Paudie, the whole thing about him being a good athlete bothers me even more.  I see him as an alpha male, (American) football player type.  I recently had a conversation with a p*rn star (don't ask!) and she said that the worst lovers she ever had, in the sense that they didn't care about the needs of their partner, were athletes.  That's how I see Henry.  

I would loathe to be in the presence of Henry VIII-imagine having to let him win every game you play and having to smell that festering leg wound!  I was actually just having a conversation about how women will sleep with anyone who is famous, triggered by a tv interview with William Hung.  For those of you who don't know who he is, he auditioned for American Idol a few years ago and was so terrible that he became famous because of it.  I think he may also have Downs Syndrome or something.  In the interview he talked about how women throw themselves at him and he's still getting marriage proposals!  My point is that that's how I see Henry VIII-a man that no woman would want to touch were he not king, but since he did have all that female attention he thought he was something special.  

As a person, Henry was an abomination.  But as a king, he was pretty good.  He did all the things a Renaissance king was supposed to-went to war, thought deeply about religion, protected his kingdom, was well read, was a patron of the arts, built up the navy, etc.  The whole thing about how being out of favor with him was like being deprived of sunshine was certainly true in a time when the king was the government, was England.  Kings went out of their way to cultivate that sense.  Louis XIV-The Sun King-built his palace so that everything having to do with himself was at the center and all things had to revolve around him.  I really liked in this week's episode of The Tudors (this is NOT a spoiler, don't worry) the French girl tells Charles Brandon that all of Europe refer to Henry as “the English Nero,” and Charles seems shocked.  In England, where being in the king's good graces was a matter of life and death, courtiers had to believe he was like the sunshine, but those looking in from the outside could see the truth.

Paudie, You are right.  Henry was all that you say he was.  As far as Kings go, he did his share for England.  For the most part, however the changes he brought about were for his own selfish interests.

Most of us seem to have a problem with the “man” he was and how he used his power of kingship to destroy lives.  Yes, Anne loved him.  Many people loved him.  He seems to have been able to switch his love on and off like a faucet.  I'm sure when Henry loved a person, no matter for how long his love lasted, they felt as though the sun was shining on them.  The fact that his love never lasted, and his need to get rid of those he claimed to once love by killing them, is what is hard to get past.  Something was missing in his character.

He elevated Cromwell to a high government position with the belief he could trust him.  Cromwell pretty much served Henry without getting too involved with many of the factions of the court. And the sun was shining. Cromwell served the King. In the end, Henry listened to all the other factions when they spoke against Cromwell.  Where was Henry's loyalty for the man who had always looked out for his interests?  Henry felt no loyalties for anyone but himself. 

That's just one example of Henry's love.  There are many more, and that leads to the conclusion that he was just an awful human being. 

And not a horrible King.

I'm agreeing with MaryBeth on this one sorry Paudie, they had no choice in the matter, it was the king you don't turn down the king, even the mistresses wouldn't do that.  I think the husbands would maybe even sometimes persuade the wife to go with him, since it would bring good fortune on the family…(don't know if that's true or not, but it seems plausible.)

Hi Ladies,

Times were certainly different then and I don't think ladies had a lot of choice in relationships with a King or any other man, this does not excuse any of the men of that time. After all, any relationship at this time in history or otherwise is more that what one can get out of it. So Henry was not relationship material then we can assume by any stretch of the imagination, regardless of the many that he had. It is hard though to see Henry properly through 21st century eyes, if I had been there, I think that I would have voted with my feet as Tomas Moore did.

On Henry and if we can understand him better, his early years can be of Interest. He was the apple of his grandmothers eye, Margaret Beaufort who was responsible for elevating him to the throne, he was educated by scholars like Skelton and Erasmus and took Greek, latin and of course French. All again had tributes for him, Erasmus is quoted as saying  that Henry was “a lively mentality which reached for the stars, and he was able beyond measure to bring to perfection whichever task he undertook.” also, Thomas More described Henry VIII as follows “He is in every respect a most accomplished prince” this before henry became King. (An interesting point is that Charles Brandon shared Henry's education as he was around Henry VII's court, his father was close to Henry VII.) Henry is said to have been very taken with Erasmus and his “Humanist” teachings this shared with Thomas Moore. Erasmus had some reformist ideas well before it became popular through Luther and Henry VIII himself. When push came to shove on reforms, I think that the influence of Erasmus would have opened doors for reformists with Henry.

And yes Martbeth, Elisabeth is probably Henry's greatest achievement and his second greatest achievement, not having a direct personal influence on her formable years. 

I'm like Sharon when it comes to Henry VIII…as much as I love Anne, I actually don't hate Henry.  Reading and thinking about some of the things he did can make me very sad and angry at times, but I've always found him a very fascinating person all around. 

Saintcast, I love it!
I passed a sign in the shopping area of Cologne Germany one time, an ad a 10 Minute mass!

It is the enigma of Henry Sharon, there are more Henry's than we can count, or as written by history.

I think people of bad character don't turn into tyrants, they just keep it well hidden.

Thomas Moore studied under Erasmus and did not turn into a tyrant (excepting an odd witch burning or two here and there…)

As you have said, Erasmus I think would not have recognized the prince who suddenly against the odds became the King who is remembered for all the wrong reasons or what he tried to instill in him. Was Henry to be Wolsey's replacement in His grandmothers plan?

There was a line in the “Tudors” show, spoken between Moore, and Wolsey “To never tell the Lion of his own strength” how true this was in principle if not actually spoken.

I think this progression can also be seen in Henry, he tested Popes, Kings, Cardinals and anyone else who came between him and what he wanted. This singular focus on things also, not resting until he got what he wanted. Was it more than just being impetuous? 

I am sure Henry could be charming, persuasive, interesting and attractive, especially as a young king. I also think he was selfish, self absorbed, and the bearer of a huge ego. Unfortunately his overwhelming desire for a son and heir superseded any desire he felt for his wives. Why did he pursue Anne for so many years? Was it because she was the love of his life, or was it because he couldn't have her? Once the chase was over and there was no son, he simply moved on.