“It is not at all clear that Jane Seymour was the bait carefully prepared by an alleged conservative faction. It is more likely that Henry met her when on progress in Hampshire. Maybe once the king’s interest in her was known, courtiers then attempted to exploit the situation, but more for reasons of patronage than policy. It may simply be that Henry entrusted Carew, as a loyal and long-serving courtier, with the responsibility of looking after Jane as she was becoming the king’s mistress. After Anne’s fall, Jane would be lodged at Carew’s house at Beddington. Maybe Carew had already earlier seized the opportunity to encourage Jane to criticise Anne, as Chapuys reported at the beginning of April; or perhaps Carew, whatever he actually did or did not do, boasted to Chapuys that he was coaching Jane to do down Anne, but we should be cautious about believing him. For Jane to tell Henry that Anne was abominated and that his marriage was thought illegitimate would be highly risky. Only someone absolutely certain that the king had already decided to repudiate Anne could confidently say that to him. Yet as late as 18 April Henry was insisting that Chapuys should publicly recognise Anne Boleyn. If Jane Seymour had spoken the words at the end of March that Chapuys says she was being coached to speak, it is likely that the king would have given her short shrift. A few days after Anne’s execution Chapuys reported that Jane had suggested to the king that Princess Mary should be restored to her former position: Henry had called her a fool and said that she should look rather to the advancement of their children. How credible is that report? Chapuys could not have overheard any such remarks. Perhaps Jane told Carew what she had told the king—though the king’s riposte would hardly have comforted the conservatives. Perhaps it was the king who let the story slip with the aim of putting further pressure, through Chapuys, on Princess Mary.”
— G. W. Bernard, Anne Boleyn: Fatal Attractions
