Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
1:59 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
Jane Boleyn is enigma simple as. Yes I agree she served 5 queens, which is why I mentioned about Jane being an a sort of unoffical governess or chaparone during Henry’s courtship of K.H even though officially she was one of AOC lady’s in waiting and naturally once the divorce was all done and dusted it would have been only natural that she would have been K.H’s lady in waiting.. Jane would perhaps have been one of ther most senior lady’s in waiting as I said she would be well versed and educated in court ettiquette. She was as Louise quite rightly says a courtier. I agree that she was never employed in the Duchesses household. Henry despite his problems did insist on the proper manner for courtship so when ever he went to see K.H at her Grandmother’s household Jane would have been there for forms sake.
One has to ask though where did the incest alleigation against Anne and George come from? I’m guessing in was an invention of Cromwell to blacken Anne’s name, and Jane was convienantly blamed for the allegation. Which makes Jane’s death all the more tragic, however why would Jane say on the scaffold that she deserved death due to her lies about Anne and George? Again is it possible that whoever told Henry what was said etc on the scaffold this was invented to upset Henry all the more.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
2:40 pm
December 5, 2009
Offline
Hi Boleyn,
Catherine Howard with also lady-in-waiting to Anne of Cleves. It was at court that Henry met and courted her, not at the Duchesses household.
Regarding the incest allegation, Jane’s name was never referred to at the time of the trials save for saying that Anne had told her of Henry’s sexual problems. The suggestion that she had something to do with the incest allegation came much later. There was, so Chapuys says, no direct evidence of incest. He says George was convicted merely on a presumption because he and Anne had spent a long time alone together on one occasion. He makes no reference to Jane and neither did anyone else at the time.
On the scaffold Jane did not say she deserved death for telling lies about Anne and George. That supposed speech is a myth propagated in fiction and by Weir.
4:58 pm
February 24, 2010
Offline
Jane’s reputation did not begin to suffer until after she was dead.
It is believed that Elizabeth, Lady Worcester gave the most damaging testimony, but exactly what she said is not known. She is the sister of Anthony Browne. The siblings had an argument about Elizabeth’s cavorting. She told her brother she did no worse than the Queen. Browne reported this conversation.
As far as I can tell, there were at least four women who supposedly gave testimony against Anne. One had been dead for two years, Bridget, Lady Wingfiled. (?) Anne Cobham, Lady Worcester. Jane. Possibly Margery Horsman. Who knows what any of them told Cromwell. Being dead, Bridget couldn’t have said anything. We know Cromwell twisted what he was told to make his case as solid as possible. None of these women appeared at the trial to testify.
On the scaffold, Jane was quite dignified. She said the words she was obliged to say. She was a sinner. She loved the king. She was judged by the law guilty. She did not make the statement that has been attributed to her by writers that she deserved to die for what she did to Anne and George.
After her death she was accused of being a bawd, a woman of vice, vile and viscious, etc. Before and after George’s death Jane was respected at court. By supporting KH, Jane lost her good reputation along with her head.
10:54 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Jane was one of the ladies who were privy to AOC’c remarks about not being pregnant since” the king kissed her morning and night she could be no virgin” (Fox Jane Boleyn p252).
How much was Anne being totally ignorant or her telling her ladies Henry was totally incapable of “getting it up” , is up to the reader? Personally I don’t think that royal or noble women were totally ignorant about s3x, especially those who were shipped off like parcels across Europe for advanteous marriages.
eta Jane was also of the ladies who witnessed and signed AOC’s letters of consent to the divorce. ( Fox JB p 254).
It's always bunnies.
1:10 am
October 28, 2011
Offline
Ha. I’ve always liked to think Anne was being slightly sarcastic when she said that, but that’s just what I like to think. Her Mother was still alive when she was sent to England, so I am quite sure she would have told her what to expect on her wedding night.
The fact is I have yet to read a book which doesn’t have Jane playing the villain, even in books by “better” authors. I suspect the decision is often made because that’s what readers will identify with. Unless they’ve worked Lady Worcester into the story earlier and made her a reasonable secondary character it’s going to be difficult to get it across a a betrayal that will resonate with the reader. Not that it’s entirely necessary to have one of Anne’s ladies betray her, there are other ways it could be done.
But isn’t it easier just to use history’s scapegoat? *sigh*
1:39 am
April 9, 2011
Offline
I’m with you Olga on Anne being sarcastic. For her to accept a divorce and all the conditions I think that shows a lady who knew the way the world worked. I think she is smarter than history has presented her to be. And she knew she couldn’t say the king was impotent cause look where that got people, so she used her words cleverly to get the point across and for someone to interpret them otherwise would paint the interpreter into a bad light and not Anne.
4:42 am
November 18, 2010
Offline
I’m soo glad that some of us think that way…
Anne appears to be first and foremost a pragmatistic, she was able to take a personally unpleasant and slanderous situation and turn it into a personal win. She walked away with money, land and her head. Sure..she may not have been allowed to re-marry but she seemed to be happy enough to remain single even after Henry died.
It's always bunnies.
10:08 am
October 28, 2011
Offline
So far I have only read one fiction book on Anne of Cleves, that was Boleyn Inheritance, and I adored her character in that. Honestly I think she is one of my favourite wives, I just love her. There is just no way I can believe she was naive, I think she was shrewd, and she seemed to be a kind-hearted and gracious lady.
I’ve got the Margaret Campbell Barnes book on her too, I must read that.
2:46 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Anyanka said
I’m soo glad that some of us think that way…
Anne appears to be first and foremost a pragmatistic, she was able to take a personally unpleasant and slanderous situation and turn it into a personal win. She walked away with money, land and her head. Sure..she may not have been allowed to re-marry but she seemed to be happy enough to remain single even after Henry died.
Oops! She was allowed to re-marry according to some-one called Claire (http://www.theanneboleynfiles……ne-cleves/)
On the 9th July 1540, just over six months after their wedding, it was declared that the marriage of King Henry VIII and Anne of Cleves was null and void, and that both parties were free to marry again
It's always bunnies.
4:41 pm
December 5, 2009
Offline
We all agree that George and Jane Boleyn take a dreadful bashing in fiction, and some non-fiction, but what about poor old Thomas Boleyn, the evil pimp? He was almost a pantomine villian in The Tudors. Whenever he entered a room I half expected someone to shout, ‘he’s behind you’! I’ve never seen or read a balanced account of his life. I think David Loades comes the closest in his Boleyn book, but in fiction Thomas tends to either be a weak fool or the Devil incarnate.
As for Elizabeth Boleyn I sometimes wonder whether she actually existed. Were the Boleyn children really born of woman, or were they all actually picked from under a blackberry bush!
7:16 pm
February 24, 2010
Offline
Anne of Cleves was no dummy. I love her. I’m pretty sure she knew what was supposed to happen in the bedroom. I think she was hiding a smile as she told Jane they made love. Henry kissed her every night and when he left he kissed her. “Good night sweetheart.” That always cracked me up. I’ve often wondered if Anne and Henry didn’t concoct the story so they both could be free. How would she be able to marry again if the reason for the divorce was a precontract with the Duke of Lorraine? Doesn’t that put a damper on any future marriage for her?
1:25 am
October 28, 2011
Offline
Yep, Henry stuffed her up there. She knew what would happen if she signed, so obviously independent wealth was more attractive than marriage to her. I can’t say I blame her really. What advantages were there for women back then? Realistically you had to pay someone to marry you which then allowed them license to get control of all your money and assets, beat you if you irritated them, with every possibility you’d die horribly and painfully in childbirth.
I’d be taking the palaces.
Louise, you’re right, poor old Thomas. I read a spoof here somewhere where he came in and he was either wearing a necklace or a cloak that said “pimp daddy”, I nearly wet myself when I read that. Pantomime villain is a good word for it. The only time I have seen Elizabeth Boleyn was in TOBG movie, I don’t even know if she’s in the book. I loved a line she had in that movie where she’s screaming at Thomas about her children. But then you really have to give Kristin Scott Thomas some lines don’t you?
3:38 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
In OTBG Jane Parker was selfish, mean, and cared for nothing but gossip but then in The Boleyn Inheritance Phillpa kinda made her seem like someone you would have sympathy for, someone who was just as controlled as anyone else. It’s like she wrote two different sides of Jane, the one everyone as believed to be her and the one where she was forced to give evidence against Anne & George. It’s confusing.
I didn’t like TOBG’s Anne Boleyn, she was just such a …. b*tch and so selfish. Of course I was sympathetic when she was executed and seeing how her father and uncle controlled the three Boleyns. That’s how PG wants people to see Anne, and I don’t belive it for a second.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
3:38 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
In OTBG Jane Parker was selfish, mean, and cared for nothing but gossip but then in The Boleyn Inheritance Phillpa kinda made her seem like someone you would have sympathy for, someone who was just as controlled as anyone else. It’s like she wrote two different sides of Jane, the one everyone as believed to be her and the one where she was forced to give evidence against Anne & George. It’s confusing.
I didn’t like TOBG’s Anne Boleyn, she was just such a …. b*tch and so selfish. Of course I was sympathetic when she was executed and seeing how her father and uncle controlled the three Boleyns. That’s how PG wants people to see Anne, and I don’t belive it for a second.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
12:22 pm
October 28, 2011
Offline
Norfolk seems to cop it a lot too. I don’t think Gregory’s portrayals of Norfolk using his nieces to advance himself is much different than anything I’ve read in fiction. But I haven’t read any non-fiction on him. And then while I don’t know much about him the things I do know don’t make me feel favourable towards him.
12:32 pm
December 5, 2009
Offline
I’ve read David Head’s biography of Norfolk and it’s not terribly complimentary. He describes him as a man who appeared not to loved by anyone. I don’t accept he had any influence over Thomas Boleyn in the alleged use of Thomas’s daughter’s, but I don’t think the Boleyns, particularly Anne and George, trusted him very much. George went to enormous pains to try and prevent Norfolk from holding lengthy conversations with Chapuys.
3:43 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
Thanks Louise.
I completely forgot for a second that K.H was a maid in waiting to AOC as well.. Guess you will have to put it down to having one of my Time Warp moments.. I.e My Brain taking a jump to the left…
Jane Boleyn would have of course got freindly with K.H during her time as maid in waiting with AOC, so it kind of explains what I was trying to say about Jane Boleyn being a sort of unofficial chaparone for K.H during Henry’s courtship of her…
Again it makes sence about Jane’s name being blackened after her death. I don’t believe she said anything against Anne or George. Why would she?
How would of it helped her? I would imagine her scaffold speech would have been along the same lines as everyone else’s. Pray for her soul and to take heed of what happens if you transgress the Law and upset the King.
We know so little of the real Jane. Did she like dancing? Who were her freinds? Her likes and dislikes? Did she mourn for George? Did she have a relationship with Mary, Elizabeth and little Edward?
I think Jane has been much maligned by history. I certainly feel that there is much more to her than just what we have been given to believe.
She must have had something about her to have actually served with 5 Queens, although this wasn’t uncommon in those times. It was considered perfectly normal for a maid in waiting to transfer to the next Queen’s household.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
3:58 pm
December 5, 2009
Offline
You’re right, Boleyn. We know hardly anything about what Jane was like as a person. She seemed to have had a good relationship with Jane Seymour because she was prominant at the funeral. She also had a good relationship with the Princess Mary. Mary’s privy purse expenses show that she was very generous to Jane, and gave her many expensive gifts including rich cloth for dresses.
10:07 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Whether or not she liked dancing, she was considered pretty enough and graceful enough to be part of Le Chateau Vert pagent in 1522. She also was important enough to go to The Field of Cloth of Gold in 1520.
It's always bunnies.
9:54 pm
January 3, 2012
Offline
Why was K.H put under attainder? Why was she not allowed to offer any form of explaination for her light behaviour when she was living in the Duchess’s household?
It was as if Henry was frightened by what she might of said?
I don’t believe for one minute that she meant any malice or hurt towards Henry when she foolishly employed Derham in her household. I rather think she knew that he was the best man for the job, as her Private Secretary, as he would have been trained to the ways the Duchess’s household was run and therefore know how K.H would want her household run.
In much the same way as Parry was retained as Elizabeth book keeper when she became Queen.
It was probably also a kindness on K.H’s part to employ Derham.
The Duchess would have had her own Private Secretary so there wouldn’t have been a need for her to have Derham in her household, finding a job as a Private Secretary in any household would have been difficult (but not impossible) and any job he did find would be in a very minor nobel’s house, such as Sir and Lady Chatham.
This is purely an opinion however and not to be taken as sancrasanct.
Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod
