While I was reading Tracy Borman's article about \”The Tudors\”, I read her rundown of Season 3 Episode 1, which is brilliant because it talks about the real events behind episode 1, and was interested to read her thoughts on Jane Seymour:-
\”The King was indeed besotted with his new wife but, in appearances at least, the real Jane Seymour fell rather short of the stunning actress who plays her. It was a source of some astonishment that this archetypal Plain Jane had caught the King’s eye in the first place. True, she had good breeding to recommend her, but she seemed to have little else.
A portrait painted of her in around 1536 (when this episode is based) shows her to have had a large, plump face with a double chin. Her eyes were small and beady, her lips thin and closely compressed, and she wore a cold, detached expression. One onlooker at court dismissed her as being ‘of middle stature and no great beauty’. Even the Imperial Ambassador Chapuys, who was predisposed to favour Jane because of her traditional Catholic beliefs, was at a loss to explain what the King saw in her. He could only conclude that she must have a fine ‘enigme’, meaning ‘riddle’ or ‘secret’, which in Tudor times referred to the female genitalia.\”
and:-
\”But Jane was not the saintly peacemaker that she is portrayed in this series (is it me, or does she bear an uncanny resemblance to Princess Diana?). She favoured Mary because it suited her own interests, and showed little interest in her husband’s younger daughter, Elizabeth, who suffered as a result. Even Jane’s supporters admitted that she was ‘proud and haughty’ – hardly the meek and submissive wife that she is portrayed as on screen.\”
Love the bit about the \”enigme\” – great double meaning, don't you love Chapuys sometimes!!
I still wonder what Henry saw in Jane, was it just the fact that he needed someone completely different to Anne? Was he just desperate for someone who would listen to him without answering back? It was obviously not her beauty.
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
8:25 pm
July 9, 2009
Jonathan Rhys Meyers said something to the effect that Henry no longer wanted a partner in crime (like Anne) but a wife to whom he could come home after a long day of torture and beheadings and be coddled by.
Henry truly seems to have been looking for his mother, and historians have found elements of her personality in all of the wives. I think he vacillated though about actual 'mothering' traits. Katherine of Aragon mothered him, but her replacement Anne Boleyn didn't take any of his shit. Then it swung the other way and he got the maternal Jane Seymour, followed by the decidedly un-motherly Katherine Howard (I'm not counting Anne of Cleves here because she wasn't really his choice). That's just my interpretation, anyway.
I guess it's good on Henry that he didn't marry for beauty with Jane, but he did supposedly make some comments about how he shouldn't have rushed into marriage because there were more beautiful women available. Hopefully Jane didn't have to hear such comments.
She really is quite enigmatic. It bothers me though that she has such a saintly reputation when she has to have been at least as conniving as Anne B unless she was a total moron and was duped into the queenship (yeah, right.). I think Henry didn't give her much thought at first, honestly. There was a faction pushing her forward and Henry wanted peace at court after the turbulent years of the Great Matter so he just gave them what they wanted and married Jane. He knew she would be a doormat, so he could still sleep with the beautiful women at court, effectively having his cake and eating it too. It was only after she accomplished her one mission in life and then passed on that she became enshrined in Henry's memory. He seemed to have been rather annoyed with her while she lived but he mourned her for years after she died.
Ainsi sera, groigne qui groigne.
12:20 am
June 20, 2009
I agree Melissa…
History has portrayed her as this meek, quiet woman who managed to nab Henry from the fiery Anne. She knew what she was doing. I don't really believe this innocence everyone seems to give her.
I believe Henry wanted a partner in crime as a mistress, but a \”mother\” figure for a wife. He never got over his mother's death, and that affected him for the rest of his life. He wanted someone to run to when he was done with his daily lashings of violence. Someone who wouldn't say anything or question him about it. Jane fit the bill. Jane knew that he was tiring of Anne, so she played the exact opposite of Anne.
Let not my enemies sit as my jury
And never forget the influence of the two Seymour boys in all this – Thomas and Edward. They were very ambitious, and would have advocated their sister for the prime job in the land with great skill as soon as an opportunity presented itself. Henry always seems to have been so weak and gullible when it came to those who had his ear. They all knew how to play upon him – like as Hamlet complains to those who tried to manipulate him – like a musician upon a pipe. Such a powerful man – and yet he often danced to the tune of others.
12:55 am
August 29, 2009
I think Jane was a clever woman under an appearance of sweetness. A woman that knew what she wanted and that also knew to follow wise advices. She knew how to stay in the winner side (she was a Catherine lady-in-waiting that entered to Anne's service), she knew how to handle the King before the marriage and supported Mary to gain favour of imperial party.
An empty headed woman couldn't have done all that, surely she was adviced, but she followed those advices.
Jane was lucky enough to give Henry a son. She died after giving him the heir and Henry could not get tired of her, she died just in time. For the King she was the best wife and her true love. And she is still by her side 500 ys later.
Lady said:
I think Jane was a clever woman under an appearance of sweetness. A woman that knew what she wanted and that also knew to follow wise advices. She knew how to stay in the winner side (she was a Catherine lady-in-waiting that entered to Anne's service), she knew how to handle the King before the marriage and supported Mary to gain favour of imperial party.
An empty headed woman couldn't have done all that, surely she was adviced, but she followed those advices.
Jane was lucky enough to give Henry a son. She died after giving him the heir and Henry could not get tired of her, she died just in time. For the King she was the best wife and her true love. And she is still by her side 500 ys later.
I love your description of Jane as clever under an appearance of sweetness. Although she is painted as this sweet, meek and mild woman who was an antedote to Anne's scheming and plotting, and hot temper etc. it's just not true. Not only do I not believe that Anne was scheming and cunning in the way that she is often portrayed, I think that Jane was far far worse than Anne. Anne kept her virtue because that's what she believed, Jane kept hers because she was copying Anne and was using it as bait. Anne followed her heart and what she believed, Jane saw a plan that worked and copied it.
As Melissa said, Henry did seem to be annoyed with Jane when she lived and also did say that he regretted the marriage, but all of a sudden when she died giving him a son she suddenly became promoted to best wife, true wife, true love. I would have been so cross with Henry if I'd been Catherine Parr when he got that family portrait painted and he put Jane in as Queen! What a nerve!
I agree with LadytoAnneBoleyn also that Henry did have some \”mother\” issues, probably stems from him being brought up by women as second son. And I also agree with Rochie, for such a powerful man he did let himself be played! I had a boss once who would never agree to new ideas put forwards by staff unless you \”drip fed\” them to him and eventually he'd think that they were his ideas and put them forward as his own!! We knew how to play him! Those who surrounded Henry knew how to play him to perfection.
So, was Jane evil presented as sugar and spice, or is that a bit harsh?!
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
11:19 pm
July 28, 2009
So, was Jane evil presented as sugar and spice, or is that a bit harsh?!
I dont think that description is harsh Claire, i think Jane knew how to play the innocent card while plotting her way at the same time. She saw the first two unions in action and knew well how to play on the king's likes and dislikes. Everyone i talk to seems to see her as a demure, sweet little creature but i have a hard time seeing her in that light considering she was grooming herself to take Anne's place before Anne was even accused. (although Anne kinda did that too, but i still LOVE HER!!! 🙂 ) She played innocent but she knew exactly what she was doing, and continued pushing her veiws throughout their marriage, though she did it more lightly than Anne had, and Henry did at times tell her to back off so to speak for she knew what happened to the \”other queen\”
*Autumn*Star*
le plus heurex
4:13 pm
February 10, 2010
I think the difference between Jane and Anne is that Anne genuinely believed that Henry's marriage to Catherine was in doubt. Catherine had already reached the menopause and, when you look at the example set by Anne of Brittany in France, might reasonably be expected to retire to a convent (although Salic law didn't apply in England). Had Catherine complied with Henry's wishes, she would have been allowed to keep her status as Dowager Princess of Wales.
In 1536 the situation was completely different. Anne had suffered miscarriages but was still capable of bearing children (unless she was Rhesus negative, which we'll never know. I'm no scientist but I wouldn't have thought the probability was very high as both her mother and sister had more than one living child). Having read Ives, Starkey and Weir it seems likely that it was Anne's opposition to sending the money from the dissolution of the monasteries to the king's coffers rather than putting it to charitable use that caused Cromwell to move against her. Henry was persuaded and then convinced himself of her guilt. But considering how important the sacrament was to the 16th century mind, I think Anne's declaration of innocence – publicly made (clever lady) – speaks the truth.
Therefore, Anne may have wished all Spaniards at the bottom of the sea when waiting for her crown but Jane calmly stepped over Anne's corpse on the way to hers. That's a lady who is either terrified, ruthlessly ambitious, completely in thrall to her advisors or hates Anne. Or it could be a combination of all four.
Where Jane does beat Anne is that, in Fraser's observation, she is inherently tactful. Take her choice of a panther as a heraldic symbol, it meant only small changes to rework Anne's leopard. Equally her badge of the phoenix enables her to have a bird, as her father did, but one with a different meaning to the proud peac*ck.
I hadn't thought of Henry having mother issues – I'd thought of him as wanting a wife who would be a lover, companion, someone who could be a queenly queen and not make scenes, and mother to his son. In other words, he was trying to have it all, which in the 16th century (not to mention the 17th and 18th centuries) was considered astonishing.
Louise
7:07 am
February 22, 2010
9:19 am
August 2, 2010
I agree with Lady: I think Jane Seymour was wily and power-hungry, under a meek, sweet facade. Her entire family was, after all, very ambitious: how could she, growing up as a Seymour, not be? Ignoring Elizabeth and only favoring Mary shows, in my opinion, that she only favored Mary because it was politically savvy, not because she was kind. I think she lured Henry away from Anne to become Queen. Interesting point, The Other Boleyn Boy, on 'justice.' My thought on that is, while what Anne did was wrong, Jane doing the same did not make it right. In fact, what Jane did was worse: she pretended to be sweet and demure, while at least Anne showed the world her true face! Plus, Anne did a lot of good as well as booting Catherine: she helped reform religion-wise and was kind and generous to the poor, not for her own gains like Jane.
"Grumble all you like, this is how it's going to be"
1:20 pm
February 22, 2010
1:59 pm
January 9, 2010
I think the fact that Jane stuck up for Mary does her great credit, especially when it was growing ever more obvious that Anne's fall was not going to automatically restore Marys rights like her supporters thought it would. To tackle Henry over his eldest daughters' status in mid-1536 you had to have some guts! I know Jane didn't make so much of a fuss over Elizabeth, but then I think Elizabeth was more protected by her age and infant status. Not much point in trying to get a three-year old to sign a document of submission!
Perhaps Jane was farsighted enough to know that good relations between father and eldest daughter would do both them and the country as a whole much good
5:53 pm
August 2, 2010
I understand your points, Other Boleyn Boy and Bella44, and true none of use will never know for sure. Still, I believe that Jane was really a hidden snake, or at least secretly ambitious. At least Anne showed true character and perseverence when she told Henry 'your mistress I will not be, your wife I cannot be'. Jane just copied her! But I understand your points of view, like I said. We will never truly know.
"Grumble all you like, this is how it's going to be"
7:10 pm
January 9, 2010
Jane was totally ambitious, I don't think there was anyone at the Tudor court who wasn't! I like what you said about Anne Boleynfan, in that Anne had strength of character right from the beginning, like she was refusing to play the meek and mild maiden card as opposed to Jane, I think, who played up that image. Part of Anne's tragedy is that she set a very dangerous precedent, demonstrating that an English born girl of relatively humble aristocratic birth could reach the absolute pinnacle of becoming Queen as opposed to before when Kings were expected to marry foreign princesses to cement alliances. It was a tactic that served both Anne and Jane well, though ironically in the end both were undone by their biology in their own ways.
If Jane had lived who knows what sort of Queen she would have become? More would have been written about her and we would perhaps have a far better understanding of her character.
The Other Boleyn Boy said:
it's strange the way Anne's actions can be justified because Catherine was 'past her prime', as though she were an old sack to be set aside! Reading Elizabeth Norton's book on Jane seems to set it out that what Jane did to Anne was merely considered 'justice'
At the end of the day, I actually don't think that either Anne or Jane need to justify their actions, it is Henry that did wrong, he was the married one. I don't think that Anne was dangled in front of Henry as bait, I think Henry noticed her and was attracted to her, whereas Jane was coached to attract the King and told how to behave and what to do, like refusing the purse he sent her. In my opinion Anne said “no” to the King because she was not willing to be his mistress and that was not a game or a plan it was something that she was not prepared to do, whereas I see Jane's actions as part of a plan cooked up by her brothers and Carew.
At the end of the day, these women did not have much of a choice. When the King wanted you then he was going to get you one way or another!
Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn
2:47 am
February 22, 2010
trouble is, that is then to remove all responsibility from Anne, especially – then she becomes a 'nothing' who just did want men wanted, so you can't then go and say, oh she was so this and that, because when you need an excuse for her frankly shocking attitude toward Mary and Catherine, oh well it was all Henry's fault really!! you can't have it both ways
7:07 am
August 2, 2010
I think that Anne showed the strength of her character from the first. Jane merely play-acted.
Claire – I agree with you, both Anne and Jane were not the married ones, though you could say they instigated it. I also agree that Anne said “no” because she didn't want to be Henry's mistress; she had watched her sister Mary have heartache and unhappiness, lose her reputation and be mocked as “the English Mare”, etc., and eventually be humiliated–all to be the ladylove of a king. Jane's actions, like you said, were a game, while Anne's only grew to be a game. Anne started out not wanting to be a mistress; Jane started out plotting to become Queen.
Other Boleyn Boy – I don't think we're removing all blame from Anne, but she did exactly what the King didn't want–she wouldn't let him make her his mistress! Actually, I think this shows a strength of character and will. Yes, she treated Mary and Catherine badly, but is this so different from what people do today? Eventually Anne was jealous, as are many men and women today. Besides, she and Catherine and Mary had many religious differences, and Catherine was dowdy and boring while Anne was young and active, and we already know Anne was vindictive. I'm not excusing Anne's actions toward them, but I think she was generally a good person and no one's perfect.
"Grumble all you like, this is how it's going to be"
9:00 am
August 2, 2010
Jane may not have been as “book-smart” as Anne but she did have enough “court-smart” to realize that the best way to successfully get Henry was to potray herself as the complete opposite of Anne, even down to the motto she adapted for herself.
That being said, I do wonder if there was a moment, however small, during Anne's trial and execution, if she felt any sense of fear or misgivings. She would have been aware of the tremendous pressure she was under to give Henry a living son and she woud have seen for herself the consequences of having Henry be displeased with his wife. I also wonder how she felt during her pregancy and if she worried about what could/would happen if she had a living daughter or a stillborn.
1:55 pm
February 24, 2010
I have stayed away from answering this question about Jane because I am just not sure what she was like or what she thought about becoming Henry's next Queen. Or for that matter what she thought about Anne's execution. But I do know Henry. Once that man made up his mind to have a new wife, there was no changing his mind. I sort of feel that Jane would not have had a choice where he was concerned. Plus, her family would have been pushing her toward the marriage. Carew apparently did groom her on how to behave, but that makes sense. She was entering the lion's den. She could not make the same mistakes Anne made. She could not push the king. If she was pushy by nature, she learned to stifle that part of herself for her own preservation. Then there was the burden of trying to give this king a son. A daughter would never do and she knew that for sure.
She is remarked upon as being sweet and demure. She was also said to be haughty. How one can be both, I don't know. We know in the beginning Chapuys did not like Jane. He said she was plain and haughty. Later he retracted the statement. Probably because she brought Mary back to court, and she seemed to have Catholic leanings. Yet, her brothers were reformers.
She was in Katherine's court and in Anne's so she certainly wasn't naive. She knew the ways of court, but I've never heard of her making any waves. Except she did wear that damn locket in front of Anne. She was certain to face Anne's wrath, but did it anyway. Did Henry or her brothers tell her to wear it? Or was she the chief strategist in that deal? We just don't know.
One more thing. She was kind of long in the tooth. 28 or 29 years old. And a King wanted her as his wife. C'mon how could she say no? Jane is my least favorite wife, but it may be because I don't know her and because she replaced a woman I hold in high regard. She walked over Anne's dead body to become Queen. Then again, maybe she was pulled over our dead Queen's body by Henry and her ambitious family.
6:14 pm
August 2, 2010
I see what you're saying, Sharon, but I think that with such an ambitious family, how could she not be ambitious at all? She didn't have to become Henry's Queen, not really; she could have become his mistress. Or she could have been loyal to Anne and soften Henry in regard to Anne, like Anne's cousin Madge Shelton did.
"Grumble all you like, this is how it's going to be"