Tea at Trianon: Anne Boleyn and Elizabeth Woodville

John Wilson Croker on Marie-Antoinette

"We have followed the history of Marie Antoinette with the greatest diligence and scrupulosity. We have lived in those times. We have talked with some of her friends and some of her enemies; we have read, certainly not all, but hundreds of the libels written against her; and we have, in short, examined her life with– if we may be allowed to say so of ourselves– something of the accuracy of contemporaries, the diligence of inquirers, and the impartiality of historians, all combined; and we feel it our duty to declare, in as a solemn a manner as literature admits of, our well-matured opinion that every reproach against the morals of the queen was a gross calumny– that she was, as we have said, one of the purest of human beings."

~from History of the Guillotine by John Wilson Croker, 1844

Edmund Burke on Marie-Antoinette

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the queen of France, then dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely there never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she had just begun to move in, glittering like a morning star full of life and splendor and joy. Oh, what a revolution....Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fall upon her, in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers! I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards, to avenge even a look which threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded...."

~Edmund Burke, October 1790

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Anne Boleyn and Elizabeth Woodville

Each refused to be a mistress so that they might be a queen, although in Elizabeth's case her king did not already have a wife (at least, not that she knew of).

May said...: I wonder if Anne had Elizabeth's example in mind?; February 9, 2011 at 11:43:00 AM EST
elena maria vidal said...: I wonder....; February 9, 2011 at 12:24:00 PM EST
Gareth Russell said...: Thanks for the link. What a wonderful blog. First comment underneath this article wasn't quite such a riotous, thigh-slapping treat, however, and unfortunately I lost the battle with keeping my cyber-temper. In fact, I lost it entirely and then decided to wallow in the defeat.

In the novel I started when I was eighteen but didn't finish, I fictionalised a setting where Anne's mother, Elizabeth Howard, served as one of Elizabeth Woodville's ladies-in-waiting in the convent at Saint Saviour during her final illness, because I've always been struck by the similarities in the two queens' story. Although there is no evidence that Elizabeth Boleyn was a maid in Elizabeth Woodville's story, she did serve her daughter, Queen Elizabeth of York. I thought it had potential to be quite interesting.; February 9, 2011 at 5:29:00 PM EST
elena maria vidal said...: Gareth, I *trembled* when I saw the comment in question and knew that you would have to respond. Can't wait to read your response!; February 9, 2011 at 5:57:00 PM EST
Lucy said...: Hi Elena:) Thanks for the link to this new blog- it's wonderful:) I suppose there are some similarities between these ladies..except that yes, Anne's king did already have a wife...
No matter how much I read though, I can't help but wonder about the whole legitimacy thereafter of British history as we know it... beginning with the King's 'important matter'- But hey, I'm no expert on the subject! thanks:); February 9, 2011 at 7:01:00 PM EST
elena maria vidal said...: Great to hear from you, Lucy! I agree....; February 9, 2011 at 7:12:00 PM EST
Gareth Russell said...: The phrase "go nuclear" alas sprang to mind.; February 9, 2011 at 8:38:00 PM EST