Historians Speaking in the Present Tense

I don't mind this but I do loathe reenactments!

It's called the historical present tense and is perfectly acceptable in some circumstances. I agree it can be irritating though.

I loathe it.

What's it meant to achieve? It's history, it's happened, it's in the past. No amount of talking about it in the present tense will change that.

I don't bother with programmes if they're presented like that. I can probably learn more from a book or Professor Google anyway.

I have to admit when doing my family history I've been known to write in the present tense. 'They have six children and James is working as a carpenter' for instance. I have to remind myself it should be the past tense, James was and they had. I think when you're writing it you can feel as though you're there with them!

Absolutely! Why? And, why the Boleyn family again? There are lots of stories about the Civil War which many people would be interested in as well as other little known areas of history. James 1 and his Queen, Anne of Denmark. A really interesting time. But the Boleyns have been done to death. I think we could all write a book about them.