Sixteenth-century ladies are being warned against answering online personal dating ads from kings of England after a woman married a man she met online, only to find that he had been married five times before.
Katherine Parr, 31, told reporters that she had responded to an advert that read, ‘Young-at-heart widower seeks like-minded companion of child-bearing age for fun, adventure and to sire a male heir to the throne. GSOH and an intolerance of Catholics an advantage.’
‘He sounded kinda fun so I arranged to meet him’, she explained, ‘but when he turned up he looked nothing like his portrait. He was grossly overweight and covered in boils. If he hadn’t been the King of England and dripping in bling I’d have left there and then.’
Katherine was also disappointed when she later learned that Henry had had five previous wives, two of which he had divorced and two he had beheaded. ‘I know he had said he was a widower,’ she complained, ‘but that doesn’t really tell the whole story does it.’
Further investigation produced evidence of even more discrepancies in Henry’s profile. ‘He said ‘religion’ was one of his interests,’ said Katherine, ‘but I discovered that this actually meant falling out with the Pope, creating his own religion in order to grant himself a divorce and systematically destroying the nation’s monasteries. I just like going to church on a Sunday and watching Songs of Praise.’
This isn’t the only case of British monarchs being economical with the truth in personal ads. Henry V is known to have listed ‘holidays in France’ as one of his interests, Richard III said in his profile that he enjoyed ‘looking after his two nephews’ and Charles I described himself as a ‘passionate pro-democracy campaigner’.
A spokesman for Match.com denied that there were any failings on their part, but did admit that they had received a previous complaint against Henry. ‘We didn’t take it any further as the complainant, Kathryn Howard, never returned our calls. Though bizarrely, she did change her profile picture shortly afterwards to a below-the-shoulders shot.’
8th October 2010