Does Henry VIII Justify The Title Henry The Great?

Through assessing and evaluating the rule of Henry VIII, it can be seen that he does not justify for the title ‘Henry the Great’, to a significant extent. Henry’s intimate and brutal ruling, poor connection with the people, his lack of involvement in the government and although young, was not concerned with running the country, all proves to show that he is not worthy of the title ‘Henry the Great’. Nonetheless, the outcome of Henry VIII’s religious and political reforms of England proves to make him worthy of being ‘great’.
Henry VIII’s intimate and brutal rule and his perception of being both physically and socially above everyone else, hence concludes him contemptible of the title ‘Henry the Great’. Henry’s rule was very intimate and brutal,

creating this atmosphere of fear and paranoia among his people. For instance this counterexample written in 1509 by Lord Mountjoy proves otherwise, ‘…an extraordinary and almost divine character…When you know what a hero he now shows himself, how wisely he behaves…If you could see how all the world here is rejoicing in the possession of so great a Prince…’ On the contrary in Historian Jasper Ridley’s book Henry VIII, ‘72, 000 thieves and vagabonds were hanged during his reign’. As well as the ‘72,000 thieves and vagabonds’, those who were potential rivals to the throne, those who refused to comply to his Act of Succession and even his most trusted advisor and alleged lovers, were all executed. This shows King Henry VIII’s harsh and powerful ruling as well as the response of execution almost accumulating to over 72, 000 over the time of his reign. Through the sources and general judgments and understandings of Henry’s rule and his connection with the people, it can be consequently determined that he does not deserve to be given the title ‘Henry the Great’ in this aspect of his ruling.
The way in which Henry VIII’s government was approached and controlled, thus represented an insignificant and is unworthy of the title ‘Henry the Great’.

Through King Henry’s government, he was not overly involved, and believed it could be left to trusted and loyal men once they knew the king’s intentions and would implement them. An excerpt from The Tudor Chronicles, by Susan Doran demonstrates the way that Cardinal Thomas Wolsey made an impact towards politics and his role within the government. His undisputed rule and Wolsey’s ‘governmental and political skills led to the advancement in the Church and the state’. As he was his ‘most trusted minister’, he gave much power and influence to him and Henry delegated his state business and mundane tasks to Wolsey. This not only shows that Henry’s government was very much dependent on the ministers and sub-leaders but also that he was a very lethargic king in the way that he gave near-complete control to Thomas Wolsey, thus proving him to not be worthy of a ‘great’ king in the governmental realm. Henry always began his rule by seeking advisors or ministers, ‘Office of Lord Chancellor (the king’s head of government)’ on most matters and would end it with absolute control, execution or redundant acts or proceedings. Through the pre-determined interpretation and the heavy reliance on Henry’s trusted ministers, thus proving him of an unworthy king to be considered

‘great’.
As Young Henry, he did not deem the title of ‘great’ and despite being good-natured and highly educated, he delegated matters and concerns away and paid more attention on sport rather than running the country.

Henry VIII exuded a charismatic and athleticism and a diverse appetite for art, music and sport but after proceeding as King, he began his rule seeking advisers on most matters and would end it with absolute control. A drawing representing ‘Henry, jousting during a tournament held in 1511…’ supports the following. King Henry VIII was ‘more interested in jousting rather than running the country’ and did not care about the important issue at hand – governing England, thus proving himself unworthy of being considered ‘great’. However the primary source written by a Venetian diplomat, Pasqualigo admires Henry’s qualities and demonstrates his young and healthy figure, ‘…draws the bow with greater strength than any man in England, and jousts marvellously. Believe me he is in every respect a most accomplished Prince’. Young Henry, although was heavily involved in sideline interests, stepped away from the role of a King and threw all his responsibilities and roles away. Although in his younger years, his personality and youth brought great vigour to the court, Henry did not successfully fill the role of the King of England and therefore not being worthy of a ‘great’ king in his earlier

years.
Through evaluating the consequences of Henry VIII’s religious policies and political reformation it can be seen that his decisions to break away from the Church of Rome, led to him to be worthy of the title ‘Henry the Great’. In discovering Henry’s implementation of religious policies and the reformation of the Church of England, it can be observed that Henry claimed prerogative over the English church and was recognised as the ‘supreme head’. The different aspects of change that was made comprising of taking over as head of the English Church, closing of monasteries and ordered the bible in every church. Although it can be argued that these changes were done for selfish reasons (‘need for a male heir’) as well as his ‘desire for power and money’ making him not a great king although the consequences of his actions seemed to have been proven otherwise. The breaking away from the Catholic Church in Rome and the reformation, resulted in dramatic changes to the religious, economic and cultural structure of European society. The implementation of Henry’s religious policies prove that although the origin of his decision was selfish, the outcome thus proved otherwise and made him deserve the title ‘Henry the Great.’
The evaluation of the rule of Henry VIII in the aspects of his ruling, government, young henry and his religious policies demonstrate that he deserves the title ‘Henry the great’ to a significant extent although he was worthy of the title in the aspect of his ruling of religious policies. King Henry VIII although his consequences of religious policies seemed to have a positive effect, his intimate ruling, lack of interest in reigning and delegating of tasks and responsibilities show that he was therefore, not ‘great’ and should not be considered as ‘Henry the great’.