Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Read of the Week


When I picked up Lacey Baldwin Smith’s book on Anne Boleyn, I was fully prepared for another analysis of her life which differed very little from any of the other books written about her. I expected it to follow the same time line and make the same arguments. I was pleasantly surprised; Smith instead treats his subject with a deep appreciation for historical and cultural context of the Tudor times and Anne’s life. I enjoyed the way he sought to understand the major players and characters from their own perspectives. He gave Henry VIII more room for thought and analysis than most other writers on the subject. The author really worked to present a book that is both balanced and insightful. He makes thoughtful remarks regarding the theories of other well know Anne historians including GW Bernard, Eric Ives and even amateur historian Alison Weir. He compares their research and suggests, very delicately, where they could improve and which of their arguments are sound. Interestingly, I found myself agreeing with him in the final chapter of the book where he cuts down the theories of many authors regarding the fall of Anne. It is a long held belief that Cromwell was ultimately responsible for Anne’s fall; this theory does not take into consideration the almost absolute power of Henry and the necessity of people involved in the trial to adhere to his wishes, or possibly pay with their lives. Smith is meticulous in detail and always is careful to neither demonize not beatify Anne. I appreciated his objective view, something not many Anne historians are capable of and certainly something I struggle with myself.

There were several things I did not like about the book, though in comparison they are relatively small. For example, on page 87 the author refers to Catherine of Aragon as “fat” and “sterile” I am still unsure whether he was trying to view the situation from Henry’s perspective (he was known to prefer slender women) or whether this is his own original thought. If it is his own, his reference of Catherine’ sterility is laughingly inaccurate. Catherine was pregnant at least seven times during the duration of her marriage to Henry, making her far from sterile. While it is true that she was beyond her years of reproductivity, it would have been more accurate to refer to her as post-menopausal or another less degrading term. My final complaint is a very personal one; I prefer footnotes to endnotes as used by the author. When there is a reference in writing that I find interesting I want to have the citation at my fingertips not be flipping back and forth between my current page and the end of the book to locate information.

This book glosses over a lot of details regarding Anne that he assumes a reader would already know. Therefore if you are unfamiliar with the story of Henry VIII and Anne or are new to the world of high level academic writing I recommend avoiding the book as you will not have done the research leg-work to understand the author’s insinuations and conclusions. Otherwise, pick it up. It makes a great addition to any Anne lover’s book collection.  

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Why Anne Boleyn?


I get asked this question pretty regularly as soon as people find out I spend a lot of my time reading about her and have devoted my education to researching her. My very first reaction is to ask “Why not Anne Boleyn?” She was a fascinating woman, a woman who was ahead of her times in terms of learning and thought, ideals and politics. Then I recall that most people do not know this version of Anne.

I have now prepared myself with the following LB Smith quote on Anne, “Anne Boleyn was the crucial catalyst for three of the most important events in modern [British] history: the break with Rome causing the English Reformation, the advent of the nation state and the birth of a daughter whose forty-three years on the throne stand as England’s most spectacular literary and political success story….”

For the historical outsider, this answer is satisfactory. Only those who choose history and research as their lifeblood will understand my true reasoning; Anne is my historical perfect storm. A woman whose actions and life so changed the landscape of an entire country, yet one we know so little about that even the year of her birth cannot be confirmed. Anne inspired such hatred, and such devotion, during her time that it is no surprise that she continues to fascinate myself and scores of other scholars. Anne is ethereal, more myth and hypothesis than established fact. Digging for her story is a never ending challenge as little primary source material about her exists and the ones that do are colored by pro-Catholic and pro-Katharine of Aragon leanings. One of the most extensive primary sources on Anne is the series of letters between Eustace Chapuys, imperial ambassador to England, and his master, Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor (nephew to Katharine). Chapuys sees fit not to use Anne’s name in this correspondence; referring to her only as the Concubine, the lady and in some cases worse nomenclature. We scholars and lovers of Anne have constant debates about how seriously we can take the claims of one of Katharine’s most ardent supporters. With the elimination of Chapuys’ letters we are left with almost no other contemporary, personal accounts of Anne’s life making the hunt for answers about her even more difficult.

We know from surviving budget accounts that Anne was generous with her money, both in support of the poor and in patronage of artists, writers and theologians. She favored men of the Reformation, whether as a means to an end, (reformation ultimately meant Henry’s divorce) or because she truly believed that a more liberal, personal relationship with God was needed has also been hotly debated. Her downfall, naturally dramatic and the subject of intense sensationalism, has become the stuff of legend. Anne had six fingers, she was a witch, she gave birth to a malformed child, and she had a sexual relationship with her brother. These mythologies have enmeshed themselves so completely with established facts about Anne that most of the general public have a distorted perception of her. There are the people who want to vilify Anne, who claim she was guilty as charged, such as historian GW Bernard, a fact any historian who has explored the evidence will refute. Then there are those that put her on a perhaps undeserved pedestal such as martyrologist John Foxe. These factions are miles apart with most historians not able or willing to work towards a middle ground that would be representative of both truth and fact.  Anne, for the first 20+ years of her life was rather unremarkable. She lived only to the age of 36 and died tragically, yet her story and the unanswered questions that accompany it, reach across a span of nearly 500 years to enthrall movie-goers, novelists and historians alike.

Anne, when examined, is fascinating. The search for her story is hard work and sometimes frustrating; which makes it all worthwhile when I come up with a conclusion about her life or discover a new source about her. And that my friends, is why Anne Boleyn.

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Read of the Week

This week I read a book I've been wanting to get my hands on for a while, The Fall of Anne Boleyn: A Countdown by Claire Ridgway. I am big admirer of Claire and her site theanneboleynfiles.com She writes really, really well, bringing together passion for Anne with hardened historical research. She digs deep into the people and cultural context of the times. I really appreciate the level of detail Claire brings to every article she writes. Her book is written on that same level of academic integrity and creative ingenuity, with details I've never read anywhere else. I especially appreciate how she dissects every character involved with Anne Boleyn's fall stating their relationship to her, their early history and life as well as how they fared after the Boleyn faction fell from power. I especially learned a lot about Sir Henry Norris and Francis Bryan. Ridgway makes thoughtful inquiries regarding Anne's actions, ecnouraging the reader to think deeply and draw their own conclusions about Anne's life and history. I really enjoyed this book, I encourage everyone to pick it up!

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

On This Day in Tudor History


On this day in Tudor history 1534 Queen Anne Boleyn spent her first full day in confinement. Confinement, in the historical sense, meant that a woman had retreated to her chamber for the remainder of her pregnancy. She would be attended only by her ladies in waiting and close female relatives; no men would be admitted other than the Queen’s priest who stood behind a screen to preach and hear confession. The amount of time spent in confinement ranged anywhere between four and eight weeks. Surprisingly, in Anne’s case, she retreated into her chamber just two weeks before daughter Princess Elizabeth was born. This could be because she calculated her dates incorrectly, easy to do in Tudor times when prenatal care was virtually non-existent, because she purposefully altered the time of conception or because Elizabeth was premature (unlikely as she would have been weak if born nearly a month early)

On August 26th the Queen had made a great ritual of the “taking to the chamber ceremony which took place at Greenwich palace. The pregnant queen attended a special mass at the Chapel Royal and then went with her ladies in tow, to the Queen’s chamber. Refreshments were served before the chamberlain prayed with the Queen and her maids for the safe delivery of a healthy baby prince. In Tudor times there was stringent restrictions on women after they entered the birthing chamber, as well as how the room should be set up.

According to the Royal Book, which dictated decorum (largely edited by Margaret Beaufort) the room must:

§  Be carpeted

§  Have its walls, ceiling and windows covered with arras, the tapestries should depict calming images

§  Have one window slightly uncovered to let in fresh air when necessary.

§  Be furnished with a large bed for the queen to recover in and a pallet at the foot of the bed which is where the queen would actually labor and give birth.

§  Have a font was required in likely case of a sickly child who would need immediate baptism

§  Have soft furnishings of dark crimson satin embroidered with the Queen’s respective arms

§  Have a cupboard specifically to hold the birthing equipment and swaddling bands

The room was kept dark and shut up against fresh air, it was thought by Tudor midwives that creating an atmosphere reminiscent of the womb would keep the baby from becoming sick as well as keep away evil spirits. Confinement was often a social time for the women involved. There would have been drinking, embroidery, gossip and much prayer. Despite the company and rest, I can only imagine Anne would have been hot and bored in the chamber where she was required to stay for a month after the Princess’ birth.

Friday, August 23, 2013

On This Day in Tudor History

August 23, 1485 marked the first day of the reign of the Tudor dynasty. The day before Richard III, the last York king, fell at Bosworth Field to the halbert blow of a Welsh commoner, ushering in the reign of Henry Tudor, father to the famous Henry VIII. The Tudors would rule over England for the next one hundred and eighteen years. The monarchs, Henry VII, Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth I, would change the social, religious and cultural landscape in enormous ways!

Henry VII
Unknown, ca 1501