To my knowledge, there's one aspect of Anne's fall that's never been discussed. If Henry had decided to annul their marriage, but he let her live, there was a chance that she'd marry someone else. A marriage often means children. If Anne had a healthy, thriving son with her new husband, it would've pointed the proverbial finger of blame where modern science says it belongs. It would've made Henry look foolish, and he couldn't risk that happening. His only way around that would've been to marry her to a man, who was deemed to old to be able to father children.
Anne had been crowned and anointed as Queen, and you can't have an Englishman cutting off his own Queen's head. Hence the swordsman from France. Katherine Howard hadn't had a coronation.
I can well imagine that Anne may have well pleaded to be allowed to retire back to France into obscurity. But Knowing Henry he probably replied " No ! but pray tell the lady I will bring France to her !
@@ReadingthePast : And then following the death of the Duke of Richmond, tearfuly announcing, that he will not have any more mistresses, but only wives.
I don’t think Anne would’ve gone “quietly” back to France & live in obscurity. Being mother to heir to the throne although bastardized would not allow her to go. I’m positive Henry KNEW that. They were only married 3 years, but Henry waited 7 or more years to marry her. I think in those years he would’ve understood how she behaved. I think he felt empowered bcuz he IS the king & he could be rid of a decade long stress. Nice that Cromwell went shortly thereafter. In a few fell swoops King H VIII rectified a tumultuous time for the country. At time he caused for England with the break from Rome. I believe THAT was just a chauvinistic moment that NO ONE is higher than HE except for God.
No, execution by sword was an act of mercy. Beheading with an axe is a bloody business. Most of the time. It took more than one blow to behead a person. It took 3-4 strikes to kill Mary, Queen of Scots. People dreaded being beheaded by an axe. That’s why the guillotine was invented. It was considered merciful. And people could be executed at a much higher rate with the guillotine.p; as was evidenced by the bloodbath that was the French Revolution. France last executed a prisoner condemned to die, by guillotine in 1977! The Death Penalty was abolished in 1981. The guillotine was considered modern and merciful enough to be France’s method of execution from the French Revolution until it abolished the Death Penalty. It’s actually faster and waay less painful than Lethal Injection. Which is never administered by Medical Professionals because it’s against the law for a doctor to kill. I’ve heard from doctor’s being interviewed about their thoughts on Lethal Injection, and read in 3-4 articles that Lethal Injection is horrific. It apparently feels like you’re being burned alive from the inside. People observing executions can’t tell this because the person being executed was paralyzed by the first shot. They are paralyzed but they have not been given any pain medication. So they are in agony for as long as 20 minutes! And these executions have failed and had to be done AGAIN, because doctors and nurses aren’t the ones putting in the IVs! Doctors and Nurses take oaths to never cause ANY harm to their patients. The US is as bad as any totalitarian government right now. Lethal Injections are torturing people. Torturing people to death. I’ve seen an old film of a guy being fried in the Electric Chair. It was extremely gruesome. His eyes were covered but you could tell they were frying. His HEAD was smoking. And if a doctor says that the Electric ⚡️ Chair is more humane than executing someone via Lethal Injection; Lethal Injection must be beyond heinous 😳
Katrina Olsen dogs are put down using phenobarbital. It takes effect instantaneously and is extremely humane. I have been present when two of my dogs were put down and would regard it as an act of mercy.
Gelbsucht I have been there when my dogs and cats were put down. 3 dogs and 3 cats. And I found 1 dog, 3 cats 1 rabbit, and one guinea pig , deceased. Yes, cats and dogs pass quickly. It’s not the same for humans. It takes them 15-25 minutes for humans to die. And it feels as though they are being burned inside. Also, sometimes it takes a really long time to get the IVs inserted.The people who put in the IVs aren’t doctors or nurses. And Phlebotomists don’t insert IVs. They only draw blood. IVs aren’t an easy thing to insert. I know because I’m an LVN (Licensed Vocational Nurse, or LPN: Licensed Practical Nurse) and I have an IV and Blood Withdrawal Certification. Drawing blood isn’t very difficult.I was also hospitalized for 10 days because I had enormous Gall Stones that caused Pancreatitis. IVs need to be removed and inserted in another place after 48 hours. I found out that most RNs weren’t very good at putting in IVs. They had to get a Nurse who was part of the “Lines Team” to insert my last IV. “Lines Teams” are made up of Nurses who are specially trained to insert IVs in patients whose veins were gone from having too many IVs put in.
@@katrinaolsen2444 Actually those axes were very heavy and sharp and did their job as designed if only the executor knew what he was doing. Unfortunately many of them dulled their own senses of having to do something so horrible as to kill another human being by drinking a lot of wine or any other alcoholic beverages so quite a few of them missed or did their job heavily intoxicated on alcohol. And since being an executor was a job nobody wanted there were too few of them to replace those who were too old and worn. They wore a mask for a reason - not to be recognized in public and ostracized. Even the most ardent and fanatical nazis during WWII took drugs and got intoxicated after machine-gunning entire villages and families of the people they wanted to be exterminated. The nazi regime only reacted because they didn't want their precious Waffen SS troops to be "mentally damaged" when they were needed for combat duties. Hence gassing was suggested and used instead. They didn't have to watch the people they killed. My point is that an executor back in those days had experience in killing perhaps 200-500 people on his own. Everybody will feel disgust or go mad doing something like that over and over again. So the executor dulled their senses with lots of alcohol. Unfortunately those who were about to be executed suffered from their executioners being drunk too. As for executed by a sword being merciful. Medieval swords were actually mostly effective on their pointy side which could be used to thrust through the few gaps they could find in the armor knight wore. As a slashing weapon they usually just dealt injuries but rarely were effective in dismembering body parts. Regular swords for battles were obviously not suited for the job so special "executioner swords" were designed. Like the aforementioned axes they had to be heavy enough to carry enough energy to take a head clean off. Even the most superior sword of the last 600 years, the samurai katana would be ineffective being yielded by somebody who doesn't know how to utilized it. Samurai were trained to use their katanas efficiently by years of training. While they could indeed strike a head off with their katanas any non-trained commoner trying the same would merely get the katana struck halfway in the neck since they don't know the technique. The bottom line is this. An executioner sword was no more "merciful" than an axe if the executioner didn't know how to handle it efficiently. And since it was designed to be handled by both hands it required quite a trained swordsman to be effective. The difference being that the trained swordsman was usually somebody who either was trained soldier, a swordsman trainer or even a sword maker. As such he was more of a professional and "hired hitman" rather than a the "local thug" the regular executioner was. Handling an axe required no training. Handling a sword took many years of practice and discipline. A sword is more balanced than an axe so unlike the executioner axe one can swing it horizontally rather than just swinging down. A master swordsman knew how to handle a heavy sword, wasn't drunk and could behead somebody standing up or while they were down on their knees. It wasn't the sword itself which was more merciful it was the professional who was far better suited to execute somebody efficiently than a mere drunk executioner who everybody ostracized and stayed well clear of. In the end they both did the same horrible job but the swordsman was seen as a "professional" who did "clean kills". Axes were also a lot cheaper than swords. Only nobility could afford swords so obviously only nobility and the wealthy were ever trained in how to handle them. I reiterate, the *training* was what made the difference not the weapon itself since an executioner sword would still require multiple chops by any executioner. " I’ve seen an old film of a guy being fried in the Electric Chair. It was extremely gruesome. His eyes were covered but you could tell they were frying. His HEAD was smoking." Some bad old, film you've seen then. Hollywood movies always make executions way more gruesome than they really are to shock the audience. Correctly distributed the electric chair kills you in a few seconds. The shock stops the heart dead and you immediately pass out from the high electric currency. You seem to think that electronic current are some sort of "microwaves" . They simply paralyze all your muscles and the shock shuts down all vital organs. Boom. Dead.
Coline Collard um, a few things. Anne Boleyn’s executioner WAS a Professional. He was brought to The Tower of London from Calais. Calais is port city in France. It was conquered and ruled by England in 1347. It was retaken by France in 1558, which was after Queen Anne Boleyn was executed.Henry VIII specifically sent for this Swordsman/Executioner because he had a reputation for being fast and accurate. Henry VIII wanted her execution to be fast and merciful so his subjects wouldn’t feel badly for her and end up being some kind of martyr. Right before he beheaded Anne Boleyn, he could see she was losing her calm. He decided to distract her. He whispered to his assistant to hand him his sword, in French. He knew Anne Boleyn spoke nearly perfect French and she would look towards his assistant. However, he already had his sword. When she was trying to figure out what was happening, He swung his sword and beheaded her instantly. I would suggest you watch/listen to Claire Ridgway. She is a Historian who has written 3 books on Anne Boleyn. Her UA-cam channel is The Anne Boleyn Files and Tudor Society. She mentions that beheading by Sword is MUCH faster/easier than with an axe. It took 3 blows to sever Mary Queen of Scots’ head. The Executioner had to saw through the last bit sinew, to get her head to fall off. And you really need to read up on the things that have happened to people while in the Electric Chair. The first person to be executed didn’t die, after being electrocuted for 17 seconds. A witness yelled, “Great God, he is alive!” They then threw the switch again for 4 minutes. He was dead. But it took several hours for the body to cool down. The newspaper reports wrote about how awful it was to watch. And the executed man was called a “poor wretch, by one of the reporters. In 1990, it required 3 jolts to kill the condemned man. And flames shot out of his head. This happened in 1890. In 1983, John Evans was sentenced to the Electric Chair in Alabama. He was still alive after his first jolt. It took 14 minutes to end his life. Smoke and sparks came out from under the hood, near his left temple. Witnesses said they started to smell smoke and burning flesh after the third jolt. His body was left charred and smoking. The list of botched/torturous Electric ⚡️ Chair executions goes on and on. And there was one condemned man whose legs caught on fire 🔥😳 In the US, it is illegal to execute condemned people in a manner that is not humane. That’s why California has suspended executions. Because none of the methods of execution used in the United States qualifies as humane. Oh, and the Waffen-SS were not the Nazi Killing Squads. They were formed to be the military arm of the SS. They did participate in the mass shootings. But that’s not all they did. They also participated in major military campaigns . And they supplied guards for Concentration Camps and Death Camps. And the difference between “Concentration Camps” and “Death Camps” are as such: Concentration Camps used their Prisoners who were healthy and strong enough for Slave Labor. Death Camps such as Sobibor started killing Prisoners right away. They stood in line for the Gas Chamber. And once they were dead, they were cremated immediately, and their ashes were taken out of the oven and dumped on a pile. Anyway, the killing units of the SS were called the Einsatzgruppen. And the men in the Einsatzgruppen were specially chosen. They were men who enjoyed killing and torturing anyone who was part of an inferior group. And those were the Jews, the Roma people (known as Gypsies.), Russians/Bolsheviks, Slavs, Learning Disabled or someone with Down’s Syndrome, and handicapped people. I read a book by David Jonah Goldhagen entitled “Hitler’s Willing Executioners”. The author did a ton of research and discovered that many Germans went out of their way to be mean and cruel to Jews. He came to the conclusion that Anti-Semitism was so pervasive back then, that the majority of Germans really hated Jews. And the majority of German adults of that generation were terrible people.
I think it was out of guilt. I think Henry knew the charges were trumped up and offering her a unique and painless execution was a small amount of mercy.
@Alan Smith I also agree. Anne's only crime was not giving Henry a son. I believe he knew she was innocent of all of those ridiculous charges, but wanted rid of her so he could marry Jane Seymour whom Henry thought would give him his long-hoped-for son (which she did). I believe he ordered that French swordsman out of guilt as well. What a MONSTER he was!!!
Alan Smith This was my assumption as well. He’d signed her death warrant, he knew he wanted to get out of the marriage, and he couldn’t back out...but he could provide a small measure of comfort to someone he’d elevated to the monarchy.
Anne had the last laugh at the end.... HER daughter became the greatest Queen in Engish history- something no son or man had achieved! I personally think that Henry would never be satisfied with anyone but at first it was the excitement of catching Anne that was the basis of the relationship. He fought so much with everyone to have this marriage and then murder her because she couldn't produce a son? I do agree a lot of the court politics probably exacerbated whatever marital problems they had.
** It NEVER OCCurred to me that Henry would have Cared Only about the CHASE===THAT is a Great Thought. ** While others hysterically are laughing at me for not knowing,, I found it to be an Interesting idea. ** I Think I am pretty good at Henry,, but Not this./// I dated a guy in Lincolnshire who did the Same to me....
Skyler Adams Queen Victoria ruled and empire on which the sun never settled. A fifth of the world. No other empire ever saw that size at any time of human history. During her reign England also became the world's center in innovation and industrial prowess. Truly the golden age of England/Britain in which was never achieved before or since. And the current Queen Elizabeth II has had a successful reign for 67 years - the longest of any English/British regent in history. And she went through the worst parts of the Cold War, British economic recessions, movements to depose the monarchy altogether and the gradual disappearance of all the former British colonies and commonwealth.
@@colinecollard533 in context of Elizabeth's route to the throne and in comparison to the times she lived in She excelled against immense odds. Compared to the other two queens listed Elizabeth basically paved the way and broke the mould. I would think we can hardly compare their individual successes to one another as they are centuries apart And whatever they achieved in they lifetime and reigns were significant to the period. For me, personally I proclaim Elizabeth I the greatest because if you had to fight your family and foes a like and sacrifice personal gratification for your own people - to me her leadership and sheer determination to become a great LEADER in a time where everything was set against her is extraordinary.
And ironically we now know it's the male who can only give the Y chromosome to create a male child. Women can only give XX. So in the end all of these women who were shunned, murdered, and executed for not producing sons......buck up men. You're to blame for that not ending up right.
I understand Henry wanting a "cleaner" death for Anne by having the French swordsman, but that wouldn't explain Katherine Howard. The executioner could have very well botched Katherine's beheading (like the axe man did with Thomas Cromwell), although I don't think he did. Wondering why he chose a sword for Anne and an axe for Katherine?? I think it was because Henry KNEW Anne was innocent and he believed Katherine Howard was guilty, although I think K. Howard was an abused teenager more than a scandalous adulteress. Great video!
Maybe the difference was that Anne was a crowned queen, while Katherine Howard wasn't. Only Catherine of Aragon and Anne had coronations. So Anne deserved a more dignified death. I'm more inclined to think it was because of Anne's sex. Other women had died by far worse execution methods. But Anne was the first woman of rank, at least in Henry's reign. He didn't want her to die poorly and thus gain sympathy. By the time Katherine Howard came to her end, he'd executed Anne and Margaret Pole (royal by blood, an old lady, and she literally ran away from the executioner who hacked at her) executed....maybe felt like he didn't need the good PR.
Queen Anne had spent a lot of her early life in France & was educated there by Queen Claude of France. It was said by a diplomat that Anne could have been a "native-born Frenchwoman." This I imagine played a big reason behind the French sword. The biggest factor is because Henry VIII was advised he needed to show mercy. It's possible he was making up for some guilty he might have felt too. I say that because 1. Look at Catherine Howard's case. Catherine was arrested at Hampton Court in November 1541 but not executed until February 13, 1542. It took this long even with love letters for evidence & confessions! Yet, Anne Boleyn was arrested May 2,1536 & executed May 19, 1536. Anne's trial was quickly! Only 1 person confessed and that was the musician Mark Smeaton, but she supposedly seduced him at Greenwich at a time its documented she wasn't even there but at Richmond! When she was suppose to be "procuring" Sir Henry Norris, she was actually still confined to her chambers from just having Elizabeth! 2. The sword was ordered BEFORE Anne's trial! That means there wasn't ever going to be any other verdict other than guilty. That is just 2 things that point to Anne being set up. The least Henry could do was make her death clean and quick.
Henry probably felt Anne was truly innocent plus she was mother to his daughter, Princess Elizabeth. Perhaps he showed a tiny bit of mercy for those reasons.
@@jennifer7582 there are several versions about Margaret Pole's end one stating she did not run away but was butchered by more than 10 blows before the executioner eventually managed to behead her.
We were told that he loved her , and wanted her to die quickly , he was strange person , but also as we were told in the tower that she had died so fast that her head rolling through the grass still whispered the psalms that she read during the beheading . This case improved her innocence
Henry was cold hearted as well as vindictive. His previous declarations of love and loyalty for Anne (and to his first wife) meant nothing to this monster. It is not difficult to believe that the postponement of her execution was Henry’s deliberate and predetermined decision to subject Anne to more suffering. He knew Anne’s conviction was inevitable and that her fate was sealed. His wants and needs were all that mattered to him. The reformation and the creation of the Church of England demonstrates his willful disregard for Roman Catholicism. If he could accomplish that undertaking what matter is taking the lives of Anne and that of innocent men? Like a spoiled and petulant child he would have his way and nothing could be said or done to prevent him from getting what he desired. Now that he wanted Anne and the others gone, taking steps to end their lives caused him no distress, at all. He was a psychopath.
Not to excuse his behavior, but Dr Kat has a video where she discusses this. He may have had brain damage from a jousting accident that altered his once pleasant nature into the tyrant we are all familiar with.
@@stevenleslie8557 actually actually , while thanks for the sentiment , he was just reading and interpreting the bible scripture properly, any1 worth his salt as a catholic , would be doers of the word, not heerers only. god loves marriage, he saved a girl from dishonour with quick killing. gods got what a man must do , written up in only mosiac law, im thinking of when joseph was want to put mary away, or as i view culturally fir the time , stone the mother of god? 😠 the angels also having mercy intervienned. so whats harsher , swords, axes, or stones,.. the real attack was subverration, henry put england into third gear and did bible. this grew up into spiritual effects that lead to cromwell, puritsinism the conquest of usa and 340 million americans. ÷ without spiritual forciveness a man is cowed and made a boy, nithing, without religion , or false papist ' religiousity' without conviction of action we have scant reward. i think it requisite to say henry us one of the favorate history characters, a tyrant, a brute and/or a smelly knobhead, not quite an abraham or a jacob, not even a samuel, but definatly in the ranks of saints. detractors and adversaries be damned, 80% of the time henry gets it right and 20% of the time its just sauce, you know he got to boulogne twice and nearly to paris , with hid second end if life invcasion... noghing he id was so out of line with scripture to warrent excomunitative threats and those that slept with his missus as far more callous than he, call me dark, but when people are mysanthropic and malign each other, i at least thing decisive action voming from, at base a jovial and pure spirit , yes a hash , on thise that say , murderous beast , but where in the bible does it say yew can't eat a pie for break fast or where does it say you can't bash down the frogs or send women who wrong' un yew to the gallows, i bet 300 years after henry women were much better at hknouring their men from john o griats to pen sance, or at least better in hiding their incontinueity. strong characters allways attract a stick or a stone every now and then, but who hates ghengus khan for having 8000 wives , nobody, i bet he was cold , never even learned their names, henry would love well, die well and keep his tarts in line, ducks in a row, yee might say, nice chap!!! sorry girl but why do married couples argue?!: 😢 its when they, love each other, he just happened to own castles, knights and prisons, its😒 smartly said, a romance goes quiet, dark and silent, thats when somethings up... its a moral tale , arthur kills lancelot in the civil war, the quen being a hussey, 😷 to the tower with you???¥!!!
@@selinapersaud7629 I can believe that. In his day, to be a king, you had to be tough and show people you mean business, even if it meant chopping a few heads off.
I’m sure any person would confess to anything while being tortured! I think Henry wanted to get rid of her, because of “No son”.. Many centuries later, we all know that the father determines the sex of child! Feel sorry for her! Henry was a monster! 🇨🇦👏💐
Don't feel sorry for her! She connived her way into power at the cost of the Queen of over 20 years, Catherine of Aragon , so she got her come uppance.
Anne was the first ever Queen in Europe to be executed and Henry didn't want a bloody spectacle that might win sympathy for the innocent Queen, but her bravery on the scaffold won her sympathy anyway, and even more so when the public found out that the king had become betrothed to and married Jane Seymour so quickly after Anne's death. Many of those who had believed her guilty began to question it, and the trial which produced very little evidence. Plus Anne answered to the charges so eloquently and logically that many believed she would not be found guilty. And people remembered this later..........and this was the mother of Henry's child, Elizabeth. He wouldn't t want to be tainted forever with the butchery of the axe.
@Gerrit Peacock yes, people knew their families could suffer if they criticised the king while on the scaffold. Monarchs were known to seize the family's assets as revenge and as a warning to others. I read Anne's speech as her being sarcastic towards Henry in a passive aggressive way. It was the only way she could have a dig at him without endangering her family. When she asks people not to speak out on her behalf, what she is doing is bringing attention to her innocence and effectively urging people to defend her. She was very manipulative. But certainly would have been concerned about her reputation and legacy after death.
I agree entirely about the comments being passive aggressive and her having to be careful what was said as she had her daughter to think about a child who was a bastard and not a bastard depending on the climate. I also agree about the exhortation to the crowd not to support her innocence and thereby telling them she was innocent
Some stories have it that Elizabeth was actually a man. She was staying elsewhere and they went to fetch her. Allegedly she died and the group could not go back empty-handed, so they grabbed a child her age and made him look like a girl. Elizabeth never married and died as the virgin queen.
@@treehouse2902 It’s amazing to me how many people have believed that she was in fact a boy pretender. In reality, there is no chance that a man could have passed for the Queen, even with the talk of heavy cake make up she wore towards the later years due to the simple fact of spies being among her at all times, her ladies in waiting assisting with bathing and of course her bed sheets being examined to assure all bodily functions were working. But it’s a great story and we know pretenders often popped up in this time!
Being a macromolecular chemist I agree with some commentators. Readers, who suspected that the failure of the production of a male child may have been caused by a genetic mutation on the sex chromosome Y is not coincidental. It is, in fact, unlikely that the daughters of HenryVII, including Elizabeth, have enjoyed good health (perhaps suffering from some mild mental disorder due to their terrible childhood). However, I too am led to believe that Henry's most spermatozoa (not all) were affected by some form of mutation. In this case, miscarriage was very likely and even those boys, who reached post-puberty (Edward VI and Henry fitzRoy) met a premature death. If I am not wrong, they never reached the age of twenty. Please forgive my poor English.
I agree. There are several factors that can affect male fertility and sperm quality. Chemical he may have been exposed to, a genetic condition, or maybe clothing. Later in life, his continuously infected leg wound may have lead to immune system complications that stress his body further and exacerbate any obstacles for conception. Fellow scientist here :)
Queen Anne Boleyn was most likely innocent King Henry the eighth knew this, but it didnt matter He tired of her because she failed to produce a son for him. This is what it all boiled down to. Many people were expendable in those times
I've always thought it was because he had such idyllic dreams about Anne being the one to produce a son. And she failed. Around that time, he met Jane Seymour and executing Anne was the way out. A fatal combination of Henry fed up with not having a son yet, and lest we forget, Anne was not a faded flower type. She often gave Henry a run for his money. I think he was just done with Anne Boleyn.
Cromwell would not have come up with such an audacious plot unless ordered to.....the consequences of him accusing the Queen of adultery, incest and treason without any foundation would have been catastrophic. And all of the many jurors knew the outcome the king wanted..
I agree. I mean, despite his high position as advisor, he was considered a commoner (no noble lineage). I couldn't see him as the person who thought of this whole scheme.
It is an indication, I think, of Henry's vindictive nature that he still went ahead and "executed" ... read murdered ... Anne Boleyn. Their marriage had been annulled a couple of days previously which meant that in the eyes of the church and the eyes of the law, that they had never been married. This being the case, the charges of treason against Boleyn ceased to exist once the annullment was pronounced by the Archbishop of Canterbury (et. al.). It was not possible for her to have committed the treasonous acts of which she was accused when she and the king had never been married at all according to the decree of nullity. I would love to see you do a video with your theories on why she was not simply released and why Henry still went ahead and killed her.
Quite possible, but equally, Henry new the exquisite annoyance of having a former wife / queen living in England while trying to set up another in her place. Maybe he wanted a clean slate?
Further, if she said what she was accused of - about looking for "dead man's shoes" - in relation to Henry, she imagined the king's death... treason, wife or not.
@@ReadingthePast agreed in my studying of this era I think no matter what he needed her gone. because of her family and the things she was accused of saying meant death. I also think by this time his mental facilities were diminishing or shifting from possible McLeod syndrome / Kells might have lead to his just get rid of her attitude. I lean towards the Kells /McLeod syndrome as it explains so much the miscarriages, the mid life behavior changes and etc
I believe he was having some mental issues. Physiology aside, it may have been exasperated by his ego. He WANTED to believe the lies told to him so he could find another to give him an heir. If Ann was allowed to live, the truth would come out for those who would defend her honor. He couldn’t let that happen.
Is there anyone that Psycho didn't execute ? Even his sixth wife almost got the chop but for the fact she intercepted the arrest warrant and ran to the King directly to plead her case.
I found your question about Henry being able to pardon Anne quite odd. Since he married Jane Seymour later in the same month on May 30th and was supposedly out with her on the morning of Anne's execution there was never going to be pardon. He wanted Jane immediately.
Despite the many times I have read about the execution of Anne Boleyn, seen re-enactments and listened to the story, I somehow always wish it will end differently. I know it's foolish and it's not possible but I still hold my breath hoping a last minute pardon will be granted by the king and Anne will live out her life quietly away from the treachery of court.
I would love to see a video with Lady Jane as the subject. Your work is excellent. I'm thoroughly enjoying the subject matter and your insight on the topics presented. Thank you from Canada.
Henry should have pardoned Anne and sent her away to a convent. But She had proved herself an enemy of Cromwell and it was Cromwell who wanted her dead, his ultimate victory.
No, I don't think so. Cromwell wanted what the king wanted. And when Henry went "off" Anne Boleyn in a big way, it was easy enough to find excuses/reasons for having her executed. She wielded too much power and influence and had made many enemies.
@@susanc4622 Not completely but it was in the process of happening, and as a way of disposing of an awkward woman short of executing her, convents were losing their usefulness.
Excellent presentation and such an interesting subject..Tudor history is so intriguing..thanks for the channel and will be following along....keep up the great work.
It’s so awful that in those days, no one realized that it is the MAN not the woman that determines the sex of the child!!! A man contributes the XY chromosome and the female XX. SO if the child is born XY it’s male. So it was NEVER his wives fault, it solely lies with Henry VIII! So it’s his fault that he only had one sickly son who died in his teenage years. The greatest Queen, oddly enough, ushered in a Golden Age, Anne’s own daughter, Elizabeth I. I can’t believe that Anne, Henry’s great love, the one he broke with Rome for and was excommunicated from the Catholic Church, and whom he waited for for years, possibly gave her the “privilege” of the sword vs. axe. I never thought about it being a “French execution” by bringing in the swordsman from Calais. Interesting and great point. To execute Anne his great love that’s where I believe Henry became a total syphillitic tyrant. LOVE YOUR VIDEOS!! They are to the point, succinct and thought provoking! Thank you!
Sadly, had they known of this fact, it would not have mattered as Henry Tudor believed he was beneath God himself, and what he said - went, if he stated that it was not true, then it was not true. In his tiny mind, he would have wondered if he could in fact be at fault, but shook that off immediately as being ridiculous, how could it be his fault, he is the King of England and cannot be at fault for anything. No one would ever persuade him that he was the reason he could not produce an heir, he even blamed God before he would blame himself!!
Thank you so much, I'm really pleased you are enjoying the content! It really was a great shame; both for his daughters and his wives! I often wonder how the news of Anne's arrest and execution was actually received by the population of England (and even Europe) at the time. That Henry would publicly execute his wife, an anointed queen, for whom he had remade the faith of his nation, must have felt seismic and shocking, surely? Side note: in the name of pedantry (because I can't help myself) ... the belief that Henry may have had syphilis had been heavily debated and, and as far as I'm concerned, disproved. I'd be happy to make a video on this if you like, what do you think?
kenn1936 you’re 💯% right my friend! (At least in the movie version), I remember Henry saying “Kings are anointed by God”. You are SO right that Henry’s word meant law and to “buck the system” meaning good ‘ol Henry was to commit treason!!! On a whim and if the wind was blowing the wrong way, and you crossed him, you were swinging from a rope or missing your head!
Reading the Past ABSOLUTELY!!! I remember seeing a documentary on the “autopsy” of Henry VIII. In that film due to largely speculation but some medical record keeping at the time, his anger and mood swings they not only attributed to his fall during the joust but he slept with dozens and dozens of women so it’s quite possible he could have contracted syphilis. Syphilis is known to cause the erratic behavior as it basically “eats” your normal healthy brain tissue. I’d love to hear why this has been disproven. I agree, Dr Kat, that even though Anne was quite unpopular with several nobles, scholars and the public alike, but even not being well received, I’m sure they felt “ah the whims of a Monarch” at her eventual fall and execution. I’m sure privately they felt, if he could kill a reigning Queen, if you fell outta favor, he’d do the same to you for simply disagreeing!! And YESSSS...he changed the course of a Nation to marry this woman! The Pope thought of her as a Putain, or whore, even though I think it was Anne’s sister Mary who was called “The Great Prostitute”. I’ll bet they (the nation and all of Europe) was shocked that he could just cast aside a wife, his best friend even the Pope on the whims of a Ruler. It seemed he “blew hot and he blew cold” disregarding and tossing aside Catherine of Aragon who in those days, was thought of as epitome of greatness and piety, that era’s People’s Princess (Queen). And you’re right on another point! Imagine how his daughters felt knowing that at any time, Henry scapegoated their Mothers and could have them put to death. I’m quite conflicted about poor Mary until she became Queen Ruler of England killing thousands of Protestants for the Catholic cause. She, too, tried to start a reformation of her own in seeing that Catholicism was restored to England. She burned many a Protestant whom she called Heretics and like her Father persecuted and took down monasteries and all religious houses to institute the Church of England. This the name she will always be remembered by...Bloody Mary! That’s what she’s remembered by! Of COURSE, I’d LOVE to see your video, any video you make, in the subject you mentioned. I love this period of history!!! Any and all videos are certainly welcomed and are always so thorough and well received. BRAVO 👏🏼. I’m binge watching all your video libraries now!!
Reading the Past LOVE a video on this and anything you choose to discuss. I LOVE this channel. If you don’t mind, I’d love to promote your channel on FB or Twitter. Anyone who loves Tudor type history or ANY historical facts by a woman with a doctorate in this period of literature would truly ❤️ this channel. We need to get the word out there. I ran across your channel in my recommended since I watch ANYTHING Tudor or Mary Queen of Scots. We need to get the word out and your subscriber count will explode. The content like I’ve said is far more educational than some lasting hours or more!!! Do you have a Twitter account and with your permission I’d like to tweet about your channel! Far superb to many others and it’s like your talking to each of us individually! Thank you again!
Another terrific program! Thank you, Dr. Kat. I’m a musician...an opera conductor. My knowledge of this subject comes from ANNA BOLENA, the opera by Donizetti. Your historical discernment and insights into AB’s predicament bring clarity to the whole situation. Thank you.
Perhaps the swordsman executioner was due to the guilt that Henry may have felt. He may have know that Anne was innocent of the charges, but his pride would not allow her to be found innocent. Everyone judging her knew that the king wanted her to be found guilty. Perhaps giving Anne an easier death allowed Henry to live with himself a bit easier.
Hi! I just found your channel and I am in love! I've always wondered if Henry suffered from imposter syndrome, as he was never intended for the throne. A lot of his actions seem to stem from deep seated insecurities and his courtiers knew how to play on those vulnerabilities. That is not to say that Henry is blameless, not even close. But I do think it may explain some of his choices. I also don't subscribe to the opinion that his Jousting accident made him crazy and led to Anne's execution. I think that his fall simply made him realise his own mortality and brought home his lack of an heir and coinciding lack of time to create one. I also wonder if Anne's comments about his lack of virility were true and if they were if that fact also contributed to his sudden urgency to rid himself of Anne and try to procreate with a new wife which was free of suspicion. If he blamed Anne for his inability to perform then it's plausible that he felt a new wife could solve that problem. I believe there are a lot of reasons he executed Anne.
I'm glad you found me and that you are enjoying the content! You have it spot on, it is certainly the case that a lot of recent exploration of Henry has focused on the head injury/personality change question following the joust; perhaps this has been at the cost of other psychological stressors? Being the second son of a man who won the throne in battle (with a dubious claim of his own), would undoubtedly have a mental legacy. Maybe we can point to the head injury, illness (malaria/leg ulcer) causing pain, anxiety over his place in the world, "buyers remorse" over his annulment and remarriage or a belief in Anne's guilt - perhaps he truly thought she wanted him dead. Any and all are possible in varying degrees when it comes to Anne's fall.
I think you're right about the jousting accident. It's often overlooked that to ingratiate himself with his subjects Henry kicked off his reign by executing the tax ministers responsible for the stuffed coffers inherited from his father, lavishly boosting his own prestige with the revenue they'd raised. The best of both worlds lol. He didn't suddenly become a ruthless killer after the accident. (Tho I'm sure it didn't make him any nicer.)
I read a fictional auto biography of Henry years ago. The author had researched a great deal about him, from different sources. The fictional Henry claimed he hired the French swordsman, to mock Anne over her personal preferences for the finer things in life.
exact... read it too... you can really live it... i read the boy parts ,,, holding his dads train, the yorkist uncle, out of favour , and raising a spare, it never ended mylady , as far as I can see...
I really like the way Dr. Kat presents alternative ideas, solutions, and possibilities. As she says, much time has passed since these events took place. She's not dogmatic, but presents a reasoned selection of maybes and possibles for us to choose from. There's a breath of fresh air about her presentations that is absent from so many "my way or the highway" historians' versions of historical events.
What you say sounds quite reasonable to me. Henry had loved(Obsessed over) Anne. Or over the concept he had created of her. She could not live up to that image. If he had not been king we would likely think of him as an abusive husband. Add to that all of the political ramifications and whispers from councilors and court and you have a lethal stew. We tend to dress his behavior in the robes of state when at core he was a jealous, controlling, demanding man who used women and discarded them with impunity. If he had managed to live longer there would have been even more unfortunate young women murdered by him. Make him an ordinary man and see how his behavior looks.
dis carded ? she adulted. your next husband gets angry if your not mutually respectfull sexually? women drive men mad, we know this. reasonable is pot calling a kettle black. in scripture, having the wrong god, cheating on yer feller or murdering is exactly equal # ten commandments, this was lawfull execution. you forget things. godbless ... :
@@stevekaczynski3793 i judt 1... i just don't see it... why do peeps give the poor executed women, carte blanche. henry rules a kingdom, doesn't want women killed for breaking the moses 10 commandments but laws be laws. its really mens fsult , jelous of true power, jeloys of pretty wives, covet not ye madlad. if men women , heck i'd kill my dog if it misbehaved a bit a child. at court henry 8th is law, please see that if fornication happens , there are loosers and winnere. queens can't just bash the bible on the head and go off as they please, so why get married in the first place. the least you can expect if you park your car in the wrong place is a bad tickets, so why not death for plopping your fanny up the wrong pole... with respect kings make law and this wasn't even hens law, it was deuteronomy. can we agree that henry acted glouriously , with honour & halt using him as a punfhing bag. i need a licence to fly a plane, if the wire is the aircraft and i sneek up and fly it, the fliggt marshall might do security and get the highjacker killed... you know... shall we end with= piss off and actions have consequences?!
"before you could say a Pater Noster.." I believe the PR is the main reason. I have read the delays were orchestrated. I've had a soft spot for Anne since reading Joanna Denny's book many years ago (no, I don't agree with all she has to say but it gave me another perspective)
I believe he had planned this even longer because the time a message is sent to France. Then adding the executioner's trip to London could've taken months.
It would have taken under a week. You can walk from Dover to the Tower of London in 24 hours. The Calais crossing to Dover would on average take a day depending on the tide and weather.
@@cherylthommo1 Yes, I doubt whether it would take more than three or four days to send someone to hire the guy, and bring him from Calais to London. The executioner might well have hired a horse to get from Dover to the Tower.
I had always heard it was Anne who requested the swordsman. Partly as a delaying tactic and partly because she didn't want a botched job and that Henry had just acceded to her request, probably for the reasons you described. It would seem more natural that Anne would request him as they had a reputation for a quick, clean cut. As you say , she still had that connection with France . There were literally thousands of swordsmen in England that Henry had access to , if he just wanted her dispatched, neatly.
Nah the swordsman was sent for before the trial even took place. There was no way she would have made that request before she even found guilty or knew what the charges were.
During that pregnancy Anne knew that the king was courting Jane Seymour but hoped it was a tenporary fling he was get over as he had dome before. But when she saw Jane wearing that locket with his picture in it, that he had given to Jane, and that Jane was actually flaunting in Anne's face, she found it harder to ignore. Then she found out that Crowmell had been made to give up his chambers to Jane's relatives so that the king could visit her there in private but not besmirch Jane's reputation by ensuring that were always chaperoned. This shows he was more serious about Jane that had been previously thought, and Anne knew it. Then on the day she miscarry she did catch Jane on Henry's knee and they were canoodling. Anne was devastated. This event was related to Lady Mary by Anne Gainsford who was a lady in waiting to Anne, and who went to visit Lady Mary at Hundson just 2 weeks after Anne Boleyns execution. There was no such thing as privacy in a royal court and the closest attendants on the king and queen knew everything that went on.
Oh, and another witness written about by Agnes Strickland related that in the weeks leading up to her arrest, Anne was quiet and pensive, sitting alone in her privy gardens with her little dogs and she seemed sad. Also the year before she had tried to speak to the French ambassador at a court banquet and she was in some fear. She wanted his help but could not speak to him now for the eyes that were upon her, neither did she dare put her fears in writing......it was something to do with the French king accepting her daughter Elizabeth as being legitimate,, which would be proved if King Francis accepted a betrothal between one of his sons and Elizabeth, which Francis had previously rejected. I think Anne lived in fear and anxiety a lot of the time when she had repeated miscarriages and no son. She saw first hand what had happened to Katherine of Aragon and the king was often cold to her and avoided her company. Before she had always been able to win him back, but now.....
Hello I’m new to this channel. Anne Boleyn is my idol. I have loved her since I got into Tudor history in high school in 96. I studied this a lot. He knew it would be messy and botched with an axe. She was first queen in English history to be on the scaffold. He had to make sure it was clean. I like to also think in a way it was his mercy on her using the executioner from France. A place she dearly loved. As for the delay in her execution, I think Henry was torn. Because once upon a time he did love her. I think he still did at the end of the day. He knew she couldn’t have committed adultery. He had way to many spies. The rumors were started with Cromwell filling the king’s head. It didn’t help she already had enemies from day one.
I had always interpreted the French swordsman as proof his Henry’s mercy on Anne. I also thought it might hint at some guilt on his part. Anne knows Henry better than anyone, especially with regards to his attitude, tricks and propaganda around ending marriage (she lived through his campaign to convince himself and everyone else re his marriage to Catherine) and in my opinion, he knows that she knows that he knows he allowed himself to be conveniently convinced of her guilt. At the top of his mind is having an heir. I doubt that if Anne had born a son or two, she’d have been killed. So, getting rid of Anne and wants to make is as easy as possible on her. His guilt shows too in that he runs out of London during al!of this. He can’t “face” her.
thats true ... its like ... its more like ... gives a son and you can have the entire world, its all i care... *** € its probs henrys fault regards le old childbearing... he was full of various womens deseases at this stage... much spanish venus was going around... bbuuurrrt.... yes. --- when i think if a son had been made , cheating or no cheating, henry wasn't perfect, he would hmmm wud likly gave defeated his own male pride and let her off a superb string if court dalluance, didn' t a commenter say he killed at least 10 to 13 people 😲😲😲 courtiers, friends , the brother of the sweet ann. I'll be myself... ill be terse... she definatly did cheat and although he didn't want to miss her, he wanted the wife he loved, to be more healthy, more able to be discreet in sex, and if found cheating, he wanted her Just as an abstract concept to have the respect of her fictional son to be. a mum should have a high place of hinour within a family and a higher unblemished record as a queen ever more eo. its been a lotta time and this is of course conjecture at this point . but blast the eyes of those that stole the queen in the bedchamber and a poxy illness of the time was of course bad in the reproductife straights... if yon henry had visiststed and roystered the hie house oess often he wouldn't be saddled with the par tual blame fir her infertility, it could be a miss mache but the first knight she had with him, she prolly git very sick!!! - latterly id say an element if bible bashing flame of fury from reading leviti cys or deuter or somesuch... but evenso. he just got some fitzroys and potential edwards with sey more so what, she layed a straw on his camels bac, so to speak. i just wish men were real men in nowerdeys modern... the metro sexual drag queen stuff does!nee provide princes , thats for sure & thanks for the prifate confersation.
i. adore. u. your channel is one of my all time favorites! I'm completely obsessed with the history of the english monarchy, so this is right up my alley! thank you for posting and being so genuine. you are a joy to watch and listen to!
Katherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn had one thing in common: neither one was going to agree to an annulment. I think to them that would have been like giving away their daughters’ birthright. Since Katherine was born a royal princess, he had to wait until her death. Anne was not royal and she was never going to agree to be put aside- and Henry knew that so the adultery charge was invented.
I believe there’s a certain complexity and simplicity in it all.Henry was only the second Tudor monarch. It was still a new dynasty. He had to secure the throne, and as he was getting older (comparatively) he had to ensure the succession. He didn’t have another 20 years to expend on another wife. Jane Seymour was ready, willing and available. The ambitious Cromwell also had to secure his survival in a court where loyalties changed frequently, and the Boleyn’s themselves, ruthlessly climbed up the power ladder in the preceding decades. Unfortunately, for Anne, it was a perfect storm. Dr Kat, I also think her uncle played a pivotal part in her downfall, which wasn’t addressed in this video. Thank you for another great video.
I cannot understand why Henri VIII is considered to be a great king, he was a monster. What kind of a horrible person you must be to execute by sword the woman you once loved, the mother of your daughter. Also Catharina Howard was beheaded. The destruction of so many beautiful buildings and works of art. He should be remembered as a psychopat, the worst king England ever had.
Your videos are so informative and thought provoking. I have always thought that Henry sent for the swordsman as a last magnanimous gesture to both Anne and his kingdom. To Anne because after all he had loved her, knew her most intimate thoughts, he had a heart and felt he at least owed her that consideration, a French swordsman. Also because she was a Queen, he felt she could not just die by the 'common' axe. Better PR, that is where the kingdom comes in, it makes him look good. As to the the delay, I believe it really happened that way. It didn't bother Henry because he knew she was going to die, but I think it might have given her the thought that maybe he wasn't going to go through with it and that is my last thought, that her final speech was so eloquent and forgiving because maybe as she must have written it days before, she had a hidden hope that he would still save her, (the delay reinforcing that thought) so she only spoke well of him not knowing that there was no going back in his mind. No confessions were needed.
Not necessarily, it was considered bad form at the time to go to the block pleading for mercy. Christians of that time believed themselves sinners who deserved to die innately, so it was more of the norm at the time to plead the populace to have mercy on your soul and those who did the condemnation.
Well I can tell by your views counter we all love our Tudor history. Keep them coming Kat you are fun and informative, Thank you! Yes, the Tudors are just so very interesting!
would it be possible to do biographies of Cicily Neville, mother of Edward 4th and Richard 3rd., Isabella, wife of Edward 2nd a.k.a. the she wolf of France, and Kathryn de Valois widow of Henry 5th?
i like elanor of aquitenne . and my mum loves ric the third. i'd love someone to cover every french lewy. i watched versailles from bbc very recently and loved the court plays on who gets be the controlling boss, the brother fights the other brother, marshalls vry for command. history is a hot pot , of grand beutifull , heads or tails if ho gets life and who gets death. Im surprised henry dudn't marry more country milk maid tew be honest, high ranking girls are diffiticult larks...
I think there was a scene in Anne of a Thousand Days which suggested he made this offer and it was rejected but had no basis in reality. If she accepted that she wasn’t legally married to him, and Elizabeth was therefore illegitimate, it follows that she couldn’t have committed adultery and there was no basis for the accusations against her and therefore the penalty. Elizabeth was removed from the succession anyway.
Your videos are great story telling - thank you! My boyfriend is so knowledgeable about history, and I know next to nothing - but I'm trying to learn. This type of narrative (instead of say, reciting events or dates) is really helpful. Thank you!
I've always wondered, did Mary Tudor attended Anne Boleyn's execution? I read in the comments that the King's older son Henry Fitzroy was there, is that true?
In a way, the sovereign also showed compassion. The penalty for committing adultery was to be burned or beheaded at the king's pleasure...although I personally believe that he would not have sent Anne Boleyn to the stake to be burned.
I find you very interesting and I love to listen to compare what I know through reading and to discover the facts I may be missing. I remember the French executioner was provided as a courtesy and kind gesture by the king. But I am not sure if I read that Ann Boleyn requested this. All in all, good stuff.
We will probably never know why Henry called for a French executioner but I like the fact that you raised the question in this video. It all went so fast for poor Queen Anne Boleyn. Today is the anniversary of this tragic day. How grand and full of dignity she was in her death. That speech is eloquent and she was a scholar so that's probably why she found the correct words at that moment. I am fascinated by the speeches all these people gave before dying. I know it was part of the etiquette but I could never face what they faced. What a terrifying (yet fascinating) period! Thank you so much Dr Kat for your videos. I am learning a lot and enjoying them. Keep on that way. kisses from France and yes Anne was close to us and I love her even more for that.
I really enjoy your videos. I appreciate all the research you've done and how clearly and succinctly you present it, along with the time and many hours of effort that goes into preparing these videos. Thank you!
I don't like the idea that the selection of the French swordsman was a gibe at Anne. Ordering an expert was more likely to have been for pragmatic reasons. Make-Henry-look-like-a-good-guy-despite-the-obvious-viciousness. Tudor spin. P.S. loved the video. Have a wonderful day
Thank you, I'm glad you like the video. I'm inclined to agree with you, I think the the French swordsman was predominantly about avoiding a botched job and the terrible PR that would have brought.
Hi, Dr. Kat! I'm a new subscriber, and I just wanted to tell you how delighted I am that UA-cam, in it's infinite wisdom, decided to drop you into my que. I, very much, appreciate your expertise on the subjects in which you speak, and I could watch your videos all day, but it's your voice that has me transfixed. I really could listen to it endlessly; there's just something about a British accent! Thank you for providing such intellectually stimulating content. I look forward to binge watching all of your postings.
I just found your channel and I have a theory on all these miscarriages. I wonder if the Queen could have been rh negative. It can cause problems with miscarriages
It has been suggested, I think particular weight is given to it because (to my knowledge) the condition does not cause issues with the first pregnancy but does in the subsequent ones.
@@ReadingthePast ,from what I understand, from my ob, it can cause problems in any pregnancy. And for this time period, when it wasn't understood, I think this may be plausible. Have any studies or research been aimed at this that you are aware of?
@@elizabethyoung309 I'm not aware of a specific study but there are a number of scholars who have floated the idea that Anne Boleyn may have been rh negative.
@@ReadingthePast I always wanted to know about the theory of the last miscarriage being deformed fueling the rumor of witchcraft or incest with her brother. Not that I believe she did it, but I could maybe understand fornication with her brother. Imagine the pressure. Im sure Henry was far from peek performance in that area by 1536.
Hello, Dr. Kat! What a pleasure it is to hear your comments about the French swordsman and what lead up to Anne's death. I have always assumed that a Frenchman was called to England for this execution because Anne herself had asked for one, or perhaps she had requested the sword because she was well aware of how some deaths with the ax were no mere single stroke. She also gave a payment, yes?, to the swordsman. I assume she would have paid the executioner (to thank him and, especially, to insure a swift, precise stroke) as other nobles had done. It would be a soft thought, I think, to suggest that Henry was trying to be more considerate of her in this manner by ordering the French swordsman but I do often think this...and I have no evidence to support this, none whatsoever. I do wish Henry had had a softer place in his heart for Anne. But, we are talking about an execution. The charges against her were dreadful, and the charge of incest with her brother seems as if it were an "add-0dd", a pretty heavy-handed one, if you ask me.There is always that discussion about Henry having changes after his jousting accident and that seems possible. His health deteriorated substantially and living with a sore and very painful injury for the rest of his life could have been at fault. The one thing that came to my mind as I was listening to your discussion was that Henry was eyeing his next wife as she appeared at court. He seems desperate, impatient, driven. Having gone through one divorce, the next must have seemed unpleasant, right up and until the death of Katherine. I vote his impatience. I think he needed a henchman and he got one. Several. And he moved on swiftly. One thing which to this day has always bothered me a lot is that Anne as a pregnant woman, who was to miscarry, did not seem to take more care in herself during these stressful times. Is there any evidence that she or any other wife of an English king stopped riding, doing tasks and/or usual requisite occupations associated with her station when she discovered her pregnancy? I can't help feeling that had Anne "played it safe" and stayed "abed" during most of her pregnancy, she would have had that son and not what actually followed. I enjoyed this video and how you presented different aspects of this issue. Tudor history is mesmerizing, isn't it? My field is Egyptology and there, we, too, have some marvelous, complicated matters at court, from dynasty to dynasty. But the Tudors! Wow! I'll be looking forward to your next! Deborah
It’s a strong possibility that Henry used that extra day to torment Anne even further. Henry seemed excessively cruel on various occasions. I think this is one of them. Great food for thought. Wonderful video. Great Teacher! 👍
What I find very interesting is that just one day later Henry was betrothed to Jane Seymour.They were married on the 30th of May, just eleven days later. Henry was King of England, his marriage would have been a ceremony of some importance. The food, Jane's dress, Henry's wedding clothes etc. would all have to have been started almost if not before Anne died. I for one find that vey interesting.
Really enjoy your videos. I think it was definitely a PR move...the eyes of Europe were on Henry. Due to his brain injury he was really deficient in empathy and in his mind probably imagined himself really kind and considerate allowing for the elegance of the axe. I don’t see Anne Boleyn a fall as any more tragic than that if Thomas more or bishop fisher or anyone else who incurred Henry’s wrath. She was in the game and went to war with the kings chief counsellor. It was not superficially a gender issue. She duelled with Cromwell and lost.
Loving your channel! I'm a wee bit obsessed with the Tudors, particularly Annne Bolelyn so I love your content. So to address your questions... I believe the swordsman was brought in, not because he loved her and didn't want her to suffer, but for good PR. It would be unfavourable to have a queen beheaded by some dirty axe, and furthermore, the commoners and high borne alike may feel symapathy for Anne. Something Henry couldnn't risk. He had planned to execute her before he even had her questioned. As to why? I think it was a perfect storm for poor Anne. She had become too dangerous to Thomas Cromwell. She had another still birth with deformaties (which we now suspect comes from Henry's genes). Back then deformaties were supposedly a sign that the mother had been sinning either before or during the pregnancy. So a part of Henry may have actually believed she was cheating as he was reportedly very supersititious. And she had become too 'mouthy' for Henry too. He loved her intelligence and strength whenn they courted, but as his queen he wanted subserviance. She outwardly complained about his affairs. She had much to say about his governing. So we have a narcissist, unhappy with a lippy wife, who gives him stillbirths which may well mean she was cheating from his pespective, no son, thenn Cromwell comes lobbing in with these false allegations, that fitted his confirmation bias!
Such a well made video. Dr Kat you really 'know your onions'. She was doomed when she failed to produce male heirs, moved against Cromwell and told Henry to do away with Katherine and (the future 'Bloody' ) Mary. Ole King Henry was tired of her and just needed a push (from Cromwell in order to save his skin- at least for a little while) to do the deed. Typical Tudor death, all killings were done with the 'law'. As opposed to, say the Borgias who preferred the dagger.
I think they were trying to break her down to confess as they were terrified of what she might say in her speech in front of all the people that could cast doubt upon their King Henry but if she confessed then they would not have to worry.
Never heard the theory or idea of the French swordsman ?? Henry doing this just to spite Anne and yes 👍 I think yes 👍 love your presentations and have subscribed to all now! I am a history lover in every way if English and Scottish and Irish history ♥ and this has lead to every kind of history over the years now Rome and Italy 🇮🇹 etc etc thank you
I’ve watched several docos and commentary on this topic but yours was the first one that looked into differing opinions on why he may have chosen the execution he did and why it was delayed . Lots of what ifs have been discussed about the lead up to her execution but the deed itself I have never seen discussed - it’s just always been a given that her trial was a farce and her fate was already decided and that he ordered the French executioner to give her a swift death . Very interesting and appreciated , thank you ! PS loved the Anne of Cleves one too 😊👍
Honestly I think it was just so Henry could keep his image as the ‘Renaissance prince’. The theatrical nature of getting a swordsman all the way from France, making the death ‘neater’, and so he can tell himself he’s merciful and granting a favour. Even if he’s just fooling himself, he’s trying to make the fact he’s executing his wife into another almost chivalric story. He’s narcissistic enough he never wants to be the bad guy or involved with something that would break his fantasy.
As I understand it, they used a lop-sided kindling ax for executions, which can be seen in the Tower today. Why wasn't a blacksmith ordered to make a much finer instrument as is seen in so many movies?
Anne has enemies on the court, which led to her downfall. If only she was like Queen Margaery of Game of Thrones - it's the same actress who played both roles - Nat Dormer. Kidding aside, there was something poetic about King Henry choosing of a French swordsman, she was a fan of the country, hence, her head was even placed in an arrow box, which was one of Anne's gifts to him. These things were somehow connected to their relationship. An inside joke, if I'd call it. I love your takes her Doc Kat. Grazie!
Great work Kat! You make a good point about Henry simply being prepared by sending for the executioner, but I have to say by that point I feel the guilty verdict was a foregone conclusion too.
Thank you so much and I agree about the verdict but I'm not sure that execution was a forgone conclusion though. I think some (perhaps only Anne) may have thought a commuted sentence of confinement, in a convent or country house, was still a possibility. If she did think of this then I wonder when (or if) that hope died in her.
Entirely possible, of course, however Henry proved himself to be something of a master at allowing people to think he was going to act in ways that benefited them alone. I'm thinking particularly of the planned arrest of Katherine Parr - the conservatives fully believed they had brought her down, up until the moment that Henry sent the arresting guards away in a fury. With the prospect of high profile executions (even with the risk the punishment may commuted or the proposed victim fully pardoned) any ambitious courtier would start sniffing around and making requests. I would argue that they hoped for wealth and titles, because at Henry's court nothing was a surety.
@@ReadingthePast interesting point- I suppose I'm extrapolating from the narrative of Anne going from 'entirely beloved' to utterly despised! I always think that Anne of Cleves was so lucky not to be the object of Henry's passion, which meant he could afford to be magnanimous even as he rejected her. Anne didn't get the protection of precedent either, Katharine of Aragon at least got a peaceful death at ?Kenilworth?
That shift is so terrifying/fascinating, isn't it? As an English subject, I wonder if Anne was ever fully aware of the stakes she was gambling with when she became Henry's wife? I also wonder if she thought that being anointed made her physically safe? Did she believe that it made her just as safe as she would have been if she had been the close blood relative of a foreign ruler? After all, no queen before, even those who rose up in rebellion against their husbands, had ever been put to death - do you think she may have assumed that that precedent would keep her equally safe? I totally agree about Anne of Cleves... if anyone can be said to have won the "Game of Wives"™, it's definitely her!
I think it's particularly telling that her speech at the time of her death was in no way anti- Henry..or anti guilt. I believe she was complying with Henry's promise to protect her daughter, or at least His word that she would go unharmed, if Anne went to her death in a satisfactory fashion. or..no words against England..the trial or the King.
Elegant, forgiving last words! Ann was thinking about her daughter, Elizabeth. I believe she was innocent. Henry was no fool and neither was she. Her mistake was that she tried to control Henry. Her entire family was ostracized. Gregory Hallett claims she wasn't executed... But lived in secret. And had a son by Henry.
Let's just get really honest. Upon examination of Henry's actions and dealings with others, there seems little evidence of Henry thinking of anyone other than himself. His entire life appears, from what has been recorded, a consistent flow of narcissistic acts and choices. Yes he may have dresses them up as his regal duty blah, blah blah. However the facts just don't lie. He was the Harvey Wiestein of his day!... with NO capacity then for correction. And yes things were violently different on EVERY level. Yet his justification for his actions put the country at great, is not tragic risk time and again domestically and internationally. He was a very large spoiled brat, with major issues. And, while this was common place for males, who were high born Henry took this to the extreme. So, in answer to the question. I believe that the choice to execute Anne as he did was for PR purposes and the added bonus of drawing attention to the socially unacceptable French connection would not have been lost on him. Nor the court. Tragic really.
To my knowledge, there's one aspect of Anne's fall that's never been discussed. If Henry had decided to annul their marriage, but he let her live, there was a chance that she'd marry someone else. A marriage often means children. If Anne had a healthy, thriving son with her new husband, it would've pointed the proverbial finger of blame where modern science says it belongs. It would've made Henry look foolish, and he couldn't risk that happening. His only way around that would've been to marry her to a man, who was deemed to old to be able to father children.
Very interesting..
Why at each of the executions do the victims insist that Henry is a gentle loving king?Is it fear for their families .
.
Anne had been crowned and anointed as Queen, and you can't have an Englishman cutting off his own Queen's head. Hence the swordsman from France. Katherine Howard hadn't had a coronation.
Interesting, I never considered that angle
She was queen consort so this is not correct
Who cut off the head of Charles I?
Mr Bush Lied google it
No, they were not sovereigns. They were consorts and became queens-consort the instant they married the king.
I can well imagine that Anne may have well pleaded to be allowed to retire back to France into obscurity. But Knowing Henry he probably replied " No ! but pray tell the lady I will bring France to her !
Eee gads, that's dark! Not impossible though, unfortunately!
@@ReadingthePast : And then following the death of the Duke of Richmond, tearfuly announcing, that he will not have any more mistresses, but only wives.
Brilliant & very witty‼️👍‼️
Very clever response. Love it
I don’t think Anne would’ve gone “quietly” back to France & live in obscurity. Being mother to heir to the throne although bastardized would not allow her to go. I’m positive Henry KNEW that. They were only married 3 years, but Henry waited 7 or more years to marry her. I think in those years he would’ve understood how she behaved. I think he felt empowered bcuz he IS the king & he could be rid of a decade long stress. Nice that Cromwell went shortly thereafter. In a few fell swoops King H VIII rectified a tumultuous time for the country. At time he caused for England with the break from Rome. I believe THAT was just a chauvinistic moment that NO ONE is higher than HE except for God.
The point about the French swordsman being a snide dig at Anne’s “Frenchness” never occurred to me and I think it is a fascinating theory.
No, execution by sword was an act of mercy. Beheading with an axe is a bloody business. Most of the time. It took more than one blow to behead a person. It took 3-4 strikes to kill Mary, Queen of Scots. People dreaded being beheaded by an axe. That’s why the guillotine was invented. It was considered merciful. And people could be executed at a much higher rate with the guillotine.p; as was evidenced by the bloodbath that was the French Revolution. France last executed a prisoner condemned to die, by guillotine in 1977! The Death Penalty was abolished in 1981. The guillotine was considered modern and merciful enough to be France’s method of execution from the French Revolution until it abolished the Death Penalty. It’s actually faster and waay less painful than Lethal Injection. Which is never administered by Medical Professionals because it’s against the law for a doctor to kill. I’ve heard from doctor’s being interviewed about their thoughts on Lethal Injection, and read in 3-4 articles that Lethal Injection is horrific. It apparently feels like you’re being burned alive from the inside. People observing executions can’t tell this because the person being executed was paralyzed by the first shot. They are paralyzed but they have not been given any pain medication. So they are in agony for as long as 20 minutes! And these executions have failed and had to be done AGAIN, because doctors and nurses aren’t the ones putting in the IVs! Doctors and Nurses take oaths to never cause ANY harm to their patients. The US is as bad as any totalitarian government right now. Lethal Injections are torturing people. Torturing people to death. I’ve seen an old film of a guy being fried in the Electric Chair. It was extremely gruesome. His eyes were covered but you could tell they were frying. His HEAD was smoking. And if a doctor says that the Electric ⚡️ Chair is more humane than executing someone via Lethal Injection; Lethal Injection must be beyond heinous 😳
Katrina Olsen dogs are put down using phenobarbital. It takes effect instantaneously and is extremely humane. I have been present when two of my dogs were put down and would regard it as an act of mercy.
Gelbsucht I have been there when my dogs and cats were put down. 3 dogs and 3 cats. And I found 1 dog, 3 cats 1 rabbit, and one guinea pig , deceased. Yes, cats and dogs pass quickly. It’s not the same for humans. It takes them 15-25 minutes for humans to die. And it feels as though they are being burned inside. Also, sometimes it takes a really long time to get the IVs inserted.The people who put in the IVs aren’t doctors or nurses. And Phlebotomists don’t insert IVs. They only draw blood. IVs aren’t an easy thing to insert. I know because I’m an LVN (Licensed Vocational Nurse, or LPN: Licensed Practical Nurse) and I have an IV and Blood Withdrawal Certification. Drawing blood isn’t very difficult.I was also hospitalized for 10 days because I had enormous Gall Stones that caused Pancreatitis. IVs need to be removed and inserted in another place after 48 hours. I found out that most RNs weren’t very good at putting in IVs. They had to get a Nurse who was part of the “Lines Team” to insert my last IV. “Lines Teams” are made up of Nurses who are specially trained to insert IVs in patients whose veins were gone from having too many IVs put in.
@@katrinaolsen2444 Actually those axes were very heavy and sharp and did their job as designed if only the executor knew what he was doing. Unfortunately many of them dulled their own senses of having to do something so horrible as to kill another human being by drinking a lot of wine or any other alcoholic beverages so quite a few of them missed or did their job heavily intoxicated on alcohol. And since being an executor was a job nobody wanted there were too few of them to replace those who were too old and worn. They wore a mask for a reason - not to be recognized in public and ostracized. Even the most ardent and fanatical nazis during WWII took drugs and got intoxicated after machine-gunning entire villages and families of the people they wanted to be exterminated. The nazi regime only reacted because they didn't want their precious Waffen SS troops to be "mentally damaged" when they were needed for combat duties. Hence gassing was suggested and used instead. They didn't have to watch the people they killed. My point is that an executor back in those days had experience in killing perhaps 200-500 people on his own. Everybody will feel disgust or go mad doing something like that over and over again. So the executor dulled their senses with lots of alcohol. Unfortunately those who were about to be executed suffered from their executioners being drunk too.
As for executed by a sword being merciful. Medieval swords were actually mostly effective on their pointy side which could be used to thrust through the few gaps they could find in the armor knight wore. As a slashing weapon they usually just dealt injuries but rarely were effective in dismembering body parts. Regular swords for battles were obviously not suited for the job so special "executioner swords" were designed. Like the aforementioned axes they had to be heavy enough to carry enough energy to take a head clean off. Even the most superior sword of the last 600 years, the samurai katana would be ineffective being yielded by somebody who doesn't know how to utilized it. Samurai were trained to use their katanas efficiently by years of training. While they could indeed strike a head off with their katanas any non-trained commoner trying the same would merely get the katana struck halfway in the neck since they don't know the technique.
The bottom line is this. An executioner sword was no more "merciful" than an axe if the executioner didn't know how to handle it efficiently. And since it was designed to be handled by both hands it required quite a trained swordsman to be effective. The difference being that the trained swordsman was usually somebody who either was trained soldier, a swordsman trainer or even a sword maker. As such he was more of a professional and "hired hitman" rather than a the "local thug" the regular executioner was.
Handling an axe required no training. Handling a sword took many years of practice and discipline.
A sword is more balanced than an axe so unlike the executioner axe one can swing it horizontally rather than just swinging down. A master swordsman knew how to handle a heavy sword, wasn't drunk and could behead somebody standing up or while they were down on their knees.
It wasn't the sword itself which was more merciful it was the professional who was far better suited to execute somebody efficiently than a mere drunk executioner who everybody ostracized and stayed well clear of. In the end they both did the same horrible job but the swordsman was seen as a "professional" who did "clean kills".
Axes were also a lot cheaper than swords. Only nobility could afford swords so obviously only nobility and the wealthy were ever trained in how to handle them. I reiterate, the *training* was what made the difference not the weapon itself since an executioner sword would still require multiple chops by any executioner.
" I’ve seen an old film of a guy being fried in the Electric Chair. It was extremely gruesome. His eyes were covered but you could tell they were frying. His HEAD was smoking." Some bad old, film you've seen then. Hollywood movies always make executions way more gruesome than they really are to shock the audience. Correctly distributed the electric chair kills you in a few seconds. The shock stops the heart dead and you immediately pass out from the high electric currency. You seem to think that electronic current are some sort of "microwaves" . They simply paralyze all your muscles and the shock shuts down all vital organs. Boom. Dead.
Coline Collard um, a few things. Anne Boleyn’s executioner WAS a Professional. He was brought to The Tower of London from Calais. Calais is port city in France. It was conquered and ruled by England in 1347. It was retaken by France in 1558, which was after Queen Anne Boleyn was executed.Henry VIII specifically sent for this Swordsman/Executioner because he had a reputation for being fast and accurate. Henry VIII wanted her execution to be fast and merciful so his subjects wouldn’t feel badly for her and end up being some kind of martyr. Right before he beheaded Anne Boleyn, he could see she was losing her calm. He decided to distract her. He whispered to his assistant to hand him his sword, in French. He knew Anne Boleyn spoke nearly perfect French and she would look towards his assistant. However, he already had his sword. When she was trying to figure out what was happening, He swung his sword and beheaded her instantly. I would suggest you watch/listen to Claire Ridgway. She is a Historian who has written 3 books on Anne Boleyn. Her UA-cam channel is The Anne Boleyn Files and Tudor Society. She mentions that beheading by Sword is MUCH faster/easier than with an axe. It took 3 blows to sever Mary Queen of Scots’ head. The Executioner had to saw through the last bit sinew, to get her head to fall off.
And you really need to read up on the things that have happened to people while in the Electric Chair. The first person to be executed didn’t die, after being electrocuted for 17 seconds. A witness yelled, “Great God, he is alive!” They then threw the switch again for 4 minutes. He was dead. But it took several hours for the body to cool down. The newspaper reports wrote about how awful it was to watch. And the executed man was called a “poor wretch, by one of the reporters. In 1990, it required 3 jolts to kill the condemned man. And flames shot out of his head. This happened in 1890. In 1983, John Evans was sentenced to the Electric Chair in Alabama. He was still alive after his first jolt. It took 14 minutes to end his life. Smoke and sparks came out from under the hood, near his left temple. Witnesses said they started to smell smoke and burning flesh after the third jolt. His body was left charred and smoking. The list of botched/torturous Electric ⚡️ Chair executions goes on and on. And there was one condemned man whose legs caught on fire 🔥😳 In the US, it is illegal to execute condemned people in a manner that is not humane. That’s why California has suspended executions. Because none of the methods of execution used in the United States qualifies as humane.
Oh, and the Waffen-SS were not the Nazi Killing Squads. They were formed to be the military arm of the SS. They did participate in the mass shootings. But that’s not all they did. They also participated in major military campaigns . And they supplied guards for Concentration Camps and Death Camps. And the difference between “Concentration Camps” and “Death Camps” are as such: Concentration Camps used their Prisoners who were healthy and strong enough for Slave Labor. Death Camps such as Sobibor started killing Prisoners right away. They stood in line for the Gas Chamber. And once they were dead, they were cremated immediately, and their ashes were taken out of the oven and dumped on a pile.
Anyway, the killing units of the SS were called the Einsatzgruppen. And the men in the Einsatzgruppen were specially chosen. They were men who enjoyed killing and torturing anyone who was part of an inferior group. And those were the Jews, the Roma people (known as Gypsies.), Russians/Bolsheviks, Slavs, Learning Disabled or someone with Down’s Syndrome, and handicapped people. I read a book by David Jonah Goldhagen entitled “Hitler’s Willing Executioners”. The author did a ton of research and discovered that many Germans went out of their way to be mean and cruel to Jews. He came to the conclusion that Anti-Semitism was so pervasive back then, that the majority of Germans really hated Jews. And the majority of German adults of that generation were terrible people.
I think it was out of guilt. I think Henry knew the charges were trumped up and offering her a unique and painless execution was a small amount of mercy.
Alan Smith I agree. See my comment above.
@Alan Smith I also agree. Anne's only crime was not giving Henry a son. I believe he knew she was innocent of all of those ridiculous charges, but wanted rid of her so he could marry Jane Seymour whom Henry thought would give him his long-hoped-for son (which she did). I believe he ordered that French swordsman out of guilt as well. What a MONSTER he was!!!
Alan Smith This was my assumption as well. He’d signed her death warrant, he knew he wanted to get out of the marriage, and he couldn’t back out...but he could provide a small measure of comfort to someone he’d elevated to the monarchy.
That is my sense of what happened, too.
@@ElizabethF2222 Total monster as was his entire court.
Anne had the last laugh at the end.... HER daughter became the greatest Queen in Engish history- something no son or man had achieved!
I personally think that Henry would never be satisfied with anyone but at first it was the excitement of catching Anne that was the basis of the relationship. He fought so much with everyone to have this marriage and then murder her because she couldn't produce a son? I do agree a lot of the court politics probably exacerbated whatever marital problems they had.
** It NEVER OCCurred to me that Henry would have Cared Only about the CHASE===THAT is a Great Thought. ** While others hysterically are laughing at me for not knowing,, I found it to be an Interesting idea. ** I Think I am pretty good at Henry,, but Not this./// I dated a guy in Lincolnshire who did the Same to me....
Skyler Adams Queen Victoria ruled and empire on which the sun never settled. A fifth of the world. No other empire ever saw that size at any time of human history. During her reign England also became the world's center in innovation and industrial prowess. Truly the golden age of England/Britain in which was never achieved before or since.
And the current Queen Elizabeth II has had a successful reign for 67 years - the longest of any English/British regent in history. And she went through the worst parts of the Cold War, British economic recessions, movements to depose the monarchy altogether and the gradual disappearance of all the former British colonies and commonwealth.
@@colinecollard533 in context of Elizabeth's route to the throne and in comparison to the times she lived in She excelled against immense odds. Compared to the other two queens listed Elizabeth basically paved the way and broke the mould. I would think we can hardly compare their individual successes to one another as they are centuries apart And whatever they achieved in they lifetime and reigns were significant to the period. For me, personally I proclaim Elizabeth I the greatest because if you had to fight your family and foes a like and sacrifice personal gratification for your own people - to me her leadership and sheer determination to become a great LEADER in a time where everything was set against her is extraordinary.
And ironically we now know it's the male who can only give the Y chromosome to create a male child. Women can only give XX. So in the end all of these women who were shunned, murdered, and executed for not producing sons......buck up men. You're to blame for that not ending up right.
a book from the viewpoint of Anne's sister did touch on that.
I understand Henry wanting a "cleaner" death for Anne by having the French swordsman, but that wouldn't explain Katherine Howard. The executioner could have very well botched Katherine's beheading (like the axe man did with Thomas Cromwell), although I don't think he did. Wondering why he chose a sword for Anne and an axe for Katherine?? I think it was because Henry KNEW Anne was innocent and he believed Katherine Howard was guilty, although I think K. Howard was an abused teenager more than a scandalous adulteress. Great video!
Maybe the difference was that Anne was a crowned queen, while Katherine Howard wasn't. Only Catherine of Aragon and Anne had coronations. So Anne deserved a more dignified death.
I'm more inclined to think it was because of Anne's sex. Other women had died by far worse execution methods. But Anne was the first woman of rank, at least in Henry's reign. He didn't want her to die poorly and thus gain sympathy. By the time Katherine Howard came to her end, he'd executed Anne and Margaret Pole (royal by blood, an old lady, and she literally ran away from the executioner who hacked at her) executed....maybe felt like he didn't need the good PR.
Queen Anne had spent a lot of her early life in France & was educated there by Queen Claude of France. It was said by a diplomat that Anne could have been a "native-born Frenchwoman." This I imagine played a big reason behind the French sword. The biggest factor is because Henry VIII was advised he needed to show mercy. It's possible he was making up for some guilty he might have felt too.
I say that because 1. Look at Catherine Howard's case. Catherine was arrested at Hampton Court in November 1541 but not executed until February 13, 1542. It took this long even with love letters for evidence & confessions! Yet, Anne Boleyn was arrested May 2,1536 & executed May 19, 1536. Anne's trial was quickly! Only 1 person confessed and that was the musician Mark Smeaton, but she supposedly seduced him at Greenwich at a time its documented she wasn't even there but at Richmond! When she was suppose to be "procuring" Sir Henry Norris, she was actually still confined to her chambers from just having Elizabeth!
2. The sword was ordered BEFORE Anne's trial! That means there wasn't ever going to be any other verdict other than guilty.
That is just 2 things that point to Anne being set up. The least Henry could do was make her death clean and quick.
Henry probably felt Anne was truly innocent plus she was mother to his daughter, Princess Elizabeth. Perhaps he showed a tiny bit of mercy for those reasons.
@@jennifer7582 there are several versions about Margaret Pole's end one stating she did not run away but was butchered by more than 10 blows before the executioner eventually managed to behead her.
We were told that he loved her , and wanted her to die quickly , he was strange person , but also as we were told in the tower that she had died so fast that her head rolling through the grass still whispered the psalms that she read during the beheading . This case improved her innocence
Henry was cold hearted as well as vindictive. His previous declarations of love and loyalty for Anne (and to his first wife) meant nothing to this monster. It is not difficult to believe that the postponement of her execution was Henry’s deliberate and predetermined decision to subject Anne to more suffering. He knew Anne’s conviction was inevitable and that her fate was sealed. His wants and needs were all that mattered to him. The reformation and the creation of the Church of England demonstrates his willful disregard for Roman Catholicism. If he could accomplish that undertaking what matter is taking the lives of Anne and that of innocent men? Like a spoiled and petulant child he would have his way and nothing could be said or done to prevent him from getting what he desired. Now that he wanted Anne and the others gone, taking steps to end their lives caused him no distress, at all. He was a psychopath.
Not to excuse his behavior, but Dr Kat has a video where she discusses this. He may have had brain damage from a jousting accident that altered his once pleasant nature into the tyrant we are all familiar with.
@@stevenleslie8557 either way still a psychopath
@@stevenleslie8557 actually actually , while thanks for the sentiment , he was just reading and interpreting the bible scripture properly, any1 worth his salt as a catholic , would be doers of the word, not heerers only.
god loves marriage, he saved a girl from dishonour with quick killing.
gods got what a man must do , written up in only mosiac law, im thinking of when joseph was want to put mary away, or as i view culturally fir the time , stone the mother of god? 😠 the angels also having mercy intervienned.
so whats harsher , swords, axes, or stones,..
the real attack was subverration, henry put england into third gear and did bible. this grew up into spiritual effects that lead to cromwell, puritsinism the conquest of usa and 340 million americans. ÷ without spiritual forciveness a man is cowed and made a boy, nithing, without religion , or false papist ' religiousity' without conviction of action we have scant reward.
i think it requisite to say henry us one of the favorate history characters, a tyrant, a brute and/or a smelly knobhead, not quite an abraham or a jacob, not even a samuel, but definatly in the ranks of saints.
detractors and adversaries be damned, 80% of the time henry gets it right and 20% of the time its just sauce, you know he got to boulogne twice and nearly to paris , with hid second end if life invcasion...
noghing he id was so out of line with scripture to warrent excomunitative threats and those that slept with his missus as far more callous than he, call me dark, but when people are mysanthropic and malign each other, i at least thing decisive action voming from, at base a jovial and pure spirit , yes a hash , on thise that say , murderous beast , but where in the bible does it say yew can't eat a pie for break fast or where does it say you can't bash down the frogs or send women who wrong' un yew to the gallows, i bet 300 years after henry women were much better at hknouring their men from john o griats to pen sance, or at least better in hiding their incontinueity. strong characters allways attract a stick or a stone every now and then, but who hates ghengus khan for having 8000 wives , nobody, i bet he was cold , never even learned their names, henry would love well, die well and keep his tarts in line, ducks in a row, yee might say, nice chap!!! sorry girl but why do married couples argue?!: 😢 its when they, love each other, he just happened to own castles, knights and prisons, its😒 smartly said, a romance goes quiet, dark and silent, thats when somethings up... its a moral tale , arthur kills lancelot in the civil war, the quen being a hussey, 😷 to the tower with you???¥!!!
@@stevenleslie8557 to be honest, he seemed to exhibit some of those negative traits even before the accident.
@@selinapersaud7629 I can believe that. In his day, to be a king, you had to be tough and show people you mean business, even if it meant chopping a few heads off.
I’m sure any person would confess to anything while being tortured! I think Henry wanted to get rid of her, because of “No son”..
Many centuries later, we all know that the father determines the sex of child! Feel sorry for her! Henry was a monster!
🇨🇦👏💐
Don't feel sorry for her!
She connived her way into power at the cost of the Queen of over 20 years, Catherine of Aragon , so she got her come uppance.
bobby bingle Hold a grudge much? Hold it for very long?
He was also in the middle of his affair with Jane Seymour as well.
@@bobbybingle1662 I believe she was pushed by her family.
@@meeeka Lol,not at all,I was just commenting on this post feeling sorry for her.
Anne was the first ever Queen in Europe to be executed and Henry didn't want a bloody spectacle that might win sympathy for the innocent Queen, but her bravery on the scaffold won her sympathy anyway, and even more so when the public found out that the king had become betrothed to and married Jane Seymour so quickly after Anne's death. Many of those who had believed her guilty began to question it, and the trial which produced very little evidence. Plus Anne answered to the charges so eloquently and logically that many believed she would not be found guilty. And people remembered this later..........and this was the mother of Henry's child, Elizabeth. He wouldn't t want to be tainted forever with the butchery of the axe.
@Gerrit Peacock yes, people knew their families could suffer if they criticised the king while on the scaffold. Monarchs were known to seize the family's assets as revenge and as a warning to others. I read Anne's speech as her being sarcastic towards Henry in a passive aggressive way. It was the only way she could have a dig at him without endangering her family. When she asks people not to speak out on her behalf, what she is doing is bringing attention to her innocence and effectively urging people to defend her. She was very manipulative. But certainly would have been concerned about her reputation and legacy after death.
#
I agree entirely about the comments being passive aggressive and her having to be careful what was said as she had her daughter to think about a child who was a bastard and not a bastard depending on the climate. I also agree about the exhortation to the crowd not to support her innocence and thereby telling them she was innocent
@@lynnedelacy2841 It does sound like a hint that she expects there will be people who back her cause or think her innocent.
Sword or axe, Elizabeth remembered too well her mother's fate. She never married, so she'd never in the same position.
I think Elizabeth was the ,"son" Henry always wanted,
Some stories have it that Elizabeth was actually a man. She was staying elsewhere and they went to fetch her. Allegedly she died and the group could not go back empty-handed, so they grabbed a child her age and made him look like a girl. Elizabeth never married and died as the virgin queen.
Tree House dr kat addresses this theory in her video on Elizabeth i
Definitely
@@treehouse2902 It’s amazing to me how many people have believed that she was in fact a boy pretender. In reality, there is no chance that a man could have passed for the Queen, even with the talk of heavy cake make up she wore towards the later years due to the simple fact of spies being among her at all times, her ladies in waiting assisting with bathing and of course her bed sheets being examined to assure all bodily functions were working. But it’s a great story and we know pretenders often popped up in this time!
Being a macromolecular chemist I agree with some commentators. Readers, who suspected that the failure of the production of a male child may have been caused by a genetic mutation on the sex chromosome Y is not coincidental. It is, in fact, unlikely that the daughters of HenryVII, including Elizabeth, have enjoyed good health (perhaps suffering from some mild mental disorder due to their terrible childhood). However, I too am led to believe that Henry's most spermatozoa (not all) were affected by some form of mutation. In this case, miscarriage was very likely and even those boys, who reached post-puberty (Edward VI and Henry fitzRoy) met a premature death. If I am not wrong, they never reached the age of twenty. Please forgive my poor English.
GREAT ANSWER== THANK YOU for your Scientific Knowledge....
I agree. There are several factors that can affect male fertility and sperm quality. Chemical he may have been exposed to, a genetic condition, or maybe clothing. Later in life, his continuously infected leg wound may have lead to immune system complications that stress his body further and exacerbate any obstacles for conception. Fellow scientist here :)
Virginia Truett could the head injury he has affect it?
Nothing to forgive Senora, your English is excellent. And I agree with you.
@@erinfrazier1439 not possible
Queen Anne Boleyn was most likely innocent King Henry the eighth knew this, but it didnt matter He tired of her because she failed to produce a son for him. This is what it all boiled down to. Many people were expendable in those times
I've always thought it was because he had such idyllic dreams about Anne being the one to produce a son. And she failed. Around that time, he met Jane Seymour and executing Anne was the way out. A fatal combination of Henry fed up with not having a son yet, and lest we forget, Anne was not a faded flower type. She often gave Henry a run for his money. I think he was just done with Anne Boleyn.
The level of dignity displayed walking to the scaffold is astounding
Because she knew she was right but had no way to refute his royal assholeness.
Yep, she was a diva..and talked back..but she sure was amazing at her execution.
Cromwell would not have come up with such an audacious plot unless ordered to.....the consequences of him accusing the Queen of adultery, incest and treason without any foundation would have been catastrophic. And all of the many jurors knew the outcome the king wanted..
Yes, Henry was behind it all
I agree. I mean, despite his high position as advisor, he was considered a commoner (no noble lineage). I couldn't see him as the person who thought of this whole scheme.
It is an indication, I think, of Henry's vindictive nature that he still went ahead and "executed" ... read murdered ... Anne Boleyn. Their marriage had been annulled a couple of days previously which meant that in the eyes of the church and the eyes of the law, that they had never been married. This being the case, the charges of treason against Boleyn ceased to exist once the annullment was pronounced by the Archbishop of Canterbury (et. al.). It was not possible for her to have committed the treasonous acts of which she was accused when she and the king had never been married at all according to the decree of nullity. I would love to see you do a video with your theories on why she was not simply released and why Henry still went ahead and killed her.
Maybe Henry felt he couldn't rest easy with Ann and her faction alive and well. An unfortunate compliment if so.
Quite possible, but equally, Henry new the exquisite annoyance of having a former wife / queen living in England while trying to set up another in her place. Maybe he wanted a clean slate?
Further, if she said what she was accused of - about looking for "dead man's shoes" - in relation to Henry, she imagined the king's death... treason, wife or not.
@@ReadingthePast agreed in my studying of this era I think no matter what he needed her gone. because of her family and the things she was accused of saying meant death. I also think by this time his mental facilities were diminishing or shifting from possible McLeod syndrome / Kells might have lead to his just get rid of her attitude.
I lean towards the Kells /McLeod syndrome as it explains so much the miscarriages, the mid life behavior changes and etc
I believe he was having some mental issues. Physiology aside, it may have been exasperated by his ego. He WANTED to believe the lies told to him so he could find another to give him an heir. If Ann was allowed to live, the truth would come out for those who would defend her honor. He couldn’t let that happen.
This channel is so nice and I love the sound of your voice is so relaxing and captivating
Is there anyone that Psycho didn't execute ? Even his sixth wife almost got the chop but for the fact she intercepted the arrest warrant and ran to the King directly to plead her case.
He was pretty chop happy, that's for sure!
What?! What was his reason for this one??!!
@EllieGoodgal, Catherine Parr was at risk for being charged with heresy. Henry was more conservative than Catherine's reformist views.
I found your question about Henry being able to pardon Anne quite odd. Since he married Jane Seymour later in the same month on May 30th and was supposedly out with her on the morning of Anne's execution there was never going to be pardon. He wanted Jane immediately.
Despite the many times I have read about the execution of Anne Boleyn, seen re-enactments and listened to the story, I somehow always wish it will end differently. I know it's foolish and it's not possible but I still hold my breath hoping a last minute pardon will be granted by the king and Anne will live out her life quietly away from the treachery of court.
I would love to see a video with Lady Jane as the subject. Your work is excellent. I'm thoroughly enjoying the subject matter and your insight on the topics presented. Thank you from Canada.
Yes! I'd love a vid on the Nine Days Queen!
I need an explanation why she's not in the song. She was coronated so I don't understand why she's not in the list of monarchs...
Henry should have pardoned Anne and sent her away to a convent. But She had proved herself an enemy of Cromwell and it was Cromwell who wanted her dead, his ultimate victory.
No, I don't think so. Cromwell wanted what the king wanted. And when Henry went "off" Anne Boleyn in a big way, it was easy enough to find excuses/reasons for having her executed. She wielded too much power and influence and had made many enemies.
Diane Walker Weren’t the convents closed as they were Catholic?
@@susanc4622 Not completely but it was in the process of happening, and as a way of disposing of an awkward woman short of executing her, convents were losing their usefulness.
May Cromwell and Henry VIII rot in hell ... if it exists!
Don't mess with the Cromwell.
Excellent presentation and such an interesting subject..Tudor history is so intriguing..thanks for the channel and will be following along....keep up the great work.
Thank you so much and welcome, it's great to have you here!
It’s so awful that in those days, no one realized that it is the MAN not the woman that determines the sex of the child!!! A man contributes the XY chromosome and the female XX. SO if the child is born XY it’s male. So it was NEVER his wives fault, it solely lies with Henry VIII! So it’s his fault that he only had one sickly son who died in his teenage years. The greatest Queen, oddly enough, ushered in a Golden Age, Anne’s own daughter, Elizabeth I.
I can’t believe that Anne, Henry’s great love, the one he broke with Rome for and was excommunicated from the Catholic Church, and whom he waited for for years, possibly gave her the “privilege” of the sword vs. axe.
I never thought about it being a “French execution” by bringing in the swordsman from Calais. Interesting and great point. To execute Anne his great love that’s where I believe Henry became a total syphillitic tyrant. LOVE YOUR VIDEOS!! They are to the point, succinct and thought provoking! Thank you!
Sadly, had they known of this fact, it would not have mattered as Henry Tudor believed he was beneath God himself, and what he said - went, if he stated that it was not true, then it was not true. In his tiny mind, he would have wondered if he could in fact be at fault, but shook that off immediately as being ridiculous, how could it be his fault, he is the King of England and cannot be at fault for anything. No one would ever persuade him that he was the reason he could not produce an heir, he even blamed God before he would blame himself!!
Thank you so much, I'm really pleased you are enjoying the content!
It really was a great shame; both for his daughters and his wives!
I often wonder how the news of Anne's arrest and execution was actually received by the population of England (and even Europe) at the time. That Henry would publicly execute his wife, an anointed queen, for whom he had remade the faith of his nation, must have felt seismic and shocking, surely?
Side note: in the name of pedantry (because I can't help myself) ... the belief that Henry may have had syphilis had been heavily debated and, and as far as I'm concerned, disproved. I'd be happy to make a video on this if you like, what do you think?
kenn1936 you’re 💯% right my friend! (At least in the movie version), I remember Henry saying “Kings are anointed by God”. You are SO right that Henry’s word meant law and to “buck the system” meaning good ‘ol Henry was to commit treason!!! On a whim and if the wind was blowing the wrong way, and you crossed him, you were swinging from a rope or missing your head!
Reading the Past ABSOLUTELY!!! I remember seeing a documentary on the “autopsy” of Henry VIII. In that film due to largely speculation but some medical record keeping at the time, his anger and mood swings they not only attributed to his fall during the joust but he slept with dozens and dozens of women so it’s quite possible he could have contracted syphilis. Syphilis is known to cause the erratic behavior as it basically “eats” your normal healthy brain tissue. I’d love to hear why this has been disproven.
I agree, Dr Kat, that even though Anne was quite unpopular with several nobles, scholars and the public alike, but even not being well received, I’m sure they felt “ah the whims of a Monarch” at her eventual fall and execution. I’m sure privately they felt, if he could kill a reigning Queen, if you fell outta favor, he’d do the same to you for simply disagreeing!!
And YESSSS...he changed the course of a Nation to marry this woman! The Pope thought of her as a Putain, or whore, even though I think it was Anne’s sister Mary who was called “The Great Prostitute”. I’ll bet they (the nation and all of Europe) was shocked that he could just cast aside a wife, his best friend even the Pope on the whims of a Ruler. It seemed he “blew hot and he blew cold” disregarding and tossing aside Catherine of Aragon who in those days, was thought of as epitome of greatness and piety, that era’s People’s Princess (Queen). And you’re right on another point! Imagine how his daughters felt knowing that at any time, Henry scapegoated their Mothers and could have them put to death.
I’m quite conflicted about poor Mary until she became Queen Ruler of England killing thousands of Protestants for the Catholic cause. She, too, tried to start a reformation of her own in seeing that Catholicism was restored to England. She burned many a Protestant whom she called Heretics and like her Father persecuted and took down monasteries and all religious houses to institute the Church of England. This the name she will always be remembered by...Bloody Mary! That’s what she’s remembered by!
Of COURSE, I’d LOVE to see your video, any video you make, in the subject you mentioned.
I love this period of history!!! Any and all videos are certainly welcomed and are always so thorough and well received. BRAVO 👏🏼. I’m binge watching all your video libraries now!!
Reading the Past LOVE a video on this and anything you choose to discuss. I LOVE this channel. If you don’t mind, I’d love to promote your channel on FB or Twitter. Anyone who loves Tudor type history or ANY historical facts by a woman with a doctorate in this period of literature would truly ❤️ this channel. We need to get the word out there. I ran across your channel in my recommended since I watch ANYTHING Tudor or Mary Queen of Scots. We need to get the word out and your subscriber count will explode. The content like I’ve said is far more educational than some lasting hours or more!!! Do you have a Twitter account and with your permission I’d like to tweet about your channel! Far superb to many others and it’s like your talking to each of us individually! Thank you again!
Another terrific program! Thank you, Dr. Kat. I’m a musician...an opera conductor. My knowledge of this subject comes from ANNA BOLENA, the opera by Donizetti. Your historical discernment and insights into AB’s predicament bring clarity to the whole situation. Thank you.
This goes so much deeper than the basic facts. The “why” of it questions are fascinating.
Perhaps the swordsman executioner was due to the guilt that Henry may have felt. He may have know that Anne was innocent of the charges, but his pride would not allow her to be found innocent. Everyone judging her knew that the king wanted her to be found guilty. Perhaps giving Anne an easier death allowed Henry to live with himself a bit easier.
GREAT Comment, Lisa....
everyone jumping to " anne the innocent " when everyone was tupping anything with breath back then. larp😙😙😙
@@adamant7794 she was certainly not an innocent, but it appears that she was innocent of these particular charges
Hi! I just found your channel and I am in love! I've always wondered if Henry suffered from imposter syndrome, as he was never intended for the throne. A lot of his actions seem to stem from deep seated insecurities and his courtiers knew how to play on those vulnerabilities. That is not to say that Henry is blameless, not even close. But I do think it may explain some of his choices. I also don't subscribe to the opinion that his Jousting accident made him crazy and led to Anne's execution. I think that his fall simply made him realise his own mortality and brought home his lack of an heir and coinciding lack of time to create one. I also wonder if Anne's comments about his lack of virility were true and if they were if that fact also contributed to his sudden urgency to rid himself of Anne and try to procreate with a new wife which was free of suspicion. If he blamed Anne for his inability to perform then it's plausible that he felt a new wife could solve that problem. I believe there are a lot of reasons he executed Anne.
I'm glad you found me and that you are enjoying the content!
You have it spot on, it is certainly the case that a lot of recent exploration of Henry has focused on the head injury/personality change question following the joust; perhaps this has been at the cost of other psychological stressors? Being the second son of a man who won the throne in battle (with a dubious claim of his own), would undoubtedly have a mental legacy.
Maybe we can point to the head injury, illness (malaria/leg ulcer) causing pain, anxiety over his place in the world, "buyers remorse" over his annulment and remarriage or a belief in Anne's guilt - perhaps he truly thought she wanted him dead. Any and all are possible in varying degrees when it comes to Anne's fall.
I think you're right about the jousting accident. It's often overlooked that to ingratiate himself with his subjects Henry kicked off his reign by executing the tax ministers responsible for the stuffed coffers inherited from his father, lavishly boosting his own prestige with the revenue they'd raised. The best of both worlds lol. He didn't suddenly become a ruthless killer after the accident. (Tho I'm sure it didn't make him any nicer.)
I read a fictional auto biography of Henry years ago. The author had researched a great deal about him, from different sources. The fictional Henry claimed he hired the French swordsman, to mock Anne over her personal preferences for the finer things in life.
** Now THAT Is a GREAT THought/CONConclusion I NEVER Considered!!!
** THE Most educated answer/EXPLANation,, So Far....
exact... read it too... you can really live it... i read the boy parts ,,, holding his dads train, the yorkist uncle, out of favour , and raising a spare, it never ended mylady , as far as I can see...
Biography, an Autobiography is when a person pens their own story. A Biography is when another, such as a historical researcher, pens it instead. 😉
I really like the way Dr. Kat presents alternative ideas, solutions, and possibilities. As she says, much time has passed since these events took place. She's not dogmatic, but presents a reasoned selection of maybes and possibles for us to choose from. There's a breath of fresh air about her presentations that is absent from so many "my way or the highway" historians' versions of historical events.
What you say sounds quite reasonable to me. Henry had loved(Obsessed over) Anne. Or over the concept he had created of her. She could not live up to that image. If he had not been king we would likely think of him as an abusive husband. Add to that all of the political ramifications and whispers
from councilors and court and you have a lethal stew. We tend to dress his behavior in the robes of state when at core he was a jealous, controlling, demanding man who used women and discarded them with impunity. If he had managed to live longer there would have been even more unfortunate young women murdered by him. Make him an ordinary man and see how his behavior looks.
True. Unfortunately he had far more power than an ordinary man.
dis carded ? she adulted. your next husband gets angry if your not mutually respectfull sexually? women drive men mad, we know this. reasonable is pot calling a kettle black. in scripture, having the wrong god, cheating on yer feller or murdering is exactly equal # ten commandments, this was lawfull execution. you forget things. godbless ... :
@@stevekaczynski3793 i judt 1... i just don't see it... why do peeps give the poor executed women, carte blanche.
henry rules a kingdom, doesn't want women killed for breaking the moses 10 commandments but laws be laws. its really mens fsult , jelous of true power, jeloys of pretty wives, covet not ye madlad.
if men women , heck i'd kill my dog if it misbehaved a bit a child. at court henry 8th is law, please see that if fornication happens , there are loosers and winnere. queens can't just bash the bible on the head and go off as they please, so why get married in the first place. the least you can expect if you park your car in the wrong place is a bad tickets, so why not death for plopping your fanny up the wrong pole... with respect kings make law and this wasn't even hens law, it was deuteronomy. can we agree that henry acted glouriously , with honour & halt using him as a punfhing bag. i need a licence to fly a plane, if the wire is the aircraft and i sneek up and fly it, the fliggt marshall might do security and get the highjacker killed... you know... shall we end with= piss off and actions have consequences?!
"before you could say a Pater Noster.." I believe the PR is the main reason. I have read the delays were orchestrated. I've had a soft spot for Anne since reading Joanna Denny's book many years ago (no, I don't agree with all she has to say but it gave me another perspective)
I believe he had planned this even longer because the time a message is sent to France. Then adding the executioner's trip to London could've taken months.
That would be, somehow, even more disturbing!
It would have taken under a week. You can walk from Dover to the Tower of London in 24 hours. The Calais crossing to Dover would on average take a day depending on the tide and weather.
@@cherylthommo1 Yes, I doubt whether it would take more than three or four days to send someone to hire the guy, and bring him from Calais to London. The executioner might well have hired a horse to get from Dover to the Tower.
I had always heard it was Anne who requested the swordsman. Partly as a delaying tactic and partly because she didn't want a botched job and that Henry had just acceded to her request, probably for the reasons you described. It would seem more natural that Anne would request him as they had a reputation for a quick, clean cut. As you say , she still had that connection with France . There were literally thousands of swordsmen in England that Henry had access to , if he just wanted her dispatched, neatly.
Nah the swordsman was sent for before the trial even took place. There was no way she would have made that request before she even found guilty or knew what the charges were.
During that pregnancy Anne knew that the king was courting Jane Seymour but hoped it was a tenporary fling he was get over as he had dome before. But when she saw Jane wearing that locket with his picture in it, that he had given to Jane, and that Jane was actually flaunting in Anne's face, she found it harder to ignore. Then she found out that Crowmell had been made to give up his chambers to Jane's relatives so that the king could visit her there in private but not besmirch Jane's reputation by ensuring that were always chaperoned. This shows he was more serious about Jane that had been previously thought, and Anne knew it. Then on the day she miscarry she did catch Jane on Henry's knee and they were canoodling. Anne was devastated. This event was related to Lady Mary by Anne Gainsford who was a lady in waiting to Anne, and who went to visit Lady Mary at Hundson just 2 weeks after Anne Boleyns execution. There was no such thing as privacy in a royal court and the closest attendants on the king and queen knew everything that went on.
Oh, and another witness written about by Agnes Strickland related that in the weeks leading up to her arrest, Anne was quiet and pensive, sitting alone in her privy gardens with her little dogs and she seemed sad. Also the year before she had tried to speak to the French ambassador at a court banquet and she was in some fear. She wanted his help but could not speak to him now for the eyes that were upon her, neither did she dare put her fears in writing......it was something to do with the French king accepting her daughter Elizabeth as being legitimate,, which would be proved if King Francis accepted a betrothal between one of his sons and Elizabeth, which Francis had previously rejected. I think Anne lived in fear and anxiety a lot of the time when she had repeated miscarriages and no son. She saw first hand what had happened to Katherine of Aragon and the king was often cold to her and avoided her company. Before she had always been able to win him back, but now.....
A minor point..but you said when Anne woke up that morning.....I doubt she had slept a wink!
It doesn't do to think about the fear she must have felt.
I think she would have spent the night praying.
Hello I’m new to this channel. Anne Boleyn is my idol. I have loved her since I got into Tudor history in high school in 96. I studied this a lot. He knew it would be messy and botched with an axe. She was first queen in English history to be on the scaffold. He had to make sure it was clean. I like to also think in a way it was his mercy on her using the executioner from France. A place she dearly loved. As for the delay in her execution, I think Henry was torn. Because once upon a time he did love her. I think he still did at the end of the day. He knew she couldn’t have committed adultery. He had way to many spies. The rumors were started with Cromwell filling the king’s head. It didn’t help she already had enemies from day one.
I had always interpreted the French swordsman as proof his Henry’s mercy on Anne. I also thought it might hint at some guilt on his part. Anne knows Henry better than anyone, especially with regards to his attitude, tricks and propaganda around ending marriage (she lived through his campaign to convince himself and everyone else re his marriage to Catherine) and in my opinion, he knows that she knows that he knows he allowed himself to be conveniently convinced of her guilt. At the top of his mind is having an heir. I doubt that if Anne had born a son or two, she’d have been killed. So, getting rid of Anne and wants to make is as easy as possible on her. His guilt shows too in that he runs out of London during al!of this. He can’t “face” her.
thats true ... its like ... its more like ... gives a son and you can have the entire world, its all i care...
***
€ its probs henrys fault regards le old childbearing... he was full of various womens deseases at this stage... much spanish venus was going around... bbuuurrrt.... yes.
---
when i think if a son had been made , cheating or no cheating, henry wasn't perfect, he would hmmm wud likly gave defeated his own male pride and let her off a superb string if court dalluance, didn' t a commenter say he killed at least 10 to 13 people 😲😲😲 courtiers, friends , the brother of the sweet ann. I'll be myself... ill be terse... she definatly did cheat and although he didn't want to miss her, he wanted the wife he loved, to be more healthy, more able to be discreet in sex, and if found cheating, he wanted her Just as an abstract concept to have the respect of her fictional son to be.
a mum should have a high place of hinour within a family and a higher unblemished record as a queen ever more eo. its been a lotta time and this is of course conjecture at this point . but blast the eyes of those that stole the queen in the bedchamber and a poxy illness of the time was of course bad in the reproductife straights... if yon henry had visiststed and roystered the hie house oess often he wouldn't be saddled with the par tual blame fir her infertility, it could be a miss mache but the first knight she had with him, she prolly git very sick!!! - latterly id say an element if bible bashing flame of fury from reading leviti cys or deuter or somesuch... but evenso. he just got some fitzroys and potential edwards with sey more so what, she layed a straw on his camels bac, so to speak. i just wish men were real men in nowerdeys modern... the metro sexual drag queen stuff does!nee provide princes , thats for sure & thanks for the prifate confersation.
Maybe. But this guy was an asshole and assholes don't run when they don't have to.
i. adore. u. your channel is one of my all time favorites! I'm completely obsessed with the history of the english monarchy, so this is right up my alley! thank you for posting and being so genuine. you are a joy to watch and listen to!
Katherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn had one thing in common: neither one was going to agree to an annulment. I think to them that would have been like giving away their daughters’ birthright. Since Katherine was born a royal princess, he had to wait until her death. Anne was not royal and she was never going to agree to be put aside- and Henry knew that so the adultery charge was invented.
Such a sad thing that happened to her. I think he just got tired of his toy and wanted a new toy.
I believe there’s a certain complexity and simplicity in it all.Henry was only the second Tudor monarch. It was still a new dynasty. He had to secure the throne, and as he was getting older (comparatively) he had to ensure the succession. He didn’t have another 20 years to expend on another wife. Jane Seymour was ready, willing and available. The ambitious Cromwell also had to secure his survival in a court where loyalties changed frequently, and the Boleyn’s themselves, ruthlessly climbed up the power ladder in the preceding decades. Unfortunately, for Anne, it was a perfect storm.
Dr Kat, I also think her uncle played a pivotal part in her downfall, which wasn’t addressed in this video. Thank you for another great video.
I cannot understand why Henri VIII is considered to be a great king, he was a monster. What kind of a horrible person you must be to execute by sword the woman you once loved, the mother of your daughter. Also Catharina Howard was beheaded. The destruction of so many beautiful buildings and works of art. He should be remembered as a psychopat, the worst king England ever had.
Your videos are so informative and thought provoking. I have always thought that Henry sent for the swordsman as a last magnanimous gesture to both Anne and his kingdom. To Anne because after all he had loved her, knew her most intimate thoughts, he had a heart and felt he at least owed her that consideration, a French swordsman. Also because she was a Queen, he felt she could not just die by the 'common' axe. Better PR, that is where the kingdom comes in, it makes him look good. As to the the delay, I believe it really happened that way. It didn't bother Henry because he knew she was going to die, but I think it might have given her the thought that maybe he wasn't going to go through with it and that is my last thought, that her final speech was so eloquent and forgiving because maybe as she must have written it days before, she had a hidden hope that he would still save her, (the delay reinforcing that thought) so she only spoke well of him not knowing that there was no going back in his mind. No confessions were needed.
Not necessarily, it was considered bad form at the time to go to the block pleading for mercy. Christians of that time believed themselves sinners who deserved to die innately, so it was more of the norm at the time to plead the populace to have mercy on your soul and those who did the condemnation.
Well I can tell by your views counter we all love our Tudor history. Keep them coming Kat you are fun and informative, Thank you! Yes, the Tudors are just so very interesting!
Did Henry fear what Anne might say on the scaffold so used the swordsman as a bribe to prevent this.
Wow! Amazing information by Dr. Kat. Thanks Doc. You're the best.
would it be possible to do biographies of Cicily Neville, mother of Edward 4th and Richard 3rd., Isabella, wife of Edward 2nd a.k.a. the she wolf of France, and Kathryn de Valois widow of Henry 5th?
i like elanor of aquitenne . and my mum loves ric the third.
i'd love someone to cover every french lewy. i watched versailles from bbc very recently and loved the court plays on who gets be the controlling boss, the brother fights the other brother, marshalls vry for command. history is a hot pot , of grand beutifull , heads or tails if ho gets life and who gets death. Im surprised henry dudn't marry more country milk maid tew be honest, high ranking girls are diffiticult larks...
I heard, Henry offered to let Anne live, if she declared Elizabeth was illegitimate. Anne said no way, and ended up on the scaffold.
I think there was a scene in Anne of a Thousand Days which suggested he made this offer and it was rejected but had no basis in reality. If she accepted that she wasn’t legally married to him, and Elizabeth was therefore illegitimate, it follows that she couldn’t have committed adultery and there was no basis for the accusations against her and therefore the penalty. Elizabeth was removed from the succession anyway.
@@gelbsucht947 Elizabeth was declared illegitimate in any case.
Thank you so much for addressing this. I had really wondered this after listening to a number of other accounts of Anne's life and death.
I love history and you tell it so beautifully.
Your interpretations were surprising! And, delightfully different than what I'd read. Thank you.
Your videos are great story telling - thank you! My boyfriend is so knowledgeable about history, and I know next to nothing - but I'm trying to learn. This type of narrative (instead of say, reciting events or dates) is really helpful. Thank you!
I've always wondered, did Mary Tudor attended Anne Boleyn's execution? I read in the comments that the King's older son Henry Fitzroy was there, is that true?
Fitzroy certainly attended; Mary was still at odds with her father so was being kept out of the way.
@@ReadingthePast Thank you for replying 💜 looking forward to learn more, I love your vids
Hi Dr kat. Once again you have given me food for thought.
Love all your videos. Thank you x x x
I just found your videos and wanted to tell you how much i enjoy them.
I'm so glad! Thank you!
In a way, the sovereign also showed compassion. The penalty for committing adultery was to be burned or beheaded at the king's pleasure...although I personally believe that he would not have sent Anne Boleyn to the stake to be burned.
I find you very interesting and I love to listen to compare what I know through reading and to discover the facts I may be missing. I remember the French executioner was provided as a courtesy and kind gesture by the king. But I am not sure if I read that Ann Boleyn requested this. All in all, good stuff.
My new favorite UA-cam channel!
We will probably never know why Henry called for a French executioner but I like the fact that you raised the question in this video. It all went so fast for poor Queen Anne Boleyn. Today is the anniversary of this tragic day. How grand and full of dignity she was in her death. That speech is eloquent and she was a scholar so that's probably why she found the correct words at that moment. I am fascinated by the speeches all these people gave before dying. I know it was part of the etiquette but I could never face what they faced. What a terrifying (yet fascinating) period! Thank you so much Dr Kat for your videos. I am learning a lot and enjoying them. Keep on that way. kisses from France and yes Anne was close to us and I love her even more for that.
Such a refreshingly open minded approach to this heavily debated event.
Fascinating, Dr Kat. Thanks so much.
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!
Fantastic video, many thanks
I always learn something new from your videos!
I really enjoy your videos. I appreciate all the research you've done and how clearly and succinctly you present it, along with the time and many hours of effort that goes into preparing these videos. Thank you!
I don't like the idea that the selection of the French swordsman was a gibe at Anne. Ordering an expert was more likely to have been for pragmatic reasons. Make-Henry-look-like-a-good-guy-despite-the-obvious-viciousness. Tudor spin.
P.S. loved the video. Have a wonderful day
Thank you, I'm glad you like the video. I'm inclined to agree with you, I think the the French swordsman was predominantly about avoiding a botched job and the terrible PR that would have brought.
great video very interesting....and as i have always know henry was a scumbag.....this proves it beyond any reasonable dought
I can't geht enough of your Channel! I love it and have thanks for sharing your wisdom!
I always thought the swordsman was a final request of Anne Boleyn's which he allowed. Thank you for your video it was interesting.
Hi, Dr. Kat! I'm a new subscriber, and I just wanted to tell you how delighted I am that UA-cam, in it's infinite wisdom, decided to drop you into my que. I, very much, appreciate your expertise on the subjects in which you speak, and I could watch your videos all day, but it's your voice that has me transfixed. I really could listen to it endlessly; there's just something about a British accent! Thank you for providing such intellectually stimulating content. I look forward to binge watching all of your postings.
I just found your channel and I have a theory on all these miscarriages. I wonder if the Queen could have been rh negative. It can cause problems with miscarriages
It has been suggested, I think particular weight is given to it because (to my knowledge) the condition does not cause issues with the first pregnancy but does in the subsequent ones.
@@ReadingthePast ,from what I understand, from my ob, it can cause problems in any pregnancy. And for this time period, when it wasn't understood, I think this may be plausible. Have any studies or research been aimed at this that you are aware of?
Elizabeth Young probably all the inbreeding on both sides
@@elizabethyoung309 I'm not aware of a specific study but there are a number of scholars who have floated the idea that Anne Boleyn may have been rh negative.
@@ReadingthePast I always wanted to know about the theory of the last miscarriage being deformed fueling the rumor of witchcraft or incest with her brother. Not that I believe she did it, but I could maybe understand fornication with her brother. Imagine the pressure. Im sure Henry was far from peek performance in that area by 1536.
Girl, you're blowing my mind. Loving your content!
Hello, Dr. Kat! What a pleasure it is to hear your comments about the French swordsman and what lead up to Anne's death. I have always assumed that a Frenchman was called to England for this execution because Anne herself had asked for one, or perhaps she had requested the sword because she was well aware of how some deaths with the ax were no mere single stroke. She also gave a payment, yes?, to the swordsman. I assume she would have paid the executioner (to thank him and, especially, to insure a swift, precise stroke) as other nobles had done. It would be a soft thought, I think, to suggest that Henry was trying to be more considerate of her in this manner by ordering the French swordsman but I do often think this...and I have no evidence to support this, none whatsoever. I do wish Henry had had a softer place in his heart for Anne. But, we are talking about an execution. The charges against her were dreadful, and the charge of incest with her brother seems as if it were an "add-0dd", a pretty heavy-handed one, if you ask me.There is always that discussion about Henry having changes after his jousting accident and that seems possible. His health deteriorated substantially and living with a sore and very painful injury for the rest of his life could have been at fault. The one thing that came to my mind as I was listening to your discussion was that Henry was eyeing his next wife as she appeared at court. He seems desperate, impatient, driven. Having gone through one divorce, the next must have seemed unpleasant, right up and until the death of Katherine. I vote his impatience. I think he needed a henchman and he got one. Several. And he moved on swiftly. One thing which to this day has always bothered me a lot is that Anne as a pregnant woman, who was to miscarry, did not seem to take more care in herself during these stressful times. Is there any evidence that she or any other wife of an English king stopped riding, doing tasks and/or usual requisite occupations associated with her station when she discovered her pregnancy? I can't help feeling that had Anne "played it safe" and stayed "abed" during most of her pregnancy, she would have had that son and not what actually followed. I enjoyed this video and how you presented different aspects of this issue. Tudor history is mesmerizing, isn't it? My field is Egyptology and there, we, too, have some marvelous, complicated matters at court, from dynasty to dynasty. But the Tudors! Wow! I'll be looking forward to your next! Deborah
Thank you, I learn a new perspective ~ excellent ✨
It’s a strong possibility that Henry used that extra day to torment Anne even further. Henry seemed excessively cruel on various occasions. I think this is one of them. Great food for thought. Wonderful video. Great Teacher! 👍
What I find very interesting is that just one day later Henry was betrothed to Jane Seymour.They were married on the 30th of May, just eleven days later. Henry was King of England, his marriage would have been a ceremony of some importance. The food, Jane's dress, Henry's wedding clothes etc. would all have to have been started almost if not before Anne died. I for one find that vey interesting.
I love listening to your podcasts. They are soooo rich.
I had never thought along the line of her French Ness. ..I really enjoy your take on things.
Really enjoy your videos. I think it was definitely a PR move...the eyes of Europe were on Henry. Due to his brain injury he was really deficient in empathy and in his mind probably imagined himself really kind and considerate allowing for the elegance of the axe.
I don’t see Anne Boleyn a fall as any more tragic than that if Thomas more or bishop fisher or anyone else who incurred Henry’s wrath.
She was in the game and went to war with the kings chief counsellor. It was not superficially a gender issue. She duelled with Cromwell and lost.
Loving your channel! I'm a wee bit obsessed with the Tudors, particularly Annne Bolelyn so I love your content. So to address your questions... I believe the swordsman was brought in, not because he loved her and didn't want her to suffer, but for good PR. It would be unfavourable to have a queen beheaded by some dirty axe, and furthermore, the commoners and high borne alike may feel symapathy for Anne. Something Henry couldnn't risk. He had planned to execute her before he even had her questioned. As to why? I think it was a perfect storm for poor Anne. She had become too dangerous to Thomas Cromwell. She had another still birth with deformaties (which we now suspect comes from Henry's genes). Back then deformaties were supposedly a sign that the mother had been sinning either before or during the pregnancy. So a part of Henry may have actually believed she was cheating as he was reportedly very supersititious. And she had become too 'mouthy' for Henry too. He loved her intelligence and strength whenn they courted, but as his queen he wanted subserviance. She outwardly complained about his affairs. She had much to say about his governing. So we have a narcissist, unhappy with a lippy wife, who gives him stillbirths which may well mean she was cheating from his pespective, no son, thenn Cromwell comes lobbing in with these false allegations, that fitted his confirmation bias!
Such a well made video. Dr Kat you really 'know your onions'. She was doomed when she failed to produce male heirs, moved against Cromwell and told Henry to do away with Katherine and (the future 'Bloody' ) Mary. Ole King Henry was tired of her and just needed a push (from Cromwell in order to save his skin- at least for a little while) to do the deed. Typical Tudor death, all killings were done with the 'law'. As opposed to, say the Borgias who preferred the dagger.
Henry needed an excuse to kill her and he was pissed she did not give him the boy he wanted.
Yes and he had “fallen in love” with Jane Seymour
I think they were trying to break her down to confess as they were terrified of what she might say in her speech in front of all the people that could cast doubt upon their King Henry but if she confessed then they would not have to worry.
Most excellent- just found this channel and love it! Thank you …
Never heard the theory or idea of the French swordsman ?? Henry doing this just to spite Anne and yes 👍 I think yes 👍 love your presentations and have subscribed to all now! I am a history lover in every way if English and Scottish and Irish history ♥ and this has lead to every kind of history over the years now Rome and Italy 🇮🇹 etc etc thank you
I’ve watched several docos and commentary on this topic but yours was the first one that looked into differing opinions on why he may have chosen the execution he did and why it was delayed . Lots of what ifs have been discussed about the lead up to her execution but the deed itself I have never seen discussed - it’s just always been a given that her trial was a farce and her fate was already decided and that he ordered the French executioner to give her a swift death .
Very interesting and appreciated , thank you !
PS loved the Anne of Cleves one too 😊👍
Good video, good questions, but we shall never know.
Honestly I think it was just so Henry could keep his image as the ‘Renaissance prince’. The theatrical nature of getting a swordsman all the way from France, making the death ‘neater’, and so he can tell himself he’s merciful and granting a favour. Even if he’s just fooling himself, he’s trying to make the fact he’s executing his wife into another almost chivalric story. He’s narcissistic enough he never wants to be the bad guy or involved with something that would break his fantasy.
Cromwell barely survived the annulment of Anne of Cleves... Cromwell lost his head on Tower Hill...
He made that marriage, he paid the ultimate price for its failure!
Thank you for this video. You brought up some amazing questions. It really got us thinking.
Thank you for providing new angles for the interpretation of historical facts.
As I understand it, they used a lop-sided kindling ax for executions, which can be seen in the Tower today. Why wasn't a blacksmith ordered to make a much finer instrument as is seen in so many movies?
Anne has enemies on the court, which led to her downfall. If only she was like Queen Margaery of Game of Thrones - it's the same actress who played both roles - Nat Dormer. Kidding aside, there was something poetic about King Henry choosing of a French swordsman, she was a fan of the country, hence, her head was even placed in an arrow box, which was one of Anne's gifts to him. These things were somehow connected to their relationship. An inside joke, if I'd call it. I love your takes her Doc Kat. Grazie!
Great work Kat! You make a good point about Henry simply being prepared by sending for the executioner, but I have to say by that point I feel the guilty verdict was a foregone conclusion too.
Thank you so much and I agree about the verdict but I'm not sure that execution was a forgone conclusion though. I think some (perhaps only Anne) may have thought a commuted sentence of confinement, in a convent or country house, was still a possibility. If she did think of this then I wonder when (or if) that hope died in her.
Entirely possible, of course, however Henry proved himself to be something of a master at allowing people to think he was going to act in ways that benefited them alone. I'm thinking particularly of the planned arrest of Katherine Parr - the conservatives fully believed they had brought her down, up until the moment that Henry sent the arresting guards away in a fury. With the prospect of high profile executions (even with the risk the punishment may commuted or the proposed victim fully pardoned) any ambitious courtier would start sniffing around and making requests. I would argue that they hoped for wealth and titles, because at Henry's court nothing was a surety.
@@ReadingthePast interesting point- I suppose I'm extrapolating from the narrative of Anne going from 'entirely beloved' to utterly despised! I always think that Anne of Cleves was so lucky not to be the object of Henry's passion, which meant he could afford to be magnanimous even as he rejected her. Anne didn't get the protection of precedent either, Katharine of Aragon at least got a peaceful death at ?Kenilworth?
That shift is so terrifying/fascinating, isn't it?
As an English subject, I wonder if Anne was ever fully aware of the stakes she was gambling with when she became Henry's wife? I also wonder if she thought that being anointed made her physically safe? Did she believe that it made her just as safe as she would have been if she had been the close blood relative of a foreign ruler? After all, no queen before, even those who rose up in rebellion against their husbands, had ever been put to death - do you think she may have assumed that that precedent would keep her equally safe?
I totally agree about Anne of Cleves... if anyone can be said to have won the "Game of Wives"™, it's definitely her!
I think it's particularly telling that her speech at the time of her death was in no way anti- Henry..or anti guilt. I believe she was complying with Henry's promise to protect her daughter, or at least His word that she would go unharmed, if Anne went to her death in a satisfactory fashion. or..no words against England..the trial or the King.
Elegant, forgiving last words! Ann was thinking about her daughter, Elizabeth. I believe she was innocent. Henry was no fool and neither was she. Her mistake was that she tried to control Henry. Her entire family was ostracized. Gregory Hallett claims she wasn't executed... But lived in secret. And had a son by Henry.
So many possibilities! Perhaps many, if not all shared in having some weight of the choices made. I any case, I have to say; love you, Dr. Kat!!!!
Great video... looking forward to looking at your past content.
Let's just get really honest. Upon examination of Henry's actions and dealings with others, there seems little evidence of Henry thinking of anyone other than himself. His entire life appears, from what has been recorded, a consistent flow of narcissistic acts and choices. Yes he may have dresses them up as his regal duty blah, blah blah. However the facts just don't lie. He was the Harvey Wiestein of his day!... with NO capacity then for correction.
And yes things were violently different on EVERY level. Yet his justification for his actions put the country at great, is not tragic risk time and again domestically and internationally.
He was a very large spoiled brat, with major issues. And, while this was common place for males, who were high born Henry took this to the extreme.
So, in answer to the question. I believe that the choice to execute Anne as he did was for PR purposes and the added bonus of drawing attention to the socially unacceptable French connection would not have been lost on him. Nor the court. Tragic really.
I have read previously that Henry ordered the swordsman as he was the best, and it was a small measure of mercy. This as excellent btw, thankyou.