UK

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 13° London Hi 14°C / Lo 8°C

The jousting accident that turned Henry VIII into a tyrant

Medical study uncovers turning point in king's life. Michael McCarthy reports

After the fall Henry became cruel, vicious and paranoid

PA

After the fall Henry became cruel, vicious and paranoid

Henry VIII became the tyrannical monster remembered by history because of a personality change following a serious jousting accident, according to a new historical documentary.

After the accident – just before he became estranged from the second of his six wives, Anne Boleyn – the king, once sporty and generous, became cruel, vicious and paranoid, his subjects began talking about him in a new way, and the turnover of his wives speeded up.

The accident occurred at a tournament at Greenwich Palace on 24 January 1536 when 44-year-old Henry, in full armour, was thrown from his horse, itself armoured, which then fell on top of him. He was unconscious for two hours and was thought at first to have been fatally injured.

But, although he recovered, the incident, which ended his jousting career, aggravated serious leg problems which plagued him for the rest of his life, and may well have caused an undetected brain injury which profoundly affected his personality, according to the History Channel documentary Inside the Body of Henry VIII. The programme focuses on the king's medical problems which grew worse in his later years, especially his ulcerated legs and his obesity: measurements of his armour show that, between his 20s and his 50s, the 6ft 1in monarch's waist grew from 32in to 52in, his chest expanded from 39in to 53in, and, by the time of his death in 1547 at the age of 56, he is likely to have weighed 28 stone.

Robert Hutchinson, a biographer of Henry; Catherine Hood, a doctor; and the historian Lucy Worsley, who is chief curator of Britain's Historic Royal Palaces, offer a picture of a sovereign eventually overwhelmed by health problems by the time of his death. His doctors recorded that he had badly ulcerated legs, was unable to walk, his eyesight was fading, and he was plagued by paranoia and melancholy.

However, Henry had started out with excellent health as a young man, being universally admired for his manly physique. An ambassador at the Tudor court reported: "His Majesty is the most handsomest potentate I have ever set eyes on. Above the usual height with an extremely fine calf to his leg and a round face so very beautiful it would become a pretty woman."

He may have had a bout of smallpox at the age of 23, but the experts speculate that his real medical problems began at the age of 30 when he appears to have contracted malaria, which is thought to have returned throughout his life. They were intensified by two factors: open sores on his legs and sporting injuries.

The sores – varicose ulcers, which began on his left leg when he was 36, and later affected his right – may have been caused by the restrictive garters he wore to show off his calves. They never healed, and increasingly restricted his mobility.

Henry also suffered various injuries because of his well-known love of sports – he excelled at pursuits such as archery, wrestling and real tennis, and, playing the latter game he seriously injured his foot.

But it was jousting – two armoured horsemen charging at each other with wooden lances in "the lists" – which proved the most dangerous. His first serious accident occurred in 1524 when he failed to lower the visor on his helmet and was hit by his opponent's lance just above the right eye, after which he constantly suffered from migraines.

Jousting nearly killed him 12 years later. The fall at Greenwich left him "speechless" for two hours, and Anne Boleyn, the woman for whom he had divorced his original queen, Katherine of Aragon, was told that he would die – the shock of which news, she said, caused her to miscarry the child she was expecting. The miscarried baby was male, and it was immediately after this that Henry told Anne they would clearly never have male children together, and turned against her. Less than six months later Anne had been executed and Henry had married the third of his six wives, Jane Seymour.

But the jousting accident may have affected his whole personality, the experts suggest. "We posit that his jousting accident of 1536 provides the explanation for his personality change from sporty, promising, generous young prince, to cruel, paranoid and vicious tyrant," Lucy Worsley says. "From that date the turnover of the wives really speeds up, and people begin to talk about him in quite a new and negative way. "After the accident he was unconscious for two hours; even five minutes of unconsciousness is considered to be a major trauma today." Henry may have suffered a brain injury, Dr Worsley says. "Damage to the frontal lobe of the brain can perfectly well result in personality change."

What is beyond doubt is that the end of his jousting combined with his leg ulcers to restrict his movement and Henry, who had a large appetite anyway, began to put on weight rapidly. The programme reconstructs his diet, suggesting he may have eaten up to 13 dishes a day, the majority comprising meat such as lamb, chicken, beef, game, rabbit, and a variety of birds like peacock and swan, and he may have drunk 10 pints of ale a day as well as wine, as water was unsafe.

Henry, the programme says, "became a comfort-eating paranoid recluse – a 28 stone man-mountain."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

BUBONIC ENTREPRENEURIAL PSHYCOPATH
[info]brazil2009 wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 01:23 am (UTC)
"HE WAS A BUBONIC ENTREPRENEURIAL PSYCOPATH. HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROPPED UP AFTER HIS DEATH, STARING STRAIGHT AHEAD, EMBALMED, HANGED, QUARTERED ( NO, HALVED- QUARTERING IS TOO GOOD FOR HIM), TAKEN BACK TO HIS CASTLE, OFFERED FOOD AND WATER, HANGED AGAIN FOR REFUSING HOSPITALITY, THEN TAKEN TO UNCONSECRATED GROUND AND BURIED IN QUICKLIME (NO, IN SLOWLIME- QUICKLIME IS TOO GOOD FOR HIM), THEN DUG UP AND BACK TO HIS CASTLE, REVIVED AND HANGED AGAIN,THEN PRESERVED UNTIL A CURE FOR HANGING IS FOUND. AND HANGED A BIT."
FAMOUS WORDS BY GEORGE W. BUSH ADRESSING HIS FORMER CIA AGENTS SOON AFTER WATCHING THE HISTORY CHANNEL DOCUMENTARY INSIDE THE BODY OF HENRY VIII.
Tyrants
[info]over325one wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 06:02 am (UTC)
Henry was a tyrant - the ordinary man was a serf (slave) the aristocracy and the church were slave drivers and they are now called the establishment.
Jousting Did Henry - Rugby Did Brown
[info]mike4626 wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 06:31 am (UTC)
now we know how Briton got into such a mess
Re: Jousting Did Henry - Rugby Did Brown
[info]tominlondon wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 10:33 am (UTC)
Yeah - people can't even spell "Britain" any more. And they think "anymore" is a word. I blame Henry VIII.
Re: Jousting Did Henry - Rugby Did Brown
[info]mike4626 wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 07:56 pm (UTC)
Yes not Yeah
Journalism and history
[info]johncmullen1960 wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 06:32 am (UTC)
It makes a good story, but can history really be reduced to anecdotes about powerful men? The constant tension between a powerful Roman Church, with its own courts, tax system and massive holdings in Land, and the modernizing elements in the economy meant that the conflict with Rome would come sooner or later, and it is the conflict with Rome which made the difference.
If I had access to Skynet's time machines
[info]thetitssayso wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 08:20 am (UTC)
I'd go back in time to before King Henry got on that horse and introduce him to the game of ping pong. Then we'd all have a much more pleasant monarch to remember!
The cruel, the cynical and dangerous
[info]humble_sparrow wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 08:23 am (UTC)
"his personality change from sporty, promising, generous young prince, to cruel, paranoid and vicious tyrant,"

His personality change might have been aggravated by his injury but most if not all people with unlimited power turn from the kind, the idealistic to the cruel, the cynical and dangerous. It comes with the territory.

One day he decided that the end justified the means and it obviously doesn't.

That's why we need democracy to keep these guys in check.
Re: The cruel, the cynical and dangerous
[info]anubisxxv wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 03:32 pm (UTC)
Didn't do much to keep George W. in check.
Re: The cruel, the cynical and dangerous
[info]humble_sparrow wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 04:08 pm (UTC)
Bush for all his faults did not bump off his wife and half his cabinet to enhance his powerbase, and didn't have the ability to throw dissenters into vats of boiling water while still alive. Nor did he have a job for life. He was always subject to checks and balances from Senate and Congress and ultimately the electors.

and anyway who is that new guy out there, Obama somebody or other, ummm ?

http://famous.y2u.co.uk/F_Barack_Obama_President_USA.html
What a difference a day - and an action - makes
[info]artsunlimited wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 08:25 am (UTC)
johnmcmullen, history often hangs on the smallest things and the actions of a single man. The conflict with Rome was the direct result of the fact that Henry didn't have a male heir and couldn't conceive (sorry) of leaving his kingdom to his daughter. Prior to his break with Rome over the divorce he was dead set against any form of protestant rebellion and even to printing the Bible in English - it was the Pope who gave him the title Defender of the Faith (still listed today in the monarch's titles) for his treatise refuting Luther. Whether that break with Rome would have come in Henry's time is open to question. France and Spain certainly didn't break with the Church - why do you think England would have as a natural course?

If Henry hadn't had been injured (and had the personality change speculated on here) and had Anne Boleyn not miscarried, but given birth to a son, how things would have changed! If she'd had even one boy, her position as Queen would have been secure, they would most probably have had more children, and Henry would have a far different reputation than he has today. Henry saw God denying him, an anointed king, an heir as a punishment - and when he finally got Edward, he was sickly, so clearly God hadn't forgiven him. In the end, monasteries and abbeys would probably have been seized and dissolved in the long run, but would Elizabeth ever have become queen?
Re: What a difference a day - and an action - makes
[info]jonathancr wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 10:57 am (UTC)
Would it have made much difference if Elizabeth *hadn't* become queen?

To be quite honest, it seems to me that the only decent Tudor monarch was the first one. The others just had either "larger-than-life personalities" (ie, were greedy murderous bastards) or very good PR. Plus, of course, wars, religious persecution, and serial wife-killing make for more interesting stories later on than spending decades avoiding wars and spending wisely does.
henry Eight
[info]gm1000 wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 10:45 am (UTC)
No Mike 4626 Henry's England was pretty good, it was only when England became Britain - not Briton -- and people stopped being able to spell.
The Other side
[info]ehross wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 02:00 pm (UTC)
Whatever Henry was for what ever reason the World owes him respect that's accorded to the great men/women of history.

During his time the predominate religion believed the earth was flat, Galileo was a fraud, education was not for the masses, no separation of church and state [they still believe that],etc.etc
His expulsion of this lunatic sect paved the way for what in many ways led to the UK being the Worlds benefactor.
The industrial revolution would have been delayed for who knows how long, [they still do not understand/allow birth control] and all the wonderful contributions make by the UK would have been delayed/stillborn.
Re: The Other side
[info]uanime5 wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 03:06 pm (UTC)
No one in the Medieval period believed the earth was flat. It wasn't until the 19th century that the Fat Earth Society claimed the Earth was flat.
Re: The Other side
[info]qnapper wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 07:31 am (UTC)
The British peoples ignorance of the nature of their own state never fails to amaze and surprise. Britain has no separation of church and state! THE QUEEN IS THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND WHICH IS THE STATE RELIGION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM. TAXPAYERS, SCOTTISH, WELSH, NORTHERN IRISH AND ENGLISH OF ALL DENOMINATIONS PAY FOR THIS NONSENSE. The church of england has special rights enshrined in law with guaranteed state positions in the constitution of the state.
p.s.
While the British Empire was by no manner of means as murderously ruthless as many of the other empires in history. It most certainly was not an early version of OXFAM. Its primary function was ECONOMIC EXPLOITATION. The 19th Century propaganda campaign of painting this NAKED GREED as a gift to mankind, indeed an onerous duty on the British people, would not withstand a close inspection of Britains public and private balance books. The LAW OF CONSERVATION OF IGNORANCE dictates that comfortable lies live on long after their original function has passed.
Re: The Other side
[info]ehross wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 12:37 pm (UTC)
To equate the relationship the Queen has with Parliament and the Pope has with say Italy,South America,The Philippines is a product of a troubled mind.
MORE ON HENRY VIII
[info]chuckman_john wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 02:33 pm (UTC)
It has been a theory for a very long time advanced by some biographers that Henry's leg wound, a suppurating wound for the rest of his life, was responsible for his tyrant behavior.

Certainly in his youth, apart from a handsome athletic appearance, he enjoyed the company of intellectuals and was a fairly impressive scholar himself, as well as a musician and writer.

Elizabeth inherited his intellect with her ability to speak six languages and her love of music.

He apparently had a rather sweet temperament, although he allowed no one to assume any sense of equality in his presence.

It is not impossible there was a genetic strain in Henry - exacerbated by his pain - because Henry VII had a seriously mean streak himself and Elizabeth at times displayed a colossally ugly temper.

As to Anne Boleyn's miscarriage, I don't think that was her downfall.

Anne's strong, rather controlling personality was.

She also may well have been guilty as charged by Henry.

Once the long pursuit and courtship were over, that side of Anne's temperament showed clearly (she was the Great Elizabeth's mother after all), and Henry did not like any sense of competition from women.
BELIEF THAT THE WORLD WAS FLAT?
[info]chuckman_john wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 02:43 pm (UTC)
Belief that the earth was flat?

Sorry, no educated person believed that in Henry's time or even long before.

That is a loose notion from six-grade geography teachers.

Eratosthenes calculated an fairly accurate diameter for the earth in about the third century BCE.

Ptolemy, centuries later, calculated a much less accurate one.

The issue amongst early explorers was really over whose calculation was right, the differences representing vast distances to Asia.

It is only the views of educated people that counts in matters like this since there will always be people who have odd superstitions and ill-founded ideas.

Even today, I'm sure there are inhabitants of remote Africa, Indonesia, or South America who believe the world is flat.
Re: BELIEF THAT THE WORLD WAS FLAT?
[info]ehross wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 04:25 pm (UTC)
Perhaps you are correct concerning The possibility that in A remote part of Africa people still believe that the earth is flat, As you know or should know there is at least one silly religious sect that believes that condoms cause HIV, I suspect they they are disciples of the same sect.
[info]sharonlindsey wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 04:30 pm (UTC)
It really sounds as if Henry may have had Diabetes II as well ... untreated Diabetes can cause poor eyesight, swings in mood, excessive eating/hunger ... just a though - don't know if the Doctors investigating Henry thought about this, too. The jousting head injury would almost definitely caused the personality disorder which may have then led to the Diabetes.
henry's health
[info]viljam wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 07:06 pm (UTC)
I always was led to believe that it was Henry's syphilis which was responsible for his later inbalance. A disease which his great daughter Elizabeth inherited: rotten teeth, nerve-storms, and so on.
Re: henry's health
[info]lodger41 wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 07:41 pm (UTC)
By all accounts Henry was in no way special or gifted or talented........ The real cause of his lustful murderous madness was his 'right' to rule, and his absolute power over his subjects, be they his wives or the Church or anyone else who possesed something which he wanted..... given the right or wrong circumstances, we are all capable of doin an Henry :)
Clean bill of health for the kids
[info]artsunlimited wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 08:08 pm (UTC)
Viljam, syphilis will cause a great many complications - it's speculated that Henry had that, and some form of diabetes as well. The never-healing wound in his leg has been dubbed a complication of diabetes or a syphilis - and tertiary syphilis could certainly account for the paranoia and personality changes that he displayed.

But you were misinformed that Elizabeth inherited syphilis from her father. Rotten teeth isn't a symptom of the congenital disease - irregular and badly deformed teeth and jaws are. Dental care being what it was then, if her teeth became decayed that was bound to happen on its own. (Her sister Mary was actually the one who was prone to migraine and terrible toothache.) Congenital syphilis usually shows up a few weeks after birth, and is almost always accompanied by mental retardation, and none of Henry's children displayed that. Elizabeth enjoyed robust good health as a child and young woman, her mind was clearly unimpaired and she rode, danced, etc. If Elizabeth had been infected, blindness, deafness and deformity or paresis would be far more likely - and Elizabeth displayed none of those symptoms. She might've had a temper but clearly not imbecility and dementia.
Man Mountain
[info]aegian wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 09:34 pm (UTC)
It is thought that in his later years when he was at his fattest, he could barely climb stairs so they created a special lift for him hoisted by ten people.
Re: Man Mountain continued:
[info]aegian wrote:
Saturday, 18 April 2009 at 10:34 pm (UTC)
The stair lift resembled a seated platform on which Henry sat while he was hoisted upstairs by a series of pulleys.

His massive body fat made him extremely hot at night so a servant had to be awake all night to bring the King water when he rang a little bell.

Tudors gave marathon banquets with up to 28 courses in order to secure the patronage of the king. So it could be said that he manfully chomped England - err for England, being the country's golden calf, or at least the man with the golden calves.

The mind boggles at the system of leavers, platforms and pulleys that must have been necessary to raise the latest wench on to his person. Who knows what the servants had to do to make congress even possible.


Did it really make a difference?
[info]49niner wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 06:27 am (UTC)
The Tudor revolution was already well advanced by 1536. The decisive Acts of Parliament severing links with Rome were passed in 1533-34. The Dissolution of the Monasteries was popular because they were discredited institutions. Parliament was full of greedy landowners eager to get their hands on rich pickings, so they were more than happy to do the king's bidding.

I've always thought of Elizabeth as one of our most shrewd monarchs. She gave us a religious settlement way ahead of its time, and spared us the carnage that many suffered in religious wars elsewhere in Europe. The principle of the monarch governing through Parliament became clearly established at this time, and meant that there were those willing and able to resist a real potential tyrant in Charles I.

In comparison to the Tudors, the Stuarts were indeed non-entities, with the possible exception of Charles II. The Tudors died out through lack of heirs but both Henries and Elizabeth made a positive difference to the life of the nature. The Stuarts were booted out, and with good reason. And as for the Georges, well they were either mad or non-entities or both.

The Tudors laid the basis for England as we know it. As a piece of medical conjecture this theory surrounding a jousting accident is interesting, but I doubt it made a difference to the course of history.
Shoddy work
[info]canuck1967 wrote:
Sunday, 19 April 2009 at 09:52 pm (UTC)
This "research" and subsequent article is very poor indeed. Since when is "speeded" a word? That this research is full of the words "could have", possible" , "maybe" is unbelievable. If this fall had happened before he divorced Katherine of Aragon his wife for 24 years, I may have thought it had some credence. However, it is a well known fact that old Henry was already starting to carouse young maidens well before Anne Boleyn appeared. There is more medical evidence that holds that he contacted syphilis: which would better explain his siring (after Elizabeth) of a weak offspring and then inability to produce at all and his slow deterioration of his mind and thus body. Not nearly as romantic as being injured in a jousting match, and makes Henry look more like a "victim of circumstance" then author of his own destruction. Revisionism History strikes once again!
Re: Shoddy work
[info]artsunlimited wrote:
Monday, 20 April 2009 at 01:59 am (UTC)
Canuck, if Henry's contracting syphilis is to blame for his deterioration, rather than a sporting injury, how would that make him any less a "victim of circumstance"? Either an STD or a head injury that worked to destroy him would have been the consequence of a choice he made - and injuries resulting from jousting were obviously well known, whereas syphilis and its legacy wasn't! I think you're seeing "revisionism" here when there's none to be found. If there's a lesson to be learned here it's that either sex or sport will eventually ruin you!

About the carousing, Henry was pretty circumspect as far as mistresses and extramarital activity went - Charles II would have thought him a Puritan. Like Elizabeth Taylor, Henry was the marrying kind and he was pretty monogamous even to his mistresses - the wenching and promiscuity you and others mention isn't supported by any contemporary documentation. When his eye roamed from Boleyn it went right to Jane Seymour, and he married her right after the execution. He also married Catherine Howard and Katherine Parr, both easily accessible at court, when he could have just made them his mistresses. When one's Queen is confined due to pregnancy or when one's affections are waning because no heirs are being produced, a mistress will come in handy - but he wasn't the rakehell that "The Tudors" portrays him to be.

While Henry might have contracted syphilis at some point, unfortunately sterility isn't a side affect. Edward was sickly, but didn't display retardation or other signs of congenital disease, and his frailness could have been due to something inherited from Jane Seymour's side of the family. His child with Mary Boleyn, who was a few years older, showed no signs of the disease. either.
Henry VIII
[info]bjr118 wrote:
Monday, 20 April 2009 at 02:39 am (UTC)
Henry was a pig, pure and simple. And good Queen Bess was a mass killer of Catholics. Both are probably in hell.
Re: Henry VIII
[info]ehross wrote:
Monday, 20 April 2009 at 07:49 pm (UTC)
Happy St Bartholomew Day
A great theory
[info]anneboleynfiles wrote:
Wednesday, 22 April 2009 at 11:32 am (UTC)
Brain damage may well explain Henry VIII's personality change and his Jekyll and Hyde behaviour, particularly his behaviour towards Anne Boleyn, a woman who he had pursued for 7 years and written over 17 love letters to. However, I think that his change in personality was also due to other factors, such as his guilt over his break with Rome, his guilt over the execution of Thomas More, his fear that God was punishing him, his constant pain from headaches and his ulcerated leg, and his worry over the security over the Tudor line and monarchy.

I've blogged about this on www.theanneboleynfiles.com
Henry to Charles.
[info]the_kegs wrote:
Monday, 11 May 2009 at 06:57 am (UTC)
"His Majesty is the most handsomest potentate I have ever set eyes on. Above the usual height with an extremely fine calf to his leg and a round face so very beautiful it would become a pretty woman."
From Henry VIII to Prince Charles, incredible what a spot of inbreeding can achieve.
His Majesty King Henry VIII
[info]edemoness wrote:
Monday, 10 August 2009 at 07:26 pm (UTC)

you know something brazil2009 i like to see you try to say that very same thing if His Majesty were still alive..i guarantee that The King would have labeled you not only as a heretic but also as a dishonorable clergyman of his then court.

I know one thing that if i was Queen and you approached me with that retched line i would have you scalped then burned at the stake at Tower of London.

Most popular in UK News


Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date