To think that Henry VIII was an abusive physco

[Iwanttoslowdown]

And should be taught in school as such.

One of mine is being taught about this tosser in Secondary school history and I was appalled that it was treated with such blasé that he literally was an abuser.

So I had to retell the story not as someone to be revered or remembered well, but that this abuser killed some of his wives including the mother of his daughter Elizabeth I, had serial mistresses, gorged his way through Court like some oversized pimple set to burst and generally Gould not be taught as a good person.

Edward I was a highly effective Plantagenet king but is never going to win awards for liberality and humanity, as we understand such concepts. His marriage to Eleanor was fascinating though; arranged (of course) both kids, but it grew into a genuine and deep love. Grim old Edward was also faithful to her, which was the source of bafflement as well, Kings having mistresses being rather a given. Accounts of his devastation on her death ring true and are very poignant.

Edward III also had an exceptionally happy marriage. OK, Ed II, not so much

It’s what she thought too. She was thoroughly patriarchal.

I completely agree, the trial and death of Anne Boleyn, her brother and three of Henry’s close friends was nothing short of murder.

And yet ‘Good King Hal’ was immensely popular at the time.

‘Anne of the Thousand Days’ is a great film on this topic.

I misread it as Harry was an abusive physio

She said “I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and a king of England too,"

It’s what she thought too. She was thoroughly patriarchal.

& so are may women now - here in the UK in 2022.
But with this phrase, I see Elizabeth as playing the men.
Trading off their expectations to get what she wanted.

Oh yay a fundamentalist reading of history.

He was a power hungry lunatic. Every time I read about him I think this why we need human rights enshrined in law: to protect us from the arbitrary power of the state.

Yes, they absolutely should teach /in secondary) how little value human life has in those days that s monarch could just snip his finger and you ended up on death row.

Whenever I read about Henry VII or the Bourbon kings, I’m horrified at how little women were valued.
Both Katherine of Aragon and Anne had to have Henry’s new love as their lady in waiting. Henry was madly in love with Anne Boleyn for years, then had her killed without even providing a coffin for her.
All of the men who negotiated the following marriages knew he was dangerous but the allure of power, influence and wealth was worth it to them. The Howards offered up two women to him.
Jane Seymour was taking a very big risk which her brothers were tremendously happy for her to do for their benefit.

Henry was different to the other kings because he actively sought to get rid of his wives. He didn’t just settle for affairs and naming a more distant relative heir.

🙄🤦‍♀️ someone doesn’t need to be a feminist themselves to be a icon for feminist

and she was telling men this…as pretty much standard for a lot of women she played down her sex to fit in…this quote was acknowledging she had a weaker body than blokes, says nothing about her views of other women

Well quite.

Except we are still living with the fall out of those days. As anyone who can read a map would know. Brexit vote ? Almost village by village following the split of the civil war that resulted from Henry reign.

And anyone living in Ireland - either part - is living through the legacy of Henrys actions.

Just remember that 80% of the land William the Conqueror Bastard gave away in 1066 remains in the same families he gave them to.

But, hey, "history is bunk" (misquote - well technically a truncated quote. 😀)

@bellac11
The pope was never the head of state. Henry made himself head of the state religion. He invented the Church of England, which was originally indistinguishable from Catholicism except its head and defender was the monarch, not the pope. It then adopted Protestant principles. Your clumsy attempt to make some sort of Brexit analogy is tenuous and inaccurate.

This is an important point and one I take up with romantic purveyors of historical fiction (this does not include Mantel) who imbue women retrospectively with a power they simply did not have at the time. It appeals to contemporary female readers of a certain kind of historical imagination - but it distorts the reality.

This. But society was different then, that's what needs explaining.

Whenever I read about Henry VII or the Bourbon kings, I’m horrified at how little women were valued.

Yet England did have "she-wolves" ...www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01db7z8/episodes/guide

Brexit analogy, what on earth are you talking about? Why are you making things up, I know its common on this forum but you dont have to join in

In terms of allegiance and who to look to, the pope was above all others, even monarchs, the pope had the ultimate power which is why monarchs had to seek dispensations for things so whether you call that technically a head of state (most european countries at that time were not 'states' as such, or whether you use some other terminology for it) that is essentially what the position was and if you couldnt recognise the monarch as the ultimate power rather than the pope then you're going to get chopped.

People saying he was 'power hungry' just cant seem to relate to the fact that this is not modern times. He didnt have to be 'power hungry' he was the monarch, the head of everything, its not like someone in power today.

But society was different then, that's what needs explaining.

Was it ? Was it really ?

Anyone who has read any history will be struck not by how different people were, but how similar we are. As a trivial example, despite centuries of clear blue water, Shakespeare is completely comprehensible apart from a few linguistic twiddles possibly.

I find attempts to say "oh we're different now" tend to be the prelude to excusing some ghastly happenings in our own age.

She said “I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and a king of England too,"

Classic NLOG 😂

There were no distant male relatives, though, only female. Henry didn’t believe that a woman could rule, hence his obsession with having a son.

I’ve always loved the fact that Elizabeth proved him so wrong.

Thats not really the full picture either though

At particular points they did have huge power. Catherine of Aragon ran the country for several years in total while Henry was out doing war all over the place.

There have been a number of queens who have essentially either removed their husbands or have stood in for their husbands due to illness etc

It has been a different sort of power and not as visceral as male power, its usually been seen negatively like as if its sinister, or underhand or collusive and destructive in a way that male power isnt (even if it is all those things)

People are never different, you can go back further than Shakespeare to literature about 'people' like 1001 nights, Decameron, Canterbury Tales etc to see how human behaviour never really changes,,, but society was different yes

You simply cannot judge historical people by todays cultural and societal expectations and values.

This! Total madness.

Do people really know so little of history that they think that Henry VIII was actually responsible for creating the CofE?

What sort of history have you been reading? Because the people of earlier societies most definitely thought differently than we do now. They were fundamentally different as their value system and world view was incomprehensible compared to today.

Quite, and you’re only seeing how royal/aristocratic women were treated and these were the privileged, elite women. The life of an average woman was much worse.

Interesting to compare the reign of Henry VIII with someone more recent.

Serial mistresses
Large number of deaths by his actions or inactions
Disregard for the established church
Abusive to others

Does that ring any bells? (Clue not a monarch or prince).