Category: Uncategorized

I loved your analysis of Henry VIII and his former mistresses! The idea that he didn’t support them is complete hogwash, I can’t stand it when people push narratives counter to the facts. You did an excellent job refuting those claims.

alicehoffmans:

Thank you! 

My main issue was that the claim seemed to rest on the assertion that the Carey children had Henry’s paternity; and as that’s not something we have definitive proof of; it’s not the strongest argument.  

I’ve also read that the annual pension of 100 pounds to Mary Boleyn after the death of her husband was a “paltry sum” for the wife of a nobleman; but I assume it was equitable because he wasn’t a very high-ranking one? It’s true he was the third cousin of Henry VIII, but he was only a knight and a courtier. Had Anne not taken wardship of her son, I could see her possibly needing more than that, but as Mary didn’t have to pay for his education, it seems a fair sum. 

In comparison, George Boleyn, who was married in the year 1526, was awarded an extra £20 a year for “young Boleyn for him and his wife to live on”. In addition, he made £80 a year for his position as Royal Cupbearer. Thus, Mary’s annual pension was equal to that of her brother’s that year, or at the very least a year not that far off, before he was titled that year as Esquire of the Body and Master of the King’s Buckhounds.

Also, idk what they made in the 1528, but under Edward VI a Gentleman of the Privy Chamber made £50 a year. Carey was a Gentleman of the Privy Chamber; so he definitely didn’t make more than that sum a year. Not sure what an Esquire of the Body made (as Carey was also one of those), but am also assuming it wasn’t much more than that…which would put his annual salary, generously, around £100 – which is exactly the amount Mary Boleyn was granted. 

I loved your analysis of Henry VIII and his former mistresses! The idea that he didn’t support them is complete hogwash, I can’t stand it when people push narratives counter to the facts. You did an excellent job refuting those claims.

Thank you! 

My main issue was that the claim seemed to rest on the assertion that the Carey children had Henry’s paternity; and as that’s not something we have definitive proof of; it’s not the strongest argument.  

I’ve also read that the annual pension of 100 pounds to Mary Boleyn after the death of her husband was a “paltry sum” for the wife of a nobleman; but I assume it was equitable because he wasn’t a very high-ranking one? It’s true he was the third cousin of Henry VIII, but he was only a knight and a courtier. Had Anne not taken wardship of her son, I could see her possibly needing more than that, but as Mary didn’t have to pay for his education, it seems a fair sum. 

In comparison, George Boleyn, who was married in the year 1526, was awarded an extra £20 a year: to “young Boleyn, for him and his wife to live on”. In addition, he made £80 a year for his position as Royal Cupbearer. Thus, Mary’s annual pension was equal to that of her brother’s that year, or at the very least a year not that far off, before he was titled that year as Esquire of the Body and Master of the King’s Buckhounds.

autrenecherche:

Henry VIII: Privy Purse Expences. 

June. Quarter’s wages to John Hawes and Dyso, watermen, 10s. each. 4th. Reward to the servant of the chancellor of France, for two tables, 50 cr. 5th. To two of lady Barkeley’s servants, for bringing hawks to the King, 30s. To a servant of the mayor of London, for bringing cherries to lady Anne, 6s. 8d. 

Four bows for lady Anne, 13s. 4d. To Walter Walshe, to pay the tailor and skinner for stuff for lady Anne, and to a printer, for books for the King, 59l. 18s.

[ Pages 747-762: Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 5, 1531-1532.]