Some people have argued that Henry VIII was clearly a psychopath, since psychopaths evince a “glib and superficial charm, grandiose (exaggeratedly high) estimation of self, need for stimulation, pathological lying, cunning and manipulativeness, lack of remorse or guilt, shallow affect (superficial emotional responsiveness), callousness and lack of empathy, parasitic lifestyle, poor behavioral controls, sexual promiscuity, early behavior problems, lack of realistic long-term goals, impulsivity, irresponsibility, failure to accept responsibility for own actions, many short-term marital relationships, [and] juvenile delinquency.” But there are two significant problems with this hypothesis.
Firstly, modern psychological theories are based largely on “WEIRD” people, i.e the subject of psychology experiments are usually Western, Educated, from Industrialized and relatively Rich societies that are usually in Democratic countries. The king was from a Western country and … that is about it. He was educated as possible for his era, but his education assured him that the planets affected his ‘humors’ and that the sun revolved around the earth. England was not industrialized, or comparatively rich, and beyond contestation it was not a democracy. Trying to measure Henry against a modern person may mean that psychologists are using a yardstick to try to measure cubic liters.
Secondly, Henry didn’t exhibit the majority of these symptoms until his middle-age – he seems to have turned into a monster in the 1530s and gotten steadily more heinous until his death. The only matching characteristic Henry VIII shared with psychopaths before his 40th birthday was a grandiose sense of self. Even then, how does one tell if a medieval king had an inappropriately grandiose sense of self?
Henry was raised in the conviction that royalty was appointed by God Himself. He was taught that a monarch was the epitome of the great chain of being and was therefore an inherently better person than all other men. From birth he had been told that the king and England were one and the same … that he was THE most important person in Britain. With the exception of believing himself to have become a god or messianic figure, it would be hard for Henry to have ‘grandiose’ ideas about his worth.
An argument for grandiosity is, of course, that Henry did declare himself the supreme head of the church of England, supplanting the pope as religious authority. However, the king made that decision based on a lot of encouragement from reformers and lawyers like Thomas Cromwell, who persuasively argued that he WAS the supreme head of the church in England and he should take up his mantle. Even then, Henry did not try to declare himself pope and insist that he had supplanted ‘the bishop of Rome’ in his ecclesiastical duties.
The budding Henrican church also did all it could to boost the king’s ego, in ways that appear blasphemous to the modern eye but which were bog standard for the time period. For example, Henry VIII was sometimes the face of the Almighty God in depictions of the Trinity.
When archeologists were restoring St Teilo’s Church for the National Museum of Wales, they discovered the remains of original early 16th century wall paintings. The originals were carefully preserved, and copies of the originals (as well as copies discovered in other churches) were repainted on the walls of the refurbished St Teilo’s using the same materials available in the 1530s. One of the original paintings was of the Holy Trinity, with God the Father seated on a throne behind the crucified God the Son, with the dove representing God the Spirit alighting on the cross.
If you look closely at God the Father, it is fairly clear that the Almighty was painted to resemble King Henry VIII. It is a bit stylized, but that appears to be Henry VIII’s broad forehead, long straight nose, and the king’s almost-delicate mouth and chin.
The theory that God was molded after Henry VIII by a flattering congregation in Wales is additionally lent supported by the depiction of king’s crest on the opposite wall, facing the Trinity.
Henry’s coat of arms normally obscured the Latin phrase Honi soit qui mal y pense (May he be shamed who thinks badly of it), which is part of the Order of the Garter, but here it is left unobstructed for the viewer. The phrase, theoretically originating with Edward III, scolds anyone who presumes to think ill of things happening around the monarch or under the royal blessing. Henry’s decision to spilt with Rome was perhaps being presented as God’s will, because it was God who put Henry on the throne. Henry IS the representative of the Lord in Britain, the crest and Trinity imply, and should apparently be thought of the de facto divine.
So how do you know when a man who is compared to God by those around him, has developed a grandiose opinion of himself? Is it any wonder that Henry – even if there were no illnesses or biological factors in play – would become despotic and tyrannical?
While the idea of divine appointment might explain the egotism, I’m not sure it explains Henry VIII’s remaining symptoms leading to his “psychopath” status. After all, I don’t recall any of his kids executing people as a public relations gesture, as with Dudley and Empson, just after his succession. IIRC, monarchs have seen themselves as appointed by G-d for years both before and after Henry VIII, but I don’t recall all of them being compared to psychopaths.