Tracy Borman’s The Fall of Anne Boleyn series

Posted By on November 12, 2020


Great news! A new three-part series on Anne Boleyn presented by historian Tracy Borman will air on Channel 5 on 24th, 25th and 26th November. It’s called the Fall of Anne Boleyn and the three episodes cover her arrest, trial and execution in 1536.

Tracy will be retracing Anne’s steps, hour by hour, in those final days, and putting forward evidence to “show how the architect of her downfall, Thomas Cromwell, uses any means necessary, including torture, to bring charges of adultery, incest and treason against the Queen.”

This is definitely something to look forward to in these strange times! When we can’t get out to visit places, it’ll be lovely to see historical attractions like Greenwich, the Tower of London, and the National Archives, albeit virtually!

The series starts at 9pm UK time on Channel 5 on 24th November 2020.

For those of you outside the UK, I’m not sure about plans for it to air internationally.

Cheeky plug now! A certain Claire Ridgway has written a book on Anne Boleyn’s fall in 1536 called The Fall of Anne Boleyn: A Countdown (available on kindle, as a paperback and as an audio book), so if you want to delve even deeper into the events of 1536, you can! Find out more at Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk.

12 thoughts on “Tracy Borman’s The Fall of Anne Boleyn series”

  1. Banditqueen says:

    I can’t wait to see this. Tracy did a great job on Henry Viii and his men. Looking forward to watching over three days. Cheers.

  2. Christine says:

    I will definitely watch it to, I enjoyed ‘The Last Days Of Anne Boleyn’ very much, so I am sure I will enjoy this latest offering.

  3. BoleynFaction says:

    I’m also super excited for this documentary. Out of curiosity, is there going to be a post on here about the warrant book discovery? I’m quite late to the party, but I’m looking for more details beyond the few articles about it.

      1. Claire says:

        Thank you for sharing that Roland!

        1. Roland H. says:

          You’re welcome Claire! : )

          In reply to ‘BoleynFaction’ – about the ‘discovery’ of the warrant book, It is actually not new news.

          The writ was mentioned by historian Eric Ives in his book ‘Anne Boleyn’ back in 1986.

        2. Claire says:

          Yes, there was quite a lot of talk on Twitter re it no being a discovery or new news. It’s always good to remind people of these things though!

  4. Banditqueen says:

    I looked up a few articles on the warrant book last night. It isn’t new, as Roland says, as Henry was known to give exact instructions over Anne’s execution and Cromwell priced it all up. However, it is interesting to see it being studied for the first time in a long time. I don’t believe it should be interpreted to determine how Henry felt while planning all of this. He was meticulous by nature. It might seem macabre but everything had to be planned and warrants issued, nor is it chilling, not when we consider how determined Henry was to be rid of Anne. Henry needed everything to go smoothly. Maybe he was moved to pity to spare Anne the flames, unfortunately we don’t know what he was feeling, but it’s a great piece of evidence to have been brought back into the light of scholars.

    1. Banditqueen says:

      Burning at the stake was also the death penalty for females who murdered, especially a superior or husband as it was petty treason. This remained the same until 1784 when the last case went so badly wrong that it was abolished. As an act of mercy the women executed for murder were strangled first but that sometimes went wrong. It was hanging for a man of course, but women were property. Horribly it was also the sentence for putting inferior metal into coins as again it was treason. Considering it was thought of as a merciful method of death in reality it was horrible and devastating and painful. I do hope Henry really did want to spare Anne the pain and terror and was moved to pity, because at least her continental method of beheading was swift. However, I think its more to do with the fact that he knew she was innocent.

      1. Christine says:

        I have often wondered the real reason why Anne was shown such mercy and beheaded by a skilled swordsman, was because Henry V111 knew there was no real evidence to condemn her in the first place, and Cromwell had merely made a case against his queen and given him a way out to rid himself of her, he had questioned Norris a close friend of many years standing, he must have known he was sincere when he swore himself and Anne innocent of any wrongdoing, but instead of believing him he gave orders for him to be arrested, because he did not admit to something that the king was desperate to hear, likewise his brother in law, Lord Rochford, surely he did not believe he had been indulging in an incestous affair with his own sister? He was married said to be a womaniser and was very attractive, he was also very pious like Anne, and so I find it very hard to understand that this king did not believe his own instinct that must have told him these charges aimed against his queen were wholly without conviction, and were instead dreadful slander against a woman who was his consort, the mother of his heir and someone whom he had deeply loved for nearly ten years, when we consider the awful charges against both Anne her brother and the rest of her alleged lovers, unlike Dereham years later who suffered a dreadful death simply because he had known Catherine Howard before they were married, and the merciful execution Anne’s co accused were given, and they were all found guilty of not only sinful adultery with the queen but conspiracy to murder the king also, treason of the worst sort, one marvels how this king could be so lenient towards them, including the lowly Mark Smeaton a mere court musician, also their heads were not tarred and pickled and displayed on Tower bridge, something where all traitors heads ended up, yet with his fifth queens alleged lover Culpeper and the unfortunate Dereham, their heads were stuck on poles and their rotting heads with their dead glassy stares was visible to many a Londoner and her visitors, the whole affair surrounding Anne Boleyn reeked off a conspiracy to rid a king of his unwanted queen, not about serving justice to a wicked immoral woman who had deceived her lord and husband, the ‘mercy’ she received in having a French sword to decapitate her instead of the axe, the merciful death her alleged lovers had, no public display of their heads after death, tells me that these were not an act of mercy by a wounded king, but a means of trying to soothe the mind of a guilty troubled conscience.

  5. hi will tracy borman be doing aa book on the fall of Anne Boleyn

    1. Banditqueen says:

      Oh I hope so, Victoria. I saw her series on Henry Viii and His Men and the Private Life of the Tudors both of which have books to accompany them, all excellent. I love her biography on Thomas Cromwell as well. I just saw the first part of Anne and her fall and it was brilliant, some evidence I have not seen before and the Moost Happi Medal and Lucy Churchill did a fantastic reconstruction from her face on that. King Henry isn’t doing well on Twitter tonight. No spoilers but this is really good.

Please note: Comment moderation is currently enabled so there will be a delay between when you post your comment and when it shows up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.