Well, considering she could conceive but not carry, I'd hazard a guess that she had what is termed an "incompetent cervix" (just made to boost a woman's ego, that name).

Here, the cervix can't take the pressure of a progressing pregnancy, which subsequently spontaneously aborts.

Any more specualtion, anyone?

Lady Grace

 

A woman is at risk when she has a negative Rh factor and her partner has a positive Rh factor. This combination can produce a child who is Rh positive. While the mother's and baby's blood systems are separate there are times when the blood from the baby can enter into the mother's system. This can cause the mother to create antibodies against the Rh factor, thus treating an Rh positive baby like an intruder in her body. If this happens the mother is said to be sensitized.

A sensitized mother's body will make antibodies. These antibodies will then attack an Rh positive baby's blood, causing it to breaking down the red blood cells of the baby and anemia will develop. In severe cases this hemolytic disease can cause illness, brain damage and even death.

Sensitization can also occur during a blood transfusion, miscarriage, abortion, ectopic pregnancy and even during some procedures, like amniocentesis. Since the antibodies do not disappear and rarely cause a problem in first pregnancies, it is very important to be screened thoroughly and give an accurate medical history to your doctor or midwife.

 

The royals of all the countries had so many ancestors in common is also another factor. I don't know about Catherine and Charles II, but look at all the others so closely related. I know Philip II of Spain had a very deformed son, not sure about any of his other children. But there was the Hapsburg jaw and then the insanity from his grandmother, Juana (Joan) that was passed down. All the inbreeding has to have something to do with the actions of the way they acted. Whatever so called "bad blood" never had a chance to be filtered out down the lines, especially when it was coming from both sides.

 

Since the antibodies do not disappear and rarely cause a problem in first pregnancies

 

I hear ya I just think that there are too many other things to rule out before reaching for this one.  Anne's situation was just too similar to every other woman's and I can't think that they ALL had rh factor.  That said, I don't think its an impossibility, just that we need to rule out the most common possiblilities first.  I think that if Anne hadn't been the subject of such an intriguing story people wouldn't have paid much attention to her plight.

Look at Queen Anne (Stuart), she had about 17 pregnancies and only one child lived to be about 10 or 11. He had deformaties, but was suppose to have been very intelligent. I still think the close blood lines thru the ages had something to do with it. Another thing is that the Queens of Henry VIII are thought to be the ones unable to carry or have his children, maybe it was something that was wrong with him to be the cause of the miscarriages and still births. It is odd that with each one he had one child, the first, with the exception of Mary, and then no more. Just wonder if the same thing occurred with his mistress who gave him his son, Henry Fitzroy!

as far as i am aware, bessie blount was quickly set up with a husband and an estate soon after her pregnancy was noticable.  i don't think henry ever visted her again.  and i think she had more children later.

If someone can be obsessed with facts, then I am guilty..............Judy