Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log Insp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_Feed Topic RSSsp_TopicIcon
Anne - Virtuous or promiscuous?
September 2, 2014
8:24 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The thing is Percy’s wife had tried to play the old pre-contract get out of marriage free card before Henry and Anne were married, and it was swept under the carpet, so even if Anne had wanted to she couldn’t agree to an annulment of the grounds of pre-contract, as it would have made a complete mockery of the reason for annulment. It wouldn’t make sence that Mary? (Henry’s wife) had brought the case for it to been kicked/laughed out of court and by the fact that vehemently denied that he and Anne had ever been pre contracted, for Anne then to say that in fact Henry had lied and they were pre-contracted.
Anne knew that the minute Henry sent her to the Tower she was dead, by one way or another. Even if she had agreed to an annulment and gone with Elizabeth into exile be that at home or abroad, Henry would have sent assassin to kill them both probably shortly after the birth of Edward, as he could risk having a rival for Edward’s throne. Anne and Elizabeth’s death would have been put down to the sweat or some other tersian fever, and Henry would have been absolved of any blame for their death’s. The only way for Elizabeth was to survive and get her inheritence was to sacrifice her own life. What a woman…I wonder what Anne would have made of her daughter’s reign. I reckon that she was clapping her hands with the biggest smile on her face looking on proudly at the daughter who ruled England for 45 years and turned the dominate male rulers in Europe into her lapdogs. She certainly showed the whole world that a woman was and is every bit as good as a King. I’d also like to think that when Elizabeth’s forces squashed the Armada into oblivion she stuck 2 fingers up at her father and said, “up yours daddykins, beat that” she made Flodden(although that was really K.O.A victory, Henry just claimed the glory) and Henry’s French pub crawls look like a game of ludo.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 2, 2014
8:34 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said

The thing is Percy’s wife had tried to play the old pre-contract get out of marriage free card before Henry and Anne were married, and it was swept under the carpet, so even if Anne had wanted to she couldn’t agree to an annulment of the grounds of pre-contract, as it would have made a complete mockery of the reason for annulment. It wouldn’t make sence that Mary? (Henry’s wife) had brought the case for it to been kicked/laughed out of court and by the fact that vehemently denied that he and Anne had ever been pre contracted, for Anne then to say that in fact Henry had lied and they were pre-contracted.

Exactly. The pre-contract hadn’t worked for Mary Talbot, because Percy denied it. And he kept on denying it right up until Anne died.

September 3, 2014
7:43 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Reginald Pole had a very close relationship to Mary and yes would have been a good match for her. But I believe it was never actually ever going to be on the cards, due to the fact that Pole himself was more devoted to God then he could be to Mary or even the crown. I also believe that the Pope had insinuated to Pole that he would be more than happy to release him from his vows should he so wish to marry Mary.
I think however Pole himself fell fowl of the Pope towards the end of his life and it was perhaps his death that saved him from being impeached and maybe excommunicated.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 3, 2014
7:54 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I have often wondered if Henry had approached Katherine in a kinder way, would Katherine have given him what he wanted? As you say, Hannele, he hurt her with his crude accusations. After 20 + years of marriage, he uses the excuse that she wasn’t a virgin? She had every right to be angry. He humiliated her.
I think Anne would have been relieved if Henry would have gone away. At least in the beginning. Henry wanted her for a mistress. Anne was having none of that. She would be no man’s mistress. Who would have thought that he would have offered marriage? He was married and had been for 20 years. Norfolk and Boleyn had little to do with the relationship in the beginning. In fact, Thomas wasn’t at all thrilled that the king was after another one of his daughters. I think with Anne holding him off as long as she did, I mean we are talking years here, it wasn’t just token resistance. She meant it.

Hannele do you like the book or no? I have it, I just haven’t gotten around to reading it yet.

September 3, 2014
10:38 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I’ve wondered this one myself Sharon. It is possible that she may have done, she knew that her childbearing years were past her. She also knew that Henry was desperate for a male heir, and that as I said she was past it. I don’t think she would have done if Henry was contemplating a match with France however, she might have even tried to him to a match of her own choosing. What’s sad is that she did everything to keep the Spanish interest in England, not realising or caring that England’s love affair had long finished. When K.O.A married Henry it was because Spain and England needed one another. England from the point of view that as Tudor dynasty was still quite new and to bag a princess of such a powerful country as Spain was back then was a quite prize it also meant that the Tudor dynasty was not just a flash in the pan. In Spain’s eyes as England was convienant as it was closer to France than Spain was, and therefore they could fight the French wars for them so to speak.
With the Val Dor party the reason for fighting in France was removed, peace for a short while existed between France and England> Henry was far too involved with getting a son to want to go to France on a pub crawl.
Therefore the reason for the marriage was also removed.
Henry could at sometimes be a subtle as a air raid. If he had approached the whole divorce in a different way who knows.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 4, 2014
7:00 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hannele said

Sharon said
I think Anne would have been relieved if Henry would have gone away. At least in the beginning. Henry wanted her for a mistress. Anne was having none of that. She would be no man’s mistress. Who would have thought that he would have offered marriage? He was married and had been for 20 years. Norfolk and Boleyn had little to do with the relationship in the beginning. In fact, Thomas wasn’t at all thrilled that the king was after another one of his daughters. I think with Anne holding him off as long as she did, I mean we are talking years here, it wasn’t just token resistance. She meant it.

We do not know if, once the decision was to marry was done, it was Anne or Henry (as Bernard claims) who wanted to refrain from sex (or at least full intercourse). Probably it was both, as it was very important not to have illegitimate children.

As for the earlier courting, it was not only virtue but perhaps more common sense (as well as her sister’s experience) that was Anne’s motive not to succumb to a royal mistress who was likely to be soon discarded. But Henry’s offer of the official mistress was another matter – it was a honorable position. Why would she not accept? Because she did not even then believe in his word? Or because of her ambition? Or because she did not love him?

In any case, once Henry offered a marriage, Anne could no more refuse, because of her family. But could she know beforehand that “no” could lead to such an offer and consciously play the game? That was a crux of the matter when defining her character.

I understand why Henry’s “one and only mistress” idea would never appeal to Anne. Henry could still have ditched her as he ditched the previous mistresses even though they did not hold that title. A mistress is always just a mistress. If he decided he wanted someone else, that great title of “one and only” would be gone in a shot. What then? Anne must have thought this. She was an intelligent woman.

I don’t think she loved him early on. I think she was hoping he would lose interest and move on to someone who wouldn’t mind being a mistress. Being ambitious doesn’t necessarily mean she was aiming for the throne all along. Again, she could not have known he would say, “okay you won’t be my mistress, I will divorce my wife.” He had never led her to believe it, nor had he said it to any other woman he had been involved with. Waiting for Henry, and thinking he would divorce Katherine, when he had not said anything like that before is just a stretch.

I understand what you are saying Hannele. Many people think Anne was sure that Henry would eventually divorce Katherine in order to marry her if she held out long enough. I’m not one of them. I think Anne was put in a situation she could not escape from. She went home to Hever to get away. Henry was very persistent. Hever wasn’t far enough. His letters, at least the first few, are to me, intimidating. But that’s just me. They are great love letters to others. I don’t question Anne’s character. I think she was put between a rock and a hard place, and managed it very well.

I will have to read that book. Thanks for the review.

September 4, 2014
10:19 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

If my lousy memory serves Diane de Portiers was given the title Matrisse en tiste (loosely worded only true mistress) by King Henry of France, but he did have other mistresses too.
By the same token Margaret Erskine was considered as James 5th cheif or main mistress, and at one point was thinking of marrying her, even though she was already married. James had approached her husband and asked him if he was prepared to release from their marriage vows, in 1536 and had even written to the Pope to allow their marriage to happen. The answer must have been no as shortly afterwards he married Madeline of France, who died about 6 months later, which then of course led to him marrying Marie de Guise mother of the ill fated Mary QoS.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 4, 2014
10:19 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

If my lousy memory serves Diane de Portiers was given the title Matrisse en tiste (loosely worded only true mistress) by King Henry of France, but he did have other mistresses too.
By the same token Margaret Erskine was considered as James 5th cheif or main mistress, and at one point was thinking of marrying her, even though she was already married. James had approached her husband and asked him if he was prepared to release from their marriage vows, in 1536 and had even written to the Pope to allow their marriage to happen. The answer must have been no as shortly afterwards he married Madeline of France, who died about 6 months later, which then of course led to him marrying Marie de Guise mother of the ill fated Mary QoS.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 5, 2014
1:43 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Anne refused point blank to become Henry’s mistress, she actually told him straight “marriage or nothing”
What happened afterwards right up until 1536 when he murdered her was all down to Henry, he was the one who persued her relentlessly. He didn’t like it when a woman said NO, the thrill of the chase and all that, he had to have her by whatever means possible if it meant tearing the country and the church apart for her, which of course he did. Anne did none of these things. She is often blamed for his actions concerning the church etc. But she didn’t tell him or coerce him in anyway to do the things he did to process her. His actions were solely his own. Yes I agree she gave him Tyndales book, but if he hadn’t had already been of the mind to pull apart the church of England/Rome in the first place he wouldn’t have read it. As it was he must have had some inkling of what was in that book due to the fact that he launched an all out attack on the so called luteran hereses of Luther, an attack which the Pope had given him the fidei defensor title (defender of the faith).
With Jane I don’t know I certainly don’t think she expected to become Queen, but I think she would have perhaps been happy to be his mistress for a while, certainly his mistresses faired better than his wives, and she could have done quite well for herself once he had tired of her.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 5, 2014
8:04 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Thanks Boleyn. I couldn’t remember the title. It means official mistress or main mistress. A semi-official position that came with a set of apartments.

Did Jane do the same thing as Anne?
Well…Henry did the same thing with Jane that he did with Anne. He liked the pattern. It worked for him the first time, it would work the second.
Jane was put in the same position Anne had been in. Jane went with it. Again being a queen hold its advantages. Do I think she was a conniver. No, I don’t. Her family coached her, but did she do everything they said she should do? Or was it Jane’s personality on its own that won the day?
No one was going to break up the marriage between Henry and Anne other than Henry himself. If he hadn’t wanted the marriage to end, it wouldn’t have ended.

It is hard to say for sure if Jane would have become mistress had Anne had a son. She was well on her way to being one before the miscarriage. I think Henry would have been in a different place if he had a son by Anne, and maybe the question wouldn’t have come up.

September 5, 2014
9:35 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I don’t think he would have given up on Jane completely if Anne had had a son, there would be the 6 week interim period until Anne was churched before she could be put back as brood mare so I do think he would have by that time had his fill of Jane, or at least very shortly after. Not being disrespectable towards Jane but I feel she would have had very little to keep the Henry interested for long. He liked woman of spirit, fire and passion, and Anne had all 3 of those in abundance. Jane was too quiet and very milk and watery her “yes Henry, no Henry, 3 bags full Henry” would I think got on his nerves after a while. Certainly his behaviour/words just a few months into their marriage show that he was already bored the words being “If I had seen that beautiful woman first I would have never married Jane” and telling her to “Shut your trap woman and remember what happened to Anne Boleyn) Show to me at least he was bored to death by her. The fact too that he was looking around for another wife just a week after she died, is not the man who deeply loved and mourned her passing. His greif at her loss was purely self motivated. For the first time in his life he had to face the world alone, as prior to her death he had always got his next victim lined up to hide behind.
He was alone for just under 2 years, not because he was greiving it was because no self respecting woman wanted him..
Which is why I ask wht was Anne of Cleves told about him? She must have been told he was a Golden Sod who was the most handsome prince in all of Christendom and Blah blah blah. If that was the case it’s small wonder she acted with sheer revoltion at what the truth really was down here in Rochester Castle. If she had been told the truth about Henry would she have come to England? Hmm hard one to guess really since we know so little about her early life. But judging by the fact she choose to stay in England after Henry divorced her I think we can make a guess her home back in Cleves wasn’t particulary happy.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 6, 2014
12:00 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I agree that Henry was forever telling Anne to sit down and shut up and the same could be said that he also did the same with K.O.A, the spirit fire and passion he got from telling Anne and K.O.A to sit down and shut up was more to do with dominance over them, not sexual dominance as such, but more to the point that he could control any woman no matter what. I also feel he did get a little bit of a sexual thrill out of his arguements with both K.O.A and Anne.
The bit about banging Mary’s head runs like this “You should bash Mary’s head against the wall until it is a soft as a baked apple, like the cursed bastard she is”
Certainly both Anne’s and Henry’s treatment of Mary is shocking beyond belief but as you rightly say Henry’s actions were his own and Anne’s vice versa. I do however feel that Henry’s actions towards Mary were far worse than Anne’s. To Anne’s mind Mary had been declared a bastard by English Law that was enough, but Henry wanted more he wanted Mary to admit it too and all but call her own mother a wh*re in the process. Hewas determined to humiliate Mary and make her feel worthless.

Henry may have not liked woman challenging him on his policies but again I think he got a buzz out of it. I think that Henry often doubted the validity of his own decisions so if his wife didn’t like what he was planning to do then it must be the right course of action to take. He had yes men who agreed with everything he said, what he needed was someone to tell him what he wanted to hear, not just agree with him. That way if the decision he made went tits up, he had someone to blame i.e his yes men. If the decision he made went right then he could crow over his wife and say “there you go woman, just goes to prove that you aren’t as clever as me so there. I suggest next time you try to challenge me on my policies you go away and stick to what you know best.”
I don’t think Jane would have had much choice about being Henry’s mistress, He’d set his beady little eyes on her, she would have had to surrender sooner or later.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 6, 2014
1:32 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Boleyn said

The bit about banging Mary’s head runs like this “You should bash Mary’s head against the wall until it is a soft as a baked apple, like the cursed bastard she is”
Certainly both Anne’s and Henry’s treatment of Mary is shocking beyond belief but as you rightly say Henry’s actions were his own and Anne’s vice versa. I do however feel that Henry’s actions towards Mary were far worse than Anne’s. To Anne’s mind Mary had been declared a bastard by English Law that was enough, but Henry wanted more he wanted Mary to admit it too and all but call her own mother a wh*re in the process. Hewas determined to humiliate Mary and make her feel worthless.

I don’t think Jane would have had much choice about being Henry’s mistress, He’d set his beady little eyes on her, she would have had to surrender sooner or later.

The quote you have there happened when Norfolk along with several other members of council were sent to try to get Mary to sign the oath. It was either Norfolk or one of the others who said, “If you were my daughter, I would bash your head against the wall until it was….etc.” Anne wrote that Lady Shelton should box Mary’s ears. Either way between Anne and Henry, Mary wasn’t respected as the daughter of a king would expect from their subjects.
Henry and Anne are both responsible for their own behavior, but I do think Anne and the rest of the court who sided with Henry, or did his bidding, were all playing off of Henry’s lead.

September 6, 2014
2:15 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Agreed Sharon I don’t think they would have acted in such a manner towards Mary if Henry hadn’t of started it so to speak.
Norfolk the odious jumped up cretinous poppingjay I hate him only a little less then I hate Henry.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 6, 2014
5:08 pm
Avatar
Boleyn
Kent.
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2285
Member Since:
January 3, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Agreed Hannele, but she must have some inkling to what he looked like etc. Reguardless or not if she liked him or not. If she had known the truth that Henry was a fat stinking sad bleeding martyr sad sack of Crap, she may not of responded as she did at Rochester Castle.
It didn’t help that Henry blundered in like a bull in a china shop in one of his stupid diguises, again if she had be forwarned that Henry, Henry liked to play dress up she could have handled such a situation a little better.
Henry too took it forgranted that Holbien’s portrait of Anne was a mirror image of her and foolishly fell in love with the portrait of Anne if he had been more sensible he would have sent another painter with Holbien to give him another view opinion or view about her. He knew Holbien was apt to exaggerate with his paint brush.
The strange thing about their marriage is that I do feel if he gave their marriage time I think it may been successful, not exactly a love match but one of an amicable nature.

Semper Fidelis, quod sum quod

September 13, 2014
7:26 pm
Avatar
Sharon
Binghamton, NY
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2114
Member Since:
February 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Bryan was a real ladies man. A rake, a poet, a soldier, and a diplomat who was noted for changing his ideals to match Henry’s every whim. He was noted for telling the king exactly what he thought, and was well liked by Henry. In 1536 he worked with Cromwell to bring down Anne, and Cromwell labeled him “The Vicar From Hell” at this time. I think his arrest along with Paget’s and Wyatt’s was for show. It was to show that not all of Anne’s friends were being condemned. Only those men who had slept with her and committed the treasonous acts would pay the ultimate price. The innocent would be released.

I agree, once Cromwell knew what Henry wanted he decided to clean house. The idea being: (A.) bring down political foes such as Brererton, who Cromwell had a political reason for getting rid of. He was gaining too much power in Wales, and (B.) to wipe out anyone who would, or might, come to Anne’s defense. With the major part of her faction being charged with treason, it would prevent anyone else wishing to come to her aid.

Forum Timezone: Europe/London
Most Users Ever Online: 214
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 1
Top Posters:
Anyanka: 2333
Boleyn: 2285
Sharon: 2114
Bella44: 933
DuchessofBrittany: 846
Mya Elise: 781
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1
Members: 425807
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 13
Topics: 1681
Posts: 22777
Newest Members:
suki60, WaverlyScott, Edwards Harlie, laylataylor, King1Landyn
Administrators: Claire: 958