15 Wilted Roses: The Lives and Deaths of the Wives of King Henry VIII

Margaret of Angoulême is captured and tried for treason. She is decapitated by sword, as opposed to hanging, given her noble status. A comfort in her last moments, for sure.​
1) Threadmarks, OP, are amazing tools that help your readers figure out which threads are new chapters and which aren't.
2) What treason? What has she done, exactly? Why is SHE captured and not, say, her husband?
3) Due to her noble status she probably wouldn't be executed in the first place? Katherine of Aragon wasn't, after all. She was just locked up.
 
1) Threadmarks, OP, are amazing tools that help your readers figure out which threads are new chapters and which aren't.
2) What treason? What has she done, exactly? Why is SHE captured and not, say, her husband?
3) Due to her noble status she probably wouldn't be executed in the first place? Katherine of Aragon wasn't, after all. She was just locked up.
1) Just added them, thanks for the reminder :)

2) She married Henry, a member of an invading force and traveled with him while he was on campaign (he didn't actually fight himself, merely accompanied his father).

3) When are you referring to? I can think of two points in Catherine's life where she was a 'prisoner' - firstly after Arthur's death, Henry VII wanted to get out of returning the first half of her dowry which he had received as stated by their prior agreement should she be returned home. This was sorted via the engagement to Henry. It would make no sense to harm her at this point so I assume you mean the second time, when Henry divorced and banished her? With the whole divorce, wedding Anne before it was legal, the political fallout with the Pope, it all would have been compounded tenfold if Henry had her executed, and what reason would he even have? On the contrary, Margaret here has been provably conspiring with an invading foreign power.
 
In our world (albeit after Henry's older brothers death, though I plan to tackle his life in either the next chapter or one after) in 1508, Henry VII was in serious talks with Maximilian to wed Eleanor to Henry. At that time Eleanor was 9 and Henry was 17, even more eyebrow raising than what I propose here. Ultimately Henry VII would die within a year and the 8th would decide against Eleanor in favour of her aunt, but it was a very likely scenario for a time. And as for the 'no marraige before 12' business, there are countless examples where this was conveniently ignored throughout history.
first off, the talks in 1508 were for a betrothal between Henry and Eleanor, not a marriage. Second off, it doesn’t matter what age the bride is when married, if she is too young then her husband is not going to risk her health by impregnating her (and if he did, he would surely be scorned by his contemporaries). Second, women back then generally began getting their periods at a later age than they do today, meaning that it is extremely unlikely that Eleanor would even be able to get pregnant in the (equally extremely unlikely) circumstance that Henry decides to consummate their marriage as soon as it happens. And third, I find it ridiculous that Maximilian would just abandon the Netherlands, the inheritance of his much loved first wife and his children by her. He just wouldn’t do it.
He doesn't withdraw in the sense that he just abandons it, he is just less hands on, focusing more on the germanic territories. Far better (in his mind, in this world) to let someone else do the governing if he can still reap the riches and hold the titles, rather than risk harming himself and his families name in the region further?
Again, the Low Countries would never be allowed to be ‘hands off’ under max and his offspring - true, max was forced out but the burgundians generally had a good view of Philippe. Also, I’m finding it unlikely that Mary would be allowed to travel to Austria to give birth, especially to her very first child.
 
The losses of the war are great, and changes on the map are slight. France annexes the last English holdout in Calais, and Margaret of Angoulême is captured and tried for treason. She is decapitated by sword, as opposed to hanging, given her noble status. A comfort in her last moments, for sure
The French would never execute a princess of the blood, especially one who is, what, 12 years old? Yeah, not happening.
 
The French would never execute a princess of the blood, especially one who is, what, 12 years old? Yeah, not happening.
17 years old*, and her father is a count not a monarch? She is a princess through marraige, not blood.
first off, the talks in 1508 were for a betrothal between Henry and Eleanor, not a marriage. Second off, it doesn’t matter what age the bride is when married, if she is too young then her husband is not going to risk her health by impregnating her (and if he did, he would surely be scorned by his contemporaries). Second, women back then generally began getting their periods at a later age than they do today, meaning that it is extremely unlikely that Eleanor would even be able to get pregnant in the (equally extremely unlikely) circumstance that Henry decides to consummate their marriage as soon as it happens.
I agree that the situation with Eleanor is all unlikely, however not impossible, which is the kind of line I find myself treading when creating a scenario that involves 15 wives for one monarch, and with each of them lasting at least a little while, before succumbing to some unlucky fate or another.

I admit I probably should have made this clearer from the offset, but this isn't meant to be a timeline based in likelihoods, rather the edge of plausibility.
 
17 years old*, and her father is a count not a monarch? She is a princess through marraige, not blood.

I agree that the situation with Eleanor is all unlikely, however not impossible, which is the kind of line I find myself treading when creating a scenario that involves 15 wives for one monarch, and with each of them lasting at least a little while, before succumbing to some unlucky fate or another.

I admit I probably should have made this clearer from the offset, but this isn't meant to be a timeline based in likelihoods, rather the edge of plausibility.

Charles is Louis' heir presumptive as the descendant of Charles V, that actually does make him, and by extension his children, princes du sang.

She would not have been executed for the sins of her father, the commons would be sent into an uproar because you simply do not treat noble ladies that way. Languishing in a dungeon and wasting away from "sickness", though? Much more likely.
 
also, at the time you posit - namely 1507 - where there's a war over the Cleves succession, it's a teensy bit more complicated. And Brandenburg and Neuburg (which is still in the hands of children following the Landshut succession war) are nowhere in view as heirs.
Firstly, the "duchies" weren't united (that only happened in 1524) when Johann III's father-in-law, the duke of Jülich died.
Secondly, Johann still had a brother (killed at Pavia OTL) and a sister, Anna (d.1567). Cleves had passed through the female line before, so it passing through the female lines again wasn't impossible. But should they ignore Anna they would still come up against her uncle, Engelbert/Engelbert's son, Charles, Comte de Nevers who has cpnnections to both Burgundy-Nevers and Navarre.
Thirdly, that Marie of Jülich and Berg is single means that the person who is most likely to marry her is also the person who most likely caused this war in the first place (Karl, duke of Guelders). He has a frictive relationship with both the dukes of Burgundy and the Habsburgs due to the fact that he regards his father's sale of the duchy of Guelders as "co-erced" and "temporary" while Burgundy/Habsburgs regarded it as "permanent" and "lawful". OTL, he got married to a princess of Brunswick, had no children and that settled the matter. He also happens to have a claim (however weak) to the duchy of Cleves as well as the duchy of Jülich, but it is enshrined in a succession law published under (ICR if it was Emperor Karl IV or Emperor Sigismund) when the duke of Jülich also happened to e the duke of Guelders (it's a very complicated and complex legal history in the area that would make even the HRE stand in the corner crying).
 
Why England would be getting involved over such a tangential matter (Hell, why the emperor is pressing a claim), IDK. The only reason I can think of why this would be is if the king of Scots starts acting up (he's descended from the dukes of Guelders and the dukes of Cleves through his grandmother). Before this sounds weird, Edward IV had a very real fear that events in Burgundy (the death of Charles the Bold and the "reassertion" of power over Guelders by Duke Arnold and then Duke Karl would lead to a war, where Scotland, France and Denmark would thus range themselves against Burgundy and the Habsburgs. Before this sounds weird,Charles the Bold had signed the alliance treaty of Quakkenbrugge with the duke of Holstein (Gerhard the Pugnacious), who was that relative of King Hans that everybody hates but you still keep him around because he's useful with ambitions of taking Hamburg, Frisia, Bremen etc. Unfortunately, Gerhard lost the war and Friedrich III mediated the peace treaty, however, if its seen - by Copenhagen - that the Holsteins are getting too chummy with the Habsburgs for their own good, I could see them backing France
 
I have to agree. Plus there is already a disturbing amount of posts on this board with a thing for early teenage pregnancy. Please stop having girls under the age of seventeen having children in TLs and stop bringing up Margaret Beaufort to justify it.
Seventeen for a first pregnancy is a little old for the period a lot of us write in, but I agree that 12/13 is disturbingly young. I tend to think that trying from fifteen or so is perfectly plausible, and then first child from whenever feels natural after that, story-wise.
 
I have to agree. Plus there is already a disturbing amount of posts on this board with a thing for early teenage pregnancy. Please stop having girls under the age of seventeen having children in TLs and stop bringing up Margaret Beaufort to justify it.
It's also a good idea not to insert modern sensibilities in a timeline that has different morals. Now in the case of England, I don't think that 10 year girls were wedded and bedded, but this being a royal marriage. Also it's a misconception that women of that age had menarche significantly later. Not according to the records which 12/13 was the average. The time period for late menarche was Victorian and around the industrialized areas and that was due to poor nutrition and lack of protein.
 
Ehm, There is no ground for decapitation of Margaret of Angouleme; First of all she is a precious hobstage, second, there are no precedent in France, daughters of traitors get closed in convents or married off (in this case after getting an annulement) Cutting her head off is a political idiocy. It sets a dangerous precedent, it goes against tradition and it loose a leverage on england. No king or regent of France was ever such an idiot.
 
It's also a good idea not to insert modern sensibilities in a timeline that has different morals. Now in the case of England, I don't think that 10 year girls were wedded and bedded, but this being a royal marriage. Also it's a misconception that women of that age had menarche significantly later. Not according to the records which 12/13 was the average. The time period for late menarche was Victorian and around the industrialized areas and that was due to poor nutrition and lack of protein.
Even if they were wedded, they wouldn't be bedded. The age for that is 16/17. This isn't modern sensibilities. 10/11 is still a child. And too young to give birth, no matter where. A 10 year old child who is pregnant has been sexually assaulted: no matter what.
 
Margaret Beaufort is the exception, not the rule. While noble girls were proxy wedded at a young age, there's a reason they only get to meet their husbands and have formal marriages at the age of reason. Medieval people did understand that girls aren't supposed to be pregnant that young, you know. They're not stupid, they know cause and effect as well as we do.

Also, where was Margaret anyway, because I'm pretty sure she would have smothered his grandson in his sleep the moment he tried to convince his father to let him marry and bed a ten year old girl. She protested letting her granddaughter marry James at 13, she would have done far worse to prevent it happening to someone even younger.

Okay, I had to dig deep in my bookmarks for this, but here's a study.

To what can we attribute this lag between age at marriage and age at first pregnancy? While most girls in the modern western world begin puberty around age 10, considerable evidence exists that medieval girls entered into this process later. The Knowing of Woman’s Kind in Childing, a late medieval gynaecological treatise, notes that girls below the age of 15 do not menstruate, ‘for they are joyefull and so yong her mete defyeth as the resseyue it. And so the blood and other humoures pass a-way’. Bioarchaeological evidence supports this assertion: an analysis of a skeletal assemblage of 314 late medieval English girls who died between 14 and 25 years of age found not only that puberty began later but also that it lasted longer [...] The women included in the database, as elites with diets higher in animal protein and iron, probably achieved full fertility earlier than the young women analysed by Shapland et al., but still well after modern British girls who, on average, begin menstruating at age 13.
 
Last edited:
The age for that is 16/17. This isn't modern sensibilities
minimum of fourteen or fifteen was generally dictated by the church for consummation IIRC. It's what made Edmund's rape of Margaret so horrible, he didn't only violate her but he violated "God's law". However, even with consummation at 14-15, that was usually only to prevent an annulment with a fuller consummation taking place later. The couples were generally also kept apart - she'd have her household, he'd have his, and they'd meet up for chaperoned visits in common areas like the gardens or the dining hall. This was still the practice as late as Marie Antoinette
 
For those casting doubt on the validity of the war itself, it literally happened in our timeline. All I changed was it's happening 2 years early, and England is brought in. Every other power really did get involved, and for the reasons stated.

Regarding Eleanor, I fully admit that consummation at 11 would be... less than likely, and certainly disgusting by modern standards. However with the multiple examples brought up by others of similar things happening at various times, I don't think it warrants this much debate.

Next chapter coming up right away :)
 
Chapter Four: Spanish Security
Chapter Four: Spanish Security

At the time of his birth, Henry had been the second-born son. His older brother, Arthur, was expected to inherit the throne, and so feelers were put out to the more powerful realms of Europe to secure an advantageous marriage.

After some less than perfect offers, Arthur struck gold with his betrothal to Catherine of Aragon. The two would marry in late 1501, though the union would meet a quick and tragic end.

Within weeks of the wedding, Arthur, always a sickly child, fell ill with a still unknown illness. Some theorise tuberculosis, sweating sickness, influenza or even the plague, though whatever it was would quickly take Arthur's life.

And so now Catherine and the current King of England Henry VII were both left in an awkward position. Henry had been paid half of Catherine's dowry already, though with his son's death it seemed likely that Catherine would return home. If this were the case, he would have to return her dowry with her. This would not do.

Therefore, after a brief stint of all-but-imprisonment, Catherine was inducted as the Spanish ambassador to England (the first woman to hold an ambassadorial position in European history); from here she became increasingly intertwined in English politics.

And so, now in 1509 with the newly crowned King Henry VIII on the throne and looking for a new wife to sire some heirs with, it seemed perfect to just pick up where his brother had left off. The very short time the two were married cast considerable doubt on whether the marriage had been consummated, and so Henry was able to convince the Pope to grant a special dispensation to allow them to marry.

AragoneseCatherine.png

Catherine of Aragon, born 1485, married 1509, died 1516

Compared to Henry's previous spouses, this union went along much more smoothly. The two developed a good relationship, and Catherine quickly fell pregnant. On the 28th of February, 1510, Catherine would give birth to identical twin girls, Margaret and Elizabeth. The following new year's day, she would welcome another daughter, Anne. Yet another daughter would follow, also named Catherine, on the 17th of September, 1513.

It was at this point that Henry began growing… antsy. So far he had sired 5 children, and all had been girls. He was still early in his reign and his (at last) successful marriage, however most agree that it was around this point that 'The King's Great Matter' began to brew. This was a colloquialism used by members of the court and other officials of the time to describe Henry's growing anger at his lack of a male heir, which would only compound in coming years.

Thus, the births kept their pace. Catherine would give birth to Princess Cecily on the 4th of December 1514, and within a year was pregnant yet again.

The toll the constant pregnancies were taking on the young Queen were apparent to all around her, seemingly all except Henry (that, or he simply didn't care). Despite urging by doctors to wait and give her body time to recuperate before trying again, Catherine insisted on more yet. Whether she was equally as committed as Henry towards his goal, or was simply acting on his insistence is a matter of debate, however the consequences are not.

On the 18th of February, 1516, Catherine would birth her last daughter, Joan. Within a few days, she would become Henry's second wife to succumb to childbed fever.

Apathetically, Henry almost immediately began the search for another wife. Seeing Catherine's and her predecessors' fates, however, the more influential nations of Europe began to grow wary of Henry. He was rebuffed by most he approached, the only higher woman to even entertain the thought being Dorothea of Denmark (born 1502).

Ultimately, Henry would find his next spouse in the leader of a small Italian duchy.

Issue:

With Eleanor of Austria

1. Mary, born 1507
With Catherine of Aragon
2. Margaret, born 1510
3. Elizabeth, born 1510
4. Anne, born 1511
5. Catherine, born 1513
6. Cecily, born 1514
7. Joan, born 1516
 
Last edited:
Top