For George Boleyn to have undertaken the position of Lord Warden would be today's equivalent of appointing a 30 year-old with no legal experience as a leading High Court judge. The Boleyn self-assurance and self-confidence meant that the high responsibility was merely viewed as a challenge to be embraced. To be able to undertake the role with panache and competency would further endorse the perception held both by the court and the general public that the Boleyn brother was an intelligent and gifted young man in his own right, not one who had to rely on his sister for preferment. Ironically, success for George Boleyn was more essential to his pride and self-respect than for any other courtier. As a favoured brother of the Queen Consort, it would have been easy for him to rest on his laurels. But pride and exuberance do not sit easy with lethargy and idleness. He lived in a world of treachery and backstabbing. He had to prove himself, and in order to do that he had to be better than anyone else. This probably added to the view of him as being arrogant; how much of this was due to a defensive response to the situation he was in, and how much to his natural personality and character, cannot be known.
George clearly embraced the role of Lord Warden. Examples of writs he issued and examples of his influence are contained in the state papers. On 23 June 1535, a matter of days after returning to England following a mission to France, a writ was issued by George to the bailiff and jurates of Romney and Old Romney, to provide a jury at Lyde on Thursday 1 July. The writ was issued from Dover Castle. The bailiffs and jurates duly sent the names of 12 jurors according to his writ. The presentation of the jury on 1 July concerned "lead, wine, sugar loaves, &c. found at Weis end, Langard, Brockes end, the Forland, the Nasse, &c".7 A similar writ was issued by the Lord Warden on 3 August to produce a jury on the seashore at Lyde at 10 a.m. on 12 August.8 On 15 September 1535, a verdict was given at Newcastle before George Boleyn by Sir John Heron and his fellows, regarding Sir Humphrey Lisle and Alex Schafto who had absented themselves from the Warden's court on account of indictments that had been found against them by freeholders of the country.9 The energy and efficiency required to fulfil the duties of Lord Warden, while still maintaining a political and ambassadorial role and a high court profile, confirm what a hardworking and remarkable young man George Boleyn was.
Ominously, George is also mentioned in his role of Lord Warden in a letter written by Lord Lisle to Cromwell dated 2 July 1535. It was regarding the issue of the forfeiture of wool. Lisle writes, "As touching the forfeit of wools, I assure you, if I had not prevented the same before, my Lord of Rochford had had it himself; and so he showed me when I came before him, or else he had been sure of it! Wherefore mine only trust is in you above all creatures..."10 It was becoming apparent to anyone in the know that Cromwell sought to be the sole source of all benefits, and that suits to the King that did not have his support should be prevented. He had expressed dissatisfaction to Lisle who had prevented forfeiture without seeking Cromwell's express authority. Lisle's defence was that if he had not done so then Lord Rochford would have carried out the action instead. By July 1535, Cromwell sought to be the sole intermediary with the King. Although Cromwell could bully the likes of Lisle, George Boleyn, as with Henry Norris and Francis Bryan, was not so easily subdued. Although the issue of the forfeiture of wool is a minor one, it does not bode well for future events.
The relationship between Anne Boleyn and Cromwell has been well documented, but there was at times a rather fraught relationship between George Boleyn and Cromwell. This is further emphasised in an earlier letter sent by George to Cromwell on 26 November 1534. It is worth quoting in full because it exemplifies Cromwell's attempt to undermine the young Lord, and George's unrestrained indignation:
On Sunday last the mayor of Rye and others were with me at court, and I have taken such order and direction with them as I trust is right and just. I have commanded the mayor to return to Rye, and see the matter ordered according to the order I have taken in it before. He now advertises me that you have commanded him to attend you, and not obey this order. If you have been truly informed, or will command the mayor to declare you the order I have taken, I trust you will find no fault in it. Touching the last complaint put up to you by one of London, I never heard of it before; but when the mayor goes down he may cause the other party to appear before you at your pleasure.11
Cromwell had countermanded one of George's orders given as Lord Warden, and this was something the young Lord was not prepared to tolerate. The young man was not only angry, but also probably humiliated at being made to look as if he were subservient. The tone of the letter is quite obviously self-righteous indignation. Dangerously, he was not afraid to show his anger to the King's chief minister, or to make no attempt to camouflage his displeasure. In 1534, Cromwell had taken him for granted, but he would not do so 18 months later.
Figure 1 - George Boleyn's cipher
Figure 2 - George's inscription in Les Lamentations de Matheolus
Figure 3 - Letter from George Boleyn to Henry VIII
Figure 4 - George's dedication and preface to Les Epistres
Figure 5 - Engraving of Anne Boleyn
Figure 6 - Engraving of Henry VIII
Figure 7 - Engraving of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury
Figure 8 - Engraving of Thomas Cromwell
Figure 9 - Engraving of Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk
Figure 10 - Engraving of Francis I of France
Figure 11 - Engraving of the marriage of Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII
Figure 12 - Engraving of Hever Castle
Figure 13 - Engraving of the arrest of Anne Boleyn
Figure 14 - Engraving of the House of Lords in the
reign of Henry VIII
Figure 15 - Tower of London
Figure 16 - Chapel of St. Peter ad Vincula, Tower of London
Figure 17 - Tower Hill scaffold memorial
Figure 18 - Dover Castle
Part 3 - The End of an Era
18 Crisis at Home and Abroad
In July 1534, George Boleyn was riding high. He was promoted to positions of trust and importance far beyond his years - he was still only around 29 to 30 years of age. The King does not appear to have had anything but confidence in his young brother-in-law; at no time was his competence challenged, save by Boleyn enemies abroad. Yet despite George's influence and importance continuing to blossom, by the middle of that year cracks were starting to show in the Boleyn stronghold.
Anne appears to have lost a baby through a premature stillbirth in the summer of 1534. At the time, her brother was in France obtaining a postponement of the meeting scheduled to take place between the French and English Kings because of Anne's pregnancy. The stillbirth, would have been extremely distressing news for George's return home. He would have left England on a high, his sister pregnant with the anticipated future King of England, only to return home to a highly distressed and emotional Anne, her dreams momentarily in tatters, and a disappointed King. Then, according to Chapuys, in the autumn of 1534 George's wife, Lady Rochford was banished from court, supposedly for conspiring with the Queen to have a rival removed: "the young lady whom this king has been accustomed to serve".1 It has been suggested that this lady was Jane Seymour, but this cannot be correct as the King's interest in Jane did not begin until much later. On 13 October Chapuys reported that Lady Rochford had plotted with Anne to pick a quarrel with Henry's new fancy and force her to withdraw. However, as Chapuys himself acknowledges, he regularly got facts wrong, and in addition to this his communications were always slanted to show Anne in a bad light. This could have simply been wishful thinking on his part. If there were a lady at court who had taken the King's fancy, it would appear that the relationship was purely superficial because it obviously did not last long. Even Chapuys himself admitted that not too much importance should be placed on it, since Henry was fickle and Anne knew how to manage him. Irrespective of the seriousness of the relationship, it was a sign that the King's affections had started to stray. Anne was n
o Catherine; she would not put up with it quietly.
With regards to Jane Rochford's role in all this, if the story is true it shows that Anne was close enough to Jane to confide in her and seek her help with what was surely a delicate matter. However, it may be that Anne chose her as an ally simply because she was George's wife, and therefore a member of the family who could possibly be trusted more than an outsider. Lady Rochford's banishment is mentioned in two dispatches from Chapuys. In the second, dated 19 December, he confirms that his previous information regarding her was correct. If true, and Jane Rochford was not only banished but also banished for the reason given by Chapuys, there is no record of her return to court. Up until the arrest and trial of her husband, there is no further mention of Lady Rochford; she may have been present at a demonstration in favour of the Princess Mary, which took place in the summer of 1535, but her name is actually not mentioned in the account of the demonstration and subsequent imprisonments. The story of her involvement comes from a note in the margin of that account mentioning "Millor de Rochesfort et millord de Guillaume".2
It was also in the autumn of 1534 that George's eldest sister, the widowed Mary Boleyn, became pregnant and secretly married William Stafford, a man of inferior rank and status. From the Boleyns' point of view, Mary, being the Queen's sister, had betrayed and embarrassed them by her shameful behaviour, and by not seeking her family's permission to marry. Anne, as queen, was now head of the Boleyn family, and should have been consulted. Anne was so furious with her sister that she banished her from court as soon as the marriage came to light. It is not certain whether the sisters ever met again. Chapuys suggests that Mary's banishment was justified because she "had been found guilty of misconduct, it would not have been becoming to see her at court."3
Shortly after her banishment, Mary wrote to Cromwell begging him to speak to her various relatives for financial support, saying, "Pray my lord my father and my lady to be good to us… and my lord Norfolk and my brother… I dare not write to them, they are so cruel against us."4 It is clear that Thomas and George Boleyn shared Anne's anger at Mary's pregnancy and poor marriage choice. Thomas's reaction was probably due to losing the chance of placing Mary in a marriage that would have proved more beneficial to him. Anne and George's anger was most likely to have been caused by pride. The nobility were not expected to marry for love; marriages were made for family advantage. Mary could not be allowed to flaunt her pregnancy around court to the embarrassment of her relations. The siblings' fury at their sister's indiscretions can only have been exacerbated by her decision to write to an outsider to intervene on her behalf with her family. The Boleyns would have been mortified that Mary chose to ask Cromwell, a mere commoner, to help her and to become involved in their family affairs. Whether George ever saw Mary again after her banishment is something we will probably never know.
Mary Boleyn, like Jane Rochford, is a difficult woman to pinpoint. Extant records are virtually silent with regard to her movements. There is no way of really knowing what Mary's relationship with George was like, but bearing in mind his ability to cut her off following her banishment, they were probably not close. Likewise, she made no known attempt to contact him following his arrest. Mary's character and personality was very different to her brother's, and George seems to have been able, whether unconsciously or by design, to distance himself emotionally from anyone whose character or views he could not or would not understand. That ability probably owed itself more to his belief in his own infallibility than anything else, as he seemed to be unable or unwilling to accept that anyone of worth could possibly disagree with his view of the world.
Despite the banishments of Jane and Mary, in the autumn of 1534 Anne and George Boleyn had far more important things on their minds. On 26 September 1534, Pope Clement VII died and Cardinal Alexander Farnese was created Pope Paul III. On 15 October, Sir Gregorio da Casale, Henry VIII's agent in Rome and a man well known to the Boleyns, wrote to George advising him that the whole of Rome was rejoicing in the death of the Pope, and that the creation of Paul III had given the greatest pleasure.5 Paul III was considered friendly towards Henry and ill-disposed to the Emperor. Despite the passing of the Act of Supremacy in November, Henry still held some vague hope of an eventual reconciliation with Rome, but only on his terms. His terms were for the Pope to ratify the annulment of his marriage to Catherine and the validity of his marriage with Anne. The appointment of the new Pope renewed the possibility of reconciliation between England and the Holy See. However, it later became apparent that the new Pope's terms for such reconciliation remained the same as those of the previous Pope.
September 1534 brought fresh hope of a more amicable relationship with France. Despite the King of France's annoyance at Henry's bombastic attitude during the summer of 1533, Francis was prepared to make fresh efforts to renew a good relationship with Henry. The prospect of an improved relationship with France was greeted favourably by Henry, as well as by Anne and George. Unfortunately for them, this renewed optimism was painfully dispelled two months later.
In November 1534, a mission from the King of France, headed by Philippe de Chabot, Seigneur de Brion and Admiral of France, came to the English court. The possibility of renewing good relations with France was of significant importance. England was becoming more and more isolated from her European cousins, all because of Henry's matrimonial problems, a fact which could not have failed to escape the Boleyn siblings and their father. Both Anne and George had been heavily involved in attempting to postpone the meeting between the Pope and Francis the previous summer, and therefore the French Embassy was met enthusiastically and with some relief. When Henry sought a courtier to escort the French Admiral from the coast to the court, it was George Boleyn, as one of his leading courtiers and someone who knew members of the French court, to whom he entrusted the job. The importance of the mission is exemplified in a letter written by George to Lord Lisle from Dover on 6 November:
This shall be to advertise you that I have sent this bearer, the king's servant, only to bring me fore-word how and after what sort the Admiral doth purpose to pass the sea, and whether he will send his train, mules and carriage over before, or else to come himself first; the knowledge whereof should be of great furtherance to me in entertaining him here.6
Every courtesy was to be extended to the Admiral, and George was given the task not only of escorting him to London, but also of entertaining him on the way. The Admiral arrived at Dover on 11 November with a huge train of men and 350 horses, for all of whom George had responsibility. The administrative logistics were a nightmare, and that day a harassed George Boleyn wrote to his uncle, the Duke of Norfolk, who had been appointed to meet George and the Admiral at Blackheath:
This my letter shall be to advise your Lordship that the Admiral arrived this day at ten of the clock at the Downs, and there I, with such gentlemen as be commanded by the king's grace to give their attendance to accompany me, met with him at his coming to land, and from hence we brought him to Dover, where he rested for this first night; and the next day to Canterbury, and there he has desired that he may tarry Friday all day, so that his train may meet with him there, which be now scattered some at Dover, some at Sandwich and some at other places.7
The visit was too important for the Admiral's wishes not to be accommodated, despite the additional onerous administrative difficulties this caused George. Doing so also resulted in him arriving in London later than planned. An already-harassed George Boleyn pre-empted any personal criticism from the King for this tardiness in a letter to Henry dated 14 November, in which he described the journey with thinly disguised irritation:
It may please your highness to be advertised, that the admiral of France hath remained here since Thursday at night, and as yet his whole train both of horses, mules and men, be not come hither nor unshipped. But by tomorrow I doubt not but all his whole train shall be here assembled together: and upon Monday, I will bring him to Sittingbourne, there to remain that night, for that
it would be too sore a journey to bring his carriage to Rochester in a day. On Tuesday from thence to Rochester. On Wednesday to Dartford; and on Thursday, by 12 o'clock at noon, to Blackheath; where as my Lord of Norfolk is appointed by your grace to meet him. I would not have him remain so long in this town, but that himself was very desirous so to do, because that he would come with his train whole together, which I thought might not for your graces honour gain saye. And thus, beseeching God to have your highness in his keeping, I make an end.
From Canterbury, this 14th day of November
Your graces most humble and obedient subject and servant,
GEORGE ROCHEFORD"8 (See Figure 3)
The undertaking of bringing the Admiral from the coast was too important for it to be placed in the hands of anyone other than a highly trusted individual, and George Boleyn was clearly acutely aware of this. The letter is earnestly written by a young man obviously eager to please the King and gives the impression of someone anxious to explain where any fault may be perceived. George clearly took his assignment extremely seriously, allowing the Admiral to travel only a single stage per day to ensure his comfort. At the same time he is keen to explain to Henry that the reason they have remained in Canterbury so long is by the specific request of the Admiral himself.
George Boleyn: Tudor Poet, Courtier & Diplomat Page 17
