May 23, 1533: The Marriage of King Henry VIII and Infanta Catherine of Aragon is declared annulled

Tags

Anne Boleyn, Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Wolsey, Carlos I of Spain, Catherine of Aragon, Emperor Charles V, King Francis I of France, King Henry VIII of England and Ireland, Pope Clement VII, Thomas Cranmer

During his marriage to Catherine of Aragon, King Henry VIII conducted an affair with Mary Boleyn, Catherine’s lady-in-waiting. There has been speculation that Mary’s two children, Henry Carey and Catherine Carey, were fathered by Henry, but this has never been proved, and the king never acknowledged them as he did in the case of Henry FitzRoy. In 1525, as Henry grew more impatient with Catherine’s inability to produce the male heir he desired, he became enamoured of Mary Boleyn’s sister, Anne Boleyn, then a charismatic young woman of 25 in the queen’s entourage. Anne, however, resisted his attempts to seduce her, and refused to become his mistress as her sister had.

It was in this context that Henry considered his three options for finding a dynastic successor and hence resolving what came to be described at court as the king’s “great matter”. These options were legitimising Henry FitzRoy, which would need the involvement of the Pope Clement VII and would be open to challenge; marrying off Mary, his daughter with Catherine, as soon as possible and hoping for a grandson to inherit directly, but Mary was considered unlikely to conceive before Henry’s death, or somehow rejecting Catherine and marrying someone else of child-bearing age. Probably seeing the possibility of marrying Anne, the third was ultimately the most attractive possibility to the 34-year-old Henry, and it soon became the king’s absorbing desire to annul his marriage to the now 40-year-old Catherine.

Henry’s precise motivations and intentions over the coming years are not widely agreed on. Henry himself, at least in the early part of his reign, was a devout and well-informed Catholic to the extent that his 1521 publication Assertio Septem Sacramentorum (“Defence of the Seven Sacraments”) earned him the title of Fidei Defensor (Defender of the Faith) from Pope Leo X. The work represented a staunch defence of papal supremacy, albeit one couched in somewhat contingent terms.

It is not clear exactly when Henry changed his mind on the issue as he grew more intent on a second marriage. Certainly, by 1527, he had convinced himself that Catherine had produced no male heir because their union was “blighted in the eyes of God”. Indeed, in marrying Catherine, his brother’s wife, he had acted contrary to Leviticus 20:21, a justification Thomas Cranmer used to declare the marriage null. Martin Luther, on the other hand, had initially argued against the annulment, stating that Henry VIII could take a second wife in accordance with his teaching that the Bible allowed for polygamy but not divorce.

Henry now believed the Pope had lacked the authority to grant a dispensation from this impediment. It was this argument Henry took to Pope Clement VII in 1527 in the hope of having his marriage to Catherine annulled, forgoing at least one less openly defiant line of attack. In going public, all hope of tempting Catherine to retire to a nunnery or otherwise stay quiet was lost. Henry sent his secretary, William Knight, to appeal directly to the Holy See by way of a deceptively worded draft papal bull. Knight was unsuccessful; the Pope could not be misled so easily.

Other missions concentrated on arranging an ecclesiastical court to meet in England, with a representative from Clement VII. Although Clement agreed to the creation of such a court, he never had any intention of empowering his legate, Lorenzo Campeggio, to decide in Henry’s favour. This bias was perhaps the result of pressure from Emperor Charles V, Catherine’s nephew, but it is not clear how far this influenced either Campeggio or the Pope.

After less than two months of hearing evidence, Clement called the case back to Rome in July 1529, from which it was clear that it would never re-emerge. With the chance for an annulment lost, Cardinal Wolsey bore the blame. He was charged with praemunire in October 1529, and his fall from grace was “sudden and total”. Briefly reconciled with Henry (and officially pardoned) in the first half of 1530, he was charged once more in November 1530, this time for treason, but died while awaiting trial.

After a short period in which Henry took government upon his own shoulders, Sir Thomas More took on the role of Lord Chancellor and chief minister. Intelligent and able, but a devout Catholic and opponent of the annulment, More initially cooperated with the king’s new policy, denouncing Wolsey in Parliament.

A year later, Catherine was banished from court, and her rooms were given to Anne Boleyn. Anne was an unusually educated and intellectual woman for her time and was keenly absorbed and engaged with the ideas of the Protestant Reformers, but the extent to which she herself was a committed Protestant is much debated. When Archbishop of Canterbury William Warham died, Anne’s influence and the need to find a trustworthy supporter of the annulment had Thomas Cranmer appointed to the vacant position. This was approved by the Pope, unaware of the king’s nascent plans for the Church.

In the winter of 1532, Henry met with King François I of France at Calais and enlisted the support of the French king for his new marriage. Immediately upon returning to Dover in England, Henry, now 41, and Anne went through a secret wedding service. She soon became pregnant, and there was a second wedding service in London on January 25, 1533. On May 23, 1533, Cranmer, sitting in judgment at a special court convened at Dunstable Priory to rule on the validity of the king’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon, declared the marriage of Henry and Catherine null and void.

Five days later, on May 28, 1533, Cranmer declared the marriage of Henry and Anne to be valid. Catherine was formally stripped of her title as queen, becoming instead “princess dowager” as the widow of Arthur. In her place, Anne was crowned queen on June 1, 1533. The queen gave birth to a daughter slightly prematurely on September 7, 1533. The child was christened Elizabeth, in honour of Henry’s mother, Elizabeth of York.

May 19, 1744: Birth of Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, Queen of Great Britain

Tags

Archbishop of Canterbury, Charles of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz., Hanover, Kew Gardens, King George III of the United Kingdom, Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Prince Regent, Queen of Württemberg

Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (May 19, 1744 – November 17, 1818) was Queen of Great Britain and of Ireland as the wife of King George III from their marriage on September 8, 1761 until her death in 1818. Both kingdoms were in a personal union under King George III until the Acts of Union 1800 merged them on January 1, 1801. Charlotte then became Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. As George’s wife, she was also Electress of Brunswick-Lüneburg (Hanover) until becoming Queen of Hanover on October 12, 1814. Charlotte was Britain’s longest-serving queen consort, serving for 57 years and 70 days.

Sophia Charlotte was born on May 19, 1744. She was the youngest daughter of Duke Charles Ludwig Friedrich of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, Prince of Mirow (1708–1752), and his wife Princess Elisabeth Albertine of Saxe-Hildburghausen (1713–1761). Mecklenburg-Strelitz was a small north-German duchy in the Holy Roman Empire.

The children of Duke Charles were all born at the Untere Schloss (Lower Castle) in Mirow. According to diplomatic reports at the time of her engagement to George III in 1761, Charlotte had received “a very mediocre education”. Her upbringing was similar to that of a daughter of an English country gentleman. She received some rudimentary instruction in botany, natural history, and language from tutors, but her education focused on household management and religion – the latter taught by a priest. Only after her brother Adolphus Frederick succeeded to the ducal throne, in 1752, did she gain any experience of princely duties and of court life.

When George III succeeded to the throne of Great Britain upon the death of his grandfather George II, he was 22 years old and unmarried. His mother and advisors were eager to have him settled in marriage. The 17-year-old Princess Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz appealed to him as a prospective consort partly because she had been brought up in an insignificant north German duchy, and therefore would probably have had no experience or interest in power politics or party intrigues. That proved to be the case; to make sure, he instructed her shortly after their wedding “not to meddle”, a precept she was glad to follow.

The King announced to his Council in July 1761, according to the usual form, his intention to wed the Princess, after which a party of escorts, led by the Earl Harcourt, departed for the Holy Roman Empire to conduct Princess Charlotte to England. They reached Strelitz on August 14, 1761, and were received the next day by Duke Adolph Friedrich IV, Charlotte’s brother, at which time the marriage contract was signed by him on the one hand and Lord Harcourt on the other.

Three days of public celebrations followed, and on August 17, 1761, Charlotte set out for Britain, accompanied by Adolph Friedrich IV and the British escort party. On August 22, they reached Cuxhaven, where a small fleet awaited to convey them to England. The voyage was extremely difficult; the party encountered three storms at sea, and landed at Harwich only on September 7. They set out at once for London, spent that night in Witham, at the residence of Lord Abercorn, and arrived at 3:30 pm the next day at St. James’s Palace in London. They were received by the King and his family at the garden gate, which marked the first meeting of the bride and groom.

At 9:00 pm that same evening (September 8, 1761), within six hours of her arrival, Charlotte was united in marriage with King George III. The ceremony was performed at the Chapel Royal, St. James’s Palace, by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Secker. Only the royal family, the party who had travelled from Germany, and a handful of guests were present.

The marriage lasted 57 years and produced 15 children, 13 of whom survived to adulthood. They included two future British monarchs, George IV and William IV; as well as Charlotte, Princess Royal, who became Queen of Württemberg; and Prince Ernest Augustus, who became King of Hanover.

Charlotte was a patron of the arts and an amateur botanist who helped expand Kew Gardens. She introduced the Christmas tree to Britain, after decorating one for a Christmas party for children from Windsor in 1800. She was distressed by her husband’s bouts of physical and mental illness, which became permanent in later life.

She maintained a close relationship with Queen Marie Antoinette of France, and the French Revolution likely enhanced the emotional strain felt by Charlotte. Her eldest son, George, Prince of Wales, was appointed as Prince Regent in 1811 due to the increasing severity of the King’s illness. Charlotte died in November 1818 with her son George at her side. George III died a little over a year later, likely unaware of his wife’s death.

May 18, 1152: The future King Henry II of the English marries Eleanor of Aquitaine

Tags

Annulment, Archbishop of Canterbury, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Empress Matilda, Henry II of England, King Robért II of the Franks, Louis VI of France, Louis VII of France, Pope Eugene III, Theobald of Bec, William X of Aquitaine

Eleanor of Aquitaine (c. 1122 – April 1, 1204)

Eleanor was the daughter of Guillaume X, Duke of Aquitaine, and Aénor de Châtellerault. She became duchess upon her father’s death in April 1137, and three months later she married Louis, son of her guardian King Louis VI of the Franks. A few weeks later, Eleanor’s father-in-law died and her husband succeeded him as King Louis VII of the Franks

Eleanor and Louis VII had two daughters, Marie and Alix. Soon afterwards, she sought an annulment of her marriage, but her request was rejected by Pope Eugene III. Eventually, Louis agreed to an annulment, as fifteen years of marriage had not produced a son.

On March 21, the four archbishops, with the approval of Pope Eugene III, granted an annulment on grounds of consanguinity within the fourth degree; Eleanor was Louis’ third cousin once removed, and shared common ancestry with King Robért II of Franks. Their two daughters were, however, declared legitimate. Custody of the daughters was awarded to King Louis VII. Archbishop Samson received assurances from Louis that Eleanor’s lands would be restored to her.

As Eleanor travelled to Poitiers, two lords—Theobald V, Count of Blois, and Geoffrey, Count of Nantes, brother of Henry II, Duke of Normandy—tried to kidnap and marry her to claim her lands. As soon as she arrived in Poitiers, Eleanor sent envoys to Henry II Duke of Normandy and future King of the English, asking him to come at once to marry her.

King Henry II of the English (March 5, 1133 – July 6, 1189)

Duke Henry II of Normandy was born in Maine at Le Mans on March 5, 1133, the eldest child of the Empress Matilda, and her second husband, Geoffrey V, Plantagenet, Count of Anjou.

His mother, Empress Matilda, was born to Henry I, King of the English and Duke of Normandy, and his first wife, Matilda of Scotland, a daughter of King Malcolm III of Scotland and the Anglo-Saxon Princess Margaret of Wessex, the daughter of the English prince Edward the Exile and his wife Agatha, and also the granddaughter of Edmund Ironside, King of the English.

King Henry I of the English was the youngest son of William the Conqueror, who had invaded England in 1066.

Marriage

On May 18, 1152 (Whit Sunday), eight weeks after her annulment, Eleanor married Henry “without the pomp and ceremony that befitted their rank.”

Eleanor was related to Henry even more closely than she had been to Louis: they were cousins to the third degree through their common ancestor Ermengarde of Anjou, wife of Robért I, Duke of Burgundy and Geoffrey, Count of Gâtinais, and they were also descended from King Robért II of the Franks.

A marriage between Henry and Eleanor’s daughter Marie had earlier been declared impossible due to their status as third cousins once removed. It was rumoured by some that Eleanor had had an affair with Henry’s own father, Geoffrey V, Count of Anjou, who had advised his son to avoid any involvement with her.

On 25 October 1154, Henry became King Henry II of the English. A now heavily pregnant Eleanor, was crowned Queen of the English by Theobald of Bec, the Archbishop of Canterbury, on December 19, 1154. She may not have been anointed on this occasion, however, because she had already been anointed in 1137.

Over the next 13 years, she bore Henry five sons and three daughters: William, Henry, Richard, Geoffrey, John, Matilda, Eleanor, and Joan. Historian John Speed, in his 1611 work History of Great Britain, mentions the possibility that Eleanor had a son named Philip, who died young. His sources no longer exist, and he alone mentions this birth.

Eleanor’s marriage to Henry was reputed to be tumultuous and argumentative, although sufficiently cooperative to produce at least eight pregnancies. Henry was by no means faithful to his wife and had a reputation for philandering; he fathered other, illegitimate, children throughout the marriage.

Eleanor appears to have taken an ambivalent attitude towards these affairs. Geoffrey of York, for example, was an illegitimate son of Henry, but acknowledged by Henry as his child and raised at Westminster in the care of the Queen.

May 17, 1536: The Marriage of King Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn is Declared Null.

Tags

Anne Boleyn, Annulment, Archbishop of Canterbury, Catherine of Aragon, George Boleyn, Henry VIII of England, Thomas Cranmer, Treason, White Tower

Queen Anne, pregnant, in 1536, was aware of the dangers if she failed to give birth to a son. With Catherine of Aragon recently dead, Henry would be free to marry without any taint of illegality. At this time, Henry began paying court to one of Anne’s maids-of-honour, Jane Seymour, and allegedly gave her a locket containing a portrait miniature of himself. While wearing this locket in the presence of Anne, Jane began opening and closing it. Anne responded by ripping the locket off Jane’s neck with such force that her fingers bled.

Later that month, the king was unhorsed in a tournament and knocked unconscious for two hours, a worrying incident that Anne believed led to her miscarriage five days later. Another possible cause of the miscarriage was an incident in which, upon entering a room, Anne saw Jane Seymour sitting on Henry’s lap and flew into a rage. Whatever the cause, on the day that Catherine of Aragon was buried at Peterborough Abbey, Anne miscarried a baby which, according to the imperial ambassador Eustace Chapuys, she had borne for about three and a half months, and which “seemed to be a male child”. Chapuys commented “She has miscarried of her saviour.” In Chapuys’ opinion, this loss was the beginning of the end of the royal marriage.

Given Henry’s desperate desire for a son, the sequence of Anne’s pregnancies has attracted much interest. Mike Ashley speculated that Anne had two stillborn children after Elizabeth’s birth and before the male child she miscarried in 1536. Most sources[who?] attest only to the birth of Elizabeth in September 1533, a possible miscarriage in the summer of 1534, and the miscarriage of a male child, of almost four months’ gestation, in January 1536.

As Anne recovered from her miscarriage, Henry declared that he had been seduced into the marriage by means of “sortilege” – a French term indicating either “deception” or “spells”. His new mistress, Jane Seymour, was quickly moved into royal quarters. This was followed by Anne’s brother George being refused a prestigious court honour, the Order of the Garter, given instead to Sir Nicholas Carew.

Charges of adultery, incest and treason

Anne’s biographer Eric Ives believes that her fall and execution were primarily engineered by her former ally Thomas Cromwell. The conversations between Chapuys and Cromwell thereafter indicate Cromwell as the instigator of the plot to remove Anne; evidence of this is seen in the Spanish Chronicle and through letters written from Chapuys to Charles V. Anne argued with Cromwell over the redistribution of Church revenues and over foreign policy.

She advocated that revenues be distributed to charitable and educational institutions; and she favoured a French alliance. Cromwell insisted on filling the king’s depleted coffers, while taking a cut for himself, and preferred an imperial alliance. For these reasons, Ives suggests, “Anne Boleyn had become a major threat to Thomas Cromwell.” Cromwell’s biographer John Schofield, on the other hand, contends that no power struggle existed between Anne and Cromwell and that “not a trace can be found of a Cromwellian conspiracy against Anne … Cromwell became involved in the royal marital drama only when Henry ordered him onto the case.”

Cromwell did not manufacture the accusations of adultery, though he and other officials used them to bolster Henry’s case against Anne. Warnicke questions whether Cromwell could have or wished to manipulate the king in such a matter. Such a bold attempt by Cromwell, given the limited evidence, could have risked his office, even his life.

Henry himself issued the crucial instructions: his officials, including Cromwell, carried them out. The result was by modern standards a legal travesty; however, the rules of the time were not bent in order to assure a conviction; there was no need to tamper with rules that guaranteed the desired result since law at the time was an engine of state, not a mechanism for justice.

Towards the end of April, a Flemish musician in Anne’s service named Mark Smeaton was arrested. He initially denied being the queen’s lover but later confessed, perhaps after being tortured or promised freedom. Another courtier, Sir Henry Norris, was arrested on May Day, but being an aristocrat, could not be tortured. Prior to his arrest, Norris was treated kindly by the king, who offered him his own horse to use on the May Day festivities.

It seems likely that during the festivities, the king was notified of Smeaton’s confession and it was shortly thereafter the alleged conspirators were arrested upon his orders. Norris denied his guilt and swore that Queen Anne was innocent; one of the most damaging pieces of evidence against Norris was an overheard conversation with Anne at the end of April, where she accused him of coming often to her chambers not to pay court to her lady-in-waiting Madge Shelton but to herself.

Sir Francis Weston was arrested two days later on the same charge, as was Sir William Brereton, a groom of the king’s Privy Chamber. Sir Thomas Wyatt, a poet and friend of the Boleyns who was allegedly infatuated with her before her marriage to the king, was also imprisoned for the same charge but later released, most likely due to his or his family’s friendship with Cromwell. Sir Richard Page was also accused of having a sexual relationship with the queen, but he was acquitted of all charges after further investigation could not implicate him with Anne. The final accused was Queen Anne’s own brother, George Boleyn, arrested on charges of incest and treason. He was accused of two incidents of incest: November 1535 at Whitehall and the following month at Eltham.

On May 2, 1536, Anne was arrested and taken to the Tower of London by barge. It is likely that Anne may have entered through the Court Gate in the Byward Tower rather than the Traitors’ Gate, according to historian and author of The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn, Eric Ives. In the Tower, she collapsed, demanding to know the location of her father and “swete broder”, as well as the charges against her.

Four of the accused men were tried in Westminster on May 12, 1536. Weston, Brereton and Norris publicly maintained their innocence and only Smeaton supported the Crown by pleading guilty. Three days later, Anne and George Boleyn were tried separately in the Tower of London, before a jury of 27 peers. She was accused of adultery, incest, and high treason. By the Treason Act of Edward III, adultery on the part of a queen was a form of treason (because of the implications for the succession to the throne) for which the penalty was hanging, drawing and quartering for a man and burning alive for a woman, but the accusations, and especially that of incestuous adultery, were also designed to impugn her moral character.

The other form of treason alleged against her was that of plotting the king’s death, with her “lovers”, so that she might later marry Henry Norris. Anne’s one-time betrothed, Henry Percy, 6th Earl of Northumberland, sat on the jury that unanimously found Anne guilty. When the verdict was announced, he collapsed and had to be carried from the courtroom. He died childless eight months later and was succeeded by his nephew.

Anne was convinced of High Treason and condemned to death on May 15.

On May 17, Cranmer declared Anne’s marriage to Henry VIII null and void.

On the morning of Friday, May 19, Anne was taken to a scaffold erected on the north side of the White Tower, in front of what is now the Waterloo Barracks. She wore a red petticoat under a loose, dark grey gown of damask trimmed in fur and a mantle of ermine.

The execution consisted of a single stroke. It was witnessed by Thomas Cromwell; Charles Brandon, 1st Duke of Suffolk; the king’s illegitimate son, Henry FitzRoy; the Lord Mayor of London, as well as aldermen, sheriffs and representatives of the various craft guilds. Most of the king’s council were also present. Cranmer, who was at Lambeth Palace, was reported to have broken down in tears after telling Alexander Ales: “She who has been the Queen of England on earth will today become a Queen in heaven.”

My Thoughts On The Coronation

Tags

Archbishop of Canterbury, coronation, Crown of St. Edward, Gold State Coach, Imperial State Crown., King Charles III of the United Kingdom, the prince of Wales, Westminster Abbey

From The Emperor’s Desk:

I really needed a day or two to process my thoughts and feelings on this week’s coronation of King Charles III.

First of all, I was overwhelmed with the sense of the magnitude and grandeur of it all and how I was witnessing a ceremony that has been performed in that exact location gong back many centuries! It could have been King Edward I or Richard III or Charles II sitting there! Continuity and how it connects us to the past is, for me, one of cornerstones of the concept of monarchy.

For example, the Crown of St. Edward that was used to crown King Charles II and was specifically made for his coronation. This crown sat on the heads of seven monarchs (including King Charles). After King Charles II James II-VII (1685), William III (1689), George V (1911), George VI (1937) and Elizabeth II (1953) have all been crowned with this historic relic.

Mary II and Anne were crowned with small diamond crowns of their own; George I, George II, George III and William IV were crowned with the State Crown of George I. King George IV was crowned with a new large diamond crown made specially for the occasion; and Queen Victoria and Edward VII chose not to use St. Edward’s Crown because of its weight and instead used the lighter 1838 version of the Imperial State Crown.

One of the things that surprised me about St Edward’s Crown was that to me it looked dull and not shiny gold like I thought it was!

Yes I hope the king will continue to wear the Imperial State Crown at the opening of Parliament. What is interesting to me is that the arches were not altered for the coronation.

If you look at pictures of the Imperial State Crown from Queen Victoria to George sixth The arches were raised, or at least up higher. I’ve read where the arches were lowered for Queen Elizabeth II to give it a more feminine look.

So I was thinking that the arches would have been returned to a little more higher position for the king. Although I love that crown it does seem a little odd on Charles and it may take a little bit to getting used to. I hate to say it but it did seem a little bit feminine in my opinion.

Here is a link to my blog entry. If you scroll down a bit you can see the picture of king Edward VII George VI and Queen Elizabeth II wearing the Imperial State Crown and see how the arches are set.

https://wp.me/p2pver-3Ds

I’ve also heard some people say that Queen Camilla should have worn a smaller crown and that this one seemed a bit too big for her head and in that case I do agree. So I do hope she wears it without the arches for the state opening of Parliament.

The British do pomp extremely well and the coronation was very evident of that. I really appreciated seeing The Jubilee Coach used to bring the king and queen to Westminster Abbey. I was especially amazed to see The Return of the newly crowned king and queen back to Buckingham Palace in the 1761 gold coach built during the reign of King George III. With the massive amount of soldiers and guards along the way it was quite an impressive spectacle!

Although a spectacular as it was I need to take into account the fact that this was a trim down coronation. For example there were not a massive group of peers wearing their coronation robes and dining they’re coronets. I have to be honest and say I really did not miss this aspect of the coronation. This is now getting into the territory of modernizing the coronation.

I did spend a lot of time online reading other people’s perspective and opinions on the coronation. I’m not taking into account the anti-monarcus and people who absolutely were against the coronation. I’m speaking of people that support the monarchy and the coronation yet also realize that the moniker needs to be cognizant of the times in which we live and continually needs to be updated to stay relevant.

I have read some opinions that felt that much of the coronation is to archaic for our day and age. I’m not sure I agree with that. I sincerely hope in the future there will be more coronation of British monarchs. However, as I said I do understand the need for the monarchy to stay relevant. I believe this can be a topic all on the song which I will address in a future blog entry.

Another aspect that I liked was the use of the regalia during the ceremony. The spurs , armills and rings were only presented to the King. Traditionally, when a King is crowned, the spurs are supposed to touch his heels. It did not happen. And the King did not wear the armills and the ring.

The Spurs are now very fragile and it was decided that the King would just touch them. The Armills and both rings would have needed to be adjusted to fit the King and Queen. Rather than adjusting them and possibly causing damage they were just presented to Their Majesties.

By being presented to His Majesty where he touched them, I thought that was a nice way to honor the old but also bringing something new.

The coronation ring needs to be modified for each person. On a ring this old fragile that is not always practical so this time it was rightfully chosen not to alter the ring. In reading about the coronation of Queen Victoria she stated that the Archbishop forced the ring on her finger and it was quite painful.

The liked the part of the ceremony where the Prince of Wales was prominent was in paying homage to the king. In the past this part of the coronation would have taken up a lot of time with each peer of the realm coming up to the king and paying their homage and loyalty to him. To me it seems practical to only have the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Prince of Wales pay homage to the king. I did think it was a nice gesture that a pledge of homage and loyalty to the king, which was completely voluntary, was offered for all to participate in. For me that very much personalized this aspect of the coronation.

The next area, the clothes that people wore, seem to be an area of controversy and mixed opinions. I’m not sure how to categorize the way women were dressed back in other coronations, or even how men were dressed if they were not dressed in the robes of the period, the majority of people were dressed in formal day wear. I’d seen some people express that they wished the people were dressed in more formal evening wear with white ties and formal gowns and tiaras would have been better was the opinion of some people.

I’m actually mixed about that. I was absolutely fine with the way people dressed and I didn’t lament the lack of tiaras or other accoutrements generally worn at a coronation. However, I certainly wouldn’t have complained if the dress for the coronation was more traditional

I did like how men of the royal family were dressed. The King asked most of the Royal Ladies to wear the Robe of the Royal Victorian Order. The Princess of Wales, Duchess of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Gloucester also wore the Robe of the Royal Victorian Order. The only odd one out was the Princess Royal who wore the Robe of the Order of the Thistle. I personally think that was so Scotland was represented. As the Duke of York and other royal males wore their Order of the Garter Robe (English Order).

I am not sure what the Princess of Wales and her daughter princess Charlotte of Wales was wearing on their head. To me it looked like some Romanesque laurel wreaths. I like what they were wearing although I read where some did not.

All in all I was very moved and even at times choked up and in tears about this coordination. I think I’ll close right now I rambled on a bit and I’m sure I will write more in the days to come!

God Save the King!

Countdown to the Coronation V: Arranging and Planning

Tags

Archbishop of Canterbury, coronation, Dean of Westminster, Earl Marshall, King Charles III of the United Kingdom, King James I-VI of England and Scotland and Ireland, Queen Elizabeth I of England and Ireland, Thomas Cranmer

Arranging and planning

All arrangements for coronation ceremonies are made by the Earl Marshal and his Coronation Committee on behalf of the Crown and not by the Abbey authorities. But the Dean of Westminster instructs the sovereign on all matters connected with the service and assists the Archbishop of Canterbury, who always crowns the monarch (unless the See is vacant and then a senior bishop will perform this).

Since the late 14th century every coronation ceremony has basically followed the same order of service laid down in the Abbey’s magnificent medieval illuminated Latin manuscript, the Liber Regalis, which can be viewed in the Galleries at the Abbey. The coronation of Elizabeth I was a mixture of Latin and English but that of James I-VI in 1603 was an entirely English liturgy.

A third recension was probably compiled during the reign of Henry I and was used at the coronation of his successor, Stephen, in 1135. While retaining the most important elements of the Anglo-Saxon rite, it may have borrowed from the consecration of the Holy Roman Emperor from the Pontificale Romano-Germanicum, a book of German liturgy compiled in Mainz in 961, thus bringing the English tradition into line with continental practice.

It remained in use until the coronation of Edward II in 1308 when the fourth recension was first used, having been compiled over several preceding decades. Although influenced by its French counterpart, the new ordo focussed on the balance between the monarch and his nobles and on the oath, neither of which concerned the absolutist French kings. One manuscript of this recension is the Liber Regalis at Westminster Abbey which has come to be regarded as the definitive version.

Following the start of the Reformation in England, the boy king Edward VI had been crowned in the first Protestant coronation in 1547, during which Archbishop Thomas Cranmer preached a sermon against idolatry and “the tyranny of the bishops of Rome”. However, six years later, he was succeeded by his half-sister Mary I, who restored the Catholic rite.

In 1559, Elizabeth I underwent the last English coronation under the auspices of the Catholic Church; however, Elizabeth’s insistence on changes to reflect her Protestant beliefs resulted in several bishops refusing to officiate at the service, and it was conducted by the low-ranking bishop of Carlisle, Owen Oglethorpe.

January 7, 1536: Death of Infanta Catherine of Aragon, Queen of England

Tags

Anne Boleyn, Archbishop of Canterbury, Arthur Tudor, Infanta Catherine of Aragon, King Fernando II of Aragon, King Henry VIII of England and Scotland, Pope Clement VII, Prince of Wales, Queen Catherine of England, Queen Isabella I of Castile, Queen Mary I of England and Ireland, Thomas Cranmer

Infanta Catherine of Aragon (December 16, 1485 – January 7, 1536) was Queen of England as the first wife of King Henry VIII from their marriage on June 11, 1509 until their annulment on May 23, 1533. She was previously Princess of Wales as the wife of Henry’s elder brother, Arthur, Prince of Wales.

The daughter of Queen Isabella I of Castile and King Fernando II of Aragon. Infanta Catherine was three years old when she was betrothed to Prince Arthur, heir apparent to the English throne.

Infanta Catherine of Aragon

They married in 1501, but Arthur died five months later. Catherine spent years in limbo, and during this time, she held the position of ambassador of the Aragonese crown to England in 1507, the first known female ambassador in European history.

She married Arthur’s younger brother, the recently ascended Henry VIII, in 1509. For six months in 1513, she served as regent of England while Henry VIII was in France. During that time the English crushed and defeated a Scottish invasion at the Battle of Flodden, an event in which Catherine played an important part with an emotional speech about English courage and patriotism.

By 1525, Henry VIII was infatuated with Anne Boleyn and dissatisfied that his marriage to Catherine had produced no surviving sons, leaving their daughter Mary as heir presumptive at a time when there was no established precedent for a woman on the throne.

He sought to have their marriage annulled, setting in motion a chain of events that led to England’s schism with the Catholic Church. When Pope Clement VII refused to annul the marriage, Henry defied him by assuming supremacy over religious matters.

Portrait of a noblewoman, possibly Mary Tudor c. 1514 or Catherine of Aragon c. 1502, by Michael Sittow. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.

On May 23, 1533 Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, sitting in judgement at a special court convened at Dunstable Priory to rule on the validity of Henry’s marriage to Catherine, declared the marriage unlawful, even though Catherine had testified that she and Arthur had never had physical relations. Five days later, on May 28, 1533, Cranmer ruled that Henry VIII and Anne’s marriage was valid.

Until the end of her life, Catherine would refer to herself as Henry’s only lawful wedded wife and England’s only rightful Queen, and her servants continued to address her as such. Henry refused her the right to any title but “Dowager Princess of Wales” in recognition of her position as his brother’s widow.

Catherine went to live at The More Castle, Hertfordshire, late in 1531. After that, she was successively moved to the Royal Palace of Hatfield, Hertfordshire (May to September, 1532), Elsyng Palace, Enfield (September 1532 to February 1533), Ampthill Castle, Bedfordshire (February to July, 1533) and Buckden Towers, Cambridgeshire (July 1533 to May 1534).

She was then finally transferred to Kimbolton Castle, Cambridgeshire where she confined herself to one room, which she left only to attend Mass, dressed only in the hair shirt of the Order of St. Francis, and fasted continuously.

King Henry VIII of England and Ireland

While she was permitted to receive occasional visitors, she was forbidden to see her daughter Mary. They were also forbidden to communicate in writing, but sympathisers discreetly conveyed letters between the two.

Henry offered both mother and daughter better quarters and permission to see each other if they would acknowledge Anne Boleyn as the new Queen; both refused.

In late December 1535, sensing her death was near, Catherine made her will, and wrote to her nephew, the Emperor Charles V, asking him to protect her daughter.

Catherine died at Kimbolton Castle on January 7, 1536. The following day, news of her death reached the king. At the time there were rumours that she was poisoned, possibly by Gregory di Casale.

Queen Catherine of England

According to the chronicler Edward Hall, Anne Boleyn wore yellow for the mourning, which has been interpreted in various ways; Polydore Vergil interpreted this to mean that Anne did not mourn. Chapuys reported that it was King Henry who decked himself in yellow, celebrating the news and making a great show of his and Anne’s daughter, Elizabeth, to his courtiers.

This was seen as distasteful and vulgar by many. Another theory is that the dressing in yellow was out of respect for Catherine as yellow was said to be the Spanish colour of mourning. Certainly, later in the day it is reported that Henry and Anne both individually and privately wept for her death. On the day of Catherine’s funeral, Anne Boleyn miscarried a male child.

Queen Mary I of England and Ireland

Rumours then circulated that Catherine had been poisoned by Anne or Henry, or both. The rumours were born after the apparent discovery during her embalming that there was a black growth on her heart that might have been caused by poisoning. Modern medical experts are in agreement that her heart’s discolouration was not due to poisoning, but to cancer, something which was not understood at the time.

Her daughter Mary would become the first undisputed English queen regnant in 1553.

December 17, 1538: Henry VIII of England is Excommunicated for a second time.

Tags

Alessandro Farnese, Anne Boleyn, Archbishop of Canterbury, Bishop of Rome, Church of England, Emperor Charles V, Excommunication, Giulio de' Medici, King François I of France, King Henry VIII of England, Papal Bull, Pope Clement VII, Pope Paul III, Protestant Reformation, Thomas Cranmer

When Pope Paul III excommunicated King Henry VIII of England on December 17 this was the second time the King had been excommunicated. I will begin by giving some background information on Pope Clement VII and the first excommunication of the King.

King Henry VIII of England and Lord of Ireland

Pope Clement VII (May 26, 1478 – September 25, 1534) was head of the Catholic Church and ruler of the Papal States from November 19, 1523 to his death on September 25, 1534.

Born Giulio de’ Medici, his life began under tragic circumstances. On April 26, 1478—exactly one month before his birth—his father, Giuliano de Medici (brother of Lorenzo the Magnificent) was murdered in the Florence Cathedral by enemies of his family, in what is now known as “The Pazzi Conspiracy”.

The future Pope was born illegitimately on May 26, 1478, in Florence; the exact identity of his mother remains unknown, although a plurality of scholars contend that it was Fioretta Gorini, the daughter of a university professor. Giulio spent the first seven years of life with his godfather, the architect Antonio da Sangallo the Elder.

Thereafter, Lorenzo the Magnificent raised him as one of his own sons, alongside his children Giovanni (the future Pope Leo X), Piero, and Giuliano. Educated at the Palazzo Medici in Florence by humanists like Angelo Poliziano, and alongside prodigies like Michelangelo, Giulio became an accomplished musician. In personality he was reputed to be shy, and in physical appearance, handsome

Following Adrian VI’s death on September 14, 1523, Cardinal Giulio overcame the opposition of the French King and finally succeeded in being elected Pope Clement VII in the next conclave (November 19, 1523).

Elected in 1523 at the end of the Italian Renaissance. Pope Clement VII was deemed “the most unfortunate of the popes”, Clement VII’s reign was marked by a rapid succession of political, military, and religious struggles—many long in the making—which had far-reaching consequences for Christianity and world politics.

Pope Clement VII came to the papacy with a high reputation as a statesman. He had served with distinction as chief advisor to Pope Leo X (1513–1521), Pope Adrian VI (1522–1523), and commendably as gran maestro of Florence (1519–1523).

Pope Clement VII, Bishop of Rome

Assuming leadership at a time of crisis, with the Protestant Reformation spreading; the Church nearing bankruptcy; and large, foreign armies invading Italy, Clement VII initially tried to unite Christendom by making peace among the many Christian leaders then at odds. He later attempted to liberate Italy from foreign occupation, believing that it threatened the Church’s freedom.

The complex political situation of the 1520s thwarted Clement’s efforts. Inheriting unprecedented challenges, including Martin Luther’s Protestant Reformation in Northern Europe; a vast power struggle in Italy between Europe’s two most powerful kings, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and King François I of France, each of whom demanded that the Pope choose a side; and Turkish invasions of Eastern Europe led by Suleiman the Magnificent.

Clement’s problems were exacerbated by King Henry VIII of England’s contentious divorce, resulting in England breaking away from the Catholic Church; and in 1527, souring relations with Emperor Charles V, leading to the violent Sack of Rome, during which Clement was imprisoned.

After escaping confinement in the Castel Sant’Angelo, Clement—with few economic, military, or political options remaining—compromised the Church’s and Italy’s independence by allying with his former jailer, Charles V.

First Excommunication

King Henry VIII himself, at least in the early part of his reign, was a devout and well-informed Catholic to the extent that his 1521 publication Assertio Septem Sacramentorum (“Defence of the Seven Sacraments”) earned him the title of Fidei Defensor (Defender of the Faith) from Pope Leo X. The work represented a staunch defence of papal supremacy, albeit one couched in somewhat contingent terms.

It is not clear exactly when Henry changed his mind on the issue of papal supremacy as he grew more intent on a second marriage. Certainly, by 1527, he had convinced himself that Catherine had produced no male heir because their union was “blighted in the eyes of God”.

Indeed, in marrying Catherine, his brother’s wife, he had acted contrary to Leviticus 20:21, a justification Thomas Cranmer used to declare the marriage null. Martin Luther, on the other hand, had initially argued against the annulment, stating that Henry VIII could take a second wife in accordance with his teaching that the Bible allowed for polygamy but not divorce.

Henry VIII now believed the Pope had lacked the authority to grant a dispensation from this impediment. It was this argument Henry VIII took to Pope Clement VII in the hope of having his marriage to Catherine annulled, forgoing at least one less openly defiant line of attack.

In 1527 Henry VIII asked Clement to annul the marriage, but the Pope, possibly acting under pressure from Catherine’s nephew, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, whose effective prisoner he was, refused.

According to Catholic teaching, a validly contracted marriage is indivisible until death, and thus the pope cannot annul a marriage on the basis of an impediment previously dispensed.

Many people close to Henry VIII wished simply to ignore Clement, but in October 1530 a meeting of clergy and lawyers advised that the English Parliament could not empower the Archbishop of Canterbury to act against the Pope’s prohibition. In Parliament, Bishop John Fisher was the Pope’s champion

In response, to Clement VII ‘s refusal to grant the anulment the Reformation Parliament (1532–1534) passed laws abolishing papal authority in England and declared Henry VIII to be head of the Church of England. Final authority in doctrinal disputes now rested with the monarch. Though a religious traditionalist himself, Henry relied on Protestants to support and implement his religious agenda.

Henry subsequently underwent a marriage ceremony with Anne Boleyn, in either late 1532 or early 1533. The marriage was made easier by the death of the Archbishop of Canterbury William Warham, a stalwart friend of the Pope, after which Henry VIII persuaded Clement VII to appoint Thomas Cranmer, a friend of the Boleyn family, as his successor.

Pope Clement VII granted the papal bulls necessary for Cranmer’s promotion to Archbishop of Canterbury, and also demanded that Cranmer take the customary oath of allegiance to the pope before his consecration.

However, as mentioned, laws made under Henry VIII already declared that bishops would be consecrated even without papal approval. Cranmer was consecrated, while declaring beforehand that he did not agree with the oath he would take. Cranmer was prepared to grant the annulment of the marriage to Catherine as Henry VIII required. The Pope responded to the marriage by excommunicating both Henry VIII and Cranmer from the Catholic Church.

Second Excommunication

I will begin this section with some background information on Pope Paul III.

Pope Paul III, Bishop of Rome

Pope Paul III (February 28, 1468 – November 10, 1549), born Alessandro Farnese, was head of the Catholic Church and ruler of the Papal States from October 13, 1534 to his death in November 1549.

Born in 1468 at Canino, Latium (then part of the Papal States), Alessandro Farnese was the oldest son of Pier Luigi I Farnese, Signore di Montalto (1435–1487) and his wife Giovanna Caetani, a member of the Caetani family which had also produced Pope Gelasius II and Pope Boniface VIII.

The Farnese family had prospered over the centuries but it was Alessandro’s ascendency to the papacy and his dedication to family interests which brought about the most significant increase in the family’s wealth and power.

As a young cleric, Alessandro lived a notably dissolute life, taking a mistress, Silvia Ruffini. Between about 1500 and 1510 she gave birth to at least four children: Costanza, Pier Luigi (who was later created Duke of Parma), Paolo, and Ranuccio. In July 1505, Pope Julius II legitimated the two eldest sons so that they could inherit the Farnese family estates. On June 23, 1513, Pope Leo X published a second legitimation of Pier Luigi, and also legitimated Ranuccio (the second son Paolo had already died).

On March 28, 1509 Alessandro was named Bishop of Parma – although he was not ordained a priest until June 26, 1519 and not consecrated a bishop until 2 July 2,1519. As Bishop of Parma, he came under the influence of his vicar-general, Bartolomeo Guidiccioni. This led to Alessandro breaking off the relationship with his mistress and committing himself to reform in his diocese. Under Pope Clement VII (1523–34) he was named Cardinal Bishop of Ostia and Dean of the College of Cardinals.

Pontificate

On the death of Clement VII in 1534, he was elected as Pope Paul III on October 13, 1534. Farnese, who did not fall within any of the factions, was considered a very good choice by the cardinals since his age (66) and state of health denoted a short papacy which would give those cardinals time to select a proper candidate for a future conclave. On November 3rd Paul III was formally crowned by the protodeacon Innocenzo Cybo.

Pope Paul III came to the papal throne in an era following the sack of Rome in 1527 and rife with uncertainties in the Catholic Church following the Protestant Reformation. His pontificate initiated the Counter-Reformation with the Council of Trent in 1545, as well as the wars of religion with Emperor Charles V’s military campaigns against the Protestants in Germany.

Pope Paul III recognized new Catholic religious orders and societies such as the Jesuits, the Barnabites, and the Congregation of the Oratory. His efforts were distracted by nepotism to advance the power and fortunes of his family, including his illegitimate son Pier Luigi Farnese.

In 1538, the chief minister Thomas Cromwell pursued an extensive campaign against what the government termed “idolatry” practised under the old religion, culminating in September with the dismantling of the shrine of St. Thomas Becket at Canterbury Cathedral.

Paul III proved unable to suppress the Protestant Reformation, although it was during his pontificate that the foundation was laid for the Counter-Reformation.

As a consequence of the extensive campaign against “idolatry” in England, and also Pope Paul III upset over the dismantling of the shrine of St. Thomas Becket at Canterbury, decreed the second and final excommunication of Henry VIII of England on December 17, 1538.

Were They A Usurper? King Henry IV. Part I.

Tags

1st Earl of Northumberland, Archbishop of Canterbury, Duke Lancaster, Duke of York, Edmund of England, Henry Bolingbroke, Henry Percy, House of Lancaster, John of Gaunt. King Charles VI of France, King Henry IV of England and Lord of Ireland, King Richard II of England and Lord of Ireland, Lords Appellant, Usurper

John of Gaunt, uncle of the King, occupied the role of a valued counsellor of King Richard II and loyal supporter of the Crown. He did not even protest, it seems, when his younger brother Thomas was murdered at Richard’s behest. It may be that he felt he had to maintain this posture of loyalty to protect his son, Henry Bolingbroke, who had also been one of the Lords Appellant who rebelled against the King, from Richard’s wrath.

Henry Bolingbroke experienced an inconsistent relationship with King Richard II than his father, John of Gaunt had. First cousins and childhood playmates, they were admitted together as knights of the Order of the Garter in 1377, but as mentioned, Henry participated in the Lords Appellants’ rebellion against the king in 1387.

After regaining power, Richard did not punish Henry, although he did execute or exile many of the other rebellious barons. In fact, Richard elevated Henry from Earl of Derby to Duke of Hereford.

The relationship between Henry and King Richard II met with a second crisis. In 1398, a remark regarding Richard II’s rule by Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk, was interpreted as treason by Henry who reported it to the king.

Henry and Thomas de Mowbray agreed to undergo a duel of honour (called by Richard II) at Gosford Green near Caludon Castle, Mowbray’s home in Coventry. Yet before the duel could take place, Richard decided to banish Henry from the kingdom (with the approval of Henry’s father, John of Gaunt) to avoid further bloodshed. Mowbray was exiled for life.

King Richard II of England and Lord of Ireland

John of Gaunt died in February 1399. Without explanation, Richard cancelled the legal documents that would have allowed Henry to inherit Gaunt’s land automatically. Instead, Henry would be required to ask for the lands from Richard.

While in exile in France, and after some hesitation, Henry met the exiled Thomas Arundel, former Archbishop of Canterbury, who had lost his position because of his involvement with the Lords Appellant. In England King Richard II went on a military campaign against Ireland.

In June 1399, Louis I, Duke of Orléans, gained control of the court of the insane Charles VI of France. The policy of rapprochement with the English crown did not suit Louis’s political ambitions, and for this reason he found it opportune to allow Henry Bolingbroke to leave France for England.

With a small group of followers, Henry Bolingbroke and Thomas Arundel, landed at Ravenspur in Yorkshire towards the end of June 1399.

With Arundel now as his advisor, Henry began a military campaign, confiscating land from those who opposed him and ordering his soldiers to destroy much of Cheshire. Henry initially announced that his intention was solely to reclaim his rights as Duke of Lancaster,

Men from all over the country soon rallied around him. Meeting with Henry Percy, 1st Earl of Northumberland, who had his own misgivings about the King, and Bolingbroke insisted that his only object was to regain his own patrimony.

Percy took him at his word and declined to interfere. The king had taken most of his household knights and the loyal members of his nobility with him to Ireland, so Bolingbroke experienced little resistance as he moved south.

Keeper of the Realm Edmund, Duke of York, had little choice but to side with Bolingbroke. Meanwhile, King Richard II was delayed in his return from Ireland and did not land in Wales until July 24. The King made his way to Conwy, where on August 12 he met with the Earl of Northumberland for negotiations.

On August 19 Richard surrendered to Henry Bolingbroke at Flint Castle, promising to abdicate if his life were spared. Both men then returned to London, the indignant king riding all the way behind Henry. On arrival, he was imprisoned in the Tower of London on September 1.

Henry was by now fully determined to take the throne, but presenting a rationale for this action proved a dilemma. It was argued that Richard II, through his tyranny and misgovernment, had rendered himself unworthy of being king.

However, Henry was not next in line to the throne; the heir presumptive was Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March, great-grandson of Edward III’s second surviving son, Lionel, Duke of Clarence.

Bolingbroke’s father, John of Gaunt, was Edward’s third son to survive to adulthood. The problem was solved by emphasising Henry’s descent in a direct male line, whereas March’s descent was through his grandmother, Philippa of Clarence.

Henry Bolingbroke, Duke Lancaster and later, King Henry IV of England and Lord of Ireland

According to the official record, read by the Archbishop of Canterbury during an assembly of lords and commons at Westminster Hall on Tuesday September 30, King Richard II gave up his crown willingly and ratified his deposition citing as a reason his own unworthiness as a monarch.

On the other hand, the Traison et Mort Chronicle suggests otherwise. It describes a meeting between Richard and Henry that took place one day before the parliament’s session. The king succumbed to blind rage, ordered his own release from the Tower, called his cousin a traitor, demanded to see his wife, and swore revenge, throwing down his bonnet, while Henry refused to do anything without parliamentary approval.

When parliament met to discuss Richard’s fate, John Trevor, Bishop of St Asaph, read thirty-three articles of deposition that were unanimously accepted by lords and commons. On October 1, 1399, Richard II was formally deposed. On October 13, the feast day of Edward the Confessor, Henry Bolingbroke was crowned as King Henry IV of England and Lord of Ireland.

Henry IV’s coronation at Westminster Abbey, may have marked the first time since the Norman Conquest that the monarch made an address in English.

King Henry IV had agreed to let Richard live after his abdication. This all changed when it was revealed that the earls of Huntingdon, Kent, and Salisbury, and Lord Despenser, and possibly also the Earl of Rutland – all now demoted from the ranks they had been given by Richard – were planning to murder the new king and restore Richard in the Epiphany Rising.

Although averted, the plot highlighted the danger of allowing Richard to live. Richard is thought to have been starved to death in captivity in Pontefract Castle on or around February 14, 1400, although there is some question over the date and manner of his death. His body was taken south from Pontefract and displayed in St Paul’s Cathedral on 17 February before burial in King’s Langley Priory on March 6.

November 17, 1558: Death of Mary I, Queen of England and Ireland. Part IV.

Tags

Archbishop of Canterbury, False Pregnancy, John Foxe, King Felipe II of Spain, Pope Julius III, Queen Mary I of England and Ireland, Reginald Pole, Thomas Cranmer

Mary and her husband Felipe

In September 1554, Mary stopped menstruating. She gained weight, and felt nauseated in the mornings. For these reasons, almost the entirety of her court, including her physicians, believed she was pregnant. Parliament passed an act making Felipe regent in the event of Mary’s death in childbirth.

In the last week of April 1555, Elizabeth was released from house arrest, and called to court as a witness to the birth, which was expected imminently. According to Giovanni Michieli, the Venetian ambassador, Felipe may have planned to marry Elizabeth in the event of Mary’s death in childbirth, but in a letter to his brother-in-law Maximilian of Austria, Felipe expressed uncertainty as to whether Mary was pregnant.

Thanksgiving services in the diocese of London were held at the end of April after false rumours that Mary had given birth to a son spread across Europe. Through May and June, the apparent delay in delivery fed gossip that Mary was not pregnant. Susan Clarencieux revealed her doubts to the French ambassador, Antoine de Noailles.

Mary continued to exhibit signs of pregnancy until July 1555, when her abdomen receded. Michieli dismissively ridiculed the pregnancy as more likely to “end in wind rather than anything else”. It was most likely a false pregnancy, perhaps induced by Mary’s overwhelming desire to have a child.

In August, soon after the disgrace of the false pregnancy, which Mary considered “God’s punishment” for her having “tolerated heretics” in her realm, Felipe left England to command his armies against France in Flanders. Mary was heartbroken and fell into a deep depression. Michieli was touched by the queen’s grief; he wrote she was “extraordinarily in love” with her husband and disconsolate at his departure.

In the month following her accession, Mary issued a proclamation that she would not compel any of her subjects to follow her religion, but by the end of September 1553, leading Protestant churchmen—including Thomas Cranmer, John Bradford, John Rogers, John Hooper, and Hugh Latimer—were imprisoned.

Mary’s first Parliament, which assembled in early October, declared her parents’ marriage valid and abolished Edward’s religious laws. Church doctrine was restored to the form it had taken in the 1539 Six Articles of Henry VIII, which (among other things) reaffirmed clerical celibacy. Married priests were deprived of their benefices.

Mary rejected the break with Rome her father instituted and the establishment of Protestantism by her brother’s regents. Felipe persuaded Parliament to repeal Henry’s religious laws, returning the English church to Roman jurisdiction.

Reaching an agreement took many months and Mary and Pope Julius III had to make a major concession: the confiscated monastery lands were not returned to the church but remained in the hands of their influential new owners. By the end of 1554, the pope had approved the deal, and the Heresy Acts were revived.

Around 800 rich Protestants, including John Foxe, fled into exile. Those who stayed and persisted in publicly proclaiming their beliefs became targets of heresy laws. The first executions occurred over five days in February 1555: John Rogers on February 4, Laurence Saunders on February 8, and Rowland Taylor and John Hooper on February 9.

Thomas Cranmer, the imprisoned archbishop of Canterbury, was forced to watch Bishops Ridley and Latimer being burned at the stake. He recanted, repudiated Protestant theology, and rejoined the Catholic faith. Under the normal process of the law, he should have been absolved as a repentant, but Mary refused to reprieve him.

On the day of his burning, he dramatically withdrew his recantation. In total, 283 were executed, most by burning. The burnings proved so unpopular that even Alfonso de Castro, one of Felipe’s own ecclesiastical staff, condemned them and another adviser, Simon Renard, warned him that such “cruel enforcement” could “cause a revolt”. Mary persevered with the policy, which continued until her death and exacerbated anti-Catholic and anti-Spanish feeling among the English people. The victims became lauded as martyrs.

Reginald Pole, the son of Mary’s executed governess, arrived as papal legate in November 1554. He was ordained a priest and appointed Archbishop of Canterbury immediately after Cranmer’s execution in March 1556.

After Felipe’s visit in 1557, Mary again thought she was pregnant, with a baby due in March 1558. She decreed in her will that her husband would be the regent during the minority of their child. But no child was born, and Mary was forced to accept that her half-sister Elizabeth would be her lawful successor.

Mary was weak and ill from May 1558. In pain, possibly from ovarian cysts or uterine cancer, she died on November 17, 1558, aged 42, at St James’s Palace, during an influenza epidemic that also claimed Archbishop Pole’s life later that day. She was succeeded by Elizabeth. Felipe, who was in Brussels, wrote to his sister Joan: “I felt a reasonable regret for her death.”

Although Mary’s will stated that she wished to be buried next to her mother, she was interred in Westminster Abbey on December 14, in a tomb she eventually shared with Elizabeth. The inscription on their tomb, affixed there by James I-VI when he succeeded Elizabeth, is Regno consortes et urna, hic obdormimus Elizabetha et Maria sorores, in spe resurrectionis (“Consorts in realm and tomb, we sisters Elizabeth and Mary here lie down to sleep in hope of the resurrection”).