And to think, if he had just claimed Elizabeth Blount and his union as legitimate, married her after divorcing Catherine, he could have had a male heir on the second known affair.
It wouldn't work, Henry Fitzroy was a bastard and simply marrying his mother wouldn't make him legitimate, Henry VIII would risk a civil war if he made a bastard his heir or there would be one after he died.
Henry VIII married Catherine of Aragorn and Anne Boleyn before Mary and Elizabeth were born, Henry Fitzroy wasn't legitimized, he was publicly acknowledged.
England hadn't been ruled by a bastard since William the Conqueror and that was before succession laws were established after the Anarchy, the kingdom wouldn't accept Henry Fitzroy as some retroactive legitimate son. Assuming such a scenario, after Henry VIII dies a civil war will erupt, Mary will claim the throne because she's Henry VIII's sole legitimate daughter and she'll win unanimous support of catholic lords and probably half of protestants who will not wish to have a bastard King.
It's also a disregard with all succession precedents, there's a reason most Kings would respect succession laws after they were established, to avoid chaos.
Well, he could try but it wouldn't end up well. It would require an Act of Parliament which passed every thing he asked for. Whether they would accept such a radical change to succession laws is hard to say but Henry VIII probably didn't trust they would enforce it after his death.
Henry VIII was afraid the realm wouldn't accept a woman as reigning Queen erupting in a War of the Roses situation (he was obviously very wrong on that), he probably thought legitimizing Henry Fitzroy was a bad idea and he was marrying Anne Boleyn (he was infatuated with her at that moment), he had no reason to believe she wouldn't give birth to a son.
But I guess is an interesting scenario to think about lol.
Barely related but the best part about this sort of son-or-daughter drama in medieval history is that everybody assumed it was the mother who determined the s*x of the child, when it was in fact the father
like if a father has 5 daughters no sons.. that's on him lmao, his sperm is made of all X's
ofc it wasn't until the 20th century that we learned about DNA and X- and Y-chromosomes.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
And to think, if he had just claimed Elizabeth Blount and his union as legitimate, married her after divorcing Catherine, he could have had a male heir on the second known affair.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It wouldn't work, Henry Fitzroy was a bastard and simply marrying his mother wouldn't make him legitimate, Henry VIII would risk a civil war if he made a bastard his heir or there would be one after he died.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Why could Henry strip legitimacy from his daughters but not legitimize his bastard son?
Henry Fitzroy was incredibly active in court and members of Henry's court encouraged him to petition the church to have HF legitimized.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Henry VIII married Catherine of Aragorn and Anne Boleyn before Mary and Elizabeth were born, Henry Fitzroy wasn't legitimized, he was publicly acknowledged.
England hadn't been ruled by a bastard since William the Conqueror and that was before succession laws were established after the Anarchy, the kingdom wouldn't accept Henry Fitzroy as some retroactive legitimate son. Assuming such a scenario, after Henry VIII dies a civil war will erupt, Mary will claim the throne because she's Henry VIII's sole legitimate daughter and she'll win unanimous support of catholic lords and probably half of protestants who will not wish to have a bastard King.
It's also a disregard with all succession precedents, there's a reason most Kings would respect succession laws after they were established, to avoid chaos.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I wasn't trying to say HF was deemed legitimate, I was more trying to say that Henry VIII perhaps could have made him so
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Well, he could try but it wouldn't end up well. It would require an Act of Parliament which passed every thing he asked for. Whether they would accept such a radical change to succession laws is hard to say but Henry VIII probably didn't trust they would enforce it after his death.
Henry VIII was afraid the realm wouldn't accept a woman as reigning Queen erupting in a War of the Roses situation (he was obviously very wrong on that), he probably thought legitimizing Henry Fitzroy was a bad idea and he was marrying Anne Boleyn (he was infatuated with her at that moment), he had no reason to believe she wouldn't give birth to a son.
But I guess is an interesting scenario to think about lol.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Barely related but the best part about this sort of son-or-daughter drama in medieval history is that everybody assumed it was the mother who determined the s*x of the child, when it was in fact the father
like if a father has 5 daughters no sons.. that's on him lmao, his sperm is made of all X's
ofc it wasn't until the 20th century that we learned about DNA and X- and Y-chromosomes.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Thanks for talking with me! I don't have anyone else to talk to about this kind of stuff lol
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Neither do I! Except for my mom who was always binged on Philippa Gregory's adaptations (The White Queen, The White Princess, The Other Boleyn girl).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Are those any good? I've heard mixed reviews
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context