The Lady in the Tower

I enjoyed reading your thoughts Claire. I’ve gotten the idea from Weir’s other books that she may be the biggest “Anne supporter.” Just seems like she has some things to say about her that are rather harsh. Also, in regards to the thought that their marriage was unhappy from the start, I kind of think that Henry expected Anne to change after marriage, and when she didn’t, he grew tired of her temper and her outspokenness. I also always thought there was more to Jane Seymour than we’ve been led to think. That she was quiet and obedient. I remember reading in another book that Jane spoke out about something in regards to a rebellion in 1537 and Henry told her to be quiet and remember what happened to her predecessor. Anybody else remember that?

Hi Claire!

Thanks for the update on the book, I was thinking of checking that out and this helps me decide to read it or not.

I’ve recently read Robin Maxwell’s 2 novels: Mademoiselle Boleyn and The Secret Diary of Anne Boleyn. Both were really interesting, but I really liked the first one. They’re not historically accurate, but I really liked them because I think she accuratelly portrays Anne’s personality and thoughts. She makes her very understandable, its really nice to read something about Anne that’s not attacking her constantly.

I suggest them, if you ever get some extra time.

I’d like to read that – I’m interested in basically everything Anne Boleyn so a new book is always like a new promise to me, because it’s interesting to see all these different views! Thanks for posting the review!
By the way that Renaissance necklace is beautiful!

Maggie R.. interesting, but 1507 is so illogical, how could a fairly unimportant nobleman’s daughter go abroad at just six? Yes Thomas Boleyn was fairly powerful and growing in influence at the time, and Gareth Russell does give the example that Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk’s daughter Anne Brandon went to the French Court at roughly the same age as Anne Boleyn, but what this fails to take into account is that Suffolk was the King’s favourite, his closest friend from his childhood, he was also extremely well born and thus was afforded privileges that the likes of Thomas Boleyn would not have been accorded. Yes, Anne may have been precocious and her father obviously recognised her talent at a very early age, but if Anne Boleyn had been born in the summer of 1501, she would have been only 11 or 12 anyway when she went to France in 1513; when a maid of honour had to be 13, this was considerably younger than most girls had to be. Furthermore, throughout the 1520s she was described as ‘young’, but let’s remember, had she been born in 1500-1, she would have been at least 15 years younger than Queen Katharine, so the contrast in ages was always something to be likely addressed.

We don’t know if the Nidd Hall portrait is a true likeness of Anne, but I think what should be considered is the ONLY contemporary likeness of Anne Boleyn – her face, on a medal, in 1534, inscriped with ‘The Moost Happi’. It does bear a similarity to the Nidd Hall portrait of Anne, and if Chapuys was biased and had a negative perspective in relation to the ‘Concubine’, as he referred to the Queen, it does not negate the point that Anne was middle-aged in the 1530s What should be considered is that several sixteenth and seventeenth century sources clearly state that Anne was either 20 when she returned home in 1521 or that she was born in at least 1500, if not possibly 1499. As Antonia Fraser – convincingly – tells us, only great, highborn heiresses were married in their teens or early twenties, it was not a matter of distinct urgency to marry at a young age – look at Jane Seymour, who was married finally at the age of 28. Elizabeth of York, Henry VIII’s own mother, was described by her husband as ‘young’ in 1502, when she was actually 36. Looking at the sheer evidence open to us, I think it is so much more likely that Anne Boleyn was certainly born in 1500-1.

I do enjoy Weirs writing but I am sorry to say that it is rather hard for me to believe that she is a huge “Anne supporter” regarding someomes comment to be able to describe Anne way she does. I have passionately been researching this woman for the last few years and just feel so much credit has bypassed. My mother is also huge on History though she does not hold the same passion as I do for Anne. In fact, she explained Anne to as this “bit@!” that as cold, calculating, ambitious, had her eye on the crown from the start, and that tried to poison Mary. I knew what author fan she was… Weir. So this image that my mother obtained was basically from Weir. Which really makes me angry. Now, granted she was more a sympathizer of Catherine it seems from the start but I just feel that authors like Weir know that a large amount of the population take their work at face value and should not have been so heavily judgemental and biased towards her. I’m not saying worship her or be biased to the opposite effect but take her at face,value for a woman that may have had both good qualities and bad.

For example, not much is ever mentioned about Anne donating more money than any of the other Queens to the poor and college. She even made herself and her ladies smocks and shirts for the poor to be distributed on their.

If you read all the primary sources (which I can admit I have not read all but have read a GREAT deal) you will clearly see her marriage was not declining from,the start and actually she seemed to,still hold much favor even weeks before her death!! This whole idea on this theory repeated OVER AND OVER that Henry tired of Anne because she did not change who she was when they married. That Henry expected her to behave differently as a wife. The expectation that Anne should have remained silent etc. I just don’t buy in to this theory one bit. Sure, Anne have Henry a run for his money but do you really think he wanted Anne to truly and heartfelt become suddenly docile, submissive and meek? I personally believe Henry loved every bit of Anne the way she was. Sure, they quarrled and bickered and sure he may have said angry words and vice versa (which may very well been the cause of her downfall but Henry didn’t want Anne to be a different woman. After Anne miscarried and she blamed him for her heart aching Henry comforted her and came running back. It just seems to me this couple were just passionate one another, both jealous, both outspoken, both stubborn and hard headed etc. For all we know, Jane could have been just something Henry was temporarily occupied with. There was no evidence whatsoever that it was ever anything serious . There are very few primary accounts of the relationship at all and are all written or spoken in regards of from within the circle of Anne’s enemies (chapyuis , cromwell, carew). And for all we know Henry could have been doing it delibertly (or in part) to arouse Anne and make her jealous. Do not men play this game even in today’s world? Regardless, there is no evidence of the theory that is so often repeated by everyone and historians alike that Henry tired of Anne and according to Warnicke tired as soon as he married her. Henry fought tooth and nail to proclaim to the world that Anne was his Queen, protected or tried to protect her reputation (or lest enforce it) , Proclomations and even made the entirety of England publicly and legally acknowledge Anne (and her heirs) as their rightful Queen regardless whether their was legality of not. Henry would not have taken the great lengths and troubles that he did ithroughout their entire marriage if he was “tired” of her from the start.

I personally believe that Henry did not plan or engineer her downfall. I believe her enemies contrived the plot against her and honestly had the tyrant Henry that was already super paranoid, jealous and IMPULSIVE actually believe that she may have commuted the adulterous affairs. I believe ultimately what caused the callousal disaster was the things Anne may or may not have actually said or were manipulated by her enemies to hAve said that got Anne in the deepest waters. For example, the comment about Henry’s virility that was supposedly said by Anne to her brother. The comment about “you look for dead men’s shoes” or Anne making fun of Henry’s ballads and dress. Jane Rochford reportedly said that Anne supposedly made a joke about whether Elisabeth was actually the kings because of his virility of Henry (i read this somewhere so have no idea the actual reference or the truth) . Anyhow, all these things and words were most likely manipulated and twisted by her enemies but nonetheless Anne most likely laahed out at times regarding Henry because she was upset, angry or jealous. Henry on the other hand was also a egotistically, jealous, “manly” and wanted to prove his masculinity , and most of all paranoid and IMPULSIVE. His closest ministers and privy men knew this and knew very well how to arouse Henry’s suspicion slowly through his own ears and through “rumor” thAt knowingly would get back to the king. Carew (according to,chapyuis which I believe to be authenticate) was coaching Jane on how to act, what to say and respond and most of all to speak badly of Anne and their marriage. That right there proves not only,does Carew and the if he privy men knew Henry pretty well but also that they knew that because of Henry’s paranoia it would prepare him slowly (even if he dismissed it all at the time as hearsay and rumor) in the end to the plot that was contrived on Anne. I may this but if you think of even today’s reationships they can start and finish (not exaxtl quite like this). And I don’t refer to murder although you could actually argue the same in that. What I mean is you have a passionate couple with a jealous man. You can easily see how rumors and things said over and over could lay dormant and then something happens and boom the person overreacts impulsively believing the accusations before the facts and truth is actually presented. For example, if Anne really did drop her hankerchif as (i believe) one of the chronicles suggest and Norris picked it up you could see where if the King was already paranoid and had enemies whispering slander consistently in his ear or consistent slandered rumors always circulating about someone how this actually could have been impulsively seen as “oh maybe she is having an affair” and quickly reacted without much thinking… Cromwell began The investigation and took Smeaton to his house in Stepney and “questioned” him obtaining a confession. Afterwards, Henry took Norris himself from May Day. Did Henry think then was it possible that Anne was in fact guilty. The whole affair with Annes downfall was moved very FAST. For one thing, cromwell knew he needed to have it done quickly before Henry could change his mind, think things through and clear his clouded judgement. The “confession” with smeaton would only have strengthened his conviction of paranoia, jealousy and suspicians. His tearful decclaration to Henry Fitzroy on May 2nd that he and his sister owed God a great debt for having escaped death at the hand of that cursed and poisoning wh*re” reveals the strength of the revulsion he began to feel for her, just as the subsequent assertion that she had been unfaithful to him with one hundred men suggests the extremes to which his anger and self-pity would take him. No crime was unthinkable in a woman who could betray him. It was this personal sense of injury and dishonour that drove Henry to root out the whole story and pursue the offenders to the death. Henry then had to prove his masculinity to his realm (and mostly himself) by “banqueting with the ladies” on his barge “sometimes past midnight and returning by the river”. Anyhow, despite my “own” “theory” and thoughts there is no evidence whatsoever that Henry “tired of Anne at the beginning of during his marriage and even at the beginning of 1536 their are only Chapyuis statements regarding to the fact surrounding it. And we all know is hopeful and wishful captives. Anyhow, there is also be evidence to suggest that What Henry wished for in a “lover” he did not in a wife. None. I could hardly see Henry being happy in a relationship or marriage that did not involve some form of rebuke to him. In my opinion, he loved every bit of the feisty Anne whether he got angry at times or not with her.

The other often repeated and apparent Weirs opinion of the fact that Anne basically “plotted” her tactic of witholding sexual intimacy with Henry so that he would want to marry her is a load of cram. None of us know what Anne’s thought even were when the attention of the King turned to her. Nor is there any evidence suggesting even that it was a tactic even used. None of us actually think of her just simply RESPECTING herself and she was going to be like that whether he was a king or not. And just because Anne was at the French court does not mean she did not mean she remained unchaste and what evidence is there that Henry ever described his sexual experience with her??? None. Ridiulous “opinions”. Actually, we don’t even honestly know for certain how old Anne actually was when she died much less the French court. She could have been but a child or barely a teen. I truly believe she was born later around 1507 but won’t go into detail of that now.

The matter with many historians is they often leave off information tonsuite their theories, beliefs and purpose and what they want is to believe. For example, here Weir goes on to discredit Chapyuis but then basically takes his word for the likelihood that Anne attempted to poison Mary. That and what the king said but nothing of it was really regarded at the trial. She also neglects to mention Lady Shelton OWN frustration with Mary not necessarily anything that Anne ordered. Lady Shelton was frustrated and aggravated with Mary because of his she was acting whether Anne ordered any kind of I’ll treatment or not.

I do completely agree with the fact that Jane wasn’t so much this meek and sweet woman she portrayed herself to be. And regardless of the comment that was made to Jane when she tried to speak for the rebels does not mean that Henry wanted an unopiniated woman but could be much that the opinion was completely against what he felt and what he wanted but also the fact that maybe he held little respect for her to begin with. Maybe he realized that Jane wasnt this chaste and innocent woman she had portrayed herself to be later on. We will never know what he thought as he only said and though aloud what he wanted others to believe.