Category: Tudor Period

1536 - A Jousting Accident

24/1/2019

The Henry VIII of his younger days was physically handsome in body and well as in face, he was intelligent and affable. He was described by Erasmus as being

“a man of gentle friendliness, and gentle in debate” and that he “he acts more like a companion than a king.”

These traits are often forgotten, overshadowed by the Henry of later years. The change in Henry, a physical and mental decline, is attributed to a riding accident, a fall from his horse during a joust on the 24th of January of 1536. The king was unconsciousness for two hours and his courtiers thought him dead.

At the time there was no mention of any obvious injury, however, today some historians think that Henry received a blow to the front part of his head which changed his personality which in turn led to an increased tendency to be irritable and quick to temper, it also led to weight gain and ulcerated legs.

Can we judge Henry on this, can we say that man he became was purely the result of this awful accident and therefore was not wholly responsible for the tyrannical actions of his later life?

Remember though, Henry started his reign with the execution of Edmund Dudley and Richard Epsom and he had Thomas More put to death just the year before.

In the image above you can see Henry jousting in a tournament at Westminster in celebration of the birth of his son in 1511.

0 Comments

Dangerous Talk Costs Lives

15/2/2016

0 Comments

On the 13th February in 1542 Catherine Howard and Jane Boleyn were executed.

Many people believe that it was Jane Parker, the wife of George Boleyn, who was to blame for initiating the downfall of her sister in law Anne in 1536, and this may be true in part. But to be fair to Jane, there were other factors that should be taken into consideration, however I do think that Jane was a pathological meddler, for the events of 1542 bear witness to that.
In 1541, Catherine Howard had begun a physical relationship with Henry's favourite courtier, Thomas Culpepper, and Jane Boleyn went out of her way to encourage this relationship.

Catherine wrote to Culpepper in a letter that was to be all their undoing:

“praying you that you will come when my Lady Rochford is here”

If Jane had anything to do with Anne’s downfall she must have realised that she was lucky to escape in 1536, and if she didn’t, then she doesn't seem to have learnt anything from the whole affair. Jane must have known what would happen if Henry found out that she was involved with Catherine and Culpepper and when the affair was out in the open each woman blamed the other. Maybe Jane had it in for Anne and didn’t need much encouragement to tell tales or maybe she was just repeating gossip, but she walked right into the Culpepper affair with her eyes open.

I have never been able to work these women out, they were either naive or actually incredibly stupid.

Following their arrest, Jane Boleyn was imprisoned in the Tower of London and Catherine Howard at Syon Abbey. The night before her execution, Catherine is said to have spent it practicing laying her head upon the block, and Jane, she no doubt was still in the throes of a nervous breakdown.

Both women were beheaded with one blow of the executioners axe and their bodies buried in the chapel of St. Peter ad Vincula.

0 Comments

Tudor Livery Collars: Valuers don't know their Esses from their Elbows.

21/8/2015

0 Comments

Edward Montagu, was Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas and a member of Henry VIII's Privy Council. In 1546/7 Henry VIII presented Montagu with what has come to be known as the Coleridge Collar.

" a 20½oz gold judicial chain of office made up of 27 S-links interspersed with 26 knot-links, with an unenamelled Tudor rose flanked by portcullises at its centre"

The Coleridge family, who owned the collar until 2006 stated that they thought that King Henry VII had given the collar to the first Chief Justice of the Common Pleas during his reign between 1485 and 1509 and that Henry VIII gifted Montagu the chain when he took up his role as Lord Chief Justice.

Henry is thought to have given at least twenty such collars to loyal subject for 'special deeds.'

Lord Coleridge, fifth Baron of Ottery St Mary, whose family have owned the collar since it was given to John, Duke Coleridge, who served as the first Lord Chief Justice of England from 1880 until 1894 was being sold to help with family finances.

In 2006 Sotheby's auction house informed Lord Coleridge that the chain was a 17th century copy and on that basis it was put up for sale, eventually reaching the final selling price of £35,000. Two year later Lord Coleridge discovered that his family heirloom had been identified as the Tudor original and resold at Christie's for £300,000 and described as a

"fascinating piece of history, both as a work of art and also as a rare Tudor relic".

A case was brought by Lord Coleridge, who sought damages based on the difference between Sotheby's valuation and the later auction price. Coleridge, argued the London auction house should have advised him that the “Coleridge Collar” was worth more than a quarter of a million pounds, but Sotheby’s disagreed and fought Lord Coleridge’s damages claim in the High Court in London, the cost of which came to £1 million pounds.

Lord Coleridge lost his case, it was judged that the Sotheby’s expert made a

'“reasonable” decision when she said an aristocrat’s gold chain was worth £35,000 three years before it sold for £260,000"'

That is one hell of a difference!

What I find worrying about this is that two experts can look at the exact same object and come to two different conclusions.
That is fine if you are looking at something from a purely historical point of view, but it is certainly not alright when it comes to authenticating a piece or when the item is someone's property that is up for auction.

Apart from the families financial loss, it calls into question the historical expertise of valuers, surely in this case someone
got it wrong?

These collars have their origins in the insignia of a medieval house and were used as a mark of fealty, the Yorkist collar for instance used suns and roses, the lion of March and Richard III's white boar as a pendant. The Collar of Esses, brought into use by Henry VIII, has a portcullis or a Tudor Rose hanging from it, a fine example of this judicial chain of office can be seen being worn Sir Thomas More in Rowland Lockey painting seen below.

0 Comments

Lace-making

17/9/2014

0 Comments

Tudor and Elizabethan Ruffs

Lace-making is an ancient craft but it was not made in its true form until the late fifteenth and early sixteenths centuries. True lace is created when a thread is looped, twisted or braided to other threads independently and originally made out of linen, silk, gold and silver threads. Today it is often made from cotton thread or a synthetic fibre

During the Tudor era the ruff was the single largest user of lace, and
the wearing of a ruff defines the Elizabethan age. We did see ruffs during Elizabeth's fathers time, but they was just a small frills that surrounded a tall collar. In the 1560's the ruff had evolved into a large separate article of clothing tied on by strings that was introduced to England from France.

Ruffs started out as starched linen edged with lace, but by the end of the 1500's ruffs were almost entirely of lace, and because it came in narrow strips several had to be sewn together to form the nine inches it usually took to make a large ruff which had to be supported by both starch and wire frames. Ruffs, on the whole were white, but were could be coloured with vegetable dye and were either pink, yellow or sometimes mauve. A pale blue colour was popular but the Elizabeth disliked it and issued a statement which stated:

"Her Majesty's pleasure is that no blue starch shall be used or worn by any of her Majesty's subjects, since blue
was the colour of the flag of Scotland "

The year 1615 saw the beginning of the end of the large starched ruff and by 1640 it was the falling ruff that was
becoming more popular.

Interestingly, between 1570 and 1625 the fan shaped ruff with an open neck was only worn by unmarried women.

0 Comments

1536 - A Jousting Accident

Dangerous Talk Costs Lives

Tudor Livery Collars: Valuers don't know their Esses from their Elbows.

Lace-making

Tudor and Elizabethan Ruffs

Archives

Categories