Reply to Anne Boleyn: villan or victim?

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Anne Boleyn: villan or victim?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]she had 6 fingers.[/quote]

No, she didn't. She had some sort of protrusion on one of her pinkies. More like a bunion than an extra finger.

Anne Boleyn is fascinating. On the one hand, you have a woman who was the pawn of her male relatives. You'd think the Duke of Norfolk (her uncle) would be disinclined to support anyone suspected of interest in reforming religion, but no. He saw Anne, and first, her sister, Mary, as a chance to undermine the powerful and corrupt Cardinal Wolsey while advancing his familial interests. Wolsey had H8 twisted around his little finger for years.

Norfolk was lucky in Anne. She was smart enough to try to take command of her future with her scheme to marry the future Duke of Northumberland, and she was attractive to men. He totally lost control of the situation, of course. She was smarter than he was. Smarter than H8, too.

So, on the other hand from the helpless pawn, she was fierce and independent. She was also manipulative, ruthless, and too quick to turn on her supporters. Norfolk was like first out the door. She helped bring Cromwell to power and turned on him after a disagreement, too. She was sort of megalomaniacal. (Sounds familiar, right?) The schism with the Catholic Church also robbed her of any support from the Vatican when H8 turned on her. The HRE would never acknowledge her. Francois I of France was noncommittal because it suited his purpose.

The ultimate issue wasn't that she couldn't bear a son. It was that she had no powerful backers. Catherine of Aragon and Princess Mary had the Holy Roman Emperor, who could have declared war on England had either woman been executed. Anne was a Johnny-come-lately Boleyn with no support. Her grandfather, while mayor of London, was a merchant. Disposing of her was easier than keeping her alive as a rallying point.

TL;DR: Very flawed hero, villainous tendencies, but ultimately a victim[/quote]

I mostly agree with this post. I think that Anne was mostly ambitious, but she would probably have been perfectly happy to marry Henry Percy because that was a plenty ambitious match for a woman of her station. She seems to have had a bit of a temper, which is hardly unique to her, but which alienated potential supporters. I think that she was banking on Henry never wavering in his affection for her, which I suppose any number of DCUM posters would have responded to with "IF HE CHEATS WITH YOU, HE WILL CHEAT ON YOU!"

I think that the ultimate issue was that she didn't have a son right out of the gate. I think if Elizabeth had been a boy, it wouldn't have mattered whether Anne had powerful allies or not. The Holy Roman Emperor certainly would have been an issue, but if she'd had at least one boy, the line of succession would have been stable.

Did any of you read Alison Weir's biography where she suggests that it is possible that Anne was Rh negative and that that is why she was not able to carry any pregnancies other than Elizabeth to term?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics