{as adapted from the Ricardian Bulletin: December 2006}

Introduction

The Ricardian article The Lancastrian claim to the throne (John Ashdown-Hill, 2003) showed Henry’s relationship to Catherine of Aragon, both descended from Blanche of Lancaster, the first wife of John of Gaunt. Genealogical conundrums (Wendy Moorhen, 2006) illustrated the descent of Anne Boleyn, her first cousin Catherine Howard and Jane Seymour, these four sharing Henry III as a common ancestor. Having once been told that all six were descended from Edward I, I was inspired to look for the other two.

Catherine Parr

Only two remain and I think Catherine Parr is the easiest of the sextet to trace. Figure 1 shows that Henry’s widow was the great-great-granddaughter of Richard, Earl of Salisbury and was a generation younger than her King – I like to call this an ‘overlap’. This “marriage” would surely have required a dispensation but the rules, so certain early in Henry’s reign and reaffirmed under Elizabeth, were in flux in the early 1540s. It would not have been a good idea to suggest to Henry VIII that a dispensation was required.

Anne of Cleves

If Catherine Parr is the easiest of Henry’s wives to locate then Anne of Cleves is the most difficult. I originally envisaged her descent as being through the Lancastrian-Iberian marriages. Then I was able to locate a new website (Genealogics!) and found her elsewhere. Anne and Henry VIII share descent from Edward I.

This time, the pedigree is necessarily in two parts (Figures 2a and 2b). Conclusion: The legend about Edward I as a common ancestor of the “wives” turned out to be true.

Notes

The original article was compiled before John clarified the positions of Henry VIII’s “wives” (see Royal Marriage Secrets, ch.10, pp.95-113 ). Please bear this in mind when reading the genealogy.

h/t Kathryn Warner

 


Subscribe to my newsletter

  1. Mary and Anne Boleyn and Katherine Howard were first cousins through their grandparents Thomas Howard and Elizabeth Bourchier. Jane Seymour was their second cousin — her grandmother Anne Hay was a half-sister to Elizabeth Tilney. They would have had identical MtDNA through their straight female-line descent from Elizabeth Cheney, mother of Elizabeth Tilney (first husband) and Anne Hay (second husband). Consequently, Elizabeth I and Edward VI should also have identical MtDNA.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Sorry, that should be Thomas Howard and Elizabeth TILNEY.

      Like

      1. You are right about Anne Boleyn and Jane Seymour, together with their children, sharing mtDNA. However, Katherine Howard’s ancestry passes once through the male line, hence her surname:
        https://www.genealogics.org/descendtext.php?personID=I00108739&tree=LEO&displayoption=female&generations=4

        Like

      1. Right; it’s Mary and Anne Boleyn on the one side, and Jane Seymour on the other side, who have the same MtDNA. Katherine Howard is merely a first cousin to the Boleyns and a second cousin to the Seymours.

        Like

      2. Indeed. We now have a post for January, thankyou.

        Like

  2. Glenis Brindley Avatar
    Glenis Brindley

    That website (Genealogics) is absolutely fascinating. So much to find, which I think will take me a while to discover!
    Thank you for an interesting article, and telling me about a website I hadn’t known of before.

    Like

  3. […] October, we published an updated version of a Bulletin article, showing that all of Henry VIII’s “wives” were descended from Edward […]

    Like

  4. […] portrait below of Queen Katherine Parr is, at this very moment as you read this, being erroneously identified regularly in books and […]

    Like

  5. […] of Arundel, and Oxford. Alice Neville married Henry FitzHugh and they were great-grandparents to Catherine Parr, Henry VIII’s sixth wife. Eleanor married Thomas Lord Stanley, one of the most significant […]

    Like

  6. […] I think. Probably the best of these, because it follows so soon after Richard III’s era, is Henry VIII‘s will which, in the failure of Edward VI and his half-sisters to reproduce, left the throne […]

    Like

  7. […] VIII Flugel described how, in an attempt to “uncover a ‘common’ cause for the long series of Henry’s matrimonial experiences“, it occurred to him […]

    Like

  8. […] the sixteenth century spokesman for the Marriage Guidance Council. After all, he had experience of six marriage ceremonies, even if he subsequently annulled four of them. Two of his “wives” didn’t have to […]

    Like

  9. […] the tomb of the Black Prince’s brother, John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, and his first wife, Blanche of Lancaster, in Old St Paul’s Cathedral. As you will see from this paper there is a record of Gaunt’s first […]

    Like

  10. […] service to Wolsey, surviving him, the Dissolution, outmanoeuvring Anne Boleyn, setting up the Cleves “marriage” and being sent to the block to encounter an inexperienced headsman that she […]

    Like

  11. […] it is, the house in Haverhill that the “sister” of Henry VIII lived in for a few years, as part of their non-consummation annulment settlement, only six months […]

    Like

  12. […] found the article below at this site where the numerous posts are Tudor-oriented (Henry VIII), but very interesting and informative. The article is given in full to tempt you into visiting the […]

    Like

  13. […] mind are the terrible death of Henry II of France (see here) and the one suffered by our very own Henry VIII, which is supposed to have changed his personality much for the […]

    Like

  14. […] in Commonwealth nations. Here you can see how easy it is to replicate these basic findings from Genealogics – just as we did with Royal Marriage […]

    Like

  15. […] (but not Ethelfleda) but was focussed upon the Tower of London and its function as a Mint, where Henry VIII debased the English coinage, a practice maintained until his younger daughter‘s reign. […]

    Like

  16. […] to this article skinny Jude Law is to play Fat Henry as he was at the time of his marriage to Catherine Parr. The makeup department is sure going to be working overtime+!!! I’m going to spend my time […]

    Like

  17. […] said that art galleries are suddenly declining to display the above portrait of Henry VIII, Jane Seymour and the boy Edward VI (who died today, 6 July, in 1553). Why the painting’s sudden disgrace? […]

    Like

Leave a reply to Glenis Brindley Cancel reply