What do you think?
Rate this book
Winter King: Henry VII and the Dawn of Tudor England
It was 1501. England had been ravaged for decades by conspiracy, violence, murders, coups and countercoups. Through luck, guile and ruthlessness, Henry VII, the first of the Tudor kings, had clambered to the top of the heap--a fugitive with a flimsy claim to England's throne. For many he remained a usurper, a false king.
But Henry had a crucial asset: his queen and their children, the living embodiment of his hoped-for dynasty. Queen Elizabeth was a member of the House of York. Henry himself was from the House of Lancaster, so between them they united the warring parties that had fought the bloody century-long War of the Roses. Now their older son, Arthur, was about to marry a Spanish princess. On a cold November day sixteen-year-old Catherine of Aragon arrived in London for a wedding that would mark a triumphal moment in Henry's reign.
In this remarkable book, Thomas Penn re-creates the story of the tragic, magnetic Henry VII--a controlling, paranoid, avaricious monarch who was entering the most perilous years of his long reign.
Rich with drama and insight, Winter King is an astonishing story of pageantry, treachery, intrigue and incident--and the fraught, dangerous birth of Tudor England.
But Henry had a crucial asset: his queen and their children, the living embodiment of his hoped-for dynasty. Queen Elizabeth was a member of the House of York. Henry himself was from the House of Lancaster, so between them they united the warring parties that had fought the bloody century-long War of the Roses. Now their older son, Arthur, was about to marry a Spanish princess. On a cold November day sixteen-year-old Catherine of Aragon arrived in London for a wedding that would mark a triumphal moment in Henry's reign.
In this remarkable book, Thomas Penn re-creates the story of the tragic, magnetic Henry VII--a controlling, paranoid, avaricious monarch who was entering the most perilous years of his long reign.
Rich with drama and insight, Winter King is an astonishing story of pageantry, treachery, intrigue and incident--and the fraught, dangerous birth of Tudor England.
448 pages, Hardcover
First published September 29, 2011
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 500 reviews
September 24, 2020
Quite ambitious in nature, Thomas Penn attempts to write a portrait of Henry VII and his reign. Why is this ambitious? 1) The number of books on Henry VII can basically be counted on one hand 2) This is Penn’s first book. To say the least, “Winter King: Henry VII and the Dawn of Tudor England” is quite an interesting read…
Initially, Penn’s writing is slightly disorganized, disjointed, and lacking a strong cohesive bond. “Winter King” doesn’t follow the traditional (centralized) historical theme which follows a figure from birth to death. On the contrary; Penn describes how Henry came to power in the prologue and begins the chapters with already-progressing events. He tends to jump back and forth chronologically, which creates some distraction and can cause a lack of really “getting into” the book at some points. For example, Penn will speak of Prince Arthur’s death, then Elizabeth of York’s death but then backtrack to explain the schooling of Prince Arthur. Luckily, this dissolves as the book unfolds, proving that Penn just needed to get comfortable.
Despite the chunky feel, Penn impresses with an immediate wealth of knowledge. Even as a Tudor buff, I was instantly presented with some facts I was unaware of. This is a huge plus for any history book, nonetheless an author’s first work. Although “Winter King” has some distance from the psyche of Henry himself (which isn’t surprising as he, himself, was detached); the look into the inner workings of his court and numerous account books are illuminating.
Penn’s literary style can also cause some dissonance as it can be too narrative for some readers and also with a sometimes over tide of familiarity (terms are used like “partying”, “bitching”, and sentences begin with “And”). This isn’t done often but that is precisely why it sticks out like a sore thumb. On a positive note, this also dissipates (albeit, not completely) and the tone becomes more scholarly and affirmative while not being too difficult to digest.
Much of “Winter King” discusses the many conspiracies, imposters, and backstabbing at Henry’s court. Although this can become tiring (and I could only read so much at a time); it opens the doors into why Henry was so private, paranoid, and so driven to create an aura of fear encircling his rule. Penn also focuses at length on Henry’s financial dealings. Henry is known for being “thrifty” and “rich” but Penn reveals Henry’s financial acumen and control over his account books, incomes, coffers, rents, bonds, etc. Also explored are Henry’s dabblings in racketeering and illegal money-makers (i.e. Alum monopoly with and against the papal states). Readers seeking to learn more about Henry’s secret dealings and his connection with Edmund Dudley will find it in “Winter King”.
Penn’s work is largely historically accurate although some views contradict other books I have read. Regardless, the unique value of “Winter King” takes hold with the reader gaining an insight into the entire Tudor dynasty foundations which Henry built. This provides a new set of eyes to view subsequent reigns of the Tudors. Plus Penn elaborately shows the intertwining of well-known figures such as Thomas Wosely, Thomas More, Thomas Cromwell, Thomas Wriothesley, etc.
Although the ending (literally the last page) was somewhat weak speaking on Thomas More versus Henry VII or Henry VII; the finality of “Winter King” and the epilogue thoroughly provided an insight into Edmund Dudley and his impact on the Tudors. The reader will understand why some of the events during Henry VIII’s reign were the way they were (due to the fact that some of the same councilors were in play).
On a smaller note, Penn uses a satisfying amount of both primary and secondary sources (which we history buffs care about!)
“Winter King” is a terrific first work by Thomas Penn despite some of its flaws. Providing a valuable insight into the founding of the Tudor dynasty for both new and experienced Tudor lovers; “Winter King” is worth a read. Thomas Penn is an author to keep an eye on.
Initially, Penn’s writing is slightly disorganized, disjointed, and lacking a strong cohesive bond. “Winter King” doesn’t follow the traditional (centralized) historical theme which follows a figure from birth to death. On the contrary; Penn describes how Henry came to power in the prologue and begins the chapters with already-progressing events. He tends to jump back and forth chronologically, which creates some distraction and can cause a lack of really “getting into” the book at some points. For example, Penn will speak of Prince Arthur’s death, then Elizabeth of York’s death but then backtrack to explain the schooling of Prince Arthur. Luckily, this dissolves as the book unfolds, proving that Penn just needed to get comfortable.
Despite the chunky feel, Penn impresses with an immediate wealth of knowledge. Even as a Tudor buff, I was instantly presented with some facts I was unaware of. This is a huge plus for any history book, nonetheless an author’s first work. Although “Winter King” has some distance from the psyche of Henry himself (which isn’t surprising as he, himself, was detached); the look into the inner workings of his court and numerous account books are illuminating.
Penn’s literary style can also cause some dissonance as it can be too narrative for some readers and also with a sometimes over tide of familiarity (terms are used like “partying”, “bitching”, and sentences begin with “And”). This isn’t done often but that is precisely why it sticks out like a sore thumb. On a positive note, this also dissipates (albeit, not completely) and the tone becomes more scholarly and affirmative while not being too difficult to digest.
Much of “Winter King” discusses the many conspiracies, imposters, and backstabbing at Henry’s court. Although this can become tiring (and I could only read so much at a time); it opens the doors into why Henry was so private, paranoid, and so driven to create an aura of fear encircling his rule. Penn also focuses at length on Henry’s financial dealings. Henry is known for being “thrifty” and “rich” but Penn reveals Henry’s financial acumen and control over his account books, incomes, coffers, rents, bonds, etc. Also explored are Henry’s dabblings in racketeering and illegal money-makers (i.e. Alum monopoly with and against the papal states). Readers seeking to learn more about Henry’s secret dealings and his connection with Edmund Dudley will find it in “Winter King”.
Penn’s work is largely historically accurate although some views contradict other books I have read. Regardless, the unique value of “Winter King” takes hold with the reader gaining an insight into the entire Tudor dynasty foundations which Henry built. This provides a new set of eyes to view subsequent reigns of the Tudors. Plus Penn elaborately shows the intertwining of well-known figures such as Thomas Wosely, Thomas More, Thomas Cromwell, Thomas Wriothesley, etc.
Although the ending (literally the last page) was somewhat weak speaking on Thomas More versus Henry VII or Henry VII; the finality of “Winter King” and the epilogue thoroughly provided an insight into Edmund Dudley and his impact on the Tudors. The reader will understand why some of the events during Henry VIII’s reign were the way they were (due to the fact that some of the same councilors were in play).
On a smaller note, Penn uses a satisfying amount of both primary and secondary sources (which we history buffs care about!)
“Winter King” is a terrific first work by Thomas Penn despite some of its flaws. Providing a valuable insight into the founding of the Tudor dynasty for both new and experienced Tudor lovers; “Winter King” is worth a read. Thomas Penn is an author to keep an eye on.
January 26, 2015
After reading
Thomas Penn's
Tudor England oeuvre (aka this book), I am now substantially less impressed by the imagination of George R.R. Martin because *Holy Toledo Batman* this stuff like really happened!
Having been MIA from the Land of Reads and Reviews for a while, I'm admittedly not writing this book the review it deserves (a theme which, alas, will likely become the chorus of my next few updates). That being said, I really think you should read it because this sh*t be crazy!
4.5/5 stars (and, like Lucille Bluth, I'm probably being withholding).
Having been MIA from the Land of Reads and Reviews for a while, I'm admittedly not writing this book the review it deserves (a theme which, alas, will likely become the chorus of my next few updates). That being said, I really think you should read it because this sh*t be crazy!
4.5/5 stars (and, like Lucille Bluth, I'm probably being withholding).
August 13, 2017
I found this really interesting, but I’m a history nut. After Wolf Hall, I wanted to find out about Henry VII, the lesser-studied father of Henry VIII, who founded the Tudor Dynasty. The author does a good job drawing on his sources and bringing the characters to life while staying true to the history, but the subject matter is just not inherently as ‘sexy’ as Henry VIII’s or Elizabeth I’s reigns. Henry VII comes across as a talented micromanager and financier. He made huge gobs of money binding his subjects to him with loyalty bonds. For him, it was never about glory and battle. He had enough of that getting himself to the throne. For Henry VII, it was all about the money and stability. He spent his entire reign fixated on eliminating or disarming his enemies, and stabilizing England after the bloody, seemingly endless War of the Roses. In that, he was quite successful, but he was neither loved nor admired. He was a ruler to be feared, a ruler to be paid. Reading this, I got a much better understanding of where Henry VIII came from, and why he was destined to be the colorful ruler he became, as an antidote to his own father. An easy read? No. But definitely rewarding!
December 21, 2012
I was disappointed by this – it was decent but I think it was somewhat overhyped. Having seen it pop up in a lot of papers' Books of the Year lists, I think I was expecting something altogether more gripping and dramatic, but in the end I thought the story of Henry VII and the Tudor succession was just not an especially thrilling tale. Henry himself was clearly a distant figure who governed through his ministers, but this means that it's quite hard to get much of a sense of his character from the few sources available. Annoyingly, much of the most interesting stuff concerns his son, and whenever Penn comments intelligently on how the events here affected the future Henry VIII's reign I found myself perking up – such as the suggestion that Henry VII's marriage to Elizabeth was ‘the kind of marriage that their second son, Prince Henry, would spend his whole life trying to find’. But that's not really what I wanted from a book about Henry VII.
The prose is workmanlike. Penn sometimes overplays his material, ominously building up events which turn out not to be that dramatic after all. ‘Whom’ is only rarely used in this book; ‘who’ usually stands for both subject and object. That's obviously fine in speech, but it meant I had to reread a few of the sentences in here to work out what was exactly was happening.
Penn is strong on writing paragraph-sketches of key figures in the regime, but he has an annoying habit of including so many of them that it becomes a demanding job to keep track of them all. Names are scattered around like confetti. This paragraph is typical (although it does include one of the rare ‘whom’s):
It was very probably the Hertfordshire knight Sir William Say – who as well as being an acquaintance of Archbishop Morton and More's father Sir John, was Mountjoy's father-in-law – who had provided the young More with an introduction to Mountjoy, with whom he became firm friends. The Say family, indeed, joined all the dots: Sir William was half-brother to Elizabeth countess of Surrey, and among the queen's gentlewomen was his sister, Anne.
This is fine at the start of a book, but when he was still introducing dozens of characters by page 300 I started to get a bit annoyed with it. Most are introduced and then dropped two pages later, never to reappear.
The most fascinating parts for me turned out to be the sidebars on 16th-century Europe – the international trade in alum, monopolised by the Pope, smuggled across the continent by Henry, was something I knew nothing about. England's enclave in Calais is also something I'd like to read more on. Financial affairs in particular are very well handled here, and in Penn's retelling at least they were one of Henry's central preoccupations. But overall (and clearly I'm in a minority, since most people seem to have loved this book) I just felt there was a lack of narrative coherence. Most people who study the Tudors tend to start with Henry VIII, and to be honest after this I can see why.
The prose is workmanlike. Penn sometimes overplays his material, ominously building up events which turn out not to be that dramatic after all. ‘Whom’ is only rarely used in this book; ‘who’ usually stands for both subject and object. That's obviously fine in speech, but it meant I had to reread a few of the sentences in here to work out what was exactly was happening.
Penn is strong on writing paragraph-sketches of key figures in the regime, but he has an annoying habit of including so many of them that it becomes a demanding job to keep track of them all. Names are scattered around like confetti. This paragraph is typical (although it does include one of the rare ‘whom’s):
It was very probably the Hertfordshire knight Sir William Say – who as well as being an acquaintance of Archbishop Morton and More's father Sir John, was Mountjoy's father-in-law – who had provided the young More with an introduction to Mountjoy, with whom he became firm friends. The Say family, indeed, joined all the dots: Sir William was half-brother to Elizabeth countess of Surrey, and among the queen's gentlewomen was his sister, Anne.
This is fine at the start of a book, but when he was still introducing dozens of characters by page 300 I started to get a bit annoyed with it. Most are introduced and then dropped two pages later, never to reappear.
The most fascinating parts for me turned out to be the sidebars on 16th-century Europe – the international trade in alum, monopolised by the Pope, smuggled across the continent by Henry, was something I knew nothing about. England's enclave in Calais is also something I'd like to read more on. Financial affairs in particular are very well handled here, and in Penn's retelling at least they were one of Henry's central preoccupations. But overall (and clearly I'm in a minority, since most people seem to have loved this book) I just felt there was a lack of narrative coherence. Most people who study the Tudors tend to start with Henry VIII, and to be honest after this I can see why.
June 27, 2013
Thomas Penn’s Winter King in a brilliant mash-up of gothic horror and political biography.
David Starkey once declared Henry VII ‘boring’. But in writing his magnus opus on the supposedly more interesting Henry VIII he got so caught up in the drama of Henry VII’s court that Henry VIII is now largely being relegated to volume two of his own biography.
The first Tudor King had no legitimate English royal blood and no legal right to the throne. His father was the product of a scandalous marriage between a Welsh chamber servant, Owen Tudor, and Henry V’s French widow, Katherine of Valois. His mother, Margaret Beaufort, was a descendent of an illegitimate son of John of Gaunt, founder of the House of Lancaster. Henry was born at the beginning of the Wars of the Roses, in 1457. Violent death was the common lot of many of his relations, royal as well as non-royal. By mid 1471 Henry was the last man standing in the house of Lancaster. He spent the next 14 years in exile, at constant risk of being handed over to the Yorkist King Edward IV, and later, Richard III. As Starkey observes, ‘The story of how Henry Tudor survived against the odds, and won his…throne against even greater odds, is one of the world’s great adventures’. But that provides just a brief prologue to Winter King.
The 28-year-old who won the battle of Bosworth in 1485 was a leader of some charm, even charisma, but also a damaged man, ‘infinitely suspicious’. He did not know England and was acutely aware that what had been won by the sword could as easily be lost by it. Henry had gained his victory with the support of those Yorkists who had turned against Richard III after the disappearance of Edward IV’s sons, the princes in the Tower. Henry carried out his promise to them to marry Edward IV’s daughter, Elizabeth of York, but was crowned in his own ‘right’ – and it was a ‘right’ that was often to be questioned. With the last Plantagenet – the Earl of Warwick – kept in the Tower, his enemies set up pretenders against him. For Penn a key moment is the appearance in 1491 of a young man who claimed to be Richard, Duke of York, son of Edward IV. Even Sir William Stanley, the man who had crowned Henry at Bosworth, was prepared to betray him for this boy. The pretender was executed in 1499 as Perkin Warbeck. Warwick, who had not left the Tower since childhood, was also killed. But Henry never felt safe, and the deaths of his elder son, Prince Arthur, in 1502, and his wife the following year, seemed to shut all the light out of his life.
Henry disappeared like a spider into his private apartments. There he spun a web that allowed him unprecedented control over his subjects. He described it as keeping them ‘in danger at his pleasure’. Earlier kings had bound offenders and suspects for their good behaviour on pain of paying a ‘debt’. Henry VII extended this system to the entire propertied class. Opposition was priced out of the market. Penn’s description of this Tudor tyranny is a tour de force: both scholarly and a pleasure to read, covering the breadth of the European political scene, while providing the details that allow us to feel intimately the terror at home. Hope for the future fixed on the young Prince of Wales, the future Henry VIII. He is the spring that, at last, follows the Winter King. Unlike Gordon Brown’s successor, Henry VIII inherits coffers stuffed with cash (if Henry VII was ‘led into avarice’, it was, at least, to some good purpose). The monster is dead. People rejoice. But, this being a horror story, Penn leaves us with the icy sensation of some unimaginable terror ahead.
This article first appeared in the print edition of The Spectator magazine, dated October 1, 2011
David Starkey once declared Henry VII ‘boring’. But in writing his magnus opus on the supposedly more interesting Henry VIII he got so caught up in the drama of Henry VII’s court that Henry VIII is now largely being relegated to volume two of his own biography.
The first Tudor King had no legitimate English royal blood and no legal right to the throne. His father was the product of a scandalous marriage between a Welsh chamber servant, Owen Tudor, and Henry V’s French widow, Katherine of Valois. His mother, Margaret Beaufort, was a descendent of an illegitimate son of John of Gaunt, founder of the House of Lancaster. Henry was born at the beginning of the Wars of the Roses, in 1457. Violent death was the common lot of many of his relations, royal as well as non-royal. By mid 1471 Henry was the last man standing in the house of Lancaster. He spent the next 14 years in exile, at constant risk of being handed over to the Yorkist King Edward IV, and later, Richard III. As Starkey observes, ‘The story of how Henry Tudor survived against the odds, and won his…throne against even greater odds, is one of the world’s great adventures’. But that provides just a brief prologue to Winter King.
The 28-year-old who won the battle of Bosworth in 1485 was a leader of some charm, even charisma, but also a damaged man, ‘infinitely suspicious’. He did not know England and was acutely aware that what had been won by the sword could as easily be lost by it. Henry had gained his victory with the support of those Yorkists who had turned against Richard III after the disappearance of Edward IV’s sons, the princes in the Tower. Henry carried out his promise to them to marry Edward IV’s daughter, Elizabeth of York, but was crowned in his own ‘right’ – and it was a ‘right’ that was often to be questioned. With the last Plantagenet – the Earl of Warwick – kept in the Tower, his enemies set up pretenders against him. For Penn a key moment is the appearance in 1491 of a young man who claimed to be Richard, Duke of York, son of Edward IV. Even Sir William Stanley, the man who had crowned Henry at Bosworth, was prepared to betray him for this boy. The pretender was executed in 1499 as Perkin Warbeck. Warwick, who had not left the Tower since childhood, was also killed. But Henry never felt safe, and the deaths of his elder son, Prince Arthur, in 1502, and his wife the following year, seemed to shut all the light out of his life.
Henry disappeared like a spider into his private apartments. There he spun a web that allowed him unprecedented control over his subjects. He described it as keeping them ‘in danger at his pleasure’. Earlier kings had bound offenders and suspects for their good behaviour on pain of paying a ‘debt’. Henry VII extended this system to the entire propertied class. Opposition was priced out of the market. Penn’s description of this Tudor tyranny is a tour de force: both scholarly and a pleasure to read, covering the breadth of the European political scene, while providing the details that allow us to feel intimately the terror at home. Hope for the future fixed on the young Prince of Wales, the future Henry VIII. He is the spring that, at last, follows the Winter King. Unlike Gordon Brown’s successor, Henry VIII inherits coffers stuffed with cash (if Henry VII was ‘led into avarice’, it was, at least, to some good purpose). The monster is dead. People rejoice. But, this being a horror story, Penn leaves us with the icy sensation of some unimaginable terror ahead.
This article first appeared in the print edition of The Spectator magazine, dated October 1, 2011
May 4, 2012
Henry VII is usually treated as a charmless and thrifty prelude to the big reign of Henry VIII, with the inevitable marriage of Henry and Catherine of Aragon, and the reversal of his father's bully policies for a golden age of chivalry and, you know, all the crazy shit Henry VIII was about to do. For inheriting an unstable throne, holding it for 25 year and leaving England relatively stable, Henry VII deserves his own biography and a lot more credit. Much of the ruthless machinery of control was designed to deal with ongoing challenged like pretenders and Yorkist sleepers and expats. Henry VII, grown rich from Morton's Fork and other squeezes, was far from a bumpkin trying to break into the royal circles of western Europe--he was being courted, and he knew very well to play Castile (Hapsburg) and Aragon off against one another after Isabella died (and Catherine might very well have been packed off home to marry someone else, it was common). Raised in France, admiring of Italian-trained lawyers (and reaping the reward of the return of a whole generation of educated English commoners who sat out the War of the Roses abroad), with good taste in Renaissance art and advised by his gracious wife and steely mother, Henry VII is a major figure, not a prequel. In many ways, it highlights that Henry VIII was a feckless inheritor of the tools of Machiavellian power, but had no idea to what productive end to put them.
August 1, 2017
Shakespeare Lied
1 August 2017
Everywhere where this book is concerned there are statements about how it won all these awards, and how wonderful it is as a history book, yet I found it on the clearance table at a bookshop I was exploring in inner city Sydney. Normally I wouldn't have purchased it, but it grabbed my attention, and a part of me actually thought it was about Richard III. Actually, maybe I bought it because it was about Henry VII and then promptly forgot, but I do know that I didn't buy it because it won all these awards namely because I generally don't buy books simply because they have won awards (and I certainly don't vote in the Goodreads choice awards, namely because I rarely, if ever, read contemporary literature).
So, as I mentioned, this book is about Henry VII, and England under his reign. Penn does point out that he tends to be a forgotten king, one that is generally skipped over in favour of Henry VIII, or Richard III. Penn suggests that this has something to do with his character, but seriously, how could you consider Henry's character to be quite bad when you put him up against Shakespeare's version of Richard III – seriously, if there was one king that should have been forgotten it should have been Richard, expect we have a play, and quite a famous saying attributed to him (which no doubt he never actually said).
This is the thing with Shakespeare, the first thing that I picked up when I was reading this book was how propaganderous Richard III actually is – when we read the play, or even watch it, we get the impression that Richard was a thug that had a very tenuous grip on power, and by the time Bodsworth Field came about it was an open and shut battle that Henry easily won. Well, nothing could be further from the truth, and the fact that Henry actually won had more to do with luck as opposed to any failing on Richard's part. As for being a tyrant, well, Henry was actually no better than Richard, though since he was the victor, Shakespeare obviously was influenced by the fact that the Tudor's won the battle.
The period of Henry VII was a period where England was in transition – going from a medieval past into a modern future. In one sense he brought stability to the kingdom, which was a kingdom that had been torn apart by wars ever since the English were kicked out of France. Yet under Richard England was also going through a period of stability, and Henry simply was able to marshal the troops, with French backing, to remove Richard and install himself as an usurper.
One interesting thing that I learnt was that one of the two boys that were allegedly murdered in the tower was said to have actually been living in Scotland, and every so often somebody would claim to be the prince and seek to take the throne off of Henry for himself. However, one of the first things that Henry did was make sure that people considered him to be a legitimate heir (his claim was actually quite tenuous), and having some guy appear and claim to be the lost prince had the potential to undermine his authority. In fact, for the first few years of his reign he found himself having to fight off other claimant's to the throne, or simply those who were still bitter than he had ousted Richard.
In a way what we have here is the beginnings of Renaissance England. At the start of Henry's reign there was still quite a large belief in the existence of King Arthur – in fact in this period and earlier the kings would claim their legitimacy by claiming to be descendant's of Arthur (well, not William the Conqueror, but you get the picture). Henry even went as far as naming his first born son Arthur, though his son ended up dying before he could take the crown, which meant that so far there hasn't actually been an actual 'King Arthur' on the throne (ignoring, of course, the wonderful story that appears in Monmoth, though it also seems that the search for Arthur is almost as futile as the search for the mythical holy grail). Yet, by the end of this period we discover that the whole King Arthur story has been put to bed, with the publication of the Anglica Historia (though not without some controversy).
Another thing we find out is that Henry wasn't actually a good king – he was an extravagant one, and in many cases was like that person that goes out to make a heap of money to basically live an outrageous and extravagant lifestyle, and spending all the money that goes with such a lifestyle. As such Henry was always looking for new and inventive ways of attempting to extort money of out his subjects. In fact, confiscating property, and titles, was one of his favourite ways of deal with enemies. However, his properties, his lavish weddings, and the fact that he lived extravagantly, demonstrated that he wasn't a king that was interested in the people, but just another tyrant wanting to live in luxury (though he was also an expert at hiding his wealth, but like a lot of people that we know about today).
I probably should finish off by saying a few things about the book. Basically it is one of those books that you would probably use if you happened to be writing a history essay on the period, or that you are really, really interested in the intricate historical details of a time period, or a person. There is actually quite a lot of interesting things in here, but it is really only something for the avid reader. Okay, I love my history, and I love reading history books, but sometime the details does cause me to bog down a bit, or to skim and scan. This book didn't really grab my attention as some have managed to do. The other thing is that it made me realise how difficult going through the sources would have been. Penn suggests that one of the reasons that we have the sources is that one of Henry's enemies escaped to France with them before they could be destroyed. When I studied history we were expected to go to primary sources, such as diaries and such – simply going to secondary sources, such as this book, really wasn't all that acceptable. Hey, even using Shakespeare as a source for Henry V wasn't acceptable, at least to my history lecturer.
1 August 2017
Everywhere where this book is concerned there are statements about how it won all these awards, and how wonderful it is as a history book, yet I found it on the clearance table at a bookshop I was exploring in inner city Sydney. Normally I wouldn't have purchased it, but it grabbed my attention, and a part of me actually thought it was about Richard III. Actually, maybe I bought it because it was about Henry VII and then promptly forgot, but I do know that I didn't buy it because it won all these awards namely because I generally don't buy books simply because they have won awards (and I certainly don't vote in the Goodreads choice awards, namely because I rarely, if ever, read contemporary literature).
So, as I mentioned, this book is about Henry VII, and England under his reign. Penn does point out that he tends to be a forgotten king, one that is generally skipped over in favour of Henry VIII, or Richard III. Penn suggests that this has something to do with his character, but seriously, how could you consider Henry's character to be quite bad when you put him up against Shakespeare's version of Richard III – seriously, if there was one king that should have been forgotten it should have been Richard, expect we have a play, and quite a famous saying attributed to him (which no doubt he never actually said).
This is the thing with Shakespeare, the first thing that I picked up when I was reading this book was how propaganderous Richard III actually is – when we read the play, or even watch it, we get the impression that Richard was a thug that had a very tenuous grip on power, and by the time Bodsworth Field came about it was an open and shut battle that Henry easily won. Well, nothing could be further from the truth, and the fact that Henry actually won had more to do with luck as opposed to any failing on Richard's part. As for being a tyrant, well, Henry was actually no better than Richard, though since he was the victor, Shakespeare obviously was influenced by the fact that the Tudor's won the battle.
The period of Henry VII was a period where England was in transition – going from a medieval past into a modern future. In one sense he brought stability to the kingdom, which was a kingdom that had been torn apart by wars ever since the English were kicked out of France. Yet under Richard England was also going through a period of stability, and Henry simply was able to marshal the troops, with French backing, to remove Richard and install himself as an usurper.
One interesting thing that I learnt was that one of the two boys that were allegedly murdered in the tower was said to have actually been living in Scotland, and every so often somebody would claim to be the prince and seek to take the throne off of Henry for himself. However, one of the first things that Henry did was make sure that people considered him to be a legitimate heir (his claim was actually quite tenuous), and having some guy appear and claim to be the lost prince had the potential to undermine his authority. In fact, for the first few years of his reign he found himself having to fight off other claimant's to the throne, or simply those who were still bitter than he had ousted Richard.
In a way what we have here is the beginnings of Renaissance England. At the start of Henry's reign there was still quite a large belief in the existence of King Arthur – in fact in this period and earlier the kings would claim their legitimacy by claiming to be descendant's of Arthur (well, not William the Conqueror, but you get the picture). Henry even went as far as naming his first born son Arthur, though his son ended up dying before he could take the crown, which meant that so far there hasn't actually been an actual 'King Arthur' on the throne (ignoring, of course, the wonderful story that appears in Monmoth, though it also seems that the search for Arthur is almost as futile as the search for the mythical holy grail). Yet, by the end of this period we discover that the whole King Arthur story has been put to bed, with the publication of the Anglica Historia (though not without some controversy).
Another thing we find out is that Henry wasn't actually a good king – he was an extravagant one, and in many cases was like that person that goes out to make a heap of money to basically live an outrageous and extravagant lifestyle, and spending all the money that goes with such a lifestyle. As such Henry was always looking for new and inventive ways of attempting to extort money of out his subjects. In fact, confiscating property, and titles, was one of his favourite ways of deal with enemies. However, his properties, his lavish weddings, and the fact that he lived extravagantly, demonstrated that he wasn't a king that was interested in the people, but just another tyrant wanting to live in luxury (though he was also an expert at hiding his wealth, but like a lot of people that we know about today).
I probably should finish off by saying a few things about the book. Basically it is one of those books that you would probably use if you happened to be writing a history essay on the period, or that you are really, really interested in the intricate historical details of a time period, or a person. There is actually quite a lot of interesting things in here, but it is really only something for the avid reader. Okay, I love my history, and I love reading history books, but sometime the details does cause me to bog down a bit, or to skim and scan. This book didn't really grab my attention as some have managed to do. The other thing is that it made me realise how difficult going through the sources would have been. Penn suggests that one of the reasons that we have the sources is that one of Henry's enemies escaped to France with them before they could be destroyed. When I studied history we were expected to go to primary sources, such as diaries and such – simply going to secondary sources, such as this book, really wasn't all that acceptable. Hey, even using Shakespeare as a source for Henry V wasn't acceptable, at least to my history lecturer.
May 29, 2017
this was well-written and i love henry vii for how he managed to a) get the throne of england and b) keep it and make the crown so solvent after the devastating years of the Wars of the Roses, but i can't help but think that a lot of this was... rather dry. of course, a large proportion of my opinion is probably due to the fact that i knew a lot about henry vii already, and Penn tried to create quite a thrilling/mysterious feel, which is all well and good if you don't already know how everything plays out.
probably someone who doesn't know much about henry vii already would appreciate the mystery of it all more. also, i didn't realise this book focused more on the last decade of his reign; i would have preferred more focus on his early life and his seizing the throne, possibly with more Wars of the Roses background as well.
i think quite a lot of people would enjoy this as henry vii is relatively obscure in the domain of general knowledge. if you know little about henry vii, or conversely if you are a giant henry vii aficionado who wants to know all the intricacies of his reign, it would be a good read. but for those of us inbetween, i wouldn't bother; i knew enough about him to suck out the mystery of it, and after that all that was left were tiny details, which i'm not interested enough in.
probably someone who doesn't know much about henry vii already would appreciate the mystery of it all more. also, i didn't realise this book focused more on the last decade of his reign; i would have preferred more focus on his early life and his seizing the throne, possibly with more Wars of the Roses background as well.
i think quite a lot of people would enjoy this as henry vii is relatively obscure in the domain of general knowledge. if you know little about henry vii, or conversely if you are a giant henry vii aficionado who wants to know all the intricacies of his reign, it would be a good read. but for those of us inbetween, i wouldn't bother; i knew enough about him to suck out the mystery of it, and after that all that was left were tiny details, which i'm not interested enough in.
April 18, 2022
Now I Know Why It Was Free
I’ve had this book on my bookshelf for over ten years, having been given it during my time working at Waterstones. There were loads of copies and we were allowed to take them, I can’t remember why. However, I can guess. This book is truest awful.
This is the story of ‘The Winter King’, Henry VII, and the dawn of Tudor England. He’s called the Winter King as his reign was the conclusion of the dark days of the Wars of the Roses, with his son, Henry VIII’s reign believed to be the coming spring. This is not a story of Henry VII, who is Henry VII? I couldn’t tell you. The most interesting questions about Henry VII are: What was his claim to the throne? Why did he think he had a claim? Why did he try and claim it? & how did he do it? None of this is answered or even pondered. The prologue deals with him coming to power and the Battle of Bosworth. Then the rest of the 278 pages dart around various times within Henry’s reign (not life, there is nothing of him prior to 1497 it seems!).
The book is confused and the writing is poor. There isn’t a narrative, theme or analysis. His wife Elizabeth of York and eldest son Prince Arthur die and then are resurrected making the story hard to follow. A lot of time is spent talking about Edmund Dudley, Catherine of Aragon and the Dutch philosopher Erasmus. Then there is occasionally someone called Henry VII mentioned? I gained nothing of the man whatsoever, he reigned as Machiavelli wanted him to, ‘in terror’, amassing a huge fortune through inventive ways of collecting tithes, old debts and tributes and taxes. Tying down nobles through huge financial burden to his loyalty. He was also a sickly man, with a wandering eye. He was also extremely suspicious, which is natural as he won the throne and therefore his position was not stable. However I gained nothing more.
Pages upon pages seem to go off point circulating around seemly innocuous people and events. Maybe they were important but then the writing failed to explains this. In the end this felt like a huge slog just to finish. I didn’t care what the author had to say and to be honest I don’t think he had anything of interest to tell me. This is not groundbreaking or a revision of history, it is not even an essay on Henry VII. Probably the worst history book I have read and I will not read any more of Thomas Penn’s work as I have lost confident in him.
I’ve had this book on my bookshelf for over ten years, having been given it during my time working at Waterstones. There were loads of copies and we were allowed to take them, I can’t remember why. However, I can guess. This book is truest awful.
This is the story of ‘The Winter King’, Henry VII, and the dawn of Tudor England. He’s called the Winter King as his reign was the conclusion of the dark days of the Wars of the Roses, with his son, Henry VIII’s reign believed to be the coming spring. This is not a story of Henry VII, who is Henry VII? I couldn’t tell you. The most interesting questions about Henry VII are: What was his claim to the throne? Why did he think he had a claim? Why did he try and claim it? & how did he do it? None of this is answered or even pondered. The prologue deals with him coming to power and the Battle of Bosworth. Then the rest of the 278 pages dart around various times within Henry’s reign (not life, there is nothing of him prior to 1497 it seems!).
The book is confused and the writing is poor. There isn’t a narrative, theme or analysis. His wife Elizabeth of York and eldest son Prince Arthur die and then are resurrected making the story hard to follow. A lot of time is spent talking about Edmund Dudley, Catherine of Aragon and the Dutch philosopher Erasmus. Then there is occasionally someone called Henry VII mentioned? I gained nothing of the man whatsoever, he reigned as Machiavelli wanted him to, ‘in terror’, amassing a huge fortune through inventive ways of collecting tithes, old debts and tributes and taxes. Tying down nobles through huge financial burden to his loyalty. He was also a sickly man, with a wandering eye. He was also extremely suspicious, which is natural as he won the throne and therefore his position was not stable. However I gained nothing more.
Pages upon pages seem to go off point circulating around seemly innocuous people and events. Maybe they were important but then the writing failed to explains this. In the end this felt like a huge slog just to finish. I didn’t care what the author had to say and to be honest I don’t think he had anything of interest to tell me. This is not groundbreaking or a revision of history, it is not even an essay on Henry VII. Probably the worst history book I have read and I will not read any more of Thomas Penn’s work as I have lost confident in him.
September 2, 2019
Levissimus = lightest, quickest, smoothest
In medieval times, Levissimus was also used to refer to the 'least of men'. It is a word that aptly describes Henry VII, the first Tudor king and one of the most wily leaders of the royal line. That familial connection wasn't as strong as other lineages, but the Winter King moved quickly to extinguish Richard III's life and to grab the throne. He effectively ended the Wars of the Roses, but many learned to never turn their back on him.
Henry's government, too, appeared strange. It was neither one thing nor the other, a kind of halfway house.
Henry VII always did his best to assume the moral high ground. His reign brought some relief from decades of lawlessness throughout England, but in doing so, many sacrificed their souls to ensure they didn't get on his wrong side. He could have been a twin of France's Louis XI, always planning to snare some poor unfortunate fly in an ever-widening web. His years spent on the run and in hiding meant he valued each golden coin that he could find, so his treasury was a healthy one that was built over time. He allowed his advisors to exploit men who had land and plenty of everything, until said men were so squeezed, they ran to the Winter King for help. By appearing to offer his assistance, he simply destroyed their last remaining wealth. It was said that Henry VII's favorite method of punishment was death by a thousand financial cuts.
Being a Ricardian, I have always despised the Tudor usurper. A book was needed to help dispel my bias, although I knew I would be on guard while reading Thomas Penn's nicely done biographical volume. This isn't a book where you will walk away with a love of the subject. Henry was not that type of man. But I did finish the book with a greater respect for the Winter King, just not any trust. In fact, I thought of Putin while reading. Peas in a pod.
Book Season = Winter (snowy channel crossings)
March 6, 2014
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 20, 2022
3.5 Stars. More than a biography of Henry VII, this book is really a highly detailed history of the last ten years of his reign, and how he meticulously and ruthlessly turned England into a police state ruled by what amounted to an organized crime syndicate. The whole system was ingeniously designed to ensure the unchallenged supremacy of the king while stamping out any challenges to his authority from the nobles, merchants, and commons. This was accomplished through the targeted imposition of fines and bonds through extrajudicial councils. Anyone perceived to have any potential political power or social capital was rendered deeply indebted to the crown and at risk of complete financial ruin upon the whim of the king and his councillors. The usual courts and justice system were totally circumvented, and there was no chance of appeal other than purchasing extremely high priced royal pardons. Loyalty was ensured, and the nobility was effectively neutered...and Henry became the richest monarch in Europe.
This extensively researched and well written history really gives the reader a feel for the times. While it is very descriptive, I sometimes felt that the narrative got a little bogged down in excessive detail regarding peripheral people and situations. That made me want to give this book three stars, but the overall brilliance generally merits four, so I'm settling on three and a half. Really good book, just not as fast paced or smoothly flowing as I would have preferred.
This extensively researched and well written history really gives the reader a feel for the times. While it is very descriptive, I sometimes felt that the narrative got a little bogged down in excessive detail regarding peripheral people and situations. That made me want to give this book three stars, but the overall brilliance generally merits four, so I'm settling on three and a half. Really good book, just not as fast paced or smoothly flowing as I would have preferred.
September 20, 2013
There are an awful lot of books written about the Tudor era, both fiction and non-fiction, so you have to ask whether this book adds anything new. I am glad to say that I think it does, for it concentrates on the reign, and court, of Henry VII, giving a different slant to the well known story. Henry VII ruled from 1485-1509 and had a dubious claim on the throne, spending most of his time before the famous Battle of Bosworth Field in exile and gaining credibility from his marriage to Elizabeth of York. His early reign was plagued by pretenders to the throne, giving the new Tudor dynasty a rocky start and a fear of conspiracy which dogged Henry VII throughout his life.
Of course, we all know the history. Henry VII's eldest son Arthur, his beloved heir, dying only a short while after his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. Catherine's subsequent loss of status, the arguments with Ferdinand over her dowry, her uncertainty over her future and the papal dispensation over whether she remained a virgin and could marry Prince Henry (worded in a rather vague way to please both parties, a fact which would come back to haunt Catherine in later years). The emergence of Henry, no longer the second son (in terms of the 'heir and the spare', he was most certainly the 'spare') suddenly having to be given training in being a future king, when it was Arthur who had been initially given his own household while Henry had been brought up with his mother and siblings. However, despite there being such a wealth of knowledge about this period, the author does a great job of bringing the court of Henry VII back to life. He explains who had control of the finances and how their power was mis-used, the emergence of characters who assumed greater importance when Prince Henry became King and how the death of Henry VII and the transfer of power was managed.
Henry VII was a wily ruler, who often mis-used power but was determined to create a new dynasty. When his death was not announced at first, so his ministers could manage the transfer of power to his son, Henry VIII, you feel he would have approved. I really enjoyed this book, especially detail about lesser known members of the court. It was a very interesting read and I recommend it highly.
Of course, we all know the history. Henry VII's eldest son Arthur, his beloved heir, dying only a short while after his marriage to Catherine of Aragon. Catherine's subsequent loss of status, the arguments with Ferdinand over her dowry, her uncertainty over her future and the papal dispensation over whether she remained a virgin and could marry Prince Henry (worded in a rather vague way to please both parties, a fact which would come back to haunt Catherine in later years). The emergence of Henry, no longer the second son (in terms of the 'heir and the spare', he was most certainly the 'spare') suddenly having to be given training in being a future king, when it was Arthur who had been initially given his own household while Henry had been brought up with his mother and siblings. However, despite there being such a wealth of knowledge about this period, the author does a great job of bringing the court of Henry VII back to life. He explains who had control of the finances and how their power was mis-used, the emergence of characters who assumed greater importance when Prince Henry became King and how the death of Henry VII and the transfer of power was managed.
Henry VII was a wily ruler, who often mis-used power but was determined to create a new dynasty. When his death was not announced at first, so his ministers could manage the transfer of power to his son, Henry VIII, you feel he would have approved. I really enjoyed this book, especially detail about lesser known members of the court. It was a very interesting read and I recommend it highly.
April 7, 2012
I have to admit to being a history geek. For me, history is alive and energizing - not something static and remote. My obsession is European history from the 12th through 17th centuries - especially British history - so of course, when I was offered the chance to review this book, my interest was piqued immediately.
I had not read too terribly much about Henry VII in the past and, with this book, Thomas Penn, brings this most important of English monarch to life in a very enjoyable fashion. There is nothing pedantry about this book. It is detailed to be sure but the details add to the read - they don't detract from the flow of the book as can become an issue with some dry historical missives. This book is lively, enthralling, detailed and enjoyable!
"Winter King" has put some of the names and historical circumstances into prospective for me. Although Henry VII was a power house of a monarch it is his son, Henry VIII, who generally gets most of the press. I learned more about the man who became the King; how he managed to cling to the monarch in a very uncertain time, how he found his way through a mire of intrigues & plots to depose him, and how, it is my impression, he was the King who really was spymaster. Mentally agile, intelligent, ruthless, thoughtful and canny, Henry VII is an engrossing historical character and this book is a winner!
Yes! I heartily recommend it for other history obsessives or Tudor fans. Well done!
I had not read too terribly much about Henry VII in the past and, with this book, Thomas Penn, brings this most important of English monarch to life in a very enjoyable fashion. There is nothing pedantry about this book. It is detailed to be sure but the details add to the read - they don't detract from the flow of the book as can become an issue with some dry historical missives. This book is lively, enthralling, detailed and enjoyable!
"Winter King" has put some of the names and historical circumstances into prospective for me. Although Henry VII was a power house of a monarch it is his son, Henry VIII, who generally gets most of the press. I learned more about the man who became the King; how he managed to cling to the monarch in a very uncertain time, how he found his way through a mire of intrigues & plots to depose him, and how, it is my impression, he was the King who really was spymaster. Mentally agile, intelligent, ruthless, thoughtful and canny, Henry VII is an engrossing historical character and this book is a winner!
Yes! I heartily recommend it for other history obsessives or Tudor fans. Well done!
Read
February 3, 2017This was excellent. Well written and really interesting about an often ignored king. I had an idea Henry VII was a force for stability; in fact he was a terrifying kleptocrat, abusing the law with arbitrary fines and imprisonment, scheming to effectively steal entire estates and wring every penny out of subjects as well as impose political control through financial means. The parts on how he abused his position and the law to enrich himself while an entire nation watched helplessly are, frankly, pretty relevant to now.
Once people had been informed against to the king and his counsellors, they had stepped outside a world governed by recognised judicial processes into one of nightmarish contingency, from which there was no escape: where the law was the king's will, expressed by mutable committees that coalesced and fragmented, and in which paper trails vanished into thin air.
November 1, 2013
Thomas Penn's Winter King is not really a biography of Henry VII, and more a study of what he was directing his government to do in his name. (We certainly can, and do, decide what sort of king Henry was based on what he had his government get up to, however.)
For a further review: http://susannag.booklikes.com/post/67... .
For a further review: http://susannag.booklikes.com/post/67... .
September 25, 2012
Interesting look at the founder of the Tudor dynesty. I thought the book was well written, even though a bit dry is spots. Henry was a remarkable man. I thought the way he controled the nobility was fascinating - keeping them in check as well a raising vast sums of money at the same time.
The book brings out his successful diplomacy - keeping England out of the various wars in Europe and managing to marry his son to the daughter of one of leading houses in Europe.
I thought the look at his relationship with his queen was interesting. He obviously married her for political reasons, but there seems to have been a deep emotional attachment to her. After her death he was devestated. Penn theorizes she was the main person who brought him out of his grief after the death of his heir.
If Penn's portrayal of Henry is anywhere close to accurate, he was a much, much better king than his son and a much better human being.
Well worth the read.
The book brings out his successful diplomacy - keeping England out of the various wars in Europe and managing to marry his son to the daughter of one of leading houses in Europe.
I thought the look at his relationship with his queen was interesting. He obviously married her for political reasons, but there seems to have been a deep emotional attachment to her. After her death he was devestated. Penn theorizes she was the main person who brought him out of his grief after the death of his heir.
If Penn's portrayal of Henry is anywhere close to accurate, he was a much, much better king than his son and a much better human being.
Well worth the read.
September 17, 2012
In my never-ending quest to read possibly every single published book on the Tudor monarchy, I spied this little gem a few weeks ago and picked it up. It's difficult to get a handle on Henry VII. Some of it is due to his personality--he played his cards close to the vest, unlike his son--and some of it is due to Tudor spin--they were, after all trying to bolster up the royal credentials for a man who didn't have that many. Overblown prose trumpeting his reign seemed to be the order of the day.
Although the first quarter of this book is a little dry, at around the twenty-five percent mark Penn all of a sudden takes off and finds his voice. What a beautifully written book. In a sure voice, Penn captures without so much as a hiccup the tenor of these men, an era of the fantastically ambitious and avaricious. Add several whose claims to the throne were considerably more legitimate than Henry Tudor's, and you have an age where the royal fortune is so fragile that success and failure seem to turn on the seemingly most trivial events, like a storm at the right place at the right time. Although these events are dramatic enough in themselves, Penn takes this up several notches by deftly marshalling these events into a coherent, fascinating narrative. The chapters dealing with the alum trade are alone worth buying this book.
The personalities of them men are large and Penn draws these men with the drollest of pens. From the enclave of rapacious Italians to the poets and humanists vying for royal favor, from Henry VII's financial henchmen Dudley and Empson to the emerging players that will play such a huge role in his son's reign (Wolsey, Cromwell, More, and Warham), Penn adroitly weaves in all their stories as the background to what is a monarchy that is obsessed with its legitimacy. Henry VII's solution to his less-than-stellar credentials was to amass so much money that he was able to buy stability, even if it meant terrorizing his people. His son would be no less obsessed and equally adept at terrorizing the populace.
A delightful read, I highly recommend it.
Although the first quarter of this book is a little dry, at around the twenty-five percent mark Penn all of a sudden takes off and finds his voice. What a beautifully written book. In a sure voice, Penn captures without so much as a hiccup the tenor of these men, an era of the fantastically ambitious and avaricious. Add several whose claims to the throne were considerably more legitimate than Henry Tudor's, and you have an age where the royal fortune is so fragile that success and failure seem to turn on the seemingly most trivial events, like a storm at the right place at the right time. Although these events are dramatic enough in themselves, Penn takes this up several notches by deftly marshalling these events into a coherent, fascinating narrative. The chapters dealing with the alum trade are alone worth buying this book.
The personalities of them men are large and Penn draws these men with the drollest of pens. From the enclave of rapacious Italians to the poets and humanists vying for royal favor, from Henry VII's financial henchmen Dudley and Empson to the emerging players that will play such a huge role in his son's reign (Wolsey, Cromwell, More, and Warham), Penn adroitly weaves in all their stories as the background to what is a monarchy that is obsessed with its legitimacy. Henry VII's solution to his less-than-stellar credentials was to amass so much money that he was able to buy stability, even if it meant terrorizing his people. His son would be no less obsessed and equally adept at terrorizing the populace.
A delightful read, I highly recommend it.
Read
August 26, 2015I'm not giving this a star rating because I suspect it's me at fault not the book. I couldn't even stay awake reading this. Seriously, got nudged by my partner when I'd nodded off. Wolf Hall this is not. Wow, it was like being battered by facts without remission for good intentions.
January 24, 2021
I've never read much on the reign of Henry VII - mostly because to really get to grips with his policies, you first have to get to grips with his exhaustively complicated financial policies - but Penn provides a wonderful accessibility through his writing, which provides valuable context to the man who founded England's most famous dynasty.
June 14, 2012
Taken from my full review at http://reviews.theanneboleynfiles.com...
Winter King by Thomas Penn is a book on Henry VII, founder of the Tudor dynasty, but it is not a full biography. I just wanted to clear that up before I launch into my review. Henry VII was born in 1457 and ruled England from 1485 to 1509, but this book opens in autumn 1497 and so does not give you all the details of Henry's early life, his rise, his claim to the throne etc. and the Battle of Bosworth is only mentioned in the prologue. That surprised me and actually disappointed me because I wanted the whole caboodle, Henry's whole life in detail. However, I wasn't disappointed when I started reading because Penn's book is, as historian Helen Castor described, "a masterpiece". I would describe it as a narrative, rather than a biography.
I must admit to not having much time for Henry VII before I read this book. Blame it on my History A' Level course which, if memory serves me right, had me writing many essays on Henry VII's financial policies. I came away thinking what a miserly and boring king he was and that stuck with me. Thomas Penn's book changed that perception though. The Henry VII of Winter King is far from boring and it's easy to see where Henry VIII got his ruthless streak from when you meet Penn's paranoid Machiavellian ruler who seemed to rule with a rod of iron and wanted to be feared, rather than loved, by his subjects. You can hardly blame the man when he was seen as a usurper and had to deal with so many challenges to his authority.
My full review gives details on what is covered is Penn's book but it really does focus on the latter years of Henry's reign and it does jump around. For example, Elizabeth of York's funeral is followed by details of her life and role as consort, but I found this easy to follow and it doesn't happen as much later in the book.
It is hard to believe that this is Penn's debut and he should be congratulated on his writing and research. It must have been an immense task to put this book together and the huge bibliography shows how much research was done. A must-read for Tudor history lovers.
Winter King by Thomas Penn is a book on Henry VII, founder of the Tudor dynasty, but it is not a full biography. I just wanted to clear that up before I launch into my review. Henry VII was born in 1457 and ruled England from 1485 to 1509, but this book opens in autumn 1497 and so does not give you all the details of Henry's early life, his rise, his claim to the throne etc. and the Battle of Bosworth is only mentioned in the prologue. That surprised me and actually disappointed me because I wanted the whole caboodle, Henry's whole life in detail. However, I wasn't disappointed when I started reading because Penn's book is, as historian Helen Castor described, "a masterpiece". I would describe it as a narrative, rather than a biography.
I must admit to not having much time for Henry VII before I read this book. Blame it on my History A' Level course which, if memory serves me right, had me writing many essays on Henry VII's financial policies. I came away thinking what a miserly and boring king he was and that stuck with me. Thomas Penn's book changed that perception though. The Henry VII of Winter King is far from boring and it's easy to see where Henry VIII got his ruthless streak from when you meet Penn's paranoid Machiavellian ruler who seemed to rule with a rod of iron and wanted to be feared, rather than loved, by his subjects. You can hardly blame the man when he was seen as a usurper and had to deal with so many challenges to his authority.
My full review gives details on what is covered is Penn's book but it really does focus on the latter years of Henry's reign and it does jump around. For example, Elizabeth of York's funeral is followed by details of her life and role as consort, but I found this easy to follow and it doesn't happen as much later in the book.
It is hard to believe that this is Penn's debut and he should be congratulated on his writing and research. It must have been an immense task to put this book together and the huge bibliography shows how much research was done. A must-read for Tudor history lovers.
May 18, 2023
This was definitely not an easy read, but the second half was significantly better than the first. I agree with the criticism that Penn didn’t spend enough time on some of the most interesting questions: what was Henry’s claim to the throne? why did he think he had a claim? I’ve also realised that, having studied Henry VII, I am more interested in scope and judgement than pages and pages of evidence. Luckily, this was delivered in the penultimate chapter:
‘In the quarter-century separating the two executions, the boundaries of royal power would change in ways that Dudley could scarcely have imagined. Thomas More died denying the supreme jurisdiction of the crown, not over its own laws and its subjects, but over the laws of God and the church. What Henry VII would’ve made of it can only be guessed at. He might’ve been appalled by his sons singleminded and ultimately cataclysmic efforts to find himself a wife who could provide him with an heir and thereby secure another dynastic succession, and his equally destructive efforts to augment his income. He might also have seen him as a chip off the old block.’
Fascinating parallel!!
In his depiction of the men that surrounded Henry, particularly his insight into Edmund Dudley, Penn’s book gave me a new set of eyes to view the subsequent Tudor reigns with. 4 stars!
‘In the quarter-century separating the two executions, the boundaries of royal power would change in ways that Dudley could scarcely have imagined. Thomas More died denying the supreme jurisdiction of the crown, not over its own laws and its subjects, but over the laws of God and the church. What Henry VII would’ve made of it can only be guessed at. He might’ve been appalled by his sons singleminded and ultimately cataclysmic efforts to find himself a wife who could provide him with an heir and thereby secure another dynastic succession, and his equally destructive efforts to augment his income. He might also have seen him as a chip off the old block.’
Fascinating parallel!!
In his depiction of the men that surrounded Henry, particularly his insight into Edmund Dudley, Penn’s book gave me a new set of eyes to view the subsequent Tudor reigns with. 4 stars!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 1, 2020
Henry Tudor is a familiar name to students of English history, especially the military side of it. Henry VII is actually a less familiar figure, despite being the same person.
So, a book on Henry VII's reign seemed like a good way to fill in the 'hole' between the Wars of the Roses and the ever-popular Henry VIII. And Penn's Winter King does a very good job at that.
I would not call this a biography. Henry VII was fairly remote as a king, watching from afar, and generally letting others be the primary face of government. Similarly, you don't get an up-close and personal view of him here. You do see a lot of him, and his drives. The book starts with a fairly brief overview of the time leading to Bosworth, and gives an idea of how that shaped him. More importantly, it spends a fair amount of time and attention on just how unstable England was after Bosworth. No one yet knew that the trading of the throne from one faction to another had come to an end, and there were still plenty of people that the next rebellion could center around (even if some of them had to be made up for the purpose).
Much of the book therefore focuses on Henry VII's efforts at control. This turned more and more to economic means, which people fined and held to that debt as a promise of good behavior. The truly disturbing part of this is that it was all extra-judicial, operating outside all the traditional forms of accusations and trials of Common Law. It also shows a deep concern for money matters, and Henry VII was throwing around some vast sums on the continent effectively trying to bribe/finance his way to international deals, particularly ones involving pretenders to the English throne.
One thing I do wish the book had gone into more was the flow of money. It gets touched on a lot, and there's much that would be hard to say with certainty, but just enough is said to bring up the topic for further interest. One thread in the middle of things deals with the illegal alum trade, which Henry VII made a fair amount of money on, and was part of the shape of international diplomacy.
So, there's a few dropped threads in what is, after all, a layman's history. And it does a good job of covering a lot of aspects of the subject, going into the stable transition of power to his son, and perhaps leaving you wanting that little bit more. Definitely a great book to round out understanding of the end of the Fifteenth Century.
So, a book on Henry VII's reign seemed like a good way to fill in the 'hole' between the Wars of the Roses and the ever-popular Henry VIII. And Penn's Winter King does a very good job at that.
I would not call this a biography. Henry VII was fairly remote as a king, watching from afar, and generally letting others be the primary face of government. Similarly, you don't get an up-close and personal view of him here. You do see a lot of him, and his drives. The book starts with a fairly brief overview of the time leading to Bosworth, and gives an idea of how that shaped him. More importantly, it spends a fair amount of time and attention on just how unstable England was after Bosworth. No one yet knew that the trading of the throne from one faction to another had come to an end, and there were still plenty of people that the next rebellion could center around (even if some of them had to be made up for the purpose).
Much of the book therefore focuses on Henry VII's efforts at control. This turned more and more to economic means, which people fined and held to that debt as a promise of good behavior. The truly disturbing part of this is that it was all extra-judicial, operating outside all the traditional forms of accusations and trials of Common Law. It also shows a deep concern for money matters, and Henry VII was throwing around some vast sums on the continent effectively trying to bribe/finance his way to international deals, particularly ones involving pretenders to the English throne.
One thing I do wish the book had gone into more was the flow of money. It gets touched on a lot, and there's much that would be hard to say with certainty, but just enough is said to bring up the topic for further interest. One thread in the middle of things deals with the illegal alum trade, which Henry VII made a fair amount of money on, and was part of the shape of international diplomacy.
So, there's a few dropped threads in what is, after all, a layman's history. And it does a good job of covering a lot of aspects of the subject, going into the stable transition of power to his son, and perhaps leaving you wanting that little bit more. Definitely a great book to round out understanding of the end of the Fifteenth Century.
October 9, 2022
2.5 rounded up
This is well researched but incredibly boring and tedious.
This is well researched but incredibly boring and tedious.
September 9, 2012
While most of us are familiar with Henry VIII and Elizabeth I and we probably have a sense of the Wars of the Roses in England, but how many of us are familiar with Henry VII. He was the founder of the Tudor dynasty, and his marriage to Elizabeth Woodville brought together the too sides that were facing off during the Wars of the Roses (the Lancasters and the Yorks) basically uniting the two houses into a single family.
This book takes the opportunity to look at the final 10 years of Henry VII's reign, which nicely highlights the transition period between the Wars of the Roses and the newfound "stability" of the Tudor line once Henry VIII took over. Henry VII was not totally without competitive claimants to the throne, but he was able to beat back the claims through various means.
Henry VII himself was a fairly capable leader, though he suffered greatly from a sense of paranoia. To some degree, he often did not trust those around him. This caused him to build a large network of spies, which was not uncommon for the Tudor rulers who would follow him.
Readers get a great deal of detail about the way people lived during this time period. While the title would seem to indicate the book is a biography of him, it is definitely not solely about him. Other famous people from the period (such as Erasmus and Thomas More) are also covered with great detail.
It is easy to see how the English government/crown evolved and changed with the presentation in this book. The events are set during a time of transition. This includes information about the long-standing betrothal marriages of Katherine of Aragon to both Princes Arthur and Henry, the competition between the English Crown and the papacies of Alexander VI (the Borgia pope) and Justinian II, and the full establishment of the role of the crown in England.
This is definitely not a book for the casual reader. It is filled with fine details, such as household records, that would be familiar to those who are fans of Alison Weir's biographies.
I know that I really liked it!
This book takes the opportunity to look at the final 10 years of Henry VII's reign, which nicely highlights the transition period between the Wars of the Roses and the newfound "stability" of the Tudor line once Henry VIII took over. Henry VII was not totally without competitive claimants to the throne, but he was able to beat back the claims through various means.
Henry VII himself was a fairly capable leader, though he suffered greatly from a sense of paranoia. To some degree, he often did not trust those around him. This caused him to build a large network of spies, which was not uncommon for the Tudor rulers who would follow him.
Readers get a great deal of detail about the way people lived during this time period. While the title would seem to indicate the book is a biography of him, it is definitely not solely about him. Other famous people from the period (such as Erasmus and Thomas More) are also covered with great detail.
It is easy to see how the English government/crown evolved and changed with the presentation in this book. The events are set during a time of transition. This includes information about the long-standing betrothal marriages of Katherine of Aragon to both Princes Arthur and Henry, the competition between the English Crown and the papacies of Alexander VI (the Borgia pope) and Justinian II, and the full establishment of the role of the crown in England.
This is definitely not a book for the casual reader. It is filled with fine details, such as household records, that would be familiar to those who are fans of Alison Weir's biographies.
I know that I really liked it!
November 12, 2013
Winter King is an in-depth biography of Henry VII. I found this to be a valuable and well-written resource. It took me a while to get through it because it is so packed with information. It is a book that I will go back to many times.
This was not a regurgitation of rumors and myths about Henry VII and Richard III, but a thoughtful and unbiased look at who Henry really was.
I was at times confused by the author's tendency to organize by topic rather than chronology. He would state that something happened on a day and I wouldn't be sure what year he was referring to. This is a relatively minor complaint, but with as much as was covered in this book full dates would have been appreciated.
An amazing amount of time and research are evident in this book. It is very well presented and includes exhaustive notes and index.
This was not a regurgitation of rumors and myths about Henry VII and Richard III, but a thoughtful and unbiased look at who Henry really was.
I was at times confused by the author's tendency to organize by topic rather than chronology. He would state that something happened on a day and I wouldn't be sure what year he was referring to. This is a relatively minor complaint, but with as much as was covered in this book full dates would have been appreciated.
An amazing amount of time and research are evident in this book. It is very well presented and includes exhaustive notes and index.
Read
October 13, 2013I don't read a lot of NF because I usually find it to be tedious, but The Winter King certainly wasn't that. There were some sections I had to skim because I didn't feel they were relevant to the storyline, but mostly I was hooked into this very complex King. I'm beginning to wonder if all of the kings beginning with the conquest weren't a little off their rocker in some way. If you are new the era, this wouldn't the first book I would pick up because it does flip flop around a bit in the beginning-but if you want to understand the players that ultimately have a significant impact on Henry VIII, this is the book for you.
February 27, 2013
Reasonably interesting overview of the reign of Henry VII of England. There's a (relatively) brief explanation of Henry's rather tumultuous childhood and his rise to the throne, before Penn really gets into the nitty gritty details during the second half of Henry's reign, focusing on his intricate foreign policy, his increasing use of finance as a means of control over his subjects and, most entertaining to me, the various plots and conspiracies of Henry's enemies. There's a lot of cloak-and-dagger stuff here, something Henry and certain of his counselors seemed especially skilled at, and it was those parts that I particularly enjoyed.
July 25, 2015
It was really very well researched and painstakingly written. Unfortunately, since all I really wanted to know about was learning about Henry the 7th and his family as people - the things that happened to them, what kind of people they were, etc. - and that was only about 50% of the book, it was only about 50% interesting to me.
The other 50% was, like I said, very well researched material about both various conspiracies to remove Henry from the throne and very detailed information about the royal household's books and ledgers. You kind of have to have that sort of info in a book like this, but boy, was it ever boring.
The other 50% was, like I said, very well researched material about both various conspiracies to remove Henry from the throne and very detailed information about the royal household's books and ledgers. You kind of have to have that sort of info in a book like this, but boy, was it ever boring.
January 17, 2016
I picked this audiobook up because it was narrated by Simon Vance. I wasn't disappointed because, as usual, he did a great job with the narration. This book is a nonfiction look at King Henry the VII. The research was thorough and it was presented well and kept me engaged. I really enjoyed it. I would read more by this author. Sometimes when reading nonfiction of this type, I never know if it is going to be dry and dull or not. This definitely was not that. So 4 stars.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 500 reviews