Got about £1.3 million?
Yes, its *those* Rochfords, as in Thomas Boleyn and family.
Here’s the article and listing information for the Hall, as well as a couple of other lovely historic properties that are for sale. Personally, I’d take any of them!
I had several Google news alerts come through on this story today, but it has left me scratching my head a little.
From The Times Online (with picture)
The christening gown worn by the future Queen Elizabeth I nearly 500 years ago has been discovered during a clear-out at a stately home.The gown, left, was found at Sudeley Castle in Winchcombe, Gloucestershire, recently the setting for Liz Hurley’s wedding. In the 1880s experts authenticated the garment, worn by Henry VIII’s daughter at her baptism at Greenwich in 1533, but it was then left in a box of textiles and forgotten.
Another link from The Daily Express
The reason I’m kind of confused is that the articles make it sound as though the gown had been lost for quite some time, but I remember seeing it (or at least something labeled as “Queen Elizabeth’s christening gown”) when I visited the castle in 1998. Anyone else remember seeing it there at some point? I’m pretty sure I’ve got a picture of it in a book or a guidebook, so I’ll dig for that tonight.
Update:
I looked at my travel journal from 1998 and I did indeed write a little something about seeing the christening gown at Sudeley. I didn’t write much beyond how cool it was to see it! I also found a picture of it in “The Public and Private Worlds of Elizabeth I” by Susan Watkins and Mark Fiennes (published in 1998). I put a small scan of it here.
Okay, I meant to post about this several days ago, but I’ve been completely swamped.
As probably a lot of you know by now, the first two episodes of Showtime’s “The Tudors” series are now online in various places, and some cable and satellite systems are playing them as well (I think in ‘on demand’ services?). I think you have to be in the US to watch them on Showtime’s website, but I don’t know if international viewers can see them through other online venues.
Watch at Showtime’s “The Tudors” website
Unfortunately I’ve only been able to see about the first five minutes of the first episode so far. I was trying to watch a little of it at work but our network connection to the outside world went down (not good at a major university!). I’ll try again during lunch tomorrow. Alas, my satellite internet at home just isn’t up to snuff for streaming video. Anyone want to buy me a T-1 line?
Update:
For those of you outside the US, here are some other options to investigate if you want to see the first two episodes:
Two Tudors episodes will be available via free VOD on Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox Communications, Cablevision Systems, Mediacom Communications, Atlantic Broadband, Bright House Networks, RCN and other operators.
At the same time, Internet users will be able to watch them via streaming video at Amazon.com’s Internet Movie Database — the first time that site has ever streamed a full-length episode of a TV show — as well as Netflix’s Watch Now, Yahoo, Microsoft’s MSN, CBS’ Innertube, Brightcove, CNET Networks’ TV.com and MeeVee.com
I was surfing on DirecTV last night and saw the last minute or so of one of the episodes on the CDUSA channel (580). Looks like they are on again tonight so maybe I’ll finally catch them!
Just a quick update on the atlas sale that I mentioned back at the beginning of the month. It ended up selling for £670,000 (or about $1.25 million US).
I’ve changed the template for the blog a little so that the timestamp that links to the post and the comments link now appear right under the title of the post and there is a separater between all the posts. Hopefully this will help people get their comments on the right post. I had a couple more end up in the wrong place, and I’d like to try to keep the responses with the correct post.
The commentary below isn’t really news, but it does relate to Tudor history. Just some observations I’ve made over the past few months, with no real point, I suppose.
The way I get news for the blog, besides what readers email me, is through Google news. I’ve set up some news alerts with various Tudor names, etc. which are then emailed to me so I can read through and see which I want to post on the blog. In the process though, I’ve encountered a couple of interesting things.
The first is relating to errors which are sometimes just typos but sometimes are things that really should be caught by an editor or fact-checker. For example – Yesterday I had a hit on ‘Anne Boleyn’ through the Google alerts and the article was about the gardens at Hever Castle (which are beautiful … I really need to visit there again). Further down the article was this sentence:
In the 16th Century it was the childhood home of Henry VIII’s fourth wife, Anne Boleyn. In the 16th Century it was the childhood home of Henry VIII’s fourth wife, Anne Boleyn.
Now, I understand where there could potentially be a little bit of confusion, since Henry’s fourth wife was another Anne and she did get Hever Castle in the divorce, but most people would associate Hever with Anne Boleyn and I’m pretty sure most people would know that she was Henry’s second, not fourth, wife.
Another error that I came across the other day was in one of the articles about the DNA testing of Mary Tudor’s hair. When describing the history around the disappearance of the princes in the Tower, the article flipped Edward IV and Henry VII! The most common error (and I’ve come across this one in LOTS of places) is leaving off one of the “I”s in Henry VIII, which occasionally creates real confusion, although most of the time it is obvious that someone really means Henry VIII and not his father. I won’t claim to be free of typos and errors, since anyone who knows me or who has read this website for any length of times knows that I’ve made plenty. But I’m not a professional journalist with an editor. 
The other thing that has caught my attention is the cultural use and off-hand references to the Tudors in the news, in particular Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. And I’ll add that there seems to be a lot of King Edward VI schools in Britain, because I see a lot of those too!
With Henry VIII, there tend to be a lot of religious articles that make reference to his split with Rome. And he tends to show up with food articles… can’t imagine why
Enough rambling thoughts from me for tonight!
The first is a follow-up to something that I posted back in May and July 2006 about a Holbein portrait of Sir Thomas Wyatt the Younger that was up for auction. It failed to sell in July after there were questions about whether or not it was really by Holbein. But now it has been re-authenticated and will go up for sale again, and this time for £5 million (almost $10,000,000 US). Read more about it from The Telegraph (including picture)
From The Times Online:
Academics have now traced the inscription to Boleyn’s contemporary, Sir John Cheke, who began his career at the court under her patronage, before becoming secretary to Edward VI. A document of about 1590 notes that Sir John inscribed numerous Holbeins for the King, helping to identify faces of royals and courtiers.Bendor Grosvenor, who carried out the research with David Starkey, the Tudor historian, said: “Cheke was one of the bright brains of the Tudor court. He would have known most of Holbein’s sitters, if not on personal terms, then at least visually . . . It seems inconceivable that he would get Anne’s identification wrong.”
A bit more on the DNA testing of Mary Tudor’s hair (including a picture of the locket):
HOPES that a lock of royal hair kept in west Suffolk could solve the centuries-old mystery of what befell the Princes in the Tower appear to have been quashed by a leading cleric.
…
It is thought these [bones] might belong to the two princes which, using modern DNA testing techniques, could have been checked against the lock of hair in Bury, because Mary Tudor, the sister of Henry VIII, would have the same mitochondrial DNA as the princes.Such a possibility has now been ruled out by the Dean of Westminster Abbey who said: “These are the remains of two innocent children that have been there for many centuries and it would be highly inappropriate, for any purpose of inquiry, to disturb them.”
And I’ve finally typed up the information on the miniature that Dr. Starkey now thinks is Lady Jane Grey. This is one of those things where I *want* it to be Jane, but I’m not totally convinced.
And finally, there will be a companion book to the Showtime “Tudors” series. You can pre-order it at Amazon.com and Amazon.uk here:
If you can, check out the Showtime webpage for the upcoming “The Tudors” series. These are two of my favorite photos from the batches I’ve seen so far. They also have downloads for desktop wallpaper and chat icons, more photos and videos. I’m not expecting 100% historical accuracy from the series (and I’m one of those who isn’t quite as picky about it, within reason) and am looking forward to it. I think it’s going to be a fun, sexy romp with some of our favorite kings and queens.
This is one of the new previews, set to “Lacrymosa” by Evanescence (I’m a big fan … love their lead singer’s voice)
A fascinating article that reader Linda passed along…
The hair that could unlock the riddle of the Princes in the Tower
The mystery of what happened to the Princes in the Tower is one of the most enduring in English history.
But an academic hopes that a locket of hair and the latest DNA testing techniques could at least reveal whether the skeletons of two children found in Westminster Abbey really are Edward V and his younger brother Richard.
…
But John Ashdown-Hill, a 56-yearold PhD student at Essex University, hopes that DNA analysis of a locket of hair believed to belong to the boys’ niece, Mary Tudor, could reveal the answer.
I’d love to see some real results come of this, although I’d like to see some additional comparisons done. Unfortunately it all will ultimately boil down to being able to test bones that are currently in Westminster Abbey, and they have been reluctant to give permission in the past. Since the technology just keeps getting better and the amount of material needed to get a sample can be small, perhaps they will allow testing now or soon?
This is the image in question in the article that I linked to last night. There was an article in the Telegraph today that included the picture. When I first read the description in the article, this is the one that I was picturing, so I was delighted to see that was indeed it. The scan that I put in above came from a catalog of an exhibition called “Artists of the Tudor Court – The Portrait Miniature Rediscovered” by Roy Strong. I don’t have the book with me right now, but I’ll check it tonight if I get a chance and post the information that the book has on the miniature.
Here’s the article from the Telegraph
From The Independent:
Brooch identifies portrait as Lady Jane Grey, the girl who reigned for nine days
By Louise Jury, Arts Correspondent
Published: 05 March 2007For decades, the female sitter in this 16th-century miniature painting remained unidentified. But after investigating the woman’s jewellery, the historian David Starkey is now convinced this is the only known portrait of Lady Jane Grey painted during her lifetime to have survived.
I’ll update if I find some links to more articles or images
Update: (link died… so I’ve removed it)
Plus, I forgot to mention it last week, but Alison Weir’s first novel, Innocent Traitor, came out in the US last week. Here are links to Amazon.com and Amazon.uk for the book:
The following links are to the three parts of a 30 min. high school film project on Anne Boleyn and Elizabeth I. The film was nominated for Best Picture and won Best Cinematography at the school’s film festival. Great job Sarah!
pt 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B807SYiMOFU
From icWales:
A RARE copy of the first printed atlas of England and Wales is to be offered at auction, it was announced today.
Sotheby’s said it was selling the “extraordinary” item in London on March 15.
The work of Yorkshire surveyor Christopher Saxton, printed between 1579 and 1590, is bound in one volume with a rare set of five charts by Giovanni Battista Boazio, illustrating Sir Francis Drake’s expedition to the West Indies and America from 1585-1586.
