Was he a good king Veeky Forums?

Was he a good king Veeky Forums?

no

Hell no

Yes, fuck the Pope.

No fucked up alliances and got into debt when he started with none

As amusing as I find him telling the Pope "I'm gonna start my own religion with blackjack and hookers" he was most certainly not a good king. Henry Vii was far superior.

Every Veeky Forumstorian should hate his guts, because the motherfucker burned the greatest bulk of all medieval English documents.

Who knows what was lost. This goes far beyond Vult

He was a horrible king. The only good thing he did was fathering Elizabeth.

The entire Tudor line is a bunch of cunts.

Fitting that it which was sprung from a unduly bloodied field should wither away in a wasted fallow

Don't go full history buffs m8

It's true, though, the dissolution of the monasteries was incredibly destructive

For you

is he holding a turd?

He made an entire new religion so he could get more pussy

He was a stupid fat cunt tbf

The destruction of documents was a crime against history

That's a glove. Stop projecting you hothead.

Are you talking about Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam ?

Muhammad could have had multiple wives anyway
>yfw Muhammad's harem ranged from MILF to Loli

>The entire Tudor line is a bunch of cunts.
citation needed

The only good Tudor was Elizabeth I. Edward VI could've been alright had he not died prematurely.

Henry VII: Usurper, total cunt
Henry VIII: Total Cunt, no explanation necessary
Edward VI: Possibly not a cunt, but also may have been-totally irrelevant
Mary I: Bloody Mary, also literal Cunt
Elizabeth: Cunt

Defy me

Elizabeth is overrated though. She failed to update the tax code and so to fund the war against the Spanish she sold off tons of royal land gained during the reformation, undermining the Stuarts and other future monarchs (for better or worse). Also her irish policy was disastrous, though that is balanced by intervention in scotland on the side of the protestants.

you're too focused on personality my friend :^). And even on that score the Tudors had some of the strongest personalities, and as a consequence some of the best eye for talent and vigorous administrations among late medieval/renaissance monarchs. They also were all strong willed and while this could backfire obviously they got shit done and could impose their will.

His heresy is dying, Catholicism has the last laugh in the end.

>decathlocucks britain
yup

He pulled off the 16th century equivalent of Brexit, so yes.

He only snagged the Loli after his milf waifu fucking died.

A king that can't prevent usurpation is no king at all.

>Elizabeth
>the worst monarch in English history

Greatest English monarch,his construction of the royal navy was the foundation of Englands independence and empire

Are there any paintings of a laughing Henry ?

Apart from you don't technically get 'the royal navy' until Charles 2nd, Henry puts some infrastructure in place like the conqueror did

who?

Not only that, he came up with a Verse to justify espousing his son's wife.

It's not like they were operating from a good starting point in the previous lot.

Henry V: total cunt
Henry VI: grossly incompetent
Edward IV: Usurper, cunt
Edward V: irrelevant
Richard III: usurper, cunt, irrelevant