The Devonshire Manuscript & its place in history

An example of early 16th century intellectual entertainment, or a seditious text?

Henry VIII’s marital history has been picked apart by so many historians of varying disciplines and writers of fiction, all with varying degrees of insight, to the point that some might think there is very little more to say about it, especially on the subject of Anne Boleyn.

Over this past year I have had the privilege of talking to Professor John Guy and his wife the historian Julia Fox about the early lives of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. It was at Anne’s court that the manuscript came into being. I have also interviewed Assistant Professor Rebecca Quossmore about the content of the Devonshire Manuscript and the people associated with it.  In addition, I have had the pleasure of talking to fellow art historian, Dr Kate Heard, curator of the Royal Collection Trust’s exquisite exhibition of Holbein’s work that features the Germain maestro’s sketches of many people associated with the court of Henry VIII, including some of those who were responsible for the manuscript.

What is the Devonshire manuscript and why all the fuss?  This document  is a collection of verses held in the British Library (Additional Ms 17492).  It was written in the 1520s and 30s and is generally accepted to have been compiled by three women who formed part of Anne Boleyn’s court.  These were Mary Shelton, Mary Fitzroy (née Howard) and Margaret Douglas.^[i] At the end of the 1530s the manuscript eventually ended up in the hands of Mary Shelton (RCIN 912227 below) who became the poster girl for the 2023/24 exhibition of the Royal Collection Trust’s exhibition “Holbein at the Tudor Court’, held at the Queen’s Gallery, Buckingham Palace. 

The contributors copied fragments of poetry by Chaucer (died 1400) and Thomas Hoccleve (1368 – 1426), and the there are various anonymous poems that have been written by these women.  There are possibly poems by Sir Thomas Wyatt – even though these were not composed specifically for the book. Other poets within Anne Boleyn’s close circle were Thomas Clere (died 1545) and Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey (1515/16 – 1547) son of Thomas Howard 3^rd Duke of Norfolk, and occasionally Sir Thomas Wyatt. 

This document has been of significant interest to academics and scholars of English literature and is also referred to in Hilary Mantel’s “Wolf Hall” and “Bring Up the Bodies”.  While Mantel’s trilogy is a work of fiction, she has taken the bare bones of history and dressed them in such a way as to bring the story of the king’s close advisor, Thomas Cromwell, to life.  What is it about the Devonshire manuscript that still fascinates historians, scholars of early modern literature and novelists today?  Perhaps it it is the ambiguity of the subjects and intended meanings of the poems that can be interpreted in a way to be among the evidence Cromwell required to bring about the downfall of Henry VIII’s second wife. 

John Guy and Julia Fox’s exploration of the early life of both Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII in their book, Hunting the Falcon, was undertaken during the pandemic. Despite the problems accessing foreign archives, the French lockdowns did not coincide with the English ones, which meant the archivists digitised original documents that had been discovered by John and Julia.  The analysis of these newly discovered records  expand our knowledge of Anne’s early life at foreign courts and how three women of noble blood ran their own courts influenced what type of court Anne wanted when she rose to prominence with Henry VIII.  

Hunting the Falcon opens with the execution of Anne. Having started with the consequence of Anne’s ambition, the book goes on to examine the early lives of the king and his second wife.  How, as a young girl, Anne travelled to Mechlen and joined the court of Margaret of Austria, Regent of the Netherlands in 1513 as one of the Regent’s filles d’honneur.   This group included other young women from Germany, Spain, France and the Low Countries.  These young girls were allowed to attend the lessons given to the archduchess’s nieces, Eleanor who became queen of Portugal then France, Isabel – the future queen of Denmark, and Marie who married Louis II of Hungary & Bohemia and later succeeded her aunt Margaret as Regent of the Netherlands. 

Not only did Anne receive a good education at Mechlen, she was surrounded by Margaret of Austria’s vast collection of paintings, tapestries, books, objects d’art, and devotional objects. Apart from learning to speak French Mechlin is where Anne first learned the art of power dressing, how to dance, to play musical instruments and engaged in or watched masques. It is also where Anne first learned the art of courtly love – the chivalric code that followed a strict set of rules.  Knights were warriors who were expected to be pious and have immaculate manners. They respected women and in the popular romances loved the woman of their dreams from afar and accepted the fact that love may be unrequited.

Margaret of Austria was well aware that courtly love could be fraught with sexual temptation, so put pen to paper laying out the standard of behaviour she expected from her young ladies if they were approached by men whose only intention was to have their ‘wicked way’.

Trust in those who offer you service?

Unless you first use your head, my demoiselles,

You’ll discover yourselves joining all those who’ve been deceived.

They choose for their smooth talk

Words softer than the tenderest of virgins

Trust in them?

In their hearts they harbour many tricks to deceive,

And then when they’ve had their wicked way

Everything will be as if it never happened.

Trust in them?^[ii]

From 1515 until her return to England in 1520 Anne spent time at the French court with Queen Claude of France, the daughter of Louis XII and Anne of Brittany.  Despite the fourteen year old Queen Claude being the offspring of the king and queen of France, she was married to her cousin François who, according to Sallic law, was the next in line to the French throne.^[iii]  Claude was a pious young woman and her relationship with her husband was not a love match, but she provided him with many children and ignored his romantic dalliances. 

Despite the couple having a working relationship, Claude’s age was against her for any kingly trust to be placed in her hands. That privilege was placed in the king’s mother, Louise de Savoie, and his sister, Marguerite de Navarre.  Marguerite’s salon was described as the New Parnassus, the mythological home of the Greek Muses where music and poetry thrived.  Anne Boleyn had arrived in France well-schooled in the behaviour expected in these salons.  On her return to England she joined Queen Katharine of Aragon’s court that was equally strictly run as those she had experienced at Mechlin and France.  Unlike those foreign salons, Queen Katherine’s was a totally feminine enclave only permitting entry to the queen’s own officers and of course her husband, Henry VIII.

As Anne rose to prominence and established her own court, she determined it should be along similar lines to the French salons where the sexes mixed and where poetry and music were performed and intellectual discussions took place.  The only space the men were forbidden to enter were the queen’s bedchamber, or her private space where she wrote and where the queen’s gold and silver plate were on display declaring her status. Unlike Margaret of Austria, Queen Claude and Marguerite, Anne did not manage to keep the same strict control over the young women of her court in the same way as those noble women she emulated. 

The women of Anne’s court included her cousin Mary Shelton, Lady Mary Fitzroy (née Howard) (RCIN 912212 below right) and

Lady Margaret Douglas – daughter of Margaret Tudor and her second husband, Archibald Douglas, 6^th Earl of Angus. All three were very much younger than Queen Anne.  However, the queen was not in total control of other women who were appointed to her salon by the king.  There were those whose loyalties lay with Queen Katharine of Aragon and these women would disclose who was close to the queen, what was said or what subjects were being discussed to those who would like to see the king’s new love interest removed.

Rebecca Quossmore’s examination of the text of the Devonshire manuscript throws an interesting light on how much of the poetry recorded in the document was anonymous. Mary Fitzroy, Mary Shelton and Margaret Douglas collated and circulated the manuscript and as the document was pass around others added their own contributions. These seem to be mainly quotes from poets of the 15^th century, but it is thought some may have been by Sir Thomas Wyatt, Thomas Howard and Henry, Earl of Surrey.  Quossmore examines how the king’s attempts at poetry were also discussed and considered by some as being plodding (at best). The royal poems were not included within the pages of the manuscript, but Anne’s enemies would have reported any discussion that inferred a slur or mocking of the king’s poetic skill, or any other skill Henry may have thought himself a virtuoso.  

But was this really a manuscript of sedition, hiding secret passions for the queen as suggested by Mantel in Wolf Hall and Bring Up the Bodies?   

Thomas Wyatt had been away in Italy serving as a diplomat and while there had become enamoured of the work of the fourteenth century poet, scholar and diplomat, Francesco Petrarch.  Petrarch’s sonnets and themes of unrequited love were based on his own devotion to the married Laura, and captured Wyatt’s imagination.  Wyatt’s use of Petrarchan themes are open to alternative interpretation depending on the reader’s mindset, and at times appears to veer close to suggesting he was in love with the queen.  Wyatt took Petrarch’s sonnet 190 and turned it into what appears to be a poem by a lovelorn swain for an unattainable love. 

Whoso list to hunt, I know where is an hind, 

But as for me, hélas, I may no more. 

The vain travail hath wearied me so sore, 

I am of them that farthest cometh behind. 

Yet may I by no means my wearied mind 

Draw from the deer, but as she fleeth afore 

Fainting I follow. I leave off therefore, 

Sithens in a net I seek to hold the wind. 

Who list her hunt, I put him out of doubt, 

As well as I may spend his time in vain. 

And graven with diamonds in letters plain 

There is written, her fair neck round about: 

Noli me tangere, for Caesar’s I am, 

And wild for to hold, though I seem tame.

The last six lines appear to refer to the queen, but by saying “Whoso list to hunt, I know where is an hind ,” it could be interpreted that Wyatt was referring to Mistress Boleyn.  By writing “I put him out of doubt” was Wyatt referring obliquely to his time in Italy as a diplomat attempting to get papal approval for the king’s divorce?

The final two lines,”Noli me tangere” translates as ‘do not touch me’ and are the same words that Christ said to Mary Magdalene outside the tomb on the first Easter Sunday.  Holbein’s painting of this scene was created in England during his first time in England, but for whom is unknown.^[iv]

Wyatt’s penultimate line states “For Caesar’s I am” and one interpretation is that Anne was not only married, but an anointed queen, therefore in the eyes of God she is now indissolubly one with the king.  Another idea is that the woman Wyatt is referring to was the king’s mistress and without a name she could have been any one of several women alleged to have caught the king’s eye.

Petrarch’s version ends with the words, “

“Let No one touch me,” she bore 

written with diamonds and topazes around her lovely neck.

“It has please my Caesar to make me free.”   

Petrarch writing about an unrequited love, such as his own for the married woman, Laura.  

Perhaps those discussing Wyatt’s poem and comparing it to Petrarch’s, chose to conclude that Wyatt’s poem referred to the queen.  To suggest that Wyatt’s poem is about Queen Anne is far too simplistic as his ambiguity makes it impossible to say to whom Wyatt was referring.  It is possible the reference was to Mary Shelton, the main contributor and editor of the Devonshire manuscript, but who may have also been the king’s mistress!  It is also debated that her sister Margaret may have been the king’s mistress, but either way, the Shelton girls were on the king’s radar.  

Like many at the Henrician court Sir Thomas Wyatt also sat for Holbein (RCIN 912250 below). 

I have known his face from my computer screen for many years, but all works of art lose something in digitisation.  Coming face to face with the original sketch of England’s first great poet since Chaucer was fascinating as his face fairly crackles with anger.  But what had caused him to look so cross!  Did Holbein capture a momentary glance of irritation? Wyatt’s own tragic story is beautifully told by Susan Brigden in “The Heart’s Forest” and Nicholas Shulman in “Graven with Diamonds”.

Other men who attended Anne’s French style salon included Henry Norris, Groom of the Stool, Francis Weston and William Brereton, all men who had been friends with the king from at least the time Henry ascended the throne, or even earlier.  And there was Anne’s brother, George, now elevated to the title of Earl of Rochford and a rising star being sent on diplomatic missions by the king.  Anne and George’s mother may have been a Howard, but in the early 16^th century that marriage had been a foot up the social ladder for Thomas Boleyn, whose roots were mercantile as opposed to the noble origins of his wife. Elevation from the merchant classes to the stratospheric height of an anointed queen, plus Anne’s documented behaviour towards Queen Katharine and Princess Mary, had earned Anne many enemies. Any inappropriate behaviour, or words exchanged between any man present and the queen, would be reported.

The women of Anne’s court had not been brought up under the strict eyes of Margaret of Austria, Queen Claude or Marguerite of Navarre.  Those of the queen’s salon had amused themselves by writing or quoting poetry, and circulating the book for others to add their own contributions, which exposed just who was romantically involved with whom. The two Mary’s and Margaret Douglas were women of noble birth and therefore had little or no individual say to whom they were married off to. 

Mary Fitzroy (née Howard), Duchess of Richmond, was already married to the king’s illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, but the marriage remained unconsummated when Fitzroy died in 1536.  She had added her thoughts and opinions to the manuscript.

Henry VIII’s niece, Margaret Douglas, had fallen in love with Thomas Howard, the younger son of 2^nd duke of Norfolk, (and brother of the 3^rd duke – confusingly also called Thomas). There are poems in the manuscript that point to this love affair, which are, by all accounts, not very competent.  Margaret Douglas’s love affair with Thomas Howard was discovered and both were thrown in the Tower. As a potential heir to the throne Margaret could not marry without the king’s permission.

Margaret went on to become Duchess of Lennox and gave birth to Lord Darnley – husband of Mary Queen of Scots. Thomas died in The Tower in 1537. 

Below is a miniature portrait of Margaret Douglas, painted in 1575 by Nicholas Hilliard. (Rijksmuseum. Accession No. SK-A-4323).

Mary Shelton had been engaged to her cousin, the poet Thomas Clere, who died before they married and left her all his lands, plus it was rumoured she had, for a short while, been the king’s mistress.  Her sister Margaret became engaged to Henry Norris, Groom of the Stool, in 1536 and he was one of the king’s closest friends. 

Sadly for Margaret in the spring of 1536 Norris was accused of treason.  A flirtatious comment by the queen that perhaps Norris was wishing to ‘step into dead men’s shoes’ was deemed to refer to the king’s death had been over heard and reported. Such a comment came under the Treasons Act of 1534 which had the specific clause stating “ those who do maliciously wish, will or desire by words or writing, or by craft imagine, invent, practise, or attempt any bodily harm to be done or committed to the king’s most royal person, the queen’s or the heirs apparent [Princess Elizabeth at this time], or to deprive them of any of their dignity, title or name of their royal estates, or slanderously and maliciously publish and pronounce, by express writing or words, that the king should be heretic, schismatic, tyrant, infidel or usurper of the crown….” At face value such a comment by an ordinary woman would have been seen as a flirting.  Such a comment made by the queen was incendiary as it fell under this clause, and Norris was arrested accused of treason.

In the case of the Brereton and Weston they were accused of adultery with the queen – and they too fell victim to this clause. Wyatt was also arrested and ended up in the Tower suspected of harbouring illicit thoughts about the queen. 

Brereton, Norris and Weston all ended their days hung drawn and quartered on Tower Hill, as did the young musician, Mark Smeaton who had also been accused of having ‘swyved’ the queen either in thought or by deed. The fifth man who went to the block and not the gallows, was the queen’s brother George – accused of the crime of incest.  Again, George was charged with treason under this clause.

Unlike these five, Wyatt escaped execution.  

Guy and Fox build a convincing argument that Henry was emotionally immature and how Anne’s early experiences at Mechlen and in France had shown her how she could become a powerful and influential woman. From this new evidence we can speculate this is when she set her sights on becoming queen of England. However, she had failed to understand that the king was emotionally constipated. While he was intelligent and well educated, unfortunately he required constant reassurance of how puissant a king he was and constant reassurance was not inn Anne Boleyn’s lexicon of skills.  

History tells of the king’s reliance on ordinary men like Cardinal Wolsey and Thomas Cromwell to run the country, while he followed his favoured pursuits such as hunting, the joust, or any other entertainment leaving them to the more onerous and, for the young king, boring job of administering the country.  Both Wolsey and Cromwell had learnt the art of giving the king what he wanted.  It has been argued that Anne’s failure to give Henry a son brought about her downfall, but Guy and Fox demonstrate there are many more factors in play.

I asked these two eminent scholars whether Cromwell saw Anne as a threat and was surprised by their answer – “No”.  In their opinion the threat to Cromwell’s career and influence was Anne’s brother, George. 

In the light of their analysis it becomes clear how in 1536 Thomas Cromwell used all evidence to remove an evolving threat to his power base.  In which case the ambiguity of the poetry in the Devonshire manuscript could be twisted to support the charges of treason and adultery against these men. 

The accusations against the Norris, Brereton, Weston and Smeaton could be considered as window dressing for the jury to determine that there was a credible case of a plot against the king. George Boleyn had no illusions that the case against them all was built on sand. Having been accused of treason they had no right to legal representation since they were, in the eyes of the jury, all dead men walking and it was inevitable they would all die.

The anonymity and ambiguity of the poetry in the manuscript, plus the record of the whispered evidence of the conversations and suggested flirtations is skillfully woven into Mantel’s trilogy as part of the supporting evidence Cromwell uses in building a case against Henry VIII’s second queen and her brother.

Despite Holbein’s sketches allowing us to put faces to names of those at the Henrician court, unfortunately, we cannot put faces to those who ended up at the wrong end of the execution’s block, except for one!

Recent technical analysis of Holbein’s sketch labelled Anne Boleyn (above RCIN 912189) has revealed that it is well rubbed and contains microscopic remnants of pigments that point to the sitter’s hair being much darker than we what see in Holbein’s sketch.  Technical analysis has led to the conclusion that the labelling was genuine.  Just why Holbein sketched such an intimate of Henry’s second queen is a matter of debate, but perhaps the sketch was made at an earlier time in their relationship and the king had requested a private miniature that he could hold in his hand for private contemplation.  Since no such miniature portrait has survived, we will never know.

Guy and Fox’s discovery of these new documents in foreign archives throws a new light on the early lives of both the most famous English love story of the 16th century, which will no doubt inspire new novels, films and documentaries.  

Thanks to Henry VIII’s acquisition of Holbein’s sketches we are able to come face to face with many members of Henry’s court, including the three women responsible for the Devonshire manuscript.  Just how the manuscript was influential when it comes to how justice was, or was not done in May 1536 will no doubt continue to fascinate scholars and academics foryears to come. Regarding its merits as a collection of poems – I’ll leave that to the professors of literature!

And finally, through the wonders of modern technology and the painstaking research of Dr Kate Heard, we have a portrait of Anne Boleyn that the Royal Collection Trust consider to be of Henry VIII’s second wife.   

MVT

13^th February 2024.

Footnotes

---

^[i] Margaret Douglas sat for Elizabeth I’s  favourite ‘painter in little’, Nicholas Hilliard in 1575, three years before her death in 1578.  In his draft treatise of 1598 Hilliard stated that he had always taken Holbein to be his inspiration. Since we know that Henry VIII had acquired Holbein’s sketches Hilliard’s statement suggests he had access to these, and other works by Holbein held in the king’s collection.

^[ii] Hunting the Falcon p44.

^[iii] In France the throne went down the male line because Sallic law prevented women from inheriting the throne.

^[iv] My discussions with Professor Guy & Julia Fox, Assistant Professor Rebecca Quossmore and Dr Kate Heard are all available as podcasts on www.TudorsDynastypodcast.com

Sources:

Devonshire Manuscript: BL Additional Ms 17492, London.

Baron, Helen; Mary (Howard) Fitzroy’s Hand in the Devonshire Manuscript; The Review of English Studies. Aug. 1994; Vol 45. No 179 (Aug 1994) pp 318-335. Oxford University Press; www.jstor.org/stable/518840. Accessed 30/01/2024. 

Brigden, Susan; The Heart’s Forest; Faber & Faber; 2012

Foister, Susan; Holbein and the Court of Henry VIII; The Queen’s Gallery; 1978.

Foister, Susan; Holbein in England; Tate Publishing, London. 2006

Guy, John & Julia Fox; Hunting the Falcon; Bloomsbury; 2023.

Heale; Elizabeth; Women and the Courtly Love Lyric; The Devonshire MS (BL Add. 17492); The Modern Language Review; April 1995, Vol. 90. No 2 pp296-313;Modern Humanities Research Association; www.jstor.org/stable/3734541. Accessed 30/01/2024.

Irish, Bradley, J; General & Politics in the Henrician Court; The Douglas-Howard Lyrics in the Devonshire Manuscript; Renaissance Quarterley; Vol 64. No 1 (Spring 2011) pp79-114.The University of Chicago Press on Behalf of Renaissance Society of America; JSTOR/stable/10.1086/660369. Accessed 30/01/2024

Irish, Bradley J; Emotion in the Tudor Court; Literature, History and Early Modern Feeling; Northwestern University Press; Illinois; 2018

Heard,Kate; Holbein; exhibition catalogue Royal Collection Trust; 2023.

Quossmore, Rebecca; Gender & Position Taking in Henrician Verse; Amsterdam University Press; 2023.

Schulman, Nicola; Graven with Diamonds: Sir Thomas Wyatt & the Invention of Love; Short Books; 2012.

Yeowell, James (ed); The Poems of Henry Howard, earl of Surrey; George Bell & Sons, London 1908.https://archive.org/details/poemsofhenryhow00surr/page/n9/mode/2up