SPEAKING THE SILENCES: WRITING, ADVOCACY AND ENABLING VOICE –An extract from Wendy’s paper for the refereed proceedings of the 16th annual AAWP conference, Ethical Imaginations: Writing World.

The full paper can be found here:

Biographical note:

Dear Heart, How Like You This?

Wendy J. Dunn is obsessed with Tudor History. Her first published novel, the award-winning Dear Heart, How Like You This? is described as ‘one of the best novels ever written about Anne Boleyn’s life’. After completing her Masters in Writing at Swinburne University in 2009, Wendy took up a position as a sessional tutor in the same course and became a PhD Candidate.  Her own writing journey continues.

Historical Fiction and Advocacy

Historical fiction is a multifaceted and demanding genre with complex ethical considerations for the writer to surmount. As Jonathan Nield writes in his 1902 Guide to the Best Historical Novels and Tales,

The spirit of a period is like the selfhood of a human being – something that cannot be handed on; try as we may, it is impossible for us to breathe the atmosphere of a bygone time, since all those thousand-and-one details which went to the building up of both individual and general experience, can never be reproduced’ (Nield 1902: 41).

Continue reading here.

Wycliffe College Chapel, Toronto

The Wycliffite bible will be displayed at the Norfolk Heritage Centre in Norwich during May and coincides with the Boleyn Festival Blickling – four days of all things Anne Boleyn!

Clare Agate, community librarian at the Millennium Library, said:

“In itself, just being a Wycliffite bible means it is of interest, but the connection for people in Norfolk is through Anne Boleyn. It is the sort of thing that scholars are usually more likely to be interested in for study, but with the Boleyn Festival going on we thought it was a good opportunity to let people know we have it and to let them have a chance to see it.”

I am attending the first two days of the Boleyn Festival Blickling and so hope to see this historic bible in the ‘flesh’.

The Boleyn bible will be available to view in the Norfolk Heritage Centre, on the second floor of the Millennium Library at the Forum in Norwich, from 2pm-4pm on May 2, 5, 8, 10, 16, 17 and 21; and from 10am-midday on May 4, 9, 15 and 23.

Had the Queen Lived: An Alternate History of Anne Boleyn by Raven A. Nuckols.

A guest post by Raven A. Nuckols, author of Had the Queen Lived: An Alternative History of Anne Boleyn.

In October 2011, I published my first historical novel entitled “Had the Queen Lived: An Alternative History of Anne Boleyn.” I set out to write my novel with what I thought was an interesting idea for a story that might appeal to fans of Queen Anne Boleyn, the second wife of King Henry VIII of England. I also thought that there could be many such fans because in recent years the popularity of the Tudor reign, particularly as portrayed on television and in film, has brought her story once more to the spotlight for a new generation to enjoy. The premise of the book is exploring the question of what might have happened had Queen Anne lived past her tragic execution in May 1536 on false charges of treason, adultery, and incest with her brother. With this idea as a starting point I created an entirely new universe for Henry & Anne, developing a history of England with possible events that Anne might have influenced. Using the actual history of the reign of Henry VIII as a foundation, I was able to select those specific events that I thought would have realistically been altered based on the continuing presence of Anne on the scene, as well as entirely fictional events that I believed Anne would have been responsible for making come to pass.

Creating a successful and believable storyline weaving together actual and fictional events and characters is challenging; however, it can be done and is wonderfully exciting. For example, in my novel I used the Pilgrimage of Grace as a key event leading to the downfall of Lady Mary Tudor. I spent months researching every piece of original material I could find as well as consulting the works of historians who wrote at length on the subject to ensure I fully understood not only the broad, actual history, but also key, in-depth details. I chose this event specifically to bring down Lady Mary because its history linked well with her deep loyalty to Catholicism.  The principal cause of the rebellion in actual history was to cease the Crown’s dissolution of the monasteries and to reinstate mass and other Catholic practices that had been stripped away with England’s breaking away from the Catholic Church. As Lady Mary was royalty and viewed as a figurehead behind the inspiration for the rebel movement, it was critical in establishing my story that I use this event to bring about her end. To make this happen, I had to exaggerate the number of deaths during the rebellion (790 from 330), but I made this alteration of history deliberately so as to show the influence Anne’s continued presence would have on the King’s state of mind, and dramatize how his desire for unquestioned authority would lead to bloodier actions to reinforce his decisions. Even so, I wanted to keep the inflated casualty number from being too excessive, to preserve historical believability, consistent with illustrating the power dynamics in Henry and Anne’s relationship.

It truly has been a rewarding artistic experience to create these wonderful plots with characters that changed the shape of British (and thus world) history. I look forward to writing future alternate histories and am working on finishing a trilogy set within the universe of Had the Queen Lived. There will be plenty more weaving of actual history and fictional events in the period of 1551-1601 for the first sequel, which I am currently in the research phase for and will cover the reign of King Henry IX, the fictional son had by Anne and Henry in the first book. I am also researching for works of actual history in the Twentieth Century on far different events of great personal interest to me, but nothing will take the place of my passion for writing about the Tudors and, in particular, Queen Anne.

By Raven A. Nuckols

Knights of the Order of the Garter

On 23 April 1536, the annual meeting of the Order of the Garter took place at Greenwich attended by the King and many Lords. It was expected that George Boleyn would be preferred but instead Henry chose Sir Nicholas Carew, ‘Anne’s known enemy and the man who had been mentoring Jane Seymour’ (Weir, pg. 88).

The entry from Letters & Papers reads,

On St. George’s Day, 23 April 28 Hen. VIII., a chapter of the Order of the Garter was held at Greenwich, at which were present the King, the dukes of Richmond and Norfolk, the earls of Northumberland, Westmoreland, Wiltshire, Sussex, Rutland, and Oxford, lord Sandys, and Sir Wm. Fitzwilliam. It was determined to hold the feast on May 21, the earl of Northumberland taking the Sovereign’s place, assisted by the earls of Rutland, Westmoreland, and Oxford, and Sir Wm. Fitzwilliam. Votes were taken for the election of a knight; and the next day, after mass for the dead, the King declared Sir Nic. Carew elected. He was installed when the feast was kept, on May 21. On this occasion the earl of Northumberland was seized with vertigo and weakness, so that it was feared he would not be able to take his part as deputy, but he recovered. The next day the hatchments of the deceased were offered up.

On April 29, Chapuys wrote to Charles V,

The Grand Ecuyer, Mr. Caro, had on St. George’s day the Order of the Garter in the place of the deceased M. de Burgain (lord Abergavenny), to the great disappointment of Rochford, who was seeking for it, and all the more because the Concubine has not had sufficient influence to get it for her brother; and it will not be the fault of the said Ecuyer if the Concubine, although his cousin (quelque, qu. quoique? cousine) be not dismounted. He continually counsels Mrs. Semel and other conspirators “pour luy faire une venue,” and only four days ago he and some persons of the chamber sent to tell the Princess to be of good cheer, for shortly the opposite party would put water in their wine, for the King was already as sick and tired of the concubine as could be; and the brother of lord Montague told me yesterday at dinner that the day before the bishop of London had been asked if the King could abandon the said concubine, and he would not give any opinion to anyone but the King himself, and before doing so he would like to know the King’s own inclination, meaning to intimate that the King might leave the said concubine, but that, knowing his fickleness, he would not put himself in danger. The said Bishop was the principal cause and instrument of the first divorce, of which he heartily repents, and would still more gladly promote this, the said concubine and all her race are such abominable Lutherans. London, 29 April 1536.

Some ominous signs for Anne and the Boleyn faction but as Weir points out in The Lady in the Tower: The Fall of Anne Boleyn, five days later, on April 28, Henry Lord Stafford wrote to the Earl of Westmoreland to thank him for ‘furthering my suit with the Queen.’ Although Chapuys believed that Anne was falling from favour, clearly others still felt her influence intact.

Hever Castle

When you hear the words, ‘Boleyn family home’ it’s difficult not to immediately picture Hever Castle, a fairytale castle in the beautiful Kent countryside that has long been thought of as Anne Boleyn’s birthplace.

The home is, as Eric Ives puts it, ‘a romantic shrine to Anne and her love affair with Henry VIII. Unfortunately, for romance and tradition, Anne was in fact born in Norfolk, almost certainly at the Boleyn home at Blickling, fifteen miles north of Norwich.’ (pg. 3)

Blickling Hall, Norfolk (built on the site of the Boleyn home)

Ives’ source? Mathew Parker, Anne Boleyn’s private chaplain born in Norfolk, who later became archbishop of Canterbury and described himself as her ‘poor countryman’. Sir Henry Spelman, a Norfolk antiquarian writing during the reign of Elizabeth I, echoed this view:

‘To Blickling was decreed the honour of Anne Boleyn’s birth.’ (Weir, pg. 19)

The Boleyns were a Norfolk family long before they moved to Hever Castle in Kent and after the annihilation of the noble Boleyn family in 1536, the gentry family survived at Blickling until the 1560s and the death of Sir James Boleyn.

The focus of this post is not to debate Anne’s birthplace or whether the Boleyns abandoned Blickling for Hever. Instead, it is to bring to your attention another Boleyn property situated by the River Wensum on King Street, Norwich.

Elizabeth Griffiths describes the Boleyn house as lying adjacent to the building now known as Dragon Hall in an area where the Pastons and the Heydons once maintained homes alongside the Boleyns.

The staff at Dragon Hall very kindly informed me that Sir William Boleyn owned part or all of what is now 125-127 King Street. Records show that William paid ‘landgable’, a type of council tax for the property and Blomefield, the Norfolk historian, called it ‘the house of Sir William Boleyn’.

Although referred to as a ‘house’, there is some doubt as to whether the building was ever used as a home. Norfolk Archaeology Report, number 500 (2000), dates the building as ‘probably late 15^th century’ and ‘suggests that it was not a private dwelling house’ and instead may have been an ‘inn’ with a corridor running along the King Street side and rooms off it.

I was delighted to find some old photos of the building taken by George Plunkett who took photos of old Norwich between 1931-2006.  I have reproduced two photographs here with kind permission of his son, Jonathan Plunkett.

The first picture was taken in 1936 and Mr Plunkett provided the following information:

‘Adjacent, and to the south of the renowned Dragon Hall, is another building of note, that comprising Nos 125-129. When photographed in 1936 its half-timbered upper storey had for long been hidden under plaster, but some ten years later the plaster was removed to reveal its sturdy construction of timber and brick. After a few more years its owners chose to rip out the entire ground floor, replacing the modest 19c shop fronts with a continuous range of plate glass and leaving the medieval first floor suspended as it were mid-air.’

King Street, Norwich 125 to 129 © George Plunkett

The second photograph was taken in 1946 when the plaster had been removed.

King Street Norwich, 125 to 129 © George Plunkett

I am visiting Norfolk next month and hope to see the building for myself even though I have been told that it is in a sad state today, having been empty for many years.

The Palace of Placentia in a 17th-century drawing

On April 18, 1536 Chapuys met with Henry VIII at Greenwich.

On arrival, George Boleyn welcomed the ambassador and Cromwell presented Chapuys with a message from Henry, inviting him to visit Anne and kiss her hand. The ambassador could not bring himself to acquiesce and so begged Cromwell to excuse him, perhaps, for Chapuys’ sake, he should have accepted this more intimate encounter with Queen Anne because what was to follow was a much more public acknowledgement.

Queen Anne Boleyn

Rochford conducted the ambassador to mass and Eric Ives relates what took place.

‘Anne accompanied Henry from the royal pew down to the chapel to make her offering, and knowing that Chapuys was placed behind the door through which she entered, she stopped, turned and bowed to this representative of the Empire, and necessarily he responded likewise. After mass, Chapuys was careful not to go with the king and the other ambassadors to dine with Anne, but again it was her brother who entertained him in the presence chamber…’ (Pg. 313)

Chapuys recounts the encounter in a letter to Charles V,

‘I was conducted to mass by lord Rochford, the concubine’s brother, and when the King came to the offering there was a great concourse of people partly to see how the concubine and I behaved to each other. She was courteous enough, for when I was behind the door by which she entered, she returned, merely to do me reverence as I did to her. After mass the King went to dine at the concubine’s lodging, whither everybody accompanied him except myself, who was conducted by Rochford to the King’s Chamber of Presence, and dined there with all the principal men of the Court. I am told the concubine asked the King why I did not enter there as the other ambassadors did, and the King replied that it was not without good reason.’ (LP, x.699)

It’s difficult to believe that only two weeks after this triumphant victory for Anne, she would be arrested and imprisoned in the Tower of London. Even more disturbing, in 31 days – she would be no more.

Henry VIII & Anne Boleyn by Arthur Hopkins

On Saturday 12 April 1533, the chapel royal at Greenwich was the setting for Anne Boleyn’s first public appearance as queen.

Anne attended mass with great pomp, resplendent in a pleated gown of cloth of gold, and adorned with sumptuous jewels. Sixty ladies accompanied her, and her cousin, Lady Mary Howard, soon to become Duchess of Richmond and Somerset, carried her train.

One can only imagine how Anne’s dark eyes must have glistened and how secure she must have felt with a crown on her head, a baby cradled deep within her belly and the adoring looks of her husband.

Both the Spanish and Venetian ambassadors reported the event to their masters. Charles Wriothesley, herald and chronicler, also noted the event.

The Spanish Ambassador

On Saturday, Easter Eve, dame Anne went to mass in Royal state, loaded with jewels, clothed in a robe of cloth of gold friese. The daughter of the duke of Norfolk, who is affianced to the duke of Richmond, carried her train; and she had in her suite 60 young ladies, and was brought to church, and brought back with the solemnities, or even more, which were used to the Queen. She has changed her name from Marchioness to Queen, and the preachers offered prayers for her by name. All the world is astonished at it for it looks like a dream, and even those who take her part know not whether to laugh or to cry. The King is very watchful of the countenance of the people, and begs the lords to go and visit and make their court to the new Queen, whom he intends to have solemnly crowned after Easter, when he will have feastings and tournaments ; and some think that Clarencieux went four days ago to France to invite gentlemen at arms to the tourney, after the example of Francis, who did so at his nuptials. I know not whether this will be before or after, but the King has secretly appointed with the archbishop of Canterbury that of his office, without any other pressure, he shall cite the King as having two wives ; and upon this, without summoning the Queen, he will declare that he was at liberty to marry as he has done without waiting for a dispensation or sentence of any kind.

The Venetian Ambassador

This morning of Easter Eve, the Marchioness Anne went with the King to high mass, as Queen, and with all the pomp of a Queen, clad in cloth of gold, and loaded (carga) with the richest jewels; and she dined in public; although they have not yet proclaimed the decision of the Parliament [Convocation ?].

Wriothesley’s Chronicle number 17

Memorandum: the 12th day of Aprill, Anno Domini 1533, beinge [A.D. 1533.]
Easter eaven, Anne Bulleine, Marques of Pembroke, 11 was pro-
claymed Queene at Greenewych, and offred that daie in the Kinges
Chappell as Queene of Englande. 6

Eustace Chapuys

After hearing of the passing of the Act of Appeals, Chapuys requested an audience with King Henry VIII.

The act, engineered by Thomas Cromwell,

‘removed English religious rule from the authority of Rome, ultimately restricting appeals to Rome on legal matters, endowing Thomas Cranmer with the right to grant Henry a divorce from Catherine of Aragon and enabling him to marry Anne Boleyn.’ (The Literary Encyclopedia)

On April 10 1533, Chapuys was granted this audience and had a long discussion with the king, ‘to whom he represented the injustice done to the queen.’ (Friedmann, pg. 90)

Katherine of Aragon by Wenceslaus Hollar

Chapuys’ efforts were all in vain, as the day before, unbeknownst to the ambassador, Catherine of Aragon had been informed that the king had married Anne Boleyn and that she should now refrain from calling herself queen – or being addressed as such.

Catherine would now be known as Princess of Wales.

Read a detailed description of Chapuys’ encounter with the king in the ambassador’s own words. Click here and scroll down to Chapuys’ letter to Charles V, entry 351.

Lauren Johnson at Hampton Court Palace

An event over this Easter weekend (6^th – 9^th April, 2012) at Hampton Court Palace re-examines the brief queenship of Jane Seymour, and presents a far more politically active queen than many will be familiar with.

I am delighted to share with you a guest post by Lauren Johnson, who interprets Jane, and is the Research Manager for Past Pleasures Ltd. about why ‘plain Jane’ deserves a second look.

Was Jane Seymour really as meek and mild as she is so often portrayed?

Click here to read Lauren’s article.

Emily very kindly agreed to talk to me about her wonderful project, one that I am very much looking forward to seeing at Hever Castle in May.

Click here to read the interview.

(Photos published here © Emily Pooley)