This day in history 1547

Today, 29th January in 1547, momentous events were afoot behind the scenes at Whitehall Palace. Very very few people knew that Henry VIII, Great Harry to those who loved him, Old Coppernose to those who held him in less respect, had been dead for 24 hours.

Not even his heir, the 9 year old Prince Edward knew of his father's death. The Earl of Somerset, Edward's uncle, was hurriedly putting in place those plans that would make him Protector. There was a little jockeying for position, but in the end, when Somerset was confident he was in charge, he called the 13 year old Elizabeth and Prince Edward and told them that their father had died. The children immediately burst into long noisy sobs.

So far all this is well known, but there is a mystery of sorts and one which can never be clarified. In a previous post, I put forward the possibility that Anne Boleyn, executed for adultery in 1536, was always Henry's one great love. The evidence I used was that he kept some of Anne's possessions, large items that took up room and never discarded them.

Henry could not possibly have presented himself as ever being in the wrong, but I would love to know his real feelings on the subject of Anne when he had had time to consider her end. There is one contemporary comment that, on his deathbed, Henry expressed the opinion that Anne had been unfairly executed. Many other contemporary accounts - and here I would point anyone wanting more information to Alison Weir's 'The Lady in the Tower - say that until 2nd April 1536, Henry and Anne were "merry together". So why did Henry allow himself to be railroaded into executing a wife that many people, including me, think was innocent of all the charges against her?

Weir brings up the possibility that Henry and Anne had mismatched blood types and that was why she gave birth to Elizabeth, her first child, but subsequent pregnancies ended in miscarriage. Anne is also known to have been pious even though she did have an issue with her temper and that led to endless rows with her husband.

I think there is little doubt that "something" happened to enable Thomas Cromwell to frame Anne and I believe that Anne struck a bargain with Henry that if he undertook to bring a French swordsman to behead her and promised to look after Elizabeth, then she would go quietly to her death. What that "something" was is gold-dust for a writer who loves playing 'what-if'.

My own opinion is that there is a possibility Thomas Cromwell felt threatened by Anne's hold over her husband. Perhaps in a temper, she said more than was wise and this was used against her, with the charges being exaggerated beyond all recognition simply to paint her as an evil manipulator. There is little doubt that Cromwell, once he set the hare running, was also in danger and Henry warned him of this with a 'you'd better be right or it will be the worse for you' conversation.

In fact, I like to think that in 1540 when Cromwell could find no reason for Henry's divorce from Anne of Cleves, the King allowed Cromwell's enemies to bring him down and did nothing to save his most able councillor purely because he wanted some payback for what had happened to Anne.

We'll never know, but what a story it would make if it were true.

Punishments fitting the crime?

Everyone knows about the punishments meted out to lawbreakers in Tudor times. So much so, that the general impression is that all felons were hanged, even if they stole a loaf of bread. It isn’t that simple, though. There were statutes which covered the whole of England, but punishment varied throughout the kingdom. Whereas some Justices would indeed hang a man for stealing a loaf or rabbit to feed his family, others would not.

It is also a myth that many people were racked. There was only one rack in the whole of England and that was in the Tower of London and saved for traitors and heretics. Capital crimes attracted the most horrific punishments, although England never descended to the horrors of the inquisition. Torture was technically illegal unless sanctioned by the monarch. Poisoners were subject to being boiled alive, a law that Henry VIII rescinded. High-born traitors were beheaded. Others were either hanged or hanged, drawn and quartered.

In the reign of Edward I (1272-1307), Richard Puddlicott robbed the royal treasury. He begged Edward to show clemancy and not hang, draw and quarter him. Edward, not known for his mercy, agreed. Puddlicott was hanged until he was dead. Then Edward had him skinned and his hide nailed to the door of Westminster Abbey to warn any others who might try to rob him.

Minor crimes were punished with less ferocity and sometimes with a fitting ‘punishment fits the crime’ sentence. For example a fishmonger who sold tainted fish would be put in the pillory and rotten fish hung round his neck. The Justices might sentence him to stay there from an hour to 24 hours, regardless of the weather. Drunkenness was also punished by a stay in the pillories or stocks, usually situated in the market place. 

Whilst so imprisoned, the malefactors were the constant target of abuse, both verbal and physical. Not just rotten food was aimed at them, but horse dung, bloody animal entrails from the fleshers stalls, anything that could be thrown. It was not unknown for the prisoners to be doused immediately before being released - and not with water. Imagine a drunken roisterer on a frosty February morning, now sober, having endured hours of such abuse, extremely cold and then released but only after being soaked by freezing horse urine. I wonder if that would make our present-day rampagers think twice before re-offending?

The ducking stool was used for alleged witches or nagging wives. If a suspected witch sank, she was innocent, so whatever happened, she was doomed. Any woman found guilty of malicious gossip or false accusation was liable to be punished by the brank or gossip’s bridle. The offender's head was imprisoned in an iron cage with a tongue lever covered in spikes. It was excruciatingly painful, especially as the populace were permitted to beat the woman whilst she wore it. Often, sufferers died. Some media bosses and editors might find that interesting.

Branding was common. The Earl of Somerset in the first days of Edward VI’s reign passed a law that any man out of work for three days was to be branded with a V for Vagrant and sold into slavery for two years. Most Justices thought this too severe and it was not enforced by all courts. Obviously, Somerset would have fallen down in shock at the theory of state benefits. Other brands included a T for thieves, who could also have their ears clipped or a hand amputated, a visible symbol of their crime. Not all murderers were executed. An M brand denoted a murderer – perhaps it depended on the intent of the criminal for there was a crime of ‘Man’s Slaughter’ for unintentional killings.

Those women who committed adultery as well as prostitutes were liable to have their heads shaved and be paraded around the town in a cart. Beatings were common and most towns had a ‘whipping post’, but that was better than being hanged! Beggars were beaten as far as the parish boundaries and cast out.

Clerics were very much involved in the formation of some laws. So much so that self-interest led to the ‘benefit of clergy’ plea, whereby anyone who could recite the first lines of Psalm 150 was given a much lesser punishment, usually a fine. It is interesting to muse on current clerical scandals and think that nothing has changed.

Anne Boleyn - Henry VIII's one true love?

The more I learn about the Tudor period, the more I realise how little I really know. I am happy to report that “A Dangerous Destiny” is progressing satisfactorily. However, as a prequel to the other two Luke Ballard books, I must now go back to the year 1546 and do the requisite research. I am so pleased I chose librarianship as a profession. My training has enabled me to find so much information about the Tudor period in which the books are set. My only regret is that I didn’t think to find a job researching Tudor history when I was working.

I’ve made two interesting discoveries today about Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. The first is that when Henry’s inventory was finally done six months after his death in January 1547, there were eleven items, including large tapestries, that had belonged to Anne Boleyn – ‘The Late Quene’. Some people have wondered whether Henry simply forgot he had them or kept them for a reason. He had given instructions that Anne’s name was never to be mentioned. Many have thought that this is because he believed he was cuckolded and bewitched by her and there is plenty of evidence to back up that theory.

However, I wonder if, after Anne’s death, he might possibly have missed her vivid personality. Jane Seymour was everything that Anne was not. Pale, obedient, never arguing with her royal husband and, dare I say it, boring. It is tempting to speculate on how long she would have lasted had she not died in giving Henry his longed-for son.

Henry was a clever man with a hot temper who was quick to perceive slights where none were intended. Until a few weeks before Anne’s execution, the royal couple were described as being ‘merry together’. When Henry calmed down after the ‘investigation’ into Anne’s behaviour, did he perhaps conclude that Thomas Cromwell had sacrificed the Queen to save his own skin, because there was, in truth, nothing to find?

Being a pragmatic man, Henry might well have decided that there was no point in killing Cromwell, who was an extremely able administrator. So much so, that after Cromwell’s execution in 1540, Henry wished he had him back again. Besides, Henry needed a male child and it was clear to him that Anne was a failure in this field. Jane might – and did – do better. As we know, Anne’s only full-term child was Elizabeth and I like Alison Weir’s theory that Anne’s subsequent pregnancies might have been cut short because of Henry and Anne having blood antigen incompatibility.

The second discovery was that Henry and Anne used honeysuckles and acorns as their private motif. As with most things in the Tudor era, everything had significance. Honeysuckles have long been a symbol of love and devotion and acorns denote fertility, luck and prosperity. It is clear that for a very long time, Henry and Anne were happy together.

My personal opinion is that items such as tapestries are so large there is no way Henry could have ‘forgotten’ about them. I like to think that he kept Anne’s things to remind him of happier times before he became the much-married blood-soaked tyrant that history remembers.

My Next Big Thing

What is the working title of your book?

 A Dangerous Destiny: The first Luke Ballard mystery


  Where did the idea come from for your book?

I wanted to marry my love for history with crime and just a bit of magic. Luke Ballard is an apothecary in the Outer Green of Hampton Court Palace. He is also an elemancer – a magician who uses the elements to perform magic for the good of mankind. Elemancers are helped by special dogs called greysprings, with the sight sense of greyhounds and the scent abilities of springer spaniels, or, as they were called in the 16th century, springing spaniels. In my Tudor universe, Anne Boleyn is still alive with her son now on the throne and she is also an elemancer, which encompasses the rumours that Anne was a witch but puts a new slant on them. The first tenet of elemancy is the balance and order of the universe, so to keep the balance, the enemies of elemancers are sunderers, who latch on to the desires and ambitions of men and use that energy to create strife. Sunderers also have dogs, called umbrans.


  What genre does your book fall under?

 I wish I knew. The shortest description is “crime fantasy set in an alternate Tudor universe.”


  How long did it take you to write the first draft of your manuscript?

 Normally, it takes a few weeks of thinking round the theme and doing the research, but once I get down to it, the writing takes about 4 months.


  What other books would you compare this story to within your genre?

 I will say that I love the Hugh Corbett books by Paul Doherty for their evocation of the setting of the early 14th century, their historical accuracy and the diligent and logical way Hugh investigates each case, but there is no fantasy in them. I also enjoy James Oswald’s Inspector Maclean books because of the whiff of the paranormal, which is never permitted to get in the way of the investigation. I can’t compare the Luke Ballard books to anything I’ve read because of the marriage of genres.


  Who or What inspired you to write this book?

 I’ve always thought Anne Boleyn had a rough ride. My oft-uttered wish is that I could go back in time to tell Henry VIII that it is the man’s chromosomes that decide the sex of the baby. So I desperately wanted Anne Boleyn not to have been executed. The first thought for the series was the phrase “Henry’s black-eyed boy” which popped into my head sometime in 2007. From there I built a setting around the Tudor Hampton Court Palace. I decided that the child Anne miscarried in 1534 would, in my new universe, have been a son, called Henry after his father. The first book in the series, “A Duty of Evil” was written in 2009 and the second “A Taste for Treason” in 2011. At this point, I had them accepted by an agent who has worked her socks off trying to find an editor to take them. Since then, I have written and published 2 non-fiction books and a book of short stories. Then I thought that it would be interesting to discover the story of how Luke came to be an elemancer in the first place and that is the subject of “A Dangerous Destiny”. So, really, it is a prequel to the other books.


  What else about your book might pique the reader’s interest?

 I do my best to pull in true historical events that took place in the years in which the stories are set melding them with elemancy as part of the plot by "adjusting" current investigation techniques and making them part of the magic. However, nothing is easy for Luke. Not only does he struggle against those in the court who will stop at nothing to achieve their ambitions and squash anyone who gets in the way, he is also waging constant war against sunderers. His magic helps clarify things, but it doesn’t solve the mystery.


  Which five writers will take over from you next week and tell us about their Next Big Thing?

 Thanks to Robert, Alan, Harry, Betsy and James for carrying on the “chain”.

 Robert DeMers • http://www.robertgdemersbooks.com/blogs.html
Alan Petersen • http://fictiveuniverse.com/
 Harry "Hammer" Wigder • http://www.actionagainstviolence.com
Betsy A. Riley • http://brws.com/wordpress 
 James M. Copeland • http://www.jamesmcopelandbooks.com

Shadows in the Light

I've just uploaded a new e-book of short stories: Want an enjoyable way to fill a few spare minutes. Shadows in the Light. 15 Short Stories Each story takes as long to read as drinking your morning tea or coffee. I think shorts are widely seen as the poor relation of novels, but, in my view and certainly in my experience, fitting in characterisation, plot, setting and a complete story arc in so few words is quite an achievement. The other advantage of course, is that you can read a complete story on the bus or train, during your morning coffee or afternoon tea or while waiting in the doctor's or dentist's surgery. In this collection, you will find Rosemary who cannot forget her first love, Anna, trying to escape from a controlling bullying employer, Will, caught between two women, one of whom he loves with all his heart and the other who won't let him go. Then there is the unknown protagonist who will go to any lengths necessary to achieve vengeance, the spider-hating girl who has a shock when she searches the basement and Silas, whose assumptions lead to tragedy. So for those of you who don't normally read shorts, take a leap of faith and try these. You never know, you might enjoy them.

Want free publicity for your books?

http://askdavid.com

Just discovered this amazing website that gives your books free publicity

Where did Luke originate?

When I wrote the first Luke Ballard novel, "Duty of Evil", I began in the middle of Luke's story. In researching the third novel, which has its origins in the Lincolnshire Uprising of October 1536, I began to explore Luke's background.

More recently, I've felt an overwhelming urge to give readers a chance to know him, too. So I am now working on a number of short stories. The first one will tell how Luke came to the knowledge that he was an elemancer and the effect that knowledge had on his character and disposition. Naturally, it will also be a mystery for him to solve.

Of course, this blogpost title has more than one interpretation. In the books and stories, Luke was born into a family who lived and worked on the Heneage estate at Hainton near Louth in Lincolnshire, England. The Heneage family had high connections at the court of Henry VIII. Thomas Heneage was attacked by the mob as he tried to suppress the abbey at Louth - one of the sparks which fired the Lincolnshire Uprising. He is often confused for Sir Thomas Heneage, who was Vice Chamberlain to Elizabeth I and who was our Thomas's nephew.

As readers of this blog will know, I have close connections to the Heneage estate. My father began his working life there in 1932 and I was born about 100 yards from the estate gates. The connection between the Lincolnshire Uprising, which not only began in the immediate vicinity of the estate, but which involved a member of the family and the link to my own family proved to be too much of a temptation.

Thus my fictional Luke, a child of the estate, came to court with an equally fictional Heneage son. Their friendship of many years was riven by a bitter quarrel over a woman and Luke was cast out to earn his living. He was lucky to find the apothecary in the Outer Green of Hampton Court Palace who took him on as an apprentice. And for the rest, you will have to wait until I've written the stories... Watch this space.