking of a girl of 13 having a sexual relationship. It's scary. And thinking about Margaret Beaufort giving birth at that age!
Mary is my 13th great grandmother
If the women of the time were not always comfortable with their young daughters having relations with much older husbands and those adult husbands 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.
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!
After hearing for years that CH had been molested by Mannox and Dereham. Then to find out they were not much older than her. I guess everybody needs an agenda. The thing that surprises me most is Catherine's willingness to play fast and loose with Culpepper. She was relatively educated and married to a man who had no problem with dispatching a wife. Insanity.
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.
I think we are missing the big picture. Did she deserve to die? No. It’s like she was under the Taliban.
Definitely not.
She was abused.
She was a CHILD with Mannox and Durham. THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY OF CONSENT. This was beneath you.
And yet children are considered adult enough in some states in the US to be convicted if murder & given life sentences without parole!
Well, I'm pretty sure you're capable of disagreeing with me without insulting me, surely.
So. Tragic. Great commentary, Claire. Thank you.
Lady Rochford sounds like a ninny.
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
It is so very easy to make judgements on long-ago times and different cultures. No matter how much we try we can never really escape our own cultural context; at best, we can hold it at bay for a while and remind ourselves to constantly question our conclusions. So while in our modern viewpoint Catherine was a victim and those who consorted with her were pedophiles, that would not have been the conclusion in the 16th century. As you say, their viewpoint would have been very different. We'll never know how Catherine herself viewed any of it. Was she just a stupid and inexperienced young girl who let herself be led into incorrect (light) behavior because she imagined herself in love? Was she a manipulative and conniving little hussy who thought she could get attention and power over men and life in general with sex/love/romance as her weapon? Or was she really no better or no worse than many of her peers but she was unlucky enough to have caught the eye of the most powerful (and perhaps the most dangerous) man in the country and so her behavior and actions got scrutinized minutely because suddenly they were IMPORTANT. I wonder if your book will give some insight as to which of these it might be, if there is any way to tell at all? I've always thought that the one thing I thought was true about poor Catherine Howard was that she was not very smart. She kept breaking the rules and at least her actions seem to have indicated that she didn't think she would ever be caught doing so. What a sad short life.
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
I don’t care which time period she lived in. We know the human brain is not fully formed until the age of twenty five or twenty six. She was still a kid.
Twenty five,or twenty six was almost classed as middle aged in tudor times!! You would have been classed as well past your sell by date at that age. And as for the men,they seemed well aware of what they were doing at 18 and 19.
They didn't know anything about that. Seriously, they had some wild assumptions about the human body. It was less biology (which didn't even exist as a science) and more superstition and philosophy. That was their medical knowledge. Let me give you some examples of what they thought: they didn't know of the clitoris (it was treated as some ancient myth open to debate, it was discovered around that time, in the late 1550s). They believed older women were poisonous, that having lost the ability to menstruate there was an imbalance in the humours and that their looks, through their eyes, could poison people, this being especially the case for poor women (it's part of why so many old women were accused of witchcraft). Would it surprise you if they had no idea about the human brain and how it actually works? What is important is that they thought of these ages as normal for starting one's sex life.
It’s just that she was so young. She didn’t even have an adult brain.
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.
Thank you for your impartiality.
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 was under the impression that she was pretty footloose and doing what she liked with whomever she liked prior to her marriage. This was one of the reasons she could have agreed she was already betrothed, when she got married to Henry. Therefore, could have just had their marriage annulled. I've never heard she was being abused by relatives. It might be interesting to examine why she chose death over divorce.
That's the point: she didn't choose death instead of divorce, she simply didn't know she had that option. She was young, barely could read and write and most importantly had nobody to give her counsel.
I don't think she even considered her past relationship with Dereham when the king proposed, or perhaps she was scared for admitting she wasn't a virgin, and I don't think it was ever a case of choosing death over divorce. I think she panicked and there's a good chance that even if she had confessed to being precontracted to Dereham that she would have still died. Confessing to an impediment to her marriage certainly didn't save Anne Boleyn.
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.
Thank you for this thorough explanation, I agree with you.
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!
What… tattoos? Wouldn’t have thought… What are they saying or representing?
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.
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!