Jane Boleyn: The True Story of the Infamous Lady Rochford (56 page)

CHAPTER
25

Henry’s aside to Chapuys on the two ladies he had seen is taken from
LP,
XI, no. 8. The ambassador’s belief that Queen Jane would not be crowned unless she became pregnant is from
CSPSp,
V.ii, no. 103. Mary’s letters to her father in which she expresses her prayers that he should have issue are from
LP,
X, nos. 1083, 1109, 1133, 1203. The Trinity Sunday Te Deum and celebrations are described by Wriothesley (1875–77, I, p. 64); the gun salute at Calais is from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 11). Mary’s gifts of cucumbers to the queen are listed in Madden (1831, p. 34). Henry’s comment on the obedience due to princes is from
LP,
XI, no. 780. The information on Hampton Court is taken from Thurley (1993, pp. 89, 131, 141) and Loach (1999, p. 4). The joy and thanksgiving with which the news of Edward’s birth was greeted is from
LP,
XII.ii, nos. 889, 905, 1053; Wriothesley (1875–77, I, pp. 66–67). My account of Edward’s christening relies heavily on the handwritten recollection of Robert Boys, a young man at the time who later went on to be in charge of providing provender for Elizabeth I’s horses. His version is from HEH, MS HM 41955, fols. 127–29. I also used
LP,
XII.ii, nos. 905, 911, 922, 923; Loach (1999, pp. 5–6); and Wriothesley (1875–77, I, pp. 66–67). Cromwell’s new posts are from
LP,
XI, no. 202 (3) and
LP,
XII.ii, no. 445.

CHAPTER
26

Edward Seymour’s elevation to the peerage and the knighting of Thomas Seymour are taken from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 939. Anne Basset’s new dress is from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 923. For the death of Queen Jane and the various reactions to it, I have relied on
LP,
XII.ii, nos. 968, 970, 971, 972, 1020, 1084. Cromwell’s suggestion that the queen’s death was caused by the negligence of her ladies is from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 1004, but the most commonly held view is that she died from puerperal fever. However, the retention of sections of the placenta as the possible cause of death has been suggested by Loach (1999, p. 7). The reference to Queen Jane’s gift to Jane Rochford is taken from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 973. The preliminary enquiries made by Norfolk and Paulet into the funeral ceremonies for Elizabeth of York are from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 1012. A basic calendared description of Queen Jane’s funeral may be obtained from
LP,
XII.ii, no. 1060; see also Wriothesley (1875–77, I, pp. 71–72). I based my description on the fuller handwritten version in BL, Additional MS 71009, fols. 37–44f.v. The attempts by Norfolk and Cromwell to persuade the king to consider remarriage are from
LP,
XII.ii, nos. 1004, 1030.

CHAPTER
27

Lady Bryan’s letter to Henry is taken from
LP,
XIV.ii, appendix, no. 9; see also Loach (1999, pp. 8–9). Descriptions of Elizabeth Boleyn’s death and funeral are from
LP,
XIII.i, nos. 696, 717;
Lisle Letters
(1981, V, nos. 1137, 1139). Information on Sir John Baldwin’s background relies on Bindoff (1982, I, pp. 372–73). Details relating to Thomas Boleyn’s death are from NA, C 1/1110/65–69;
LP,
XIV.i, no. 511;
LP,
XIV.ii, no. 781 (p. 309 at fol. 71). As an example of Cromwell’s willingness to help the widows and orphans of those executed, I chose
LP,
XIII.i, no. 1. Lord Morley’s purchase of Markhall from Thomas Shaa is from NA, C 54/420. His distraction over Lady Edgecombe’s jointure is from CRO, MS ME/829 (dated July 31, 1538). The reference to Margaret Boleyn’s precarious state of mind comes from her inquisition post mortem in Cambridgeshire: NA, E 150/87/6 (31 Henry VIII). The piecing together of the intricacies of Jane’s jointure and marriage settlement requires patience and considerable detective work as the full details, unfortunately, are not neatly contained in one document. The license to alienate Aylesbury and Bierton is from NA, C 66/680;
LP,
XIII.ii, no. 734(24). The information concerning the series of legal recoveries by way of conveyances for the cluster of manors in Norfolk and Cambridgeshire, and the manors of Aylesbury and Bierton in Buckinghamshire, is from NA, IND 1/17181, fols. 117–17f.v., CP 40/1099, mm. 317, 411 (Norfolk and Cambridgeshire); NA, IND 1/17218 (index to feet of fines for Buckinghamshire, Hilary term, 30 Henry VIII), CP 25/2/3/16/Henry VIII Hil [
sic
] (manors of Aylesbury and Bierton, document annotated “Buk” 55); WRO, microfilm 705:349/12946/498360, 705:349/12946/498361, 705:349/12946/499489, 705:349/12946/498729, 705:349/12946/499490, 705:349/12946/498711, 705:349/12946/499476, 705:349/12946/499484, 705:349/12946/498713. Other information is from Cranwell’s letter to Cromwell:
LP,
XIV.i, no. 854. Jane’s final jointure settlement is worked out from WRO, microfilm 705: 349/12946/498729; HLRO, MS PO/1/1539 (Original Acts, 31 Henry VIII, c.20); NA, C 65/147;
LP,
XIV.i, nos. 867, 1171; NA, E 315/233, fol. 338 (grant of the manors of Utlecote and Loxley);
Journals of the House of Lords
(1767–1846, I, p. 112). The two complementary indentures between Henry VIII, Mary Carey and her husband, William Stafford, and between Henry VIII and Sir James Boleyn are taken from C 54/418, entries numbered 14 and 18, belonging to March 22, 1539. As the result of a clerical error, entry no. 18 is misdated to the regnal year “31 Henry VIII” instead of “30 Henry VIII.” However, its position on the roll makes clear this is a slip, and the entry belongs to 30 Henry VIII.

CHAPTER
28

Marillac’s report on Henry’s demeanor is taken from
LP,
XIV.i, no. 1092. Charles’s comment on his leave-taking from Francis is
CSPSp,
V.ii, no. 102. For information on George Rochford’s involvement with the Schmalkaldic League, see McEntegart (2002, pp. 27–29). Of the many references to the so-called Exeter or Pole conspiracy, I have chosen to use
LP,
XIII.ii, nos. 695, 702, 765, 955, 979, 986. The appearance and personal qualities of Anne of Cleves are from
LP,
XIV.i, no. 552;
LP,
XIV.ii, no. 719. I have also relied on Starkey (2004, pp. 618–22) and Warnicke (2000, pp. 77, 88–93). The references to Anne’s ladies are from
LP,
XIV.ii, nos. 572, 719;
LP,
XV, nos. 21, 776. The extracts from Cromwell’s “Remembrances” are from
LP,
XIV.ii, no. 573. A succinct, but highly readable, account of Henry’s first meeting with Anne is given by Starkey (2004, pp. 627–29). A similar account, but one that also analyzes the protocol required for the meeting of a foreign bride, is found in Warnicke (2000, pp. 130–37). Another version can be found in Wriothesley (1875–77, I, pp. 109–10). The procession after the marriage is from Wriothesley I, p. 111, the voyage from Greenwich to Westminster is from I, p. 112, the May Day jousts are from Wriothesley I, pp. 117–18. The most usual interpretation of Cromwell’s fall bases it on factional struggles. This is very clearly described in
ODNB,
under the heading “Cromwell, Thomas.” Alternative explanations are from Warnicke (2000, pp. 187–228) and Bernard (2005, pp. 556–79). The extracts from Cranmer’s letters, including those from his letter to Henry VIII, are from Cox (1846, pp. 399–401). Cromwell’s plea for mercy is from
LP,
XV, no. 776. Of the plethora of references to Henry’s distaste for Anne and its consequences, including the divorce proceedings and Anne’s response, I have relied on
LP,
XV, nos. 776, 822, 823, 845, 850, 861, 872, 899, 925. Covos’s comment on the divorce is from
CSPSp,
VI.i, no. 115. However, I also relied heavily on the analysis in Starkey (2004, pp. 632–35) for details on the lack of consummation, the ladies’ evidence, and pp. 639–43 for the divorce proceedings. See also Warnicke (2000, pp. 162–65, 204–05) for opinion concerning nonconsummation and further discussion of Henry’s impotence. Warnicke distrusts the evidence of Jane and the other ladies because of Anne’s language difficulties (pp. 233–35). It is indeed true that the councilors specifically mention taking an interpreter with them when visiting Anne (
LP,
XV, no. 845) but that may have been for the avoidance of error in the future. This was, after all, a highly complex legal matter with potentially massive international implications. There are no objections to the usual interpretation raised by Starkey (2004, pp. 633–35) or Bernard (2005, p. 549), a rare point of agreement between these historians. Indeed, Bernard points out that if Henry wanted to suggest that Anne was no virgin before she came to England, the ladies’ testimony points to the opposite, so there would be no reason for the government to fabricate it, although the women do, of course, confirm Henry’s statement that he did not have sexual relations with Anne himself. In the absence of further evidence, it is impossible to be certain about how much knowledge of English Anne had picked up in the six months or so since her arrival, but since the predominant language spoken around her would have been English, she must have absorbed at least the rudiments. Anne still had a handful of German attendants, including the influential Mrs. Loew, so it is possible that there could have been some simultaneous translation going on as well. Whatever the truth of the episode, Jane Rochford’s testimony places her very much on the side of the king, the very place where she has to be if she is to remain at court and that is what is crucial to her story.

CHAPTER
29

A basic biography of Catherine Howard can be found in
ODNB.
For a fuller picture, which also sets her within the context of her world, see Smith (1961). The most recent assessment is Starkey (2004, pp. 644–84). An excellent account of Cromwell’s final speech and his unpleasant death is found in Hall (1904, II, pp. 306–7). The council’s request to Henry to marry Catherine, with his comment on her as a “jewel for womanhood,” is from
LP,
XVI, no. 1334. Dorothy Josselyn’s opinion of Catherine is from
LP, Addenda
I.ii, no. 1513. Mary’s disagreement with her is from Chapuys in
LP,
XVI, no. 314. He also reports Mary’s present to Catherine and the visit of Anne of Cleves:
LP,
XVI, no. 436. Catherine’s agreement to Mary’s residence at court is from
LP,
XVI, no. 835. Marillac’s account of Henry’s devotion to Catherine is from
LP,
XVI, no. 12, which is also the source for the reintroduction of French fashions. Information on some of Henry’s gifts to Catherine is from
LP,
XVI, no. 1389. Marillac’s report of rumors concerning her pregnancy and possible coronation is from
LP,
XVI, no. 712. The abstracts of Jane’s possessions from
LP,
XVI, no. 1340, and
LP,
XVII, no. 267, p. 147, are too brief. I have used the fuller, handwritten lists from NA, SP 1/167, fols. 163–64 (begins at stamped fol. 147) and E 315/160, fols. 104f.r.–v., 106. Opinions of Henry’s health are from
LP,
XIII.i, no. 995;
LP,
XVI, no. 589. The new building at Chenies was discovered by excavations at the site in 2004. The fact that Henry was accommodated in a “lower chamber” together with the state bed specially prepared for him, which would have had to be constructed within the room as it was far too big, heavy, and cumbersome to be moved, is from Sir John Russell’s will: NA, PROB 11/69. Henry’s method of hunting is from
LP,
XVI, no. 1089. For my account of Henry’s size and ailments, I relied on Starkey (1991b, pp. 125, 144–45). See also Chamberlin (1932, pp. 278–82). The river pageant is from
CSPSp,
VI.i, no. 155, and
LP,
XVI, no. 650. Information on the progress is from
LP,
XVI, nos. 1011, 1088, 1089. Chapuys is the main source for Catherine’s fears of a possible reconciliation with Anne of Cleves and rumored divorce plans:
CSPSp,
VI.i, no. 163, and
LP,
XVI, no. 1328. Henry’s joy at his marriage is from
LP,
XVI, no. 1334, and my account of his early reactions to news of Catherine’s betrayal is taken from
LP,
XVI, nos. 1328, 1332, 1334.

CHAPTER
30

Why Jane decided to support Catherine in her doomed affair with Culpepper is crucial to her story and to an understanding of her life. I cannot agree with Warnicke’s suggestion (
ODNB,
under the heading “Howard, Catherine”) that Jane did so because she was “financially straitened.” Since she had just obtained her jointure settlement and was richer than ever before in her own right, Jane did not need to endanger her life for money. In any case, although Henry was generous to his young wife, it is hard to believe that constant payments to Jane would have gone unnoticed for long. Starkey interprets Jane as comparable to Juliet’s Nurse, indulging and pandering to her charge: Starkey (2004, pp. 673–74). While Jane and Catherine do appear to have rubbed along happily together, as the queen’s reliance on her proves, Jane’s earlier experiences with Anne’s fall would surely have deterred altruism that came accompanied by such a degree of risk. I think Jane had come through too hard a school to deliberately jeopardize her own position even if she did feel some sympathy for the young queen. Lacey Baldwin Smith suggests that since Jane “went mad under the strain of disclosure and ceaseless interrogation,” it might be “charitable to believe that she was insane from the start”: Smith (1961, p. 156). Apart from the obvious nonsequitur, this does not fit with the considerable acumen Jane had displayed in obtaining her jointure settlement. There is no hint in the sources of any unbalanced behavior until she was sent to the Tower. The Culpepper affair lasted from April 1541 until the exposure of Catherine’s early conduct in November 1541. If Jane was “insane” for six months, it seems odd that there is no mention of it. Her confession (see notes to chap. 31 in this volume) is completely lucid. I think the most plausible explanation for Jane’s foolish behavior is simply that she became involved because Catherine gave her a direct order. She was the queen’s pawn, rather than the other way around. Then, once embroiled, and with no male protector in whom she could confide and on whom she could rely, her dangerous situation spiraled out of control.