Blood Well Spent: Anne Boleyn's Triumph

There is a classic scene in Anne of the Thousand Days (Jarrott, 1969) where Anne Boleyn (Genevieve Bujold) looks Henry VIII (Richard Burton) in the eye and proclaims 'My Elizabeth shall be queen! And my blood will have been well spent!'

Blood well spent: Anne of the Thousand Days

There is no proof that such an exchange ever took place between the pair but it is a powerful and prophetic moment that tells the viewer that Anne's blood was indeed well spent, and her words prove true as Elizabeth, her daughter, became possibly the greatest ruler England ever had. How she eventually came to be queen is nothing short of a miracle, the 'bastard' daughter of King Henry VIII, who became renowned as the Virgin Queen.

Elizabeth was the daughter of King Henry VIII, infamous for his six wives and establishing the Church of England. A church established in order to divorce his first wife Katherine of Aragon so that he could then marry his second wife, Anne Boleyn.

The Queen's Mother: Anne Boleyn

Anne won Henry's heart through her passionate personality and her many refusals of being his mistress. Once married it wasn't long before Anne was pregnant. Unfortunately, she did not deliver the son Henry so desperately wanted but a girl who she named Elizabeth. After this Anne failed to produce another living child and was eventually disgraced and executed on charges of adultery, witchcraft and treason on 19th May 1536. Elizabeth was only two years old.

Henry married a further four times and did manage to have the son he desired with his third wife Jane Seymour, and Elizabeth was overlooked for the majority of her young life in favour of her brother. However, she was eventually restored to the succession with help from Henry's sixth wife, Katherine Parr, who took a kinder incentive towards Elizabeth, providing for her education and establishing her own belief in the Protestant faith. Katherine had even been left as regent of the kingdom when Henry went to war with France, showing Elizabeth that it was possible for a woman to rule in her own right.

The Lady Elizabeth Tudor

When Henry died in January 1547 Elizabeth went to live with her stepmother and her fourth husband Thomas Seymour. During this time there is much speculation about the conduct of Seymour in his affection towards his ward, attempting to seduce her and besmirching her honour. Eventually she was established in her own household and never saw Katherine Parr again. During her brother's reign, Edward VI, she lived quietly but was under suspicion when Seymour devised a plot to kidnap the king, for which she was found innocent.

Edward died in July 1553, which made her sister, Mary Tudor, Queen of England - the first Sovereign Queen in England's history. When Mary entered the city of London Elizabeth was with her, following her sister who triumphed over rebellions to prevent her ascension to the throne. Mary's reign began with a positive outlook, even with the sisters looking to heal old wounds. Unfortunately this did not last. After time questions of religion plagued Mary's reign, and completely destroyed any relationship the sisters once had when Elizabeth was placed in the tower and rigorously questioned in connection with rebellions by Thomas Wyatt, accusations which again had no basis of proof. The relationship between them never recovered and Mary died alone in 1558, defeated and loathed by the people.

Upon her death Elizabeth became the Queen of England. Her reign began with much upheaval and religious persecution that was eventually outlawed, with Elizabeth being more accepting of both Catholic and Protestant faiths, unlike her siblings. Over time Elizabeth established England as a powerful nation in its own right, her reign remembered as a golden age in English history. Elizabeth never married or produced an heir to carry on the Tudor name, she became known as The Virgin Queen; an icon and a mother to her people. England prospered under her rule, which is why she is admired to this day. Even in the face of adversity  she proved her mettle; such as the Spanish Inquisition that looked to 'cleanse' England of heresy, an invasion that was unsuccessful despite the odds being in Spain's favour. Elizabeth I is remembered by many names - Good Queen Bess, Gloriana, The Virgin Queen. She overcame the odds to become the best loved of the Tudor Sovereigns.

Elizabeth became Anne's greatest triumph. As the prophetic and poignant scene proves, Anne's blood was indeed well spent.

Elizabeth Wydeville: The Slandered Queen [Book Review]

Queen Elizabeth Wydeville, the slandered Queen of England has gone down in history as a greedy and horrid woman, characteristics written of her by her many enemies. In this volume, Okerlund delves into the preconceptions in order to shed light on the truth - was she truly a vile woman or was she a strong individual who endured where others would have crumbled?

It does appear that Elizabeth Wydeville was indeed a much more complex personality than sources have made out in the past. A deeply pious woman, Okerlund determines that the marriage of Elizabeth and Edward IV was truly a love match and not a result of witchcraft, as many contemporaries accused at the time.

Here, Elizabeth is described as a charitable woman who rewarded those loyal to her and not simply a greedy upstart that history paints her to be. Indeed, there appears to be much loyalty and respect towards her as a Queen; and Okerlund does present her through her trials and experiences as someone adaptable and strong who survived two husbands, the unjust executions of members of her own family including a son from her first marriage, the disappearance her her two sons by Edward IV, remembered as the princes in the tower.

Upon reading this biography I gained much respect for the woman often deemed a witch, whose reputation has been marred by time, and only recently gaining a more respectable reputation in the light of a reviving interest in the wars of the roses.

Elizabeth Wydeville played a key role alongside Margaret Beaufort, mother of Henry VII who has enjoyed a more respected reputation in history; she was the grandmother of Henry VIII, and her blood still runs through the veins of the British royal family to this day. There is likely truth within tales of vanity, as a Queen she represented an image to the people and many nobles were envious of her position and her family's rise to power that this image of vanity and greed has superseded the many other aspects of her life that made her a captivating and admirable woman for her day.

I admit that Okerlund's view is biased in favour of Elizabeth, but it is a refreshing view compared with that of historians who decree that she was nothing more than an arrogant, greedy upstart; a view that most often translates into fictional portrayals as well.

It may be time to give Elizabeth Wydeville more credit for her numerous good qualities and strengths that helped her endure in a world ruled by men. And this biography is a good starting point.

The Image of 'Bloody' Mary

Mary Tudor, the first Queen of England has never had a good reputation throughout history and this idea has translated onto film. All in all there have only been three films made centering on Mary and her story. These films are Marie Tudor (Capellani, 1917), Marie Tudor (Gance, 1966) and The Twisted Tale of Bloody Mary (Barnard, 2008).

However, the majority of the time when Mary is in films or TV shows about the Tudors, she is usually a minor character or features only as a cameo. In films such as Anne of the Thousand Days (Jarrott, 1969) or The Other Boleyn Girl (Chadwick, 2008) she is reduced to a cameo appearance. On television she has appeared in Henry VIII (Granada, 2003) and The Six Wives of Henry VIII (BBC, 1970); both times she has only a minor role and her relationship with Henry is never really explored.

When in films about Elizabeth I she has always been the antagonist to Elizabeth’s protagonist. In the mini-series’ Elizabeth R (BBC, 1971) and The Virgin Queen (BBC, 2006) Mary is seen as unjust in her treatment of Elizabeth, hardly showing any redeeming qualities whatsoever. The same happens in Elizabeth (Kapur, 1998) where again she is seen to be treating Elizabeth cruelly. This is a recurring theme throughout films regarding Elizabeth’s early days and often Mary comes across as if she’s on the brink of insanity and isn't fit to rule a Kingdom. But it is easy to gather this image from Mary's treatment of Elizabeth; Mary did have her sister committed to the tower of London for fear of rebellion.

As well as Elizabeth, she is often seen as an antagonist towards other historical figures in film. After Elizabeth there is Lady Jane Grey, who ruled England for nine days when her family and others came together in a bid to prevent Mary from claiming her crown. As a cousin to the Tudors she had a good claim to the throne through her grandmother, Mary Tudor but she wasn’t the next in line until Edward VI changed Henry VIII’s will. These depictions include Tudor Rose aka The Nine Days Queen (Stevenson, 1936) and Lady Jane (Nunn, 1986). In both cases Mary is the villain to Jane’s protagonist, who is portrayed as an innocent young girl who is unjustly treated by Mary. In the case of being unjustly treated, perhaps that can be debated as she was eventually executed in the tower of London; yet according to one of Mary's biographies, England's First Queen by Linda Porter, Mary only resorted to execution as a last resort after Jane's father rose up an unsuccessful rebellion in his daughter's name while she was still prisoner. Although this was unsuccessful the next one may not be as far as Mary was concerned; so Jane had to go. Before this Mary was inclined to save her cousin if she could, as it was over a year before Jane was finally executed. Mary appears to not have wanted Jane dead, likely knowing Jane didn't have a say in any plans made by Edward VI's advisers and her family; but her father's actions tragically sealed the girl's fate, not Mary's.

In Mark Twain’s classic The Prince and the Pauper (1881) she is again depicted as cold and heartless. This story is about Edward VI, Mary’s younger brother who swaps places with a pauper; hence the title. At one point Tom Candy (the pauper replacing Edward) tells “the grimly holy Lady Mary” that she is banished to her closet and “beseech God to take away that stone that was in her breast and give her a human heart”. This has also been developed into a Disney film.

In truth, Mary and Edward had been close before Edward became King, with people believing that Edward looked up to his sister as a mother figure. Both siblings had similar stubborn traits; once Edward confronted Mary on her disobedience, and they both ended up in tears. They had cared deeply for the other, and if it hadn't been for their religious differences then they may well have remained close.

The most recent depiction of Mary in The Tudors (2007) is perhaps by far the most sympathetic portrayal on screen to date. In the Showtime TV series she is portrayed from a young child adored by her father through her parents’ divorce, her own bastard status and her life up to the point of Henry’s last days.Mary's own suffering is shown in better detail here than in previous projects, showing a child forced to accept herself as a bastard or face execution. Although the most sympathetic it still alludes to the idea of her future reign and her desire to purge England of heresy with the burnings of heretics.

All in all, there are very few portrayals of Mary Tudor as a human being, someone who was a victim at some point in her life. Any films about Henry VIII show Mary in a cameo role; films on Elizabeth or any other figure tend to show her as an antagonist with very little redeeming characteristics.

As well as an unpopular reputation on film, to date there has only been three documentaries where Mary is the topic of discussion. One is entitled The Most Evil Women in History (n.d.), discussing Mary and her reign in a negative way. The second is Edward & Mary: The Unknown Tudors (2002) by David Starkey who discusses her life, only briefly looking at her childhood, concentrating on why she hated Elizabeth before going on to discuss her reign, painting Mary as a weak monarch. The opening credits of the documentary give you Starkey’s point of view of Edward and Mary with a strong pose from the actor portraying Edward, and the actress portraying Mary looking into the camera with an almost deranged look on her face. His discussion of Edward conveys the idea that he was on his way to becoming a great King, whereas Mary’s reign isn't really addressed, but her growing cruelty is highlighted as well as her phantom pregnancies and her unsuccessful marriage to Philip II. It didn't include the fact that the majority of the country was still catholic or the policies that she was working on to reintroduce coinage - which Elizabeth took all credit for; or the fact that she introduced foreign trade with Russia, which was successful. Both documentaries concentrate on the burning of Protestants, bringing no new information or viewpoints to light.

Mary’s reign is remembered as a dark age before Elizabeth became Queen, but few take into account the opposition that Mary faced throughout her life or how she helped influence her sister in how to rule the country. Elizabeth is remembered as the Virgin Queen, married solely to England; but she was not the first to use this line of speech. Throughout her reign Mary gave several powerful speeches; during the Kentish rebellion in 1554 she spoke directly to the troops declaring:

“I was then wedded to the realm, and to the laws of the same, the spousal ring whereof I wear here on my finger, and it never has and never shall be left off.” (Whitelock, 2009; 215)

Here she declared that she would put the interest of her subjects first, comparing her love for her subjects to the love that a mother has for her child. Mary was a great spokeswoman, and successful in gaining her throne and was kind to her subjects, even disguising herself as one of her ladies in waiting and giving alms to the poor, talking to them about everyday things; but she is still remembered for the burnings of the Protestants.

Some historians argue that Mary was disillusioned in her use of burning, and some debate that Europe was on the verge of discarding this form of punishment altogether. Eamon Duffy points out that this isn't the case at all and that this argument “has a whiff of historical wiggery about it” (Duffy, 2009; 82). One example he includes in his findings is the number of Protestants burned in the Spanish Netherlands during the 1560s being around 270; summarising that Mary’s council were not the only government who used this form of punishment to restore order. Mary’s negative image seems to be due to the propaganda that emerged during Elizabeth’s reign, which highlighted the cruelty towards the Protestants under Mary’s rule, giving her the nickname ‘Bloody Mary’.

Due to the propaganda that established Mary’s image throughout history, it overlooks the fact that burnings still took place during Elizabeth’s reign and even before that, during her brother Edward's reign, although it had been outlawed. In an article Witches in the Dock (BBC History Magazine, 2012), Henry VIII’s witchcraft act, repealed in 1547, was resurrected in 1563 as an ‘Act Against Conjurations, Enchantments and Witchcraft’ (AACEW) which led to many burnings throughout Elizabeth’s reign; yet these burnings are barely remembered compared with those of the Protestants.

All in all, Mary’s reign is not fondly remembered, she may well be seen as the medieval equivalent of Margaret Thatcher; never to be remembered as fondly as her sister. As a result Mary’s image translates on screen as that of an angry and sometimes deranged tyrant who’s death is only remembered for being on the same day as Elizabeth’s accession to the throne. 

Silent Seduction: There is only Louise Brooks

‘If I ever bore you, it’ll be with a knife’.

These words were uttered by Louise Brooks. And they‘re true. If you dig deep enough into her life, you’re likely to be fascinated by the elusive and sultry beauty who became the embodiment of 1920’s Hollywood. With her uniquely exotic good looks and her banged and bobbed hair style, Louise Brooks captivated moviegoers everywhere, yet critics and film executives alike were unimpressed with her acting abilities. As the years went by, however, Brooks has become a cult icon whose work is seen as a remarkable accomplishment in cinema history.

    Mary Louise Brooks was born on November 14, 1906 in Cherryvale, Kansas to Leonard and Myra Brooks, the second of four children. When Louise was four years old she starred in a church benefit production of Tom Thumb’s Wedding, portraying the bride. Her mother was impressed by the way her daughter ‘manipulated her shower bouquet and bridal veil with all the ease and assurance of a grown­up bride’.

Brooks had a very cultured upbringing, surrounded by books and creativity, which contributed to her lifelong passion for literature and the arts. At the age of 15 Brooks was enrolled into the Denishawn Dance Company where she learned expressive dance and artistic movement with tremendous vigour. She then went on to travel the country performing in front of audiences in different towns practically every night before moving to Europe and becoming the first person to perform at the Charleston in London.

 It was then in 1925 that Hollywood came calling and Brooks signed a five year movie deal with Paramount Pictures. After starring in her first picture, The Streets of Forgotten Men, Brooks quickly became leading lady material. After a couple of years in Hollywood, Brooks moved over to Berlin in 1928 where she filmed her most iconic role of Lulu, in G. W. Pabst’s Pandora’s Box(1928).

What makes Brooks’ performance in Pandora’s Box fascinating to watch is the way in which she connects sex and death in a way no other actress possibly could is a testament to her dexterity. The way she portrays Lulu as an innocent yet provocative entity through her own distinctive subtlety is extraordinary, Brooks herself later referring to her style as ‘the movement of thought and soul transmitted in a kind of intense isolation’. By the end of the movie Lulu herself has lost most of the innocence she once possessed at the beginning and is now isolated from society. Her downfall in the end comes when, on Christmas Eve, she prostitutes herself to Jack the Ripper. Brooks later described the scene as ‘It is Christmas Eve and she is about to receive the gift that has been her dream since childhood. Death by a sexual maniac.’

Pandora’s Box was a flop and Brooks received negative feedback for her performance. But she went on to film another Pabst production, Diary of a Lost Girl (1929), based on the book by Margerete Bhome. and one French film, Prix De Beaute (1930). After this Brooks decided to return to Hollywood. Pabst begged her to stay on in Europe but she refused. Of course, Pabst eventually became tired of her endless drinking and responded, ‘your life is exactly like Lulu’s and you will end the same way’.

Upon returning to Hollywood Brooks had become blacklisted due to her refusal to film sound retakes for The Canary Murder Case. In the years that followed she was reduced to bit parts in poorly produced films such as Windy Reilly in Hollywood. She also battled with excessive alcoholism which had become a problem while working in Berlin. She was eventually exiled from Hollywood and moved back to Kansas in 1940. Pabst’s prediction had become a reality.

After being forced out of Hollywood and living in Kansas, Brooks scrubbed floors for a living before moving to New York in the mid-forties where she went from working as a sales girl to working as a call girl before spiralling into a middle aged, overweight, alcoholic has-been. She was ultimately rescued from this despair by old flame William Paley, who became her benefactor by giving her a monthly allowance which she lived by for the rest of her days.

Virtually her whole life, Brooks had had problems with controlling her excessive behaviour. She struggled to gain the proper respect from many Hollywood executives; struggled with alcoholism for most of her life and garnered a reputation as a whore due to her many illicit affairs with both men and women. Brooks was a modern woman and just didn’t fit in with Hollywood’s customary clientele.

Maybe if her circumstances had been different she could have gained a long and successful career. However, Louise Brooks’ character had been irreparably altered, especially her sexuality, when she was molested by a neighbour at the age of nine. This traumatic event was the turning point in Brooks’ life that contributed to her complex, excessive and reclusive temperament. However horrific an effect this had on Brooks, it has to be said that if not for these qualities that she possessed she would possibly not have possessed such an alluring personality.

After spending twenty years living in isolation from the world, something incredible happened. In the mid-fifties she became acknowledged as an iconic presence of the silver screen for her work in Pandora’s Box. Finally, after years of self loathing and seeing herself as a fuck-up, Brooks’ stature in cinema history had finally become that of a monumental genius of acting and fashion, whose style is replicated by actresses throughout Hollywood to this day. Film historian and restorer, Henri Langlois once declared, ‘There is no Garbo, there is no Dietrich, there is only Louise Brooks’. This is true for fashion trends of late, with actresses and models sporting Brooks’ trademark banged and bobbed hair style, makeup and dress sense on runways and in magazines, as well as other stars from the 1920s and 30s.

With this new found respect, Brooks built up an illustrious reputation as ‘the finest writer to ever emerge from Hollywood’, as described by Roger Ebert. She wrote several essays discussing her life and career in Hollywood, all of which can be found in her autobiography, Lulu in Hollywood. Brooks had managed to turn her life around by taking her own failures and exploiting them to her full advantage. She had found that the love people had for her and her greatest creation, Lulu, would live and continue to grow after her death.

And it’s true. Today Louise Brooks has garnered something of a cult following, and her celebrity status is better known today than that of more successful silent actresses of her era, Mary Pickford, Gloria Swanson, amongst others. Thanks to her own subtle performance, Pandora’s Box is now seen as a masterpiece of world cinema. No other silent star oozed sex appeal in the same way while also displaying an unparalleled intelligence on the screen, and many historians and critics will agree, from Lottie Eisner to Kenneth Tynan.

In life, Brooks was seen as a talentless and destructive nymphomaniac. In death, she became the embodiment of 1920s sophistication. Many have paid homage to her through music, literature and film. She remains a fascinating creature and a true icon of the 20th century.

And like Miss Brooks herself said, ‘A well dressed woman, even though her purse is painfully empty, can conquer the world’.

The Drama Queen of Scots: A Book Review

A young Mary Stewart

There has been a recent surge in interest of Scotland's infamous queen Mary Stewart. An exhibition is currently on at the national museum of Scotland, two films are currently in production about the life of Scotland's most tragic figure, as well as a TV series starting in October focusing on her years in France. After reading up the 2013 movie it was said that the book that gave the writer the most influence was a biography by playwright/biographer Stefan Zweig.

Poster for the movie version

From the moment of her birth Mary had been the centre of attention - queen at just six days old she was a coveted prize for both England and France, with Henry VIII going to war trying to procure her for his own son, Edward;an infamous struggle that became known as the rough wooing. Upon her death she was forever remembered through history as a martyr who died for her faith. Her final comment was said to be 'In my end is my beginning.' A true statement, as her memory is immortal in comparison with any other Stewart monarch before or after. Indeed, Mary's life had all the ingredients of a great drama: passion, danger, intrigue, deception, murder, and of course tragedy. Which is why she has fascinated many historians and film makers and authors over 400 years after her death.

Stefan Zweig

Zweig was of Austrian descent and has written numerous books in his lifetime, from fiction to biographies as well as theatrical work. This perhaps makes his biography of Mary Stewart a little different from others. Other biographies include Marie Antoinette: The Portrait of an Average Woman (1932), and Decisive Moments in History (1927).

A copy of
The Queen of Scots

The Queen of Scots was first published in 1935 as Maria Stuart and chronicled the life of Mary, focusing mostly on her time in Scotland, with a little background to her father's reign, King James V. The biography stands out as it has more of a curiosity about the personalities of the players on the "stage", and also voices the author's strong belief that Mary was already having an affair with the Earl of Bothwell before the demise of Darnley, and it was due to her dependence on Bothwell that she eventually lost her throne.

The writing style differs from other biographies in that Zweig writes about the people as if they are characters in a play, dissecting their personalities to give a wider scope of what motivated their actions. Zweig is very particular in using the facts but tells the human story of this historical period as a drama rather than simply dictating the facts of Mary's life.

Overall, it is an entertaining account of a fascinating and tragic woman, giving a slightly different perspective from other biographies. I recommend this to any fan of history, or those interested in Mary Queen of Scots.

Katherine of Aragon: The Valiant Queen

Upon finishing Giles Tremlett's biography of Katherine of Aragon, I've come away with an even deeper respect for Henry VIII's first Queen.

In this day and age, there has been so much written on the six wives of Henry VIII, and many more that declare Anne Boleyn as the greatest of them all, while the others have been neglected. Indeed, Tremlett's biography is the first since the early seventies to focus solely on Henry's first Queen. And it proves long overdue. Tremlett gives us the portrait of a woman who was not merely a matronly wife who defied a king; she was a strong willed and highly intelligent woman who survived many hardships thrown at her by the people she was raised to submit to unquestionably.

Katherine of Aragon was the youngest child of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabel of Castile, two of the most powerful monarchs of medieval Europe; not to mention unique for they both governed with equal authority - Isabel ruling Castile in her own right, while Ferdinand ruled over Aragon. Indeed, with a mother with such unprecedented power Katherine later came to believe that her own daughter was capable of such authority in her own right, even if Henry didn't agree.

In 1500 Katherine sailed to England to marry the heir to the throne, Arthur Tudor, only for him to die within months of their wedding. After this, Katherine became a pawn in the power play between Henry VII and her parents.  She could not even trust her own ladies, including her indomitable Lady in waiting Elvira Manuel who manipulated Catherine in order to bring a union between Henry VII and Philip of Burgundy, husband of Katherine's sister Juana la Loca (Joan the mad).

In 1504 Isabel of Castile died. Her eldest surviving child, Juana, was now the Queen of Castile. However, Juana did not have the mental stability or strength of her mother and the rule of Castile became a battle of wills between her husband Phillip and her father, Ferdinand. And Katherine was a means to an end in securing the victor.

As Katherine's most trusted adviser, Elvira manipulated Katherine to urge Henry VII into an alliance with Phillip in order to gain Castile for himself. Once she learned the truth Katherine worked to ensure the interests of her father above anything else. Tremlett states that this event shaped a large part of Katherine's personality. She learned the hard way that you cannot trust those closest to you, a lesson that would come in useful in the future.

When Henry VII died, he was succeeded by his son as King Henry VIII, and Katherine finally became a Queen. By 1511 she and Henry were blessed with a baby boy, but he was dead within a month. This is a tragedy that would plague Katherine for the rest of her days.

In 1513 Henry went to war with France, leaving Katherine as regent in his absence. Although he gained small victories they would pale in comparison with Katherine's own triumph over the Scots. When Henry left for France, the French King turned to their ally James IV of Scotland who retaliated by attacking the English. Upon hearing of the Scots army approaching the borders Katherine didn't hesitate to gather troops and have them sent to face the Scottish King who perished on the battlefield. He left behind a 13 month old son, who became King James V, and his widow Margaret Tudor, Henry VIII's sister.

Upon this victory Katherine had the Scottish King's coat sent on to France to show Henry. She had proved herself a loyal and trustworthy regent for her husband. She even acted as an unofficial ambassador for her father, urging her husband to favour Spanish interests. During Henry's campaign with France, Ferdinand signed a secret treaty with the French King, and Catherine was forced to choose between her husband and her father. It was an easy choice, as her father had failed her time and time again and this time she had had enough.

In the meantime Katherine focused on conceiving the longed for son that she knew Henry desperately wanted. An all consuming desire that would push the once loving couple further away from each other and push Katherine closer to God.

God finally answered her prayers on 18th February 1516 when she delivered a healthy girl into the world. Despite the joy of a healthy baby, the fact that she was a girl did not bode well for the Tudor dynasty. Eventually Henry grew tired of Katherine and although they kept up appearances, he no longer sought her council either, preferring the advice of Cardinal Wolsey. Slowly, Katherine became isolated within the royal court, spied on by her own servants and with little joy except for her daughter Mary.

After 1525, everything changed. Katherine's marriage and her own personal history were called into question when Henry applied to the Pope for an annulment on the grounds that his marriage to Katherine had never been valid due to Katherine's previous marriage to Henry's brother Arthur. The argument was based around a passage from the Old Testament that declared it a sin to marry your brother's wife, and that 'he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless.' Yet, Katherine stood firm. She declared her marriage to be true and lawful - a statement that she would stand by to her dying days.

Around the time of the divorce proceedings Henry had been courting the infamous Anne Boleyn who would be blamed by so many for what was to come. Yet, it would be unfair to blame Anne for Henry had already carried these doubts about his marriage before Anne ever entered the picture. But it is the age old patriarchal view that when a marriage breaks up it is the fault of the wife or the mistress, never the husband. Especially if he also happens to be the King. Anne may not have been the initial cause for Henry's annulment, but she certainly took advantage of the situation, likely pushed on by her father and uncle, both hungry for power of their own; as well as her own desire for power.

The one mistake all the players made however was that they underestimated their opponent. Katherine discovered Henry's plans, knew of his secret meetings and wrote to her nephew, the powerful Emperor Charles who inherited a mighty kingdom, including Aragon and Castile. Katherine made sure that all the major players knew what was happening in England; and even Henry was at a loss when Charles invaded Rome, taking the Pope prisoner, leaving him in limbo over his divorce.

Throughout the whole proceeding Katherine proved time and time again to be a better fighter than her husband. Even Anne Boleyn warned him not to argue with the queen for she was 'sure to have the upper hand'. Alas, she was right. Even when the divorce proceedings opened in Blackfriars Katherine managed to manipulate the situation in her favour, getting down on her knees, submitting to her husband like any dutiful wife and asking Henry that she be allowed to consult Rome, to which he agreed.

It must be remembered that Katherine fought not only for her right as Queen but also for her daughter's right as heir to the throne. Even forced separation couldn't stop Katherine and Mary from standing by each other.

Henry of course grew impatient waiting for Rome's verdict and eventually tore England away from Rome, creating the Church of England thus leaving the decision of his marriage in the hands of an English verdict. Katherine was banished from court, stripped of much of her surroundings, her jewels being given to Anne who wore them at her own coronation. In spite of these humiliations Katherine remained obstinate and stood her ground. She would willingly die for her cause.

Sadly, she did die on 7th January 1536, alone and destitute. Abandoned by her husband, deprived of her only child, and forgotten by the Emperor, Katherine died at Kimbolton Castle, after a long and serious illness. Yet, she remained constant in her argument that she was the true Queen of England.

Upon her death, she was buried at St. Peterborough Cathedral. On the day she was buried Anne Boleyn miscarried for what was believed a second time. Mary was kept a prisoner, forced to be a servant waiting on Anne Boleyn's daughter, Elizabeth. Within five months of Katherine's death Anne Boleyn was sent to the Scaffold and executed on Tower Green.

After so many long year of fighting, both women in the end lost their lives in vain. Neither produced the male heir Henry desired, but they both left behind two strong willed daughters who would both become queen in their own right.

Katherine of Aragon herself has been cast into the mold of a long suffering wife rejected by her husband. Yet, this is only one aspect of a fascinating and complex woman who was a born fighter enduring more hardships than most and never crumbled under the pressure. Even when faced with the prospect of death she stuck by her beliefs, proving a more challenging adversary to the King and his council than any army ever could. Even her enemies couldn't doubt her strength, Thomas Cromwell declaring 'but not for her sex, she would have surpassed all the heroes of history.'

Hello and Welcome!

This is my first entry here. This blog with focus mainly on my own writing and book I have read and people in history that I take an interest in. I will also attempt some snippets from possible works, short stories and poems so keep checking for updates.