The Fall of Anne Boleyn: A Countdown

by Ridgway, Claire

  It does not appear that they found in his possession any books of an heretical nature, which was fortunate for Latymer considering what was going on in May 1536. Latymer was a keen reformer and did bring religious texts back from the Continent for Anne, so he was lucky this time. After the search, Latymer was escorted to London.

  William Latymer

  It is thought that William Latymer was introduced to Anne Boleyn by one of her other chaplains, Matthew Parker, who knew Latymer from their Cambridge days. As I have said, Anne used Latymer to procure evangelical texts for her and Anne's patronage was often sought through Latymer. In 1536, Tristram Revell tried to present her with his version of Lambertus' "Farrago Rerum Theologicarum" through William Latymer - Anne refused it, probably because it denied transubstantiation, salvation through good deeds and the power of prayers for the dead. Radical views. We don't know for sure what Anne believed about these issues, but in 1536 she was in a rather precarious position, having miscarried a son, so she just could not put her name to such a radical text.2

  William Latymer survived the fall of the Boleyns in 1536 and went on to become master of the College of St Laurence Pountney in London in 1538. He also served as rector of Witnesham in Suffolk between 1538 and 1554, and then a number of benefices in Kent, London, Nottingham and Suffolk

  In 1547, Latymer voted in favour of clerical marriage at convocation and married a widow, Ellen English. In 1549, he was a key prosecution witness, with the future Marian martyr John Hooper, in the case against Bishop Edmund Bonner who subsequently lost his bishopric.3

  When the Catholic Mary I came to the throne in 1553, Latymer was deprived of his living, due to his marriage. He separated from Ellen in order to serve a parish in Ipswich, Suffolk, but the couple never actually separated in reality; Ellen conceived a son, Edward, by Latymer during their separation!

  When Anne Boleyn's daughter, Elizabeth I, became Queen, Latymer was appointed as one of her chaplains. In 1559, he was appointed dean of Peterborough. In addition, Elizabeth made him a prebendary of Westminster Abbey, where he also served as archdeacon and treasurer. It was during Elizabeth's reign that Latymer wrote his biography or treatise of Anne Boleyn, the "Chronickille of Anne Bulleyne". On the Queen's visit to Cambridge in August 1564, Latymer was made Clerk of the Closet and Doctor of Divinity.

  Latymer died in 1583, in his early 80s, and was laid to rest in Peterborough Cathedral on 28th August 1583. He was outlived by his wife Ellen and two sons - Edward and Joshua.

  Anne Boleyn's Desire for Spiritual Comfort

  Also around 7th May, in a letter to Thomas Cromwell, Sir William Kingston wrote of Anne's requests to the King that "she [might] have the sacrament in the closet by her chamber" and that her almoner, John Skip, should also be permitted to visit her. Anne had asked for the sacrament when Kingston had first taken her to her lodgings in the Tower, but she had obviously reminded him of this. The problem was that Anne was charged with a sexual sin, a sin that she had not confessed to or done penance for. It would, therefore, "have been highly inappropriate for an adulteress to have the Host displayed in her rooms".4 Poor Anne - she was in the Tower of London surrounded by women who were unsympathetic to her plight and who were acting as spies, and she was being denied spiritual comfort. All she could do was pray to her Father in Heaven.

  Kingston also reported Anne's hope that her bishops would appeal to the King on her behalf, but her steadfast faith in the face of death, if the appeals did not work: "And then, she said, shall I be in Heaven, for I have done many good deeds in my days".5

  8th May 1536 – The Vultures Circle

  While Anne Boleyn, Mark Smeaton, Sir Henry Norris, Sir Francis Weston, Sir William Brereton, George Boleyn, Sir Richard Page and Sir Thomas Wyatt were in prison awaiting their trials, courtiers were already clamouring over the spoils that might result from the fall of grace of the former personages. These people were like vultures circling a corpse, like the Roman soldiers casting lots over Christ's clothes. Three of these 'vultures' were Sir Henry Fitzroy (the Duke of Richmond and the illegitimate son of the King), landowner and lawyer Richard Staverton and Lord Lisle.

  Here are three letters which show the true character of these men:

  Vulture One – Arthur Plantagenet, Lord Lisle

  Letter from Lord Lisle to Thomas Cromwell, 8th May 1536

  "And seeing there are many things now in his gracious disposition and hands by reason of the most mischievous, heinous, and most abominable treasons against his most gracious and royal Crown and person committed, I wholly trust that his Grace, being good lord unto me, will vouchsafe to employ some part of those same upon me, which I do well know may so much the rather be obtained by your good mediation and furtherance."1

  Vulture Two – Richard Staverton of Warfield, Berkshire

  Richard Staverton was a lawyer and landowner who may have been related by marriage to Sir Francis Weston. He wrote to Cromwell on 2nd May, just two days after Sir Henry Norris had been detained for questioning:

  "It pleased you to write to me of your good will to my preferment. Various offenders have been committed to the Tower, among others Master Henry Norris, who has various rooms in the parts about me near Windsor, for which I hope you will have me in remembrance. He has the Little Park, the Park of Holy John (Foly John), Perlam (Perlaunt) Park, and the room of the Black Rod, in Windsor Castle, which I shall be glad to have, as I have 14 children."2

  Vulture Three – Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond

  The following is a letter from the Duke of Richmond to John Longland, Bishop of Lincoln, 8th May 1536:

  "As the stewardship of Banbury is like shortly to be vacant in consequence of Mr. Norres' trouble (many men thinking that there is no way but one with him,) asks the Bishop for a grant thereof under the chapter seal, that he may exercise the office by his deputy Gyles Forster, master of his horse, the bearer. London, 8 May"3

  Unfortunately for Richmond, the post had already been given to Thomas Cromwell. Here is an extract from a letter from the Bishop of Lincoln to Cromwell, dated 5th May:

  "If it is true that Norrys has not used himself according to his duty to his sovereign lord, offers Cromwell the stewardship of the University of Oxford, if he will accept so small a fee as 5l. When the duke of Suffolk exchanged his lands in Oxfordshire with the King, he gave up the stewardship of Banbury to the behoof of Norris, on condition that in the new grant to Norris he might be joined with him for the longest liver. Advises Cromwell to ask the Duke to give up his interest in it. The fee is only 6l. 13s. 4d. Will then give Cromwell a new patent."4

  This clamouring over the spoils makes you wonder if there was any chance of justice for Anne Boleyn and these men. These 'vultures' seemed to think that it was a done deal.

  9th May 1536 – Meetings

  On Tuesday 9th May 1536, King Henry VIII wrote to Thomas Cromwell summoning him to meet with the King "for the treaty of such great and weighty matters as whereupon doth consist the surety of our person, the preservation of our honour, and the tranquillity and quietness of you and all other our loving and faithful subjects, like as at your arrival here ye shall more plainly perceive and understand.".1 On the same day, the King summoned a group of noblemen and gentleman to a Council meeting at Hampton Court Palace. Among their number were the Duke of Norfolk and Suffolk, the Marquis of Exeter and the Earls of Oxford, Arundel, Westmoreland, Essex, Derby, Worcester, Sussex and Huntingdon.2 We don't know what was discussed, but it is plausible that they discussed Cromwell's investigation into the alleged offences of Anne Boleyn and the men imprisoned in the Tower.

  It was just one week since Anne Boleyn's arrest, but Thomas Cromwell felt that he had gathered enough evidence to move forward and start the judicial process. According to the Baga de Secretis (now held in the National Archives), 9th May was also the day that the justices of the King's Bench at Westminster ordered the sheriffs of London assemble a grand jury the following day to rule on the offences alleged to have taken place at Whitehall a
nd Hampton Court Palace. The sheriffs were able to make a list of 48 men to go before the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, John Baldwin (Sir Henry Norris's brother-in-law), on 10th May at Westminster.3

  10th May 1536 – The Middlesex Indictment

  On 10th May 1536, Giles Heron, foreman of the Grand Jury of Middlesex and son-in-law of the late Sir Thomas More, announced that the jury had decided that there was sufficient evidence to suggest that Anne Boleyn, George Boleyn, Mark Smeaton, Sir Henry Norris, Sir Francis Weston and Sir William Brereton were guilty of the alleged crimes carried out at Hampton Court Palace and Whitehall, and that they should be indicted and sent to trial before a jury.

  Here is the full Middlesex indictment drawn up by the Grand Jury of Middlesex:

  "Indictment found at Westminster on Wednesday next after three weeks of Easter, 28 Hen. VIII. before Sir John Baldwin, &c., by the oaths of Giles Heron, Roger More, Ric. Awnsham, Thos. Byllyngton, Gregory Lovell, Jo. Worsop, Will. Goddard, Will. Blakwall, Jo. Wylford, Will. Berd, Hen. Hubbylthorn, Will. Hunyng, Rob. Walys, John England, Hen. Lodysman, and John Averey; who present that whereas queen Anne has been the wife of Henry VIII. for three years and more, she, despising her marriage, and entertaining malice against the King, and following daily her frail and carnal lust, did falsely and traitorously procure by base conversations and kisses, touchings, gifts, and other infamous incitations, divers of the King's daily and familiar servants to be her adulterers and concubines, so that several of the King's servants yielded to her vile provocations; viz., on 6th Oct. 25 Hen. VIII., at Westminster, and divers days before and after, she procured, by sweet words, kisses, touches, and otherwise, Hen. Noreys, of Westminster, gentle man of the privy chamber, to violate her, by reason whereof he did so at Westminster on the 12th Oct. 25 Hen. VIII.; and they had illicit intercourse at various other times, both before and after, sometimes by his procurement, and sometimes by that of the Queen.

  Also the Queen, 2 Nov. 27 Hen. VIII. and several times before and after, at Westminster, procured and incited her own natural brother, Geo. Boleyn, lord Rocheford, gentleman of the privy chamber, to violate her, alluring him with her tongue in the said George's mouth, and the said George's tongue in hers, and also with kisses, presents, and jewels; whereby he, despising the commands of God, and all human laws, 5 Nov. 27 Hen. VIII., violated and carnally knew the said Queen, his own sister, at Westminster; which he also did on divers other days before and after at the same place, sometimes by his own procurement and sometimes by the Queen's.

  Also the Queen, 3 Dec. 25 Hen. VIII., and divers days before and after, at Westminster, procured one Will. Bryerton, late of Westminster, gentleman of the privy chamber, to violate her, whereby he did so on 8 Dec. 25 Hen. VIII., at Hampton Court, in the parish of Lytel Hampton, and on several other days before and after, sometimes by his own procurement and sometimes by the Queen's.

  Also the Queen, 8 May 26 Hen. VIII., and at other times before and since, procured Sir Fras. Weston, of Westminster, gentleman of the privy chamber, &c., whereby he did so on the 20 May, &c. Also the Queen, 12 April 26 Hen. VIII., and divers days before and since, at Westminster, procured Mark Smeton, groom of the privy chamber, to violate her, whereby he did so at Westminster, 26 April 27 Hen. VIII.

  Moreover, the said lord Rocheford, Norreys, Bryerton, Weston, and Smeton, being thus inflamed with carnal love of the Queen, and having become very jealous of each other, gave her secret gifts and pledges while carrying on this illicit intercourse; and the Queen, on her part, could not endure any of them to converse with any other woman, without showing great displeasure; and on the 27 Nov. 27 Hen. VIII., and other days before and after, at Westminster, she gave them great gifts to encourage them in their crimes. And further the said Queen and these other traitors, 31 Oct. 27 Hen. VIII., at Westminster, conspired the death and destruction of the King, the Queen often saying she would marry one of them as soon as the King died, and affirming that she would never love the King in her heart. And the King having a short time since become aware of the said abominable crimes and treasons against himself, took such inward displeasure and heaviness, especially from his said Queen's malice and adultery, that certain harms and perils have befallen his royal body.

  And thus the said Queen and the other traitors aforesaid have committed their treasons in contempt of the Crown, and of the issue and heirs of the said King and Queen".1

  The language used in the indictment and the details of the alleged offences aim to shock those reading or listening. Anne Boleyn is described as "seduced by evil" and having malice in her heart and "frail and carnal appetites", and then we have the details of her seducing her brother by "alluring him with her tongue". Anne was being painted as the Devil incarnate, a woman so possessed with evil and lust that she would even seduce her brother, and who appetites were so insatiable that rather than just taking one lover, she took five! Her lust and appetite knew no end. Shock was the aim and shock was what was achieved.

  The Queen was accused of:-

  "Entertaining malice against the King" and following her lustful desires.

  Procuring her servants to be her lovers.

  Seducing and committing adultery with Sir Henry Norris, Sir William Brereton, Sir Francis Weston and Mark Smeaton.

  Committing incest with her brother, George Boleyn, Lord Rochford.

  Encouraging the men with gifts.

  Plotting with the men to kill the King.

  Agreeing to marry one of them after the King's death.

  Never having loved the King.

  Causing harm to the King.

  Committing treason by her actions.

  The five named men were also obviously accused of these crimes, but there was no mention of Sir Richard Page or Sir Thomas Wyatt who were also among those imprisoned in the Tower of London at that time.

  The Middlesex Indictment had covered all the bases – Anne Boleyn and the men were guilty of adultery and high treason (by plotting the King's death), and Anne was an evil seductress who had caused the King great harm. Any problem with the dates chosen for the alleged offences was covered by "divers days before and since" and "several times before and after", wonderful catch-all phrases which made it impossible to refute these dates. The Crown must have been pleased with itself – the jury would be shocked by Anne's behaviour and also by the harm done to their lord, the King, and they would surely want to please the King by doing his will. Anne Boleyn never stood a chance.

  Arrangements for Trial

  Also on 10th May 1536, Sir William Kingston, the Constable of the Tower of London, was ordered "to bring up the bodies of Sir Francis Weston, knt. Henry Noreys, esq.William Bryerton, esq. and Mark Smeton,gent. at Westminster, on Friday next after three weeks of Easter",2 i.e. 12th May. Both Alison Weir3 and Eric Ives4 point out that this order was sent before the meeting of the Grand Jury in Kent and may even have been sent before the Middlesex meeting. Sir John Dudley wrote to Lady Lisle on the 10th May:

  "Is sure there is no need to write the news, for all the world knows them by this time. Today Mr. Norres, Mr. Weston, William a Brearton, Markes, and lord Rocheforde were indicted, and on Friday they will be arraigned at Westminster. The Queen herself will be condemned by Parliament. Wednesday, 10 May."5

  Obviously Dudley did not realise that Rochford, like the Queen, would be tried on the 15th May, but he correctly predicted that she would be condemned.

  11th May 1536 – The Kent Indictment

  Just as the Grand Jury of Middlesex met at Westminster on 10th May 1536, the Grand Jury of Kent met on 11th May in front of Chief Justice John Baldwin and six of his colleagues at Deptford. They met to rule on the alleged crimes committed at Greenwich Palace, East Greenwich, and Eltham Palace by Queen Anne Boleyn, Sir Henry Norris, Sir William Brereton, Sir Francis Weston, George Boleyn (Lord Rochford) and Mark Smeaton. Unsurprisingly, this was a repeat of the previous day's meeting and it was ruled that the Queen and the five men would stand trial.

  Here is a transcript of
the Kent Indictment:

  "Record of indictment and process before Baldewyn, Luke, and others, in co. Kent.

  The indictment found at Deptford, on Thursday, 11 May 28 Hen. VIII., is precisely similar in character to the Middlesex indictment, except as regards times and places; viz., that the Queen at Estgrenewyche [East Greenwich], 12 Nov. 25 Hen. VIII., and divers days before and since, allured one Hen. Noreys, late of Est Grenewyche, to violate her, whereby he did so on the 19 Nov., &c.; that on 22 Dec. 27 Hen. VIII., and divers other days, at Eltham, she allured Geo. Boleyn, lord Rocheford, &c., whereby he did so, 29 Dec., &c.; that on the 16 Nov. 25 Hen. VIII., and divers, &c., at Est Grenewyche, she allured one Will. Bryerton, late of Est Grenewyche, &c., whereby he did so, 27 Nov., &c.; that on the 6 June 26 Hen. VIII., &c., at Est Grenewyche, she allured Sir Fras. Weston, &c., whereby he did so, 20 June, &c.; that on the 13 May 26 Hen. VIII. &c., at Est Grenewyche, she allured Mark Smeton, &c., whereby he did so, 19 May 26 Hen. VIII.

  And further that the said Boleyn, &c. grew jealous of each other; and the Queen, to encourage them, at Eltham, 31 Dec. 27 Hen. VIII., and divers times before and since, made them presents, &c.; that the Queen and the others, 8 Jan. 27 Hen. VIII., conspired the King's death, &c., and that she promised to marry one of the traitors whenever the King was dead, affirming she would never love him, &c."1

  The alleged offences were the same as the Middlesex indictment – seduction, adultery, incest, jealousy, plotting to kill the king etc. – just at different venues, so it is no wonder that the jury decided to send it to trial after the previous day's decision. The indictment also included the same catch-all phrase as the Middlesex Indictment, regarding various days before and after these dates.