15 - Uncle to a Future Queen
By the time George returned from France at the end of August 1533, Anne was heavily pregnant, and there were already rumours circulating that the King had begun having affairs. If Henry expected Anne to endure this, as Catherine had done, he could not have been more wrong. The rumours originated through Chapuys, who later admitted that he had got things wrong, and dismissed an argument between Anne and Henry as merely a lover's quarrel.1 Not even Henry would have risked upsetting Anne while she was pregnant with the long-awaited Prince, and in any event there is no evidence to suggest that the marriage was in difficulties as early as August 1533. There is no realistic suggestion that the King's eye had started to wander until the autumn of 1534, by which time the rumours may have had an element of truth, although again they originated almost exclusively from Chapuys. In the autumn of 1533, there was no reason to suppose that even the birth of another useless girl could turn Henry against Anne. Despite the disappointment of the child being a princess rather than the anticipated prince, Anne was still young enough to have more healthy babies, and everyone, including the King, was convinced that the next child would be a boy.
Although George missed the coronation of his sister, he was present at the christening of his niece, Elizabeth. Princess Elizabeth was born on 7 September 1533, having been conceived the previous December, shortly after Anne and Henry returned from Calais. She was christened on Wednesday 10 September at the Church of Observant Friars, Greenwich. Thomas Cranmer was appointed godfather to the future Queen Elizabeth I, and the Marchioness of Exeter, Dowager Marchioness of Dorset and Dowager Duchess of Norfolk stood as godmothers. As Anne was recovering from childbirth she was not present, and it was customary for the King to be absent. The Dowager Duchess of Norfolk carried Elizabeth and the train of the baby's mantle was held by her grandfather the Earl of Wiltshire, the Earl of Derby and the Countess of Kent. On either side of the Duchess walked the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk. John Hussey, William and Thomas Howard, and Elizabeth's uncle George, Lord Rochford, all supported a canopy over the baby.2 3 The Boleyns were determined to put a brave face on the event and it would still be some time before the lack of a son would destroy their equanimity. For now, everything in the garden appeared to remain rosy for them, provided Anne had a son at some point.
Nevertheless, the birth of a daughter was a huge disappointment to everyone. It was hardly surprising that shortly after the christening of the new princess the treacherous Duke of Norfolk became more and more familiar with the imperial ambassador. This familiarity with Chapuys resulted in the complete breakdown of the relationship between Norfolk and Anne Boleyn during 1534. On 15 September, just five days after the christening of Elizabeth, Norfolk and Chapuys attempted to have a private conversation, but had not banked on the presence of Norfolk's annoyingly perceptive nephew. Chapuys wrote to Charles V about the attempt at subterfuge:
At my departure from court I begged Norfolk would allow me to speak with him apart, which he showed no inclination to do for the reasons already mentioned [i.e. Anne's suspicion of him]. He therefore sent the brother of the Lady, as I understand from a man who heard him, on a message to the king's chamber, who returned almost immediately after so as to cut short any conversation which we might be engaged in.4
The vigilant George rushed back in order to prevent a conversation between his uncle and the Boleyns' bitterest enemy. Norfolk may very well have complained that Anne and George were becoming increasingly suspicious of him, but it was hardly unmerited. The siblings had just cause to be concerned over their uncle's rapidly decreasing loyalty. His daughter was now married to the King's only surviving son, albeit an illegitimate one, and there was limited incentive for Norfolk to continue supporting the Boleyns - although as long as the King commanded it, he would continue to do so. The birth of a daughter caused much smug satisfaction among Boleyn enemies, and both Anne and George must have been aware of that.
Sixteenth century queens had a duty to have sons, and not to do so was considered a failure, as it had been with Catherine. Yet in the sixteenth century, there was a high level of childlessness, and a high child mortality rate added to the problem. George and Jane Boleyn were married for around 11 years and had no children, or at least none that survived. There is no record of Jane actually conceiving let alone giving birth, although it is possible that there were miscarriages. By the time of her marriage, Anne was approximately 31, which, although certainly not too old to have further children, would have reduced the likelihood of her conceiving, particularly as she did not have her first child until she was about 32. Added to her problems was the issue of Henry's potency. This was later raised at George Boleyn's trial, which confirmed that rumours regarding the King's potency did circulate, and perhaps there were periods when Henry suffered sexual dysfunction. All of this put enormous pressure on Anne, who would only be fully acknowledged as queen if she produced a son. The stress and pressure alone would have made it even more difficult for her to conceive. Yet despite this, Anne did apparently have a strong maternal bond with Elizabeth. Although the child was moved to her own household shortly after her birth, her mother regularly visited her.
At the time of Elizabeth's birth, her half-sister Princess Mary was living at Beaulieu Palace in Essex. Mary had resided there for several years, but after the birth of Elizabeth she was made to leave the property in order for her to become part of her half-sister's household. This was basically a punishment for her refusal to recognise Elizabeth as heir to the throne. According to Chapuys, Mary had to be forcibly removed from Beaulieu by Sir William Fitzwilliam, the Duke of Norfolk and Henry Norris. Previously, in 1529, George had been granted the Chief Stewardship of the Honour of the Palace of Beaulieu. Beaulieu, situated in Boreham, near Chelmsford, was originally named New Hall. It had belonged to the Earl of Ormond and had been inherited by George's father upon the Earl's death in 1515. Thomas had quickly sold it in 1517 for £1000 to Henry VIII, who had loved the property since he had first set eyes on it. The King greatly improved the property and renamed it Beaulieu, meaning, "a fair place". After Mary was made to leave, it was given to George who also loved the place, and wasted no time in moving in his household and some of his furniture.5 Acquiring Beaulieu as a home was a great coup for George. It was not only a signal of Henry's approval; it also brought one of the Ormond estates back into the Boleyn fold. And Beaulieu was now a truly splendid property, having had thousands of pounds spent by Henry, including a tennis court.6 George and his wife now lived in regal splendour.
Irrespective of George's delight at the acquisition of Beaulieu, there remained the vexing problem of Mary. Her loathing of Anne, and her obstinacy in acknowledging Anne as queen and Elizabeth as heir to the throne, cannot have been helped by ousting her from the home she had lived in for years, or the fact that it was then handed over to the brother of the woman who had usurped her mother.
When Mary joined Elizabeth's household, she was under the charge of Elizabeth's governess, Lady Anne Shelton, who was also Anne and George's aunt. According to Chapuys, the Duke of Norfolk and George Boleyn rebuked Lady Shelton for treating Mary with too much kindness and respect, saying the girl should be treated like the bastard she was.7 As with most of Chapuys' reports, there is no supporting evidence, and no indication as to the source of his claims. He was regularly fed information by Boleyn enemies, and obviously swallowed any criticism with relish. Although George had a natural antipathy towards Mary, this was not true of his uncle. Norfolk was prepared to facilitate a marriage between his niece and his monarch if that was the will of the King, but his natural allegiance was toward Catherine and Mary. That said, this would not have prevented him from carrying out the King's orders with respect to Mary. Chapuys' dispatches frequently give Anne Boleyn sole responsibility for Mary's treatment; yet it was Henry who was determined to break his daughter's will. The rebuke, if it was in fact made to Lady Shelton by George and Norfolk, was provoked by to the King's increasing hostility to
wards his proud, obstinate daughter. As Anne's aunt, Lady Shelton could not be seen to fail the King. It was not until Henry's harshness towards Mary continued, and even worsened, following the Boleyn siblings' deaths, that the girl learned that her treatment was not solely due to Boleyn manipulation.
Although it was the King's command that Mary should not be allowed to call herself Princess, Mary's stubbornness did remain a thorn in the Boleyns' side. They needed Mary to accept Elizabeth as the rightful heir. Although Henry's marriage to Catherine had been pronounced null and void, at the time of Mary's birth the marriage had still been considered legal. In canon law this meant she was not subsequently judged to be illegitimate, and she would remain heir to the throne in the event of Henry's death, irrespective of the Act of Succession passed in March 1534. This was a direct threat to Anne's daughter and George's niece, and the Boleyn instincts was to fight.
At his trial, George publicly exhibited his commitment to his niece in dramatic and courageous style; when it came to protecting his family's interests, he, like the King, was not beneath putting pressure on a 17 year-old girl, albeit through a third party. But in George there was also the voice of reason. It had been him that had warned Anne, following her threat to have Mary killed, that this would insult the King. He may have gone so far as to put pressure on Mary to accept Elizabeth as rightful heir, but he would sensibly go no further. Anne did make three separate attempts to befriend Mary, two in 1534 and one in January 1536 when the girl's mother was on her deathbed, but unsurprisingly these attempts were all rejected. Mary's justified rudeness caused even more resentment from Anne, which in turn caused more resentment from Mary.
All of this would have been irrelevant if Anne had given birth to a son. There would no longer have been any argument as to the succession because a son would automatically have taken precedence over all previous daughters. Unfortunately for the Boleyns, of course, that never happened.
16 - French Alliance Put to the Test
On 12 October 1533, the Pope finally had his meeting with the King of France, the meeting which Francis had previously refused to abandon.1 This took place in the presence of the English ambassador, Bishop Stephen Gardiner, who had taken over from Norfolk and George Boleyn as Henry's chief representative at the French court after their return to England in August. The only concession Gardiner was able to obtain at the meeting was that the Pope would agree to delay putting into effect his censures on Henry, in particular the excommunication, by a further month.
Henry was a proud and arrogant man who was effectively being blackmailed by Rome into submitting to its will under threat of excommunication. Henry could also be a shallow, egotistical man who allowed himself to be easily influenced if the advice being given would ultimately result in him getting his own way. Playing on his ego and desire for Anne, the Boleyns and their supporters, in particular Thomas Cranmer, manoeuvred him towards an absolute division of the English church from the authority of Rome. As King of England, why should Henry be bound by any other jurisdiction? There commenced a game of bluff between London and Rome, with the Pope threatening censures and excommunication on Henry, and Henry threatening a break with Rome. Henry was a born-and-bred Catholic, and his basic religious ideals remained the same throughout his life - hence his dogged determination to influence the Pope to agree to the annulment. George and Anne Boleyn were genuinely interested in, and motivated by, Reform; the break with Rome took place not because of a similar commitment from Henry, but because he needed to reform the church in order to get his own way.
George and Anne played on the King's self-centred egotism to get their own way. As his wife, Anne could influence Henry. Up until his fascination with her diminished, she could speak to the King in a way that nobody else would dare; the rest of the Boleyn faction could only advise. However strong Anne may have been though, particularly for a woman in the sixteenth century, no single person could have done what she did on her own. She needed her friends and family behind her. Her brother, through love as well as selfish motivations of his own, provided her with a level of committed support through ten long years that enabled her to challenge the religious convictions of a nation. It was his strength of character, so similar to her own, that resulted in Anne asking for him following her arrest, and the same strength of character that necessitated his own death.
1534 was to prove an eventful year. On 23 March, Rome voted unanimously for the validity of Henry's marriage to Catherine.2 This meant that as far as Rome was concerned Henry's marriage to Anne was invalid, and Henry was a bigamist. This also meant that Rome deemed Elizabeth illegitimate. From the Boleyns' point of view, this made the eventual break with Rome essential. The French cardinals had absented themselves from the Rome vote and therefore, although on the one hand King Francis I was supporting Henry's cause, on the other hand he was only prepared for this to be passive, not active. Events in Rome coincided with the passing of the Act of Succession in London, making only the children of Henry and Anne legitimate heirs to the throne.
The Act of Succession, and the Act of Supremacy passed eight months later, were major triumphs for the Boleyns, but this is not to say that Henry and Anne did not continue to have problems. There was the ever-present question of the Princess Mary, in addition to the fact that Anne was still without a son. Anne's unpopularity was growing, and this was exacerbated by the political situation abroad. Although Henry relied on the alliance with France, Henry and Francis never completely trusted each other. Henry's lack of trust was exacerbated by Francis's failure to provide active support for Henry's cause in Rome, as demonstrated by the French cardinals absenting themselves from the March vote.
Henry VIII's matrimonial difficulties caused huge upheaval to England's foreign policy. Had Henry maintained his policy of neutrality between France and Spain this would have secured England's safety abroad. His marriage to Anne and his treatment of Catherine, Charles V's aunt, ensured reconciliation with the Emperor was impossible. In addition to this, Henry's alliance with France was under constant pressure and suspicion. This suspicion as to the King of France's loyalty resulted in a further embassy to France for George Boleyn. In April 1534, George was chosen, along with Sir William Fitzwilliam, to undertake a further mission to obtain an audience with Francis and his sister, Marguerite, the Queen of Navarre.3 Their instructions were to urge Francis to abandon his alliance with the Pope and actively declare himself against him; to suggest that Francis should invade Milan, but without taking subsidies from the Pope; to urge Francis to adopt similar legislation as had been passed in England against the Pope's supremacy; to arrange a meeting between the two Kings, the Queen of Navarre and Anne in the near future; and to further urge Francis to refuse to give the hand of his daughter to the King of Scotland.
Their mission was kept secret and was not generally known in the court, again much to the annoyance of Chapuys. They departed on 16 April with Chapuys frantically trying to find out the purpose of the embassy. On 17 April, George and Fitzwilliam wrote to Lord Lisle regarding a delay caused by bad weather:
This shall be to advertise [you] yesterday we took our passage at Dover with a very stout wind to have landed at Calais. Howbeit, when we were somewhat off the shore, the wind uttered at northeast, so as we co[lde] not fetch Calais, but were forced to land at a village [five miles] from this town [Boulogne- sur-Mer] called Utterselles: by reason whereof, considering the haste of our journey, we could not conveniently [see your] lordship at this time. Nevertheless at our return we w[ill] not fail to do...4
Due to the delay, although the envoys left for Calais on 16 April, they were unable to meet with Francis until the 21st at Coucy-le-Château. Upon their arrival, George and Fitzwilliam received a warm welcome from Francis and his sister, and a lavish reception party was arranged for them.5 On this occasion, though, Francis had no intention of agreeing to English demands. The warm greeting towards Henry's representatives was partly an extravagant attempt to soften the blow of their eventual failure. Altho
ugh they became aware of the French king's attitude early on in the negotiations, neither George nor Fitzwilliam was prepared to give up without a fight, and four days of negotiation followed. George Boleyn in particular would have wanted to successfully negotiate with Francis for an outcome satisfactory to Henry. To go home a failure would certainly raise allegations of his incompetence from his envious rivals, which in turn would lead to the inevitable malicious comments about his royal connections. George's position was that of having to work three times as hard for the same amount of respect. As can be seen from his manic work ethic throughout the early 1530s, he was not a man to sit back and take advantage of his position. His pride alone would not allow him to do so.
George Boleyn: Tudor Poet, Courtier & Diplomat Page 15
