Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log Insp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_Feed Topic RSSsp_TopicIcon
Some recent works of interest
February 23, 2011
9:46 am
Avatar
Nasim
UK
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 71
Member Since:
February 3, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I have been going through PhDs completed in recent years on Tudor history – partly in an attempt to ensure that my proposed topic has not already been looked at! – and I came across one discussing Anne Boleyn. It is,

 

Candice Murray, 'Dynasty: The Legacy of Tudor Scandal in Elizabethan Court Culture', PhD thesis., (State University of New York at Albany, 2008). An abstract is available on ProQuest.

 

The thesis explores not only Anne's time as queen but mainly her posthumous reputation and it's impact on her daughter and her reign. According to the synopsis:

 

'The study will focus on the Tudor crown as both source and subject of sexual scandal. Beginning with Henry VII, the dynasty was inherently compromised by its illegitimate Beaufort lineage. In 1527, his son's annulment politicized royal sexuality when the Great Divorce became public gossip. Amidst emergent Protestant Reformation tensions, the court of public opinion found Henry, and particularly, Anne Boleyn, guilty of immoral concupiscence, and judged their sexual scandal responsible for England's uncertain future. When Henry and Anne's daughter ascended the throne in 1558, their scandal, and its specter of illegitimacy, cast a shadow over every facet of Elizabeth Tudor's reign, while her personal character became a contentious subject for public debate between Protestant and Catholic.'

 

The final chapters:

 


'examine Elizabeth's response to these dynastic scandals as the


daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. Elizabeth's ambiguous lineage posed a

delicate and politically dangerous issue for the safety of the state when she became queen

in 1558. As if her gender and single state was not unsettling enough, her patent bastardy

created a blatant political challenge to the Catholic powers of Europe while also

undermining her dynastic claim within England. Elizabeth's right to the crown derived

from her father's last magnanimous will, which restored her to the Tudor succession, but

failed to overturn his previous legislation denouncing the Boleyn marriage. What slight

pretense to dynastic legitimacy Elizabeth held rested in Archbishop Thomas Cranmer's

pronouncement on the marriage of Anne Boleyn to Henry Tudor as legal and true

according to the Church of England, a verdict Cranmer later revoked in May of 1536

when the king distanced himself from the scandal of his second marriage. Anne's

marriage bequeathed to her daughter Elizabeth's legitimate Protestant crown, but Anne's

disgrace and execution also revoked that claim. While Elizabeth recognized the political

need for discretion regarding the volatile subject of her mother, particularly when the

debate threatened to impugn her own right to the throne, a variety of sources show that

Elizabeth favored her maternal legacy, often at the expense of her father's line. Elizabeth

sponsored her mother's kin, and her mother's supporters. The literature she sanctioned

painted a sympathetic portrait of Queen Anne as Protestant heroine and martyr. Elizabeth

frequently utilized Boleyn imagery in her art and in her personal effects, which her court,

following her lead, incorporated into their own devices.'

 

Interestingly, the subject of Elizabeth's relationship with her maternal relations during her reign is explored in another recent thesis:

 

Kristin Bundesen, 'No other faction but my own: dynastic politics and Elizabeth I's Carey cousins', PhD thesis., (University of Nottingham, 2008).

 

Bundesen argued that 'as the queen's own, safely non-royal family Elizabeth could deploy the Careys in a wide variety of roles and be assured that their successes would not seriously challenge her authority. She provided them with sufficient support that other court families could not escape the fact that the Careys were the most favoured 'tribe of Dan', yet she never provided them with sufficient  wealth and power that they could destabilise her authority.' (p. 201).

 

Bundesen thinks it likely that both Katherine and Henry Carey were fathered by Henry VIII. She mentions this in several places including in this discussion on the wardship of Henry Carey:

 


'When William Carey died in 1528, the wardship of two-year-old Henry Carey was granted to his aunt, Anne Boleyn. It would be another four years before his mother married William Stafford who was considered a poor match for the sister of the queen, so there was no need to rescue immediately Henry from a less exalted household. This opens the question of why Henry became his aunt's ward. At the time, he was not yet an heir to the Boleyn estate, so control of his wardship did not include control over a significant source of revenue, although it remains possible that control his eventual marriage would have been something that Anne and her family would have wanted to exert. Certainly, if the king were his father, his marriage would have been politically important. If the underlying Boleyn dynastic ambition dictated damping down any notion that Henry was part-Tudor, then Anne would have wanted to make sure that his spouse was carefully selected to avoid any future challenges to her own, yet to be born, children. There is no record of the wardship of his sister Katherine, who would have been about four years old at the time, so perhaps the siblings were separated at this stage.' (p.82).


 


The Careys were referred to as the 'tribe of Dan', and Bundesen argeus that this may have been another reference to their unrecognised status as children of a King (p. 75). 

 


 

So some interesting new research. May it continue!

 

"Much as her form seduc'd the sight,
Her eyes could ev'n more surely woo;"

February 23, 2011
6:34 pm
Avatar
Bella44
New Zealand
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 933
Member Since:
January 9, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Interesting indeed!  

Particularly in regards to Elizabeth and her Boleyn cousins, who I'm in two minds about regarding their paternity.  And I always love to see Elizabeth honouring Anne and her legacy. Thanks for putting these snippets up.

February 24, 2011
10:56 am
Avatar
Claire
Admin
Forum Posts: 958
Member Since:
February 16, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Oooh, exciting! I love it when you unearth new research, it's such a thrill!

Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn

February 24, 2011
11:50 am
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Very interesting and thank you for taking the time to post it for us.

February 25, 2011
7:29 am
Avatar
Nasim
UK
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 71
Member Since:
February 3, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Thank you all!

 

Don’t know whether this has previously been mentioned but back in 2009 there was the publication of a volume on early modern quenship –  Liz Oakley-Brown and Louise Wilkinson (eds.), The Rituals and Rhetoric of Queenship: Medieval to Early Modern – that contained two articles on Anne Boleyn:

 

Nadia Bishai, '‘Which thing had not before been seen’: the rituals and rhetoric of the execution of Anne Boleyn, England’s first criminal queen'.

 

Paula de Pando, 'Unqueening the queen: the Spanish image of Anne Boleyn'.

 

For a review on the articles:

http://www.history.ac.uk/revie…..review/940

"Much as her form seduc'd the sight,
Her eyes could ev'n more surely woo;"

Forum Timezone: Europe/London
Most Users Ever Online: 214
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 1
Top Posters:
Anyanka: 2333
Boleyn: 2285
Sharon: 2114
Bella44: 933
DuchessofBrittany: 846
Mya Elise: 781
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1
Members: 425803
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 13
Topics: 1679
Posts: 22775
Newest Members:
Administrators: Claire: 958