Henry VIII's Health in a Nutshell (11 page)

20
It is impossible to know for certain how many times Henry’s reproductive partners may have actually conceived. Considering the fact that poor nutrition, even for the wealthiest women, made it likely that irregular periods were not uncommon, simply missing a menstrual period or having a longer interval between menses would not have been seen as anything other than a hopeful sign of possible conception. Pregnancies were often well into the second trimester before they would be reported, since women of that time did not consider themselves to be truly pregnant until the foetus “quickened”, i.e. the mother could feel movement in her uterus. Quickening was so crucial because it was assumed that until the foetus could be felt moving that it did not have a soul and was therefore not really a person, or even necessarily alive (Ginsburg, 1989; Fraser, 1992). Therefore, Henry’s reproductive partners could have easily had miscarriages in the first trimester of pregnancy that were unknown and, thus, unreported.

21
Keynes, page 179.

22
Contrary to the popular misconception that syphilis was brought to Europe by Columbus when he returned from North America, there is convincing archaeological evidence of skeletons exhumed from medieval London graveyards that predate 1493, which display tertiary syphilis (Glass, 2001).

23
Fraser, page 335.

24
Cunningham et. al.; Larsen

25
Whitley and Kramer

26
Sanguinis; Marsh and Redman; Berkowtiz et al; Caine and Meuller-Heubach; Baichoo and Bruce-Tageo; Mayne et al; Goh, et al; Bowman, et al; Win et al

27
Baichoo and Bruce-Tafgoe

28
Santiago, et al

29
Luban

30
Whitley and Kramer

31
Katherina’s second child, the New Year’s boy, died at less than two months old but his death does not have any characteristics that mark it as Kell related HDN. It is likely that the baby boy was Kell negative, like Mary, and his death was the result of one of the myriad common illnesses that killed infants during this period of history.

32
Geifman-Holtzman

33
Mayne et al

34
Journal of Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh 43, 4 pages 353-360.

A tale of two Henrys: The king before and after 1531

35
Erickson, page 27.

36
CSP Vol. 2 pages 104-118.

37
CSP Vol.2, pages 104-118.

38
During the Tudor period it was commonly believed that the king was anointed by God, and therefore any person who acted against Henry also acted against God

39
CSP Vol 4, pages 2376-2385.

40
Erickson, page 283.

41
CSP Vol 1, pages 24-34.

42
Lacey

43
Erickson, page 53.

44
Fraser, page 220.

45
Matusiak

46
Robinson, page 37.

47
Ward

48
Erickson, page 257.

49
Fraser, page 190.

50
Lindsey, page 71.

51
It was also likely Henry could afford to be sanguine because he was still expecting a papal nullification of his first marriage. After all, papal annulments were reasonably common for nobility and royalty. Henry’s best friend, Charles Brandon, had two marriages annulled before he married Henry’s sister. Moreover, the children of annulled marriage could still be granted legitimacy by the pope. It was the support of Katherina’s nephew, Charles V, which prevented Clement VII from granting the nullity suit. (Fraser, 1992 page 134-136).

52
Henry was occasionally out of sorts with his wife before 1531 , but any coolness between them never lasted long. In one instance he was angry with the queen because her father had betrayed his alliance with Henry. Another notable time he was upset with Katherina was when she had the audacity to be angry about the elevation of Henry’s illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, to the title of the Duke of Richmond. She felt this was an insult to her and a threat to Mary’s succession. Henry, who was more like a spoilt child than an adult at times, was irked with Katherina for not automatically approving of his actions.

53
Erickson, page 225.

54
Lindsey, page 128.

55
Lindsey

56
Erickson

57
Erickson, page 254.

58
Lindsey, page 131.

59
Erickson

60
Erickson

61
Fraser, page 294.

62
Lindsey, page 136.

63
Henry’s conviction that he was forced to marry an ugly woman against his will by cruel members of his court had little, if any, validity. In spite of Henry’s slander, Anna of Cleves was not ugly. Her portrait clearly shows her to be a reasonably attractive woman. The royal portrait artist who painted her, Hans Holbein, was renowned for the accuracy of his portraits. Henry retained Holbein’s services after meeting Anne, so he must have rendered her accurately enough to escape the king’s wrath, which was no mean feat at this time. Moreover, Henry did not dismiss, imprison or behead anyone who had actually seen her beforehand and had reported to him that she was very pretty

64
Lindsey, page 157.

65
Lindsey, page 152.

66
Lindsey, page 165.

67
Erickson, page 313.

68
This was probably the same Thomas Culpepper who was an accused rapist and murderer. He raped a park-keeper’s wife in front of several witnesses and when a bystander tried to intervene to help the woman being assaulted, Culpepper killed him. Culpepper was, rather ironically, pardoned for his crimes by Henry VIII, mainly because the victims were from a low social caste (Lindsey, 1995, page 168). I am unable to suppress my lack of professional detachment and must admit that I find it delightful that he was publicly executed. I sincerely hope that the woman that he had raped, and the family of his murder victim, were all in the watching crowd to enjoy his beheading.

69
Lindsey, page 164.

70
Smith

71
Erickson, page 74.

72
CPS Vol.15, pages 481-488.

73
Erickson, page 288.

74
CSP Vol.18(2) pages 26-30.

75
Lindsey, page 198.

76
Magnússon, page 323.

77
Scarisbrick, pages 448-451.

78
Pollard, page 412.

79
Scarisbrick, pages 450-451.

80
Scarisbrick, pages 454.

81
Smith, 1970, pages 289-296.

82
Scarisbrick, 1970 page 484.

83
Childs, page 24.

84
Sessions

85
Sessions, pages 396-398.

86
Smith, 1970, pages 290-291.

87
Sessions, pages 398-397.

88
Sessions, page 409.

89
Dimmock, page 117.

90
Smith, 1982, page 313.

91
Smith, 1982, page 313.

Theories regarding Henry’s mental aberrations

92
Murphy

93
Hutchinson

94
Kybett

95
Adamson, page 227.

96
Erickson, page 267.

97
Weir, 2001, page 349.

98
Erickson, page 253.

99
Scarisbrick, 1970; Smith, 1982.

100
Lipscomb

101
Lindsey

102
Lipscomb

103
McNalty

104
Lipscomb, page 58.

105
Cifu and Caruso, page 52.

106
Starkey, page 523; Bernard, pages 167-168.

107
Marshall,page 27.

108
The Catholic Encyclopedia, page 630

109
Cromer

110
Yahoo News, 2013

111
Loades, page 96.

112
Scarisbrick, page 481.

113
Scarisbrick, page 481.

114
Smith, 1982, page 31.

115
Starkey, page 306.

116
Scarisbrick, 1970, pages 118-120.

117
Starkey, page 428.

118
Fraser, page 107.

119
Grohol

120
Meyers

121
Stamatakis

122
Conley

123
Coleman

124
Kraus and Keltner

125
The Economist, 2010

126
Lindsey, page 153.

127
Shore

128
Seltzer

129
Seltzer

130
Bernard, page 152.

131
Bernard, pages 152-153.

132
Stone, page 277.

133
Bernard, page 153.

134
Danek et al.

135
The basal ganglia are a group of nuclei in the brain called the caudate nucleus, putamen and globus pallidus. These nuclei are associated with the cerebral cortex, thalamus and brainstem. In humans the basal ganglia are believed to control a diverse group of functions, including motor control, cognition, learning and emotions.

136
Symmans et al.