Was henry VII a good king?
How far do sources 1, 2 and 3 support the argument that Henry VII was a good king?
Henry VII had a very controversial reign. Some people argue that he was not in fact the rightful king; which resulted in a lot of tension among Britain and the houses of Lancaster and York. However despite Henrys weak hereditary claim to the throne, others argue that he was in fact a good king. Sources 1 and 3 both have firm views of Henry VII as a monarch, but source 2 presents both sides to this debate.
Henry VII is known for his wise and sensible decisions while in power. Polydore Vergill, a historian, claimed that in government he was ‘shrewd and prudent’ and he was thorough during his ‘wise deliberation’. All of these admirable characteristics are ones that are needed for a leader in order for them to maintain a stable country. This is supported by the speech made at Henry’s funeral in 1509, made by John Fisher. Fisher claims that Henry VII’s ‘political wisdom in governance was singular’. Henry is also documented to have been very kind natured, mentioned repeatedly in both sources 1 and 2. ‘He was gracious and kind and was as attentive to his visitors… his hospitality was splendidly generous.’ This statement is evidence of how Henry treated his citizens and his fairness as a leader. John Fisher also described him as ‘goodly and amiable’. Another trait of Henry VII’s that is mentioned in these sourced are his intelligence. ‘His mind was brave and absolute’ and ‘his speech gracious in diverse languages’ prove henry’s intellectuality, which strengthen his ability to lead and be a good king. Vergil, the writer of Source 2, wrote his statement in during Elizabeth I’s reign. As Elizabeth was Henry VII’s granddaughter, this source could be interpreted as biased as he may have been trying to appease his queen- as offending her may have resulted in serious consequences. However contrary to this, the purpose of source 2 was to inform people of British history, meaning Vergill would
Henry VII had a very controversial reign. Some people argue that he was not in fact the rightful king; which resulted in a lot of tension among Britain and the houses of Lancaster and York. However despite Henrys weak hereditary claim to the throne, others argue that he was in fact a good king. Sources 1 and 3 both have firm views of Henry VII as a monarch, but source 2 presents both sides to this debate.
Henry VII is known for his wise and sensible decisions while in power. Polydore Vergill, a historian, claimed that in government he was ‘shrewd and prudent’ and he was thorough during his ‘wise deliberation’. All of these admirable characteristics are ones that are needed for a leader in order for them to maintain a stable country. This is supported by the speech made at Henry’s funeral in 1509, made by John Fisher. Fisher claims that Henry VII’s ‘political wisdom in governance was singular’. Henry is also documented to have been very kind natured, mentioned repeatedly in both sources 1 and 2. ‘He was gracious and kind and was as attentive to his visitors… his hospitality was splendidly generous.’ This statement is evidence of how Henry treated his citizens and his fairness as a leader. John Fisher also described him as ‘goodly and amiable’. Another trait of Henry VII’s that is mentioned in these sourced are his intelligence. ‘His mind was brave and absolute’ and ‘his speech gracious in diverse languages’ prove henry’s intellectuality, which strengthen his ability to lead and be a good king. Vergil, the writer of Source 2, wrote his statement in during Elizabeth I’s reign. As Elizabeth was Henry VII’s granddaughter, this source could be interpreted as biased as he may have been trying to appease his queen- as offending her may have resulted in serious consequences. However contrary to this, the purpose of source 2 was to inform people of British history, meaning Vergill would