Was Anne Boleyn Innocent?

[TheNightScentedStock]

I'm not entirely sure.

It must have been so tempting to try and have a child. She knew it was out of the question with Henry and also knew that she was in danger of losing him.

A child, a son, would have secured her safety and destiny.

It would have been dangerous but maybe worth the risk.

Given what we can guess to be the state of hygiene of the average Tudor kitchen, this was much more likely to have been botulism or e coli or someone with an allergy that turned fatal. It does though say a lot about the public perception of AB that she was thought to be responsible, largely because one of the people affected, John Fisher, was a vocal opponent of the king's divorce.

Not to mention that poison was generally seen as a woman's weapon because no violence was needed.

Bishop Fisher's household? HVIII had at least as much motivation as Fisher was arguing against his divorce. And of course HVIII eventually executed Fisher, and Thomas More, and other stand-outs against the divorce/Supreme Head of the Church business.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Roose

Chapuys originally suggested this possibility to the Emperor in his March letter, telling Charles that "the king has done well to show dissatisfaction at this; nevertheless, he cannot wholly avoid some suspicion, if not against himself, whom I think too good to do such a thing, at least against the lady and her father".[30][41] The ambassador seems to have believed that, while it was unlikely that the king, being above such things, had been involved in the conspiracy, Boleyn was a different matter. The medievalist Alastair Bellany argues that, to contemporaries, while the involvement of the King in such an affair would have been incredible, "poisoning was a crime perfectly suited to an upstart courtier or an ambitious whore"[42] such as she was portrayed by her enemies.[42]

Allegations by people who disliked her - some referred to her as the goggle-eyed whore and of course she was blamed for HVIII wanting to set aside K of A. Chapuys of course was a massive K of A supporter.

It was also alleged later that she had poisoned K of A - but given the isolation of K of A in the Midlands, Anne would have had difficulty accessing her and no need to anyway, given HVIII had no intention of going back to his ex-wife.

We all have theoretical motives for all kinds of crimes. That doesn't mean that we commit them - motive, method, opportunity are all required. Hundreds of clergy were against HVIII marrying Anne - she couldn't (and manifestly didn't) knock 'em all off.

I wouldn't take Chapuys as gospel for much about AB. IIRC he didn't believe the accusations against her, though.

She was fatally stitched-up. Poor Anne.

Thanks.

Ya gotta think, if Anne Boleyn and her family held the life of her enemies in such disregard, trying to polish off Katherine would have been a better strategy than poisoning the household of a Bishop (who in the end didn't eat the food in question).

Her father was repellent, though - attending the trials of Anne and George.

Do you think he had much choice, though? His "vote" wouldn't have changed the outcome and he would have been more likely to lose what honours remained to him if he hadn't gone.

I don't know if he did or not, but given that his family were ruined anyway, a diplomatic illness might have been understood (altho IIRC that didn't get the earl of Northumberland a pass).

Wiki says he sat on the jury passing judgement on Anne's alleged lovers, but was spared that at his children's trials.

As an aside, I wonder if george knew he was literally for the chop so decided to read out in cour what he was told not to.

How weird, not sure why my post got hidden!

ETA was essentially linking to a blog that said Sir Thomas Boleyn was back at court within a few months, participated in putting down rebels in the Pilgrimage of Grace and was invited to Edward's christening, so although he lost some titles, he (and Mary Boleyn) were not totally ruined.

I forget who said it, but they made the point that he'd just seen a beloved sister have to stand up in court and be accused of adultery, treason and incest and be condemned to beheading or burning. He must have been pretty sure that he was going to be condemned to death anyway, so he took a very public revenge on Henry by reading out in a court full of scores of people the claim that the king was impotent - knowing that that would spread like wildfire and Henry would hate it.

Wasn't George tried first?

ETA no, I was wrong there!

Mary Boleyn must have blessed the day she was rusticated from court for marrying Thomas Stafford.

Indeed!!

Indeed. Lord Percy had to attend too. And was sick over the bench he was sitting on.

No. I am not.
Nobody humiliated Henry and expected him to forget it. And Cromwell was in charge of the whole proceedings. It was him or Anne. And he knew it.
Henry was entirely humiliated by the very fact the Court was even considering his wife’s alleged adultery.
Anne of Cleves was the final straw. But not the first one.
Cromwell got too ambitious, too greedy. Henry cruelly made him an Earl, only to chop his head off shortly afterwards.
It was always a point from the old established nobles that Cromwell was a rough sort not from the right background. That he was more capable than most administratively was neither here nor there.
In executing him Henry inherited his wealth. The title forfeited. But a few months later it did give Henry a way of creating Cromwell’s heir a Baron.

Eh?

Henry made him Lord Privy Seal just after Anne was executed (and Thomas Boleyn booted from the job) and then Baron Cromwell a couple of months later. TC also gained a whole bunch of new jobs between 1536 and 1540, and didn't lose many of the old ones.

Henry was rather impulsive when it came to punishing "betrayal" - brooding on it for 4 years not really his style. Agree that the last minute Earldom was a special piece of spite, though.

I like hilary mantel's position on Anne boleyn's fate, she played a winning hand at the tudor court, but ultimately lost everything, henry tudor was a psychopath i think...

Has anyone read Alison Weir's, " Lady in the Tower" ?

It's non fiction and deals with the last days of her life and I found it readable and informative.

She was innocent and set up to be found guilty. Henry had moved on and wanted her out of the way.

Yes, that was the book I linked upthread which gave places and dates, meaning that most of the alleged adulterous occasions were logistically near impossible

Sorry @SheilaFentiman I wasn't disregarding your post on purpose.

She was complicit and manipulative in getting rid of Catherine of Aragon
She had no compassion for Catherine
That said I do not think she had an affair but was probably not a virgin when married H 8

She was accused of witchcraft and incest as well as adultery. I don’t think any serious historian believes she was guilty of any of those “crimes”.

I thought she slept with her brother ? Not to get pregnant though as I think even then they realised that was a bad idea.