Mere mortals : $b Medico-historical essaysMacLaurin, C. (Charles)
History
Mere mortals : $b Medico-historical essays
MacLaurin, C. (Charles)
Biography; Pathology
Furthermore, so virulent is sectarian prejudice that almost every single
point about Henry’s life seems still to be in dispute. If anybody could
tell me a safe track through the maze of conflicting accounts of the
reign of Henry Tudor, between the modern feminists who still cling to the
idea that he was an unspeakable monster, the Roman Catholic Church which
still paints him as the very devil, Froude who hailed him as the great
Protestant hero of the Reformation, and the accounts of the ordinary man
who looks upon him as a bloodthirsty spot of grease—I believe Charles
Dickens used that elegant description—I should welcome it; but as I have
no criterion of truth but what medical experience has shown me to be true
of men, women and disease, I can only follow the account of him given
by Professor Pollard, who, treating him with studied moderation, was
prepared to consider him as the “great Erastrian,” the protagonist of
State against Church. No doubt that is substantially true. It is not for
a doctor to say.
Even the number of premature births endured by his wives is in dispute;
and all sorts of cock-and-bull stories are made up to show that his
children, if born alive, or his wives if they took ill were singularly
subject to the effects of cold and overlong christenings. Once would be
all very well; but when it happens more than once it becomes suspicious.
It is wonderful what people can invent when they wish to explain a thing
by religious and political conspiracies—of which they can really _know_
nothing in an age so utterly different from ours, in which the actors
have long gone beyond our intimate knowledge—when the obvious medical
truth is staring them in the face. Human beliefs have changed, but
syphilis is still the same.
I follow Pollard because he impresses me as a man of common sense. I
have not met him; but the sheer virulent abuse of the ordinary man is no
argument and is a better description of the critic’s own mind than of his
subject.
The facts which can only reasonably be explained by the idea that he was
suffering from constitutional syphilis are as follows—I put them in the
order in which they impress myself:
(_a_) The extraordinary number of premature births and dead
children from two of his wives, one of whom was young and
healthy. The early death of Catherine’s first-born son is
attributed to the strain of a long christening on a bitter
midwinter day.
(_b_) The poor health of at least three of his children, Mary
Tudor, Edward VI, and the illegitimate Duke of Richmond;
whether Elizabeth escaped the infection is at least doubtful
since Professor Chamberlain has carefully investigated the
details of her health.
(_c_) The terrible degeneration, mental, moral, and physical,
which set in in his early middle age.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account