minervacasterly:On the 18thof April 1536, Eustace Chapuys met with Anne Boleyn. The two had never me

minervacasterly:On the 18thof April 1536, Eustace Chapuys met with Anne Boleyn. The two had never met inthe seven years he had spent in England. His reports speak truth of this, as hehad been mostly informed of her comings and goings from her servants, hisfriends and of course, his spies. This was the first time the two would seeface to face. To most historians the meaning behind this is clear: Henry wasmaking a statement that regardless of the rumors that Eustace had heard, orwhat other foreign ambassadors thought of his wife; his relationship with Annewas still strong and therefore he had to acknowledge her as his lawful Queen andConsort.  Eustace reaffirms this in hisdispatches.“I wasconducted to the Chapel by Lord Rochfort, the Concubine’s brother, and when theoffering came a great many people flocked round the King, out of curiosity, andwishing no doubt to know what sort of a mien the Concubine and I should put on.”On theirway to the altar, the King and Queen passed the Ambassador and he had no “choicebut to bow in return.” This has been the school of thought for many years, butsome believe that he had not been tricked at all, and that he was alreadyexpecting it since the King began to insist him, months prior, to show respectto Anne. Historian Lauren Mackay is one of the few who believes the latter. In herbook “Inside the Court of Henry VIII”, she writes that the Savoyard behavedwith complete decorum, adding that he “did not dwell on the incident” and thatit is “entirely possible that Chapuys was deliberately downplaying thesituation.” There isanother reason for this event which argues that it was Anne who desperatelywanted to meet the Ambassador, regardless of his negative opinion of her. Sheknew she was in deep trouble. The end was coming, she could feel it. She hadbeen lady-in-waiting to Katherine of Aragon and Henry had left her for her,with the primary intention to beget a male heir. Now his eye had wandered toanother. Another who refused his gifts, and who Henry now believed –as he hadonce believed with Anne- could give him a son. I am talking of course of JaneSeymour. If Henry had gotten rid of his wife of many years whose only crime,Suzannah Lipscomb says, was “failing to give Henry a son”; what was to stop himfrom divorcing Anne whose blood was less royal than her late predecessor? Itwas clear that Anne needed validation from the other courts if she wanted tosurvive, and keep her position and her daughter’s inheritance intact. Laterthat month, Chapuys had been told that Anne had been upset because he hadrejected her invitiation to dine with her and Henry. She had even gone as faras to “abuse the French Ambassador” writes Mackay, so she could ingratiateherself with the Emperor. The Emperor was one of the most powerful Kings inChristendom, and his support would validate Anne’s position in Europe. If thatmeant abandoning the French whom she desired an alliance with the most, then sobe it. Unfortunately for Anne, this didn’t work. As Eustace and the others realizedthat her days were numbered, they began to refuse her invitations more andmore, and felt more bold to speak more loudly against her.Sources: Inside the Court of Henry VIII by Eustace Chapuys, Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn: The Lovers who Changed History (Documentary) by Suzannah Lipscomb and On this day in Tudor History and Anne Boleyn Collection by Claire Ridgway. -- source link

More pics about