User Name  Password
Today | Join | Member | Search | Who's On | Chat Room | Photos | Help | Sign In | | | | | Follow Aimoo_Com on Twitter
Hop to: 

Today
Author
Message
Date

scarlet_11
Topic :   The Mystery of Sir Richard Page

Sir Richard Page, along with Sir Thomas Wyatt, were the only two men sent to the Tower in the Anne Boleyn roundup who were not charged with anything & later released unharmed.  We all knew who Wyatt was, but no one had a clue on who Page was.  Earlier I ran across an author's blog where she discusses Page in a rather lengthy post.  So, mystery solved as to who he was, tho not why he was either arrested or released.  (The hyperlink thing doesn't appear to be working today.)

http://www.susanhigginbotham.com/blog/posts/the-fortunate-sir-richard-page/



04/07/2013 2:46 AM


Forever_Am
Re :   No New Members

Meh.  They don't care, why should I?


01/31/2013 12:20 PM


scarlet_11


10/24/2012 2:13 AM


Forever_Am
Topic :   No New Members

AMT is NOT taking any more applications for membership.  The ones we have now are total mutes who never discuss anything, so why bother?  I don't understand people who join a public group that is 100% accessible sans membership, & then never say a word.  You can read & not be a member.

In fact, I'm off to purge mutes as we speak.  Ruthlessly.  C ya.



08/11/2012 5:11 AM


Forever_Am
Topic :   Aimoo is A Right Royal Mess

I think that title says it all.  Groups are vanishing & reappearing L & R.  Stuff isn't working.  Server seems to be going kerflooey.  Very irritating as I was planning to update our old MSN custom pages & put them into Information Station.  Fingers crossed for posting goodness right here alone.


05/23/2012 2:46 AM


scarlet_11
Topic :   Tudor Architecture

They're not castles, but there are some really nice Tudor mansions in this site (if you click the thumbnails they get bigger).  It's a work in progress place where someone is documenting Tudor-era houses that haven't been demolished (bu county) & still exist to gawk at.  It's called Tudor Buildings.

http://tudor-buildings.co.uk/



01/09/2012 7:02 AM


scarlet_11
Topic :   English Civil Wars Meet West Side Story

In honor of the 50th anniversary of the release of West Side Story....Horrible Histories' takeoff on the English Civil Wars, shamelessly scammed from the Sharks & the Jets:

 



11/20/2011 4:05 AM


Greensleev
Topic :   Right Royal Xmas

The custom pages copied over from the original MSN AMT group can be found in the archives.

HERE.


11/07/2011 9:38 PM


Nyria
Re :   Henry VI: Crazy or Just Sick?

I also think it's some sort of schizophrenia. There are many forms of this and I think that some people on the net dismiss it because they only think of it as hearing voices. Also, as you say - there are more cases of mental illness in his family.


06/30/2011 1:36 AM


scarlet_11
Re :   A Convenient Death: Amy Robsart

Burial:
University Church of St Mary the Virgin
Oxford
Oxfordshire, England

This is where Find A Grave says Amy Robsart is buried.  The church still exists.  If it's not a Crown Peculiar, then the queen has no say over exhumations taking place at it.  If it is a Crown Peculiar, then she can & does say no to requests for that.


06/22/2011 1:01 AM


scarlet_11
Topic :   Henry VI: Crazy or Just Sick?

A catatonic state can be caused by schizophrenia (which is what I always pegged Henry as as soon as I found this stuff out b/c that's what they think Grandpa had & that can be genetic), or even severe bipolar syndrome, autism, or PTSD (maybe Jack Cade really scared him :-O).

But it can also be called by that whole tse-tse fly sleeping sickness thing (which we can rule out as Henry didn't go on safari to Africa like Harry & William) that's a form of encephalitis, a drug overdose (medieval medicine....'nuff said), or in the aftermath of a stroke.

So since Henry was about 33 at initial onset of this recurring state, maybe he wasn't mentally ill. Kind of late in life for really severe bipolar to make itself known & Henry was never observed to be manic, just naive & not the sharpest quill in the royal writing box. Autism also would've shown up a whole lot sooner. He could've developed PTSD from watching Joan of Arc toast when he was taken over to France to be crowned as a child....he supposedly did fret, w/ how devout he was even as a kid, that she really was a saint....but I can't think of anything else in his sheltered little life up until that time, except for Jack Cade's Rebellion, that would've been traumatizing. Not to say that there couldn't have been some abuse in secret, what w/ him being in a separate household from his mother & surrounded by power-grubbing uncles & other men since he was still in diapers.

Maybe Henry got too much of some "strengthening tonic" w/ oddball ingredients no one would ever ingest nowadays....medieval medicine was more likely to kill ya than cure ya. They sprinkled wounds w/ powdered pearls, for Pete's sake, regularly took a pint of blood out just b/c they could, & spent an inordinate amt of time sniffing royal urine & stool samples to see if the king's "humours" were in order. Who knows what sort of stuff Henry was being fed, & he'd be the type to knock it back unquestioningly if told it was good for him.

Or maybe he just had a series of strokes. The catatonic episodes weren't frequent & there weren't a lot of them. Never realized strokes could cause that b4. Mr Google is my friend LOL

Still can't rule out schizophrenia w/ the hereditary evidence, but there are times when doctors think ppl are just mental when they have a physical ailment even today (fibromyalgia leaps to mind). If Henry was nuttier than a fruitcake, the current crop of royals are lucky that schizophrenia left the gene pool, w/ his poor begats showing :P

In looking at the "markers" for schizophrenia, psychologists have 2 sets of them, positive & negative.

Positive ones are the more obvs ones that are likely to raise an early alarm for mental illness, like hallucinations (incl those involving the 5 senses), hearing voices, paranoia, delusional behavior, your basic psychosis brewing. Sitting in a corner babbling about monsters coming after him would make ppl think Henry was insane, to give a simplified example. Him thinking his meat tasted green or smelled like red roses or felt like velvet on his tongue wouldn't be noticed. Paranoia to a degree was expected *healthy* behavior in a king, esp w/ a powerful cousin like York in the opposition camp.

If Henry wasn't having the screaming meemies type of hallucinations & kept his little *oddities* to himself, who'd see it?

Negative markers are more subtle, like lack of motivation, lack of emotion, sparse &/or monosyllabic speech, wanting to be alone, inability to enjoy life, things that wouldn't shriek "Hey! The king is nuts!" at the ppl surrounding him.

There's also the aspect of Henry's extreme piety, the main reason he was able to hang onto his throne as long as he did. He was revered as saintly in addition to that whole divine right of kings thing. So if he went & knelt at his prie-dieu for hrs & didn't want to be bothered, his household would just think the king was deeply involved in prayer, as God's appointed monarch ought. It wouldn't occur to them that he was in a light trance, listening intently to the voices in his head, deliberately avoiding socializing or responsibility, etc. God & prayer was a huge part of life & it was important.

So that's why I don't think it can be entirely ruled out. He could well have been having symptoms of schizophrenia that went unremarked, mainly b/c ppl already felt he wasn't quite *right* to begin w/. Most ppl are diagnosed by age 20 or so. No medieval shrinks, tho, to do so. As long as Henry wasn't acting out violently or weirding out in public all the time, meh. He was thought to be a bit slow & stupid anyway (maybe he was mildly brain damaged from birth) & was constantly wandering off to go pray & meditate, leaving the kingly work to his councilors. They got goodies for that; are they going to object?

But yeah, because this episode of crystal-clear WTF didn't arrive until his 30s, he could just as well have suffered from strokes. You'd think it might've been earlier in life if it was schizophrenia.



06/22/2011 12:54 AM


Greensleev
Topic :   Right Royal Review of the Wedding

You lot are total mutes if even a topic like this doesn't bring anyone out of the woodwork to post!  WTF?  Must I do everything?

On the whole, for dragging my American head off its pillow at an ungodly hr, in retrospect I should've slept in.  The YouTube Royal Channel's live stream was terrible.  It froze, it stuttered, it never even caught the balcony kiss pffft.  The only good thing about it was at least you didn't have to put up with inane TV personalities nattering incessantly.  It wasn't too bad in the Abbey but just awful outside of it.  I know there were a lot of viewers but hello are you new you should've expected it & beefed up the tech end accordingly to accommodate.

Plus it was rather disappointing & a clear indication that the new breed of royals isn't going to be any more exciting than the old ones, alas.  Kate & William are SO BORING.  They're YOUNG, for Pete's sake, can't they act like it once in a while?  Yes, they have a certain amt of tradition yadda yadda, so what, you can't create new traditions in England?

I was surrpised that the entire wedding was basically a lot of singing.  They got married posthaste & Kate's brother did a rdg & that was pretty much it besides the boring sermon.  I thunk there would at least be a nuptial Mass b/c that's what Americans do when they have a church wedding, the actual vow bit is in the middle of the service, not the service itself.

The whole engagement ring thing creeped me out.  The Brits look at it as "heirloom jewelry" & "Diana inclusion".  I look at it as a train wreck of a marriage & a gauche, gaudy piece Diana snagged off the Garrad's tray b/c she thought it was the most expensive & the biggest nyaah nyaah looky what I got.  Plus blasting the blood off it from her final wearing of it....yuck.  Poor Kate.  And William refused to wear a wedding ring.  That's nice, huh?

Anyhow, I was surprised that William's choice of garb was the ceremonial Irish Guards uniform that was recently bestowed upon him, rather than his workaday RAF dress uniform.  Everyone can sigh & say he's soooo much like Di all they want....nuh uh.  This is total Windsor behavior.  Dark RAF blue would've faded him into the Abbey woodwork.  It's not as fancy a dress uniform as Harry's Army one, either.  Bright scarlet screams LOOK AT ME!  I'M THE STAR TODAY!

Well, OK, it was his wedding.  But still.  It's like he wanted to stand out more than the bride.  Rather Charles-like if you ask me.  No one looks at the groom.  They don't care.  They want to check out the fashion show.  A groom should not thrust himself into the fashion show by wearing a loud outfit.

And the dress!  O tres disappointing after all the speculation & fuss!  It looked like a cross btwn Princess Grace's mid-50s (hello the century has changed, royals) gown & Scarlett O'Hara's green velvet dress made out of Miss Ellen's portiers IMHO.  No wonder Kate starved herself skeletal before the wedding.  Anyone's ass would've looked big in that if they weren't a stick.  On the other hand, Pippa's maid of honor gown, now there was a nice dress for a skinny chick.  Gussie that up w/ a train & it would've been a much nicer wedding gown.  Even the ivory was safe, dull, & boring.  I really expected Kate to show up in something much more fashion-forward & not anywhere near white in tone.  Blue, maybe, w/ the kind of sleek draping her sister's outfit had.  That would've been trend-setting.  Twas Queen Victoria who set the trend for brides to wear white b/c before that they could wear any color they pleased & it would've been nice if peeps were brave enough to go back to that.  A white dress is a white dress & there ain't much ya can do to make it exciting.  What Kate wore, not so much trendy, BTDT, meh, not going to inspire a lot of brides.  It was your basic strapless gown w/ lace thrown over it.  And prolly stuffed as the last pix of her before the wedding, she had no bosom left from dieting down to a size nothing.  Even the veil was boring.  Kate is not going to be an edgy princess when it comes to playing dressup.  Don't she look at what the other royals are wearing?  From other countries, not British ones.

And OMG her makeup!  If a pro did this they ought to be fired & if Kate did it herself she needs to get a pro posthaste.  It looked as if William had applied a 1-2 punch to either side of her face w/ the bruising application of dark blush!  WTF were they thinking to let her leave looking like a clown FFS?  And even more eyeliner than ever....like she didn't wear enough before?  Jeez.  Foundation put on w/ a trowel, too.  Looked even worse once the veil got flipped back. 

Even the tiara failed to dazzle.  I was hoping she wouldn't get stuck w/ that godawful Fringe one the queen & Princess Anne wore for their weddings (now there was a wedding gown, Princess Anne's, w/ its Tudory nods) & at least that stayed in its box.  I was rooting for the Strathmore Rose tiara b/c it's absolutely gorgeous & looks like Tudor roses cast in diamonds (Google it).  It's been in its box for yrs, alas.  The Cartier Halo, meh.  Not dazzling, barely there. 

I figured the queen wasn't going to let the Girls of Great Britain & Ireland (now there's a big-ass tiara) out of her mitts as she wears that one a lot, but they couldn't do better than this piddly thing?  Even tho odds were on her granting them the Cambridge title, I also figured the Cambridge Lover's Knot was out of the running b/c it was the queen's wedding gift to Diana, which she promptly spurned & wore a Spencer piece, then did naught but bitch for yrs on how heavy the damn thing was & how it hurt her wittle head to wear.  But the Duchess of Teck tiara is dazzling (also has a Tudor rose thing going on along w/ a celestial motif), the Delhi Durbar is another huge-ass sparkler, the Scroll Diamond is positively encrusted w/, well, diamonds, the Grand Duchess Vladimir can have its pearls changed out for emerald drops, no one's laid eyes on the very regal-looking County of Surrey tiara since Queen Mary wore it so that could've been dusted off, the Empress Marie Feodorovna tiara would've matched the engagement ring (which Kate didn't wear!) b/c it has sapphires in it, the Burmese tiara is full of rubies that would've gone well w/ William's uniform jacket, the Queen Mum's Papyrus tiara is both delicate & showy, the Boucheron Honeymoon tiara is a ginormous one that Camilla's worn a few times, Queen Alexandra's Russian tiara I'm not fussed over b/c it's like a giant version of the Fringe, Queen Victoria's Oriental Circlet w/ its cabochon rubies is just stunning....o the choices Kate had & this is what she picks?  Or what the queen offered?  The woman has more jewels than anyone, c'mon, you could do better.  Kate didn't even have a necklace on & her diamond earrings were a gift from her parents.

The bridemaids' dresses were bland & similar to Diana's bridemaids' ensembles, & even the pale gold sashes did naught to gussie them up.  All royal bridesmaids seem to look the same.  The only exception I can think of is that Autumn Kelly put hers in green instead of white when she married Princess Anne's son Peter Phillips, & being Canadian & not British, she had more adults than children in her bridal party. 

OMG did you see how Grace van Cutsem's head is being Photoshopped all over the world BTW?  This 3 yo bridesmaid was caught in the foreground of the balcony kiss pic w/ her hands over her ears from the roar of the crowd & making a frowny face.  So now peeps are having her "disapprove" of everything from Charlie Sheen to who knows what for fun (Google Frowning Face Bridesmaid to see).  The poor kid will never live this down. 

I did love the Regency-inspired red jackets on the pageboys; they were turned out well, tho someone ought to take Tiggy's kid & smack him b/c he's old enough at 9 to know how to behave & didn't.  Camilla's 3 yo granddaughter did better than he did.  Princess Margaret's granddaughter Margarita, one of the bridesmaids, is going to grow up to be a stunner methinks, while Lady Louise, Prince Edward's daughter, unfortunately looks just like the queen did when she was little.

I missed the junior royals' entrance into the Abbey, & I did have a smidgen of hope for Princess Eugenie when I saw her sitting, as her outfit had a blue print bodice that rather had a Tudor doublet feel to it & a very square neckline, which is flattering to big boobs, but once she stood up it looked as if she'd tucked a tablecloth under it, the skirt was that bad.  Wrinkled, asymmetrical, poufy, totally unflattering.  Pity as the top half was looking OK, but she's also getting chubby lately so the skirt was an ass disaster.  Princess Beatrice has slimmed down (she used to be the pudgy York) but OMFG does she not have mirrors that she would leave the house looking as she did?  Holy cow.  Not only is she apparently attending Kate's seminars in how to improperly apply eyeliner as she was sporting enough for all of Monaco, her Band-Aid colored coat was awful w/ its loopy fringes & that thing on her head could not be called a hat or even a fascinator, it was so repellant.  It seriously looked as if someone had tied a huge bow around a bodily orifice & I ain't kidding.  These girls have all the money in the world, why can they not dress properly?  They always look terrible.

The queen always looks the same, just in diff colors, & chose screaming LOOK AT ME! primrose yellow UGH.  Sophie Wessex is another one who dresses like an absolute frump despite having the money to do it right & her outfit was so boring I can't even recall what color it was.  Princess Anne actually looked decent for a change in a fun floral-patterned coat over a royal purple ensemble w/ matching hat & shoes.  Very Easterish.  In fact, it was much better than her Easter ensemble of boring navy blue shapeless capelet thingy she wore then.  Camilla & Kate's mother went the big hat route w/ pastel coatdresses & looked pretty good.  Zara & Autumn also went w/ ginormous hats in silver-grey coatdresses.  Autumn has yet to lose the baby weight, alas.  In fact, she looks so bloated I wonder if she's pregnant again even tho Savannah is only 4 mos old.

How does Edward get a military outfit when he's never been in it, BTW?  Philip, Charles, & Andrew were all in the Royal Navy so they got stuff, but Edward has never done a damn useful thing in his life as far as I know & that incl dabbling in the service, so 'sup w/ that? 

I'm disappointed that so far I haven't seen anything on what royal guests (like, other royals) were wearing.  Didn't any of em show up?  LOL  Of course there was the obligatory shot of Elton John & his BF singing away on the hymns & a shot of that irksome troll Victoria Beckham in 6-in stilettos even tho she's pregnant.  Silly cow.  Prolly pissed b/c she wouldn't have rated an invite if William wasn't friendly w/ David.  She never smiles & always looks constipated.  I guess having to undergo bunion surgery once didn't teach her a lesson about her absurd shoes.

The only "fun" thing the newlyweds did was to jump into one of Charles's Aston-Martin convertibles (I so heart those) that had been decorated w/ just married stuff & drive down the street from Buckingham Palace to Clarence House after the reception to change for the evening party.  For which Kate had a strapless gown that looked like someone had peeled all the lace off the wedding dress, meh, & I was LOL'ing as she wore an angora shrug over it.  Not regal.  And she took off the tiara!  WTF?  Peeps who were still hanging outside the palace were amused w/ the convertible jaunt.

Kate dunno what she's gotten herself into.  When they stepped onto the balcony & she saw the gazillions of peeps massed out there she stopped dead & went O WOW.  Jolly good show for a country that claimed it had zero interest in a pair of royal parasites getting hitched.  Some lipreader claims that during the carriage ride back to the palace & the balcony scene that William kept telling Kate what to do next.  Even the kiss (there were 2, actually) was orchestrated by him.  And what, she dunno enough to wave at this pt?  Oy.

They're going to be safe, boring, & dull, you watch.


04/30/2011 12:25 AM


Greensleev
Topic :   Prince Charles Sets A Record

April 20, 2011
Charles, Prince of Wales, sets a record as the longest-serving heir apparent in British history.

He’s been waiting 59 years, 2 months, and 14 days to be King of England.

Now 62, Charles became heir apparent at the age of 3, when his mother took the throne as Queen Elizabeth II in 1952.

The previous record was held by King Edward VII, Prince Charles’ great-great-grandfather, who became king after his mother Queen Victoria passed away in 1901.



04/21/2011 10:27 AM


Greensleev
Topic :   Digging Up Henry!

QUEEN ASKED: MAY WE DIG UP HENRY VIII? 
Permission to unearth Henry VIII's remains must have royal approval

Sunday February 13,2011
express.co.uk
By Josephine Forster  

The Queen is to be asked for permission to exhume the body of Henry VIII in a bid to prove that a rare ­disease caused his ferocious temper and may have driven him to have two of his six wives executed.

American researchers Catrina ­Whitley and Kyra Kramer believe that Henry had “Kell-positive” blood, and ­suffered from the related genetic ­disease McLeod’s syndrome.

Dr Whitley, a bioarchaeologist, said: “This could vindicate Henry in history. Knowing he was mentally ill offers a different explanation for why Henry, who was greatly loved as a young prince, became a ­tyrant in ­later life.”

Henry, who died in 1547 at the age of 55, is buried under the floor of St George’s Chapel, in Windsor ­Castle. Permission to unearth his remains and take hair and bone samples for DNA tests must have royal approval.

Dr Whitley added: “McLeod’s ­syndrome causes muscle weakness and even schizophrenic behaviour. It usually reveals itself at around the age of 40 with an episode of mental illness, which gets gradually worse for the rest of the sufferer’s life. Henry was 41 when he married Anne Boleyn.

“The turning point for Henry was around his 40th birthday. I believe the charges he made against Anne were the ­result of psychosis.”

Mrs Kramer, an ­anthropologist, said: “His ministers knew he was as mad as a hatter but he was still behaving like an intelligent man. It must have been terrifying. ­Imagine a man like that having the power of life and death over you.”

A spokesman for the Queen declined to comment.



02/28/2011 5:51 AM


BanditQuee
Re :   A Convenient Death: Amy Robsart

I am joining this forum as I have been reading, for the fourth time, but first since the hard back came out and watching the National Geograthic on Elizabeth: Killer Queen from the book by Chris Skidmore Death and the Virgin about the alleged murder of Amy Robsart, the first wife of Robert Dudley, later Earl of Leicester, the lover of Elizabeth I. I have to agree that some of the theories are a bit out there, but the evidence does need to be revisited. However, without the physical remains of Amy, which are missing, or some of her clothing, or her blood or some other physical thing from the murder scene we cannot be sure that she was murdered. I do not believe she committed suicide, even though she may have had some depression due to the fact that she had breast cancer. She may have been on some Tudor form of morphene; they did use mercery for a number of illnesses to relieve pain and the symptoms. This may have affected her brain and may have made her crazy. She may also simply have been resting in the house, wanting to be alone, and woken up, still drosy from the drugs and could have fallen by accident, by losing her footing. If she came from her room, on the upper landing, along to the half set of stairs, then down the second set, that may have added to her confusion and she simply collapsed and fell, hitting her head and breaking her neck. You do more damage on only a few stairs than you do a full flight. The theory by Gregory that William Cecil had her killed is rubbish. Cecil saw Dudley as a rival; so why get rid of an innocent woman in order to trap his rival with a charge of murder? He could have had him done for a trumped up charge of treason and executed. After all the rest of his family had been either killed as traitors, accused of treason and put in the Tower and a charge of suspician or hiding a plot against Elizabeth was brought against him 10 years after Amy's death. Elizabeth may have ordered her death; but why? She could not marry a man accused of murder, even if she was capable of such a thing. And Robert Dudley? He may want to get rid of his wife, but he only had to wait and it is possible that she would die in any case and he was cleared at the time. But then he could have bribed the coronor and the jury? Dudley wanted an inquest and he had to clear his name; he could not remain at court unless he did. But the evidence against him or that clears him was not conclusive. And was it even murder? For many years this was something that I actually believed, but now with more evidence in the public domain it is clear that an accident is just as likely. She could have just fallen and may-be we are too keen to find someone to blame because we like a mystery with a whodonet ending. The most compelling evidence for a murder is the recently discovered coronors report and inquest. The report says that she had two wounds in her head; one a couple of inches long and another an inch or so long. But the measure is that of a thumb. Now a thumb is a subjective measure as it is individual to the owner. And how do you measure an internal wound with a thumb? It is very difficult to put a thumb into a closing wound and a hole in the skull that is not totally open, as it causes the skull to crack inwards and to fill with skin and mass. There are several problems, but I will not go into them as I am not a pathologist. They are problematic wounds and they are also wounds that we cannot verify. They are described in the report, but we do not know how they were made. We do not know if they are postmorton, at the time of death and impact, or before she fell down the stairs. We do not have the body and the skull of Amy Robsart to examine. We do not have anything to look at to establish if the wounds exist, if they are large enough to have been caused by a blunt or a sharp object, or if they are caused by the fall. We have to take the examiners word and we do not have a reason to doubt that they exist; we simply can never verify this and we simply do not know how the wounds were caused. The discovery of the body may have been helpful, but a lot would have depended on the condition of the skull. We also need to be sure that we are looking at Amy's body. Yes, she may have been killed or it could have been an acciden. The fact is, without her body, we can never really be sure.


02/26/2011 8:04 PM


Greensleev
Re :   A Right Royal Wedding is Coming!

Twas a girl & smart enough to arrive in time on Dec 30th to be a 2010 tax deduction LOL  But rumor has it that she has a decidedly unroyal name....Savannah.  I still think Winter would've been more amusing.  Apparently they wait yonks to christen kids nowadays, as she won't be until March.  William supposedly has been asked to stand godfather.

Now that the royal rugrats are ageing, it's interesting to see Peter & William look more like brothers than William & Harry do.  So much for all those peeps swooning & insisting William looks like St Diana LOL  Both lads resemble Prince Philip IMHO.  And Harry's got the queen's squinty lil eyes.

THIS is from the UK Telegraph, I figure they likely have better royal wedding stuff than an American TV show would.


02/12/2011 7:59 AM


Greensleev
Topic :   Catherine of Aragon: Anorexic?

Never heard this one before, considering C of A is usually described as "dumpy" in the most flattering ambassadorial reports.  And I think they've made a mistake in labeling this one portrait as being Arthur, because there's a Hapsburg jaw on that peep if I ever saw one!   Gotta be wrong.

Was Henry VIIIs First Wife Anorexic?:
Catherine of Aragon's Secret Problem

By Giles Tremlett
Last updated at 8:02 PM on 6th November 2010


Fertility problems throughout her marriage meant that Catherine of Aragon never fulfilled her most important obligation – to produce a male heir. Could this have been a result of her ‘disordered eating’? Historian Giles Tremlett investigates.

The warning signs were there. The teenage girl due to become England’s queen consort was not eating properly. Behind her back, worried letters were sent from one side of Europe to the other. In a sharp echo of the words used to describe anorexia, bulimia and today’s food-orientated illnesses, Catherine of Aragon was given to ‘disorderly eating’ – or so one close observer would go on to write in the early days of her marriage to Henry VIII.

The 15-year-old Spanish princess had arrived in England in 1501, after a long , storm-tossed journey from the magnificent surroundings of her home at the Alhambra Palace in Granada. Catherine had always known her destiny was to marry the future king of England and bear a son to continue the Tudor dynasty. Her first years in England, however, were miserable: a time of loneliness, uncertainty and almost continuous illness. Her eating problems did not help. But could they have had a knock-on effect, making it difficult for her to produce the desired male heir and thereby pushing her husband into the arms of Anne Boleyn and changing the course of English history?

We think of eating disorders as a uniquely modern phenomenon. Blame is pinned on everything from skeletal catwalk models, fashion magazines and bikinis to exams and career stress. But self-starvation and binge eating have been with us for centuries – at least since the Romans began vomiting after meals, or it first occurred to someone that fasting was virtuous. It is quite possible that Princess Diana was not the first famous royal to suffer.

Anorexia wasn’t formally diagnosed as an illness until the end of the 19th century, but candidates for early anorexics are now thought to range from Joan of Arc to Mary Queen of Scots. ‘Did this exist before? Absolutely. It just wasn’t called anorexia nervosa,’ says Dr Julie Hepworth, a specialist in eating disorders. ‘The symptoms have been called different things at different times.’

It is impossible to make a medical diagnosis five centuries later, but Dr Hepworth agrees that Catherine’s situation as a powerless, unhappy young woman and the symptoms I describe her experiencing in my biography Catherine of Aragon: Henry’s Spanish Queen are reminiscent of the lives of modern sufferers. ‘There are striking features which are very similar,’ she says.

Catherine’s troubles started soon after her arrival in England. She had not originally come with the intention of marrying Prince Henry, but had been engaged since the age of four to his elder brother Arthur, heir to Henry VII. A wedding ceremony at St Paul’s sealed the match between the two 15-year-olds, and a wedding bed awaited Catherine and Arthur in the neighbouring Bishop’s Palace. It was there they were meant to set about the business of producing a future heir to the English crown.

But her marriage to Arthur seems to have been as unhappy as it was short. Historians have argued endlessly about whether the two ever managed to have sex. Catherine insisted they did not, and her retainers told of an embarrassed Arthur shuffling out of her chambers, leaving a sad and dissatisfied Catherine behind. ‘I fear he will never be able to have relations with me,’ she said, according to one retainer. That must have been a blow to her self-esteem, especially as her main task was to provide heirs. Her sense of failure and worthlessness would have been acute.

After weeks of partying the young couple were sent to live inside the towering grey walls of Ludlow Castle, close to the Welsh border in Shropshire. But Arthur died within months, and Catherine found herself a widow at 16, ill and, presumably, anxious to leave what her mother called ‘that unhealthy place’. Her kindly mother-in-law, Elizabeth of York, eventually sent a black-fringed carriage to take her back to London, but Henry VII and her parents, the mighty Spanish monarchs Isabel and Ferdinand, soon had fresh plans for her. In 1503 she was engaged to marry Arthur’s young brother Henry. Her new fiancé was, however, still an 11-year-old child. She must wait to marry him.

In the meantime her parents abandoned her to the care of the tight-fisted Henry VII, but repeatedly failed to send the final instalment of dowry money that would allow her to remarry. Seven glum years were spent in misery-provoking limbo. ‘I fear my life will be short, owing to my troubles,’ she told her father. Henry VII was sometimes cruel, hoping that might force her family to send the money.

Catherine was a pawn in European politics – trapped and powerless. She complained bitterly, especially about money: at one stage she was forced to sell her bracelets in order to buy herself a new dress.

Grief then added to Catherine’s woes. On 26 November 1504 Queen Isabel died. Catherine lost not just a mother, but her marriage-market status as daughter to the queen of Castile – a title that passed to her elder sister, Juana ‘the Mad’. If
Catherine was already powerless, her mother’s death can only have made her
feel increasingly worthless.

At some stage Catherine began eating erratically. Fasting on religious grounds offered her an opportunity to shun food. Today’s eating disorders are often associated with exaggerated perfectionism, and religion provided Catherine with examples of ways to pursue that. Some of the more extreme practices could involve self-harm – ranging from self-flagellation to starvation. Famous medieval saints such as Catherine of Siena had even starved themselves to death. ‘She was constrained every day to vomit the food she had eaten,’ the saint’s confessor had reported. Comparisons with today’s self-starving anorexics chasing a perfect body are apt. The saints replaced ‘the ideal of thinness with holiness’, says historian Rudolph Bell, author of a book on female saints whom he called ‘holy anorexics’.

Among those who spotted the danger to Catherine’s health was the Pope. Julius II, whose permission was required for many marriages between Europe’s royal families, was a key player in continental politics. So when he received news that Catherine was overdoing her fasting and jeopardising her ability to bear children, he wrote to the Prince of Wales.

The Pope’s letter is dated confusingly and it is not clear whether it was meant for Prince Arthur or Prince Henry, but Catherine was probably aged between 15 and 19 – the age at which today’s eating disorders appear. Julius leaves little doubt about the worry she caused. He had been told that the ‘fervour of her devotion’ was such that she excessively observed ‘holy oaths and prayers, fasting and abstinence’ without the Prince of Wales’s permission. Catherine ‘does not have the full power of her own body’, the Pope wrote. ‘And the devotions and fasting…if they are thought to stand in the way of her physical health and the procreation of children…can be revoked and annulled by men.’

He gave the prince ‘authority to restrain and compel’ her and prevent anything ‘that would stand in the way of the procreation of children’. Catherine, in other words, could be ordered to eat.

Catherine was plagued by mysterious, long-lasting illnesses. Her own doctor believed she suffered one continuous bout of illness that lasted for six years after her arrival in England. The symptoms were varied and erratic. They included ‘derangement of the stomach’,  hot sweats, cold sweats, fevers that came every other day, summer colds and summer coughs that baffled King Henry’s physicians. She would complain, on the same day, of ‘suffering cold and heat’.  It is difficult not to see her underlying illness as depression. Her doctor said as much. ‘The only pains of which she now suffers are moral afflictions beyond the knowledge and ability of her physician.’

The cures were various. Mostly they involved blood-letting and purgatives that would have provoked both vomiting and diarrhoea. Catherine preferred blood-letting. The cures at least guaranteed her a little bit of attention, if only from her physician. Spaniards at court speculated that an early bout of illness was caused by the fact that ‘she was a virgin, and that if she married someone who had skills with women, she would get better’. What she needed, they meant, was a ‘real’ man in her bed. Her own physician proposed something more sensible –  a little bit of love. Some ‘paternal solicitude’ from her uncaring father, he insisted, was ‘her only hope’.

Catherine’s troubles were brought to a sudden end by Henry VII’s death in 1509. The 17-year-old Henry VIII was proclaimed king, and one of his first decisions was to marry Catherine, now aged 23. The final dowry payment was made quickly, and the young couple were apparently happy, but overanxious to produce children. Catherine’s strange eating habits soon drew the attention of a worried Spanish ambassador. 

‘Irregularity in her eating makes her unwell,’ he reported. ‘Which is why she does not menstruate well.’ Little surprise, he went on to say, that Catherine was having trouble conceiving.

A disturbed menstrual cycle is one of the first symptoms to appear in modern eating disorders, and problems getting pregnant can be another knock-on effect. In fact Catherine did conceive – at least half a dozen times – but her pregnancies mostly ended badly. Stillbirths, miscarriages and infant deaths were a painfully repetitive part of her existence. This was not abnormal for the times, but research also suggests that both miscarriages and underweight babies can be linked to eating disorders.

Only one of Catherine’s children survived into adulthood – Mary Tudor, the future queen who would go down in history as Bloody Mary. Crucially, Catherine provided no male heir – and a daughter was not enough for Henry VIII. It was the desire for a son, as much as the spell cast by the bewitching Anne Boleyn, that drove Henry to leave Catherine. This only happened after 17 years of outwardly successful, amicable marriage (Catherine eventually lasted twice as long as Henry’s queen as the five wives who followed her put together).

A long and messy divorce battle, which Catherine fought tenaciously despite the obvious dangers to her life, ended only when Henry decided to split the English church from the Pope and Rome. He could then appoint an archbishop of Canterbury who would do his will and grant a divorce, a decision that reverberated through English history for generations.

So was it an eating disorder that robbed Catherine of her ability to give Henry the male heir he craved? At this distance, and with the evidence available, it’s impossible to be sure. We can’t know if she had some other medical condition that might explain her symptoms, and we know little about her weight. Later portraits and descriptions certainly show her as plump enough.

But anorexics and bulimics, as their families know only too well, often spread their suffering beyond themselves.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-1326591/Was-Henry-Vllls-wife-anorexic-Catherine-Aragons-secret-problem.html



02/12/2011 7:13 AM


Greensleev
Topic :   The Long & Short of Royals

I usually prefer to copy articles as they have an irksome habit of vanishing, but this one has too many illustrations to make it feasible & since's it's already a bit old maybe it's archived.....fun DM story showing how height doesn't much run in the royal family.  William at 6'3" is fixing to be the tallest king since the mighty Longshanks, whose record has been unchallenged over 700 yrs (tho Charles II came close). 

Why, at 6ft 3in, Prince William towers over his titchy ancestors

Bet he won't come anywhere close to breaking Longshanks's breeding records w/ what a stick his fiancee is.  I'm thinking Harry's got a shot at the throne.  Surely Kate's hipless, bosomless figure isn't very conducive to royal rugratting LOL  Wonder if she had to have a gyno exam assuring the Windsors of fertility potential before she got her mitts on Diana's sapphire?  Elizabeth I allegedly had one of those when her Froggie came a-courtin', because she was past 40 & why bother marrying the old bat if her eggs had expired, but they were still reasonably fresh.

Be sure to read the commentary in the height lines LOL some of it's tres amusant.


02/12/2011 7:00 AM


" height=86 width=189>
[List Sites] [Random] [Join]
Sign Up | Create | About Us | SiteMap | Features | Forums | Show Off | Faq | Help
Copyright © 2000-2013 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.