Why Anne Boleyn?

I get asked this question pretty regularly as soon as people find out I spend a lot of my time reading about her and have devoted my education to researching her. My very first reaction is to ask “Why not Anne Boleyn?” She was a fascinating woman, a woman who was ahead of her times in terms of learning and thought, ideals and politics. Then I recall that most people do not know this version of Anne.

I have now prepared myself with the following LB Smith quote on Anne, “Anne Boleyn was the crucial catalyst for three of the most important events in modern [British] history: the break with Rome causing the English Reformation, the advent of the nation state and the birth of a daughter whose forty-three years on the throne stand as England’s most spectacular literary and political success story….”

For the historical outsider, this answer is satisfactory. Only those who choose history and research as their lifeblood will understand my true reasoning; Anne is my historical perfect storm. A woman whose actions and life so changed the landscape of an entire country, yet one we know so little about that even the year of her birth cannot be confirmed. Anne inspired such hatred, and such devotion, during her time that it is no surprise that she continues to fascinate myself and scores of other scholars. Anne is ethereal, more myth and hypothesis than established fact. Digging for her story is a never ending challenge as little primary source material about her exists and the ones that do are colored by pro-Catholic and pro-Katharine of Aragon leanings. One of the most extensive primary sources on Anne is the series of letters between Eustace Chapuys, imperial ambassador to England, and his master, Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor (nephew to Katharine). Chapuys sees fit not to use Anne’s name in this correspondence; referring to her only as the Concubine, the lady and in some cases worse nomenclature. We scholars and lovers of Anne have constant debates about how seriously we can take the claims of one of Katharine’s most ardent supporters. With the elimination of Chapuys’ letters we are left with almost no other contemporary, personal accounts of Anne’s life making the hunt for answers about her even more difficult.

We know from surviving budget accounts that Anne was generous with her money, both in support of the poor and in patronage of artists, writers and theologians. She favored men of the Reformation, whether as a means to an end, (reformation ultimately meant Henry’s divorce) or because she truly believed that a more liberal, personal relationship with God was needed has also been hotly debated. Her downfall, naturally dramatic and the subject of intense sensationalism, has become the stuff of legend. Anne had six fingers, she was a witch, she gave birth to a malformed child, and she had a sexual relationship with her brother. These mythologies have enmeshed themselves so completely with established facts about Anne that most of the general public have a distorted perception of her. There are the people who want to vilify Anne, who claim she was guilty as charged, such as historian GW Bernard, a fact any historian who has explored the evidence will refute. Then there are those that put her on a perhaps undeserved pedestal such as martyrologist John Foxe. These factions are miles apart with most historians not able or willing to work towards a middle ground that would be representative of both truth and fact.  Anne, for the first 20+ years of her life was rather unremarkable. She lived only to the age of 36 and died tragically, yet her story and the unanswered questions that accompany it, reach across a span of nearly 500 years to enthrall movie-goers, novelists and historians alike.

Anne, when examined, is fascinating. The search for her story is hard work and sometimes frustrating; which makes it all worthwhile when I come up with a conclusion about her life or discover a new source about her. And that my friends, is why Anne Boleyn.

Tweet