The Six Wives of Henry VIII. by Antonia FraserReview by: Retha M. WarnickeThe Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4 (Winter, 1993), p. 1059Published by: The Sixteenth Century JournalStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2541713 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 14:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The Sixteenth Century Journal is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheSixteenth Century Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.177 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:17:13 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Book Reviews 1059

The Six Wives of Henry VIII. Antonia Fraser. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1992. n.p.

As an example of the somewhat old-fashioned method of stringing together biographies of Henry VIII's six wives in one volume, Fraser's is probably the best available. A public for this kind of history does exist, for it is the second book on this topic and with this title, the other byAlisonWeir (Grove Weidenfeld, 1991), that has been published in the last two years. In Fraser's work, which is handsomely illustrated, its author set out to counter the tiresome

stereotyping of the six wives: Catherine of Aragon as the "Betrayed Wife;" Anne Boleyn as "the Temptress;"Jane Seymour as "the Good Woman;" Anne of Cleves as "the Ugly Sister;" Katherine Howard as "the Bad Girl;" and finally, Catherine Parr as "the Mother Figure" (1). It is true that these women do deserve much better treatment, which, in fact, most of them have had in recent works. Historians have long asserted that women of early-modern patri- archal societies could and did display intelligence and considerable strength of character. At least in the case ofAnne Boleyn, despite their great disagreements on other issues concerning her life, scholars have recently presented her as an intelligent, educated, and even dedicated student of religion. The intellectual and religious interests of Catherine of Aragon and Catherine Parr have also been lauded.

Much of Fraser's volume, described on the book jacket as "historical biography," seem

strangely unhistorical. Quotations were often without citations. Sometimes documents were miscited. HenryVIII's love letters to Anne Boleyn were undated, as Fraser correctly pointed out. Later, she referred to a gift given for unspecified reasons to Henry by Anne as a New Year's gift; the reference to it can be found only in one of the love letters which did not reveal the date the gift was sent or received. Some omissions are troubling. Heresy, a major charge against Thomas Cromwell, went unexplained in her discussion of his fall. The bibliography, although not expected to be a complete listing, is missing major works. The scholarship on Thomas More and the English Reformation ofJohn Guy, for example, was not cited.

Her interpretations are also troubling. In a discussion of customs concerning privacy, Fraser left the impression that the royal family had no privacy during the most intimate mo- ments from anyone who wished to wander into their privy chambers.The very existence of

privy chambers testify that the Tudors, while unable or unwilling to gain privacy from their servants, could and did withdraw themselves from the eyes of unwanted visitors. There is ev- idence, as, for example, the secrecy surrounding Catherine ofAragon's first miscarriage, that

privy chamber servants were successfully prevented from airing information about intimate

royal matters. Fraser also made no attempt to sort out prevailing historical theories about court life, eclectically selecting her facts without providing adequate explanations. The role of HenryVIII at court, for example, remained inconsistent. While not admitting to the ma-

nipulation of him by court factions, a theory put forth by Eric Ives, most recently inAnne

Boleyn (Cambridge, 1986), Fraser still speculated that Cromwell and a faction knowingly had an innocent Anne Boleyn executed. Disingenuously, Fraser hinted that the: king, earlier iden- tified as "a monster of obesity (2)," was not fullyawareI of the details of his wife's fall.

The author indicated she felt no more partiality for oneivife than another, for each was- "created or destroyed by her;biological destiny"!(420), but readers areleft with the inference that Fraser, was biased. At the end of her volume, she -choseto. discuss the tablet the citizens' of Peterborough erected in 1986 .to: honor. Catherine of Aragonl who was buried in their Abbey, and Fraser's final words in her; study of thei six wives praised Henry's first queen as "loyal, pious, courageous, and! compassionate," (430). Retha M. Warnicke ........................................ Arizona State University

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.177 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:17:13 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions