Sign in or 

|
karenofbethany |
20. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 12 2009, 7:45 PM EST
I think I know the definitive answer about THomas: get any of your books, go to the index and look up "Boyelyn, Thomas. Read the references, and see if any of them mention anything positive about his contributions to his childrens' lives. I'll bet that all of them relate to his being "present" or "status" or "court activities", perhaps "trial". Finally, hopefully, "death of".
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
tudorfan79 |
21. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 12 2009, 8:04 PM EST
There are somethings worse than death. I am not sure if watching his children die, or knowing that they were going to die bothered him all that much. However, as ambitious, greedy and selfish he was, it would be a fate worst then death to be disgraced and banished from court. To have his lifes ambition lopped off, trust me he was hurting.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
Neveleo |
22. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 12 2009, 8:28 PM EST
"I felt so badly for Anne as her father walked out of the Tower. How utterly abandoned she must have felt, not to mention the daily abandonment he afforded her whilst she was in court. Also, I thought at first in the last scene of season two they were carrying in Anne's head for Henry to behold and confirm her death, but the director chose to leave us with the disturbing scene of a gluttonous tyrant completely out of control. Next year ought to be a doozie!"I aree re the final scene, but I think another image it portrayed of Henry was him destroying something beautiful. The episode keptnshowing the swans gliding serenely on the lake, and then in the end Henry just devoured them greedily giving no though to the beauty he was devouring and destroying - rather like he did with Anne Boleyn - and I think that was one of the points of that scene. It was very good at making Henry look horrible though in any case! I believe Thomas Boleyn died only a couple of years after Anne and George's executions (lets not forget he also abandoned his son). And their mother passed away relatively soon after their deaths too. I thought the scene with Anne remembering her father picking her up and treating her like a cherished daughter was particularly moving, in light of his 'abandonment' of her. I would like to think that he was not quite as evil as he was portrayed though. Do you find this valuable? |
|
tudorcrazy |
23. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 12:08 AM EST
"Yes that was very cryptic. Did it mean he had slept with her, or that he still wanted to sleep with her. He definitly had a yen for her, and I think there was always sexual tension between them.sorry, I did mean Thomas Wyatt. must have been thinking of how sad he was at the beheading. I love the poem these bloody days have broken my heart...he must have felt so bad to see her destroyed on trumpted up charges. Do you find this valuable? |
|
N-Boleyn-Tree |
24. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 8:48 AM EST
"Records stated that he sat on the jury of the men tried with his son and daughter, but was recused from the jury presiding over his children. His whereabouts unknown when the executions took place, but was not recorded as being in London, and did not witness the deaths. Most likely to have withdrawn to Hever in seclusion with his wife"With respect, if you will kindly review the Thomas Boleyn bio and historical timeline - you find he DID view the execution of both Anne and George. http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/thomas-boleyn.htm Do you find this valuable? |
|
MsSquirrly |
26. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 11:31 AM EST
"With respect, if you will kindly review the Thomas Boleyn bio and historical timeline - you find he DID view the execution of both Anne and George.Unfortunately while the website you quote has some interesting information, it does have some inaccuracies and as it doesn't quote sources, it cannot be taken as fact. It definitely has many dates incorrect on that timeline and doesn't even use the term circa where there is some dispute. According to primary sources...ie. reports made at the time by Wriothesly and the Spanish Ambassadors correspondence. There were approximately a thousand spectators at Anne Boleyn's execution. The only well known nobles who were recorded to be in attendance were, Thomas Audley,the Lord Chancellor, Charles Brandon, Thomas Cromwell and Henry Fitzroy. It is believed that Thomas Wyatt who was imprisoned probably viewed the execution from where he was being held. Other than that, there are no records of Thomas Boleyn being in attendance. Do you find this valuable? |
|
TheLadyNatalie |
27. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 1:16 PM EST
Only the good die young... I was a bit miffed that they didn't show anne's mother. I would have loved to see her, being a howard born-and-raised. I would have loved to see her reaction to what her husband had done. Do you find this valuable? |
|
tudorcrazy |
28. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 1:37 PM EST
I think the Seymours were just as ruthless, just not as brilliant. I absolutely think Thomas Boleyn was that ruthless, and heartless, as he saw his daughters as the best way to advance his career. The only reason he felt bad, is he didn't think Henry would kill them, especially after Elizabeth was born. That's why he got so upset when Anne miscarried, and he asked her what happened, and got very tough with her. He thought he had no more problems. The tragic story Of Lady Jane Grey was the same. Her parents beat her until she married Guilford, such a famous scene portrayed by Helena Bonheim Carter, and then when she was crowned she was beheaded. Yes, these fathers are just as ruthless as the same fathers in Darfor, or other places in the world today who sell their daughters as sex slaves, concubines, and prostitutes. The only difference is that this was royalty. I have very little faith, and that many fathers only saw the girls as a means to advance themselves. Sorry to sound so bitter, but I think they were monsters, and Henry wasn't any different except he didn't need to advance, he was king!
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
karenofbethany |
29. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 7:10 PM EST
"Records stated that he sat on the jury of the men tried with his son and daughter, but was recused from the jury presiding over his children. His whereabouts unknown when the executions took place, but was not recorded as being in London, and did not witness the deaths. Most likely to have withdrawn to Hever in seclusion with his wife"I am reading now about how (you are correct) he was not present at the trial. However, he did have a chance to present pro or con evidence, and he chose to concur with his peers who condemned her. It was her Uncle Thomas who cried at the trial. Do you find this valuable? |
|
karenofbethany |
30. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 7:12 PM EST
"With respect, if you will kindly review the Thomas Boleyn bio and historical timeline - you find he DID view the execution of both Anne and George.According to Antonia Fraser he didn't. But maybe I am (she is) incorrect. Do you find this valuable? |
|
karenofbethany |
31. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 7:19 PM EST
"There are somethings worse than death. I am not sure if watching his children die, or knowing that they were going to die bothered him all that much. However, as ambitious, greedy and selfish he was, it would be a fate worst then death to be disgraced and banished from court. To have his lifes ambition lopped off, trust me he was hurting. "You have a good point. Quality of life is his issue. THe problem is that he was instrumental in determining the quality of life for his daughters (and son) - which of course increased with the family power. But all of the circumstances culiminated in a tragedy and my argument is that (1) he pushed her toward her destiny and (2) she lost her life while he was allowed to keep his. Life is life, most people will cling to it if they can. Writers say that Anne faced death with good humor as an end to all of her troubles. But that was on the scaffold which must have been unreal. Before that, she vacillated between despair and hysteria. Henry had already galloped off, and where was her father? He should have at least stood by her at the very end. Her uncle was there, and actually there was no love lost between them but he was recorded as being very shaken by it all. (of course, he lived for a while, too). Do you find this valuable? |
|
tudorfan79 |
32. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 10:14 PM EST
"You have a good point. Quality of life is his issue. THe problem is that he was instrumental in determining the quality of life for his daughters (and son) - which of course increased with the family power. But all of the circumstances culiminated in a tragedy and my argument is that (1) he pushed her toward her destiny and (2) she lost her life while he was allowed to keep his. Life is life, most people will cling to it if they can. Writers say that Anne faced death with good humor as an end to all of her troubles. But that was on the scaffold which must have been unreal. Before that, she vacillated between despair and hysteria. Henry had already galloped off, and where was her father? He should have at least stood by her at the very end. Her uncle was there, and actually there was no love lost between them but he was recorded as being very shaken by it all. (of course, he lived for a while, too)."I wonder why the uncle is present on the series after season 1. I read that he lived to be 81. Do you find this valuable? |
|
karenofbethany |
33. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 10:45 PM EST
"I wonder why the uncle is present on the series after season 1. I read that he lived to be 81."Well, I may be totally off but isn't he the Duke of Norfolk? In the movie Elizabeth he gets knocked off pretty early in her reign. I think he did get killed...we can find out by going to our little box of all knowledge and looking him up (up on the left). Hope I haven't steered anybody wrong, I do get some of the people and titles (earls, dukes, marchionesses) confused. Do you find this valuable? |
|
karenofbethany |
34. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 10:46 PM EST
Maybe the Duke of Norfolk during Elizabeth was his son? Would someone please help?
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
MsSquirrly |
35. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 13 2009, 11:07 PM EST
"Maybe the Duke of Norfolk during Elizabeth was his son? Would someone please help?"During Elizabeth's reign it was the 4th Duke of Norfolk who was the 3rd Duke's grandson. His son had been beheaded by Henry and the 3rd Duke just missed being executed because Henry died the day he was supposed to be beheaded. He was imprisoned for Edward's reign and released when Mary took the throne, dying at the age of 81 ....4 yrs before Elizabeth took the throne. Do you find this valuable? |
|
karenofbethany |
36. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 14 2009, 6:30 AM EST
"During Elizabeth's reign it was the 4th Duke of Norfolk who was the 3rd Duke's grandson. His son had been beheaded by Henry and the 3rd Duke just missed being executed because Henry died the day he was supposed to be beheaded. He was imprisoned for Edward's reign and released when Mary took the throne, dying at the age of 81 ....4 yrs before Elizabeth took the throne."As usual, you are here with the necessary facts while I am ranting and failing to check my sources. Now I remember, thanks! Do you find this valuable? |
|
VerelaiR |
37. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 14 2009, 8:44 PM EST
"I think the Seymours were just as ruthless, just not as brilliant. I absolutely think Thomas Boleyn was that ruthless, and heartless, as he saw his daughters as the best way to advance his career. The only reason he felt bad, is he didn't think Henry would kill them, especially after Elizabeth was born. That's why he got so upset when Anne miscarried, and he asked her what happened, and got very tough with her. He thought he had no more problems. The tragic story Of Lady Jane Grey was the same. Her parents beat her until she married Guilford, such a famous scene portrayed by Helena Bonheim Carter, and then when she was crowned she was beheaded. Yes, these fathers are just as ruthless as the same fathers in Darfor, or other places in the world today who sell their daughters as sex slaves, concubines, and prostitutes. The only difference is that this was royalty. I have very little faith, and that many fathers only saw the girls as a means to advance themselves. Sorry to sound so bitter, but I think they were monsters, and Henry wasn't any different except he didn't need to advance, he was king!"An interesting thread, but I must ask if the contributors are discussing the Sir Thomas Boleyn of history, or the character Sir Thomas Boleyn in the series? Two different people. Wiltshire was certainly an accomplished diplomat and courtier in the tradition of Castiglione - a superb linguist, adept, charming, highly intelligent and accomplished; the only negative was his parsimony, as diplomats were paid very little. Yes, he was ambitious, but no more so than any other member of Henry VIII's court: he never pushed either daughter in the KIng's way. Anne Boleyn was very much her father's daughter, and a consummate, ambitious courtier, as well. Wiltshire recognized George and Anne Boleyn as having exceptional potential - this lead to his securing a position for AB in Margaret of Austria's brilliant court. I suspect he approved of AB's secret betrothal to Henry Percy - Boleyns always married well. He did quarrel with his strong willed daughter, but more over strategy rather than overall goals. He was in the Westminster jury that presided over the trials of the four accused men, but recused from the Tower trials of his son and daughter; no, he never witnessed the executions, having left London, most likely to Hever - in deep seclusion, with his wife. He remained close to his children - AB, upon her arrest, anxiously asked for her father and brother. In terms of intervening - absolutely impossible. The jurors would have likely faced arrest, confiscation of property, poverty, disgrace and possible imprisonment or capital punishment for defying the pre-ordained verdict. No one could produce any sort of evidence - trials were completely different then. Within a year, he tried again to succeed at court (after his wife's death), with minimal success. Rumour had it he might have married Margaret Douglas, Henry VIII's niece, but he died in 1539. No evidence indicates he was as heartless as in the series. Do you find this valuable? |
|
beardedlady |
38. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 15 2009, 8:48 AM EST
Great post! I think one of the reasons why Thomas Boleyn is viewed as heartless in popular fiction is because writers try to apply modern day perceptions of family life to the Boleyn family. Very few 16th century nobles raised their children. Religious beliefs, education, morals and etiquette were the responsibility of the governess and tutors. You won’t find examples of Thomas Boleyn having father/daughter bonding time with Anne. His job was to provide for the family and find an advantageous match for his daughter. That’s it. In that regard, he was the ideal 16th century father.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
beardedlady |
39. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 15 2009, 8:54 AM EST
Another note to add - A good illustrated example of 16th century family values can be seen in the emblems that were circulated throughout London. Emblems on parenting taught that coddling children would lead to weakening their character.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
Anne'sCurls |
40. RE: Why Thomas Boleyn Survived
Jan 15 2009, 3:11 PM EST
Thomas isnt always portrayed as heartless. In Anne of the Thousand Days he was ambitous but he still loved his family. He was present at Anne and George's death for, what I beleived, was moral support. I will be with you to the end kind of thing. He did participate in the trial but only sead that Anne and George were his children and he looked damn upset doing it. Norfolk was also portrayed positively in the movie giving some support to Anne even though her life was crumbling. In TOBG(2008) he is like an idiot pawn of Norfolk who has no back bone unless he is up against his wife, and even at the end she beats the crap out of him. In the Tudors he is a runner up to evil right behind Henry, I believe that with the NOrfolk actor gone they had to make Thomas be the evil Boleyn. BTW all these Norfolks are confusing the hell out of me! I know one was Anne's uncle and I believe but am not sure that his son was the Duke/Earl/Sir Surrey or something like that and he was executed...do I have that right. Then Elizabeth had to execute one of them. Do you find this valuable? |