since you were talking about that, genuine question (I don't want to start a fight or anything!): was Henry VII unfaithfull to Elizabeth? did he have mistress(es)?
*MY TIME HAS COME TO SHINE*
short answer: no. there is no account, no record, no proof supporting the idea that Henry has a mistress.
long answer: Nowadays, there is this tendency in fiction to paint Henry as a lecher and lusty man, and more precisely, as having an passionate affair with Katherine Gordon, the wife of the pretender Perkin Warbeck that threatened his reign during almost 10 years. A woman that became later lady-in-waiting of Queen Elizabeth. So i will talk mainly about her since this idea is what i found in almost EVERY talk of Henry aving an ~~affair. I will say it plain: there is no evidence or contemporary rumors of an affair between Henry and Katherine (or any other woman btw). some facts: Katherine
was close to James King of Scots, a kinswoman of the scottish Monarch.
Knowing the relationship between England and Scotland (to be short: very complicated ones), she couldn’t be
treated badly at Court —on the contrary. So she gained a high place in
the Ladies in waiting of the Queen and was treated with respect
following the King’s demand. Maybe it was even a way to watch after her
as she was the wife of the prentender’s Warbeck. Furthermore, she was
known to be highborn, kind and pretty. These reasons are explanation for the
good treatment she received. Tbh, Henry was a man and
did enjoy the sight of the beauty of women. There is this letter he sent
to Spain before Katherine of Aragon joined England to marry his son
where he asked that the spanish ladies escorting her had to be pretty
and at least ‘not ugly’. Or when after Lizzie’s death, he sent letters
asking precisely the physical description of the different candidates
for a possible new marriage (like the shape, hair, breast, waist…). And
there is another anecdote, when he received a beautiful Princess from
Portugal, and he welcame her with an embrace ‘a little bit too long’.
So he seem to enjoy beauty. And Katherine is depicted as beautiful… so Henry could have wanted that her stay was
pleasant. Knowing how Henry is depicted as inscrutable and hard to ‘win’, imagining him trusting and seducing the wife of pretender who
fought him during a decade is… what? it’s Henry VII we are talking about! and i genuinely think, it would have be noted somewhere if Henry was lusting after another woman at Court. It was noted he admired her (by the flowery Andre). They could have been acquaintances
or even friends. Why not? Man/woman friendship exists. Maybe he was even charmed at some points by her but
Henry was recorded as devoted and ‘faithful’ during his marriage. And
do you think that EoY, Queen of England, ruling over her own household,
would have kept the mistress of her husband by her side? no. IIRC,Katherine of Aragon, wife of henry VIII, dismissed Anne Boleyn as soon as she perceived Anne was a threat for her marriage… Sure, EoY is not the same nature as Katherine, but accepting the mistress of your husband in your household? no. Being a high born lady
from Scotland. Henry couldn’t permit her to be badly treated as she was
close to the scottish King. Some people like to use the ‘Henry bought her expensive gowns’ as an evidence of him being smitten but *BREAKING NEWS* Kings regularly bought expensive clothes to their wives’ attendants! Interesting to notice that the few dresses
he bought to Katherine happened around the period the discussion for an
alliance between England and Scotland started. Clothes were made for
her as the companion of Margaret Tudor, daughter of Henry, for her marriage with James IV of
Scotland. Spending money on the ladies-in-waiting or dancers
or minstrel was something common for him. He was not a miser when it was
for the prestige of his Court. For what happened after Elizabeth’s
death, perhaps they spent time together, bonding over Elizabeth’s memory
and Henry held fondness for her (when she joined the Court
the first time, he asked that Katherine had to be treated ‘like a
sister’ and i do think that he percevied her at first as a victim of Perkin’s
plan, feeling sorry for her -a highborn mady married to a liar) and i think that they became friends, a sort of pleasant companionship for
Henry. They played cards together and she even give him a present a few
days before his death. A Scots chronicler/ambassador wrote about that time they spent together after the Queen’s death, that one ”would have thought they were secretly married…” but this account was
written 20 years after Henry’s death. And in Scotland. Sadly, the whole Katherine Gordon drama comes from this very ‘reliable’ account (and the gowns) and i am like ‘oh’…Looking secretely married means she is mistress? hmmm idk Furthermore, Henry’s household was right next door to his son’s
rooms, so if something ever happened between them (or with any other
woman), Prince Henry -and ourself- would have known now if she was his
mistress. And the King was feeble and weak, his condition more and more
deficient during his last years. Having a mistress now would have been
almost incongruous (i have already difficulties to picture him sexually
active). Catherine didn’t remain at the Court all the times after Elizabeth’s
death and left the palace like the rest of the ladies in waiting, but
she visited the court regularly. And she had to wait 1510, during Henry VIII’s reign,
to obtain letters of denization to be considered as a English citizen,
including the right to hold land, to marry and to travel… If Henry was truly smitten by her, he
could have at least given her the simple right to own her own place. But he didn’t. Catherine was virtually a prisoner. So
really, nothing reall support the idea of them as lovers. Close acquaintances, why not? She
indeed visited him, talking, playing cards with him, and even visiting
him a few days before his death to offer him clothes, but she clearly
acted like a nurse, a companion, a support. Not as a mistress. I am not an historian. I can’t be 100% sure but this is my viewpoint with all i know about Henry and the little is known about Katherine, and the evidences we have. a last point: no matter who you are, even the King, you do not put your mistress as the chief mourner at your wife’s funeral.
And, imho, if Henry took a mistress, why not a new wife? Knowing
Henry’s fear to have just one and only son as heir, knowing his fear
for his dynasty and his want to keep the throne, knowing his love for
money as well, he could have remarried for political purpose, to strenghten his
position as King and to gain a new dowry as well –or just by personal comfort. But he didn’t, despite being something expected for King.
in conclusion: no contemporary account or rumor or fact support the idea of him having a mistress.
i see your scifi and your robots and i raise you: angels
what are they? are they alive? humans were explicitly given free will - do angels have free will? are they merely tools, machines created by the divine rather than human hands? a radio, or less, a megaphone for passing messages? are they alive enough to think, to feel, or do they operate on a fundamentally different form of “thinking” than we do such that though they are but tools, it does not matter? we fear robots having sentience because they might disobey us or at least think about it and therefor make us slave drivers for using them. but is there such an issue when sentience, when self-awareness and identity never results in a disobedient thoughts furthermore, are angels destructible, and if not, does that erase the issue of erasing or destroying a sentient mind at someone else’s whims? can it be considered a mere whim when it is the choice of a god? what is the difference in that question when we consider the greek or roman gods who certainly operated on mere whims and ultimately human desires versus gods who operate otherwise, gods who actually follow their own laws?