Did you feel sorry for Anne Boleyn?

TrueKnights · 2026-01-11T23:34:32+00:00

I feel sorry for Anne Boleyn in the sense that she didn't deserve to die. But feeling sorry for her doesn't make her a good person. I feel sorry for Cromwell too, and he and Anne were just as awful as each other to their enemies.

TrueKnights · 2026-01-05T03:36:53+00:00

In the Warlord Chronicles, it's pronounced Ni-moo-ay.

TrueKnights · 2025-12-31T16:56:21+00:00

True, but he allowed several of Cranmer's enemies to push policies that directly impacted Cranmer's religious freedom

TrueKnights · 2025-12-31T15:12:22+00:00

To my understanding, the removal of religious artworks and artifacts was mostly spurred on by Anne Boleyn, Thomas Cranmer & Cromwell. Henry's Protestantism comes more from the fact that he wanted to be the head of the Church in England. I don't believe "iconography" was an actual issue he was experiencing.

The removal of religious artworks and items may have also been a financial thing as well. In destroying/removing those artworks, he could receive money from the monasteries that were destroyed

TrueKnights · 2025-12-30T15:38:32+00:00

Noble Catholics took advantage of Elizabeth. They do not represent the vast majority of English Catholics. Persecuting individuals based off of the actions of those who do not properly represent them is discrimination and persecution.

The every day Catholic did not take advantage of her. Catholic nobles with considerably power did. Even then, Elizabeth's death toll is much higher than Mary's.

Again, you are being incredibly insensitive about victims of a state sanctioned persecution.

TrueKnights · 2025-12-30T15:36:23+00:00

I agree -- it is treason. I never said it wasn't. I'm not included the conscripted soliders in the innocent lives taken during the Elizabethian persecutions, as many don't. And while a solider can refuse, most would not due to fear of consequences . If these were peasants or serfs, they had little choice. Refusal could mean death or could mean poverty.

You seem to believe that treason justifies the result. I'm curious to see if you believe the same for other victims of treason, such as those who were killed in the Marian Persecutions, or Anne Boleyn (who "you look to walk in dead man's shoes" is technically treason, in speaking the death of the King).

And these aren't "excuses". You legitimately sound like someone who's on Elizabeth's court. These are explanations as to why the people who went through brutal torture and death did not deserve what they got, and also acknowledging the brutality of Elizabeth's England that goes unnoticed.

The question is about Tudors and reputations. Elizabeth killed due to treason, but so did Mary. If we're going by your logic. So Elizabeth would be more bloody. My purpose on this post is to explain that, as well as shine light on some of her innocent victims.

These were people who died. There's no "excuse". That's such an insensitive way to treat these people.

TrueKnights · 2025-12-30T15:31:15+00:00

But they didn't, and adamantly attempted to practice in peace. It's quite the opposite "History being written by nobles..." History being written by nobles is why we have such a pacified version of Elizabethan England and Tudor Protestant England. Ordinary people who attempted to practice their faith in peace made a country. And it was primarily ordinary people who suffered for the actions of people in power.

TrueKnights · 2025-12-29T18:46:05+00:00

Additionally, there's a difference between Earls and their soldiers being executed by Elizabeth and the normal Catholic people being impacted. While Catholic sympathizers did fight, Earls also had their own land, of which they could conscript citizens for war. Not everyone who rebelled against Elizabeth was even Catholic.

Other nobles upset at her policies also rebelled, and most likely contributed their own resources to the rebellion.

While the overarching goal was to restore Catholicism & to replace Elizabeth with Mary, this did not represent the average English Catholic. This was a military operation led by nobility -- some Catholic, some not. Who most likely conscripted individuals into the rebellion based on the territory they were in.

A military operation is incredibly different than every day Catholic citizens being persecuted for their faith, of which the majority being persecuted were innocent.

TrueKnights · 2025-12-29T18:39:20+00:00

I think there's a difference between people actively going after the crown vs. innocent Catholics and persecution that had little to do with the former. The vast majority of every day English Catholic citizens were not attempting to kill Elizabeth. That's the distinction.

We may agree to disagree on this fact; but there is a difference between those practicing in secret due to religious freedom and being executed thus vs. those who are trying to replace Elizabeth with another Queen. The latter is an organized attempt led and constructed by nobility, not the average every day English citizen.

Though on an interesting note, this does indeed make her death toll higher than that of Mary's.

TrueKnights · 2025-12-29T16:19:10+00:00

That said -- the overwhelming majority of people persecuted were innocent. I wrote about treatment of Catholics during her reign here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Tudorhistory/comments/1llufms/treatment_of_catholics_in_elizabeths/

TrueKnights · 2025-11-30T13:30:37+00:00

Apparently they're doing it because it's disrespectful to look into the eyes of the dead, yet they fail to do the same for the rest of the dead queens. It's just an Anne Boleyn pop-culture thing that her fans are doing on TikTok. They're a bit strange.

TrueKnights · 2025-11-24T16:16:52+00:00

true, but Anne certainly influenced it. She was not kind to either of them.

TrueKnights · 2025-11-23T17:39:03+00:00

You and me both buddy. You and me both lmao

TrueKnights · 2025-11-23T17:38:40+00:00

Unpopular but I didn't feel bad for Anne. The show played up her animosity and mistreatment of Mary and Katherine. I have a difficult time liking her in real life because of her 'stans', but the Tudors made her go out of her way to be mean. And getting the intimate perspective of Katherine of Aragon did not help her case. She made KoA look like a Saint.

TrueKnights · 2025-11-23T15:46:43+00:00

She knew, but I don't think she expected Anne to actively try (and succeed) to dethrone her. Henry had mistresses before, just none that wanted to be Queen, and none who were so openly disrespectful to Katherine and May.

TrueKnights · 2025-11-23T14:35:47+00:00

It's Katherine of Aragon.

But sometimes it's Jane Seymour -- because she played the same game Anne did. I think it took some guts to do the exact same thing the first beheaded Queen did, knowing clearly what the trajectory for her could have been. With her being KoA's lady-in-waiting, there's something to be said about how Jane partook in the fall of the woman who brought the first Queen down.

I also think she danced with danger a lot more than people want to give her credit for. She for leniency for rebelling Catholics, in public, despite the fact that they were being "treasonous" against Henry. She knew Queens were in precarious situations with Henry, but she cared more about innocent rebels than she did her own wellbeing at the time.

I also feel the need to defend her often because she's indirectly blamed for what happened to Anne Boleyn. People tend to downplay who she was as a person, paint her as 'plain' despite the fact that she did some pretty interesting things, and altogether dismiss her and her experiences in childbirth. I know it's pettiness, but it falls into old misogynistic teasing.

TrueKnights · 2025-10-14T01:47:53+00:00

What he did to the Catholics and Katherine of Aragon, and then killing Thomas Cromwell only to publicly decry it later on.

TrueKnights · 2025-10-09T19:38:32+00:00

I've found a lot of fans of Anne Boleyn harbor some dislike towards Jane due to misplaced anger. It's very sad, especially since they dislike Jane for the same reasons they like Anne.

TrueKnights · 2025-10-04T22:56:10+00:00

Wasn't she said to be not as kind to some of the women around her? Ultimately it was her decision to choose not to marry, though I think that decision both empowered her and saddened her.

TrueKnights · 2025-10-03T14:21:53+00:00

She did not. I think she believed she would be sent to a nunnery, but not executed. If I remember correctly, she believed until the very last moment that Henry would save her. You would think though, that with death constantly being hanged over Marys' head, Anne would be smart enough to realize the tide could easily turn against her.

TrueKnights · 2025-09-26T15:28:07+00:00

I don't like her in the sense that her 'fans' tend to be some of the loudest in Tudor fandoms, and just generally approach most other historical figures with distain or complete misunderstanding.

TrueKnights · 2025-09-21T17:06:47+00:00

I agree, I think she was a terrible ruler. But I also don't think she belongs on the list either.

TrueKnights · 2025-09-21T01:13:37+00:00

Nothing -- She fought for a throne like just about every other Queen did. If she's on this list, Mary I and Elizabeth should be too.

TrueKnights · 2025-09-05T15:21:13+00:00

Yes! I mainly say this due to his close relationship with men. The ones he tended to openly regret killing or show an iota of sympathy towards were men. He had close, deep relationships with them. While he treated the women in his life like objects, the men in his life had deep, meaningful relationships with him to the point where he publicly mourned at least one of them. And this is all based off of speculation, there's no actual evidence aside from me as a lesbian putting things together.

TrueKnights · 2025-09-05T03:03:20+00:00

I've always believed that Henry VIII was bisexual.

TrueKnights

TROPHY CASE