Henry VIII - waste of space?

[ImJustMadAboutSaffron]

"Apart from his immaturity over religion and which way he really swung, and the total waste of lives, time and money fighting France which achieved sod all - just for starters - anyone got a good word to say for the guy?"

These are not my words neither is the subject heading, I saw it on Facebook. But was he a waste of space? I do have one good word to say for him though I'm not going to start discussing religion.

He wrote Greensleeves didn't he
?

This made me laugh.

Awwww, look at his cute lil y-fronts! He looks adorable. A true to life portrait!

Prayitsok · 20/09/2022 21:59
Well he did break from the Catholic church and create the church of England. Not that he did it in the best way or for the best reason (so he could get divorced).

He didn't create the C of E, , Elizabeth did. Henry considered himself a devout Catholic to the end of his life - just became his own Pope, and ignored the chap in Rome.
If Pope Clement had not been under siege at the relevant time by Katherine of Aragon's nephew, he would have granted Henry an annulment. And things would have gone merrily on as they had for centuries - maybe.

One of my answers to "if you could go back in history, what would you say, and to whom?"

I'd love to tell H8 "It's the father who determines the sex of the child. Changing wives won't help"

Redannie118 · Yesterday 13:44
The thing that people forget is that although the Catholic church was without doubt corrupt and money grabbing, they also played a huge part in supporting the poorest in society, something Henry cared nothing about. They provided free healthcare, homes for orphans, food for the hungry and shelter for women escaping violence and rape. Look at any medieval map of a city and most of the land was taken up by monastaries and convents. Alongside the charitable help they provided they also supported the local economy by providing employment. Henry was made aware of this, but chose to ignore the advice to set up alternate support for the poor and instead pocketed the lot.

Absolutely agree. The first Poor Laws in England were set up during Elizabeth's reign. Not needed before.

caroleanboneparte · Yesterday 18:45
He was a domestic abuser who murdered 2 of his DPs.
If he was non royalty and living now he'd be in prison on a whole life sentence.

This is totally misunderstanding "history". There was no such thing as "domestic abuse". A husband and father was supposed to smack his wife and kids around if they disobeyed him. They were the weaker vessels, to be kept in line by the strong man

CaptainBarbosa · Today 01:57
SenecaFallsRedux · Today 01:47
Prince William was the Duke of Gloucester's son.
Yes sorry 😳 I must have the Kent's and Gloucester's mixed up!!

The present Duke of Kent's father was killed when the plane he was in (possibly flying it) crashed into a hillside in Scotland during the War. No one seems to know why he was there at all.

Bit of a digression but I find it fascinating that when Charles has his coronation that the front rows will be stuffed with direct descendants of his namesake Charles II. William and Harry (2 lines via Diana) and their children, Camilla, Fergie (if she's invited of course) who has no less than 3 direct lines from him, Beatrice and Eugenie ditto. A great many of the hereditary peers fall into the same category, all down to Charles II ennobling his numerous illegitimate offspring.

He might be happy in his vault thinking he got there in the end No divorces, no beheadings and a queen who he might not have loved, who couldn't bear a child and he wasn't faithful to, but refused to "put aside".

Yes, and Charles II was quite jealous of his cousin Louis XIV's greater wealth and power. No coronations in France anymore; another Charles sits on the British throne, and the next King will be a direct descendant of all three Charles'.

Good point. He had mumsnet high standards

And if Kate really is descended from Mary Carey and Mary was Henry's daughter, then there's another first when George becomes king! Alas we will never know...

No, Poor Laws existed long before this.

I'm, erm, fairly sure though that even in Tudor England, having your wives beheaded on trumped-up charged was considered a teeny bit dodgy, right>

(Also, you know, there were court cases about domestic violence in this period. We might be shocked at what was considered perfectly normal husbandly behaviour, but pretending that past societies had no understanding whatsoever of violence being unacceptable within a marriage, is just absurd.)

Why does that make her a tease? And why is six years mind-boggling?

Would you last six years before you had sex with someone?

No, but I also wouldn't cope for six days without a flushing toilet, so I'm not really sure I'm a good case study for Tudor England.

Not to be horrible but why are you commenting on a Tudor thread?

You don't really believe you live in Tudor England, right?

Surely all of us are aware we might have a tiny bit of historical distance between us and the Tudors?

Why does that make her a tease? And why is six years mind-boggling

it’s accurate that they weren’t sleeping together, I meant. I wasn’t agreeing with the opinion of Anne’s behaviour, but could have worded that more clearlly.

And six years is mind boggling to me given what we think we know about Henry VIII’s personality. He was a Tudor King and autocrat and he could realistically have had almost any woman he wanted as his mistress. Being prepared to wait six years for Anne - not just to marry her, but to sleep with her - seems amazing to me. Particularly given how quickly things went downhill after that.

Well, 26 million people have been baptised into the church he invented so I assume some of them must think he did something good.

He didn't invent protestantism, it was a movement across Europe.

And the breach from Rome was a political act, not just a religious one. The role of the papacy then was nothing like today - they had and exercised real political power. Leaving Rome was just as great a political shock as Brexit

He had mistresses plus a first wife he really loved. Ann was positioned as wife material - look, her sister has a son! Get yourself free and you can have a legitimate version of that affair!

That was worth waiting for - because his aim was a legitimate son, not instant gratification

And people had far less sex then - no contraception, real risks of death in childbirth, possible ostracism of illegitimate children. So waiting not unusual

SarahAndQuack · Yesterday 23:29
No, Poor Laws existed long before this.

"English Poor Law legislation can be traced back as far as 1536, when legislation was passed to deal with the impotent poor, although there were much earlier Plantagenet laws dealing with the problems caused by vagrants and beggars."
The Ordinance of Labourers doesn't really count. Wages rose in response to the Black Death

orbitalcrisis · Today 07:23
Well, 26 million people have been baptised into the church he invented so I assume some of them must think he did something good.
VikingVolva · Today 07:32
He didn't invent protestantism, it was a movement across Europe.
And the breach from Rome was a political act, not just a religious one. The role of the papacy then was nothing like today - they had and exercised real political power. Leaving Rome was just as great a political shock as Brexit

Henry would have been horrified to have been accused of starting a new church, or being called a Protestant. He saw himself as just as Catholic as the Pope.