Crown of Blood

by Nicola Tallis

  During the years of estrangement from her father it is unlikely that Mary saw much of her cousin Frances. Prior to the disbanding of her household, Mary’s accounts for the beginning of 1533 reveal that she did, however, spend time with Henry Grey and his family. Despite their apparent loyalty to Anne Boleyn, they had evidently managed to retain good relations with Mary, for not only was Henry’s sister Katherine, Lady Maltravers, a member of Mary’s household, but Mary’s accounts demonstrate that Henry and his mother came to dine with her at Otford in June.19 By this time plans for his marriage to Frances were well underway, and it is certainly possible that Henry discussed these with Mary, who would have taken a keen interest in her cousin’s impending wedding.

  On the same day as Elizabeth’s birth, Jane’s grandfather the Duke of Suffolk, recently widowed by the death of his royal wife, married again. His bride was his fourteen-year-old ward, Katherine Willoughby, who had been betrothed to his young son Henry.20 Although remarrying soon after the death of a spouse was not considered to be unusual in the sixteenth century, the marriage did cause some comment in court circles. On 3 September, the amused Imperial ambassador, Chapuys, wrote to inform his master the Emperor Charles V:

  On Sunday next the Duke of Suffolk will be married to the daughter of a Spanish lady named Lady Willoughby. She was promised to his son, but he is only ten years old; and although it is not worth writing to you Majesty, the novelty of the case made me mention it. The Duke will have done a service to the ladies who can point to his example when they are reproached, as is usual, with marrying again immediately after the death of their husbands.21

  Despite the age difference (Suffolk was almost fifty), the marriage was a happy one. The new Duchess was described as ‘virtuous, wise and discreet’, and was popular at court.22 Even the King was fond of her. In addition, the marriage produced two sons, Henry and Charles.23 This was of particular importance to Suffolk, as in 1534 his only surviving son by the French Queen, Henry, died.24

  ON 7 JANUARY 1536 Katherine of Aragon died at the age of fifty at Kimbolton Castle. Though Mary’s reaction to her death is not recorded, she fell ill shortly afterwards, and given the close bond she had shared with her mother her grief may be easily imagined. At court meanwhile, Chapuys recorded that ‘you could not conceive the joy that the King and those who favour this concubinage [Anne Boleyn] have shown at the death of the good Queen, especially the Earl of Wiltshire and his son [Anne’s father and brother], who said it was a pity the Princess [Mary] did not keep company with her’.25 Anne’s triumph would, however, prove to be short-lived.

  Though he was at last married to Anne, the King’s love for her had quickly waned. On 29 January 1536, the same day as the funeral of her recently deceased rival, Anne miscarried of a child – certainly the second, and possibly even the third that she had suffered – which had all the appearances of being male. The King’s patience was exhausted, and by the beginning of May, Anne found herself imprisoned in the Tower of London on trumped-up charges of adultery and incest with her own brother. There was to be no mercy, and following the swift annulment of their marriage which saw Anne’s daughter Elizabeth, like Mary before her, declared illegitimate and deprived of her title, the King ordered Anne’s execution within the confines of the Tower on 19 May. She was replaced just eleven days later with one of her own ladies, Jane Seymour, whom the almost forty-five-year-old Henry married on 30 May. Jane was a more popular choice than the controversial Anne had been, and Sir John Russell, a gentleman of the court who was a friend of the King’s and had been Anne’s enemy, wasted no time in relating that through his attachment to Jane, the King ‘hath come out of hell into heaven, for the gentleness in this, and the cursedness and the unhappiness in the other’.26 Where Anne had been insufferably arrogant and was prone to outbursts of temper, managing to alienate even her own supporters, Jane showed herself to be placid and submissive.27 In short, while Anne’s behaviour demonstrated that she was highly unsuited to queenship, Jane proved to have all the qualities expected of a consort. But the outward show of obedience masked a steely determination.

  During her lifetime, Jane Grey’s grandmother, the French Queen, had made no secret of her dislike for Anne Boleyn. Despite the role her father had played in her coronation and his show of loyalty, Jane’s parents may have been relieved at her removal. They probably also approved of Queen Jane, for shortly after her marriage Jane resolved to do all that she could to achieve a reconciliation between her husband and his eldest daughter, Mary. It was clear that this could not be achieved until Mary made a formal submission to her father, acknowledging that her parents’ marriage had been invalid and that she herself was a bastard. Mary, like her mother, had denied this for years, much to the detriment of her health. But her mother was now dead, and craving her father’s love and worn down by emotional stress and anxiety, she finally capitulated. On 13 June, Mary signed all of the articles given to her, which at a stroke defied everything she had previously fought for. She never forgave herself for what she saw as an act of treachery against her mother, but her submission immediately improved her situation. After writing loving letters to her father and stepmother, on 6 July Mary was reunited with the King and his new queen privately at a house in Hackney. Henry was now only too happy to play the role of the doting father and showered her with gifts, while Jane gave her stepdaughter a beautiful diamond ring. Mary was thrilled at this seemingly perfect reconciliation, and the common people, who had always been fond of her, were pleased at the improvement in her treatment; however, Queen Jane’s interest did not extend to the King’s other daughter, the two-year-old Elizabeth, who had been banished to the Palace of Hatfield and was out of favour following the execution of her mother.

  Queen Jane’s efforts to restore Mary were only successful in personal terms. On 4 July the King had passed the Second Succession Act in Parliament, which barred both of his daughters from inheriting the throne. The Act stated that, instead, any children the King had by his ‘most dear and entirely beloved wife Queen Jane’ should succeed him.28 Should he fail to produce any further children by Jane or subsequent queens, Henry could appoint any heir he chose. At this time, however, he declined to do so, lest the person named should ‘take great heart and courage and by presumption fall to inobedience and rebellion’.29 Shortly afterwards, on 23 July at St James’s Palace, the King’s illegitimate son the Duke of Richmond, Henry Grey’s childhood friend, died of a pulmonary infection at the age of seventeen. There were many at court who believed that the King intended Richmond to succeed him, and for that reason his death was initially kept a secret in order to avoid anxiety over the succession. The young Duke’s body was smuggled out of London in a wagon covered with straw, and buried by arrangement of the Duke of Norfolk.30 Once again, the stigma of illegitimacy that attached itself to the King’s daughters meant that Lady Frances, her sister Lady Eleanor and their children were technically superior in status to their royal cousins – though they were not mentioned in the Second Succession Act, their legitimacy had not been questioned. From the beginning, Jane was intimately connected with both Mary and Elizabeth, and as she grew she would discover that her fate lay intertwined with theirs, all by chance of the royal blood they shared.

  Shortly after the restoration of good relations between father and daughter, the King was confronted by one of the greatest threats of his reign. Henry VIII’s decision to split from Rome and establish the Church of England with himself at its head had set the wheels of religious reform in motion, and in 1536 the Ten Articles were introduced. Probably set out by Cranmer, the Articles were a formulary for the new church, and set out moderate doctrinal and ceremonial changes. Perhaps more disturbing was the fact that in the same year, reform had led to the dissolution of many of the religious houses in England, whose treasure had found its way straight into the royal coffers and those of the nobility. As a result, many monks and nuns had been forced into poverty, and could only watch as the buildings they had once lived in were r
ansacked and destroyed. There were many who felt that the King had taken his religious reforms too far and, in a violent demonstration of outrage, on 2 October, the first riot in the rebellion known as the Pilgrimage of Grace broke out in the town of Louth in Lincolnshire. The rebellion spread rapidly through the northern counties of England, with its ranks growing each day and marching under a banner of the Five Wounds of Christ. By the time the rebellion reached York, the rebels had taken as their leader a barrister named Robert Aske, and soon the rebel army began marching south to lay their complaints before the King. The Dorsets would not have felt much sympathy for the rebels, for they were champions of religious reform. They had also profited greatly from the dissolution of the monasteries, for Henry had been granted sixteen estates in his home county of Leicestershire, and certainly had no wish to hand these back. However, they were no doubt appalled and afraid when word reached them that Lady Frances’s sister, Eleanor, now married to Henry Clifford, had become directly and dangerously involved.31

  Members of the northern nobility, many of them under duress, had joined the rebels on the march south, but Lady Clifford’s husband and her father-in-law, the Earl of Cumberland, were among those who resisted. Realizing that this might put them in danger from the rebels, they fortified their castle at Skipton in Yorkshire in preparation for a possible siege. Soon afterwards, however, Lady Clifford’s husband journeyed north to Carlisle to defend the city against the rebels, leaving his wife in the safekeeping of his father. Fearing for Lady Clifford’s safety if she were to remain at Skipton, her father-in-law sent her, together with her baby son and two of his daughters, to his estate at Bolton Abbey, where he believed they would be safe.32 On 22 October Skipton Castle came under siege, and ‘finding the castle impregnable’, the rebels, discovering that Lady Clifford was ensconced in Bolton Abbey just ten miles from Skipton, forced their way into the Abbey and took Lady Clifford, her son and her sisters-in-law hostage.33 Lady Clifford was terrified, and in great fear for her own life and that of her child. The evidence suggests that she was treated with appalling severity by her captors. Before long her father-in-law received a message informing him of what had happened, and warning him that unless he surrendered Skipton Castle, Lady Clifford, her baby and the Earl’s daughters would be placed in the front line of the besiegers of the castle ‘to violate and enforce them with knaves, unto my Lord’s great discomfort’.34 This was a disgraceful way to treat the King’s niece, and the outraged Earl set out to rescue his family. Travelling to Bolton, Cumberland bravely entered the rebels’ camp with ‘none but the vicar of Skipton, a groom of the stable and a boy’.35 The negotiations were concluded by none other than Robert Aske’s brother, Christopher, who later gave an account of what had happened, and who probably realized that the consequences would be grave indeed if any harm came to Lady Clifford. As a result, Lady Clifford was allowed to leave Bolton, and her relief at being reunited with her father-in-law must have been profound. Together with her son and sisters-in-law, she returned to Skipton Castle that same evening. Cumberland’s bravery was commendable, and demonstrates the high regard in which he held his daughter-in-law, of whom he seems to have been genuinely fond. After a five-day siege the rebels abandoned Skipton having failed to take it, much to the relief of the Earl and his family.36 The Duke of Suffolk, however, was alarmed when he heard of the danger his daughter had been in, and wrote anxiously to Cumberland, ‘I heartily pray you my lord in eschewing any further danger or peril ye will send her unto me hither if ye think ye may so do by any surety possible, and here I trust she shall be out of danger.’37 There is no record of Eleanor making any such journey to be with her father, but the Duke’s letter does demonstrate that he was a genuinely loving father, who doubtless felt equally protective of Frances.

  While the dramatic events of the Clifford family were being played out, the Duke of Norfolk had ridden north in order to suppress the rebellion, accompanied by Jane’s father Henry. This was Henry’s first military experience, and it soon became clear that it was a task to which he was completely unsuited. It is possible that the King’s decision to send him north was a test of his mettle, or had perhaps been Suffolk’s suggestion in order to give his son-in-law an opportunity to shine. In either instance, they were to be disappointed, for Henry did not distinguish himself and had no taste for military action. Frances must have been concerned for her husband’s safety as she waited anxiously for news of the rebellion. Like the rest of the court, she must also have been jubilant to learn that Norfolk had successfully disbanded the rebels, following a number of false promises made to them on the authorization of the King. Norfolk and Henry returned to London in time to celebrate Christmas, which the court held at Greenwich Palace.

  Having received a formal pardon from the King on 8 December, Robert Aske spent the Christmas of 1536 at court as the King’s guest. Though Henry may have visited during the celebrations, Frances was almost certainly absent, probably on account of her baby daughter. The King’s show of friendship towards Aske was all a great pretence. This became clear shortly after New Year 1537, when in February a resurgence in the rebellion, this time led by Sir Francis Bigod (and frequently called Bigod’s Rebellion), gave the King the excuse he needed to send Norfolk north once more to deal with the rebels.38 This time Henry did not accompany him, for which Henry must have been grateful. After suppressing the rebellion once and for all, Norfolk set about punishing those involved, many of whom, Sir Francis Bigod included, were hanged as an example to other potential rebels.39 Though Aske had not sanctioned the second rebellion, it gave the King a convenient reason to rid himself of the former dissident. Aske was captured, and having been condemned for high treason was sentenced to a grisly end. On 12 July he was hung in chains over the gates of York and left to die, his fate serving as a gruesome warning to any who dared to contemplate rebelling against the King.

  AT THE BEGINNING of April, news of a more exciting nature was announced: after almost a year of marriage, Queen Jane was pregnant with her first child. The kingdom rejoiced at the news, and throughout London bonfires were lit, and free wine was distributed to the people by way of celebration. Prayers were offered up in churches for the Queen’s safe delivery, and both the King and Queen were in high spirits. All of the doctors employed were confident that the child would be a boy.

  Hampton Court Palace had been chosen as the setting for the birth of the royal child, and at the beginning of September the court moved there to await its arrival. The Queen officially withdrew to her chambers on 16 September to await the birth, attended by the Lady Mary. When her labour pains began on 9 October it became clear that the birth was not going to be an easy one. Finally, after three long days and nights, at two o’clock in the morning of 12 October, Queen Jane gave birth to a healthy prince. The King was utterly elated, and the Queen was able to write a proud letter to the Council announcing the Prince’s birth, declaring triumphantly that ‘we be delivered and brought in childbed of a prince, conceived in most lawful matrimony between my lord the king’s majesty and us’.40 The child was named Edward after his great-grandfather Edward IV, and Lord Lisle’s informant John Husee related that the Prince’s birth ‘has more rejoiced all true hearts than anything done this forty years’.41 Jane’s paternal grandmother, Margaret Wotton, also took the opportunity to write to the King, congratulating him on ‘the most joyful news that has come to England these many years of the birth of a prince’.42 The King’s joy was, however, of short duration, for not long after the Prince’s delivery, Queen Jane fell dangerously ill. It soon became clear that she was not going to survive, and the Duke of Norfolk wrote to urge Thomas Cromwell, then absent from court, ‘to be here tomorrow early to comfort our good master, for as for our mistress there is no likelihood of her life, the more pity’.43

  Norfolk’s prediction was sadly true, and on 24 October, twelve days after providing her husband with a male heir, Queen Jane died of puerperal fever. The King was devastated. In a letter to the French King
Francis I, Henry wrote that ‘Divine Providence has mingled my joy with the bitterness of the death of her who brought me this happiness’, and retired ‘to a solitary place to pass his sorrows’.44 Jane’s mother was among the women who joined the funeral party as the Queen was laid to rest in St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle, in ‘the presence of many pensive hearts’.45

  Meanwhile, the birth of Prince Edward was of the utmost significance for the country: after many years of waiting, their king had at last produced a legitimate male heir to succeed him. The male heir was to become an important figure in the life of Lady Jane Grey, and as the two cousins grew they would have much in common. As infants in the cradle, however, for the moment these events were of little matter, and the politics of the Tudor court in London seemed a world away.