We must also take into account Wyatt’s own motivations in writing his biography. Jane’s execution alongside another queen in 1542 might have made it easy to reflect upon the past with biased hindsight. Much had happened since Queen Anne and George’s deaths and some of it likely colored her perception. Even if Lady Zouche spoke as honestly as possible, there is no way to prove that she remembered everything exactly right. He was not a witness to Anne’s life or death and his chief witness, Lady Zouche, was well into her seventies by the time she shared her memories with him. Wyatt didn’t even begin his biography until the late 1580s – nearly fifty years after the events. In order to accept Wyatt’s assertions, it has to be proven that his witnesses were telling the truth, and that is nearly impossible. Humans are notoriously unreliable witnesses. However, upon closer examination, the certainty begins to waver. At first blush, the younger Wyatt’s biography would seem to be the perfect primary source he would have the best resources and be in a position to know the truth. In addition, the author included recollections from some of the ladies who served Anne, primarily Anne Gainsford Zouche.

His work seems to have taken shape based upon legends passed down in his family, neighbors of the Boleyns in Kent.

The same Thomas Wyatt who went to the Tower along with Anne and the six other men accused alongside her. In his biography of Anne Boleyn, Wyatt calls Jane a “wicked wife, accuser of her own husband, even to the seeking of his own blood.” Later historians have put great stock in his assessment for several reasons, but chief among them is because he was the grandson of Thomas Wyatt. No, the first appearance of Jane’s involvement comes much later, in a work by George Wyatt. At least not until 1541, when the crown began its investigation into Katherine Howard, but the events of 1536 are not mentioned there. In fact, there is no record that she was even interrogated at all. So, where does this story come from? There are no transcripts of her interrogation. However, based upon the evidence, that’s precisely what it is – a story. It makes for a great story, doesn’t it? It has all the inherent drama and turmoil every writer needs. Yet, the end result is always the same – Jane runs to her savior, either Lord Secretary Cromwell or the Duke of Norfolk, with news of her husband’s deviant behavior and justice is quickly served. Her motivations vary with each portrayal: jealousy, anger, fear. King Henry VIII and Thomas Cromwell may have been responsible for Queen Anne’s death, but when it comes to George, the blame falls squarely on Jane’s shoulders. Over the last five centuries, it’s become vogue to pin the lion’s share of George Boleyn’s downfall on his supposedly vile and grasping wife. Well – she’s some version of Lady Rochford – most likely a version that her contemporaries would not even recognize. You know her name – it may as well be synonymous with evil. She’s vicious and cruel she’s out for revenge. “Do you know what George and Anne do behind closed doors?” “I’ve got a secret for you,” she whispers, her grey eyes dancing with barely contained delight. If you’ve read Tudor historical fiction or watched The Tudors, you’ve seen her she’s just over there, lurking in the shadows and peering through keyholes. _ This Holbein drawing is believed to be Jane Parker Boleyn, Viscountess Rochford. In this highly thought-provoking article, Adrienne Dillard attempts to dispell a host of potential misconceptions. Are these characterizations from a host of historians, novelists, and playwrights fair to her legacy? Throughout history, Jane Boleyn, Viscountess Rochford, commonly was painted as largely responsible for providing Thomas Cromwell and his agents with the witnessed information needed to bring charges against her husband - and by extension, some of the charges lodged against Queen Anne Boleyn. With Anne Boleyn already found guilty of all charges, it was impossible not to find Rochford guilty, as well. Thomas Cromwell made a foolproof decision to seal Rochford’s fate, however. As you will learn more comprehensively from Claire Ridgway at The Anne Boleyn Files, his defense was so compelling few in attendance believed Boleyn could be found guilty based on the evidence presented. Our Lord of Rochford did not acquiesce to his fate.

Today in English History,, George Boleyn, Viscount Rochford, was tried and condemned to die at King’s Hall by the same jury that also condemned his sister, Queen Anne Boleyn, earlier the same day.

Mercy black legend