Virile King to psychotic despot: The changing public representation of Henry VIII and what this reflects in society by Katie Lees

The representation of King Henry VIII has changed drastically between his 16th century reign and present day. Not only has his changing representation charted the emergence of new historical schools of thoughts but it has reflected the evolution of societal views, in particular the progression of gender equality. Whilst Henry VIII was of course an important King in English history, his prominence in national identity has at times been overemphasised and his reign not always studied with the same critique as other Kings. Whereas rulers such as Richard III, Edward VI and James I, have not been viewed in History as overtly masculine with such extreme power over women and subjects and therefore have been more intensely critiqued. Looking at the changing public view of Henry VIII demonstrates the beginning of a vital progression from a society that bolstered ‘great men’ of history and justified their actions no matter how immoral, towards a culture influenced by feminism which aims to expose male abuses of power. During his lifetime, Henry VIII constructed a powerful image through portraiture that often showcased a large, intimidating figure. This defined his reputation for centuries, as it was replicated by his children, who emulated their fathers persona during their own reigns. The most recognisable image of the King comes from The Whitehall Mural commissioned circa 1537 which despite being destroyed in a fire in 1698, has had a long lasting legacy. The portrait depicts Henry VIII, Jane Seymour and his parents, Henry VII and Elizabeth of York, but places Henry VIII as the strongest and most powerful ruler. The women in the portrait are all turned slightly to the side, looking demure and meek, whilst Henry VIII faces outward in a militaristic stance. Henry VII however, has been painted to mirror the women's position rather than his sons, therefore reducing his masculinity and appearing subservient to his child. Henry VIII bolstered his own importance at the expense of his father in this portrait, demonstrating that his main priority was the strength of his own image even if it weakened others. To undermine the strength of his father and the founder of the Tudor dynasty, which was known to have a weak claim to the throne, was a bold and borderline dangerous move but at this point in his reign, many courtiers who found themselves on the wrong side of the King had been executed. By 1537 then, Henry VIII’s reputation was so established that he seemingly felt so confident in his own power and brutal style of Kingship that he could undermine his father. This is evident in portraiture and the image he was constructing of himself, which aimed to further display his power and disencourage dissent. The original Whitehall Mural spanned an entire wall in the Palace of Whitehall and would have no doubt been an overwhelming sight, with the viewer's eye line purposely drawn to the King standing front and centre. From his intimidating stature and stern expression, to his bejeweled chest and large codpiece, the image was created to remind viewers that the King was virile and not to be challenged. This portrait is widely recognisable in English culture, being one of the most famous of any English monarch, so the message behind it stayed present in society for centuries. The Whitehall Mural portrayed Henry VIII as a God-like ruler who dominated those around him and placed him as the most widely discussed English King, therefore his importance was elevated whilst other Tudor figures were pushed to the side. Henry VIII's codpiece is evident in many visual representations of him and has attracted so much attention that it is arguably synonymous with his image. In the 16th century, a codpiece was the most obvious sign of masculinity and fertility that men could display aside from fathering children. Henry VIII’s extensive link to codpieces has brought with it a legacy of virility, despite his struggle for an heir with many wives hinting that he was not overtly fertile like his York ancestors had been. It also placed the blame for miscarriages and lack of heirs onto his wives rather than him. During the Victorian period, visitors to the tower of London were known to touch what was believed to be Henry VIII’s codpiece as a type of fertility charm, demonstrating the correlation between the King and procreation. This then shows that the powerful and virile representation of Henry VIII stood the test of time for centuries. Furthermore, this exemplifies the sexism in society that through imagery and representation Henry VIII could be actively linked to fertility whilst his wives were so often blamed for their miscarriages and lack of children. The overtly masculine representation of Henry VIII, which placed him as a dominating King of England in popular history, was so exaggerated and long lasting because of England’s patriarchal society. Although Henry VIII was the common factor among his wives miscarriages and lack of pregnancies, he was not blamed because childbirth was considered solely a female concern. Additionally, all of Henry VIII’s wives aside from Jane Seymour were presented in History, until more recent scholarship, as having failed in their womanly duties. Catherine of Aragon aged out of her ability to have children. Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard were affiliated with adultery and seen as morally dubious women. Anne of Cleves was deemed unattractive by Tudor propaganda and Catherine Parr was too strong and opinionated. These women were seen to fail as wives by patriarchal ideals and consequently could be blamed for the lack of heirs and issues within their marriages. To the public, Tudor history consisted of Henry and his problematic wives who were categorized based on their demise in songs and discourse rather than on their characters. To have and control the fates of six wives was seen as a power move for Henry which captured public attention to such an extent that the women were left behind in the study and presentation of history. This sexism has further bolstered Henry VIII’s reputation and created the long lasting legacy of him as a great man of history that only truly began changing with JJ.Skarisbrick’s work in 1968 and has slowly evolved to become a more equal redefining of Tudor history in academia and popular culture.

The public representation of Henry VIII has changed particularly rapidly in the 21st century with the intensity of fourth wave feminism and the awareness this has brought to society. An interesting way to explore the public view of the King and how it has changed is through popular film and television. In 2007, the television series The Tudors was created alongside a revival of obsession in all things Tudor and sparked an interest in the period for many people. Historical representation in the Tudors is not particularly accurate and has been quite contentious in its academic reception. Jonathan Rhys Meyers’ Henry was presented as attractive and charismatic, visually he was quite different from portraiture but does align with descriptions of the King being athletic and attractive as a young man. He was neither likeable nor dislikable but rather goes between the two; sometimes the audience sees a very human and emotional side to the King whilst in other scenes are presented with his childish tantrums and unstable personality. He did truly love his wives and friends such as Thomas More but would never put them above himself and cast them off when they no longer served his needs. The wives of Henry VIII did lean into stereotypes, Catherine of Aragon was older, Anne Boleyn was ambitious and Jane Seymour was much more passive than both of her predecessors. However, despite this and the sexualisation of women in the series, they were definitely strong in their character and beliefs and did not let Henry control them without resistance. The Tudors was then a mishmash of positive and negative representations that prioritised entertainment value over anything else. Whilst The Tudors is not historically accurate to any degree, it has shaped the modern public view of Tudor figures and therefore is worthy of study. This television series demonstrated that the representation of Tudor figures to the public was beginning to change. They still fit into classic stereotypes but were being displayed with more layers and humanity to their characters; they were young and messy in a way that made them more relatable to viewers than traditional depictions of royals. The depiction of Henry VIII showed him to be childish and explosive but still redeemed him and his Kingship, he could be cruel but was not necessarily abusive. Henry's looks barely declined over the course of the show, which kept him visually in much better condition than Henry VIII would have been in and consequently kept him as an attraction for the audience. Overall, he was still presented as an attractive King that is highlighted in English identity and the drama of the Tudor dynasty was still valued above a redefining of unfair representations. Anne Boleyn has become a fourth wave feminist icon and Natalie Dormer's intensely human portrayal in The Tudors largely contributed to this. Dormer showed how ambition, wit and bold attractiveness were the traits that were encouraged and idolised in Anne Boleyn but also were subsequently used against her to stain her character. The emotional depiction of this pushed Anne’s story to resonate with audiences more than it had previously and more than in other modern depictions of Anne. For example, in The other Boleyn Girl Anne’s characterisation is much harsher and in Wolf Hall she is simply not the character that is being rooted for. Likewise in academia during the 2010s, a focus emerged on telling stories that had previously been dismissed including women, minorities and courtiers who had previously only been studied in relation to the monarchs rather than in their own right. These changes in historical narratives coupled with the #MeToo movement and wider fourth wave feminism pushed forwards the importance of holding men accountable for abusing their power and mistreating women. This societal progression has majorly affected the representation of Henry VIII and this is perhaps best demonstrated by Six: The Musical which has become a cultural sensation that the public and specifically young women admire. In this, we see Tudor women reclaiming their narratives and telling their own stories, Henry VIII does not even appear as a character in the production. This has reflected how in media, society and academia, Henry VIII is no longer viewed as the great man of Tudor history, instead academics and the public alike are more interested in the narratives of those who have been neglected. This is evident in the public sphere through media and heritage, as well as in academic texts. Tudor smear campaigns marred the image of Henry’s wives for centuries simply because they did not live up to the King's wishes and now their narratives are finally being researched and reclaimed. The representation of Henry VIII is now leaning into the idea of a man who used his power to abuse the people around him, even more so than was normal for Kings to do in the early Modern era as Henry VIII overstepped the authority of the church to do so. This could be viewed as a change of historical opinion based on current societal conditions rather than the historical context. However, in the case of Henry VIII when the patriarchal bias is taken away it leaves a King who failed in many of the goals of his reign, was borderline despotic in his ruling style by his death and allowed his personal aims and sexual desire to lead and alter the country monumentally. This is not a King that modern society wants to define England’s historic identity and thus, Henry VIII’s representation to the public has declined from an overbearing but fantastic monarch to a satirical, sickly man which can be witnessed in contemporary Tudor content.

In the 2020’s, academic work produced has reflected the fall of Henry VIII’s representation and focused instead on reclaiming dismissed and less studied Tudor narratives. Heritage sites have also gradually increased their focus on bottom up experiences of history or prioritising and empowering voices other than Henry VIII, such as Hever Castles Catherine & Anne: Queens, Mothers, Rivals exhibition which attempted to unite two women who have consistently been placed in competition with one another. This is also evident in the public reception of history; the popularity of Six: The Musical and Wolf Hall has demonstrated that the public do wish to engage with varied experiences of Tudor life rather than a solely Henry-centric view. The Spanish Princess does display a young, handsome and loving Henry but focuses solely on before and the very early stages of his reign, it does not therefore show him at the peak of his power, when his rule became much harsher. Additionally, it does show audiences a more rounded and youthful view of Catherine of Aragon rather than just the pious and dowdy wife who could not provide an heir so it does still successfully create a view of Tudor history not solely focused on Henry VIII and his whims. Furthermore, with this movement in popular culture it can be seen that the rise of interest and focus in alternative Tudor histories has further triggered the negative reception of Henry VIII because the true brutality and unfairness of his treatment towards wives, courtiers and citizens has been more openly studied, discussed and represented to society. The popular culture moment that has most dramatically displayed the fall of Henry VIII’s public representation is the movie Firebrand (2023). This movie follows Catherine Parr through a tumultuous time at court where she is on the brink of arrest due to her religious beliefs. This story is based on a fiction book rather than following the historically accurate events from this time period, however, it is relevant in showing the current perception of Henry VIII to the public. In stark contrast to any other notable productions of the 21st century, in Firebrand Henry VIII is not redeemed in the slightest, through looks or personality. Jude Law’s Henry VIII is completely off putting to the audience through both his aging, sickly figure and aggressive behaviour. He is abusive and violent towards Catherine Parr and viewers are placed to feel immensely sympathetic for her. This is a representation of Henry VIII that has not been portrayed so extremely before, no moments of charisma, love or attractiveness redeem his negative actions. Although there is little historical accuracy in the movie, the foulness of Henry’s illnesses alongside his changeable, manic behaviour is likely closer to how the King would have been towards the end of his life rather than the nationalistic image of the masculine red haired King that is often presented. It is borderline uncomfortable to watch the representation of Henry VIII in Firebrand and this can demonstrate the progression of society in presenting historical men more truly to how they may have been rather than airbrushing and excusing their actions simply because they were powerful men. Witnessing and interacting with Henry VIII would have likely been uncomfortable for the wives, women and courtiers around him too, as they fought to stay in his favour and keep their properties, wealth and lives. Overall, the public representation of Henry VIII has changed almost entirely from the nationalistic image that was built through portraiture, especially in the 21st century. This reflects the progression in society as there is a much larger sense of equality and accountability. The fall of Henry VIII’s image is an example of how powerful men, in history and now, are no longer excused for abusive behaviour because of power and riches. This in turn has forwarded dismissed narratives and encouraged a study of other Tudor figures, focusing on their own lives rather than just their lives in relation to the monarch. Additionally, this has allowed a truer and more nuanced study of the Tudor period because Henry VIII’s constructed image as a powerful, virile monarch and nationalistic icon who was successful in being a great King of England was not entirely accurate. These changes are seen in academia, heritage and in the public view of Tudor history and in showing a wider selection of Tudor voices more people have been able to connect with Tudor history, creating a revival of interest in the period that will encourage further study, heritage work and appreciation of the Tudor dynasty.