‘Henry’s Women’ exhibit
Feb 26th, 2010 by admin
This year Hampton Court has several exhibitions based on Henry viii’s life in connection to the 500th anniversary of his accession. Amongst these is an exhibition entitled “Henry’s Women”, which focuses on his wives and daughters. Some of the paintings included have not been shown before to the public, namely the paintings of Katherine Parr and Anne of Cleves. The exhibition begins on the 10th April. There is still some uncertainty regarding the identity of one of the paintings – the portrait allegedly of Katherine Howard. Currently the National Portrait Gallery has the portrait labelled as “Unknown woman, formerly known as Katherine Howard”, and there have been suggestions that the sitter is actual a member of the Cromwell family, more specifically Thomas Cromwell’s daughter-in-law, Elizabeth Seymour. Ultimately the sitter’s identity is still not known, although I tend to think it is not Katherine. For more information on the exhibit: www.hrp.org.uk
I was in London this summer and went to Hampton Court. What a lovely exhibit!
What is very amusing is how much the portrait of Katherine Parr resembles Deborah Kerr, who portrayed her in that semi-absurd costume drama, *Young Bess*, in 1953.
Katherine of Aragon was so beautiful!
what makes you think so?
I have to agree with those who believe that the Catherine Howard portrait is probably not of her. The sitter definitely looks too old.
There is a stained glass portrait that is said to be Catherine Howard portraying the Queen of Sheba. It definitely shows a very young, attractive young woman with rich blond hair.
It would be nice if we could discover who this mystery woman really is and also find an authentic portrait of Catherine Howard.
I just saw a recent documentary and the Anne Boleyn portrait is definitely not what she looked liked according to accounts and a portrait believed to be the most accurate, and Katherine Howard, definitely not her. She was a teenager.
These are probably contemporary portraits. Anne Boleyn had dark hair and black eyes, she also was very slender and long necked. These are actual accounts of her by those at court and the Spanish Ambassador.
The last to wives: Katherine Howard & Katherine Parr aren’t too bad looking. I think Katherine Howard, from the paintings at least, was the prettiest of his wives.
jane seymour is uggggleeee
Beautiful video & love the music you chose for it too!
that is deff not Katherine howard
Very nice display, and music.
wel i gota make use of it. and i have, i went in december! going with me mum nxt week she actually see it on the telly and wanted to go,, everyones got the henry bug atn (or is it swine flu?)
You lucky bastard. . . how on earth did you manage to become a member?! I wish some handsome gay would buy me a membership
fascinating – especially all your comments
Definately agree the Catherine Howard painting cannot be her – way too old!
thanx littlemisssunnydale – brilliant!
Thank you for the comment!
The track is called “Kyng Henry VIII Pavyn”. I am unaware of the exact date of the piece although I think it is early sixteenth-century.
Awesome video. I love the music, is this an elizabethan tune?
I agree, the painting is very unlikely to be of Catherine Howard. But that is how Starkey identifies it, and I believe the exhibition is his baby. I agree with Antonia Fraser’s arguments (the ones you cited).
In defence of Jane though, she was described as a beauty. I quote: “the fairest of all Henry’s wives”. I realise that could mean that she was fair, not dark, and that it was common practise to flatter Henry’s choice of woman, whoever she was, I just thought I’d mention it in her defence.
*’other’ siblings. Evidently I can’t spell. . .
I agree – the date c. 1525 seems notable considering she was not mentioned in a family will in c. 1524 although over siblings (presumably older ones) were not overlooked.
Ultimately I suspect that they wanted a portrait they could claim to be of Katherine and used this one, even though the identity of the sitter is not determined.
Also cupidxxrawr is right on the subject of Catherine’s painting – she’s far too old. The date given on the original is 21. Even if we accept the earliest probable date for Catherine’s birth (1521) it’s extremely unlikely that she would have reached that age by the time she died (1542), since she died in February and had been in disgrace since November 2nd of the previous year. Personally, I tend to agree that Catherine’s date of birth was actually between 1524 and 1527, probably 1525.
It’s definitely not Catherine Howard. She’s wearing widow’s weeds, which Catherine never had cause to wear. It’s shockingly poor research on the part of the exhibition. The painting of Anne is also problematic – it may supposed to be her, but one recent essay persuasively argues it bears no resemblance to the original Anne. Moreover, as a response to cupidxxrawr, I should say that alas Jane was never described as being beautiful by anyone. Anne was actually – not universally, but occasionally.
I think that the Katherine Parre painting looks a lot like Elizabeth??? I wish I was able to go.
Thema was very popular by edition set mark postage “King Henry VIII and their wifes ” painting of Holbein
this is good looking of presented picture