Yes, I realize I’m looking at this with 21st century eyes. That was the point of my post. It’s expected for both Anne and Catherine’s miscarriages and stillborns to be seen as failures by their contemporaries. That was a woman’s “duty,” to provide a male heir, especially as a queen.

However, I wrote this post for 21st century eyes, especially people who know more about Anne (and Catherine, for that matter). Most people who are an active participant in the online Tudor community know what you and I know about A.B. and C.o.A. — that they were outstanding women in terms of intellect, faith, and actions in their society and ours.

So yes, in looking at their failed pregnancies as *failures* we’re adjusting a 16th century concept to our own. Had either woman lived in today’s society, their miscarriages and stillborns would be seen purely as tragedies.
While it might not be fair to combine concepts of societies hundreds of years apart, we’re doing it by labeling Anne and Catherine as feminist icons for today’s generation of young women — and if we’re treating them by these strong, feminine standards, shouldn’t we be treating their biological misfortunes with similar standards?

What I’m attempting to say is that today, in the 21st century, we don’t label unfortunate, biological occurrences as failures, and I think we should be acknowledging the fact that a miscarriage in history is the same as it is today. A tragic event. Especially where we’re bringing other aspects of their lives into today’s modern ideas (like feminism, etc).

What may or may not have happened if Catherine had given birth to a son that lived through to adulthood is too conflicting for me to imagine. History would have been very different!

Thanks so much for the great comment, Beverly!

Fair or unfair, bearing children was THE primary job function of a medieval queen, just like a medieval king was supposed to be good at war and diplomacy, even if he was good at, say, growing cucumbers or interior decorating. No matter how good the queen’s other qualities were, she was supposed to make babies, or considerately die off or get to a nunnery, so he could make them with someone else.

Mind you, I love Anne Boleyn. She was smart and fiery and witty and amazing. But if you look at Catherine of Aragon before her: Royalty – check. Highly intelligent and educated – check. Gracious and generous – check. Excellent regent in times of peace or war – check. Deeply pious – check. Beloved by one’s subjects – check. She was even an excellent seamstress. The only way that *Catherine* failed was she could not produce a living son (not for lack of trying).

If Catherine’s boys had lived, Henry might still have fallen for Anne, might have been influenced by her, become her Henri to his Diane de Poitiers. But it is impossible to imagine Anne would have become queen, unless Catherine died, and even then, if even one of Catherine’s boys had lived, the court would have been a very different place. Henry would *not* have broken with the Pope and the Catholic Church to marry Anne.