Prince Arthur Tudor, son to King Henry VII and Queen Elizabeth of York, was perhaps the most beloved baby in England at the time of his birth in 1486. The firstborn son of the newly married English couple, Arthur set the Tudor dynasty in motion simply by being born the heir apparent. This was, of course, necessary and important for his father, who had only claimed the throne of England at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, establishing his own dynasty and doing everything he could since that time to maintain his stability on the throne. England, having just come out of decades of civil war, was a tense country in need of security. With the birth of Arthur, named for the well-known legend, England got that security - the promise of another king to take the throne upon Henry Tudor's death. This was crucial in security the future of the Tudors and warding off (at least some of) the threat of potential usurpers. With a a handful of siblings, even a spare heir (Prince Henry), England was fully prepared for whatever may come. Now, with their new royal family firmly situated with the crowns firmly placed on their heads, all was well for the infant Tudor reign.
Prince Arthur, c. 1500 (around age 14). Taken from Wikimedia. Considering all of this, it is all the easier to understand why this day in history was such a fatal and devastating blow for the dynasty. On 2 April 1502, Arthur Tudor, Prince of Wales, died at Ludlow Castle, leaving his parents devastated and his country in a panic. Arthur had been married to the Spanish daughter of Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, Catherine of Aragon, for less than five months. Arthur and Catherine had been residing in Wales at Ludlow, where they were both reportedly affected by a sickness in March 1502. While Catherine recovered, Arthur did not. He died six months short of his sixteenth birthday.
There seems to have circulated since his death a myth that he was a sickly child, and that his early death was not altogether a surprise. But this, indeed, seems to be just a myth. There are no contemporary reports of Arthur being a sickly child, and the source of the rumor seems to be from a Victorian misunderstanding of a 1502 letter. In fact, the only interesting thing to note about Arthur as a child is that he seemed to grow abnormally tall for his age. He was regarded as a handsome boy with reddish hair, small eyes, and a high-bridged nose. He is described as being 'delicate', but also 'amiable and gentle' - so the first comment does not necessarily mean that he was delicate in health - but perhaps delicate in countenance and character. We have no reason to believe that his sudden illness and death was in any way expected due to any long-term health issues. Sudden illness and death at any age was commonplace in the sixteenth century, so we need not ascribe a lifelong medical diagnosis upon Arthur. Much more likely, he succumbed to an unlikely bout of sweating sickness, and it certainly shocked both his wife and his parents.
The news of Arthur's death did not reach Henry VII's court until late on 4 April, when the king was awoken in bed with the news that '[his] dearest son hath departed to God' - resulting in him reportedly bursting into tears. He called his queen to his side so they could share in their grief together. Elizabeth, evidently attempting to be the voice of reason, reminded them that they still had one prince and two princesses, and that they were young enough even for more. Once Henry was calm, she left the chamber, but collapsed into her own fit of tears shortly after. It was true that they still had little Prince Henry (then only eleven years old), but we can be sure that the knowledge of one living heir was not enough to quell the grief of two parents who had just lost their beloved child.
There seems to have circulated since his death a myth that he was a sickly child, and that his early death was not altogether a surprise. But this, indeed, seems to be just a myth. There are no contemporary reports of Arthur being a sickly child, and the source of the rumor seems to be from a Victorian misunderstanding of a 1502 letter. In fact, the only interesting thing to note about Arthur as a child is that he seemed to grow abnormally tall for his age. He was regarded as a handsome boy with reddish hair, small eyes, and a high-bridged nose. He is described as being 'delicate', but also 'amiable and gentle' - so the first comment does not necessarily mean that he was delicate in health - but perhaps delicate in countenance and character. We have no reason to believe that his sudden illness and death was in any way expected due to any long-term health issues. Sudden illness and death at any age was commonplace in the sixteenth century, so we need not ascribe a lifelong medical diagnosis upon Arthur. Much more likely, he succumbed to an unlikely bout of sweating sickness, and it certainly shocked both his wife and his parents.
The news of Arthur's death did not reach Henry VII's court until late on 4 April, when the king was awoken in bed with the news that '[his] dearest son hath departed to God' - resulting in him reportedly bursting into tears. He called his queen to his side so they could share in their grief together. Elizabeth, evidently attempting to be the voice of reason, reminded them that they still had one prince and two princesses, and that they were young enough even for more. Once Henry was calm, she left the chamber, but collapsed into her own fit of tears shortly after. It was true that they still had little Prince Henry (then only eleven years old), but we can be sure that the knowledge of one living heir was not enough to quell the grief of two parents who had just lost their beloved child.
Arthur Tudor (center) with younger siblings Henry (left) and Margaret (right) - taken from TownandCountryMag.com. Too often, I find that we modern-day historians tend to look at (especially royal) sixteenth-century parents and assume a kind of detachment from their children's death - as if such a thing didn't affect them in the same way it would today. I think this way of thinking de-humanizes these very real historical figures. They were, of course, human. They were parents, and Henry and Elizabeth undoubtedly loved Arthur very much - in addition to feeling exceedingly proud that he was the heir that the dynasty required. At the end of the day, he was their beloved son, and his death certainly shattered their hearts.
A procession for Arthur's soul would take place several days later on 8 April, and his body would be carried to the parish church at Ludlow on the 23rd, followed by another procession to Worcester Cathedral on the 25th for the funeral.
A procession for Arthur's soul would take place several days later on 8 April, and his body would be carried to the parish church at Ludlow on the 23rd, followed by another procession to Worcester Cathedral on the 25th for the funeral.
References:
- Wikipedia (Arthur Tudor)
- Hubbard, Lauren, "The Cause of Prince Arthur Tudor's Death Remains a Medical Mystery" (2019), www.TownAndCountryMag.com.
RSS Feed
