after finishing the wolf hall trilogy, i too embarked on a glut of everything i could find on cromwell. he is certainly a fascinating character and this is only added to by the fact that he IS an enigma. my train of thought leads me to think that he was a man who realised that 'we need to pick our battles', but that ultimately he was a good man. as to his 'out box', i think that when he was 'taken', those who took him also took his papers, and destroyed them. great broadcast, highly enjoyable. thankyou.
From a Diarmaid MacCulloch lecture I was introduced to Hilary Mantel and from Mantel back to MacCulloch. I am inspired in many ways but how fortunate are we all to be able to be enthralled, in real time, by parallel and converging works of two greats, Mantel and MacCulloch, on one historical figure in the era of Henry VIII. Have they dispensed the fissures between historians and writers of historical fiction? Perhaps the powers that be in both circles say no, but for me I feel there's been an elevation in discourse and understanding.
I've been devouring the Mantel novels for the last few years. When listening to Mantel interviews, I found MacCulloch. I'm now eagerly awaiting his book on Cromwell to arrive via post. Indeed, historians & historical fiction writing are two very different approaches --the latter, of course, can take those "what if?" grey areas around a fact & turn them into something quite marvelous, while historians need to be more faithful to the archives and give us new insights. Having said that, it seems to me that Mantel knows her archives, and in the few interviews I've heard with MacCulloch are very engaging. I study 19thc. literature, but it was a hard choice between that and the 16th c. ... the history is so fascinating! It does seem like we're living in a time of compelling interpretations.
@@richardpentelow655 Of course Mantel is fiction. I do not believe my post stated otherwise; I did write that "historians & historical fiction writing are two very different approaches." I was observing that I enjoyed Mantel's novels, and am looking forward to reading about Cromwell by a historian.
@@richardpentelow655 Mantel's impact is a rising tide lifting all boats--her triology, the adaptations for stage and film, have ignited an explosion of research, writing and general public interest on Thomas Cromwell, Tudor England, Thomas More, the reformation, the Holy Roman Empire as well as the enigma that is King Henry VIII, his wives and pursuit of his "great matter." MacCulloch acknowledges Mantel's work in his new Cromwell biography; he supports her perspective on how Cromwell's dedication to Woolsey created a complicated and ironical situation re Anne Boleyn's demise. So, of course, history writers have different protocols but, as Mantel has described it, without solid immersion in the history, historical fiction writers would not be compelling.
Cromwell, much maligned, but infinitely influential on his times. Thank you both for your hard research, but for your erudite and interesting talk as well. Will look up your books and look forward to enjoying them.
There are many reasons why a portrait painting could end up altered, time and alterations in appearance that the artist may not have been satisfied with! And Diarmaid MacCulloch wasn't presenting like with like, one print v one painting is not a comparison per se, you might ask also, why Cromwell kept his portrait to himself?
Sorry but on a viewers perspective (obviously) the imaging and narrator is far too small. His voice also sounds distant and muffled. You real can’t have tiny imaging. Great are of screen just black. Please sort these technical issues out It just ruins the whole experience Just stupid and frustrating
everybody has their own agenda.. for example where does the story of thomas more changing the painting come from? and i don't like his and mantels general take on More (i am catholic LoL 🙂) stripping of the alters and voices of Morebath are interesting reads..
You say that like “Polemicist” is an inherently negative descriptor. And the book ‘the stripping of the altars’ was controversial - Eammon Duffy himself has said that - it still creates debate even today. That’s no bad thing, again, Duffy himself has said that’s rather the point
I was totally enjoying until current politics came up re American president. Totally disappointed. I watch history RU-vid to get away from all of that negativity.
It was a quick comment, probably mentioned because of the fact that a lot of articles have made the comparison between Henry VIII and trump or Johnson. Besides, MacCulloch seemed to me to be suggesting it was an erroneous comparison to make
