Mary Boleyn: The Great and Infamous Whore Page 8
In the nineteenth century there was “no doubt it is Mary, and not Anne Boleyn, who was fille d’honneur to Margaret of Austria and the subject of that lady’s letter to Sir Thomas Boleyn,”34 and several historians since have repeated the error,35 but the issue is settled by an undated letter, written in French by Anne to her father (and the first of hers to survive), that must belong to that period.
Sir [she wrote],
I understand by your letter that you desire that I shall be a worthy woman when I come into the court, and you inform me that the Queen will take the trouble to converse with me, which rejoices me much to think of talking with a person so wise and worthy. This will make me have greater desire to continue to speak French well, and also spell, especially because you have enjoined it on me, and with my own hand I inform you that I will observe it the best I can. Sir, I beg you to excuse me if my letter is badly written, for I assure you that the orthography is from my own understanding alone, while the others were only written by my hand, and Semmonet tells me the letter but waits so that I may do it myself.
Written at Veure by Your very humble and very
obedient daughter,
Anna de Boullan.36
For a long time it was thought that this letter was written at Hever Castle,37 but in 1981, Hugh Paget retranslated it, and discovered that it was in fact written from La Veure (or Terveuren), a royal palace and hunting park near Brussels, which Margaret of Austria favored as a summer retreat. We know the letter is authentic because it was preserved by Thomas or Anne Boleyn, and bequeathed by Anne’s chaplain, Matthew Parker, later Archbishop of Canterbury, to Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.38 Thus there can be no doubt that it was Anne who was sent to the court of the Archduchess.
“Semonnet” was presumably a governess—possibly called Simonette—who instructed Anne, and perhaps the other filles d’honneur, in French, or “she” could conceivably have been a male tutor with that surname; there was a gentleman called Symonnet in the household of Margaret of Austria’s nephew, the future Charles V, in 1510.39 Certainly Margaret had assured Anne’s father that, by the time he saw his daughter again, she would be able to converse with him in French.40
It is likely that Anne was present at Lille when the Archduchess entertained Henry VIII there in October 1513, and she may even have been one of the “damsels” with whom the twenty-two-year-old King spent the night dancing.41 This may have been the first occasion on which she set eyes on Henry of England, unless she had seen him when her grandfather entertained him at New Hall in 1500.
It was highly unusual for a younger sister to be advanced before an elder one, and Anne’s appointment has been cited as proof that she “had to have been the elder”;42 yet it was even more unusual for a younger sister to be married first, and the fact that Mary did marry before a husband was found for Anne tends to demolish that argument. It has also been asserted that Anne was not married off before Mary because she was expected to make a good marriage in France,43 but by 1520 she had been there five years and no husband had materialized. Moreover, by the spring of that year, as soon as her sister had been wedded and bedded, her father was negotiating a marriage for her in England—which immeasurably strengthens the case for her being the younger sister.
Even so, it is strange to find Mary, who evidently spoke good French, being passed over as a fille d’honneur to Margaret of Austria. The reason was possibly that her father believed that Anne had what it took to succeed at court in greater measure than Mary. Yet Mary was clearly by no means deficient in that respect, for soon Sir Thomas would find her a place at court too. This leads one to wonder if there was some other reason for Anne being chosen first. Maybe Mary was unwell at the time, or her father had other plans for her, perhaps hoping to place her at the English court.
It may be that Mary Boleyn was jealous of her younger sister going before her into the world of courts, and we may imagine that, after Anne had left for the Low Countries in 1513, Mary perhaps felt resentful and not a little lonely. Yet there is no evidence that the sisters were close,44 or even friendly, so she may have welcomed some respite from being always in the shadow of Anne. Mary has also been seen as “a highly sexed young woman who had been desperate to escape from the boredom of her home at Hever Castle,”45 and as “sensual and precociously attractive”46 and therefore no doubt frustrated—but no one can say any of this for certain. Yet even if Mary was bored at Hever, she would not have to wait long for her own advancement. And if she did not have the same talents, charm, and ambition as Anne, she had clearly been afforded an education that would befit her for a career at court, for in a very short time, thanks to her father’s influence, she would make her own debut there.
While we cannot be sure what Mary looked like, as she grew toward womanhood the charms that were to inspire lust in two kings must have become evident. Modern writers describe her variously as “dark-haired,”47 “stately and golden-haired,”48 or “dimpled and red-cheeked, with lightish-brown hair and gray eyes” and a “rosy, soft, blue-eyed fairness”;49 but there is nothing to substantiate any of these confusing statements. All we know is that Thomas Boleyn’s chaplain, John Barlow, thought that Mary was by far the more beautiful of the Boleyn sisters. That is in direct contradiction to claims that she was “physically not very attractive”50 and “not a beauty.”51
Portraits of Mary’s son, Henry Carey, show a man with a long, thin face, a pointed chin, hooked nose, and heavy-lidded eyes. He does not favor his father, William Carey, although the resemblance to Elizabeth I and Anne Boleyn is striking. Possibly Mary herself had similar features, which were inherited from the Boleyns. But sadly, there is no authenticated portrait or likeness of her.52
In the summer of 1514, Mary Boleyn would no doubt have been delighted to receive a summons to court. The King’s sister, the beautiful eighteen-year-old Mary Tudor, was to be married to Louis XII, King of France, and had need of young girls of good birth who could speak French to attend on her.53 Mary Boleyn had not had the benefit of specialist coaching in French at the court of Brussels, yet she was selected, which argues that she had not had need of it, having inherited her father’s aptitude for languages. The Princess specifically asked for Anne Boleyn also, having heard, presumably from Sir Thomas, that she had made excellent progress in French. “To this request I could not, nor did I know how to refuse,” the proud father wrote to the Archduchess Margaret.54 There had been much jostling for places in Mary Tudor’s train, and the fact that he was successful in obtaining appointments for both his daughters is a measure of Sir Thomas Boleyn’s growing influence and standing at the English court.
This royal wedding was being organized at very short notice. Anne’s letter to her father had been written in that summer of 1514, when the Archduchess took her household for a summer visit to La Veure.55 By then, however, diplomatic relations between England and the Empire were deteriorating. Henry VIII had broken the longstanding betrothal of Margaret of Austria’s nephew, the Archduke Charles (the future Emperor Charles V), son of the Emperor Maximilian, to Mary Tudor, and had instead made an alliance with France and affianced an unwilling Mary to the ailing Louis XII, Maximilian’s rival. Soon, on August 14, Thomas Boleyn was writing from Greenwich tactfully to ask the Archduchess Margaret if she would permit his daughter to return to him with his emissaries, explaining that Princess Mary wanted his daughter as one of the attendants she would take with her to France.56 Thus the queen to whom Anne had referred in her letter from La Veure was Mary Tudor, who now boasted that royal style after having been married by proxy to the King of France.
There has been much confusion as to whether one or both of the Boleyn sisters went to France in 1514. Several writers have stated that it was Mary who accompanied Mary Tudor there,57 but the evidence has perplexed many historians. An “M. Boleyn” is listed among the group of privileged young ladies who were to form part of Mary Tudor’s train,58 and, for more than a century, there was much learned discussion as to whether the M stands
for “Mary,” “Mistress,” or “Mademoiselle.” We know now that it referred to Mary, for in a recently discovered list of Queen Mary’s ladies who were paid for their service during the period between October and December 1514,59 the name “Marie Boulonne” is to be found. Anne Boleyn’s name, however, is missing.
It is clear, though, that both Boleyn girls went to France at some stage, although Anne is also missing from the list of the English attendants who traveled with Mary Tudor from England. Possibly she traveled direct from Brussels.60 Thomas Boleyn had written from Greenwich to the Archduchess requesting that she be returned to him. That was on August 14, the day after Mary Tudor had been married by proxy at Greenwich. Mary would not sail to France until October 2, while her wedding to King Louis would take place on October 9 at Abbeville; thus there would have been enough time for Anne to come home first and then travel to France with her new mistress, but clearly she did not. It may be correct to assume that the Archduchess, angered at the breaking of her nephew’s betrothal, made difficulties about Anne leaving, and delayed her departure,61 for the absence of her name from the list of payments made to Mary’s attendants between October and December 1514 indicates that she did not arrive in France until early in 1515.62 Unfortunately, no records of similar payments survive for the following quarter.63
Whether her departure was obstructed or not, it may be that, in order to serve the Queen of France, Anne had to return home to be fitted for a new wardrobe—she was only in her early teens and probably still growing—and that it was this, and perhaps winter weather, that delayed her arrival at the French court.
Among the new Queen’s household of nearly 150 persons, Mary Boleyn was initially to be one of four “chamberers,” along with “Mistress Wotton, Alice Denny, and Anne Jerningham.”64 Chamberers served their mistress in the privacy of her chamber, or private suite, performing the menial tasks that were beneath the dignity of her ladies-in-waiting. All the same, they were personal servants who enjoyed a degree of intimacy with her.
It was probably in August 1514 that Mary Boleyn arrived at the court of Henry VIII, which was then in residence at Greenwich Palace, the beautiful riverside residence where the King had been born in 1491. The former palace of Placentia had been rebuilt around 1500, and was one of the chief and most magnificent residences of the Tudor dynasty. Ranged around three vast courtyards, it was of red brick with great bay windows, surrounded by exquisite gardens and orchards, and sumptuously decorated and appointed throughout.
In the splendid but daunting environment of the court, Mary was entrusted at once to the care of Jane, Lady Guildford, the “Lady of Honor”65 or “Mother of the Maids,” who had charge of all the Princess’s maids of honor and was appointed to look to their welfare and good conduct, and to instruct them in etiquette.66 Lady Guildford, widow of Sir Richard Guildford, the comptroller of Henry VII’s household, had formerly been the Princess’s governess, and a lady-in-waiting to her mother, Elizabeth of York, and her grandmother, Margaret Beaufort. She knew how things were done in courts, and was not only a longstanding confidante and mentor to her young mistress, but also ruled her maids and chamberers efficiently.
Mary Boleyn would soon meet her fellow attendants. Some she already knew, including her stepgrandmother, Agnes Tilney, Duchess of Norfolk, and her cousin, Anne Howard, Countess of Oxford. One of the maids of honor was Jane Popincourt, a Frenchwoman who is known to have been maid of honor to the King’s late mother, Elizabeth of York, in 1498, and to have transferred by 1500 to the service of his sister, Mary. It was no secret that Jane was the mistress of a French prince, Louis d’Orléans, Duc de Longueville, who was at that time a prisoner of the King, having been captured in battle in 1513. Since then, while waiting to be ransomed, Longueville had been comfortably lodged in the Tower of London, and was often invited to court, where he had negotiated the marriage of Mary Tudor to Louis XII—and successfully pursued Jane Popincourt. Together with the Princess’s former tutor, John Palsgrave, the illicit lovers were now helping Mary Tudor to perfect her French. Nothing that is recorded of Jane Popincourt supports the assertion that she was “an uncomplicated young woman, more interested in romances, fashion, and shopping,”67 and it has been calculated that she was then around thirty68—middle-aged by Tudor standards.
Louis XII had been sent for approval a list of those who had been selected to attend upon his bride and accompany her to France, but he struck off Jane Popincourt’s name after the English ambassador in Paris had warned him that she was leading an “evil life” as the mistress of the married Longueville, whose duchess would be attending the King’s wedding.69 Mary Tudor was upset at the prospect of being parted from her friend, but Louis was adamant, insisting that his only concern was for the moral welfare of his new queen. To quiet her protests, he sent her the famous Mirror of Naples, a huge diamond with a pendant pearl, valued at 60,000 crowns (about £5 million). Poor Jane was destined to lose not only her place in Princess Mary’s household, but also her lover, who was returning to France with the bridal train.
Recent writers have speculated70—or even stated as a fact71—that Jane Popincourt became Henry VIII’s mistress for a short time, and it has been suggested that the affair was “lighthearted” and “without deep passion on either side”;72 but there is no evidence to support any of this. In May 1516, after the death of King Louis, Jane was allowed to rejoin her lover in France, and on her departure from England, Henry VIII gave her £100 (£48,000).73 This substantial gift is the sole basis for the theory that he and Jane had amorous relations; but, contrary to what has been imagined, it was far more likely to have been bestowed in recognition of her sixteen years of good service to his mother, his sister, and his wife. In 1519, in comparison, Henry granted an annuity of £100 (£38,000) to Sir John Wiltshire in consideration of his services as Comptroller of Calais.74 In any case, Jane seems to have cherished feelings for Longueville, for they resumed their affair as soon as they were reunited in France. Moreover, by October 1514, Henry had begun his liaison with Elizabeth Blount.
Nevertheless, Mary Boleyn, an innocent young teenager first arriving at court, had had a chance to observe firsthand how Jane Popincourt’s adulterous relationship had brought her only disgrace and unhappiness. It was a lesson from which Mary might have benefited.
Contemporary observers were unanimously agreed that Princess Mary was very beautiful; one Venetian called her “a paradise.”75 She had a sweet nature to match, and was to prove a kindly and generous mistress. There is evidence that she cared for the welfare and interests of her servants all her life, even those who had left her service. “Mademoiselle Boleyn” was fortunate to have been placed in the service of such a lady.
Mary Boleyn was probably in attendance on Mary Tudor for her proxy wedding to Louis XII on August 13 at Greenwich Palace, and a witness to the lavish ceremony in the great banqueting hall, which had been hung with cloth of gold embroidered with the royal arms of England and France. The Duc de Longueville stood in for his master, and was kept waiting for three hours by the bride, who arrived in a purple and gold checkered gown that matched his own. After vows, rings, and kisses had been exchanged, the couple was escorted to a sumptuous chamber where a great bed had been prepared, and lay down together fully dressed, apart from each having one leg bared to the thigh. When their naked legs touched, the marriage was declared to have been consummated.
Thereafter, preparations for the wedding proceeded at a flurry, and Mary Boleyn would no doubt have helped when her mistress was fitted with the thirty new gowns that would make up her trousseau, and watched in awe as the jewels and furnishings bestowed by King Henry on his sister were delivered, admired, and packed.
In the last week of September the bridal train—numbering over a hundred persons, and reportedly the richest cavalcade ever seen—made its cumbersome way to Dover, escorted by the King himself, riding side by side with the Princess, and accompanied by the Queen and the entire court. Everyone, Mary Boleyn included, was wearing t
heir best clothes.76 On the way, the vast train lodged at Otford, the great palace of the archbishops of Canterbury near Sevenoaks. High winds detained the royal party at Dover Castle until the sea calmed sufficiently for a crossing to be attempted, and then, on October 2, in the gloom before four o’clock in the morning, Mary’s attendants were awakened and summoned to the quayside at Dover, where the royal fleet awaited. There, Henry kissed his sister and commended her “to God and the fortunes of the sea, and the government of the King your husband.”77 Then Mary Boleyn’s maternal grandfather, Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk, escorted the Princess on board, her entourage following. Sir Thomas Boleyn was also of their number. In all, fourteen ships set sail that day for France.
In one of them, probably the vessel that conveyed Mary Tudor and her personal attendants, was Mary Boleyn. They endured a terrible voyage in gales and foul weather:78 the fleet was scattered, one vessel was lost with hundreds of lives, and it was four days before the Queen’s ship was grounded on a sandbank at Boulogne, with waves still crashing over the decks. In this tumult, a very seasick and bedraggled Mary Tudor was carried to the beach to be greeted by a reception committee of French dignitaries, who were extremely impressed by the size and splendor of her entourage. Mary Boleyn, like her fellow attendants, had to endure a perilous ride ashore by rowboat in a turbulent sea, and would no doubt have gotten very wet in the process.79