Was Catherine Parr Nearly Executed?

[@lauramason5667]

Catherine Parr was quick on her feet and very impressive. Perhaps it’s the fact that she had already had two older husbands that she had experience in handling men.

[@lisaannpennington3958]

Excellent point ... she'd been married twice before! Practice for the ultimate husband challenge!

[@ermintrude_fanshaw]

Henry absolutely gave her a chance to humble herself and save herself, which he didn’t give to his previous wives. But you can bet that if she had t played the game, or hadn’t played it well enough to be convincing, that arrest would have gone ahead.

[@Sabrinajaine]

Thank goodness Catherine was able to speak with him. I only wish the others had been given the same chance...

[@brontewcat]

The fact she was able to speak to him suggests Henry was not really planning on getting rid of her. With his other wives he either went to another palace or sent his wives to another palace just before their downfall was planned. He made sure he wasn’t around.

[@MazMedazzaland]

I personally think Henry did it on purpose, and that he was giving her a chance. But she still had to do the work, so to speak. It must have been terrifying - Risley was only doing what Henry had told him (even if he wanted to do it) and he suddenly got shot down. No such thing as true loyalty from Henry.

[@williamammerman8862]

IMO, Parr was no smarter than Anne of Cleves. They both submitted and saved their hides.

[@dennisgoatimer1079]

I don't think Anne of Cleves life was ever in danger the divorce or should I say annulment was seen badly enough behind close doors of Anne's family which was quite powerful her being killed would start a war no doubt. The only people who got beheaded were of English nobility so wasn't too much of a threat of rebellion and even if there was it should be easily manageable. I'm not saying she wasn't smart she was she kept being in touch in Henry being a sister of sorts to Henry and an aunt to his kids not many people stayed on the right side of Henry since his brain got scrambled from the jousting incident so kudos to that but her life being in danger I find it hard to believe.

[@redemptivepete]

By the time Catharine Parr was Queen Henry 8th had killed two out of five of his previous wives. That's a kill rate of 40%. If that doesn't put her life in danger what do you think would?

[@kazoolibra7322]

Thank you, claire!! I love stories about this queen, my favorite of Henry's wives. So wise, smart and effective!! 😊

[@ClockUnClock]

Catherine Parr is possibly one of the most cunning wives King Henry VIII had. People like to say Anne Boleyn knew how to work the king, but I think Catherine puts her to shame in that reguard.

[@BlackCatMargie]

I don't think Anne could have saved herself the way Catherine P did. Anne's only hope was a boy child, and that had become less of an issue by Catherine's time.

[@DavidJohnRedwood]

​@@BlackCatMargie Yes. That is definitely the case 👍

[@Pulchria24]

The 'cunning' required by Anne was totally different from that required by Catherine Parr.

[@paulguise698]

Hiya Claire, the 2 who tried to have Catherine executed,were they executed? I think both Catherine was cleaver and lucky both at the same time, Henry must of known he was dieing,so he wanted someone with him to see his life out

[@redemptivepete]

I think the Henry of 1546 was even harder to deal with than in 1536! Also by then Henry needed a nurse and stepmother to his children something Anne Boleyn would have struggled with!

[@Shane-Flanagan]

Thanks Claire 💚 Seems like Henry just wanted to scare Catherine, test her, put her in her place and show her who was boss etc. Execution may have been a bit further off. Henry was old and tired at that point and may not wanted the hassle of another wife in trouble. Had Catherine not been so convincing and submissive though, who knows what would've happened. Fair play to Catherine though, she played a blinder with experience, intelligence and past example on her side.

[@JaneEasterbrook-bn3ux]

Thank you , Claire. Have you read the novel by Philppa Gregory on Katharine? The scene where she submits is truly appalling.

[@lemongrabloids3103]

I’ve read that, I love Gregory’s novels but you must bear in mind that they are fictional 😅

[@UtahGmaw99]

Excellent as always Claire! It was sickening that they racked poor Ann. They must have enjoyed it as they did it themselfs. Catherine was in mortal danger I believe. I don't think Hennry had been in his right mind for years. The court was a very dangerous place. No one was safe not even the queen.

[@BeeKool__113]

Catherine Parr is one of my favorites of these remarkable queens. Much like Queen Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn, she was an intelligent and strong woman ahead of her time. I never tire of learning about these fascinating women. 👑📖🕯📚

[@renshiwu305]

Kateryn Parr was obliged to marry her first three husbands. Thomas Seymour was her choice for the succeeding husband and what a disastrous choice he was: grooming young Elizabeth, trying to take bodily possession of Edward VI. The Bad Boy trope is real. Thomas Seymour was a self-interested, power-hungry bad boy and Kateryn Parr fell for him.

[@FingalsMyst]

I think it a fair assessment that Henry, mercurial as ever, could easily execute Catherine without a second thought. I wonder how much the ‘caretaker’ of an aging and ill king played upon what sympathy he may have played in her survival. Henry needed Catherine. He was unlikely to marry again and his estrangement with both Mary and Elizabeth would not have either taking Catherine’s place.

[@michellecrocker2485]

The fact Catherine was able to talk her way out of execution proves how clever she was

[@octavianpopescu4776]

I don't think she talked her way out of an execution. Thing is, if Henry decided he wanted to end someone, that person would have 0 chance of seeing him. Henry was never the kind of person to look you in the eye before killing you. I agree with Elizabeth Norton's interpretation that it was all theatre for Henry to remind all of them: Katherine, Gardiner, Wriothesley who was in charge. But it's not like she outsmarted him, as much as: they both knew what was happening and why. Henry absolutely knew she was a heretic and that she was lying, but looked the other way seeing she got the message and surrendered. In fact, it was an open secret that forbidden books were circulating at court, but again Henry tolerated it... within some limits, of course.

[@michellecrocker2485]

@ could it have been a matter of his age? Maybe he knew he had been manipulated by his people against Catherine and planned to defy them

[@octavianpopescu4776]

@@michellecrocker2485 I think he knew they were right and that she was a heretic, and I do see it as a matter of age. I don't think he was in the mood to kill a third wife and have to look for another. I think he just got tired. I suspect Katherine made him feel comfy and cozy, i.e. despite her religious opinions, he could settle with her. He was no longer in the mood for an exciting young girl like Catherine Howard or sending ambassadors all over Europe like he did with Anne of Cleves. His body was old and sick, he must have had some notion that he was nearing the end of his life and he wanted someone to comfort him in his last days and Katherine was perfect for that. I see him as a tired old man towards the end of his life. Still dangerous if crossed, but fundamentally looking for peace and quiet.

[@michellecrocker2485]

@ probably got tired of that. Lost his taste for it. I think he knew he couldn’t do that forever with the same eagerness that he had when he was executing Anne Boleyn

[@alancumming6407]

Many thanks for this episode Claire. Your narrative successfully highlighted the various characteristics of those individuals made up the Henrician court. The paranoia of the King, the intelligence of Catherine Parr, the evil intent of Rich and Wriothesley but most of all - the courage of Kingston. A really interesting broadcast.

[@jobes4525]

TY Claire. Very informative as usual 👏😊

[@Sabrinajaine]

Do you think he might have executed his own daughter Mary if she hadn't submitted to him in 1536?

[@mj9949]

Yes

[@renshiwu305]

No, Henry would not have destroyed his own descendant and he would not have made himself a byword for evil in that way. Philip II of Spain (Mary's husband) was portrayed as wicked for the mere notion that he had had his son, Carlos, killed while the son was in captivity. Wives were easy to get rid of: they weren't giving him heirs and fickle Henry grew tired of them, too.

[@DavidJohnRedwood]

No. The people would not have THAT, but in most respects this tyrant definitely had things very much his own way nearly all of the time.

[@octavianpopescu4776]

No, I don't think so. Let's not assume the worst about him. I think he would have imprisoned her in the Tower and let her rot there, but he wouldn't have executed her per se. It would have been way too abominable, even for him. He must have known that everyone on the continent at least, knew him as the wife-killing tyrant. Murdering members of his own family, especially the popular Mary, could have opened him to a lot of trouble, both externally (I'm sure the Emperor wouldn't have been happy at all) and internally (probably a lot of people would have felt: "if he's going to murder his own daughter, what will he do to me", people may enter a sort of "he's going to kill me, so I have nothing to lose by rebelling" mindset). He would have been in big political trouble.

[@jordanramseyer]

I feel she was not actually in danger of being executed. I feel he wanted to scare her and put her in her place Thats why he didnt call off the arrest

[@neilbuckley1613]

A question; is the Sir Richard Rich who put Anne Askew to the rack the same Richard Rich who features in Robert Bolt's play ' A Man for all Seasons'? He is portayed as a liar who threw More under the bus for a position at court.

[@SharonPadget]

Sounds as if Henry wanted to “scare her straight” and it worked.

[@julienora7079]

Catherine Parr was unquestionably very very smart….My thought is that she wasn’t necessarily smarter than Anne Boleyn(for example), but definitely wiser. Then again, when Henry was married to Catherine, it was known he certainly wouldn’t hesitate in having his wife executed. Anne Boleyn didn’t have that precedent.

[@bmj1680]

I believe that the King did use his powers to establish his authority to both his Queen and his court. Thanks for introducing me to this theory. It’s something that I hadn’t considered .

[@brenmanock]

She dodged a bullet.

[@cindyrobinson3077]

Thank you! She is so interesting!!

[@stevekaczynski3793]

Henry was probably slightly nuts - his ability to turn on a dime with Catherine Parr and all sorts of people suggests that.

[@patmccoy8758]

I can imagine the ongoing intrigue at court. I heard a rumor that Catherine Brandon nee Willoughby couldn't stand Bishop Gardner!

[@liljayr1]

She was able to be more shrew with King Henry because the history of drama for years wasn’t there nor was her heart involved; the man she was married to wasn’t the man Anne had married, loved & fought for.

[@cmcg9035]

I am so impressed with Catherine Parr. Yes, I'd say she was nearly executed. And her friend Anne Askew got the worst of it all. What a hero is was to not give names. Henry VIII was a most vile person. Everything was about his power and ego. I'm not too surprised that he let her have an audience with him, so she could beg for her life. Because where was he going to find another nursemaid-wife? I think he decided it was better to keep her. But the way he did it, after the fact, in driving off those who came to arrest Catherine, to show his chivalry (eye roll) was cruelly reckless on his part. That could have gone terribly wrong. Henry was in poor health. Who knows if he could have been relied upon to stop the order for her arrest. Catherine could have ended up on the scaffold after all. The composer who wrote the song cycle I'm going to perform left Catherine Parr out of it because she survived. I think for everything she had to put up with with Henry, she definitely deserves a song, at least.

[@gypsydonovan]

I’m starting to wish there were laws to prevent fiction writers and film makers from using real names. I’ve been studying the Tudor dynasty for 30 years. I have tremendous respect for Claire’s work, and research (even where I disagree with her conclusions she has clearly done enough to justify her opinions). I am a non-celebrity historian. I’m often amazed at the seemingly unending patience of celebrity historians. To have to explain facts or even defend decades of your own work EVERY time someone releases a new Tudor era story for public consumption? It’s insane that someone who spends an hour and a half watching a movie will emphatically “correct” people who’ve studied a field for decades. I’ve seen an obscene amount of misinformation about every Tudor figure that gets a mainstream moment. Lately it’s that firebrand regicide Parr. A fascinating woman with a TRUE history worth exploring. I love how movies and books can spark people’s interest in the era. That can become a passion that leads them to devote their careers to better understanding and sharing the lives of people of the past. It’s wonderful. But it doesn’t have to be inaccurate. I’m one for “it was crazy enough that it doesn’t need exaggeration”, but I think it’s great for people to use their imagination, get creative and dive into the wonder of “what if”. I just really don’t understand why they hav to use the real names of human beings who were real people just like us. It’s not just misleading the public, it honestly feels disrespectful to the dead. Tell a story or tell their story. You don’t have to blend it. Biopics today (yes, they take “creative license”- more than I like ) have some limitations on how outside reality they can go. Probably because surviving family could sue & that’s just not going to happen no matter what is said about the Tudors.

[@belldandypleb5610]

Claire, I would love to see you do a ‘Facts Vs Fiction’ on the movie ‘Firebrand’, similar to the one you did for ‘the other Boleyn girl’. I loved that video and would very much love to hear your opinion on this movie about Catherine Parr… please, please, pretty please? 🌼

[@alayneperrott9693]

Why did Firebrand find to necessary to film this episode in such a crude and anachronistic way? Henry was terrifying in part because he was subtle and manipulative. I enjoy the thought of the totally unscrupulous Wriothesley and Gardiner being so badly bested by the trap that Henry set for them.

[@octavianpopescu4776]

Katherine is my favourite out of the 6, but I don't know if she would have been proud of this episode. I agree with Elizabeth Norton's interpretation that it was all theatre put on by Henry to remind people who's in charge. The most telling element to me is the needless extra steps... giving Cranmer a ring instead of just telling those who wanted to arrest him to back off. Or how he let Wriothesley try and execute the warrant instead of just sending him a message to cancel it. I can only think it was for the sake of drama. I think both Henry and Katherine knew the truth, that yes, she was a heretic, but Henry decided to look the other way and pretend he believed her. I think the real discussion between them in that room was: "Do you surrender?" "Yes, I do." "Good! Now, I'm going to pretend to believe you weren't trying to tell me what to do and there better not be a next time." She was smart enough to get the memo and... honestly, cowardly enough to keep her head down. She didn't have Anne Askew's bravery and we see it as being smart and surviving, but I think she would have seen it as a humiliating, shameful episode of her not standing up for the true faith, like Peter denying Jesus. Keep in mind that for Protestants back then, it was seen as very important to shout your faith from the rooftops, to denounce the Pope and to be prepared for martyrdom. As a staunch Protestant, she must have felt she failed that test, choosing to save her own skin over sacrificing herself for God. I think this contributed to the tone of her book Lamentation of a Sinner whose gist is "I used to like parties and fine dresses, but I now realise I'm the worst sinner imaginable and everyone around me is a snake." We call her actions smart in our modern-day view, but I don't think that's how she would have seen what she did.

[@Glovesforfoxes]

Hi Claire, you've been very helpful on the past - is it likely that it's Catherine Parr, not Anne Boleyn in the chequers ring? Is there any scholarship lon this? It's the Seymour connection and the hair colour that makes me think it might be

[@RogieVixen]

Henry was disgustingly manipulative with everyone, yet always felt he was the one up against it. As for Rich and Wriothesley, I forget how utterly evil they were (concerning Anne Askew), but they had previous form using torture relentlessly with other traitors as well didn't they. I have a hit list of powerful Tudor blokes, and Gardiner has always been on it one way or another.

[@mandygray764]

Great video

[@stevekaczynski3793]

Religious conflict was part of the background music to the survival (or not) of Henry's wives. Catherine of Aragon was a diehard Catholic, Anne Boleyn Protestant-inclined. Jane Seymour probably the same but more malleable. Catherine Howard herself could probably have cared less but the Howard family as a whole were Catholic-inclined, though not so much as to refuse the Act of Supremacy. John Lassells, a strongly Protestant courtier, played a significant role in Catherine Howard's downfall - Lassells himself was burned at the stake in 1546. Parr was Protestant-inclined and it is possible to see a Catholic motivation in the denunciation of her.

[@BlackCatMargie]

Thank you for another fascinating look at Catherine Parr. She certainly successfully navigated Henry and his court. I wonder if Henry's strategy of leaking information to give her and the others a chance to prove themselves loyal, might have sprung from regret at executing Cromwell? Am I right in guessing that Henry only used this strategy in the years following Cromwell's death?

[@DavidJohnRedwood]

This video sums up the situation very well, thank you 👍. As we saw in the film, there were folks at court such as Bishop Gardiner and his colleagues who were keen to take their protestant queen down. Fortunately, Catherine had been able to talk to the king, and the king's mood ran in her favour at the time of the unsucessful arrest. However, we could definitely say Catherine probably dogged a bullet. With Henry as king Iife was very uncertain.

[@purrdiggle1470]

One has to wonder what reforms any of Henry's queens could have gotten away with if they could only have produced a son.

[@Calla-sl8gd]

Hi Claire! Good video as ever. I think Catherine Parr was in danger ~~ everyone was in danger with Henry. This king was old and sick, and his temper could explode at any time and in any direction. And service to Henry could not be counted on any more than marriage could be counted on. Catherine was a smart woman and wisely submitted to Henry. Thanks again for the video ~~ please keep them coming!

[@andrewkeir6918]

Unfortunately, I watched Firebrand last week! Terrible misrepresentation of this period of Catherine's life (not even accurate with Elizabeth Freemantle's novel which I had thoroughly enjoyed), which shows her cast into a dungeon and later suffocating Henry to death. The ages of the 3 children were all wrong, along with the Anne Askew narrative. If you haven't watched it Claire, don't bother!

[@elizabethspedding1975]

Lucky Catherine