# Why did King Henry VIII of England want a male heir when his daughters could take the throne? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 30, 2011, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826 "2011-12-30T14:13:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2011, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/41 "2011-12-31T19:44:21Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > One point that’s been missed was that the king was supposed to physically lead the troops in battle (Henry VIII was the last English king to do so, but he had no way of knowing that)… For a King of England, as such, I believe that’s true; while the last King of Great Britain to personally lead troops in battle was George II: [George II - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_george_ii#War_and_rebellion) ---
**Author:** ![dangermom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e274bd/32.png) [@dangermom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dangermom)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2011, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/42 "2011-12-31T22:52:33Z")
> [@robby](#): > > I’ve read that Henry VIII was making a move to do just that. He acknowledged FitzRoy as his offspring (though illegitimate), and made him both an Earl and Duke. > > What ended these hopes for him to succeed was his untimely death at just 17 due to tuberculosis. (His half-sibling Edward, who would later inherit the throne, was born shortly after his death, and would later die of the same malady.) > > Had FitzRoy survived Edward, he would likely have ended up on the throne before any of Henry’s daughters (i.e. Mary and Elizabeth). Recall that both daughters were disinherited at one time, and were themselves declared illegitimate and ineligible to succeed to the throne. Did he really? I’d like to read about that, I hadn’t heard about it. I figured it was one thing to declare him a duke, and quite another to declare an illegitimate child the heir to the throne. Sure, he had Mary and Elizabeth declared illegitimate, but I’m not sure that fooled anyone. > [@LavenderBlue](#): > > Did Edward have health problems during Henry’s lifetime? I think he developed tuberculosis after Henry died. I can see Henry being afraid of only having a single male heir but I’m pretty sure during his lifetime Edward was considered in good health. You know, I thought he was always sickly, but I looked in Alison Weir’s _The Children of Henry VIII_ and she said that while that’s a common idea, he was a reasonably healthy kid, though slightly built and not interested in athletics. So yep, I was wrong. ---
**Author:** ![LavenderBlue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e95f7d/32.png) [@LavenderBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LavenderBlue)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2011, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/43 "2011-12-31T23:26:17Z")
> [@dangermom](#): > > Did he really? I’d like to read about that, I hadn’t heard about it. I figured it was one thing to declare him a duke, and quite another to declare an illegitimate child the heir to the throne. Sure, he had Mary and Elizabeth declared illegitimate, but I’m not sure that fooled anyone. > > You know, I thought he was always sickly, but I looked in Alison Weir’s _The Children of Henry VIII_ and she said that while that’s a common idea, he was a reasonably healthy kid, though slightly built and not interested in athletics. So yep, I was wrong. I think Weir is where I read that about Edward. If anyone wants to read about exactly how they decided on Elizabeth’s successor I strongly recommend the book _After Elizabeth: The Rise of James of Scotland_ by Leanda de Lisle. She looks at the leading contenders and details what happened right after Elizabeth’s death. James was welcomed by the people as a male but towards the end of his reign the people decided he was rather too much of a spendthrift and foreign with a superficial understanding of the English. Naturally they began to long for Elizabeth again. ---
**Author:** ![Vlad\_Igor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/7feea3/32.png) [@Vlad\_Igor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vlad_Igor)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/44 "2012-01-01T00:32:09Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > … Henry did not found a new church; he asserted the independence of an existing ecclesiastical establishment from the Pope. Not to put a too-fine point on it, but I would (and do) consider this to be the founding of the _modern_ Anglican Church and the start of _modern_ Anglicanism. Before Henry, the Church of England was part of the catholic Church (lower “c” intended). After Henry, the C of E was its own entity, still Roman but no longer administered by Rome. The _Via Media_ from Elizabeth and influence of Richard Hooker further defined the C of E as a separate theological entity from the Roman church while still retaining some catholic theology. So, while the C of E existed as an odd child of the Roman Church in the previous 1000 years, its present form and theology can be arguably traced to Henry the VIII’s actions. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/45 "2012-01-01T00:43:57Z")
> [@LavenderBlue](#): > > I think Weir is where I read that about Edward. If anyone wants to read about exactly how they decided on Elizabeth’s successor I strongly recommend the book _After Elizabeth: The Rise of James of Scotland_ by Leanda de Lisle. She looks at the leading contenders and details what happened right after Elizabeth’s death. James was welcomed by the people as a male but towards the end of his reign the people decided he was rather too much of a spendthrift and foreign with a superficial understanding of the English. Naturally they began to long for Elizabeth again. _God’s Secretaries_ by Adam Nicolson, about the writing of the King James Bible, also offers an interesting look at the last days of Elizabeth and the early reign of James. Nicolson is more down on Elizabeth (for caring little about the succession, for being very isolated from the people towards the end, and for ongoing religious repression) than any other historian I’ve read. ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/46 "2012-01-01T01:17:43Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > Besides the disputed case of Maud vs Stephen several centuries earlier, had there been any female rulers anywhere in the world? I guess Hatshepsut in the 18th dynasty (c. 1500 BC) when the Middle Kingdom was at its height. Cleopatra was installed by Rome (Julius Caesar and Mark Antony). Zenobia in third century A.D. Syria. But I can’t think of any female rulers in Ancient Rome. There were several female rulers or Egypt long before the famous Cleopatra, especially in the Ptolemaic dynasty- her own sister had ruled before her, as had several other women, including at least one other Cleopatra… It’s pretty hard to work out, in the era of multiple co-regents and incestuous name confusion, exactly who was ruling sometimes, but it’s fairly clear that some of them were female. Female rulers elsewhere were rare, but before Henry VIII’s reign there was known to be at least one ruling [Byzantine Empress](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Irene), a slightly confusing female [King](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jadwiga_of_Poland) of Poland, a Queen who ruled half of [Scandinavia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_I_of_Denmark), (admittedly with a slightly legally tenuous title) and one ruling Queen of [Judah](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athaliah) mentioned in the Bible. Also, though they were unlikely to have been heard of by the British at that time, Japan had 7 female Empresses pre-dating Henry VIII, there was also one early female Empress of China, and even a female [Sultan](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razia_Sultana) in Delhi. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/47 "2012-01-01T02:23:39Z")
> [@Filbert](#): > > There were several female rulers or Egypt long before the famous Cleopatra, especially in the Ptolemaic dynasty- her own sister had ruled before her, as had several other women, including at least one other Cleopatra… . If I’m not mistaken, the famous Cleopatra was Cleopatra VII. So, it seems there has been quite a lot of Cleopatra(s) ruling Egypt. ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/48 "2012-01-01T02:53:45Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > If I’m not mistaken, the famous Cleopatra was Cleopatra VII. So, it seems there has been quite a lot of Cleopatra(s) ruling Egypt. Most of the others were wives or co-regents with their sons, rather than rulers in their own right; though some of them did rule, it certainly wasn’t all 6. Or however many of them there were- the numbers were added later, and as all wives and daughters in the dynasty used one of three names, it’s all a bit of a muddle. V and VI are now thought to be the same person. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/49 "2012-01-01T03:03:55Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > Besides the disputed case of Maud vs Stephen several centuries earlier, had there been any female rulers anywhere in the world? I guess Hatshepsut in the 18th dynasty (c. 1500 BC) when the Middle Kingdom was at its height. Cleopatra was installed by Rome (Julius Caesar and Mark Antony). Zenobia in third century A.D. Syria. But I can’t think of any female rulers in Ancient Rome. _Isabella of Castille_, mother of Henry VIII’s wife Catherine, for starters (she was far, uh). She was Queen Regnant of Castille and Consort of Aragon (and Navarre); her husband Ferdinand was King Regnant of Aragon (and Navarre) and Consort of Castille. She was crazy about him, but attempts on his part to order her how to rule (rather than advise, which is among a Consort’s duties) didn’t go well. Ferdinand was the son of John II of Aragon and his second wife, Juana Enríquez. John’s first wife had been _Blanca, Queen Regnant of Navarre_; John’s refusal to behave like a proper Consort to Navarre was a source of troubles throughout their marriage and beyond, as was his refusal to acknowledge that Blanca’s heir was their son Carlos (IV), first Prince of Viana, and not John himself, thus earning the epiteth The Usurper (which I’m reasonably sure isn’t in any king’s wishlist). Ferdinand claimed kingship of Navarre as John’s son; this year sees the 500 anniversary of the invasion of Navarre by Castillian troops working as mercenaries for Aragon (i.e., Ferdinand had to pay his daughter Juana for it, something he wouldn’t have had to do if he’d been King Regnant of Castille). Isabella and Ferdinand’s daughter _Juana_ was Queen Regnant _of Castille_, but she’d never been trained for the job. She was able to push some interesting laws past her father, her husband and Parliament (such as the one stating that women had to be allowed to study at University) but was eventually declared mentally incapable after her adored husband’s death and Ferdinand made her Regent. Emperor Charles (Phillip II’s father) was her son. The heir of Carlos of Viana was his eldest sister, Leonor. She only got to rule the part of Navarre which wasn’t under Aragonese control (now part of France); her husband remained King Consort. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/50 "2012-01-01T03:14:31Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > If I’m not mistaken, the famous Cleopatra was Cleopatra VII. So, it seems there has been quite a lot of Cleopatra(s) ruling Egypt. Cleopatra VII ruled with a succession of male co-rulers, as was Ptolemaic tradition. These included her father Ptolemy XII, her younger brother/husband Ptolemy XIII, her even younger brother/husband Ptolemy XIV and her son Ptolemy XV Caesarion ( her probable son by Julius Caesar ). Of course Cleo VII was the actual power behind the throne under all but the first, except when her first mentioned brother briefly de-throned her to seize sole power. Her elder sister Berenice IV attempted to rule without husbands, but was repeatedly forced to marry, such was the strength of tradition. So while a few of the female Lagids ( Ptolemaic dynasty ) did rule in a de facto fashion, they were almost always saddled with a male co-ruler, usually a brother. The females of that line were numbered because it was tradition for them to be named co-ruler with their husbands, whatever their actual power status was. As far as queen regnants go there have been a moderate number ( another Macedonian outside Egypt was the Seleucid queen Cleopatra Thea, who however was also a Lagid, as the name may indicate 😉 ). In Europe the Iberian penninsula in particular had a relative slew of them. A wiki [list](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_queens_regnant) - some of those names I’m sure can be argued as to their actual status ( or even existence in some cases ). ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/51 "2012-01-01T03:18:43Z")
The two first Joans of Navarre were co-Regnants, both of their husbands had been crowned at the same time. How they split power and duties is something which would take months of scouring through the Anales and other documents to decipher; I certainly do not have the information. The ones I listed had husbands who were not crowned as Kings of their wives’ realms. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/52 "2012-01-01T04:10:00Z")
> [@Cazzle](#): > > Regarding whether Henry loved Catherine, they were betrothed during Henry’s father’s lifetime but Henry was made to renounce the betrothal when Catherine became a less desirable match in the changing face of world politics. Nevertheless, when his father died Henry quickly went to Catherine and married her. In the early days of their marriage, they were considered a love match. > > Later, after their repeated failures to keep a male heir alive and with Catherine’s childbearing years at an end, Henry developed an attack of conscience and asserted that the Pope had been wrong to issue the dispensation. He saw the lack of living male heirs as proof that his marriage offended God. When he was unable to get the current Pope to agree that his predecessor had erred, that’s when he broke away . I have always been of the opinion that Henry married Catherine in part to spite his old mans ghost, the two dud not get along after Henry VIII mother died and the elder Henrys treatment of Catherine was nothing short if disgraceful. Henry VIII sent the first few years of his reign busy breaking with his fathers style, executing his fathers advisers, removing attainders his father had issued, invading Scotland and generally doing everything which said “I am not Henry VII”. ---
**Author:** ![PeacePlease](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/71c47a/32.png) [@PeacePlease](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PeacePlease)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/53 "2012-01-01T06:37:28Z")
Fascinating thread, thank you all!!! ---
**Author:** ![Rhiannon8404](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rhiannon8404/32/17929_2.png) [@Rhiannon8404](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhiannon8404)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/54 "2012-01-01T07:52:53Z")
> [@SDMBKL](#): > > If King Henry VIII had stayed with Queen Catherine of Aragon, then Mary could easily ascend the throne… and --gulp-- persecute Protestants. Would there even have been Protestants for her to persecute if Henry and Catherine has stayed together? Presumably, Henry would not have left the church. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 8:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/55 "2012-01-01T08:52:52Z")
> [@Rhiannon8404](#): > > Would there even have been Protestants for her to persecute if Henry and Catherine has stayed together? Presumably, Henry would not have left the church. Leaving aside the fact that Henry went out of his way to emphasize that it was the same religion, just sans the Pope’s authority, there would have been many. Protestantism was a movement and it was growing in England even aside from the Kings great matter. What would have changed is that most likely the devout Henry would have cracked down on it. How this effects relations with Scotland is interesting. You historically had a situation north of the border where a reformation occurred inspire of official sanction, how it would have effected the future course of history is anyones guess, as unlike our timeline, the Scots would not have had any reason to consider Protestant England an ally. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/56 "2012-01-01T11:37:23Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > Plus, generally, a woman was generally supposed to take econd place behind her husband - meaning whoever married Mary or Elizabeth would be the actual power. Most kings preferred that the power go to their offspring, not to someone else who maried in. Women were not seen as effective leaders of men. Elizabeth I turned out to be an exception. (Of course, a lot of kings were not great leaders of men either). IIRC, Mary of Orange agreed to be Queen only if her husband William (with a more tenous lineage claim) also got to be king. > > Elizabeth determined that she would not marry (most likely..) because she expected that whoever married her would try to take over and rule as king. If she married someone from abroad, it would be a foreign take-over; if she married internally, all the internal politics and jockeying between the top English families would precede the choice she made. Worst case, one side might revert to a civil war to avoid losing position. I think this is the key point. Henry knew that a female heir would lead to England being ruled by some guy who married into the royal family and Henry didn’t want to see the Tudor dynasty becoming mere figureheads. History proved Henry’s concerns were justified. His daughter Mary was dominated by her husband Philip and England became a subsidiary to Spain. You’ve also got the examples of Mary Stuart and Jane Grey. It was a reversal of how it works in chess: queens tending to get demoted to pawns. Elizabeth avoided this fate but she did so at the cost of never marrying and producing no heir. To Henry, this was even worse - the Tudor line becoming extinguished rather than subsumed. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/57 "2012-01-01T12:02:51Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I think this is the key point. Henry knew that a female heir would lead to England being ruled by some guy who married into the royal family and Henry didn’t want to see the Tudor dynasty becoming mere figureheads. > > History proved Henry’s concerns were justified. His daughter Mary was dominated by her husband Philip and England became a subsidiary to Spain. You’ve also got the examples of Mary Stuart and Jane Grey. It was a reversal of how it works in chess: queens tending to get demoted to pawns. > > Elizabeth avoided this fate but she did so at the cost of never marrying and producing no heir. To Henry, this was even worse - the Tudor line becoming extinguished rather than subsumed. To this day Henry VII’s decedent sits on the throne. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/58 "2012-01-01T12:37:09Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > To this day Henry VII’s decedent sits on the throne. But not Henry VIII’s. While Margaret was born a Tudor, she married a Stuart. And when her descendants become the monarchs, they were considered the start of a new Stuart dynasty and not the continuation of the old Tudor dynasty. Which it the point I was making. Henry VIII wanted to see his family line - the Tudors - continuing in power. Not being replaced by some other family line, which is what he would regarded the Stuarts as. Especially when the Stuarts were a foreign family line. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/59 "2012-01-01T18:26:35Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But not Henry VIII’s. Unclear. Perhaps I shouldn’t nitpick, but it is something I’m good at. :smack: King Henry VIII is alleged to have left bastards other than Henry Fitzroy, including [Katherine Carey](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Carey), Chief Lady of Queen Elizabeth’s Bedchamber. She was certainly Elizabeth’s 1st cousin (Catherine’s mother being Elizabeth’s aunt), but was she also Elizabeth’s half-sister? She was born at the height of Henry VIII’s dalliance with Mary Boleyn, and her resemblance to the young Elizabeth was said to be striking. And Queen Elizabeth II is the 7-great granddaughter of Dorothy Spencer, daughter of Dorothy Sydney, daughter of Dorothy Percy, daughter of Dorothy Devereux, daughter of Lettice Knollys, daughter of Katherine Carey, daughter of Mary Boleyn. If this descent is unsuitable, Henry VIII may still end up in the future Royal Pedigree: [John Perrot](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Perrot), Lord Deputy of Ireland, is also alleged to be a bastard child of Henry VIII, and he appears in the pedigree of the late Princess of Wales, whose son William is heir apparent to the same throne once held by Henry VIII. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2012, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826/60 "2012-01-01T18:30:11Z")
**septimus** , that’s fascinating! I had no idea that the current Queen and her family have those connections to Henry VIII. Thanks. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-king-henry-viii-of-england-want-a-male-heir-when-his-daughters-could-take-the-throne/607826.md?page=4)