Monarchy

[sodascouts]

I've been on an Anglophile kick for a while now. I even bought the box set of Starkey's Monarchy.

Since it seems to be a popular topic judging from the recent "What Are You Into" thread, I thought I'd make a separate thread for it. Enjoy!

[Troubadour]

I'll be interested to know which kings & queens interest you. I'm currently reading a biography of Henry IV, one of my heroes.

I have just finished reading 'Young Henry: The Rise of Henry VIII' by Robert Hutchinson, which was great.

I am particularly interested in Alfred the Great. He is a prominent presence here in Winchester, and I have always loved this statue. Maybe it is my romanticism, but it is as if he is guarding the city.





William I (the Conqueror) is another of my interests, partly because he built Winchester Cathedral. He used stones from an old Saxon church that had stood there for years and stamped his mark on this country with the cathedral's completion only thirteen years after he came to power. Some of the original Norman building still exists, and it is fascinating to see the original rounded Norman arches juxtaposed with the later Gothic-style arches that now dominate the building. William II (Rufus) was actually brought to the cathedral after he died and his bones, along with those of King Cnut and others, are in beautiful ornate boxes that sit on beams halfway between the floor and the ceiling in the nave. Quite amazing!

I would like to learn more about all of the monarchs, but right now I am especially interested in Richard III (the fact that he has been portrayed, largely by Tudor propaganda, as such a despicable character makes him fascinating), Edward III, Henry V, Charles I and Elizabeth I. When you get the chance, I'd love to hear what you admire so much about Henry IV, and a little about your other favourite monarchs...

I'm not even sure if this should perhaps become another thread! Soda?

[Freypower]

Just quickly, I was just using that lovely bookmark you sent me of Winchester! I've only been there once; would love to go back someday.

Henry VIII is my hero & has been since I was about 7 or 8. Elizabeth ranks just under her father. Henry IV founded the Lancastrian dynasty & survived, against all the odds, although of course it all fell apart under Henry VI in the Wars of the Roses. Because Henry VII was the Lancastrian heir and because I am a Tudor junkie my sympathies were always with the Lancastrian side (and this also has something do with why I support Liverpool but that is another story). I could go on about this for hours but I'm just quickly responding. I don't know if it's too esoteric a subject to have its own thread.

I recommend Ian Mortimer's books about Edward III, Henry IV and Henry V (although in the Edward III book he takes the position that Edward II was not murdered; I find that very hard to accept).

[Glennsallnighter]

Lou, I love your pics of Winchester. I have to get there some day ...... Soon!

You should try to get a few today under the blanket of snow!

I have read a lot of both fiction and historical works based around the Tudor period and find it fascinating.

[sodascouts]

I'd like to move the posts about royalty into a separate thread but it's going to be difficult because most posts respond to both the royalty aspect and other things as well. I'll try to figure something out.

ETA: I did the best I could, even though I had to leave some of the posts about monarchy in the other thread due to the fact that they dealt with multiple subjects. However, from now on, let's try to keep it to this thread. I find this subject fascinating!

[Ive always been a dreamer]

I have a question for Freypower. I am interested in knowing why you consider Henry VIII to be your hero. I have always found his life to be interesting and fascinating, but never heroic. I mean the man had six wives - two of which he beheaded, and two of which he dumped to marry the others, and that doesn't even count his mistresses. Other than that, the only other significant thing that he did that I can think of off the top of my head is to separate the Church of England from the Catholic Church. I guess some could interpret that as heroic. Anyway, just curious.

[sodascouts]

I'm curious to hear the answer too. When I think of "hero," I think of someone admirable I would like to emulate. Henry VIII is far from that, IMHO. He did some good in his time and had some admirable qualities, but for me, in order to be a hero one most also be moral. When it came to morality, his behavior was at best selfish and vain, was at worst vicious and cruel.

While it was not uncommon for kings and queens of the day to kill at will and do whatever it took to maintain power, does that make it right?

Plus, even in his time period, Henry VIII's behavior was extreme. It earned him the name "The English Nero" from foreign contemporaries. As someone who has studied Renaissance history at length, I find him to have very little about him that is worthy of the accolade "hero."

As far as it being "heroic" for him to establish a new church, he did to both allow himself to divorce Catherine of Aragon and grab for himself power and money he saw going to the Pope and Rome. Placing himself as the head of the church not only allowed him to grant himself a divorce, but also allowed him to make decisions without concerning himself with the Pope's opinions and seize money for the state which had in the past gone to the church.

If this was done out of theological conviction, I would respect it; after all, did the corrupt popes really deserve the kind of political power bestowed on them at the time? The pope's selling of indulgences in order to bring more money into the church was a disgusting exploitation of religious power. However, it is clear that Henry VIII did not want true reformation because when it did start to take hold as a result of his disavowal of the Pope, he tried to reign it back in.

The level of his hypocrisy is clear when you realize that only a few years prior, he had written a work called Defense of the Seven Sacraments railing against Protestant leader Martin Luther and singing the praises of Catholicism - he didn't care about the corruption in the church then, when an alliance with the Pope was profitable to him. It was only when it became politically expedient to disavow the Pope that he did so.

[Lisa]

The pope in Rome might have wielded his office and his ministry to influence British political decisions. The act that forms a separate church and effectuates Henry VIII to officiate as its first minister is a beginning to the social direction that now separates affairs of the church from affairs of the state.

[sodascouts]

You're absolutely right, Lisa, with regard to papal interference. The corrupt Pope often tried to manipulate kings and queens to forward his own interests, many of which had nothing to do with religion.

As a Protestant myself, I recognize the value of what Henry VIII did in forwarding the Protestant Reformation (although I wouldn't call it separation of Church and State, since The Act of Supremacy actually made him head of BOTH church and state, concentrating them in one power). However, I cannot respect Henry VIII's motivations, and I feel The Act of Supremacy's positive ramifications were a happy byproduct of Henry VIII's selfishness rather than the result of an admirable theological initiative on his part.

[Lisa]

I wouldn't know. I have done no study of British history to date. I don't know too much about its monarchy, either.