What about the allegation by the writer of The Other Boleyn Girl, Philippa Gregory, that Anne Boleyn was definitely guilty of at least one murder?
Rating: +0
I haven't read TOBG girl for a long time so I can't remember the details but I know that Philippa Gregory portrayed Anne as a woman guilty of murder and incest. What we have to remember is that although Philippa Gregory does do historical research she is a fiction writer and not an academic historian. She embellishes stories. She has also admitted to loathing Anne Boleyn and to paint Mary Boleyn as a virtuous angel and Anne as some corrupt, ambitious woman who will let nothing stand in her way, is completely incorrect. I know that Gregory based many of her theories on Retha Warnicke's biography of Anne which is an interesting read, but I don't think that even Warnicke believes that Anne was a murderer.
There is no evidence at all that Anne murdered anyone or that she committed incest or adultery. I believe, like Eric Ives and many historians, that Anne Boleyn was innocent of all charges against her (which did not even include murder) and was framed. I'm sure that Anne would have been charged with murder too if anyone thought that she had committed one or that they could frame her with that too.
Eustace Chapuys, the Imperial Ambassador, reported that Catherine of Aragon's heart was black when she was opened up after her death in January 1536 and it was rumoured that she may have been poisoned. Of course, this report has led to Anne's name being muddied and her being accused of murdering Catherine, but I don't think it really was in Anne's interests to get rid of Catherine. It may have been a relief to her when Catherine died but some say that Catherine's death may have been a catalyst of Anne's fall. Henry could get rid of his wife and would not be forced to return to his previous wife.
The poisoning accusation is a very wild accusation and there is no basis for it whatsoever. It is now thought that Catherine died of heart disease or cancer and that this accounts for the appearance of her heart. Does Gregory also accuse Anne of trying to poison Bishop Fisher in TOBG? I can't remember, but this is also a complete fabrication.
I have nothing against Philippa Gregory - she writes great fiction, but that's all it is, fiction, and I do not agree with many of the theories that she comes up with. I do not believe that Anne was the vindictive, conniving woman that Gregory makes her out to be.
Thanks for responding. In the novel itself, Anne murders Fisher’s accomplices. However, it is in the author’s notes in the afterward — in which she defends herself against certain criticisms of the novel, including the criticism of her implication in the novel that the incest charge was true — that she says Anne committed at least one murder. It is noteworthy that she doesn’t say what murder she is convinced Anne committed, which greatly undermines her position. However, I thought perhaps someone might know what she was talking about, maybe she mentioned in in another interview. I haven’t read a quote from her that she loathes Anne Boleyn; it would be interesting to see that. I think I’m going to give away my copy of TOBG; I don’t think Anne Boleyn was a saint, but I’m not a supporter of tacit attempts to rationalize the murder of wives by husbands — even when those wives aren’t the nicest people in the world, there is no excuse for murder.
[Reply]
Does that include the fact in The Boleyn Inheritence that Anne of Cleves ‘inherited’ that someone was falsley blaming her for treason?
[Reply]
Thought I’d share….I’m reading Alison Weir’s incredible biography of Henry VIII. One point addresses poisoning in England — it just wasn’t done. While the rest of Europe’s royals were offing each other with some drops in the chalice, it wasn’t the British style. One would think Anne would have offed Catherine that way; it sure would have made her life easier earlier on. Maybe poisoning was too underhanded? They’d prefer a good fight?! That’s all I can think of. Nobody in Henry’s court was ever even food poisoned, let alone murdered … that way.
Without Anne, there’d be no Elizabeth. She passed on her smarts, genius, guile to her daughter! I’d prefer her to any “saint” like the stomach-turning Mary (who when she insisted she was pregnant, it turned out to be a stomach tumor!) Nobody would touch that horrid woman!
[Reply]
The line that Anne murdered, is grossly and incideously preposterous – lacking a better description. When people continue to .. ‘mythisize’ … about someone of Anne’s stature in history – society, unforgivable injustices are being done that carry over into eventual folklore and subsequently a subdued interest in her real being. Such tragic presentations of myth and sensationalism are clealry unfortunate, which over time, makes an already mysterious and honourable figure, even more mysterious and difficult to understand. What hope have we, to move forward with Anne’s persona, if this decrepid nonsence of lies and literary frolicking remain in the anals of her legacy? Anne was an exceptional woman, in my take: intelligent, loving, motherly, charitable, and knew her place in life and the court into which she was cajoled. But she fell through the cracks, as many have and will continue to do and no matter what she would have done, she was predestined to fall, because of her ‘royally’ greedy, and insane circumstance. She was hated by Wolsey, tossed to the dirt by an decrepid psychopath, lied about, physically compared to a witch – why wouldn’t she get angry? Why wouldn’t she scream and shout? And yes, after being accused of everything under the sun, why not include murder, too? … R.I.P. Anne … at least try … please …
[Reply]