Henry VIII--A Likely Failure?

Suppose Cathrine of Aragon's multiple stillbirths/miscarriages/infant deaths don't occur, and she thus provides a male heir with a child or two to spare.

Would King Henry then be remembered for his failure and wastefulness?

I'm thinking of how much of a spender he was, blowing through his father's fortune and being financially rescued by the seizure of the monasteries/church lands. Granted, some of that money was relatively productively invested in the development of the navy, but it's a bit harder to compliment his investment in palaces.

Without a break with Rome, what happens when Henry runs out of money? He's not the sort of man eager to reign in his ambitions, and parliament is probably going to be a bit less than enthusiastic about new taxes for fripperies.
 
That could be problematic, as Parliament while relatively docile does have the purse strings.

Henry was a fairly good Catholic, or at least not cynical enough to convert just to seize church land, I think. Although if he's broke . . .

I have the impression of trumped up charges for those Henry dislikes for some reason.
 
That could be problematic, as Parliament while relatively docile does have the purse strings.

Henry was a fairly good Catholic, or at least not cynical enough to convert just to seize church land, I think. Although if he's broke . . .

I think the fact that money is in the hands of Parliament at that point would prevent that sort of opportunistic conversion, but I wouldn't put it past him.

Maybe more likely is a renewed round of attacks on monastic/church privileges. Working from a platform of opposing corruption in the Church would appeal to people like Thomas Moore and moderate reformers, certainly, and there's a fair degree of historical precedence for the King of England to try squeezing taxes or property out of the Church.

In this case, Henry might even win a few concessions on that. The Pope would rather make some sacrifices there to keep England onside against the rising protestant heresy.

I have the impression of trumped up charges for those Henry dislikes for some reason.

That seems quite possible, but trying to squeeze money out that way would be an excellent way of galvanizing domestic opposition, and building momentum for a revolt.
 
I think the fact that money is in the hands of Parliament at that point would prevent that sort of opportunistic conversion, but I wouldn't put it past him.

Maybe more likely is a renewed round of attacks on monastic/church privileges. Working from a platform of opposing corruption in the Church would appeal to people like Thomas Moore and moderate reformers, certainly, and there's a fair degree of historical precedence for the King of England to try squeezing taxes or property out of the Church.

In this case, Henry might even win a few concessions on that. The Pope would rather make some sacrifices there to keep England onside against the rising protestant heresy.

Yeah. Not sure if that'd be enough for Henry, though.


That seems quite possible, but trying to squeeze money out that way would be an excellent way of galvanizing domestic opposition, and building momentum for a revolt.

Indeed. But desperate kings have tried such things.
 
Yeah. Not sure if that'd be enough for Henry, though.

Depending on how often Henry wants to go to war, probably not.

Indeed. But desperate kings have tried such things.

Makes me wonder if this might lead to enough widespread opposition to force Henry to relinquish further powers to Parliament. Henry doesn't seem the type to take that lying down though.
 
Suppose Cathrine of Aragon's multiple stillbirths/miscarriages/infant deaths don't occur, and she thus provides a male heir with a child or two to spare.

Would King Henry then be remembered for his failure and wastefulness?

I'm thinking of how much of a spender he was, blowing through his father's fortune and being financially rescued by the seizure of the monasteries/church lands. Granted, some of that money was relatively productively invested in the development of the navy, but it's a bit harder to compliment his investment in palaces.

Without a break with Rome, what happens when Henry runs out of money? He's not the sort of man eager to reign in his ambitions, and parliament is probably going to be a bit less than enthusiastic about new taxes for fripperies.

As much of a failure as George IV.
 
No personal succession crisis - means Henry remains RC he was quite a devout individual - it also significantly alters the development of the English Parliament.

Parliament was usually summoned early in a reign to rubber stamp the traditional taxes and revenues granted to the crown....monarch's usually only summoned new Parliaments during their reign to get it to grant additional revenues or taxes to pay for wars - after granting initial hereditary dues to the crown - the monarch was supposed to "live off his own".
They did not sit permanently and were summoned and dissolved by the whim of the crown.
Henry's desire for an heir or rather his desire for Anne Boleyn if we are being a bit more honest led to his summoning a long running series of Parliaments from 1529 to pass the laws that established his supremacy of the church, the dissolution of the monasteries, the transfer of church property to the crown, and to ammend on numerous occassions the succession.
That need for Parliament to rubber stamp significant religious change meant Henry and his successors summoned Parliament and kept it in session far more than their predecessors.
In his twenty two year reign Edward IV - summoned only six parliaments and each only lasted a few months.
Henry VIII called nine parliaments - one of which was in session for seven years (the so called Reformation Parliament 1529 to 1536).

No reformation means the Tudor relationship with Parliament remains much closer to that of their Plantagenet predecessors and slows down constitutional development.

As to Henry's dosh - he is probably going to need money in the 1530s and 40s. How he gets it is another matter - one thing Henry (like his daughter Elizabeth) was good at was using his personality and prestige to dominate his parliaments.
 
Top