For Tudor history lovers, May is often referred to as Anne Boleyn month. This May, we’ve been treated to several new releases about this much beloved historical figure. Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion, and the Queen Who Changed History by Martha Tatarnic is one of these books. I’d like to thank Martha Tatarnic and Morehouse Publishing for sending me a copy.

Anne Boleyn’s story is a familiar one — she grew up in the picturesque Kent countryside at Hever Castle. She spent a number of her formative years abroad before joining the English court. She caught the eye of King Henry VIII, who decided that Anne would be his next Queen. After a lengthy courtship, Henry and Anne married in 1533. But by 1536, Henry had tired of Anne. She was accused of adultery, treason, and incest with five men, and executed in the Tower of London. While Anne’s story is well-known, she still evokes passionate, polarising responses from people around the world.

Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion, and the Queen Who Changed History offers something new to the historiography. Firstly, it focuses on Anne Boleyn’s role in the English Reformation. Secondly, Tatarnic writes from the unique perspective of a priest. On Anne, Tatarnic writes that “to cut out her religious passion is to miss the key ingredient in Henry’s desire for her, the enemies who closed in on her, the controversy that surrounded her, the conviction that ended her life, the role that was expected of her as a woman, and her failure in conforming to that role.” Anne Boleyn is written as both a religious exploration of Anne Boleyn and a personal journey for the author. Importantly, Tatarnic encourages readers to challenge long-standing assumptions about Anne.

As someone who spends much of my time considering Tudor history, and particularly Anne Boleyn’s history, her role in the English Reformation is one that I am yet to consider in detail. This is purely because it is such a complex topic that requires (I believe) an in-depth knowledge of religion, and the changes that occurred as a direct result of the Reformation. So for me, Tatarnic makes the topic highly accessible, allowing readers to grasp what is a very complex topic. Tatarnic writes, for example —

“Anne would not be given credit — by Cromwell, by Archbishop Cranmer, and certainly not by King Henry — for her spine of steel, her resolve, her vision, the chess pieces that she moved into place to secure for these men the things that they each desired: power and money of an almost unlimited sort for Cromwell and the king, and for Archbishop Cranmer, the opportunity to be the signature leader of the religious change he so desired. These men would continue with the agenda that Anne had begun without a backward glance at the debt that they owed her.”

Tatarnic also raises many questions for readers to consider, highlighting them in ways that encourage pause and reflection.

Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion, and the Queen Who Changed History is recommended for Tudor history enthusiasts seeking an accessible exploration of Anne’s role in the English Reformation through the lens of a female Anglican priest. As Tatarnic acknowledges, her aim wasn’t to undertake her own “primary source historical research.” In doing so, she acknowledges the scholarship of researchers and academics who have contributed, and continue to contribute, to the body of research on Anne Boleyn. The purpose of this book, she states, is to “help us to see what has been hiding in plain sight and to draw connections between recorded historical evidence and the stories we tell about her [Anne].” The author openly commits to representing the current scholarship in “a more approachable look into Anne’s life.” Thus, for readers wanting to understand Anne Boleyn’s role in the English Reformation through a personal, accessible lens, this book makes an excellent choice.

If you would like to receive articles and book reviews directly to your inbox, please consider subscribing.

Subscribe now

Mary Boleyn. We know her as Anne Boleyn’s sister, the “English mare,” Henry VIII’s mistress and mother of one, or perhaps two, of his illegitimate children. She has been referred to as the one that showed less promise, that wasn’t as smart, that gave in to the “temptations” of the courts. Mary Boleyn made mistakes, and Anne Boleyn learned from her sister’s example what not to do. Or at least, this is the story we have often been told. But how much truth lies in the narrative we have been so convincingly sold?

Anne Boleyn’s biographer, the late Professor Eric Ives, once said that “what we know about Mary Boleyn could be written on a postcard with room to spare.”1 But as Sylvia Barbara Soberton demonstrates in her latest biography of Mary Boleyn — this isn’t quite the case. In Mary Boleyn: The Queen’s Slandered Sister, Sylvia Barbara Soberton returns to the primary sources, following the trails of rumour to their source and leaving no stone unturned.

As a biography, Mary Boleyn starts at the beginning, which of course, begins with uncertainty. The ages and birth order of the Boleyn siblings, Mary, Anne and George, are themselves topics of debate. Some readers may pause to think — does it really matter? Once you dive into the debate, it becomes ever more apparent just how important the birth order and subsequent ages become. For Mary, whether she was the eldest sister or the younger matters. It is important because it can be quite revealing about the Boleyn family dynamics. Was Thomas Boleyn traditional, securing a court position for his eldest daughter Mary before seeking places for the younger Boleyns? Or did Thomas Boleyn notice something special in Anne and secure her place first?

The birth debate is closely tied to the evidence for Anne Boleyn’s time spent at the court of Margaret of Austria. As such, Soberton explores the evidence, moving from the early years at Hever Castle to the Burgundian and later French courts. One aspect I particularly appreciated is how Soberton explores the historiography of the traditional narratives and rumours. She traces them (where possible) from the primary source to how historians and scholars have subsequently handled the evidence.

What becomes glaringly clear is how Mary has, over time, become somewhat disregarded, written off, and perceived as the less intelligent one — the one that gave away her ‘virtue.’ Soberton eloquently demonstrates how this happened while showing why Mary is so much more than what we have been led to believe.

Avid Tudor history readers might worry that Mary Boleyn is another re-telling of the same story. I’m delighted to say this is most certainly not the case. Mary Boleyn is brilliantly written, thought-provoking, and compelling. My only ‘criticism’ is that I didn’t want it to end.

Mary Boleyn: The Queen’s Slandered Sister is not simply another biography. It offers a timely and careful reassessment of this oft-misunderstood Tudor woman. Crucially, Soberton does not claim to have all of the answers or solve the Tudor mysteries that have captivated historians for centuries. Through Mary Boleyn, we are reminded of the importance of returning to primary sources, tracing rumours to their origin, and questioning long-held assumptions.

If you enjoyed this review, and would like to receive more articles from Notes of a Time Traveller, please consider subscribing.

Subscribe now

The Throckmorton family was comprised of husband and wife, Robert and Elizabeth Throckmorton, and their eight children.1 The Throckmorton family had recently moved to the village of Warboys.2 The family would still have been settling into their new life when, on the 10th of November, 1589, the second youngest daughter, Jane, became ill.3 According to the pamphlet, Jane would sometimes:

“sneeze very loud and thick for the space of half an hour together, and presently as one in a great trance and swoon lay quietly as long; soon after she would begin to swell and heave up her belly so as none was able to bend her or keep her down; sometime she would shake one leg and no other part of her as if the palsy had been in it; sometimes the other; presently she would shake one of her arms and then the other, and soon after her head, as if she had been infected with the running palsy.”4

News of little Jane’s affliction spread throughout the village, and over the following days, neighbours began to visit. Alice Samuel was one of these neighbours. On visiting the Throckmortons, little Jane cried out “Grandmother, look where the old witch sitteth.”5 Alice continued, pointing at her neighbour, “Did you ever see one more like a witch than she is?”6 Over the coming days, Jane’s condition continued to worsen. Her concerned parents consulted a Cambridge doctor who perceived there to be “no kind of distemperature,” unless perhaps it was caused by worms. Repeated consultations with the Doctor resulted in the following advice being given to Robert and Elizabeth Throckmorton:

“… he should not strive any more therewith by physic, nor spend any more money about it; for he himself said that he had some experience of the malice of some witches, and he verily thought that there was some kind of sorcery and witchcraft wrought towards his child.”

As time passed, the illness began to spread throughout the house with two more of the Throckmorton daughters presenting with the same illness as Jane.7 While Robert and Elizabeth remained unconvinced their daughters had been bewitched, the three children accused Alice Samuel of bewitching them.8 The illness continued to spread until all five of the daughters and twelve servants were afflicted.9 By this point, accusations of bewitching extended to Alice’s husband, John, and daughter, Agnes.10 Robert Throckmorton thus began attempting to secure a felony conviction against Alice, John and Agnes Samuel.

Returning to our earlier exploration of Tudor witchcraft legislation, the Witches of Warboys case fell under the Elizabethan Witchcraft Act of 1563. The 1563 Act stipulated that the use of witchcraft resulting in death would result in a felony conviction, where the convicted criminal would “suffer the paynes of Deathe as a Felon or Felons.”11 But in this first trial against the Samuel family, no deaths had yet occurred.12 As identified in the 1563 Act:

“And further bee yt enacted by thaucthoritee aforesayd, That if any pson or psons, after the saide first daye of June nexte comyng, shall use practise or exercyse any Wytchcrafte Enchauntement Charme or Sorcerie, wherby any pson shall happen to bee wasted consumed or lamed in his or her Bodye or Member, or whereby any Goodes or Cattelles of any pson shallbee destroyed wasted or impayred, then every suche Offendour or Offendours their Councelloures and Aydoures, being thereof laufully convicted, shall for his or their first Offence or Offences, suffer Imprisonment by the Space of one whole Yeare, without Bayle or Mayneprise, and once in every Quarter of the said Yere, shall in some Market Towne, upon the Market Daye or at suche tyme as any Fayer shalbee kepte there, stande openly upon the Pillorie by the Space of Syxe Houres, and there shall openly confesse his or her Errour and Offence.”13

As a result, Alice Samuel was imprisoned for one year.14 But mere imprisonment was not deemed a sufficient punishment by Robert Throckmorton. On completion of her period of imprisonment, the Throckmorton family decided to detain Alice Samuel and her daughter Agnes Samuel.15 It was during this time that Lady Cromwell visited the family, “following which she was afflicted in her dreams and died a year later.”16 Robert Throckmorton now possessed the evidence needed to link the Samuel family’s witchcraft to a death. The Samuel family were again taken to court.

During the trial, Jane Throckmorton’s possession was the “centrepiece”.17 Adding to this already damning evidence were written depositions and verbal eyewitness testimony.18 As a result, Alice, John and Agnes Samuel were all executed. The Witches of Warboys pamphlet would have readers believe that the Samuels were executed for bewitching the Throckmorton children. But the real reason for their execution appears lower down on the title page - “And also for the bewitching to death of the Lady Cromwell.”19 Notably, the first trial against Alice Samuel lacked sufficient evidence to bring about the death penalty. Only after Lady Cromwell’s death was linked to witchcraft did the Throckmortons possess the evidence needed to bring about the desired outcome.

Comparing the Chelmsford trial of 1566 with the Witches of Warboys trial of 1589 reveals how the Elizabethan Witchcraft Act was applied in practice. In Chelmsford, Agnes Waterhouse was executed for causing the death of her neighbour - a crime to which Agnes had confessed. In Warboys, however, the case was more challenging. Without sufficient evidence, Alice Samuel was imprisoned for a year for causing harm. The Throckmortons had to work considerably harder to collect sufficient evidence against the Samuel family to secure a felony verdict and thus their executions.

Therefore, the cases of Chelmsford and Warboys reveal that the Elizabethan Witchcraft Act was more complex than it appears. It necessitated the collection of sufficient evidence to convince judges and juries. As we continue our exploration of witchcraft legislation in Tudor England, we are reminded that the application of the witchcraft acts was not as simple as it may first appear.

If you enjoyed reading this article and would like to receive the next instalment in our witchcraft, please be sure to subscribe so that it can be delivered directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

Recommendations for further reading

Primary Sources

The Most Strange and Admirable Discoverie of the Three Witches of Warboys Arraigned, Convicted, and Executed, at the Last Assises at Huntingdon, for the Bewitching of the Five Daughters of Robert Throckmorton Esquire, and Other Persons. https://archive.org/details/bim_early-english-books-1475-1640_the-most-strange-and-adm_warboys_1593/mode/1up

Secondary Sources

Historical fiction

The Bewitching by Jill Dawson (2022)

Non-fiction

The Witches of Warboys: An Extraordinary Story of Sorcery, Sadism and Satanic Possession in Elizabethan England, Philip C. Almond, 2007.

Witches of Warboys, Moira Tatem, 1993.

It has been a couple of months since my last Tudor update post. So today, I thought I would share some of the latest Tudor books and online events, combined with a couple of upcoming non-Tudor history books that I am particularly excited about.

I hope you find something new and/or exciting here.

Lucy x

Online Tudor Courses and Events

Professor Suzannah Lipscomb recently announced her latest online course - this time the topic is Witches. Working with Dr Laura Kounine, this 16-week online course explores “witchcraft beliefs, accusations, and trials in the 16th and 17th centuries.” If you subscribe to Professor Lipscomb’s newsletter you would also have received a discount code for the course. You can find more details about the course here.

Following on from her fabulous 4-week seminar on Tudor and Valois Queens, Dr Estelle Paranque has announced an upcoming live lecture. The topic - Saving Anne Boleyn: The French Who Tried. The session will include a 40-minute lecture, followed by a 20-minutes live Q&A. Tickets are currently available to participants of her recent seminar, but keep an eye out on Dr Paranque’s Instagram for when tickets open to the public.

Dr Lacey Bonar Hull has also just announced that she will be running an online course here on Substack called Women in Late Medieval England. The course will run from April 24 to August 2 and includes 14 lectures and 2 live discussions. Find out more here.

Books

In my last Tudor News post, I shared the details about the upcoming books by Dr Tracy Borman, Sylvia Barbara Soberton and Dr Elizabeth Norton.

The House of Boleyn it the latest historical fiction novel by Historian Dr Tracy Borman. Excitingly, it is being released in just a few short days, on the 23rd of April. Dr Tracy Borman has recently been interviewed by Philippa Lacey Brewell from British History which you can watch here.

Mary Boleyn: The Queen’s Slandered Sister by Sylvia Barbara Soberton is also approaching publication day. This non-fiction biography of Anne Boleyn’s sister Mary, challenges and corrects some of the rumours that have become part of Mary Boleyn’s established narrative. Sylvia was recently interviewed by Adam Pennington for the podcast, The Tudor Chest. This interview offers a tantalising glimpse of the book. You can listen to it here.

Another Boleyn book coming out in May is another historical fiction novel, The Boleyn Secret by Alison Weir. While Borman’s The House of Boleyn centres around the family home of Hever Castle, Weir’s The Boleyn Secret focuses on the story of Katherine Carey (daughter of Mary Boleyn and William Carey).

I am also about to start reading Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion and the Queen who Changed History by Martha Tatarnic. This latest non-fiction book will be released on the 5th of May. A huge thank you to Morehouse Publishing for sending me an Advanced Reader Copy.

Two non-Tudor history books coming out soon that I am particularly excited about are The Lost Voices of Pompeii: The Final Day in Seven Lives by Dr Jess Venner, and Things we Found in the Ground: A Metal Detecting Journey through Britain by Eleanor Bruce and Lucilla Gray.

News

Over the last fortnight I shared that my journal article has been accepted for publication with the Royal Studies Journal. Unfortunately, I am unable to share any more at this time but I am so excited to finally get to share my research with you all in the near future.

In exciting Tudor discoveries, late last week it was announced that Professor Lucy Munro found a floorplan that identifies the London property of William Shakespeare. You can read all about it here.

What Tudor history news have you seen lately that sparked your interest? Leave a comment below to share the books, courses, movies, exhibitions and announcements.

Leave a comment

Thank you for reading these Notes of a Tudor time traveller. If you enjoyed reading this post, please do subscribe so that you can receive these posts direct to your inbox xx

Subscribe now

Margaret Beaufort: Survivor, Rebel, Kingmaker by Lauren Johnson

As I began my journey into Tudor history, Margaret Beaufort quickly became one of my favourite women of the period. Margaret Beaufort was the Tudor matriarch - mother of King Henry VII. She was a descendant of John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford. She married four times; her second husband, Edmund Tudor, married her at the age of 12. Margaret lived through the precarious Wars of the Roses and survived to see her grandson Henry VIII ascend the throne in 1509.

I initially hesitant to read this book - purely because a brilliant biography of Margaret Beaufort had come out in 2019 (Uncrowned Queen: The Fateful Life of Margaret Beaufort, Tudor Matriarch by Nicola Tallis). But there were two factors that convinced me to buy it. First, I had read Lauren Johnson’s previous non-fiction book on King Henry VI, which I loved (Shadow King: The Life and Death of Henry VI). Second, I am taking part in Estelle Paranque’s online seminar on Tudor and Valois Queens, and it was highly recommended in the reading list. I’m so glad I read it.

Lauren Johnson is a masterful storyteller who blends narrative history with impeccable research to tell Margaret Beaufort’s story. I loved every second of reading this book and highly recommend it to fellow Tudor history enthusiasts.

Catherine de’ Medici: The Life and Times of the Serpent Queen by Mary Hollingsworth

I discovered Catherine de’ Medici more recently. In 2022, Estelle Paranque released Blood, Fire and Gold: The Story of Elizabeth I & Catherine de Medici. I found Catherine de Medici such a fascinating figure, and I am always interested in what else was happening in the world during the Tudor reign. Mary Hollingsworth released Catherine de’ Medici: The Life and Times of the Serpent Queen in 2024.

Catherine de Medici was born in 1519 to Madeleine and Lorenzo de’ Medici. Within a month of her birth, Catherine was an orphan. In 1533, she married Henri, the future Henri II of France. Throughout her marriage, Catherine endured the humiliation of Henri’s long-term liaison with Diane de Poitiers. Catherine and Henri had ten children together; seven survived into adulthood. In 1559, Henri II died after a jousting accident drove splinters into his eye. Throughout her life she filled the roles of dauphine, Queen of France, regent, and Queen mother. Catherine endured the early deaths of eight of her children; only two outlived her. She was well educated and an avid patron of the arts. While Catherine is often remembered as an evil villainess, Mary Hollingsworth uncovers the real woman by examining her surviving letters.

I really enjoyed learning more about the life of this incredible woman.

The First Kingdom: Britain in the Age of Arthur by Max Adams

The First Kingdom was another early medieval book recommendation from Holly A Brown over on Medieval Musings. In fact, Holly speaks so highly of Adams’ work, calling him ‘one of the most accessible authors out there for readers beginning their journey into early medieval history.’ As someone beginning my journey into early medieval history, I decided The First Kingdom would be a perfect follow-up to The Lost Realms: Histories of Britain from the Romans to the Vikings by Thomas Williams. So far, my favourite aspect of these early medieval books is how they blend archaeological research into the narrative. It was thoroughly enjoyable, and I’m very much looking forward to reading more about the period and more from Max Adams.

The books I am looking forward to reading in April

This is probably an overly optimistic list of books I hope to read this month. Alas, here they are.

The Lives of Tudor Women by Elizabeth Norton

The Lives of Tudor Women has sat on my shelf for years. The Talking Tudors Patreon book club recently selected it for their monthly read. I’ve only just started reading it and hope to finish it before our discussion.

The blurb reads:

“The turbulent Tudor age never fails to capture the imagination. But what was it actually like to be a woman during this period?

This was a time when death in infancy or during childbirth was rife; when marriage was usually a legal contract, not a matter for love; and the education of women was minimal at best. Yet the Tudor century was also dominated by powerful and characterful women in a way that no era had been before.

Elizabeth Norton explores the seven ages of the Tudor woman, from childhood to old age, through the diverging examples of women such as Elizabeth Tudor, Henry VIII’s sister who died in infancy; Cecily Burbage, Elizabeth’s wet nurse; Rose Hickman, merchant’s wife, religious activist and exile; Elizabeth Boleyn, mother of a controversial queen; and Elizabeth Barton, a peasant girl who would be lauded as a prophetess. Their stories are interwoven with studies of topics ranging from Tudor toys to contraception to witchcraft, painting a portrait of the lives of queens and serving maids, nuns and harlots, widows and chaperones.”

Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion, and the Queen Who Changed History by Martha Tatarnic

Anne Boleyn was the second queen of King Henry VIII. Anne is undoubtedly one of the most written-about women of the Tudor period. Whenever a new book comes out, I’m skeptical - can there be anything new to say about this much-studied woman? But I can’t resist, and more often than not, there’s a new angle on the evidence, a fresh perspective on Anne, or even new evidence altogether. Martha Tatarnic’s Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion, and the Queen Who Changed History is the latest book on Anne. It will be released next month. I would like to express my gratitude to Martha and the team at Morehouse Publishing for sending me an advanced reader copy. I’m looking forward to diving into it in the coming weeks.

The blurb reads:

“For centuries, Anne Boleyn has been cast as a power-hungry manipulator, vulnerable to the schemes of kings. In Anne Boleyn: Reputation, Revolution, Religion, and the Queen Who Changed History, Martha Tatarnic turns this narrative on its head, exploring a queen who used her power and influence to shape the English Reformation and transform Europe’s political and religious landscape. With fresh insights and a bold new perspective, Tatarnic reframes Anne’s story - challenging assumptions and shifting the conversation about women in history.”

Wild: Tales from Early Medieval Britain by Amy Jeffs

I discovered Amy Jeffs through a Substack post on Medieval Musings by Holly A Brown. I recently read her book Storyland: A New Mythology of Britain and loved it. It left me wanting to read more of Jeffs’ work, so I settled on Wild: Tales from Early Medieval Britain.

The blurb reads:

“In Wild, Amy Jeffs journeys - on foot and through medieval texts, manuscripts and objects - from landscapes of desolation to hope, offering the reader an insight into a world at once distant and profoundly close to home. Inspired by the Old English poems of the Exeter Books, the Welsh Englynion, and Immrama of the Irish tradition, as well as surviving early medieval artefacts of gold, garnet, stone and whale’s bone, these stories give voice to figures who tread the borderlands of early medieval literature: women, monsters, animals.”

Hidden Hands: The Lives of Manuscripts and Their Makers by Mary Wellesley

I love books and adore scrolling through illuminated manuscripts online. The first book that drew me into this world was Meetings with Remarkable Manuscripts by Christopher de Hamel. Studying these books makes me ponder on the hours people spent on their craftsmanship. As the title suggests, Hidden Hands explores the world of manuscripts and their makers. I’ve heard wonderful things about this book and can’t wait to read it.

The blurb reads:

“Manuscripts teem with life. They are not only the stuff of history and literature, but they offer some of the only tangible evidence we have of entire lives, long receded, Hidden Hands tells the stories of the artisans, artists, scribes and readers, patrons and collectors who made and kept the beautiful, fragile objects that have survived the ravages of fire, water and deliberate destruction to form a picture of both English culture and the wider European culture of which it is part.

Without manuscripts, she shows, many historical figures would be lost to us, as well as those of lower social status, women and people of colour, their stories erased and the remnants of their labours destroyed.

From the Cuthbert Bible, to works including those by the Beowolf poet, Margery Kempe, Julian of Norwich, Sir Thomas Malory, Chaucer, the Paston Letters and Shakespeare, Mary Wellesley describes the production and preservation of these priceless objects. With an insistent emphasis on the early role of women as authors and artists and illustrated with over fifty colour plates, Hidden Hands is an important contribution to our understanding of literature and history.”

Hild by Nicola Griffith

Hild is a historical fiction novel centred on the life of the Abbess Hild of Whitby (d. 680). Medieval Musings selected Hild as their book club read. As many of you know, I’m currently undertaking my Masters in History (Medieval to Early Modern), but my research has largely focused on the late medieval to early modern periods. I’ve been enjoying my recent journey into the early medieval period.

The blurb reads:

“Britain in the seventh century - and the world is changing. Edwin, King of Northumbria, plots his rise to overking of all the Angles. Ruthless and unforgiving, he is prepared to use every tool at his disposal. Into this brutal, vibrant court steps Hild - Edwin’s youngest niece.

With her glittering mind and powerful curiosity, Hild has the ability to make startlingly accurate predictions. It is a gift that can seem uncanny to those about her. It is also a valuable weapon. She is indispensable to Edwin - unless she should ever lead him astray. The stakes are life and death: for Hild, for her loved ones and for the increasing numbers who seek the protection of the strange girl who can see the future and lead men like a warrior.”

I would love to hear what you are reading at the moment. Have you read any good history books that you would recommend? Or, perhaps some historical fiction?

Leave a comment

If you enjoyed this article and would like to receive the latest posts directly to your inbox, please consider subscribing.

Subscribe now

Thank you for joining me on my history journey.

Until next time.

Lucy x

In 1566, a pamphlet was published, entitled The Examination and Confession of Certain Witches at Chelmsford in the County of Essex. The pamphlet provides us with a detailed glimpse of the 1566 Chelmsford witchcraft trials. The pamphlet tells us first about a woman by the name of Elizabeth Francis who first “learned this art of witchcraft at the age of seven years of her grandmother whose name mother Eve of Hatfield Peverell, deceased”.1 Elizabeth’s grandmother, we are told, instructed Elizabeth to “renounce God and his word and to give her blood to Satan (as she termed it) which she delivered her in the likeness of a white, spotted cat”.2 She taught Elizabeth “to feed the said cat with bread and milk, and she did so”.3 Here we are given the details of Elizabeth’s confession - namely to using witchcraft to bring livestock to make her rich, to bring about a marriage, to use her cat Satan to waste her husband’s goods and bring about his death, to bring about the death of the child in her womb, to bring about the death of her 6-month-old child, and to cause lameness in her second husband’s leg.4

The 1566 pamphlet does not reveal what happened to Elizabeth Francis following the trial. While Elizabeth Francis was not executed under the Witchcraft Act in 1566, it is important to note that the initial accusation was for bewitching “John the infant son of William Auger of Hatfield Peverel so he became paralysed.”5 Elizabeth was found guilty of causing harm to another individual. According to the 1563 Witchcraft Act, bringing about illness or injury would result in imprisonment for one year for first offences.6 As such, Elizabeth, in this instance, was imprisoned for a period of one year.

Elizabeth’s confession ends by informing us that after keeping Satan the cat, for 15 or 16 years, she began to tire of it and gave it to her neighbour, Agnes Waterhouse.7 A later witchcraft trial in 1579 reveals that Elizabeth and Agnes were in fact sisters.8 The 1566 pamphlet tells us that Agnes Waterhouse confessed to various acts, including; willing her cat Satan to kill her neighbour’s cattle and geese, “destroying the brewing” and killing both her husband and neighbour.9 Agnes’ daughter, Joan, was also put on trial and confessed that, on being denied the provision of bread by a neighbour’s child, she called Satan, who appeared in the likeness of a dog. Satan went to “this girl in the likeness of an evil-favoured dog with horns on his head, and made her very much afeared”.10 Crucially though, it is important to understand the charges that were laid against Agnes and Joan Waterhouse. Agnes Waterhouse was accused of bewitching “William Fynee at Hatfield Peveral so that he lingered… and then died,’ while Joan was accused of bewitching “Agnes Browne of Hatfield Peverel, spinster, so that she lost the use of her right arm and leg”.11

Comparing the charges, confessions and outcomes of Agnes and Joan reveals the 1563 Witchcraft Act in action. Agnes Waterhouse was charged with, and confessed to, killing her neighbour. Within the 1563 Witchcraft Act, this constitutes using witchcraft to cause the death of another, which results in the death penalty. Joan Waterhouse, however, had been accused of bewitching someone who lost the use of their right arm and leg. While Joan confessed to using Satan to make the child “very much afeared,” the child was brought to trial to provide a witness statement. Within the 1563 Witchcraft Act, using the eyewitness statement, Joan’s crime constitutes using witchcraft to bring about injury, which results in imprisonment for a year. She would spend quarterly spells in the pillory for six hours to confess their error and offence.

The 1566 Chelmsford Witchcraft Trial thus demonstrates the different applications of the 1563 Witchcraft Act. Elizabeth Francis was imprisoned for a year for bewitching an infant, causing paralysis. Joan Waterhouse was also imprisoned for a year for using witchcraft to cause injury. In contrast, Agnes Waterhouse was accused, and confessed to, using witchcraft to cause the death of her neighbour, and as such, received the death penalty. The case of Agnes Waterhouse “created a precedent and defined the parameters within which the Witchcraft Act would be understood by lawyers and judges”.12

In our next deep dive into Tudor witchcraft legislation, we will continue our exploration of some of the witchcraft trials that took place during the Elizabethan period.

I would love to hear your thoughts - were you already aware of the 1566 Chelmsford witchcraft trial of Elizabeth Francis, Joan Waterhouse and Agnes Waterhouse? Did the different outcomes of the trial surprise you in anyway? Has this changed your understanding of witchcraft trials?

Leave a comment

If you would like to receive the next instalment in our witchcraft series, please be sure to subscribe so that it can be delivered directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

Queen Mary I, daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, died in 1558. Following Mary’s death, her younger half-sister, Elizabeth, ascended the throne. In 1563, Queen Elizabeth I reinstated the Witchcraft Act. The 1563 Witchcraft Act, also referred to as An Act Against Conjurations, Enchantments and Witchcrafts, begins by bringing attention to the original Henrician Witchcraft Act, which had been repealed under Edward VI. Since the repeal, as stated in the Act:

‘many fantastical and devilish persons have devised and practised invocations and conjurations of evil and wicked spirits, and have used and practices witchcrafts, enchantments, charms and sorceries, to the destruction of the persons and goods of their neighbours and other subjects of the realm, and for other lewd intents and purposes contrary to the laws of Almighty God, to the peril of their own souls, and to the great infamy and disquietness of this realm.’1

While the 1563 Witchcraft Act reinstates consequences for the practice of witchcraft, importantly, the consequences are quite different. Henry VIII’s Witchcraft Act of 1542 treated all acts of witchcraft as a felony, resulting in the death penalty.2 Under Elizabeth, however, the consequences of witchcraft are different depending on the severity of the crime. For example, the most serious offences, such as conjuring an evil spirit, or practicing witchcraft which causes the death of another, carried the death penalty, and the loss of sanctuary and clergy.3 But, if the accused witch only brings about the illness or injury of another, or of their “goods or cattle” then the accused faced imprisonment for a year, with quarterly spells spent in the pillory for six hours to confess their error and offence.4 However, a second offence carried the death penalty.5

Furthermore, the 1563 Witchcraft Act also contains a third category for penalties. Under the Act the use of witchcraft to find treasure, or lost or stolen goods, or to bring about unlawful love also warranted a year’s imprisonment with quarterly visits to the pillory.6 But, in these less severe cases, a second offence meant life imprisonment and forfeiture of their goods and cattle.7

Another crucial difference between the Henrician Witchcraft Act and the Elizabethan, is the reference to the legal process that will proceed in felony charges. In regards to this, the Act states:

‘Provided always, that if the offender, in any of the cases aforesaid for which the pains of death shall ensue, shall happen to be a peer of this realm, then his trial therein to be had by his peers, as it is used in cases of felony or treason and not otherwise.’8

Under Queen Elizabeth I, the types of offences that could be treated as witchcraft became broader, but in doing so, Parliament actually created the potential for more accusations of witchcraft.9 Crucially though, the Act also identified the requirement for trials as “is used in cases of felony or treason.”10 This implies a requirement for strong, credible evidence in order to secure a guilty verdict.11

Parliament further broadened the types of actions deemed witchcraft in 1581. Instead of a specific Witchcraft Act however, the actions are found in An Act Against Seditious Words and Rumours Uttered Against the Queens Most Excellent Majesty. The section pertaining to witchcraft reads:

‘And for that divers persons wickedly disposed, and forgetting their duty and allegiance, have of late not only wished her majesty’s death, but also by divers means practices and sought to know how long her Highness should live, and who should reign after her decease, and what changes and alterations should thereby happen; To the extent that such mischiefs and inconveniences as may thereby grow in the common Weale, to the great disturbance of the same, may be cut off and prevented; Be it also enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any person or persons, of what estate, condition or degree soever he or they be, at any time, after the end of the said forty days, and during the life of our said sovereign lady the Queen’s Majesty that now is, either within her Highnesses dominions or without, shall be setting or erecting of any figure or figures, or by casting of nativities, or by calculation, or by any prophesying witchcraft conjurations or other like unlawful means whatsoever, seek to know, and shall set forth by express words, deeds or writings, how long her Majesty shall live or continue, or who shall reign as King or Queen of this Realm of England after her Highnesses decease, or else shall advisedly and with a malicious intent against her Highness, utter any manner of direct prophecies to any such intent or purpose, or shall malitiously by any words, writing or printing wish, will or desire the death or deprivation of our Sovereign Lady the Queens Majesty (that now is,) or any thing directly to the same effect, that then every such offence shall be felony, and every offender and offenders therein, and also his or their aiders, procurers and abettors in or to the said offences, shall be judged as felons, and shall suffer pains of death and [forfeit] as in case of felony is used, without any benefit of clergy or sanctuary.’12

Unsurprisingly, with the broadening of actions deemed punishable under the 1563 Witchcraft Act, there was an increase in the number of witchcraft prosecutions. For example, from 1570 until the end of the 16^th century, the counties of Essex, Herfordshire, Kent, Surrey and Sussex, saw 403 indictments for witchcraft.13 But, how was the Witchcraft Act applied in practice? Were there observable differences in witchcraft accusations, evidentiary support, and the associated outcomes?

In our next deep dive into Tudor witchcraft legislation, we will explore some of the witchcraft trials that took place during the Elizabethan period.

I would love to hear your thoughts on witchcraft in the Tudor period. Are there any misconceptions about witches, or witchcraft trials, or witchcraft in general, that you would like to read more about?

Leave a comment

If you would like to receive the next instalment in our witchcraft series, please be sure to subscribe so that it can be delivered directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

Henry Wotton is not a particularly well known name in Tudor and Stuart history. His name appears from time to time, generally, as a footnote. Yet, Wotton is credited as the inventor of modern diplomacy. What then can we tell from Wotton’s early experiences that shaped his later career as English Ambassador in Venice? How does he fit amongst the key players in Elizabethan and Jacobean histories? Lying Abroad: Henry Wotton and the Invention of Diplomacy by Carol Chillington Rutter is the first full-length modern biography of this elusive man.

In Lying Abroad, Chillington Rutter structures Wotton’s life into three parts; Wotton’s education and early travel experiences, his time in service to Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, and lastly his role as English Ambassador in Venice for King James VI and I. The significance of this study lies in its use of Wotton’s “full dossier” of archival evidence, which illuminates “the evolution of diplomacy.” When sources pertaining directly to Wotton are scarce, Chillington Rutter draws on a rich array of documentary evidence to build what Wotton’s experiences may have been like. Lying Abroad is narrative non-fiction, reminiscent in style of Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall trilogy.

Acknowledging that Henry Wotton is a relatively unknown figure, Chillington Rutter starts by positioning Wotton amongst the key figures of the late 16th century - Robert Cecil, William Shakespeare, Elizabeth I, Robert Devereux. Readers then travel back in time to his birth in 1568. We learn about Wotton’s father, his education, his early travels abroad. With fragmentary evidence, Chillington Rutter speculates about what Wotton may have looked like, how he may have watched the Spanish Armada from the English coast. These details reveal how they shaped the man and Ambassador he was to become. The diplomacy Wotton became skilled at was not inherited but cultivated through his early humanist education, travel, and life experiences.

In January 1595, Henry Wotton entered the household of Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, as his personal secretary. Wotton is thrown into the “turbid centre of Elizabethan politics.” In this role he learns the critical importance of secrecy, so much so that “secrecy is written into his job title.” Throughout these years Wotton’s hand appears in Devereux’s writing; a reminder of his close proximity to the “Earl’s daily affairs.” Here, Chillington Rutter traces Wotton’s movements and recreates his life experiences through his handwriting that survives in Devereux’s extant documents. Through Wotton’s presence in the records, we experience Devereux’s doomed position in Ireland, which builds to a crescendo when the Earl forces his way into Queen Elizabeth I’s bedchamber in 1599. Here, Chillington Rutter has found new archival evidence that contradicts former assumptions, revealing Wotton as “an exile, an outlaw, an intelligencer, a traitor.” Through these Essex years, Wotton learns much about the political machinations of power that will shape his approach to diplomacy in his next career move.

Henry Wotton meets King James VI and I - Wotton finds the king “a man of contradictions” while James finds “the seriousness of thought-wise Wotton appealing.” Wotton is made the English Ambassador in Venice. His initial years are spent observing, learning. Yet readers discover Wotton is a man who bends the rules, a man who challenges ambassadorial boundaries. He discovers secrets, feeding this information back to England. Yet strategically, he positions himself, stating “first I am an Englishman, then, by God, I’m Venetian.” It is during these years that he is inventing diplomacy. By 1609, Wotton yearns to return to England.

Through Lying Abroad, Carol Chillington Rutter has restored Henry Wotton to his rightful place in history - not as a footnote, but as the architect of modern diplomacy.

Thank you to Manchester University Press for sending me an advanced reader copy for review.

Had you read about Henry Wotton before? Which other understudied Tudor or Stuart figures would you like to read about?

Leave a comment

If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing to receive articles directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

King Henry VIII’s reign began in 1509. Henry VIII is often referred to as a tyrant, and yet debate surrounds whether he was always a tyrant, or whether he became such in his later years. The first piece of witchcraft legislation in England was introduced in 1542.1 Interestingly, Henry VIII’s 1542 Act Against Conjurations, Witchcrafts, Sorcery and Enchantments was the most severe of England’s witchcraft acts. This was likely a reflection of the increasing anxieties and suspicions of the King in his later years.2 The Act states:

Where dyvers and sundrie persones unlawfully have devised and practised Invocations and conjurations of Spirites, pretending by suche meanes to understande and get Knowlege for their owne lucre in what place treasure of golde and Silver shulde or mought be founde or had in the earthe or other secrete places, and also have used and occupied wichecraftes inchauntement and sorceries to the distruction of their neihbours persones and goodes, And for execution of their saide falce devyses beastes or fowles, and also have made Crownes Septures Swordes rynges glasses and other thinges, and gyving faithe & credit to suche fantasticall practices have dygged up and pulled downe an infinite nombre of Crosses w’in this Realme, and taken upon them to declare and tell where thinges lost or stollen shulde be become; whiche thinges cannot be used and exercised but to the great Offence of Godes lawe, hurt and disquyetnes of the Realme: For reformation whereof be it enacted by the Kyng oure Soveragne Lorde with thassent of the Lordes special and temporall and the Comons in this present Parliament assembled and by auctoritie of the same, that yf any persone or persones, after the first daye of Maye next comyng, use devise practise or exercise, or cause to be used devysed practised or exercised, any Invocations or conjurations of Sprites wichecraftes enchauntmentes or sorceries, to thentent to get or fynde money or treasure, or to waste consume or destroy any persone in his bodie membres or goodes, or to pvoke any persone to unlawfull love, or for any other unlawfull intente or purpose, or by occasion or color of suche whinges or any of them, or for dispite of Cryste, or for lucre of money, dygge up or pull downe any Crosse or Crosses, or by suche Invocations or conjuractions of Sprites wichecraftes enchauntementes or sorcerie or any of them take upon them to tell or declare where goodes stollen or lost shall become, That then all and every suche Ofeence and Offences frome the saide first day o May next comyng, shalbe demyde accepted and adjuged Felonye; And that all and every persone and persones offendyng as is abocesaide their Councello’s Abetto’s and Procuro’s and every of them from the saide first day of Maye shalbe demyde accepted and adjuged a Felon and Felones; And thoffender and Offenders contrarie to this Acte, being therof lawfullie convicte before suche as shall have power and auctoritie to here and determyn felonyes, shall have and suffre suche paynes of deathe losse and forfaytures of their landes tentes goodes and Catalles as in cases of felonie by the course of the Common lawes of this Realme, And also shall lose the p’vilege of Clergie and Sayntuarie.3

Therefore, the 1542 Witchcraft Act saw the use of witchcraft to find treasure, or to locate lost or stolen items as a felony. But, so were actions such as the destruction of neighbours and their goods, conjuring spirits, bringing about death or harm, and causing individuals to fall in unlawful love. What’s particularly striking is that the Act treated all of these offences the same - whether you located a lost item or caused harm, the penalty was the same. Individuals convicted of witchcraft would suffer “suche paynes of deathe.”4 But, while the 1542 Witchcraft Act was the harshest of England’s witchcraft acts, there is no surviving evidence to suggest that it was ever implemented.5

King Henry VIII died in January 1547, following which his son Edward would become King Edward VI. Under Edward, the 1542 Witchcraft Act was repealed.6 It would be easy to assume that the repeal of the 1542 Act demonstrated a decline in beliefs pertaining to witchcraft at the time. However, the repeal of the 1542 Act appears to have been part of the sweeping legislative reforms that commonly took place with onset of a new government.7 The repeal of the 1542 Witchcraft Act that occurred under Edward VI falls within An Acte for the Repeale of certaine Statutes concerninge Treasons, Felonyes, &c.8

Edward VI’s reign was brief. He died in 1553, following which there was the brief reign of Edward’s cousin, Lady Jane Grey (often referred to as the nine day Queen), who was then overthrown by Henry VIII’s eldest daughter, Mary. Mary reigned for five years. Focused on restoring Roman Catholicism she made no changes to witchcraft legislation during her reign.

Queen Mary I, died in 1558 and her younger sister, Elizabeth, was to inherit the throne and the landscape of witchcraft in England was set to dramatically change.

I would love to know - what are some of the beliefs you hold, or have held, about witchcraft?

Leave a comment

In the next article we will explore the Elizabethan witchcraft legislation and trials. If you enjoyed reading this article please subscribe and receive the next addition of the series directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

I have had a very varied month of reading - from the ancient epic Gilgamesh, to early medieval history, classic literature and Victorian detectives .

I would love to hear what you are reading at the moment. Have there been any books that you would recommend to fellow history lovers?

Leave a comment

Here are my reads for the month of February:

1. Lost Realms: Histories of Britain from the Romans to the Vikings

   by Thomas Williams
   I came to Lost Realms through Holly A. Brown’s Substack, Medieval Musings - It was both a highly recommended book and one that was selected for the Medieval Musings book club. My personal studies tend to focus on the late-medieval to early modern period, so it was wonderful to dive into some early-medieval material.

   Lost Realms is broken up into chapters that focus on each kingdom of early medieval Britain - from the end of Roman Britain to the dawn of the Viking age (c. 410-740 AD). Williams explores the rise and fall of the kingdoms of Elmet, Hwicce, Lindsey, Dumnonia, Essex, Rheged, Powys, Sussex, and Fortriu. I loved how Williams integrated the most recent research from archaeological excavations into the narrative. I also loved Williams’ evocative choice of language. For example:

   “Ultimately all ghost stories end this way, disquiet giving way to pity, to grief for the dead and for our own mortality, and the knowledge that one day we too will all be dust: our voices lost out on the moor, our bodies annihilated, our names forgotten.”

   Overall, I found this to be a fabulous read and one that has piqued my interest

   into finding out more about the so called “dark age.”

2. Storyland: A New Mythology of Britain

   by Amy Jeffs
   Similarly to Lost Realms, I came to Storyland through the Medieval Musings Substack. Again, Britain’s mythology is an area I have not ventured into. Storyland was perfect for my first venture into the topic. Often, early writing can feel a world apart, and can be difficult to find connections with. But, Jeffs’ retelling of Britain’s mythology was engaging and accessible. The stories were grouped chronologically into creation, prehistory, antiquity and the middle ages. After each story, Jeffs includes a brief explainer or shares a short tale of her own journey with it. Importantly though, these don’t detract from the book’s primary focus. Jeffs has also included numerous linocut images she created to accompany the stories which I found were a really beautiful addition to the stories.

   Amy Jeffs has written a number of other books including Wild: Tales from Early Medieval Britain, Saints: A New Legendary of Heroes, Humans and Magic, and being released later this year, Arthur: A New Life. All of these titles I have immediately added to my wish list.

3. The Mysterious Case of the Victorian Female Detective

   By Sara Lodge

While female detectives do pop up in historical fiction novels or on the screen, I had never considered the fact that these depictions might have actually been based on real women. The Mysterious Case of the Victorian Female Detective explores the rise of female detectives in the Victorian period. It delves into the type of work they may have taken on, such as catching cheating spouses. It explores the ways in which they carried out undercover work, such as gaining a serving position within a household. It highlighted how familial ties often led to sisters or daughters becoming detectives themselves. Crucially, it linked the phenomenon of the rise of female detectives to the depictions of them on the stage and in books. This was a really fascinating read.

4. The Mysterious Affair at Styles

   By Agatha Christie
   The Mysterious Affair at Styles may seem an odd choice, but it was one that was inspired after my reading of The Mysterious Case of the Victorian Female Detective. The Mysterious Affair at Styles is the first of the Hercule Poirot murder mystery novels written by Agatha Christie. Published in 1920, it most certainly wasn’t written in, or published, during the Victorian period. Nor is Hercule Poirot a female detective. But, while reading The Mysterious Case of a Victorian Female Detective, I was reminded of the enjoyment I found in reading Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express when I was a teenager. It was very different to my usual reads but I found it a quick, easy read.
   

5. Lady Chatterley’s Lover
   By D. H. Lawrence

   In recent years, I have been making a concerted effort to read more classic literature. This month, I settled on Lady Chatterley’s Lover. In this novel, Lady Chatterley ends up in a deep emotional and sexual relationship with her husband’s groundskeeper. I enjoyed seeing the characters develop and their relationship build. What I found shocking, was the inclusion of quite explicit descriptions. Lady Chatterley’s Lover was published in 1928, at a time when such things were not spoken about, let alone written about in such a manner. Furthermore, class systems were still prominent, so the idea of an upper class woman having an affair with a working class man was utterly scandalous. So, what I find quite astonishing is the fact that such a novel was written at this time.

6. Gilgamesh: A New Translation of the Ancient Epic
   By Sophus Helle

I became interested in the epic of Gilgamesh after reading Elif Shafak’s most recent novel, There are Rivers in the Sky. Shafak’s novel centres around the epic tale and the ancient writing system of Cuneiform. The latest edition of Gilgamesh by Sophus Helle offers a new translation as well as a number of essays to take readers deeper into the epic. I really enjoyed Helle’s translation, and the fact that it highlighted the amount of missing text from the epic. There is something very surreal about reading a story that dates back more than 4,000 years!

7. Democracy: Eleven Writers and Leaders on What It Is - and Why It Matters

This very short book explores the topic of democracy. It includes essays and short pieces that explore the topic from a range of authors including novelist Elif Shafak and historian, Mary Beard. I didn’t enjoy this one as much as I thought I would.

8. Black Beauty
   By Anna Sewell

Black Beauty was our latest family read aloud book. First published in 1877, Black Beauty tells the story of a horse’s life from the point of view of the horse. As a former zoo keeper, I mostly enjoyed it. When I first started zoo-keeping in the early 2000s, the industry was very much against anthropomorphism (the application of human emotions to those that aren’t human). But, just as I was finishing up in the industry, there appeared to be a shift in this approach - with a general move to acknowledging the benefits of it. Because Black Beauty is being told from the horse’s point of view, it is filled with anthropomorphism. This strategy helps to build empathy for Black Beauty, and working animals in general. Readers journey through Black Beauty’s early years, his tough working years, and his senior years. Set during the Victorian era - a period of peak industrialism when animals were critical to society - Black Beauty offers insight into the lives of working horses. Black Beauty is a children’s classic, but interestingly didn’t engage my children. So, this month’s read aloud was essentially the opposite of our previous read (Wind in the Willows) - one that I enjoyed and they didn’t.

I would love to know what you have been reading? Do you have any recommendations for fellow readers?

Leave a comment

If you enjoyed this post please consider subscribing so that you can receive these articles directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

If you enjoyed this post, here are some of my previous book posts that you might enjoy:

So, you want to read more about the Tudors?

January Reading Round-up: Five Books that I Enjoyed Throughout January

Alternatively, here are some of my top research posts that you may be interested in:

Tracing the Letter from Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria

Anne Boleyn: The Identities of the 18 Filles d’Honneur

Years ago, when I first went down the Tudor rabbit hole, I had no idea where to start. I scoured the internet, made shortlists and worked out where to source the books from. If you are interested in learning more about Tudor history, here are five recommendations for books to get you started and pique your interest further.

Tudor: A Family Story by Leanda de Lisle

In Tudor: A Family Story, de Lisle goes back to the year 1437 to explore the very origins of the Tudor dynasty. De Lisle takes readers on a narrative journey through the Tudor’s welsh origins, to their sudden and unprecedented rise at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, to the accession of the ‘spare,’ Henry VIII, and his notorious six marriages, followed by the reign of his children, Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth I. There is a reason this book is so often recommended to beginners.

Uncrowned Queen: The Fateful Life of Margaret Beaufort, Tudor Matriarch by Nicola Tallis

First published in the UK in 2019, Uncrowned Queen tells the story of King Henry VII’s mother, Margaret Beaufort. Margaret is often portrayed as an evil, manipulative, controlling, power-hungry woman. In Uncrowned Queen, Dr Nicola Tallis draws on primary sources to reveal a very different woman. Uncrowned Queen absolutely blew me away, and I proceeded to buy every other book Tallis has written. Margaret Beaufort is one of the many maligned women in history. In Uncrowned Queen, Tallis dispels the rumours and myths that have surrounded the mother of the Tudor dynasty for centuries.

The Six Wives of Henry VIII by Alison Weir

Henry VIII is remembered primarily as the King who had six wives. Yet, as the musical Six astutely points out, it’s because of them that he is still talked about today. Weir’s The Six Wives of Henry VIII was my gateway Tudor book. After watching the television series The Tudors, this was the first book I picked up. This led to another book, which led to another, and so on and so on. Weir’s writing is accessible and engaging. What better way to dive into the Tudors than with Henry VIII’s six queens?

The Private Lives of the Tudors by Tracy Borman

Dr Tracy Borman, Historian and Chief Curator of Historic Royal Palaces, has noted that visitors to places like Hampton Court Palace ask fascinating questions about the ‘private life’ of the Tudors. This would include questions about the role of the Groom of the Stool to Queen Elizabeth’s skincare. In The Private Lives of the Tudors, readers can find out about what went on behind closed doors. Borman’s writing is brilliant. She has written numerous non-fiction and fiction books - all of which I recommend.

Gloriana: Elizabeth I and the Art of Queenship by Linda Collins and Siobhan Clarke

Image was everything for the Tudor elite, and symbolism was everywhere. Portraiture provided a way to communicate status, wealth, religious leanings, marriage alliances, and hidden meaning. Queen Elizabeth I was the last of the Tudor monarchs, before Scotland’s Stuart King James VI and I acceded the English throne in 1603. Elizabeth, who famously never married, strategically used portraiture to convey power and majesty instead. In 1596, the ‘mask of youth’ developed by court painter Nicolas Hilliard became the official image of Elizabeth I. All subsequent portraits had to follow this approved design. Gloriana takes readers on a visual and literary journey through the reign of Queen Elizabeth I.

What Tudor history books do you recommend?

Do you have a Tudor history book that you always recommend to friends and family looking to learn more? Let us know what book you recommend by leaving a comment.

Leave a comment

If you enjoyed this post, here are some of the most popular articles on Notes of a Tudor time traveller:

• Tracing the Letter from Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria

• Anne Boleyn - One of eighteen maids of honour? A case of mistaken identity.

• Anne Boleyn - The identities of the 18 filles d’honneur

• The Household of the Young Charles V in 1513: Part One - The Grand Chapel

• The Household of the Young Charles V in 1513: Part Two - The Small Chapel

• The Household of the Young Charles V in 1513: Part Three - The Children of Honour

• Claude Bouton: A life in service, with a focus on the years 1512-1514.

  ---

Thank you for reading. If you enjoyed reading this post, please consider subscribing to receive posts directly to your inbox.

Subscribe now

It seems there is always something new in the world of Tudor history - the discovery of a lost portrait, the re-dating of an object, a new archival finding, new books and courses.

I thought I would summarise some of the latest Tudor news for you. For those interested in finding out more, I have included links that will take you to the relevant websites for further information.

I do hope you find something new here.

Lucy x

Books

The House of Boleyn by Tracy Borman

23 April 2026

The House of Boleyn is the latest historical fiction novel by Historian Dr Tracy Borman. This novel documents the spectacular rise and rapid fall of the Boleyn family as told through the lives of Hever Castle’s inhabitants.

Fox Lane Books are currently accepting pre-orders for signed and dedicated editions of The House of Boleyn. You can order your copy here.

Mary Boleyn: The Queen’s Slandered Sister by Sylvia Barbara Soberton

07 May 2026

Mary Boleyn was sister to Queen Anne Boleyn, yet very little is known about her. She is rumoured to have had affairs with both King Francis I and King Henry VIII, and has been labelled the “great and infamous whore”. It has even been said that everything we know about Mary Boleyn can fit on a postcard. But, what if everything we thought we knew about Mary was wrong?

I am really looking forward to reading Sylvia’s latest book on Mary Boleyn and her take on the primary sources. You can find out more about this upcoming book here.

Jane Seymour: Patronage, Culture and Image Crafting by Elizabeth Norton (cover yet to be announced)

23 July 2026

Jane Seymour: Patronage, Culture and Image Crafting by Elizabeth Norton will be the first full length academic book exploring Jane Seymour’s life and queenship. Jane Seymour has often been referred to as plain, or boring, but is this because we know so little about her? In Jane Seymour, Dr Elizabeth Norton has brought together all the surviving source material to uncover the life of Henry VIII’s “true love”.

You can find out more about Dr Norton’s latest book here.

Exhibitions

Capturing a Queen: The Image of Anne Boleyn

Hever Castle

11 February 2026 - 2 January 2027

This week, Anne Boleyn’s childhood home of Hever Castle, in Kent, has celebrated the opening of their latest exhibition, Capturing a Queen: The Image of Anne Boleyn. This exhibition brings together the largest collection of portraits believed to depict Anne Boleyn. Congratulations to the team at Hever Castle. The exhibition looks incredible.

If you do happen to visit Hever Castle, be sure to also check out their B&B Accommodation while you are there for an extra special treat.

You can find out more about the exhibition here.

Announcements

The British Museum has announced that they raised £3.5m needed to keep a pendant bearing the intertwined letters H and K, which stand for King Henry VIII and Katherine of Aragon. The pendant was discovered by a metal detectorist in 2019.

You can read their Press Release here.

Historian, Dr Estelle Paranque, is the author of Blood, Fire and Gold: The Story of Elizabeth I and Catherine de Medici, and Thorns, Lust and Glory: The Betrayal of Anne Boleyn. Estelle has recently announced that she is putting together a 4 week online seminar on Tudor and Valois Queens in Crisis. It sounds fabulous! You can register your interest here.

Professor Suzannah Lipscomb has relaunched her newsletter, and earlier this year, launched her Tours Through Time. You can visit her website to sign up for her newsletter and check out her courses here.

What Tudor history news have you seen lately that sparked your interest? Leave a comment below to share the books, courses, movies, exhibitions and announcements.

Leave a comment

Thank you for reading these Notes of a Tudor time traveller. If you enjoyed reading this post, please do subscribe so that you can receive these posts direct to your inbox xx

Subscribe now

Do you love watching historical television shows and movies but not sure what is fact and pure fiction?

Are you searching for a safe place to ask questions or share your thoughts on all things Tudors?

Do you want to find out about new insights into the Tudor period?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then Notes of a Tudor time traveller is the place for you.

Subscribe now

Who is the Tudor time traveller?

My name is Lucy and I am currently studying a Masters in Medieval and Early Modern History with the University of New England. I became fascinated by the Tudors as a young child when I would stare at my grandmothers dolls of Henry VIII and the six wives. But, when I was at school we never learnt about Tudor history. So I had to find my own way.

My early exposure, or re-exposure, to the Tudors was through television and film. First with the 1998 films Elizabeth and Shakespeare in Love, then with the Showtime television series, The Tudors. But, I fell well and truly down the rabbit hole once I wanted to find out what was fact and what was fiction.

Over the last decade I have devoured as many Tudors books as I possibly could. I have had the absolute joy of being a participant in countless online Tudor courses and events. I have travelled to the UK and visited many locations that were witness to pivotal moments in Tudor history. In 2024, I started carrying out my own research into the primary sources. Over the last year+, I have been immersed in researching the original documents associated with Anne Boleyn’s time at the court of Margaret of Austria, which led me to commence my MA in History last year.

Having gone through the process of finding my way into the Tudor period, and around the sources, I wanted to build a community and safe space where I can support others embarking on their own journey.

Subscribe now

Why should you subscribe?

As a free subscriber, you will have access to:

• One monthly book review or book recommendations post.

• One monthly article where I write about Tudor history, share updates on my original research or share articles compiling the latest research and book news from the Tudor community.

• Access to my entire Notes of a Tudor time traveller archive.

  Subscribe now

My most popular posts

Anne Boleyn - One of eighteen maids of Honour? A case of mistaken identity.

Anne Boleyn - The Identities of the 18 Filles d’Honneur

The Birth Debate: An Assessment of Anne Boleyn’s Letter to her Father

The Household of the Young Charles V in 1513: Part One - The Grand Chapel

Tracing the Letter from Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria

Eagerly Anticipated History Books of 2025

Subscribe now

I started Notes of a time traveller on Substack early last year to share my love of history and build a fabulous community of fellow history lovers. Almost a year later, I still love the Substack format and engagement here.

I have realised I need a clearer focus for readers, so I’m giving the publication a little revamp. Notes of a Tudor time traveller will make it easier for Tudor history lovers to find and engage with this community. Since I already write about Tudor history, this change feels like a natural step.

Along with it, I will be sharing regular articles, book reviews and recommendations, along with chats and ongoing research.

Thank you for being part of this journey with me.

Lucy xoxo

Leave a comment

One of my reading goals in 2025 was to read more widely and I have carried this goal into 2026. For many years, I mostly read non-fiction books about the Tudors or medieval history. I’m still reading these books - just not as many. This month, there isn’t a single book that I would have traditionally picked up. Nevertheless, I really enjoyed this month’s reading journey.

I would love to know what you are reading at the moment - both to inspire myself and others. For years, most of the books in my collection have come from recommendations on podcasts, social media and blogs. So please do share what you have been reading and if you have any recommendations.

Here are my reads:

1. Fenwomen: A Portrait of Women in an English Village by Mary Chamberlain

   This beautiful 50th anniversary edition is a piece of oral history. In the 1970s, Mary Chamberlain interviewed women of all ages from the village of Isleham in the Cambridgeshire Fens. In doing so, she captured the voices of women who might otherwise have been lost. She spoke with women born in the nineteenth century and children born in the late 1960s. In so many ways, Fenwomen demonstrates how dramatically women’s lived experiences have changed; in others, they remain the same.
   As part of this anniversary edition, the author has added an updated afterword. Here, Chamberlain reflects on her return to the village, her experiences, the practice of oral history, and how the book was received by the villagers. This is a beautiful addition to the book that captures the complexities of oral history.
   In 2023, during our extended UK history adventures, we spent a month living in the East Anglian village of Somerleyton. The descriptions of village life in Fenwomen reminded me so much of Somerleyton. I could easily sense the isolation and the impact of change on a small village.

   
   

   

2. A Month in the Country by J. L. Carr

   Continuing with the theme of life in an English village, my second read is J. L. Carr’s classic novel, A Month in the Country. Tom Birkin is a survivor of the First World War who travels to the small village of Oxgodby, where his task over the next month is to uncover a medieval wall painting in the village church.
   A Month in the Country is a story of recovery - about how a place can seem untouched by time through memory, and about the power of going slow and appreciating life’s seemingly small moments.

   “You’ll find that, once you’ve dragged yourself off round the corner, there’ll be another view; it may even be a better one.” - J. L. Carr, A Month in the Country, p. 92

3. The Screwtape Letters by C. S. Lewis

   Two years ago, my eldest and I read The Chronicles of Narnia. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe was a favourite of mine as a child, as were the BBC adaptations from the 1980s. It was such a joy to read them again and share the magic with my child. That same year, I read a biography of Lewis. More recently, I listened to an episode from the BBC Great Lives podcast which renewed my interest in exploring some of his other works.

   The Screwtape Letters is a creative piece of fiction in which the demon Screwtape writes letters to his nephew, offering advice on how best to corrupt the human soul. The letters include fascinating and humorous observations of human character.

   I found it to be a quick yet thoroughly enjoyable read.
   

   

4. Fallen Idols by Alex von Tunzelmann

   This was my favourite read of the month. I have often seen this book in stores - I would pick it up, have a quick glance, and put it back down again, assuming it wasn’t a topic that would interest me. That changed over the last six months or so through my studies, which encouraged me to think more critically about the discipline of history and the writing of history.

   Fallen Idols explores the often controversial topic of statues - who gets to decide who is immortalised in stone and marble? Who decides whether they are pulled down? Does the removal of a statue constitute the rewriting of history? Tunzelmann explores these questions through the lives of historical figures and their statues including, for example, King George III, King Leopold II, Sadaam Hussein and George Washington. It is an incredibly compelling read. I struggled to put it down.

   I think Fallen Idols is an important and timely book and highly recommend it.
   
   

   

5. The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame

   This children’s classic was our chosen read aloud this month. There are elements of it that are quite beautiful, and other’s that, to me, seemed a little nonsensical. That said, it was often stories about talking animals (hello, Narnia) that developed my love of animals as a child. To be honest though, it didn’t matter what I thought of the storyline - the fact is that the children loved it.
   

   Subscribe now

   ---

I would love to know what you’ve been reading - do you have any recommendations for me or fellow readers?

Wishing you all a safe and happy February.

Lucy xoxo

Leave a comment

This week saw the release of Sylvia’s latest book - The Forgotten Tudor Women: Jane Boleyn and Susanna Horenbout. Congratulations Sylvia.

Today, Sylvia explores the possibility that Susanna Horenbout served at the court of Margaret of Austria.

I do hope you enjoy this fascinating insight into the life of Susanna Horebout xxx

Susanna was the daughter of Gerard Horenbout and sister of Lucas, painters and miniaturists who came to England in the 1520s. Susanna was a gifted artist in her own right, praised by German painter Albrecht Dürer who bought one of her works:

"Master Gerard, the miniature painter, has a daughter about eighteen years old, called Susanna, who has illuminated a little page with a Savoir, for which I gave her 1 florin. It is a great wonder that a woman shouls be able to do such work.”1

Before the Horenbouts settled in England, Gerard worked as an artist at the court of Margaret of Austria, Dowager Duchess of Savoy and Regent of the Netherlands. In 1515 he became “valet de chambre et painctre”, Margaret’s “servant and painter”. Gerard’s most famous commissions were a portrait of Christian of Denmark painted from life, and illumination of the Sforza Hours.

As I was writing about Gerard’s service at Margaret’s court, I had a thought crossing my mind: what if his daughter Susanna served as Margaret’s maid of honour?

Margaret of Austria was the daughter of Maximilian i, Holy Roman Emperor and Mary, Duchess of Burgundy. Following the premature death of her only brother, Philip the Handsome, her father appointed her as the Regent of the Netherlands. She was the first woman to occupy this post. Margaret established her court in Mechelen, in today’s Belgium. She employed young girls, daughters of ambassadors and court dignitaries, as her filles d’honneur; maids of honour. These girls hailed from different parts of the vast Habsburg dominions but Margaret also employed at least two Englishwomen: Anne Brandon, daughter of the Duke of Suffolk and Anne Boleyn, daughter of Sir Thomas Boleyn who served as ambassador at Margaret’s court in 1513.

Susanna Horenbout would have been about twelve years old in 1515 and so it is highly likely that her father would have not only taken her to Margaret of Austria’s court with him but made sure that she was appointed as the archduchess’s fille d’honneur. “Nowhere could a father find a better start for a future courtier”, according to historian Eric Ives.2 Margaret of Austria had no children of her own but she was a foster mother to her late brother’s son and three daughters: Charles, Prince of Castile and Eleanor, Isabelle and Mary. Ives explained: “The elite of Europe vied to place their offspring as attendants on her and her charges in the knowledge that they would effectively be educated alongside Europe’s rulers of the next generation.”3

Margaret of Austria was particularly fond of employing girls who possessed special talents. Anne Boleyn who spent about fifteen months as Margaret’s fille d’honneur from the summer of 1513 to autumn of 1514, was skilled “in playing on instruments, singing and such other courtly graces, as few women were of her time.”4 Susanna inherited her father’s talent and this skill would have been of particular interest to the archduchess who herself dabbled in painting.

Margaret was an avid art collector and she took great pleasure in displaying her vast portrait collection to the elite visitors who flocked to her cultured court. She employed many court painters, including her favourite Bernard van Orley, whose portraits were faithful depictions of Margaret. The archduchess avoided unnecessary flattery in her portraits and wanted them to reflect her true appearance.

Between 1516 and 1521, Gerard Horenbout was regularly mentioned in Margaret of Austria’s accounting books. From these accounts, we know that he was paid for “certain paintings” he made for Margaret as well as for “beautiful, illuminated stories” in a rich book of hours on parchment.5 This was a reference to the Sforza Hours, currently preserved in the British Library, presented in an unfinished state to Margaret of Austria by Bona Sforza, Duchess of Milan. Margaret commissioned Gerard to complete the work on the Sforza Hours.

The last mention of Gerard Hornbout at Margaret’s court was made in 1522. The next reference to the family comes from their service at the court of Henry VIII, where they worked permanently. Susanna worked in her father’s workshop, married John Parker, Yeoman of the King’s Wardrobe, and served in the household of Henry VIII’s wives as a “gentlewoman”. She forged a career path that would earn her the admiration of her contemporaries. Lodovico Guicciardinini, contemporary Italian writer and merchant, remembered her as “an excellent painter, especially in making of very small works beyond all belief; and most excellent in illuminating so that the great King Henry VIII brought her to England with great gifts and provisions, where she lived many years in great favour at his court and died rich and honoured.”6

Tudor Notes with Sylvia Barbara Soberton

During the research for my books, I often stumble upon captivating stories and unearth fascinating documents. Through this blog, I will share interesting bits and pieces from my original research.

In order to trace the letter, it was necessary to work backwards to it’s earliest mention in the secondary sources. The original source for the letter can then be located, and the letter’s movements traced from there.

The letter’s journey spans 500 years. For ease of reference a shorter, infographic summary has been provided at the end of this article.

Locating the Letter from the Secondary Sources:

Anne Boleyn’s biographer, Professor Eric Ives, reports that his source for the letter is an article entitled The Youth of Anne Boleyn, written by Hugh Paget, and published in the Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research in 1981.1

Turning to the article by Paget, the source of the extract from the letter is identified as Sergeant, Appendix D.2 Further investigation found that this refers to The Life of Anne Boleyn written by Philip W. Sergeant in 1923.3

In Appendix D of Sergeant’s work, relating to the letter the author writes “The following is the text of Sir Thomas Boleyn’s letter to Margaret of Austria in 1514, as transcribed by Mr. J. Eliot Hodgkin in “Notes and Queries, 8th Series, Vol. VIII., page 141, from the original holograph then recently sold by auction at Sotheby’s.”

The stated volume of Notes and Queries dates to the 24th of August, 1895.4 On the early life of Anne Boleyn, Hodgkin states that":

“A little bit of fresh information on this point has just come to light, in the shape of an original holograph letter, recently sold at Sotheby’s, from Sir Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria, Governor of the Netherlands.”

Firstly, it should be noted here that the letter is identified as an original holograph letter. A holograph letter is defined as a “document entirely in the handwriting of the author.”5 This indicates that the letter was both written and signed in Thomas Boleyn’s handwriting. The fact that the letter is also identified as the original indicates that it is, as stated, the original, rather than being a later copy.

Hodgkins goes on to write that:

“By this document a considerable addition accrues to our stock of information. We find, in the first place, that a daughter of Sir Thos. Boleyn was, in August, 1514, at the Court of Margaret of Austria, Governor of the Netherlands, and was summoned thence to England by her father at the request of Mary Tudor, a fact quite unknown to the biographers of Anne Boleyn, who assume that she (or her sister Mary) was at Hever when summoned to Mary Tudor. In the second place we learn that the arrival of “la petitte boulain: in England could not have taken place much earlier than the end of August, 1514, whilst the espousal of Mary Tudor to Louis XII, took place at Greenwich on Aug. 13 of that year. Hence it appears that the resolution of Mary to have the little Boleyn in her train must have been a somewhat hurried one, as the girl could not have arrived till after the ceremonial”

Hodgkin’s published transcription of the letter reads:

“Ma treschiere et tres redoubtee dame dans sy hu’ble cuer quil mest possible a v’re bonne grace me Recom’ande. Il vous playrs a sauoir com’ent la seur du Roy mon maistre madame marie Reyne fyancee de france ma Requyse dauoir auecques elle ma fille la petite boulain laquelle ma tres redoubtee dame est a present auesques vous en v’re court a laquelle Requeste Je may peult ne sceut Refuzer nullement, sy est ma tres redoubtee dame que Je vous supplie tres humblement quil vous plaise de don’er et octroyer congiet a ma fille de pouuoir Retourner p’deuent moy auecques mes gens lesquels Jay envoyet deuers vous a ceste cause ma tres redoubte dame Je me tiens fort obligiet envers vre bonne grace a cause de la gra’t hon’eur que fait aues a ma fille et que ne mest possible a desseruir deuers vre bonne grace non obstant que Je ne dezire aultre chose synon que Je vos puisse faire aulcun seruice agreable ce que Jespere de faire encores cy en apres un plaisir de dieu auquel Je prie ma tres redoubtee dame quil vous doinst lentier accomplissment de vos nobles et bons desirs Escript desoubz mon signe manuel a la court Royalle de grynewiche en engleterre/le xiiije Jour daoust mo xve et xiiij.”

vre tres hu’ble Sruiteur

Sr Thomas Boleyn.”6

The above article from Notes and Queries was published in August of 1895. Within it, Hodgkin identifies the document as being recently sold at auction at Sotheby’s. Further investigations found the advertisement published by Sotheby’s in May 1895 announcing the upcoming sale of a letter from Sir Thomas Boleyn.7 Therefore, it is highly likely that the letter was sold at auction at Sotheby’s on the 30th May 1895.

A transcription of the letter is on display at Hever Castle (figure 2). Note that in the bottom left hand corner of the letter there is some faint writing. Three of the words that can be seen here are “for Historical Notes”. Perhaps this could be the transcription of the letter made by J. E. Hodgkin for submission with the article for Notes and Queries? Further investigations are being carried out to determine the provenance of the Hever copy.

Using the above information it was possible to determine the letter’s provenance from 1514 to 2025. This was done by tracing the letter’s movements both before and after Hodgkin’s purchase in 1895.

Tracing the letter’s provenance from 1514 to 2025

As identified by Hodgkins, the original letter was written by Thomas Boleyn, at Greenwich, on the 14th of August 1514. Depending on the conditions, the letter may have taken anywhere from 3 to 10 days to reach Margaret of Austria. Following the letter’s arrival it would have made it’s way to the archives. The Hôtel de la Poterne was a complex of buildings that comprised the documents from the chambre des comptes and the Trésor des Chartes de Flandre.8

The chambre des comptes of Flanders “was founded in 1386 by Philip, duke of Burgundy” and comprised of government documents such as account books and quittances.9 The contents of the chambre des comptes of Flanders were moved to the site of the Hôtel de la Poterne towards the end of the 17th century.10 In contrast, the collection of “personal papers of the rulers of the county of Flanders, collected over centuries of rule” was referred to as the Trésor des Chartes de Flandre.11 Originally stored at the Chateau de Courtrai in Lille they were moved to the Toures des Chartes (of which was part of the Hôtel de la Poterne) in the latter part of the 16th century.12

By 1801, the Hôtel de la Poterne had deteriorated to the point that it was demolished.13 The contents of the archives were moved to the “attic spaces of the Town Hall.”14 Finally, in 1806, they were moved to their new home at the Hôtel de Lombard.15 In June 1833, the commissioners from the Record Commission in England arrived to begin transcribing documents pertaining to England.16 Research by Pierre Chaplais, found that there was a link between the presence of the English commissioners and the disappearance of archival documents, one that was also observed at the Archives in Paris.17 Independent scholar, Christopher Ford, has recently identified the letter from Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria as one of the 151 manuscripts stolen from the Lille Archives around 1835.18

Research by Chaplais and Ford has identified a number of the stolen documents for sale in London by bookseller Thomas Thorpe in 1836.19 Furthermore, a number of stolen documents were then traced to the collection of Sir Thomas Phillipps who had purchased the entire Thorpe collection.20 Phillipps was a prolific collector of the period. An extensive study of the Phillipps Collection by A. N. L. Munby identified 45,000 manuscript and autograph letters that were from Phillips’ collection and made available for purchase through auctions between 1828 and 1850.21

Phillipps appears to have kept the letter in his collection until his death in 1872. Following which, his collection was sold in stages between 1886 and 1937. As previously identified, it is in May 1895 when the letter is next sold at auction, and in August 1895 when the article and transcription is published in Notes and Queries.

From here, the next mention of the letter is in 1897. This time though, it is listed in a document called The Manuscripts of J. Eliot Hodgkin, Esq., F.S.A, of Richmond, Surrey (figure 3).22 Therefore, it can be deduced that it was J. E. Hodgkin who purchased the letter from the Sotheby’s auction in May of 1895 and consequently, recognising the document’s significance, published it’s transcription a few short months later.

John Eliot Hodgin passed away in 1912.23 His extensive collection was put up for auction at Sotheby’s in 1914. The letter from Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria appears in the auction catalogue ‘The J. E. Hodgkin Collections. Catalogue of the Autograph Letters and Historical Documents’.24 It was sold as Lot 26, as part of the ‘First Day’s Sale.’ In the catalogue, the item is identified as:

“BOLEYN (Sir Thomas) Lord Privy Seal, father of Anne Boleyn, A VERY RARE AND IMPORTANT A. L. s. (in French), 1 p. folio, Greenwich, Aug. 14, 1514, to Margaret of Austria, asking her to allow his daughter, “la petite boulain,” to return to him, as Mary Tudor desired to have her near her, with portrait, etc.

*If this extremely interesting letter refers to his daughter Anne, and not to his other daughter Mary, and this seems probably from the expression “la petite boulain” (Anne, according to Camden, was seven years of age at this time), a very important light is thrown on the early life of this unfortunate Queen, and points to the fact that she was in France in 1514, forming one of the train of Margaret of Austria. See Mr. Hodgkin’s elaborate notes enclosed.”

Presumably, the letter stayed in the hands of a private collector(s) until its reappearance in the 1970s. In 1979, the British Library took a copy of the letter. The record for this copy indicates that the document (identified as R. P. 2696/1) is part of the British Library’s Photocopies of Exported manuscripts.25 This means that in 1979, to comply with legislation, the document was copied in preparation for export. As such, it can therefore be assumed that the letter was sold at auction in 1979.

Searching through auction catalogues for 1978 and 1979, there is a match on same page for the name Thomas Boleyn in the Catalogues of Sales for 1979 from Oct 25 - Nov 20.26 Further investigations find that on the 20th November 1979, Sotheby’s held an Auction of Valuable Continental Autograph Letters and Manuscripts.27 This is therefore a very likely candidate for the Auction where the next owners, Brigitte and Harry Spiro, purchased the letter.

Brigitte and Harry Spiro began “collecting important English historical documents and letters in the late 1970s.”28 Harry, Brigitte and their family lived in New York.29 The fact that the Spiro Family began their collection in the 1970s and lived in New York, along with the purchase of the letter from Sotheby’s in November 1979, and that it is copied in preparation for export all fits with Harry and Brigitte Spiro being the next owners of the Thomas Boleyn letter.

Harry Spiro died in 2001 and the items from the Spiro Family Collection started being sold at auction.30 On the 3rd of December 2003, the letter was sold as Lot 10 in Part 1 of the Spiro Family Collection.31 It was estimated to sell for a price of 2,000 - 3,000 GBP and sold for 3,585 GBP.32

In the auction, the brief description reads:

“BOLEYN, Sir Thomas, Earl of Wiltshire and Ormonde (1477-1539. Letter signed (‘T. Boleyn’) to Margaret of Savoy (‘Notre tres chere et redoubtee dame Madame de Savoye Rege[n]t et Gouvernante de Flandres’, Greenwich, 14 August 1514, in French, one page, folio, address panel (integral leaf removed, a few words and part of signature faded by effects of damp, slightly frayed outer edge, inner margin trimmed, traces of mounting on verso, lightly dust stained.”33

Further details added are as follows:

“A personal and diplomatic letter. Boleyn writes to Margaret of Savoy after the unexpected proclamation of peace between England and France, requesting on behalf of the Princess Mary, now betrothed to Louis XII, that she will permit his daughter [Anne Boleyn] to return to him with his emissaries. ‘[M]adame marie Reyne fyancee de france ma Requyse davoir avecquelles elle ma fille la Petite boulain laquelle ma tres redoubtee dame est a present avecques vous an v[ot]re court a laquelle Requeste je nay peult ne scent Refuzer nullement… je vous supplie tres humblement quil vous plaise de doner et troyer c[on]giet a ma fille de pouvoir Retourner par devers moy avecques mes gens.’

Boleyn had negotiated with Margaret of Savoy the previous year the treaty whereby her father, the Emperor Maximilian, Pope Julius II, Ferdinand of Spain and Henry VIII agreed to make war on France. Henry later conducted secret negotiations leading to the proclamation of peace with France on 5 August 1514, and the betrothal of his sister, Mary, to Louis XII. Boleyn now had to recover his daughter from Margaret’s court in Flanders since early in 1513 when Margaret confirmed the arrival of ‘La Petitte Boulain’. (H. Paget. The Youth of Anne, Bulletin of the Inssitute of Historical Research, no. 54, 1981). At the date of the present letter she was with the court at Veure [Tervuren, outside Brussels] and she travelled directly from Flanders to France, where her father was also going, in the suite of Princess Mary. Anne Boleyn remained in France for several years."34

The likely purchasers of the letter were Jane Eaglen and Brian Lyson. Born in Lincoln, Jane Eaglen is an opera singer who has had a long and successful career.35 In 2000, she married linguist, Brian Lyson at the Seattle Opera House.36 In 2009, Jane Eaglen and Brian Lyson donated the letter to Lincoln Cathedral.37

Lincoln Cathedral describes the letter as follows:

“Autograph letter of Sir Thomas Boleyn, earl of Wiltshire and Ormonde, to Margaret of Austria, dowager duchess of Savoy and govenor of the Netherlands, asking for the return of his daughter Anne to England so that she might accompany Mary Tudor, sister of Henry VIII, to France for her marriage to Louis XII.”38

The letter remains to this day as part of the collection at Lincoln Cathedral. In 2024, the letter was on display for the public (figure 4).

This letter began in the hands of Thomas Boleyn at Greenwich on the 14th of August 1514. It journeyed across the channel to Margaret of Austria, spending the next three centuries in Archives before being stolen and taken to London. It has been through Auction houses multiple times and in the hands of countless people. It spent a little over two decades in New York, and has come to what may be it’s final home, at Lincoln Cathedral. It is a remarkable survival and a document that has much to reveal. If only it could tell us it’s secrets.

Share

A Summary of the Provenance of the Letter from Thomas Boleyn to Margaret of Austria

Subscribe now

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the work of Chrisopher Ford, Pierre Chaplais and A.N.L. Munby for their work on the letter’s early provenance. Likewise, this investigation would not have been possible without the dedication of Anne Boleyn’s biographer’s Professor Eric Ives, Hugh Paget, and Philip W. Sergeant. I would also like to acknowledge J. E. Hodgkin for recognising the importance of this letter and publishing his transcription of it in 1895. My thanks also to the staff at Christie’s and the British Library for responding to my emails. My heartfelt gratitude to Linda Donald for her permission to use the photo of the letter from her personal collection, taken at Lincoln Cathedral in 2024.

“I have received your letter by the Esquire [Claude] 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.”1

But, who was this man?

Claude Bouton (b. ~1470) was the son of Philippe Bouton and Catherine de Dio2. In 1467-1468, Philippe Bouton is identified as being in the service of the royal family as a premier ecuyer tranchant.3 Claude followed in his father’s footsteps and it is from 1501-1505 in which he is listed in the service Margaret of Austria’s brother, Philip the Fair, as an ecuyer d’ecurie.4 The ecurie was the section of the royal household responsible for the care of Philip the Fair’s horses.5 In 1506, Philip travelled to Spain and was accompanied by “more than 400 courtiers, over 100 guards and some 2,000 German troops.”6 To the shock of all, Philip died suddenly in Spain that September.7 What was to become of Philip’s vast household?

Claude appears to have made an appeal to Margaret of Austria for assistance. In 1507, she wrote from Mechelen to her father Maximilian:

“ My most revered lord and father, I humbly commend myself to your gracious favour. My lord, Claude de Bouton, equerry to the late king, my brother, whom God has called to his side, is currently on his way to you for reasons he will explain. And for this reason, Your Lordship, as he served my late lord and brother well and for a long time, and even since his passing has been continually engaged in the war in Gelderland, sparing neither his person nor his possessions, I beg you Your Lordship, to hold him in high and special regard, and you will do me honour and pleasure. My most revered lord and father, I pray to our Lord to grant you a very good and long life with the fulfilment of your highest and most virtuous desires.”8

Presumably, Margaret’s letter to her father was successful because on the 10th of October 1508, Maximilian, this time writing to Margaret, said:

“Our dearest and most beloved daughter, we have appointed our beloved and loyal squire, Claude Bouton, Captain of the Guard of our dearest and most beloved son, the Archduke, and we are sending him to you now to take up his duties and office; of which we advise you, so that you may take the captain and twenty of the archers who are with our son, and leave the other twenty there until you go to Cambray or have other business to attend to; in which case you may summon them all to you and use them as you see fit.”9

As such, Claude Bouton was transferred into the household of the young Archduke, the future Charles V. While in Philip’s household he fulfilled the position of an ecuyer d’escurie, he was now placed into the position of Captain of the Guard. He appears again in May of 1509. This time in a lengthy letter from Maximilian to Margaret (of which only an excerpt has been provided here). Touching on Claude Bouton, Maximilian writes:

“Furthermore, we have retained our beloved and loyal squire, Claude de Bouton, as captain of the gentlemen and others whom, by deed to be made to our son, we intend to assign to his care, counting eight horses at the price of eight gold pieces for each horse per month and at the pension that you would order for him each year, as you can see in the letters in which we requested that you dispatch our letters patent to him. We request of you again that, in the event that the said pension has not already been assessed and ordered and our said letters of retention dispatched, you do so immediately in accordance with and following the said first letters that we have all written, and similarly to those of our finances. And you will do us pleasure.

Furthermore, we have instructed and ordered the said Bouton to purchase for us a large and powerful steed, which he is to send to us immediately, along with the two that we previously ordered and instructed Mingouval, squire of our son’s stable, to purchase for us, and two others that Gillotin, groom of our late son, has said he will bring us. We request that you have the aforementioned horses paid for by our financial officers and that you immediately provide whatever is necessary to bring them to us by coach, for we have a pressing need to use them on our journey.”10

Claude Bouton, therefore remained in the service of the Burgundian royals and was a highly regarded member of staff. At some point between 1509 and 1512, Bouton appears to have been promoted from the position of Captain of the Guard (capitaine de la garde) to Chambellan. This department of the Archduke’s household would have been responsible for the “day to day activities of the royal bedchamber,” providing Charles with companionship, while also being sent on ambassadorial missions.11 It is around 1512-1513, where Claude receives his next career advancement.

The years of 1512 and 1513 are quite significant in Claude’s career. In 1512, he received his pension of 300 livres. Within the document it indicated that regarding his work they hoped “that he would continue to do even more good in the future, so that he would be more inclined and determined to continue in their service and that he would have more with which to support himself in his position as chamberlain during the half-year that is not counted by the accounts of the ordinary expenses of the household of the said Archduke, ordered, granted and agreed to take and have from them as a pension each year, in addition to and above the ordinary wages assigned and ordered to him because of his said status as chamberlain.” This is important as it indicates that they are hoping he will take on additional work on top of his pre-existing duties as chambellan. But, it also reveals that his work as chambellan is carried out as part of a rostering system.

The application of a rostering system is evident in the household ordinances for the Burgundian royals. For example, in the Ordonnances of 1495, Claude Bouton is one of “five squires [that] shall serve during the months of January, February, March, April, May and June.”12 They then seem to rotate with another five squires who serve from July to December. A similar system of rostering has also been observed in the structure of Charles' chapel, the structure of which was based off of that of Philip the Fairs.13 Therefore, in the document regarding his pension of 300 livres from 1512, it can be determined that Claude is part of a rostering system, but is also being offered the opportunity to carry out work on behalf of Margaret of Austria and the Emperor Maximilian during the months he is not rostered on for work in Charles’ household. While the household ordinances from 1495 indicate that Bouton was rostered on to work from January to June, it is currently unknown which roster he may have been on at the time. The household wage list from 1513 that has been analysed previously has been damaged and the sections that may indicate Bouton’s presence (or absence) are frustratingly missing.14 A household wage list from April 1512 identifies Bouton as a Chambellan at the time, so it is possible he retained his original roster of January to June.15

On the 29th of March, 1513, a formal commandment for payment to Claude was made. The payment being made is for the work Claude carried out in December of 1512. While it doesn’t specify the exact work that was carried out it does say that it was carried out in Allemagne. The word Allemagne is French for Germany. But, it is important to remember that the borders of Allemagne in the early 16th century were vastly different to what they are today.16 This voyage was made to visit the Emperor Maximilian “for certain matters greatly concerning the honour and reputation of us, and the good and security of our country.”17 Furthermore, the duties Claude was being paid for included the work he conducted while in the service of Philip the Fair, the existing work that he carries out for Charles, for his pension, and to reimburse him for the “costs and expenses he had, and sustained, during his trip.” This mission in December 1512 has previously been put forward as the start of Bouton’s diplomatic career.18

We gain a little more information from Claude Bouton about his journey in December of 1512. In a letter of receipt for the aforementioned command for payment, Claude Bouton repeats many of the phrases taken from the original command.19 While the command for payment was written in late March, Bouton doesn’t respond to it until the 1st of May. Furthermore, Bouton in his acknowledgment of receipt, he identifies the gentleman he travelled with on this journey with as a Monsieur de Thamise. Further research indicates that Monsieur de Thamise was Roland le Fevre who was the Treasurer General of Finances from 1509 to 1515.20

Of further significance in these two primary source documents are Claude Bouton’s titles. In the command for payment in March 1513, Claude was referred to as “Claude de Bouton, seigneur de Corberon, escuier et chambellan.” But, when Bouton responds in May, he identifies himself as “Claude de Bouton , écuyer , seigneur de Corberon, conseiller et chambellan de l’archiduc.” Therefore, by May he appears to have received another promotion. In addition to the position of chambellan, Bouton is also now one of Charles’ counseillers.

Thus far, it can be determined that in December of 1512 Bouton was travelling for work on behalf of Margaret of Austria and the Emperor Maximilian, and it is hoped that he will carry out further additional duties in the future during the months he is not employed in Charles’ household. In March 1513, a formal command for payment is made to Claude from Margaret’s court in Mechelen. In May 1513, Claude responds to this payment. A court list of wages from March 1513 is damaged and the sections in which Claude may have been listed have been lost.

In May or June of 1513, Bouton is recommended for a mission by Margaret of Austria to the Emperor Maximilian.21 In this letter, Bouton is described as a “very wise and skillful gentleman.” Margaret also recommends a gentleman by the name of Armestorff - indicating that if Maximilian did not want to use Armestorff that he should use Bouton. It is unknown if Bouton was selected for this mission, but by July, Maximilian is writing to Margaret about the Armestorff mission.22 Bouton’s biographer believes this is indicative that Bouton was not selected for this particular mission.23 Bouton is however believed to have been one of the nobleman who, from June 1513, started raising troops for the upcoming Battle of Guinegate and the capture of Tournai for Henry VIII.24 This belief stems from a record of payment made from Henry VIII to Claude Bouton in 1514. From the 9th of June 1514, this record of payment reads “To Monsr. Claudy Bouton, by the King’s command, and my Lady of Fayffey’s (Savoy’s) letters, 100 gold florins for wages for the month of April last=15l. 11s. 1d. Signed: K. Bouton.”25 If Bouton had started raising troops in June of 1513, but the Battle itself didn’t take place until August of 1513, and he is on Henry’s payroll for work in April of 1514 - he may have been fully occupied in this work from June 1513 until at least April of 1514.

So, what else can be deduced from the archival records.

Firstly, Claude Bouton is employed in the household of the future Charles V. From December 1512, he starts carrying out additional duties on behalf of Margaret of Austria and the Emperor Maximilian.

Generally, it has been posited by previous historians and scholars that the most likely time for Anne Boleyn to have arrived at the court of Margaret of Austria is after Thomas’ departure (given Thomas had to be away from court in order for Margaret to write to him of his daughter’s arrival). Based on Thomas Boleyn and Claude Bouton’s movements, this would potentially limit the possible period for Anne’s arrival to the last two weeks of April 1513, or mid-late May.

But, it is worth mentioning however that Thomas Boleyn was a special envoy at Margaret’s court not an Ambassador.26 As a Special Envoy, Thomas was given “a specific commission” which in this case was to negotiate and ratify a specific treaty. In Thomas Boleyn’s case, the treaty was ratified on the 5th of April 1513, and on the 11th of April 1513, he was in Calais preparing to cross the channel and return to England.27 It has been assumed that on his return, he immediately sent Anne to Margaret’s court.

In the extract included in Le Glay’s Correspondance of the Emperor Maximilien and of Margaret of Austria from 1507 to 1519 as footnote, Le Glay transcribed that on Thomas’ return they [Margaret and Thomas] would need no other intermediary other than Anne.28 But, given that Thomas was a special envoy and the treaty had been ratified, and therefore his mission complete, there would have been no expectation of Thomas returning? Unless, this letter was written to Thomas while he was travelling in the region in his attempts to meet with the Emperor, in which case Margaret was expecting his return? Perhaps Anne arrived earlier at Margaret’s court earlier than has been previously thought?29

Returning to Bouton’s career after 1514 - by 1516 Bouton had advanced further, being referred to as conseiller et maitre d’hotel de l’empereur.30 In 1519, he travelled to England and is described in a letter by England’s Ambassador in the Low Countries, Thomas Spinelly, to Cardinal Thomas Wolsey as "Monsieur le Maistre d’hostel Bowton, Ambassador to England.”31 He appears to have acted in this ambassadorial capacity and is mentioned a number of times throughout 1514.32 Later in 1519 however, he appears to have been placed in the household of Charles’ younger brother Ferdinand.33 In another record from 1519, he is referred to as the premier ecuyer d’ecurie de Ferdinand, archiduc d’Autriche.34 By 1525, he acted as the Governor of the country in the absence of the Captain General.35 Around 1528-1529, Bouton was identified as a Counsellor of the Privy Council, and Chambellan.36 In 1542, Bouton, the Knight and State Counsellor to the Emperor was paid 300 livres for travel he carried out on “matters greatly affecting the security and welfare” of the country.37 In 1549, he has been identified as the grand equerry of Mary of Hungary.38

One portrait of Claude survives. It can be found in a manuscript in the National Library of France. It dates to around 1540.

Throughout his life Claude Bouton had a successful career in the Burgundian court. In his personal life, Bouton married a woman of noble birth by the name of Jacqueline de Lannoy. Together they had a son by the name of Jacques. Bouton died in 1556 and is buried with his wife in the church of Notre‑Dame du Sablon in Brussels.

Subscribe now

The list of Children of Honour includes eleven names. One of these names, Maistre Adrian de Wyele (Wiele) was the maistre d’escole des enffans d’honneur de monseigneur. That leaves ten Children of Honour that formed part of Charles’ household in 1513. Out of these ten, half are identified by their full name which makes identifying them somewhat easier. The remaining individuals are only identified by either a surname, their place of origin, or a noble title within the family. It is important to highlight, however, that in some cases names are repeated multiple times within the same family, for example in one noble family of the period there is a Jan van Gistel, his son and three cousins, all of the same name.1 In some cases, identification has only been able to be put forward as suggestions as to who the individual might have been, and in others identification has frustratingly not been possible.

Pierre de Feyre (Veyre)

Pierre de Feyre (or alternative spelling of Veyre or Vere) appears first on the list of Children of Honour from 1513.2 He is absent from the list of Children of Honour dating to 1512.3 But, the 1512 list does identify a Seigneur de Veyre as a Maitre d’Hotel who is to be paid 4 livres, 2 sols, 2 deniers.4 This is indicative of an older Veyre employed in the household of Charles V in 1512. Further investigations find that this position was held by a Philibert de Veyre.5

Philibert Veyre was the son of Pierre de Veyre and Marguerite de Talaru.6 In 1471, he entered royal service as Chamberlain to Duke Charles of Burgundy. In 1489, he held the position of chief equerry at the court of Maximilian and Philip the Fair.7 Around 1505-1506, he was made a Knight of the Order of the Golden Fleece.8 Around 1507, he returned to Mechelen and held the position of Maitre d’Hotel (or Chamberlain) to the young Charles V.9 This would indicate that the Seigneur de Veyre who appears in the 1512 list of Charles’ household is Philibert Veyre.

Philibert’s position as a Knight in the Order of the Golden Fleece is indicated in his heraldry (Figure 110).11 Philibert de Veyre married Marguerite de Lannoy and together they had four children.12 Only one of his children is clearly identified in the extant records. Her name was Marie de Veyre and she was included in the epitaph of Philibert and Marguerite.13

One extant manuscript survives pertaining to Philibert de Veyre. It was commissioned by Philibert and can be dated to between 1490 and March 1498.14 It contains both the heraldry of Philibert de Veyre and Marguerite de Lannoy (figures 2 and 315). It is thought that Philibert commissioned the manuscript as a gift for Margaret of Austria.16 Furthermore, the manuscript was likely a gift for Margaret’s marriage to Juan of Castile.17 It was at the marriage of Margaret and Juan where Philibert de Veyre was the ‘Best Man’.18 The French Manuscript 6440 is a French edition of the History of Alexander the Great by Quintus Curtius.19 Following Margaret of Austria’s death in 1530, the manuscript went into the possession of Margaret’s niece, Mary of Hungary.20

Based on Philibert’s long career at court, and his position in Charles’ household, it is presumed that Pierre de Veyre was the son of Philibert de Veyre. Marguerite de Lannoy died in March 1498.21 Therefore, if Pierre de Veyre was the son of Philibert de Veyre, he would have to of been born in or before March 1498. Alternatively, Philibert remarried after the death of Marguerite, and Pierre was the child of Philibert and his second wife. But, there are no records to indicate that Philibert remarried and there are records that Philibert and Marguerite had four children. Furthermore, Philibert did not have any brothers, or at least there are none mentioned in the extant records (so it is unlikely that Pierre was Philibert’s nephew). Therefore, there is a strong possibility that Pierre de Veyre was the son of Philibert de Veyre.

Philibert de Veyre died in April 1512.22 Therefore, it can be presumed that Philibert died shortly after the 3rd of April 1512 when the 1512 list of Charles’ household was compiled.23 It is plausible that Pierre de Veyre was placed under the care of Margaret of Austria following the deaths of both his mother and father.

Pierre de Veyre then remained in the service of Charles until his own death. In 1517 he is mentioned in Charles’ household in the position of a “escuiers trenchans.”24 By 1527, he is referred to as an Imperial Diplomat.25 At this time Pierre de Veyre is involved in the conflict associated with the League of Cognac and the sack of Rome.

In September 1527, Pierre de Veyre had travelled to Italy. He wrote to Charles - “Things over here are now in a very different state from what Your Majesty thought when I left.... they are in such a bad state that they could not be worse.” Veyre begged Charles to “make peace with France, because it will be less dishonourable, and also you will gain the freedom to avenge yourself on those who strive to harm you.”26 Pierre de Veyre was killed as part of this conflict. He died between late 1527 and early 1528, killed just outside of Naples by the arquebusiers of the Black Bands (a group of Italian mercenary troops).27

Joachim de Rye

The parents of Joachim de Rye were Simon de Rye, Seigneur de Belancon et de Dissey and Jeanne (Antoinette) de la Baume, Comtesse de Montrevel.28 Evidence of their union survives in two manuscripts. The first manuscript contains the Rye heraldry (figure 429) and the names “Simon de Rye Jeanne de la Bavme” written amongst the book’s decorative border (figure 530).

The second surviving manuscript contains a depiction of a royal image (figure 631). In the bottom centre of the image sits the Rye heraldry. Framing the scene are two pillars and on these pillars are two shields of the Rye heraldry, and two shields of the combined Rye-Baume heraldry.

Simon and Jeanne were buried together in the Couvent des Cordeliers de Dole. In the mid-seventeenth century, Pierre Palliot, conducted surveys of tombs, heraldry, and epitaphs etc. Then, in 1698, Louis Boudan copied Pierre Palliot’s survey, the copies of which still survive (figure 7).32 The epitaph states that Jeanne died on the day before the Kalends of May in 1512 (30 April 1512, o.s.) and that Simon died on the 9th day before the Kalends of July in 1518 (23 June 1518, o.s,).33

It is through the epitaph that we also learn that Joachim de Rye was one of twelve children.34 A year of birth for Joachim is more difficult to identify. One secondary source however, states that Joachim de Rye was just out of swaddling clothes when he was given by his father Simon de Rye to Charles V, who was the same age as him, where he served the Prince as a Child of Honour.35 Charles V was born on the 24 February 1500, and as such Joachim de Rye is assumed to have been born in, or close to, 1500.36 Most sources document that Joachim was the eldest son, which makes sense given that he was chosen to be raised in the royal household with the future Charles V.37 Of his brothers - Claude died without posterity, Louis became the Bishop of Geneva and the Abbot of Saint Claude, Philibert also became the Bishop of Geneva (after the death of his brother Louis), Marc de Rye became Lord of Dicey and Knight of Toison, and Gerard de Rye possibly became the Marquis of Tréfort, Baron of Balançon, Lord of Vuillafans.38

Thus Joachim de Rye was raised with Charles in the royal household. He appears in a list of household wages for the young Prince Charles in 1512.39 Then, in the 1513 list of household wages for the young Prince Charles, Joachim de Rye appears third in the list of Children of Honour and is to be paid 3 sols per day.40 In 1517, he appears in two lists of wages for Charles’ household.41 In one of the 1517 lists he is identified as holding the position of paige. He appears again as a paige in a list from 1521. While in this list he is only identified as Rye, it is presumed to be as he is the only Rye at the time to have held a court position, spending his life in the service of Charles V.

Growing up with the young Prince Charles, the two developed a close friendship. This friendship is evidenced by the honours bestowed upon Joachim and his family throughout his life.42 One such honour was the arrangement of marriages for Joachim and his brothers Marc and Gerard, to marry Antoinette de Longvy (Longwy) and her sisters (Jeanne to Marc and Louise to Gerard).43 Through these marriages, which took place on the 3rd of January 1532, the Rye brothers obtained the lordships of Neuschâtel.44 In 1545/1546, he was entered into the noble Order of the Golden Fleece.45 Both his union with Antoinette and his membership with the Order of the Golden Fleece are depicted in his heraldry (figure 846 and figure 947).

One source suggests that Joachim served the Emperor so well that he was chosen to accompany him to Valladolid in 1518.48 Following this he was made a sommelier and guardian of the corps.49 In the archival inventories for 1520-1522 he is identified as “Joachim de Rye, chevalier de la Toison d’Or, capitaine d’un regiment de chevauchers.” But, as he wasn’t admitted to the Order of the Golden Fleece (chevalier de la Toison d’Or) until the “Utrect chapter of January 1546,” this was likely an addition of the archivists to identify him more specifically.50 He was made a Knight in 1535 during the Conquest of Tunis.51 Another record pertaining to Joachim de Rye in the archival inventories for the years 1551-1553 identifies Joachim as “Joachim de Rye, Knight of the Golden Fleece, captain of a regiment of cavalrymen.“52

With his wife, Antoinette de Longvy, he had one daughter, Francoise de Rye.53 Francoise was married to her first cousin Claude de Rye.54 However, the union of Francoise and Claude produced no children. Most sources tend to agree that Joachim de Rye died in 1560. There don’t appear to be any records of where Joachim was buried. It has been thought that he was buried in the Church of Our Lady of the Assumption in the French town of Rahon. The lordship of Rahon was originally part of the Longvy inheritance but with the marriage of Antoinette de Longvy to Joachim de Rye, it passed into the Rye family.55 However, there is no proof of his place of burial, nor is it known whether his tomb has been destroyed.

Fransquin de la Gracht

Fransquin de la Gracht appears in the records in various forms. In the 1513 list of Children of Honour, the name is written as Fransquin de la Gracht. Fransquin de la Gracht was also referred to as Francois van der Gracht. He descended from the ancient and noble van der Gracht family.56

Francois’s grandfather was “Wautier van der Gracht, Chevalier, Seigneur des Fosses, Morsele, Volandre, Wevelghem, Belleghem, &c. Grand and Souverain Bailly de Flandres en 1472.”57 Wauthier married Elisabeth de Heule, Dame de Heule, Leeuwerghem.58 Wauthier died in 1505.59 Wauthier and Elisabeth had four children - Thieri, Isabelle, Francois and Martin.60

The eldest son, Thieri, became Thieri van der Gracht, Chevalier “Seigneur des Fosses, Heulle, Morsele, &c. Grand Bailly de Bruges.”61 Thieri married “Isabelle de Ghistelle, Dame de Maelstrede, Axelles.“62 Together, Thieri and Isabelle had five children - Wauthier, Josse, Francois, Marie, and Antoinette.63 The order of the children’s birth is unknown. It appears to be accepted that Thieri died in 1500 and that Francois appears to have been born in 1499, so Francois would have been one of the youngest children in the Van der Gracht family.

The eldest son Wauthier van der Gracht became the “Seigneur des Fosses, Heulle, &c.”64 Josse van der Gracht inherited the title of Seigneur de Axelles.65

Francois was known as Francois van der Gracht, Seigneur de Maelstede.66 Francois married Anne de Hallewin.67 Anne de Halewin was the daughter of George, Seigneur de Hallewin and Antoinette Sainte-Aldegonde, and the grand-daughter of Jeanne de Commines de Hallewin, the long-serving friend, and lady-in-waiting to Margaret of York.68 Anne de Hallewin was a Maid of Honour to Margaret of Austria in the mid to late 1520s.69

Francois is absent from the list of Children of Honour in 1512.70 But, he is on the 1513 list of Children of Honour.71 By 1517 however, he has become a “varltetz servans“, along with Jehan Quarre, Heulle and Pieriquiete.72 Francois and Anne likely married around 1527. There is a mention of Anne Hallewin as a Maid of Honour to Margaret of Austria in a book written by her secretary Jean de Marnix.73 He served Margaret of Austria in 1527. In his writings he identifies a number of women as dames, femmes and filles d’honneur including one Anne de Hallewin.74 But, Anne is absent from the 1530 list following the death of Margaret of Austria.75 Some time before November 1528, Francois’ brother Wauthier died.76 He had been the Chatelain and Capitaine de Chateau de Contray.77 On his death, Francois took over this role which was likely located in Flanders. Therefore, it is plausible that they married around 1527-1528 and moved together to Flanders, explaining their absence from the 1530 list. The van der Gracht family will be revisited again shortly.

Jehan Quarré

Jehan Quarre was born to parents Louis Quarré, Seigneur de la Haye et Hainaut and Barbara Croesinck who had married in 1478.78 A portrait depicting Louis and Barbara facing one another in prayer survives and is housed in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille in France.79 Louis Quarré was a rising courtier in the latter part of the 15th century80 During his time in the employ of the Emperor Maximilian I, Quarré rose to the positions of “Receiver General of Finances in the Burgundian Court at Malines and Treasurer of the Order of the Golden Fleece.“81 He was then knighted in 1506.82 Louis died in 1519, while Barbara lived on until 1531.83

A Book of Hours which once belonged to Louis Quarré survives in the Bodleian Library. Referred to as MS. Douce 311 the Hours of Louis Quarré can be stylistically dated to around 1490-1495. While the original coats of arms within MS. Douce 311 have been painted over (figure 11 and figure 1284), specialist analysis has been able to identify the originals as belonging to Louis Quarré and Barbara Croesinck.85 The illuminations throughout the Quarré Hours have been attributed to the Master of the First Prayer Book of Maximilian, who is thought to have been active in Ghent and potentially Bruges in the late fifteenth to early sixteenth century.86 Also referred to as the Maximilian Master, circumstantial evidence indicates the identity of this individual as an Alexander Bening.87 But, the workshop of this Master likely involved numerous individuals.88

There is a second Book of Hours that belonged to the Quarre family. It is MS 138 and it is kept in the Médiathèque d’Orléans in France.89 The decoration in MS 138 appears to be stylistically consistent with production in the Ghent-Bruges region, possibly from the late 15th to early 16th century, but as yet, academic studies on the manuscript are yet to be found. It’s ownership by the Quarre family is evident as it has also been used as a livre de raison from 1553-1641.90 Exactly when it came into ownership by the Quarre’s is unknown.

There were three Quarre siblings - Jehan was the eldest, followed by Maximilien and Jeanne.91 In an extant list of wages from 1512, Jehan Quarre appears among other Enfants d’Honneur including Heulle, Armude, Mangerfruyt, Traviere, Pericquille, Couart de Connixberghe and Joachim de Rye.92 Jehan Quarre then appears in the 1517 list of Charles’ household.93 In these accounts, Jehan appears as a “varletz servans.”94 Interestingly, with him in the same position in the 1517 list are his fellow Children of Honour from 1513 - Fransquin de la Gracht, Heulle, and Pericquiete.95

In 1524, Jehan Quarre married Catherine Ruchroch van de Werve.96 Together they had Jacques Quarre, who inherited the Seigneur de la Haye title from his father.97 Jacques also served the royal household.98 He married Anne de Blehen and together they had a number of children.99 Jacques died in 1568 and was buried in the church of St Catherine in Mechelen.100 It is currently unknown when Jehan died and where he was buried.

Heulle

The Heulle name appears numerous times in the Archival Inventories. In the 1513 list of Children of Honour, this individual is identified simply as Huelle. But, the Heulle name appears numerous times in the Inventories throughout the 16th century.101

In 1504, we find a Guillaume Heule, de Bruges.102 In 1514, a Guillaume van Huele, de Cortemarcke.103 In 1516, a Jean de Heulle, ecuyer.104 In 1518, a Jean de Smet, de Huele.105 In 1530, a Monsieur Guy de Huelle, chevalier, seigneur de la Motte. In 1538, a Francois Willems, de Heule.106 In 1544, a Pierre Holdenbrech, de Heule.107 In 1561, a Simon Bernaert, de Heule.108 In 1565, a Wallerand de Landas, ecuyer, seigneur de Heulle.109

A Huelle referred to simply as Huelle, is found thus far on 4 occasions. Firstly, in the Archival Inventories in the 1512 list of wages as an enfant d’honneur.110 The next sighting is in the 1513 list of wages, again as an enfant d’honneur.111 In a list of Charles V’s household from 1517, Heulle is listed along with Jehan Quarre, Fransquin de la Gracht and Piericquiete as a “varletz servans”.112 Given the appearance of Heulle in this list with other former Children of Honour, it is presumed to be the same Heulle from the 1512 and 1513 lists.

Given that the positions of Children of Honour were reserved for the children of noble families, and that the Children of Honour raised in Charles’ household were of a similar age to the Archduke, we are searching for children born in, or around, 1500 who come from a noble family baring the Huelle title.

Wautier van der Gracht

Wautier van der Gracht was the eldest brother of Francois van der Gracht who we have already met. Wauthier and Francois’ grand-father was also a Wauthier van der Gracht. His roles and titles include “Chevalier, Seigneur des Fosses, Morsele, Volandre, Belleghem, &c. Grand and Souverain Bailly de Flandres en 1472.”113 This elder Wauthier van der Gracht married Elisabeth de Heule, Dame de Heule, Leeuwerghem.114 From this point, the Heulle title moves into the van der Gracht name.115 Wauthier and Elisabeth’s eldest son was Thieri.116 He became known as “Thieri van der Gracht, Chevalier, Seigneur des Fosses, Heulle, Morsele, &c. Grand Bailly de Bruges”.117 The elder Wauthier van der Gracht died in 1505 and one source indicates that Thieri died before his father (et mourut avant son père).118

But, when we turn to Wauthier and Francois’ grandfather on the maternal side, we find not only another noble, but a high-standing, influential member of the court - His name was Joos van Ghistele.119 Known as the grand traveller, Joos’ titles and positions included Knight, Lord of Axele, Advisor and Chamberlain of Maximilian.120 Joos van Ghistele is a fascinating individual.

Joos van Ghistele was born in Ghent in 1446.121 In 1449 his father was called by Philip the Good to fulfil the role as Grand Bailiff in Ghent.122 But, in 1451 the people of Ghent banished the family from the city who retreated to their castle.123 In gratitude for their services though, the young Joos van Ghistele was added to the retinue of the teenage Charles the Bold.124 Joos joined Charles the Bold in his campaign against the people of Liege in 1465, and following the Battle of Brusthem in 1467 he was knighted.125 In 1477 he formed part of the delegation who travelled to Brussels to celebrate the betrothal of Mary of Burgundy to Maximilian of Austria.126

In late 1481, Joos set out on a journey through the Middle East and Mediterranean.127 The journey was originally intended as a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, and his travel companions indeed returned home after the usual pilgrimage duration of six to nine months, but interestingly Joos continued on his travels for a further three years.128 His journey was originally published in 1557 and was reprinted in 1563 and 1572.129 After his return in June 1485, he stepped into the role of Chief Alderman and in 1492 became the Grand Bailiff of Ghent. Following this he acquired the title of private counselor and chamberlain to Maximilien I (privé-raadsman en kamerheer van Maximiliaan van Oostenrijk) and later to Philip the Fair.130

Returning to the younger Wauthier van der Gracht - he had inherited the Heulle title from his father, Thierri, who had died in 1505. His maternal grand-father Joos van Ghistelle was employed in the close knit circle around the emperor Maximilian. It therefore seems plausible that Joos van Ghistelle arranged for his grandson Wauthier van der Gracht to be raised in the household of the young Charles V, and is then able to secure a position for Wauthier’s younger brother Francois van der Gracht who also joins Charles’ household in 1513.

Based off of the research, Wauthier van der Gracht appears to be the most likely candidate to be identified as Heulle in the 1513 list of Children of Honour. Other possible candidates that were investigated included Wallerand de Landas and Daniel van Huele, Lord of Lichtervelde but these were discounted on further investigation.131 The names of the individuals found throughout the Archival Inventories were also investigated, but the individuals found did not fit the age range, or status, for a Child of Honour in Charles’ household in 1513.

Armude

An individual by the name of Armude (also spelt rmude) is present in both the 1512 and 1513 lists of Children of Honour.132 In Ghent on the 21st of June 1517, there is also an Armude, but this time in the position of Eschancon (cup-bearer).133 One identity that has been put forward for this individual was a “Jan, Lord of Arnemuiden, married to Catharina van Gistel... a son of Arnoud van Trazegnies (died 1494), Lord of Arnemuiden, and Margaretha van Elverdinge (died 20 May 1542).”134 This identification was posited due to the presence of Jean, Lord of Arnemuiden’s in a court record of 1515 and the list of wages from December 1517.135 Further investigations into these individuals find that the union between Arnoud and Margaretha founded the Trazegnies-Arnemuiden branch, which dies out in 1558.136Furthermore, it can be found that Jean was the eldest son of Arnoud van Trazegnies.137 Given that Arnoud died in 1494, and that Jean was Arnoud’s eldest son, it is unlikely that the individual in the 1513 list is Jean as he would likely have been too old to be in the position of Child of Honour. Furthermore, one secondary source indicates Catherine and Jean/Jan, Seigneure d’Arnemuyden married in 1526, so the individual with the Arnoud title also cannot be from any children from the union of Catherine and Jean.138 But, there do appear to be a number of illegitimate children in the Trazegnies line, and some sources identify a Pierre de Trazegnies as a son of Jean de Trazegnies and Catherine de Ghistelles.139 Pierre cannot be the son of Catherine de Ghistelles, unless she was older than thought, or if she were married earlier. One source provides a year of birth for Pierre de Trazegnies of 1500, which would fit with a child of the young Charles V’s age. Therefore, Pierre de Trazegnies is a possible candidate for the Armude mentioned as a Child of Honour in the 1513 list.

Another possibility for the identity of this individual could be the illegitimate offspring of Jean III van Trazegnies. Jean van Trazegnies (different to the Jean van Trazegnies explored above) is the son of, yet another, Jean van Trazegnies, who happens to be the eldest brother of Arnoud van Trazegnies. Both Jean van Trazegnies, the younger and the older, had prominent court positions.

The younger Jean van Trazegnies became a member of the Order of the Golden Fleece, and the coats of arms depicted with his own is that of Armaude (figure 13140). According to one source, Jean van Trazegnies served Philip the Handsome before becoming Councillor and Grand Chamberlain to Charles V. He also apparently stood in for Charles V in his proxy wedding to Isabella of Portugal. He died in 1550 and is buried in the Church of Saint Martin in Trazegnies, Belgium (figure 14 and figure 15).

Therefore, it could also be possible that the Armude identified in the 1513 list is that of an illegitimate child of this Jean Trazegnies, Councillor and Grand Chamberlain to Charles V.

Maughe frime

In the 1513 list of wages, this individual is identified as Maughefrime, but there is some fading and folding which makes this section of writing difficult to decipher.141 In the 1512 list, this individual has been transcribed as Mangerfruyt.142 He then appears to be absent from the 1517 list. At the time of writing, I have been unable to identify this individual further.

Traimuie

In the 1513 list of wages, this individual appears as Traimuie or similar.143 He is also present in the 1512 list, in which the name has been transcribed as traviere.144 He then appears to be absent from the 1517 list. At the time of writing, I have been unable to identify this individual further.

Perriquille

In the 1513 list of wages, this individual is identified as Ptricqui(?)te.145 There is some fading in the writing on this section which makes the writing more challenging to read. In the list found in the 1512 wages, this individual is transcribed as Pericquille.146 He is found again in the 1517 list of varletz servans (this time transcribed as Piericquiete), along with fellow former Children of Honour Jehan Quarre, Fransquin de la Gracht and Heulle.147 At the time of writing, I have been unable to identify this individual further.

Anrart de Conixlergsy

In the 1513 list of wages, this individual appears as Anart de Conixlergsy, however there is some fading at the end of the name which makes it more challenging to transcribe.148 In the 1512 list of wages, this individual has been transcribed as Courart de Connixberghe.149 He then appears to be absent from the 1517 list. At the time of writing, I have been unable to identify this individual further.

Maistre Adrien de Wielle

Master Adrien de Wielle was not one of the Children of Honour, but was instead responsible for their education. He is listed with the Children of Honour in the 1512 transcribed inventory which identifies him as “leur garde.”150 In the 1513 document, he is identified as “mat adrien de wyele.”151 Adrien de Wiele was among one of the Archduke Charles’ first teachers.152 He taught alongside Robert of Ghent, Juan d’Anchiata and Luis de Vacca.153 One biography credits the early education of the Archduke to a Don Juan de Vera, the Bishop of Leon, who held the position of Grand Chaplain in the children’s household (prior to the formation of Charles’ own household), but he was recalled to the court of Ferdinand of Aragon in early 1505.154 Another source states that Adrien de Wiele was placed in this position shortly after becoming secretary to the Archduke Charles.155

Adrien de Wiele has previously been mistaken for Adrien of Utrecht, the future Pope Adrian VI.156 While Adrien of Utrecht is known to have been involved in the education of the young Charles, an error in identification has meant that he was believed to have been engaged in this role for a much longer period. This error in identification can be attributed to a mistake in transcription by Le Glay.157 Translating Le Glay’s thoughts on the identity of Adrien Wiele he writes that “I think I read Wiele after the word Adrianus. Without this Wiele, I would be convinced that it is Adrian of Utrecht, the future pope... And even assuming the word Wiele is correctly read, is it possible to attribute the letter to someone other than Adrian VI? Did the young prince have two tutors named Adrian? Who would this Wiele be, of whom I find no other trace either in the accounts or in the correspondence?.... As for the handwriting, I compared it with autographs signed Adrian of Utrecht but several years later. It is indeed the same type of characters except for these slight changes that the difference in time often brings to a man’s handwriting.”158 Le Glay’s error in identification then made its way into the literature - Just as Anne Boleyn was thought to be included in a list of 18 filles d’honneur and it became an established part of her narrative, Le Glay’s error in identification has also made its way into the literature on the early lives of Charles V and Adrien VI.159 Rather than being involved in Charles’ education from 1507, it was actually in 1511 that Adrien Boeyens de Utrech assisted Charles’ teacher Luis Cabeza de Vaca.160

The letter in which Le Glay transcibed was one from 1507 in which Adrien de Wiele signed himself “custos et paedagogus adolescenulorum regiorum archiducum“ (guardian and educator of the young royal archduke).161 In 1509 the household of the Archduke Charles and his sisters, Eleonore, Isabeau and Marie, were divided, with the prince receiving his own household.162 Also in 1509, Adrien de Wiele is identified with his official title as “maistre d’escole des enffants d’honneur de Mgneur l’archiduc.”163 It therefore appears that as a separate household was created for Charles, that Adrien Wielle stayed in his position with Charles rather than with the princesses. It is also from this time that the Children of Honour are frequently mentioned in correspondence.164 As previously mentioned, Adrien appears in the lists of the the young Charles’ household with the Children of Honour in both 1512 and 1513. Furthermore, a record of payment from 1514 identifies Adrian as “a maistre Adrien Wielle maistre d’escole des enffans d’honneur de monseigneur.”165

According to one source, Adrien de Wiele wrote the Illustrations of Gaul for Margaret of Austria.166 He had the manuscripts illuminated and finished the first volume in 1514 and the second in 1515.167 In 1515 Charles V assumed his rule in the Netherlands.

Following the completion of his position as maistre d’escole des enffants d’honneur, Adrien appears to have stayed on in the Emperor Charles V’s service. In 1530, he is known to have been again in the position of secretary to Charles V. This evidence survives in a letter that Adrien de Wiele wrote to none other than Desiderius Erasmus. The letter reads:

“Cordial greetings. I would have deafened your ears with my useless trifles if my dull stupidity and the perfection of your learning, which does not abide anything that is not elegant and highly polished, had not deterred me. What would I, a jackdaw who has not even greeted literature from the threshold, sing to a parrot? And yet my affection and respect for you (I who was and will always remain the admirer and champion of your celebrity, to the point of arousing hatred) prompt me to make known to you what a noted Friar Minor here named Medardus (I would call him Mostardicus), court preacher to the king of Hungary for public assemblies and slanders etc, spat out against you from the pulpit, either to accuse you of calumny or betray you in some way. In the presence of a rather numerous crowd, in a manner worthy of his temerity and virulence, he called you Herr Asinus, as if you were hallucinating when, in translating ‘He has regarded the humilitatem of his hand maiden’ in the Magnificat, you submitted vilitatem for humilitatem. To this he added at the top of his voice that you provided the instigation and occasion of all present evils and dissensions. These words aroused the indignation and muttering of the more learned members of the audience. Therefore, to make this outlandish fool reef his sails, either pour a jar of spicy mustard down his throat or, if you prefer, treat him with contempt.

I know besides that every time you write about your pension, which has long been owed to you by his Majesty, you have wasted both oil and toil. You risk losing the rest of it as well, unless through some friend you make solicitation for it. In this matter I assure you of my loyalty, if you will but send me the commission, and of my aid, which is available to all righteous and learned men.

There is nothing new here except that in its labour this diet in the end gave birth to tumults and the inextinguishable fires of war, if ever (God forbid!) it comes to war. Be in good health.

In haste from Augsburg, 16 November 1530

If you wish to ask something of me, direct your letter to Antwerp to the house of our common friend Pieter Gillis.

The confessor of Queen Mary, a friend of mine, commends himself to you. I am translating your famous Christian Widow into French, to be presented to her majesty, when it is finished.

Most devoted to your Lordship, Adriaan Wiele of Brussels, secretary to his imperial Majesty in the Council of Brabant, widower of many years, weighed down with eight children (what a burden!), especially four marriageable daughters who must soon find a husband.

To the distinguished and most learned Erasmus of Rotterdam, my most revered master.”168

Despite being only a brief glimpse of Adrien de Wielle, it gives readers an insight into the man that played a crucial role in the education of the young Charles V.

Conclusion

In this article we have explored the eleven names included in the 1513 list of wages for the Children of Honour who formed part of the young Charles V’s household. Where individuals have been able to identified, it can be seen that these young boys descended from noble families. In a number of cases they had a close male relative in the employ of the royal Burgundians, including Maximilien I, Juana of Castile, Philip the Fair, and Margaret of Austria. For a number of these boys, we see their career progression as they advance through the ranks of the household, with a number of them staying on to serve Charles for the rest of their lives, being awarded with favourable positions, advantageous marriages, and knighthoods.

In Part IV, we will look at the remaining names on the 1513 list and summarise the findings from our exploration of the household of the young Charles V in 1513.

Subscribe now

Notes

For an immersive experience, feel free to enjoy listening to music by members of the court who were found to be on this list of staff members in the Grande Chappelle of the young Charles V in March of 1513.

As mentioned in Part One, Charles’ chapel was divided into the grand chapel and the small chapel. The chaplains and singers of the grande chapelle were responsible for the celebration of high mass and those of the petite chapelle were responsible for spoken or low mass.1 The petite chappelle was “intended more for the monarch’s private oratory” and comprised primarily of members of “religious orders who were more entrusted with spiritual tasks.”2 The records demonstrate how the grand chapel was considerably larger than that of the small chapel.

The Document

The original document3, is dated the 25th of February 1512 (o.s.), which converts to the 7th of March, 1513 (n.s.).4 There has been some damage to the bottom and corner of the document which has resulted in the loss of some names. Regardless of this damage, there are at least 95 names contained within it. This includes 24 members of the Grand Chapel, 7 members of the Small Chapel, 11 Infants of Honour (including his schoolmaster), 13 Paiges, 4 members of the Panneterie, at least 3 cupbearers, and at least a further 33 names from unknown departments.

The Petite Chappelle

The structure of Charles' chapel was modelled on that of his fathers (Philip the Fair).5 In 1496, Philip divided his chapel into the structure we see replicated in that of Charles' - the Grand Chapel and the Small Chapel.6 For Philip, the Small Chapel was comprised of "a confessor, almoner, two chapelains, two clerics and three sommeliers."7

So, who were the members of the Petite Chapelle in 1513?

Michiel de Panye (Pavie)

Maistre Michiel de Panye (Pavie) appears to be the most senior member of the Petite Chapelle. He is listed first and is paid the most (24 sols).8 According to other surviving lists from 1510, 1512 and 1514, de Panye maintained this position throughout this period of time.9 Michiel de Panye was likely Charles' confessor, as in 1515 there is a reference to his Small Chapel ("Capilla menor") where we find a "Maestro Miguel de Panye Deano de Cambrey" which further states that as the confessor he was always paid 24 sols per day ("un confessor siempre pagado a 24 placas por dia").10 Michiel de Panye is also referred to as Michel de Pavie.11 Furthermore, Michel de Pavie, the Dean of Cambrai, is documented to have been Charles' first confessor, serving the young Charles from his early childhood through to his emancipation.12

Pavie studied in Paris in 1479 and 1480 before teaching at the College de Sainte-Barbe.13 In 1484, he began studies in theology at the College of Navarre, where he learnt under the famous preacher Jean Raulin.14 He received his doctorate in 1496.15 In 1498, he was in Cambrai when greeted by Desiderius Erasmus as "my old teacher."16 In 1514, a letter was sent to Pavie referring to him as the confessor to the future Charles V.17 In 1516, Pavie preached a solemn sermon following the death of Ferdinand II of Aragon.18 Michel de Pavie (Panye) died in Brussels in 1517.

Pierre Ruys

Records show that Pierre Ruys is consistently listed second in the Petite Chapelle from 1510-1514.19 In the 1513 document, he is paid the same as in 1512 and 1514 (18 sols).20 In 1515, there is a record that Pierre Ruys (Pedro Ruyz), was the senior almsgiver who was paid "18 placas por dia." It could therefore be conjectured that in 1513, he also held the position as senior almsgiver (based off of his income and placement in the list).21 In 1517, another source makes reference to Pierre Ruys, as the first almsgiver to the King.22 This is a position that he therefore appears to have held for a number of years.

Nicole Mayoul

Identified third in the list of the Petite Chapelle is a Messire Nicole Mayoul, to be paid 8 sols.23 One source from 1515, identifies Mayoul as one of three senior alms collectors24

Nicole Mayoul the Elder (presumably Nicole Mayoul the Younger's father), was a cantor for Emperor Frederick III who then went into the service of Maximilian.25 Nicole Mayoul the Elder died in 1506.26 Nicole Mayoul the Younger purportedly entered the records in 1477.27 In 1494, a large payment was made to a group of men including a Nicole Mayoul the Younger ("le jeusne") in consideration of the good and agreeable services they had rendered to the King on his recent journeys to Germany and Hungary.28 One source suggests that Mayoul disappears from the records from 1505.29 But, as we can see from this document, he is still present and active in 1513.30 Furthermore, another source has found Mayoul's name on lists dating to 1517 and 1519, and even as late as 1521.31

Jacques Tolman

Next on the list is a Maistre Jacques Tolman who is to be paid 6 sols.32 There is very little information available about Jacques Tolman. He is absent from a list from Mechelen in 1510.33 But, he does appear on a list from the 3rd of April 1512 where he was also paid 6 sols.34 He is then absent from the 1514 list before reappearing on a list of wages for the Small Chapel in 1519 where he was still receiving 6 sols.35

It is difficult to determine the role that Tolman played in Charles' chapel. But, by comparing the order and wages from a list in 1515 we can put forward an idea as to what his role may have been.

The first three positions in the 1513 list have already been identified. These being - The confessor (Michiel de Pavie, 24 sols), the senior almsgiver (Pierre Ruys, 18 sols), and a senior alms collector (Nicole Mayoul, 8 sols). The names, positions and wages of these individuals are the same as those found on the 1515 list. The next position on the 1515 list is that of the chaplains, who are paid 6 sols per day. Given that the 1515 list identifies members of the Small Chapel between the years of the primary source document (1513) and a later list of 1519 where members are still receiving the same wages, it could be conjectured that Jacques Tolman was one of Charles' chaplains.

Martin Bourgois

Maistre Martin Bourgois is the next individual to be identified on this list.36 He was also to be paid a wage of 6 sols.37 Bourgois is another individual who is difficult to track in the records in terms of the religious role that he played in the court. He appears on chapel lists from 1510 and 1512, in which he is also paid 6 sols.38 He also appears on later lists (from 1517 and 1519) as a Martin Bourgoiz and a Martin Bourgeois.39 Around the early 1520s, Bourgois no longer appears on any paylists, but does appear on benefice lists.40

Interestingly, Martin Bourgois is documented as a "chaplain-priest" who was the "principal music scribe" for Philip the Fair.41 In 1500-1502 Bourgois was paid for "making a richly illuminated book of masses, motets 'and other things' for the Emperor Maximilian."42 The order for this illuminated manuscript was placed in 1500 and it took Bourgois two years to complete.43 Going down the path of illuminated manuscripts, in this context Bourgois (Bourgeois) is referred to as Court Scribe B, and forms part of the Alamire workshop (Pierre Alamire you may recall was a member of the Grand Chapel, and you can revisit him here). A number of surviving manuscripts have been attributed to him, including the Chigi Codex, VIII, 234 (currently stored in the Vatican Library) and the MS. Ashmole 831 (currently stored in the Bodleian Library).44

Given his earlier role as a "chaplain-priest" for Philip the Fair and his consistent position and wage within the lists from 1510 to 1513, it can be posited that in Charles' Petite Chapelle he filled the role of chaplain. But, given his evident talent and reputation as a scribe of illuminated manuscripts, and his association with Pierre Alamire, he may also have worked in this capacity during this time, although there is currently no evidence to support his work as a scribe after 1509.45

Robert le Preux

Very little information remains regarding a Robert le Preux. There is one extant record of him from April 1514 in which he was part of Charles' Petite Chapelle and was paid 8 sols.46 On the list from 1513, Robert le Preux is listed sixth and is to be paid 5 sols.47 Given that the list of the Grand and Petite Chapelles appear to be written in a hierarchical order, it can be put forward that he was in a lower position than the individuals listed above. Therefore, he cannot have been the confessor, almsgiver, alms collector or chaplain. Given that the chapel of the future Charles V was based off of his father's chapel, the remaining positions yet to be encountered in the Petite Chapelle are the clerics and sommeliers. Therefore, based off of a process of elimination it could be put forward that Robert le Preux fulfilled the position of either a cleric or sommelier. Although this is entirely conjecture.

Guillaume de Vandenesse

Guillaume de Vandenesse appears in Charles' Chapel records in 1510.48 He is also present on the lists of 1512 and 1514, and appears to be a consistent part of Charles' Small Chapel.49 In 1510 and 1512 the records indicate that he is to paid 3 sols.50 This is also the amount that he is to paid on the 1513 list.51 However, in 1514, his name moves up position in the lists, and his wage increases from 3 sols to 8 sols.52 In 1515, he is identified as a sommelier, who is to be paid 8 sols per day.53 In 1517, in Valladolid, as part of the Petite Chapelle that travelled with Charles to Spain, Vandenesse was paid 9 sols.54 Then in 1519, he has moved to third place in the list and is to be paid 18 sols per day.55 He appears to retain this position through to 1521.56 But, in 1522 he is raised to the position of almoner, being mentioned first in the list of staff in the Petite Chapelle with a wage of 30 sols per day.57 Furthermore, in 1522, Vandenesse was named the Bishop d'Elne in Roussilon at Valladolid in Spain.58 In 1524, he became the grand almoner.59 He then appears to retain this position for some time, as evidenced on the extant lists of the 1520s.60 Throughout this period the members of Charles' Chapel remain relatively consistent, with the majority of staff accompanying Charles to Italy - Vandenesse however, was not one of them and it is at this time that he disappears from the lists.61 After a long career in Charles' chapel, Guillaume Vandenesse died in 1530.62

But, returning to his role in 1513, Vandenesse occupies the lowest ranking position of the Small Chapel, with a wage of 3 sols per day. Therefore, it could be put forward that he started his role within Charles' chapel as a cleric of sommelier.

Conclusion

In Part One, we explored the individuals that formed Charles' Grand Chapel. In this article, we have explored the individuals that formed Charles' Petite, or Small, Chapel. In Part Three, we will delve into the rest of Charles' household, including the positions of Enffans d'Honneur, Paiges, Panneterie and Eschansons, as well as make an exploration of the names of individuals whose role in Charles' court in 1513 has been lost due to damage.

Subscribe now

Notes