The woman known to history as Catherine Howard was born a noblewoman, at some time between 1518 and 1527. Her father, was one was Edmund Howard, thewas third son of the Duke of Norfolk, and her mother was Jocasta Culpepper, who is also frequently referred to as “Joyce” in contemporary documents from the period. Joyce Culpepper gave birth to eleven children who survived to adulthood – an incredible occurrence in sixteenth-century Europe.
Culpepper had five children with her first husband, Sir Ralph Leigh, and six more with her second husband, Edmund Howard, of whom Catherine was the second-youngest. Lord Edmund and his wife and children lived in a stately but modestly-appointed house with his wife and children. Their home was provided by Lord Edmund’shis father, and was located on Church Street in Lambeth Parish, Surrey.
Edmund often bemoaned his aristocratic birth for the financial pressure it brought. He was one of the Duke’s younger sons, and his modest inheritance, he claimed, could never support him, much less his wife and children, in the style expected of the Howards. Paid work of any kind was considered vulgar for a Tudor nobleman.
Lacking any other income, Edmund served as a local justice of the peace at Lambeth, and was later made Comptroller of Calais, but nonetheless found himself continuously in debt. He was also terrible at managing the few financial resources he did have and spent most of his adult life borrowing money from his friends, ducking his creditors, and avoiding the angerire of three successive wives. The date of Catherine Howard’s birth is uncertain and highly debated, with some historians dating it as early as 1518 and others dating it as late as 1527.
However, a date in the mid-range seems more likely in light of documentary evidence. The will of Joyce’s former father-in-law, Sir John Leigh, which was probated in 1524, mentions Catherine’s older siblings, Henry, Charles, George, and Margaret, but not Catherine herself, or her younger sister, Isabel, presumably because they were either too young yet to be considered, or because they were not yet born. However, the 1527 will of Catherine’s maternal grandmother mentions both Catherine and Isabel.
Therefore a date of birth somewhere between 1522 and 1525, seems more plausible. If we accept this estimate, then Catherine was, at most, no more than six years old when her mother died in 1528. By the following year, Edmund Howard had embarked on the first of two subsequent marriages, and according to custom, some or perhaps all of his children by his previous wife were placed in the homes of Howard’s relatives.
This was not as harsh an action as it may appear today. The early modern English practice of “putting out” young children was frequently undertaken even if both parents were still living and readily able to care for them. Many children, perhaps a near-majority between the ages of six and twelve, might be sent to a household outside of their immediate family to complete training or education, or to begin service.
This practice was considered necessary for working-class children because of the economic value of a child’s labour to their families. But gentry and noble families put out their own children just as often. Some historians believe they did so to keep the children from being spoiled by their parents, who might indulge them rather than impose much-needed structure and discipline.
Even King Henry’s son, Prince Edward, was taken from his governess, his nurses, and his sisters at the age of six, and given into the care of a governor and tutors to complete his education to be King. As a result of this widespread practice of “putting out” of children, Catherine Howard probably did not get the opportunity to develop very close relationships with all of her many siblings during childhood, although at least one of her brothers did initially accompanyied her to her new household. Catherine did welcomed the opportunity to nurture her relationships with her siblings later on, however, when she became Queen.
Sometime between 1529 and 1531, when she was probably between six and eight years old, Catherine was sent to live in the household of Edmund’s widowed stepmother, Agnes Howard, the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk. Catherine spent roughly the next decade living either at Chesworth, the Duchess’s country estate of the Duchess at Horsham, in Sussex, or at Norfolk House in Lambeth. The Dowager Duchess was probably the most prominent noblewoman in England.
Virtually no woman besides the Queen herself or Henry’s daughters could claim precedence over her, so this was a very advantageous household for any child to be placed in, one in which the childy wereas certain to get an excellent education and to meet the right people. TAnd the Duchess did indeed have many wards. There could have been, at any time, as many as a dozen children of varying age and status living in her household, so Catherine would hardly have been lonely.
She would have spent most of her time in what was known as the Maidens’ Chamber, which was essentially a girls’ dormitory, home to both wards and servants. At first glance, such arrangements might suggest that there was little or no pride of placedifference in the treatment between of more aristocratic children, and those of humbler origins under the Duchess’ care, but the reality was probably more nuanced. Catherine might have played, laughed, argued, fought, eaten her meals, and shared her bed with any number of of a group of children from diverse socio-economic backgrounds.
But at the same time, the Howard name, her rank, and heritage likely gave her a decided superiority, one which makes the observer doubtit unlikely that any of her fellow wards could have prevented her from having her own way when she wanted it. Apparently, Catherine and her brother George were the only wards permitted to dine at table with the Duchess, and Catherine’s status probably gave her the authority to control the activities and arrangements of the Maidens’ Chamber to a certain extent. Nonetheless, the boarding school-style atmosphere probably did much to shape her personality.
Few truly specific details are known about Catherine’s childhood, but many historians believe that she experienced a rather lax and unstructured upbringing for a noble ward in an aristocratic household. Documentary evidence does suggest that the Dowager Duchess neglected her duties as a caregiver and supervisor, and that as a result, her wards often ran rather wild. To be fair to the Duchess, who was in her seventies and headed a household totaling one hundred people, there was little she could do to police the actions of everyone residing under her roof.
Catherine’s contemporaries remarked on the notable lack of reserve and dignity in her behavior, but many of the same critics were willing to concede that she also had a kind demeanor, which was immediately warm and engaging. Perhaps her life in the Duchess’s household among children from many different backgrounds had made her less pretentious. Unlike many Tudor aristocrats, Catherine Howard less often displayed the self-important haughtiness for which the nobility were renowned.
Still, her flightiness and lack of reserve would hardly have endeared her to those who expected a noble lady, or more importantly, a Queen, to act as onethe part. And unfortunately, the lack of supervision and discipline in Agnes Howard’s household was to have catastrophic and tragic consequences for Catherine later on. Catherine received an education similar to that of other noble women of the Tudor era.
Conduct and etiquette would have been her first and most important lessons. As a Howard, who would undoubtedly have to appear at court one day, Catherine would have learned how to properly walk, stand, sit, and curtsey, as well as how to address and/or serve individuals, according to their rank. She would have learned the rules of table etiquette and how to make polite conversation, but also likely the virtues of silence and obedience in women.
Catherine probably received her most extensive training in dance, and was described by many contemporaries as a fine and graceful dancer. She received music lessons in the Duchess’s household, reportedly learning to play the virginal, a small version of the harpsichord piano, and as well as the lute. However, she does not seem to haveit seems that she did not maintained her interest in music for very long.
Between the ages of ten and twelve, Catherine learned how to read and write. She does not appear to have had anyShe seems to have not received any academic training beyond basic literacy, but this was not unusual for the sixteenth century. In fact, the Tudor princesses were some of the first early modern Englishwomen to be as well and as carefully and as well educated as their male counterparts, learning history, philosophy, geography, and multiple languages as part of their education.
When Catherine Howard was between twelve and fourteen years old, she began taking music lessons from a teacher named Henry Manox*, a man at least ten years olderher senior, who soon began to make romantic and sexual overtures toward his adolescent pupil. Scholars are divided on the nature of their relationship, with some characterizing it as sexual abuse. Many modern observers would readily agree, considering Catherine’s extreme youth at the time of this relationship.
But Catherine was also at the threshold of sexual awakening, and in the Tudor era, fairly close to the age of eligibility for marriage, and may have willingly responded willingly to Manox’s* advances. , which from a modern commentators cannot help butperspective, it commonly viewed as exploitative “grooming” behaviour. ApparentlyIt is widely agreed that, Catherine and Manox* had a relationship which lasted several months, but their relationship did not cross the final physical boundary.
Later, And Catherine was probably most likely glad later on that they it had not. According to a housemaid in service to the Duchess named Mary Lascelles*, Manox* had admitted that while he had no honourable intentions toward Catherine, he nonetheless boasted that he would “have her maidenhead. ” Reportedly furious when she learned this, Catherine broke off her relationship with Manox*, who soon resigned his position as her music teacher.
Our understanding of history is often less heavily influenced by the events themselves than by the scholars who interpret and write about them. Historians have traditionally denigrated Catherine Howard as a morally loose and promiscuous young woman, but more recent historians have shown different attitudes. Most no longer view sexual curiosity or experimentation as inherently wicked or destructive, and feminist interpretations of Henry’s ill-fated fifth wife have begun to challenge the traditional indictment* of her character based on her sexuality.
More than one recent biographer has highlighted the overtones of abuse and manipulation by a much older adult man in a position of trust in her life. No more than a year after her break with Manox*, another young man named Francis Dereham* came to join the household in service to the Dowager Duchess. Francis Dereham* began his employment as secretary to the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk in 1538.
He was probably the same age as Manox*, in his mid-twenties, while Catherine was probably fourteen or fifteen. The two formed an attachment which continued for at least several months but may have lasted nearly two years. Dereham* called Catherine “Wife,” and she called him “Husband.
” They gave each other small gifts and love tokens. He gave her gifts of velvet and silk flowers, while she embroidered an armband and a friars’ knot for him. Francis also entrusted his money to Catherine when he went away on business.
The argument for Catherine’s control over the Maidens’ Chamber is a strong one, because it seems impossible that she could have entertained Dereham* there as many times as she probably did, for as many months as she did, without the Duchess finding out. And unlike her relationship with Manox*, it seems fairly certain that Catherine’s relationship with Francis Dereham* was fully consummated. To any casual observer during the Tudor period, it would appear that Catherine and Francis would eventually marry.
In fact, in medieval and early modern Europe, any two unmarried people who had declared their intention to wed one another and who had already slept together were considered “precontracted,” which was as good as married in the eyes of the Church. Unfortunately for the young couple, the Duchess did eventually foundind out about their affair. Apparently acting out of jealousy, the rejected Henry Manox* wrote the Duchess an anonymous letter exposing Francis and Catherine’s relationship, and slipped it onto her pew at church.
Furious, the Duchess was quick to send Dereham* away. He left for Ireland, promising Catherine he would eventually return. But by the time he didhad, Catherine would already be married, and would have risen to become Queen Consort of England.
It is impossible to know if, and how deeply, she mourned her parting from Francis Dereham*. In any event, as the niece of the Duke of Norfolk, she probably would not have been permitted to marry him, or indeed to choose her own husband at all. Dereham* was better born than Henry Manox*, but likely still not good enough for the niece of a Duke.
In the autumn of 1539, King Henry VIII was preparing to wed his fourth wife, Anne of Cleves. Anxious to add a Howard lady-in-waiting to the new Queen’s chamber, the Duke of Norfolk decided that his young niece Catherine should be sent to live and serve in Queen Anne’s new household. Catherine’s father, Edmund Howard, had died just a few months previously, and her uncle, the Duke, promptly took advantage of his new ability to order control his niece’s destiny.
Soon after Catherine’s arrival at court, she very likely met Thomas Culpepper, one of the King’s personal servants, member of the Privy Chamber, and a distant cousin of hers on her mother’s side. It is not clear if their acquaintance predates Catherine’s arrival at court, but some historians believe that an affection may have grown between them well before Henry first noticed her. Catherine’s apparent affection for Culpepper would eventually prove disastrous for both of them.
By January of 1540, it was abundantly clear that the freshly re-married Henry VIII was already seeking to divorce his latest wife. It is not known exactly when Henry first noticed Catherine, but by March, there was already talk of how frequently the King could be seen crossing the Thames toward Lambeth to visit Norfolk House, and of the young lady whom, many in the capital believed, was already his mistress. The fall from favour of Anne of Cleves had left a power vacuum at court.
Religious conservatives like the Howards, anxious to dispense with this new Queen who was assumed to be a Protestant, saw an opportunity. Catherine was very young – probably no more than seventeen – and not terribly well-educated, meaning. As a result, she was a the less than ideal choice for those seeking a woman to help manage the King.
She was, however, the woman of the moment, and for Henry, that seemed to be enough. The King was nearing fifty, and his fascination with the teenaged lady-in-waiting speaks eloquently of a midlife crisis. Henry was clearly disappointed after his first meeting with Anne of Cleves, claiming that her appearance was unsatisfactory.
Anne had also unintentionally and publicly embarrassed Henry during their first meeting by not recognizing him, and thus behaving coldly toward him. This awkward encounter likely contributed to Henry’s initial dislike of her. Some historians believe that advancing impotence, related toas a result of the King’s age and health problems, may also have played a significant role in Henry’s failure to consummate his fourth marriage.
Henry certainly protested and assured multiple parties of his potency and virility in the weeks following his wedding night – almost in self-defense it might seem to some observers. Winning the favour of a beautiful young girl like Catherine would doubtless have helped Henry feel like as if he was regaining some of his lost youth. And evidence suggests that Catherine Howard was indeed lovely.
The miniature painted by Hans Holbein the Younger between 1540 and 1542 is one of the few portraits which most historians can agree most likely depicts Catherine, although a few have pointed out that the early date range of 1540 indicates that the sitter in the portrait might well in fact be Anne of Cleves instead. Anne, however, was thought to have had blond hair, not auburn like the subject in the miniature portrait. Nonetheless, the sitter’s identity as Queen may reasonably be inferred from the jewels she is wearing.
Henry is known to have gifted the same royal jewels repeatedly to his successive wives, and the jewels worn by the subject are in the miniature portrait appear nearly identical to those worn by Jane Seymour in her Holbein portrait. In the miniatureportrait, the subject assumed to be Catherine Howard has auburn-red hair, visible under her jeweled coif, and her brown eyes gaze softly and knowingly at the viewer, as if she is privy to some secret which the observer is not. She has a full, prominent nose and an oval face with shapely lips and eyebrows.
What can be seen of her figure appears slim, but there is the slight suggestion of a double-chin in the portrait, which might suggest she had some curviness to her figure. Another Holbein sketch roughly dated from 1540 to 1545, known as “Portrait of a Young Woman,” is also believed by several scholars to depict Catherine Howard. In this sketch, the subject appears even younger than the one in the miniature, with similar, but somewhat more exaggeratedly delicate features than those in the miniature.
Unfortunately, since Catherine died in disgrace with her husband keen to forget her, she has not been well-enough memorialized for us to be sure which of the numerous Tudor portraits of unnamed ladies actually depict Catherine for certain. Contemporary observers described her as petite, pretty, charming, and high-spirited. Throughout the spring of 1540, Henry showered Catherine with gifts, expensive clothing, jewelry, and even lands.
Aware of the King’s interest and confident in Henry’s ability to eventually dispense with his current wife, the Duke and Dowager Duchess of Norfolk carefully coached Catherine with regard to how she should behave toward Henry, and how best to please him. Some of Catherine’s biographers believe that she and Henry consummated their relationship sometime in May, when the King began to noticeably escalate efforts to divorce Anne of Cleves. Perhaps the renewed urgency stemmed from a belief that Catherine might already be pregnant.
On the 28th of July, 1540, only six months after his wedding to Anne of Cleves, Henry VIII married Catherine Howard at Oatlands Palace near Weybridge, in Surrey. Henry’s new Queen Consort settled into her new role fairly well to begin with. She adopted a badge featuring a crowned rose and the motto: “Non autre volonté que la sienne,” or “No other will than his,” a sentiment which could not have failed to please Henry.
And the King was clearly besotted with his young bride. His courtiers and ambassadors remarked pointedly on Henry’s constant and openly affectionate behaviour towards Catherine. Even in public, he could not keep his hands off her, and continued to spoil her regularly with lavish gifts and honours.
Henry took his bride on a six-month honeymoon progress progress throughout the south of England, going from one royal palace to another, hunting, feasting, being entertained, and of course, doing what the newly married often do. Because of Henry’s advancing age and declining health, and because he had no more children after the death of Jane Seymour, some historians have speculated that he was unable to consummate any of his last three marriages, and that perhaps his last two spouses – Katherine Parr in particularly – were Henry’s nurses rather than his wives. Other historians disagree strongly however, pointing out that sex between sixteenth-century married couples was heartily encouraged, and was considered normal and healthy for couples at any age.
Moreover, men of mature years regularly married girls as young as Catherine Howard during the Tudor period, and many of these unions produced children. There is evidence to suggest that Henry anticipated on several occasions throughout his marriage to Catherine that she might be pregnant. The King seemed to have developed a policy beginning with his third marriage – not to consider having a coronation for a Queen until she had produced an heir.
But shortly before their 1541 progress to the north of England, tentative preparations seem to have been underway for a potential Queen’s coronation at York, one which never materialized since Catherine was not found to be pregnant after all. Some scholars speculate that she may have had a short pregnancy, which ended in a miscarriage in the spring of 1541. Simply being the darling of her husband’s eye might not seem like much of an achievement to most observers, but then, Henry was by no means easy to please, as the trail of dead wives, friends, courtiers, and clergy in his past could have testified.
Catherine therefore deserves significant credit for carefully, intelligently, and tactfully navigating her new position as Queen. Henry’s constant fawning over her was, no doubt, encouraged by Catherine’s efforts to lovingly conform herself to his will. The King had a pattern of responding with anger and even threats when his wives attempted to exercise political power, unless he himself deputized them to do so, as in the case of Katherine of Aragon’s regency during Henry’s campaign in France.
Anne Boleyn had stoked resentment in Henry for her habit of being outspoken on political and religious matters. Even Jane Seymour, mother of the King’s beloved son, was met with threats from Henry when she attempted to influence his policies toward those involved in the 1537 Pilgrimage of Grace. In contrast to most of her predecessors, as well as her successor as Queen, Catherine Howard almost never interfered in policy of any sort, or challenged what Henry viewed as his kingly prerogative.
On the rare occasions she did attempt to exert influence over state matters, she did so in ways that were socially acceptable for women in Tudor England. Like other Queens, Catherine sought promotions and honours for her family and household members, but she also interceded with Henry for imprisoned and condemned nobles. She begged Henry’s permission to send warm clothing and comforts to the Countess of Salisbury, Lady Margaret Pole, whom Henry had imprisoned in the Tower largely because her son, Cardinal Reginald Pole, was carrying on a campaign abroad against Henry’s religious reforms.
In fact, Catherine’s largest single household expenditure during her time as Queen was what she spent on Margaret Pole’s comfort. Catherine also interceded on behalf of Sir John Wallop, Sir Thomas Wyatt, and Wyatt’s secretary, John Mason, who were imprisoned simply for their social proximity to the lately disgraced and executed Thomas Cromwell. Henry, softened by his wife’s compassion, relented, and granted pardons and release to all three men.
Not only did Catherine play her royal role well by keeping Henry happy, but she also set out to be her most warm and charming self with those close to him, including his ex-wife Anne of Cleves. Now recognized as the King’s “beloved sister,” Anne had begun to be regularly received at court. This was a somewhat bizarre and unique social arrangement for the Tudor age, and most observers would probably understand if Catherine had behaved coldly toward Anne.
But rather than keeping her at arm’s length, the new Queen treated Henry’s ex-wife with effusive goodwill. Catherine famously and gaily celebrated the new year of 1541 by drinking and dancing with Anne of Cleves and other members of the court long after Henry had retired from the festivities. She also presented Anne with one of the puppies Henry had given her as a new year’s gift.
Catherine was keen to cultivate warm relationships with Henry’s children as well. Elizabeth and Edward were still very young, just seven and four years old respectively, and if they could not have a mother’s care, they were at least eager for a kind stepmother, which Catherine proved herself perfectly willing to be. The Lady Mary, however, proved a much tougher nut to crack.
To begin with, the Queen’s new stepdaughter was quite a few years older than her, highly educated, deeply pious, and rather serious. Catherine, no doubt, struck Mary as a silly and pleasure-loving juvenile, which perhaps, to a certain extent, she was. But what else, one might ask, could one reasonably expect from a seventeen or eighteen-year-old girl with Catherine’s background and upbringing?
She had been taken from the Maiden’s Chamber of the Duchess’s house and within mere months, had been placed at the very pinnacle of honour, adoration, wealth, and luxury in English society. Such a Cinderella story might make any young woman want to revel in it all, the dancing and amusements, the beautiful clothes and jewels. No doubt, it all seemed shallow to Mary, who had perhaps travelled a tougher road than Catherine in some respects, forcing Mary to grow up quickly.
She was also, admittedly, far more dignified with seemingly more substance than the teenaged Queen, but this probably doesn’tmost likely does not fully explain Mary’s seemingly intense dislike of her. Mary may have been transferring projecting some of the resentment she felt for her father, on to Catherine. Mary likely found it humiliating to be forced to reverence what seemed to her an artless young girl as her stepmother and Queen, while Henry’s first wife and her own beloved mother, one of the most admired royal women in Europe, had been left to die in pain and disgrace.
She also probably resented that Henry had cast off Anne of Cleves, whom she admired and cared for, to marry Catherine. Mary’s coolness and continued disregard for her new stepmother infuriated the Queen, and with an uncharacteristic display of spite and haughtiness, she removed two ladies from Lady Mary’s service for the lack of respect theyshe had shown. In spite of this clash, Catherine remained high in Henry’s favour.
But when her fall came, it was both sudden and violent. Historians have traditionally cited Catherine Howard’s greatest missteps as Queen as mainly sexual, however there is no truly firm evidence that Catherine was ever actually unfaithful to Henry during their marriage. One is tempted to see her greatest missteps as those she made with Mannox and Dereham, before she ever came to serve at court, for it was rumours of these premarital relationships which that first led Henry to order an investigation into Catherine’s past.
Yet, if these were indeed her only crimes, they turn Catherine Howard’s life, and her marriage to Henry VIII, into the very definition of a tragedy – to be destined for a terrible and ignominious end, even before one begins from the very outset. Until the spring of 1541, Henry’s health had actually begun to show promising improvement following his marriage. The years of 1539 and1540 had seen him gain a great deal of weight all at once, largely due to enforced physical inactivity on account of his constantly ulcerated leg.
But he improved markedly during the second half of 1540, enough to become something of his own active self again during his extended honeymoon with Catherine. In December, he even began a doctor-supervised regime to reduce his weight. But in April of 1541, the wound on the King’s leg began to pain him once again, keeping him confined to his chambers for weeks at a time.
Henry continually sent messages and gifts to Catherine but refused to see her throughout his illness. Presumably, he was anxious that his beautiful young wife might see him as an ailing and helpless old man. It may have been the boredom of life without Henry, or the worry that he might be tiring of her, which that led Catherine into dangerous territory, while seeking comfort and distraction.
Some historians believe that Catherine Howard’s alleged affair with Thomas Culpepper began around this time. The full extent of their physical relationship remains unknown, as both of them later denied that they had ever slept together. But they did secretly send gifts and letters to one another, and at least one witness revealed, under varying circumstances of interrogation, that Catherine and Culpepper had met secretly and in private on multiple occasions.
Jane Boleyn, the widowed Lady Rochford, who was one of Catherine’s principal ladies-in-waiting, revealed during questioning that she had many times served as a messenger between the Queen and Culpepper, and that she had even stood guard outside the door on multiple occasions during their secret meetings. One of the most telling pieces of evidence of Catherine’s feelings for Culpepper is the letter which that she wrote to him in her own hand, perhaps during the early summer of 1541. This letter was found in Thomas Culpepper’s room in November or December of 1541, and while it does not confirm any infidelity on the Queen’s part, it is highly suggestive of her romantic feelings for him.
It is the only document written by Catherine Howard which that has survived intact. “Master Culpepper,” it reads, “I heartily recommend me unto you, praying you to send me word how that you do. It was showed me that you were sick, the which thing troubled me very much…I never longed so much for a thing as I do to see you and to speak with you, the which I trust shall be shortly now…It makes my heart die to think what fortune I have that I cannot be always in your company…My trust is always in you, praying that you will come when my Lady Rochford is here for then I shall be best at leisure to be at your commandment…I would that you were with me now that you might see what pain I take in writing to you.
Yours as long life endures, Katheryn. ” Historians have traditionally viewed Catherine’s appointment of staff to her household as another example of her major missteps as Queen, but these are fairly understandable in context. When Catherine became Queen, the usual stream of family members and friends were drawn to the court seeking positions, some by invitation, but some, most likely, as the result of blackmail.
Catherine was glad to promote the prosperity of her family members when she became Queen. Her uncle, the Duke of Norfolk, was higher in favour than ever and the court seemed inordinately crowded with Howards. Her siblings all benefitted from Catherine’s elevation, including most notably her eldest brother Charles, who was made a member of the Privy Chamber, and her younger sister Isabel, who came to court to serve as lady-in-waiting.
But among those recruited to the new Queen’s household were a few troublingly familiar faces from her past, Joan Bulmer and Francis Dereham. Joan had once served the Dowager Duchess and had lived at Norfolk House with Catherine for several years. Joan wrote to Catherine soon after her impending marriage to the King was made public, and while the letter seems respectful enough, some scholars have suggested that a few lines might imply a vague threat: Joan said that she chose to apply to Catherine because of the “perfect honesty” that Joan had always found in her, and which, Joan had heard from others, still remained.
In sixteenth-century English, the words “honesty” and “chastity” were often used interchangeably, and it is possible that Joan was reminding Catherine of just how much she knew about her past. “I trust,” Joan wrote, “that the Queen of Britain will not forget her secretary. ” Catherine promptly installed Mistress Bulmer in her household as a lady-in-waiting.
In a seemingly more risky move, considering their previous relationship, Catherine also gave a position to Francis Dereham. He applied to Catherine using a letter of recommendation from the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk which is extremely interesting. Agnes Howard had known about Catherine’s premarital relationship with Dereham and had been furious and disapproving enough to separate them and banish him to Ireland.
Why would the Duchess then take the enormous risk of recommending him for the Queen’s service when it might not only endanger Catherine’s reputation, but her own as well? This leads one to suppose that Dereham might have blackmailed both the Duchess and Catherine in order to secure a position for himself. Whatever the case, Catherine obliged and gave Dereham a position as gentleman usher.
Strangely, on the same day that Henry ordered a mass of thanksgiving to be said in every church for his beloved Queen, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer delivered to Henry a letter detailing accusations against Catherine for premarital sexual impropriety. The informant was John Lascelles, a former client of Thomas Cromwell and an ardent reformer, anxious to see the religiously conservative Howards removed from power. John informed Cranmer that he had received troubling intelligence about Catherine from his sister, Mary Lascelles, who had served as a housemaid for the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk during Catherine’s residence there.
John had reportedly encouraged his sister to apply to the Queen for a place in her household on the strength of their previous acquaintance, and Mary had apparently declined, claiming disapprovingly that prior to her marriage, Catherine had been quote, “a light [young woman]…both in living and in conditions. ” Mary then revealed the Queen’s previous relationships to John. Henry was utterly shocked.
He ordered an investigation to be conducted into the rumours, but initially seemed to doubt that any corroborating evidence or testimony might be found. Still, he ordered his Queen confined to her chambers, without explanation, until the allegations were dismissed. Sadly, they never were, and, as the investigation progressed, Catherine’s freedoms and honours were increasingly curtailed.
During his interrogation, Henry Manox readily admitted to his previous relationship with Catherine, but affirmed that they had not slept together. Luckily for him, he was the only man accused of intimate former acquaintance with the Queen who was eventually released without charge. Francis Dereham, however, was not so lucky.
Francis admitted to his formerly romantic and sexual relationship with Catherine and insisted that they had been precontracted, but he vehemently denied that they had renewed their affair following his arrival at court. Under torture, Dereham confessed that he had not attempted to pursue Catherine again because she had already embarked on a relationship with Thomas Culpepper. Thomas was then promptly arrested for questioning as well.
Culpepper also denied having slept with Catherine, but later admitted that he had intended to do so, and that she had intended the same. When Thomas Cranmer came to question Catherine herself, “she was in such a pitiable state,” he wrote, “such as I never saw in any creature. ” She alternated sharply between terror of what might happen to her, and remorse for concealing her sexual experiences before her marriage to the King.
She confirmed the testimony of Henry Manox, and to a certain extent, that of Francis Dereham as well. However, she denied that there had been any precontract between them, or expectation of marriage. Many historians have wondered at this, for the existence of a precontract prior to her marriage to the King might have been grounds for an annulment.
If her marriage to Henry had been declared invalid, then there would have been no grounds for adultery charges. In the case of a Queen, adultery was considered treason, since it placed in doubt the legitimacy of potential heirs to the throne. Catherine did not seem to understand that admitting to a precontract could have saved her life.
In a later interrogation session, Catherine reportedly changed her testimony, alleging that Dereham had raped her, for reasons that are still unclear. Perhaps she believed that by by denying any willing participation, as well as the precontract, this might prevent the imposition of a death sentence. Despite the fact that two of her relationships predated her marriage, and both she and Culpepper denied the accusations of adultery, she was nonetheless condemned to death by act of attainder in February of 1542.
The evidence of Catherine’s guilt was only circumstantial, such as the letters and gifts exchanged between themher and Culpepper. Under interrogation, one of her ladies-in-waiting admitted she had seen the Queen “look longingly” at Culpepper, and another testified that she had not seen Catherine in her bed on several nights. Lady Rochford could not confirm that Catherine and Culpepper had slept together, but claimed that they had spent such a significant amount of private time alone together while Lady Rochford stood guard that, she said, she “could not think it otherwise.
” Sadly, Lady Rochford was found guilty of treason right alongside her unfortunate mistress. Francis Dereham and Thomas Culpepper were sentenced to die by hanging, drawing, and quartering, but Culpepper’s sentence was ultimately commuted to beheading, presumably owing to his noble birth and Henry’s former fondness for him. Catherine Howard went to her own execution with impressive bravery.
On the night before her death, strangely, she did not send for a confessor but instead requested that the executioner’s block be brought to her, so that she might rehearse the proper way to place herself upon it. This gives us a poignant picture of Catherine at the end, determined to bear her coming ordeal with calm, courage, grace, and dignity. The next morning, on the thirteenth of February, 1542, Catherine was led out onto the Tower Green.
She faltered for a moment as she approached the block, and had to be assisted to mount the scaffold. But when she faced the assembled crowd, she spoke clearly and steadily. Some sources claim that Catherine said she wished she had died the wife of Culpepper, but most historians have dismissed this claim as apocryphal.
Catherine’s last words were actually much more conventional. She asserted that she deserved death for her crimes against the King, exhorted the crowd to pray for him and obey him, begged that her disgrace not rebound unfairly on the members of her family who were innocent and ignorant of her wrongdoing, and affirmed her faith in God. This kind of final speech was highly typical of those condemned to execution, and showed that Catherine was anxious to protect those she knew she would leave behind, for the last words the of condemned persons were reported to the King.
Poor Lady Rochford, who had suffered what seemed to be a psychotic break during her incarceration, promptly followed her mistress to the executioner’s block. Henry had actually pushed a bill through Parliament to allow insane persons to be executed for treason, just for the occasion. Much of the historiography on Catherine Howard has been called misogynistic in more recent works.
Traditionally, she has been depicted as a silly, emptyheaded, pleasure-loving, and wanton temptress, a teenaged femme fatale. Earlier biographers, even twentieth-century scholars have used words like “whore” and “good-time girl” in academic print and discourse to describe her. More than any other facet of her life, Catherine Howard’s sexuality has been the central focus of most historians who have written about her.
This is somewhat understandable since it was the central focus of her downfall and historical documents which tell us anything about her personal experience or personality are relatively rare. Recent scholarship has argued that this trend of focusing only on Catherine’s sexuality has had the effect of obscuring almost everything else about her, and that her condemnation was an absurdly hypocritical expression of double standards. L, but looking past her supposed “sins” is necessary to see something more closely approximating the whole person; A girl who was impressionable, susceptible to flattery and adoration, who seems to have deeply revered and cared for Henry, but may have fallen away from him due to a lack of confidence in his love for her; A girl who was compassionate to those who were suffering, who loved animals, especially dogs, and who was happy to help family members to become more prosperous; A girl who had perhaps made mistakes, but who, some historians argue, was repeatedly exploited by much older men.
Whatever one’s perspective, Catherine Howard met her end with a sense of personal responsibility and with a bravery that one cannot help but respect, especially in a girl of no older than nineteen. She was buried in an unmarked grave in the chapel of St. Peter ad Vincula, close to the final resting places of George and Anne Boleyn, her first cousins and fellow martyrs to King Henry’s ego, rage, and ambition.
Henry was reportedly devastated by Catherine’s supposed betrayal. He had firmly believed her to have been chaste before their marriage, which for him was problematic enough, but the fact that she had taken Francis Dereham into her Queenly household, and spent time alone with Thomas Culpepper, as well as writing to him and sending him gifts, was evidence enough for Henry of her unfaithfulness, however circumstantial. Perhaps the most humiliating thing for Henry was not just the appearance of being cuckolded, but what it implied.
If his beautiful teenaged wife, whom he doted upon, had seen the need to look elsewhere for sexual fulfillment, it impugned Henry’s manhood by suggesting he was too old and impotent to satisfy her. This inference may well have contributed significantly to his decision to execute her rather than divorce her or annul the marriage. The suggestion of Henry’s impotence had pierced his pride and ego – the most dangerous of wounds.
This episode may have also facilitated the growth of Henry’s attraction to Katherine Parr, who was more mature at thirty-one, capable of more educated and intelligent discourse, and who promised a warm companionship with someone closer to his own age. In some ways, Henry’s relationship with Katherine Parr calls to mind his first marriage to Katherine of Aragon, for the King apparently found much to admire in his sixth wife that he had also admired in his first. What do you think of Catherine Howard?
Please let us know in the comments section, and in the meantime, thank you very much for watching!
