0:00

Historians rely a lot on primary source evidence to interpret the past. But what do you do

0:05

when multiple sources tell a different story of what happened? Learn about the many accounts

0:10

of the execution of Anne Boleyn and consider what they tell us about a major moment in

0:14

English history today on Footnoting History!

0:20

Hello Footnoting History friends, it’s Kristin, back again with an exciting history adventure

0:29

for you … it’s time to play: Choose Your Own Adventure, History Primary Source Edition.

0:35

I’m not sure if they’re still out there, but when I was younger, they had these books

0:39

where the outcome of the story was different, depending on how you read the book, what decisions

0:43

you made, what page you turned to and the story was different depending on what you

0:49

chose. Some of my classmates liked these books because they only read one option and for

0:54

book reports, it looked like you were reading a much bigger book than you actually were,

0:59

because they only read one of the outcomes. But I read them all, and I liked these books

1:05

because you got different endings. Even though in reality, I wouldn’t have, say, chosen

1:11

to follow the ghostly howlings down into the basement where they were coming from – no,

1:16

you get the HELL out of there, you fool – I did like knowing that I was right, though.

1:21

You always get killed when you run down into the basement in a mystery/ghost story. And

1:25

I did like seeing the different outcomes play out. And these inclinations have followed

1:31

me to adulthood. I never go see what’s making a scary noise in the basement and I always

1:37

like thinking about different possibilities when dealing with primary sources. And the

1:43

good news is, in this context, it just means more reading, so yay!

1:47

Today’s lucky subject is the execution of Anne Boleyn. If you know me or have listened

1:54

to my previous episode on the Other Anne Boleyn, you know that I find this 16th century English

2:00

queen absolutely fascinating, and not gonna lie, a little bit of a badass. I probably

2:06

would not have liked her in person but as an historical figure, I think she’s great.

2:11

I also really love considering source material and thinking about how we know what we know

2:17

about history. I’m a medievalist, so my written source material is generally sparse

2:23

– if it exists at all – and very – and I mean VERY – rarely do medievalists ever

2:29

get multiple accounts of a single event. It does happen – there are a few versions of

2:36

the Merovingian king Clovis’ conversion in the early 500s – but you usually don’t

2:41

get to do a compare-and-contrast. Like we can with Anne.

2:46

Anne Boleyn is a pretty famous figure, and you’ve probably at least run across her

2:51

name before. She is a very frequent visitor in pop culture and media, and she was pretty

2:57

famous in her own time too. If you’re listening to this on episode release day, which is May

3:03

18, that’s the eve of the anniversary of Anne Boleyn’s execution. I didn’t even

3:09

plan it that way, it’s just the way things worked out, but I guess it was meant to be.

3:14

The brief rundown is this: Anne Boleyn was born either in 1501 or 1507, most likely at

3:23

Blicking which is in Norfolk, which is in the northern part of England. I know I just

3:28

gave you a lot of uncertainty there when I just said that we know a lot about her – and

3:32

both those things are true. We are still just at that point in history where people didn’t

3:38

always write down the details we’d like to know now, as modern people, and birthdays

3:44

and places were not usually things that people thought were important to mention in writing,

3:49

in the early 16th century. You don’t start to get really good consistent data like that

3:54

until at least 100s of years later. But we have a good ballpark for Anne. Her parents

4:00

were Thomas and Elizabeth – and Thomas was a rich landowner and politician who would

4:05

go on to acquire titles, and Elizabeth was a Howard whose father was an earl. The family

4:12

was rich, well-off and connected, and Anne went abroad to be educated in foreign courts,

4:18

most famously she was in France where she learned (or honed) her wit and the sophistication

4:23

that would go on to attract the attention of King Henry VIII when she returned home

4:29

to the English court in 1522. Henry, of course, was married at the time to Catherine of Aragon.

4:36

And that’s a Whole Big Thing that you can read about many other places, but if you’d

4:41

like a few suggestions please visit the Further Reading for this page to get you started.

4:46

If you like big drama and romance and betrayal, you won’t be disappointed, let me just say

4:53

that. After years-struggle with the papacy, Henry also chose his own adventure, and set

4:59

Catherine aside. The marriage was formally annulled in May of 1533, but Henry had already

5:05

married Anne a few months before. Details. Also, Anne was pregnant at the time with the

5:11

future Elizabeth I.

5:13

Anne was influential in many ways, one of which was her impact on the course of the

5:19

English Reformation – and it was far more than just being an excuse for Henry to do

5:25

what he wanted, just … for the record. But being at the mercy of the whims of Henry VIII

5:31

was no safe place to be and yadda yadda yadda Anne, her brother, and a few other men found

5:37

themselves accused of treason, and in Anne’s case adultery, and therefore, at the business

5:43

end of the axe in 1536. Although in Anne’s case, it was a fancy sword. Which brings us

5:49

back to our focus today: the accounts of that execution.

5:54

And first, let me say that there are many. People either really loved or really hated

5:59

Anne and consequently there was a lot written about her both during her time and after.

6:04

In order to make this a bit manageable for us today, in no particular order, I’ll give

6:10

you just a few and then talk about what they kind of agree on, what they don’t, and what

6:17

exists only in their version, so who knows if its accurate or not. And then we can think

6:22

about where we can go from there.

6:24

First up, I give you Eustace Chapuys’ letter to Emperor Charles V, dated 19 May 1536. Eustace

6:33

Chapuys was born in the Duchy of Savoy, which in the 16th century, was part of the Holy

6:39

Roman Empire – today it’s part of France. He was the Imperial ambassador to England,

6:45

who arrived in 1529 and who was one of Katherine of Aragon’s biggest supporters. Which makes

6:52

sense since Holy Roman Emperor Charles V was Catherine’s nephew. Both Chapuys and Catherine

6:58

– and her daughter, Mary, for that matter – were Catholic. Chapuys hated Anne with

7:03

a passion and calls her “the Concubine” in this letter and other places. An interesting

7:10

detail that Alison Weir points out is that Chapuys was good at some languages, but he

7:15

wasn’t so fluent in English and had to have a secretary translate for him when he first

7:21

got to England. He got better over the years, but Weir questions how much of English idioms

7:27

he ever really got. So, if you’re thinking about his interpretation of what was actually

7:32

said, it’s a thing to keep in mind. He doesn’t give you word-for-word speeches, the way other

7:38

writers do, but you get a paraphrase of some things. Maybe Chapuys was there at the execution

7:44

and maybe he wasn’t. In his letter, which he does write on The Day It Happened –he

7:50

even gives you a time It Happened, 9 o’clock in the morning – Chapuys says that only

7:55

the Chancellor, Cromwell, and others of the [king’s] Council were present – and that

8:01

“foreigners were not admitted.” Chapuys would have definitely been considered a foreigner.

8:07

Anne’s execution did take place within the Tower of London walls and was not considered

8:12

“public” by the standards of the day – and not just anyone could attend. He goes on in

8:17

the letter to talk about things with the qualifier “it is said” or that other people told

8:23

him, so he was present at court and writing in the moment, but he wasn’t an eyewitness.

8:29

It seems. I suspect that if he could have attended, he probably would have, it would

8:33

have been a big moment for him. Now. It is not clear that any of these writers that I’m

8:39

going to talk about today were there, in the moment. They maybe could have been, despite

8:42

the attempt to keep the execution a very small, invite-only affair, but it was a big deal

8:48

and people maybe snuck in, maybe scaled the walls to see, maybe caught a glimpse through

8:55

the open Tower Gate, maybe were part of the many workers who were inside the Tower at

9:00

any given time, maybe there were prisoners who had a good view, there are tons of possibilities

9:05

for people outside the official guest list to have witnessed the execution, but all of

9:10

these are speculation.

9:13

Next up, we have a very detailed description, dated 10 June 1536. So, pretty close to the

9:20

event. It was written by an anonymous Portuguese person, who again, also would have been considered

9:26

a foreigner and banned from attending the execution. We have no idea who this person

9:32

was or how he (or she) got their information. When I say it’s detailed, it’s super detailed.

9:39

This writer tells you how many steps there were up to the scaffold, they tell you what

9:44

Anne was wearing and how many ladies accompanied her, you get a verbatim final speech to the

9:49

crowd and one she gives to her ladies, the very final moments before that sword fell,

9:55

and then where Anne was buried.

9:57

Another source, written by John Stowe, echoes the Portuguese Anonymous letter though it

10:02

is much shorter and lighter on the detail. This account was included in The Annals of

10:07

England, written in 1592. So … a bit further away than our Portuguese friend and Eustace

10:13

Chapuys. Stowe is considered an “antiquarian,” which is to say he was kind of doing history

10:19

as we think of it, but the methodology was definitely not as developed as it is for modern

10:24

historians. 20th-century historian A. L. Rowse considers Stowe “one of the best historians

10:30

of that age,” and notes that Stowe did revise his writing when he thought he’d been wrong

10:35

about something he wrote years before. Stowe was writing during the reign of Elizabeth

10:39

I, Anne’s daughter, and one of Elizabeth’s favorites, Robert Dudley, the earl of Leicester

10:45

suggested to Stowe that he start writing histories. So, this may have affected how he portrayed

10:51

Anne in her last moments. The next account is also anonymous and … slightly confused about what day it was. The account

10:59

is dated May 16, 1536. No one had been executed yet. This writer is identified as being “Imperial,”

11:08

aka from the Holy Roman Empire, like Chapuys. Whoever this dude was, they did not like Anne

11:15

either. The account begins with “The said Queen (unjustly called) …” so you know

11:23

what this author thinks about her. There is a short, paraphrase of a final speech and

11:29

an account of Anne’s last moments and what happened with her head and body after.

11:34

The final account we’ll talk about is from a very sympathetic writer, and it’s a poem

11:40

by Lancelot de Carle. De Carle, as you may have guessed, was French, and he was at the

11:47

court of the future Henry II, writing poems and descriptions of coasts of arms before

11:53

he went to the French embassy in London in 1536. The poem – which was addressed to

12:00

the French Dauphin – was written in London on June 2, 1536, originally in French. Anne,

12:06

if you remember, spent time in the French court and was known for her chic “French”

12:12

style. De Carle’s poem is … flowery (I mean, it’s a poem) and Anne is described

12:18

as beautiful and her final speech is quite eloquent. The poem is pretty long. You get

12:25

a lot of detail in it.

12:27

So, what do all these sources agree on? Well, in 1536, before Anne Boleyn was executed by

12:35

beheading, she said some stuff. We know that it was May 19 from other sources, some of

12:40

the sources I mentioned here also give that date: Chapuys, Stowe, Portuguese Anonymous,

12:45

our Anonymous Imperial source said it was May 17, but I’m not going to ding him too

12:49

hard for that one, since people didn’t always know precisely what day it was. So fine, it

12:54

was May 19. Chapuys said it was 9 o’clock in the morning. John Stow says it was 8 o’clock.

13:00

Close enough? De Carle and the Anonymous authors don’t say what time it was. Does it matter

13:05

what time it was? Maybe.

13:07

So, what stuff did she say exactly? The gist is more or less the same in these accounts.

13:14

Portuguese Writer says Anne said, “Good people, I am not come here to excuse or to

13:20

justify myself … but I come here to die and if in my life I did ever offend the King’s

13:26

Grace, surely with my death I do now atone” and she says she doesn’t blame her judges

13:31

or the king who was just the most awesome prince ever and who was always so great to

13:37

her. (Yeah, I know. But this is how these speeches often went – Dying Well was A Thing

13:44

in the medieval and early modern worlds, and plus you didn’t want to piss off the executioner

13:50

in that moment, or the king who could make things really difficult for your surviving

13:56

family.) Anne also had some sad last words for her ladies and Portuguese Anonymous’

14:02

Anne says that her head didn’t deserve to wear a queen’s crown in life. And she did

14:08

not make any confession of her fault. John Stow has a somewhat similar version without

14:14

the final farewell to the ladies: his Anne says she “humbly” submits to the law and

14:21

doesn’t blame other people and says basically God knows my offenses. Oh, by the way, Henry,

14:27

you’re the most awesome king ever, big thumbs up. De Carle’s version is flowery (of course)

14:33

and has Anne asking people to forgive her if she ever offended them and that she’s

14:37

not going to rehash why she was up on that scaffold, but God knows everything and hopefully

14:43

will be merciful. Also, by the way too, Henry, you’re so amazing and best of luck in all

14:49

your future endeavors. Chapuys … well, his version seems to veer off a bit. He says Anne

14:55

raised her eyes to Heaven and cried for God and the King to grant her mercy for all her

15:00

offenses before giving Henry 5 out of 5 stars, would recommend. At first read, it kind of

15:06

sounds like she’s admitting what she was convicted of – and I’m going to bet that’s

15:11

what Chapuys wants you to think. Especially since he ends his short letter with a by the

15:17

way, the lady who told me all this, she said that Anne confessed to her she had been unfaithful

15:20

before she received her last Communion. Chapuys’ Anne strikes the reader as a lamenting, fearful

15:28

– and guilty as hell – Anne – and though Portuguese Writer’s Anne says she “submit[s]

15:33

to death with a good will,” he describes her in his opening paragraph as “the unhappy

15:38

Queen.” De Carle’s Anne seems kind of serene, saying that she hopes G-d “blesses

15:44

[her] and in His grace takes [her] to Him and receives [her] soul today” and De Carle

15:48

describes people being moved and sorry for her but impressed by her “great faith.”

15:55

Stowe doesn’t seem to editorialize too much. The Anonymous Imperial Writer gives a bare-bones,

16:01

paraphrased version of the speech that is similar to Chapuys’, our other Imperial

16:07

friend. However, Anonymous Imperial describes Anne as “very much exhausted and amazed”

16:14

and he did not mean “amazed” in a flattering way. He says she kept looking behind her as

16:19

she walked to the scaffold. His Anne also raised her eyes to the sky and cried for mercy

16:23

from G-d and had only good things to say about Henry. No matter what, in every version, “Henry

16:31

You’re Just the Tops” seems to be quite the theme.

16:35

In terms of what Anne wore, it varies a bit. So, Anonymous Portuguese says that she wore

16:40

a dress of black damask and a white cape. In his opening setting-the-scene paragraph,

16:46

Anonymous Portuguese doesn’t mention anything else, but after her speech, they say that

16:50

– “with her own hands, she took of her coifs from her head,” handed it off to one

16:55

of her ladies and then then put on “a little cap of linen to cover her hair.” And Portuguese

17:00

Anonymous says that one of her ladies covered Anne’s eyes with a bandage.

17:04

Anonymous Imperial writes that after Anne’s speech, she was “stripped of her short mantle

17:09

furred with ermines and afterwards took off her hood, which was of English make.” Then

17:14

one of her ladies gave her a linen cap – and Anne covered her own hair and knelt, making

17:20

sure her dress was covering her feet. Then one of the ladies covered her eyes.

17:25

De Carles talks a lot about Anne’s demeanor but has only passing mention of clothes. He

17:31

says she had on a “white collar and hood” which were removed. Then she knelt. When she

17:36

knelt, one of her ladies removed her linen veil and used that to cover Anne’s eyes.

17:41

John Stow had no comment on what Anne wore to the scaffold – and makes no mention of

17:47

her eyes being covered. Just that she knelt down, prayed and off came her head with one

17:52

stroke of the sword. Lucky Anne. Chapuys seems not to have cared less what Anne wore or who

17:58

covered her eyes, if they were covered at all. He spreads an unfounded rumor – that

18:03

he had to have known full well wasn’t true – that “it is said” that Anne’s head

18:09

was to be put on Tower Bridge with other common criminals’, at least for a little while.

18:15

That is absolutely not what happened to Anne’s head and body. Portuguese Anonymous says that

18:22

Anne’s ladies covered her body and head with a sheet, put them in a chest, and she

18:25

was buried in a church within the Tower. John Stow agrees that the body with the head were

18:31

buried in the choir of the chapel in the Tower,” though he doesn’t mention a sheet or who

18:36

did the burying. De Carles also talks about a sheet (he calls it a shroud but I’m going

18:41

to say close enough), and he tells you that it was white. His Anne was put in “a sad

18:47

place of burial inside the Tower,” near to her brother George, who was executed a

18:52

few days before. Imperial Anonymous says that one of the ladies covered Anne’s head with

18:57

a white cloth and the body was taken by her other ladies. Both pieces were carried to

19:02

“the church nearest to the Tower of London.” Piecing this together, historians figured

19:08

that the location was the Chapel of St. Peter Ad Vincula within the Tower walls – and

19:13

that was in fact confirmed in 1876 when, during renovations of the chapel, the remains of

19:19

several people were found under the altar. At the time, people identified the skeletons

19:24

of Anne – as well as Jane Grey and Katherine Howard. The skeleton identified as Anne’s

19:30

was found near to that of George Boleyn, her brother. This is an instance where, when written

19:34

sources disagree or are silent or vague on an issue, you can use physical evidence to

19:40

answer some questions.

19:42

Historical sources rarely give you everything you want – the few we’ve talked about

19:47

today are all unique in some way, some agree with each other, some disagree, some give

19:52

you descriptions that only exist only in their version. You can do some comparing and contrasting

19:58

and piecing together an event through the written accounts and the archaeology, but

20:03

even when you’re lucky enough to have multiple versions of an event, as an historian, you

20:08

still need to do some sleuthing and interpreting. Only one person mentions that Anne wore black.

20:14

Does that mean she did or didn’t? Outlandish or known-to-be false things are the ones that

20:21

jump out at us immediately for questioning, and it’s easy to accept mundane or plausible

20:27

details as true when … maybe not. People agree on other details like the cap and the

20:32

sheet, but you can’t discount that these writers were basing their accounts on what

20:37

someone else said … which maybe was right and maybe wasn’t. Agreement doesn’t mean

20:41

accuracy, and eyewitness testimony doesn’t mean the person got it right or was even trying

20:46

to or didn’t have an agenda coloring their account. Different people can watch the same

20:52

event and come away with different interpretations of what happened. It’s important to consider

20:56

all the possibilities, and when you’re lucky enough to have multiple accounts of one event,

21:02

you have to stitch them together, kind of like a quilt, and then stand back and look

21:06

at the big picture. All of which is both fun and frustrating and makes the work of an historian … never quite

21:13

done. What did Anne say in those last moments? How did she say it? What did she wear? Weigh

21:18

the evidence, read it again and read more, and Choose Your Own Adventure, Historians,

21:22

but know that there’s always more to think about. And this May 19, keep a thought for

21:28

Anne. This has been Footnoting History. If you like the podcast, please visit our website, where

21:32

you can find further reading suggestions related to this week’s episode as well as a calendar

21:37

of upcoming podcasts. Please remember that you can find this – and all of our episodes

21:41

– captioned on Footnotinghistory.com as well as our YouTube channel. Please like and

21:44

subscribe and share with your friends. If you’d like to help us keep Footnoting History

21:49

open access, you can join us on Patreon or Ko-Fi, or by purchasing some Footnoting History

21:54

merch. And always remember the best stories are in the footnotes.