Henry would have claimed that no promise was made. Mary and Brandon could have ended up in the Tower for marrying without Henry's consent. They got off with a huge fine.

Katheryne Koelker scumbag Henry for taking his sister’s money though. May his fat crackle in the fires of hell for all the shit he pulled

catbyte 06 - Oh, noooooo kidding, right??!!?!? The man is GORGEOUS!!!!!!!!! Always a shock when I see a portrait of the real Brandon...

Absolutely!

I completely agree

I’m going to buy the book she mentions about the life of Charles Brandon and I will picture Henry Cavil as I read 😂😂

Sorry we probably sent it to you. We had 25cm on Wed in Ontario

Jeanne Bowes We’ll be getting it tomorrow here in Pennsylvania. ☹️

An Alberta Clipper, maybe? I'm in Toronto, & yes, we have been having a fair bit of snow lately. It's probably our fault. Sorry. 😔 ⛄ 🌨️❄️🌬️ ☃️

Jeanne Bowes I live in Sydney and there is threatened heatwave coming

Ruth Goebel Two sons are in Frederick, MD

Wendy LOL! 😂😂😂

@@jillniemczynski5517 --- Thanks, Jill! I need to cut back on the coffee... ;)

@@ianslass Hey don't apologize. Nothing wrong with a good cup of joe! 😋☕ Have a great day! 👍✌💖🙋

Brandon was not the best guy even for their standards. Henry really didn't want Brandon to get involved with his sister. He did love his little sister and he knew his best mate was a cad

Typical Tudor 'tude! 👸

Well Henry was a crappy father soooo

@@Edna2u we can only imagine him as an uncle. You’d think he’d have sent a birthday card once in a while “ to my nephew, James on his birthday. From your awesome uncle “

I think she could´ve choosen a convent in Fance, to keep her distance from her brother

Hah! If THAT was going to be a problem, she couldn't have married almost ANY man, then or now! 👰

I don't think Brandon was the heroic man he's often portrayed as today, he certainly did not treat the previous women connected with him well.

@@anneboleynfiles But most men of that time don't stand up well under modern scrutiny. Times have changed. Sir Thomas More was considered a bit odd by some because he had pronounced himself certain that women, as well as men, actually had souls! This was still under debate! 🙏

@@h.calvert3165 Yes, but Brandon was bad even for the time. He consummated his union with Anne Browne, then abandoned her to marry her aunt, then abandoned her to go back to Anne...Then there was the scandal of him marrying his young ward, who was supposed to marry his son...

It's too bad Brandon picked up The King's habits.

Charles had been Duke of Burgundy from 1506 onwards, so he was not a mere Infante of Castile.

It is thought that the Mary Rose was actually named after the Virgin Mary. See maryrose.org/blog/historical/museum-blogger/who-was-mary-rose/

@@anneboleynfiles ok thank you I will take a look at the links xx

Steven Gunn's book on Brandon is very good. It seems to have been a happy and successful marriage.

Me too!🛎

Anna Goodwin bells, she acknowledged them

Claire had once mentioned work being done on their home. That might be what you hear.

Which bit? The bangs are the roof expanding in the sun and our house is always creaking and making noises. And our local bar owner (we have a little bar very near us) likes to turn on the extractor fan as soon as I'm recording lol! Then there's the pets! And the other day I had to keep stopping because people kept knocking on our door!

@@rosemariepataky6185 no not those was some kind of tapping

@@anneboleynfiles oh i see xxx

Margaret was actually married to the King of the Scots - that is where Mary, Queen of Scots, claim to the English throne came from.

Dogs?

Probably. 🐕🐕

Claire had once mentioned work being done on their home. That might be what you are hearing

@@jillniemczynski5517 - That must be it because it doesn't sound like dogs to me - more like a nail gun or hammering. Lol.

It's our roof expanding as the sun hits it. Our house is rather noisy, and then the dogs like to go through doors and let them slam behind them too!

I've been told that both Anne Boleyn and Katherine Howard were ancestors of mine through a family connection with the Duke's of Norfolk.

@@vikkifenlon6741 neither could be ancestors, as Anne had no grandchildren by her only child, Elizabeth... and Katharine had no children.

Anne Browne is my 1st cousin 15 times removed.

Jamie Haystead ...mine too

No, it is not accurate to say that Jane brought Mary back into the fold. If anyone deserves to be given credit for that, it's Eustace Chapuys, the imperial ambassador. He feared for Mary's life, so he persuaded her to sign the oath of supremacy and to submit to her father, and she did. Henry VIII was then willing to have her back at court as she had then obeyed him. Jane had nothing to do with it. It was a simple case of Henry not having anything to do with Mary while she was defiant (as he saw it) and then being fine with her when she finally submitted. And Anne's head was definitely not burned, that's a bizarre claim. We know from contemporary accounts that it was taken with her body to the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula and buried in a chest that was fetched from the Tower armoury, and then buried in the chancel.

This is a different Mary. There were several - Henry VIII's sister is the subject of this video. The Mary that was brought back into the fold was Henry VIII's daughter.

@@anneboleynfiles It's the same presenter with bad facts every time. I switched it off because they were doing Jane. I'm not interested in her. I think I'll avoid this 'historian' in the future

I'm not sure what the law was in France, but in England, for example, births, deaths, marriages etc. did not have to be recorded in the parish register until later, which is why we don't know the birth dates of a lot of Tudor people. I haven't seen a record, apart from mention in the sources, of their later more official marriage on 31st March either.

@@anneboleynfiles Thank you.

The marriage laws in England at the time (and apparently also in a lot of European countries at the time) were actually purely contractual to stand up as marriages. Only two things needed to happen: the two parties (man and woman only of course) had to agree that they were married, and the marriage had to be consummated. This is why they asked Henry's wife no. 5, Catherine, if she had 'pre-contacted' with one of the young men she had slept with. For inter-state matches, such as Henry and Catherine of Aragon, the contract was about much more than a marriage between two people though. It was about religion (hence getting the blessing of a priest and permission from the Pope for things that may not have been considered Biblically too wholesome such as shacking up with your brother's previous wife); it was about alliances (which is why the monarch was supposed to have the say in who the nobles of his family and country married - to foster good inter-country alliances); and it was to assure that legitimate children took ownership of land.

It wasn't compulsory to register births in England until 1837, which is MASSIVELY annoying when researching family history! You mostly need to go by christening dates before then (IF the records survived); though as Claire has said several times, that was usually only a few days after a baby was born, so you're pretty close. And there's no WAY all documents survived- the ones that remain are a fraction of what was written down, even much later than Tudor times.

No! In "The Tudors", they had her marrying the King of Portugal and they also combined the characters of Mary and Margaret, so it was very inaccurate. But no, there is no suggestion at all that she killed Louis. He was in bad health and had been hit hard by his wife Anne's death too.

The Anne Boleyn Files and Tudor Society - well that’s a bit misleading. Surely they could have gone somewhere closer to the truth than come up with something untrue, but I guess for the entertainment industry - the truth was too boring.

@@jennifermoran6637 That show doesn't care much for history, which is sad because the history WAS interesting! The lead actress said that it didn't matter because young women weren't interested in history 😒

Cypresssina Which lead actress would that be? I'd love to send her a note.

@@barbaravick5634 The one who plays Mary on Reign. It was years ago, hopefully she's matured since then 😂

The Tudors tv series was historically inaccurate in many instances.

I think so ye the dukes of Suffolk still have Charles's name

No, but she had complained of a pain in her side.

I'm 69 😃

31 here :)

I'm not entirely sure.

I'm 38.

I'm a 39 year old female in the U.S. who was a history major in university, if that helps. 😊

Yes, she did. They were married from 1515 to her death in 1533. Mary Tudor was the daughter of Henry VII and sister of Henry VIII. Perhaps you're thinking of Mary I?

Back then it would have ruined Mary's honor to have slept together out of wedlock. He would not have written it down unless they were actually married

Mary was 37 I think and it is not known what caused her death but there is mention of a complaint in her side.

Jill Niemczynski I was angered by so much in that series. And Mary in the nonexistent marriage was right up there. If they're going to call it the Tudors, follow the history. Otherwise call it a fictional name to go with the fictional story.

@@barbaravick5634 I feel differently. The series was never promoted as being a documentary, or true rendition. It is historical fiction. I enjoyed it as pure entertainment. There are enough educational docs out there to learn the true stories of just about any subject. This series was a chance to sit back, enjoy the beautiful sets, wardrobe & the actors. Nothing wrong with that. I also read a lot. Fiction, biography, true crime, horror, science fiction, a bit of everything. I have a wide variety of interests. This is just my opinion. I mean no offense to anyone. Have a great day.

Jill Niemczynski I think the problem is that a LOT of viewers did think it was accurate. What I did like about it though was that it made the politics and emotions understandable to a modern audience. That Henry and Brandon were considered very good looking for the times. That the Tudor wives and daughters were feeling people who were both involved in as well as push about by the events of the times; and just how the court would have had intrigues, in-fighting and changing factions - often due to fairly petty things.

@@barbaravick5634 When it comes to actual members of the Tudor family, I think it's ridiculous the script didn't stay closer to history. Don't make one sister completely disappear and have the one you keep marry a King that neither sister married. To skip over that the real Margaret married the King of Scotland and was the grandmother of Mary Queen Scots is a disgrace. How would any sequel to the Tudors explain how the Stuarts took over the English throne?

I can't change my accent. I'm British and that's just the way we speak. I'm glad you are enjoying the history though

I'm half-Welsh so could try a Welsh accent, but I'm not very good at it.

Why do you say it, then? Would you appreciate someone making such a comment about the way *you* speak?

@@anneboleynfiles I'm from Texas and I love to listen to you talk.