The Journal of Historical Fictions
published by the Historical Fictions Research Network
Volume 6, Issue 2: “Historical Fiction as Reparative Biofiction: Susanna Horenbout in the Work of Michelle Diener” by Valerie Schutte (Independent Scholar), pp. 45-64, 2025.
| DOI forthcoming |
The recent Six Lives: The Stories of Henry VIII’s Queens exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery of London (20 June to 8 September 2024) demonstrated the continued popularity of the Tudors and highlighted the complex and complicated task of identifying Tudor court artists, especially female ones (Tittler, Painting 32; Tittler, “‘Feminine Dynamic’” 123-131).[1] Susanna Horenbout (sometime Anglicized as Hornebolt) is no exception.[2] Susanna (1503-c.1554) came from a family of Flemish artists who worked at the Tudor court beginning in the 1520s. Her father Gerard was a famed miniaturist and painter for Archduchess Margaret of Austria and her brother Lucas likely created the first portrait miniatures at the Tudor court, possibly even teaching Hans Holbein.[3] As Lucas was recorded in Henry VIII’s expense accounts as a painter and Susanna was not, it is difficult to determine if she completed any of the miniatures typically ascribed to him.[4] In fact, only in November 2024 did historians Emma Rutherford, Owen Emmerson, and Nicola Tallis reidentify a miniature held at Compton Verney House, Warwickshire, as a depiction of Princess Mary Tudor and painted by Susanna Horenbout in the 1540s.[5] They based their findings on the shape of Mary’s nose and the fact that both Susanna’s father and brother were dead by the time Mary received the cross she wears in the image. While most previous exhibitions featuring Horenbout miniatures tended to credit only Lucas, Charlotte Bolland, curator of Six Lives, chose to recognize the “Horenbout workshop” rather than one specific sibling for creating nine miniatures and possibly even the writing box currently held by the Victoria and Albert Museum (Bolland 31, 55, 75).[6]
Even though Susanna received the patronage and employment of Henry VIII, Catherine of Aragon, Anne of Cleves, and Katherine Parr, she remains a relatively unknown figure at the Tudor court (Campbell and Foister 726; Frye 78; James and Franco). To remedy this, novelist Michelle Diener chose Susanna Horenbout to be the main female protagonist in her historical fiction debut and subsequent series. Diener wrote three historical novels and one short story about Susanna and her first husband, John Parker: In a Treacherous Court (2011); Keeper of the King’s Secrets (2012); In Defense of the Queen (2013); and Dangerous Sanctuary (2012), an e-book situated chronologically between the first and second novels. I argue that Diener’s novels function as a reparative fictionalized biography of Susanna Horenbout. Diener takes advantage of what Michael Lackey describes as “the confusion surrounding biofiction” (Novak and Dhúill, 16). Biofiction “sets out to rediscover marginalized lives,” for whom traditional biographies would be near impossible due to lack of credible sources (Lackey 1). In naming her “protagonist after an actual historical figure,” Diener’s novels sit in a liminal space between fiction and biography (Lackey 1). Furthermore, Diener’s novels allow her readers to engage with the “representational processes” of history: that is, why and how Susanna has been relegated to the margins of art history compared to her brother (De Groot, Remaking 2).
To offer a reparative biofiction of Susanna, Diener turned to the earliest historical article on Susanna and her family of artists, as well as histories of the Tudors by Alison Weir, and books on Renaissance art and illumination (Campbell and Foister; Weir).[7] Using these sources, Diener represents Susanna as “sharp-eyed and direct…working in a field almost entirely dominated by men,” with “no expectations for a normal life.”[8] Diener based her version of Susanna on fact, yet purposefully wrote the artist into situations of political intrigue to fill in the numerous gaps in her life at the Tudor court (Padmore, “Paintrix” 160; De Groot, Novel, 3). In having Susanna feature as the lead protagonist in four historical fictions, Diener gives agency to an artist mentioned only sporadically in the historical record (Gardiner and Padmore 181).
In her Author’s Note, Diener writes: “This is a work of fiction, although where possible I have tried to stay true to what happened during this exciting time in England’s history” (Diener, Court 299). According to Jerome de Groot, authors of historical fiction use paratextual material to legitimize themselves as authors, as well as add “authority and authenticity” to their texts (De Groot, Novel 63). De Groot further suggests “this reliance on authority, and interleaving of fictional account with historical information and inference, gives the work a certain authenticity” (De Groot, Novel72). As Stephanie Russo observes, audiences expect that historical fiction ought to adhere to some kind of historical accuracy (Russo 3, 8). Russo rightly points out that historical novelists “frequently stress the historicity of their works, in either public commentary or the paratextual materials often appended to historical novels” (Russo 2). For biofiction in particular, the quest for accuracy is prominent because these novels are rooted in real names and events (Novak and Dhúill 7-8; See also Jacobs; Keener; Lackey). Thus, in order for Diener to successfully recover Susanna from the historical record, she chose to use known historical information and only embellish aspects that would not change the course of history.
While Kelly Gardiner and Catherine Padmore have previously suggested that In a Treacherous Court seeks “to rehabilitate or restore” Susanna’s reputation, this chapter builds upon their work by looking at all four of Diener’s novels featuring Susanna, not just the first (Gardiner and Padmore 188). Furthermore, though they identify Diener’s first novel as “firmly located in the crime genre,” all four novels featuring Susanna also contain elements of historical romance (Gardiner and Padmore 183). As Diana Wallace suggested in 2005, historical novels by women about women are “hybridised, cross-fertilising with romance, fantasy, the Gothic, the adventure story and the detective novel,” creating a distinct literary form (Wallace 3). Diener herself envisions the novels as “thriller[s] with a romantic element but one[s] that w[ere] true to the historical facts.”[9] I argue that the four biofictional stories by Diener featuring Susanna Horenbout were meant to rectify the difficulty in attributing any extant miniatures or illuminations to her.
The Fictional Susanna Horenbout
In a Treacherous Court opens in February 1525, when readers are introduced to John Parker, a short-tempered servant of Henry VIII, and Susanna Horenbout, a painter from Ghent. Demonstrating her faithfulness to her historical sources, Diener immediately has Susanna recall Albrecht Durer purchasing a painting from her and being impressed that a female artist could be so talented (Diener, Court 14). The historical Susanna met Durer in Antwerp in May 1521, when he bought an illuminated plätlein of the Savior from her, complimenting her skills at the age of eighteen (Campbell and Foister 725). When the fictional Parker doubts Susanna’s new role at the Tudor court, she tells him: “‘My father would not have sent me to represent his atelier unless I was the very best he had available'” (Diener, Court5). Susanna constantly having to defend her talent and abilities becomes a recurring theme in Diener’s first two novels and short story. Every time she does so, it reinforces her value as a Tudor court artist worth remembering, thereby restoring her reputation and career.
Thus, Diener’s novels focus on Susanna as a “creator[s] and practitioner[s],” instead of solely reliant upon the men around her (Fitzmaurice, Miller, and Steen 15). According to Catherine Padmore, who has written extensively about In a Treacherous Court, Susanna’s “uneasy reception and her continual need to defend her authority and authorship turns the clock hands forward to our times” (Padmore, “Paintrix” 166). In this way, Susanna “functions in a meta-fictive way, offering commentary on the status of female writers in our own world” (Padmore, “Paintrix” 167). This emphasis continues in Diener’s other biofictions about Susanna as well. In order to make Susanna relatable to Diener’s modern readers, Susanna faces both modern and early modern problems, such as having to choose between family and her spouse, being undervalued in the workplace, and even sexual assault.
Again, when Susanna meets Henry VIII for the first time, she hands him a sketch: “He cast a glance across at Parker, as if to confirm this really was the work of a woman’s hand. From long practice, Susanna suppressed her frustration and hurt” (Diener, Court 34). This scene is another instance of Diener trying to restore Susanna’s lost work, by indicating the unfairness of judging her artistry to be of lesser quality because it was completed by a woman. This reparation continues with her conversation with the king. When Parker formally introduces Susanna to the king, he is confused because he had expected her brother to be his new court painter. Susanna explains that he will be sent over soon, “‘but I am as able as my brother in illumination and painting’” (Diener, Court 34). Later, after she creates a “magnificent” spur-of-the-moment painting of strangers in a pub, the landlord proclaims: “‘If I hadn’t seen yer there with me own eyes, painting it, I’d never believe ‘twas a woman done it'” (Diener, Court 79). Over and over, observers doubt Susanna’s talents because she is a female working in a traditionally male-dominated craft. As with novels featuring female Tudor painter Levina Teerlinc, Diener’s novels reflect contemporary concerns regarding gender equality (Padmore, “Portrait” 33). With these statements being relevant to both the Tudor period and Diener’s modern audience, Diener suggests that little has changed for women over the last 500 years.
The main storyline of In a Treacherous Court involves a high-ranking person at court conspiring against the king, with the most likely candidate being the Duke of Norfolk. This anonymous conspiracist tricks many of Henry’s courtiers into intercepting letters from Richard de la Pole, with the intention of placing de la Pole as the king’s heir. Yet, the conspiracy actually runs deeper. The plan is that once each courtier is found to possess a letter from de la Pole, he or she will be sent to the Tower for treason, just as de la Pole enters England with an army. With Henry at his weakest, the real person behind the conspiracy will grab the throne for himself. All four of Diener’s novels follow a similar pattern, in that the main plot of each story has to do with political intrigue centered around Henry VIII, Cardinal Wolsey, and Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk, with Susanna’s art remaining a substantial subplot. This organization allows Susanna to move freely around the Tudor court while she completes several high-profile paintings and manuscript illuminations.
Diener also restores Susanna’s reputation by giving her agency, not only over her career, but also over her personal life. Susanna frequently recounts that her father sent her to England because she wanted a sexual relationship with a blacksmith who worked in her father’s workshop. Susanna recalls how it was unfair her brother Lucas “could bed half of Ghent if he had a mind to,” and her father would not disapprove (Diener, Court 78). Susanna wants to be considered equal to her brother in both artistic talent and personal qualities. Thus, Susanna chooses to lose her virginity to Parker only four days after meeting him. Susanna’s decision to embrace sexual freedom, clearly a reflection of contemporary attitudes towards sexuality, rather than the Tudor past, is an example of anachronism serving “to close the perceived gap between the past and the present” (Russo 4). Susanna may not be relatable to her audience as an early modern artist, but she is as a female concerned with her sexuality and sexual expression.
Dangerous Sanctuary, the four-chapter e-book Diener self-published, picks up immediately after the first novel. The day after Parker proposes to Susanna, Henry commissions her to make a painting of a ceremony at St. Paul’s Cathedral that commemorates the Battle of Pavia, Richard de la Pole’s death, and Francis I’s capture. Walking out of the cathedral, Susanna overhears Geoffrey Pole and Yeoman of the Guard Halliwell secretly plotting to assassinate the king. Pole is insulted that the king wishes to celebrate the death of his cousin Richard de la Pole and now covets the throne for himself. Susanna later spots Pole disguised as a monk and uses her wits to talk the would-be assassin out of harming the king, and then proceeds to draw the king during the celebratory Mass. As Geoffrey Pole exits St. Paul’s, he tells Parker: “‘Give thanks for what God has sent you, Parker. I cannot imagine a more intriguing woman'” (Diener, Dangerous unpaginated, appears in chapter 4). Apart from Pole’s remark about her being intriguing and Susanna introducing herself to Pole as the King’s Painter, this short story has no other attempts to restore Susanna’s character or make up for historical wrongs against her. Instead, Diener portrays Susanna as a capable and talented artist, as well as a functional member of the Tudor court; Susanna has triumphed against the odds as a working female artist.
Diener’s second novel in the Susanna Horenbout series, Keeper of the King’s Secret, opens with another conspiracy against the crown, again likely instigated by the Duke of Norfolk. Taking place only one month after Susanna’s arrival in England, it has less of the artist defending herself and her abilities and more glimpses into her work for the king. Thus, Diener suggests that Susanna’s talents and abilities are becoming widely known and respected. Mistress Greene, Parker’s housekeeper, reminds her: “‘But do not think you are without influence. You are no longer the stranger you were in these parts. People respect you. And they like you'” (Diener, Keeper 193). Mistress Greene’s comments are reparative of Susanna’s character as well. While her new countrymen are only starting to appreciate her talent, Susanna now commands immediate respect as a gentlewoman, helped by the fact that she is betrothed to Parker. Susanna herself is amazed at how quickly she has been accepted, thinking: “She has not been here very long, and she was surprised how quickly she had settled in, how much she felt at ease” (Diener, Keeper 193). With this second novel, Diener continues to argue that Susanna is exceptional for being a working female artist.
Susanna is summoned by Cardinal Wolsey to illuminate a document by King Henry that will be sent to Emperor Charles V. Susanna responds: “‘And it is my work, what I was brought to London to do'” (Diener, Keeper 35-36). Now that Susanna is settled at the Tudor court, Diener seeks to recover the artist through her accomplishments. When she arrives in Wolsey’s chambers to complete her work, she sits down and starts to read the text. Wolsey is surprised she can read, briefly tells her the contents, and instructs her to illuminate quickly. Susanna proves to be not only an accomplished artist, but also a woman who speaks and reads multiple languages. However, Susanna later reveals to Parker that the document really was a proposal by Henry to invade France while Charles holds Francis hostage.
At court, Susanna is mistaken for the king’s new mistress, repeating events from the first novel. As she waits outside the king’s bedroom, Thomas Wyatt approaches her, thinking she is there for a sexual purpose. In another scene, Susanna laments: “The Queen did not know her. They had never been introduced. Susanna repressed a sigh. Would her father ever have sent her here, if he had known that all thought her the King’s mistress, simply because she was young and often seen leaving His Majesty’s chambers?” (Diener, Keeper 138). Susanna is disappointed that other members of court see her only as an object of sexualization. Diener relies on this mechanism to suggest that one of the only ways a woman could achieve power at court was through a sexual relationship with the king. Susanna operates outside these norms. She has a career painting and illuminating that offers her both social and physical mobility, thereby restoring her character as unique among Tudor women. Additionally, she is able to overcome Tudor sexual politics by having a career, something that might resonate with Diener’s modern readers.
Susanna is further rehabilitated when she must navigate court on her own because Wolsey has kidnapped Parker. Queen Katherine summons Susanna upon the pretense of her painting a portrait of Princess Mary. However, Katherine quietly reveals ulterior motives, informing Susanna that she has heard rumors about Wolsey’s dislike of Parker. With Parker held at Fleet Prison, Susanna is the person completing most of the action to move the plot forward; she is thrust into spying and politicking on her own. As a non-Englishwoman, but part of the English court, she is uniquely positioned to identify the intricacies of Tudor society because she usually goes unnoticed (Padmore, “Paintrix” 162). While members of the court continue to doubt her artistic talent, they also do not even consider that she could be anything more, allowing Susanna to enter spaces and conversations other women do not have access to. Thus, Diener recreates Susanna not only as an artist, but also a spy and crime detective, because repairing her reputation as an artist is insufficient. Since Susanna’s art cannot speak for itself, Susanna must become more than an artist. Just as Diana Wallace observed of historical novels about women, Susanna functions as artist, romantic partner, and spy simultaneously. Historian and art critic Susan E. James actually suggested the possibility of the historical Susanna being a spy for King Henry only a couple years before Diener published her first novel (James, Feminine 250; Schutte). There is no indication that Diener read any of James’s work on Susanna; her book is not mentioned on Diener’s website, nor in any of the Author’s Notes as being one of the historical sources that she consulted.
For the fictional Susanna, however, even being a successful artist and spy does not overcome all her doubts about her career at the Tudor court. She still feels some bitterness towards her brother because she knows he will always overshadow her, a reflection of what happens to the historical Susanna. When one of the young boys Parker employs to be a spy feels left out, Susanna recalls: “She had felt the same way countless times when her brother had been given a chance or commission, and she had been overlooked. She knew the slow burn of resentment” (Diener, Keeper 194). In another scene, while Susanna is searching through the chamber of an old family friend, Master Jens, to look for a missing jewel belonging to King Henry that could plunge England into war with France if not found, she finds the first page of a letter from her father to the jeweler. She thought of how she had been in England nearly two months without receiving a missive from her father. Susanna was surprised to find that her father boasted “of her position at the English court, and the fine work her brother Lucas was doing in Germany” (Diener, Keeper 245).
Susanna eventually rescues Parker from Fleet Prison, dressed as a priest, as women were not allowed to enter the prison on their own. With Susanna having retrieved the missing jewel, Parker gives it to the king. As in the first novel there is no punishment for Norfolk or Wolsey’s machinations; political grabbing is allowed to continue because there is not enough evidence to convict either man. In doing so, this tracks with the historical Norfolk and Wolsey, as neither man was arrested for treason in 1525, even if the historical Wolsey suffered considerable embarrassment over the failure of the Amicable Grant and Norfolk lost his position as Lord Admiral and spent much of the next two years away from court. So, while the jewel theft plot is fictional, it could have fitted into the historical timeline, one of Diener’s goals, per her Author’s Note (Diener, Keeper 285). It also gives Susanna the opportunity to operate as an artist, spy and savvy modern woman, all while acknowledging her familial connections to other European courts, thus serving as a reparative device to move forward Diener’s development of Susanna.
At the end of the novel, Susanna finally receives a letter from her father. Susanna tells Parker: “‘They are coming to England'” (Diener, Keeper 282). Furthermore, “‘he is bringing my mother, and he and my brother Lucas will take over my work for the King'” (Diener, Keeper 282). Susanna bemoans: “Even though the understanding had always been that this opportunity was temporary, now that he was taking it away, she realized how much this work meant to her. This life. Being the visible artist, not the one who toiled in obscurity in the atelier” (Diener, Keeper 281). This is really the point of Diener’s novels – to raise Susanna from obscurity and give her a story to make her better known, as there is too little-known extant art to do so (Padmore, “Portrait” 43). Secondarily, Diener writes Susanna as a strong female character for her modern readers to admire and regard as a feminist forebear.
The final three pages of this second novel drive home the point: Susanna is upset her father and brother will take her place as the King’s Painter and be credited with all work created by the Horenbout family. Parker wants his betrothed to be happy and recommends that she should still paint, just for other clients. He tells her: “‘It seems to me you have other clients already, besides the King.’ He stroked her hair. ‘The Queen, and her ladies, are all clamoring for your pictures'” (Diener, Keeper 282). Susanna happily agrees that she shall continue to paint. These last events not only serve to repair Susanna as a painter in her own right, but also loosely follow the known facts of her real life. Her family moved to England sometime during the 1520s, she and Parker served at the Tudor court, and she later received the patronage of Princess Mary and Queen Katherine Parr (Campbell and Foister 726). In writing her character this way, Diener reconciles the fictional Susanna with the historical one, thus bringing the Tudor court artist out of obscurity, just as she set out to do.
Diener’s final novel about Susanna Horenbout, In Defense of the Queen, appears to be self-published, as the front matter offers no publication information, and takes place a few months after the second novel. In this final novel, there is much less defense of Susanna’s skill as a painter, and more acceptance that it is her job at court. Susanna’s brother, Lucas, arrives at Parker’s house and Susanna thinks: “It was hard to admit it, even to herself, but while she was happy to see her brother again, she was equally sorry he’d come, because there could be only one reason for it. He was taking her job from her” (Diener, Defense 5). Susanna believes Lucas lied about his reasons for coming to England:
I know him too well. He wasn’t telling the truth. I thought perhaps he feared I could persuade my father against the plan to give him my position, and rushed here to establish himself before I could do it, but there is something more to it than that. He would be comfortable with that lie, because he believes my job as painter to the king to be his due, but he’s nervous. My brother is afraid of something (Diener, Defense 9-10).
As it turns out, Lucas embroils Susanna and Parker in yet another scandal against the English crown.
Lucas quickly reveals that Margaret of Austria wants Susanna to pass a message to Queen Katherine. If Susanna refuses, Margaret will stop paying the Horenbouts their wages. Lucas thinks Susanna will easily agree, but she does not want to commit treason by secretly passing messages between sovereigns. Susanna enjoys being valued as a court painter and is not willing to give it up. Ultimately, the message from Margaret to Katherine is simply a warning that Charles V intends to break his betrothal to Princess Mary so that he can marry Isabella of Portugal instead. If Charles does not marry Mary and Katherine cannot have any more children, Henry may not have any more use for either and could promote his illegitimate son, Henry Fitzroy, as his heir.
Susanna and Parker go to court to give the message to Henry, but are turned away because he is in a bad mood. Susanna finally decides to give the message to Katherine, and not telling Henry, figuring that at least one member of the royal couple needs to know of Charles’s planned deception. As a royal artist, Susanna has “increased social mobility” and can enter the queen’s chambers without suspicion (Padmore, “Paintrix” 164). The artist presents the queen with a miniature of Princess Mary, who is appreciative and tells her how lifelike it is. Yet Parker and Susanna are too late; Wolsey is busy at court spreading rumors that Susanna is a traitor and a spy. Just after Susanna passes on Margaret’s message, she is arrested for treason and taken to the Tower on the order of Cardinal Wolsey.
While in the Tower, Susanna contemplates her brother’s role in her arrest: “I can’t believe Lucas wishes me this much ill.… He has been jealous of me. He is jealous of the position I hold with the King. But deliberately having me arrested, and possibly tortured? I can’t believe it” (Diener, Defense 103). This dialogue and plot device actually seem counterproductive to the rest of Diener’s novels. In the earlier novels, her father sends her to England as punishment for trying to pursue a sexual relationship outside of wedlock. She also frequently expresses her father’s favoritism for Lucas. In the second novel, she reveals that she is barely in contact with her family, as demonstrated by the lack of letters from her father. Additionally, Lucas and Gerard held the same court position under Margaret of Austria that Susanna held in England. Lucas would have no reason to be jealous of her, and even less reason to conspire against her with Cardinal Wolsey. It seems as though Diener wants this passage of dialogue to serve as another device to repair Susanna’s character as just as talented, yet unknown, compared to her brother. However, it is inconsistent with how she has previously developed Susanna’s character. Yet to push this particular plot forward, Susanna’s character must be doubted.
During her time in the Tower, Susanna has many visitors who offer her help: Parker; Will Somers, the King’s Fool; and, Gertrude Courtenay, one of the queen’s gentlewomen. Their visits serve to show that not only is Susanna established, but is also respected. Even Henry presents Susanna with a constant stack of writs and documents to be illuminated and commissions her to paint Fitzroy. Though she is suspected of treason, Henry allows her to leave the Tower daily to paint his bastard son, as her talents are unrivalled.
It is only the young Fitzroy who is surprised at Susanna’s skill. When he sees her drawing of him, he tells her: “‘I didn’t know women could paint and draw'” (Diener, Defense 128). Unlike in the first two novels, Susanna answers him patiently and without feeling slighted, presumably because he is a child, telling him that as women have fingers, hands, and eyes, they can surely paint even if they are not frequently taught how. She explains: “‘My father is a famous painter. And he taught me…I didn’t have to help my mother with the cooking and cleaning, I could paint all day'” (Diener, Defense 128). Following this exchange, Susanna’s Tower guard reiterates Fitzroy’s feelings. “‘You draw better than anyone I have ever seen,’ Kilburne said, suddenly from behind. ‘Man or woman'” (Diener, Defense 129). He continued: “‘Your skill reflects well upon him [the king]. No person receiving such a letter could fail to understand the King of England is the greatest sovereign in the world'” (Diener, Defense 129).
The main conspiracy of the novel concludes with an assassination attempt against Fitzroy, while Parker, Susanna, and Kilburne are present. They decide to take him to the Tower for safety but are denied entry and leave. The group then takes Fitzroy to Bridewell Palace, and the king arrives just after them. All is well – Fitzroy is safe and all suspicion against Susanna is lifted. Parker warns Norfolk that he knows he was behind everything. But again, as in the first two novels, Norfolk escapes any charges, in keeping with the historical duke’s political career. At their departure, Henry tells Susanna that her painting of Mary is good, but she should make Fitzroy’s better.
This final novel of the Susanna Horenbout series ends with Lucas leaving to go back to Ghent. He says he and their parents will all return soon, telling Susanna: “‘Don’t get too comfortable in my job'” (Diener, Defense 294). Therefore, by the end of the series, even though Susanna’s skill as an artist is widely acknowledged, her position at court is still in jeopardy. However, Lucas’s departure serves Diener’s plan to restore and repair Susanna’s career. With Lucas gone, anything painted or illuminated from the “Horenbout workshop” must be completed by Susanna.
Of the four stories, this one seems to be written with the least nuance. Even the mystery at its core is the least provoking. Given that the whole novel revolves around giving a secret to the queen, it is odd that it did not end with a scene between Susanna and Katherine. Diener likely did this intentionally so that Susanna remained the most important female character. Importantly, by the end of the series, Susanna’s skill no longer needs to be restored or reinforced; she is simply a female courtier frequently embroiled in court intrigue.
Conclusion
According to Sylvia Barbara Soberton, Hans Holbein’s sketch bearing the inscription “the Lady Parker” may in fact be Susanna Horenbout (Soberton 133-157). Soberton suggests that a sketch by a well-known artist such as Holbein would have increased Susanna’s own credibility as an artist, effectively serving as a statement of support (Soberton 149). Likewise, Michelle Diener’s three novels and one short story offer a reparative biofiction of the Tudor court artist, redressing past grievances of her obscurity and giving her a voice among her Tudor peers. Diener establishes Susanna as working above and outside stereotypes of early modern women and gender (Fitzmaurice, Miller, and Steen 19). The fictional Susanna is artistically talented and strong-willed, has agency over her career, and is simultaneously compassionate and relatable. With control over her career and sexuality, she is able to collapse the space between past and present as a feminist role model. Yet, as so little extant artwork can be confirmed to be by Susanna, Lucas Horenbout gets the last word in art history. He is the artist praised in galleries, while Susanna remains in the shadows—perhaps befitting her career as a spy in Diener’s novels.
Works Cited
Secondary Sources:
Auerbach, Erna. Tudor Artists. Athlone Press, 1954.
Charlotte Bolland, et al. Six Lives: The Stories of Henry VIII’s Queens. The National Portrait Gallery, 2024.
Campbell, Lorne, and Susan Foister. “Gerard, Lucas and Susanna Horenbout.” Burlington Magazine, vol. 128, no. 1002, 1986, pp. 719-727.
Coombs, Katherine. The Portrait Miniature in England. V&A Publications, 1998.
De Groot, Jerome. The Historical Novel. Routledge, 2010.
De Groot, Jerome. Remaking History: The Past in Contemporary Historical Fictions. Routledge, 2016.
Diener, Michelle. Dangerous Sanctuary. Self-published e-book, 2012.
Diener, Michelle. In a Treacherous Court. Gallery Books, 2011.
Diener, Michelle. In Defense of the Queen. Self-published, 2013.
Diener, Michelle. Keeper of the King’s Secrets. Gallery Books, 2012.
Fitzmaurice, James, Naomi J. Miller, and Sara Jayne Steen. “Introduction: Biography, biofiction, and gender in the Modern Age.” Authorizing Early Modern European Women: From Biography to Biofiction, edited by James Fitzmaurice, Naomi J. Miller, and Sara Jayne Steen, Amsterdam University Press, 2022, pp. 13-20.
Frye, Susan. Pens and Needles: Women’s Textualities in Early Modern England. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010.
Gardiner, Kelly and Catherine Padmore. “Australian women writing Tudor lives.” Imagining Gender in Biographical Fiction, edited by Julia Novak and Caitríona Ní Dhúill, Palgrave Macmillan, 2022, pp. 179-210.
Hearn, Karen. “No. 65 Henry VIII.” Dynasties: Painting in Tudor and Jacobean England 1530-1630, edited by Karen Hearn Tate Publishing, 1995, pp. 118.
James, Susan. The Feminine Dynamic In English Art, 1485-1603: Women as Consumers, Patrons, and Painters.Ashgate, 2009.
James, Susan E. “The Horenbout family workshop at the Tudor Court, 1522-1541: Collaboration, patronage, and production.” Cogent Arts & Humanities, vol. 8, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-50.
James, Susan and Jamie Franco. “Susanna Horenbout, Levina Teerlinc and the mask of royalty.” Jaarboek Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen, 2000, pp. 91-125.
Kren, Thomas, and Scot McKendrick. The Renaissance: The Triumph of Flemish Manuscript Painting in Europe. The J. Paul Getty Museum, 2003.
Lackey, Michael. Biofiction: An Introduction. Routledge, 2022.
MacLeod, Catharine, with Rab MacGibbon, Victoria Button, Katherine Coombs, and Alan Derbyshire. Elizabethan Treasures: Miniatures by Hilliard and Oliver. The National Portrait Gallery, 2019.
Novak, Julia and Caitríona Ní Dhúill. “Imagining Gender in Biographical Fiction: Introduction.” Imagining Gender in Biographical Fiction, edited by Julia Novak and Caitríona Ní Dhúill, Palgrave Macmillan, 2022, pp. 1-46.
Padmore, Catherine. “Portrait of an unknown woman: Fictional Representations of Levina Teerlinc, Tudor paintrix.”Authorizing Early Modern European Women: From Biography to Biofiction, edited by James Fitzmaurice, Naomi J. Miller, and Sara Jayne Steen, Amsterdam University Press, 2022, pp. 33-47.
Padmore, Catherine. “The Tudor paintrix in recent fictions.” Recovering History Through Fact and Fiction: Forgotten Lives, edited by Dallas John Baker, Donna Lee Brien, and Nike Sulway, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2017, pp. 158-170.
Paget, Hugh. “Gerard and Lucas Hornebolte in England.” Burlington Magazine, vol. CI, 1959, pp. 396-402.
Russo, Stephanie. The Anachronistic Turn: Historical Fiction, Drama, Film, and Television. Routledge, 2024.
Schutte, Valerie. “Anne of Cleves and Tudor Court Artists.” Crafting a Legacy: Artists and Female Patronage in Early Modern Europe, edited by Noelia García Pérez. Brepols: forthcoming February 2026.
Soberton, Sylvia Barbara. “Susanna Horenbout at the Tudor Court: Hans Holbein’s Forgotten Sitter?” Royal Studies Journal, vol. 11, no. 2, 2024, pp. 133-157.
Strong, Roy. Artists of the Tudor Court: The Portrait Miniature Rediscovered, 1520-1620. The Victoria and Albert Museum, 1983.
Strong, Roy. The English Renaissance Miniature. Thames and Hudson, 1983.
Tittler, Robert. Painting for a Living in Tudor and Early Stuart England. The Boydell Press, 2022.
Tittler, Robert. “The ‘Feminine Dynamic’ in English Art: A reassessment.” British Art Journal, vol. 17, no. 1, 2016, pp. 123-131.
Wallace, Diana. The Woman’s Historical Novel: British Women Writers, 1900-2000. Palgrave Macmillan, 2000.
Weir, Alison. Henry VIII: The King and His Court. Ballantine Books, 2002.
Woods, Kim W. “Holbein and the reform of images,” Viewing Renaissance Art, edited by Kim W. Woods, Carol M. Richardson, and Angeliki Lymberopoulou, Yale University Press, 2007, pp. 249-286.
[1] Zoom discussion with Karen Hearn, 17 May 2021.
[2] For the purposes of this essay, I will refer to her as Susanna, so as not to confuse her identity as her last name changed with each of her marriages. She is typically referred to with her natal name to associate her with her famous family of artists.
[3] The most complete biography of the Horenbout family is Campbell and Foister. See also Paget; Auerbach; Hearn 118; Coombs 21-24; Woods 271.
[4] Thomas Kren and Scot McKendrick acknowledge many manuscript miniatures that could have been completed by either Susanna or Lucas. Kren and McKendrick 432-434. Strong 8, 44. See also James, “Horenbout.”
[5]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/nov/17/after-decades-tiny-500-year-old-royal-portrait-is-identified-as-mary-tudor. Accessed 1 December 2024.
[6] Strong, Artists. This catalogue accompanied the exhibition that took place from 9 July to 6 November 1983. Kren and McKendrick. This catalogue accompanied the exhibition that took place at the Getty Museum from 17 June to 7 September 2003. MacLeod. This catalogue accompanied the exhibition that took place from 21 February to 19 May 2019.
[7] https://www.michellediener.com/tag/susanna-horenbout/. Posted by Diener on 1 March 2013. Accessed 1 December 2024.
[8] https://www.michellediener.com/tag/susanna-horenbout/. Posted by Diener on 1 March 2013. Accessed 1 December 2024.
[9]https://onthetudortrail.com/Blog/book-talk/author-interviews/q-a-with-michelle-diener/. Accessed 14 December 2024.
Historical Fictions Research Network 