Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
8:15 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
I was just wondering about how accurate portraits are from back then. For example, Henry VIII had a painting of Anne of Cleves done to see what she looked like and to chose whether he'd want her as a wife and he chose her because of that painting but when he saw herin person he was completely disgusted and disapointed by her appearence. It doesn't really make sense…. I mean in person Anne must've looked different then her in the portrait, right?
So this leaves me wonder whether any of the wives portraits are in any way accurate. By seeing their portraits i try very hard to imagine what they actually looked like and it just really sucks that there is absolutely no way of knowing what they looked like. I'd literally give an arm just to get a glimpse of them and everyone back then.
Hm…Any thoughts? Or am i alone and going crazy?
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
11:43 pm
June 7, 2011
Offline
I think generally you can piece them together by reading the description of their looks and then looking at all the portraits. I am doing paintings of each wife using the most “authentic” paintings of each of them, and then restoring them to look more 'realistic'. It would be interesting however, to see if they are how other people imagine. I'm trying to use paintings before their marriage to Henry – if they exist, to ensure no bias or propaganda was used to edit them sightly. I'm working on Anne Boleyn at the moment, and from the clean up of her portrait, she was incredibly beautiful. 12
"It is however but Justice, & my Duty to declre that this amiable Woman was entirely innocent of the Crimes with which she was accused, of which her Beauty, her Elegance, & her Sprightliness were sufficient proofs..." Jane Austen.
12:33 am
May 19, 2011
Offline
You know what I'd love to be able to do? Have them dug up (with all respect obviously) and then reconstruct the face based on bone measurement etc… Then we could all see what they really looked like- imagine coming face to face with Anne- imagine coming face to face with Elizabeth!!!! Oh- I may have to go have a quiet lie down in a dark room for a while..
Death masks are quite accurate I think. That of Cromwell and Elizabeth both resembled portraits. This lead me to think that the “Rainbow portrait” was the most accurate likeness of Elizabeth (add a few lines to indicate her age at the time perhaps!) She was quite coy when it came to an accurate likeness however..
"A fresh young damsel, who could trip and go"
6:33 am
June 7, 2011
Offline
E said:
You know what I'd love to be able to do? Have them dug up (with all respect obviously) and then reconstruct the face based on bone measurement etc… Then we could all see what they really looked like- imagine coming face to face with Anne- imagine coming face to face with Elizabeth!!!! Oh- I may have to go have a quiet lie down in a dark room for a while..
Death masks are quite accurate I think. That of Cromwell and Elizabeth both resembled portraits. This lead me to think that the “Rainbow portrait” was the most accurate likeness of Elizabeth (add a few lines to indicate her age at the time perhaps!) She was quite coy when it came to an accurate likeness however..
Anne's body was dug up and examined, in the 1800's. The examiner said her skull was symmetrical, with high cheekbones and large eyes. Kathrine Parr was also exuhmed (Around 1700 I think, could be wrong) But she was perfectly preserved until someone disrespected her body while examining it, and causing her to decay. Its a shame, they should have made Katherine a glass casket!
"It is however but Justice, & my Duty to declre that this amiable Woman was entirely innocent of the Crimes with which she was accused, of which her Beauty, her Elegance, & her Sprightliness were sufficient proofs..." Jane Austen.
2:00 pm
October 31, 2010
Offline
Portraits were certainly…embellished. I think artists tried very hard to capture the subject's features while minimizing or sometimes eliminating features that were less-than desirable. Or including features or aspects that the subject perhaps wished he/she possessed. I was watching something on the history channel where they took death masks and compared them to portraits to some very famous people. In George Washington, for example, they found that the face we see on the $1 bill has a much more pronouced, square jawline than the death mask does. We know that when the portrait was done, George Washington had no teeth and was most certainly wearing dentures while sitting for the portrait, and the death mask of GW indicated a rounder jawline. I think, long story short, that the job of the artist was to make the subject (read: the person paying him) happy. So that might mean eliminating some wrinkles or a mole or perhaps shortening a nose that the subject felt was too long.
I mean, no one ever sees a portrait with Henry wearing a bandage around his smelly leg.
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
3:29 pm
May 16, 2011
Offline
I agree they should do a deathmask of them, or at least Anne because i think her apperance (besides KathHoward) is widely questioned and maybe it could prove she didn't have a wen on her neck whcih was a ridiculous myth. I wish time machines exsisted cause i'd probably live in the 1500's more than i would in 2011.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
5:53 am
June 7, 2011
Offline
I'm sure she wasn't deformed, she wouldn't of attracted the King's attention if she had.
"It is however but Justice, & my Duty to declre that this amiable Woman was entirely innocent of the Crimes with which she was accused, of which her Beauty, her Elegance, & her Sprightliness were sufficient proofs..." Jane Austen.
7:50 am
October 31, 2010
Offline
Elliemarianna said:
E said:
You know what I'd love to be able to do? Have them dug up (with all respect obviously) and then reconstruct the face based on bone measurement etc… Then we could all see what they really looked like- imagine coming face to face with Anne- imagine coming face to face with Elizabeth!!!! Oh- I may have to go have a quiet lie down in a dark room for a while..
Death masks are quite accurate I think. That of Cromwell and Elizabeth both resembled portraits. This lead me to think that the “Rainbow portrait” was the most accurate likeness of Elizabeth (add a few lines to indicate her age at the time perhaps!) She was quite coy when it came to an accurate likeness however..
Anne's body was dug up and examined, in the 1800's. The examiner said her skull was symmetrical, with high cheekbones and large eyes. Kathrine Parr was also exuhmed (Around 1700 I think, could be wrong) But she was perfectly preserved until someone disrespected her body while examining it, and causing her to decay. Its a shame, they should have made Katherine a glass casket!
We have no way of knowing that the skeleton that was examined was truly Anne's. When the chapel floor was excavated, they found bodies upon bodies piled on top of each other and literally hundreds of skeletons jumbled together and relatively unmarked. While they felt somewhat confident that the skull they examined was Anne's, forensic techniques of the 1800s most certainly weren't what they are now. The skull could just as easily been that of Margaret Pole or Jane Parker or some other poor woman.
I think our best bet with Anne is to use her portraits and find the similarities between them and then use written descriptions to sort of fill in the blanks. I think, for those who had them, the death mask is certainly the best way to see what they looked like at the time of their death. Because of the way they were made, they were basically a cast of the deceased's face. I think they've actually been able to tell that Shakespeare probably died from an eye tumor because his death mask was so well made.
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
8:52 am
February 16, 2009
Offline
MegC said:
We have no way of knowing that the skeleton that was examined was truly Anne's. When the chapel floor was excavated, they found bodies upon bodies piled on top of each other and literally hundreds of skeletons jumbled together and relatively unmarked. While they felt somewhat confident that the skull they examined was Anne's, forensic techniques of the 1800s most certainly weren't what they are now. The skull could just as easily been that of Margaret Pole or Jane Parker or some other poor woman.
I think our best bet with Anne is to use her portraits and find the similarities between them and then use written descriptions to sort of fill in the blanks. I think, for those who had them, the death mask is certainly the best way to see what they looked like at the time of their death. Because of the way they were made, they were basically a cast of the deceased's face. I think they've actually been able to tell that Shakespeare probably died from an eye tumor because his death mask was so well made.
I have Doyne C Bell's 1877 report of the work carried out on the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in 1876 and 1877 and the examinations of the bodies found and in the chancel area they did not find “literally hundreds of skeletons jumbled together”, they dug in the spot where records suggested Anne Boleyn was buried and found “the bones of a female… not lying in the original order, but which had evidently for some reason or other been heaped together into a smaller space… no other female bones were found on this spot.”
Although Alison Weir suggests that these bones may belong to Lady Rochford or Catherine Howard they could well be Anne's seeing as they lay where records showed that Anne was buried. We just don't know.
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
9:10 am
June 7, 2011
Offline
MegC said:
We have no way of knowing that the skeleton that was examined was truly Anne's. When the chapel floor was excavated, they found bodies upon bodies piled on top of each other and literally hundreds of skeletons jumbled together and relatively unmarked. While they felt somewhat confident that the skull they examined was Anne's, forensic techniques of the 1800s most certainly weren't what they are now. The skull could just as easily been that of Margaret Pole or Jane Parker or some other poor woman.
I think our best bet with Anne is to use her portraits and find the similarities between them and then use written descriptions to sort of fill in the blanks. I think, for those who had them, the death mask is certainly the best way to see what they looked like at the time of their death. Because of the way they were made, they were basically a cast of the deceased's face. I think they've actually been able to tell that Shakespeare probably died from an eye tumor because his death mask was so well made.
I have Doyne C Bell's 1877 report of the work carried out on the Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula in 1876 and 1877 and the examinations of the bodies found and in the chancel area they did not find “literally hundreds of skeletons jumbled together”, they dug in the spot where records suggested Anne Boleyn was buried and found “the bones of a female… not lying in the original order, but which had evidently for some reason or other been heaped together into a smaller space… no other female bones were found on this spot.”
Although Alison Weir suggests that these bones may belong to Lady Rochford or Catherine Howard they could well be Anne's seeing as they lay where records showed that Anne was buried. We just don't know.
I think it was Anne, the heaped bones would make sense as she was bundled into a chest. She wasn't given a proper burial. Plus the age was about right I believe? Why would they mark the graves wrong anyway, surely they would have taken great care to ensure they were returned to their rightful places?
"It is however but Justice, & my Duty to declre that this amiable Woman was entirely innocent of the Crimes with which she was accused, of which her Beauty, her Elegance, & her Sprightliness were sufficient proofs..." Jane Austen.
10:07 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
Anne really did not deserve that. It's horrible. First to die innocently then basically be thrown into a chest then buried in place thats barely noticed and walked on? If i knew those were Anne's real remains and if i could give her a proper burial then i would. She deserves it. I think Elizabeth should've done that a while ago though.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
10:30 am
June 7, 2011
Offline
Mya said:
Anne really did not deserve that. It's horrible. First to die innocently then basically be thrown into a chest then buried in place thats barely noticed and walked on? If i knew those were Anne's real remains and if i could give her a proper burial then i would. She deserves it. I think Elizabeth should've done that a while ago though.
I agree, that was the ultimate disrespect. I find it so strange, how Henry treated her after loving her so passionately for so long. I personally think he went mad, 'began imagining things', almost like a paranoid schizophrenic. Anne was his 'inner demon'. He certainly was paranoid enough to warrant a mental illness. And his changeability only makes the likely-hood of it stronger.
I think Elizabeth was very careful about her mother. She loved her, there's no doubt of it – with her ring and honouring of those who knew Anne, but I think she feared being 'tarnished with the same brush' so to speak, so was very discrete. Maybe she was afraid that if she brought up Anne's memory, people would start doubting her legitimacy again.
"It is however but Justice, & my Duty to declre that this amiable Woman was entirely innocent of the Crimes with which she was accused, of which her Beauty, her Elegance, & her Sprightliness were sufficient proofs..." Jane Austen.
2:15 pm
June 1, 2010
Offline
I wondered if the bones were heaped together in a smaller space because Anne had to be literally folder up to fit her into the arrow chest. An Arrow chest is not very long, so Anne would not have been buried laying down flat.
3:07 pm
August 12, 2009
Offline
I think Anne is at peace where she is and should be left in peace beside the brother who died with her. There is a folk saying I think applies here: “An honest man's pillow is his peace of mind.” Anne knew she was innocent, and knew God knew she was innocent. She is at peace despite Henry's attempt to smear her reputation and obliterate all memory of her. It's her ultimate revenge, I think.
"Don't knock at death's door.
Ring the bell and run. He hates that."
3:10 pm
August 12, 2009
Offline
Wendy said:
I wondered if the bones were heaped together in a smaller space because Anne had to be literally folder up to fit her into the arrow chest. An Arrow chest is not very long, so Anne would not have been buried laying down flat.
That's a possibility. I always prefer to think there was room to lay her out if her head was tucked under her arm (as in the song!), but it must be considered that she was folded, perhaps in a fetal position, to fit.
"Don't knock at death's door.
Ring the bell and run. He hates that."
4:34 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Impish_Impulse said:
I think Anne is at peace where she is and should be left in peace beside the brother who died with her. There is a folk saying I think applies here: “An honest man's pillow is his peace of mind.” Anne knew she was innocent, and knew God knew she was innocent. She is at peace despite Henry's attempt to smear her reputation and obliterate all memory of her. It's her ultimate revenge, I think.
I'm another who thinks they should be left where they are.
It's always bunnies.
1:30 am
May 19, 2011
Offline
Impish_Impulse said:
Wendy said:
I wondered if the bones were heaped together in a smaller space because Anne had to be literally folder up to fit her into the arrow chest. An Arrow chest is not very long, so Anne would not have been buried laying down flat.
That's a possibility. I always prefer to think there was room to lay her out if her head was tucked under her arm (as in the song!), but it must be considered that she was folded, perhaps in a fetal position, to fit.
Impish Impulse- I love your signature! I think Anne and her Brother are at peace- where ever they are. They were too vibrant personalities who died innocentlly not to be at peace. I agree with leaving them buried and at rest- but my curiousity and interest in these heros of mine outways that. I would love to be involved if they were exhumed (even though I agree it is a bit wrong!!) and studied with the techniques we have now. If the skull surface area was measured they could build soft tissue, muscle and skin- creating a virtual Anne. Oh it would be incredible! How I wish they had put Katheryn Parr in a glass casket EllieMarriana!
"A fresh young damsel, who could trip and go"
11:08 am
May 16, 2011
Offline
Yes, they should be left in peace but the curiousity of their actual appearence is very great.
• Grumble all you like, this is how it’s going to be.
1:17 am
July 3, 2011
Offline
There would have to be approval from our present Queen and she has stated that in her opinion Elizabeth I was someone who she did not like. This was taken up venomously by Dr David Starky who like me is an avid fan of Elizabeth I.
The fact is our present Queen would not give approval for Anne to be exhumed. Elizabeth I could have a small sample of her DNA extracted to prove beyond doubt that Anne was who she was before they gave her a proper burial. While our current Queen is alive I just don't believe it will ever happen!
8:20 am
October 31, 2010
Offline
Claire said:
Although Alison Weir suggests that these bones may belong to Lady Rochford or Catherine Howard they could well be Anne's seeing as they lay where records showed that Anne was buried. We just don't know.
That's my point, exactly! We don't know! It doesn't really matter how many bodies were located around her, and, personally, I don't have the most confidence in 1870's forensic techniques. I'm certain they did the best they could do with the tools they had, but there is no way they could ever have said “This is Anne Boleyn” with 100% certainty short of her body being found with a plaque with her name on it. We'd have a hard time doing that now with our modern technology! Certainly, other evidence strongly suggests that this is Anne's body, but, I'm not 100% convinced and I probably never will be.
At the end of the day I don't really see that it matters who is buried where within the chapel. Almost every person buried there gave their life for crimes they never committed (almost), and even for the ones who were guilty the punishment certainly didn't fit the crime(s). We know who is buried in that chapel because pretty decent records were kept and I don't personally feel that any one person deserves our respect more than another. They should all be remembered for who they really were and what they accomplished in life and not whatever trumped-up charges lead to their deaths, and, in keeping with the spirit of the AB Files, I think that should be our goal for them all.
So while the idea of bringing up Anne's skeleton to perform analysis and perhaps do a facial reconstruction on it is an intriguing one, I think we are served equally well by drawing conclusions from portraits of her done during her lifetime–perhaps more so because we KNOW that the portraits of AB are Anne, but we will never really know if the skeleton attributed to Anne is truly hers. Ultimately, though, Anne's memory is best served by remembering her accomplishments and her remarkable place in history.
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
