Read of the Week

This week I really enjoyed The Other Tudors,  Henry VIII's Mistresses and Bastards by Phillipa Jones. It was a really interesting read in that Jones sought to humanize Henry's womanizing by describing it as his eternal search for the perfect woman. The author explores Henry's youth and how his mother influenced what he saw as the ideal wife. It also discusses his relationships with his wives Bessie Blount, Mary Boleyn, Jane Pollard and Mary Berkley. Jones believes that Henry had many illegitimate children (I can't say I agree) and presents evidence included how these bastards were treated by Edward, Mary and Elizabeth during their respective reigns and honors bestowed upon them, sometimes undeservedly. The author is convinced that Henry just loved being in love but was never fully satisfied hence the turn-over rate of his spouses. She emphasizes Henry's positive qualities, playing up his good treatment of his children and his wives, but fails to mention that once they fell from favor that treatment quickly ended. On an interesting side note, Jones also seeks to exonerate Mary Boleyn by suggesting she did not sleep with Francis I but rather that Henry VIII was her first love. It is an interesting interpretation of Henry's private life, despite my hesitation on fully agreeing with much of her research. Still, I encourage you to pick it up as it adds a lot of nuance to Henry's story.

The Trial of Anne Boleyn

On May 15, 1536 Anne Boleyn was tried in the King's Hall of the Tower of London in front of approximately 2,000 spectators. A special elevated platform has been built in the hall so that nobles and commoners alike could attend the trial of Queen Anne. She was tried by a jury of peers rather than the Commision of Oyer and Terminer who had judged and convicted her accused lovers. Everyone in attendance and the King himself was convinced she would be found guilty. He said as much in a letter to Jane Seymour stating he would ..."send her news at 3 o'clock of the conviction of the putain..." In addition to the King's pressure to convict Anne, the jury was made up of many of her enemies including Charles Brandon (friend and brother in law to the King) her uncle the Duke of Norfolk, who knew that if he did not vote to convict his own life would be in danger, Ralph Neville friend to the Seymour family and the Earl of Surrey, cousin to Anne but who had often spoke against her religious policies.

Anne defended herself with grace and dignity; Charles Wriothesley wrote of her performations saying she "...made so wise and discreet aunsweres to all thinges layde against her, excusing herselfe with her wordes so clearlie, as thoughe she has never been faultie to the same..." Anne denied all the charges against her, except for the patronage of Sir Francis Weston. It was after all customary for the reigning queen to patronize promising artists. Despite her magnificent defense, the jury found her guilty. They stripped Anne of her titles, wealth and crown. It was recorded that the Duke of Norfolk had tears on his face as he read the verdict and sentence saying:

 "Because though has offended against our sovereign the King's Grace in committing treason against his person, and here attainted of the same, the law of the realm is this, that thou hast deserved death, and they judgement is tis: that thou shalt be burned here within the Tower of London on the Green, else to have they head smitten off, as the King's pleasure shall be further known of the same..."

Lancelot de Carles recorded that Anne then spoke to the court saying:

"I do not say that I have been as humble towards the King as he deserved considering the humanity and kindness he showed me, and the great honour he has always paid me; I know that my fantasies have led me to be jealous...but God knows that I have never done him any other wrong"

Anne's quiet dignity and restraint during the trial garnered her much sympathy as word spread through London that the King sought to have his wife executed and marry another. In fact even the commoners, never overly fond of Anne, began to speak out questioning her guilt, the King's motives and besmirching his conduct of engaging in another relationship while his wife was awaiting trial. Despite the outpouring of support for Anne, the King and Cromwell moved determinedly forward towards her judicial execution.

Anne Boleyn Day Contest

Theanneboleynfiles.com is hosting their annual Anne Boleyn Day contest. Normally the site founder, Claire Ridgeway, runs an essay contest; however this year she has decided to host a site wide scavenger hunt. Just answer the following twelve questions and email your answers to claire@theanneboleynfiles.com

1. In what year did Claire start the Anne Boleyn Files
2. What nationality is Claire
3. Who was Anne Boleyn's Master of Horse?
4. Which ambassador referred to Anne as "the concubine"?
5. How many Tudor books has Claire written
6. Sandra Byrd's To Die For tells Anne's story through which woman's eyes?
7. Where does Sarah Morris' title Le Temps Viendra come from?
8. Susan Bordo's The Creation of Anne Boleyn is describes as "Part biography, part..." (2 words)
9. Which Tudor queen did Katherine Longshore's first Tudor novel feature?
10. Where is Anne's place?
11.Where was Anne crowned queen?
12. Which movie has a scene in which Henry VIII visited Anne Boleyn in the Tower and Anne told Henry, "MY Elizabeth SHALL BE QUEEN! And my blood will have been well spent!"

Prizes for the hunt include a beautiful Anne Boleyn B necklace, autographed books and other great items! I urge you to enter and celebrate Anne Boleyn!

Yesterday in Tudor History

Yesterday, May 12th is the anniversary of the trial against Henry Norris, William Brereton, Mark Smeaton and Francis Weston. They are all found guilty of engaging in treasonous acts by allowing themselves to be seduced by the Queen, Anne Boleyn. For some information on their charges, trials and convictions please read my post here.

The Middlesex Indictment

On May 10th, 1536 Giles Heron, who was serving as the foreman of the Grand Jury of Middlesex and ironically married to the daughter of the late Sir Thomas More, announced that his jury had established that there was enough evidence to suggest the Anne and George Boleyn, Mark Smeaton, Henry Norris, Francis Weston and William Brereton were culpable of the alleged crimes carried out in previous months at both Hampton Court and Whitehall. Additionally, the jury suggested that they be indicted and tried before a jury.

Below is the text of the original indictment drawn up by the Grand Jury:

“Indictment found at Westminster on Wednesday next after three weeks of Easter, 28 Hen. VIII. before Sir John Baldwin, &c., by the oaths of Giles Heron, Roger More, Ric. Awnsham, Thos. Byllyngton, Gregory Lovell, Jo. Worsop, Will. Goddard, Will. Blakwall, Jo. Wylford, Will. Berd, Hen. Hubbylthorn, Will. Hunyng, Rob. Walys, John England, Hen. Lodysman, and John Averey; who present that whereas queen Anne has been the wife of Henry VIII. for three years and more, she, despising her marriage, and entertaining malice against the King, and following daily her frail and carnal lust, did falsely and traitorously procure by base conversations and kisses, touchings, gifts, and other infamous incitations, divers of the King’s daily and familiar servants to be her adulterers and concubines, so that several of the King’s servants yielded to her vile provocations; viz., on 6th Oct. 25 Hen. VIII., at Westminster, and divers days before and after, she procured, by sweet words, kisses, touches, and otherwise, Hen. Noreys, of Westminster, gentle man of the privy chamber, to violate her, by reason whereof he did so at Westminster on the 12th Oct. 25 Hen. VIII.; and they had illicit intercourse at various other times, both before and after, sometimes by his procurement, and sometimes by that of the Queen.

Also the Queen, 2 Nov. 27 Hen. VIII. and several times before and after, at Westminster, procured and incited her own natural brother, Geo. Boleyn, lord Rocheford, gentleman of the privy chamber, to violate her, alluring him with her tongue in the said George’s mouth, and the said George’s tongue in hers, and also with kisses, presents, and jewels; whereby he, despising the commands of God, and all human laws, 5 Nov. 27 Hen. VIII., violated and carnally knew the said Queen, his own sister, at Westminster; which he also did on divers other days before and after at the same place, sometimes by his own procurement and sometimes by the Queen’s.

Also the Queen, 3 Dec. 25 Hen. VIII., and divers days before and after, at Westminster, procured one Will. Bryerton, late of Westminster, gentleman of the privy chamber, to violate her, whereby he did so on 8 Dec. 25 Hen. VIII., at Hampton Court, in the parish of Lytel Hampton, and on several other days before and after, sometimes by his own procurement and sometimes by the Queen’s.

Also the Queen, 8 May 26 Hen. VIII., and at other times before and since, procured Sir Fras. Weston, of Westminster, gentleman of the privy chamber, &c., whereby he did so on the 20 May, &c. Also the Queen, 12 April 26 Hen. VIII., and divers days before and since, at Westminster, procured Mark Smeton, groom of the privy chamber, to violate her, whereby he did so at Westminster, 26 April 27 Hen. VIII.

Moreover, the said lord Rocheford, Norreys, Bryerton, Weston, and Smeton, being thus inflamed with carnal love of the Queen, and having become very jealous of each other, gave her secret gifts and pledges while carrying on this illicit intercourse; and the Queen, on her part, could not endure any of them to converse with any other woman, without showing great displeasure; and on the 27 Nov. 27 Hen. VIII., and other days before and after, at Westminster, she gave them great gifts to encourage them in their crimes. And further the said Queen and these other traitors, 31 Oct. 27 Hen. VIII., at Westminster, conspired the death and destruction of the King, the Queen often saying she would marry one of them as soon as the King died, and affirming that she would never love the King in her heart. And the King having a short time since become aware of the said abominable crimes and treasons against himself, took such inward displeasure and heaviness, especially from his said Queen’s malice and adultery, that certain harms and perils have befallen his royal body.

And thus the said Queen and the other traitors aforesaid have committed their treasons in contempt of the Crown, and of the issue and heirs of the said King and Queen.”

Sir John Dudley, a noble close to the King, wrote to Lady Lisle describing the situation on May 10^th saying:

“Is sure there is no need to write the news, for all the world knows them by this time. Today Mr. Norres, Mr. Weston, William a Brearton, Markes, and lord Rocheforde were indicted, and on Friday they will be arraigned at Westminster. The Queen herself will be condemned by Parliament. Wednesday, 10 May.”

it is apparent that Dudley, like most courtiers believed the Queen would be condemned with the men involved. Although, he does not seem to know yet that Rochford would also be tried by the Parliament on May 15th. He does not go into detail on the charges against Anne, but the list was lengthy.

The Queen was accused of:

*Entertaining malice against the King

*Hiring servants specifically to serve as lovers

*Seducing and committing treasonous adultery with Mark, Henry, William, Francis as well as committing incest with George

*Using her considerable wealth to entice men with gifts and money

*Plotting to kill the King

*Agreeing to marry Norris upon the King's death

*Never loving the King

*Causing extreme harm to the King

Anne's five "lovers" were indicted for their supposed parts in Anne's crimes, yet was there any real justice in this situation? I would argue no:

On May 10th, William Kingston, the Constable of the Tower was ordered to "...bring up the bodies of Sir Francis Weston, knt. Henry Noreys, esp. William Bryerton and Mark Smeton, gent. at Westminster, on Friday next after three weeks of Easter" In The Life and Death of Anne Boleyn, Eric Ives makes the point that this order was made before the Grand Jury ever met, meaning an indictment and guilty verdict was expected. Sadly, if the Jury had failed to indict they would have felt the wrath of not only Cromwell, but surely the King as well. There must have been immense pressure on these people, not to mention the fact that Giles Heron, the foreman, had a vendetta against Anne. His wife, daughter of Thomas More, and her family believed that Anne was personally responsible for the demise of their father. Interestingly, the indictment makes no mention of Henry Page or Thomas Wyatt, both of whom were imprisoned on suspicion of treason at the time.

Additionally, when dates of the events in question were impossible, downright lies the alleged offences were covered by “divers days before and since” and “several times before and after”, these open for interpretation phrases made is nearly impossible to deny the claims of the crown. Cromwell and his minions must have been very pleased with themselves, Anne's purported behavior was so scandalous, so shocking that the citizens indicting and judging her would want to do right by the King and destroy the woman who caused him so much emotional pain and anguish. The charges against her accused her of using her tongue to seduce her own brother and as having sexual appetites to carnal that she took countless lovers and was still insatiable. She was the devil incarnate, it said, a woman so completely enshrouded in evil that she would even plot the death of the King to whet her lust. Anne never stood a chance against the might of Cromwell and the King with their ability to manipulate English subjects to do their bidding. The indictment was one more step towards Cromwell ridding himself of one his biggest challengers for courtly power and a giant leap forwards in the King being able to marry Jane Seymour. It was apparent to all witnesses that both would get what they wanted.