Talk:Anne Boleyn/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2014

Please add http://www.historyofroyalwomen.com/anne-boleyn/anne-boleyn-mechelen/

Title: Anne Boleyn in Mechelen

to external links.

Djlancey (talk) 21:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Done — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 02:22, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Son named Edward?

Yesterday someone pointed out to me that the google feature that shows a summary of the Wikipedia information on Anne Boleyn lists her children as Elizabeth I and Edward. I thought maybe the author knew something that I didn't, maybe her stillborn/miscarried sons had a name, but for the life of me, I can't find any sources that mention that. Furthermore, if I click on "Edward", it redirects to Edward VI's Wikipedia page. If this is an honest mistake, it should be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.234.168.146 (talk) 17:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the google box identifies a child called "Edward Tudor". If you click on that it goes to pages which combine those names, most prominently Edward VI. But this is a problem with the google software, which links material from several online sources to create the "infobox", not the Wikipedia article. Paul B (talk) 14:48, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2015

Please add an external link to new wikisource article from EB1911 - {{cite EB1911|wstitle=Boleyn, Anne}}.

PS. I have been an established user for many years and was granted reviewer status in 2010, but was I recently forced to change my userID from "Diverman" - I chose "DivermanAU". See my talk page. Now I can't edit semi-protected pages. DivermanAU (talk) 03:43, 23 March 2015 (UTC) DivermanAU (talk) 03:43, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done Hope your account gets sorted. -- haminoon (talk) 08:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Downfall and execution: 1536

"The following day, Henry and Anne wore yellow, the symbol of joy and celebration in England, from head to toe, and celebrated Catherine's death with festivities." I want to note that it is uncertain whether Anne Boleyn actually wore yellow "from head to to toe". Eric Ives does state this in his biography, however, Eustace Chapuys, who despised Anne and would be glad to talk about her disrespect, makes no mention of Anne being clad in yellow and only gives a very detailed account of Henry.

There's also no evidence that yellow really was a color of mourning. Letempsviendra (talk) 15:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Letempsviendra, I can only suggest you try to fix (by attributing accounts perhaps). I don't know, someone may 'pile in' if they think you are wrong.Pincrete (talk) 07:38, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Charges of adultery, incest and treason

This subsection begins "According to author and Tudor historian Alison Weir, Thomas Cromwell plotted Anne's downfall while feigning illness and detailing the plot 20–21 April 1536." There is no citation to Alison Weir, and what on earth does "detailing the plot 20–21 April 1536" mean? I have added some tags and hope someone can tidy this up. Moonraker (talk) 16:21, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

This tendency to make such bold un-cited statements that others have to flag up, seems to me to be one of the unfortunate weaknesses of the Wikipedia principles. Look, this has remained as at present since last July, now some seven months ago. And having to supply other people's citations, guessing and researching where they came from, is a real pain in the whatsit. Time is better spent on other more constructive editing. I suggest deleting the complete short section referring to Alison Wear (an author of historical fiction and popular history?), then the next author, who is cited, covers a similar point, and Thos Cromwell can be cross-linked from there. If nobody objects within the next few weeks, I shall make this change. Okan 19:42, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I have removed questionable text as proposed by Okan and Moonraker above.Pincrete (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Anne Boleyn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101101192001/http://copperfieldreview.com/reviews/life_and_death_of_anne_boleyn.htm to http://www.copperfieldreview.com/reviews/life_and_death_of_anne_boleyn.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia style question: New style versus Old style dating

Looking at the coronation date, some other dates aswell, this article not standing alone with regard to my question: are Old style & New style, Julian & Gregorian respectively, to be noted and/or differentiated? If not, then why? If not, then being as that it's not a rule I'd assume, then I would like to argue to amend accepted policy.W124l29 (talk) 02:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Anne Boleyn's year of Birth

Why has the hobby-horse of a random American academic (that Anne was born in 1507) been given equal billing with the consensus view of 1501? Warnicke has presented her evidence and failed to convince the academic community. It is extremely unlikely that Anne was a maid-of-honour aged 5 or 6, or that she could've written the letter aged 7 (in her second language). TheMathemagician (talk) 12:52, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Of course, correct me if I am mistaken, please. I believe that you are mistaken and referring to the opposite ages, vice versa, as is apparent to me after checking the citation, that the consensus supposedly used to be AD1507 CE and an academic has supposedly proven that Anne was not a child-prodigy but rather was born in AD1501 CE.W124l29 (talk) 02:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I have just searched, and found numerous sources stating that Warnicke said 1507, in contrast to a consensus for 1501, and not a single one giving it the other way round, so it seems that the original post above was right. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:27, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Who flew into a rage?

The 'Downfall and execution' says 'Another possible cause of the miscarriage was an incident in which, upon entering a room, Anne saw Jane Seymour sitting on the lap of Henry. After flying into a rage, Henry soothed her, saying "peace be sweetheart, and all will be well."' The wording makes it sound like Henry flew into a rage and then soothed Anne, but I assume Anne flew into a rage? If so, can the wording be clarified? Sadiemonster (talk) 11:36, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Henry Percy = Anne's Husband??

In the template at the bottom of this article, Henry Percy is listed as Anne's husband. Why? Even if someone was attempting to argue canon law, if we list Percy this way, we'd have to list the Duke of Lorraine as Anne of Cleves's husband as well, and so on. Chaos would ensue.

I guess I'm just very confused as to how this ever got there or why it's stayed. Any objections to its removal? History Lunatic (talk) 06:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)History Lunatic

The template was edited to remove Percy as "Husband," then after further discussion on the template Talk page, he was removed as "Betrothed" as well because no actual pre-contract was ever proven. On 13 June user TonytheTiger undid the edit, pointing out that the article does refer to a "secret betrothal" between Anne and Percy, but we should have had discussion on whether to relist Percy as Betrothed or edit the article to reflect that said betrothal was never proven. As I said on the template Talk page, Percy's wife Mary Talbot claimed in 1532 that her marriage was invalid because Percy had a pre-contract with Anne; Percy took an oath on the sacrament in front of the Duke of Norfolk, the archbishops, and the king's cannon lawyers that there was no pre-contract. Chapuys wrote in July 1532 that the oath was taken before the king's Council. And in 1536 Percy was questioned again on the matter by Archbishop Cranmer and again swore there was no pre-contract. He and Anne may have planned to marry, but a "secret betrothal" with no contract or consummation is very different from a binding betrothal under canon law. This is an important point because if such a betrothal did exist, Percy could have been executed in 1536. Unless someone can show proof that there was a pre-contract, Percy should be removed from the template.

Discussion? History Lunatic (talk) 17:30, 25 June 2017 (UTC)History Lunatic

"A verbal contract ain't worth the paper it's written on", as Sam Goldwyn didn't quite say. You are clearly right that Percy cannot be listed as betrothed unless the majority of sources say the engagement happened. What he himself says proves nothing in a sense, what would he say? It would be good to list Percy in some capacity as involved in the story, and I wonder if a more accurate description could be found. Pincrete (talk) 08:34, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Having read the linked article, it seems an informal betrothal, or private intent to marry, took place. Mmmmmmmmm??? Pincrete (talk) 08:46, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Titles, styles, honours and arms

1501/1507 - 1532 the lady Anne Boleyn
1532-1536 the Marquess of Pembroke
1533-1536 her majesty the Queen

Hello, I am a student editor. For one of my English classes I have been assigned to edit a Wikipedia article. I have chosen to edit Anne Boleyn's article because I have always been intrigued by her story. I am planning to add a section (or subsection) dedicated to Anne's faith and spirituality. Before I make any edits, I wanted to ask any users if they have any preliminary thoughts or advice. Thank you! --Agostov77 (talk) 20:25, 16 April 2018 (UTC) Agostov77

Hello and welcome! Be sure to cite your sources and do not be upset if someone edits the section :) Looking forward to your contribution! Surtsicna (talk) 23:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Cultural legacy

The page concerning queen Anne Boleyn is a very valuable source of information on her. It could maybe improve a little with a separate part on her cultural legacy, separate from the present section "See also".

For example, I see the song "With Her Head Tucked Underneath Her Arm" mentioned under "See also', but I miss the song Anne by Dutch progressive rock group Kayak from their 1980 album Periscope life in this row.

These are but a few examples on the inspiration Anne Boleyn must have been for songs and I suspect there must be many more. For consideration.

Kind regards, Arno Luyendijk User:Sendanor 11:00, 12 July 2018 (edit)

There is already Cultural depictions of Anne Boleyn, which is linked already in "Recognition and legacy" on this article. Pincrete (talk) 12:09, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Ancestry Chart

As a genealogist I can't believe I hadn't noticed this before; I constantly look at and help edit the handy color-coded ancestry charts on Wikipedia, but hadn't noticed until now that this article ignores Anne's maternal ancestry (barring mentions in-article). There is an entire Boleyn family tree that shows more than Anne's direct Boleyn ancestors, but to see all her direct Howard ancestors you have to go to the articles on her maternal grandparents - neither her mother Elizabeth nor Elizabeth's more famous brother Thomas have an ancestry chart on their Wiki pages. In addition, the Boleyn family tree appears to be repeated in the page of each family member on it (those who have their own pages) in addition to the tree itself having its own page.

Would it not be... cleaner? ... to give this article the normal Ancestry most other articles have with links to the Boleyn tree and the Dukes of Norfolk tree? It certainly would be less confusing. History Lunatic (talk) 03:33, 19 September 2019 (UTC)History Lunatic

Wikipedia is not a genealogy website. An ancestry chart should mention those people who are discussed in biographies of the subject. I agree that the family tree presently in the article is not very good. A chart for this article must include Anne's maternal uncle. Surtsicna (talk) 08:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

~sigh~ Yes, I am aware Wikipedia is not a genealogical site, thanks. I just wondered why we have so this overly-complicated looking tree rather than the Ancestry section that is included in so very many other articles on royals we know far less about, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_of_York#Ancestry. These charts usually list any known ancestors for 3-5 generations, including those not mentioned in the subject article and regardless of whether those ancestors have their own article. With the immense entangling of families during the 15th and 16th centuries especially, these charts are of great help to anyone with an interest in history, not just genealogy. I'm looking at form and why the Howards are ignored. History Lunatic (talk) 17:18, 6 October 2019 (UTC)History Lunatic

I can't see how any 5th-generation ancestor could deserve a place in a genealogical chart more than the uncle who shaped her life and condemned her to death. Surtsicna (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I never said they were more impotant; I find ancillary ancestors immensely important from a genealogical POV as well as a historical one, but they do make a tree unwieldy. That's another discussion, but these charts are important and there is pertinent interest, or we wouldn't have so many on Wikipedia to begin with. For instance, Anne was criticized by contemporaries and historians for her low birth, but her ancestry shows she was descended from Plantagenet kings at least 3 times over. That is of historical interest to some.

My question was why such an Ancestry chart - so ubiquitous in Wikipedia articles for her peers - does not appear in an article as important as Anne's. And why her Boleyn ancestry gets such huge emphasis while her Howard ancestry is completely ignored.

While Thomas Howard is mentioned in the article for being one of the peers that tried Anne, it is not specified that he was the one who condemned her. This really should be added; you're right, it is an important fact. Cheers. History Lunatic (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2019 (UTC)History Lunatic

Rumored Descent from the House of Flanders

I have seen many websites claim that Anne was a male-line descendant of the Counts of Bolougne, through an illegitimate son of Eustace II, whose name is Geoffrey. Has anyone else heard of this connection, and if so, what are your takes regarding this route?— Preceding unsigned comment added by MoldySoup (talk • contribs) 04:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

There is a thorough discussion on Anne's roots and rumors of her roots, including the Boulogne connection, to be enjoyed here: https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/annes-roots/ History Lunatic (talk) 06:42, 6 December 2019 (UTC)History Lunatic

14 or 17 May 1536?

When was Anne Boleyn's marriage to Henry VIII annulled? It is often stated that it ended two days before her execution, on the 17 May, but it is also said that Thomas Cranmer declared the marriage void on 14 May 1536? So on which date ended her tenure as Queen of England? --Edouard2 (talk) 09:42, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello fellow user!

You are right and wrong Anne Boleyn was stripped from her title as Queen but even before her execution her ministers, Ladies and waiting, and subjects referred to her as Queen of England, or her Royal Magesty the Queen. So thus you can say she was still Queen of England even though her marriage was annulled

Talk: Marieuui|talk ]])

Adding titles/Honors of Anne Boleyn

A lot of us know Anne Boleyn was Queen Consort of England and irenland But she was also probably Lady of Ireland And I Know she was Marquess of Prembroke But it does not say it it only says Queen Consort of England.

Can you explain it?

Thank you

Hello fellow user, You seem to be confused, I can help :) The reason why Anne Boleyn is not labeled for “Marquess of Prebmoke” And Lady of Ireland is because first of all The term “Lady Of Ireland” Is a Royal peerage the never existed that lordship of Ireland is only given to a male. And to answer Marquess of Prebmoke there was no predecessor or succeeder so there would be no need to add that peerage on her list, And by the way the Marquess of Prebmoke it labled over her portrait.

Your welcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marieuui (talk • contribs) 21:11, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Greater detail

For greater detail about Henry's work, see https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/why-henry-viii-orchestrated-every-detail-anne-boleyns-execution-180976135/ . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.238.18 (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2020

Hi, I just want to add a link to “Capital punishment“ were it says Execution! Marieuui (talk) 21:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. That wouldn't really be an appropriate link, per MOS:OL. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:17, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Oy! =\ Apparently some folks have been making the rounds! In a wikipedia article about TENNIS (of all random things), there was a wikilink to 'capital punishment' for 'execution' (in reference to Anne Boleyn's execution). Like Deacon Vorbis, I also found this inappropriate, and changed the pipe to make it redirect to this page instead. Firejuggler86 (talk) 08:58, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2021

plz lemme edit ill donate 50 bucks 2001:1970:4A65:0:50F:B251:28E8:BCE5 (talk) 18:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. Terasail^[✉] 19:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-Protected Edit Request: Add a contemporary woman's assessment of Anne Boleyn

I want to add this to the "Recognition and legacy" section, which lacks any assessment of Anne by a woman. Although I have been reading about the period since the 1960s, this comment took me back as a great summary.

Claire Foy, the actress who played Anne in the 2015 Wolf Hall Series I, assessed her character and achievement: "For the amount that she achieved, and given the limited role of women in her time, Anne really had massive balls - bigger balls, I think, than anyone at Henry's court. If she had been born in a man's body, I think she would have made an extraordinary ruler."

I don't know how to format the citation.

Sherna Noah, "Wolf Hall star Claire Foy reveals she was emotional filming Anne Boleyn death scene." Mirror 27 Jan 2015 retrieved Jan 22 2021

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/wolf-hall-star-claire-foy-5048698 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:30C0:6E50:6049:8C1B:5442:587A (talk) 15:48, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Sorry, but UK tabloid the Daily Mirror is not generally regarded as a reliable source. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC) p.s. if she had been born in a man's body, I think we might assume she would have been a man. But how big would his balls have been??

"quartered", in a place famous for torture?

"In 1864, Captain (later Major General) J. D. Dundas of the 60th Rifles regiment was quartered in the Tower of London." This reads as if Dundas were cut into four pieces.77Mike77 (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Where she married Henry VIII: Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2021

Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII were married at Whitehall Palace, not Westminster Abbey. Emysavage (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

The article does not say where they were married - it says she was crowned at Westminster Abbey "Catherine was formally stripped of her title as queen and Anne was consequently crowned queen consort on 1 June 1533 in a magnificent ceremony at Westminster Abbey". I have always understood that there is doubt as to WHERE the secret marriage ceremony took place (possibly in France even).Pincrete (talk) 15:31, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit Request

In the article, it is said "In the end he had to return with a conditional dispensation, which Wolsey insisted was technically insufficient.[61] Henry now had no choice but to put his great matter into Wolsey's hands". Not now, not quite. This isn't modern history, here. THEN had no choice is more like it. May this edit please be made, or restrictions be loosened. Whatever's easiest 👍سلامتحية (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

If I might ask, why did you create the large white space? In any case, your edit has been made.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)--سلامتحية (talk) 02:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Anne's annulment in the infobox

Several times recently, the 'annulment' of Anne's marriage to Henry has been inserted in the infobox. Is the inclusion of this info in the infobox useful and clear, or does it serve to confuse matters?

Just to refresh, as the main article text makes clear, a few days after Anne's trial, that is two days before her execution, her marriage to Henry was declared null. Why this was done isn't made explicit, but presumably it is legally simpler, or 'looks better' to decapitate an ex-wife and ex-Queen. So the facts are clear, the marriage ended in annulment legally speaking two days before her execution - though the annulment was simply 'clearing the path' to enable her execution which had been decided at her trial a few days earlier.

My argument is that simply recording the fact of the annulment and its year (which is how the date shows up in the infobox), confuses, rather than clarifies the circumstances of the end of her marriage and life. That the infobox is for clear, simple, unambiguous facts and that it is clearer to NOT record the annulment. Thoughts? Pincrete (talk) 06:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Date of birth

Should we narrow the birth range? We know she was born sometime between 1501-1505 for several reasons:

1. Her mother’s jointure was settled in 1501 (these were always done the year of or after her marriage) 2. Her father wrote that a child was born each year while they were in poverty - as his poverty ended in 1505, they all must’ve been born between 1501 and 1505. Dancingtudorqueen (talk) 04:36, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Missing "In popular culture" section

Where is "In popular culture" section? Jane Seymour has this section so Anne Boleyn deserves it also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.24.80.227 (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

There's a whole article on it: Cultural depictions of Anne Boleyn. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:50, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Re: New AMC Ann Boleyn show

May need to comment that Anne Boleyn was not a black person. For educational purposes may need to refer to her birth and hereditary genetics. May need to comment on pop culture artistic woke nature of having a black actress play Ann Boleyn. As a history teacher it is very annoying. 2600:1700:A890:3160:1884:9A5F:56F1:886F (talk) 17:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

I would have though the lead image here gives a petty clear impression of her appearance and ethnicity? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit request

In the sentence "Henry and Anne formally married on 25 January 1533...", the "formally" is unneeded. Please delete the word. Thank you. --76.14.122.5 (talk) 05:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Although it would normally be redundant, in fact the word 'formally' is needed here, for reasons explained in the article text about the two marriage ceremonies held.Sbishop (talk) 08:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Per Sbishop. --Ferien (talk) 09:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2022

I want to add a reference. Marleymikelajaziahkawena (talk) 01:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. —Sirdog (talk) 01:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2022

HistoricalWyd (talk) 00:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

==Ancestry==

Ancestors of Anne Boleyn/Archive 4

16. Sir Geoffrey Boleyn (died 1440) 8. Sir Geoffrey Boleyn 17. Alice Bracton 4. Sir William Boleyn 18. Thomas Hoo, Baron Hoo and Hastings 9. Anne Hoo 19. Elizabeth Wychingham 2. Thomas Boleyn, Earl of Wiltshire 20. James Butler, 4th Earl of Ormond 10. Thomas Butler, 7th Earl of Ormond 21. Joan Butler, Countess of Ormond 5. Lady Margaret Butler 22. Richard Hankford 11.Anne Hankford 23. Anne Montagu (d.1457) 1. Anne Boleyn 24.Sir Robert Howard 12. John Howard, 1st Duke of Norfolk 25. Margaret Mowbray 6. Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk 26. William Moleyns (died 1425) 13. Catherine Moleyns 27. Margery Walesborough 3. Elizabeth Boleyn, Countess of Wiltshire 28. Sir Philip Tilney 14. Sir Frederick Tilney 29. Isabel Thorpe 7. Elizabeth Tilney, Countess of Surrey 30. Sir Lawrence Cheney 15. Elizabeth Cheney, Lady Say 31. Elizabeth Cockayne

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done It was pretty obvious to me that the superior {{ahnentafel}} code was meant to replace the scanty Family tree section. Peaceray (talk) 01:09, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I've undone this as it is over-detailed and not cited. A family tree showing her important relationships is actually more informative than a generic ancestry table, and is usually what is shown in a biography. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

“Lady” Elizabeth Howard

Why are we still referring to her as “Lady Elizabeth Howard”? Yes, her father became a Duke later in life, but after she became “Lady Elizabeth Boleyn”. Her father had been restored as Earl of Surrey in 1489; and was created (or restored as) Duke of Norfolk in 1514 (2nd Duke of the Howard creation). In modern times a daughter of an Earl uses the courtesy title “Lady”, sure, but in Tudor times if your name was “Lady Elizabeth Howard”, that signified you were the wife of a Howard who had been knighted or above. Her mother, born Elizabeth Tilney, would have been known for a short time as “Lady Elizabeth Howard” from 1478 until her husband was created Earl of Surrey in 1489. Can I take out the “Lady”? Lady Meg (talk) 04:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thomas was also Earl of Surrey from 1483-1485 as well. So, correction, from 1478-1483, Elizabeth Tilney was known as “Lady Elizabeth Howard”. Lady Meg (talk) 07:18, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

"Early Years" subpart - Anne Boleyn's ancestors

In the "Early Years" part, the article states that "great-great-great-grandparents included a Lord Mayor of London, a duke, an earl, two aristocratic ladies and a knight. One of them, Geoffrey Boleyn, had been a mercer and wool merchant before becoming Lord Mayor". This is incorrect: Geoffrey Boleyn (the Lord Mayor of London) was Anne's great-grandfather and not her great-great-great-grandfather. Her other great-grandfathers were (in the order mentioned in the article), a duke (John Howard, 1st Duke of Norfolk), an earl (Thomas Butler, 7th Earl of Ormonde), and a knight (Sir Frederick Tilney). One her great-grandmothers, Anne Hoo (the wife of Geoffrey Boleyn), was the daughter of a peer (Thomas Hoo, Baron Hoo and Hastings), while the other three belonged the gentry families. In the article, "great-great-great-grandparents" in the sentence mentioned above should be replaced by "great-grandparents". 85.28.126.58 (talk) 14:44, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2023

i just want to add the cause of death, she got decapitated. SoniliaUwU (talk) 13:46, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Per the the lead, "The circumstances of her marriage and of her execution by beheading for treason and other charges made her a key figure in the political and religious upheaval that marked the start of the English Reformation." – Callmemirela 🍁 14:04, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

The age of Anne Boleyn

The age of Anne Boleyn (born 1501 or 1507) is a topic so researched I think it’s worth its own article. I have been been interested in the question for over twenty years. Granted, the answer is not conclusive, but the preponderance of weak evidence favours 1507 over 1501. Most recently, I am influenced by the following: https://onthetudortrail.com/Blog/anne-boleyn/guest-articles/the-age-of-anne-boleyn/

The problem, now, is that with “1501 or 1507” being given, or chronological order, is with Wikipedia derivative sources running with the first and ignoring the uncertainty. Google informs, with seeming confidence, that Anne Boleyn married Henry VIII when she was 31 years old. Their courtship was seven years. Did it begin when she was 18, or when she was 24?

Can anyone help? What are the most reputable sources for discussing the age of Anne Boleyn? SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:21, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

To establish Anne's age both Starkey (ISBN 0701172983) and Ives (ODNB) draw on the certain year of 1513 when Anne was dispatched as lady-in-waiting to Archduchess Margaret at the court of Machelen—Anne's father Thomas had made the lady's acquaintance when he was ambassador to the Netherlands from 1512 to 1513. Margaret accepted aristocratic "pupils" from all over Europe, at the age of 13 or so, as ladies in waiting. Anne wouldn't have gone at age 6. 1521 fits neatly with the date of Thomas's marriage in 1520—Anne was the second child.--AntientNestor (talk) 06:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Anne’s nickname was Nan or Nanny Boleyn. I think that would be quite interesting Oric22 (talk) 10:45, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Chateau Vert

Doesn’t Chateau Vert deserves its own page? We have Field of the Cloth of Gold, so why not this pageant? There’s no shortage of information- it happened Shrove Tuesday 1522, at York Palace, arranged by Cardinal Wolsey. Eight women dressed as Beauty, Honour, Perseverance, Kindness, Constance, Bounty, Mercy, and Pity. Anne was Perseverance, Mary was Kindness. They were guarded by eight boys who represented Danger, Disdain, Jealousy, Vindictiveness, Scorn, Malebouche and Strangeness. Eight men who were dressed as Amoress, Nobleness, Youth, Attendance, Loyalty, Pleasure, Gentleness and Liberty asked to free the ladies from a tin foil castle. Henry refused, and so the men stormed it. Then, a banquet with dancing. So why can’t Chateau Vert have its own page? We know lots about it! Oric22 (talk) 07:12, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

The Field of the Cloth of Gold had international political significance, which is hardly the case with the York Palace event, which was just a court entertainment. If you believe there is enough sourced material there is nothing to stop you initiating a page on it.Sbishop (talk) 07:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

It was to celebrate Charles V’s engagement to Princess Mary. Oric22 (talk) 09:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Just to note that "in honour of the imperial ambassadors" links to a list, presumably specific ambassadors were honoured, but I don't have access to the sources to find out which. Pincrete (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to remove that link; Josephine Wilkinson states that these were envoys from Charles, sent over for negotiations relating to his betrothal to Princess Mary, rather than the regular Spanish ambassador.

References

--AntientNestor (talk) 07:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@Oric22:According to the sources, this was the usual Shrovetide celebration, to which the ambassadors were invited, rather a special celebration of the betrothal.--AntientNestor (talk) 08:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Ives's biography

Firstly, apologies for messing up the Harvard referencing. The titles in the Bibliography are wrong: Ives's 1986 and 2004 editions are significantly different and the citations need to be sorted—shouldn't be too difficult as most will be to the 2004 edition. There has been a maintenance tag requesting this for three years. Watch this space over the next couple of days.--AntientNestor (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Now fixed—I've followed WP:AGE MATTERS and lost the 1986 version.--AntientNestor (talk) 14:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Queen Anne?

Is there a reason why we never call her that? 99.228.43.228 (talk) 23:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

"Anne Boleyn (/ˈbʊlɪn, bʊˈlɪn/;[7][8][9] c. 1501 or 1507 – 19 May 1536) was Queen of England from …" is the opening sentence, so we are clear that she WAS Queen for a period. History refers to ALL of Henry's wives mainly by their 'maiden' names - or titles for Catherine of Aragon, presumably for reasons of clarity. There is no reason why we could not call her 'Queen Anne' for the period she held that title.Pincrete (talk) 07:41, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Many Queen Consorts tend to be referred to by their titles or maiden names - Joan of Navarre, Catherine of Valois, Margaret of Anjou, Elizabeth Woodville, Anne Neville, Elizabeth of York, Catherine of Aragon, Anne of Cleves, Anne of Denmark - sometimes with "Queen" added, but often without. In that there have been a number of Queen Consorts called Anne (including two married to Henry VIII), plus one Queen Regnant, calling her Anne Boleyn makes it clear which Queen Anne is referred to. RGCorris (talk) 09:14, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2024

Please add the category Category:Mothers of monarchs. 2601:249:9301:D570:9012:4870:54CD:5F95 (talk) 23:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Liu1126 (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)