by Julia Fox
CHAPTER 13
All the standard accounts of Anne’s coronation derive from Anon. (1533); STC, no. 656; Hall (1904, II, pp. 237–39); Wriothesley (1875–77, I, pp. 19–20); LP, VI, nos. 584, 601, 661. In addition, I have used BL, Additional MS 71009, fols. 57f.v.–60, for vivid details that are not in any of the above abstracts or references. For the traditional protocol, I followed Royal Book (1790, pp. 123–24), Bayne (1907, pp. 650–73), and Loach (1994). Modern descriptions covering the event but lacking the benefit of the information in the BL Additional MS are by Ives (2004, pp. 178–79) and Starkey (2004, pp. 500–1). What is particularly intriguing is that Anne appears to have used St. Edward’s Chair as well as St. Edward’s Crown. Katherine, her predecessor, had been crowned only with Queen Edith’s Crown as the major diadem was, naturally, reserved for Henry. Both Ives and Starkey point out the significant use of the crown, and Ives agrees that Anne also used the chair. If she was given the king’s crown, rather than that of the consort, it is only one step further to allow it to be conveyed on the correct chair. BL, Additional MS 71009, describes how the chair was decorated and places it on the platform. It is this document that also describes the chair that I think she used as a throne. It was customary for more than one chair to be used by the monarch at coronations and it seems likely to place that upon a platform also. For comparison with the placing of the chair for Elizabeth I’s coronation, see Knighton and Mortimer (2003, p. 124). For Henry’s personal revision of the coronation oath, see Ellis (1824–46, 2nd series, I, p. 176). The coronation banquet is meticulously described by Hall (1904, II, pp. 239–42); Wriothesley (1875–77, I, pp. 21–22); and LP, VI, nos. 561, 562, 584, 601, 661. Baynton’s reference to the Duke of Suffolk is from NA, SP 1/76, fol. 195 (stamped fol. 168); LP, VI, no. 613. For Suffolk’s rivalry with Norfolk, see Gunn (1988, pp. 121–27).
CHAPTER 14
George’s membership of Parliament is from LP, VI, no. 123. Chapuys lists him as being in the Privy Council in CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1072. CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1127, shows how his presence could be a dampener to conversation. The wardship of Edmund Sheffield is listed in the king’s grants of April 1533, taken from LP, VI, no. 419(8), with background information on the boy from Bindoff (1982, III, p. 305). Suffolk’s wardship of Katherine Willoughby is from LP, IV, no. 5336(12). George’s hawks are mentioned in LP, VI, no. 1515, and LP, VII, no. 1273. Anne’s litter is from LP, VI, no. 720; items from the great wardrobe are from LP, VI, no. 602, the royal plate is from LP, VI, no. 1364, and Anne’s jointure is from LP, VII, no. 419(25). The huge list of lands and rents originally given to Katherine, from which my highly abridged details come, is LP, I.i, no. 94(35). Thurley (1993, p. 36) has a tantalizing description of Baynard’s Castle. Of the many references to Katherine’s christening cloth, I have used CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1107. The references to Katherine’s response to Henry’s messengers derive from LP, VI, no. 805. Chapuys’ antagonism to Anne comes from CSPSp, IV.ii, nos. 1058, 1061. His accounts of the receptions accorded to Katherine and Mary are from CSPSp, IV.ii, nos. 1100, 1107. Of the many references to English antagonism toward Anne, I have chosen LP, VI, nos. 923, 964. Chapuys’ hopeful reference to Henry’s falling in love with someone else is from LP, VI, no. 1054; his shrewd comment about lovers’ quarrels is from LP, VI, no. 1069. Henry’s choice of name for his son is from LP, VI, no. 1070. Sir Edward Baynton’s highly informative letter is from NA, SP 1/76, fol. 195 (stamped fol. 168), and LP, VI, no. 613. The Privy Purse Expenses yield further fascinating details: LP, V, p. 761, for instance, has Weston partnered with Anne at Pope Julius’s game. References to Jane’s possessions are from NA, SP 1/104, fol. 82 (LP, X, no. 1011). Henry’s desire to spare Anne worry over Clement VII’s actions is from LP, VI, no. 918. Clearly, a love of learning and study was inculcated in the Morleys. Books associated with the family are discussed by Axton and Carley (2000, pp. 70–72). The first reference to Jane’s scholar is from LP, X, no. 1251, but sight of the original letter, now NA, SP 1/104, fol. 282 (stamped fol. 253), rather than the printed abstract is illuminating, because Foster needed help at the very time the Boleyns were fighting for their lives. Fosters abounded in Aylesbury as the local records show: WRO, microfilm 705:349/12946/498724, 705:349/12946/498704, 705:349/12946/498700, 705:349/12946/498353. Members of Eton College were tracked in Sterry (1943), who confuses and conflates two different William Fosters who later overlapped at King’s College, and therefore presumably also did at Eton. The career of Jane’s William Foster at King’s College is from KCAR/4/1/6, MS vol. 14 (unfoliated; entries dated between August 1535 and October 1536), not to be confused with a Fellow of King’s by the same name who had already graduated Master of Arts and went on to be bursar. The newly discovered manuscript of Wall’s translation of the French treatise is from NA, SP 9/31/2. The underlinings and corrections may well be George’s. According to Carley (2004, p. 133), Suffolk gave George the copy text, but this was still in French. The new document shows that George took it one step further. My account of Anne’s birthing suite follows Royal Book (1790, pp. 125–26); LP, VI, nos. 890, 1069; and Cressy (1997, p. 21). See also Thurley (1993, pp. 140–41), for further detail on Anne’s chamber. Despite fears about the dangers of childbirth, mortality figures for mothers, as Schofield (1986) convincingly argues, were far lower than was popularly believed.
CHAPTER 15
The birth of Elizabeth crops up in many documents. I have chosen Chapuys’ fairly stark account in LP, VI, no. 1112. The officially pre-prepared document announcing the birth of a “prince,” which had to be hastily altered to “princes,” is from State Papers (1830–52, I, p. 407); there was room only for one s in princess. The rituals of childbirth are from Cressy (1997, pp. 80–86) and Harris (2002, pp. 99–107). Information on Jane’s nephew is from Bindoff (1982, III, pp. 58–59). Lyst’s letter to Anne concerning the Observant Friars is printed in Ellis (1824–46, 3rd series, II, pp. 245–49). Full accounts of the christening are from Hall (1904, II, pp. 242–44) and LP VI, no. 1111. The official protocol for royal baptisms is from BL, Additional MS 71009, fols. 27–28f.v. The partisanship of the Marchioness of Exeter is from LP, VI, no. 1125; see also Ives (2004, p. 185). Chapuys, ever vigilant of anything that might harm Mary, informed Charles V of his fears about the baby’s name: LP, VI, no. 1112. He also could not resist informing Charles of Suffolk’s sudden marriage to Katherine Willoughby: CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1123. Anne’s determination that her daughter must be dressed as a princess comes from the list of some of the items she purchased for her: LP, X, no. 913.
CHAPTER 16
Anne’s pregnancy is from LP, VII, nos. 232, 566, 958 and CSPSp, V.i, no. 7. The significance of Henry’s purchase of a silver cradle, documented by LP, VII, no. 1688, is discussed by Ives (2004, p. 191). Lady Honor Lisle, the wife of the deputy of Calais, wrote to Anne several times, fully aware of the benefits gained from a highly placed patron. She also sent many gifts to the queen, among which were the dog and the linnet. See LP, VII, nos. 92, 654. The account of the dog’s death and Henry’s solicitude is from Lisle Letters (1981, II, no. 299a, p. 331). Henry’s dogs, both buckhounds and pets, often got lost, usually in forests. The rewards to the finders of Ball and Cut are listed in LP, V, pp. 749, 750. The Boleyns’ interest in the new religious ideas is well known. Chapuys often remarks upon it: LP, X, no. 699. The reference to shirts for the poor is part of an account of Anne’s charitable works described in the life written by George Wyatt, the grandson of Sir Thomas, printed in Cavendish (1825, II, p. 207). While George Wyatt never met his grandfather, the suggestion is that there were family stories on which he could draw. Perhaps. The most outstanding work on the books Anne possessed is by James Carley. He found the inscription in the Epistles and Gospels and identified it as from George: Carley (2004, p. 128). Other references to Anne’s books are from Carley (2004, pp. 125–31) and Ives (2004, pp. 239–40, 269–73). There are many lists of New Year’s gifts and recipients. I have used LP, VI, nos. 1382 and 1589 for Anne; see also Ives (2004, p. 216) fo
r Jane’s presentation of a shirt. Anne’s gift to Henry is from LP, VII, no. 9. Unfortunately, Henry’s present to Anne is unrecorded. The dog collars are mentioned in LP, V, no. 686. For a very vivid account of Henry receiving his presents while Tuke notes them all down, see Lisle Letters (1981, IV, no. 1086). For relations with Katherine, I have drawn on CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1100; CSPSp, V.i, no. 4. For Mary, see CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1132; CSPSp, V.i, nos. 1, 17, 22; LP, IX, no. 873. Greenwich references are from Thurley (1993, pp. 130, 190) and LP, V, pp. 750, 758. Chapuys informs us of George’s acquisition of Beaulieu: CSPSp, IV.ii, no. 1137. Details on the rooms and construction are from Thurley (1993, pp. 44, 73, 103, 164, 170–71, 186, 196) and Colvin (1982, p. 172). I have drawn on the detailed inventory of the house’s furnishings and appointments in NA, E/101/622/31. See also Starkey, Ward, and Hawkyard (1998, nos. 789, 967, 1164, 1307, 1701, 1888, 1889, 13147, 13685, 13686, 13706, 13708, 13741, 17221) for lists of some of the items found at Beaulieu and confiscated goods from George and Jane, which became part of the royal property. Intriguingly, Jane appears to have wangled the great Rochford bed back from the king, as it is listed in the inventory as her property rather than George’s.
CHAPTER 17
A very full and readable account of the main opposition to Henry’s religious policies is given by George Bernard. He also provides an analysis of recent research on each opponent. For Elizabeth Barton, see Bernard (2005, pp. 87–101); for the Carthusians, see pp. 160–67; for Syon, see pp. 167–72; for Fisher, see pp. 101–25; and for More, see pp. 125–51. For Elizabeth Barton, I followed LP, VI, nos. 1419, 1464, 1465, 1466, 1519, 1546, and LP, VII, no. 522. Of the many references to those more ordinary folk who spoke against Anne, the divorce, or the royal supremacy, I chose LP, VII, nos. 498, 522, 1652; LP, VIII, nos. 196, 278, 809; and LP, VI, no. 1503. For Cavendish’s remark on Wolsey’s warning to Kingston, see Cavendish (1825, I, p. 321). The quotations from the writings of Lord Morley are printed and discussed in Wright (1943, pp. lxxi, lxxxviii, xciv, xcv). Morley’s religious views are discussed by Richard Rex in Axton and Carley (2000, pp. 87–107). Reynold’s speech is from LP, VIII, no. 661. Information concerning the trials and deaths of the Carthusians and the spectators’ reactions is from NA, KB 8/7/1; LP, VIII, nos. 661, 666; and CSPSp, V.i, no. 156. My account of Fisher’s conduct, incarceration, and trial is from NA, KB 8/7/2; LP, VII, nos. 498, 499, 500, 1563; and LP, VIII, no. 856. The case of More is discussed by Guy (2000b, pp. 186–205). He assesses More’s reasons for refusing to take the oath and describes his trial. While both Fisher and More chose to die rather than betray their consciences, they do so for quite different reasons. Fisher was an outright papalist; More was not. He believed in the superiority of church councils and the received wisdom of the church. A consensus was needed if change was to happen: one individual kingdom or country could not go against the universality of the Catholic Church, the common body of Christendom. For the list of high-profile judges in More’s case, see NA, KB 8/7/3. For other details, I mainly used LP, VIII, nos. 815, 988, 996, and LP, VII, nos. 1114, 1116. More’s speeches at his trial are translated from the Paris Newsletter, printed in Harpsfield (1932, pp. 263–64). Accounts of Margaret’s last meeting with her father are from Roper (1935, pp. 97–99) and from the Paris Newsletter in Harpsfield (1932, p. 265). More’s last letter is from Rogers (1961, pp. 256–57). Suffolk’s bid for More’s Chelsea lands is from LP, VIII, no. 1101.
CHAPTER 18
Henry’s latest infatuation and its consequences for Jane and others are pieced together from LP, VII, nos. 1257, 1554; CSPSp, V.i, nos. 97, 118. The fall from favor of the unidentified lady briefly in Henry’s affections is described by Chapuys: LP, VIII, no. 263. For a fuller analysis of this episode, see Ives (2004, pp. 194–95). There is no record of Jane’s return to court, but we would not necessarily expect to find one. Chapuys, the source of so much that was going on at the time, was alert for signs of Henry tiring of Anne, of flirting with other women and so on, and fearful for the lives and prospects of Katherine and Mary. Having reported the incident involving Jane, her fate was low on his agenda. When individuals were sent from court, however, many did come back after a short period, possibly after the next court move or “remove” (as it was known), so it is reasonable to assume that Jane returned sometime in the early months of 1535, before the executions of Fisher and More. Chapuys’ report of the prophecy is from CSPSp, V.i, no. 230. Flamock’s story is taken from Puttenham (1589, p. 324). Mary Carey’s exile from court is from LP, VII, no. 1554, and her letter to Cromwell is from Wood (1846, II, pp. 193–97). Anne’s quarrels with Norfolk are taken from LP, VIII, nos. 1, 826. For possible causes of their estrangement, see Ives (2004, p. 202). Boorde (1547) contains fascinating details on medical conditions and suggested remedies; STC, no. 3373.5. Information on William Foster, a scholar at King’s College, Cambridge, is from NA, SP 1/104, fol. 282 (stamped as 253); KCAR 4/1/6, MS vol. 14 (unfoliated; entries dated between August 1535 and October 1536); NA, C 1/983/2; LP, IX, no. 708; and LP, X, nos. 1238, 1251. He is not to be confused with a Fellow of King’s by the same name, also appearing in KCAR 4/1/6, MS vols. 13–14 (unfoliated), who had already graduated Master of Arts and went on to be bursar. For information on King’s College Chapel, see Harrison (1953). The screen is still in situ today: the visitor can see the carved initials and symbols commissioned when Henry saw Anne as his true and last wife. Ives (2004, pp. 243, 249–50) provides a fuller description and analysis of the screen.
CHAPTER 19
Anne’s turbulent relationship with Mary and Katherine is chronicled in CSPSp, V.i, no. 68, and LP VIII, nos. 666, 1105. Her assertion that she would not become pregnant while they were alive is from CSPSp. V.i, no. 144. Chapuys’ plot for Mary’s escape is taken from LP, VIII, nos. 263, 501. Mary’s ill health is discussed in Loades (1989, pp. 80–82). Katherine’s heartrending letter begging to nurse her daughter is from LP, VIII, no. 200. She refers to Chapuys as her “especial friend” in CSPSp, V.i, no. 134. Henry’s attitude toward his former wife and daughter is taken from CSPSp, V.i, no. 263, and LP, VIII, no. 263. Lady Shelton’s letter is from LP, VII, no. 1172. Anne’s religious zeal is taken from LP, VII, nos. 693, 710. See also Ives (2004, p. 286), and Ives (1996, pp. 83–102). For Anne’s charitable works, see Ives (2004, p. 284). Her wealth can be estimated on the basis of an account of income and expenses for the year 1534–35 compiled by her receiver-general: LP, IX, no. 477. A list of items taken from Baynard’s Castle is from LP, VIII, no. 209. For my theory that her interest in poor relief and education came from family tradition as well as her own religious beliefs, see the wills of Sir Geoffrey Boleyn and Sir William Boleyn: NA, PROB 11/5, PROB 11/14. Chapuys’ report on Anne’s comeback is from CSPSp, V.i, no. 174. Her remark to Henry that he should be grateful to her is from LP, VIII, no. 666. The proposed marriage for Elizabeth is mentioned by Chapuys: CSPSp, V.i, no. 213. George’s interview with his sister is from LP, VIII, no. 826. Henry’s letter from the heyday of their romance referring to George is from Halliwell (1848, I, pp. 317–18) (LP, IV, no. 4539). The royal progress is taken from LP, IX, nos. 639, 571; for fuller analysis, see Ives (2004, pp. 291–92) and Starkey (2004, pp. 524–32). The demonstration in support of Mary is from LP, IX, no. 566. Ives (2004, p. 293) believes that Jane was one of the women involved, while Starkey in Axton and Carley (2000, p. 14) disagrees. The evidence for her involvement rests entirely on the handwritten marginal note, but that is too vague and inconclusive to be relied on. I feel that Jane’s colors were still firmly nailed to the Boleyn mast at this point. Anne’s downfall was not really in sight. Even had Jane suddenly developed deep feelings toward Mary, she was sensible enough to realize that taking part in such a demonstration was incredibly risky. She had already felt the force of Henry’s anger when she was sent from court; to invite that again would be foolhardy. Henry’s switch toward Madge Shelton is from LP, VIII, no. 263; Anne’s sudden outburst is from LP, VIII, no. 48. Ives views this laughter as genuine, but I suspect there
was a little more to it than that. When Anne was imprisoned, she would often break out into uncontrollable laughter, presumably her reaction to stress. She had behaved in exactly the same way when she had met the ambassadors and had remarked on Henry’s forgetting a message because he was talking to another woman.
CHAPTER 20
Katherine’s last days and death are pieced together from LP, IX, no. 1037; LP, X, no. 28; CSPSp, V.ii, nos. 3, 4, 9. Starkey (2004, pp. 541–49), gives an excellent account of her illness and death. Court reaction is from CSPSp, V.ii, nos. 9, 13. Anne’s offer to befriend Mary is reported by Chapuys, CSPSp, V.ii, no. 9. The banter in Anne’s chamber, which becomes crucial in the condemnation of Anne, Norris, and Weston, is referred to in LP, X, no. 793. Henry’s ivory chess set is listed among the goods seized from Baynard’s Castle: LP, VIII, no. 209. His riding accident is from LP, X, nos. 200, 427. Katherine’s funeral has many references. I have used LP, X, no. 284, as a basis, combined with CSPSp, V.ii, nos. 9, 13, 21. For the fate of the Observant Friars, see Bernard (2005, pp. 151–60). Anne’s miscarriage is from CSPSp, V.ii, nos. 21, 29. Jane’s knowledge of Henry’s lack of sexual prowess is repeated at George’s trial, CSPSp, V.ii, no. 55. Jane Seymour is first mentioned by Chapuys, CSPSp, V.ii, no. 21. The gold purse incident and Henry’s offer to meet her on neutral ground is from CSPSp, V.ii, no. 43. Further grants to the Boleyns, even at this late stage, are listed in LP, X, nos. 243, 597. The meeting between Chapuys and Anne is from CSPSp, V.ii, no. 43a. Henry’s revealing decision to elect Carew as a Knight of the Garter instead of George is from CSPSp, V.ii, no. 47. For an account of the May Day joust, see Ives (2004, p. 320).
