In 1524, Wyatt followed his father's example and started a career at court as Clerk of the King's jewels. In 1525 he was made Esquire of the Body and he went on to become an ambassador, undertaking many foreign missions for his master, King Henry VIII. These included one to France in 1526 and one to the Papal Court in Rome in 1527, this last an embassy to try to convince Pope Clement VII to annul the King's marriage to Catherine of Aragon. In 1528 Wyatt was made High Marshal of Calais and in 1532 he was made Commissioner of the Peace in Essex. Wyatt was also one of the men chosen to accompany the King and Anne Boleyn on their visit to Calais in late 1532 and he served Anne at her coronation in the summer of 1533. He was knighted in 1535.
Thomas Wyatt and Anne Boleyn
It is thought that Wyatt fell in love with Anne Boleyn when she first arrived at the English court in 1522. He was unhappily married and it seems to have been love at first sight for Thomas. In his biography "The Life of Anne Boleigne", Thomas Wyatt's grandson, George Wyatt, wrote that when Wyatt saw Anne, "this new beauty", he was "surprised somewhat with the sight thereof" and that he "could gladly yield to be tied for ever with the knot of her love".2 At this time, though, Anne and Henry Percy were in love.
In 1524, Wyatt became clerk of the King's jewels and would have seen Anne at court because she was a member of Queen Catherine of Aragon's household. There is no real evidence that there was any relationship between Anne and Wyatt at this time, and in any case, by Shrovetide 1526 Anne had a new admirer; the King. At the Shrovetide joust, Henry VIII rode out "resplendent in cloth of gold and silver, richly embroidered with a man's heart gripped in a press and engulfed in flames. The motto read declare ie nose – "declare I dare not"." The King had a new love.
Some people believe that Wyatt's poetry is evidence of a relationship between Anne Boleyn and Thomas Wyatt. For example, his riddle poem "What wourde is that that chaungeth not" has the answer "Anna", and in "The Lover Confesseth Him in Love with Phyllis", he writes of "That Brunet" which is taken to refer to Anne. Further evidence (if you believe The Spanish Chronicle!) is the story of Wyatt visiting Anne at Hever, finding her in bed, declaring his love for her, kissing her and touching her breasts and then being disturbed by stamping from upstairs from another of Anne's lovers!3
Another story is told by George Wyatt. Thomas was entertaining Anne one day as she did needlework and playfully grabbed a jewel hanging by a lace from her pocket. He decided to keep it as a trophy, wearing it around his neck. When the King and Wyatt were playing bowls one day, they argued over a shot. Wyatt declared that it was his, but the King declared "Wiatt, I tell thee it is mine" as he pointed to the wood with the finger on which he wore Anne's ring. Wyatt saw the ring and replied "And if it may like your majesty to give me leave to measure it, I hope it will be mine" and he took the jewel from around his neck and began to measure the cast with the ribbon. This angered the King, who broke up the game and then demanded an explanation from Anne, who told him how Wyatt had stolen her jewel.4
Whatever the truth of George Wyatt's story, Anne and Thomas Wyatt's relationship seems nothing more than a case of unrequited love. Wyatt's poem "Whoso list to hunt" tells of a man (Wyatt) hunting a hind with little chance of success, and then withdrawing from the hunt because of another hunter. If we see Anne as the hind, then Wyatt is talking of withdrawing his suit of Anne because she is now the property of the King: "Noli me tangere; for Caesar's I am".
Sir Richard Page
Nothing is known about Sir Richard Page's background and early life, all we know is that he started his career working for Cardinal Wolsey as the latter's chamberlain. In the Royal Household records of December 1516,1 Page is listed as "Sir Ric.Page", a gentleman of the privy chamber, so he was serving Henry VIII then and had also been knighted by this point.
Page served as a Justice of the Peace for Surrey between 1522 and 26, and again in 1528, and for Middlesex in 1524. In January 1522 he was appointed as comptroller of the customs in the port of London "during good behaviour, in consideration of his services to the King and cardinal Wolsey".2 In 1525, he was chosen to help administer the household of Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond, the illegitimate son of Henry VIII, and served on the Council of the North. It is thought that he also served as recorder of Hull and chief steward of Beverley around this time.3
His biographer, Catharine Davies, writes of how he accompanied Cardinal Wolsey to Calais in 1527 wearing a great chain which weighed 200 pounds, and in 1528 Page and Sir John Wallop were chosen "To be surveyors and receivers, &c. of the subsidy of cloths called karseys, in the ports of London and Southampton, with an annuity of 100l. T"4
On 3rd December 1530, after the fall of his master, Cardinal Wolsey, Page was awarded "Grant of the site of the late priory of St. Leonard, Thoby, Essex, and the manors of Thoby and Bluntzwall, Essex; with messuages, lands, &c. in Thoby, Gingemountney alias Mountnesing, Bluntzwall, Cupsolde, Wyndall, Parva Warley, Marses, Nosells alias Norlsells, Rome, Maylond, Mowlond, Wyndhull, Runwell, Bobyngworth, Springfeld, Hereford, Stoke Paching, Shenfeld, Ingraf, Raureth, Colchester, Borhame, Stondon, Wryttell, Shelowe, Gingemargaret, Cubsant, and Shenfeld, Essex; which belonged to Thos. cardinal archbishop of York, attainted."5 Page surely must have had mixed feelings about that reward!
By 1532, he was working alongside the likes of Sir Nicholas Carew and Sir John Russell in the privy chamber in a climate of rivalry. Carew was one of the Seymour faction, so this may explain Page's arrest. Page was a close friend of the Queen's. He had carried out "sundry little services" for Anne and she had rewarded him with gifts,6 so there was a connection. Paul Friedmann writes of how his links to the Fitzwilliams and Russells may explain his eventual release7 in July 1536.
Sir Francis Bryan
Sir Francis Bryan is thought to have been born around 1490 and was the first surviving son of Sir Thomas Bryan. His mother was Lady Margaret Bryan (née Bourchier), lady-in-waiting to Queen Catherine of Aragon and the future governess of Princess Mary, Princess Elizabeth and Prince Edward. Bryan was a second cousin to both Anne Boleyn and Jane Seymour.
In 1516, he became the King's cupbearer and then, in 1518, master of the toils. He also became a gentleman of the privy chamber in 1518, but lost this position in Wolsey's purge. He regained the position in 1528, probably due to the influence of Anne Boleyn. He was knighted in 1522 for his courage during the capture of Morlaix in Brittany, serving under the Earl of Surrey, and by 1526 he held the position of chief cupbearer and master of the henchmen. During the King's Great Matter, Bryan was Henry VIII's trusted messenger to the Pope and Francis I. He even went as far as sleeping with a courtesan at the Papal court to get inside information.
Thomas Cromwell referred to Bryan as "the vicar of Hell" in a letter to Gardiner and Wallop on the 14th May 1536,1 and, according to Catholic recusant Nicholas Sander, the King also referred to him by this nickname. Sander writes "This man was once asked by the king to tell him what sort of a sin it was to ruin the mother and then the child. Bryan replied that it was a sin like that of eating a hen first and its chicken afterwards. The king burst forth into loud laughter, and said to Bryan, "Well, you certainly are my vicar of hell". The man had been long ago called the vicar of hell on account of his notorious impiety, henceforth he was called also the king's vicar of hell."2
Bryan was a staunch Catholic and his motto was Je tens grace ('I look for salvation'). Historian Susan Brigden3 writes of how he owned a copy of the 1537 Matthew Bible and that he acted as a patron of scholars who could translate the Bible from the original Greek. Like his good friend, Thomas Wyatt, Bryan was also a poet.
It seems that he felt no guilt in conspiring with Cromwell to bring down the Boleyn faction. Cromwell ordering Bryan back to London for interrogation was probably for show, a tactical move.
Robert, Abbot of Woburn, made a declaration in 1538 regarding Sir Francis Bryan's involvement in the fall of Anne Boleyn, which he likened to the fall of Lucifer. Of Bryan, he said:
"At the fall of queen A
nne Mr. Bryan was sent for by the lord Privy Seal in all haste "upon his allegiance." At his next repair to Ampthill the abbot went to visit him, being in the Court with lord Grey of Wilton and others. Sir Francis espied the abbot at the gate, and of his gentleness came to meet him. Said, "Now welcome home and never so welcome." He, astonished, asked, Why so? Said he would explain at leisure. Afterwards, in the great chamber with the others, drew a parallel between the fall of Lucifer and that of queen Anne, congratulating Sir Francis that he was not implicated. He replied it was true that when he was suddenly sent for he marvelled; but knowing his truth to his prince he never hesitated but went straight to my lord Privy Seal, and then to the King, and there was "nothing found" in him."4
Sir Francis Bryan was probably never in any danger; after all, he had allied himself with the Seymours and the anti-Boleyn faction. He was probably hoping to profit from Jane Seymour's rise, just as he had with his other cousin, Anne Boleyn. The fact that just three hours after Anne Boleyn's condemnation Bryan was sent to tell Jane Seymour the news is proof indeed that he was never in any real danger. After Anne Boleyn's fall, he replaced the late Sir Henry Norris as Chief Gentleman of the King's Privy Chamber and got his share of the spoils. In 1539, Bryan was removed from this post as Cromwell turned against him and others of that faction, but he gained favour again after Cromwell's fall and became vice-admiral of the fleet. During the reign of Edward VI, Bryan was made Lord Chief Justice of Ireland. He died in Ireland in 1550.
6th May 1536 – From the Lady in the Tower
On 6th May 1536, it is said that Anne Boleyn wrote the following letter to her husband, King Henry VIII, from the Tower of London:
"To the King from the Lady in the Tower" [Heading said to have been added by Thomas Cromwell]
"Sir, your Grace's displeasure, and my Imprisonment are Things so strange unto me, as what to Write, or what to Excuse, I am altogether ignorant; whereas you sent unto me (willing me to confess a Truth, and so obtain your Favour) by such a one, whom you know to be my ancient and professed Enemy; I no sooner received the Message by him, than I rightly conceived your Meaning; and if, as you say, confessing Truth indeed may procure my safety, I shall with all Willingness and Duty perform your Command.
But let not your Grace ever imagine that your poor Wife will ever be brought to acknowledge a Fault, where not so much as Thought thereof proceeded. And to speak a truth, never Prince had Wife more Loyal in all Duty, and in all true Affection, than you have found in Anne Boleyn, with which Name and Place could willingly have contented my self, as if God, and your Grace's Pleasure had been so pleased. Neither did I at any time so far forge my self in my Exaltation, or received Queenship, but that I always looked for such an Alteration as now I find; for the ground of my preferment being on no surer Foundation than your Grace's Fancy, the least Alteration, I knew, was fit and sufficient to draw that Fancy to some other subject.
You have chosen me, from a low Estate, to be your Queen and Companion, far beyond my Desert or Desire. If then you found me worthy of such Honour, Good your Grace, let not any light Fancy, or bad Counsel of mine Enemies, withdraw your Princely Favour from me; neither let that Stain, that unworthy Stain of a Disloyal Heart towards your good Grace, ever cast so foul a Blot on your most Dutiful Wife, and the Infant Princess your Daughter.
Try me, good King, but let me have a Lawful Trial, and let not my sworn Enemies sit as my Accusers and Judges; yes, let me receive an open Trial, for my Truth shall fear no open shame; then shall you see, either mine Innocency cleared, your Suspicion and Conscience satisfied, the Ignominy and Slander of the World stopped, or my Guilt openly declared. So that whatsoever God or you may determine of me, your Grace may be freed from an open Censure; and mine Offence being so lawfully proved, your Grace is at liberty, both before God and Man, not only to execute worthy Punishment on me as an unlawful Wife, but to follow your Affection already settled on that party, for whose sake I am now as I am, whose Name I could some good while since have pointed unto: Your Grace being not ignorant of my Suspicion therein.
But if you have already determined of me, and that not only my Death, but an Infamous Slander must bring you the enjoying of your desired Happiness; then I desire of God, that he will pardon your great Sin therein, and likewise mine Enemies, the Instruments thereof; that he will not call you to a strict Account for your unprincely and cruel usage of me, at his General Judgement-Seat, where both you and my self must shortly appear, and in whose Judgement, I doubt not, (whatsover the World may think of me) mine Innocence shall be openly known, and sufficiently cleared.
My last and only Request shall be, That my self may only bear the Burthen of your Grace's Displeasure, and that it may not touch the Innocent Souls of those poor Gentlemen, who (as I understand) are likewise in strait Imprisonment for my sake. If ever I have found favour in your Sight; if ever the Name of Anne Boleyn hath been pleasing to your Ears, then let me obtain this Request; and I will so leave to trouble your Grace any further, with mine earnest Prayers to the Trinity to have your Grace in his good keeping, and to direct you in all your Actions.
Your most Loyal and ever Faithful Wife, Anne Bullen
From my doleful Prison the Tower, this 6th of May."1
The Words of Anne Boleyn or a Forgery?
The letter first appeared in Lord Edward Herbert's 1649 book "The Life and Raigne of King Henry the Eighth".2 Herbert was sceptical, believing that the letter may have been a fake penned in the reign of Elizabeth I, but Gilbert Burnet, Bishop of Salibury,3 writing in 1679, believed it to be genuine. It was claimed that the letter was found with Sir William Kingston's letters in Cromwell's papers and, like Kingston's letters to Cromwell, it had been damaged during a fire in 1731.
This letter has often been considered a forgery, mainly due to the handwriting which differs from other authenticated letters by Anne. However, at the time of publication, the claim was made that the letter found was a copy made by Cromwell. This would explain why it was not in Anne's handwriting. Although Burnet and Victorian historian J.A. Froude4 believed that the letter was authentic, historians such as Agnes Strickland and James Gairdner thought it to be a forgery, with Gairdner5 believing it to be written in an Elizabethan hand. Other historians, like Paul Friedmann and P W Sergeant, also thought it to be a forgery. Modern day historian Alison Weir6 makes a further point when she draws our attention to Henry Savage's view. Savage states that the difference in handwriting could be due to this letter being written a decade later than Anne's other authenticated letters, which date from the 1520s, and also the fact that she was imprisoned and living in fear of her life. Weir also cites Jasper Ridley, editor of "The Love Letters of Henry VIII,"7 as pointing out that the letter "bears all the marks of Anne's character, of her spirit, her impudence and her recklessness".
There are, however, anomalies which suggest that the letter is a forgery:
The signature "Anne Bullen" rather than the usual "Anne Boleyn", "Anne de Boulaine" or "Anne the Queen".
The fact that Cromwell kept it rather than destroying it.
The heading at the top: "To the King from the Lady in the Tower" – wouldn't Cromwell have referred to her as the Queen or as Anne Boleyn? "The Lady in the Tower" is rather poetic and romantic.
The style, which is not consistent with Anne's other letters.
The reproving tone and provocative content – The writer is claiming that the King instigated the plot so that he could marry Jane Seymour. Would Anne risk angering and insulting Henry in this way?
BUT these anomalies can be thrown out of the window:
If the letter was a copy then this could have been Cromwell referring to Anne.
It wasn't discovered until the 17th century so it was obviously kept hidden and not made public.
Perhaps Cromwell no longer saw her as Queen and nicknamed her "The Lady in the Tower".
Anne was not writing a normal letter, she had the shadow of the axe (or rather, sword) hanging over her.
Anne could be p
rovocative when she wanted to be. It may have been a huge risk to take but perhaps she wanted this one opportunity to tell the King what she thought of him and his plot.
The handwriting issue and the use of "Bullen" can also be explained away. The letter could have been a copy made by Cromwell. It could be, as argued by Jasper Ridley,8 a late 16th century copy of the earlier original, or Anne may have been so distraught that she dictated it to one of her ladies. Ultimately, there is no way we can be certain one way or the other, but I hope that Anne did write it or something like it. Anne's execution speech stuck to the usual rules, in that she accepted her sentence and praised the King, but I'd like to think that Anne had some opportunity to let the King know what she really thought.
7th May 1536 – A Chaplain is Searched
On Sunday 7th May 1536, Queen Anne Boleyn's chaplain, William Latymer, was searched on his arrival at Sandwich in Kent. He was returning from a business visit to Flanders, a visit he had undertaken on behalf of the Queen.
A letter from the Mayor and Jurates of Sandwich to Henry VIII recorded the search:
"On Sunday, 7 May, Sir Wm. Latymer, one of the Queen's chaplains, arrived at Sandwich, where he was told that the Queen and others were prisoners in the Tower. He said that he had come from Flanders on her business, and showed the contents of his budget and purse to the mayor and jurates, as Thos. Boys, one of the King's servants then present, can testify. Enclose a list written by him of the books he had with him, and of others in his mail, which had not yet arrived, but which were to be conveyed to London to one Mrs. Wilkinson. Boys will convey Latymer himself to the King. Sandwich, 8 May."1
The Fall of Anne Boleyn: A Countdown Page 11