Jane Boleyn: The True Story of the Infamous Lady Rochford

by Julia Fox

  CHAPTER 3

  Detail on Tudor costume is from Norris (1997, pp. 199–200, 203, 208, 220–22). For documents concerning the execution of the Duke of Buckingham, see LP, III.i, nos. 1, 1284; LP, IV.i, no. 2159. CSPSp Supp, preface, pp. xii, xiii, xvii, provides information on the imperial ambassadors. My account of the Shrove Tuesday pageant relies on the information from LP, III.ii, no. 1522; Hall (1904, I, pp. 238–40); Ives (2004, pp. 36–39, 70); Anglo (1969, pp. 120–21). The most authoritative and comprehensive account of the way tapestries were used for court festivals and as decorative objects is by Campbell (2007, chaps. 6, 9). For the five players in the masque who had been part of Katherine’s entourage at the Field of Cloth of Gold, see Rutland Papers (1842, p. 38) and The Chronicle of Calais (1846, p. 25).

  CHAPTER 4

  Details on Buckingham’s income and lands are taken from LP, III.i, nos. 1286, 1287. The sale of Newhall to Henry VIII is LP, II.ii, p. 1470, while the references to the grants to the Boleyns are in LP, III.ii, no. 2214(29), and LP IV.i, no. 5469(2). There are many references to the Ormond lands: for example, NA, SP 46/183, fol. 124; SP 46/183, fol. 140, for references to Aylesbury; SP 46/183, fol. 164, and SP 46/183, fol. 189, for Rochford; and SP 46/183, fol. 186, and SP 46/183, fol. 194, for Newhall. For Morley’s diplomatic mission and ensuing letters, see LP, III.ii, nos. 3373, 3390, 3391, 3546, 3619. ODNB references to Sir Thomas Boleyn and George Boleyn are useful, as is The Complete Peerage (1987, especially IV, p. 138) for details on George. His part in the Christmas revels is from LP, II.ii, p. 1501. The wills of Sir Geoffrey Boleyn and the Earl of Ormond are from NA, PROB 11/5, PROB 11/18. General background material on Lord Morley comes from Starkey’s “Introduction” to Axton and Carley (2000). See also Carley’s ODNB entry on Morley. The respective dates and order of birth of the Boleyn children have exercised historians for over a hundred years as the evidence conflicts or is inconclusive. J. H. Round debated the subject in Round (1886), and Gairdner (1893) is an excellent critique and summary. See also Friedmann (1884, II, appendix note A, pp. 315–22). A birth date of 1507 for Anne was given by Camden. However, contradictory evidence comes from the family of Mary Boleyn: her son, Lord Hunsdon, said that his mother was the elder sister, while the funeral monument to Lady Berkely, Hunsdon’s daughter, gives Mary as the second daughter. To further muddy the waters, Weever (1630, p. 799) has a reference to William Boleyn in which he states that Anne was sixteen years younger than Henry VIII, which supports a later birth date of about 1507; on the other hand, Brooke(1619) names Anne as the second daughter on one page and the eldest on another (p. 250). Ives follows in the footsteps of Paget (1981, pp. 162–70). He suggests about 1499 for Mary, 1500–1 for Anne, and 1504 for George: Ives (2004, p. 17). Starkey (2004, p. 258) supports this order, although he places the dates a year or so later. Warnicke disagrees, arguing that Anne was the elder daughter, born in 1507: Warnicke (1985a, pp. 939–52). Fortunately, there seems to be unanimity in accepting George as the youngest Boleyn sibling. References to the king’s contribution to Jane’s jointure are from LP, X, no. 1010, and Ellis (1824–46, 1st series, II, p. 67). The fullest details, however, including newly discovered evidence not in the printed sources can be found in WRO, microfilm 705:349/12946/498729; this should be read in conjunction with HLRO, MS PO/1/1539 (Original Acts, 31 Henry VIII, c.20). Lord Morley’s payment to Thomas Boleyn is from LP, IV, appendix 99, p. 3116. Elizabeth Edgecombe’s jointure is taken from CRO, MS ME/824. Boleyn’s indenture with his mother, Margaret, is enrolled on NA, C 54/379. Mary Tudor’s bargain with Henry VIII is taken from LP, II.ii, no. 227. An excellent starting point for anyone wanting to understand the jointure system can be found in Harris (2002, pp. 44–50).

  CHAPTER 5

  The wording and proceedings of the marriage ceremony are taken from The Sarum Missal (1913, II, pp. 143–61), which was the form of liturgy in use throughout southern England. General details on Tudor marriage customs can be found in Stone (1961) and Peters (2000). The most comprehensive survey is by Cressy (1997, pp. 285–375). Information on the costumes of Katherine of Aragon, Mary Tudor, and Eleanor of Austria is from Norris (1997, pp. 209, 273, 650). Wolsey’s Eltham Ordinances are from LP, IV.i, no. 1939(4), interpreted in the light of his crucial preparatory material in his own hand from NA, SP 1/37, fol. 102. There is no record of an application for a marriage license listed in the allegations for marriage licences issued by the vicar-general of the bishop of London.

  CHAPTER 6

  Good summaries of Mary Carey’s early life are by Starkey (2004, pp. 274–75) and Ives (2004, pp. 15–17). She is likely to be the “Mademoiselle Boleyn” listed among the French queen’s attendants in LP, I.ii, no. 3357. The reference to her morals comes from LP, X, no. 450. Basic details on the life of William Carey can be found in ODNB. His wedding to Mary is from LP, III.ii, p. 1539, the Eltham Ordinances are from LP, IV.i, no. 1939(4), and his rewards are pieced together from LP, III.i, no. 317; LP, III.ii, no. 2074(5); LP, III.ii, no. 2297(12), p. 973; LP, IV.ii, no. 2972, p. 1331. Murphy (2003, pp. 38–39) has a useful account of Richmond’s investiture. See also LP, IV.i, no. 1431; CSPVenice, III, nos. 1037, 1053. I also used ODNB’s overall assessment of Richmond’s life and character. Ives (2004, p. 83) discusses the rumor that Richmond would inherit the throne. The reference to Katherine’s commissioning a treatise on marriage is from CWE, 11, p. 308. Rumors about the parentage of Henry Carey are from LP, VIII, no. 567. Interestingly, the precise date of his birth is contested. See Starkey (2004, p. 274); Ives (2004, p. 369), and ODNB entries for Mary Boleyn and Henry Carey. The inscription on Carey’s tomb, which can still be seen in Westminster Abbey, states that he was in his seventy-second year (anno aetatis) when he died on July 23, 1596 (Monumenta Westmonasteriensia[1683], p. 328), which suggests that he must have been born in 1525 as there appears to be little doubt that the month of his birth was March. George Boleyn’s post as cupbearer is from LP, IV.i, no. 1939, sect. 14, p. 871; his entitlement to living at court with Jane is from LP, IV.i, sect. 4, p. 865. The reference to the silver dishes comes from Starkey, Ward, and Hawkyard (1998, no. 1865, p. 60). George’s ownership of the satire on marriage and his gift of the manuscript to Smeaton is taken from Carley (2004, p. 133), who has also noticed that the musician was so enamored of the book that he wrote his name inside it. Carley suggests that the manuscript was a humorous wedding present, which seems very likely. Stone (1961) gives details on Tudor marital customs. Information about the duties of the keeper of royal residences is from Thurley (1993, p. 83).

  CHAPTER 7

  The accounts of the “still” Christmas and Shrove Tuesday joust rely on Hall (1904, II, pp. 56–57). Anne’s description is from CSPVenice, IV, no. 824. Interestingly, this tallies very well with the description of Anne suggested by the discovery made during repairs to St. Peter ad Vincula of what were reputed to be her bones. See Bell (1877, pp. 26–28) for a firsthand account of the nineteenth-century excavations. Cavendish’s account of the Percy affair is from Cavendish (1825, I, pp. 58, 66). For Anne’s other suitors, see Ives (2004, pp. 72–80); Starkey (2004, pp. 268–71); and LP, III, no. 1762. The complexities of the chronology of Henry’s relationship with Anne are tackled by Ives (2004, pp. 81–92) and Starkey (2004, pp. 271–85). By establishing the date of the Percy marriage, Starkey redates the beginning of the affair. Trying to establish the sequence of the love letters is equally problematic as they are undated and, for the earlier ones at least, contain no clue to allow us to fix even on a definite year. The order I have chosen for the six mentioned here is, therefore, speculative but does, I think, make sense of the overall chronology: Halliwell (1848, I, p. 310) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3220), Halliwell (1848, I, p. 302) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3321), Halliwell (1848, I, p. 309) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3219), Halliwell (1848, I, p. 303) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3326), Halliwell (1848, I, p. 305) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3218), and Halliwell (1848, I, p. 306) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3325). The decoding of the third letter is explained in Starkey (2004, p. 281) and an analysis of the ship image can be foun
d in Ives (2004, pp. 86–87), Starkey (2004, pp. 282–83), and Arnold (1988, p. 76). For Thomas Boleyn’s accounts, see LP, IV.iii, appendix 99, p. 3116, and, for his possible involvement in the developing relationship between Henry and Anne, see Ives (2004, p. 217).

  CHAPTER 8

  Henry’s letters to Anne are taken from Halliwell (1848, I, p. 311) (LP, IV.ii, no. 4537) and Halliwell (1848, I, p. 317) (LP, IV.ii, no. 3990). The entertainment for the French ambassadors is from Hall (1904, II, pp. 84–88); Anglo (1969, pp. 212–24); CSPVenice, IV, no. 105; and Starkey (2004, pp. 284–85). The significance of the David tapestries is discussed by MacCulloch (1995, p. 180), Herman (1994, pp. 193–218); Campbell (2007, chap. 10). Campbell explains that Henry ordered a new set of David tapestries at the heart of the divorce controversy, but they did not arrive in England until 1528. Henry’s comments on his relationship with Katherine are taken from Hall (1904, II, p. 146). Wolsey’s early involvement is from Cavendish (1825, p. 139). Katherine’s intention to remain Henry’s wife is from LP, IV.ii, no. 4875; Charles V’s support is mentioned in LP, IV.ii, no. 3312. The sack of Rome is from LP, IV.ii, nos. 3114, 3200. Information on James Boleyn’s interest in religion is mentioned in Susan Wabuda’s entry on Nicholas Shaxton in ODNB. Robert Wakefield is described by Lloyd Jones (1989, p. 1860) and ODNB. His lecture and writings are from Wakefield (1528); Wakefield (n.d.); and STC, nos. 24943, 24944. See also Lloyd Jones (1989, p. 64) and LP, IV.ii, nos. 3233, 3224. For Fisher’s views, see LP, IV.ii, nos. 3148 and 3232 for his comments on Henry’s right to consult the pope. More’s recollections of his meeting with Henry at Hampton Court are taken from Rogers (1961, pp. 206–8) and LP, VII, no. 289.

  CHAPTER 9

  A comprehensive and fascinating account of the sweat is by Caius (1552), himself a doctor: STC, no. 4343. For modern analysis, see Flood (2003); Thwaites, Taviner, and Gant (1997, 1998); Dyer (1997). My description of the disease’s symptoms is from Caius (1552, pp. 12–13) and CSPVenice, II, no. 945. The general fear it engendered is from LP, IV.ii, nos. 4332, 4510, 4542; the remedies are from Caius (1552, pp. 32, 35); LP, IV.ii, no. 4409; CSPVenice, II, no. 945; and Wood (1846, II, p. 29). For Henry’s reaction, see LP, IV.ii, nos. 4383, 4391, 4403, 4409, 4422, 4440, 4542. His rather cheeky building works at Tittenhanger are mentioned in LP, IV.ii, no. 4438. The news of Carey’s death is from LP, IV.ii, no. 4408 and the effect on the Boleyn family from LP, IV.ii, no. 4410 and LP V, no. 11. Carey’s offices appear in LP, IV.ii, no. 4413; Russell’s wardship requests are from LP, IV.ii, nos. 4436 and 4437. The Wilton Abbey case is explained by Knowles (1959, p. 161), Ives (2004, p. 102), and Starkey (2004, pp. 333–36). Relevant documents include LP, IV.ii, nos. 4477, 4507, 4509. Anne’s letter to Wolsey is LP, IV.ii, no. 4480 and the joint letter from Anne and Henry is LP, IV.ii, no. 4360. References to the divorce are from LP, IV.ii, nos. 3686, 4742. Mention of Anne’s emerald ring can be found in LP, V, no. 276, and Ives (2004, p. 91).

  CHAPTER 10

  For a comprehensive account of the divorce, see Scarisbrick (1968) or Starkey (2004). I have concentrated only on those events that particularly touched Jane as a member of the Boleyn family. My account of the distrust of Wolsey is taken from LP, IV.iii, nos. 5255, 5635, 5803; CSPVenice, IV, no. 461. Cromwell’s sudden prominence is evident in, for example, LP, IV.iii, nos. 5437, 5446, 5457, 5459, 5460. Clement VII’s desire to please Henry is from LP, IV.iii, no. 5516. The Duchess of Suffolk’s hostility to Anne is from CSPVenice, IV, no. 761. Campeggio complains of the weather in LP, IV.iii, no. 5636. Henry’s return to London is from LP, IV.iii, no. 5016, and Anne’s farm is mentioned in the Privy Purse Expenses, LP, V, p. 753. The trial is from CSPVenice, IV, no. 482; LP, IV.iii, no. 5702; Hall (1904, II, pp. 150–52); and Cavendish (1825, I, pp. 147–58). The testimony relating to Arthur is from LP IV.iii, nos. 5774, 5778. Clement VII’s letter to Wolsey is from LP, IV.iii, no. 5759. Starkey (2004, pp. 237–40) gives a very full description of the Parliament Chamber at Blackfriars. Wolsey’s fall is described by Cavendish (1825, I, pp. 166–70, 181–82); LP, IV.iii, nos. 6017, 6019, 6025, 6026, 6075. His loss of property is from LP, IV.iii, nos. 6026, 6184, 6186. His reliance on Cromwell can be seen in LP, IV.iii, no. 6076. The rewards and house for Jane and George are taken from LP, IV.ii, nos. 4779, 4993(15); LP, IV.iii, no. 6115; LP, V, no. 686, p. 314, and pp. 306, 312, 754. New Year’s gifts are from LP, IV.ii, no. 3748; LP, V, pp. 307, 317. A grant to William Boleyn is from LP, IV.iii, no. 5815. The wardship awarded to Edward Boleyn is mentioned in LP, V, no. 80(29). For the gift of Durham House, see Starkey (2004, pp. 356–58), and Colvin (1982, p. 76). Thomas’s investiture comes from LP IV.iii, nos. 6083, 6085, and LP, V, p. 316. George’s gambling is from the Privy Purse Expenses, LP, V, pp. 755, 757, 758, 760. Gifts to Anne are taken from LP, IV.iii, appendix 256 and LP, V, no. 276. The redemption of Mary Boleyn’s jewel and details on the satin are mentioned in LP, V, p. 752.

  CHAPTER 11

  The New Year’s gift list is printed in LP, V, no. 686, p. 327. There are extensive accounts of York Place and the building works there in Thurley (1993, pp. 50–55, 137); Thurley (1999, pp. 37–64); and Colvin (1982, pp. 300–15). Additional information is from CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 720; LP V, no. 952. Anne’s handwritten letter to Lady Wingfield is from BL, Cotton MS, Vespasian F. XIII, fol. 198 (formerly fol. 109); printed by Wood (1846, II, pp. 74–75). For its significance, see chap. 21. My quotations describing Wolsey’s death are from Cavendish (1825, I, pp. 310, 320). Cavendish reports Wolsey’s advice to Kingston on p. 321. The loss of Katherine’s jewels is from CSPSp, II, no. 1003, pp. 524–25). Henry’s infatuation for Anne is from CSPSp, II, no. 995, p. 512. Katherine’s letter to Charles V is from LP, V, no. 513. An account of Anne’s investiture as marquess of Pembroke is printed in LP, V, no. 1274; the significance of Anne’s sons’ ability to inherit even if illegitimate is explored by Friedmann (1884, I, pp. 162–63). Rumors that Katherine was to be confined in the Tower are from CSPSp, II, no. 993, p. 509. The tantalizing snippet of Henry’s habit of beginning sentences with well is mentioned in Lisle Letters (1981, III, p. 412). For a very readable analysis of Henry’s belief that the pope had no authority in the matter of the divorce and for his claim for supremacy in the church, see Ives (2004, pp. 129–39). George’s presentation to Convocation is from NA, SP6/2, fols. 81–83 (formerly pp. 187–92), discussed by Lehmberg (1970, p. 114). There is a brief account of the Calais visit in Anglo (1969, pp. 245–46). Hall (1904, II, pp. 218–21) gives a fuller account. Both should be read in conjunction with CSPVenice, IV, no. 824; LP, V, nos. 1484, 1485, 1492; Anon. (1532a, 1532b); STC, nos. 4350, 4351. Ives (2004, p. 159) confirms that Henry lodged at the Exchequer and has a very full description of the building and its gardens on p. 161. Anne’s loss at cards is from The Calais Chronicle (1846, p. 121). Suffolk’s opposition to the Boleyn marriage is described by Ives (2004, p. 164). The rumor that Anne and Henry intended to marry in Calais is from CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1003, p. 527. The date, place, and the officials involved in the secret marriage of Henry and Anne have been much debated: Friedmann (1884, I, pp. 182–84) and Ives (2004, p. 161) should be read in conjunction with Starkey (2004, pp. 461, 463, 474–77) and MacCulloch’s appendix in Thomas Cranmer (1996, pp. 637–38). Starkey and MacCulloch’s argument that there were in fact two ceremonies is compelling. Chapuys’ comment about witnesses is from LP, VI, no. 180. Henry’s remark to the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk is from CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1055. Anne’s ceremonial entry to mass at Easter 1533 is from LP, V, no. 351; Friedmann (1884, I, p. 200) refers to public opposition. The letter concerning the Dunstable judgment is from LP, VI, no. 528. For a discussion of the proceedings at Dunstable, see MacCulloch (1996, pp. 92–94).

  CHAPTER 12

  For my account of the river pageant, I used LP, VI, nos. 556, 562, 563, 584, 585, and 601 in conjunction with Wriothesley (1875–77, I, p. 18) and Hall (1904, II, pp. 229–31). Very readable descriptions of the event are by Ives (2004, pp. 172–74) and Starkey (2004, pp. 493–94). Jane’s letter to George is referred
to in Baynton’s letter: NA, SP 1/76, fol. 195 (stamped fol. 168); LP, VI, no. 613. Katherine’s defiant gesture is from CSPVenice, IV.ii, no. 923. The ceremonies associated with the investiture of Knights of the Bath is sketched out by Bayne (1910), but I relied on the fuller and more contemporary information from BL, Additional MS 38174, and HEH, MS HM 41955, fos. 129f.v.–33. My focus was on Henry Parker, but Ives (2004, pp. 175–76) discusses the Boleyn links of others chosen for knighthood on that occasion. Anne’s procession from the Tower to Westminster is taken from LP, VI, nos. 561, 563, 564, 583, 584, 585, 601, and 602, although 585 is from a manuscript described as “unfavourable to Anne.” The fact that she had a female fool is from LP, X, no. 913, in which the queen pays for a gown and a cap for her. See also Royal Book (1790, p. 123) for traditional regulations for the coronation of a queen. Anne’s appearance was not a result of a whim or personal choice; every last detail conforms to the protocol prescribed. For a description of the various pageants performed for Anne, see Hall (1904, II, pp. 232–36), and for an analysis, see Ives (2004, pp. 219–30) and Starkey (2004, pp. 496–99). BL, Additional MS 71009, fols. 57f.v.–60 (formerly fols. 48f.v.–59) provides the exciting new information I have included on the order of the procession and Jane’s place in it. Courtenay’s pleading letter to Cromwell is from LP, VI, no. 521. Ives (2004, p. 221) discusses Anne’s adoption of the falcon badge.