This book is badly written, copied from other authors and a bunch of stolen and silly theories. I went in hoping to learn something new but i left this feeling like i wasted my time. It could have been a good read if the author had focused on the pop culture lense instead of what he did do. This is not worth wasting your time on as a reader and instead pick up one of the many books the author copied passages from.

While I enjoyed this book, it was not quite what I expected. It advertises itself as an examination of Anne Boleyn in pop culture and the different ways she has been portrayed but the first sixty percent of the book is merely a rehasing of her life with some little tidbits tossed in. I would have enjoyed more detail on the different depictions of Anne throughout the ages.

Our perspective on Tudor history is largely based on the work of a small group of historians. They have access to the same library of materials and make their name with assertions that are not based on fact. Anne Boleyn has been a particular victim of this type of record. Her "extra finger", extra nipple, alleged expertise in seduction, supposedly learnt in France, are all wearying examples of this.
Anne is mysterious, and that annoys historians. It's not even clear when she was born.
I enjoyed Mickey Mayhew's new approach to Anne. He doesn't shy away from the usual account of her life but he is more questioning of how we interpret it. Context is king: we have to go back to Tudor times to remember the delicate political situation, Henry's need for a male heir and Anne as a pawn - or otherwise - in her family's bid for wealth and high office.
Mayhew provides entertainment in his writing. No dry re-telling of Chapuys here. I wish he wasn't quite so obsessed with the Showtime drama The Tudors, because although it was a wonderful romp, it's not very accurate.
Mayhew achieves the impossible, finding new information on Boleyn relating to her execution. He finds out about the mysterious swordsman of Calais, and what happened to the weapon in question.
For Tudorphiles and students this is an engaging and balanced view of Anne Boleyn, and highly recommended.

I received this from the publisher for review. I am so happy that I got to read this. I am a a big Anne Boleyn fan. She's the only wife I am interested in reading about of Henry's infamous 6. From page one of this book I knew I was going to love this. The topic is all about Ann, no shoving her into a chapter or two because we have to get the other 5. No, this is all about out girl with all the delicious details about her and her life. If you are interested in Anne and her time before Henry, during and well the end, this is a book for you. I highly recommend this.

This engaging and easy-to-read book presents a brief account of Anne Boleyn's life and explores cultural depictions of her throughout history. The biographical information offers nothing new, but the look at popular portrayals of her was informative. The tone is light, sometimes with a hint of snark.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

This books makes a lot of claims but fails to substantiate them. It also perpetuates a lot of the myths that surround Anne Boleyn. Large sections appear to the copied from other authors work as well. I’m afraid I didn’t enjoy this but it’s well edited.

I must admit I found a lot of this book quite untrue.While some research seemed familiar other research seemed wild and outlandish at best.I have never heard of the Swordsman from Calais's family being identified much less the actual man himself and I've read widely in the Tudor sphere.As far as Anne's character here I don't subscribe to Anne being so religious that her end goal in marrying Henry VIII was to reform the entire country.While she was deeply religious that particular realm was the domain of Henry VIII.As for calling this a Bible on Anne I couldn't disagree more.

Much thanks to Netgalley for sending me a copy in exchange for my honest review

I want to thank Pen & Sword and Netgalley for the uncorrected copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.

Undertaking a book that examines and challenges the historical record should be commended.

However, I have absolutely no idea nearly 30% in what Mayhew’s arguments are. Repeatedly, popular ideas of Anne seem to be challenged with no real substance. This is made worse by the fact that Mayhew repeatedly says that Anne Boleyn fans get up in arms if you say anything bad about her so challenges to her image are not well received. As a reader it felt like if I didn’t agree with Mayhew’s point then I was basically being called stubborn at best or an idiot at worst.

Overall, this book felt like a mix of a Twitter argument gone awry or a historical companion to the Showtime series The Tudors. For example, the way that Thomas and Mary Boleyn were discussed for example paints a one-dimensional picture based on their portrayal in the series.

If you want a book that examines Anne Boleyn in a nuanced way I recommend finding a different book.

I did not post this portion of the review to either Storygraph or Goodreads. I want to start by saying I am not a historian nor do I have a Twitter account, so the Twitter argument addressed at the beginning is not something I am familiar with. However, throughout this book, Mayhew displays a level of arrogance that was incredibly grating to read. Opinions and interpretations were stated as if they should just be accepted as fact. For example, more than once Anne Boleyn is described as having antisemitic views. As a reader with a high level of interest in her as a person, this is something I had not considered, but given the beliefs of the time was not against the idea of her holding views negative to those outside her religion. However, Mayhew's argument is that because she's described as being Lutheran (by Chapuys) she must have had ALL the same views as Luther. Yet, later on in the book Anne is described as having no real religious convictions because she observed Catholic rights while in the tower before her death and even later she's described as setting out to capture Henry's attention purely to advance the Protestant faith. I only made it 27% in and I truly have no idea if Mayhew has a clear idea of what Anne's religious beliefs were. Even if I allow for the fact that records have been lost to time and things were fluid in terms of religious beliefs due to reform, why are you writing a book called "The Anne Boleyn Bible"? The premise of this is that you are going to highlight her religious beliefs more than other biographies have when you have no clear idea of where she stood religiously. At best Mayhew does have an idea but is awful at articulating that to the reader.

Quite frankly holding a doctorate myself (albeit in a different field) I am amazed that Mayhew was allowed to take the tone he does in this work. Challenge the interpretation of Anne Boleyn by all means, and make people think critically about her from new angles. That's part of the fun of history, but every time you cite a source the reader should not be left feeling like the current author (Mayhew) feels like he is the only one who knows anything on the subject. Discourse is important, but you can do that without degrading all of the work that came before you. Work that was no doubt used as a starting point for your own.

I read this ARC for an honest review
All thoughts and opinions are mine

I was attracted to this purely on the basis of Tudors and the subject matter
It wasn't quite what I thought it would be and drew a lot on other books and references to TV series so I really feel that a lot of information real and false has been perpetuated here

Written in a very accessible style, I did enjoy this. However, I have read a lot about Anne Boleyn from a historical point of view and was able to balance some of the more outrageous references. Someone with less knowledge wanting to gain information from this might not get the more accurate information needed for a historical figure