Posted on 01/28/2018 9:43:51 AM PST by beaversmom
1
Henry VIII was slim and athletic for most of his life
At six feet two inches tall, Henry VIII stood head and shoulders above most of his court. He had an athletic physique and excelled at sports, regularly showing off his prowess in the jousting arena.
Having inherited the good looks of his grandfather, Edward IV, in 1515 Henry was described as “the handsomest potentate I have ever set eyes on…” and later an “Adonis”, “with an extremely fine calf to his leg, his complexion very fair…and a round face so very beautiful, that it would become a pretty woman”.
All this changed in 1536 when the king – then in his mid-forties – suffered a serious wound to his leg while jousting. This never properly healed, and instead turned ulcerous, which left Henry increasingly incapacitated.
Four years later, the king’s waist had grown from a trim 32 inches to an enormous 52 inches. By the time of his death, he had to be winched onto his horse. It is this image of the corpulent Henry VIII that has obscured the impressive figure that he cut for most of his life.
2
Henry VIII was a tidy eater
Despite the popular image of Henry VIII throwing a chicken leg over his shoulder as he devoured one of his many feasts, he was in fact a fastidious eater. Only on special occasions, such as a visit from a foreign dignitary, did he stage banquets.
Most of the time, Henry preferred to dine in his private apartments. He would take care to wash his hands before, during and after each meal, and would follow a strict order of ceremony.
Seated beneath a canopy and surrounded by senior court officers, he was served on bended knee and presented with several different dishes to choose from at each course.
3
Henry was a bit of a prude
England’s most-married monarch has a reputation as a ladies’ man – for obvious reasons. As well as his six wives, he kept several mistresses and fathered at least one child by them.
But the evidence suggests that, behind closed doors, he was no lothario. When he finally persuaded Anne Boleyn to become his mistress in body as well as in name, he was shocked by the sexual knowledge that she seemed to possess, and later confided that he believed she had been no virgin.
When she failed to give him a son, he plumped for the innocent and unsullied Jane Seymour instead.
4
Henry’s chief minister liked to party
Although often represented as a ruthless henchman, Thomas Cromwell was in fact one of the most fun-loving members of the court. His parties were legendary, and he would spend lavish sums on entertaining his guests – he once paid a tailor £4,000 to make an elaborate costume that he could wear in a masque to amuse the king.
Cromwell also kept a cage of canary birds at his house, as well as an animal described as a “strange beast”, which he gave to the king as a present.
5
Henry VIII sent more men and women to their deaths than any other monarch
During the later years of Henry’s reign, as he grew ever more paranoid and bad-tempered, the Tower of London was crowded with the terrified subjects who had been imprisoned at his orders.
One of the most brutal executions was that of the aged Margaret de la Pole, Countess of Salisbury. The 67-year-old countess was woken early on the morning of 27 May 1541 and told to prepare for death.
Although initially composed, when Margaret was told to place her head on the block, her self-control deserted her and she tried to escape. Her captors were forced to pinion her to the block, where the amateur executioner hacked at the poor woman’s head and neck, eventually severing them after the eleventh blow.
I don't rely on Wikipedia. I've got plenty of non-fiction books on British history, the monarchy, and books on Richard III. David Starkey has stated that Sir Thomas More’s History of Richard III might have more truth to it than people originally thought. He bases his belief on the fact that in More's account, Sir James Tyrrell admitted his guilt in murdering the princes, and that Richard III ordered it. The reason Starkey gives credibility to More's account is because it is recorded that during Tyrrell's trial, Henry VII and Elizabeth of York were present throughout. Starkey concluded that it would have been highly unusual to have a King and Queen watch over such a trial, unless it was an extraordinary case. He theorises that this piece of evidence makes it more than likely that Richard III was the boys murderers.
Two older ones by Philip Haigh and Charles Ross on War of the Roses which sets stage for the rise of the Tudors which aside from Charles II are the last successful true monarchs in England cum Britain
Ross book is War of the Roses
Haigh is “campaigns of war of the Roses”
On Henry VII who I find more interesting than his son....there is
Earlier works by Gladys Temperly and of course Francis Bacon
Lately a plethora of historical works and historical novels by women about Plantagenet and Tudor women’ and their enormous contribution to this era abound and frankly the women and their DNA and birth alliances made history as much as the battles did...and some paid the ultimate price..
The aforementioned unfortunate Margaret de la Pole...the last direct regal Plantagenet
It funny but it all stemmed from John of Gaunt....the last surviving son of Edward III and younger brother to Edward the famous Black Prince
Edward III grandson to Longshanks and son of the homosexual failure Edward II
EDWARD III was a decent and very long reigning monarch and he reoaired the damage done by his dad.
But back to Gaunt.....
He fathered legimately the roots of the Lancaster side of the War of the Roses...the Yorks and Tudors through the children of his mistress Katherine Swynfford and her descent Margaret the mother of Henry VII who killed Richard III at Bosworth
Gaunt also fathered the line of a United Spain through his marriage to a Castillo princess and the Portuguese line and foundations of the Habsburg dynasty
I’d wager nobody who wasnt king had ore influence on what became modern Europe than did his tadpoles
Fascinating period of history to me
The end of chivalry and feudal Europe and the rise of the Renaissance
True kings but they had to fight to keep it
Miss Marmelstein is an authority on the oft and likely unfairly maligned Richard III and I’m sure knows many more sound volumes than do I
I think she is a member of the Richard III society
It’s no question my personal favorite English era....that and Alfred but there is a dearth of work on Alfred
And he still has loyal supporters in Northern England.
I am not an expert on the subject but have been impressed with the doggedness of his defenders throughout several centuries. It says something good about British culture that the debate about Richard Ill is still ongoing.
And I am glad he is now buried in a manner fit for a Christian king.
And he still has loyal supporters in Northern England.
I am not an expert on the subject but have been impressed with the doggedness of his defenders throughout several centuries. It says something good about British culture that the debate about Richard Ill is still ongoing.
And I am glad he is now buried in a manner fit for a Christian king.
The “proof on the record” is Titulus Regius. It was so much proof Henry VII took pleasure in destroying every copy (neglecting one) as well as any other positive proof of R3’s brief but fascinating reign. Thomas More was a Tudor toady and the protege of John Morton, the Bishop of Ely. Talk about a snake in the strawberry patch! Richard didn't execute members of the clergy but if he had, all of the trouble that followed in his brief reign might never have occurred. A born pot-stirrer who should have been minding his flock, not plotting against the realm. More destroyed the reputation of Sir James Tyrell based on nothing but smears of a dead man. We' ve now been at it for two days. We will never agree. I suggest we drop it.
I also suggest Paul Murray Kendall’s famous Richard the Third. While it is definitely a sympathetic view of the king, its research and footnotes are invaluable and much esteemed by British historians although Kendall was an American who never visited London to do his research. An absolute expert with a fine writing style.
Don’t forget the American friends of R3 who have contributed huge amounts of money to fund the search for his remains. I have a friend who has even embroidered his coat of arms for all the kneelers at Leicester Cathedral. She lives in Arizona. Of course, she like others, wishes that the King had been laid to rest in York Cathedral but the modern clergy don’t care a fig about history or Richard’s place in it. They know nothing of his history with Yorkshire.
Looks like you know your stuff, WD. I’m not an expert but I do have a lifelong interest in Richard the Third and his family, the Plantagenets. We are hoping to find out more about John Plantagenet, the illegitimate son of R3 who was appointed the Captain of Calais by his father. We know next to nothing about his daughter, Katherine. It’s an interesting period as you’ve demonstrated.
Here’s a good chart that shows her ancestry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestry_of_Elizabeth_II#Ancestry_tree
Perhaps I would have been more correct to say that Elizabeth II was not in a direct line of succession going back to The House of Tutors since it then passed to The House of Stuart then to The House of Hanover, then The House of Saxe-Coburg (The House of Windsor - From 1917).
http://www.thamesweb.co.uk/windsor/windsorhistory/kings_queens.html
Basically all the European royals are related to each other somewhere along their lines, some more closely related (cousins marrying 1st cousins such as Victoria and Prince Albert) than others.
102 posts to mention Margaret Beaufort. If anyone other than Richard had the means, motive and opportunity to have the Princes murdered it was her.
It was a bit more complicated than that. Also Protestantism was already on the rise and established in German, Switzerland and Scandinavia before Henry VIII split with Rome. It was also rising in Scotland.
Harmless Teddy Bear does a pretty good job at post #59 of explaining the chain of events that led up to it.
Agreed, but Henry 8’s divorce was a tipping point/catalyst that moved things along.
Think about all the books, plays, movies etc that were written/ performed specifically focused on Henry and Anne Boleyn. It was a dramatic moment in history.
Did you get a chance to see Wolf Hall on BBC? What did you think of it?
Neat site. She’s cousins with the whole planet. I wish I could plug me in to see what comes up. Funny I just saw two of her cousins, Illeana Douglas and Ethan Hawke, in a movie together.
Welcome, lp.
Because they have no idea what they are talking about?
That's not covered in the Catholic Encyclopedia, lol.
I do not like the Tutors in general but fair is fair. And Henry was right in his request.
Thanks...appreciate your point of view.
I’ve spent a fair amount of time on the Religion Forum here, and all the vehement Henry VIII haters are Catholic. Just about all of the Freepers who trash the UK or England in general are, too. It’s religious. They’re apparently only taught positive spin on the role of their religion in history, because knowledge of anything outside of that is sorely wanting.
You’re welcome! Nice to talk to you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.