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.

I must say that Sudeley is one of the most atmospheric and beautiful places I have ever visited and you’ll notice that it is the Chapel of St. Mary at Sudeley that features prominently on my website’s header.

Thank you Debbie!

The Queen Katherine Parr Quincentenary

This year Sudeley Castle is celebrating the life of Queen Kateryn Parr with a series of special events and exhibitions to mark the 500 years since the birth of this remarkable woman.

Katherine Parr is best known for being Henry VIII’s surviving queen, but through the exhibitions on show we find out more about the life and loves of Katherine and her time at Sudeley. I was surprised to learn that KP stood 6 feet tall, almost unheard of in Tudor times. It is no wonder she caught Henry’s eye at court – towering above the other ladies. Katherine was also a published author and you can view original copies of her work on display for the first time. In KP’s book of lamentations you can see she has signed her name, Kateryn the Queen KP.

Katherine Parr's Book of Lamentations © Debbie Fenton

Also on display are love letters written to Thomas Seymour and items taken from her tomb when it was opened in 1782 which include a lock of auburn hair and a tooth! (In very good condition I might add) The exhibition ends with a short film by Dr David Starkey where we learn more about Katherine and her time at Sudeley and why she felt compelled to marry Henry when she was in love with Thomas Seymour.

Katherine Parr's Closet Window © Debbie Fenton

The next part of the KP trail takes you to the South Hall and Katherine’s private rooms, which are open to the public for the first time in five years. If like me you like to soak up the atmosphere of an historic place and imagine the conversations that have taken place within the walls, then you will enjoy this experience the most. You ascend a staircase to the only remaining rooms from the original castle that KP lived in. (No photography sadly as my partner found out when he took a snap then was fiercely reprimanded by the guide!). There is a beautiful closet with a stained glass window that allows light to flood in, giving the room a very happy feel. The idyllic views across the garden as Katherine would have seen them, lead on to her private chapel in the church of St Mary. In the window stands a mannequin of Lady Ann Herbert, KP’s sister who was her groom of the stool, who according to the display, assisted KP with the very important job of wiping her bottom!

Katherine Parr's private door © Debbie Fenton

As you descend the staircase you are invited to exit the castle through the very door that KP would have used to make the short walk to her private chapel to carry out her daily devotions. An added moment of excitement ensues when you are told that the door has remained until now unopened since Tudor times. Now you can make your way to the church for the most poignant part of the trail.

Inside the church of St Mary’s, alongside KP’s tomb, you will see a peaceful Katherine lying in state surrounded by candles. She is being watched over by her young chief mourner, Lady Jane Grey. I found this moment quite haunting and a fitting end to the trail.

Katherine Parr lying in state © Debbie Fenton

There are more special events planned for this year, including talks with Dr David Starkey and Alison Weir, and also a re-enactment of Queen Katherine’s funeral.

The exhibitions are on a small scale, but I found them to be intimate, atmospheric and engaging. I left feeling closer to Katherine, and I will certainly now give her as much thought as I do all my other favourite Tudor people.

By Debbie Fenton

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.

Keeper of the King's Secrets by Michelle Diener

By Michelle Diener

Thank you again to Natalie for having me back as a guest blogger. I know Natalie’s particular interest is Anne Boleyn, and while Anne plays an off-stage role in my Tudor-set Susanna Horenbout and John Parker series in the current books, Thomas Wyatt is a prominent secondary character in Keeper of the King’s Secrets, the second book in the series (released 3 April). Because Wyatt’s history is entwined with Anne Boleyn’s, I thought it might be fun to talk about Thomas a bit, and how I’ve portrayed him in Keeper of the King’s Secrets.

Wyatt is well-known for his poetry, and for the apparent unrequited love he had for Anne Boleyn. Their Kent family estates were close to one another, and it seems they grew up together. Wyatt is said to have behaved jealously in front of Henry VIII when Henry was pursuing her, making it obvious he was very interested in her, as well. My favorite story regarding this is the incident, recounted by Wyatt’s grandson, that Wyatt stole one of Anne’s lockets and refused to return it, no matter how often she asked. In retaliation, Henry took one of her rings. A few days later, Henry, Suffolk, Bryan and Wyatt were playing bowls and a dispute arose between Henry and Wyatt as to who was the winner. Henry pointed to Anne’s ring on his finger and said ‘I tell you, it is mine.’ Wyatt took off the locket, and used the chain to measure the balls, and said, ‘I hope it will be mine.’

Thomas Wyatt

Anne denied any feelings for Wyatt when Henry questioned her, and that does seem to be the case. Or in any event, there is no evidence she ever encouraged him.

The interpretation I’ve used in Keeper of the King’s Secrets is that while Anne and Wyatt are long-time friends, and Wyatt does have strong feelings for her, Anne has made it clear she will not be a married man’s mistress. And yes, the irony of Wyatt recounting Anne’s standpoint to Susanna and Parker, my main characters, given this is 1525 and really just months before Henry starts pursuing Anne, was delicious to write.

Wyatt was married (hence Anne not being interested), very unhappily, and had one son. His wife was apparently very promiscuous, and in Keeper of the King’s Secrets, I’ve created the backstory of Wyatt being forced into a marriage he didn’t want, to a woman who had some feelings for him. As her handsome husband takes mistress after mistress, she retaliates in kind, until there is no hope of a reconciliation. His father was very distressed by Wyatt’s habitual infidelity, and I’ve used that in Keeper of the King’s Secrets to affect the job Wyatt has at court.

Wyatt’s father was Master of the King’s Jewels, and Wyatt was Clerk of the King’s Jewels. They would have been the keepers of the Mirror of Naples, the magnificent jewel Mary Tudor illegally took from the French Crown Jewels and gave to Henry as part of her apology for marrying Charles Brandon without his permission. As a large part of the plot of Keeper of the King’s Secrets hangs on the disappearance of the Mirror of Naples, this puts Wyatt firmly in the frame, and his rocky relationship with his father is part of the problem. I also use his infatuation with Anne as part of the plot.

Another reason Wyatt was a perfect secondary character from my point of view was his connection to the Duke of Norfolk. Norfolk is one of the antagonists in Keeper of the King’s Secrets (and in the first book in the series, In a Treacherous Court), but he also happened to be Wyatt’s sponsor at court, and the godfather to Wyatt’s son. Poor old Wyatt is caught between a rock and a very hard place, being played by men far more ruthless than he.

He seems to have much preferred country life and spoke very disparagingly of court politics and dramas. He obviously also thought Henry’s infatuation with Anne was a passing fancy, and when, in 1527, it became clear Henry was very serious indeed, Wyatt actually asked the King for permission to leave the country for a bit, and laid very, very low at court when he finally returned. He was probably seriously regretting teasing the King with Anne’s locket at that point.

It was a gift for me, as a writer, to have a beautiful, blond poet, all brooding with unrequited love, whose carelessness and self-indulgence, as well as his misplaced trust, put him in an incredibly tight corner. He is a wonderful foil to Parker, one of my main characters, who is dark, straightforward and has never been careless in his life.

I’d like to end with one of Wyatt’s poems, which is thought to be about Anne Boleyn, entitled “Of His Love, Called Anna”:

What word is it that changeth not,
Tho’ it be turned and made in twain?
It is mine Anna, God it wot,
And eke the causer of my pain,
Who love rewarded with disdain.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, whether you have an opinion on Wyatt, or not, and will be giving away a copy of Keeper of the King’s Secrets to a lucky commenter.

Michelle Diener

Conditions of Entry

For your chance to win  you must be subscribed to On the Tudor Trail’s newsletter (if you are not already, sign up on our homepage).

Then simply leave a comment after Michelle’s guest post between now and April 11.

Don’t forget to leave your name and a contact email.

Good luck!

Hever Castle

Today the Boleyns are usually associated with Hever Castle in Kent but they were in fact a Norfolk family firmly established at Blickling. They traced their origins to Geoffrey Boleyn of Salle and Alice, daughter of Sir John Bracton (Griffiths, pg. 454).

The couple had several children, including Geoffrey Boleyn who was born c. 1405 in Blickling. According to David Loades, he was ‘the founder of the family fortune’ (pg. 9).

Geoffrey married as his second wife Anne, daughter and co-heir of Lord Hoo and Hastings. This was a beneficial match, as now the Boleyns were mixing with local gentry and the lesser nobility. Geoffrey became an alderman of the City of London in 1452, Lord Mayor in 1457-8 and was knighted by Henry VI (Weir, pg. 145).

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

In 1452, Geoffrey Boleyn purchased Sir John Fastolf’s Manor of Blickling and in 1462 he purchased Hever Castle in Kent.

Sir Geoffrey and Anne’s son, William, continued the trend of advantageous marriages by taking as his wife Margaret Butler, daughter of Thomas Butler, Earl of Ormond (Loades, pg. 7).

Lady Margaret and Sir Geoffrey had four sons that survived infancy and four daughters (Griffiths, pg. 454). Of their sons – Thomas, James, William and Edward – Thomas Boleyn is the most famous and earned his place in history as the father of Anne Boleyn who in 1533 married King Henry VIII.

Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk

Thomas continued the tradition of impressive unions by marrying Elizabeth Howard, daughter of Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey and his first wife, Elizabeth Tilney. She was the eldest of two daughters and was descended from King Edward I (Fraser, pg. 116).

Weir writes of how the Howard fortunes had suffered after the Battle of Bosworth where Surrey’s father had fought on the losing side. This was fortunate for Thomas who otherwise might have found Elizabeth ‘too grand for him’ (Weir, pg. 146).

Elizabeth’s brother, Lord Thomas, was at the time married to Queen Elizabeth’s sister, Anne, who was the daughter of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville.

Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk

It was Thomas’ marriage to Elizabeth that brought the Boleyns ‘into the ranks of the higher Tudor nobility’ (Loades, pg 7).

Sir James Boleyn

William Boleyn owned property in Kent and Norfolk, dividing much of his time between Hever Castle and Blickling. According to Loades, it is at the latter that James Boleyn was born in 1480 (pg. 12).

For most of his life, Sir James lived in the shadow of his older brother but perhaps he deserves more of our attention. He outlived Thomas by 22 years and it was because of James that the Boleyns survived as a gentry family at Blickling until the 1560s and, ‘through the female line, survived into the seventeenth century’ (Griffiths, pg. 453).

Had he produced a male heir before his death in 1561, the Boleyns might still be at Blickling today.

What do we know about him?

-       May have received legal training in his youth

-       Served on the commission of the peace for Norfolk from 1511 until 1561

-       He was knighted in 1520 for reasons unknown

-       At some time before 1520, James married Elizabeth, the daughter of John Wood of East Barsham in Norfolk

-       In 1529 he sat for Norfolk in the Reformation parliament

-       He was a Knight of the Body by 1533. This position did not involve regular attendance at court and was ‘largely honorific’.

-       From 1533-36 he served as chancellor in the household of his niece, Queen Anne Boleyn and his wife, Elizabeth Wood, Lady Boleyn, ‘served’ Anne during her imprisonment in the Tower and was one of the ladies that accompanied her to her trial and death in May 1536 (According to Ives, Lady Boleyn was not one of Anne’s favourite attendants)

-       James survived the destruction of his niece and nephew (Anne and George Boleyn) in 1536

-       In 1539 his brother, Thomas Boleyn, died

-       In January 1540 he attended the third Duke of Norfolk (his kinsman by marriage) at the reception of Anne of Cleves

-       In February 1540 he was granted livery of Thomas Boleyn’s lands although he was not permitted to claim the earldom of Wiltshire

-       In March 1540 he exchanged newly acquired lands in Kent with the Crown for six manors and other land in Norfolk

-       In 1542 he received a grant of all of Jane Rochford’s moveable property that had been left at Blickling

-       In 1546 James served on the jury which indicted his kinsman Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey for high treason

-       James served as custos rotulorum (“keeper of the rolls”) for Norfolk from 1558-60

-       In November 1558 he saw his great-niece ascend the throne

-       In 1561 he made his will, requesting to be buried at Blickling

The "Hampden" portrait, by Steven van der Meulen, ca. 1563.

Sir James Boleyn died in 1561 and was buried with ‘great Pomp at Blickling’ (Blomefield, pg. 627) on September 6. He left various things to Queen Elizabeth in his will, including ‘a basin and gilt ewer’ and small bequests to various nieces and nephews.

He also left Elizabeth ‘my written book of the revelations of Saint Bridget’, and Roger Virgoe, author of James’ biography published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1509-1558, concludes that there is no evidence to suggest that Sir James Boleyn shared the reformist beliefs of other members of his family. Although, Eric Ives states that

‘Her chancellor was her uncle, James Boleyn, with whom, as with Cromwell, she shared some sympathies’ (pg. 211).

Since he and his wife, Elizabeth, had no surviving children ‘with him the direct male line of the Boleyns became extinct’ (Loades, pg. 18).

Read part 1 of this series of posts here.

References

The exhibition will run from March 1 through until September 2012. It is named ‘Lux in Arcana’ to convey its main objective,

The light piercing through the Archive’s innermost depths enlightens a reality which precludes a superficial knowledge and is only enjoyable by means of direct and concrete contact with the sources from the Archive, that opens the doors to the discovery of often unpublished history recounted in documents. The exhibition is enriched by multimedia installations, guided by an intriguing but rigorous historical narration, to allow the visitor to experience some famous events from the past and to “re-live” the documents, that will come to life with tales of the context and the people involved.

Pope Clement VII

Among the 100 priceless documents selected is Henry VIII’s appeal to Pope Clement VII for an annulment of his marriage to first wife, Catherine of Aragon. The appeal bears 83 signatures; signed by nearly 70% of the members of the House of Lords, all dukes, marquesses, earls and most of the barons and the abbots in charge of the major abbeys.

Also on display is Mary Stuart’s last letter to Pope Sixtus V where she writes in French,

“that it hath pleased God to allow, because of my sins and those of the people of this unfortunate island, that after twenty years of imprisonment, I (sole descendant of the house of England and Scotland to profess this faith) be shut up in a narrow prison and finally condemned, by the States and the heretical assembly of this country, to die.”

You can explore these documents and many more, including Martin Luther’s excommunication here.

Watch the official video.

Unfortunately, this is not an exhibition I will be able to see but I would love to hear from anyone that does make the trip to Rome!

For further information visit the exhibitions official website.

Enjoy!

Hampton Court Palace

A Brief Introduction to Hampton Court by Mike Glaeser

Why come ye not to Court?
To which court?
To the king’s court?
Or to Hampton Court?
Nay, to the king’s court!
The king’s court should have the excellence
But Hampton Court hath the pre-eminence!
- John Skelton

Despite the land having ties to the Romans, Hampton pulls its name from two Saxon words: Hamm (bend in a stream) and Ton (settlement). Hampton Court’s slow rise to becoming the byword for majesty and magnificence started in the 1330s when the Knights Hospitaller built a priory on the land that would eventually hold a palace. As a priory, the location was visited by the head of the order in England several times a year. Multiple visits dictated that the site was prosperous and while it did not provide sufficient manpower for further Crusades to the Levant, it did have a substantial agriculture base. From past archeological surveys, it is thought the priory contained a hall, pigeon house and a separate chapel, all of which was surrounded by a rectangular moat funneled from the nearby Thames. In 1497, the Hospitallers leased the land to Sir Giles Daubeney, the future Lord Chamberlain for Henry VII. Sir Daubeney fought for Henry at Bosworth and would rise through the ranks during his reign. His tomb, complete with reclined effigy, can be seen in Westminster Abbey’s St. Paul’s Chapel. It was Daubeney who started the elaborate buildings that would later be completed by both Cardinal Wolsey and Henry VIII. In fact, a portion of what is currently called “Henry VIII’s Kitchens” was originally built by him.

Continue reading here.

Of late Sarah has found herself more and more drawn to the least famous of the Boleyn siblings and has dedicated much time to reading and researching Mary’s life.

In this guest article Sarah outlines what we do know about Mary and also looks at some of the great mysteries that surround her life.

I hope you enjoy the article!

Mary Boleyn: Fact vs Fiction by Sarah Bryson

It has been proposed that this portrait by Lucas Horenbout, once thought to be Anne Boleyn, is in fact the true face of Mary Boleyn.

If you are interested in Tudor history you have probably heard of Anne Boleyn. She was the second wife of King Henry VIII and Queen Consort of England. Much has been written about the life of Anne Boleyn from debate over the date of her birth, her role in the English Reformation, to the tragic details of her fall and execution. Yet Anne Boleyn had an older sister, Mary. Mary Boleyn was the sister of one of the most famous Queens of England and yet so little has been detailed and recorded about her life. She lead quite a fascinating life, at one point even defying the social norms and the wishes of her father, and her sister the Queen and following her heart to marry for love. In this short piece I will outline some of the facts that are known about Mary’s life and some of the great mysteries that surround her.

Read the full article here.

The Crown by Nancy Bilyeau

To celebrate the UK release of the historical thriller ‘The Crown‘ by Nancy Bilyeau, I am delighted to share with you a guest article that Nancy has written about George Boleyn.

I am currently reading The Crown and enjoying every moment of it! I was hooked from the very first line,

“When a burning is announced, the taverns of Smithfield order extra barrels of ale, but when the person to be executed is a woman and one of noble birth, the ale comes by the cartload.”

I relish returning home in the evenings and losing myself in the pages of this truly engrossing story. Here is a little taste…

George Boleyn
By Nancy Bilyeau

On May 15, 1536, took place one of the most sensational trials of the 16^th century. George Boleyn, the brother of Queen Anne, answered charges of high treason—that he had committed incest with his sister and conspired at the king’s death.

Anne Boleyn, second wife of Henry VIII, had directly before been found guilty of treason. A jury declared that she had committed adultery with her brother and four other men. The Lord Mayor of London said, “I could not observe anything in the proceedings against her, but that they were resolved to make an occasion to get rid of her at any price.”

It would seem impossible that any other verdict than guilty could be reached for George Boleyn. Yet after hearing the evidence, Viscount Rochford defended himself “so well that several of those present wagered ten to one that he would be acquitted, especially as no witnesses were produced against him,” said a contemporary.

Read the full article here.