Iâm overdue in discussing it, but one should acknowledge that⌠thing which often happens in the last two decades of Tudor centric media (Becoming Elizabeth, The Mirror & The Light, etc) where they stop to make a glib little comment that implies Edward VI was in some way a beneficiary factor of his motherâs death in childbirth. âMy sister died bringing the king into this worldâ âthe babe and his father prosper while the mother lies in clayâ etc etc. Itâs an interesting development, after the last several hundred years of Janeâs death being framed as something she graciously allowed for the sake of the kingdom, as is the general trend among cultural depictions of her passing, like the folk song and the oil painting. Itâs also an interesting development in light of that talking point which was popularized in Tudor industry circles from around 1990-2010 - the one where they described Jane dying after childbirth as some kind of blessing in disguise, the only thing preventing her from being murdered by her husband (as if getting your head cut off isnât preferable to spending three days in labor then another week dying slowly of sepsis.)
You can call it a manifestation of the most recent trend in womenâs reproductive rhetoric, where some infants are framed as being born guilty and indebted to their âmothersâ due to whatever vaginal trauma she went through while âtheyâ were a clump of tissue being gestated, and thus more acceptable targets for abuse after birth, be that prolonged violence or immediate murder as a newborn. This is a predictable ideological development, given the increase in women and girlâs crimes against infants since the dismantling of abortion rights in western countries, and womenâs broader role in shaping the trafficking of children as a global institution.
Considering the way Edward was treated by the adult men in his life, you can certainly see why modern writers would feel the need to lay some predestined claim to evil at his feet. If heâs not pre-established as guilty, then his whole short career of being shipped around like cargo between various self-serving predatory adults becomes something that was inflicted on him, instead of something that he at least partially deserved from the minute his heart first began to beat. (Again, this logic of assigning autonomy and blame to unborn fetuses is outdated and creepy, but w/e.) The narrative that Edward was a Bad Seed who did Bad Things - including, in this line of thinking, being born - for no meaningful reason beyond biological evil and died a premature death after severe extended suffering (much like the mother being retroactively martyred in this narrative) because of the karmic debt of what he was at the moment of his birth is a very easy, comfortable one to process. At least, itâs easy and comfortable when compared to the more realistic notion, that Edward was a very young and psychologically complex figure with a plethora of bad role models and no meaningful support system that wasnât also seeking to exploit him in some way, who died horrifically for no good reason.
Ironically, this line of thinking shares a lot of similarities with the one about how Jane was âluckyâ to die from horrifically drawn out postnatal complications instead of getting executed. It might not be realistic, but it makes the fact that both historical figures died torturously easier to swallow, especially in a narrative thatâs eager to frame those torturous deaths as karmic justice for Henry VIIIâs victims (usually Anne Boleyn or Elizabeth I, in Tudor centric media, but it could just as easily be others.) Both concepts treat Jane and Edwardâs bodies as disposable, more ideologically driven in the extremity of their suffering than physically or psychologically.
So letâs put it this way. Jane consented to her relationship with Edward, and Jane decided to give birth to him to elevate her status by proxy. Edward did not. Even if Jane hadnât wanted to give birth to a son, he still wouldnât be an autonomous factor in the relationship. And Jane did! And her husband did! Itâs interesting how the rhetoric used to justify the abuse of unwanted children is just as readily applied to the abuse of children that are fervently, aggressively sought out by their parents. I guess that shouldnât be a surprise. If one child can be born deserving to get tortured, then any other can. Even one whose father toppled religious institutions just to create him.
