Fw: Putative paternity/maternity musings: Danger!

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Leo van de Pas

Fw: Putative paternity/maternity musings: Danger!

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 02 okt 2005 08:04:01

Dear Peter,

Many thanks for this. In that message in this e-mail I cut short the
information I have amongst the biographical details for Henry Carey.

I think, now, that my details are too cryptic and misleading. I did not know
that when John Hale made that statement he was already being pursued for
denying the king's supremacy. I had jumped to the wrong conclusion that
legal action was taken after his statement, not before. This throws a
different light on it all and I will change these biographical remarks but
they won't become visible until about a month from now. Many thanks.
Leo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: Putative paternity/maternity musings: Danger!


""Leo van de Pas"" <leovdpas@netspeed.com.au> wrote in message
news:08c001c5c6c5$d1b4c830$0300a8c0@Toshiba...
Dear Adrian,

William Carey died in 1528 while Henry VIII was very much alive. If Henry
VIII executes someone because he said he had seen Henry Carey "the son of
the king", wouldn't someone claiming the (not so large) inheritance from
William because William's children were really the king's, also ask to be
executed?

I think this is the wrong way round - Henry VIII did not execute John Hale
because Hale said he had seen the king's son Henry Carey, whereas Hale may
very well have said it because he was about to be executed. This happened
two weeks after the reported statement about Carey.

He was put to death for denying Henry VIII's supremacy as governor of the
Church in England, and the processes for this offense took a lot longer
than two weeks. Hale would have known his overwhelmingly likely sentence
and fate at the time of his appearance before the Council.

Anyone who believed that the pope was supreme in matters spiritual and
canonical within the realm of Henry VIII, and who disapproved of the
king's divorce from Catherine of Aragon, also had a motive for denying &
disparaging the union between Henry and Anne Boleyn. A supposed barrier
from affinity due to the king's prior carnal relationship with her sister
Mary could well have turned into a desperate gambit on Hale's part.

It is scarcely credible to me that, having let this compromising
information out to the extent that a mere vicar of Isleworth knew about
it, Henry was somehow about to put the genie back in the bottle so
effectively that the enemies of his daughter Elizabeth I didn't noisily &
endlessly use it against her.

These people spread evey imaginable tittle-tattle about her, and then
some, across Europe for many decades, considering her a bastard from hell
because of the circumstances of her birth. Why didn't they latch onto the
Carey connection, if this was thought to have any reality behind it?

Peter Stewart


Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»