Inside the Court of Henry VIII FULL SPECIAL (2016) | PBS America

Part Renaissance prince, part medieval tyrant, Henry VIII is the most famous of English kings. Venture beyond the facade of his glamorous court to understand the danger and intrigue that routinely cost courtiers their heads.
Broadcast Date: April 7, 2016
About PBS America:
Welcome to PBS America, a British TV channel from America’s public service broadcaster, PBS, showcasing award-winning American history, science, current affairs, plus arts and culture shows alongside the works of living legend Ken Burns, output is all hand-picked by a British team.
Get More PBS America:
Website: www.pbsamerica.co.uk/
Twitter: / pbsamerica
Facebook: / pbsamerica
Instagram: / pbsintheuk

[@pppmanly]

This narrator has a great voice for historical documentaries. It is clear, captivating, and commands one's attention.

[@swissmiss572]

Samuel West

[@janeclarkson8471]

Yes, it's perfect. What days they were!

[@BeeLZBeeb]

This is a breath of fresh air after the previous documentary i just watched on henry vii. Props to the cameramen, editors and many experts.

[@peoniesandparchment]

that was incredible! i was hooked from beginning to end. thank you

[@lindamckenzie6500]

This is possibly one of the most interesting programmes l have seen on Henry V111 ...having read much about him it was good to know that inadvertently he left important legacies..including historical fascination with his reign for ever ...

[@janeclarkson8471]

Absolutely! However I didn't like him OR many around him. They were also out totally, for themselves. I'd have sooner been a peasant. Very important legacies, I agree.

[@Wildrover82]

Brilliantly made documentary.🙌

[@bettinabesom5919]

This was a great watch, thanks for posting

[@gwentheresamckenzie]

Very good presentation TY to all who contributed to the production....

[@frans8086]

As an historical graduate and student of Early Modern England, I would like to congratulate PDS on this episode. It includes testimony from respected historians and covers the entire reign of Henry 8 with very few contentious assertions. Well done. ,

[@SineadHough]

Why do people have to mention their own things, well done

[@SineadHough]

I'm a graduate in historical studies

[@vandahorvath9939]

Fun fact: all of Henry's wifes and himself were related, although you have to go back 200 years to find the common ancestor, Edward I.

[@BonniesFrauchen]

Not Anne of Cleves though!

[@claudiab6105]

So what? Nothing new, even today.. .

[@notpurrfect6397]

Cool! How many generations is that?

[@whitneyanders5945]

Some cultures go out of their way to ensure that they remain closely related …vomit central

[@tracyhodgkins7516]

The wives were not all related to Henry. He was closely related to Katherine of Aragon and Katherine Parr. They all have a common ancestor in John of Gaunt. Anne Boleyn and Katheryn Howard were related to each other, they were cousins, but they weren’t related to the King.

[@DonnellOkafor-pd7yn]

The pain he would have been in would be beyond excruciating. Leg ulcers are more painful than kidney stones. And nothing to even take the edge off of his pain and nothing to cure the infection.

[@haeronalda4136]

Mostly it would have been wine, which would have been well sugared and would not have helped with the diabetes he probably had, and in turn would not help the ulcers. His doctors would have prescribed herbal medicines which may have included herbs with natural pain relieving and sedative effects, like the common field poppy which produces a sedative, though it wouldn't be as effective as a modern refined medication as dosage would be kinda all over the place. Henry himself also dabbled in herbal medicines and was known to make his own "cures" and medications.

[@tresajessygeorge210]

THANK YOU...!!!

[@arthuroldale-ki2ev]

What goes around etc.

[@user-gd3xy2vl1s]

I have read works by T. Borman and R Hutchinson but of them all Professor MacCulloch's biography of Thomas Cromwell is masterful.

[@Kawasaki_King]

Think this documentary has its facts slightly confused - if i remember my history classes correctly, Richard II was actually the most tyrannical king England ever knew, and he was also the one that started the whole " your highness/majesty" crap too.... just saying...

[@CyberspacedLoner]

A Paranoid Ruthless Tyrant just like Joseph Stalin

[@DonnellOkafor-pd7yn]

Same with Ceacescu, Hitler, Kim jong un, King jong Il, Pol Pot, Papa Doc Duvalier

[@chuckselvage3157]

The actor playing Ann is a babe.

[@claudiab6105]

??? Meaning what???

[@DonnellOkafor-pd7yn]

She's above average

[@DonnellOkafor-pd7yn]

​@@claudiab6105means he thinks she's pretty. Is English your second language?

[@DonnellOkafor-pd7yn]

The female wearing the pink scarf is nasty

[@claudiab6105]

@@DonnellOkafor-pd7yn thanks for the answer. and yes, it is.....

[@ladythalia227]

“She wanted to be queen”. I believe this is a false accusation. I believe she truly loved her betrothed and wanted to marry him. She went into a fit when Henry forced them to split and I believe she wanted away from him in earnest when she fled his presence. Slowly but surely he made himself her only option and eventually she grasped the chance. That said, no, it wasn’t her initial intention, how could it be. In catholic Europe, divorce was unheard of. She would not have expected Henry to get him and she didn’t want to be a mistress. You can’t treat her intentions as if she knew marriage was a possibility, she had zero reason to believe it was even remotely possible. We know it - she didn’t.

[@Paul-cf1cu]

Oh the likes are hidden so we can't see people's views

[@user-gh8ru6sk5y]

Sounds like a complete narcissist

[@francesbernard2445]

Well at least Henry VIII held court indoors eh? I mean how else are some people since then who are tyrants outside too supposed to get away with what they do while blaming everybody else except Henry the VIII and themselves too while NOT taking proper responsibilty for their own choice of which set of hats to wear all at the same time too. For example a priest offering a re-baptism of the mother of his children n a very slippery river bank during a flood with 2 infants looking on at the time. Or how about a tyrannt who decides to become both a gender expression policeman and executioner both at the same time. Every woman during their lifetiime has a story about a male tyrant like that. A lot of men during their lifetime too has a story about a female tyrant like that who only once or who more than once always held court indoors only too instead. How does a personality best described as being tyrannical get planted and then formed? Could that have at least something to do with what is called human based only respector of persons? Respector of persons human nature which enables some of us to recognize our marriage partner for life. Turned into something else. Something else which fails to recognize how the word was made flesh in its fullest sense. A tyrant cheats himself or herself of being able to look into the heavens when outside resting without feeling bitter and resentful about anything written down about what he cannot see there yet too. Plato was like that. So was a lot of tyrants who insist they are the best interpreters of the bible around. As if they could be better at that than both Saint John the Baptist and god himself too..

[@swissmiss572]

That background'music' is revolting

[@alitatorjusen9437]

What makes Catherine Howard "a silly, silly" girl, please? A statement like that discards the whole documentary. The statement is outrageously unprofessional for a historian.

[@haeronalda4136]

That's been the predominant attitude towards poor Katherine for a long time, unfortunately. It's only more recently that this started to change.

[@alitatorjusen9437]

@@haeronalda4136 Indeed it has. Yet, I find it difficult to trust an opinion of a historian who chooses to call Catherine (Katheryn) Howard "a silly girl" without as much as bothering to explain what exactly makes Catherine "silly". Also, what a term to use by a professional historian. Complete and utter lack of respect and eloquence.

[@kasie680]

She was a very silly girl, marrying the king and cheating on him! Very silly

[@alitatorjusen9437]

​@@kasie680 Are you sure you belong in the 21st century? Are you stuck in times where they burnt "witches"?! Did Catherine have a choice? Have you ever been a teenager? As a teenager, were you obliged to please a 50 year old stinking egoist? Could you imagine falling in love head over hills been a teenager? I do not think Catherine was silly. I think those who judge her, especially in the 21st century, are either silly or have no empathy.

[@davidc3839]

@@kasie680 How do you know she cheated on him. I doubt that very much, it was simply an excuse to get rid of her. You are a very silly boy for claiming to know. Plus, she was a woman.