Jonathan Rhys Meyers said something to the effect that Henry no longer wanted a partner in crime (like Anne) but a wife to whom he could come home after a long day of torture and beheadings and be coddled by. 

Henry truly seems to have been looking for his mother, and historians have found elements of her personality in all of the wives.  I think he vacillated though about actual 'mothering' traits.  Katherine of Aragon mothered him, but her replacement Anne Boleyn didn't take any of his shit.  Then it swung the other way and he got the maternal Jane Seymour, followed by the decidedly un-motherly Katherine Howard (I'm not counting Anne of Cleves here because she wasn't really his choice).  That's just my interpretation, anyway.

I guess it's good on Henry that he didn't marry for beauty with Jane, but he did supposedly make some comments about how he shouldn't have rushed into marriage because there were more beautiful women available.  Hopefully Jane didn't have to hear such comments. 

She really is quite enigmatic.  It bothers me though that she has such a saintly reputation when she has to have been at least as conniving as Anne B unless she was a total moron and was duped into the queenship (yeah, right.).  I think Henry didn't give her much thought at first, honestly.  There was a faction pushing her forward and Henry wanted peace at court after the turbulent years of the Great Matter so he just gave them what they wanted and married Jane.  He knew she would be a doormat, so he could still sleep with the beautiful women at court, effectively having his cake and eating it too.  It was only after she accomplished her one mission in life and then passed on that she became enshrined in Henry's memory.  He seemed to have been rather annoyed with her while she lived but he mourned her for years after she died.

And never forget the influence of the two Seymour boys in all this – Thomas and Edward. They were very ambitious, and would have advocated their sister for the prime job in the land with great skill as soon as an opportunity presented itself. Henry always seems to have been so weak and gullible when it came to those who had his ear. They all knew how to play upon him – like as Hamlet complains to those who tried to manipulate him – like a musician upon a pipe. Such a powerful man – and yet he often danced to the tune of others.

I think the difference between Jane and Anne is that Anne genuinely believed that Henry's marriage to Catherine was in doubt. Catherine had already reached the menopause and, when you look at the example set by Anne of Brittany in France, might reasonably be expected to retire to a convent (although Salic law didn't apply in England). Had Catherine complied with Henry's wishes, she would have been allowed to keep her status as Dowager Princess of Wales.

In 1536 the situation was completely different. Anne had suffered miscarriages but was still capable of bearing children (unless she was Rhesus negative, which we'll never know. I'm no scientist but I wouldn't have thought the probability was very high as both her mother and sister had more than one living child). Having read Ives, Starkey and Weir it seems likely that it was Anne's opposition to sending the money from the dissolution of the monasteries to the king's coffers rather than putting it to charitable use that caused Cromwell to move against her. Henry was persuaded and then convinced himself of her guilt. But considering how important the sacrament was to the 16th century mind, I think Anne's declaration of innocence – publicly made (clever lady) – speaks the truth.

Therefore, Anne may have wished all Spaniards at the bottom of the sea when waiting for her crown but Jane calmly stepped over Anne's corpse on the way to hers. That's a lady who is either terrified, ruthlessly ambitious, completely in thrall to her advisors or hates Anne. Or it could be a combination of all four.

Where Jane does beat Anne is that, in Fraser's observation, she is inherently tactful. Take her choice of a panther as a heraldic symbol, it meant only small changes to rework Anne's leopard. Equally her badge of the phoenix enables her to have a bird, as her father did, but one with a different meaning to the proud peacock.

I hadn't thought of Henry having mother issues – I'd thought of him as wanting a wife who would be a lover, companion, someone who could be a queenly queen and not make scenes, and mother to his son. In other words, he was trying to have it all, which in the 16th century (not to mention the 17th and 18th centuries) was considered astonishing.

Louise

I agree with Lady: I think Jane Seymour was wily and power-hungry, under a meek, sweet facade. Her entire family was, after all, very ambitious: how could she, growing up as a Seymour, not be? Ignoring Elizabeth and only favoring Mary shows, in my opinion, that she only favored Mary because it was politically savvy, not because she was kind. I think she lured Henry away from Anne to become Queen. Interesting point, The Other Boleyn Boy, on 'justice.' My thought on that is, while what Anne did was wrong, Jane doing the same did not make it right. In fact, what Jane did was worse: she pretended to be sweet and demure, while at least Anne showed the world her true face! Plus, Anne did a lot of good as well as booting Catherine: she helped reform religion-wise and was kind and generous to the poor, not for her own gains like Jane.

I think the fact that Jane stuck up for Mary does her great credit, especially when it was growing ever more obvious that Anne's fall was not going to automatically restore Marys rights like her supporters thought it would.  To tackle Henry over his eldest daughters' status in mid-1536 you had to have some guts!  I know Jane didn't make so much of a fuss over Elizabeth, but then I think Elizabeth was more protected by her age and infant status.  Not much point in trying to get a three-year old to sign a document of submission!

Perhaps Jane was farsighted enough to know that good relations between father and eldest daughter would do both them and the country as a whole much good

Jane was totally ambitious, I don't think there was anyone at the Tudor court who wasn't!  I like what you said about Anne Boleynfan, in that Anne had strength of character right from the beginning, like she was refusing to play the meek and mild maiden card as opposed to Jane, I think, who played up that image.  Part of Anne's tragedy is that she set a very dangerous precedent, demonstrating that an English born girl of relatively humble aristocratic birth could reach the absolute pinnacle of becoming Queen as opposed to before when Kings were expected to marry foreign princesses to cement alliances.  It was a tactic that served both Anne and Jane well, though ironically in the end both were undone by their biology in their own ways.  

If Jane had lived who knows what sort of Queen she would have become?  More would have been written about her and we would perhaps have a far better understanding of her character. 

trouble is, that is then to remove all responsibility from Anne, especially – then she becomes a 'nothing' who just did want men wanted, so you can't then go and say, oh she was so this and that, because when you need an excuse for her frankly shocking attitude toward Mary and Catherine, oh well it was all Henry's fault really!! you can't have it both ways

Jane may not have been as “book-smart” as Anne but she did have enough “court-smart” to realize that the best way to successfully get Henry was to potray herself as the complete opposite of Anne, even down to the motto she adapted for herself.

That being said, I do wonder if there was a moment, however small, during Anne's trial and execution, if she felt any sense of fear or misgivings. She would have been aware of the tremendous pressure she was under to give Henry a living son and she woud have seen for herself the consequences of having Henry be displeased with his wife. I also wonder how she felt during her pregancy and if she worried about what could/would happen if she had a living daughter or a stillborn.

I see what you're saying, Sharon, but I think that with such an ambitious family, how could she not be ambitious at all? She didn't have to become Henry's Queen, not really; she could have become his mistress. Or she could have been loyal to Anne and soften Henry in regard to Anne, like Anne's cousin Madge Shelton did.