Henry VIII essay - Grade: 1 PDF

Preview

Summary

Henry VIII essay...

Description

Clara Balon

Was there any substance behind the competitive glamour of the Renaissance Kingship of Henry VIII? The Renaissance Kingship of Henry VIII was marked by a return to classical values such as chivalry, which permeated all aspects of his court and spread out into England. Thus a ‘competitive glamour' emerged during this period, with Henry himself competing with his court, the Papacy and with other European rulers. In order to understand whether or not this glamour had substance behind it, it is necessary first to explore the historiography surrounding the reign of Henry VIII. While Henry VIII seemed a very impressive figure to contemporary writers, inspiring both awe and respect in his role as an absolute monarch (contemporary sources also make much of his unusually handsome appearance), modern historians disagree on the extent to which Henry made independent decisions, and whether he spearheaded his own policies. Following the traditional interpretation, provided by the likes of A. F. Pollard, a largely positive view of a capable king emerges. However, Elton and his students argue that Henry was not a leader, but rather a follower, and thus it may be considered that the glamour of his kingship concealed a lack of substance caused by his insecure attitude to power. The competitive glamour of Renaissance kingship was arguably embodied by the court of Henry VIII. Henry's interest in learning was well documented by contemporaries; the Venetian ambassador to Henry's court described how ‘he speaks French, English, and Latin, and a little Italian, plays well on the lute and harpsichord, sings from book at sight, draws the bow with greater strength than any man in England, and jousts marvellously.' The English court embraced the advent of humanist learning, which formed a major part of intellectual life during this period, and became more culturally polycentric. Among the educated elites, concepts of chivalry, ecclesiological, ideological, legal and classical ideas were blended with the European values which pervaded Court etiquette and culture. The influence of ideas from around Europe can also be seen in that most books and manuscripts, which included famous courtesy manuals and works such as Castiglione's ‘Book of the Courtier’, Guevara's ‘Dial of Princes’ and Hoby's ‘Book Named the Governor’, were imported from European print works. These texts explored the ideals of the civic humanism of the Renaissance through the traditional ideals of magistracy and nobility. It follows, therefore, that with such material at his disposal, Henry VIII was inclined to adopt Renaissance values as a basis for his kingship. Indeed, it has been argued that, following the humanist classical tradition, ‘counsel' was seen to be intrinsically linked to virtue, as the king was required to act with concern for the common good due to the requirements of leading a virtuous lifestyle. Further competition at court can be seen in the factions that emerged during Henry VIII's reign. Recent studies have emphasised the importance of factions in our understanding of politics. A degree of sycophancy towards the king was arguably inevitable, but the language of surviving sources reveals the need of Henry's ministers to ingratiate themselves with him, as he had the power to make or destroy them. The language of Cromwell's letters reveals his respectful detachment and reverence for the king, as every request or command is issued with regard to the king (‘the kinges highnes desireth you…' and ‘the kinges highnes pleasure and commaundyment is…'). Elton argues that Cromwell was the power behind the King, whose initiatives drove governmental reform during Henry's reign. It is evident that Henry relied heavily on his ‘first ministers', who included Cromwell, More, Cranmer and Wolsey. However, 1

Clara Balon all of these men eventually fell from favour, arguably due to the pressure exerted on the King by their enemies at court. It is unclear why Cromwell had charges of treason and other offences brought against him, (as there was no evidence to suggests a direct falling out between him and Henry) but it is highly plausible that his enemies, including the Duke of Norfolk, were able to persuade the King to have Cromwell attainted and beheaded. Therefore, the court of Henry VIII projected the high culture of Renaissance kingship, especially from the humanist influence in this period, creating an illusion of glamour which surrounded Henry VIII, hiding his insecurities. Henry's insecurities were shown by his extremely competitive nature, and his insecurities made him more and more desperate for power, which he was able to achieve by asserting his royal authority, employing his royal prerogatives and setting himself up as an absolute monarch. The power of the Renaissance papacy during the reign of Henry VIII arguably made it inevitable that a Renaissance King, ruling as an absolute monarch, would come into conflict with the Pope. The Popes of the Renaissance, including Leo X, Alexander VI and Julius II, had transcended the previously modest and highly spiritual position of their predecessors and moved towards a role that C. A. Duffy described as ‘all decadence and drag'. The Popes broke multiple rules of conduct: Alexander VI had eight children with three different women, Julius II took on a military role and was described by contemporaries as a ‘fearsome Pope' while Leo X was dragged into the controversy surrounding the rebuilding of St Peter's Basilica using funds from indulgences sold in Germany, which was one of the outrages that Martin Luther addressed in his Ninety-Five Theses. Henry VIII followed in the footsteps of his father Henry VII in terms of asserting his royal authority, but went further, establishing himself as an absolute monarch. However, a remaining balance to Henry's authority was that of the Papacy, therefore, A. F. Pollard argued that, even if Henry had not needed an annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon, he may have come to reject papal control over the governance of England for political reasons. The process of Henry taking control of religion in England was solidified in the Act of Supremacy of 1534 which stated that the King was ‘the only Supreme Head on Earth of the Church of England'. Following this, the Oath of Supremacy acknowledging the King as such became mandatory on pain of death under the Treasons Act of 1534. Royal authority was founded on the Ten Commandments, with an emphasis on the King being divinely sanctioned and conveying the Word of God. A belief in divine authority was central for this, as Henry VIII revived an archaic tradition of the King being seen as God's messenger on earth, thus greatly legitimising his position. The determination of Henry to assert his authority is evident in the brutality of his methods: The Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536 saw Henry renege on his promise to pardon the rebels led by Robert Aske and the execution of some two hundred ringleaders. The Henrician reforms culminated in an aggressive policy against ‘idolatry' under Cromwell from 1538, including the destruction of the shrine of St. Thomas Becket at Canterbury (the complete dismantling of shrines to saints was sanctioned in 1540, and England's remaining monasteries were dissolved in 1542). In consequence, the king was excommunicated by Pope Paul III on 17 December of the same 1538, signalling the completion of the ‘Break with Rome'. Superficially, it appears that the competitive glamour of Renaissance Kingship had substance and gave Henry an edge over the Papacy, allowing him to emerge as a dominant contender in his own religious sphere. However, a more nuanced view of this returns to the debate regarding the degree of autonomy Henry VIII had in decision making. This debate also encompasses the role of the Privy Council, especially when determining whether or not the 2

Clara Balon Privy Council acted as a point of contact between the King and People, as this would make England atypical in terms of the Renaissance model, where the counsel was a subset of the court. Elton engages the view that Cromwell led religious reform, but historians have also remarked that Anne Boleyn was an intellectually curious woman with Reformist sympathies (which may have contributed to her downfall). If we believe that Henry was an impressionable king and was led by others, the competitive glamour of his Renaissance Kingship lacks substance, as the King would then not be the driving force behind his conflict and eventual break with the Papacy. Competition among European Renaissance Monarchs was a major feature of this period. The most renowned kings of the early European Renaissance were the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, Francis I of France (who was succeeded by his son Henri II) and Henry VIII of England. Despite major differences across the Continent and in Europe, there were common elements surrounding the political agenda of the Tudor and leading European monarchies, and their ideas of statecraft were linked. Interestingly, the historiography surrounding these rulers has not always clearly identified them as Renaissance monarchs, indeed, G. Richardson goes so far as to say that, despite their claims to an imperial status, the three kings were actually not particularly different from their predecessors and the competitive glamour of Renaissance kingship created an illusion of grandiosity. Despite this, there is evidence of increased competition in this period, especially between Henry VIII and Francis II. This took the form of international courtly displays such as the Field of Cloth of Gold (which showed the exemplary cultural influence exerted by courts). Indeed, the contemporary English diplomat and Scholar Eylot argued that ‘majesty' was an outpouring of ‘the fountain of all excellent manners', showing the importance of etiquette and dignity of conduct in competition. However, much of the competition seen in the reigns of Henry VIII and Francis I was military. From the outset of his reign, Henry VIII was set upon achieving the sort of military glory his father had not pursued and asserting his right to the tile of King of France. Henry joined the Holy league with Pope Julius II and Ferdinand of Spain so that they could attack France with a Papal blessing. The alliance was formally made on 13th November 1511 and war with France was subsequently declared. In 1512, however, Ferdinand removed his forces from the campaign following the capture of Navarre and English troops were forced to return to England in October 1512. Such was Henry's eagerness for military glory that in 1513 Henry went back to France, leading an army, with Wolsey in charge of the preparations for 25,000 men to sail. Despite enjoying victories at Therouanne and Tournai, the cost of the war prohibited further battles and Louis XII made generous peace terms with Henry VIII. This lasted until the third invasion of France in 1544, when, despite his dynastic ambitions, Henry refused Charles V's request to march on Paris so English forces were left isolated. The failure of the French invasion of England in 1545 saw both sides sign the Treaty of Camp on 7th June 1546, as a result of which Henry secured Boulogne for eight years. The competitive glamour of warfare between the English and French during this period saw both sides suffer heavy losses both militarily and financially. However, the priority of military glory is visible on both sides, and the use of royal prerogatives to restore dynastic heritage is a common theme of Renaissance Kingship. The priorities for Charles V were somewhat different. Despite entering into alliances with Henry VIII when it suited him, Charles was more concerned with maintaining control of his myriad territories, and in his role as a ‘universal soldier', protecting Christendom from the Ottoman threat. Therefore, behind the competitive glamour of Renaissance kingship across Europe, there were different priorities. 3

Clara Balon The wars of this period arguably had substance behind them, but perhaps not to the extent desired by Henry VIII or the European rulers, as costs prohibited a great victory for either side. In conclusion, there was little substance behind the competitive glamour of the Renaissance kingship of Henry VIII. The King was in competition in three major areas during his reign: in Court, with the Papacy and with other European Monarchs. From the historiographical debate surrounding the reign of Henry emerges an image of a King who relied on his successive first ministers to arrange his policy and was preoccupied with creating a court centred around the revival of classical values, as well as pursuing his dynastic aims in France and entering the European arena with England as a growing power. However, it appears that Henry VIII was strongly influenced by those around him and the substance behind the competition and glamour of the monarchy was perhaps generated not by Henry himself but by his ministers and associates, and sometimes wives. Particularly in his later life, at the point of Henry's physical disability and ‘tyrant complex', the grandiosity created by the competitive glamour of Renaissance kingship generated an illusion of power which largely concealed the King's insecurities. Thus, while the values of Renaissance kingship were certainly substantial, the competitive glamour of the reign of Henry VIII was perhaps lacking in this respect.

4...