2 people bested this!2 people are curious. |
Do you think this is the best? 
|
Although not as immedeiatley interesting as Henry VIII, he firmly established a secure Tudor Dynasty and stabilised the Treasurey, which i must point out his bloody son wasted almost instantly!!
The Best Sponsors in the World (and other stuff we like)
Members that think Henry VII is the best!
Comments
He was certainly an improvement on his predecessor, Richard III.
Mind you, the trouble with the British monarchy began with Edward III's death in 1376, because there were too many claims to the throne among his numerous descendants. The grandson who succeeded him (Richard II) is best summed up as a complete prat, and he was deposed in 1399 by Henry IV, his cousin. The stage was then set for what is now referred to as the Wars of the Roses, the struggle between the Houses of Lancaster and York - cousins of each other, descended from Edward III - which rumbled on for most of the 15th century.
Richard III (York) took the throne by force; Henry's (Lancaster) claim to it was dubious, to say the least, but after Richard's disposal of his nephews (the tragedy of the 'princes in the Tower' - and I don't think anyone who examines the evidence can doubt that) Henry's path to kingship was more or less laid out for him.
Incidentally, because of these events, his son Henry VIII was acutely aware of how fragile the stability of the realm was without a (male) heir or two - hence his ruthless behaviour towards his wives.
(My favourite historical description is of wife no. two: 'that goggle-eyed whore Nan Bullen' [Ann Boleyn])
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node=Henry%20VIII
Serious question, Baumstamm - could you not get the 'link' comment box to appear? Your link is repeated here.
And it seems quite succinct and accurate, may I add.
oh i forget sorry and thanks
It is very refreshing to see someone give credit to this unsung ruler who certainly stabilised the English monarchy at a very important time.Recently,a Channel 4 programme on British t.v. examined the more human side of Henry.I read the book "Perkin"by Ann Wroe ,on which some of the historical facts were based with great interest.He kept his cool,this one!
Would that be Perkin Warbeck?
But a very clever fraud.His identity is still a mystery;there is a possibility that he was a son of York-at least,genetically.It looks as if he went to his execution with a badly beaten face- nobody took any chances as he had strongly resembled the Queens' family.But even here,as I have already said,Henry had kept his cool-no mean feat!
I think if Warbeck made any big mistake it was to be too well groomed-too "like a prince"-as a young Thomas More carefully noted.Richard of York had seen his father die suddenly,his brother dethroned-if he had lived he would have seen him murdered and then learn that the usurper had seduced his sister(see Alison Weir:"The Princes in the Tower")He, more than anyone in this period of English history, was entitled to a nervous breakdown!!
Quite right, Tribble. The Princes in the Tower is one of my favourite history books, too.
Trying to establish what really happened after such a long interval is what fascinates me.