Henry VII

by S B Chrimes

  But there was unfinished business when Henry died, and the most important items were the prospective marriages of his daughter Mary and his son Prince Henry.

  A treaty of marriage between Mary and the Archduke Charles had been concluded in December 1507, and ratified by Margaret as regent of the Netherlands on 1 October 1508.1 But when Henry VII died, Mary was still only twelve years old; there could at that time have been no expectation of the marriage’s taking place for several years, and in fact it never took place. The story of how it was that five years later Henry VIII’s desire to snub the Hapsburgs and to make alliance with France induced him, to the chagrin of the Archduchess Margaret, to arrange a hasty marriage in 1514 between Mary and the elderly Louis XII is a story that belongs to the new reign, where we must leave it.2

  But the fact that the marriage proposed and agreed between Prince Henry and Catherine of Aragon so soon after the death of Prince Arthur in 1502 did not occur until 11 June 1509 needs further consideration; all the more because it involves the problem of Catherine’s treatment by Henry VII during her widowhood.

  The long delay in completing the marriage is at first sight all the more surprising since it seems evident that the Spanish monarchs were most anxious to secure its completion. The initiative came from them very soon after the death of Arthur.3 Isabella’s instructions to Hernan Duque de Estrada, then ambassador, in July 1502, clearly reveal the great importance she attached to the plan, especially as a means of preventing any alternative alliance that the king of France desired to make with Henry VII. She apparently accepted Catherine’s lady-in-waiting’s (Doña Elvira’s) assertion that the marriage with Arthur had not been consummated, believed that delay might be dangerous, and declared that the rest of the dowry would be paid when the second marriage was consummated but not before that.4 In September Ferdinand himself stressed to Estrada the need to hinder Louis XII’s schemes.5

  But long delays there were to be. Prince Henry did not, indeed, reach the stipulated age by completing his fourteenth year until 28 June 1505. On the day before that the prince made a declaration protesting against recognition of the marriage treaty that had been made when he was under age.1 Before that date and after it, until perhaps nearly up to the time of his death, Henry VII became reluctant to allow the completion of the marriage treaty. Until he could be sure of getting on to terms of firm alliance with the Hapsburgs, he had been willing enough to contemplate the renewal of the matrimonial alliance with Spain, on the understanding that a valid marriage with Arthur had been completed – at which Catherine had not at the time protested. Pending the settlement of outstanding dowry questions he had granted her the not inconsiderable allowance of £100 a month to maintain her in her largely Spanish household at Durham House.2

  But the death of Queen Isabella on 26 November 1504, and the sudden emergence of the question of the succession to Castile, fundamentally changed the position and gave to Henry VII quite different thoughts. The opportunity now came for him to undermine Ferdinand of Aragon’s position by supporting the Hapsburg’s ambitions in Castile, and his eventual alliance with King Philip and his schemes for matrimonial alliances for himself and Prince Henry with the Hapsburgs were hardly compatible with the furtherance of the earlier plan for the marriage of the prince with Catherine of Aragon. Ferdinand’s rapprochement with France signalized in the Treaty of Blois of 1504 and his subsequent marriage to Germaine de Foix, together with the hostility shown by the council of Castile towards English merchants, and the abandonment of his project for his own marriage to Joan of Naples, all tended to swing Henry’s mind away from furthering the Spanish marriage. Inevitably his wooing of the Hapsburgs, culminating as it had in the agreements with Philip in 1506, received a severe blow by the subsequent death of Philip, whilst the frustration of his plan to remedy the situation by himself marrying Joanna seemed to destroy his objective of scoring off Ferdinand. Not unnaturally in these circumstances Henry developed a feeling of acute hostility towards Ferdinand and a distaste for the Spanish marriage.1

  But it is difficult to see how Henry can be acquitted of meanness and harsh spite towards the unfortunate victim of these twists and turns in high politics – Catherine of Aragon. In order to show his disapprobation of Ferdinand’s activities, it was not necessary to stop his allowance to her, to oblige her to give up her household at Durham House and to live in straitened circumstances and poor accommodation at one or other of his royal houses, and generally to treat her not as a widowed daughter-in-law and prospective wife for his heir, but as an insignificant pawn in his diplomatic game. Catherine, at least in the earlier years of her widowhood, was admittedly a difficult and querulous person to deal with, full of complaints about her health and the efforts of the Spanish resident ambassador, De Puebla, dominated as she was by Doña Elvira for some years and later by her confessor Fray Diego Fernandez.2 But she learnt much from her privations, became more discreet after at her own request she was given by her father credentials as an ambassadress, and became adept in the arts of dissimulation.3 She remained steadfast in her aim of achieving marriage with Prince Henry, thereby furthering, she believed, her own and the Spanish interest.

  The time came when Ferdinand, fearing the threats to Spain on the continent, sought to improve the prospects by agreeing to terms acceptable to Henry on the dowry question, made Catherine at long last a grant of some money with which to pay part of her mounting debts, and sent, in response to Catherine’s request for an ambassador more acceptable than De Puebla, an additional envoy in the person of Don Gutierro Gomez de Fuensalida,4 to try to further the completion of the marriage. The extraordinary bunglings of Fuensalida and his inept and disastrous interviews with Henry VII did nothing to enhance the king’s enthusiasm for the marriage but confirmed him in his delaying tactics. The time came, however, when what Henry wanted most was Ferdinand’s consent to the marriage of Henry’s daughter Mary to Ferdinand’s grandson the Archduke Charles. Henry’s anger, both at Fuensalida’s refusal to convey such an assent and his extreme tactlessness, was immense, all the more alarming in Henry’s state of declining health.

  Henry decided in the end to do without Ferdinand’s assent, and proceeded to a public bethrothal of Mary and Charles, which Fuensalida refused to attend and forbade Catherine to attend. But by this time (17 December 1508) Catherine had learnt to appreciate the experienced wisdom of De Puebla and the inept pomposity of Fuensalida, and herself decided to attend the ceremony, whilst Fuensalida was turned away from court. The partisans of the Hapsburgs now seemed triumphant and the eventual marriage of Prince Henry with Eleanor, the Archduke Charles’s sister, also seemed very likely, but it may be that Catherine’s sensible action softened Henry’s attitude towards her cause.

  It is possible that when King Henry reached his deathbed he did desire his son to carry out the old-standing treaty obligations and marry Catherine. At any rate this was Henry VIII’s explanation to Margaret of Savoy of his own decision taken shortly after his father’s death on 21 April 1509. On 11 June 1509 Catherine became queen of England.

  Catherine had indeed experienced troubles since at the age of sixteen she had become princess of Wales, most of them not of her own making. She did perhaps little to endear herself to many people in England before 1509, but the far greater troubles that were eventually to engulf her during the second half of her life she was to endure with a nobler dignity and a still greater fortitude.

  1 J. D. Mackie, The earlier Tudors (1952), gave much space to a valuable survey of Henry VII’s foreign policy; and the subject is given fresh and illuminating treatment in the first five chapters of R. B. Wernham, Before the Armada (1966). Busch, op. cit., gave substantial attention to it. G. Mattingley, Catherine of Aragon (1942), and Renaissance diplomacy (1955), are important contributions. But it is clear that the large amount of evidence available for the subject, in print as well as in manuscript, has still not received the detailed examination which it deserves. It is much to be hoped that in time some expert in
the field will give to the theme the entirely fresh scrutiny that it requires.

  2 Mackie, op. cit.

  3 Wernham, op. cit. 38.

  1 ibid.

  2 The popes of the period were Innocent VIII from 1484; Alexander VI, August 1492 to 1503; Pius III, September to October 1503; and Julius II, November 1503 to 1513.

  1 Cited, Wernham, op. cit. 19, from Cal. S.P. Venetian, VIII, 345.

  1 Foedera, XII, 227, 281; Pollard, op. cit. III, 1–2.

  2 See above, p. 70, fn. 1.

  3 The most detailed account of Anglo-Scottish relations at this time is in Conway, op. cit. 1–41.

  4 Rot. Scot, II, 477; Materials, I, 572; Foedera, XII, 316. Miss Conway, op. cit. 10, showed that Rymer in Foedera post-dated this treaty by two years, to the confusion of much subsequent historical writing.

  5 Conway, op. cit. 11; D. MacGibbon, Elizabeth Woodville (1938), 193–4.

  6 Conway, op. cit. 24 ff.

  7 Foedera, XII, 303.

  1 Foedera XII, 318–21.

  2 Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, Nos 13 and 14.

  3 The fullest account in English of these affairs is in J. S. C. Bridge, op. cit.

  4 Foedera, XII, 362–72. By its terms Henry VII merely promised to send 6,000 men to serve the duchess, at her own expense, until All Saints’ day, for whom two strong places fully equipped were to be provided by her. She agreed to support England if ever that realm sought to obtain its ancient possessions on the continent; to arrange no marriage or treaty of alliance (except with Maximilian or Ferdinand) without Henry’s assent, and then only if England were included in such treaties.

  5 ibid. 344, 345.

  6 Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, No. 34; Foedera, XII, 411–29. A detailed account of the embassy to Spain and Portugal written by Roger Machado, 157–99, 328–68; Richmond Herald and Norroy king of Arms since 1485, and Clarenceux king of Arms from 1494 is printed in Memoriah. A treaty with Portugal was also made. Foedera, XII, 378.

  1 These matters are discussed in Mackie, op. cit. 93–7.

  2 Machado’s journal of two embassies to Brittany in June and August 1490 is printed in Memorials, 200–22, 369–90. For Maximilian’s vacillations and Charles VIII’s efforts at negotiations, supported by Pope Alexander VI, who desired French help against the king of Naples and the Turks, see Mackie, op. cit. 99–102.

  1 Foedera, XII, 497 ff; Pollard, op. cit. III, 6–25; the treaty was confirmed by act of parliament, 11 Henry VII, c. 65; S.R., II, 635; R.P., VI, 507.

  2 Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, No. 78; Pollard, op. cit. 26–7.

  1 See above, p. 233.

  2 Foedera, XII, 638–42; Pollard, op. cit. III, 33.

  3 Foedera, XII, 592.

  4 Foedera, XII, 658–66.

  5 Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, 241 ; Pollard, op. cit. I, 206–8.

  1 Foedera, XII, 572–3, 635–6.

  2 See above, p. 88.

  3 L. & P., I, 104–9; Pollard, op. cit. III, 37–44.

  4 Foedera, XII, 673, 721–8, 729.

  5 ibid. 787, 793, 803.

  6 cf. S. Anglo, Spectacle, pageantry, and early Tudor policy (1969), 106. It is worth remembering that Margaret by her marriage with James IV became the grandmother of Mary, queen of Scots; and by her second marriage to Archibald, sixth earl of Angus, the grandmother also of Henry, Lord Darnley, Mary’s second husband. Margaret married thirdly Henry, Lord Methven.

  7 Foedera, XII, 741–9; Pollard, op. cit. III, 44–59.

  8 Ratified by Henry VII, 5 May 1500, Foedera, XII, 751. The Spanish ambassador’s dispatch to Ferdinand and Isabella, in which he asserted that ‘not a doubtful drop of royal blood remains in this kingdom except the true blood of the king and queen and above all that of the lord prince Arthur’, was dated 11 January 1500 (L. & P., I, 113–19). He said also that he had previously informed their majesties of the execution of Warbeck and the earl of Warwick. But as Busch conclusively pointed out (op. cit. 351), the contract of marriage was concluded before the executions occurred.

  9 Busch, op. cit. 137, and refs fn. 1. Letters dated June and July from Henry VII to Ferdinand and Isabella on the subject of Catherine’s future arrival are printed in L. & P., I, 119, 121.

  10 Elaborate plans had been made for her reception, L. & P., I, 404 ff; II, 103 ff. King Henry was unable to meet her on arrival because of bad weather, but sent her a charming letter in French drafted in his own hand (ibid. I, 126–8). The next day both he and Prince Arthur visited her with great ceremony; Leland, Collectanea, IV, 352 ff.

  1 See Anglo, op. cit. 56–97; Busch, op. cit. 139–40, and refs 353, n. 5.

  2 Chronicles of London, ed. C. L. Kingsford, 255; Pollard, op. cit. I, 223.

  3 Kingsford, op. cit. 258; Pollard, op. cit. 231. Wernham, op. cit. 51, wrongly attributes the queen’s death to April.

  4 Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, 317, 318; Pollard, op. cit. Ill, 59–60.

  5 Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, 351.

  6 ;Foedera, XIII, 76–86; Pollard, op. cit. III, 75–8.

  7 Foedera, XIII, 76.

  1 This assertion, agreed to by both contracting parties in the treaty without protest by Catherine, cannot but throw grave doubts on any denials of its truth either earlier or later. Why the testimony of Doña Elvira (whatever validity it may have had) was set aside when it came to the point of agreeing a fresh treaty remains obscure. But apart altogether from the truth of the matter (which will never be known) and from the canonical questions arising, it needs to be remembered that important financial questions were also involved, and these may well have decided the issue for the time being. If the marriage had been consummated, the outstanding half (100,000 crowns) of the dowry promised by Spain would be payable before Henry VII need put Catherine in possession of her dower revenues. Both Henry and Ferdinand therefore would have seen advantages in the affirmative assertion. Moreover, to obtain a papal dispensation on grounds of less than the first degree of affinity might prove to be dangerous in the future. The Spanish ambassador, De Puebla, whose services over some twenty years, ill-requited or recognized by the parties at the time (except by Henry VII), were of great importance to Anglo-Spanish relations, had advocated the affirmative from the start. On the question generally, see Mattingley, Catherine of Aragon, 48–52; J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, 191–2; Wernham, op. cit. 52. On De Puebla, see Mattingley, Renaissance diplomacy, 141–2.

  2 The 100,000 scudi already received as half of the marriage portion paid on Catherine’s first marriage were to be reckoned as half of her new marriage portion; the same dower as Prince Arthur had settled was to be arranged. Part of the agreement was that solemnization of the marriage should not occur until after the whole marriage portion should arrive in London ready for delivery. The scudo was to be reckoned as worth 4s 2d.

  3 The difficulties of establishing with certainty the dates in question arise from doubts as to the nature of a papal brief sent by the pope to comfort Isabella of Castile on her deathbed in November 1504, some version of which appears to have reached England at some date – presumably the bull referred to in Ferdinand’s letter to Henry VII dated 24 November 1504, which he said he had sent to De Puebla (L. & P., I, 241–3). As late as 17 March 1505, the bishop of Worcester wrote to Henry VII saying that the pope desired him to bring to England the original bull of dispensation and regretted that a copy of some kind had been transmitted to England previously (L. & P., I, 243–5). All these and cognate documents later came under close scrutiny and controversy in the course of Henry VIII’s divorce proceedings. See Scarisbrick, op. cit. 216–19.

  1 Ferdinand wrote on the same day to inform Henry VII of the event, Cal. S.P. Spanish, I, 409; Pollard, op. cit. I, 240.

  2 It was unfortunate that James Gairdner (who held somewhat unnecessarily jaundiced views of Henry VII’s endeavours to find a second wife) should have lent his authority to what he called this ‘monstrous proposal’ (L. & P., II, xxvii). The flimsy nature of the allegation was exposed by Busch, op. cit. 378, n. 4.

  1 The instructions and report of the
envoys (Francis Marsin, James Braybrooke, and John Stile) are printed in Memorials, 223–39.