Was the marriage of Catherine of Aragon with Arthur, elder brother of Henry VIII, consummated or not?

Question

Some English writers and historians tended to assume that Catherine's marriage to Arthur was consummated, possibly to lay a justification for the eventual establishment by Henry VIII of the Church of England. Some other historians, particularly Spanish, tended to believe in the truth of the declaration by Catherine, a Spanish princess and daughter of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile, that the marriage was never consummated.

Answer 1

You've said it all, really. The marriage only lasted four and a half months before Arthur died; he probably suffered from the family disease of tuberculosis, and we know that at their wedding it was the robust Henry who danced with Katherine while the more timorous, less athletic Arthur looked on.

However, the marriage was arranged (as were all others) to bear fruit - an heir for the throne - and it was probably expected that the young couple would get to work as soon as possible. It is known that Arthur emerged from the bridal bed saying variously that being a husband was "hot work", and that he had "been in Spain" that night.

I suppose we'll never know the truth; Arthur may have performed his husbandly duties with resignation and diligence rather than enthusiasm or vigour, but Katherine, Infanta of Spain and the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella - and a devoted Catholic to boot - could not possibly lie. Or could she? Her future rested upon her maintaining that she was a virgin.

It's a fascinating question. I had also read (for a previous answer) a medical report on Katherine's failed pregnancies, where a medical historian was pretty sure that she and Arthur would have slept together.

Here's an interesting article:
http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/tudor_england/20521

Answer 2

IMHO I am convinced the marriage was consummated.
Firstly, both Catalina and Arthur were raised from infancy to do what was expected of them. Consummation was absolutely necessary in order to cement the alliance between Spain and England. Her duenna would have also definitely made it known to Ferdinand and Isabella that the marriage remained unconsummated and there is no evidence that any such communication ever took place.
Secondly, Catalina may have been a good Catholic, but she was also a princess of Spain. If her parents told her to do whatever it took to ensure the alliance held between the two countries, she would have. From her childhood she was groomed to be the future Queen of Enlgand. Had she merely stepped aside and been known as the Dowager Princess, her worth would have been greatly diminished and of very little use to Ferdinand and Isabella.

Answer 3

I don't know - I wasn't there!

It seems likely that it was consummated to me, but who knows? A lot of people seem to think that a girl brought up a strict Catholic wouldn't be able to lie. I don't agree at all! The Spanish, in those days, broke the ten commandments when it suited them and said that it was done in the name of God! They lied, murdered, cheated - all for God!

In those days, women had no rights to own property or anything of the sort. They were considered chattels of their husbands. Widows with no support would probably have been marginalised, and have no way of supporting themselves. Therefore, I think that in such a case it would be very much believable if Catherine of Aragon lied as to the consummation of her marriage to Arthur. If she remained "virgin", she would be "pure" and be able to marry again. I have to be honest and say that I don't know if widows remarrying was frowned upon in those days....I know that later on widows were thought to be sex-mad and that marrying a widow wasn't encouraged.

Catherine would also have grown up in court, and would therefore have known all about the political games played at court. She would therefore have been naive in the extreme if she didn't play the game - her survival would have depended on it!

Of course, if Arthur was really as sickly as they say, then he may have had a hard time geting the deed done.

I think though that we will never really know the truth of the matter. Both sides of the dispute had their reasons for standing firm in their protestations. In the end, I guess you have to choose what you want to believe!

By the way, I think the matter of Catherine's virginity at the time of her marriage was unimportant. She had been married for about 18 years to Henry VIII. The only time her "purity" at the time of her marriage came into question was when Henry realised that she was approaching menopause and he hadn't got a son!!! 18 years is a long time to wait to try and find out if your wife was a virgin when you married her!! So her virginity wasn't the problem - Henry's lack of a male heir was!!! He just used it as a excuse to get rid of her, so he could try to get an heir and consolidate his 'dynasty' - a serious thing for guys in those days.

We all know that the real problem lay with him, right?!

Answer 4

I have read a few books on Katherine of Aragon, and in my opinion, the marriage was not consummated. She was a devout Catholic and would not have lied.
In this case, I would have to agree with Spanish historians.
Henry VIII was a maniac about getting his son on the throne. The there was talk that he would marry his illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, to his and Katherine's daughter, Mary, so Fitzroy could rule. A man who would even think of that is capable of anything.

Great question, by the way! I think these are the kinds of questions Yahoo Answers was made for.

Answer 5

I don't think it was consummated because they were both so young and Arthur was very ill. Plus I don't think that is something that Catherine would have lied about, she was very reglious and truthful.