‘The whole stature of a goodly man and a large horse’: memory, masculinity and the military status of Henry VIII

‘The whole stature of a goodly man and a large horse’: memory, masculinity and the military status of Henry VIII A marble slab marks Henry VIII and Jane Seymour’s final resting place in the Quire of St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle; however, this was only intended to be temporary while a grand monument was completed and it is clear that no expense was to be spared. It was antiquarian John Speed in the seventeenth century who unearthed a now vanished manuscript believed to have been owned by Nicholas Charles, Lancaster Herald, which gave details of Henry VIII’s tomb based on a design drawn up in 1527 by the Italian sculptor Jacopo Sansovino. The king offered an extraordinary 75,000 ducats for this design, which is the modern equivalent of six million, ninety thousand pounds. Had Henry’s plans been realised this would have been truly a magnificent site to behold. Clare Rider, the archivist and chapter librarian of St George’s Chapel Windsor referring to Speed’s work in her description of Henry’s tomb describes how: ‘the vast edifice was to be ornamented with fine oriental stones and resplendent with white marble pillars, gilded bronze angels and four life-size images of the King and Queen’. In all there were to be ‘one hundred and thirty-four figures, including St George, St John the Baptist, the Prophets and the Apostles’. This was all to be topped by a life-size gilded statue of Henry on horseback under a triumphal arch ‘the whole stature of a goodly man and a large horse’. It is significant that Henry commissioned this grand design at a point in his kingship, in which after nearly twenty years of marriage, he was still without a male heir and petitioning for his marriage to Queen Katherine of Aragon to be annulled. One of the crucial benchmarks of masculinity in this period was the ability to father sons and this relates to perceptions about the superiority of the male. It is telling that Henry designed this manly structure in 1527, as in the absence of sons, he clearly intended for his manhood to be memorialised through this active knightly stance. It is evident that had Henry’s designs been realised that this magnificent structure would have been far grander than the tomb of Henry’s parents and far more ornate then the resting places of all the European monarchs. Indeed perhaps the only royal tomb comparable to Henry’s design is Emperor Maximillian I’s who envisioned a grand tomb, surrounded by 28 life- sized statues of his ancestors, real and mythical. Work on the figures began in 1502, and carving continued, under Maximilian’s son, Charles V, and his grandson, Ferdinand I. Thus we might speculate that the image of the Emperor-Knight that Maximillian constructed in his portraits and planned for his tomb influenced the English king in his own equally elaborate design. In this paper I will examine how Henry VIII showcased his masculinity when he was alive, how he wanted it to be represented where he was buried and how he hoped to be remembered. As king, Henry was actively involved in chivalry both on the battlefield and in the tiltyard and went to great lengths during his reign to ensure that this is how others would remember him also. It is evident that Henry was determined to construct a lasting image of chivalrous kingship and martial masculinity even though his attainments in the military arena were rather slender. Although as the design was made in 1527, it does suggest that Henry still hoped that he would have the opportunity to accomplish great martial feats. Therefore it is important to examine the fact that this is how Henry wanted to be remembered, nonetheless. In this paper I will argue that Henry’s design for a monumental effigy of him on horseback wearing armour is a final indication of his ambitions to be immortalised as a warrior king and it was in this chivalrous context that he wanted his kingship and masculinity to be remembered and celebrated. From the early medieval period there was a strong association between horses, knighthood and manhood. In fact a knight’s talent at horse riding constituted a vital measure of his masculinity, it was expected that he would be able to dominate and control his horse. This implied that he was able to exercise self-mastery, which was an important quality of honourable manhood. This was demonstrated through his ability to maintain a particular type of body that was required for the tiltyard. In this setting elite men were also expected to be athletic, muscular and supremely fit, it was this physique that was the embodiment of high status. Indeed the relationship between the two is self-evident as having a manly body befitting the tiltyard implied that a man was capable of physical prowess because of the hours of training that were involved to achieve this particular physique. Noel Fallows describes how a knight’s body was often defined by his well formed buttocks, thighs and legs. Fallow’s explicit discussion of the male body in connection with jousting prowess offers a major contribution to the current literature surrounding chivalry. It is evident that historians of gender more widely have rarely looked at issues of physique, strength and height in connection with embodiment. In particular those studying medieval and early modern jousting have not considered these issues. The description for Henry’s life sized effigy describes that of a ‘goodly man, on a large horse’, it is not surprising that the king would depict himself mounting a horse it demonstrates his dominance as a master, which has direct connotations to ideas of masculinity. It is also apparent why Henry wanted his body to be sculpted as that of a ‘goodly man’, as it celebrated his superior manhood and provided a visual display of his knightly body. It is also true that a man of great stature and build who had mastered fighting skills was likely going to dominate on the battlefield and in the tiltyard, which were two essential arenas for establishing authority over other men and confirming masculinity. It is telling that towards the end of his life in 1545 Henry had two enormous paintings commissioned of him in battle. In the first Henry is presented at the ‘Battle of Spurs’ that took place in northern France in 1513, in which the king and his English army defeated the French at Tournai on 16 August, in an fight called the ‘Battle of the Spurs’. So called, by English chronicler Edward Hall because it was the French, who ‘rune away so fast on horsbacke’. In this portrait Henry is presented at the centre of the battle clad in black harness with gold decoration on horseback, acknowledging the surrender of the French chevalier Bayard, who kneels before the king. It is significant that Henry is presented mounted on horseback wearing his armour, whilst Bayard has stripped himself of all his visible masculine tokens and is shown dismounted without his horse, sword, or armet. Thus Bayard is at the complete mercy of the king, who is shown in a dominant position exercising his superior masculinity and victory over the French knight. It is revealing that Henry is portrayed in the thick of the battle as it highlights where he wanted to be and more importantly where he wanted others to remember him, despite the fact that the king was actually behind the front line. It also had significant implications for Henry’s manly and kingly image; if he was not presented actually taking part as historian Scarisbrick has argued, since he could hardly stake claim to the title of warrior king.  Another painting entitled: ‘The Meeting of Henry VIII and Emperor Maximilian I’ depicts the king and the emperor greeting each other for the first time at the beginning of the invasion of France. They are depicted in the middle distance, on horseback, between divisions of artillery and cavalry. Just above them the Battle of the Spurs is taking place, while in the background the towns of Thérounne and Tournai are under siege. It is also notable that the Battle of the Spurs has been depicted as a grand confrontation, but it was arguably more of a skirmish. However it is also important to recognise that Henry’s capture of the town of Tournai was England’s first victory in France in living memory, thus Henry had to make the most of this victory in an effort to establish his warrior status. David Trim contends that modern historians have treated Henry VIII’s war with contempt, but in the immediate aftermath of these victories, ‘Henry VIII was perceived as a successful warrior king’. It is evident that from the start of his reign Henry was determined to equal and perhaps to surpass the success of Henry V in his imperial ambitions. Yet in reality his victory was hardly comparable to the achievements of his ancestor at Agincourt in 1415. Henry VIII’s literary tastes also reflected his military ambitions; in particular the works that he commissioned and those that were dedicated to him indicate an enthusiasm for medieval warfare and chivalric glory that came through conquest in France. Dedicated to Henry was The English Life of Henry the Fifth that was anonymously translated into English in c.1513. Henry VIII wanted to align his new dynasty with his royal ancestors, thus he glorified the kingship of Henry V. It is certainly possible that the work was used as part of Henry’s propaganda campaign for his military expedition to France in 1513. Dale Hoaks argues that these paintings including, ‘the Battle of Spurs’ proved how much Henry VIII still dreamed of war’. Though the fact that Henry promoted these victories for the rest of his reign is telling in itself, as he had nothing else to replace them with. One could argue that, in the absence of victories abroad Henry then used the tournament in his reign as an alternative martial setting, in which he could establish himself at the top of the manly hierarchy by competing against other men and by successfully dominating them. The tiltyard also provided an important setting in which Henry could demonstrate that he had all the qualities and accomplishments necessary to achieve military victory, as the tournament still acted as a vital training ground for warfare in this period. A key to understanding competition between men is Ruth Mazo Karras who discusses the aggressive environment of the tournament, where knights reaffirmed their masculinity by performing knightly deeds in a public setting. Karras argues that masculinity in the later Middle Ages, ‘was primarily a matter of proving oneself against others, nowhere was this more true than in the tournament’. In particular for Henry, in his early years, tournaments were his only opportunity to display himself as a warrior. The most famous being in 1511 when an extravagant tournament was held at Westminster on the 12 and 13 of February to celebrate the birth of his son and heir, Henry, Duke of Cornwall, who tragically died a short time later. There are a wealth of sources pertaining to this event that include: the Westminster Tournament Roll, the Westminster Challenge and the Westminster score cheques, as well as additional entries in Harley MS. 6079. The surviving evidence demonstrates that the Westminster Tournament was a spectacular moment in the reign of Henry VIII, in which the king acted as the chief Challenger, leading his team of three knights into the lists. The opposing team known as the Answerers was made up of a dozen other English knights who had readily signed up to the king’s allegorical Challenge as the original surviving Westminster tournament held in Harley MS. CH 83 H.1, illustrates. The Great Tournament Roll in the College of Arms vividly depicts the proceedings at this tournament. It is a pictorial illustrated manuscript, a continuous roll approximately 60 feet long. Henry wanted such a pictorial record made of his tournament to mark the birth of his male heir, which was the most crucial validation of manhood. Arguably the most famous image from this roll is the membrane that shows the king tilting at the barrier against one of the Answerers. Henry is depicted in the foreground running from the left and shattering his spear against his opponent’s helm, in true knightly fashion. However when comparing this representation to the surviving Westminster score cheques also held in the College of Arms, it is evident that the king did not break a single lance on the head of his opponents on either of the two days. Jessica Riddell argues that Henry VIII commissioned the roll as a dynamic text, which portrayed him performing successfully in front of a live audience. Therefore it is apparent that the roll represented an idealised version of the jousting match, rather than reflecting what actually happened. Henry sought to cultivate a court that centered on him and his kingly and manly accomplishments, as the Tournament roll illustrates. By choosing to compete in the tournament himself Henry wanted to prove he was not only like all other men, but that he was the best man. As manhood in the tiltyard was measured by the hits that men were able to make on the adversary’s body or head, it is apparent that Henry wanted to be depicted scoring the highest points. In this way Henry constructed a visible template of exemplary masculinity for all other knights to emulate even though the score cheques reveal that he was in fact not able to perform in this way at the tournament itself. It is evident that Henry wanted to be remembered as a tournament champion being one of the few medieval kings to actively compete in jousts it was a way for him to solidify his knightly masculinity. Henry’s grand plans for a life-sized statue of him on horseback atop a brass canopy, was not just designed as an opulent structure, but acted as a symbol of his kingship and manhood. Always conscious of the need to emphasise his knightly masculinity, Henry laid down an elaborate plan to have himself depicted on horseback modelling the iconic image of the medieval knight and his burial tomb was intended to reflect that. Henry also requested to be buried at St George’s chapel, which was home to the Order of the Garter founded by Edward III in 1348. Edward III had renovated Henry III’s Chapel of St. Edward the Confessor at Windsor and rededicated his new St. Georges Chapel to St. Edward the Confessor, the Virgin and St. George. Significantly Henry’s grandfather Edward IV, was the first monarch to be buried at St George’s chapel, which was fitting given his close affinity to chivalry during his reign. It is true that some of the greatest tournaments of the medieval age were held in the reign of Edward IV, in which the king acted as both a competitor and as a chivalrous judge. Edward also took a keen interest in the Order of the Garter by rebuilding the chapel of St George. Both Edward IV and Edward III were active participants in chivalry entering the tiltyard as kings, unlike Richard II and Henry VII who held magnificent tournaments, but who chose not to compete. Thus it is apparent that Henry VIII clearly identified with his medieval ancestors being actively involved in chivalry, unlike his father, which may explain why he selected to be buried at St George’s chapel, Windsor rather than at Westminster with his father. Indeed the iconography surrounding Henry’s planned burial monument included the figure of St. George as described above by Speed, thus showing that the king wanted to emphasise a very specific English version of masculinity. The design of Henry’s burial tomb does suggest that he thought of himself as a medieval king, and thus it is in this context that we should remember both his kingship and masculinity. It is surprising that that more has not been made of Henry’s planned burial tomb despite it not being completed it is still important that we consider how the king wanted to be remembered. There is much we can learn about how Henry understood his kingship and masculinity from the design of his edifice that was planned to venerate him as a knight in shining armour on horseback. It represents the model of masculinity that Henry was determined to embody throughout his reign made explicit through his ambitions for war with France and his vigorous tourneying from the start of his reign. Henry’s ambition to model his kingship and manhood on his idol Henry V is clear evidence of his desire to have his rule viewed within this same warrior milieu. Henry’s participation in tournaments also formed an important part of this martial image, thus I have argued throughout this paper that he was committed to this archetype throughout his reign and even in death this imagery was designed to immortalise his knightly masculinity. It is likely that Henry ever obsessed with his youth felt that he had plenty of time to finish his tomb, or perhaps the costly design was enough to make even him flinch. Yet there it is indeed ironic that a king who lived in such opulence, who hosted such vastly expensive tournaments and pageants, whose court was known in its time as the most splendid in Europe, should lie in a plain vault, marked only by a marble slab.