by G Lawrence
As for her time with Dereham… there are conflicts there too. Many people suppose her relationship with him was consensual. I do not. Catherine’s affair with him appears to have lasted only a few months, and she quickly became worried about his temper and possessiveness. Some say she tired of him, and wanted a new life, and perhaps this is so, but I think it was for reasons other than simply a young girl wishing to end an affair.
Dereham was again much older than her. She might have been as young as eleven when it started, which is below the Tudor age of consent. I put her at fourteen, above the Tudor age of consent, but still an age we would recognise today as vulnerable. Indeed, today, Dereham would stand accused of statutory rape at the very least.
What is curious in this case is that historians accept he was reckless, his later actions prove this beyond doubt, and he was prepared to exploit Catherine and her family when she became Queen. They also generally agree he had a terrible, frightening temper. But they do not look at these traits and think how, when applied to a relationship with a young girl, they might become coercive. In the Tower, Catherine said something I think revealing. She said Dereham had made her have sex with him using “in a manner, violence, rather than of her own free will and consent”. In a manner, violence, to me sounds as though she was afraid of him. This suggested a form of coercive control, or emotional/psychological abuse to me, and that is how I chose to represent their relationship. This is, again, my interpretation, and it is doubtful the truth will ever be known, but I have reasons for supposing this.
Catherine maintained after arrest that she had been forced to have sex with Dereham. Some historians claim that Catherine was entirely unaware of the danger of her situation, and thought that if she could blazon it out, insisting she had been raped, she might remain Queen. Others say she did it for pride. I think differently. I think Catherine was telling the truth. Catherine would not have been unaware of the dangers of her situation after arrest. She had grown up watching Katherine of Aragon deposed, and there were widespread rumours of poison when the Queen died; Anne Boleyn was executed, and many said at the time she was innocent; Jane Seymour was neglected after she had produced the Prince, so she died; Anne of Cleves had been set aside for Catherine herself. To suppose she was unaware of the dangers is ridiculous.
I think she maintained her story that Dereham raped her because it was true. If cast off as the King’s wife, and if the pre-contract between Dereham and her was upheld, she might have ended up married to him. She had escaped Dereham once. I think she had no intention of ending up back with him if she survived.
If Catherine had agreed that she had entered into a consensual sexual relationship with Dereham, and had consensually called each other man and wife, then she was, in the eyes of the law, married to him. This would have rendered her union with Henry obsolete, and it is possible she might have escaped with her life.
I think the reason she insisted it had been rape was simple; it was. Dereham might not have seen it that way, but she did. Catherine’s “in a manner, violence” suggests to me she felt coerced into a sexual relationship, and she was afraid of him.
I chose to frame their relationship as abusive, as I think it was, but even if it were not, she was still very young when it occurred, and if she was the dominant partner, as some historians argue, I would suggest her earlier abuse at the hands of Manox was the cause. Hyper-sexuality is a much misunderstood condition and one common in abuse survivors. It leads to a survivor becoming overtly sexual, aggressive, and often risk-taking as a means to claim back control over their body and life. It can also lead to the survivor placing themselves in dangerous situations. I think, if she was the instigator, this is what happened to Catherine. Her abuse at the hands of Manox led to a relationship she was not prepared for with Dereham.
If it happened this way, then by the standards of the time, Dereham did not rape Catherine. Coercive control has only recently been recognised as a form of abuse in our times, let alone then. This may lead to some defending Dereham, but I would suggest again that just because something was not recognised as a crime in Tudor times does not mean it was not a crime. Marital rape was not recognised as a crime either. Slavery was legal in many countries. Child marriage occurred and people could be detained and executed without evidence or a trial. It was legal to burn people alive for being of another faith. Beating a wife and religious genocide were positively encouraged in many realms of society, and women had no legal rights once married to a husband. Laws change over time, hopefully becoming more just.
So if Catherine was coerced, threatened, or indeed, as I have suggested, was unable to grant consent at the time, she was raped by the standards of our time, if not the Tudors’.
Something often brought up against her and held up as a reason that she lied about Dereham raping her is that she remained in a relationship with him for some months. People say she would not have done so if he had raped her, and I wonder why. We recognise that in abusive relationships today people stay, enduring beatings, sexual and emotional abuse, and we understand the reason is they are afraid. Why would Catherine be any different? After they had had sex once, Dereham could use it against her all he wished, could ruin her in the eyes of the world, so even without his famous temper, which brings up the possibility he could have hurt her physically or threatened to, why would she not be afraid? His temper was not made up by me. If Catherine was afraid of him, and continued their relationship because of this, I understand, even if many do not. Life isn’t simple. The heroine doesn’t always get free of the villain.
And if she tried to convince herself that Dereham loved her and she him? People do this all the time with partners who abuse them. It is logical to say we should leave those who abuse us, yet so many do not. Once self-confidence is eroded, it is hard to build it back up. Once an abuser has infiltrated a mind it can be impossible to push them out. Good times and bad fluctuate, keeping the abused person always confused, part of a pattern of abuse which keeps them a prisoner. People suppose abuse survivors to be weak, especially if they remain in the relationship. Such an arrogant and ignorant assumption. Those who survive abuse, those who have to live in fear every day, are strong. Imagine living in fear of assault or even death. Imagine being controlled. Imagine fearing for your children. Imagine having the strength to endure that day after day, and imagine having the courage to escape. Even those who do not escape we should not censure. They live with horror, and still they continue on, trying to think the best of someone who treats them despicably. That is not weakness. Weakness is blaming the victim. Weakness is not having the courage to point a finger at the abuser, and say the situation is their fault.
We should uphold survivors of abuse as some of the strongest, most courageous people in the world. Many of them have faced death, the destruction of their self confidence and the obliteration of the truths of their reality. These are the people we should laud.
If you, yourself, are in an abusive situation, I urge you to get help. There is help out there. Reach out to friends, family, and help lines. Find support. You think you are alone, but you are not. You deserve to be treated with respect, kindness and love. Someone who tells you otherwise does not love you. They are trying to control you.
And Catherine, to my eyes, broke from abusers not once, but twice, demonstrating a fortitude and courage beyond her years. Often put down and shrugged off as the silly, weak, stupid little girl amongst the wives of Henry VIII, I see another person entirely. I see a child who escaped abuse, made a new life for herself, but was brought down by politics and the prejudices of the times. I see a woman who, had she lived, and even in the short time she had, was remarkable.
Catherine kept her love in her heart, tried to make life better for others. She did not emerge from pain and horror a bitter, twisted person, but one who had joy and generosity in her heart. That is truly something to admire.
Deviations from Historical Fact
Where possible, I try to follow facts, but in the
case of Catherine, there is much that is unknown.
As said, my interpretation of Catherine’s early life is just that, an interpretation. Plenty of others will disagree with me, and that is fine. We are all entitled to our opinions.
Catherine’s father, Sir Edmund Howard, is depicted as an alcoholic. I have no evidence other than the manner of his death to support this. He was known as a wastrel, a man to whom money should not be loaned, one who never rose high, who was proud, but suffered from self-pity. His death, taking potions to aid his kidneys, and wetting the bed, is my only evidence that he might have been an alcoholic. His habit of wallowing in self-pity suggested this condition to me, and in my book The Lady Anne, I suggested he was an alcoholic, so chose to continue the idea in this book.
Another invention is the visit Anne Boleyn made to Catherine’s house when Catherine was a baby, talked about in this book in retrospect by Catherine’s maid Alice. I have no evidence this happened, but it is not impossible. The time period of the visit coincides with when Anne was banished from court after daring to contract herself to Henry Percy, heir to the Duke of Northumberland, and since Jocasta Howard was ill, Anne as a close relative may have gone to her. I included this, as again it appeared in my book The Lady Anne, and so fits with my world of the Tudors. What is fact is that Anne did find a job for Edmund Howard. It is not impossible therefore that Catherine admired her for this, and many other things she did in life.
Some of the characters have nick-names I granted them. Mary Perrot, one of the possible mistresses of the King, is called the parrot, as she is in my books on Anne Boleyn. This is my invention. The same is true for Edmund Howard’s nick-name, Old Ill-Hap Howard. He was thought unlucky, but I made up the name.
About Joan Bulmer, Catherine’s friend, there appears some confusion as to the date of her first marriage, with some claiming she was married young, before joining the Dowager’s household, and others saying she married when Catherine left for court. I chose to have her married young. It was more usual for women to marry when they were in their twenties in the Tudor period, but young marriages did happen. I have no evidence her husband beat her, but chose to include it as a way to show how wives of the times could be legally treated. Catherine’s aunt, Katherine Howard, is another example and she did separate from her husband, most likely for reasons of abuse. Joan certainly was eager to get away from her husband later in life, so I doubt their marriage was happy.
There is a woman called Margaret Smith in the book. Her surname is made up by me, because prior to marriage I cannot find a maiden name for her. She is not the same person as Margaret Morton.
I chose to spell Catherine’s name with a C, to differentiate her from the many other women of the same name, who I gave Katherine with a K to. Catherine actually spelt her name with a K in a letter to Culpepper, and spelt it Katheryn, but I chose to go with the C as I have always used a K for Katherine of Aragon. Catherine’s aunt, and Katherine Carey seem have used a K as well. I thought, frankly, too many women of the same name and same spelling would just be entirely confusing.
Catherine’s method of extracting herself from her relationship with Dereham is my invention. She was found kissing him by Agnes, but the manner in which she was discovered seemed so close to the way she was found with Manox that something jarred for me. It may be it was an accident both times, and Catherine just was that unfortunate, but I chose to frame it as a set up on Catherine’s part, knowing her grandmother would separate him from her if she found out about their affair. By that time he was making demands on her, such as having sex during the day, where many people could see them, and pulling her into the jakes (Tudor toilets) so she could pleasure him. I think she was uncomfortable about his behaviour, feared his temper, and sought a way out. I have no evidence for this other than the similarities between how she and Manox, and she and Dereham, were discovered.
Culpepper is presented romantically in the book. I take a rather more cynical view. I think he was guilty of rape.
Readers might find it uncomfortable, therefore, that I have presented him as a romantic character, but that is because this book is written through Catherine’s eyes. Sadly for us, villains don’t go about with horns on their heads and angels don’t wear halos. I hope I left some doubt in the pages about his character, however.
That Catherine might be attracted to yet another abuser should not surprise us. It does not always happen, but it is not uncommon, sadly. Sometimes, when the view of what is right and what is not, what is love and what is not, is warped in childhood, we find adults heading back into abusive relationships that mirror those they suffered before. There is something psychologists say, that if you meet eyes with someone across a crowded room and feel instant love, you should walk away, fast. You are attracted to a type, and probably one that is not good for you. It might be the father who ignored you, the first boyfriend or girlfriend who was cruel to you, or another person who did you harm. That is the love you were taught was right, the one that was most worthy, and it is also the love that is worst for you, the most damaging. This is what you see when eyes meet across a crowded room, and you head for it, back into another relationship that is damaging, because you have not worked out the issues in your past.
I think this is what happened with Culpepper. When she talks of the wildness in him reaching out to that in her, this was what I was trying to suggest. She notes, upon being attracted to Thomas Seymour, that she is worried about her attraction to men who do harm to women. I was attempting to suggest in this part of the book that Catherine was attracted to men who were bad for her, because of the abuse she suffered with Manox. I think had they married, she would have ended up in a deeply unhappy relationship with Culpepper.
Catherine’s intervention for Lord Lisle is my invention, but she might have attempted to aid Anne Basset, as the two were friends, and Lisle was on the conservative side, so her uncle would have backed him. Anne Basset also came to court later than is depicted in the book, but I have her there from the beginning so Catherine and the readers have an experienced guide to the Tudor court.
The interpretation of Anne of Cleves as intelligent is also my interpretation, but based on secure footing. Anne did the best out of all of Henry’s wives. She often gets discounted for ending up as his sister, but I think we fail to see she escaped from danger and death into liberty and great wealth. She was quick to learn English, and although not learned in a bookish sense, she was clever. I admire Anne of Cleves a great deal and I think her conversation about sex was, indeed, a feint to reveal that the King had not had sex with her and therefore she could not be blamed for not producing an heir. This theory was not mine, but has been cited by various historians.
I chose to present Jane Boleyn, Lady Rochford, in a sympathetic light. Jane often gets slandered, reasonably or not, for betraying her family. Thomas Boleyn and the Duke of Norfolk did the same, yet are often pardoned with excuses of survival and political suaveness. Jane merely gets condemned. I think she may well have betrayed her husband and sister-in-law, and it may well have been what she had to do to survive. I chose to show her in this light.
Hopefully I have covered everything I altered in the story, and hopefully you enjoyed the book. This was not an easy book to write in so many ways, but I hope I have done Catherine Howard justice, more than she was accorded in life.
Thank You
…to so many people for helping me make this book possible… to my proof reader, Julia Gibbs, who gave me her time, her wonderful guidance and also her encouragement. To my family for their ongoing love and support; this includes not only my own blood in my mother and father, sister and brother, but also their families, their partners and all my nieces who I am sure are set to take the world by storm as they grow. To my friend Petra who took a tour of Tudor palaces and places with me back in 2010 which helped me to prepare for this book and others; her enthusiasm for that strange but amazing holiday brought an early ally to the idea I could actually write a book. To my frie
nds Nessa, Annette and Sue for their support and affection, and to another friend, Anne, who, during many dog walks with our hounds has offered support, friendship and untold warmth. To all my wonderful readers, who took a chance on an unknown author, and have followed my career and books since. To those who have left reviews or contacted me by email or Twitter, I give great thanks, as you have shown support for my career as an author, and enabled me to continue writing. Thank you for allowing me to live my dream.
And lastly, to the people who wrote all the books I read in order to write this book… all the historical biographers and masters of their craft who brought Catherine, and her times, to life in my head.
Thank you to all of you; you’ll never know how much you’ve helped me, but I know what I owe to you.
