Category: Anne Boleyn

Tudor history is rife with politics, reformation, and scandal, and in the midst of it, all is Anne Boleyn, the notorious temptress who changed the face of religion and stands out for her time with her determination. Even to this day, she remains one of the`s most famous queens despite ruling for just three years, and her character persists in intriguing and often eluding historians.

After spending much of her youth in France, by 1522 Anne had returned to, where she stood out with her French manners and style of dress, putting her at the forefront of fashion. Anne`s character has been defined as witty, sophisticated, and lively, but also ruthless and sharp-tempered; the loyalty and pride she held for her family were unassailable, and her courage was evident as she transgressed gender stereotypes with her independent spirit. Despite being an advocate for religious reform, she observed the images of the Catholic faith and expressed the belief she was destined for Heaven as she had done ‘many good deeds’. Perhaps it was because of this that she was so generous and intent on setting a high moral standard for her household: her ladies spent hours sewing garments for the poor, which she could distribute on progress. It is estimated that her annual charitable donations came to £1,500 (£450,000 nowadays), and she sponsored reformers, gave financial support to universities, used her influence to save heretics from persecution, and funded the studies of poor scholars. Time has distorted how we view her, shaped by changing religious beliefs and differing attitudes about gender: Victorians tended to view Anne as an unfortunate woman without political goals or ambition, while modern views respect a more headstrong, fierce Queen. She was clearly a passionate reformist who dared go head-to-head with Thomas Cromwell at his most powerful and wouldn`t allow herself to just be a King`s mistress.

Seventeen letters from Henry to Anne from 1527 to 1529 are in the Vatican archives: one he sent in 1527 refers to him having been struck by the dart of love for more than a year. The affair was also implied during Shrove Tuesday 1526, when the motto Declare je nos ‘Declare I dare not’ was embroidered on Henry`s jousting costume, emblazoned above which was a heart engulfed in flames. Anne must have had an iron will to defy such ardent gestures from a King, yet she fended him off for at least six years, and in 1533 the King`s cousin declared that Anne, by refusing Henry, had known ‘how soon he was sated with those who had served him as his mistress’. Soon, Henry was infatuated with Anne and focused on obtaining an annulment of his marriage to Katherine of Aragon Pope Clement VII, under pressure from Charles V, refused to grant it. Anne read books banned in and recommended Henry books criticizing the papacy and emphasizing the power of monarchy; in a letter to Anne, Henry would claim he was spending up to four hours a day studying theological tomes and suffering ‘some pain in his head’ as a result, clearly fixated on getting the annulment.

Anne, meanwhile, slowly became more comfortable in her role: during Easter 1529, Anne caused a minor scandal when she blessed cramp rings, a ritual only to be performed by an anointed monarch. At the end of July 1529, at Grafton, she kept state more like a queen than a simple maid, and in November 1529 she occupied the consort`s chair at feasts and wore purple (the color of royalty) gowns that Henry gave her. She argued with Henry over delays in the nullity case, declaring she was wasting her youth to no purpose and threatened to have courtiers dismissed: in 1532 Anne argued with Sir Henry Guildford, who praised Katherine in her hearing and threatened to have him punished and removed from office when she was Queen. By December 1532, she had given in to Henry and was pregnant, and Henry wanted his ‘son’ to be legitimate. He, therefore, got Thomas Cranmer to annul his marriage to Katherine, and Henry and Anne secretly married as Parliament, in April passed the first of several pieces of legislation which would enact the reformation of the Church in. Five days after Katherine`s marriage was annulled, it was declared that Henry`s marriage to Anne was valid, and she was crowned. Anne took as her new motto, La plus heureuse: ‘The Happiest’.

Unfortunately, this happiness couldn`t last. While pregnant, she discovered Henry was being unfaithful and, unlike Katherine, she protested with certain words which the King very much disliked. He retaliated by claiming she had to shut her eyes and endure as her betters had done, and they maintained a silence for a few days, followed by a grudging reconciliation. Anne soon gave birth to a healthy girl, Elizabeth, but it was not the son Henry wanted: he did not attend Elizabeth`s christening and the jousting organized to celebrate was canceled. He still believed she would give him a son, but in July-August 1534 disaster struck as she miscarried the child. Henry was desperate for a legitimate son to name his heir, and in 1535 the French ambassador noted that the King`s love for Anne was dissipating as he courted ‘new amours’, including Jane Seymour, the antithesis of Anne: quiet, demure, and tractable. Anne still chastised Henry for infidelity, openly argued with him, laughed at his clothes and poetry, and even appeared bored in his presence. She had much influence over public affairs and the King dares not contradict her he was likely to be a bit in awe of her but also growing resentful. In February 1536, Chapuys claimed Henry had had little to do with her for three months.

Katherine of Aragon, widowed and lonely, died on the 7th of January 1536, and seventeen days later, at a tournament in Greenwich, Henry was unhorsed, and his armored mount collapsed on him. He was unconscious for two hours and at one point it was feared he was dead, so the Duke of Norfolk went out to tell the Queen the news. Some historians claim Henry’s fall could have resulted in brain damage, however, there is no evidence to suggest this no sources mention any sudden change in behavior from the King, but it could have worsened the ulcer in his leg or caused a vein to burst and become thrombosed. In any case, from descriptions as a very enlightened, bright, and charming youth, this may have accelerated Henry`s notorious descent into tyranny it was estimated 57,000-72,000 people were put to death during his reign.

On the same day as Katherine was buried, Anne went into early labor and lost another son, which Anne attributed to the shock she encountered when Norfolk told her the King was dead and her distress over Henry`s unfaithfulness. As Ambassador Chapuys would say, she has miscarried her savior: it was probably around this point that Henry started to question the validity of his second marriage. Despite this, Anne’s position seemed stable during February-April 1536, and Henry strongly defended her status as Queen when it came to the Imperial alliance. Late in March, however, Anne fell out with Cromwell, the King`s chief minister, and they quarreled over what to do with money obtained from the dissolution of the monasteries: she hoped the money would go to charitable enterprises while Cromwell intended to give it to the King. On the 2nd of April, a chaplain who handled Anne`s charitable giving delivered a sermon at court implying a comparison between Cromwell and the Bible character Haman, the corrupt minister of an Old Testament king, ominously noting that Haman died on the scaffold. Thomas Cromwell believed the Spanish alliance was crucial, but the King insisted the Emperor apologize for past behavior toward him and acknowledge Anne as the Queen in writing, a humiliating demand that would never be met. Cromwell believed the alliance and his future were in jeopardy Anne was therefore the biggest threat to his career and life. Historians are split on Cromwell`s motives perhaps he was just working on the King`s orders but he still worked to orchestrate her downfall.

Lord Chancellor Audley authorized Cromwell and Norfolk to lead a commission investigating unspecified cases of treason, and alleged conversations were used against her as incriminating evidence. Anne was known to dance with her ladies and favored gentlemen in her bedchamber. Most were part of the King`s Privy Chamber and she flirted with them openly, exchanging money and gifts, as were the accepted conventions of courtly love, and her flirtatious nature and enjoyment of male company made the charges plausible. Her fall was sudden: on April the 30th, Cromwell set before the King evidence that she had seduced members of the Privy Chamber, including her brother, and plotted regicide. Most of the evidence came from questioning members of Anne`s household, however, and the case is suggested to be based on inferences and innuendo. Henry had previously had an affair with Mary Boleyn, Anne`s sister, which could be considered as damning as Katherine`s previous engagement to Henry`s brother, but, instead, Anne was charged with adultery, witchcraft, and incest, charges absurd even to her enemies. It wasn`t enough to just get rid of her; she was to be crushed. At one point, Anne was seen entreating Henry with Elizabeth in her arms, but to no avail.

On the 30th of April, the musician Mark Smeaton was arrested and on May the 1st taken to the Tower. Likely under torture, he confessed to adultery with Anne on three occasions he was the only man accused to admit guilt, but it was enough to convict them all. Anne asserted Smeaton had only been in her apartments twice, on April the 29th and at Winchester in 1535, when he played the virginals for her, but she was already doomed. Cromwell took a risk by accusing Sir Henry Norris, one of the King`s closest friends of the King`s belief in the evidence against Norris suggests it was very convicting, although, perhaps in his frenzy, he was willing to believe almost anything put to him. Norris was summoned to accompany Henry to York Place, and on the way, Henry accused him of committing adultery with Anne as far back as 1533. Despite the King promising him a pardon if he confessed the truth, Norris vehemently denied these charges and was taken to the Tower the next day.

On May the 2nd, Anne herself was arrested and taken to the Tower, the same day as her brother, although the accusation of incest was on the evidence of George Boleyn`s wife, Lady Rochford, alone she may have spoken out of spite for her promiscuous husband. Sir Francis Weston and William Brereton were also put in the Tower, along with Sir Richard Page and Sir Thomas Wyatt. On May 12th, Norris, Weston, Brereton, and Smeaton were sentenced to death. Anne and George Boleyn`s trial occurred three days later, and both were sentenced to die despite pleas of innocence. Before twenty-seven peers of the realm, Anne said, I can say no more but ‘nay’, without I should open my body. If any man accuses me, I can say but ‘nay’, and they can bring no witnesses. No member of the nobility helped her, though, and her own uncle pronounced the death sentence. Henry Percy, Anne`s previous lover, swooned during the trial and had to be carried out, and Cranmer told the King, my mind is amazed; for I never had a better opinion in woman than I had in her.

On the 17th of May, the Queen`s alleged lovers were beheaded, and all but Smeaton claimed innocence, they never retracted his confession and repeated it at the foot of the gallows. Rochford warned onlookers to beware ‘the flatteries of the court’, and the same day, Archbishop Cranmer announced Anne`s marriage to the King null and Elizabeth a bastard. This logic sets a flaw in the case against Anne if she had never been married to the King, how could she have committed adultery? But this was overlooked, and, on Friday the 19th of May, Anne met her death with dignity, continually looking behind her while being taken to the scaffold. The day after Anne`s execution, Jane Seymour and the King were formally betrothed and married on May 30th.

Historians can view Anne`s story in a multitude of ways. Peter Ackroyd claimed it has been supposed Anne was the victim of a conspiracy managed by Cromwell, however, it would have been a risky business if this was not some nebulous charge built upon rumor and false report. Why accuse five men, four of them known and respected, when one would have been sufficient?. . It may be that she pursued other men in a desperate search for a male child who could be hailed as the heir to the throne . . . [Henry] must have been thoroughly convinced of her guilt, or had come upon another offense that he never disclosed, or both. While Ackroyd has a point, I disagree: while Henry may have believed those charges, he also may have simply wanted a way to rid himself of her. I am more inclined to Robert Lacey`s opinion that Anne had always been flirtatious, and this proved the route to her undoing. Playful glances and gestures were interpreted as evidence of actual infidelity. Men were tortured and ‘confessions’ produced . . . the servants of a Tudor government knew that proof had to be found so that the defective Queen could be condemned. After all, Henry had come to regard his kingship as an example of his divine providence: annotations in a Psalter show he did not see reading them as a way to reflect on his own shortcomings but to congratulate himself and sympathize with its author. As Chapuys would observe, The King, in his blindness, fears no one but God; one of his gold chains carried the inscription: ‘I prefer to die rather than change my mind’. Henry believed in his own superiority and the state of monarchy being sacrosanct, and this bigotry probably made him feel capable of doing anything he pleased After all, he was accountable to no one but God. Henry`s only son was dying at the time, which could also be partially responsible for Henry`s uncertain temper and emotional reactions. If he was displeased with his quarrelsome wife, who was to deny him her removal? After all, Cromwell had set evidence before him which gave him the perfect opportunity. Cromwell also could have wanted Brereton out of the way as there was evidence he disliked Brereton`s territorial influence where Cromwell served as Richmond`s deputy; Brereton`s wife and family would plead his innocence. Wyatt and Page were soon released, and Norri’s office was replaced by one of Cromwell`s men; looking at it from afar, it seems Cromwell benefited from the Queen`s fall.

Imagining the king`s death was treasonous; when Anne said to Norris you look for the dead man`s shoes; for if anything happens to the king, you would look to have me, she essentially convicted herself. When Anne arrived at the Tower, she asked the lieutenant, Sir William Kingston, if she would die without justice. The poorest subject the king has, he replied, has justice, to which she laughed maybe she knew she would get no justice and was completely at the will of the King. Before her death, Anne swore on the blessed sacrament she was innocent, but any claims of innocence were futile.

Anne is unlikely to have been guilty as charged and is the apparent victim of a temporary court faction supported by Cromwell. I find it difficult to believe that someone so intelligent would risk her life with such behavior as she was charged, nor would she have chastised Henry so much about his mistresses if she had not been faithful herself. Henry may have believed the charges, or he may have just wanted an excuse to get her out of the way. Anne`s arrogance made her unpopular at court, and perhaps he was worried about a repeat of Katherine, with a daughter followed by several miscarriages. To me, it seems more than mere coincidence that Henry married Jane Seymour, a more agreeable woman, after Anne`s death – maybe he just wanted a less assertive wife. Jane was not to be drawn into religious or political discussions and was subservient to his will. Perhaps it was Anne`s cleverness and ferocity which caused her untimely death: overshadowing a king when, at such a time, her qualities were not admirable in a woman. But, since history is altered and adapted, there is no way of knowing, and Anne Boleyn`s story can be perceived in numerous ways… many things should be regarded as apocryphal as time has taken the certainty of them away.

In Anne Boleyn`s last speech, recorded by Edward Hall, she said, I am come hither to die, for according to the law, and by the law, I am judged to die, and therefore I will speak nothing against it. She never confessed guilt, but likely wanted to protect her daughter by keeping her execution speech neutral: to me, however, it sounds cynical. She essentially stated she was there to die because the law decreed it so, and she knew nothing she said against it would have saved her. Unfortunately, she was doomed from the start: to get the executioner from Calais in time, he would have been ordered before Anne`s trial. The double standards at the time were unfair: Henry had two of his wives beheaded on charges of infidelity despite his own reputation for mistresses. Men at the time regarded it their prerogative to pursue other women while expecting their wives to remain chaste Henry, who annulled three of his marriages, furiously censured his sister Margaret when she divorced her husband to wed another man. Unfortunately, there is no way of reversing time, and

The last thing I want to cite is a poem that Thomas Wyatt wrote, likely referring to Anne Boleyn:

Be a sign of love, then I do love again.

If thou ask whom: sure, since I did refrain

Her that did set our country in a roar.

After Anne`s execution, he amended the last line to Brunette, that set my wealth in such a roar, ridding himself of the link to Anne, but the original line remains there, even after it was written over: Anne Boleyn set in a roar, and it hasn`t been the same since. Whatever we may claim about Anne victim or villain, innocent or guilty she was still a young, defiant woman in a time of gender stereotypes who managed to change history, and five hundred years later, I still find that inspiring.

Although the desire to reform religion played some role in the creation of the legislation for Royal Supremacy, it was not a primary motivation – instead this was focused on Henry’s need to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. This would permit him to marry Anne Boleyn, as he believed he could acquire his male heir through this new mistress of his. While MPs passing the legislation may have used their influence in order to reform religion and Henry would have welcomed the new enhancement of his own power, ultimately it was motivated by the need for the annulment.

Whilst a desire to reform religion was not the main motivating factor behind the Acts establishing the Royal Supremacy it still may have been a consideration. Sources A and B describe the existence of anticlericalism in England although historians are divided on how extensive it was. Rosman argues there was ‘little evidence of much opposition to the existence of the clergy as such’ but does suggest that the higher clergy were a source of complaint as were those clergy who failed to live up to the ‘ideals’ of what a priest should be. Simon Fish supports this view by providing a list of anticlerical complaints which point to ways in which the clergy were acting as ‘hungry wolves’ exploiting the very people they were supposed to help. Whilst the existence of a desire to reform the behaviour of the clergy is not in doubt, it does not seem to have been a motive of Henry’s in establishing the Royal Supremacy as none of the Acts were specifically aimed at reforming religion. However, we know that some MPs did have anticlerical views and it is possible that in passing the Acts they hoped that as the new leader of the Church in England Henry would reform the abuses of the clergy.

While power is not the most important factor regarding the establishment of the Royal Supremacy, it also may have been seriously considered. Rosman states that ‘given its power, the Church was bound to be the focus of resentment’. This is backed up by Fish who wrote to Henry that the church ‘suck all rule [and] power’ from him, both here referencing how the Church is a very powerful force. These views highlight the might of the Church at the time and see it as an opposing force to Henry, showing how they have ‘the best lands’ and ‘authority’, rights which should belong to Henry. Henry believed he was an ‘Imperial King’, therefore he would have hated anything that took power from him or whose power rivalled his own. Therefore he would have wanted to claim the power of the Church for his own. However, the original legislation was created not to draw power from the Church, but to earn him his annulment. This desire for a male heir drove him, making him desperate to divorce the wife who he believed could bear him no son (due to God’s judgement of them). Although important, power was only the means by which achieving this annulment, therefore a method as opposed to a motive.

The most important motive for creating the Royal Supremacy was the need for an annulment with Catherine of Aragon, driven by Henry’s unyielding quest for a male heir. Source C is the only one which mentions Henry’s chase for the divorce. Bernard explains how the Acts of Succession and Supremacy ‘dealt directly with the King’s divorce’. In addition, the Act of Succession ‘dealt with the consequences of the King’s divorce at his death’ – this proves that the Acts were all revolved around receiving this annulment, and that neither power nor a desire to reform religion were truly at the heart of it. Henry was very young in the Tudor dynasty and needed a male heir in order to secure his family. This desire was what defined his every action, as he felt that God was punishing him for taking his brother’s widow by not allowing him a son. Therefore he believed the only way to birth one was to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon, which is the entire reason he begins his journey of legislation. Every single one of the Acts is focused on getting the annulment, and the other ‘motives’ are little than fringes. Power was simply a method with which to achieve this, and the desire to reform religion was not Henry’s own aim, though it may have been influenced by MPs who did seek religious reformation.

Therefore it is clear that the need for an annulment was the key motivating factor behind the legislation creating the Royal Supremacy – Henry desperately needed a male heir to secure his dynasty (being only the second in the so-far dubious Tudor line) and felt that God would not permit him a son with Catherine. Although the MPs passing the legislation may have sought to bring about religious reform due to the massive power and trade-interference of the Church, Henry was main man of the process, subsequently these ideals would have periphery. And despite power being very appealing to Henry, it was merely a fringe benefit which later became an ambition, but no more key than the desire to reform religion.

On May 19th, 1536, a woman’s fate was sealed. Clad in a loose, dark gray gown and a gable headdress, she slowly approached her ineluctable demise. A unanimous conviction by a court of peers brought Anne Boleyn from the pedestal to the scaffold. Accused of adultery, incest, and high treason, she received one last act of mercy from the King: a swift blow from a razor-sharp blade of a French swordsman.

That was the end of the story of the legendary couple Anne Boleyn and King Henry VIII. Their story was considered “the soap opera of the Tudor age”, but Anne and the King were not just soap opera. They were the living legends of the Tudor age. Their story inspired a plethora of artworks, including the phenomenal oil painting “The Courtship of Anne Boleyn” by Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze. Both the infatuation of King Henry VIII and the political tension of the Tudor age are encapsulated within a few strokes of paint. Since Gottlieb Leutze was a staunch supporter of the American and German revolutions, the artist’s distaste of the royal can be represented by the painting below. Contrary to the popular myth that Anne was an upstart, she was born into a respectable family. Her father, Sir Thomas Boleyn, was a member of the King’s council. Having spent many formative years in France, Anne Boleyn was deemed as an exotic flower once she returned to England in 1522. Her first recorded appearance at Court was March 1st, 1522 at a masque. It was not long before King Henry VIII drowned in the fathomless depths of her dark eyes. Her courtship with the King was initially kept in the dark. Since writing letters was rumored to be the King’s bête noire – something he truly detested, his love letters to Anne Boleyn were the testament to his ineffable passion for the maiden. While most of the King’s letters remained intact in the Vatican library, Anne’s letters were unfortunately nowhere to be found. Therefore, her response to his advances remained an enigma to this day.

Their amorous liaison soon became inflammable. Fueled by his despair of the queen – Catherine of Aragon’s failure to produce a male heir – by August 1527, the King sought an annulment. However, the Pope refused to grant the annulment. Driven by his determination, the King broke free of the Catholic Church, initiated the English Reformation, established the Church of England, banished Catherine of Aragon from court, and married Anne Boleyn. On June 1st 1533, Anne Boleyn was officially crowned Queen of England in Westminster Abbey. The coronation processsion was a powerful statement that Anne had become the King’s rightful wife and queen. Sadly, their relationship started to go downhill from there onwards. It was the beginning of the end for their marriage when Anne failed to satisfy the King’s unwavering desire to father a legitimate male heir to the throne. She was accused of numerous charges, including high treason, and was executed on May 19th, 1536 within the confines of the Tower of London. She was buried in St Peter ad Vincula, the church of the Tower of London, where she would be later joined by Henry’s fifth wife, Catherine Howard. Whether Anne Boleyn did commit these crimes or not remains to be a perplexing riddle to historians.

To this day, this powerful couple never ceases to captivate us. Numerous films and novels are inspired by their story, including Donizetti’s opera Anna Bolena (1830) and the historical novel “The other Boleyn Girl” (2001) by Philippa Gregory. Through cultural depiction, Anne Boleyn is more often than not portrayed as a ruthless opportunist. Her ascension on the ladder of power was one of prolonged controversy. In “The other Boleyn Girl”, Anne was almost a villain while her sister, Mary Boleyn, was depicted as the epitome of virtue. The novel sparked a heated debate among the historians regarding the level of historical accuracy. Sadly, Anne Boleyn is no isolated case. Many historical figures become distorted through the lens of popular culture. Marie Antoinette, the last Queen of France, is a typical case in point. Due to her extravagance and possibly gambling habit, she was overthrown by the French Revolution and was eventually guillotined on October 16th, 1793. Her story was the inspiration for the historical drama Marie Antoinette (2006) starring Kirsten Dunst. However, the film was fraught with historical inaccuracies. The political background of the 18th century was woefully neglected, which inadvertently resulted in the audience’s failure to envision the grand picture. Not to mention the costumes were overly “modernized” with the appearance of a pair of Converse. The historical drama “The Imitation Game” (2014) starring Benedict Cumberbatch is also an archetype of this case. The film, which suggested that the British codebreaker and mathematical genius Alan Turing might have committed the unpardonable crime of covering up for a Soviet spy, was frowned upon by historians and considered “as much of a garbled mess as a heap of unbroken code” by The Guardian.

In the entertainment industry, historical accuracy is more often than not sacrificed in the pursuit of ratings and viewership. Although there is no denying that these products have piqued the lay public’s interest in those historical figures, the question remains whether the dramatic effects or the historical integrity should be of paramount importance. In the world where creativity is highly valued, should the artists’ liberties be bounded within the realm of history or should their works be judged based on the artistic value only?

To conclude, it has been over four centuries since the story of Anne Boleyn came to the last chapter. Although her story has been retold countless times throughout the course of history, she somehow remains in the mists of time.

Sir Thomas Wyatt, born in 1503 in at Allington Castle, was fated to become one of English literature’s most important Renaissance period poets. Wyatt’s father, Henry Wyatt, was a Lancastrian who followed a similar life as his son in that he was arrested under the reign of Richard III and was released by Henry VII and rewarded with multiple grants and titles. Wyatt’s father was an executor of Henry VII’s will and a Privy councilor in 1509 and continued to server under King Henry VIII and was eventually knighted. During Watt’s childhood, it is said that he was raising a lion cub when one day the cub turned on Wyatt to which Wyatt stabbed his rapier through the lion’s heart. King Henry VII caught wind of this story and commented “Oh, he will tame lions”. Thomas Wyatt attended St. John’s College in Cambridge which was well known for its humanism. In 1520 Wyatt married the daughter of Lord Cobham, Elizabeth Brooke, and they had a son for whom had the Duke of Norfolk as his standing godfather. These early life experiences, along with those to come in Wyatt’s future, played a key role in the development of the influences on his works as his relationships with others, his, so called, relationships with Anne Boleyn, and his legal difficulties with arrests and imprisonments (Anne Boleyn Files, “Sir Thomas Wyatt the Elder”).

Through Wyatt’s father, his friend Cromwell, and many other famous poets before him Wyatt was influenced and shaped by these relationships. Sir Henry Wyatt, Thomas Wyatt’s father was not a direct influence on the works of his son but was indeed a direct influence on the life of his son which in turn was a key reason for which Wyatt’s life and works went down the path which they did. The most evident of these influences was Henry Wyatt’s influence on his son to pursue a diplomatic career, leading to Thomas Wyatt’s many important position under King Henry VIII much like his father’s. Along with Thomas Wyatt’s similarities to his father in the diplomatic career, the both of them had arrests and imprisonments. These, along with the happenings in the diplomatic environment led to several of Thomas Wyatt’s most famous works as a poet. Cromwell, Wyatt’s most notable friend, performed the apprehension of Thomas Wyatt. Once arrested Cromwell helped Wyatt out by talking to the tower guard and making sure that Wyatt was as comfortable as possible during his imprisonment, promising that Wyatt would be out soon. Thomas Wyatt is believed to have mourned the loss of his dear friend in “The Pillar Perished” which was written following Cromwell’s execution. However, this was not Thomas Wyatt’s only friend. He wrote about several other deaths of close friends such as “Weston, that pleasant was and young” for whom “all we should weep that thou [Weston] are dead and gone” (Lean, “Sir Thomas Wyatt :”). Elizabeth Brooke, Thomas Wyatt’s wife, cause him much grief and pain throughout their marriage and is believed to have been the reason for which Thomas Wyatt translated Petrarch’s sonnets with an angered and frustrated lover as the narrator of the works (Lean, “Sir Thomas Wyatt :”).

Wyatt was not only influenced by friends and family, but also other writers of his time and times before him. Francesco Petrarch, a 14th century esteemed Italian Poet, was translated by Wyatt. These translations were not mere practice performed by Wyatt to improve his skills, but these translations maintained their same style and form under Wyatt’s pen but they also acquired new concepts and ideas which came together to form a uniquely English style of poetry. These translations; however, seemed to have diverted original questions on severely controversial and significant themes like those of political intrigue and courtly betrayal. Even preceding these translations of Petrarch were Wyatt’s translations of Plutarch. Plutarch wrote chronicles based on the lives of Roman and Greek leaders which used extremely engaging details to communicate the deeds of Plutarch’s characters. Wyatt was also an admirer of the works of Chaucer, with whom he had many similarities, but Wyatt wanted the English Literature to be developed into a more respected and elevated form of literature. Lastly is the famous Plato, who which was mentions in Wyatt’s poem “Farewell Love” as a source of contemplation and solace (Lean, “Sir Thomas Wyatt :”).

Wyatt is acclaimed to have had fallen in love with Anne Boleyn following her arrival to the English courts in 1522. In fact, George Wyatt, who was Thomas Wyatt’s grandson wrote that his grandfather was “surprised by the sight there of “(Anne Boleyn Files, “Sir Thomas Wyatt the Elder”) when Anne Boleyn was first sighted by Wyatt. Three years after Anne Boleyn’s arrival to the courts in 1522 Thomas Wyatt parted from his wife and his unhappy marriage which is believed to have been partly due to his acquaintance with Anne Boleyn. Even though the love match between Anne Boleyn and Wyatt would nearly have been impossible due to the admiration which the King had for Boleyn, she is still indirectly mentioned numerous times in the works of Wyatt. For this reason the love between Boleyn and Wyatt is considered to have been purely ‘one-way’. However, a story in The Chronicle of King Henry VIII depicts Wyatt visiting the home of Anne Boleyn where he found her in bed and they had physical relations until interrupted by the sound of the footsteps of her lover. Yet another story told by Wyatt’s grandson, George Wyatt, tells of Wyatt entertaining Boleyn with his poetry while she performed some needle work. Wyatt had seen a hanging jewel around Boleyn’s neck and snatched it as a trophy. Later on when Wyatt was playing bowls with the King the two were arguing over a shot to which Wyatt took out the jewel he had swiped from Boleyn and used it to measure the shot. The King recognized the jewel and stormed off to question Anne Boleyn about it. Multiple works of Wyatt’s were indirectly attributed to Anne Boleyn including “What Wourde is that that Changeth not”, “The Lover Confesses Him in Love with Phyllis”, and “Whoso list to hunt”, which was developed off the story of Caesar’s deer who bore the collar of Caesar (Anne Boleyn Files, “Sir Thomas Wyatt the Elder”). Wyatt compares Boleyn to Caesar’s deer with its “graven with diamonds in letters plain/there is written her fairneck round about:/Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am” (Wyatt, “Thomas Wyatt Poetry”) in which Caesar represent the King with his jewels being worn around the neck of Anne Boleyn.

Thomas Cromwell, one of Wyatt’s dear friends, apprehended Wyatt in 1536 by order of the King. This first arrest is believed to have been in conjunction with Anne Boleyn. Cromwell assured Wyatt that he would watch out for him but that he would have to be imprisoned in the tower for the time being. Wyatt said that he was stainless and had no reason to fear. Thomas Wyatt watched from his window in the bell tower the executions of Weston, Bereton, Norris, Smeato, and George Boleyn. These sights from the tower led to one of Wyatt’s most famous poems, “Innocentia Veritas” (Anne Boleyn Files, “Sir Thomas Wyatt the Elder”). These sights, as described in Innocentia Veritas, were said that “The Bell Tower showed me [Wyatt] such sights that in my head stick day and night”. Thomas Wyatt was promptly released from the tower as he had already regained the favor of King Henry VIII (Academy of American Poets, “Thomas Wyatt).

In conclusion, following Thomas Wyatt’s rather eventful childhood with his ‘taming’ of the lion, he attended the humanism esteemed St. John’s College in Cambridge, went on to lead a diplomatic career much like his father, and married having one son. Through Wyatt’s father, Petrarch, Plato, Chaucer, Cromwell, Anne Boleyn, and the multiple arrests of Thomas Wyatt, his woks developed into some of the first reputable English poetry written and showcased his relationships with others including Anne Boleyn and his arrests and visits to the bell tower which showed him inspiration for one of his most dramatic poems.

Was the Kings a great matter cause for the English reformation?

Albert Frederick Pollard was the chair of the history at the London University College for 28 years and written over 500 entries on the Tudor period. His many years of knowledge of the Tudor period make this source more reliable. However because this book was written so long after the matter, some of the information could be inaccurate, which could make it less reliable. Also, some of his work has been discredited over recent years by the school of history for some controversial speculations. He was also part of the Whiggish school of history that believed that Henry VIII was a reformer who pushed England out of its medieval ways. This could affect the reliability of his work, as Pollard may have been more in favour of Henry VIII and not considered all aspects.

My interpretation of this source is that A.f Pollard believed that the main theme for the cause of the reformation was the need for power and not Henry VIII’s divorce. A.F Pollard states that Henry VIII’s divorce was the occasion, not the cause of the reformation. This could mean that it was circumstantial that the divorce and the beginning of the reformation happened at similar times and they were both inevitable to happen on their own. This source also tells me that the real cause for the reformation was Henry’s need for power in England. It also states that Henry was able to succeed because of the devotion of the English people and the support of parliament, which in turn made Henry ultimately more powerful.

Although this source focuses on power, it neglects the fact that Henry was a devout Catholic before the divorce and reformation. This gives evidence that the divorce and desire for power over the churches outweighed his religious beliefs. Also, the source does not include the importance of money in the reformation. After the war with France Henry VIII was short of money and as there was a lot of money in the churches, by gaining power over them would give him the money that he needed. This source also does not mention the corrupt church and how they were exploiting the people for money, which is why Martin Luther started the protestant revolution.

Source 1 is from the book ‘Henry VIII’ written by A.F Pollard a historian and University professor. As the motive for this book was written for academic purposes, to teach others about this period it means that it is very credible. This is because it will be backed up with evidence and not bias, as it is to educate others. Also, a book is a reliable source as most academic books are usually looked over and reviewed by several publishers and editors before it is published so there is less room for bias opinions.

• Source 1: ‘Henry VIII’ by A.f. Pollard, published by Groupil & Co, London, 1902

The key issue was one of power. The Church would not allow Henry VIII to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon and this gave him the opportunity to rid himself of the Church’s restrictive influence. The divorce, in fact, was the occasion and not the cause of the reformation. The cause was Henry VIII’s determination to exercise supreme power in England. Ultimately, the wonder is not that the break took place when it did, but that it was delayed for so long. The success of Henry VIII’s mission was confirmed by a rising tide of nationalism felt by the English people and voiced by Parliament. The allegiance owed to the Pope could no longer be accepted. The Church in England had to become the Church of England. The lion was to truly become master of his own jungle

This source tells me that before there was any doubts in the Catholic Church that the relationship between the King and the Pope was good. It also states that Henry VIII took advantage of the situation where the people of England were losing trust in their church. My interpretation of this source is that the divorce contributed to the reformation but did not cause it to happen. It was instead the mistrust of the public in the church and the information that had been revealed. However, lastly, this source states that without the divorce there would not have been a reformation as Henry VIII’s power would have been against it, which highlights its importance.

This source is like source 1 in the way that it expresses that divorce is not the sole cause for the reformation, and they support one another on this front. However, they are different as source 2 focuses more on the corruption of the church but source 1 focuses on Henry’s hunger for power.

G.R Elton was a German-born historian who specialized in the Tudor period but focused mainly on the study of Henry VIII’s life. He taught as a professor of modern history at Clare College in Cambridge for 5 years. As his studies focused mainly on the life of Henry VIII this could mean that source 2 is more biased and less reliable than source 1, it will focus more on the actions of Henry and not other factors that could have affected the reformation.

This source comes across to me as though there are some negative feelings towards Henry VIII. Words such as ‘exploit’ ‘broken’ and ‘issue’ support this interpretation.

This source does not explain how Henry’s desire for more power and money largely affected his decision to split from the Catholic Church. This source mentions how Henry was to exploit the anti-Catholic feelings, that the public were having but it neglects to mention that before this Henry VIII was a committed Catholic. He was even given the title of ‘defender of the faith by the Pope because he defended the Catholic Church from Martin Luther’s teachings. This was until Henry had something to gain from the reformation.

Source 2 is one from a book titled ‘England under the Tudors’ which follows the religious and government changes that occurred in the Tudor period. The information written in this book by G.R Elton was questioned by other historians and is no longer considered a correct theory. This makes this source of less value and credibility than others that are accepted. Like source 1, because it is a book to be used for educational purposed it will be more credible as it will have been checked over before being published.

• Source 2: G.R. Elton, England under the Tudors, published 1977

Until Henry VII fixed his desire upon Anne Boleyn, and Pope Clement VII found himself a prisoner of Charles V, there was nothing to disturb the harmony between the King and pope. Until their alliance was broken, all the underlying anti-Catholic feelings in England that Henry VIII was to exploit remained under the surface. This illustrates the importance of the divorce issue in the English Reformation. It did not alone cause the Reformation and did not even play any large part in bringing about a movement that rested on English national feeling and the scandal of a corrupt Church. However, without the divorce, there would have been no Reformation in England because the power of the Crown would have been against it.

This source was a pamphlet in the form of a petition from the poor to Henry VIII. It was only 5000 words and was written to express the miseries of the poor people as a result of the Church. This source is valuable as we can see firsthand the opinions of the protestant people at this time. However, this makes it very biased, as Fish was a protestant reformer and it cannot be said that it is all true. This source was written directly to Henry VIII to persuade him into thinking the way the protestant reformers did. This could mean that some statements or facts may have been exaggerated in order to sway Henry VIII to break with the Catholic Church.

Clergy: religious leaders e.g. catholic priests ministers etc.

Papal head: the authority or position of the Pope in the Catholic Church

Fish was a protestant reformer who had very strong opinions against the Catholic Church, as shown in source 3. This could affect the sources usefulness and it may be seen as bias because he was a protestant reformer. As Henry VIII’s divorce would have been in favour of Simon Fish because this would cause the break from the Catholic Church. As Fish was alive during the time the reformation it makes this source useful because we get to see firsthand what some of the public people’s opinions were during that time.

• Source 3: Simon Fish’s A supplication for the beggars, written 1529

The clergy are not the shepherds, but ravenous wolves going about in sheep’s clothing, devouring their flock. They do no work, yet own more than a third of the country. The best manors, land, and territories are theirs. Besides this, they take a tenth of everyone’s wages, a tenth of the wool, milk, honey, wax, cheese, and butter that is produced, and even every tenth egg from poor widows. And what do these greedy idle, holy thieves do with all this produce they take from the people? Nothing, but take all rule, power, authority, and obedience from you, your Highness, and give it to themselves and their Papal Head.

Although this source gives opinions on the Catholic Church and its affect on Henry VIII’s power, it does not mention his divorce itself and the people’s opinions on it. It also does not include any real evidence and is based from one protestant’s opinion.

An interpretation of this source may be that Simon Fish believed that the Catholic Church was taking money and resources from the poor people and they were extremely angry. He states in this petition to Henry VIII that the church is taking all of the rule, power, and authority away from him, which would have influenced Henry, even more, to go ahead with the break with Rome. These reformers were angry and pleading with Henry VIII after discovering the actions of the Church. Words used such as greedy, idle, thieves, and ravenous are all words of anger and have been used to persuade the reader against the Church. Because of the anger used in this text, it makes the reader question the value of what is actually being said.

Source 3 is backed up by source 1 because it explains the importance of Henry VIII’s power and the part this would play on the reformation rather than his divorce. This source and source 2 also support each other as source 2 explains that there were ‘anti-Catholic feelings in England’ which this source clearly shows to be true.

This source is a letter written from Henry VIII to Anne Boleyn. It was written a year after Henry VIII decided to divorce Catherine of Aragon and approximately 2 years after Henry had began his quest for Anne. This is only one of many letters sent between Henry and Anne. As Henry VIII wrote this it makes it a very valuable historic piece that gives us an insight into his mind and the reasons behind his actions. Although some of the letters may have been lost in translation so it can be batter understood.

As Henry VIII himself wrote this it makes it very bias as he would not have wrote bad about himself. This is because although this letter comes across like he is in love with Anne Boleyn and that is his only motive for the reformation. His love for Anne may have only been part of the reason and his desire for the power and money he would gain from breaking with the Catholic Church may have played a great part however Henry would not have admitted this himself.

This source may be interpreted in a way that Henry VIII was determined to do anything to make Anne Boleyn happy. The phrase from this quote ‘I will cast out all others’ and ‘to serve you and you alone’ seems to me that he would have even abandoned his religion in order to get his divorce from Catherine of Aragon and be with Anne Boleyn because she refused to be his mistress and would not be with Henry unless they were married. I also believe Henry is referring to casting out the Catholic church because this letter was written the same year that he went against Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and ultimately the beginning of his journey to acquire a divorce.

• Source 4: A letter from Henry VIII to Anne Boleyn, written in 1528

I beg you with all my heart to let me know definitely your whole mind concerning the love between us both. For I must of necessity force you to reply, as I have been more than a year now smitten with love’s dart, being uncertain either a failure or of finding a place in your heart and sure affections. If it pleases you to play the part of a true, loyal mistress and friend, giving your body and soul to me, I promise you that I will cast out all others save yourself from my thoughts and affections, to serve you and you alone.

In this source, there are many words used that show this is a love letter and one showing lots of emotions. Some of these words include heart, affections, true, loyal, friend, love, and smitten.

This source is similar to source 3 in the way that it was written. They are both direct messages meant to be read by one specific person.

This source is different to sources 1 and 2 as Henry doesn’t mention anywhere his desire for power being the reason for the divorce and split with Rome but rather his deep desire to be married to Anne Boleyn.

• Dart: a sudden, intense pang of a particular emotion
• Smitten: to suddenly like or be in love with something or someone

Conclusion

In conclusion, there is evidence to say that the King’s great matter was the cause for the reformation and evidence to go against this statement. Sources 1 and 2 both claim that the divorce played a role in the reformation but in no way was it the sole cause, but rather it was to gain money and power from the church. Source 3 also supports the interpretation that the cause was more so to do with power and taking over from the corrupt Catholic Church. However, source 4 is very different and solely focuses on Henry VIII’s love for Anne Boleyn and how he would do anything for her including a divorce. After studying the above sources I believe that without Henry VIII’s divorce from Catherine of Arragon the reformation would have never happened but the divorce alone would not have cause it and there were many more factors. One of which was money and power as Henry VIII had lost a lot of money after the war with France and taking over the Church would give him this money. As well as this I think pressure from the public weighed into the cause as shown in source 3, they were extremely angry with the Catholic Church and played a part to push Henry VIII to split with Rome. His need for divorce and money along with the new realisations of the Catholic Church were all a coincidence to happen around the same time but played equal parts in causing the reformation.

• Essay plan
• Paragraph 1 – Introduction

I would give a short background on the question that the essay is about.

• Paragraph 2 – I would include my sources that support the question, I would then include interpretations of this source and a breakdown of what makes it reliable or not.
• Paragraph 3 – This paragraph would include evidence that goes against the question and also interpretations and a breakdown of the sources.
• Paragraph 4 – Conclusion

I would write a conclusion summing up the evidence that supports it and goes against it and give my own overall opinion

1. Cambridge Dictionary (2019) Clergy. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/clergy (Accessed: 17 October 2019)
2. Cambridge Dictionary (2019) Papal. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/papal (Accessed: 17 October 2019)
3. Cambridge Dictionary (2019) Smitten. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/smitten (Accessed 24 October 2019)
4. Encyclopaedia Britannica (2019) A.F Pollard. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/biography/A-F-Pollard (Accessed: 10 October 2019)
5. Haskolinn Reykjavik (2019) Reliable Sources. Available at: https://en.ru.is/referencing/reliable-sources-and-peer-review/ (Accessed: 20 October 2019)
6. Historical Research Update (2015) Sir Geoffrey Elton. Available at: https://www.historicalresearchupdate.com/stories/sir-geoffrey-elton/ (Accessed: 10 October 2019)
7. History Learning Site (2015) Henry VIII Timeline. Available at: https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/tudor-england/henry-viii-timeline/ (Accessed 24 October 2019)
8. Lexico (2019) Dart. Available at: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/dart (Accessed: 24 October 2019)
9. Oxford learner’s dictionary (2019) Defender of the faith. Available at: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/defender-of-the-faith (Accessed: 13 October 2019)
10. Spartacus Educational (2015) Simon Fish. Available at: https://spartacus-educational.com/Simon_Fish.htm (Accessed: 17 October 2019)
11. Wikipedia (2019) Geoffrey Elton. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Elton#The_Tudor_Revolution_in_Government (Accessed: 10 October 2019)
12. Wikipedia (2019) Simon Fish. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Fish (Accessed: 17 October 2019)
13. YouTube (2018) The Tudors: Henry VIII – The Break With Rome – Episode 20. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NBD-xfZwE4 (Accessed: 8 October 2019)

Many factors can be argued to be the most influential and political ones regarding crown policy. These factors may contradict each other or even complement each other, however, the most influential one is still debated. In my opinion, I think that religion was the most influential political factor, however other factors such as Successorship, Foreign policy, Rebellions, and Public opinion could also be pivotal contributing factors that influence crown policy. I believe that Religion was the most important factor due to how essential it was to most individuals during this time period. Religion was accepted by everyone and played a huge role in day-to-day life.

‘The sixteenth century was an age of religion: God mattered’ -English reformations.

Christopher Haigh believes that religion was the most influential factor to the crown policy during the period of 1509-1603. He goes on to say that few in England doubted the basic ideas of Christianity and even if they did they would keep the doubts to themselves, as it would be a crime of heresy to speak out against God. The Christian belief system was rarely criticized or rejected as it was part of the day-to-day life every citizen on England was accepting of. An example that helps prove this statement is when Martin Luther protested outside of catholic churches in order to reform catholic traditions and ideology which was affecting those who devoted their lives to Christianity. In 1517, the results of these protests created the branch of Christianity known as Protestantism, which did not force its followers to blindly follow the dogma of catholic traditions and apostolic succession, but encouraged followers to accept the basic rules and teachings of Christianity, while still having a sense of individuality in the religion by having own interpretations of authority such as the bible or Jesus’ teachings. This denomination of very traditional religion in the 1500s was a shock due to it having drastically new and different ideas of the new testament than the catholic churches. The influence religion has on crown policy is then also linked to Henry VIII wanting to divorce Catherine of Aragon, as he wanted a son, an heir to the throne, however, Catharine could not deliver a son but instead gave birth to a daughter called Mary. Because of this, Henry sought to divorce Catherine, However, pope Julius II could not divorce them, as in religion marriage is a lifetime commitment, and would not even consider divorce to be possible as in the eyes of the Lord two people who are married cannot break the vows between each other. In 1533, Thomas Cranmer becomes the Archbishop of Canterbury, which is the most important church-related job in England. This leads to Cranmer granting Henry a divorce, which allows Henry to marry Anne Boleyn legally. The Pope then excommunicates Henry which is a serious punishment for a strong Christian such as Henry. The pope does this as Henry went through with the divorce which was very serious due to the possible repercussions it had on the public. It suggests that anyone could now get a divorce, on the other hand, it could be seen as the king being allowed divorce due to God appointing him as monarch, which was the public opinion at the time of any monarch on the throne meaning her had higher privileges and authority due to him being chosen by God. In 1534 Henry splits off from Roman Catholicism and the Pope, making himself in charge of the church of England. Lastly in 1535, The bible is published in English and people can read the bible for themselves, rather than priests and other religious messengers translating it. This is when the different denominations of Christianity began to flourish as individual interpretations could be made without having to take the word of catholic priests or monks’ interpretation of the translation. Haigh knew all these religious reformations were taking place during 1509-1603 and stated that the reformation was not a quick process but took time and many contributing elements helped in the outcome of the English reformation. I believe that religion influenced every monarch during 1509-1603, which meant it affected crown policy whenever a new law was passed, whether the reason behind the proposed law stemmed from religion or not.

Within the ‘Problem with succession’ the Tudor times state that the rules of succession were not black and white in the Tudor period, stating that every monarch wished to bequeath the throne to a worthy heir and in doing so, would prevent rebellions, assassination attempts and even wars in extreme cases. Successorship could be considered another influential political factor to crown policy. The monarch appointed as ruler of England would obviously be expected to have some major political influence on crown policy. For example, certain legislation will only be passed depending on the monarch’s own beliefs and ideas on how to further the country in the way they think is best,if the legislation made it through parliament. Queen Elizabeth 1st decided to merge the catholic and protestant churches into the church of England, allocating herself as the head. She did this in order to stop the division of religion as the knock-on effect would be a divided England. This was done due to past rebellions causing instability in England, and this prevented catholicism and Protestantism from conflicting with each other. Queen Elizabeth, who becomes queen of England in 1558, passed laws such as the act of uniformity, which angered both Catholics and protestants alike in the same year she became queen of England. Both denominations of Christianity accepted this law, however, it meant that Catholics could not have a pope due to it conflicting with protestant beliefs, as well as Elizabeth making herself head.

Henry VIII had many instances where the crown policy was affected by successorship. The divorce between Henry Percy and Catherine of Aragon is one of the first and most important changes, not just relating to crown policy, but also contains changes for religion as well. Wolsey, who was Henry’s chief advisor, was entrusted with the responsibility of finding a way around Henry’s marriage to Catherine, as he had fallen for the young Anne Boleyn. Due to Catherine giving birth to Mary, Henry now had no trustworthy or reliable heir. With a son, directly related to Henry and is next in line for the throne, Henry would not have to worry about any opposition to his throne when he dies through a weak claim to the throne.

Henry’s divorce- Extract, from a long letter from Cardinal Wolsey to Henry VIII, 5 July 1527;

‘…So I demanded of him whether he had any special conjecture or knowledge what the matter should be where in the queen desired to have his advice. Whereunto he answered that by certain report and relation [story] he knew nothing how be it upon conjecture rising upon such things as he hath heard he thinketh it was for a divorce to be had between your highness and the queen, which to conject, he was especially moved upon a tale brought unto him by his brother from London who showed him that being there in a certain company he heard say that things were set forth sounding to such a purpose…’

This is an extract taken from a letter composed by Wolsey in an attempt to justify his reasons for being unable to pass the divorce of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon. As Wolsey failed to divorce the two, he was not only preventing Henry from remarrying Anne Boleyn, he was also preventing the possibility of a male heir. Throughout the early years of his reign, this is what Henry desired the most. He wanted a successor in order to pass down his ideologies, resulting in similar ideas on crown policy and religion reigning over England for a longer period of time. He also strongly believed that God wanted Henry to have a male heir as the monarchy were said to be anointed by God. and Henry set him on to annul the marriage in 1530. Wolsey later died after attempting to annul the marriage. This was a huge setback for Wolsey as in 1518, he was appointed ‘Papal Legate’ which allowed him to exercise the same powers as the Pope himself. Wolsey was also put in charge of the legal system under Henry’s wishes and wished to reform justice most of all. This reinforces the fact that Wolsey had a considerable amount of power within the country and fought the Pope’s wishes in order to obey Henry’s will. Religion influenced many aspects of day-to-day life, as well as crown policy, however, whether it was the most influential and political factor affecting crown policy is debatable. On the one hand, Succership played a huge role in crown policy especially during Henry VIII’s reign, bringing out legislation in a whole different way to previous monarchs. He would often declare new laws such as the act of supremacy through proclamation rather than through parliament, which is also known as the ‘Henry VIII clause’. The act of supremacy was passed in 1534 which directly took power from the pope himself and granted Henry full power when he created his own Church of England. Henry declared himself as head of the church as he was king, and once again this reinforces the idea of monarchs being appointed by God and Henry thought that this made him a natural leader that should be in control. However I believe that religion is the most influential and political factor regarding crown policy as although you have the monarch Henry seizing control and power for himself through his own legislation, you can say that without religion, Henry would not have created acts such as the act of supremacy, as he would not have needed the act in order to try and control religion, which was such a huge aspect of everyday life.

Anne Boleyn’s speech-This account of Anne Boleyn’s speech at her execution was made by the Tudor chronicler Edward Hall. The execution took place on 19 May 1536 at 8 o’clock in the morning. It was the first public execution of an English queen; ‘Good Christian people, I am come hither to die, for according to the law, and by the law, I am judged to die, and therefore I will speak nothing against it. I am come hither to accuse no man, nor to speak anything of that, whereof I am accused and condemned to die, but I pray God save the king and send him long to reign over you, for a gentler nor a more merciful prince was there never: and to me, he was ever a good, a gentle and sovereign lord. And if any person will meddle of my cause, I require them to judge the best. And thus I take my leave of the world and of you all, and I heartily desire you all to pray for me. O Lord have mercy on me, to God I commend my soul.’

This Primary source conveys the religious language used in this time period. A lot of religious dialogue can be seen within the account and most citizens would have strongly resembled this dialect. The provenance of the source is Edward hall who was a member of parliament and was given the title of serjeant from 17 March 1553. I believe this in turn makes the source more valuable due to him being a trusted member of parliament, as well as the fact that this source is a recount written at the time of Anne Boleyn’s execution, meaning he would not lie or falsify the account of her last words and recalled what she said accurately as he was present at the time of her execution. One of the main speculations about why Anne Boleyn was sentenced to death was her growing power and status in England threatening Thomas Cromwell. Thomas disagreed with the dissolution of monasteries throughout England as Anne wished to further the monasteries but only in the areas that needed the most tending to. She wished to use the money for educational and charitable purposes and Cromwell felt Anne’s growing influence over the King was a problem for him. Anne ended up ruining multiple policies, including an alliance with the Holy Roman empire in 1535. The overall tone of the speech can be considered more of prayer then a speech due to the connotations of God and religion present within the account. She directs a lot of her speech to God which correlates with her views regarding religion. However, it seems to be directed at the citizens watching the execution, asking for forgiveness as well as asking for their prayers. Different historians are unsure whether Anne was a conventional catholic, a zealous reformer or a protestant martyr. However, this source clearly shows the meaning and faith behind even the monarchy regarding religion during the reformation and was still held as important, although Protestantism was a conflicting force towards Catholics within England during the reformation and crown policy was affected due to the two different branches of Christianity clashing with each other. An example of this would be the Wyatt rebellion in 1554. I believe that the Wyatt rebellions can be considered either political or religious, however, the protestants rebelled due to the fear of catholicism returning.

An account of Thomas Cranmer’s death from an anonymous bystander in 1556;

“Mary had good cause to dislike Cranmer. Not only was he the premier Protestant in England, but he also annulled her parents’ marriage and subsequently married King Henry VIII to Anne Boleyn. But that I know for our great friendships, and long-continued love, you look even of duty that I should signify to you of the truth of such things as here chanceth among us; I would not at this time have written to you the unfortunate end, and doubtful tragedy, of Thomas Cranmer late bishop of Canterbury: because I little pleasure take in beholding of such heavy sights. And, when they are once overpassed, I like not to rehearse them again; being but a renewing of my woe, and doubling my grief. For although his former, and wretched end, deserves a greater misery, (if any greater might have chanced than chanced unto him), yet, setting aside his offenses to God and his country, and beholding the man without his faults, I think there was none that pitied not his case, and bewailed not his fortune, and feared not his own chance…”

Within this source, it relates back to God which is a consistent theme in all these sources. Thomas is claimed to have offended God within the source as well as his country. As mary was the queen of England during this time, it is possible that she meant the annulment of her parent’s marriage being described as an act against God and the country. It affected a lot of political instability when the Wyatt rebellion took place as protestants were afraid of further catholic reformations in 1554. However, the main weakness of the rebellion was the lack of support from other nobles and even commoners across the country. This is why the rebellion failed as not enough Protestants feared the return of catholicism such as noble Thomas Wyatt. The protestant rebellions believed the marriage of Philip of Spain and Mary would allow Spain to have a great influence over English politics. However, this means that religion was not the only influential and political factor causing the rebellion. Mary decided to show her true Christian nature as a catholic and released the rebels that were imprisoned as her public opinion would increase by showing mercy.

In conclusion, I believe that religion was the most influential political factor affecting crown policy between 1509-1603. Successorship I believe did contribute to crown policy, especially during Henry VIII’s reign, and many acts and regulations were passed due to his own beliefs and personality. However he also was a very religious man and after creating the church of England, you can clearly see how much religion influenced him as a man and a monarch. His act of supremacy and Elizabeth I’s act of uniformity could be seen as very similar, as they both appointed themselves head of the church of England at different points in time. With four monarchs taking the throne in the space of one hundred years, you can clearly see that each individual from Henry VIII to Elizabeth I were different in one way or another, however, religion was important to the monarchs and allowed some sense of continuity between kings and queens who shared the same religious value and opinions. The implications of religion affecting crown policy meant that a stable sense of legislation could be relied upon for future kings or queens to continue during their own reign, however, the future heir of the throne would need to share religious ideology with the previous monarch if this was to work, and due to individuality and specific beliefs, this may not have always been the correct way to gain a sense of stability in regards to crown policy. In my opinion, I think that many changes during this period was due to religion’s huge role in the reformation and even if many changes occurred, monarchs would have based most of their crown policy on basic foundational teaching of Christianity that helped further their religious standpoint.

The early modern period roughly encompasses the time period from 1500 to 1800. This period gave rise to many acclaimed authors, playwrights, and poets including Sir Thomas Wyatt and William Shakespeare, both of whom I will be discussing in this essay. The literature I will be exploring are Wyatt’s poems “Whoso List to Hunt” and “They Flee from Me”, and Shakespeare’s sonnet 66 “Tired with all these, for restful death I cry”. The purpose of this discourse is to discuss how the writings of both Sir Thomas Wyatt and William Shakespeare responded to authority and power at the time they were writing in. For context, both men wrote during the 16th century in England, but many years apart and under different authority figures. Wyatt wrote during the reign of King Henry VIII circa 1530, and Shakespeare wrote during the reign of Henry VIII’s daughter Queen Elizabeth I, circa 1595.

Sir Thomas Wyatt was an advisor to King Henry VIII during his early reign in England. However, Wyatt fell out of favour with Henry and the Henrician court when he was accused of adultery with Anne Boleyn, Henry’s second wife. (Griffin) Despite the fact that there was no explicit evidence of a sexual relationship between the two, Henry VIII ordered for Sir Thomas Wyatt and his wife Anne to be imprisoned. While Wyatt was released a year after his arrest, Anne was executed by beheading on the grounds of adultery and treason. (Griffin) This unfair imprisonment, unfair due to the lack of empirical evidence surrounding a supposed affair, is an example of the absolute power of the monarch in the 16th century. The idea of undisputed, and in my personal opinion regal, authority can be seen throughout much of Wyatt’s poetry.

It was during his imprisonment in the Tower of London, alongside Anne Boleyn and other suspected suitors, that some scholars suspect Wyatt may have written his poem “Whoso List to Hunt”. Wyatt begins the poem with his speaker challenging the reader to hunt a “hind” with him. However, in just the next line the speaker reveals that he himself “may no more.” The speaker’s lack of freedom to hunt is interesting when paired with the audience Wyatt would have been writing for; the Tudor Court and an English society devoted to their King. Following this revelation of a lack of free will, the speaker also appears to acknowledge the power of the crown in lines 12 to 14 which read “It is written, her fair neck round about, “Noli me tangere, for Caeser’s I am, And wild for to hold, though I seem tame.” (Wyatt, p. 77) The deer’s collar bears the inscription ‘Noli me tangere’. This is a biblical reference to the phrase “Touch me not” which Jesus is attributed to saying to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection. (Griffin) This phrase reads as an order as if the hunter will face repercussions from her owner “Caesar” if the command she be left alone is not obeyed. This command solidifies the speaker’s lack of freedom to hunt the hind which was referenced at the beginning of the sonnet. If the deer represents Anne Boleyn, it could be said that her owner, Caesar, represents King Henry. This reference to Caesar, presumably from Caesar Augustus in the Bible, carries heavy connotations to the ideas of authority and power. Wyatt understands that, like Caesar in the Roman Empire, Henry holds all the power in the Tudor society of the day. The speaker desires the deer, but she belongs to Caesar. Wyatt desires Anne Boleyn, but she ‘belongs’ in a sense, through marriage, to Henry. Wyatt understands that Henry holds great authority that could lead to him losing his position in Henry’s court or, worse, execution on the grounds of adultery and treason like Anne Boleyn. Wyatt presents his social and political world as one, in which the political powers control how people act in the social world. In ‘The Comparatist’, Louis Schwartz describes “Whoso List to Hunt” as a “narrative concerning the relationship between a courtly speaker, the desired woman, and the temporal reader who holds the key to all privileges and actions in their world”. (p.2) From my knowledge of Wyatt and analysis of the poem itself, I believe attributing the courtly speaker to be Wyatt himself, the desired woman to be Anne Boleyn, and the temporal ruler to be King Henry VIII is a fair assumption.

Another of Wyatt’s poems concerned with the ideas of authority and power is “They Flee from Me”. Albert S. Gerard notes that this is a particularly “obscure poem” of Wyatt’s which even has explicators “in utter disagreement as to whom the poet is writing about.” (p. 359) This is why the reader perspective is crucial in deciphering the message of the poem. Based on my analysis of, and research surrounding, “They Flee from Me” I interpret the message from Wyatt’s speaker as being that the Tudor court is an extremely dangerous place. Dangerous in that one who was once sought after, as the speaker says he was in the first line, can be exiled without remorse. At the time this poem was written Wyatt was very disillusioned from court politics because, as aforementioned, he had been shunned and exiled by King Henry VIII on suspicion of adultery with Anne Boleyn. (Griffin) This disillusionment can be seen overtly throughout “They Flee from Me”. It is a very personal poem that intertwines the political and the sexual. The speaker seems to dwell on the role of politics and political power in everyday life. Although he is “in [his] chamber”, there is still little to no privacy. The political world he was a part of and shunned from is permeating his personal life. He is completely at the mercy of those who hold the power in court, specifically King Henry. Wyatt is aware that, as King, Henry has the power to order for him to be executed if he so wished. The image of a “naked foot” conveys a sense of vulnerability and exposure of the speaker to the authority figures surrounding him. The first stanza of the poem reflects the role of power and politics in people’s lives, particularly those in Henry’s court. The second stanza focuses more on fortune, and the futility of thanking fortune, but is still connected to the ideas of power and powerlessness. The speaker recognizes that fortune is always changing out of the control of the receiver. Wyatt’s good fortune of being a privileged and respected advisor to the King of England has turned to misfortune. He is now powerless, exiled, and shunned shell of his former high-ranking self. While the first two stanzas are highly critical of the authority and power present within society, the final stanza reflects more on the speaker’s personal powerlessness. Line 16, “all is turned thorough my gentleness”, criticizes the power system but simultaneously laments that the speaker is far too noble and good for court politics. There is no resolution at the end of the poem, which reflects the discord and hopelessness of the political situation Wyatt found himself in at the time. He had fallen from grace and was left powerless, vulnerable, and weak.

Although he is famed for his plays, William Shakespeare is also an acclaimed poet of the Elizabethan era. As mentioned in the introduction, Shakespeare wrote his sonnets during the reign of Queen Elizabeth 1. Sonnet 66 “Tired with all these, for restful death I cry” deviates from other Shakespearean sonnets as it is not a love poem but a lamentation of the corruption of the world, from which the speaker desires to be released from. This sonnet serves to criticize three different aspects of life: the unfairness of life itself, corrupt society, and an autocratic, repressive governing body. Lines 2 and 3 “As, to behold desert a beggar born, And needy nothing trimmed in jollity” (66. 2-3) reflect on power, and lack thereof, in relation to the position and nobility of a person in society. The higher your status, the more power, and authority you possess. In order to be respected and successful during the Elizabethan era, family nobility and contacts of the same class and status was of the utmost importance. Shakespeare rejects this in his sonnet and reveals that, if he did not have to leave his lover behind in such an unfair, oppressive society, he would like to die rather than live in such a world. This resentment of the power structure of society may have stemmed from the lack of freedom of expression for artists in their work, Shakespeare says art is “made tongue-tied by authority” (66. 9) The nobility, who were the authority figures in society, could control the art produced by those they sponsored. If they did not agree with a piece of art, for example, a poem or sonnet, written by an individual they could censor it and ensure it was not released to the public. For a writer like Shakespeare, this would have been extremely frustrating, but he did not have the power to challenge those of higher prestige than him. His critique of society in sonnet 66 was not intended to be published which may explain why Shakespeare felt he could be overtly critical in this work.

Throughout this essay, I believe I have shown how poets of the early modern period, like Sir Thomas Wyatt and William Shakespeare, responded to the ideas of authority and power in their literature. In the early modern period, sources of authority and power were often heads of states, like King Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth 1, or high-status nobility born into their prestigious positions. Wyatt was concerned with the repercussions of going against an authoritative figure like King Henry VII, and how the political and sexual were linked in his everyday life leaving him powerless and vulnerable. Shakespeare was also concerned with the oppressive power figures of the day and wrote from a position of the anguish of wanting to leave behind such a cruel, unfair society.

Works Cited

1. Gerard, Albert S. Wyatt’s ‘They File From Me’, Essays in Criticism, Volume XI, Issue 3, July 1961, pp. 359 Griffin, Carrie. “Courtly Literature.” February 2019, University of Limerick. Lecture.
2. Schwartz, Louis. “But as for me, Helas, I may no more’: Petrarchan imitation and courtly sociability in Wyatt’s ‘Who So List to Hounte.’” The Comparatist, vol. 18, 1994, pp. 1-22. JSTOR.
3. Shakespeare, William. Shake-Speares Sonnets.: Neuer before Imprinted. By G. Eld for T.T. and Are to Be Sold by Williaam Aspley, 1609.
4. Wyatt, Thomas, and Rebholz, R A. The Complete Poems. Yale University Press, 1981. pp. 77.· pp. 116-117.