Thinking outside the box for a mo, I wonder if historians have ever considered the possibility Jane Boleyn may have been homosexual or bisexual herself.  She outlived George by almost six years without remarrying.  She didn't have significant wealth or advantage, so a new marriage might have meant opportunity to better herself.  She remained unwed and childless for the remainder of her life.  Perhaps her interests ran toward women. 

It's bizarre to me Jane aided Catherine Howard with her Culpepper trysts.  Jane had a front row seat concerning how Henry repaid disloyalty in his household.  She had to know the risks involved.  Was she perhaps attracted to Catherine and acted out of affection?  Was she an adrenaline junkie? 

She was declared insane in the final months of her life, is it possible she was always mentally or emotionally unstable?  This might have made her susceptible to Cromwell's interrogations during Anne and George's downfall.

There, see …  I just outlined a new writing project for Phillippa Gregory.  

Louise said:

La Belle Creole said:

 

There, see …  I just outlined a new writing project for Phillippa Gregory.  

 

---

No, please!!!! She needs no encouragement.

Oh come on!  Unsympathetic, deranged lesbian characters sell books and films.

Louise said:

Regarding George's wife, there is very little evidence to suggest Jane gave evidence against the Boleyn's, other than saying that Anne had told her the King was impotent. Likewise there is no evidence about the state of the marriage of George and Jane. Most of what has been written about them is fiction. There is nothing to suggest that George hated his wife or that he wouldn't sleep with her. Again this comes straight from the pages of fiction. George had known Jane for years before they were married, and although it was an arranged marriage there is nothing to suggest it was enforced. George was an only, and much loved son. If he really hated Jane there were other eligible women at court he could have been married to. I find it difficult to believe Thomas would force his charismatic son to marry a woman he loathed. Perhaps it was, or became, a marriage of relative indifference but I have never found any evidence that it was a marriage of out and out dislike. The state papers are virtually entirely silent about Jane. Perhaps it was an unhappy marriage, but that is pure speculation. 

---

A few things I did not know about Jane:  Chapuys, who as always should be taken with a grain of salt, stated that “in October of 1534 Anne had involved her sister-in-law in a 'conspiracy' to get one of the king's mistresses replaced by Madge Shelton, the Queen's cousin.  But Henry found out, and Jane was dismissed from her post of lady-in-waiting and banished from court.”

The king is on Progress.  Mary is at Greenwich.   In October 1535 there was an incident with some women: “A vast crowd of women, wives of citizens and others, unknown to their husbands, presented themselves before her weeping and crying that she was Princess notwithstanding all that had been done.  Some of them were placed in the Tower, constantly persisting in their opinion.”  Jane was one of the women sent to the Tower along with Lady William Howard.  This was in Weir's book, “Lady in the Tower.”  Ref: LP Froude, Note D in Thomas (LP911)

I thought Jane was also responsible for giving testimony about the incest charge too?  Chapuys states that “it was George's wicked wife who informed on their “accursed secret” by letter.”  Anthony Anthony confirms “the wife of Lord Rochford was a particular instrument in the death of Queen Anne.” 

There were many people who hated Jane because she was married to a Boleyn and therefore, one of them.  It was easy to condemn her and sully her name.

Meg, Mary Boleyn was sent from court in disgrace for marrying without permission from the Queen.  She was not disinherited.  Anne sent her money through Cromwell.  Thomas left his estate to her.  He was going to leave the Irish estate to Elizabeth, but in the end he reconsidered.

Hi Louise.  Thanks. 

I found the story about Jane being at the demostration and in the Tower not only in Weir's book, but I also found it in Ive's book.  The statements accredited to Anthony and Chapuys were found in Denny's and Ive's books.  I tried to find statements that were in all three books because I am very familiar with the grain of salt theory.  Normally I only go to Ive's.  The other two were right next to his, so I took a look. 

I am going to order Fox's book today.

Louise said:

Hello Sharon,

Yes, her possible involvement in the demonstration is mentioned in a lot of books, but there is no conclusive evidence, because her name is only referred to in a margin note in a report. It's just that Weir treats it as uncontroversial fact, which isn't really right.

Regarding Jane's involvement in the incest allegation, Chapuys makes no mention of her. He only talks about her giving evidence that Anne had told her Henry was impotent. Weir says that Chapuys refers to Jane specifically regarding the incest allegation, and it is that which she's made up.

Other historians raise the suggestion that Jane may have been more to blame, but they don't make up evidence to prove it, which is why I am so anti Weir.  The Anthony records have been lost, but he is quoted in Froude. Again, Fox deals very well with this in her biography of Jane.  I have always wondered whether it was generally known that Jane gave evidence i.e. about Anne speaking to her of Henry's impotency, and that the nature of that evidence became twisted over time, sort of like Chinese whispers, so that in the end she was blamed for evidence she never actually gave.

I'm really pleased you're getting Fox's book. It has been criticised for being more about Anne than Jane, and for saying such things as, 'Jane was probably there. I agree with a lot of that, but her dealing with Jane's involvement in the Boleyn's trials is excellent.

 Hi Louise, If there is no evidence proving she was in the Tower in '35, I wish authors would stop repeating that part of the story…grrrrrr.  Ives doesn't discount her being there.  He says Jane was arrested and in the Tower with Lady William Howard. 

There are so many holes in this trial.  So much has been lost.  I also read in one of these books, I think Denny's, that Jane was probably pressured by Cromwell so much she might have said something that was twisted by Cromwell.  Now that I can believe.

I agree about Weir.  And I should also add that I rarely believe anything Chapuys says. I try not to quote him either.  I lost it for a bit, I guess. 

I ordered Fox's book this morning.

Thanks for your help.  Cleared up some things for me.

Even though there is much debate over Philippa Gregory's The Other Boleyn Girl at least it has thrust Mary into the spotlight, but I feel George is now the neglected Boleyn. I am really wishing now that someone wrote a book about George Boleyn. There isn't a book coming out about him is there? I must have dreamt it cause I couldn't find anything today while searching for it.

Louise, What the heck happened to the tribute you wrote to George?  I saw it the other day, and thought I'd come back to it today.  It's gone.  I think you should post it again.

Louise said:

I first posted this a few days ago, but when I read over it I understood that most people would think it's over sentimental rubbish, so I deleted it. Then I had a re-think. Yes, I know it is over sentimental, but it's the way I feel, so I'm going to have the strength of my convictions, not be a coward, and re-post it (he he). Anyway, if I couldn't reach back in time this is what I would say to George Boleyn:-    

 

“16th May

Dear George,

I know what happened yesterday; that you were found guilty of a crime which causes you such shame, but I hope I can reach across nearly five-hundred years of history and tell you that we all know you, Anne and your friends are innocent.

It must be hard for you to believe, as you sit and await death, but your family and everyone who knows the truth are so proud of your strength and courage, and Anne's. In recent years feminist writers, people who want to make a name for themselves and purveyors of fiction and tried to demonise you and Anne, and damage your reputations. Please believe me that their baseless accusations will dissolve into mediocrity long before your memories fade.

I heard about your trial, and that your performance was a marvel to see. They found you guilty anyway, but knowing you, I suspect your destruction of the prosecution case gave you comfort.

I know you are not perfect. You share Anne's pride, and I know you haven't always been faithful to your wife, but you don't deserve this, and I don't think there are many people even in your lifetime that believe you do.

I also know you are anxious about the people who you owe money to, and more so for those who owe you money and will be forced to repay those debts to the King when you die. Try not to worry too much. You could never have foreseen what was going to happen to you. It's not your fault, but your concern for your friends does you credit. You may have lived a life of selfish hedonism but you tried to make good in the end and I admire you for that, particularly when you are about to die a fearful death. To put your mind at rest, it only takes the executioner one blow of the axe. There was a later rumour that it took three, but no eye-witness account supports this. You have a quick death.

I know that you must be terrified as you listen to the sounds of your scaffold being built, but please understand, the crowd do not jeer you or spit at you. They will be strangely quiet during your speech. Is it out of respect? I would like to think so. Your speech is brilliant by the way, but then you know that don't you? It will be recorded around Europe, and will be remembered throughout history. I know that knowledge will also give you comfort.

Don't worry too much about Anne. She also dies with courage and dignity, and her death is quick. She will be remembered as long a history survives. I know you worry about being remembered only for the manner of your death, because your scaffold speech betrays that fear. You want some recognition don't you? I admit that there are some people who don't care about you, and even some who believe you deserved your death because of the falsehoods written about you. But there are a growing number of people who care about the truth, including the truth about you.

It's getting closer and I can see the beginnings of sunrise. I hope you can hold on to everything I've said and die with some semblance of peace. You are not dying with more shame and dishonour than has ever been heard of before. Your memory will not be tainted by your conviction as long as there are people who care.

You will be remembered.”  

 

I know it's mushy, but there you are!

Aww Louise you're gonna make me cry!

Good for you for re-posting!

Louise,

This is a wonderful letter. It spoke from the heart. If people think it's overly sentimental, then they can move on. I would never consider this rubbish. For those that do, too bad. George Boleyn is someone that is often overlooked in history, or defamed for his supposed guilt and association. I never believed him to be anything but innocent, and his true life deserves to be told. There are many things in this letter that George would have wanted to know before his death. But, with his and Anne's strong faith, they knew they'd be reunited in heaven. There they could find peace and happiness.

I am glad that you re-posted. It speaks to your courageous nature. I am speaking from experience here. I know how fearful it is to have your writing read by other people and open to criticism. Writing is a personal, intimate thing to do, and we never want something so important to be devalued. For me, your letter is kind and insightful. It speaks to how you feel, and there is nothing more powerful than your heart's reactions.

You're right, George (and all the others) will be remembered. Keep carrying their torch and never let it burn out.

Best!