Catherine looks for Mary 

Truth Henry also loved Mary he loved to promise her to Kong’s then withdraw her cuz she was to great for them they both loved Mary Henry was a tyrant but the way they have Catharine and Henry treating Mary is stupid

i agree~don't know why this show portrays Kathrine like this-uhhh

Could hysteria have had something to do with her mistaking a different child for her daughter in the show? I feel like people have done that. I don’t think it’s completely unrealistic that Catherine would have been disappointed to some extent, she was under a lot of pressure to have a boy, but that doesn’t mean that she didn’t learn to love her daughter later in life. It’s not like the King and Queen were going to turn around and say ‘yeah we had a healthy baby but it’s a girl so...’ of course they’re going to put out the impression that they were elated. I know how much COA adored Mary but I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that she was disappointed for a little while. Henry became increasingly obsessed with having a male heir, the pressure and feeling like she’d disappointed not only him but England too must have been overwhelming.

Henry VIII may have not been as much sexist as realistic in wanting a son. England's history was full of bad examples of women in power or women trying to get to power. His own mother was overlooked as heir to the throne(despite having really strong claim to the throne) in favour of a man with a laughable claim to the throne! (his father). That was the English mentality! English weren't prepared to accept a woman on the throne and had Edward VI(despite his age) not been such fanatic protestant that even protestants were protesting against his measures...Mary I would have really much less support than she had. (and if her father didn't get rid of most male claimants) ... Actually, CoA may have strengthened in Henry the narrative that women couldn't cope with the ruling. In 1513 she was left as Regent. However, most webpages, state totally wrongly how she did as Regent and contribute her what Henry VIII did! He was the one who chosen Earl of Surrey to stay behind and protect England in case of Scottish invasion(Surrey's life proof he was the best choice for this, so it was a sound military decision on Henry's part, not Henry disliking old man). Henry prepared gold and supplies in advance before he left for France and once scots sent one month notice that they will invade he quickly sent by his ships(his navy) some troops back home with artillery-and those troops and artillery got to the battle. However part of Northern troops left with Henry in France and he couldn't simply send all of them back, hence North, in order to not face Scots with much fewer men, needed reinforcement from South-from Midlands. That was supposed to be Katherine's job. .... But those reinforcements never got to North. She focused on gathering more supplies(which frankly were not needed, Henry VIII prepared enough) and forgot to sent order to raise levies. English lords couldn't raise levies without royal order, that would be treason! (Surrey had been given authority by Henry to raise levies in North but in Midlands.) She wouldn't even be the one who would muster troops, she just needed to send the order and somebody else would manage it. Had she sent the order and then focused on those supplies, you'd not hear my peep. But she didn't. She only remembered to do it, once the whole month was up and Scots already crossed border-on 3rd of September. Way too late. That was not down to Surrey, nor council, nor English lords. That was down to her. It was too big distance for troops even from Northern Midlands to cover in such a short time. They couldn't get to the Scottish border on time and weren't at Flodden. So Katherine giving a speech to this reinforcement army was nice...but that didn't improve chances of English victory in slightest, because that part of the army never got to battle. What she did was so late, it was as if she didn't do anything at all. So that makes her actually pretty incompetent Regent, not a great one. But because Surrey was great commander, he managed to come with a battle strategy that allowed him to win. Less experienced, less shrewd man would probably lose because Scots had a very big, newly equipped army and advantageous position uphill. So Katherine being incompetent got swept under carpet and nowadays is not talked about, but I think Katherine doing poorly as Regent may have later influence Henry's views upon girls in charge.

Mary was his favorite in "the tudors".

In the beginning he did . But it was also him who truly destroyed Mary. He didn't live long enough to ruin Elizabeth anyway . I can't even imagine the pain in which Mary had been through especially in her teenage.

You're right, I think he later became estranged with Mary because he was brought up in times when father's word was everything and if you disobeyed your father you were really bad. So when Mary sided with her mother, Henry was angry with her and tried to force her to come to his side, instead of sitting down with her, nicely explaining to her why he needed a son and that it wasn't her fault what was happening between her parents and that he loved her no less. I think had he done that he would make her come to his side, eventually. But for father at those times, that would be unthinkable to do.

@@janehaylay1152 @Jane Haylay Henry was a man who desired complete submission and didn't care how he got it . He was a powerful man . A great scholar once said " Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." I think Mary's relationship with Henry has another dimension as well . He couldn't bend Katherine and as long as Mary stood out not accepting him as the supreme head of the Church of England she could have become a figurehead of opposition and further resistance . Moreover he never married Mary for a reason . He wanted to protect his son Edward . I think you know about James 5 of scotland son of Margret Tudor , he and Henry had a pretty turbulent relationship . So now if Mary married a strong foreign or indigenous power she could've created problems for Edward . She also had the backing of Spain and especially Northern England who wanted England to return to Catholicism . But I don't blame Henry entirely after all he was also a product of his time.

@@sagarika_0076 He had black and white narrative-you're with me or against me. And found it very hard to forgive. I don't think he desired complete submission(at least not until later in his reign when he was paranoid etc.), but he wanted obedience. As any other monarch of his time, in that, I agree with you. And I also agree with your reasons why Henry VIII didn't have her married. However, though I agree that Henry became a tyrant and he had flaws even as a young man, Katherine had flaws also, but hers are swept under carpet. Mary was stuck between two battling parents, trying to destroy one another-with neither doing what was best for her if you ask me. ... Mary I had backing in England mainly because Edward VI(despite never coming of age) had forced upon England such extreme fanatic Protestantism that even protestants were protesting. (That and fact her father got rid off most of the male claimants to English throne.)

@@janehaylay1152 I agree with you and really glad to find someone who is obsessed with the Tudors as I am . Still I think my opinion about Henry 8 is slightly different from yours . Perhaps we remeber Henry because of his controversial character . I still remember this phase "Divorced ,beheaded ,died divorced ,beheaded ,survived". Perhaps past cannot be interpreted in modern terms something . Like burning heretics was considered a necessity at that time and now it is seen as a crime against humanity. Ofcourse its necessary for a monarch to have obedience of his subjects othervise you'll loose power. I often remember this line of Game of Thrones while studying history "When you play the game of thrones you win or you die ." Still in context of Henry and Katherine of Argon as far as my interpretation go my sympathy will always lie with Katherine . As women she did sacrificed alot for Henry and England . Still she was thrown away like trash . I don't think she deserved to be treated the way she was .Perhaps Henry might be right as per the standard of that time still I feel sorry for both Katherine and Mary . Mary did do terrible things and they were wrong I totally agree but there must be a time where she was lonely totally abandoned by everyone . However it doesn't justify the horrors she inflicted upon her subjects . I'm glad Elizabeth I didn't commit the same mistakes as her sister . She's my favourite . Anyways history cannot be interpreted in black and white terms but as readers we do make opinions about people and events after reading . I think it defines us and our intellect so here we are elucidating the past . It felt really good to have a meaningful conversation about the Tudors anyways.

I couldn't agree more.

To be fair Royal children weren’t raised by their parents. Princes and Princesses were often raised by their tutors, nurses and household. Mary, Elizabeth and Edward were all raised away from court and away from their parents.

@@May-vf4mh Yes, but it was noted by many that Katherine of Aragon was involved in her daughter's upbringing a lot, before Mary left for Welsh Marches and that she loved Mary -from beginning. Even though she wasn't as involved as modern day mothers, she didn't ignore her child for years. ... Henry VIII's mother raised him and his sisters in Eltham Palace, being very involved in their upbringing and education until she died. But Arthur was not raised by her. ... Hence's generalization doesn't fit always.