Question from Mary R - Thomas Boleyn and Anne and George's trials
Did Thomas Boleyn actually sit in judgment of his own children (Anne & George's [supposed] incestuous affair) and find them guilty? I have read in a couple of novels that he did, but is there any documentation to support this?
13 comments:
Anonymous
said...
According to his wikipedia page, it was Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, who presided over the trials, not Thomas Boleyn:
Perhaps "sat in judgment" was a poor choice of words on my part. What I wanted to know was whether or not Thomas Boleyn was among those peers who found Anne and George guilty:)
Esther, thank you for bearing with me:) I checked out the Anne Boleyn files website that you recommended. Talk about a stacked jury!
What a weasel Thomas Boleyn was, too. By finding Norris, Weston, Smeaton etc. guilty, he was, in effect, signing the death warrants of his own children. What a contrast, too, to Katharine of Aragon, and even Anne Boleyn, who protected the interests of their children above even their own lives.
Says something about the female of the species, doesn't it?
I'm curious as what you are mean by the phrase "Katharine of Aragon, and EVEN Anne Boleyn"? It seems to imply that Anne Boleyn's character was lesser as compared to Katherine's.
Anne's treatment of Henry's daughter Mary did not reflect well on her. She did her best to keep Henry and Mary apart, and completely succeeded in separating Mary from her mother. I don't think I'm alone in believing that Anne would have been more than happy to be rid of Mary altogether. I really don't see Anne as a compassionate woman or as a woman of sterling character.
Would Katherine have behaved differently had the situations been reversed? Perhaps not.
No. Thomas Boleyn was not one of the jury at his children trial. However, he would have been. according to Alison Weir ( "The Lady in the tower) he was suppose to be jury #27. However he was dismiss by Thomas Howard ,3rd Duke of Norfolk.
Accordingto some historian, Thomas Boleyn did serve as jury in the case of the men convicted along with Anne & George.
Would Katherine have behaved differently had the situations been reversed? Perhaps not.
I disagree. Queen Katherine had to put up with Henry VIII bastard child Henry Fitzroy,1st Duke of Richmon,and she never said a bad thing about him. Also while in the mist of Henry VIII 's fascination with Anne, when he was seeking to put Katherine aside, Queen Katherine refuse to let anyone else speak ill of Anne in her present. However not because she liked Anna, or anything like that, but because she knew one day Anna would be in the same situation she was in.....and she was right LOL! But according to most historian Queen Katherine was way to pious to treat anyone in the manner that Anna did.
I also do not think Thomas Boleyn was a weasel for finding the guys guilty. I think he had no choice but to find them guilty. If he had found them innocent. That would only be one vote for innocent, which could have cause problem for the rest of his remaining family. After all he still had a sick wife,and a daughter to think about. So he had no choice in the matter. It was a situation that he couldn't get out of.
Katharine of Aragon did put up with quite a lot, such as sitting through the ceremony in which Henry created his illegitimate son Duke of Richmond. I think, though that K of A was a woman who chose her battles wisely. I doubt she would have been as complacent if Henry had made his son by Bessie Blount legitimate. Mary was still heiress to the throne whether Henry Fitzroy became a Duke or not.
Katharine, daughter of Isabella, was definitely a woman capable of putting up a fight if necessary. She certainly proved that.
Anne's position was a bit different. If Henry had died in 1534, Elizabeth's position would have been precarious to say the least.
It is hard to say what a person who died almost 500 years ago would have done in this, that or the other situation;) Take the "saintly " Thomas More (author of "Utopia") for example. He would not take the oath of succession to save his own life because to do so would have violated his principles. He was, by all reports, one of the kindest fathers in England and one of the most devoted husbands. Yet, he took part in the torturing of heretics in the Tower of London. Not what you would expect of such a man!
I still think Thomas Boleyn was a weasel. It is unlikely that Henry would have taken vengeance on Mary Boleyn if Thomas Boleyn were to have voted "not guilty" at the trials of Norris, Smeaton, etc. Remember, Mary's children were most likely his children, too:) I think Thomas Boleyn's main concern was for Thomas Boleyn.
"I still think Thomas Boleyn was a weasel. It is unlikely that Henry would have taken vengeance on Mary Boleyn if Thomas Boleyn were to have voted "not guilty" at the trials of Norris, Smeaton, etc. Remember, Mary's children were most likely his children, too:)"
Do you mean Anne Boleyn? Or are you now talking about Mary Boleyn Carey?
I know of no evidence that Henry VIII ever took vengeance on Mary Boleyn Carey or her children. To what are you referring?
kb,I was responding to Luv's comment which was posted right before my last comment on this subject. She argued that Thomas Boleyn might have found Smeaton, Norris & company guilty (of adultery with Anne Boleyn) in order to save his remaining family (primarily Mary Boleyn Carey) from persecution.
While I agree with her that Thomas Boleyn's lone "not guilty" vote would not have saved Anne or George Boleyn, I don't agree that Thomas Boleyn was protecting Mary Boleyn Carey.
Thank you to everyone who answered this post. I appreciate the information provided and the lively debate! Thank you again, Lara, for providing us with this wonderful site.
13 comments:
According to his wikipedia page, it was Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, who presided over the trials, not Thomas Boleyn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Howard,_3rd_Duke_of_Norfolk#cite_note-autogenerated1-1
Esther
Perhaps "sat in judgment" was a poor choice of words on my part. What I wanted to know was whether or not Thomas Boleyn was among those peers who found Anne and George guilty:)
I'm sorry I misunderstood you. According to this, the answer is "no":
http://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/5375/15th-may-1536-the-trial-of-anne-boleyn/
However, Thomas Boleyn was on the jury that condemned the remaining men (Smeaton, Weston, Norris, etc.), which effectively pre-judged Anne's case.
Esther
Esther, thank you for bearing with me:) I checked out the Anne Boleyn files website that you recommended. Talk about a stacked jury!
What a weasel Thomas Boleyn was, too. By finding Norris, Weston, Smeaton etc. guilty, he was, in effect, signing the death warrants of his own children. What a contrast, too, to Katharine of Aragon, and even Anne Boleyn, who protected the interests of their children above even their own lives.
Says something about the female of the species, doesn't it?
Mary R,
I'm curious as what you are mean by the phrase "Katharine of Aragon, and EVEN Anne Boleyn"? It seems to imply that Anne Boleyn's character was lesser as compared to Katherine's.
Anne's treatment of Henry's daughter Mary did not reflect well on her. She did her best to keep Henry and Mary apart, and completely succeeded in separating Mary from her mother. I don't think I'm alone in believing that Anne would have been more than happy to be rid of Mary altogether. I really don't see Anne as a compassionate woman or as a woman of sterling character.
Would Katherine have behaved differently had the situations been reversed? Perhaps not.
No. Thomas Boleyn was not one of the jury at his children trial. However, he would have been. according to Alison Weir ( "The Lady in the tower) he was suppose to be jury #27. However he was dismiss by Thomas Howard ,3rd Duke of Norfolk.
Accordingto some historian, Thomas Boleyn did serve as jury in the case of the men convicted along with Anne & George.
Would Katherine have behaved differently had the situations been reversed? Perhaps not.
I disagree. Queen Katherine had to put up with Henry VIII bastard child Henry Fitzroy,1st Duke of Richmon,and she never said a bad thing about him. Also while in the mist of Henry VIII 's fascination with Anne, when he was seeking to put Katherine aside, Queen Katherine refuse to let anyone else speak ill of Anne in her present. However not because she liked Anna, or anything like that, but because she knew one day Anna would be in the same situation she was in.....and she was right LOL! But according to most historian Queen Katherine was way to pious to treat anyone in the manner that Anna did.
I also do not think Thomas Boleyn was a weasel for finding the guys guilty. I think he had no choice but to find them guilty. If he had found them innocent. That would only be one vote for innocent, which could have cause problem for the rest of his remaining family. After all he still had a sick wife,and a daughter to think about. So he had no choice in the matter. It was a situation that he couldn't get out of.
Katharine of Aragon did put up with quite a lot, such as sitting through the ceremony in which Henry created his illegitimate son Duke of Richmond. I think, though that K of A was a woman who chose her battles wisely. I doubt she would have been as complacent if Henry had made his son by Bessie Blount legitimate. Mary was still heiress to the throne whether Henry Fitzroy became a Duke or not.
Katharine, daughter of Isabella, was definitely a woman capable of putting up a fight if necessary. She certainly proved that.
Anne's position was a bit different. If Henry had died in 1534, Elizabeth's position would have been precarious to say the least.
It is hard to say what a person who died almost 500 years ago would have done in this, that or the other situation;) Take the "saintly " Thomas More (author of "Utopia") for example. He would not take the oath of succession to save his own life because to do so would have violated his principles. He was, by all reports, one of the kindest fathers in England and one of the most devoted husbands. Yet, he took part in the torturing of heretics in the Tower of London. Not what you would expect of such a man!
I still think Thomas Boleyn was a weasel. It is unlikely that Henry would have taken vengeance on Mary Boleyn if Thomas Boleyn were to have voted "not guilty" at the trials of Norris, Smeaton, etc. Remember, Mary's children were most likely his children, too:) I think Thomas Boleyn's main concern was for Thomas Boleyn.
Hmmm....
"I still think Thomas Boleyn was a weasel. It is unlikely that Henry would have taken vengeance on Mary Boleyn if Thomas Boleyn were to have voted "not guilty" at the trials of Norris, Smeaton, etc. Remember, Mary's children were most likely his children, too:)"
Do you mean Anne Boleyn? Or are you now talking about Mary Boleyn Carey?
I know of no evidence that Henry VIII ever took vengeance on Mary Boleyn Carey or her children. To what are you referring?
kb,I was responding to Luv's comment which was posted right before my last comment on this subject. She argued that Thomas Boleyn might have found Smeaton, Norris & company guilty (of adultery with Anne Boleyn) in order to save his remaining family (primarily Mary Boleyn Carey) from persecution.
While I agree with her that Thomas Boleyn's lone "not guilty" vote would not have saved Anne or George Boleyn, I don't agree that Thomas Boleyn was protecting Mary Boleyn Carey.
Agreed!
Thank you to everyone who answered this post. I appreciate the information provided and the lively debate! Thank you again, Lara, for providing us with this wonderful site.
Post a Comment