I agree Louise, it is beautifully writen. Well done Olga and many many thanks for sharing it all with us and for all the work you have done on this article.
I hope that when more people have read it in the world outside from our happy home, they too will recognise just what a remarkable woman Anne truly was.
Although Olga could I tempt you into writing an article called “How to murder Henry 8th” (slowly and as painfully as possible) I had thought about roasting him over a open fire but it would take about a dozen men to turn the spit, not to mention all the fat dripping on the fire would likely cause a serious fire hazzard around the whole palace.. I supoose I could wallpaper the room with him, just depends if I can slice him thinly enough. On I wouldn’t Henry (paper) the front room with him I would Henry the toilet with him, seems an appropiate use for him, and I need something to write on when I am working out the answers of the latest Suduko puzzle in the Telegraph. It may even stop Dinosaur from writing graffiti on the walls when he goes in there, seriously some of it in there is postively Pompeiian.

Boleyn said
Although Olga could I tempt you into writing an article called “How to murder Henry 8th” (slowly and as painfully as possible)

I fear my imagination might run away with me Bo Perhaps the same treatment he gave to the Carthusian monks.

Thank you for sharing this Louise and for all your support, I really appreciate it

I don’t understand why Mantel treats her female characters that way. In regards to Jane Boleyn Hirst and Gregory were researching before 2006 – and like everyone else they were going with the traditional view of Jane. I mean even Ives accuses Jane of testifying, no one questioned it before Julia Fox did (that I am aware of). So I don’t accept Mantel’s excuse that introducing Lady Wingfield would have taken too much time, I finally read Wolf Hall while I was researching this and she was stitching Jane up from the very beginning. What is sad that she had the opportunity to do something new and she decided to go the usual ‘woman scorned’ rubbish. It is the most vile portrayal of Jane and George I have read so far.
And men may have viewed women as ‘frail’ but it doesn’t mean they viewed all women with absolute contempt.

Thank you Sharon.

there’s always one who spoils the fun with logic and reason and facts…

Good article Olga. I enjoyed reading it.

Olga said

I don’t understand why Mantel treats her female characters that way. In regards to Jane Boleyn Hirst and Gregory were researching before 2006 – and like everyone else they were going with the traditional view of Jane. I mean even Ives accuses Jane of testifying, no one questioned it before Julia Fox did (that I am aware of). So I don’t accept Mantel’s excuse that introducing Lady Wingfield would have taken too much time, I finally read Wolf Hall while I was researching this and she was stitching Jane up from the very beginning. What is sad that she had the opportunity to do something new and she decided to go the usual ‘woman scorned’ rubbish. It is the most vile portrayal of Jane and George I have read so far.
And men may have viewed women as ‘frail’ but it doesn’t mean they viewed all women with absolute contempt.

I really had a 180 degree turn wth regards to Jane Boleyn following Ms Fox’s book. I throughly believed the whole Jane as a wronged woman, a vengeful harpy who threw her husband and sister in law to the wolves in order to ….well whatever the novelist required for the plot to develope.

Mariette said

I enjoyed your recent bio of George, but was a bit surprised at the implication that Cromwell showed himself a coward while in the Tower over his plea to the king for mercy. Imo Cromwell knew he was ‘done for’: at this stage he didn’t know whether he would be hanged, drawn and quartered or burned alive. He was asking the king for a quick death, to provide for the welfare of his son, daughter-in-law, their children and his servants.

while I haven’t read the 2 Clare/Claire’s George book, I’ve always thought of the Cromwell letter as a typical Reformation plea for clemency with a side order of “look after the younglings”.

Cromwell had far too much nouse to plead his own cause..he knew that he was doomed but still threw his last dice to gain a more merciful death for himself.

Anyanka said

Mariette said

I enjoyed your recent bio of George, but was a bit surprised at the implication that Cromwell showed himself a coward while in the Tower over his plea to the king for mercy. Imo Cromwell knew he was ‘done for’: at this stage he didn’t know whether he would be hanged, drawn and quartered or burned alive. He was asking the king for a quick death, to provide for the welfare of his son, daughter-in-law, their children and his servants.

while I haven’t read the 2 Clare/Claire’s George book, I’ve always thought of the Cromwell letter as a typical Reformation plea for clemency with a side order of “look after the younglings”.

Cromwell had far too much nouse to plead his own cause..he knew that he was doomed but still threw his last dice to gain a more merciful death for himself.

Anyanka, That’s exactly how I see it.

Clare and Claire wrote on pp 278-279 of George’s bio: ‘Following the Boleyn’s deaths Cromwell had praised their sense wit and courage. Unfortunately, he was not able to emulate their courage or their dignity when faced with his own misfortunes.’

Mariette said

Anyanka said

Mariette said

Henry should have been kept in solitary confinement and fed nothing but brussels sprouts…

Oh…I say…a Sprout Diet is totally inhumane…

…and a side order of chestnuts slowly roasted over an open fire

My kind and generous off-spring would vary the all BS diet wth aubergne/eggplant and artichokes…but then they are budding Venegnce demons..

Mariette said
I’m glad that you found Schofield’s biography of Cromwell ‘outstanding’. Have you read David Loades’ recent (appalling) bio? I’m almost dreading Diarmaid MacCulloch’s upcoming bio…

Mariette! I haven’t seen you in ages. Yes I finally read Scofield’s bio, it was awesome. Actually I have to admit I really found him entertaining as well, I love a bit of sarcasm in my history books. I have Hutchinson and Loades here to read, but I have not heard good things yet.

Anyanka said
I really had a 180 degree turn wth regards to Jane Boleyn following Ms Fox’s book. I throughly believed the whole Jane as a wronged woman, a vengeful harpy who threw her husband and sister in law to the wolves in order to ….well whatever the novelist required for the plot to develope.

I would have thought the same of Jane if I hadn’t started reading history only in the last few years Anyanka, it was a few people here (probably you) that recommended I read Julia Fox’s book. Earlier books I read by Starkey, Ives or Fraser portrayed Jane in the traditional sense.

I know historians are trying to revise opinions of various historical figures these days – Anne Boleyn and Richard III are probably two of the only people that have been argued about for a long time (centuries really). But trying to give a more balanced view of Elizabeth Woodville or Margaret of Anjou is necessary. I don’t agree with Henry VIII needing revision.