This is my third read of this volume, and (by virtue of its being a crawl, and attended by such excellent commentaries by Simon and others) by far the most rewarding. Each time, with more conviction at each stage, I am reminded that we still do not know the truth of these allegations, nor will we ever. Anne (this is surely not a spoiler) is doomed, and thereby becomes one of the most famous Englishwomen: you have to suppose that she would have preferred to live a few decades more….
Absolutely! Mantel said we can never know and never be sure, and she manages to capture that unknowability through Cromwell's limited point-of-view. A book from Anne's POV must lose that ambiguity and decide one way or the other. As it is, we are always left wondering.
The successive interviews in this section reinforce what a master of dialogue Hilary was. Each of the characters come off as distinct parts of the whole and it becomes obvious quite quickly (to everyone except George with his 'whatting') what is going to happen. The description of George in his white velvet alongside the flayed saint is wonderful. And Lady Worcester with the cakes. So good.
I'm feeling more with this reading generally. Despite knowing how it all plays out, I found myself silently willing Monseigneur to accept terms and compel Anne into a convent. Not that that would be ok, but it'd be better than what's coming. I'm glad that Crumb doesn't have to resort to fabrications of his own, that the convent option was his preferred route, so I don't have to feel too guilty about still rooting for him. Then there's the discomfort of the incest allegations. You think Mary Shelton's account is the big reveal of the week but then in comes Jane Rochford with her bombshell. I share Crumb's feelings of being momentarily at a loss as to how to proceed. Imagine having to tell Look- What-A-Big-Virile-Man-I-Am-Henry that his wife is at it with her brother. Oh dear...
Side note: I genuinely felt sorry for Anne's father here, how much he is going to lose.
Everyone is expendable in Cromwell's service to the King. Wolsey was more independent of Henry than Cromwell is.
Cromwell considers how much stronger the position of a widow or the wife of a merchant is than a woman at court married to someone like Rochford. He, Cromwell, is more like Lady Rochford than he realizes. He too is subject to an impetuous and omnipotent meter.
Re: Not knowing the truth about Anne Boleyn (she's brought her secret to the tomb and won't reveal it no matter how much we poke at her ghost): I LOVE Mantel's choices here, how skillfully she presents us with both options. One, Cromwell's as he himself wants to appear to the world, the impartial judge, the scrupulous detective, gathering evidence and reaching the only logical conclusion. And two, a Cromwell more and more isolated, trying to keep precarious power, Wosley's shadow looming over, its tragic end suggesting anxiety and demanding revenge. Cromwell studying the women he interviews, noting their helplessness, (the subtext screaming: women can't stab, but they can poison). And lastly, did you notice all the hints at Crumb being a liiitle sexually frustrated? His mind only too ready to conjure images of utter perversion, because he's been agonizing for a woman's touch. That's what dedicating yourself to your job only will bring you! Isn't is interesting, to show him fantasizing about Bess Seymour and lady Worcester and Mary Boleyn and Mary Shelton, just before transferring it all to Anne herself? Impassible judge indeed.
By the way I decided that from today on I'll be reading ahead, weekly installments are just not working for me, I don't know why, I have no issues with my other slow reads. Maybe it's a rhythm problem, it takes me a lot to get back into it, to remember where we are at and who all the characters are. Hopefully riding the flow to the end and then going back and re examining our weekly sections at leisure will help. Anyone else feeling the same?
This is understandable. Especially with this book, which is something of a thriller at heart. The slow reading schedule was originally set up with re-readers in mind, and also because I simply can't write fast enough to cover the story at a faster pace. So you go ahead and read however it works best for you.
Excited to be caught up and on time this week! I think re-reading the books back to back as part of this slow read-along has really highlighted the shifting perception of Cromwell that Mantel crafts. It's distinct in each book. I think in Wolf Hall she really gets you rooting for Cromwell. He's mostly likeable, if complex, and you definitely understand his actions. By Bring Up The Bodies, I feel she's chosen to shift that and a much more morally grey, threatening and ambiguous side of his character comes into play. And I know it'll shift again for Mirror, when he'll be reflective, more vulnerable and sympathetic. Such a layered character study.
This section was a challenge for me as someone who has spent two years writing a revisionist piece about the Rochfords! I definitely agree that, although this is a traditional depiction of Lady Rochford as bitter and eager to give evidence, Mantel still crafts her as a witty, sympathetic character. George does not fare so well. Mantel, or perhaps more fairly Cromwell, does not recognise his strengths and we only see the arrogance. Cromwell did, historically, interfere with George's office as Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports and there were definitely those at Court who felt he'd only gained his ambassadorial positions because of his sister's relationship with the King, as Henry says in this chapter. But George was also a very skilled courtier, absolutely dedicated to Reform and his religious beliefs (more so than Anne), and very committed to his duties in Parliament (once he secured a position in 1533, he attended more sessions that almost any other Lord.) I'm going tell myself Cromwell underestimates or misjudges George but I do think he's just written as a pretty foppish, foolish character in this version of the history!
You're right about George! I thought you might appreciate Mantel's "notes on characters" in the theatre adaptation:
"The younger brother of Anne and Mary, you are recognised in your lifetime as an accomplished and attractive young man, but there is a curious blank in history where you should be. You were a busy Court poet but your verses are lost. You were said to be handsome but no picture remains. You were committed to religious reform but your only religious writings are translations. You are oddly insubstantial and so, in these plays, you are your clothes: flamboyant, expensive and a bit silly."
It's an interesting reading! We could take his contemporary reputation at face value or we could read something into the blank. As with Anne, by telling George through Cromwell's eyes, Mantel gives herself the flexibility to leave George ambiguous. Anything inside those fine clothes? Who can tell.
Yes, I love that! I find it comforting to know his absence of character is carefully considered, though as is everything in these books. I find his removal from history very sad. To a certain extent, Anne has had her recognition and rehabilitation but there's so many that are still in the shadows.
Yay! I've caught up! (I came across this group just a few weeks ago.) I read Wolf Hall last year, and loved it, but it was great to refresh my memory with the notes, links, and comments here, and then to embark on the second part of the trilogy in the company of so many others. This week's session was riveting. You can feel those screws tightening... I'm awed by Mantel's writing. So easy, yet so deep. I'm listening to the audio-version, and love Ben Miles's performance. Looking forward to the rest.
Welcome Linda! As it happens I am on my way to Devon this weekend for the Wolf Hall Weekend, where I'll get to meet Ben Miles and hear him read Wolf Hall. His recording is definitive!
This is one of the most interesting bits of the whole trilogy because it is pure guesswork. The trial of Anne Boleyn is a historical mystery so here we see Mantel at her most inventive, weaving whole cloth. I find her explanation of how Cromwell chooses his targets far-fetched (the 'paws' theory) but I guess she had to come up with a motive. She does make him a man who never forgets a grudge.
Weave whole cloth is about right! I don't think it matters if it is far-fetched at this point. After all this is not the real Cromwell but Mantel's Cromwell who has become alive to us, and walks down our corridors and through our minds. It is his story she is telling. The man who forgets but thinks he never does. The man who loved his master. We are spinning myth by this point in our reading and we cannot slow down else we will stop believing it.
I have to say I really, really love her depictions of the ladies-in-waiting at this juncture: it's like they step out of the background and become actors all of a sudden, each with her own grudges and motives. That opening sequence of pregnant Lady Worcester and the cakes- and Christophe eating the leftovers: "He craves honey, sugar. You can never mistake a boy who was brought up hungry." Just amazing. It's the turning point, but it's done so lightly.
I read it also as a way for Cromwell to justify to himself the fact that he is taking people to their deaths without even having proof of their guilt...
Thank you for your notes, as always. I loved your detective work about Henry’s 'rhyming' - as you rightly said, how very Henry!
I got a bit behind, but now that I'm here I agree with others who've said that it's hard to stick to the reading schedule at the moment. Things are moving so fast ("we must take this week hour by hour") and rapidly spiralling out of control ("matters are out of our hands") even if George Boleyn can't see where it is all tending and Mary Shelton still thinks her biggest problems are her own love life and the staffing of the queen's chamber...
I still find myself being sucked in by Cromwell’s moments of decency, especially the sympathetic way he thinks about Jane Rochford and the good advice he gives her about covering her tracks by petitioning the king to show mercy to her husband. (In reality I wonder whether this was a way for Mantel to reconcile her exaggerated version of Jane with the historical record?)
Even I can't entirely ignore Cromwell’s cynical side now though, as he desperately tells everyone what they need to hear to get their cooperation - in a previous section he cheerfully agreed that Anne’s downfall would help bring Henry back to Rome, and now he's off to persuade Cranmer that it will actually further the cause of the English Bible.
There's a lot of playing pretend going on too - from Cristophe as an unconvincing waiter at Cromwell’s interrogations over cake, to Call-Me's surprisingly fluent "maidenly excuses". Somehow all this forced lightness builds to hammer home how serious the situation really is - no wonder Cromwell wishes they could all take off their disguises and go home.
A lot of play acting. The only thing that unites this coalition is they hate Anne. And in the case of Cranmer, not even that. And there's no time to question the morality of what is happening. Question it, and you're done for.
[...] He (Jane Roachford's father) He paid less mind to contracting me to Boleyn than he would to selling a hound puppy. If you think there's a warm kennel and a dish of broken meats,what more do you need to know? You don't ask the animal what it wants." (p. 315)
And at the same time it makes me angry about how women were treated.
Oh, Jane Roachford ... she's such a complicated character ... On the one hand, she has all my sympathy ... and half a page further on, I'm shocked by her ...
A distraction, I’m sure this will be, and perhaps a trivial one, but does anyone have a view on the C. J. Sansom “Shardlake” series? I gather Cromwell turns up in at least one of the seven books in the series. I read heaps of mysteries but eschew historical mysteries, and I wasn’t interested at all in Tudor times at all, but now…
The Shardlake books are very good historical fiction, and Cromwell appears in the first few books, but he is a secondary character. The main character, Shardlake, is a fictional lawyer who is one of Cromwell's agents and is sent to investigate various cases. Later he joins forces with one of Cromwell's young protégés (also fictional), who is fiercely loyal to him. Cromwell's shadow hangs over the remainder of the series, but he himself only appears in a few scenes at the beginning and we don't really get to know him. Brilliant books, though, and very informative on the Tudor world. There is a TV series coming out soon I think.
Thanks. Despite being snowed under by reading, your endorsement has sent me to the very first book. I remember Dorothy Dunnett books from my teenage years, loved them even though they were “historical,” so I’m looking forward now to getting back into this sub-genre.
This is my third read of this volume, and (by virtue of its being a crawl, and attended by such excellent commentaries by Simon and others) by far the most rewarding. Each time, with more conviction at each stage, I am reminded that we still do not know the truth of these allegations, nor will we ever. Anne (this is surely not a spoiler) is doomed, and thereby becomes one of the most famous Englishwomen: you have to suppose that she would have preferred to live a few decades more….
Absolutely! Mantel said we can never know and never be sure, and she manages to capture that unknowability through Cromwell's limited point-of-view. A book from Anne's POV must lose that ambiguity and decide one way or the other. As it is, we are always left wondering.
The successive interviews in this section reinforce what a master of dialogue Hilary was. Each of the characters come off as distinct parts of the whole and it becomes obvious quite quickly (to everyone except George with his 'whatting') what is going to happen. The description of George in his white velvet alongside the flayed saint is wonderful. And Lady Worcester with the cakes. So good.
I'm feeling more with this reading generally. Despite knowing how it all plays out, I found myself silently willing Monseigneur to accept terms and compel Anne into a convent. Not that that would be ok, but it'd be better than what's coming. I'm glad that Crumb doesn't have to resort to fabrications of his own, that the convent option was his preferred route, so I don't have to feel too guilty about still rooting for him. Then there's the discomfort of the incest allegations. You think Mary Shelton's account is the big reveal of the week but then in comes Jane Rochford with her bombshell. I share Crumb's feelings of being momentarily at a loss as to how to proceed. Imagine having to tell Look- What-A-Big-Virile-Man-I-Am-Henry that his wife is at it with her brother. Oh dear...
Side note: I genuinely felt sorry for Anne's father here, how much he is going to lose.
Oh Nicola, this might be the first time I've seen someone sympathise with Monseigneur!
Everyone is expendable in Cromwell's service to the King. Wolsey was more independent of Henry than Cromwell is.
Cromwell considers how much stronger the position of a widow or the wife of a merchant is than a woman at court married to someone like Rochford. He, Cromwell, is more like Lady Rochford than he realizes. He too is subject to an impetuous and omnipotent meter.
Ah yes! I was thinking too, dear Crumb you are describing yourself!
Re: Not knowing the truth about Anne Boleyn (she's brought her secret to the tomb and won't reveal it no matter how much we poke at her ghost): I LOVE Mantel's choices here, how skillfully she presents us with both options. One, Cromwell's as he himself wants to appear to the world, the impartial judge, the scrupulous detective, gathering evidence and reaching the only logical conclusion. And two, a Cromwell more and more isolated, trying to keep precarious power, Wosley's shadow looming over, its tragic end suggesting anxiety and demanding revenge. Cromwell studying the women he interviews, noting their helplessness, (the subtext screaming: women can't stab, but they can poison). And lastly, did you notice all the hints at Crumb being a liiitle sexually frustrated? His mind only too ready to conjure images of utter perversion, because he's been agonizing for a woman's touch. That's what dedicating yourself to your job only will bring you! Isn't is interesting, to show him fantasizing about Bess Seymour and lady Worcester and Mary Boleyn and Mary Shelton, just before transferring it all to Anne herself? Impassible judge indeed.
By the way I decided that from today on I'll be reading ahead, weekly installments are just not working for me, I don't know why, I have no issues with my other slow reads. Maybe it's a rhythm problem, it takes me a lot to get back into it, to remember where we are at and who all the characters are. Hopefully riding the flow to the end and then going back and re examining our weekly sections at leisure will help. Anyone else feeling the same?
This is understandable. Especially with this book, which is something of a thriller at heart. The slow reading schedule was originally set up with re-readers in mind, and also because I simply can't write fast enough to cover the story at a faster pace. So you go ahead and read however it works best for you.
Nice observations! Especially Cromwell's sexual frustration. It's right there but I hardly noticed it for all the drama.
Excited to be caught up and on time this week! I think re-reading the books back to back as part of this slow read-along has really highlighted the shifting perception of Cromwell that Mantel crafts. It's distinct in each book. I think in Wolf Hall she really gets you rooting for Cromwell. He's mostly likeable, if complex, and you definitely understand his actions. By Bring Up The Bodies, I feel she's chosen to shift that and a much more morally grey, threatening and ambiguous side of his character comes into play. And I know it'll shift again for Mirror, when he'll be reflective, more vulnerable and sympathetic. Such a layered character study.
This section was a challenge for me as someone who has spent two years writing a revisionist piece about the Rochfords! I definitely agree that, although this is a traditional depiction of Lady Rochford as bitter and eager to give evidence, Mantel still crafts her as a witty, sympathetic character. George does not fare so well. Mantel, or perhaps more fairly Cromwell, does not recognise his strengths and we only see the arrogance. Cromwell did, historically, interfere with George's office as Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports and there were definitely those at Court who felt he'd only gained his ambassadorial positions because of his sister's relationship with the King, as Henry says in this chapter. But George was also a very skilled courtier, absolutely dedicated to Reform and his religious beliefs (more so than Anne), and very committed to his duties in Parliament (once he secured a position in 1533, he attended more sessions that almost any other Lord.) I'm going tell myself Cromwell underestimates or misjudges George but I do think he's just written as a pretty foppish, foolish character in this version of the history!
You're right about George! I thought you might appreciate Mantel's "notes on characters" in the theatre adaptation:
"The younger brother of Anne and Mary, you are recognised in your lifetime as an accomplished and attractive young man, but there is a curious blank in history where you should be. You were a busy Court poet but your verses are lost. You were said to be handsome but no picture remains. You were committed to religious reform but your only religious writings are translations. You are oddly insubstantial and so, in these plays, you are your clothes: flamboyant, expensive and a bit silly."
It's an interesting reading! We could take his contemporary reputation at face value or we could read something into the blank. As with Anne, by telling George through Cromwell's eyes, Mantel gives herself the flexibility to leave George ambiguous. Anything inside those fine clothes? Who can tell.
Yes, I love that! I find it comforting to know his absence of character is carefully considered, though as is everything in these books. I find his removal from history very sad. To a certain extent, Anne has had her recognition and rehabilitation but there's so many that are still in the shadows.
Maybe we are looking to you to bring him out of the shadows!
These character notes are fascinating, great idea to include them.
I have tried to include extracts from them in the character summaries: https://footnotesandtangents.substack.com/p/the-cast-of-the-cromwell-trilogy
I'd love to hear more about your work on the Rochfords!
Yay! I've caught up! (I came across this group just a few weeks ago.) I read Wolf Hall last year, and loved it, but it was great to refresh my memory with the notes, links, and comments here, and then to embark on the second part of the trilogy in the company of so many others. This week's session was riveting. You can feel those screws tightening... I'm awed by Mantel's writing. So easy, yet so deep. I'm listening to the audio-version, and love Ben Miles's performance. Looking forward to the rest.
Welcome Linda! As it happens I am on my way to Devon this weekend for the Wolf Hall Weekend, where I'll get to meet Ben Miles and hear him read Wolf Hall. His recording is definitive!
This is one of the most interesting bits of the whole trilogy because it is pure guesswork. The trial of Anne Boleyn is a historical mystery so here we see Mantel at her most inventive, weaving whole cloth. I find her explanation of how Cromwell chooses his targets far-fetched (the 'paws' theory) but I guess she had to come up with a motive. She does make him a man who never forgets a grudge.
Weave whole cloth is about right! I don't think it matters if it is far-fetched at this point. After all this is not the real Cromwell but Mantel's Cromwell who has become alive to us, and walks down our corridors and through our minds. It is his story she is telling. The man who forgets but thinks he never does. The man who loved his master. We are spinning myth by this point in our reading and we cannot slow down else we will stop believing it.
I have to say I really, really love her depictions of the ladies-in-waiting at this juncture: it's like they step out of the background and become actors all of a sudden, each with her own grudges and motives. That opening sequence of pregnant Lady Worcester and the cakes- and Christophe eating the leftovers: "He craves honey, sugar. You can never mistake a boy who was brought up hungry." Just amazing. It's the turning point, but it's done so lightly.
I read it also as a way for Cromwell to justify to himself the fact that he is taking people to their deaths without even having proof of their guilt...
Thank you for your notes, as always. I loved your detective work about Henry’s 'rhyming' - as you rightly said, how very Henry!
I got a bit behind, but now that I'm here I agree with others who've said that it's hard to stick to the reading schedule at the moment. Things are moving so fast ("we must take this week hour by hour") and rapidly spiralling out of control ("matters are out of our hands") even if George Boleyn can't see where it is all tending and Mary Shelton still thinks her biggest problems are her own love life and the staffing of the queen's chamber...
I still find myself being sucked in by Cromwell’s moments of decency, especially the sympathetic way he thinks about Jane Rochford and the good advice he gives her about covering her tracks by petitioning the king to show mercy to her husband. (In reality I wonder whether this was a way for Mantel to reconcile her exaggerated version of Jane with the historical record?)
Even I can't entirely ignore Cromwell’s cynical side now though, as he desperately tells everyone what they need to hear to get their cooperation - in a previous section he cheerfully agreed that Anne’s downfall would help bring Henry back to Rome, and now he's off to persuade Cranmer that it will actually further the cause of the English Bible.
There's a lot of playing pretend going on too - from Cristophe as an unconvincing waiter at Cromwell’s interrogations over cake, to Call-Me's surprisingly fluent "maidenly excuses". Somehow all this forced lightness builds to hammer home how serious the situation really is - no wonder Cromwell wishes they could all take off their disguises and go home.
A lot of play acting. The only thing that unites this coalition is they hate Anne. And in the case of Cranmer, not even that. And there's no time to question the morality of what is happening. Question it, and you're done for.
Isn't that infinitely sad:
[...] He (Jane Roachford's father) He paid less mind to contracting me to Boleyn than he would to selling a hound puppy. If you think there's a warm kennel and a dish of broken meats,what more do you need to know? You don't ask the animal what it wants." (p. 315)
And at the same time it makes me angry about how women were treated.
Oh, Jane Roachford ... she's such a complicated character ... On the one hand, she has all my sympathy ... and half a page further on, I'm shocked by her ...
A distraction, I’m sure this will be, and perhaps a trivial one, but does anyone have a view on the C. J. Sansom “Shardlake” series? I gather Cromwell turns up in at least one of the seven books in the series. I read heaps of mysteries but eschew historical mysteries, and I wasn’t interested at all in Tudor times at all, but now…
The Shardlake books are very good historical fiction, and Cromwell appears in the first few books, but he is a secondary character. The main character, Shardlake, is a fictional lawyer who is one of Cromwell's agents and is sent to investigate various cases. Later he joins forces with one of Cromwell's young protégés (also fictional), who is fiercely loyal to him. Cromwell's shadow hangs over the remainder of the series, but he himself only appears in a few scenes at the beginning and we don't really get to know him. Brilliant books, though, and very informative on the Tudor world. There is a TV series coming out soon I think.
Thanks. Despite being snowed under by reading, your endorsement has sent me to the very first book. I remember Dorothy Dunnett books from my teenage years, loved them even though they were “historical,” so I’m looking forward now to getting back into this sub-genre.
Dunnett's books are wonderful!