There is no evidence to suggest that Jane was a lying, possessive or jealous person. Claire has written a number of articles about her which are worth reading in order to get a better understanding of her. You mention her actions in history, which I assume you mean she gave evidence of incest against Anne and George. As you will see from Claire’s articles there is no contemporaneous evidence to suggest that Jane provided evidence against them other than to say that Anne had told her Henry had sexual problems.
I think she has been unfairly demonised throughout history. Jane Fox’s book on Jane Boleyn is also definitely worth a read.

Jane doesn’t deserve the reputation she has received. As Louise and Boleyn have said there is no evidence of her being a horrible person. She served 5 queens. After the death of her husband and sister in law she went on to serve Jane, AOC and finally KH. If she had been known as a gossipy, evil, jealous person who was responsible for her family’s deaths, she would not have served the next three queens. Henry would never have allowed it. Nor, I suspect would the queens.
We have no idea what the relationship was with her husband. For all we know, they may have been quite happy together. There is certainly nothing that proves different. She must have been a confidant of Anne’s if Anne confided to her about the king’s impotence. Anne seemed to trust Jane. At one point, at Anne’s request, Jane tried to get rid of a mistress of the king and she was banned from court for a while by Henry. She was allowed back at court soon after. There is no evidence that Jane was a shrew who was jealous of Anne either. It wasn’t Jane who said Anne and George were together alone. It was Lady Worcester. That seems to get lost in the telling.
Julia Fox’s book, Jane Boleyn, is a good read, and I highly recommend it.

krsskmm202 said

It seems that in every piece of Literature that Jane Parker–George Boleyn’s wife–was a horrible, sneaky person who deserved what she got. She is depicted as a lying, jealous, and possessive woman that definitely got her dues in the end. I don’t doubt those things, because you could see her actions in history.

But what do you think? Is she someone to sympathize with or just as the description above?

Literature is designed to entertain not educate…

I had a very close friend I used to go shopping with..My description would be went to Shop X , saw suitable dress in colour I liked….tried it on, nice length, didn’t show things I wanted covered, colour suited me..bought dress..went to next shop.
My friend could spin a whole world out of that experience .. she should have been an author because she could describe the inside of the shop, the dress, how I looked….

My account would be 100% fact..hers would be 5% fact and 95% her input good and bad.

We know so very little about Jane Boleyn aside from how she was shown by latter commentators. Her contemporaires had very little to say about her.

The few actual facts we know is that
1)she was married to George Boleyn sometime in late 1524 or sometime in 1525
2)served the first 5 queens of Henry VIII
3)was involved in the attempted removal of a lady from Anne’s train which back-fired and Jane was exiled instead
4) Anne confided in Jane about Henry’s…little marital problem which she may or may not have told her husband about.
5) she was interrigated by Cromwell but he didn’t provide any evuidence aprt from HLMP against George possibly from Jane.
6) She got an Act of Parliment passed guarenteeing her jointure from Thomas Boleyn in 1537
7) she aided Kathryn Howard in her attempt to have an affair with Thomas Cromwell
8) she was treied but sufferd a mental breakdown
9) was exxecuted as a traitor in Feb 1542
10) her reputation started to be smeared by John Foxe in the reign of Elizabeth I.

Julia Fox’s book Jane Boleyn, the True Story of the Infamous Lady Rochford is a very good look at both Jane’s life and degradation of her reputation as well as a look at how Tudor noble-women were treated with respect to thier ambissions and chances of a life both in the career court or at the family home.

I just read about that in Elizabeth Norton’s new book Louise. It made me very sad to tell you the truth, it’s the first time I have seen it as well.

The problem is before Julia Fox’s book was published no-one had bothered to take much of a look at Jane, so most historians were going along with the same old story. Six years isn’t enough to undo the damage of five centuries unfortunately.

Boleyn said

That’s very true Olga, it is said that if you tell a lie long enough and loud enough you will end up believing it is true. It strikes me at least enough Lies have been told about poor jane that people have believed that she was capable of anything, even giving Cromwell the evidence to kill her Husband. Nah Jane didn’t do anything of the sort in fact, Jane was probably laying bricks, she could have built a house for herself with them, wondering if Cromwell make up a story about how Jane had been involved with Anne’s affairs, and would get her chopped up too.

THe whole JAne telling tales started as a foot note in Foxe’s Acts in 1576…40 years post George and over 35 years post Jane’s excution*.,

* Julie Fox again..

As far as I’m concerned and having believed Jane Boleyn was a total ichy B with a grudge for many years ..Jane was more involved with keeping Anne as queen due to family loyality rather than throwing Anne and George to the ravening beasts .

Jane took the rap for trying to remove a rival from Anne’s household.

Jane was likely to have told Cromwell about Henry’s little marital problem which Anne had confided in Jane which Jane had then mentioned to George..cos good gossip is hard to remain a secret. And Jane didn’t totally understand the depths Cromwell was prepared to plumb to remove Anne and her faction..

Anyanka said

Boleyn said

That’s very true Olga, it is said that if you tell a lie long enough and loud enough you will end up believing it is true. It strikes me at least enough Lies have been told about poor jane that people have believed that she was capable of anything, even giving Cromwell the evidence to kill her Husband. Nah Jane didn’t do anything of the sort in fact, Jane was probably laying bricks, she could have built a house for herself with them, wondering if Cromwell make up a story about how Jane had been involved with Anne’s affairs, and would get her chopped up too.

THe whole JAne telling tales started as a foot note in Foxe’s Acts in 1576…40 years post George and over 35 years post Jane’s excution*.,

* Julie Fox again..

As far as I’m concerned and having believed Jane Boleyn was a total ichy B with a grudge for many years ..Jane was more involved with keeping Anne as queen due to family loyality rather than throwing Anne and George to the ravening beasts .

Jane took the rap for trying to remove a rival from Anne’s household.

Jane was likely to have told Cromwell about Henry’s little marital problem which Anne had confided in Jane which Jane had then mentioned to George..cos good gossip is hard to remain a secret. And Jane didn’t totally understand the depths Cromwell was prepared to plumb to remove Anne and her faction..

Thank you Anyanka. It does in some way confirm my theory that, Cromwell twisted an innocent enough sounding comment of Jane’s into something more sordid. I.e “George is never at home.” which Cromwell twisted into “George is never at home, because he is always in bed with his sister.” Because of the feelings within the court at that time, people in mourning for K.O.A, Anne’s recent miscarriage, and hated for Anne which had probably been intensified due to K.O.A’s death anything anyone said however innocent about Anne would have been into something sordid. Another reason to why I doubt the statement made by the Countess of Worcester. Tempers were high at that point in court and anything said or done however innocent could have resulted in anyone being imprisoned and/or executed.
Anne was blamed for a lot of things and I believe at one point she was suspected of poisoning K.O.A so that when her child was born in 1536, the catholic faction, after face ache was pushing up the daisies could turn around and say her child was a bastard because it had been born whilst Face ache’s true and legal wife was still alive. One really does wonder what would have happened if K.O.A and Anne and her new child was alive when Face ache kicked the bucket. It would have been the War of the Roses all over again, although in this case it would have been the war of the Falcon and the Pomegrante.
I think Cromwell was perhaps feeling a little bit guilty about using Jane in such a way and wanted to make sure that she wasn’t completely destitute, after all the Boleyn’s did in a small way play a part in getting Cromwell a place in Face ache’s court.
Is it any wonder that poor Jane lost her wits, at the downfall of K.H, the poor woman must have been terrified.
A little bit of trivia for you it was said that on the day of Anne’s miscarriage and again of the day of her death, that the candles around K.O.A tomb flared up and burned brightly for some minutes.

Hi Mrs. Fiennes,
I agree with you on every point except the one of Jane being in Cromwell’s pay. There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that she was a spy for Cromwell or anyone else. When she came back to court after Anne and George were killed, she had already received her jointure from Thomas Boleyn. This left her pretty well off. She could have, and probably should have, retired to the country on the funds she received in her settlement. She would have been better off, but she had been at court most of her life. That was what she knew best, so she went back to court. She became the Lady of the bedchamber, and she was taken into Katherine’s confidence. I don’t know whether she could have said no to the queen. I sort of doubt it, but she must have been aware of the danger she was putting herself in by helping her. I just don’t think she knew how to extricate herself from the position the queen had put her in.

Mary Boleyn also wrote to him asking him to intercede with her family on her behalf after she married Stafford, she had no special place at court and no particular relationship with the man. Everyone wrote to Cromwell, it doesn’t really mean anything in particular, he was Henry’s right-hand man. Sharon is right, Jane did not need anyone to pay her. She had her jointure and was housed and fed at court.

Thomas Boleyn was also back at court within the year. Cromwell probably saw it as prudent not to punish the remaining Boleyns further or he would have had to drag them all into the mess.
Cromwell would have had enough of his own men in place to bother with the likes of the impoverished widow of a traitor being a spy in the bedchamber. Not to mention I am quite sure Jane began in a lowlier position and did not have close access to Jane Seymour anyway. Cromwell may have actually been doing her a kindness. You don’t need to wonder why he may have felt slightly compelled to help a woman whose life he had helped destroy. But never point the finger at the scapegoats. Henry is always to blame, and left everyone else to clear up his mess.

Jane the spy is a popular fictional device, although normally she’s spying for the Duke of Norfolk.
By the way, I came across an escape goat once. It played havack with my wing mirror!