Henry VIII’s reign is often remembered for his many marriages and his relentless pursuit of a legitimate heir. While his marital antics have become the stuff of legend, less attention is paid to the potential medical reasons behind his inability to ensure the Tudor hold on power. Modern science suggests that Henry’s reproductive woes might not have been the fault of his wives as Henry often claimed. Instead, the early deaths of many of his children or their fetal demise may have been caused by the very genetics that made up King Henry VIII himself.   Failed Marriages Because of Missing Heirs Henry and His Wives. Source: From Old Books.com   Henry VIII’s first two wives, Catherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn, endured an unbelievable amount of pregnancies that ended without a healthy, living child for the realm. Between 1509 and 1519, Catherine had at least six pregnancies, only one of which resulted in a surviving child — Mary. Anne Boleyn’s record was even more tragic; during her 1,000-day reign, she had three known miscarriages out of four pregnancies between 1533 and 1536.   Among the rare children who did survive childbirth, Henry’s firstborn son, Prince Henry (born in 1511) lived for less than two months. Jane Seymour, Henry’s third wife, eventually gave birth to the long-desired male heir (an act which killed her) but she too experienced pregnancy complications, possibly suffering one or two miscarriages before Edward’s birth.   The recurrent miscarriages and infant deaths have led both historians and medical professionals to speculate about the role of underlying health issues in one or both of the parents. One theory that has gained some traction is that Henry’s wives, particularly Catherine and Anne, may have suffered from undetected anemia.   If an anemic woman becomes pregnant, her eggs may degrade over time, leading to non-viable pregnancies. This could prevent the proper division and growth of fetal cells, increasing the likelihood of miscarriage. Repeated miscarriages, in turn, could exacerbate the anemia, creating a vicious cycle of trying for a royal baby, getting pregnant, and then the pregnancy terminating before birth.   Jane Seymour, by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1536-7. Source: RKD Images   At least in his early years, Henry didn’t seem to struggle to get his wives with child. There is documentation suggesting that a couple of Henry’s marriages may have been hastened along due to evidence that his potential queens were already carrying his child. For instance, Jane Seymour’s swift marriage to Henry eleven days after Anne Boleyn’s execution might have been driven by a suspected pregnancy. Likewise, Katherine Howard, Henry’s fifth wife, was reported by several ambassadors to be pregnant remarkably shortly after her late July marriage to the king.   In September 1540, the Venetian ambassador Francesco Contarini noted that “the new Queen Katherine is said for certain to be pregnant.” Three months later, Charles de Marillac of France described Katherine as “grosse,” a term used in French to refer to pregnancy at that time. These reports continued into 1541, with de Marillac stating that the court was preparing for both Katherine’s coronation and the christening of her child. However, no further mention of this pregnancy was made after Lent of 1541, leading to speculation that Katherine may have suffered a miscarriage or that the reports were exaggerated.   Katherine Parr, Henry’s sixth wife, also faced an uphill battle regarding childbirth. When she married Henry in July 1543, she was 31 years old — and on her third husband. There is no record that there was ever a rumor she was carrying the King’s heir. Yet, five years later, at 36, she did become pregnant, much to the concern of her friends who feared for her safety and much to the joy of her fourth husband, Thomas Seymour. Although Katherine Parr never bore Henry a child, the marriage was consummated, and Henry even made provisions in his will in case she was pregnant when he died.   Katherine Parr, late 16th century. Source: The National Portrait Gallery, London   This string of reproductive failures raises questions about whether the problem lay solely with Henry’s wives, or if the king himself might have contributed to the issues through genetic or health-related factors. As we explore further, we’ll consider the possibility that Henry’s own medical conditions, some of which may have been passed down through his interconnected family tree, played a significant role in the tragic outcomes of his marriages.   After all, Bessie Blount and Mary Boleyn both went on to make marriages after their affairs with Henry and the bearing of his children — marriages that were much more fruitful than any of Henry’s would ever be. They were very much the ones who got away and thrived while doing so.   It All Could Have Ended With Henry of Cornwall Joust celebrating Henry’s birth, from the Westminster Tournament Roll, 1511. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The reign of Henry VIII is often defined by his relentless quest for a male heir, a quest that led to seismic shifts in England’s religious and political landscape. But what if that desperate search hadn’t been necessary? What if Henry, Duke of Cornwall, the princely son of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, had lived? The ripple effects of his longer life would have reshaped the very fabric of English history, possibly preventing the cascade of events that followed his tragic death.   On New Year’s Day in 1511, England’s prayers for an heir were answered with the birth of Prince Henry. Hall’s Chronicle paints a bright picture of the realm’s rejoicing as the queen took to her birthing chamber, and the king celebrated Christmas at Richmond Palace. As the new year dawned, the nation rejoiced at the arrival of a male heir, a moment that was met with grand celebrations, fountains filled with wine free for the peasants’ enjoyment, and preparations for the boy’s christening. The ceremony was as illustrious as the moment demanded and took nearly a week to plan.   Henry VIII, by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1539-40. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Yet, the joy was tragically short-lived. After only 52 days, on February 22, the young Prince Henry passed away at Richmond Palace, apart from his parents’ royal presence. His death was sudden and shocking, with no prior record of illness. Hall’s Chronicle describes the event with solemnity saying that the boy’s death caused his mother deep lamenting and his father to have to comfort her in front of the court.   The implications of Prince Henry’s survival are tantalizing to consider. Had he lived, Henry VIII’s obsession with securing a male heir might never have had to take root, thereby altering the course of history. The infamous break with Rome, which was largely fueled by Henry’s desperation to annul his marriage to Catherine in pursuit of a younger, more fertile Anne Boleyn, might never have occurred. Without the need to seek a divorce, Henry might have remained a steadfast ally of the Pope, preserving England’s Catholic identity for a longer period.   In this alternate reality, the English Reformation could have taken a very different path — or perhaps not occurred at all. The Dissolution of the Monasteries, the rise of Anglicanism, and the violence of the religious conflicts that followed might have been avoided or at least delayed. England’s political, religious, and dynastic landscape would be unrecognizable from the history we know today. Think of it: Henry and Catherine could have remained married; Anne Boleyn would have been allowed to marry her Irish cousin; there would have been no King Edward or Queen Elizabeth; Mary would have been born later and allowed to make a dynastic marriage at a younger age; and Henry could’ve lived to see a grandson born who could carry the Tudor line into the far future.   Catherine of Aragon, by Lucas Horenbout, 1525. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The cause of Prince Henry’s death remains one of history’s mysteries. He appeared to be a healthy infant at birth, as evidenced by his delayed Christening — sickly infants were usually baptized immediately to allow access to heaven. His was well documented and conducted five days after his birth, suggesting no immediate concern for his well-being. Yet, without enough warning to call his parents to his side, he was gone. Theories have been floated, from crib death to a respiratory infection—after all, the Tudors were constantly claiming their lungs were affected by bad air—but the true cause of the little prince’s death is likely lost to time.   In the end, the death of Henry, Duke of Cornwall, was not just a personal tragedy for his parents but a fulcrum that would set the stage for the dramatic events of the Tudor Dynasty. It was a moment where history hung in the balance, and with the loss of a single infant, the future of England was put on a collision course with Rome.   Maybe It Wasn’t the King but His Ancestors Coat of Arms of Henry VIII. Source: Wikimedia Commons   While Henry VIII is often the focal point of discussions about the Tudor Dynasty’s reproductive struggles, it is worth considering that the problems might have originated with his ancestors. The Tudor line was relatively new, established by Henry VII after his victory at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, making him a king by force rather than by right.   The Tudors, like many royal families, practiced endogamy, marrying within a limited gene pool to preserve their claim to the throne (the older King Henry VII’s was tenuous at best). This practice could have introduced or perpetuated genetic conditions that affected Henry VIII and his offspring. Exploring the medical history of Henry’s parents and grandparents might provide clues about the inherited health issues that eventually ended the line of Tudor sovereignty.   Blood Conditions Richard III and Henry VII stained Glass, photo by John Taylor. Source: Wikimedia Commons   One crucial but often overlooked factor that played a role in Henry’s repeated failures to secure a healthy male heir may very well have been rooted in something as microscopic as his very blood cells. Specifically, the Kell blood group and Rh incompatibility may have been the silent saboteurs at the Tudor court.   The Kell blood group is a genetic marker that can cause significant complications in pregnancy when the mother and fetus have incompatible blood types. In Henry VIII’s case, the issue wasn’t just about bad luck; it may have been about bad blood — literally. Henry was likely Kell positive, something experienced by less than 10% of the British population, and his Kell-positive blood was passed on to his children in utero. The immune systems of his wives, all of whom were likely the far more common Kell negative, may have responded with deadly consequences.   Detail of The Family of Henry VIII, now at Hampton Court Palace, 1545. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The first pregnancy for a Kell-negative mother might proceed without issue because her immune system has not yet encountered Kell-positive blood. However, during childbirth, if the mother’s blood is exposed to the baby’s Kell-positive blood, her immune system becomes “primed.” Like an immune system encountering the common cold for the first time, the body learns that something is harmful and fights it off, though with the Kell blood group the fighting happens in subsequent pregnancies, making it so her body would see any Kell-positive blood as a threat and start producing antibodies to destroy it. These antibodies would then attack the blood cells of any future Kell-positive fetuses, leading to hemolytic disease in the newborn.   In the 16th century, such a condition would have been undetectable and therefore fatal for the either unborn or newborn child, with no hope for intervention. We do know that some of Henry’s babies made it through the turbulence of a Tudor birth but succumbed to unknown circumstances quickly after.   Today, thanks to advancements in medicine, babies affected by hemolytic disease can often be saved through blood transfusions, sometimes even while still in the womb. But in the time of Henry VIII, such medical interventions were unheard of and the science behind such procedures was generations away.   Prince Arthur Tudor at prayer, 1499-1502, priory church, Great Malvern, Worcestershire. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Consider Catherine of Aragon, Henry’s first wife, who endured an agonizing series of pregnancies. She produced five babies who died within days or weeks of delivery, three of whom were sons. Only Mary, born in 1518, seven years after elder brother Henry of Cornwall whom she’d never meet, survived. If Catherine was Rh-negative and either of her husbands—first Arthur, Henry’s elder brother, and then later Henry himself—was Rh-positive, her body might have developed antibodies due to exposure that compromised her eventual pregnancies. This would explain why her obstetric journey, especially those resulting in male children, ended in neonatal death. The destruction of the baby’s red blood cells due to these antibodies could have been a primary factor in these losses.   Adding another layer to this genetic puzzle is the fact that Henry VIII was related to all of his wives in some way, thanks to the intricate web of the European aristocracy. This cousinhood could have exacerbated any underlying genetic conditions, making the likelihood of complications even higher. In a time when royal bloodlines were more a matter of prestige than genetics, the interconnectedness of the European nobility may have been more a curse than a blessing.   Anne Boleyn in the Tower, by Edouard Cibot, 1835. Source: French Ministry of Culture   Henry’s second wife, Anne Boleyn, faced similar struggles. After the birth of Elizabeth, Anne suffered multiple miscarriages, which some historians speculate could have been due to the same Kell-related issues that plagued Catherine. Jane Seymour, Henry’s third wife, managed to produce a male heir—Edward VI—but she too may have suffered from miscarriages before successfully carrying Edward to term. Was Edward one of the lucky babies to be Rh negative, like his mother?   The cruel irony of Henry’s reign is that his obsessive quest for a male heir may have been thwarted not by fate, but by the very blood coursing through his veins. No matter the cause, it is clear that the story of Henry VIII’s heirs is as much a tale of biology as it is of politics and inheritance.   Diabetes and Chronic Malaria Dance Macabre, from the Nuremberg Chronicles, by Michael Woglemut, 1493. Source: The MET, New York   Imagine a young, vibrant Henry — strong, handsome, and full of life. This was a man who had survived smallpox, numerous sore throats, and even the dreaded “ague,” known today as malaria. In those days, malaria was a common affliction, especially in marshy regions and places where mosquitoes surrounded the River Thames. The disease was so prevalent that it was almost an expected part of life for those living near the river, with outbreaks continuing well into the Victorian Era.   If Henry suffered from chronic malaria, it might have been the starting point of his fertility issues. Malaria was a frequent and deadly companion in the damp Thames marshes, and its effects could linger long after the initial infection, causing recurring fevers, chills, and a general decline in sperm quality.   As if the ravages of malaria weren’t enough, Henry could’ve been diabetic, a condition that, in the 16th century, was a death sentence in slow motion. The king’s legs, once strong and capable, became sites of unbearable pain and decay. He suffered from varicose veins that ulcerated, leaving open sores that refused to close properly. This was a common complication for diabetics, where even a small cut, particularly on the lower legs or feet, could lead to a gangrenous ulcer — a wound that would only deepen with time.   And worsen it did. The smell of Henry’s rotting legs reportedly preceded him by several rooms, a pungent reminder of the once-great monarch’s mortality. In modern times, these ulcers would be treated with advanced medical care, possibly even leading to amputation to prevent the spread of infection. But for Henry, there was no such relief. If he did have uncontrolled diabetes, it may have ravaged his body while simultaneously contributing to his difficulties in producing a hale and hearty male heir.   Henry VIII, by Hans Holbein the Younger, 16th century. Source: Wikimedia Commons   Recent research indicates a strong link between diabetes and male infertility. A study found that a majority of men with diabetes experienced subfertility and, in the worst-case scenarios, complete infertility. If Henry’s blood sugar levels were as uncontrolled as his temper, it is no wonder that he struggled to father children who could survive infancy.   The image of Henry VIII that persists in popular culture often focuses on his larger-than-life personality, his tyrannical rule, and his six ill-fated marriages. But beneath the crown and the royal accouterments was a man slowly being eaten away by disease — his own body betraying him in ways that no political enemy could. It is a question of either or both when considering diabetes and chronic malaria that could have afflicted Henry. On their own, each of these conditions could’ve played a significant role in the tragic infant losses that haunted his lineage.   Lupus Erythematosus and Klinefelter’s King Henry’s Battle Armor, 1509-47. Source: Met Museum   In the gallery of Henry VIII’s potential ailments, two rare but significant conditions may have further complicated his health and his relentless quest for a male heir: systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and/or Klinefelter syndrome. Both disorders, though vastly different in their manifestations, could have played a role in the mysterious decline of Henry’s health and the tragic pattern of infant mortality that plagued his marriages.   Systemic lupus erythematosus is a chronic autoimmune disease that can affect nearly any organ system, from the skin to the heart, kidneys, and lungs. It is a disease most commonly associated with young women, striking them at ten times the rate of men. But that doesn’t rule out the possibility that Henry VIII, with his broad spectrum of health issues, could have been the rare male sufferer. SLE is notorious for its unpredictable attacks and the production of antibodies that attack the body’s own tissues, leading to a host of debilitating symptoms.   Henry could have been an earlier version of another royal who struggled to produce heirs for England. Consider the horrific tale of Queen Anne, who endured a staggering 17 pregnancies, only to see each end in miscarriage, stillbirth, or the early death of her children. Modern historians believe she was plagued by SLE and its cruel companion, antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, a condition that causes blood clots, strokes, and repeated pregnancy losses. Could Henry VIII have faced a similar, albeit less understood, struggle? Like Henry, Anne had a single child survive, a longed-for son, who made it only to his eleventh birthday.   Queen Anne, by Michael Dahl, 1705. Source: National Gallery, London   Henry’s bouts of illness, his chronic leg ulcers, and his apparent fertility issues might point toward an autoimmune disorder like lupus, though the exact cause remains speculative. If he had SLE, it is possible that his immune system was not only attacking his body but also complicating his wives’ pregnancies.   On the other hand, Klinefelter syndrome presents an entirely different challenge. This chromosomal disorder affects males, giving them an extra X chromosome, resulting in a typical karyotype of 47, XXY. Men with Klinefelter syndrome often face a range of physical and cognitive challenges, including tall stature, small testes, and infertility — traits that might have been easily overlooked or misattributed in Henry’s time.   While it is unlikely that Henry VIII exhibited the classic signs of Klinefelter syndrome, such as gynecomastia (enlarged breasts) or a lack of masculine traits, it is possible that a milder, less obvious form of the condition contributed to his difficulties in producing a viable male heir. The syndrome is also associated with neurocognitive and behavioral issues, which could offer some insight into the King’s increasingly erratic behavior as he aged. The progressive testicular failure associated with Klinefelter syndrome could have led to a gradual decline in fertility, exacerbating the pressures on Henry to secure a male successor.   Each failed pregnancy, and each lost child would have been a blow not just to the Tudor Dynasty but to Henry’s own sense of identity and value to his people as a monarch.   The possibility that Henry VIII could have been afflicted by either of these conditions underscores the complexity of his medical history — a history that was as tumultuous and tragic as his years on the throne.   Does Henry’s Line Live on Through His Unrecognized Daughter? Elizabeth Knollys, a descendant of Catherine Carey, attributed to George Gower, 1577. Source: The National Trust   In the vibrant and politically charged court of Henry VIII, the king’s early mistresses, Bessie Blount and Mary Boleyn, stand out not just for their beauty but for their timing. Both women had Henry when he was young, virile, and seemingly less rocked by the maladies that would later ravage his body and mind. Bessie Blount bore him a son, Henry Fitzroy, who was openly acknowledged and given the best titles the king could offer an illegitimate child. Mary Boleyn, on the other hand, carried his legacy in a more covert manner.   As Henry’s health began to deteriorate—his body increasingly plagued by ulcers, possible diabetes, and perhaps a host of other conditions that impacted his fertility—his official unions became less fruitful. Yet, it is these early extramarital affairs, before the shadow of illness darkened the halls of Hampton Court Palace and Whitehall, that may have truly secured his line.   While Bessie Blount’s son lived a privileged life in a bright spotlight, it was Mary, the king’s quieter, more enigmatic lover, who might have ensured that the Tudor bloodline carried on in the most unexpected of ways. Catherine Carey, Mary’s daughter, is widely believed to have been Henry’s child. Unlike her half-brother, Fitzroy, Catherine was not acknowledged as Henry’s offspring, but the historical evidence and the timing of her birth suggest that she was indeed the king’s daughter.   Catherine Carey’s line leads directly to notable figures in modern history, including both Charles III and Diana, Princess of Wales. Charles traces his lineage back to Catherine’s daughter, Lettice, while Diana’s connection is through Henry Carey, Catherine’s younger brother. And in a twist that would surely have infuriated the notorious king, one of Catherine Carey’s descendants is none other than Kate Middleton, the current Princess of Wales.   Hampton Court Palace, by KT Likes Coffee. Source: Unsplash   Isn’t it ironic? Those who sit on the throne today are not as much Tudors as they are Boleyns. Kate Middleton, Catherine Carey’s several times granddaughter, is married to the current heir to the British throne and mother to another. Philippa Gregory, author of The Other Boleyn Girl, notes, “Catherine was born at the height of Henry’s passion for her mother.” And so, as Henry VIII continued to forge ahead with his ill-fated marriages, desperately seeking an heir, it may have been Mary Boleyn who truly carried his line forward. Through Catherine Carey, Henry’s blood—though unrecognized—survived and flourished in a lineage that now sits atop the British monarchy.

  On the Wednesday following the last Tuesday in January, Shetland shuts down. It is the only place in Scotland to have an extra public holiday. The reason is simply because everyone is exhausted. They’ve been up all night burning a Viking galley.   In neighboring Orkney, they’re a little less obsessed with flames, but that doesn’t mean they value their Viking heritage any less. Every Christmas Eve and Hogmanay, they play “The Ba,” a mass football game on the streets of Kirkwall. Every match sees the Uppies versus the Doonies — which team you side with, depends on your line of Norse heritage.   A Land Where the Sea is Everything Lerwick, Shetland, photo by Don Lodge. Source: Pixabay   Separated from the British mainland by the hostile North Sea, the sea is still a key feature of daily life for these Scottish Islands. Despite recent oil and gas discoveries opening up new possibilities for Islanders, most prefer to rely on the sea for their livelihoods.   It has always been that way. While much of British history was shaped by the Romans following their invasion they never made it to Orkney or Shetland. The Vikings did, though. In the 9th century, Viking warriors landed and soon learned that these islands were far too valuable to plunder. They set up a base here and made the Northern Isles their home. A strategic halfway point between their Nordic homes and the British mainland, Shetland and Orkney were placed under Norwegian Rule and stayed under it until 1468.   It was a pure chance that control of the isles was rescinded by Norway. In 1468, Norwegian King Christian I pledged the Northern Isles to King James III of Scotland in return for a dowry for his daughter, Margaret who went on to marry James.   Interestingly, that dowry was never paid, and there are some historians who state that Orkney and Shetland should still be Norwegian. Many islanders share this view, and as recently as 2023 a member of the Orkney Islands Council tabled a motion for a referendum that could see the islands return to Norwegian control. All things considered, it should come as no surprise that both Orkney and Shetland feel more Nordic than they do Scottish.   Norwegian flags are carried through the streets of Lerwick on Norwegian Constitution Day. Source: The Shetland Times   The only way to truly understand these unique, remote lands, is to see them for yourselves. Red and blue Norwegian flags outnumber the Saltire, classic folk songs echo through the streets in place of the sound of bagpipes, and if you ask an islander what they wear under their kilt, they’ll simply tell you that they don’t own one.   The Must-See Viking Sites in Orkney & Shetland Boat burning at Up Helly AA, Lerwick, photo by Roy Mullay. Source: Wikimedia Commons   From the 9th Century CE right up until 1472, Orkney and Shetland were a Norse territory, known as the Earldom of Orkney and governed locally by the Earl — or Jarl as they were known in the Norse language. Despite the name, the Earldom was comprised of both Orkney and Shetland along with the northernmost part of mainland Scotland.   For history lovers, the islands are a paradise. And not only because of the abundance of Viking sites. Both islands are home to some historically significant spots from the Neolithic age right through to the Second World War. Be sure to make time to explore these too.   Orkney Interior of St Magnus Cathedral, Kirkwall. Source: North Link Ferries   The top Viking sites in Orkney are all located on the Mainland, the main island and home to the islands’ capital, Kirkwall. This makes getting around them all easily achievable in a couple of days.   Dominating Kirkwall’s skyline, St Magnus Cathedral is a good starting point. This stunning Romanesque building, built in striking red sandstone, holds many accolades; it is Britain’s most northerly cathedral, as well as Scotland’s oldest. Built during Viking rule, with construction starting in 1137 and additions continuing for the next 300 years, it was created for the bishops of Orkney and named after Magnus Erlendsson, Earl of Orkney from 1106 to 1117. He was known to be a gentle man (by Viking standards at least), and he notably refused to fight during raids.   Right opposite the cathedral are the ruins of the earl and bishops’ palaces. The Bishop’s Palace was built during the Viking era and is one of the best-preserved buildings of its time. It was here that King Haakon of Norway died in December 1263. The Earl’s Palace was added two centuries after Norse rule ended, but is an impressive sight, nonetheless.   Maeshowe Neolithic Tomb, Stennes. Source: The Viking Herald   Traveling back in time, Birsay is another must on a Viking voyage around the islands. Now a small village, mainly occupied by farmland, it once played a far more significant role as the capital of Orkney, until the administrative center moved to Kirkwall in the 11th Century. The parish church, St Magnus Church, is built on the site of the first cathedral in Orkney. The small tidal island, Brough of Birsay, is home to the remains of the Viking settlement that once stood there.   Another, perhaps unlikely, contender for a stop is Scapa Flow. This sheltered body of water is perhaps best known as the location of the scuttling of the German fleet during the First World War, but its history goes back much further. The Vikings used it as a safe harbor for their longships; King Haakon moored the Norwegian flagship, Kroussden, there in August 1263.   In Stenness, famous for the neolithic Standing Stones, visit Maeshowe. This tomb, thought to date from around 2700 BCE, was visited by the Viking settlers who left their mark in the form of graffiti.   Shetland Lerwick Town Hall with its commemorative stained-glass windows. Source: Groves Raines   Unlike Orkney, the best Viking sites in Shetland are a little more spread out. Looking at a map of Shetland, you’ll see why; the archipelago is long and thin, while you’re never more than three miles from the sea, it’s 116 miles from the southern tip of Fair Isle to the most northerly point of Unst. Starting again, in the islands’ capital, Lerwick, be sure to visit the Town Hall, where the impressive stained-glass windows depict events and figures from the Viking era.   Just north of Lerwick, is the Tingwall Valley, worth the drive out of town for the views alone. It was here, on a small outcrop of land jutting out into Tingwall Loch, that the Norse parliament sat. This spot, known as Tingaholm in Norse, is the place at which important decisions were made; laws were interpreted, criminals were tried, and legislation was enacted. Little remains today, bar a few foundations.   Another one of Shetland’s most-visited sites, in the South Mainland, is Jarlshof. Most commonly celebrated for its significance as the best-preserved prehistoric archaeological site on the islands, it also played a key role in the Viking era. Norse settlers occupied the site for the entirety of their rule, with the first remains of a Viking longhouse anywhere in Britain being discovered here in the 1930s. A number of more recent digs have unearthed tools used by the Vikings for fishing and farming.   The replica Viking longhouse in Haroldswick, Unst. Source: Monissa   With that said, there is one place in Shetland that holds more significance than any other: Unst. Representing the northernmost part of the islands, the journey from Lerwick involves two ferries and requires a full day, but you won’t regret it.   It is thought that Unst was the first place Viking settlers landed in the United Kingdom, which makes perfect sense as it is the first land they would have reached. Three longhouses have been excavated on the island, and a replica has been built in Haroldswick, which stands alongside a replica longship — the Skidbladner. Unst Heritage Centre provides a fascinating exhibition. As with Jarlshof, Unst has a long and varied history, and the Heritage Centre offers an insight into everything from prehistoric times to the present day.   Up Helly Aa Festival Viking mounts ship, Up Helly Aa. Source: Shetland.org   It is impossible to discuss the Viking history of Shetland and Orkney without giving a mention to Up Helly Aa. This somewhat peculiar festival is a testament to the fact that there is nowhere else in the world that takes their Viking heritage as seriously as Shetland does. Every year on the last Tuesday in January, the streets of Lerwick light up with a procession of torches, carried by squads of townspeople dressed in full Viking attire, led by the Guizer Jarl who is elected by a committee every year. They loop around the streets to a play park on King Harald Street, where a life-size galley boat is waiting to be burned.   When the galley is set alight, squads head for the town’s community halls and schools, where they put on themed displays all through the night. Every squad moves from hall to hall so visitors can witness every one of them without having to move.   The party runs into the early hours, with more dancing, singing, and drinking than you could imagine. The following Wednesday is designated as a bank holiday in Shetland, with everything grinding to a halt; the shops are closed, the buses don’t run, and the people are fast asleep.   Tickets to the event are very limited and get snapped up quickly, but if you ever get the chance to witness it, it is a sight like no other — a true once-in-a-lifetime experience, for all except those of us lucky enough to have lived in the isles.   Why Visit Orkney and Shetland? Standing Stones, Orkney. Source: Scotland.org   Shetland and Orkney, Britain’s most northerly outposts, manage to pack in some of the best-preserved and most significant sites from the Viking Era. A visit to the islands is a pilgrimage for Viking history enthusiasts. More than that, ticking off two of the British Isles’ most out-of-the-way archipelagos is an achievement in itself, and one well worth adding to your bucket list.   Aside from the fascinating history, these islands are some of the most tranquil, beautiful places in the country, or as the locals would tell you — on earth. The welcome is always warm, the weather less so, but one thing is for sure: you’ll rarely find anyone who has made the journey who doesn’t say they want to come back time and time again. Given their location, the Northern Isles aren’t the easiest places in Scotland to reach. But this only adds to the appeal — and the feeling of being on the edge of the world.

Michelle Obama has finally revealed the real reason she skipped President Donald Trump’s 2025 inauguration, and it’s every bit as shallow as you’d expect from someone of her caliber. In a recent episode of her podcast she co-hosts with her brother, “IMO With Michelle Obama and Craig Robinson,” she admitted...

Ayanna Pressley, a member of the increasingly irrelevant "Squad," has sunk to a new low with her latest fear-mongering antics, proving once again that the left excels at little beyond divisive hysteria. Her recent comments about ICE detentions are not just absurd -- they’re a shameless attempt to stoke fear...

I know this probably comes as a shock, but it turns out that giving a 25-year-old firebrand activist with virtually no experience in organized politics or the private sector the vice chairmanship of your party's national committee isn't a wise idea. I understand, I'm as shocked as the Democrats are,...

The Democratic National Committee is not going to let Vice Chair David Hogg have it both ways. During a conference call on Thursday, Chair Ken Martin stated that "no DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election, whether on behalf of an incumbent or a...

President Donald Trump poked fun at former President Joe Biden during a meeting with wounded military veterans by suggesting the doddering Democrat was an incompetent and illegitimate leader. The hilarious exchange occurred Wednesday in the Oval Office, during which Trump asked one of the veterans about a comical photo of...

It's typically difficult to take an elected official who insists on wearing a hat at all times despite being cursed with a blind haberdasher seriously, which is why we're all usually blessedly able to safely ignore Democratic Rep. Frederica Wilson. However, underneath Wilson's blinding choice of headwear, the Florida lefty...

New York, it seems, will never learn. And if and when it does, it'll come too late for "Momma Zee." According to the New York Post, Excenia Mette -- the proprietor of the first woman- and black-owned bodega in Gotham, who was known as "Zeenie" and "Momma Zee" to the...

Trump Derangement Syndrome is no joke. Thursday evening began the NFL draft in Green Bay, Wisconsin, home of the Packers. To kick off this much anticipated event, former Packers' linebacker and legend Clay Matthews had a special message for the fans, supposedly from President Donald Trump. "I just got off...