{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02293144208037825, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0016548463356973995, 'mean_word_length': 5.009943181818182, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
British Nuclear Culture: Official and Unofficial Narratives in the Long 20th Century

history: Henry VIII’s will. Lipscomb, historian, author, broadcaster, and senior lecturer in early modern history at the New College of the Humanities, attacks this ambitious endeavor with confidence and diligent research. The King is Dead contains an exceptional visual aesthetic, incorporating a vast amount of paintings, portraits, and documents throughout the book, which illustrate what might be achieved by integrating heritage sites and artifacts with sound historical research. Disagreement regarding the intent and legitimacy of Henry VIII’s last will and testament has existed from the very moment of its conception. The prevailing school of thought has centered largely on the conclusions of Tudor historians such as G. R. Elton, David Starkey, and John Guy, who have maintained that Henry VIII’s will was the product of a conspiracy staged by an evangelical faction led by Edward Seymour, Earl of Hertford, and Sir William Paget. They argued that, because the king’s will was written a month before his death and left unsigned until his death, Hertford and Paget used that time to provide their own self-serving additions before stamping Henry’s signature. This theory follows the notion that Henry VIII was a king easily manipulated and fooled by his ministers and favorites. Lipscomb counters that Henry VIII controlled events until the moment of his death. Lipscomb argues that there was a limit to how much anyone could force Henry VIII to do anything. She uses the public taming of Katherine Parr, comparing Katherine’s grand speech of submission to that of Shakespeare’s Kate in Taming of the Shrew, to establish the premise that, even when sick, “Henry could not be manipulated to do what he did not wish to do” (64). Lipscomb provides an exceptionally convincing argument; however, more credit could potentially be given to Katherine’s ability to obtain access to the king to defend herself at that pivotal moment. This book not only contradicts previous historical notions regarding Henry VIII’s will but also establishes its lasting impact and importance. The king’s will provides a testament and a benchmark for the state of Henry’s faith at the end of his life, using rhetoric that suggests that, at the end of his life, Henry was still doctrinally Catholic. According to Lipscomb’s conclusion, “Henry didn’t end his life— just as he hadn’t lived it—as a Protestant, but rather in his own special, idiosyncratic religious position: reform coupled with fairly orthodox Catholic theology” (111). Further, his will epitomizes the very essence of Henry’s reign, considering that Henry’s life’s chief labor had been to guarantee the crown’s successful succession to a male heir. To an extent, Henry’s will also illustrates his immense hubris; he took it upon himself to attempt to circumvent the tradition of primogeniture maintained by previous English kings when he purposely placed the heirs of his younger sister above the elder in order to remove the Scottish line in favor of the English. A pivotal chapter of The King is Dead focuses on the relationship and machinations of Hertford and Paget. Lipscomb uses letters exchanged between these two courtiers to offer insight into a relationship fascinating enough to merit a study of its own. Crucially, Lipscomb argues that Hertford and Paget saw Henry rally from the brink of death enough times that they would not dare make any plans for the future until the very end, when it was clear that there would be no recovery. It was only at this point that the two men seized upon the opportunity already afforded to them by Henry’s own will and planned to consolidate their power for the coming reign. Lipscomb’s writing is refreshingly critical of Henry VIII, while still maintaining great respect for her subject, deftly giving the infamous king both credit and criticism. Although The King is Dead provides a great deal of background information, making it accessible for a general audience, it maintains a level of serious scholarship that establishes this book as an important contribution to the discourse that surrounds the last will and testament of King Henry VIII.