izabelferreiramelo - Tumblr blog

izabelferreiramelo · 24 days ago

Photo

Did Anne Boleyn really serve at the courts of Margaret of Austria and Queen Claude of France?

A/N: I know some of Anne’s fans won’t like this post of mine, that’s why I want to point out: this isn’t my personal opinion, I am not saying the person who came to such conclusion is right (and I am not that person, btw.) because I don’t know that - I just wanted to share something that I find interesting in regards to Anne’s childhood and early adolescence that she had spent abroad, so, please, don’t lash me for something which isn’t my personal stance.

Definitely one of these things which make Anne Boleyn stand out from the crowd of English ladies of the Tudor era is the fact (or maybe assumption) that she served at the courts of Margaret of Austria and Claude of France during her stay abroad. It’s said that Anne spent her childhood and early adolescence abroad but it doesn’t necessarily mean she had some significant position at the courts of two influential women of the time. It is believed she left England in order to become one of the filles d’honeur of Margaret of Austria, the Governor of The Neatherlands and later she was serving Mary Tudor, Queen of France who after three months of the marriage to the French king, on 1th January 1515 had become a widow and left France, although leaving Anne Boleyn behind who went on to serve her successor, Claude of Valois.

However there is another side of the coin and Anne’s life abroad might have looked totally different from what is commonly believed.

Margaret of Austria’s court

It is believed that when Thomas Boleyn, Anne’s father was visiting Neatherlands with diplomatic mission in 1512, he managed to secure a position of a maid of honour of Margaret of Austria for one of his daughters. Usually it’s said it was Anne. There is some evidence to support that notion, however it may be too shaky to be given any credence.

First of all, Margaret of Austria’s letter to Thomas Boleyn:

“I have received your letter by the Esquire Bouton who has presented your daughter to me, who is very welcome and I am confident of being able to deal with her in a way which will give you satisfaction, so that on your return the two of us will need no intermediary other than she. I find her so bright and pleasant for her young age that I am more beholden to you for sending her to me than you are to me.”

However, this letter is undated and doesn’t mention specifically either Anne or her father by name. This letter was written in French and even in the original there is no trace of Thomas Boleyn or any of his daughters for that matter. It could have been basically written about a daughter of any courtier.

The second: Anne Boleyn’s letter to her father, written allegedly from Margaret of Austria’s court. Judging by this letter, Anne seemed to be close to her father and wanted him to be proud of her progress in regards to learning French:

“Sir, I find by your letter that you wish me to appear at court in a manner becoming a respectable female and likewise that the Queen will condescend to enter into conversation with me. At this I rejoice, as I do to think that conversing with so sensible and elegant a princess will make me ever more desirous of continuing to speak and to write good French; the more so as it is by your earnest advice, which I acquaint you by this present writing, I shall follow to the best of my ability. Sir, I entreat you to excuse me if this letter is badly written: I can assure you the spelling proceeds entirely from my own head, while the other letters were the work of my hands alone; and Semmonet tells me he has left the letter to be composed by myself that nobody else may know what I am writing to you. I therefore pray you not to suffer your superior knowledge to conquer the incination, which you say you have to be of service to me (…). As to myself, rest assured that I shall not, ungratefully, look upon this office of a father as one that might be dissolved, as I am to lead as holy life as you may please to desire of me: indeed my love for you is founded on so firm base that it can never be imparied. I put an end to this my lucubration after having very humbly craved your good-will and affection. Written at Hever by your very humble and obedient daughter, Anna de Boullan.”

There is a question in regards to that letter which provoked many discussions amongst historians. Where was it really sent from?

“(…) bone grace et scripte a Uevre/Veure de Vre treshumble et tresobiessante fille, Anna de Boullan.”

This phrase has been variously interpreted:

1. written at Hever Castle, home of the Boleyns (”et scripte a Uevre”)

2. written at 5 o’clock (”ecrite a v. heures”) from Briare near Paris

3. written from “La Vure”, Margaret od Austria’s summer residence

Hugh Paget in “The Youth of Anne Boleyn” claimed that Anne meant exactly what she wrote; “written at Veure”, saying that “La Vure or a variant of this” was “the French version of the name of the royal park at Brussels, well known today in its Flemish form Terveuren.”

Many modern, prominent historians use Paget’s work as a credible source of information. However it seems Paget might have been wrong in his assumptions in regards to “La Vure” and Anne Boleyn’s service at Margaret’s court.

Paget used the correspondence between Maximilian I, the Holy Roman Emperor and his daughter, Margaret of Austria as a reference to support his assumption. Examination of this correspondende, however, makes us find out that there was a village “la Vure/la Wure” and a castle “de la Vueren” mentioned in those letters. But there was no castle or summer residence such as “La Vure”. If so, Anne Boleyn would be writing from ‘Chateau de la Vueren’ but she didn’t include such information in the said letter to her father.

“Terveuren” is today known as Tervuren and it’s a municipality in the province of Flemish Barbant in Flanders, one of the richest municipalities in Belgium.

As Tervuren has its own website, the author of the book I am using as a reference for that article, didn’t have a problem with getting in touch with the administrators and asking a couple of questions in regards to the historical background of this place. And she was informed that “Vure” was the original name of the village in the Middle Ages. The name derived from “Fura”, a village on the banks of a small river, the Voer. Margaret of Austria visited the castle in Tervuren on a few occasions.

The castle was demolished in 1718 which had been ordered by Joseph II, the Emperor of Austria and its remnants are in the park, nearby the chapel of Saint Hubert.

In “Gialignani’s traveller’s guide through Holland and Belgium” we can read about such place as Terveuren and it was the palace of Margaret of England (daughter of Edward I of England), who was married to John II, the Duke of Barbant:

“At short distance from the church of Tervueren, is a large building which existed in the time of the Normans, and which Margaret, daughter of king Edward and wife of John II, made use of as her palace. It has nothing remarkable except a chapel which was bulit there by the archduke Albert, on the place where Saint Hubert, the founder of Tervueren, expired in 727.”

It seems like historians confused Margaret of Austria with Margaret of England. And such confusion led them to the conclusion that Anne had written the letter to her father from “La Vure.”

The French author Audin Jean Marie Vincent, M. interpreted the phrase of Anne’s letter as “Uevre”, not “La Vure.” and this may serve as another proof that Anne wasn’t writing her letter from the Neatherlands.

However, on a list of Margaret of Austria, there is a mention of a girl whose surname was “Bullan”. But there is no name included, so we can’t state with 100 percent certainty it was Anne Boleyn.

Hugh Paget stated that Anne appeared on that list as “Mademoiselle Bullan” but it seems that statement is incorrect. That’s true, there appears a girl known as “Bullan”, however there is no such person as “Mademoiselle Bullan”. There appears, however, someone titled as “Mademoyselle de Bulleur” but it can’t be a reference to Anne Boleyn since the surname “Bullan” is already on the list.

There was a family of the surname le Febvre de Bulleur at the court of Margaret of Austria so the said “madamoyselle de Bulleur” was highly likely a member of this family, not related to the Boleyns.

There is another reference in Thomas Boleyn’s letter to Margaret of Austria in which he asked the archduchess to release “ma fille de petitte boulain” - “my daughter - the Little Boleyn” from her court but there is neither a specific reference to Anne and that letter is undated as well. We can’t even be sure if the said letter is authentic.

What’s also interesting in this matter: Charles V who had been raised by his aunt, Margaret of Austria, never mentioned that Anne Boleyn had spent some time at his aunt’s court. None of Anne Boleyn’s contemporaries mentioned such thing either.

Besides it’s suspicious that a daughter of a mere ambassador who came from the family of mercantile roots (Anne Boleyn’s great grandfather started his career as a hatter), not a noblewoman by birth (although she was related to the Dukes of Norfolk and to the Earls of Ormond through her mother) would function as a maid-of- honour to such woman as Margaret of Austria. There was no custom in the Neatherlands for foreign ambassadors’s daughters to serve at court as maidś-of-honour, Anne Boleyn would be an exception.

Anne’s stay in France

As we all know in 1514 the marriage between Henry VIII’s sister Mary and Louis XII of France was arranged. There was a large age gap between the future spouses; Mary was a pretty 18 years old girl and the French king was an ageging and ill, 52 year old man.

Mary and her ladies-in-waiting left for France and usually it’s said one of the Boleyn sisters (or even both of them) was a part of Mary’s royal entourage.

On October 9th 1514 Mary “Rose” Tudor and Louis XII got married and some time afterwards she was crowned Queen Consort of France. However on January 1th 1515 King Louis XII passed away, leaving Mary a widow. The occurrences that happened afterwards were both scandalous and shocking - Henry VIII had sent his trustee and best friend, Charles Brandon, the Duke of Suffolk to France in order to bring his sister back to England but the two - highly likely already in love with each other - got married on the French soil, in secret, not asking Henry VIII for the permission. They returned to England and eventually were pardoned by Mary’s brother but her scandalous and inappropriate conduct caused resentment at the French court. Francis I of France described Mary Tudor as “more dirty than queenly”. At this point Anne Boleyn’s whereabouts are unknown. According to the tradition, after Mary Tudor’s departure to England, Anne Boleyn stayed behind and went on to serve her former mistress successor, Claude of Valois, the wife of Francis I and daughter of late king Louis XII. But is there any contemporary source to support that notion?

There is an evidence as for that Anne Boleyn definitely lived in France.

In “Calendar of State Papers, Spain: Further Supplement to Volumes 1 and 2: Documents from Archives in Vienna” we can find:

“The French ambassadors made several complaints about suspiciously unfriendly English acts. All the English students have recently withdrawn from Paris, which, they said, seemed to indicate an English intention to make war on France. Wolsey replied that the students, seeing the confusion in France, were merely consulting their own safety and could have no idea of Henry’s intentions. The ambassadors complained that Boleyn’s daughter who was in the service of the French Queen, had been called home, and said it was not a sign of continued friendship. The cardinal said that he himself was responsible for her recall, because he intended, by her marriage, to pacify certain quarrels and litigation between Boleyn and other English nobles.” (17 January 1522)

In “Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3: 1519-1523″ King Francis I wrote:

“I trust that the suspicions mentioned in your instructions, which I might have against him, are unfounded; yet I think it very strange that this treaty of Bruges was concealed from me, and also the powder and balls which are going to Antwerp; - that his subjects go and take the Emperor’s pay; - that the English scholars at Paris have returned home and also the daughter of Mr. Boullan, while ships were being made at Dover, and musters taken in England, the rumour being that it was to make war on France.”

It’s clear those two sources that mentioned “Boullan” were referring to Anne because her sister Mary was in England at the time, she got married to William Carey on February 4th 1520. But none of those contemporary sources named the Queen to whom Anne Boleyn allegedly served. Mary Tudor during her lifetime was known as Queen of France rather than the Duchess of Suffolk and it might have been precisely she whom Anne Boleyn ever served - which would make more sense for an English noblewoman to be in the service of the French Queen - who was the English princess by birth - not necessarily Claude at any point.

There is also another record of Anne - in another letter of King Francis I in which he mentions “the daughter of Mr. Boullan” returning home but at any point he didn’t state the said daughter had been serving his wife. If Anne was amongst his wife’s ladies-in-waiting, wouldn’t Francis I mention that fact?

Some “Maire Boulonne” appears on Mary Tudor’s list of ladies-in-waiting from 1514, so it’s possible it was Mary Boleyn, Anne’s sister who also appears in English Letters and Papers:

“Gentlewomen which were appointed to have abidden in France with the French Queen : - Dame_Guylford, lady of honor, Lady Elizabeth Grey, Eliz. Ferrys. M. Ann Devereux, _Grey of Wilton, M. Boleyne, M. Wotton, Alice Denys and Anne Ferningham (Jerningham?), chamberers, Dr. Denton, almoner, Mr. Palgrave, secretary, _(blank), chaplains.”

“Madamoyselle Boleyne” stayed at the French court after King Louis XII had dismissed a few ladies from Mary Tudor’s household but there is no trace of information about Anne Boleyn.

It’s really reasonable to assume that the said “madamoyselle Boleyne” was Mary Boleyn and not Anne. If Mary was the eldest of the two as it is commonly accepted by majority of the historians, it makes a lot of sense for her to be her family’s choice as one of the ladies for Mary “Rose” Tudor. There is, however, another question: why was Mary Boleyn sent to France in such character since she wasn’t a member of the English nobility but just an ambassador’s daughter? It might have been thanks to her maternal uncle Thomas Howard, the Duke of Nofrolk who went to France with Mary Tudor’s entourage. It seemed to be the Howard’s triumph because on the list appear not only the Duke of Norfolk himself but also his wife, his brother Lord Edmund Howard and the Duke’s son, the earl of Surrey.

The lists of Queen Claude

In “Etats de maison” of Claude of France, the lists of the officers and ladies-in-waiting from her household, there is no trace of information about the Boleyn sisters. One of the specialists in French courts, Caroline zum Kolk, PhD, from the Research Centre of Versailles believes that the Boleyn sisters were confused with “Anne de Boulogne” and “Magdeleine de Boulogne” that were present in the Queen Claude’s household from 1509 onwards. Those were French noblewomen who had been serving at Claude’s court since their childhood. One of them, Magdeleine was Catherine de Medici’s mother, Anne was her sister hence Catherine de Medici’s aunt. They have been known in the French sources as “de Boulogne” even though their real surname was de La Tour d’Auvergne.

Mary Tudor’s behavior after Louis XII’s death was scandalous; she got married to Charles Brandon, the Duke of Suffolk, merely two months after her husband’s passing.

In the letter to Cardinal Wolsey dated on March 1515, the Duke of Suffolk confessed that not only had he taken Mary “Rose” Tudor as his wife but also that she was already expecting his child - merely two months after her French spouse’s death. We don’t know what happened to the said child because there are no records saying about any children of that couple until the 1516. But it might have been a mere diplomatic trick on Mary “Rose” Tudor and Charles Brandon’s part to soften Henry VIII’s wrath.

Despite the fact Mary and Brandon got married merely two months after Louis XII’s demise, Mary “Rose” had taken the French Crown Jewels even though she didn’t have any right to use them anymore - and sent them to her brother, Henry VIII. There was le miroir de Naples amongst them - a very valuable piece of jewellery. This occurrence caused scandal in France.

Is it really possible that if one of the Boleyn sisters served Queen Claude, she would stay behind after her Lady’s (Mary “Rose”) scandalous departure? Probably not. Since Mary Tudor and her entourage left France in atmosphere of scandal it wasn’t in the Queen Claude’s interest to keep any of her predecessors’s ladies. It would have looked differently if Mary Tudor had suddenly died - then Queen Claude might have chosen some of her female servants to keep them in an act of mercy - but it didn’t happen. Mary didn’t die and returned to England with her entourage.

According to Eric Ives: “Anne Boleyn was to stay with Claude for nearly seven years, a period for which we have no direct evidence.” Indeed, it seems such evidence doesn’t exist, got lost over time or hasn’t been discovered yet.

But there were certainly rumours that Anne Boleyn had been serving Queen Claude - those rumours were circulating during Anne’s lifetime. Could they be an assumption that if Anne had lived in France for so long, she must have been serving the French Queen?

It is all uncertain either way. It’s highly likely though that Mary Boleyn, Anne’s sister might have served at the French court of Mary “Rose” Tudor and then returned to England.

But there are also theories that Anne spent her youth at the court of Francis I’s sister, Margaret of Valois, the Duchess of Alençon, later the Queen of Navarre. Margaret was known for her leanings towards the New Teachings and the assumption of Anne Boleyn and her friendship was born later over time. But Margaret got interested in the New Learning much later and it wasn’t at the time of Anne Boleyn’s stay in France.

There are some references to Anne Boleyn’s feelings towards Margaret of Valois, the Duchess of Alençon and the Queen of Navarre and they might have led to the conclusion the two knew each other. Anne’s brother, George Boleyn was sent to France with a diplomatic mission in 1534 and he was also meant to inform Margaret of Valois that his sister wouldn’t be able to participate in a summit in Calais as she was expecting a child:

“Rochford is to repair to the French king with all speed, and in passing by Paris to make the King’s and Queen’s hearty recommendations to the queen of Navarre, if she be there, and say that the Queen his mistress much rejoices in the deeply-rooted amity of the two kings, but wishes her to get the interview deferred, as the time would be very inconvenient to her, and the King is so anxious to see his good brother that he will not put it off on her account. Her reasons are, that being so far gone with child, she could not cross the sea with the King, and she would be deprived of his Highness’s presence when it was most necessary, unless the interview can be deferred till April next.”

In 1533 Anne’s uncle, the Duke of Norfolk had had an audience with Margaret of Valois and afterwards he reported:

“Since coming here (Paris) I have been twice with the Queen of Navarre, and both times for at least five hours. She is one of the most wisest frank women, and best setter forth of her purpose, that I have spoken with, and as affectionate to your Highness as if she were your own sister, and likewise to the Queen.”

According to the Duke of Norfolk, the Queen of Navarre was affectionate towards Henry VIII and his new wife and probably willing to acknowledge Anne Boleyn as the Queen of England. He concluded to Henry: “My opinion is that she (the Queen of Navarre) is your (Henry VIII’s) good and sure friend.”

There is no indication that Anne Boleyn and Margaret of Valois, the Duchess of Alençon and the Queen of Navarre made good friends during Anne’s stay in France. It’s interesting that Margaret of Valois didn’t mention Anne Boleyn to the Duke of Norfolk or to George Boleyn at any point, given she and Anne allegedly had some sort of friendly relationship.

Briis-sous-Forges

Since we don’t have any direct evidence for Anne Boleyn service at Queen Claude’s court and she spent a few years in France, where would she be at the time?

Local French tradition links Anne Boleyn to the town located nearby Paris, Briis-sous-Forges. There is something like Tour d’Anne Boleyn (Anne Boleyn’s Tower) and it’s supposed to be a part of the remains of the castle where Anne Boleyn spent her youth. The famous story that Anne Boleyn was sent to France in her youth comes from Nicolas Sander:

“At fifteen she sinned first with her father’s butler, and then with his chaplain, and forthwith was sent to France and placed, at the expense of the king, under the care of certain nobleman not far from Brie.”

Sander wasn’t the only one to claim Anne Boleyn spent her youth nearby Paris. Julien Brodeau wrote that Anne Boley had been brought up in Briis-sous-Forges by her parent’s relatives. William Rastall and Adam Blackwood supported that notion as well.

It’s possible that Thomas Boleyn sent his daughter to France so she would be educated in his relatives’s household, it is unknown though why he did so, considering people tended to send their children to be brought up by their relatives but within the country.

It is also possible that Anne Boleyn during her stay in France was at Claude’s court but not necessarily as a maid-of-honour.

As I already said: it isn’t my opinion. I am open to all the possibilities. Anne Boleyn might have served at these courts or she might have not - I don’t know and everything is possible. I just wanted to share.

And chill out before you get on me or on the author of the book I am using as a reference - she put an immense effort into her research and she has never claimed arrogantly she is 100 percent right. It isn’t any sort of attack and an attempt to diminish Anne’s role and her good qualities.

Source: “The Daring Truth about Anne Boleyn: cutting through the myth”

60 notes · View notes

izabelferreiramelo · 1 month ago

Text

Mary Tudor and Katherine Howard could have actually been friends? 🏵️

All of us Tudor fans have been persuaded at some point to believe that Mary and Katherine were enemies and couldn't stand each other. If we were to read separate biographies of katherine and Mary, we would indeed get that impression, especially when it comes to the narratives of certain authors who didn't see much need to delve into the relationship between the two.

🧐 What do we know about Mary and Katherine's relationship besides common belief? That Katherine wanted to dismiss two of Mary's ladies because Katherine was a spoiled and childish young lady, or that Mary found Katherine vain because she liked to dress francy clothes and dance. But what if I told you that Katherine acted as a merciful queen in many instances, such as when she sent her tailor to Margaret Pole in the Tower of London or when she helped free Thomas Wyatt, the poet, from the Tower? And what about Mary liking fancy clothes and dance too? But well, we will not try to understand Katherine's qualities hidden in the shadow of the stereotype this time. In order not to develop a giant text, I will just make a timeline of the relationship between the two from 1540 to 1542.

🏵️1540 — DECEMBER — Katherine try to dismiss two of Mary's ladies because Mary was showing her little respect as she had shown Jane Seymour and Anne of Cleves. (In my opinion, this only happened because Mary was witnessing what happened to her mother repeat itself. *Let's not forget that Katherine was a lady-in-waiting to Anne of Cleves, as Anne Boleyn was to Katherine of Aragon*).

🏵️ 1541 — JANUARY — (New Year) Mary tries to reconcile with Katherine and sends gifts, trying to maintain a good relationship with her father and stepmother.

🏵️ 1541 — 2 of FEBRUARY — Henry banishes one of Mary's ladies. Chapuys was the one who reported this, and unlike the first occasion when Katherine tried to dismiss two of Mary's ladies, on this occasion Chapuys mentions only the king. I believe that if it had been an appeal from Katherine to the king, Chapuys would have mentioned it, as before.

(It would not be the first time Henry had expelled ladies-in-waiting. He did the same to Katherine of Aragon when the two argued over the attention the king was giving to Henry Fitzroy. That time he expelled three of Katherine's ladies-in-waiting).

🏵️ 1541— 22 of FEBRUARY — Mary and Katherine baptise Jane Seymour daughter of Edward Seymour (Edward VI uncle). Why did they both were godparent of the same child if they were not in good terms? This makes me believe that Mary's problem 20 days before this was indeed with the king.

🏵️ 1541 — Spring — Katherine is said to have sent Margaret Pole clothes according to Alison Weir, she didn't mention an exact month, but Conor Byrne points to 'spring' (so, March, April or early May). I know Katherine had a good heart and Margaret's situation touched her, but I think she may have had some consideration for Mary when she did this.

🏵️ 1541 — MAY — Margaret Pole is executed, the same time Katherine aproves Mary staying at court. (This is why I believe she had some regard for Mary's pain of losing her second mother.)

🏵️ 1541 — In the summer Katherine, Mary and Henry traveled together to visit Prince Edward, and Katherine gave Mary a gold pomander containing a clock while they were on a progress at Pontefract Castle. (Again, why would she if they were not in good terms?)

🏵️ 1542 — FEBRUARY — Katherine is executed. "Following Katherine Howard’s execution, Mary enjoyed far greater favour and presided over court feasts as if Queen. As a New Year’s gift Henry presented her ‘with rings, silver plate, and other jewels’ among which were ‘two rubies of inestimable value’. However, during these months, the princess suffered repeatedly from chronic ill-health, linked to anxiety, depression and irregular menstruation, although the symptoms varied widely from one episode to the next. In March and April, she had a ‘strange fever’ that brought on heart palpitations and so afflicted her that at times ‘she remained as though dead’."

We know that Katherine died in February, but by December Culpeper had been executed, and the queen's jewels had certainly returned to the king who had given them to Mary. If Mary had developed any feelings of friendship with Katherine, it was very cruel of him to make her go through this, and I am not surprised that Mary fell strangely ill afterwards. 😪💔

Art by: https://www.instagram.com/heqijin_illustration?igsh=MTRjZTN4bzJqcXJseA==

Sources:

https://tudortreasures.net/mary-catherine-howard/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewels_of_Mary_I_of_England

Katherine Howard: A New History by Conor Byrne.

Mary Tudor: England' First Queen by Anna Whitelock.

Baatard Prince: Henry VIII'S lost son by Beverley A. Murphy.