∎ Read Gratis Henry VIII Jasper Ridley Books

Henry VIII Jasper Ridley Books

Download As PDF : Henry VIII Jasper Ridley Books

Henry VIII Jasper Ridley Books

An impressive and exhaustive study of Henry, his reign, and his world, focusing more on domestic and foreign events than his wives. Ridley goes into great detail with his subject matter, whether it is recounting the economic and political climate within England or the shifting diplomatic tides abroad. He makes extensive use of primary sources, including analyzing their reliability (or in Marillac’s case, lack thereof). This is no Tudor kiddie pool, but deep water.

Ridley sees Henry as completely in control during his reign, knowing exactly what he was doing, and often with better instincts than his ministers. He was not a pawn of powerful ministers or factions. He chose the correct argument to make concerning his divorce (questioning Papal authority) and he, not Cromwell, was the real mastermind behind the Reformation. Cromwell’s fall was Henry’s doing--it improved Henry’s image at home and abroad to dispose of him, and he did lie about Anne of Cleves, after all.

Ridley also makes quite clear his view of Henry, and it is harsh. He was a tyrant presiding over a totalitarian regime. He was cold and calculating, "deliberately sowing fear and distrust among factions." He "used ministers to do unpopular work and then punished them for carrying out his orders." His goal was to impose "absolute obedience" on his subjects. He "brainwashed them through pulpit" and used "weapons of terror and propaganda." He is compared to Stalin. And he had piggy eyes. Ridley tells us this more than once.

This scathing assessment of Henry gives me pause. How much does bias color Ridley’s assessment and description of events? Henry was no saint, but surely he had some positive qualities. Ridley doesn't credit him with any redeeming feature whatsoever, or give him any kind of humanity. Do Ridley’s assertions about Henry, such as his role in the Reformation and Cromwell’s fall, have merit or are they distorted interpretations? I don’t have the expertise to tell. I much prefer Scarisbrick for his more temperate approach. He also points out Henry’s failings, but without the judgmental language.

What kept niggling at the back of my mind was that more than one professor specializing in Henrician studies has singled out Scarisbrick’s book as the “classic” and “most complete and scholarly,” while Ridley’s book doesn’t even make their recommended reading lists. This suggests to me that as impressive as Ridley’s book is, it doesn’t stand out to people who devote their careers to studying this era.

At the end of the day, I liked the book for its depth of detail, but distrusted Ridley’s conclusions.


Tags : Amazon.com: Henry VIII (9780670806997): Jasper Ridley: Books,Jasper Ridley,Henry VIII,Viking Adult,0670806994,1491-1547,Biography,Biography Autobiography,BiographyAutobiography,General,Great Britain,Great Britain - History - 18th Century,Great Britain;History;Henry VIII, 1509-1547.,Great Britain;Kings and rulers;Biography.,Henry,Henry VIII, 1509-1547,History,King of England,,Kings and rulers,VIII,,King of England

Henry VIII Jasper Ridley Books Reviews

I really like reading these kind of books but I never ordered this one. I’ve written to you guys about it several times and I got no reply so I just gave up. Thank you
I really enjoyed this book. It does a great job of not only painting a portrait of Henry VIII, it also gives the reader a sense of what every day life was like in 16th century England.
If you are only going to read one book about Henry VIII, this is a good option. It is a very engaging treatment of the main characters. Ridley sells his point of view quite well.
Very good book and arrived in great shape. Good for history buffs for that era.
Really vivid and absorbing portrayal of the subversive and subservient politics and the incredible intrigues of court life.
It takes a little while to get used to the writing style, but once you get beyond it, this is a very interesting book. It goes into much more depth about Henry VIII
Jasper Ridley views Henry VIII as a 16th century version of 20th century dictators. He uses the term "dictator" several times and when Henry died, Ridley says that his counsellors were stunned and grief-stricken by his death, "as were the members of the Politburo when Stalin died." Normally, this kind of analogy would be deadly to a biography of someone who lived nearly 500 years earlier in a very different political environment. But Ridley does a superb job of pinning down Henry's actions through careful documentation and careful noting of the timing of his actions. If Henry was not Stalin, he was as close as an absolute ruler in the 1500's could get.

Ridley's book reads extremely well. As noted in other reviews, there is much less emphasis on the social side of the reign. Ridley does not ignore that. While we never learn much about Henry's building plans, we do learn more than enough about his six wives, especially Catherine of Aragon and Anne. But, unlike Alison Weir's biography, which I also read, this book weaves those stories into the economic and political context in which they happened. Weir's book I found enjoyable also but, as noted elsewhere, it focuses on the social events of Henry's reign. Here Ridley brings in the same events but puts them into a context that makes more sense of the big picture. Henry knew power - he knew it well. He played people against each other both at home and abroad using whatever was available. At home it was usually religion where he alternated between keeping both Catholics and Protestants off guard while taking advantage of both for his own needs. Abroad it was the power plays of Charles and Francis (Francois in this book) with Henry taking every advantage of their weaknesses. He often failed, especially as he got older, and Ridley shows us why. All the details from the break with Rome and the suppression of the monasteries to the wars with Charles and Francis are explained in a fluid, interesting and easy-to-follow way. The book is an excellent example of the "narrative" style of writing history that also is documented to the maximum.

I highly recommend this biography. It is one that I never thought I would enjoy reading so much, especially since it was written in 1984 and in which the author at the beginning and at the very end talks about Henry's "cruel, piggy eyes," which is just a bit of a value judgment. Despite this, his portrayal of Henry's strengths is fair but Ridley shows how his desires and power needs eventually overcame his strengths. This was power politics that ended the Middle Ages in England. A great read.
An impressive and exhaustive study of Henry, his reign, and his world, focusing more on domestic and foreign events than his wives. Ridley goes into great detail with his subject matter, whether it is recounting the economic and political climate within England or the shifting diplomatic tides abroad. He makes extensive use of primary sources, including analyzing their reliability (or in Marillac’s case, lack thereof). This is no Tudor kiddie pool, but deep water.

Ridley sees Henry as completely in control during his reign, knowing exactly what he was doing, and often with better instincts than his ministers. He was not a pawn of powerful ministers or factions. He chose the correct argument to make concerning his divorce (questioning Papal authority) and he, not Cromwell, was the real mastermind behind the Reformation. Cromwell’s fall was Henry’s doing--it improved Henry’s image at home and abroad to dispose of him, and he did lie about Anne of Cleves, after all.

Ridley also makes quite clear his view of Henry, and it is harsh. He was a tyrant presiding over a totalitarian regime. He was cold and calculating, "deliberately sowing fear and distrust among factions." He "used ministers to do unpopular work and then punished them for carrying out his orders." His goal was to impose "absolute obedience" on his subjects. He "brainwashed them through pulpit" and used "weapons of terror and propaganda." He is compared to Stalin. And he had piggy eyes. Ridley tells us this more than once.

This scathing assessment of Henry gives me pause. How much does bias color Ridley’s assessment and description of events? Henry was no saint, but surely he had some positive qualities. Ridley doesn't credit him with any redeeming feature whatsoever, or give him any kind of humanity. Do Ridley’s assertions about Henry, such as his role in the Reformation and Cromwell’s fall, have merit or are they distorted interpretations? I don’t have the expertise to tell. I much prefer Scarisbrick for his more temperate approach. He also points out Henry’s failings, but without the judgmental language.

What kept niggling at the back of my mind was that more than one professor specializing in Henrician studies has singled out Scarisbrick’s book as the “classic” and “most complete and scholarly,” while Ridley’s book doesn’t even make their recommended reading lists. This suggests to me that as impressive as Ridley’s book is, it doesn’t stand out to people who devote their careers to studying this era.

At the end of the day, I liked the book for its depth of detail, but distrusted Ridley’s conclusions.