Short answers, pulled from the story.
The author of the Spanish Chronicle remains unknown and is described as one of history's most persistent ghosts. No name is attached to the original manuscript, and no clear trail leads to a specific Spanish diplomat, merchant, or traveler. Some scholars speculate the author may have been a member of the Spanish embassy in London, while others suggest the text was a later fabrication.
The Spanish Chronicle was published in 1889 when historian Martin Hume translated it from Spanish and added his own notes. The work was written during the reigns of Henry VIII and Edward VI but remained unpublished until the late 19th century. Hume treated the text as an authentic 16th-century source upon its release.
Francisco Felipe serves as the primary eyewitness whose account forms the backbone of the Spanish Chronicle narrative. His testimony provides vivid descriptions of court life, religious upheavals, and the personal struggles of Henry VIII. The reliability of Felipe's account is questionable, and historians debate whether he was a genuine observer or a fictional construct.
Historians including Alison Weir label the Spanish Chronicle notoriously inaccurate due to numerous errors in dates, names, and events. The text often contradicts other contemporary sources regarding Henry VIII's marriages and religious policies. These discrepancies suggest the work may be more of a historical curiosity than a factual record.
Martin Hume translated the Spanish Chronicle from Spanish into English in 1889 and added notes to clarify what he believed were errors or omissions. He approached the text with the assumption that it was an authentic contemporary document and treated it as a reliable source of Tudor history. Later scholars have challenged Hume's confidence in the text's authenticity due to found inconsistencies and anachronisms.