“[Edward] also appears to have kept mementos of his mother, documents, a comb and (extraordinarily enough) ‘small tools of sorcery’, which casts an entirely new light on Jane's activities. More reasonably he also retained an enamelled glass depicting Christ's passion, and sundry ‘unicorns horns’ garnished with silver gilt. To what extent Jane had used all these trinkets we do not know, but their retention argues a dutiful sense of filial piety in the son who had never known her.”

“Quite what these ‘instruments of sorcery’ may have been is not known, but the thought of Jane indulging in a little witchcraft to pass the time is an intriguing one. Presumably her husband never found out!”

(David Loades, Jane Seymour: Henry VIII's Favourite Wife)

Jane Seymour, you’ll never escape the accusations of witchcraft now.

If I ever write fanfiction about you, I’ll portray you as a proto-Wiccan.

#paraphrased from isabellalinton #everybody is aware that Jane Seymour wasn’t actually a cut out from a 1950s Sears catalogue right? #and I don’t mean she wasn’t traditionally feminine or religiously conservative #I mean she had complex thoughts emotions and opinions like any other human being #and the continued effort to shoehorn her into ‘perfect wife’ or ‘scheming whore’ is misogynistic and reductive

Why do people act like “proud” and “quiet” or “ambitious” and “pious” are traits that contradict each other. Why do people insist that Jane Seymour had to be one posthumously assigned character trope or another. Human beings aren’t like that.

🤣And they say the witch was Anne.

But seriously, I think the ancient herbalism that women were taught in the past is underestimated.

Jane may not have been a great scholar, but she certainly wasn’t a fool or a simpleton.

“Of the thirty items so far identified in [Anne Boleyn’s music Manuscript 1070 (Royal College of Music)], half are by the favourite composers heard at Margaret of Austria’s court. The line of influence seems plain. One must assume, too, that this taste was shown in Anne’s own music-making, for somewhere in her education she was able to develop considerable musical skill; this is evidenced in a number of sources and may well have been an interest in common with Henry VIII, who prided himself on his own musical abilities.”

— A European Education. The life and death of Anne Boleyn: ‘The most happy’. (Eric Ives)

“For a Saint Valentine’s Day ball, Anne commissioned diamonds crafted into the shape of hearts to wear in her loose, long brown hair. She struck such a glamorous figure that even one of her bitterest enemies called her ‘the rose of state.’”

— Gareth Russell on Anne Boleyn’s Valentine’s Day style in 1530
(via pinkballerinas)

#someone remind me what it says but i know it means jesus#i wonder if its the queens jewels or not (catalinamaria)

it's IHS! :)

and the cross is the Tau cross. it's not as good quality, as we're relying on Leemput's copy of the original, but Jane might be wearing it again (as a pendant) in the Whitehall Mural.

as for them being the queen's jewels, according to Tallis:

“[...] a tau cross that appears in both queenly inventories can be seen in portrait miniatures of both Jane Seymour and Kateryn Parr – its distinctive style sets it apart from the other crosses in the inventory. The miniatures [...] confirm that the cross was a part of the collection from at least the reign of Jane Seymour, and James suggested that it may even have been owned by Anne Boleyn. However, a miniature of Catherine of Aragon [...] shows her wearing a similar tau cross, so it is equally likely that it originated with her. [The Jesuses] may have been the IHS brooches/pendants that can be seen adorning portraits of both Catherine of Aragon and Jane Seymour [...] If this was the case and the Jesus was the same as that which adorns Jane Seymour, then it would fit the description of the item described as ‘a Jehus of golde conteignyng xxxij diamondes hauyng thre peerlles hanging at the same’, and ‘a Ihesus furnysshed with xxxij Dyamountes and three perles pendaunt’. It also matches a description of a jewel found in Henry VIII’s 1519 and 1530 jewel inventories: ‘A diamond Jhs with three hanging pearls’. This could be nothing more than coincidence, but it is interesting to consider the possibility that it was given to Jane Seymour by the King before passing into the hands of her successors. [...] Catherine can be seen wearing a border of pearls, gold and diamonds, whilst the remainder of her jewels clearly represent her piety. The brooch with the letters IHS – the first three letters of the name Jesus in Greek – and the necklace to which a tau cross is attached, could have been a deliberate choice by Catherine in order to convey her religious devotion. It is possible that the tau cross was the same as that which appears in miniatures of Jane Seymour and Kateryn Parr – it seems remarkably similar. Although the crosses worn by the latter two queens show two fewer diamonds, they are otherwise identical in design and it has already been noted that it was not uncommon for jewels to be refashioned. Similarly, the same tau crosses worn by Jane Seymour and Kateryn Parr appear in both Kateryn and Katherine Howard’s inventories. If Catherine of Aragon had also owned the tau cross then it serves as further visual evidence that queens had access to the belongings of others, and there may be yet a further example of this. Although not identical, the IHS brooch worn by Catherine is similar to the one worn in Holbein’s portrait of Jane Seymour. Such designs retained their popularity until the seventeenth century, and chapter two suggested that Jane’s brooch may have been given to her by her husband. However, Jane was known to be a great admirer of Catherine, in whose household she had once served. If Jane’s jewels had been 635 deliberately chosen for their similarity, it could reflect a desire from Jane to emulate the pious example of queenship that had been set by her former mistress.”

the Parr miniature referred to is here:

Catherine of Aragon’s miniature detail:

in terms of Henry VIII’s acquisition of Catherine of Aragon's jewelry, in Letters and Papers:

“But though on this matter of the journey and interview the courtiers appear cold and indifferent, certain it is that the Lady [Anne] thinks otherwise, for knowing very well how to make hay while the sun shines, she has not been slack to provide herself with rich and most expensive dresses and ornaments, which the King has ordered to be bought for the occasion. After sending her his own jewels (baghes), the King has, I hear, lately given the duke of Norfolk commission, and he has come down here on purpose, to procure through a third person those belonging to the Queen; who, I am told, said to the bearer of the Royal message: "., cannot present the King with my jewels as he desires, inasmuch as when, on a late occasion, I, according to the custom of this kingdom, presented him with a New Year's gift he warned me to refrain from such presents in future. Besides which (she said) it is very annoying and offensive to me, and I would consider it a sin and a load upon my conscience if I were persuaded to give up my jewels (baghes) for such a wicked purpose as that of ornamenting a person who is the scandal of Christendom, and is bringing vituperation and infamy upon the King, through his taking her with him to such a meeting across the Channel. Yet," continued the Queen, "if the King sends expressly for my jewels I am ready to obey his commands in that as well as in all other matters." Though highly displeased and sore at the Queen's answer the King nevertheless did send a gentleman of his chamber, who brought express orders to the Queen's Chancellor, and to her Chamberlain, to see to the delivery of the said jewels besides a letter to the Queen herself in credence of the messenger, who said to her in the King's name that he was very much astonished at her not having sent her jewels forthwith when he first asked for them, as the queen of France, her sister, and many other [ladies] would have done." Upon which the Queen gently pleaded excuse for her former refusal, and sent him. the whole of her jewels, and the King, as I am given to understand, is very much pleased and glad at it.”

“Henry’s other three English brides used their wardrobe to raise themselves from mere courtiers to a queen. The use of dress by Henry’s wives was also a means of establishing their own identity at court, and for his English brides, not born and reared to be queen, to establish their position as queen. Jane Seymour, for example, sought to enforce a certain English style of dress on the women of her household. […] Sleeves provided an excellent means of display. Jane had sleeves adorned with gold aglets or rather pairs of gold aglets. Forty-nine pairs of sleeves were decorated in this way and the descriptions indicate that the aglets had a function: ‘oone peir of Slevis of white cloth of golde reyzid with golde and Silver tissue / tyed with viij peir of Aglettes of golde’. After aglets, embroidery was the next most favoured form of adornment, being employed on 16 pairs. It appears to have chiefly been carried out in metal thread or black silk, and a few naturalistic designs are recorded: acorns, honey-suckle and ‘a barnacle and traile’. There are also four instances of decorative quilting, and in each case the work was executed in black silk in floral designs of the type recorded in portraits including ‘oone peir of Slevis paned overthwarte with golde and Silver quiltid with blac Silke ruffed at thande with strawberye Leavis and flowers of golde and blac Silke’. Just one pair of sleeves was decorated with the king’s initial made in gold: ‘oone peir of Slevis of crymsen Satten thowtesides of either of them sett with iiij .H. of golde And in every H. ix peerles’. It is possible that Jane wore these sleeves when Henry wore the doublet, the foresleeves and placard of which, had been decorated with 18 emeralds and 29 letter of I, each containing nine pearls, all set in gold. The stones and letters were delivered by Sir Anthony Denny on 14 June 1536 to William Ibgrave, embroiderer to the king. Jane also owned two pairs of linen sleeves of the type seen in the portrait from the Mauritshuis (Pl. VIa), one pair being more luxurious than the other: ‘oone peir of Lynen slevis paned with golde over tharme quiltid with blac ilke and flowers betwixe the panes and at the hande. oone peir of Lynen Slevis enbraudred alover with blac silke and venice golde tuffed owte with Lynen cloth’.”

also interesting to compare the size of wardrobes between CoA and JS:

or, as Maria Hayward summarises: “The evidence of her wardrobe indicates that she used it to define her role as queen. On 23 December 1536 ‘Yesterday the king and Queen, with all the dukes and lordes and the Emperor’s ambassador, rode through London and were honourably received. Such a sight has not been seen since the emperor was here’. A selection of Jane’s clothes is recorded in the 1542 inventory of Whitehall. It represents a significant percentage of the clothes that were made for her during the 17 months of her marriage to the king. Her wardrobe included a wider range of garments to those found in Catherine of Aragon’s wardrobe. Jane’s clothes were also made from a larger range of colours but a similar range of fabrics.”