Anne Boleyn - A Role Model?

Anarchyskat7 has stated things in a much more eloquent fashion than I could, so I will try not to repeat her words!

Not that Anne was necessarily immoral. It's just that if you look at her as a role model, it's hard to see the morality in her LIFE (not her herself, as it's possible she was a very moral person).

I’m not sure what you mean here – she was a moral person but lacked morality in her life? If by this you mean she was a complicated individual who was neither ‘good’ or ‘bad’, than I agree. She was human and the fact that she had shortcomings (and in my opinion not horrendous ones) are one of the things I like best about her.


I find Anne Boleyn to be the most interesting sixteenth-century figure. She was a diverse personality; she could be spiteful, temperamental; she spoke her mind even when it was not pragmatic to do so and appears to have fully believed in the legitimacy of union to Henry and was indifferent to those who did not recognise this. Yet she was extremely brave; when taking up a cause, stuck with it; often was more hardworking than her husband and had an impressive bout of confidence. In general she was a remarkable consort (it is noteworthy, for example, that during her queenship the King’s and Queen’s apartments were placed closer together and the consort was allowed better access to the monarch). Of course I can only speak about my own perception of Anne and why I like her. The historical figures that I am interested in and like do need to be perfect paragons of virtue. In fact I am often fascinated in those who were pretty much disliked by the majority of their contemporaries and/or by most historians! I like the fact that Anne Boleyn had many character flaws; I like the fact that she still evokes such debate today and historians continue to focus upon her Queenship and the details of her downfall. But overall I like her, regardless of her tantrums and her sharp tongue. I find it hard to completely assert that she is my role model; it is hard to fully affiliate one’s self with a person who faced such radically different circumstances. But would I wish for a bit of Anne’s confidence and determination? Oh, definitely!

You're right that I may be going a bit too far with blaming Mary's acts as Bloody Mary on Anne, but I actually don't think it's that far-fetched. Psychologically, it makes a lot of sense. When you hate someone very much - and there's no doubt Mary loathed Anne Boleyn, possibly more than anyone else in the world - anything you associate with that person (such as the Protestant Reformation) you will hate as well. But I'm perfectly willing to concede I might be wrong about that. Still doesn't excuse Anne's treatment of Mary.

I could ramble on about this issue all day, so I will try to keep it short . I’m extremely interested in the life and reign of Mary I and have observed that perceptions Mary can never been fully balanced, particularly in regards to her involvement in the renewal of the heresy laws during her reign. Mary’s dislike for Protestants was due to the offence made towards her faith; not because of Anne Boleyn. Obviously Mary was offended by those who had been involved in her father’s break from Rome and the dissolution of his marriage to her mother and had of course the whole thing never occurred she would not have persecuted as many individuals. But Mary’s main grievance was with those who denied the Catholic mass. She found this horrendous and completely intolerable. She was of course not alone on such a viewpoint; her father also persecuted individuals who rejected transubstantiation. But again, the mass was the crux of the matter. Alongside that were the obvious political grievances Mary had with Protestants -they were her natural opponents and like her fellow Tudor monarchs, she was capable of dealing with her political opponents in a decisive manner.

I am not denying that Mary could be capable of pettiness and having vengeful tendencies. Take for example the case of Thomas Cranmer, who had actually recanted his beliefs but was still killed. And according to the Venetian ambassador, Mary raised the subject of Anne Boleyn a few times just in order to insult her character. But in regards to Anne Boleyn, that was about it. Mary was far more concerned with Anne’s daughter and the reformists who were actually still present.

Mary was a complex figure – we can feel sympathy for her and at the same time feel exasperated over her actions (like Anne Boleyn!). I think historians need to work towards destroying the ‘Bloody Mary’ myth whilst simultaneously rejecting the extensive sympathetic revisionist approach (which admittedly is not going down well with the bulk of historians). But importantly I think it is fair to point out that Mary was a pretty smart individual who was deeply involved in the policies of her own reign, thus holds a lot of responsibility for what occurred. So she was behind the successes and the failures (and there were some successes!).





‘Noli me tangere; for Caesar's I am’

reply share

add reply

formatting help