User reviews

Divorced. Beheaded. Died. Divorced. Beheaded. Survived.

Lucy Worsley goes where many historians have gone before -- but in a unique way, by stepping back in time to illustrate scenes from Tudor life. She spends a decent chunk of the three episodes with Katharine of Aragon, revealing her as the "warrior queen" devoted to her husband's spiritual welfare, dispelling the myth of her as an angry, bitter old woman and instead showing the fire and zeal of a true fighter, who gave Henry 'what for' over seven years.

Her Anne Boleyn is a fair portrait of an intelligent, ambitious woman in over her head, whose flirtations give rise to scandal and set her up for removal.

She defends Jane Seymour as no doormat, but instead an intelligent, clever woman intending to play one in order to survive.

Anne of Cleves is depicted as the one woman who outsmarted all the others, who held out for better things, and died better off by far than any of the others.

Katherine Howard arguably receives the greatest re-imagining, with Worsley raising questions about her affair with Culpepper being the result of blackmail over her previous sexual activities -- and she boldly attacks the presuppositions about Katherine as a "slut" by staring into the camera and asserting that nowadays, we'd call her an abused child.

Katherine Parr is portrayed as the most "intellectually curious" of Henry's wives, with much emphasis placed on her evangelism, her writing of the first book in England published by a woman, and her cleverness in managing to escape an arrest warrant.

It's arguably brief. It glosses over much in each woman's life. You'd need longer than three episodes to explore the first two queens' humanitarian work, or Katherine Howard's compassion to those in need (including poor imprisoned Margaret Pole), but for a brief introductory biography that escapes common clichés and biases, and treats each wife fairly with no hints of favoritism, it's an excellent three hours.

I generally like Lucy Worsley's stuff, and certainly the theatrical device of having standing by as an ignored servant during the imagined conversations works well. The idea of life from Henry's wives point of view is excellent, but the program isn't really that. Rather it concentrates on some highly contentious views of the history, views that are barely supportable. OK as an academic thesis, not good for a documentary.

Anne Boleyn is presented as losing her grip on Henry and then being stitched up and executed. But it is known that Henry, only two weeks before Anne was arrested, engineered an encounter with the French Ambassador where he was forced to acknowledge her. Anne had long craved this acknowledgment - France and Spain made no secret of their view that she was little more than a whore. If Henry had become dis-affected, why would he have expended diplomatic capital on her behalf in this way. Definitely not his style. She wasn't losing her grip on him.

It is hard to escape the conclusion that something very serious came to light between that meeting and her arrest. Would the 'treasonous' light hearted conversation with Norris that touched on Henry's death (hence treasonous) have been enough? It seems unlikely. Given the suddenness and ferocity of Henry's reaction you have to think he felt deeply insulted. Proof of adultery is the more likely explanation, and her brother is a very good candidate.

Again the love letter from Catherine Howard to Thomas Culpepper is brushed off; the explanation from Worsley is just not credible. Yes, Howard was seduced by Culpepper and had an affair with him; the letter makes it crystal clear she was a willing participant. If as Worsley says "she was only writing what Culpepper wanted to hear", she would not have put her heart into it as she did, she would have written the words, but without passion. Yes, she was abused as a child, yes she was seduced, but she knew the rules. If you marry the king, falling in love and having an affair carried the death sentence.

There were other things I noticed, but enough is enough. It is all a bit "Henry's wives according to the women's pages of the Guardian"

A fabulous way of looking at the tragedies of 6 of our most famous queens and with that little Lucy Worsley magic turns it into more than just a short ditty " divorced, beheaded, died - divorced, beheaded, survived the '

I really hope that schools use these dramatic documentaries to teach, Lucy as a way of captivating you. Even if you don't have a niche for history.

I love Lucy

Lucy Worsley (though closely followed by Tracy Borman and Suzannah Lipscomb) is my favorite historian and her accounts of the six wives of Henry VIII is my favorite Tudor documentary. Her enthusiasm and clear passion reminds me of my favorite history professors from college and I'm absolutely the kind of history nerd who re-watches documentaries for fun. Having a woman presenter is extra important when learning about women who lived in a time dominated and chronicled by biased, misogynistic men.

Well, I've just finished the last episode. An excellent series about the wives of Henry VIII, attempting to show the women as dynamic and 'real'. The series mixed dramatisation with fact, and although it would have been nice to clarify which was which, the whole concept worked well.. During the first two episodes Worsely seamlessly morphed from her usual self to a Tudor servant/lady in waiting in shot and this provided an interesting perspective. In the third episode she merely changed in the different sections and this flowed less well. There was very little new material but it was presented by Worsley in an appealing and vivacious way.

I thought nothing could beat the sight of Worsley sat in a campervan next to the portrait of Catherine of Aragon. The image of her eating chips on a ferry next to the portrait of Anne of Cleves proved me wrong.

The third episode starred Richard Ridings as the aging king and he was thoroughly convincing. Even though he is Daddy Pig from Peppa and this was more than a little distracting 🙂

Ok so the bad bits. There was a lot of preview and recap at the start and end of each episode. I would also question her conclusion that Elizabeth I secured the Tudor dynasty as she faced several plots to remove her, and she failed to provide an heir so the throne went to the Stuarts after her death.

Overall this series was FAB-U-LOUS. Well done to the BBC and Lucy Worsley.