The Instigator
Atheist-Independent
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Max.Wallace
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Henry VIII of England was a good king

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Atheist-Independent
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/8/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,104 times Debate No: 61345
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (2)

 

Atheist-Independent

Pro

Round 1: AcceptanceThis is intended to be a fun debate about whether or not Henry VIII of England was a good king. I will take the pro side and attempt to show that Henry VIII was a good king, while my opponent will obviously attempt to argue the counter to this claim.The structure of the debate is as followed: Round 1: AcceptanceRound 2: Opening ArgumentRound 3: Rebuttals
Max.Wallace

Con

I accept.

There has never been a good King, only followers that submit to the Kings powers, for their own benefit.
Debate Round No. 1
Atheist-Independent

Pro

Round 2: Argument

I will be arguing that Henry VIII was overall a good king for England. There is lots of controversy surrounding around Henry VIII, and it primarily originates from his six wives and infamous beheading of two of them. I will attempt to show that despite these gruesome events, Henry VIII was overall good for England. For each of my arguments, I will provide the historical context and then make my own personal analysis about the matter.

I intend for this debate to be fun, as the topic is not on an important current event but rather on a historical one. However, I do intend to take it seriously and hope for my opponent to have a similar mindset. Now on to the debate!

Providing Stability

Henry inherited the throne during a delicate time in England's history. Henry's father, Henry VII, had taken the throne after a bloody war with house of York [1]. This war, often dubbed the Wars of the Roses due to the fact that the Heraldic badges of the houses of Lancaster and York where a Red and White rose, respectively. In order to create peace between the two families, Henry VII announced his marriage to Elizabeth of York to create a joint unity between both houses.

Despite this supposed peace between the two families, the tension between the houses of Lancaster and York has still not been resolved when Henry VIII assumed the throne. In order to avoid another war, Henry VIII took a more moderate approach when it came to dealing with the Yorks. One example would be how he pardoned multiple Yorkists that had been imprisoned by his father following his coronation as king [2].

The Yorks, however, were not the only problem that was presented to Henry VIII during his reign. One notable issue was the matter of religion. The reign on Henry VIII began and continued throughout a period called the Reformation, when many began to question the authority of the Catholic Church. This event was able to spread due to the invention of the Printing Press, and Henry VIII knew that it would not be long until the Reformation spread to the British Isles. To solve this problem, Henry VIII was remarkably lenient when it came to religion and was able to prevent a religious war similar to the one in the Holy Roman Empire. One way that this was possible was when Henry VIII split off from the Catholic Church in Rome and created the English Church with himself as the head. This was partially because Henry had wanted to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, however it solved many problems. For one, the Church was essentially Catholic and had not changed any of the doctrines, with the one difference being that there was no pope. However, it also kept the Protestants happy because their complaints had been directed towards the Church in Rome, and now that England had split off they were satisfied [3].

These two examples, amongst many, show clearly that Henry VIII was a natural at manipulating his enemies. He was able to turn his enemies into allies, or at least not threatening. This is a very good trait to have as a king. Given Henry VIII natural ability to prevent war with clearly more powerful enemies, it is clear that England was better off having Henry on the throne.

Making England Stronger

Because of both the Wars of the Roses and the small population, England was a relatively weak country when Henry VIII ascended to the throne. However, Henry managed to strengthen the power of both himself and the country by the end of his reign. One way that Henry strengthened the authority of the crown was by splitting off from the Church in Rome. By creating the Church of England and placing himself in direct power, he made his vassals fear him. This was because Henry now had all political and religious authority. Another method that Henry utilized in order to gain authority was fear. Henry made his vassals fear him because he showed that he was willing to punish anyone severely if they ever plotted against him. This can be seen clearly in his executions of Thomas Wolsey, Thomas More, Thomas Cromwell, the Duke of Norfolk, etc. This fear of the king allowed Henry to take full control over the kingdom and through his absolutism allow England to leave the lawlessness of the Middle Ages.

Henry VIII made England stronger militarily as well. By the time Henry VIII inherited the throne from his father, England has five royal warships in its navy. By the time he died in 1547, there were over forty far superior war ships in the navy. This strong navy was essentially in providing defense for England and also making England a powerful political force [4].

One last way that Henry VIII made England stronger was through education. Using his own money, Henry VIII established schools that were called Kings Schools [5]. These schools were so impressive because they accepted talented peasants as well as noble sons. Through these Kings Schools developed some of the brightest minds in the world such as Christopher Marlow and William Harvey. He also had the Tyndale Bible published in a unified English dialect. Before this bible was published, English varied greatly depending on the region. However, the Tyndale Bible allowed England to become a more united nation due to their new common language.

Conclusion

Had Henry VIII not become king, England would have been considerably weaker. They would have faced stronger threats and potentially war with the Yorks, French, German, and Scotland, and may not have been able to overcome these challenges. Henry VIII also allowed England to advance with his acceptance and advancement of the Renaissance.

When one hears the name "Henry VIII" they generally think that he was an evil and bad because he executed two of his wives. However, given the multiple number of advancements he provided to his county it is clear that Henry VIII was not only not a bad king, but a great one.

Sources

[1] http://www.britannica.com...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://www.britannia.com...
[4] http://www.rmg.co.uk...
[5] https://login.wikifoundry.com...




Max.Wallace

Con

Was Hitler a good king also? If your were a German nationalist in 1940, he was the best.
Debate Round No. 2
Atheist-Independent

Pro

As I anticipated, my opponent has not taken this debate seriously and therefore has put in a minimal effort in defending his case.

Either way, the comparison between Hitler and Henry VIII is completely irrational, as Henry VIII did not commit a genocide. I comprehend your point that it was bad that Henry VIII killed two of his wives, however comparing this to Hitler makes no since.

The reason for why Henry VIII executed his second wife, Anne Boleyn, because he was desperate for a son and knew that if he did not produce an heir England would go into civil war once again. He executed his fifth wife, Katherine Howard, because he had discovered that she was in the middle of an affair with Thomas Culpepper. Also, Henry VIII did not want to be defied in any regard because that showed that his power was not absolute. These may not be the best of reasons for execution, however given the many ways that he improved the state of England shown in the second round, I believe that it is reasonable to assume that Henry VIII was overall a good king.
Max.Wallace

Con

Do you have any idea how hard it is to feed yourself by manual labor? What king does manual labor? Henry the VIII? lol!

I do take this seriously, but I work all day, not write all night.
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
you inspired me for my next debate, thank you.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Your atheist comment is pure slander.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I am not a socialist, so your ? of how societies operate is pure mootness. I do know how societies operate, quite clearly dear friend, and that is my essence of commitment to this battle of the electronic type, somewhere it makes a difference, I have faith.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
Having an education doesn't make me elite, it just means I'm capable of forming opinions based on more than empty rhetoric and propaganda. Max you should either try to seriously debate or stop wasting others time.

It seems athiest-independent wanted a real debate and all he got was "Do you have any idea how hard it is to feed yourself by manual labor? What king does manual labor?"

Have you ever thought about how societies even function? You may be an isolationist libertarian nut job but that's no excuse to just ramble on incoherently with pointless 2 liner quips. Seriously, look at how other people live. Try to understand how much bigger the world is than you and how you fit in it rather than fight against it.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Harvardian.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Listen, please, You may view me as a troll, but I am actually as human as you, Sir Harvidian Ivoriniotowerinio. you spook me.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
good kings do not kill people.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
The quality of the self selected judgemen is surely just as suspect.
Posted by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
Yea, it's more about quality of debate, not quantity. Not that you'd know about quality debate. Also I've started (PC tyrant brainwashing) school and debates take a while, so priorities.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
The political science love has not debated much, but fancies himself king.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Atheist-IndependentMax.WallaceTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con basically trolled the debate.
Vote Placed by Bennett91 2 years ago
Bennett91
Atheist-IndependentMax.WallaceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: No contest.