The Lost Crown of Henry VIII
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 янв 2024
- In 1649 the Commonwealth ordered the destruction of all the crown jewels, the centrepiece of this collection of regalia was the king's state crown, made of solid gold and studded with gems. The crown was an extraordinary example of late Gothic craftsmanship and had been made for either Henry VII or Henry VIII, and was worn by most of the Tudor and Stuart sovereigns. In this video I look at the historical evidence for this crown, its form and decoration, drawing on both visual and documentary sources.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @allanbarton 
Развлечения
Wars , civil or otherwise, are very useful when it comes to the destruction of art , architecture and historical records.
Sadly so. Sigh.
But also in the encouragement of 'the new'.
Or hidden, buried or lost!!
As does having an all powerful King such as King Henry VIII.
We will never know what was lost.
Fascinating bit of history. Plus the item found in a field is amazing in itself. Who knows what is out there waiting to be discovered
Still" A LOT".
It would be great in the future if somebody could discover King John’s lost baggage train, which included his treasury.
yes he should make a vid or 2 of this treasure and whether if found would reveal a fantastic treasure. I've always wondered where it may have been lost, ands whether an original MAGNA CARTA is amongst it still sealed ...and what was amongst the treasure.
More than likley recovered and broken down by locals at the time.
@@scrubsrc4084 I doubt it...still to be found.
It is thought to have been lost whilst navigating the coastal sand banks of the Wash, then inundated by an ill judged tide.
I always wondered if it was really lost or John just stole it and then told people it had been lost.
Always a pleasure to see a new Antiquary video.
Thank you very much.
I’d be so interested to know more about the craftsman and artisans who put these things together.
Having come across the crown of Princess Blanche in another YT video I am struck by how much it resembles the jewelled coronet worn by Richard II in the Wilton dyptych. Is it likely that the representations we see in illuminations are actually closer to reality than we may have appreciated? Richard must have shone in the candlelight.
Thank you for producing this content. It's very well done and highly interesting. This is what RUclips was created for!
Whose was it?'
'His who is gone.'
'Who shall have it?'
'He who will come.'
('What was the month?'
'The sixth from the first.')[4]
'Where was the sun?'
'Over the oak.'
'Where was the shadow?'
'Under the elm.'
'How was it stepped?'
'North by ten and by ten, east by five and by five, south by two and by two, west by one and by one, and so under.'
'What shall we give for it?'
'All that is ours.'
'Why should we give it?'
'For the sake of the trust.'
Thank you Sherlock 😃.
What a glorious, tho' sadly lost, piece of English history! Thank you, Allan!
A lot of historians have come around to dumping on Henry VIII in the last 10 years, but I personally feel like it's immensely short-sighted.
Firstly, people tend to overlook that Henry was essentially a product of the War of the Roses, his father's crowning only marking the final act of the immensely bloody and divisive conflict (and this really only being the result of Henry VII being [almost literally] the last man standing). Henry VIII was acutely aware not only a) of the Tudors' overall rather tenuous claim to the crown, but also b) that his father had been plagued by a series of minor rebellions shortly after his installation, and c) that there had never been a true English queen in her own right. Thus, there was a LOT riding on producing a male heir - not just the prolonging of Henry's line, but the stability of the country itself.
Second, a number of Henry's wives were... well, they were kind of looking for trouble. Anne Boleyn, for example, probably didn't have the affairs she was accused of, but she was also disruptive of the court, made a lot of enemies, and even after charges were brought, was offered a perfectly good 'out' to retire to a nunnery (a rather common medieval/renaissance method of disposing of a wife). It was only after she refused this that she was tried and executed. Catherine Howard DID sleep with someone, which was going to get you beheaded in pretty much any court. Henry actually treated Anne of Cleves quite well despite rejecting her, and took care of all of her expenses for the remainder of her life. So the accusations of Henry being this bloodthirsty monster are really exaggerated.
Finally, we have to remember that in the last decade of his life Henry was seriously wounded. In 1536, he was thrown from his horse during a joust. And although the historical record doesn't fully agree on the injuries sustained, they are supposed by modern historians to be substantial. Henry was in so much pain that he couldn't hunt, lost mobility, and gradually gained weight. And there were potentially even psychological side effects - depression, certainly, but maybe even neurological damage.
The point in all of this is that the recent condemnation of Henry feels a bit 'me too'-ish for me. No, he wasn't a saint, but he wasn't an ogre, either. In fact, he was pretty much in line with other enlightened monarchs of his era. And he rightly deserves his place as one of the most famed of all English monarchs (re: NOT INFAMOUS).
I have always felt that Henry VIII was not quite as bad as he's painted. For his time, much of what he did was pretty well normal, and as you say he had serious ill health in later life, in an era of pretty basic medical care and poor pain control. And we can hardly imagine the vital importance to him of having a male heir. WE know it worked out pretty well, but...
Must admit I didn't realise that Anne Boleyn had actually been offered the 'Nunnery' way out, only that she was hoping for some such possibility. but I 'm not an expert in the period. Were there still nunneries open and taking in new postulants at this point ?
Finally, I've often wondered what would have happened in Henry had died in the mid 1520s- would we remember him as a strong, handsome athletic man whose marriage to his ONLY wife had been remarkably tender and supportive for the time, especially considering she'd only produced one surviving female child. Might we still respect his learning, piety and support of the church ?
Eh, eh. Confined his first wife, made up a new religion with himself as the head of it, and executed dozens (including two wives) on trumped-up charges to suit his own ends. Pretty infamous.
@@olwens1368 The historiography regarding Henry VIII has changed in the last few decades. Prior to that, he spent about 200 years (since the late 18th Century) being revered for his artistically progressive court, and religious reforms. More recent assessment has been a lot more harsh, condemning his as something of a womanizer and lout. All I was saying with my comment was: there were legitimate reasons that Henry acted in the way he did, and his desperation for a male heir was not only normal for the time, but of particular importance due to England's recent background of civil war.
I fully agree and note that at least some of the negative mob do consider psychological post-joust brain injury. But the overall "monster" meme concerning Henry contains several disparate groupings. Traditionalist Roman Catholics still going on about the monastic orders and Thomas More, as if More himself and various Popes didn't have blood soaked hands. Heretic hunting was a blood sport. The following century's massacre by the French monarchy of Protestants there has been successfully erased from history by the trad R.C. Two standards?
Then there is the modernist historian who uses Henry as an avatar for all they despise about royalty, aristocracy, empire, class and any period of history before the Russian revolution. There's also a lazy "just pile on" writing style for some historians who are probably looking for a Hollywood deal as historian-adviser on some cable or streaming thing.
I'm well aware of his childhood traumas, but he clearly became a narcissistic tyrant. And the trauma he inflicted on his wives, his daughter, the future queen (by killing her own mother) [not even getting into Catherine/Mary], and the nation vis-à-vis the Dissolution of the Monasteries was profound and far reaching. He really was 'that bad'. We need to stop putting rulers, royal or otherwise, on pedestals.
"The old fleurs-de-lis, especially the ones found in our first kings' sceptres, have a lot less in common with ordinary lilies than the flowers called flambas [in Occitan], or irises, from which the name of our own fleur-de-lis may derive. What gives some colour of truth to this hypothesis that we already put forth, is the fact that the French or Franks, before entering Gaul itself, lived for a long time around the river named Lys in the Flanders. Nowadays, this river is still bordered with an exceptional number of irises -as many plants grow for centuries in the same places-: these irises have yellow flowers, which is not a typical feature of lilies but fleurs-de-lis. It was thus understandable that our kings, having to choose a symbolic image for what later became a coat of arms, set their minds on the iris, a flower that was common around their homes, and is also as beautiful as it was remarkable."
It would be very interesting to know where all those jewels ended up.
i haven't got them
Whatever is extant, likely the owners have no idea what they have lol.
Totally fascinating .. .. Thank you !!
Wonderful video. I have always wondered about all the crowns and regalia used through history and if any of it still survives today. Thank you.
That one manuscript illustration of the King wearing the crown, with orb and scepter is magnificent! What gorgeous use of pen in the border surrounding the drawing of the King. Can you tell us where the original is found? (Seen at 9:55) Many thanks!
Maybe Henry VIII changed the enamels to remove the classical Catholic iconography. Especially since he was now the heard of the church and his authority to rule no longer came from the Catholic Church. As you said the enamels might indicate the “divine right of kings” type motif. Now being Protestant and head of the church he replaced those with English saintly kings to make it more Protestant. He probably chose to replace them with images of English Saintly Kings because the relatively new Anglican Church did not yet have its own established iconographical images to choose from. The main point in the change being to remove the Catholic iconography.
The Virgin and Child image is associated more with traditional Catholic iconography than with that of any "Reformed" church. I would think Henry would have removed that particular image first if he was intending to make a clean break with the past.
I personally think that the reason the figures of Christ were removed was because Henry wanted to include those of the sainted (or in the case of Henry VI, expected to be sainted...and a standing reminder of the Yorkists who allegedly martyred him) English kings, and there was only room for four figures. Henry VIII would have convinced himself that the removal of the figures of Our Savior and Saint George would be forgiven by the Almighty in the interest of His servant maintaining a perfect Church and State for His glory: and Christ is still represented in the Virgin and Child figure.
But Henry continued to regard himself as "Catholic" even after the break with Rome. He maintained most Catholic practices. He never sanctioned the sort of iconoclasm that would later become a hallmark of full-blown English Protestantism (with the notable exception of the shrine of St. Thomas Backet, and that not out of moral conviction against idolatry, but because Becket had been an archbishop who defied his king).
Thank you!!! Always a treat, your whole channel is a dear treasure thank you!!
Glad you're enjoying my videos!
Superb, as always! Thank you Dr. Barton!
Glad you enjoyed it!
I believe that the Historic Royal Palaces research and so the crown they had constructed points to 5 each alternating crosses and fleur de lis.
You can see that the side arches spring from between pairings rather than directly behind crosses, which you'd expect from this pattern
The inventories are not wholly clear, some suggest five, some four.
I love your videos on Royal Regalia and Jewels ❤👑
Naveed, you have earned my Respect. Outstanding work. Been watching your progress since the channels have started. I hope you presented with many opportunities for all your hard work. I wish you Peace.
Truly fascinating. Thank you Allan.
Another brilliant episode sir! Thank you 😊
As usual, an excellent episode. Thank you.
Always informative and interesting. Thank you.
Very, very enjoyable Allan. You are a treasure to us all with your videos. Thank you. ❤❤
Thanks Chris.
The crown looked awe inspiring, but chunky. Seven pounds is a lot, maybe that is why they only wore it on certain occasions. I have always been partial to the Sapphires ( my birthstone) that are in the crowns and the set that the late Queen had was breathtaking. I guess dear old Oliver cared more for the monetary value than historical value, between that and the lot that was lost in the marshes, it is sad that they are not around anymore. Great video as always, you have my dream profession! God bless, from Texas.
So much research! Thank you Allan. Well done!
Another superlative video! Just fantastic work, and much appreciated!
Thanks very much, glad you enjoyed it!
I've never known 19 minutes go by so quicky. Always a pleasure to spend time with you.
Bless you Chris, I am pleased you enjoyed it. It was a really enjoyable video to produce this one.
Another fascinating video. Thanks!
Please bring more about the order given by the monarch . I am very keen to know about all the orders as you did for order of garter❤
I’ve seen the replica crown at Hampton Court and it’s fabulous! Amazing craftsmanship.
Me too, it is a beautiful thing.
Another jewel of a story. Thank you!
Another great video! Question: and I'm sure you've answered this before, but what is the opening and closing music you use?
I remember the interment service for Richard III - a replica crown was placed on his coffin.
A lovely thing.
GREAT video, as usual, Allan!! 👏❤💞👍👑
Thanks Nadia.
Thank you for an other very interesting article.
Cromwell was the detestable one,grrrrr...
Too many of him around now ... hell-beings.
Thank you so much for another interesting and well-researched video.
Love your magazine!❤🎉
Thanks Zack
Great crown story! I suspect that Henry replaced the image of Christ in the crown with English Kings to assert the greater importance of the English Kings. Henry was head of a new religion and narcissistic, and it makes sense in that context. But just a guess.
Henry wasn’t head of a new religion nor a new church… he merely did what many English Kings sort to achieve… a restoration of the English church’s independence from Rome… something that was the norm in western Christendom until Rome began to assert its self over the rest of Christendom.
The King’s of England always had a right to choose the bishops of their Kingdom and from very early on it was understood that they were head of their nations church with the pope as nominal authority until complete reversal under King John when the King’s of England became vassals of the papacy until Henry’s brake with Rome.
As every, a very interesting and entertaining episode .
Brilliant video as always Allan, just one recommendation - could I suggest you look into some sound dampening/proofing around where you record your audio? It slightly sounds like it has a bit of an echo/empty room sound and diminishes the amazing content you produce 🙁
Thank you, this is my first outing with a brand new microphone, so I’m getting used to it. It’s rather more sensitive than the last one and I’m having to tweak my very limited recording space (my family living room) to get the best out of it. Bear with me!
@@allanbarton glad you've upgraded your microphone, I look forward to many more amazing videos, thanks for all you do Allan 👍
Tom
Your voice is definitely clearer, though!! Tweaks will help, I'm sure. Some foldable felt panels nearby? ❤
I think that is the answer, I am currently recording with a pile of cushions beside me@@trussell9899
thank you....information I was unaware of
Did they ever bury kings or queensqitha crown?
They did, but they were specially made funerary crowns, usually made of gilt base metal.
Amazing video
This was fascinating!
Glad you enjoyed it!
It's sad to think how much medieval art has been lost, both in Great Britain as well as on the continent, during these periodic outbreaks of revolution, civil war, and religious reforms. Think of the great works of French history lost during the French Revolution in the late 18th century, the confiscation, destruction and sale of valuables during Henry VIII's Dissolution of the Monasteries and the English Reformation (think of the loss of the famous tomb of St. Thomas a Beckett at Canterbury), the confiscation and destruction of the English crown jewels during the English civil War, after the execution of Charles I. There's something within these movements where those involved want to destroy any works that are memorials to the prior regimes and a reminder of past history. It's not something that only happens in the past. Think of how much art and historical works and monuments have been destroyed by religious and revolutionary movements across the Middle East and Afghanistan in the last 50 years alone, or great works of historical importance during the Cultural Revolutions in China under Mao.
Absolutely gorgeous. Blessings from Memphis Tennessee USA 🐈🐾
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed this!
Excellent video! Can you do one on the lost French royal jewels?
I certainly can - I've done quite a bit of the work towards that already.
Thanks, Allan!
Some of the images show the cross pieces centered on the fleur de lys in the earlier crown and some on the crosses.
Thank you Dr Barton! ❤
My pleasure! Glad you liked it.
Oh, well done. Thank you!
Glad you liked it!
Thanks for this.
My pleasure!
I know I ask for too much so forgive me, but if you could make a video about the crowns or other head pieces of other European monarchies there's so little about them with the exception being Charlemagne's and the iron crown of Lombardy
I’ve seen that picture of Charles I so many times and never really thought about the crown. 😬
If I read the pearls as dots then what does it say? Per jewel ?
What is the gold orb mean? 1:55
The reconstructed crown is awesome but it looks like it’s made of hard candy!
It does, and tin or plastic. I thought the stones were fakes. I don't expect it to be like the Tudor crown of solid gold weighing 7lbs, but it does look quite cheap, but it is lovely to have a replica so that we can see what it would have generally looked like. I'm sure they didn't have a large budget to create it.
If you tilt it it appears written what does it say?
I live in hope that, one day, the sands of The Wash in Norfolk/Lincolnshire give up their lost treasures. The English mediaeval regalia, allegedly lost by King John in the early 13thC.
I would think the reason that the icons were switched around by Henry the Eighth was perhaps that he may have received those particular artifacts when the monasteries were dissolved.
It may be that they were more artistically rendered and perhaps of better material than the earlier carved images
I wrote a long comment which somehow didn't appear, I hope it wasn't because I insulted Henry....love that painting of him with the barber surgeons, manspreading as ususl! Thank you sir for yet another beautifully presented video.
I don’t know, I don’t delete comments and certainly not yours Rhiannon which I always enjoy. He’s showing off his manly legs!!! 😂😂😂
The stylized lily also symbolizes her Assumption to heaven. In 451 A.D. it was noted by St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon that the apostle, St. Thomas, was said to have found beautiful roses and lilies where her body once lay.
I enjoy your videos very much and hope you don’t find it too annoying when I tell you that in Fleur de Lys, the S at the end is pronounced too😉
The replica crown of 2012 was completely round which is why it wobbled on the head of the picture model, we don't of course have a round head, more of an oval shape. Queen Elizabeth said in a documentary the Imperial State Crown sat easily on her head because she had a similar shaped head to her father, George VI, I think I read the crown fitted easily or was altered slightly to fit King Charles.
Hi Allan! One would need a bullneck to wear that crown for any length of time. An impressive creation indeed.
You certainly would Terry, I'm not surprised they wore it infrequently.
A fascinating story.
It reminds me of the loss of of the jewels of the Russian monarchy after the revolution of 1915. The new Bolshevik government needed cash, and while some ceremonial items were kept, it is estimated that 3/4 of the jewels were sold to private buyers in the West. The catalogue for the sale of 1922 provides a detailed inventory with photos, which gives some idea of the extent of the Imperial jewel treasury. Today, (with some notable exceptions) the whereabouts of the sold jewels is unknown. There is a telling photo of the jewellery appraisers from Faberge (the Bolshevik government employed 6) sitting around a table which is just a jumbled pile of tiaras and the like. The jewellery appears to have been unceremoniously dumped en masse out of a wooden packing box. The appraisers are valuing each item for the 1922 sell-off, and removing stones from their settings as instructed by those supervising -- all under the continuous watch of armed guards, I believe. It's a very sobering image.
I wonder if the replacement of Mary and Jesus from the crown were a form of piety in from the 10 Commandments where followers God are not to possess graven images. These could have been replaced by the very pious kings of times past. Appreciate your thoughts on that. Great videos. Love the channel.
A. Conan Doyle in his Sherlock Holmes story "The Musgrave Ritual" had the crown (in pieces) being saved, and kept (and forgotten about) by an old royalist family. By solving the mystery of the ritual Holmes finds and identifies it!
It's at Hampton Court Palace
The British Museum: 🥷👑🥷
Moriarty: 👑🏃🏻♂️💨
The crosses represented theCatholic Church and Henry VIII removed the church and maybe changed the crown because of that? You think????
Can the public see the replica at Hampton Court?
Yes, it’s on the public route.
Jerry Lawler got it😂😂😂😂😂
Would monarchs ever be buried with any jewels?
If the depictions of King Henry's crown are accurate, then a serious error was made by those re-creating it. It seems to me from the paintings that the arches of the original sprang from behind the fleurs-de-lis and not the crosses as is the case with the replica, as if it was assumed that the form followed that of Saint Edward's Crown and the post-Restoration Imperial State Crowns, where the arches spring from above the crosses. The cross at the top of King Henry's crown does seem to conform with the later crowns in that it faces a cross and not of one of the arches/fleurs-de-lis.
I for some reason see some resemblance in Henry’s paintings but it doesn’t look like the exact crown. Why is that
The Russians were very lucky to have had Lenin take charge of the Kremlin before the royal jewels of the Imperial family faced the same fate as the English and French jewelry.
The modern reconstruction has the arches aligned with the crosses, whereas the paintings show the arches aligned with the fleurs de lis. I can't imagine that was a mere oversight, so I'm curious what was behind that decision. Also, I have to say, historically accurate or not, the reconstruction looks like a cheap, plastic novelty from Party City.
Too true!
Or an AI render lol. I've made quite a few of them.
The stone are of such poor quality. Cloudy. It might have been better to have Maison Gripoix make the stones out of their 'poured glass' that they use for the Chanel jewelry which often mimics Renaissance and Byzantine jewels. They are clear and aren't perfect and IMO would look better than cheap stones. That and burnish the gold or something so it isn't so bright and new looking.
The British still very upset from the crown jewels being melted down in 1649 by the Commonwealth. A Unite gold coin as example as to what happened to all that gold.
👑
Do you think that, had the crown and regalia been saved, this beautiful piece of art would still be used today?
No, it would have been retired or replaced. We’ve had four crowns since that replaced this one. The 1660 state crown doesn’t survive at all. The 1727 and 1837 survive as empty frames.
@@allanbarton thanks!
No, he would wear it during court functions to show off.
If I had to guess why he put the three kings on his crown, it was the Collectanea satis copiosa (1530-1531), a document that justified Henry VIII's personal and England's provincial independence from Rome. The Collectanea supplied the ideology behind the Royal Supremacy. As evidence that Kings of England historically had no superior on Earth. The assertion of England's imperial status may have explain why he put the kings on the crown.
0:05 that is Ricky Guvaises dad.
i thought the whole point of the heavy weight, was the Burden of the King
..........and, no kings in rome
Such a shame it was destroyed 💔
To heck with the Tudors, what happened to Henry II crown?
It was taken the kids ago and you’ll never ever see it again.
I'm sure the vatacun has it
👍✌
What Crown was Louis XIV crowned with or what was his state crown?
He was crowned with a medieval crown called the Crown of Charlemagne.
@@allanbarton Have you got a video on it? Also what were the closed crowns in his portraits? By the way loving the content
@@edwin_music5213 I haven't, but it is on my list of videos to do. Thank you, really pleased to here you enjoy my content.
One possible inconsistency -- in the paintings (about 17min) the arches appear to spring from behind the fleurs-de-lis (the enamelled virgin and child at the front, on the top lobe of that fleu-de-lis). In the other paintings (about 16min), and on the modern replica, the arches appear to spring from behind crosses. Which is it?
10:17 the Henry VIII we've all come to know & love (?????)
What shockers the puritans were!!
Your thumbnail is wrong, the crown has no cap of maintenance as shown on the left.
It's not my thumbnail but Historic Royal Palaces that are wrong in that case, for they made the replica crown that is shown on my thumbail. The paintings all imply the use of cap of maintenance.
There is a video on yt showing the construction of a replica with the man in the thumbnail as Henry VIII and specifically says no cap. As you said not your picture.
I just want to point out the British crown is no longer made out of Gold! They accepted that the people subjugated them to figurehead, hence the silver crown!
There is more than one crown, and that explanation is absolute nonsense.
his shiny hat could probably fund the building of entire housing estates for the poor and homeless UK citizens.
Except that it was made into coin in 1649 to fund the aspirations of Puritan republican ideologues. Even the Soviets saw the value in art!
Not really.