The New Murrey and Blue blog

Don’t they know Henry VII’s calendar went backwards….?

, , , , , , ,

Henry and Bosworth

Well, well, here we have ten facts about Horrible Henry VII. Oh, dear, he won’t be pleased about one thing…the Express has mistakenly dated his reign from the 22nd. Oops. We ALL know it was from the 21st, because Henners told us it was! He was king before Richard was killed in battle. Richard was never king. Er, then what was all that royal ceremony that went on in Westminster Abbey in 1483? Scotch mist? Henry should have asked his mother to explain. She was there, carrying the queen’s train. Perhaps Margaret was just a hologram? No such luck, the scheming creature was only too real.

So bah, humbug to the Express for compiling this list. Better still, print it off and shove it where Henners’ sun don’t shine!

 

Subscribe to my newsletter

  1. McArthur, Richard P. Avatar
    McArthur, Richard P.

    The list points out the backdating. The facts are accurate.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Jasmine Avatar
      Jasmine

      `Yes, the list is accurate. We may not like Henry, but he died in his bed, with a full treasury, and passed the crown to his son. A pretty reasonable record for the time.

      Like

      Reply
      1. viscountessw Avatar
        viscountessw

        A record achieved through grossly unreasonable means. The vile legacy of a vile man, who sired an even viler son.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. viscountessw Avatar
      viscountessw

      My comments still stand, Mr McArthur. How anyone can praise HVII beats me. He screwed everyone, but somehow eluded payback time. A nasty piece of work by the standards of any age.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  2. mry4441 Avatar
    mry4441

    A treasury gained through tyranny and judicial murder a policy carried on by his awful son and indeed his granddaughters.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  3. hoodedman1 Avatar
    hoodedman1

    A full treasury gained through such dubious means as Morton’s Fork…and his lovely henchmen Dudley and Empson (immediately executed by Henry VIII when he took the throne.) People apparently danced in the streets when Henry VII died, he was hardly loved…however, they did not know what was coming.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. Jasmine Avatar
      Jasmine

      Nobody said anything about liking HVII, but if you compare him with his three predecessors – Henry VI was an incompetent king, deposed and killed, his son killed in battle – Edward IV’s second reign was nowhere near as good as the first; he left an empty treasury and sons who did not succeed him. Richard was killed in battle after a short reign, leaving no direct heir – so on that basis, Henry’s record is much better at the prime function of kingship – dying in a bed, with a full treasury and an heir.

      Obviously his methods are not to be praised, nor was he likable on a personal basis.

      Like

      Reply
      1. viscountessw Avatar
        viscountessw

        I’ll allow you that one, Jasmine, except that I wrote praise, not like. I just hope his life was miserable and haunted. He was a monster, like his son…but more on the q.t. The non-smiler with the knife beneath his cloak.

        Like

      2. jrlarner Avatar
        jrlarner

        So the ideal king is one that dies in his bed with a full tresury and an heir? I thought the coronation oath enshrined the ideal of kingship as, broadly:’maintain the church, administer justice, uphold the laws of England, and defend your subjects’. All of these Richard strove to do (although he failed to defend the realm, he died trying). How well did the Tudors do at these? Can’t say Henry VIII ‘maintained the church’ very well, and justice? Pah! And Henry VII was hardly a great warrior, he rather had the Beefeaters to defend himself. To me, the differences are that the two Henrys acted for their own gains whereas Richard acted for the weal of the common man. By that reckoning he was by far the better king. Dying in your bed, having a full treasury and an heir are advantageous to the monarch himself rather than the country.

        Like

  4. sparkypus Avatar
    sparkypus

    Even the old Croyland Chronicler was shocked at this backdating of Henry’s reign. It did not bode well for the future.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. Jasmine Avatar
      Jasmine

      Reply to jrlarner – I did not say that H7 was an ‘ideal king’ however you cannot escape the fact that kings generally wished to die in their beds, hand their crown to their heir and not have any money worries. This is certainly true of Henry. The fact that his son went on to implement the Reformation in England in a particular way is beside the point.

      None of this takes away from the fact that Richard strove to carry out kingship in the best way possible – I am sure he would liked to have reigned long, handed the crown over to his son along with a full treasury. He was not able to do this for various reasons which we all know.

      As for your last point, if a king dies in his bed, hands a secure kingdom to his heir with enough money to provide for he state, that does indeed benefit the country – it escapes from high taxes, and civil wars between various claimants for the crown.

      Like

      Reply
  5. Jasmine Avatar
    Jasmine

    Thanks, Viscountess – but I haven’t praised him either, can’t stand the man, but we cannot deny that he held on to the throne, despite attempts to remove him from it, unlike the previous decades where it seems the crown was a football kicked between a few competitors with no certainty as to the future.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. viscountessw Avatar
      viscountessw

      Yes, Jasmine, he had fingers dipped in superglue….and then dipped in everyone else’s purses. A superb sneak-thief. And a classic case of sitting on the side lines during the grudge match, and then creeping in to lift the cup and make off with it.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  6. skiinglady Avatar
    skiinglady

    I actually have mixed views about henry v11. He was a very clever man in many ways and absolutely brilliant at propaganda. Cunning is the best way to describe him. The two monstrous kings in my mind were henry v111 and Charles 11. Richard 111 was by FAR the better man

    Like

    Reply
    1. Jasmine Avatar
      Jasmine

      A bit out of period, but I wonder why you include Charles II as a monstrous king alongside Henry VIII.

      Like

      Reply
      1. skiinglady Avatar
        skiinglady

        I agree that not all people would but to me his relentless pursuit of his fathers prosecutors after assurances he would not was rather bad. In particular the way the corpses were re-tried . Can you imagine if Richard had done that!!!!

        Like

  7. David Avatar
    David

    How many people lost their lives as a result of the backdating? How many judicial murders?

    Like

    Reply
    1. super blue Avatar
      super blue

      Very few, but this dodge was principally about attainting those who had already died, such as the Duke of Norfolk, thereby seeking part of their property and titles.
      Henry evidently feared that “Perkin”‘s army might take him alive and execute him, hence the 1495 law.

      Like

      Reply
  8. halfwit36 Avatar
    halfwit36

    Most Ricardians I have met consider themselves politically and philosophically liberal.
    With a hat-tip to Gilbert & Sullavan:
    “Every lad and every gal that’s born into the world alive,
    Is either a little liberal or a little conservative.”
    Tudor’s soak-the-rich policy made him the first liberal, you see.
    Richard, his opposite in great and small ways,
    Would vote conservative always.

    Or why don’t we simply face the fact that nobody likes paying taxes. Henry earned his bad rep mostly due, not so much to taxation, but to following Edward IV’s policy of bonds and ‘benovelences’ collected from the rich and powerful.
    And, as a modest suggestion: quit trying to draw parallels between the 15th century and current events, even though I am doing so here. The situations are altogether different.

    Like

    Reply
  9. Another way for Henry VII to screw money out of his subjects…. – murreyandblue

    […] you were peerless! Or why not simply ride roughshod over the laws? After all, that’s how you stole your throne in the first place. But no, you found a way of using them to your advantage. It would clearly have been too much to […]

    Like

    Reply
  10. Treachery is one man’s meat and another’s poison…. – murreyandblue

    […] when Richard III was hacked to death at Bosworth and replaced by Henry VII, who promptly strove to date his reign from the day before the battle, so that every one of Richard’s supporters could be declared […]

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Another way for Henry VII to screw money out of his subjects…. – murreyandblue Cancel reply