I kinda believe it.  The myth is so pervasive it seems like it had to come from somewhere.  Cavendish isn't exactly a primary source, but he's close enough considering it's been 500 years.  I agree with Flora that the high collars and sleeves must be a myth because we know that wasn't the fashion at the time.  Also, regarding the argument that Henry wouldn't have chosen a woman with such obvious defects, bottom line is Henry wasn't the most rational person and often acted out of character.  I read (I want to say it was in Ives' book) that Anne had a difficult labour with Elizabeth and Henry was heard to say that he wanted Anne's life saved at the expense of the child's if it came to it (opposite of how he felt about Jane Seymour).  From what we know of Henry, a living heir was all he cared about, so for him to say that just shows how obsessed with Anne he really was. He only started to fall out of love with her after the birth of Elizabeth.  I only say this to emphasize that while his obsession lasted, he would've overlooked any defect in Anne.  If that old story about Katherine of Aragon playing cards with Anne and Henry just so he would notice Anne's extra nail is true, I can see Henry catching on pretty quickly.  From a pyschological standpoint, he probably would have clung to Anne out of spite for Katherine's ploy.  Not saying Henry got with Anne to spite Katherine, but in this one instance I can see Katherine's actions backfiring on her.

My feeling is that the whole sixth finger or nail thing is blown out of all proportion.

From what I have read, all that was written about a sixth finger or nail was written after Anne's death.

One would think that more would have been made of it in the time before her marriage to Henry by her many enemies and the Church of Rome.  Thomas Moore would have had something to say about it, that is if there was any truth in it, one would think. As Moore was on a witch burning crusade of his own at that time. Would Saint Thomas be able to sit across the table from a six fingered Anne picking at her moles, say grace and finish his supper???

I don't think so.

Think of how many of Anne's foes met their deaths before Anne but never pointed a sixth finger at her or made her out to be a witch?

the ones who would have most to say was Catherine of Aragon and her daughter Mary. Perhaps with most reason. Catherine called her \”The wh*re of all Christendom\” and not the witch.

While not having the forensic resources of today, during the archaeological dig of saint Peter ad Vincula, the remains believed to be Anne did not have six fingers.

I think that stories as this one sells books and unfortunately gives credence to such myths.

Paudie. 

I think if she DID have it, then they wouldn't have had to concoct such crazy accusations to be rid of her. It would have been very easy to use this ”deformity”  to prove that she was a witch. Her witchcraft caused the king to do all the crazy things that he did for her and as a result she would have been burned at the stake, no questions asked.  The fact that she “bewitched” him is merely mentioned almost as an afterthought, when it would have been a concrete case against her.

I personally don't think Henry could have fallen so deeply in love for someone with any form of physical defect at all. 

I also think that after her death (& the subsequent failed marriages/beheadings thereafter) people may have questioned the validity of the accusations against Anne and her poor companions in death. So to wipe out any doubt of whether the King was justified in her execution, they tacked on the witch stigma and needed something to back it up. Something like the witches mark perhaps?

Just my thoughts!

I just found this on Youtube:

It says that the body was exhumed in the 1800 & that there were only 10 fingers….its about 8 minutes long but very interesting! ENJOY

-Gina

The Other Boleyn Boy said:

the nail was noticed long before anyone had any real axe to grind with her, if you'll pardon the expression. Don't canonise Anne – if she had an extra nail, so what?!?

When was the nail noticed and who noticed it?

I don't think people here want to cannonize Anne.  She certainly was human.  Considering the times she lived in, it would seem to lead us to believe she would not have been Queen of England if she had anything wrong with her physically.  As has been said previously in this thread, any sort of deformity was looked upon as being a sign of witchcraft. At the least it was a sign of unworthiness. One of the charges against Anne was witchcraft.  This charge, as far as history tells us, was not used against her.  If they could have proved she was a witch, they would have done so.

For us today, an extra nail means nothing.  (with a few exceptions)  In the 1500's it meant much more.  People were beyond superstitious.  A deformity meant a punishment from God, and the people shunned anyone who was different.  It seems ridiculous to us today, but that is the way people thought in Henry's time.

Henry was a superstitious man, and he wouldn't have put a Spanish princess aside to marry a witch and put her potential son on his throne.  Any “strange” thing on one's body was considered as the Devil's sign, and a sixth finger was more than an evidence for witches hunters. A sixth nail was surely suspect, but not enough to put you on a stake. So Anne's story proves that she had quite normal hands. And, if she had had an extra finger, she probably would have it amputated, like the witch in The Secret Diary of Anne Boleyn suggest.

By the way, Claire, you look lovely on your new photo. and with such a good entourage!