QuoteThe twenty-five-year-old princess was seated beneath an oak tree on the lawn of her home, Hatfield House. Suddenly, several courtiers hurried across the lawn until they reached her location, stopped, and bowed. The queen has died, they told her. You are now queen of England. Young Elizabeth, it is said, fell to her knees and quoted a line from Psalm 118: "It is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes."
Elizabeth I, daughter of King Henry VIII by his second wife, Anne Boleyn, had reached the throne by a more circuitous path than most monarchs. Her father's first wife, Catherine of Aragon, had born a daughter, Mary, but no son. Frustrated, Henry had broken with the Catholic Church and formed the Church of England so he could divorce Catherine and marry Anne Boleyn. After she bore Elizabeth and a stillborn son, Boleyn was beheaded for adultery—a trumped-up charge—when Elizabeth was but three. Henry then married Jane Seymour, who finally produced a male heir, the prince Edward.
Much of Elizabeth's childhood and youth were difficult and spent away from court because her father rejected her. When he died and Edward came to the throne, she soon fell under suspicion of complicity in a plot to overthrow him. Her careful response to questions saved her. When Edward died, Mary came to the throne. She tried to restore the Catholic Church, leading to several Protestant rebellions, which led the queen to throw her half-sister into the Tower of London for a few months and eventually send her to Hatfield under house arrest.
Read more: http://blog.oup.com/2011/11/elizabeth/
Cindy
Hahaha... I can imagine how tame "juicy" would be for Henry VIII's era :laugh:
Despite being a republican I think it's wonderful to have historical evidence in the actual hand of someone notorious. To have handwritten love notes by Henry VIII to Anne Boleyn is a saucy and personal bit of history. It certainly beats the second hand sources of modern writers.
I particularly liked the letter where Henry told Anne that he couldn't wait to (see? touch?) her "pretty little duckys again". :D
The first time I saw an artifact was sometime in the 1970's, at the Folger Shakespeare Theater in Washington, D.C., when there was a display of items belonging to Elizabeth I. The only thing I specifically remember was her bible ... or maybe her book of hours. I found it fascinating that I was looking at something she'd used daily. Of course, I probably would have been just as fascinated had I seen a cookbook that her kitchen maid used.
Cindy
That's perhaps pushing it a little too far for me :laugh: ... I can't say that I feel awe because someone has used it, touched it etc - rather I enjoy the traces of history more generically.
Daily Mail Article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083826/Henry-VIII-secret-daughter-taken-throne-Elizabeth-I-historian-claims.html)
QuoteElizabeth Tailboys was the Tudor monarch's illegitimate lovechild who would have changed the course of English history had the King, pictured, acknowledged her as his at the time.
Umm - if she was illegitimate and he never married Bessie Blount, then she could never have inherited. It is true that at various times, he declared Mary and Elizabeth illegitimate, but he HAD married their mothers.
Well, truly, there is nothing to prove that the child was his, in the first place. She may have been, but Mary Boleyn's child may have been his, too. As much as we've heard about Mary Boleyn's first (at least) child, has anyone heard of Bessie Blount's daughter? This is the first I've heard of her.
Cindy
Doesn't matter if he did have another daughter or did not.
Hen had a son or two , but they were called that ugly word of the day.
That other daughter(s) would not have been crowned being daughters and then outside of marriage.
If any of those others would have been crowned it would have been the sons called that ugly word of the day.
I have heard of Bessie Blount.
Of course there are scholars who say yes, Mary Boelyn's son was his, and others say not.
http://queryblog.tudorhistory.org/2006/01/question-from-jennifer-henry-viiis.html
Above link has some interest about both of these things: Mary's son, and Bessie 's.
http://www.angelfire.com/mi4/polcrt/Henry.html
You can look up the other 100 links.
I would assume it is really hard to pinpoint which was his and not. One thing is certain, he did have children outside of marriages.
Who knows how many now for who really knew how many then. The conspiracy theories can grow and you find links here and there.
He was King. Having the 8 wives, then mistresses and lastly, just plain ole bed warmers was his life. It is not as if he was selective and there was birth control. He was King.
If you mean bastard, I think we all know what ti means. and there's never been any indication that Henry had more than 1 child by Elizabeth Blount and no serious historian believes that Mary Boleyn had children by him.
And Henry had 6 wives, not 8.
Opps, Herny the 8th with the 6 wives. I got my 8 mixed up.
True about Mary's son not being his, as I said, but (movie) Anne of One Thousand Days implied this and (movie) The Other Boylen Girl, whatver the movies were called have implied Marys' son was his.
One way sources say yes. The other way says no because of the dates of the people and evnts, timeline...Mary;s return to England, court, her sons's brith, Carey marraige, etc.
Quote from: FanDianaFancy on January 28, 2012, 03:25:14 AM
Opps, Herny the 8th with the 6 wives. I got my 8 mixed up.
True about Mary's son not being his, as I said, but (movie) Anne of One Thousand Days implied this and (movie) The Other Boylen Girl, whatver the movies were called have implied Marys' son was his.
there are no reputatable sources to say Mary b's children were Henry's
^^ True. "Anne of the Thousand Days" was one of the more accurate historical movies about Henry and Anne, but it still had several facts wrong. Claiming that Mary's unborn child was Henry's was just thrown in for dramatic effect.
Amabel, let me know when you get your website set up. :)
Cindy
And if you add into the mix books like Philippa Gregory's "The Other Boleyn Girl", it gets really confusing. She touts herself as a historian more than a fictional writer, making it seem like the events surrounding Henry VIII in the book are historically correct.
Historians give a version of events - not all historians agree on what happened so to say "She touts herself as a historian more than a fictional writer"
is fine if you realise that another historian could write something completely different and still claim that their version is historically correct.
History isn't about facts but about interpretations which is why you get entire schools of historical interpretation with different versions of the same events and the different schools all see themselves as 'historically correct'.
That is very true that historians have interpretations of events
Philippa Gregory's books are not interpretations of historical events such as Henry VIII children etc. She creates fiction loosely based on events. Authors do that all the time; what many historians object to with PG is her assertion that her novels are accurate fact. Which was my point; it is hard for most people excluding historians to determine what is fact and what is fiction when movies and novels, especially those that are touted as accurate, mess around with history.
This article is particularly annoying. There is no way that Elizabeth Tailboys would have inherited the throne, even if she was the daughter of the king. She wasn't acknowledged as Henry's child, the line of succession was clear who was to inherit the throne and she wasn't anywhere on it. She was the heiress and became the 4th Baroness Tailboys of Kyme - obviously making her the acknowledged legitimate child of the 1st Baron.
I vaguely remember reading somewhere that Philippa Gregory made a remark that she regrets having written "The Other Boleyn" Girl as she did. I wish I could remember where I read that, but it was several years ago ...
Cindy
Yes anabel and others, that is what I said.
Same thing you said. Some scholars say this 50 one way and others say the oppostie. The dates are off, best known dates, and for the movies 's sake, good drama.
Quote from: cinrit on January 28, 2012, 06:54:23 PM
^^ True. "Anne of the Thousand Days" was one of the more accurate historical movies about Henry and Anne, but it still had several facts wrong. Claiming that Mary's unborn child was Henry's was just thrown in for dramatic effect.
Cindy
It is one of hte better movies about Anne... but it is FULL of historical inaccuracies such as the claim that Anne was very much sexually active almost from childhood, or that Mary B's children were the king's... And IIRC it showed Mary attending her mother Cath of Aragon on her deahtbed, when M and C had been separated for years.
QuoteA saddlecloth reputedly used by Queen Elizabeth I during a state visit to Bristol in 1574 has sold for £19,000.
The emerald green saddlecloth is believed to have been used by the Virgin Queen in a procession through the city more than 400 years ago.
Elaborately decorated with gold lace and fringe, the heirloom - said to be cursed - has been in the Kington family for generations.
Expected to fetch £10,000, it was sold for almost double its estimate.
Her mother was beheaded, her sister had her thrown in the Tower of London and her cousin was executed on her orders...
The saddlecloth is thought to have been used by Queen Elizabeth I to ride in a procession through the cobbled streets of Bristol during a three-day visit to the city.
Queen Elizabeth-signed guest book up for sale - Monsters and Critics (http://www.monstersandcritics.com/people/royalwatch/news/article_1704120.php/Queen-Elizabeth-signed-guest-book-up-for-sale)
Cindy
Portrait of Elizabeth I showing off her wrinkles goes on display | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2277221/Portrait-Elizabeth-I-showing-wrinkles-goes-display.html#axzz2KXYJoqW4)
QuoteElizabeth I's Portrait Brings Us Face to Face with the Ravages of Age
If you think the beauty myth is oppressive nowadays, picture what it was like to be a woman in Renaissance Europe. The Renaissance created a cult of female beauty so all-pervasive that it shapes western perceptions and fantasies right down to today. From Botticelli's Venus to Titian's Flora, the greatest artists dedicated their genius to imposing impossible standards of beauty on a world that, in reality, was scarred by pox, ravaged by poverty and untouched by hygiene.
No wonder the tiny minority of women who got to control their image instructed painters to preserve their youthful good looks, or fabricate a finer face than they ever had. Only the handful of women who ruled states had any such power. Titian's portrait of Isabella d' Este, marchioness of Mantua, which hangs in Vienna's Kunsthistorisches Museum, shows her as a twentysomething beauty, soft skin unblemished by wrinkles, in the bloom of youth. In reality, she was about 52 when Titian painted it.
Elizabeth I ruled a much bigger territory than Isabella, and got a law made in England prohibiting the circulation of unflattering portraits of her. Elizabeth's portraits are notoriously fictitious in always showing her as a pearly-skinned icon of Renaissance beauty even when she was old. This is what makes a newly revealed portrait of her from the workshop of Marcus Gheeraerts so remarkable.
Elizabeth I's portrait brings us face to face with the ravages of age | Art and design | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2013/feb/13/elizabeth-first-portrait-face-age-unhappiness)
Cindy
I would wager Elizabeth I never saw this portrait. Not only was she personally vain, but it would show a vulnerability that she didn't want seen by the outside world.
Cindy
QuoteMore than 400 years after her untimely death, Anne Boleyn remains a source of interest and intrigue.
The success of TV show The Tudors and Hilary Mantel's Booker prize winning Wolf Hall and Bring Up The Bodies proves that we still have an appetite for the rise and fall of the six wives of King Henry VIII.
And the life of his second wife, Anne, is the most scintillating story of all.
But while the fictional accounts play up her role as a seductress and an adulteress who was even accused of relations with her own brother - what is the truth about the downfall of the Queen?
Cheating seductress or framed by Henry VIII? Find out the truth about Anne Boleyn at The Daily Mail Chalke Valley History Festival | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-2332724/Cheating-seductress-framed-Henry-VIII-Find-truth-Anne-Boleyn-The-Daily-Mail-Chalke-Valley-History-Festival.html)
Cindy
Agree, there is an oversaturation of all things Boleyn. I would be interested in more stuff on Kathyrn Parr
Quote from: cinrit on May 30, 2013, 06:25:46 PM
Have you bought any of them, Amabel? I haven't. The last one I bought was Eric Ives' ... many years ago.
Cindy
I try not ot buy expensive books but I have quite a few novels about Anne B which were written years ago. Someare good, some not so good. I have read the Ives book more than once and it is an excellent biography. But you know all the stupid novels that have come out in the wake of "Other Boleyn Girl" an "the Tudors". That's what has made me feel fed up with the whole thing..
Double post auto-merged: May 31, 2013, 04:33:34 AM
Quote from: Macrobug on May 30, 2013, 08:50:34 PM
Agree, there is an oversaturation of all things Boleyn. I would be interested in more stuff on Kathyrn Parr
Or anyone but the Tudors and Henry and his six wives!! there are lots of interesting royals of the Victorian age..
I haven't read any of the recent novels about Anne Boleyn. The last novel about her that I read was nearly 15 years ago (oh, how time flies!!), "The Secret Diary of Anne Boleyn". I tend to get most of my books these days from amazon.com, from the "used" lists. I've had great luck ... when the seller says the books is "good" or "very good" condition, it has been.
Cindy
Interesting. I guess, She gets to keep her head. Has a son named Thomas. Who throws England (or keeps it ) in a state of turmoil like a bad narcissistic Roman emperor. Henry succumbs to diabetes, but how will they know? Being obese and having an ulcerated leg is a good guess. Still?! Must read to find out.... :lol: Thanks, Sandy!
I haven't read it but I'd like to. It sounds like an interesting read. :)
With the exception of Catherine of Aragon, all of Henry VIII's wives were commoners. The 2nd Duke of Norfolk was Anne Boleyn's grandfather, and the 3rd Duke of Norfolk was her uncle. Personally, of all Henry VIII's wives, Anne Boleyn is my favorite.
Cindy
I just don't get why over hype their relationship she was a goner when he understood he couldn't get what he wanted form her he DID NOT love her and I doubt she was crazy about the old man either ...
One reason she's made a big deal over is because Henry VIII formed the Church of England in order to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. Also, without Anne Boleyn, England would not have had Elizabeth I, one of it's greatest monarchs. Henry finally got his legitimate son with Jane Seymour, and he became Edward VI, but he died at the age of 16.
Thanks for starting this thread, Eri. A very interesting subject. :flower3:
Cindy
^ He did not do that for Ann he did that because :
a. He wanted a son
b. He was sick having to answer to the Pope ( Henry liked to do as he pleased)
He did NOT do all of that because he was crazily in love with Ann LOL !!!
He was definitely crazy in love with Anne. The fact that he wanted a son is part of it, but if it were for a son alone, he would have annulled his marriage to Catherine a few years before he ever met Anne. Have you ever read the letters that he wrote to Anne? :o :hehe: Henry was a romantic. Except for Anne of Cleves, he married all his wives for love.
Henry VIII liked getting his way, but he was a devout Catholic. His title, Defender of the Faith, was given to him by Pope Leo X, for having written a defense of the sacraments, which was dedicated to the Pope. Had it not been for his desire to annul his marriage to Catherine, he would have been content to bow to the Pope for the rest of his life.
On the other hand, if Catherine had given him a son, it's unlikely he would have had the marriage annulled. But if Anne had agreed, he'd have had her for a mistress.
Cindy
^ LOL !!! A tyrant like Henry a romantic? He beheaded her because she wouldn't give him a son ... that is all she was goof for (in his view) ... Ann was more like his middle age crisis the typical husband leaves wife of Years for younger girl story ... Henry turned hold and cold very fast ...
Henry was only 32 when he became infatuated with Anne Boleyn. That's not middle-age. Was he a romantic? He was in love with all his wives, except for Anne of Cleves:
He married Catherine of Aragon when he was barely 18, he was head over heels for her.
He became infatuated with Anne Boleyn when he was 32 ... read some of his letters to her to determine if he loved her.
He married Jane Seymour when he was 44 ... he was buried with her (but then, she died before he could get tired of her).
He married Anne of Cleves when he was 49 ... no love match, this one. He said of her, "I like her not!" And Thomas Cromwell lost his
head over that contract.
He fell madly, crazy in love with and married Katherine Howard (a cousin of Anne Boleyn) the same year he annulled his marriage to
Anne of Cleves. He sobbed when he learned she'd cheated on him. She was also beheaded.
He married Katherine Parr when he was 52 ... she wanted to marry Thomas Seymour, but Henry was insistent that she marry him. He
died before he had a chance to tire of her, but there was one incident when he'd actually signed papers to send her to the Tower.
Cindy
^ Henry ran hot and cold pretty fast like you described ... too bad it's all about Ann he had incredibly interesting wives especially Katherine Parr ...
Anne Boleyn stands out from the other wives, but there are dozens of books about all his wives, some all together and some books about each individual. Anne is most well-known because she was the first Queen to be beheaded, and because Henry VIII broke off from Rome to marry her. And because Elizabeth I was her daughter. Personally, I think Anne of Cleves was maybe the most interesting of Henry's wives, and probably the one with the most "street smarts".
Cindy
IMHO I believe Anne of Cleves was happy to leave the Duchy of Cleves, but would have likely had some reservations about a man like Henry.
Of Henry's wives I'm partial to Catherine of Aragon and Anne of Cleves.
^ I am team Queen Jane some say she was submissive I say she was smart :lol: ... she is the only wife that was taken from him and he couldn't "break up" with and gave him a son so I believe he stayed partial on her all his life ...
Jane was "lucky" in that she not only delivered a son (who didn't live very long, sadly), but she died before Henry could tire of her. There were stories that his eye was already beginning to wander while she was pregnant. Romantic that he was, Henry VIII was no sentimentalist. Neither was Jane, who knew that Anne would be killed and didn't lift a finger to try to save her.
I feel sorry for Katherine Howard. She was too young, too impetuous, and too loosely brought up. The Duke of Norfolk did her a great disservice by bringing her to court and putting her in front of the King.
TLLK, I agree ... I believe Anne of Cleves was happy to get out of Cleves, but she couldn't have been very happy when she finally saw Henry in the flesh, nor heard of his reputation.
Cindy
^ What could Jane do for Ann really? Die with her?
^^ She couldn't have done anything. But she didn't protest, either, meaning she didn't care that much. Other of Henry's wives spoke up when they saw his injustices. It didn't change his mind, but at least it showed they cared. I think Jane was a lot more cunning than she seemed to be.
Cindy
^ Ann got what she deserved ( you live by the bed you die by the bed) given how she treated QUEEN Katherine of Aragon she acted horribly she wasn't exactly a woman's woman so I don't get why Jane should have done anything for her at least she wasn't rude to her like Ann was to Katherine ... Jane spoke her mind too that is why Ann's fate was reminded to her by Henry ( he knew how to end an argument with his wife) ...
Anne was certainly more brash and upfront about her dislike for Catherine, but at least she was honest about what she was after
He was a mad man for sure.
He lived at a time where Kings were Gods on Earth to us he might look crazy but he wasn't he was just a guy who lived in his era ... with this I am not excusing or downplaying the horrible things he did I am just putting them in the contest of the times he lived in ...
Henry knew his claim on the throne was weak, and he needed a son (or so he thought) to help secure his dynasty. Remember, before Mary, no English Queen had inherited the crown
^ Poor Mary I blame Henry for all of it ... she was more subject to his cruelty than Elizabeth ever was ...
Anne Boleyn was surely a handful. She spoke her mind, she was haughty, and she tended to bouts of hysteria. But the majority of historians, as well as her contemporaries, agree that she was innocent of the charges against her. Henry knew she was innocent, which is why he at least ordered a swordsman for her execution, which was swifter and more "merciful" than the ax ... which is something he didn't do for Katherine Howard, whom he knew was guilty of the charges against her. The only crime Anne Boleyn committed was not to have produced a son that lived ... and the fact that Henry was getting tired of her.
As for him living in his times ... I don't think so. When he was looking for a wife after Jane Seymour died, he was turned down by several noble women who were approached about marriage to him. One went so far as to say she'd rather be his mistress so that she could keep her head. Henry is as well-known as he is because he wasn't like the other monarchs of his time.
Elizabeth was also mistreated by Henry. The worst thing he could have done to her, he did ... he had her mother killed when she was a little more than three years old. Is it any wonder that Elizabeth I never married? When she died, it was discovered that she had a special ring that opened. On one side was a miniature painting of herself, on the other side was a miniature painting of Anne, her mother. She didn't forget....
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4javt1rs61rso3iso1_500.jpg
Cindy
I Don't know much about them , just basic history :orchid: but even from that Henry seemed crazy :Lothwen: even for his time .
^^ Thanks, Eri. I'm glad "The Tudors" perked your interest, and I'm always happy when a historical series or movie urges someone to learn more about the story. But I have to say "The Tudors" was really not historically accurate. If you can find it, Keith Mitchell's "The Six Wives of Henry VIII", while not completely historically accurate either, is much more correct. It may be available on YouTube, but I'm not sure.
This topic comes at a good time for me. Last week, I started a six-session workshop on Henry and his wives. The first session was, of course, all about Catherine of Aragon. It's being led by a history professor at one of the colleges here. He uses Antonia Fraser's book, "The Six Wives of Henry VIII", as our "textbook". Next session, we'll discuss Anne Boleyn. From comments that I heard last week, I'm not sure Anne has many admirers among the participants. Looks like I'll be defending her then, too. :P
Cindy
Henry still got it after all this Centuries :lol: ... people love to talk about him look at this topic ... there is something about him :hide: ...
Yes, Henry VIII was considered very attractive in his youth. He was tall, handsome, talented, and good at sports. He aged badly, though. By the time he married Katherine Howard (or probably by the time he married Anne of Cleves), he was so enormous, a contraption was needed to wheel up and down the stairs, or even onto his horse. He had a leg wound that wouldn't heal (possibly a sign of diabetes?), and he was foul-tempered. The fact that Jonathan Rhys Meyers refused to portray him that way was good for ratings, which was what Showtime was more interested in than facts, but not at all realistic.
Henry VIII, the final years (http://faculty.history.wisc.edu/sommerville/361/361-10.htm)
Cindy
P.S. Today in 1547, Henry VIII died at Whitehall Palace in London.
I had a teacher who went to England and said that in the Tower of London they have all of Henry VIII's suits of armor. He said it was pretty funny that they got bigger and bigger and bigger as you went down the line :lol:
Quote from: Lothwen on January 29, 2014, 01:40:51 AM
I had a teacher who went to England and said that in the Tower of London they have all of Henry VIII's suits of armor. He said it was pretty funny that they got bigger and bigger and bigger as you went down the line :lol:
I saw his suits of armor in the Tower. His first one was very slender. The last one was enormous!
Cindy
Have you ever seen any of the hilarious Horrible Histories videos, Eri? Here's one where Henry tells about each of his wives. :lol:
Cindy
I'm very interested in this particular area too. When I was around nine years old, I was learning about the Tudors in History class, and that sparked my interest. I'm not so keen on Henry VIII, but I'm interested in Mary I's childhood and pre-Queen years, Catherine of Aragon and Jane Seymour.
(Apologies for going slightly off-topic, I know this is about Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn's relationship.)
Quote from: Eri on January 27, 2014, 05:41:13 PM
^ Poor Mary I blame Henry for all of it ... she was more subject to his cruelty than Elizabeth ever was ...
I agree. She went from beloved heir to being threatened with possible execution for failing to acknowledge her step-mother as queen.
^ Henry sure turned into a Monster over the years but I don't think he was like that at the beginning of his reign ...
At the beginning, he was only a few months away from being 18 years old, and he was poorly prepared to be King. He was actually meant to enter the clergy, until Arthur died. As he got older, though, he realized how much power he had in his hands, and he became a true horror.
Cindy
There was a brilliant line in "Anne of the Thousand Days", where Thomas More tells Thomas Cromwell (I think it's Cromwell that he tells) that he'd best advise Henry what he should do, but never advise him what he can do. It's a made-up line, but somewhere in his life, someone told Henry what he could do.
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on January 30, 2014, 10:00:49 PM
What do you think of Anne Boleyn, HereditaryPrincess?
Cindy
I'm still forming a "solid" opinion on Anne, but I think she was quite clever, however I'm not so sure about her adultery charges. I'll do some more research and tell you what else I think. :)
I'll be interested in your conclusion, HereditaryPrincess. The Henry VIII workshop that I'm attending was supposed to be about Anne Boleyn this past Wednesday night, but it was postponed due to ice (professor couldn't get here) and we'll be discussing her next Wednesday. It's always interesting to get other points of view.
Cindy
Ann is my my least favorite of Harry's wives I just don't like her ... I don't like her rudeness towards Queen Catherine and how "loud" she was KARMA bite her big time !!!
Quote from: cinrit on January 26, 2014, 11:51:40 AM
With the exception of Catherine of Aragon, all of Henry VIII's wives were commoners. The 2nd Duke of Norfolk was Anne Boleyn's grandfather, and the 3rd Duke of Norfolk was her uncle. Personally, of all Henry VIII's wives, Anne Boleyn is my favorite.
Cindy
Anne of Cleves was also royal, but yeah most of H's wives were commoners. Very few previouis queens had been commoners
Double post auto-merged: February 01, 2014, 12:10:50 PM
Quote from: Eri on January 26, 2014, 12:20:53 PM
I just don't get why over hype their relationship she was a goner when he understood he couldn't get what he wanted form her he DID NOT love her and I doubt she was crazy about the old man either ...
I dont know who you mean by "the old man", but he certainly loved or at least was obsessed with her. He waited 6 years to marry her when by giving her up, he might have had a much better chance of getting an annulment of his marriage.
Wasn't Anne of Cleves' father a Duke? Wouldn't that make her nobility?
I agree with Amabel ... Henry was completely obsessed with Anne Boleyn. I've got a book of his letters to her before they were married ( :o ), and I only wish I could read some of her letters to him. Unfortunately, they're under lock and key at the Vatican. Cardinal Campeggio apparently took them with him as evidence when he returned to Rome.
Cindy
Quote from: amabel on February 01, 2014, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: cinrit on January 26, 2014, 11:51:40 AM
With the exception of Catherine of Aragon, all of Henry VIII's wives were commoners. The 2nd Duke of Norfolk was Anne Boleyn's grandfather, and the 3rd Duke of Norfolk was her uncle. Personally, of all Henry VIII's wives, Anne Boleyn is my favorite.
Cindy
Anne of Cleves was also royal, but yeah most of H's wives were commoners. Very few previouis queens had been commoners
Double post auto-merged: February 01, 2014, 12:10:50 PM
Quote from: Eri on January 26, 2014, 12:20:53 PM
I just don't get why over hype their relationship she was a goner when he understood he couldn't get what he wanted form her he DID NOT love her and I doubt she was crazy about the old man either ...
I dont know who you mean by "the old man", but he certainly loved or at least was obsessed with her. He waited 6 years to marry her when by giving her up, he might have had a much better chance of getting an annulment of his marriage.
But he wouldn't get the son he was obsessed about ...
I believe Henry was just as obsessed with Anne as he was with getting a son. In my opinion, his wanting a son ... which I firmly believe he thought he needed ... was a convenient excuse to annul his marriage to Catherine and marry Anne. Catherine's last childbirth was in 1518; Henry started chasing Anne in 1526 and married her in 1533. He had plenty of time to look for other alternatives to beget a legitimate son. He may have thought about it over the years, but he didn't say or do anything about it until he fell for Anne. I agree with Amabel, that if he'd played it cool and kept Anne's name out of it, he may have gotten an annulment. Once that was accomplished, he could have married Anne. The outcome would probably have been the same ... no living son from Anne, and he'd have gone on to Jane Seymour.
Cindy
I think he wanted both, but yes he was madly in love with Anne and wnated HER to be the mother of his son, not some other wife. Anne of Cleves was the daughter of a reigning sovereign.. of a small german state....
I think he loved all his wives in his own way even Ann of Cleves who he built a very friendly relationship with ... I don't get why single Ann out he got tired with her like with the rest of them she wasn't "special" he fell in love madly in love with Jane while married to Ann :sneeze: ...
The Tudors - Henry & Jane - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGqz-axRte4)
Anne Boleyn was "special" ... or maybe more accurately, more studied about and more well-known ... because Henry tore apart his kingdom to marry her. He formed a religion in order to get the annulment that the Pope wouldn't give him. And because she was the first Queen to be beheaded.
Really, don't put too much faith in "The Tudors". It is notoriously inaccurate. There is even a website (or maybe two) that lists all the inaccuracies in it. It made a good story, but wasn't factual. All historical movies have their fair share of inaccuracies, but "The Tudors" is full of them.
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on February 01, 2014, 12:45:17 PM
Wasn't Anne of Cleves' father a Duke? Wouldn't that make her nobility?
Cindy
Yes, her father John was the Duke of Cleves (aka Jülich-Kleve-Berg). John belonged to the House of La Marck, which would make Anne a member of the German nobility. :) For more info on the House of La Marck and the Duchy of Cleves, see here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_La_Marck) and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Cleves).
Quote from: cinrit on February 01, 2014, 05:58:47 PM
Anne Boleyn was "special" ... or maybe more accurately, more studied about and more well-known ... because Henry tore apart his kingdom to marry her. He formed a religion in order to get the annulment that the Pope wouldn't give him. And because she was the first Queen to be beheaded.
Really, don't put too much faith in "The Tudors". It is notoriously inaccurate. There is even a website (or maybe two) that lists all the inaccuracies in it. It made a good story, but wasn't factual. All historical movies have their fair share of inaccuracies, but "The Tudors" is full of them.
Cindy
I just posted that video for the sake of it of course it is not historically accurate ... I think you will enjoy this though :
The Tudors: Jonathan Rhys Meyers is King - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzlf78RNlWA)
Thanks, Eri. Jonathan Rhys Meyers really is nice to look at. :happy: Maybe I'll start watching the series that he's on now. (I expected his real accent to have more of an Irish lilt to it.)
Dracula (TV Series 2013? ) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2296682/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_1)
Cindy
Quote from: Eri on February 01, 2014, 05:43:03 PM
I think he loved all his wives in his own way even Ann of Cleves who he built a very friendly relationship with ... I don't get why single Ann out he got tired with her like with the rest of them she wasn't "special" he fell in love madly in love with Jane while married to Ann :sneeze: ...
The Tudors - Henry & Jane - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGqz-axRte4)
I'd say he fell in lovewith Jane because she was so different to Anne.. and as for other wives, he certainly didn't love Anne of C.. though they got on well enough as Friends.. and he was very infatuated with Kath Howard but was even more disillusioned iwht her than with Anne.
Do you think he was more disillusioned (torn to pieces, is more like it) by Katherine Howard because he knew she was guilty, whereas he knew Anne Boleyn was innocent? Wasn't he told twice about Katherine Howard? Didn't he dismiss it the first time, and then had to believe it the second time because of the letter she'd written to Culpeper? What was it he said, that he would make sure she suffered as much in her death as she pleasured in her sin? Paraphrasing.
Cindy
I can't remember but I thought the remark about that she'd have to suffer all the more having taking delight in her lovers was about Anne. I am not sure if he really believed A was promiscuous,but I think that maybe he made himself believe it at the time, as he wanted ot get rid of her. She had disappointed him, He had turned England and the church upside down for her and she had not produced a son for him, she had alienated the nobility and common people, she had caused him to be at odds with half of Europe. And she had then not been a supportive wife of the kind he expected.. I guess Anne was never really in love with him and as time passed he knew this. so he was angry and disillusioned.
With Kath Howard, there had been rumours but he'd dismissed them. Then the investigation showed pretty unmistakable evidence of infidelity, or at the least a desire to commit adultery even if perhaps Kat hadn't gone the whole way on it perhaps through fear, so he knew she was guilty and having been infatuated with her, an old man's love for a girl, he was again angry and disillusioned and knew that he had made a complete fool of himself. And I think it was Chapuys who said that his grief over katherine was also becuase he had no replacement in mind for her.. so he was losing a wife and had noone ot put in her place..
Do you guys think Ann was guilty of being TOO flirty and that is why rumors about her came to life? She had so many enemies I bet they couldn't believe their luck when they saw how she was behaving ...
She was certainly too flirtatious and when it came to trumping up a charge against her, there was enough foolish talk from her that coudl be put forward as probable evidence of adultery. She engaged in flirty talk with teh young men of her court, and possibley also she and George B did make jokes about Henry's potency, which again were brought up as evidence that she had ridiculed the King or cast doubt on the succession.
Yes, I agree that Anne was too flirtatious, but I don't believe it went any further than that. She was basically raised in the French court, where flirting was a way of life. She should have learned better from the years that she spent in England when she returned. After all the years that Henry spent chasing her, I think she overestimated her value to him at the end.
Quote from: amabel on February 02, 2014, 06:46:04 AM
I can't remember but I thought the remark about that she'd have to suffer all the more having taking delight in her lovers was about Anne.
Definitely not Anne, especially since he made special effort to send for the French swordsman. Ah, here ... I found it in Antonia Fraser's book, "The Six Wives of Henry VIII" (page 345), in the Katherine Howard chapter:
"As the hideous truth emerged - this was no calumny, the Queen was not innocent - the King's "perplexity" gave way to an orgy of self-pity. He blamed his Council - who else? - for 'this last mischief'. He lamented his misfortune in having a succession of such 'ill-conditioned' wives. After that, his mood turned to mighty anger, in view of his Queen's ingratitude, the monstrous betrayal she had brought about. He called for a sword to go and slay her 'that he loved so much'. He vowed that all the pleasure 'that wicked woman' had had from her 'inconsistency' (wantonness) should not equal the pain she should feel from torture. And finally, 'he took to tears'. Some of his courtiers thought he had actually gone mad."Cindy
Thanks Cindy. Poor Katherine.
I think that Anne was too flirty, I think it was a desperate need in her to have male admiration, esp perhaps sicne she and Henry were increasingly at odds with each other, and after miscarrying her last baby, I think she got into dangerous territory with the young men of her entourage, encouraging them to say things that were pretty inflammatory, and easy to misinterpret. I don't think she went any further than verbal flirting but she should not have gone as far as she did.
Quote from: cinrit on January 31, 2014, 08:17:06 PM
I'll be interested in your conclusion, HereditaryPrincess. The Henry VIII workshop that I'm attending was supposed to be about Anne Boleyn this past Wednesday night, but it was postponed due to ice (professor couldn't get here) and we'll be discussing her next Wednesday. It's always interesting to get other points of view.
Cindy
Thanks cinrit - here are some extra points to my opinion on Anne:
I too think Anne was a little too flirtatious, and I don't particularly like her attitude towards Catherine of Aragon and her daughter Mary. She's not my favourite of Henry VIII's wives. On the plus side, I think she was quite pretty and clever. I've also read that she was one of the most fashionable women at court around the time.
Thanks, HereditaryPrincess. I agree, Anne's treatment towards Princess Mary was abhorrent. I'm not so sure she had much to do with the treatment of Catherine, though she dressed in yellow and danced (along with Henry) when Catherine died.
Eri, Anne Boleyn's sister-in-law, Lady Rochford, who was also her lady-in-waiting, perjured herself by saying that Anne had had a sexual relationship with her brother, George, even though she knew it was untrue. Lady Rochford did not have a good relationship with George, and she didn't like the closeness between he and Anne. She got special favors from the court afterwards for "helping" with the case against Anne. She was also lady-in-waiting to Katherine Howard, and she was executed along with her, for having helped Katherine in her affair with Thomas Culpeper. Not a woman to be trusted under any circumstances.
Anne Boleyn's brother, George, was thought to have put up a good defense, and probably would have been found innocent, had he not disobeyed an order in the court. He was handed a letter that was supposedly to him from Anne, telling him that Henry VIII was impotent. He was told to read the letter silently and agree to it or not. Instead, he read it out loud, purposely ... and was found guilty.
Cindy
The vast majority of historians believe she was innocent. At her trial, even the dates they concocted as her having been when she committed adultery were proven to be fabricated, since they made no sense. She was nowhere near where they claimed she was on some dates, she was with the King on other dates, and I believe at least one date was when she was far along in pregnancy. And the only lady-in-waiting who talked was Jane Rochford, who was well rewarded for her story. Had Henry believed that Jane knew that Anne and her brother were committing incest and hadn't reported it, Lady Rochford would have had a different ending. I'm not sure where the idea that her ladies-in-waiting were talking like canaries comes from, but it's not so.
Cindy
I watched the documentary a couple of days ago, Eri, and I've just watched it again. I didn't hear anything about Anne's ladies-in-waiting turning against her, nor anything about them talking against her. As Amabel and I have stated, the only lady-in-waiting who is "on record" as giving evidence against her is Jane Rochford, and there is doubt in some areas that she did, either. There is only the evidence that a letter, supposedly from Lady Rochford, accusing Anne and her brother George (Jane Rochford's husband) of incest, was read in court. Yes, Anne did have enemies. In such a highly politically charged court as Henry's, it would be unusual for anyone to not have had enemies. But Anne had friends, too, as was also common in the court.
Perhaps you could provide the counter number where the ladies-in-waiting turning against Anne is reported in the documentary?
Cindy
Yes, exactly, Amabel. Jane Rochford implicated George only, and I suspect from a position of jealousy. There were hints that her marriage to George was in trouble over differences of religion.
As it turns out, I watched the documentary a third time last night! When I turned the television to my local PBS station, expecting a documentary about the Amish, I was surprised to see that they were showing the same documentary that Eri posted a few days ago! How's that for coincidence?
Tonight, my Henry VIII workshop will be focusing on Anne Boleyn. I will take note of what the professor has to say about Anne's downfall.
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on February 05, 2014, 12:40:05 PM
Yes, exactly, Amabel. Jane Rochford implicated George only, and I suspect from a position of jealousy. There were hints that her marriage to George was in trouble over differences of religion.
As it turns out, I watched the documentary a third time last night! Whe
Tonight, my Henry VIII workshop will be focusing on Anne Boleyn. I will take note of what the professor has to say about Anne's downfall.
Cindy
Novelists have tended to portray Jane Rochford as being jealous of her husband's affection for Anne, and making up stories out of spite. She did also protest about the divorce and was in the tower for speaking in favour of Mary and Catherine. But she also was on Anne's side at times and IIRC she plotted with Anne to get rid of a girl at court whom Anne suspected of flirting iwht Henry. So she probably swung around according to what suited her interests at the time. But her conduct later seems to suggest instability or insanity.. She is said ot have gone mad by the time she was executed.
The workshop last night was interesting (and fun). Lots of participation, more than the previous session on Catherine of Aragon, and I was surprised at how much support Anne got. From comments that I heard at the last session, I wouldn't have expected it. Eri, we went overtime last night, which put us at almost three hours, so I can't remember everything the professor said, but he said pretty much the same that Amabel and I have been saying. If you ask specific questions, I can tell you what his viewpoint was on each. We ran so much overtime, we didn't have time to get to Anne's arrest and trial, and I assume we'll fit that in at the beginning of next week. The general consensus, though, from comments throughout the workshop, was that Anne was more than likely innocent.
Oh, and speaking of Bernard, the one historian who believes Anne was guilty, the professor's opinion about him is that he (Bernard) tends to disagree with just about everyone about just about anything historical.
Cindy
Hi Cindy, glad you got there. I read Bernard's book last year or mabye a bit longer back, and it didn't seem to be anything more than HIS deciding to believe that she was guilty, and to follow a poem written about her at the time, which is hardly IMO evidence. I tried ot get a discussion of it going here but I think at the time there was no great interest, except for you.
Quote from: cinrit on February 06, 2014, 11:37:27 AM
The workshop last night was interesting (and fun). Lots of participation, more than the previous session on Catherine of Aragon, and I was surprised at how much support Anne got. From comments that I heard at the last session, I wouldn't have expected it. Eri, we went overtime last night, which put us at almost three hours, so I can't remember everything the professor said, but he said pretty much the same that Amabel and I have been saying. If you ask specific questions, I can tell you what his viewpoint was on each. We ran so much overtime, we didn't have time to get to Anne's arrest and trial, and I assume we'll fit that in at the beginning of next week. The general consensus, though, from comments throughout the workshop, was that Anne was more than likely innocent.
Oh, and speaking of Bernard, the one historian who believes Anne was guilty, the professor's opinion about him is that he (Bernard) tends to disagree with just about everyone about just about anything historical.
Cindy
Why does he think Ann lost her head?
^^ Eri, he believes the reason was two-fold ... he was tiring of Anne, and she hadn't given him a son. He believes that if she'd born a living son, he would have stayed married to her, even though they probably wouldn't have had a close marriage. He had to get rid of Anne completely in order to "start over" with a new wife. If not, he would be in the same position as when he married Anne, meaning there would still be people who would consider Anne his true wife as long as she was alive. Henry needed to make sure that any son that Jane might bear, would be considered legitimate by everyone.
Quote from: amabel on February 06, 2014, 12:51:56 PM
Hi Cindy, glad you got there. I read Bernard's book last year or mabye a bit longer back, and it didn't seem to be anything more than HIS deciding to believe that she was guilty, and to follow a poem written about her at the time, which is hardly IMO evidence. I tried ot get a discussion of it going here but I think at the time there was no great interest, except for you.
Thanks, Amabel. At least the roads weren't icy last night! I remember when you tried to get a discussion about Anne going here. I'm glad that we now have the opportunity. I haven't read Bernard's book, but I'd heard about him. I wasn't sure of his name, though, until I read your post. Is the poem he bases his opinion on, the one written by Thomas Wyatt? Or was it another one? Wyatt did seem to have a fascination for Anne, but as the professor last night asked, did he feel romantic love for her, or was it courtly love? In any case, in Wyatt's poem, he does reference that she belongs to Henry:
Who list her hunt, I put him out of doubt,
As well as I may spend his time in vain.
And graven with diamonds in letters plain
There is written, her fair neck round about:
Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am,
And wild for to hold, though I seem tame. Cindy
Oh no, not Wyatt. I can't remember who its by, butyou know how people wrote ballads about current events, like they post on Twitter now! I think it was De Carles, but I can't remember offhand and am suffering from nasty acute back pain so can't carry books right now.
But there were ballads about Anne, and they were of dubious authenticity.
there was a story that Anne had Mark Smeaton hidden in a closet and her women let hm out to sleep with her, obviously all that 's invention!!
But I think that G Bernard just was being ornery and determined ot go against current historical opinion.
it wasn't' rocket science to figure out why Anne fell. she was a political liability, sicne she tied Henry to the French alliance.. and the French were difficult allies whereas Henry's and England's Best course of action was to keep free and side with the Emperor or the French as their needs required.
And she was pretty unpopular with the nobility AND the common people. .
If she produced a son, that would outweight her faults, sicne it was important ot have a secure succession.. but she had only had 1 girl and a few miscarriages. So she was not looking good from that POV either. Of course Henry would never have displaced the mother of a son, he didn't care about a "close marriage" by then.. he would have found hs amusements elsewhere. but he was bitterly disappointed in Anne. She was not popular, she had failed ot give him his son, she alienated people with her arrogance, she had not been the wife he had hoped for.. and he had a perfect "Submissive Tudor woman" type in Jane S..
Oh, do you mean like the broadsheets of the Middle Ages and Renaissance? I remember reading one about Henry VIII many years ago, but I don't remember much about it. It was more like a parody or a farce of him and one of his wives, or maybe all of them. I don't remember a name being associated with it, but there may have been.
I'm not sure I understand how Anne tied Henry to the French Alliance. Wasn't she shunned at some gathering that he took her to ... maybe they weren't even married yet? Was it Queen Claude who said she wouldn't meet with her?
I wonder if Anne's unpopularity surprised her, too? I wonder if she really cared, as long as she had Henry's protection? And she did have his protection until he accepted that she, too, would not provide him with a son.
Cindy
Since the Emperor was C of Aragon's aunt, naturally they weren't too thrilled iwht doing diplomatic business with England, when their princess had been ousted and ill treated by Henry and Anne. so that really just left France as an ally. There were only 2 poweres in Europe.
And the French had their ups and downs with England. Francis was a little sympathetic to Anne and received her as Hery's future wife, but his wife would not. She was a relative of the Emperor's. (Not queen Claude but F's second wife).
And while Anne probably WAS foolishly arrogant enough to think that her lack of popularity didn't matter, it did. When Henry began to cool towards her, it meant she Had no one else.
Quote from: amabel on February 06, 2014, 02:02:00 PM
Oh no, not Wyatt. I can't remember who its by, butyou know how people wrote ballads about current events, like they post on Twitter now! I think it was De Carles, but I can't remember offhand and am suffering from nasty acute back pain so can't carry books right now.
But there were ballads about Anne, and they were of dubious authenticity.
there was a story that Anne had Mark Smeaton hidden in a closet and her women let hm out to sleep with her, obviously all that 's invention!!
But I think that G Bernard just was being ornery and determined ot go against current historical opinion.
it wasn't' rocket science to figure out why Anne fell. she was a political liability, sicne she tied Henry to the French alliance.. and the French were difficult allies whereas Henry's and England's Best course of action was to keep free and side with the Emperor or the French as their needs required.
And she was pretty unpopular with the nobility AND the common people. .
If she produced a son, that would outweight her faults, sicne it was important ot have a secure succession.. but she had only had 1 girl and a few miscarriages. So she was not looking good from that POV either. Of course Henry would never have displaced the mother of a son, he didn't care about a "close marriage" by then.. he would have found hs amusements elsewhere. but he was bitterly disappointed in Anne. She was not popular, she had failed ot give him his son, she alienated people with her arrogance, she had not been the wife he had hoped for.. and he had a perfect "Submissive Tudor woman" type in Jane S..
Jane wasn't submissive just because she wasn't rude and arrogant like Ann doesn't mean she was submissive ... she was smarter that's for sure ...
I don't know if Jane was submissive or if she was putting on a good act, but she certainly did come across as submissive. She was definitely coached by her brothers, both of whom were ultimately beheaded for treason. Jane's good luck, if you can call it that, was that she died before Henry had a chance to tire of her. After she gave him a son (who died at 16), he would never had divorced her, but there were rumors that his eyes were beginning to roam even while she was pregnant.
Cindy
That's true Cindy. She wasn't 100^% submissive, she stood up to Henry over the issue of the monasteries, and possibly over Princess Mary.. but usually Henry di what he wanted. it was rare for him to pay a lot of attention to women's influences. His eyes wandering didn't really matter, he was likely to flirt or fool around, but yeah you're rihgt that Jane was lucky enough to die before pehrpas Henry DID get bored iwht her and paid less attention to her..
Quote from: cinrit on February 06, 2014, 01:15:28 PM
^^ Eri, he believes the reason was two-fold ... he was tiring of Anne, and she hadn't given him a son. He believes that if she'd born a living son, he would have stayed married to her, even though they probably wouldn't have had a close marriage. He had to get rid of Anne completely in order to "start over" with a new wife. If not, he would be in the same position as when he married Anne, meaning there would still be people who would consider Anne his true wife as long as she was alive. Henry needed to make sure that any son that Jane might bear, would be considered legitimate by everyone.
Quote from: amabel on February 06, 2014, 12:51:56 PM
Hi Cindy, glad you got there. I read Bernard's book last year or mabye a bit longer back, and it didn't seem to be anything more than HIS deciding to believe that she was guilty, and to follow a poem written about her at the time, which is hardly IMO evidence. I tried ot get a discussion of it going here but I think at the time there was no great interest, except for you.
Thanks, Amabel. At least the roads weren't icy last night! I remember when you tried to get a discussion about Anne going here. I'm glad that we now have the opportunity. I haven't read Bernard's book, but I'd heard about him. I wasn't sure of his name, though, until I read your post. Is the poem he bases his opinion on, the one written by Thomas Wyatt? Or was it another one? Wyatt did seem to have a fascination for Anne, but as the professor last night asked, did he feel romantic love for her, or was it courtly love? In any case, in Wyatt's poem, he does reference that she belongs to Henry:
Who list her hunt, I put him out of doubt,
As well as I may spend his time in vain.
And graven with diamonds in letters plain
There is written, her fair neck round about:
Noli me tangere, for Caesar's I am,
And wild for to hold, though I seem tame.
Cindy
Will you talk about Jane next? Please report back :flower:.
^^ Yes, Jane will be next. We'll most likely go over Anne's arrest and her trial first, then onto Jane. I'm looking forward to what the general consensus on her will be. I'll be sure to report back here. :)
Cindy
Reporting in from the Henry VIII workshop last night. There was a lot of speculation about Jane Seymour, because, as the professor said, we know practically nothing about her. For over 25 years, we heard nothing about her ... then she was suddenly on the scene when Henry noticed her, and only three or four years later, she was gone. We saw clips from several movies, showing how different directors have chosen to depict her. Because no one knows more than a small percentage of her life, writers and directors can portray her any way they want. Some show her as innocent and naive, some show her as cunning and conniving. We'll never know the real Jane.
There was a moment of levity when one woman said that she'd heard Jane died of a fever after giving birth because she "went down to the kitchen looking for something to eat, mingled with the cooks, and caught a fever from one of them". I wish I could describe the look on the professor's face. :hehe: It turned out that one of his colleagues told this story to the woman, who believed it. The professor got a kick out of the practical joke, and declared that before he retired for the night, he would be writing an email to his colleague.
Not much more to report, Eri. We discussed a little about Catherine of Aragon, a little about Anne Boleyn's execution, and a little about "The Tudors" (the professor said he's not a fan of it). We saw pictures of actresses who've played Anne in movies (and I was surprised to learn that Jane Asher, who was engaged to Paul McCartney in the Sixties, played her in the early 70's). Next week, we'll talk about Anne of Cleves, and that should be very interesting. We don't know a lot about her, either, but we know enough to know that she was smart enough to escape marriage to Henry with her head intact, and to gain a lot by doing so.
One interesting thought that was brought up when someone in the group noticed that most of Henry's wives had the same "shape". As it turns out, Henry obviously liked a certain body build ... thin, with small chests. Anne of Cleves was a big woman and top-heavy. The professor believes that Anne of Cleves' misfortune was that she just wasn't Henry VIII's "type".
Cindy
QuoteI have just learnt of a most surprising event in our island story. Queen Elizabeth I's privy council ordered bonfires to be lit and prayers to be said in church to give thanks for the defeat of the Ottoman fleet at Lepanto in 1571.
As a Christian queen, Elizabeth had no love of "the Turke". During the Ottoman campaign to invade Hungary in 1566, long prayers were ordered to muster "spirituall ayde", lest "the Infidels, who have already a great part of that most goodly and strong kyngdome in theyr possession, shoulde prevayle wholly agaynst the same (whiche God forbyd), and all the rest of Christendom should lye as it were naked and open to the incursions and invasions of the sayde savage and most cruell enemyes the Turkes".
The notion of Christendom in peril remained, but the remarkable thing in 1571 was that Elizabeth was allying the prayers of Protestant England with the Holy League put together by Pope Pius V. The fleet sent into battle by Spain, Venice, Genoa, Savoy, the Papal States and the Knights Hospitaller from Malta was commanded by Don John of Austria, natural son of the Emperor Charles V and half-brother of Philip II of Spain.
Pope Pius and the Virgin Queen - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10638834/Pope-Pius-and-the-Virgin-Queen.html)
No, I haven't heard of it, Amabel. It may have been mentioned in the workshop I participated in, but I don't remember. I checked it out on amazon.com, and it looks interesting. I may have to order it. I haven't read a good Anne Boleyn book in a long time. Thanks for mentioning it!
Cindy
Cindy I'd get it from the library if I were you!!! She has written more serious books but this is a weird piece of work, that seems to have sprung from some kind of FB page or blog or something about Anne Bol and AB fans! She puts in a Lot of stuff about her own personal life, and it doesn't IMO seem very scholarly.
Thanks for the tip, Amabel. I'll look at my local library to see if they carry it. I don't see a lot of books about British history or royalty there, but I did manage to find a book about Jane Rochford once.
Cindy
I just wanted to say I understand why Ann out of all Harry's wives gets the most attention I just think it's unfair especially since they love to hype their relationship as the biggest love story ever known to man kind when it was just a man who knew he couldn't have any more children from his wife and looked elsewhere :hide: ... all his wives are fascinating and I wish we would hear more of them <_< ...
Ann also receives the most attention because of the changes she brought to the monarchy. Because of her, the Church of England was founded. Had there been no Anne Boleyn, the U.K. could still be Catholic. She was also the mother of what many people (including my professor at the recent workshop I attended) believe was England's greatest female monarch, and one of the U.K.'s greatest monarchs in general.
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on March 26, 2014, 05:25:47 PM
Ann also receives the most attention because of the changes she brought to the monarchy. Because of her, the Church of England was founded. Had there been no Anne Boleyn, the U.K. could still be Catholic. She was also the mother of what many people (including my professor at the recent workshop I attended) believe was England's greatest female monarch, and one of the U.K.'s greatest monarchs in general.
Cindy
As I said I understand all of that what I have a problem with is their relationship being hyped out as some grand love story when in reality he had her head cut off when he understood she wouldn't give him a son ...
^^ It was more than that, Eri. He chased Anne for seven years before she gave in. Was she playing a game with him? Maybe so ... or maybe she was taking her sister, Mary, as an example of what happens when you give in too fast. Be that as it may, Henry wooed her for all those years. That's the part that makes it the "great love story" that people remember. They remember that in the end, she was beheaded by the man who wanted her so much, but there can be no denial that he waited a very long time for her before marrying and then tiring of her.
To be honest, though I do believe his obsession for a son was sincere, I think it was also a handy excuse for needing to divorce Catherine and marry Anne. If not, he could have looked for another wife long before marrying Anne.
Cindy
I think that the execution was kind of a sign that he had passionate feelings for her..he MIHGT have gotten away iwht divorcing her and sending her into seclusion, since she wasn't his wife in the eyes of many people..
But I think he was so fired up with Strong feelings about her, that he ended up needing to execute her Rather than just get rid of her legally. He didn't want to think of her still alive.. and of course he was probably afraid of another ex wife trying to push the Rights of her child, as had happened iwht Catherine. I agree that the waiting 6 or 7 tears for her was another sign of love or at least obsession, since he could have possibly gotten an annulment more easily, if he hadn't been planning on marrying a lower class woman like Anne...
It really is a good thread. I very much enjoy it. Thank you, Eri, for starting it. Anne Boleyn is the reason I got interested in royalty when I was 15-16 years old. She'll probably always be my favorite, and I take any chance I get to talk about the her, and the Tudors in general. :)
Cindy
Do you guys think he got with Ann just to have the son he wanted or was he that "in love" with her? I don't deny at the beginning she had him wrapped in her little finger but he got over her in time and fell "in love" with Jane while with Ann ... to me it's telling that she lost her head when it was clear the son wasn't coming but of course a lot of people would have a different take on it ... so what do you guys think Henry a man in love or son crazed?
We've talked about Henry VIII being a romantic. He married five of his wives for love. He had to have been in love with Anne Boleyn to have chased her for so many years, and to take as many bold steps as he did in order to marry her. Read his letters to her, especially the later ones as he got bolder:
Henry VIII's Love Letters to Anne Boleyn » The Anne Boleyn Files (http://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/resources/anne-boleyn-words/henry-viiis-love-letters-to-anne-boleyn/)
Did he fall out of love with her? Yes. She was getting older and wasn't as attractive, and besides, he was tiring of her hysterical temperament. Her inability to give him a son was another perfect excuse for him to get rid of her. Henry always had a "reason" for whatever he did. Had Anne given him a son, he would still have fallen out of love with her, but he would never have gotten rid of her in any way.
Cindy
^ So you think he leaving his wife that he loved and respected and he cutting Ann's head had nothing to do with him wanting a son? Too many coincidences ...
Of course he wanted a son, but without Anne, he might have made the best of having a daughter.. OR he might have still sought an annulment but married another princess. that would have been a far better option form a practical POV than insisting on marriage to a lady in waiting of relatively low birth who was unpopular with the common peole and with the upper classes as Anne was.
and I'm not sure why you keep mentioning his "cutting her head off". Execution on a trumped up charge,given Anne's relative unpopularity and his past experience with Katherine, was probably the best way of getting out of the marriage for good and all and making sure that no one would be around to defend Elizabeth's claim ot the throne.
Quote from: Eri on March 28, 2014, 07:54:08 AM
^ So you think he leaving his wife that he loved and respected and he cutting Ann's head had nothing to do with him wanting a son? Too many coincidences ...
No, that isn't what I said. Yes, of course he wanted a son, but I said that I think it was a handy excuse. If his wanting a son was the only reason for the things he did, he could easily have gotten rid of Catherine long before he hooked up with Anne. His passion for Anne spurred him on to do what he could have done years before.
Cindy
Think that wanting a son was the leaset of it. Unlike other monarchs who didn't have a son, Henry doesn't seem to have really put any effort into trying to find a younger wife, for a long time. He toyed maybe with the idea of naming Richmond as his heir but he knew that would create more problems. And given that Anne was not that young either, he woudl have had a better chance of a son with a younger wife.. in fact apart from Kat Howard none of H's wives were all that young..
Quote from: cinrit on March 28, 2014, 09:07:43 AM
Quote from: Eri on March 28, 2014, 07:54:08 AM
^ So you think he leaving his wife that he loved and respected and he cutting Ann's head had nothing to do with him wanting a son? Too many coincidences ...
No, that isn't what I said. Yes, of course he wanted a son, but I said that I think it was a handy excuse. If his wanting a son was the only reason for the things he did, he could easily have gotten rid of Catherine long before he hooked up with Anne. His passion for Anne spurred him on to do what he could have done years before.
Cindy
All I am saying is that I see a pattern here ...Ann entered the scene when Catherine couldn't give birth to an Heir anymore and Jane entered the scene when it was clear Ann wouldn't give him an Heir either ...
Henry had 12 years between the birth of his and Catherine's last son and the appearance of Anne Boleyn. Catherine gave birth to their last son (Henry, Duke of Cornwall) in 1514; he lived only a few hours. Anne did not attract Henry's attention until early 1526.
Henry started flirting with Jane Seymour shortly after Catherine of Aragon's death, before Anne was delivered of her last child. In fact, Anne happened to see Jane sitting on Henry's lap when she (Anne) was about five months pregnant. And Jane, at least once, deliberately made a point of fidgeting with a locket, a gift from Henry with his portrait inside, in front of Anne.
I don't think Henry was thinking too hard about a son either of those times.
Cindy
^ I am not saying it was an obsession for him but it was his job to provide an Heir and he was failing ... let's not pretend his marriages were all about love ...
Eri, did you read Henry's letters to Anne? All of them?
Cindy
^ No ... not all of them ... but I am sure he wrote the same things to Jane only no one cares ... there is a lot of building up Henry and Ann's relationship ... ultimately the only person Henry loved was Henry :wink: ...
Quote from: Eri on March 28, 2014, 04:17:46 PM
^ I am not saying it was an obsession for him but it was his job to provide an Heir and he was failing ... let's not pretend his marriages were all about love ...
Most of them were. Catherine of Ar was not considered the ideal bride, being alot older than him.. but he insisted on marrying her. He was obsessively in love with Anne for 6 years. He was in love with Jane Seymour "on the rebound" from Anne, again she wasn't that young and he could probably have done better in finding a younger wife who would have more child bearing years. His marriage ot Anne of Cleves had a lot to do with politics, Rather than strictly speaking producing another son. With Kath Howard and Kat Parr, he was in love iwht KH and at least fond of K Parr. I doubt if he thought of producing children iwht his later wives...
Double post auto-merged: March 28, 2014, 07:34:57 PM
Quote from: Eri on March 28, 2014, 04:49:54 PM
^ No ... not all of them ... but I am sure he wrote the same things to Jane only no one cares ... there is a lot of building up Henry and Ann's relationship ... ultimately the only person Henry loved was Henry :wink: ...
We have no evidence of what he wrote to Jane. He was certainly in love with her, in a way but in a quieter way than his intense feelings for Anne.
Double post auto-merged: March 29, 2014, 03:24:08 PM
While Henry DID have an obligation to try and provide an heir and it was a factor in many of his decisions, it seems to me that he was not as concerned about it as he might have been. Maybe not even as worried as he SHOUDL have been,
I think that Cindy said that he was usually marrying for love and I think that that's true, with the proviso that of course his love was very shallow. However he DID I think have a psychological need to have a wife whom he thought of as a soul mate, in some way - a woman that he Had Strong feelings for. he had relatively few mistresses, only 2 whose name are known to us. he seems to have really preferred to be married, to a woman he was "in love" with, rather than sleeping with a lot of girls.
QuoteYesterday I wrote about Anne Boleyn attending Easter Eve mass as Queen and now we fast-forward three years and find her taking part in Easter celebrations just over a month before her execution.
On the 13th April 1536, Maundy Thursday, Anne Boleyn did her duty as Queen, distributing Maundy money (alms) and washing the feet of poor people. It was traditional for the monarch and his consort to wash the feet of as many poor people as years they were old, as well as giving them purses of coins,
More: 13 April 1536 ? Anne Boleyn and Maundy Thursday (http://networkedblogs.com/VSLRU)
Cindy
Fascinating thank you !!! :flower:
You're welcome, Eri. I thought it might interest you. :flower:
Cindy
Quote from: amabel on March 28, 2014, 07:34:10 PM
Quote from: Eri on March 28, 2014, 04:17:46 PM
^ I am not saying it was an obsession for him but it was his job to provide an Heir and he was failing ... let's not pretend his marriages were all about love ...
Most of them were. Catherine of Ar was not considered the ideal bride, being alot older than him.. but he insisted on marrying her. He was obsessively in love with Anne for 6 years. He was in love with Jane Seymour "on the rebound" from Anne, again she wasn't that young and he could probably have done better in finding a younger wife who would have more child bearing years. His marriage ot Anne of Cleves had a lot to do with politics, Rather than strictly speaking producing another son. With Kath Howard and Kat Parr, he was in love iwht KH and at least fond of K Parr. I doubt if he thought of producing children iwht his later wives...
Double post auto-merged: March 28, 2014, 07:34:57 PM
Quote from: Eri on March 28, 2014, 04:49:54 PM
^ No ... not all of them ... but I am sure he wrote the same things to Jane only no one cares ... there is a lot of building up Henry and Ann's relationship ... ultimately the only person Henry loved was Henry :wink: ...
We have no evidence of what he wrote to Jane. He was certainly in love with her, in a way but in a quieter way than his intense feelings for Anne.
Double post auto-merged: March 29, 2014, 03:24:08 PM
While Henry DID have an obligation to try and provide an heir and it was a factor in many of his decisions, it seems to me that he was not as concerned about it as he might have been. Maybe not even as worried as he SHOUDL have been,
I think that Cindy said that he was usually marrying for love and I think that that's true, with the proviso that of course his love was very shallow. However he DID I think have a psychological need to have a wife whom he thought of as a soul mate, in some way - a woman that he Had Strong feelings for. he had relatively few mistresses, only 2 whose name are known to us. he seems to have really preferred to be married, to a woman he was "in love" with, rather than sleeping with a lot of girls.
I think that's very true, amabel; Henry was largely in love with love. He was well versed in the traditions of courtly love and exaggerated romance.
In fact, one of the wives' historians (maybe Starkey, but don't quote me) posited that the issue with Anne of Cleves was that she knew absolutely nothing of the flirtatious courtly love tradition. He bases this on the records of the first meeting of the two, in which Henry came to the castle in which Anne was staying on her way from the sea port to the capital. He and his courtiers "invaded" her rooms disguised as somewhat lower class rowdies. She was *supposed* to recognize her "true love"; any of his other wives would have, being familiar with the trope. But Anne didn't, because coming from a very austere German Protestant court with absolutely no flirtatious "masquerade" tradition, she just thought she was dealing with lower class rowdies. It bitterly disappointed Henry, goes the theory.
With that said, the way Anne played the divorce from Henry was masterful, and I love her for it.
QuoteHer snow white skin has been iconic for centuries. But it seems Queen Elizabeth I may not have been the pale and interesting poster girl history dictates. Microscopic analysis of one portrait has revealed she had blushing cheeks blotted with rouge.
And our perception of the monarch as austere comes after her numerous portraits have faded, losing their subtle pink touches, National Portrait Gallery scientists claim.
During Elizabethan times, women went to great lengths to maintain smooth, pale skin - a sign of wealth and high class. Tanned skin, blemishes, sunburn, or freckles were reserved for lower ranking members of society who toiled on the land, while the upper classes relaxed indoors.
More: Why the Virgin Queen wasn't really pale and interesting: Paint tests of portrait show Elizabeth I had rosy red cheeks | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2654917/Why-Virgin-Queen-wasnt-really-pale-interesting-Paint-tests-portrait-Elizabeth-I-rosy-red-cheeks.html)
Cindy
Whew, all that arsenic-based white lead on the skin and then a touch of rouge on top. Must have looked very attractive! :D
Anne Boleyn was Henry VIII's most 'compatible wife', claims researcher | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2671064/Anne-Boleyn-Henry-VIIIs-compatible-wife-claims-researcher.html)
QuoteDespite chopping off her head after just three years of marriage, Anne Boleyn was the best match for King Henry VIII.
Using modern dating techniques, British historian Elizabeth Norton found the Tudor king was largely incompatible with all of his wives due to his aggressive personality, high levels of neuroticism and lack of compassion.
But second wife Anne Boleyn was best suited to the monarch as they were open with one another, shared similar libidos and both had high levels of energy and ambition.
The second most compatible wife was Anne of Cleves, whose marriage with Henry ended within six months.
Henry and his fourth wife shared a similar level of intelligence and diligence, and remained amicable despite their divorce.
In third place was first wife Catherine of Aragon whose profiling indicates that her relative lack of interest in appearance and athleticism may have caused friction with the sporty king.
Yet their marriage lasted for 23 years before Henry split with the Roman Catholic Church in order to divorce her.
Matchmakers put third wife Jane Seymour in fourth place deeming her not bold and outgoing enough, despite the King saying he felt her his 'first true wife.'
She died following child birth and a year of marriage, and is the only wife to be buried with Henry VIII.
Fifth wife Kathryn Howard's mismatched libido led to her losing her head, after two years of marriage and she was the fifth most incompatible.
And last wife Katherine Parr was considered too intellectual for the king's tastes and was seen as the least suitable of all six - although she outlived Henry.
QuoteThe Queen was furious. She thrust down her fan, behind which she had been coquettishly giggling with a courtier, rose from her throne and strode towards the woman who had dared to enter her chamber.
And when Queen Elizabeth I reached the Countess of Leicester she soundly boxed her ears and screamed: "Get out!"
The new countess fled and was never to appear at court again. Her crime was to be the second wife of the man Elizabeth adored.
Lord Robert Dudley had tried for years to marry the captivating and tempestuous Queen and now, fed up and resigned to the fact she would never consent to the match he had tried so ardently to bring about, he had married a young relative of Elizabeth's called Lettice Knollys. Yet Elizabeth refused to let this derail a deep love affair that was the scandal of Europe.
More: All the Queen's men: Was Elizabeth I really the virgin Queen | Royal | News | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/486639/All-the-Queen-s-men-Was-Elizabeth-I-really-the-virgin-Queen)
Cindy
I think she was technically a virgin, since she would not have cared to risk a pregnancy. So many women died including two of Elizabeth's five stepmothers, Jane Seymour and Katherine Parr.
I also think the reason she did not marry was because she was reluctant to share power with anyone.
they were hardly foolproof, and given that the queen was constantly surrounded by people if she Had been living an irregular life, ti would certainly have become public knowledge.
I believe she was a virgin. Everything she did was known, certainly her laundresses would have watched her sheets and her clothes for tell-tale signs of sexual intercourse. She was rarely alone and always watched, so sneaking out was not easy. I also do not believe she ever had a child. The laundry women would have known if her periods stopped and it would have been instantly known. Elizabeth was too smart to endanger her reputation or her throne. I believe she and Dudley went as far as they could without "going all the way".
^^I agree. A bit of threshing about and heavy breathing was about as far as Elizabeth and Dudley got! Sovereigns in those days were helped to undress and dress by several attendants and servants. A swollen belly would soon be noticed and noted. Foreign ambassadors would be writing home that day!
I do think Dudley was the great love of Elizabeth's life, though, and she must have felt embittered and hurt as well as angry when he married for the second time. They found his last letter to her, which she had kept as a keepsake, after she died I believe.
Quote from: Lothwen on July 11, 2014, 05:09:55 AM
They had ways of preventing pregnancy even back then.
Just saying.....
This is my opinion as well... :nod:
Of course there were ways. However, if Elizabeth's periods stopped her laundresses would have taken note of it. Of course she might have said she was sick but then getting an abortion would have been a problem. I believe she played it smart and did not give even Dudley the chance to betray her. She trusted very few people, which of course is understandable.
we'll never know right? It is all speculation but she certainly could have taken steps to prevent pregnancy. I am inclined to think she feared pregnancy and also saw the example of her half sister Mary and so would have avoided any entanglements.
She certainly though manipulated men with the possibility of becoming her consort or even just favorite. Essex is one I feel sorry for - she sends him - as her favorite - to Ireland to deal with a rebellion and instead of slaughtering everyone - he come back with a peace treaty. Good work we'd say but not then - she and her council wanted slaughter - so Essex is accused of treason cause he got a peace treaty mind you - and beheaded. Did not pay to be the Queen's favorite.
There was the tiny matter of Essex trying to force his way through London with his supporters in an attempt to see the Queen nearly two years later, cate, after his monopolies had been taken away. Admittedly, it was too pathetic and short lived to be called an actual 'rebellion' but a desperate Essex was rather stupid to be a hothead and play into his enemies' hands on that occasion.
I think that, almost to the end, Essex believed he would be saved because of the affection the Queen had for him.
Quote from: Limabeany on August 15, 2014, 11:05:07 AM
Quote from: Lothwen on July 11, 2014, 05:09:55 AM
They had ways of preventing pregnancy even back then.
Just saying.....
This is my opinion as well... :nod:
they were extremely unreliable adn abortions were dangerous. Eliz would not take that sort of risk. And she was constant surrounded bye poeple, so anything beyond very limited sex play would be taken note of.
There were herbs, and there were condoms made of animal intestines and eventually, linen. Most likely not very reliable. (And I'd think the linen condoms would be uncomfortable.)
History of Condoms | Condom Jungle (http://www.condomjungle.com/history-of-condoms/)
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on August 16, 2014, 10:46:46 AM
There were herbs, and there were condoms made of animal intestines and eventually, linen. Most likely not very reliable. (And I'd think the linen condoms would be uncomfortable.)
History of Condoms | Condom Jungle (http://www.condomjungle.com/history-of-condoms/)
Cindy
Condoms were tie-ons too. very unreliable.
QuoteSalacious details of how Anne Boleyn was said to have cheated on Henry VIII with her own brother are contained in documents which have been put on the internet for the first time. An official account of her trial in 1536, including graphic claims of incest, features in an online exhibition to mark the 500th anniversary of the Tudor monarch's accession to the throne.
Anne's relationship with Henry set the course of British history, triggering England's split with Rome amid his divorce from his first wife Catherine of Aragon.
The collection also includes a court document relating to that divorce and a letter dealing with his later plans to cut ties with his fourth wife, Anne of Cleves, because of disappointment in the bedroom.
......
A section on his marital affairs includes a rare glimpse of the official record of the trial of Anne Boleyn, Henry's second wife, and her brother George Boleyn, who were accused of high treason and incest. Historians have dismissed the allegations as trumped up charges designed to free Henry from his controversial marriage to Anne but debate continues about his motives.
Once part of the "Bag of Secrets", a collection of highly sensitive records from Tudor times, the King's Bench document recounts the opening of the proceedings at the trial in May 1536.
More: Salacious claims of Anne Boleyn's incest in Henry VIII documents placed online - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/5120633/Salacious-claims-of-Anne-Boleyns-incest-in-Henry-VIII-documents-placed-online.html)
Cindy
Oooh. Thanks for posting this Cindy, I'm actually taking a class on Early Modern British history where we discuss the Tudors and this is great material.
You're welcome, HistoryGirl. :flower: Unfortunately, the link given in the article doesn't work. Hopefully, they'll correct it tomorrow. I'm just bursting to get a look at the documents.
Cindy
Thanks for all you do, Cindy :hug:
Agreed :) I can't wait to see the documents either, it's amazing to be able to see something from such an interesting and different time period
Quote from: SophieChloe on August 22, 2014, 07:50:45 PM
Thanks for all you do, Cindy :hug:
Awww ... thanks, SC. :hug:
Cindy
Quote......About the Lovers Who Changed History
They are two of history's most captivating figures, their romance-turned-tragedy known the world over. But what was the true nature of the relationship between Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn, and how did Anne come to lose her head?
In a new two-part series for Channel 5, Tudor historian Dr Suzannah Lipscomb will seek to answer these questions.
Henry & Anne: The Lovers Who Changed History will take Lipscomb on a journey from Anne's childhood home at Hever Castle in Kent, to the French palace where, some say, she learned the art of love. She will also visit Hampton Court, where Henry built the Great Hall for his new queen, and the Tower of London, where he had her beheaded.
Here, ahead of her new two-part series that airs on Thursday, Lipscomb dispels some of the myths that surround one of history's most iconic couples:
"The love affair between Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn is shrouded in historical myth, romantic legend, cliché and half-truths. Much of their story remains fiercely debated by historians – everything from why Henry fell for Anne, to why he destroyed her in the end.
More: Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn: dispelling myths about the lovers who changed history in new Dr Suzannah Lipscomb Channel 5 series | History Extra (http://www.historyextra.com/feature/henry-viii-and-anne-boleyn-suzannah-lipscomb-dispels-myths-about-lovers-who-changed-history)
Cindy
I was under the impression that Catherine de Medici sent her own doctors to check Elizabeth out when she was being courted by Alencon. They found her a virgin and perfectly capable of bearing children.
:thanks: lilibet80, interesting, I will look that up.
Quote from: lilibet80 on September 14, 2014, 04:10:20 PM
I was under the impression that Catherine de Medici sent her own doctors to check Elizabeth out when she was being courted by Alencon. They found her a virgin and perfectly capable of bearing children.
I don't beelive so. They might have asked for reports from Eliz's own doctors who did say she was capable of having children. I can't see that Eliz a sovereign queen would submit to examinations by foreign doctors./.
I agree with Eri, cindycinrit, Lowthen, Limabeany. :clap:
There was unreliable BC. Abortions and having a baby were both death sentences.
Being married and being Q would have been a death sentence too with her husband, P or Lord or Duke wanting to be K , and plotting to be K and plotting to have her killed.
Being married and being Q was a death sentence because who could she have married? Jesus Christ had already died at that time. The Apostles too. LOL!
Being a mother would have kiled her because if the birth did not, then the male child could have grown up to plot against her in order to be K. Kill her. Have her imprisoned at the Tower. If a daughter, same thing to be Q and with plotting against others to send her mother, QEI, to the Tower...etc.
Being a woman back then in childbirth was a death sentence, a gamble.
For QEI, life in general was a death sentence and she took all measures, even forgoing personal happiness, to stay alive for as long as she could. She did stay alive as P and as Q and died a bald headed, toothless, acid facial fan (pre plastic surgery) LOL, woman titled Q. She died on her own terms of natural causes at an old age for then. :happy15:
Back to thread....
I think QEI as the Young Princes Elizabeth was her father's daughter all the way: mean streak :pullhair:, smart :Lothwen: politcally, looks, etc.
I think her history was, as we are child knowledgable today, can say that her mother's beheading by her father, she being declared a bast- - -, her half-sister Mary's mother being banished, her various other stepmothers, the long wanted boy child and his special treatment, his death, and her case of middle child syndrome, LOL, well, yeah, with all that and more , who needed to be married and have children. She was totally a victim of her bad childhood. Mostly bad.
Add the time as an older girl, mid teens or so, she almost died because of trumped up charges, rumor of treason, etc. I cannot recall the story right now, but you all know it. She was living with her dear At Mary, and step uncle...something happened.
Shewasthisclose to losing her head .
I think she may have had actually sex. Some kind of way. Could she have done something to prevent having a pregnancy like a hysterectonmy? Yes. All kinds of things done now, (BC, abortion, hysterectonmy, etc.) was done then, although primitive.
She did not, could not have had any of this done because it would have been said , rumored some sort of way during her life and certainly after her death at least. Being QEII and even before that, PE, she was so inspected. Never alone. Ladies -in-waiting. Etc.
She most definitely could have lots of other ways with Dudley without sex. Probably did.
Who really knows??!?!?!?
Separate subject.
Lets say she did take all these precautions and did, I do not think the courtiers, enemies, etc. could have banished her from the throne. She was born HRH. Sort of like what we discussed about CPB,PC, PD, and the rules like that did apply to PAnne, PMaragaret, etc.
.
I think she had sex no doubt about it in my mind ... the term ''virgin Queen" comes from the fact she never married not because she was a virgin ... no one has claimed she was a virgin in fact there were rumors about her and her step father Seymor since she was a teen ...
Thomas Seymour was dead by the time Elizabeth was sixteen, though. Seymour was nearly 40 when he started flirting with Elizabeth who was then about 14. He was extremely ambitious and she may have learned a lesson from the way he behaved.
I have a hard time believing that after everything her mother, step-mothers, sister, and fellow queens at the time went through, Elizabeth would throw it all away for a dalliance. If nothing else she was pragmatic and thought through her decisions carefully which is what made her a successful queen.
Quote from: Eri on September 26, 2014, 11:10:44 AM
I think she had sex no doubt about it in my mind ... the term ''virgin Queen" comes from the fact she never married not because she was a virgin ... no one has claimed she was a virgin in fact there were rumors about her and her step father Seymor since she was a teen ...
yes people HAVE claimed she was a virgin...and she almost certainly was. Seymour was indiscreet but he would be a crazy fool to tamper with a royal virgin, and what he wanted to do, was to marry her, not have sex with her. He probably hoped by luring her into sexual infatuation with him, to get her into a frame of mind that she would wish to marry hm and since he had influence over her brother, Edward, he would get royal consent to the marriage. later on she had learned far too much about men and how to deal with them, and never to trust them...so she would hardly risk her throne for any man living.
^ Wasn't he The King's UNCLE? Anyways ... what I was trying to say is that there were rumors about her since she was a teen so not everyone bought in on the "virgin" spin ...
Thomas Seymour was the King's uncle, though no blood relation to Elizabeth. He was her stepfather, as Katherine Parr had loved him for years and married him not long after Henry's death. (She died in childbirth.) Elizabeth wasn't sleeping with Seymour in her teens. He flirted with her, tickled her. His wife was sometimes present and joined in the horseplay so it didn't go any further. (She knew what Seymour was like.) It was only when Seymour had Elizabeth in his arms and Katherine saw them that Elizabeth was sent away.
Quote from: Eri on September 28, 2014, 06:51:23 AM
^ Wasn't he The King's UNCLE? Anyways ... what I was trying to say is that there were rumors about her since she was a teen so not everyone bought in on the "virgin" spin ...
we are not talking of "everyone". Or at least I wasn't'. I'm talking bout historians who have studied Elizabeth and who are pretty certain that her being the Virgin queen was the real truth
Quote from: Eri on September 28, 2014, 06:51:23 AM
^ Wasn't he The King's UNCLE? Anyways ... what I was trying to say is that there were rumors about her since she was a teen so not everyone bought in on the "virgin" spin ...
He was Edward's uncle, being the brother of Henry VIII's third wife and mother of Edward, Jane Seymour.
Cindy
and of course Catherine' Parr's husband and so Elizabeth's stepfather. To Eiri, there are always rumours about most royal women - and men. There were stories of Anne Boleyn, that she had several lovers, but virtually nobody believes them. Elizabeth was Young and a bit foolish with Tom Seymour, but Kath Parr did make sure that she was protected from any molestation and when it was obvious that Tom was a bit infatuated with the girl and she with him, she sent Eliz away so as to protect her reputation.
New Statesman | Why did Anne Boleyn have to die? (http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2014/05/why-did-anne-boleyn-have-die)
Quote
Anne caught Henry's eye some time in late 1525 or early 1526. By this time, the king had been married to the Spanish Catherine of Aragon for over fifteen years and, after six pregnancies, only a single child had survived, and that was a daughter: Mary. Henry had fathered one illegitimate son and bedded Anne's married sister before the sophisticated beauty arrived at the English court. Educated in the Netherlands and France, the dark-eyed Anne was intelligent and stylish, in contrast to the much older Catherine, then past her fortieth birthday. In anticipation of more children, Henry instigated the divorce proceedings that would result in his breach with the Roman Catholic church, the displacement of an anointed Queen and his own excommunication.
All this for Anne. As if to make his point, Henry probably married her twice, first at the end of 1532, and again the following January. She quickly fell pregnant but the child she bore in September 1533 was not the longed-for son, but a daughter, Elizabeth. She had at least one other miscarriage in the following years, before falling pregnant again in the autumn of 1535. In spite of the efforts of various historians to claim they were virtually doomed from the start, Henry and Anne's marriage still seemed strong as they celebrated the arrival of 1536. Then, in January, Henry suffered a fall while riding and, shortly after, Anne miscarried a male child. The King was diverted by Jane Seymour, but none of this guaranteed Anne's fall and as late as April, the royal pair were planning a joint trip to Calais. They appeared to quarrel at the end of the month, with one observer noting the Queen holding her daughter, apparently begging with Henry through an open window. Then, on 2 May, Anne was arrested and taken to the Tower. The swordsman may have been summoned as early as a week later, given that he had to cross the Channel, making it clear that her death was planned. On May 14, the marriage was declared null and void, but the following day, Anne was charged with treason, adultery and incest. It was a foregone conclusion. She met her death within four days.
So why did Anne have to die? No other English Queen had been treated in this way. When Catherine had stubbornly opposed divorce, she was sent away from court and Henry went ahead and remarried anyway. Even anointed Queens could be accommodated, no matter how bitterly they complained. Other options were available, such as retirement into a monastery, or Anne could have lived out the rest of her natural life in the courts of Europe. Adultery and incest were not verdicts that carried the death sentence. In any case, the charge of "incontinent living" has been disproved by the research of Alison Weir as, on the majority of dates, Anne or her supposed lovers, were elsewhere. If Henry believed Anne guilty, this gave him the perfect excuse to dismiss her and few would have blamed him. If she was at the heart of a political coup, masterminded by Thomas Cromwell, or the Seymours, or too vocal an advocate of religious reform, the execution was still an unprecedented step. Someone wanted her out of the way, but not just out of sight. There had to be no comeback. It seems that there was one main reason that Anne had to die and that was that Henry himself wanted her to.
An excellent article, a good all-round summing-up of this tyrannical man and his relationships, especially with Anne.
I'm disappointed this article glosses over the importance of Henry needing a son in the context of what his father had gone through during the Wars with the Roses and how scared Henry was of a civil war breaking out over a contested successor and how that may have contributed to his choices.
I believe that Henry VII was constantly plagued with concerns about the throne he'd captured at the Battle of Bosworth Field. Marriage to the York heiress Elisabeth and the arrival of four surviving children including two sons never seemed to give him confidence that the Tudor dynasty would continue. There was always the question of a "pretender" claiming to be Edward V or Richard of York appearing plus the Spanish required the death of Edward (Teddy) of Warwick before permitting Catherine to come to England to marry Arthur. Arthur's early death must have weighed heavily on Henry VII's mind and undoubtedly his formidable mother Margaret Beaufort. Both must have impressed upon the new heir Henry VIII the need to secure the throne with a male heir and spare. Two of Henry's surviving children (Mary/Edward) never enjoyed good health especially Edward and this must have concerned him regarding the future of the Tudor line.
I am under the impression that the notion that Edward wasn't healthy is a false hood and that he was quite healthy until he became I'll for the last time. I am not sure but I think Mary's illnesses had more to do with stress.
I sometimes wonder how much Henry's marriages were about the son issue, if it was all about having more sons he shoukd have jumped on Anne of Cleves, to heck with how attractive she was or wasnt. What's the saying? Close your eyes and think of England?
I also doubt Henry was really all that handsome, it seems to be more perception than reality. When he became king he wasn't the youngest so that automatically puts him ahead of thr old men. Then Francis came along and he had a nose like a parrots beak, then Charles comes on the stage with his deformed Hapsburg lip; Henry is the most handsome by default.
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on December 31, 2014, 11:04:44 PM
I am under the impression that the notion that Edward wasn't healthy is a false hood and that he was quite healthy until he became I'll for the last time. I am not sure but I think Mary's illnesses had more to do with stress.
I sometimes wonder how much Henry's marriages were about the son issue, if it was all about having more sons he shoukd have jumped on Anne of Cleves, to heck with how attractive she was or wasnt. What's the saying? Close your eyes and think of England?
I also doubt Henry was really all that handsome, it seems to be more perception than reality. When he became king he wasn't the youngest so that automatically puts him ahead of thr old men. Then Francis came along and he had a nose like a parrots beak, then Charles comes on the stage with his deformed Hapsburg lip; Henry is the most handsome by default.
I think Henry was genuinely regarded as a good looking man by onlookers. Standards of beauty in Tudor England were of course different to ours. Blonde hair was admired and Henry was a strawberry blond. Yes he had a rather hook nose (which Elizabeth inherited) and a small mouth. However, he was tall for those times and athletic, so had a good physique. He was young and active and sporty. This probably added to his attractiveness.
Henry, in his youth, was definitely considered a good-looking man by the standards of his time. By the time he was 40, though, he was beginning to show the worse for wear. His suits of armor in the Tower of London tell the sad story....
Cindy
I have the book The Creation of Anne Boleyn and I love it. It is a good book and well writtrn. I like to see how thr image of Anne has changed throughout the years. I didn't like that it ended with the idea that Chapuys interpretation of her is making a comeback. I hope another swing towards the positive happens soon.
Anne was a smart woman but she had no imagination, she didn't see that what Henry did to Katharine could be done to her. She never imagined that she wouldnt have a son despite that she was steadily getting older. Her only powerful ally by the time of her marriage was Henry; she put all her eggs in one basket aND it backfired horribly. Katharine had the nobility, the common people, the church, and the Emperor.
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on January 01, 2015, 06:45:32 PM
I have the book The Creation of Anne Boleyn and I love it. It is a good book and well writtrn. I like to see how thr image of Anne has changed throughout the years. I didn't like that it ended with the idea that Chapuys interpretation of her is making a comeback. I hope another swing towards the positive happens soon.
Anne was a smart woman but she had no imagination, she didn't see that what Henry did to Katharine could be done to her. She never imagined that she wouldnt have a son despite that she was steadily getting older. Her only powerful ally by the time of her marriage was Henry; she put all her eggs in one basket aND it backfired horribly. Katharine had the nobility, the common people, the church, and the Emperor.
I should say that once she had committed to the King (and I do think it wasn't easy to avoid him esp when he was offering marriage rather than an affair), there wasn't much she could do. She probably did worry about having a son, but what could she do about it other thank keep on hoping. She probably didn't think, any more than Henry did, that she would have to wait 6 years for a divorce, and that her child bearing years would be wasted in waiting.. antoehr reason she was angry with Wolsey. She could have been more gentel and less aggressive and then she might have had more popular and noble support, but she was hot tempered and had a hard streak, and so found it hard perhaps to conciliate people...
Quote from: cinrit on January 01, 2015, 12:21:45 AM
Henry, in his youth, was definitely considered a good-looking man by the standards of his time. By the time he was 40, though, he was beginning to show the worse for wear. His suits of armor in the Tower of London tell the sad story....
Cindy
I know he was considered good looking in his youth, I am disputing whether he really was that good looking. Pictures of him before he got fat don't show a very good looking man imo. I guess attractivenews has changed over the centuries but Jane Seymour was said to be average at best by her contemporaries and I must say I agree. I just wonder if all the talk about how good looking he was was more hype than honesty. I also don't find Edward IV all that good looking and people went gaga for him as well.
I didn't have a problem with The Tudors not again Henry (or anyone) until season 4. I feel Catherine was an idiot but I do think Henry's physique and ill health should have been shown because I think it is a part of Catherine's story; a teenage girl married to a man old enough to be her grandfather who may or may not be able to perform. Instead they just wrote Catherine as a harlot/nympho who jumps anyone with a semi pretty face.
Edward had TB - as did Henry's older brother Arthur - it is often referred to as the "Tudor disease" because so many Tudor's had it and it was so common at the time
So I suspect Edward was never robust.
What did Henry Fitzroy die of? Edward may not have been robust but that doesn't mean he was sickly. Again I am not saying this is fact but I recall reading somwe here that he was not particularly ill as a child. But at the same time Arthur Henry Fitroy and Edward all died at around the same age.
Some lung disease- likely TB.
I don't think Arthur died of TB - I thought he had the sweating sickness
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on January 02, 2015, 03:38:58 AM
What did Henry Fitzroy die of? Edward may not have been robust but that doesn't mean he was sickly. Again I am not saying this is fact but I recall reading somwe here that he was not particularly ill as a child. But at the same time Arthur Henry Fitroy and Edward all died at around the same age.
I thought Henry Fitzroy died of 'consumption' (tuberculosis) though so much was mis-diagnosed then. It was reported that he had consumption in early July, and died before the end of the month.
Edward died by inches really, he suffered terribly. He had the measles and the smallpox in April 1552, and had a 'straining cough' after his supposed recovery. Dr Cardano diagnosed tuberculosis when he visited him in September (and secretly cast his horoscope, which forecast 'a great calamity'. Edward was virtually bed-ridden by Christmas.
the sweating sickness was probably a hantavirus but they may have confused sweating sickness with the high fevers (and sweating) that can accompany TB. So it is hard to be sure of what they all died of. But we know for certain poor Edward died of TB.
One of the reasons it may be true that Katherine's marriage to Arthur was not consummated is that he was either in the final stages of TB when they married or he had hantavirus.
So Edward Arthur and Henry died of TB.
Arthur and Catherine were both ill at the same time, apparently with the same symptoms. They both were described as having "a malign vapor which proceeded from the air". Catherine recovered; Arthur did not.
Cindy
Quote from: amabel on January 02, 2015, 12:20:47 AM
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on January 01, 2015, 06:45:32 PM
I have the book The Creation of Anne Boleyn and I love it. It is a good book and well writtrn. I like to see how thr image of Anne has changed throughout the years. I didn't like that it ended with the idea that Chapuys interpretation of her is making a comeback. I hope another swing towards the positive happens soon.
Anne was a smart woman but she had no imagination, she didn't see that what Henry did to Katharine could be done to her. She never imagined that she wouldnt have a son despite that she was steadily getting older. Her only powerful ally by the time of her marriage was Henry; she put all her eggs in one basket aND it backfired horribly. Katharine had the nobility, the common people, the church, and the Emperor.
I should say that once she had committed to the King (and I do think it wasn't easy to avoid him esp when he was offering marriage rather than an affair), there wasn't much she could do. She probably did worry about having a son, but what could she do about it other thank keep on hoping. She probably didn't think, any more than Henry did, that she would have to wait 6 years for a divorce, and that her child bearing years would be wasted in waiting.. antoehr reason she was angry with Wolsey. She could have been more gentel and less aggressive and then she might have had more popular and noble support, but she was hot tempered and had a hard streak, and so found it hard perhaps to conciliate people...
Anne may not have thought about her again at the beginning but by the time she hit her 30s it should have been at least at the back of her mind. Were there many women having their first child in their 30s which Anne was by the time she married? She was too confident and didn't have a back up plan; I doubt she even thought Henry would get rid of her. Only the wives after her were able to have the knowledge that Henry's attentions were deadly. Even Katherine Parr after she saw 2 of her predecessors die, fell into forgetting that her husband was a killer.
I don't see that heney was a "killer".. per se. but he was a monarch who had a lot of power and became more dangerous as he got older. I don't quite know what "back up plan" Anne could have had.??
I think she didn't envisage being executed, but she did fear Losing Henry's favour when she seemed unable to produce a male heir.. She might have feared divorce and being sent into seclusion as K of A had been.. but of course being of lower rank than K she was in more danger. But what actually could she have done? She had gotten pregnant pretty soon after she and Henry first had sex, and had proved she was fertile but it was a girl. Then she Had miscarriages...But what actually could she have done, once she had trouble having a baby? There were no doctors who could do anyting.. she may have feared that if Henry wasn't as "highly sexed" as his image had been, she might have less and less chance of getting pregnant. the only back up plan she might have had was the one which was highly dangerous, truying ot get pregnant by someone else and pass it off as the Kings..
Other than that there was very lilte she could do. She could have been a bit solfter and gentler bu that probably was vey difficulft for her..
I view Henry as killer especially a wife killer.
By the time Anne started having problems having a son it was too late to start thinking about having supporters to help her. She should not hAve alienated those around her who could have helped her and kept her safe. She was never going to be popular with the people, but the people at court could possibly have been swayed to her side if she had been softer. The fact that she could not do this is proably why she couldn't be a good Queen. She didn't know how to play the role or to play politics with those around her.
I say Anne did not have imagination not that she didn't have spirit or.intrlligence. How Henry treated Katharine, Mary, Wolsey, and even Thomas More could have at least.given her some hint on how he can turn on people close to him.
It's sad that she believed in Henry's love fully and that it was enough to survive as his Queen. Maybe no woman thought more than love was necessary until Anne. But the followING wives had more to stand on. Jane had the backing of Catholics at court and supporters of Mary, AoC was a foreign princess, Katherine Parr had The Seymour Bros and Thomas Cranmer. Catherine Howard didn't really hAve a good team in her corner seeing as how it was lead by the Duke of Norfolk who'd abandon his own butt if it caused trouble with the King.
Does anyone one know what Henry's supposed medical issues were? I've heard syphilis, Type 1 or 2 diabetes, gout, ulcers etc...Any thoughts Tudor fans?
All of the above
Quote from: TLLK on January 03, 2015, 03:19:39 AM
Does anyone one know what Henry's supposed medical issues were? I've heard syphilis, Type 1 or 2 diabetes, gout, ulcers etc...Any thoughts Tudor fans?
There is a very interesting documentary on YouTube called 'Inside the body of Henry VIII'. I do think the jousting injury that injured his leg and became ulcerated caused his obesity problems.
Thank you Macrobug and Curryong. My only response can be :o :no: :blink:
I don't see Anne as very smart just a nasty witch who thought that as long as she kept Henry happy in the bedroom she would OK ... typical mistress psychology she never got into a Queen's mindset it might be because she got to be one ONLY after THE REAL ONE died ...
Quote from: Eri on January 03, 2015, 09:08:48 AM
I don't see Anne as very smart just a nasty witch who thought that as long as she kept Henry happy in the bedroom she would OK ... typical mistress psychology she never got into a Queen's mindset it might be because she got to be one ONLY after THE REAL ONE died ...
She thought that she'd keep Henry happyin the bedroom?? YOu dotn think that she realisd she had to produce a son?
Double post auto-merged: January 03, 2015, 09:27:23 AM
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on January 03, 2015, 01:37:33 AM
I view Henry as killer especially a wife killer.
By the time Anne started having problems having a son it was too late to start thinking about having supporters to help her. She should not have alienated those around her who could have helped her and kept her safe. Thomas More could have at least.given her some hint on how he can turn on people close to him.
It's sad that she believed in Henry's love fully and that it was enough to survive as his Queen. Maybe no woman thought more than love was necessary until Anne. But the followING wives had more to stand on.
I am sure she was aware of how vulnerable she was, which was why when Henry flirted with other women she got nervous and angry and flared up at him..when she would have been better to turn a blind eye...
but she didn't have the Patience or skill to cultivate alliances in the way that a really smart politician would have done. and in the end, smart politicians "went down" if they failed Henry...
People at court would stand by her as Long as she was successful, no longer. Even her own family apart from George deserted her... because once the king had turned on her and she had no son to keep her safe, she was doomed...
I don't really see what she could have done. She gambled on being queen, on Henry's love holding out long enough in spite of the waiting they had to do, and he DID make hr queen. But she was still something of a political embarrassment in that she was a barrier to getting on well with the Emperor and she was seen as a Protestant.. and as such was not liked by Catholics... and that couldn't really be helped. So her next move to make sure she was safe was for her to bear a son. And she could not do anyting about that. and Henry Might have just divorced her but given that he had divorced Katherine and gone the route of saying that he wasn't truly married to K because of the marriage to Arthur, he would look ridiculous if he said the same thing about Anne.. "I wasn't married to her because of my affair with her sister" or "because she had a pre contract with Henry Percy".. So with its being difficult ot make a good case for divorce, the best thing to do was to get rid of her completely
Double post auto-merged: January 03, 2015, 01:04:23 PM
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on January 03, 2015, 01:37:33 AM
I view Henry as killer especially a wife killer.
He dd have 2 wives executed but in both cases, it was justifiable.. in that they were both accused of adultery.. Some previous queens who had committed adultery were sent into confinement, but Anne B was a political figure and the mother of his daughter, so as such she was a dangerous enemy.. so he probably felt he couldn't leave her alive.. and K Howard's adultery was so humiliating for him that I think most people would have said that he was justified in having her executed as well....
One execution was possibly jusjustified and that was Catherine Howards.I believe she slept with Culpepper but there are still those who disput the charges. Annes charges were a lie to just get rid of a wife he hated. He threatened Jane Seymour with Anne's fate and tried to kill Katherine Parr. Only wife who could be safe from Henry seems to only be the foreign ones. I need to verify this but i think the only other ruler who killed their wives was Ivan IV?
I'm sure there were a couple of French kings... who had their wives killed..
As for Anne, while obviously the charges were false, I think that in the context she was accused of adultery because having so recently (and with such difficulty) gotten rid of Katherine via the annulment route, Henry didn't want to be seen doing the same thing with his next wife. It would look stupid.
Anne wasn't all that popular but she was a tough customer and she Had a child to fight for, so I think that Henry was afraid that if he left her alive, she would be there to be a figurehead on Elizabeth's behalf...So form that point of view, he had to get rid of her very thoroughly. If she had just been accused of one lover, Henry would look stupid, like a cuckold, but if she was accused of having several, including her brother , she would look like a vicious and evil :censored: and he'd be justified getting rid of her...(and given Anne's ramlbing talk in the tower she DID probably furnish them with ammunition against her.. She wasn't sleeping with any of these men, but she was flirting foolishly....
Cinrit-Knowing that Anne Boleyn is your favorite royal who would be another Tudor era royal that you find interesting?
Thanks, TLLK. This lady is Tudor era, but not Tudor ..... Mary, Queen of Scots. A tragic figure, sometimes of her own making.
Cindy
I'm not going to quote the whole post, but Annes flirting was a other factor that made her a bad candidate for a Queen . She had to be above suspicion even if she wasn't married to a lunatic. I will never see what Henry did to Anne was justified bUT man was she a liability. No son, a reformer in a country divided, she was pro France and even if she wasn't she could never be embraced by the Spanish because of the KAO situation. The majority of thr coubtey didn't like her, courtiers didn't like her, his daughter hated her...it really must have seemed like the past 10yr was all for nothing.
Another question, how much of a figurhead she coukd have been. She wasn't a foreign Princess and 80% of England didn't like her. If Jane was wife #3 and she still gave birth to Edward I don't see how anne could be much of a threat. How do you see that happening?
Quote from: KaTerina Montague on January 04, 2015, 10:01:00 PM
I'm not going to quote the whole post, but Annes flirting was a other factor that made her a bad candidate for a Queen . She had to be above suspicion even if she wasn't married to a lunatic. I will never see what Henry did to Anne was justified bUT man was she a liability. No son, a reformer in a country divided, she was pro France and even if she wasn't she could never be embraced by the Spanish because of the KAO situation. The majority of thr coubtey didn't like her, courtiers didn't like her, his daughter hated her...it really must have seemed like the past 10yr was all for nothing.
Another question, how much of a figurhead she coukd have been. She wasn't a foreign Princess and 80% of England didn't like her. If Jane was wife #3 and she still gave birth to Edward I don't see how anne could be much of a threat. How do you see that happening?
Henry wasn't a lunatic, albeit he became more suspicious and power hungry and angry as he grew older...I agree that her flirty nature was a fault, but Henry knew she was like that, when he married her. She had probably attracted him initially by being flrirtatous in a way that attracted men without her having to go to bed with them...
But I think he executed her for 2 reasons. One was that she HAD been his wife, and crowned queen and as such, she might not have many supporters but it was possible that she would still be seen as his rightful wife by some, such as the Protestant faction.. even if divorced. She had his daughter who had been recognised as Legitimate and his heir... If Jane didn't have a Son, or had a son and he died suddenly - and this was soon after his fall from the horse which had scared him... Elizabeth and Elis's mother would be one faction, trying to take the throne, and Marys' supporters would be another factor to worry about...
and the other was that he had had violent feelings for Anne, and wanted to get rid of her completely.. he porblaby did not want to think of her alive and well even if living in seclusion... he had had too much emotion about her for so long
Double post auto-merged: January 05, 2015, 07:31:06 AM
Quote from: cinrit on January 04, 2015, 07:47:40 PM
^^ And that's exactly why I've stopped posting in this thread, Amabel. I would just start sounding like a broken record. :ugh:
Cindy
Thank Cindy!
Henry just liked to play the romance game and once the game was over for him he wanted to move onto another woman.
Jane had already entered the picture when Henry decided to get rid of Anne. Jane was the new romance but he couldn't allow Anne to exist because of politics and all that he had done to get her.
Had Jane lived she would have been replaced soon enough. Not through marriage because of the Son but she would have been replaced. There were already rumors that he was looking around before she died.
QuoteTop 10 Facts About Elizabeth I
On January 15, 1559, Elizabeth I was crowned Queen of England in Westminster Abbey.
1. The Dictionary of National Biography reports that Queen Elizabeth had black teeth from eating too much sugar and took a bath once a month.
2. It also says that "she swore, she spat upon a courtier's coat when it did not please her taste, she beat her gentlewomen soundly, she kissed whom she pleased".
3. The personal motto on her coat of arms was "Semper Eadem" (always the same).
4. The date of Elizabeth's coronation was chosen as auspicious by the astrologer John Dee.
5. Elizabeth I wore thick white makeup to cover up scars left from a bout of smallpox.
More: Top 10 facts about Elizabeth I | Top 10 Facts | Life & Style | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/top10facts/551988/Top-10-facts-about-Elizabeth-I)
Cindy
History Rewind: A Tudor Wedding (http://royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/history-rewind-a-tudor-wedding-43529)
Quote
Anne spent the early years of her life as a lay in waiting to Archduchess Margaret and Queen Claude of France. She would make her first appearance at court in 1522.
Anne was to marry the Earl of Ormonde but that did not work out as planned. Henry Percy tried to obtain her hand in marriage but his efforts thwarted by Anne's father and the interfering Cardinal Wolsey.
Mary, Anne's older sister, was one of the many in the every changing list of Henry VIII's mistresses. Anne was not remotely interested in Henry after witnessing the courtship tactics with her sister and rebuffed his advances.
In the spring of 1526 Henry was overcome with lust and beseeching Anne to become his mistress. The passion he had for Anne is quite clear in the love letters he composed. Today, 17 of those letters are in the Vatican Library. In one letter, dated January 1528, Henry writes: "henceforth my heart will be dedicated to you alone."
Anne knew Henry was desperate both is his longing for her as well as having a male heir. As he set forth to have his marriage annulled, which was not an easy task thanks to The Queen and her allies in Rome, he began to shower Anne with gifts and treat her as if she were indeed his new queen.
Hope I'm alright reigniting this thread! Just been reading through all the chats about Anne and Henry, etc, and was wondering if anyone has been on the website The Anne Boleyn Files? Full of all sorts of interesting Tudor facts and tales, not all strictly about Anne Boleyn, either. And all evidence based, so very interesting! :nod: It was one of the pages on that site that made me change my mind over the whole Jane Rochford giving evidence against Anne and George Boleyn saga...
I was going to suggest that you seek out this thread but I'm glad that you found it. The Tudors will still a favorite with royal watchers!
Quote from: amabel on January 11, 2015, 10:28:04 AM
Quote from: cinrit on January 04, 2015, 08:01:20 PM
Cindy
Oh I can't stand Mary Stuart. I find it really hard to be fair to her. I remember from childhood days, novels by Jean Plaidy about Cath De Medici and QUeen Margot... anyone interested in them
Double post auto-merged: January 11, 2015, 10:35:59 AM
I can't stand Mary either, she is the poster child for the group who says women shouldn't be monarchs. Which is odd seeing as how she grew up around Catherine DE Medici and her own mother ran Scotland. Neither nature nor nurture could help her.
As for Jane Rochford, I have also been changing my view on her, some things I have come across suggest the evidence she gave wasn't really evidence she just answered a question.
Quote from: snokitty on July 18, 2015, 12:03:22 PM
What Did Elizabeth I Achieve? | Made From History (http://madefrom.com/history/tudors-and-stuarts/elizabeth-achieve/)
QuoteIt was called the Golden Age – a time when England grew in wealth, power and culture. What's even more remarkable is that this all happened with a woman at the helm.
History sees Elizabeth I as being one of our most successful and celebrated monarchs, but is this fair? How many of her achievements were down to her rule and how much is just good PR spin? Here are some key things that changed during the time of Elizabeth.
^^I certainly think that the Renaissance in drama and poetry for example, could be put down partially to her patronage of the arts. She gave a sense of stability to England IMO, with a long reign. This sense of national confidence assisted in defeating the Armada, though Elizabeth certainly wasn't in charge of the British ships on that occasion!
Its hard to get very clear facts about Anne's trial and the part played by Jane Rochford. it is possible that she didn't like Anne and only supported her a bit because she was her sister in law. or possible she had no feelings for her one way or the other, or that she clearly supported Mary and Katherine... But I think that she must have said SOMETHING to her questioners that looked bad and made things worse for Anne. She cracked up before she died, and she also was extremely foolish in her conduct as K Howard's Lady in waiting so she may no have been a very sensible or stable person.. and she may have said things about Anne, to imply a relationship between her and George. Of course it is possible that she did just answer questions and they twisted her wrods to make it seem bad.. as happened iwht Anne herself. her wild talk in the tower certainly made her appear foolish and a bit crazy (hardly surprising as she was in such danger), but it made her look foolishly flirtatious at best..
She was a woman with low morals who thought she could play with the big shoots and lost ... sorry but I can't feel sorry for Ann after how she was with Katherine and Mary and being a mistress for Years who got pregnant before the marriage karma is a powerful thing ... also she wasn't very bright if you ask me ... she only had Henry and that is a shaky ground to be in and she forged no friendships in fact a Courtier said Jane was like waking up from a bad dream ...
King Philip II of Spain sent his envoy, Ambassador de Feria, to begin marriage negotiations with Queen Elizabeth I within days of her accession.
She reminded Philip that the Pope would never allow him to marry her unless she became a Catholic.
^ I don't believe Elizabeth had the faintest intention of marrying anyone (let alone a Roman Catholic.) Robert Dudley perhaps, if his wife had died quietly in bed of a recognised illness. Even then there would probably have been rumours of poison, I suppose.
King Philip II of Spain was determined that Princess Elizabeth of England marry Emmanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy. :windsor:
The plan had the benefit that if she did inherit the throne, Philip's cousin, Emmanuel Philibert would rule as Elizabeth's husband and King of England.
Quote from: Curryong on September 04, 2015, 12:58:26 AM
^ I don't believe Elizabeth had the faintest intention of marrying anyone (let alone a Roman Catholic.) Robert Dudley perhaps, if his wife had died quietly in bed of a recognised illness. Even then there would probably have been rumours of poison, I suppose.
I think that she must have considered marriage, to provide heirs, but I think that on balance she felt that the disadvantages of marriage such as sharing her status, Britain being dominated by a foreign country, or a subject being elevated and causing jealousy, among her courtiers, outweighted the advantages. (mostly having a settled heir to inherit)
One of Anne Boleyn's closest confidantes was her brother George, with whom she spent many hours debating Martin Luther's new theological ideas. George Boleyn was an ardent reformer.
The Boleyn children were encouraged to question the theology of the Roman Catholic Church by their father Thomas.
I would doubt that Thomas Boleyn encouraged them in discussing what were heretical views. George was interested in religious reform and so was Anne, but I think it was a generational thing. and of course since Anne was finding that the Pope was not likely to annul Henry's marriage, she was likely to become interested in challenging the Papist viewpoint.
^ I think Elizabeth I chose red for her wigs in order to emphasise the resemblance to her ginger haired father (who might have actually been more of a strawberry blonde.) Apparently she used to delight in people in the crowds calling her 'Old Harry's daughter'. If she had become a brunette or blonde it just wouldn't have been the same.
Queen Elizabeth allowed negotiations for a possible marriage with Charles, Archduke of Austria, to continue.
In June 1567, Thomas Radclyffe was sent to Emperor Maximilian II's court with the order of the Garter for the Emperor Maximilian II, along with a portrait for his brother, Archduke Charles.
yes she allowed numerous courtships, and enjoyed the "marriage game", but I think after a certain time she Had no intention of going through with anything...
Another of Elizabeth's suitors was Adolf, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp. Adolf was a brother of King Christian III of Denmark.
Among the Queen's marriage candidates, the Duke actually visited England.
Adolf was Protestant and wealthy.
Queen Elizabeth, as Princess Elizabeth, received an education that made her fluent in Greek, Latin, French, and Italian.
Her Greek and Latin tutor, Roger Aschan, liked her beautiful handwriting and musical skills.
In autumn 1532 King Henry VIII went over to France to meet with Francis I, accompanied by a vast retinue.
Henry had brought Anne Boleyn with him on this state visit, not Catherine of Aragon.
As a result, neither Francis I's wife, Queen Eleonore, nor his sister, Marguerite, attended.
Quote from: Eri on July 30, 2015, 05:08:18 PM
She was a woman with low morals who thought she could play with the big shoots and lost ... sorry but I can't feel sorry for Ann after how she was with Katherine and Mary and being a mistress for Years who got pregnant before the marriage karma is a powerful thing ... also she wasn't very bright if you ask me ... she only had Henry and that is a shaky ground to be in and she forged no friendships in fact a Courtier said Jane was like waking up from a bad dream ...
It's not so much morals she didn't have a choice. In these times if your daughter caught the eyes of the King or pope the family would push them on the Royal and hope for a pregnancy to give the family power.
Queen Elizabeth I oversaw England's attempt at poverty relief. A gradual accumulation of rulings like mandatory taxation towards this end culminated with the 1601 Elizabethan Poor Law.
Well, the Elizabethan Poor Law was at least a bit more humane than the 1830's one which replaced it. Very few people were displaced from their homes and separated from their spouses and children in Tudor England.
Anne: Axe or sword
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2013/08/anne-boleyns-last-secret/
Quote from: PaulaB on January 05, 2016, 03:52:07 PM
Quote from: Eri on July 30, 2015, 05:08:18 PM
She was a woman with low morals who thought she could play with the big shoots and lost ... sorry but I can't feel sorry for Ann after how she was with Katherine and Mary and being a mistress for Years who got pregnant before the marriage karma is a powerful thing ... also she wasn't very bright if you ask me ... she only had Henry and that is a shaky ground to be in and she forged no friendships in fact a Courtier said Jane was like waking up from a bad dream ...
It's not so much morals she didn't have a choice. In these times if your daughter caught the eyes of the King or pope the family would push them on the Royal and hope for a pregnancy to give the family power.
She did have a choice..and she chose to try and win the King to marry her, rather than become his mistress. Henry's Mistresses didn't' do that well, out of their affairs, so while of course a court family would not mind their daughter catching the Kings eye, they probably would not do as well out of a royal affair as a family a the French court where the concept of a royal mistress being very powerful was well known.
there's a programme on one of the History Channels about Anne last ngith, about her downfall which appears to have Suzy Lipscombe, Hilary Mantel, Philippa Gregory and some historians, discussing it. I haven't watched it yet...
^ Yes, I do think that Elizabeth grew up associating love and marriage with death. It wasn't just her mother. Jane Seymour died in childbirth, Katherine Howard was executed, the stepmother she was closest to, Katherine Parr, escaped going to the Tower by the skin of her teeth. As well, even Thomas Seymour, Katherine Parr's last husband who flirted with Elizabeth, ended up on the executioner's block..
I believe Elizabeth inherited a cautious streak from her paternal grandfather, Henry VII. She would probably have married Robert Dudley if he hadn't already had a wife. However, as she got older and more entrenched in power on her own account, Elizabeth realised the complications of a foreign match and the even worse complexities that would come from marrying a subject
I think that this is largely modern psychology being imposed on a 16th C woman. Elizabeth wasn't the only person to see women dying in childbirth or the only royal who lost people because of their political postion, since being related to the King was a dangerous thing in many ways.
but her big problem wast that "if she married a subject, she was degrading herself by Tudor standards and she was risking jealousy among her nobles and if she married a foreign Prince, she was subjecting England, which was becoming Increasingly patriotic and nationalistic, to a foreign overlord
Royal wives dying in childbirth was one thing. However, there weren't too many rulers in Europe who were both tyrannical and married six times, let alone any that had sent two of their wives to the execution block! Fellow monarchs were horrified by his behaviour, a foreign princess he liked joked that she would have married him if she had had two necks! Yes, Henry was not an exception otherwise (in executing subjects) but Elizabeth grew up in the atmosphere of that court, even if she was proud of being King Hal's daughter.
Childbirth was dangerous for women in the 16th century. Elizabeth was aware that there would be much speculation as to whom she might choose to wed.
When Queen Anne miscarried in January 1536, King Francis I of France was told the story.
Eustace Chapuys reported the news to Holy Roman Emperor Charles V that Anne was not really pregnant at all.
She and her sister Mary had invented the story to keep King Henry VIII believing Anne could give him the son he wanted.
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on April 11, 2016, 10:00:06 PM
When Queen Anne miscarried in January 1536, King Francis I of France was told the story.
Eustace Chapuys reported the news to Holy Roman Emperor Charles V that Anne was not really pregnant at all.
She and her sister Mary had invented the story to keep King Henry VIII believing Anne could give him the son he wanted.
Nonsense, Anne was pregnant and she had a miscarriage of about 3 1/4 or 4 months. Chapuys tended to try and make out that Anne was "on the way out", with Henry and his information was n't always accurte.
As soon as she became Queen, Elizabeth I reversed the debasing of the coinage. She encouraged trade in London, the Foreign Exchange, and the learning of skills from foreign refugees.
Elizabeth I ruled England for 44 busy years.
Elizabeth I: Ruled England for 44 Years - Fast Facts | History - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddB20U1hQt0)
The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth I
Queen Elizabeth I Coronation (Greatness) HD - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uapvgwQpgM)
How about attending The Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn lecture?
Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn Lecture - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47kFjUtiSVg)
How did the Vatican library obtain the love letters King Henry VIII had written to Anne Boleyn?
Elizabeth may have realized that any man that she would wed would expect to become King of England. He might take all authority away from her as Queen.
Queen Elizabeth I's speech to troops in Tilbury before battle in 1588
Queen Elizabeth I Speech to Troops in Tilbury - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSV7zSjbrts)
A huge crowd gathered when Anne Boleyn rode through the streets of London on the way to her coronation on June 1, 1533. The crowd had been ordered to cheer. Instead they yelled that Nan Bullen should not be their Queen.
On September 8, 1553 Elizabeth attended her first Catholic Mass.
In what prison did Queen Anne get sent to?
Anne Boleyn's Prison and Execution Spot - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJy107seDYA)
An incredibly rare 16th century textile was found cut (in sections) hanging in a church. It is speculated it could have been from the skirt worn by Queen Elizabeth I in the Rainbow Portrait.
Elizabeth I's long-lost skirt goes on display after it was found in a 13th century church | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4099778/Elizabeth-s-long-lost-SKIRT-goes-display-humble-13th-century-English-church.html)
Excellent news because I know that so few Tudor royal artifacts survived the once Cromwell took over as Lord Protector.
^ Yes, I believe one of Henry VIII's hats survived the selling off of the Royal Wardrobe in its entirety and remains today, but precious little else. I find that quite surprising really. You would have thought that a secret Royalist family or two would have sent a servant to bid for shoes, shirts, jackets etc belonging to the Martyr King, as Charles I was known among his adherents. Perhaps they did though, and in the centuries since these items were thrown out. I admire the precept that Parliament is paramount but not many of the deeds that followed the Civil War.
In my view as a history buff, three things have occurred in previous centuries that caused extraordinarily important, ancient and precious Royal artefacts to disappear. Two of them occurred during the Interregnum. The selling off of King Charles I's art Collection which was then dispersed all over Europe, and the destruction of the Crown Jewels, including pieces from the Anglo Saxon kings. Irreplaceable!
The third was the unfortunate burning of the Houses of Parliament in 1834. The room in which Edward the Confessor had died and the chamber in which Queen Elizabeth I and her Ministers gathered as the Armada approached disappeared in that conflagration, as did so much else, including famous tapestries of that Armada which hung on the walls.
Quote from: Curryong on January 10, 2017, 01:32:03 AM
^ Yes, I believe one of Henry VIII's hats survived the selling off of the Royal Wardrobe in its entirety and remains today, but precious little else. I find that quite surprising really. You would have thought that a secret Royalist family or two would have sent a servant to bid for shoes, shirts, jackets etc belonging to the Martyr King, as Charles I was known among his adherents. Perhaps they did though, and in the centuries since these items were thrown out. I admire the precept that Parliament is paramount but not many of the deeds that followed the Civil War.
In my view as a history buff, three things have occurred in previous centuries that caused extraordinarily important, ancient and precious Royal artefacts to disappear. Two of them occurred during the Interregnum. The selling off of King Charles I's art Collection which was then dispersed all over Europe, and the destruction of the Crown Jewels, including pieces from the Anglo Saxon kings. Irreplaceable!
The third was the unfortunate burning of the Houses of Parliament in 1834. The room in which Edward the Confessor had died and the chamber in which Queen Elizabeth I and her Ministers gathered as the Armada approached disappeared in that conflagration, as did so much else, including famous tapestries of that Armada which hung on the walls.
I really wish someone had preserved Anne Boleyn's and her daughter's jewels. It would have been interesting to see whether they were really as fashionable as history tells us. I once read that Anne was actually crowned as if she were a queen regnant using St. Edward's Crown. Henry VIII must have been super smitten to grant such an elaborate ceremony.
William Cecil, Lord Burghley served Elizabeth I as her Secretary of State and Lord High Treasurer.
He would write her long memoranda, detailing the pros and cons of every decision.
When Edward VI was King, his sister Elizabeth worshipped according to the King's royal decree.
She made no great public show of her faith and stayed discreet.
Unlike their elder sister Mary who would not give up her Roman Catholic faith.
QuoteEmma Thompson to portray Queen Elizabeth I
Emma Thompson is set to portray Queen Elizabeth I in the second season of the popular Shakespearian comedy, Upstart Crow to air on BBC2 later this year. Just this week, the show was named best new TV sitcom at the comedy.co.uk awards. This isn't the first historical role Thompson has played during her long career. She played Eleanor Dashwood in the 1995 drama Sense and Sensibility opposite Hugh Grant.
During the next season of the comedy, viewers will see the now iconic playwrite continued his epic journey to become a London playwrite whilst still trying to keep his family, living at Stratford Upon Avon, contented. He'll receive help from his friends played by Rob Rouse, Gemma Whelan and Tim Downi. Shakespeare will suffer various commuting problems. He'll take a low-cost trip to Verona, endure coach cancelations, and survive an ugly reunion with a schoolmaster.
Filming has already begun for the second season. Upstart Crow is written by Ben Elton and stars Paula Wilcox as William's mother Mary Arden, Liza Tarbuck as Anne Hathaway, his wife, Helen Monks as their daughter Susanna, and Mark Heap as his nemesis Robert Greene.
Read more:
Emma Thompson to portray Queen Elizabeth I – Royal Central (http://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/otherroyals/emma-thompson-to-portray-queen-elizabeth-i-75670)
In 1570 Pope Pius VI declared Queen Elizabeth I a heretic, unfit for the throne, and relieved her subjects of all obedience to her.
At her coronation in Westminster Abbey on January 15, 1559 Queen Elizabeth I pointedly refused to witness the Catholic ritual of Bishop Oglethorpe elevating the Host.
QuoteElizabeth I to be played by Margot Robbie
Negotiations are underway to have Australian actress Margot Robbie portray Elizabethan era Queen Elizabeth I in the new film Mary Queen of Scots. The film, which has yet to be confirmed, will be co-produced by Focus Features and Working Title.
Robbie has previously been seen in The Wolf of Wall Street and Suicide Squad.
The news, first reported by Variety, said that Beau Willimon, House of Cards creator, is writing the script based off of a book called The True Life of Mary Stuart authored by John Guy.
Read more:
Elizabeth I to be played by Margot Robbie – Royal Central (http://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/otherroyals/elizabeth-i-to-be-played-by-margot-robbie-81132)
I think Margot Robbie would be quite good in the role. I have to say that I think the Tudors/Elizabeth I have been done to death on TV and to a certain extent the cinema, but I suppose Mary Stuart is a new angle.
It seems like many movie directors want to make remakes of royal movies. There was already two Mary, Queen of Scots movies that were made in 1971 and 2013. Perhaps the directors want to focus on different aspects of her life that the other two movies didn't. As for the acting of her cousin, Queen Elizabeth I, I was personally impressed with Helen Mirren and Cate Blanchett's performances as her. I hope Margot Robbie does well as her!
^ Vanessa Redgrave played Mary in the 1971 version, I believe, and being a tall redhead, physically resembled the Scottish Queen. I think Glenda Jackson was Mary's cousin Elizabeth in that film.
According to IMDB, Glenda Jackson plays Mary's cousin:
Mary, Queen of Scots (1971) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067402/)
I never seen the 1971 version before, but I have heard about it. The movie has a lot of good reviews, so I think it is worth watching. I hope it is available online to watch.
Glenda Jackson was magnificent in that. I have not seen a better Elizabeth I. Everything was just fascinating from the voice, dress and mannerisms. You almost felt as if she were not acting. The most surprising thing is that Glenda Jackson is a left-leaning Labor MP :eyes: but she sure does know how to play her haughty Tudor tyrants.
Was the court musician Mark Smearton a lover of Queen Anne Boleyn?
:romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo: :romeo:
Decidedly not. He was tortured and forced to"confess" . He was a court musician. Historians believe Anne was executed on trumped up charges so HEnry could be rid of her and marry Jane Seymour
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on December 01, 2016, 10:21:42 PM
A huge crowd gathered when Anne Boleyn rode through the streets of London on the way to her coronation on June 1, 1533. The crowd had been ordered to cheer. Instead they yelled that Nan Bullen should not be their Queen.
DId they?
Queen Elizabeth I told the English Parliament, "We princes are set as it were upon stages in the sight and view of the world."
The Coronation Ball of Queen Elizabeth I
Queen Elizabeth's Coronation Ball - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWmoDiM0yN8)
Members of Parliament protested violently against the Spanish Marriage. But the day Thomas Wyatt died, they gave in. The Royal Marriage Bill became law. Parliament told Mary I that Philip II would be welcome in England.
Like all Tudors, Mary had both intelligence and courage. She also believed in her divine right to rule. Those two elements pretty much defined how the Tudors would be as Kings or Queens. None of them ever tolerated dissent or any interference in the exercise of their royal power. Mary's tragedies were mainly personal...too devout, too trusting and too loving of an unloving husband. Phillip of Spain ruined her and her kingdom. Catholicism also drove her to a level of fanaticism which appalled her people.
In 1527 King Henry VIII wrote to Anne Boleyn: I and my heart put ourselves in your hands, begging you to have them suitors for your favour, and that your affection for them should not grow less through absence.
:stars: :stars: :stars: :stars: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts:
In 1563 Queen Elizabeth I suggested Robert Dudley might marry her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots. Robert refused to marry Mary. He preferred to stay in England, close to Elizabeth.
In 1535 King Henry VIII and his second wife Queen Anne Boleyn stayed at Thornbury Castle.
Should Queen Elizabeth marry a foreign Royal?
Elizabeth I and the Idea of Marriage - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q85PLXn166Q)
Queen Elizabeth I consenting to the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots in 1587
Portrait print of Queen Elizabeth I of England consenting to the Stock Photo: 27403822 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-portrait-of-queen-elizabeth-i-of-england-consenting-to-the-execution-27403822.html)
If Queen Elizabeth I named Catherine or Mary Grey as heir, there would be Protestants who supported Henry Hastings.
I don't think Elizabeth would have harked back to the tumult of the Nine Days Queen by naming any of the Grey family as her heir. I don't believe she officially named her second cousin James because she was an imperious and very stubborn woman who disliked contemplating her own mortality. However, James was a Protestant and I think everyone at Court took it as read that he was Elizabeth's successor, in spite of considerable reservations. (An heir from the old enemy Scotland.) If it wasn't seen as inevitable then there would have been rebellions once James took the English throne and there weren't.
Quote from: Curryong on September 16, 2018, 02:47:41 AM
I don't think Elizabeth would have harked back to the tumult of the Nine Days Queen by naming any of the Grey family as her heir. I don't believe she officially named her second cousin James because she was an imperious and very stubborn woman who disliked contemplating her own mortality. However, James was a Protestant and I think everyone at Court took it as read that he was Elizabeth's successor, in spite of considerable reservations. (An heir from the old enemy Scotland.) If it wasn't seen as inevitable then there would have been rebellions once James took the English throne and there weren't.
Elizabeth said "I will be queen of England while I live, and then it will be whoever has the best right" and James I had the best right. She didn't want to name her successor because she feared that it might arouse opposition from those who disagreed or that people as she grew older,might plot ot put the next heir on the throne..
If Queen Elizabeth I named Mary, Queen of Scots, as heir, there would be Catholics who supported Lady Margaret Douglas.
Well, they might, but Elizabeth didn't do that thing, Mary was executed by her order in 1587 and Mary's son James ultimately came to the English throne.
Queen Elizabeth I on her way to Hunsdon House in England
Queen Elizabeth I on way to Hunsdon House, England, "Classical Stock Photo: 83848529 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-queen-elizabeth-i-on-the-way-to-hunsdon-house-england-classical-portfolio-83848529.html)
Queen Elizabeth I told the English Parliament, "We princes are set as it were upon stages in the sight and view of the world."
Elizabeth I's succession was met favorably and was announced swiftly. Less than half an hour after the official announcement of Mary I's demise on November 17, 1558, Parliament had confirmed Elizabeth as Mary's successor. On November 19, heralds proclaimed the Queen at the gates of Hatfield.
:PR: :PR: :PR: :PR: :PR:
In some of his love letters to Anne Boleyn, King Henry VIII referred to himself as Anne's servant. When she responded that she should actually be considered Henry's servant, this delighted Henry.
:yesss: :yesss: :yesss: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts: :yesss: :yesss: :yesss: :hearts: :hearts: :hearts:
On attaining the throne, Queen Elizabeth I dismissed many of the older Catholic ladies-in-waiting of the Court of Queen Mary I. Elizabeth I replaced them with family and friends closer to her own age. There was Anne Morgan (wife of Henry Carey, Lord Hunsdon), Anne Poyntz (wife of Sir Thomas Heneage), Lettice Knollys, and Elizabeth Fitzgerald.
In 1563 Queen Elizabeth I suggested that Robert Dudley might marry her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots. At that time, Mary was a possible heiress to Elizabeth. Robert Dudley could have become King of England if he married Mary. He refused to marry Mary.
Queen Elizabeth I legislated for a Protestant church with the monarch at its head.
She refused her father's title of Head of the Church. It was argued that the position could only be held by a man since men could not be ruled by women in matters of religious doctrine.
Would it have been possible for Queen Mary I to persuade the nobility and gentry to surrender the monastic lands they had purchased from her father?
In 1592 Walter Raleigh was recalled from one of his expeditions by Queen Elizabeth I after it was discovered that he had secretly married one of her ladies-in-waiting, Elizabeth Throckmorton, in 1591. It was strictly forbidden for ladies-in-waiting to marry without the Queen's consent. Elizabeth Throckmorton was dismissed.
From the outset of Elizabeth's reign, William Cecil used his skills to make the transition as easy as possible. He prepared a list of twelve points to make the transition successful. These points included the contents of the proclamation; which Heads of State should be formally notified; and who should arrange Elizabeth's coronation.
For Queen Elizabeth I the date of her coronation was placed in the hands of the mathematician, astronomer, and astrologist Dr. John Dee. For Elizabeth's coronation date, Dr. Dee chose January 15, 1559.
William Cecil, Lord Burghley, who was Queen Elizabeth I's Secretary of State and Lord High Treasurer, would write her long memoranda, detailing the pros and cons of every decision. After some discussion the Queen would make up her mind, more often than not in accord with Lord Burghley.
First meeting of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn in the house of Cardinal Wolsey
First meeting of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn in the House of Cardinal Wolsey Stock Photo: 186154897 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/first-meeting-of-henry-viii-and-anne-boleyn-in-the-house-of-cardinal-wolsey-image186154897.html)
The Coronation Procession of Queen Mary
Mary I's Coronation Part 3 - The Coronation Procession of Mary I - The Tudor Society (http://www.tudorsociety.com/30-september-1553-the-coronation-procession-of-mary-i)
Queen Elizabeth I knighted Francis Drake on his ship in 1581.
Queen Elizabeth I knights Francis Drake on his ship, 'Golden Hind' Stock Photo: 105281355 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-queen-elizabeth-i-knights-francis-drake-on-his-ship-golden-hind-after-105281355.html)
:mil1: :mil1: :mil1: :mil1:
One of Queen Elizabeth I's suitors was Adolf, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp. Elizabeth let him down gently and with great diplomacy. Adolf returned home and with splendid presents and the Order of the Garter.
Tudor Christmas at Hampton Court Palace
Presents were given on New Year's Day.
Tudor Christmas at Hampton Court Palace - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMAi2yQ5V3Y)
:xmas7: :xmas7: :xmas7: :xmas7: :xmas7:
In 1558 Queen Elizabeth I accepted the allegiance of the Bishops at Highgate, London, England.
1558 and Queen Elizabeth I accepts the allegiance of the Bishops at Stock Photo: 87310950 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-1558-and-queen-elizabeth-i-accepts-the-allegiance-of-the-bishops-at-87310950.html)
King Henry VIII with Anne Boleyn at the Palace of Cardinal Wolsey
Henry VIII (1491-1547). King of England. Henry VIII with Anne Boleyn Stock Photo: 132921458 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-henry-viii-1491-1547-king-of-england-henry-viii-with-anne-boleyn-1501-132921458.html)
Queen Elizabeth I received the French ambassadors after the Massacre of St. Bartholomew.
'Queen Elizabeth Receiving the French Ambassadors after the Massacre of St. Bartholomew', 1890. Creator: Unknown Stock Photo: 259688876 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/queen-elizabeth-receiving-the-french-ambassadors-after-the-massacre-of-st-barthomew-1890-creator-unknown-image259688876.html)
During the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, Sir Francis Drake became the first Englishman to circumnavigate the globe. :mil1: :mil1: :mil1:
On March 18, 1554, Princess Elizabeth was imprisoned in the Tower of London. Due to Elizabeth's supporters in the government, Queen Mary I was convinced not to execute her sister in the absence of hard evidence.
Princess Elizabeth didn't just have supporters at Court and in Parliament but all over the country among the common people. Some still clung to the old ways of Roman Catholicism but the Protestant Reformation was in full swing. I've got no doubt that if Elizabeth was executed there would have been uprisings. Mary probably would have had her killed as a last resort but she herself had no children and her half-sister was the obvious heir, much to her chagrin.
If Queen Mary I and Prince (King) Philip (II of Spain) had had a son, would the child have been the heir to both the thrones of England and Spain?
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on June 23, 2020, 09:18:46 PM
If Queen Mary I and Prince (King) Philip (II of Spain) had had a son, would the child have been the heir to both the thrones of England and Spain?
I thought that the marriage treaty of Mary and Philip excluded that possibility? The treaty only speaks of England, Wales and whatever Continental possessions England had at the time. Philip had a son, Don Carlos, from a previous marriage who would inherit Spain and the Habsburg possessions in the Low Countries.
Philip wouldn't even be sovereign of England after Mary's death. The English throne would go to Elizabeth if there was no child of the marriage. Philip seemed to know from the beginning that Mary was unlikely to bear children or survive any childbirth and set himself to finding a new wife as Mary wouldn't in his estimation live for many years anyway. He would have quite liked to marry Elizabeth, (whom he had persuaded his wife not to execute at one point,) and who was young and attractive, but she refused.
Queen Elizabeth I kept a personal advisor named John Dee - a renowned mathematician, astronomer, astrologer, and professed alchemist - in her regular company. Elizabeth relied on Dee's counsel in the scheduling of important events.
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on August 31, 2020, 11:46:22 PM
Queen Elizabeth I kept a personal advisor named John Dee - a renowned mathematician, astronomer, astrologer, and professed alchemist - in her regular company. Elizabeth relied on Dee's counsel in the scheduling of important events.
Well, it was said that she did, and Dee was certainly known in Court circles. However, Elizabeth tended to be on the cynical side when being told certain 'facts'. She demanded documentation for example from one adviser who tried to tell her that a certain custom had been in place since Anglo Saxon times. Her education by Ascham and others had inclined her towards the logical and rational.
Elizabeth just doesn't strike me as the sort of person who was terribly superstitious and would rely on astrology for important things. (I've practised astrology for much of my adult life and still regard it as inexact when foretelling the future, though accurate in pointing to character traits.) She may well have been interested in the subject (it's fascinating) but using it to schedule important meetings etc? I'm sceptical. Now someone like James I, I can well imagine doing so!
First meeting between King Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn
http://www.alamy.com/first-meeting-between-henry-the-eighth-and-anne-boleyn-henry-viii-1491-1547-king-of-england-anne-boleyn-c-1501-1536-queen-of-england-as-the-image-229311695.html
Who would have been the best husband for Queen Elizabeth I?
State Carriage of Queen Elizabeth I
State Carriage of Queen Elizabeth I. Date: circa 16th century Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/state-carriage-of-queen-elizabeth-i-date-circa-16th-century-image222877910.html)
Queen Elizabeth II complains of motion sickness and uncomfortable seating in her carriages and State coaches, so God know what it must have been like to travel in one of those 16th century contraptions. No springs, no decent chassis, jolting along terrible cobbled roads within London. No wonder Elizabeth I liked horseback riding on long journeys, awful though it must have been along primitive roads.
This article about Anne Boleyn's jewellery is quite interesting, I think. Especially the bit about Henry refashioning pieces from one wife to the next!
Anne Boleyn's Jewellery (https://onthetudortrail.com/Blog/2011/03/18/anne-boleyn%E2%80%99s-jewellery/)
However, this is also intriguing.
It was customary to make and remake pieces for the next Tudor sovereign and in Anne?s case; items specific to her would have been almost immediately broken up. Even so, Henry repurchased from Thomas Trappers a gold bowl ?having Queen Anne?s sapphire upon the top of the cover? and his post-mortem inventories included a dust bowl of gold (for blotting ink) with a crown on the lid and ?H? and ?A? in enamel? (Ives, Pg. 252).
Ives goes on to describe how Henry also kept a tablet of gold bearing the monogram ?HA? set with small emeralds, pearls and one diamond (Ives, Pg 252).
In the words of Eric Ives, ?it suggests vividly what has been lost? and for me raises the question of why did Henry repurchase some of Anne?s items?
Did he want to remember her and the passion and love they once shared? Did he have some fond memories of their time together and want some physical connection to her? Did he feel some guilt over the manner of her death? Did Anne still have a place in his heart after all that had happened? Or was it that he simply liked those pieces?'
In another article a commenter remarks that she was given a private tour of St James Palace a few years ago, and a fireplace there still had stone embossings on it of entwined 'H and A's' where Henry later dined, so he kept that as it was as well. Mixed feelings of regret and sweet memories perhaps?
Was any of the jewellery Henry VIII took from Catherine of Aragon originally jewellery that had been given to her by her parents?
Probably some pieces were. Katherine brought a great dowry to Henry VII from Spain. However, after her husband Arthur's death she was in huge difficulties. Henry was extremely reluctant to return any of her dowry (which included her jewels), and in her widowhood she had to sell many of her things in order to feed her Household (retinue and servants.)
In fact one letter survives, to her father, telling him that she had few items of clothing like chemises left and she has had to sell some bracelets to buy food for everyone. She was saved by Henry VIII's proposal of marriage after his father's death, really.
When he wished to marry Anne Boleyn he demanded to be given Katherine's jewellery. Katherine regarded Anne as the Wh*re of Babylon and strongly protested, but had to submit. Perhaps she managed to smuggle, via the Spanish Ambassador, a few sentimental pieces to her daughter Mary, but how much of what she had left were jewels from her parents and how much gifts from Henry VIII in happier times it is hard to say.
It would have been nice if Princess Mary (Queen Mary I) would have been able to receive some jewellery from her grandmother Queen Isabella I.
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on November 23, 2020, 11:34:33 PM
It would have been nice if Princess Mary (Queen Mary I) would have been able to receive some jewellery from her grandmother Queen Isabella I.
ISabella had given jewels to Catherine as part of her dowry.. that shoudl have gone to Mary in due course
Queen Elizabeth I was fond of her Carey cousins. On her accession, Henry Carey was knighted and in January 1559 was created Baron Hunsdon. In October 1560 he was appointed Master of the Queen's Hawks.
When Holy Roman Emperor Charles V proposed that Queen Mary marry his son and heir, the future Philip II, Mary was delighted to accept. On July 25, 1584 the wedding took place at Winchester Cathedral.
Princess Elizabeth was honorably and extravagantly received at her brother King Edward VI's court. On March 17, 1552, she arrived at St. James's Palace with over 200 ladies and a company of yeomen.
:curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy: :curtsy:
In 1574 Queen Elizabeth I promoted the restoration of Bath Abbey, to serve as the grand parish church of Bath. She ordered that a national fund should be set up to finance the work. In 1583 she decreed that it should become the parish church of Bath.
Sad to know that once-great Abbeys and priories all over the country were falling into disrepair and ruin even in the 1570s, and it was a good idea to try and preserve the beautiful Bath Abbey.
However how typical of Elizabeth I to suggest a national fund to pay for the restoration. No suggestion that she herself might start it off with a generous donation. I've often suspected that Elizabeth had far more of her cautious and parsimonious paternal grandfather than has hitherto been suggested.
I don't think Henry VII was as miserly as he has sometimes been portrayed. However I also don't believe he was anxious to pay for things himself, even for show, if others were willing or able to do it, and Elizabeth was the same.
Were the international allies of King Henry VIII alienated from him after he married Anne Boleyn?
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on March 02, 2021, 09:57:29 PM
Were the international allies of King Henry VIII alienated from him after he married Anne Boleyn?
I don't know about 'alienated'. I have no doubt that foreign dynasties on the Continent were shocked and dismayed that a fellow monarch had chosen to marry a commoner (and one with Protestant views) and the disruption that this Union was causing in the English Church.
They probably felt Henry's prestige had suffered by defying the Pope and going ahead with such a match. But realpolitik was around in the 16th century just as it is now. Religious and other scruples would have been set aside if there was seen to be an advantage in signing any treaty.
There were 2 basic allies, the emperor and the King of France and Britans policy was always not to commit to one or the other.. so when the emperor was alienated due to Henry's rejection of his aunt, the British turned to an alliance wiht France... but there were signs of a rapprochment with the Empire towards the end of Anne's reign...
Queen Elizabeth I after an original crayon drawing by F. Zuccero, London, 1575
Queen Elizabeth I after an original crayon drawing by F. Zuccero Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-image-queen-elizabeth-i-drawing-163029262.html)
Layer Marney Tower was begun in 1523 by Henry, 1st Lord Marney, who served King Henry VIII as Privy Seal.
Queen Elizabeth I stayed there on a royal progress through Essex in 1579.
An enormously rare piece of Tudor clothing, known as the Bacton Altar Cloth, is now on show at Hampton Court Palace ? and it was once one of Elizabeth I?s dresses. The piece has long had local legend linking it to Gloriana, but now the experts are almost certain the Tudor Queen once wore it
The Bacton Altar Cloth - Elizabeth I's only surviving dress - now at Hampton Court Palace ? The Crown Chronicles (https://thecrownchronicles.co.uk/history/history-posts/the-bacton-altar-cloth-elizabeth-is-only-surviving-dress-now-at-hampton-court-palace/)
It?s wonderful that this material has survived for so long, and fascinating embroidery. However I do think when it was an altar cloth it was quite a bit smaller than what we see on the model in the second photo.
The second is a replica of a dress she wore in a portrait. They think that the alter cloth is the remains of that dress. The embroidery is very similar.
Seeing the lady taking such patience to embroider one flower reminds me of my aunt who is an embroideress.
King Henry announced the death sentence of Queen Anne.
King Henry VIII of England announces the death sentence (1536) for Anne Boleyn, his second wife and mother of the future Queen Elizabeth I of England (http://www.alamy.com/king-henry-viii-announces-image398986675.html)
Heads up for all Tudor fans. https://twitter.com/Hstry_with_Cats/status/1402242796115877895
Today is the day!
If your area of interest is the late medieval or early modern periods, please feel free to join in on the #TudorTuesday hashtag.
Hopefully this can help us all find others interested in the same period and learn a bit more about these fascinating centuries
Just eleven days after the execution of Queen Anne Boleyn, King Henry VIII married Jane Seymour on May 30, 1536.
Was Henry VIII's claim to the throne weak because he was descended through the female line from King Edward III's fourth son John of Gaunt, the Duke of Lancaster?
The Tudor claim to the throne was weak, mainly Henry VII won it by right of conquest......
Back then might made right.
Yes and no. Legitimate succession meant that there were no wars over the issue of who was to be King. Richard III had no legitimate heir.. and the suspicion that he had killed the Princes was damning for him. Winning the throne by rihgt of conquest was going out as a method of becoming King. OTOH a weak king who could not control his nobles, who lost wars etc was not going to last very long..
I?m sure I?ve answered this before, maybe on another forum. Henry?s claim, through the Beauforts was very weak indeed. Nonetheless, by 1483 Henry was the senior male Lancastrian claimant remaining after the deaths in battle, by murder or execution of Henry VI (son of Henry V and Catherine of Valois), his son Edward of Westminster, Prince of Wales, and the other Beaufort line of descent through Lady Margaret's uncle, Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset. He won through right of conquest as medieval kings before him had done but kept a very sharp eye out throughout his reign for possible rivals.
He had to keep a sharp eye on rivals because the Tudor dynasty did largely derive its place from right of conquest. Henry VIII also got rid of dynastic rivals who had a good claim to the throne. But as the 16th century progressed, and esp because of Elizabeth's long reign the idea of winning on a battlefield went out of fashion....
Yes, and Parliament gained more power at least as an advisory body in Elizabeth?s reign. The next challenge to an English monarch?s power came through Charles I clashing with Parliament. I suppose though that if Bonny Prince Charlie had been able to mass a convincing army in the ?45 then perhaps a Stuart could have won back the throne by force of arms.
Queen Elizabeth I toured the country in regional visits known as progresses. She often rode on horseback rather than by carriage. Elizabeth made at least 25 progresses during her reign.
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on July 17, 2021, 12:04:05 AM
Queen Elizabeth I toured the country in regional visits known as progresses. She often rode on horseback rather than by carriage. Elizabeth made at least 25 progresses during her reign.
Yes she enjoyed travelling around to different places, showing herself to the people as well as being entertained and staying with her large retinue at various country houses, virtually bankrupting the owners in the process. A very expensive process, having a monarch or the heir to stay, as various friends of Bertie found when he was POW then King Edward VII. Even if he didn?t bring the hordes of servants, retainers and attendants that Elizabeth did.
One of the first acts that Jane Seymour did as Queen of England was to try and restore the court to how it had been under Catherine of Aragon. Jane got rid of the French style instigated by Anne Boleyn and to put back in place the traditional style of English dress.
:shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe: :shemademe:
A French suitor for Queen Elizabeth I was Jacques de Savoy, Duc de Nemours. In 1561 he wanted to send his brother, the Cardinal of Ferrana to England to ask for Elizabeth's hand. His suit was not successful.
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on September 04, 2021, 11:39:05 PM
A French suitor for Queen Elizabeth I was Jacques de Savoy, Duc de Nemours. In 1561 he wanted to send his brother, the Cardinal of Ferrana to England to ask for Elizabeth's hand. His suit was not successful.
His suit wasn?t successful because Elizabeth really had no intention of marrying and sharing power with anyone. Although she grew quite fond of him I believe, it wasn?t love. Dudley was her only love.
Quote from: Curryong on September 04, 2021, 11:48:12 PM
His suit wasn?t successful because Elizabeth really had no intention of marrying and sharing power with anyone. Although she grew quite fond of him I believe, it wasn?t love. Dudley was her only love.
Have not the history writers debated the pros and cons of Queen Elizabeth I not marrying?
Yes, of course. There would be some advantages to Elizabeth marrying. Heirs of her own body to inherit the Throne. Powerful foreign alliances with Continental powers, for a start. However there were just as many cons to any union. Her Ministers were very anxious for her to marry and become a mother. However they were also wary of being dragged into foreign wars by a Continental bridegroom.
They no doubt looked at the examples of Mary I?s union with Philip of Spain, and Mary Queen of Scots?s relationship with a subject, Lord Darnley, who demanded to be made King. Not particularly satisfactory examples of Queens ruling with their hearts not their heads.(Mary was indulgent with Philip, whom she loved and yearned for in his absence.)
Strong as Elizabeth was, she was, I believe, deeply in love with only one man in her lifetime, Robert Dudley, and if he had been single and unecumbered then they might have married when they were young. That was something her Ministers regarded with horror. Subjects gained huge power through royal marriages, look to the Wydeville and Boleyn families. I don?t think Elizabeth would have yielded such power to Robert?s family but there was always the possibility.
I do believe that the prospect of sharing her throne and authority with a man, whoever he was, did become less and less palatable to Elizabeth as she grew older. After all she famously declared: ?I will have but one mistress here, and no master.?
And there were probably personal demons lingering because of her parents? marriage and its ending. I think it?s notable that Dudley himself was told a friend that he had known Elizabeth since she was eight years old, and that even at that age she had vowed she would never marry.
Catherine of Aragon pleaded her case against divorce from Henry VIII.
Catherine of Aragon pleads her case against divorce from Henry VIII. Painting by Henry Nelson O'Neil Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/catherine-of-aragon-pleads-her-case-against-divorce-image247197428.html)
Queen Elizabeth I indulged in pastimes and festivities. Like many aristocrats, Elizabeth loved to ride horses through the royal grounds. She had a love of music. She liked hawking, hunting and jousts.
When Mary Tudor was stripped of the title of princess, she became a lady-in-waiting to her half-sister Elizabeth. Mary wrote a letter to her father. King Henry VIII put Mary back in the line of succession.
Not sure this is the right thread, but anyway?..
An antique wooden bird has been discovered that once belonged to Anne Boleyn. Incredibly rare and still intact, more or less. What a find!
https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/anne-boleyn-bird-henry-viii-england-gbr-uk-intl-scli/index.html
I read that. Amazing!
Sorry. :teehee:
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/269618702_1539934736368274_1541080854943803417_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_rgb565=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=FfDOSdbmIzcAX-Ld2fP&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=00_AT-ew_gB1finKieTGVxKdkFtde4s4GT02b3ToXpNoKxbaQ&oe=61C8386B)
So funny. :partaay: However Henry married three Catherines, one Jane and two Annes. Don?t people with tattoos change a name they don?t want any more into another word? He could have had fun with all those Kates.
When Parliament opened in June 1536, Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond, King Henry VIII's son, was part of the procession. He walked in front of the King carrying the Cap of Maintenance, made of crimson velvet lined with ermine. The Cap of Maintenance was traditionally carried by the senior member of the House of Lords.
In Kings & Queens of Great Britain Every Question Answered, David Soud wrote:
When King Edward VI died in 1553 and Mary I took the throne, Elizabeth found herself in the precarious position she would later describe as "second person."
In 1546 King Henry VIII made peace with France. Before this when England and France were at war, why did King Henry sell off some monastic lands?
In Mary Queen of Scots, Antonia Frasier wrote:
Was the Scottish queen to be received at the English court, and permitted to enjoy full liberty in England? The Venetian ambassador in Paris sanguinely reported that a palace was being specially prepared for Mary in London.
Which palace might that have been?
At her coronation on October 1, 1553, Queen Mary I refused to be crowned sitting on the same chair as her Protestant half-brother Edward VI had.
Queen Claude of France was present at the public acceptance of the political engagement of her ten month old son Francis to Princess Mary of England, the daughter of King Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon in Paris, France in 1518.
At one time Queen Mary I viewed her half-sister the Protestant Elizabeth as a direct threat. Elizabeth was briefly imprisoned in the Tower of London. However, she was not excluded from the succession.
Queen Elizabeth I translated classical works and wrote poems throughout her life.
On November 14, 1575 Queen Elizabeth I refused the Crown of The Netherlands offered by the Dutch rebels. :mad16: :mad16: :mad16: :mad16:
Why did so many of the children of King Henry VIII die?
Why Did So Many Of Henry VIII's Children DIE? - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPemOpRGAoM)
On January 24, 1502 King Henry VII of England was involved with Scotland and England concluding the Treaty of Perpetual Peace. This was the first peace agreement between England and Scotland in over 170 years.
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on July 02, 2022, 10:34:10 PM
On January 24, 1502 King Henry VII of England was involved with Scotland and England concluding the Treaty of Perpetual Peace. This was the first peace agreement between England and Scotland in over 170 years.
This treaty wasn?t particularly successful in keeping peace in the border regions of England/Scotland as reivers continued their raids until the beginning of the 17th century. Nor did it prevent future conflicts between the two Kingdoms. However, one of the main purposes of the treaty was to marry King Henry?s daughter Margaret Tudor off to King James of Scotland and that came to fruition.
The Tyndale New Testament had been published in 1525. Tyndale's New Testament was banned by royal proclamation in 1530.King Henry VIII held out for the promise of an officially authorized English Bible being prepared by learned and catholic scholars.
:random44: :random44: :random44: :random44: :random44: :random44: :random44: :random44:
Prince Arthur's christening occurred on September 24, 1486.
September 24 - Prince Arthur's christening - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PF5kvS4mKuY)
The first State bed of King Henry VII of England and Elizabeth of York
Is this the bed which launched the Tudors: Dumped in a hotel car park this four poster could be where Henry VIII was conceived and is worth ?20million (http://www.pinterest.com/pin/449797081536515724)
18 Interesting Facts about King Edward VI
18 Interesting Facts about Edward VI - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRG29AJfhr4)
Elizabeth of York, Queen Consort of King Henry VII, reading a book
Mary Evans ELIZABETH OF YORK 10081783 (http://www.maryevans.com/history/Elizabeth-of_york-10081783)
:booknerd: :booknerd: :booknerd: :booknerd: :booknerd: :booknerd: :booknerd: :booknerd:
Charles of Valois, Duke of Orleans (1522-1545) was the son of King Francis I of France.
King Henry VIII of England offered a betrothal between his daughter Princess Elizabeth
and Charles of Valois, Duke of Orleans.
:xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17: :xmas17:
What if Arthur Tudor was King of England?
What if Arthur Tudor was King? - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90zPdCM1m8g)
When Prince Arthur met Catherine of Aragon
Tudor Minute November 6, 1501: When Prince Arthur met Catherine of Aragon - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apJaEQFuFi8)
:xmas22: :xmas22: :xmas22: :xmas22: :xmas22: :xmas22: :xmas22: :xmas22:
King Henry VIII and Cardinal Thomas Wolsey
Mary Evans King Henry VIII and Cardinal Thomas Wolsey 10056299 (http://www.maryevans.com/history/10056299)
Prince Arthur married Infanta Catherine on November 14, 1501
Arthur Tudor marries Katherine of Aragon | 14th November 1501 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzZcymqEe4M)
Edward VI was the only royal prince born at Hampton Court.
There had been a suggestion that Henry Fitzroy, the son of King Henry VIII, could marry his half-sister Princess Mary to secure Henry's succession and avoid the annulment of King Henry VIII's marriage to Mary's mother Queen Catherine of Aragon.
The Pope drafted a dispensation to allow this.
Christina, Dowager Duchess of Milan could have been a possible wife for King Henry VIII.
CHRISTINA OF MILAN: the girl who escaped Henry VIII. European royal history documentary. Royal women - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLgNiktAcmE)
The coronation of a consort who might have been England?s first queen regnant ? Royal Central (https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/the-coronation-of-a-consort-who-might-have-been-englands-first-queen-regnant-187509/)
?In another lifetime, perhaps she?d be recognised as England?s first queen regnant, but Elizabeth of York was fated to be a consequential queen consort instead, with her popularity helping to sow peace in the aftermath of the Wars of the Roses.
Elizabeth holds a unique position in English history: she is the only woman to be daughter, niece, sister, wife, and mother to kings.? End quote.
That will almost certainly never happen again! And, as this article points out, Elizabeth was far more popular than her husband. Large crowds came out to cheer her Coronation procession.
The Coronation of Queen Anne Boleyn
The Coronation Of Queen Anne Boleyn - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSqo70qkdRs)
Procession of King Edward VI along Cheapside, City of London, circa 1550
Procession of Edward VI along Cheapside, City of London, c1550. Artist: Unknown Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-procession-of-edward-vi-along-cheapside-28055468.html)
An Amateur Metal Detectorist in the U.K. Has Struck History-Lover?s Gold: A 16th-Century Pendant With Links to King Henry VIII (https://news.artnet.com/art-world/metal-detectorist-tudor-pendant-henry-viii-2251891)
An exquisite little gold necklace with links to Henry VIII and his first wife Katherine of Aragon has been found.
An Englishman who picked up metal detecting while he was grieving the death of his dog has hit upon the most notable Tudor finds in a quarter-century.
Charlie Clarke was using his metal detector on a friend?s property in the Warwickshire countryside in England, when the machine picked up a target. Clarke unearthed the object, thinking it was probably a soda can, but instead found a heart-shaped gold pendant attached to a gold chain. Ornate script on the reverse of the 2.1-inch pendant spelled the initials ?H? and ?K,? which, as Clarke?s friend pointed out, could be linked to Henry VIII and his first wife, Katherine of Aragon.
The End of the House of Tudor
The End of the House of Tudor (2023) FULL DOCUMENTARY | HD - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c8Dm9D0b44)
Quote from: LouisFerdinand on July 03, 2023, 10:55:04 PM
The End of the House of Tudor
The End of the House of Tudor (2023) FULL DOCUMENTARY | HD - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c8Dm9D0b44)
The end of the House of Tudor was really due (besides the delicate health of their teenage boys with both of Henry VIII?s sons dying of complications of TB in their mid teens) to a lack of male heirs. Plus of course a barrenness among the women. Neither Elizabeth nor Mary produced even one child.
They weren?t an ill-starred line like the Stuarts, but the fecundity of the Hanoverian line for example, really shows the Tudors? weakness. A royal House can only thrive, obviously, if a number of children are produced, grow up healthy, marry and have lots of heirs of their own. The Tudors didn?t. Right from the beginning there was a problem as Henry VII was an only child and it didn?t get any better when Prince Arthur succumbed to a sweating sickness at 15. And Elizabeth?s refusal to wed didn?t help.
We've reached 15 pages on this thread so it is time to close this one and open a new thread.