Obstacles to King Henry’s Divorce, 1529–31 (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
Obstacles to King Henry's Divorce, 1529–31
Why progress was so slow during these years
Henry's efforts to secure an annulment of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon proceeded exceptionally slowly between 1529 and 1531. The situation facing the King was complex, and he viewed his need for a divorce as urgent. Wolsey had attempted to resolve the matter but failed, leading to his fall from power. Some historians have characterised this period as 'years without a policy', though this judgement may be harsh. Wolsey's failure stemmed not from incompetence but from the absence of any straightforward solution to Henry's problem.
The appointment of Thomas More as Lord Chancellor in 1529, replacing Wolsey with a layman rather than a cleric, marked an unusual break from tradition. This departure from the custom of appointing churchmen to the highest ministerial position would prove significant in shaping the approach to Henry's divorce.
More proved far less willing than Wolsey to adopt a pragmatic approach and pursue whatever course Henry demanded, regardless of Church teaching or papal authority. Both More and other ministers struggled to achieve the outcome Henry desired, creating mounting frustration and obstacles.
Sir Thomas More's appointment and his principles
Thomas More brought impressive credentials to the chancellorship. An accomplished scholar, he had written extensively on political and social matters, most famously in Utopia (1516). This work presented a fictional island where inhabitants lived in a state of innocence, allowing More to construct a sharp satirical critique of contemporary Christian society. He particularly targeted the land-owning elite, accusing them of greedily exploiting tenant farmers and enclosing common land. His writings gained considerable influence during the Renaissance period.
More's intellectual output attracted Henry's attention and approval. He had produced a historical account of Richard III's career, which reinforced the myth of Richard as a murderous monster. At court, More showed sympathy for Catherine of Aragon's position and expressed concern about Henry's treatment of her. He supported those willing to promote Church reforms as a method of obtaining the divorce, demonstrating he believed reform could be achieved through gradual persuasion rather than drastic action.
However, More drew a firm line at heresy. He wrote aggressively against Lutheran reformers and their beliefs, playing an active role in the harsh persecution of reformers in 1528 and again in 1530–31 during his chancellorship. He conducted heresy trials against suspected Lutherans, though some individuals under suspicion of Anabaptist views, such as Anne Boleyn, received protection from execution.
The Critical Difference Between Wolsey and More
The most substantial difference between Wolsey and More centred on flexibility and principle. Wolsey had shown willingness to seize opportunities and act with considerable flexibility in service of his royal master. More, by contrast, operated as a man of rigid principles, particularly concerning religious matters. When he assumed the role of chief minister, the question of the King's divorce remained unresolved, creating genuine difficulties in his relationship with Henry. Since the divorce remained the central issue when More became Chancellor in 1529, this inflexibility would prove problematic.
As Chancellor, More succeeded in attacking Lutheran influences within the Church. However, his work faced frustration from Anne Boleyn's presence at court and from the complicated nature of the royal divorce, which Henry regarded as the most pressing issue in 1530.
Key figure: Anne Boleyn
Anne came from the junior branch of the Howard Earls of Norfolk, an intelligent and assertive woman with ambitions. Historical assessments of her character vary widely. Those who disapproved of the divorce portrayed her as a 'goggle-eyed harlot'. Historians have accused her of employing 'engineering ways' that brought about her downfall, arguing that after Henry won her sexually he grew increasingly disillusioned with her sexuality as well as her failure to produce a male heir. Her destruction in 1536 resulted from Thomas Cromwell's actions, who tortured her musician Mark Smeaton into confessing adulteries. Her brother George faced charges of incest, which allowed her conviction for treason and execution by beheading.
Contrasting Historical Interpretations
E.W. Ives, her recent biographer, has presented a contrasting portrait of an intelligent woman with genuine interest in religious reform. Ives argues she was betrayed by her husband and family, then destroyed by the demands of court politics and the succession. She bore no guilt for adultery.
Arguments about whether she deserved her fate depend heavily on the preferences and biases of different writers. Students approaching this topic should examine multiple interpretations, reading both Ives and Henry's biographer J.J. Scarisbrick, then form their own judgement.
Attempts to advance the divorce question
Between 1529 and early 1532, Henry applied numerous measures designed to force the clergy into supporting his case for divorce. He found assistance from the common ground he shared with religious reformers seeking radical religious changes. These reformers viewed the Church as the main obstacle to their ambitions. Lollards, who supported Lutheran ideas, came together with general anti-clerical sentiment encouraged by humanist writings in support of Church reform. For reformers, the problems facing the Church could only be resolved by improving religious leadership.
One method of achieving this involved strengthening royal power to protect and develop the Church in England. During the 1520s Henry had opposed this thinking and even written a book, In Defence of the Seven Sacraments, which implied support for the Pope's authority in Rome. The Church had awarded him the title 'Fidei Defensor' (Defender of the Faith) by the Pope for this service.
However, as Henry's dispute with the Pope worsened, reformers' ideas began to appear more attractive. In 1528 William Tyndale published The Obedience of the Christian Man, arguing that kings possessed authority from God which gave them responsibility for subjects' souls as well as bodies. Royal authority stood supreme above any power within or beyond kingdom boundaries. The book faced a ban in England, but Anne Boleyn obtained a copy sent from France and brought it to Henry's attention. Courtiers such as Thomas Cromwell had travelled extensively in Europe, where they would have encountered similar ideas. When Henry found himself obstructed by Roman and papal authority, he was not short of suggestions and ideas about how he might remove these obstacles permanently.
During Henry's campaign between 1529 and 1534, two clear objectives emerged. Initially, to obtain the divorce he so desperately desired, he applied pressure on the English clergy to avoid opposing him. He also applied pressure on Pope Clement VII. During these years, Henry moved from putting pressure on the Pope to challenging papal control over the English Church.
The historiographical debate about timing
Historians remain unclear about when the idea of taking control over the Church shifted from a vague threat in Henry's actions to official policy. According to the historian Conrad Russell, the concept of divorcing Catherine without the Pope's permission existed in Henry's mind as early as 1527. However, he needed to delay until he could appoint higher clergy men who would likely support him. This meant waiting at least until after the Archbishop of Canterbury's death. William Warham was nearly 80 in the late 1520s (his exact birth date is not known – c.1450).
Other writers have detected more caution in Henry's policies. They argue that royal policies were applied very hesitantly. In the case of the prohibition of payments of annates (a special tax paid by members of the higher clergy to Rome during their first year in office), for example, the policy was suspended for a year and then only applied with the King's approval. This suggests Henry still hoped to use the policy as a bargaining chip in his negotiations to obtain a divorce. Historians such as Geoffrey Elton and Christopher Haigh both use evidence of this kind to suggest Henry was unsure what to do and feared an open split with the Pope.
The Dangers of Challenging Papal Authority
To challenge the power of the Catholic Church so directly could have been dangerous to Henry. While an anti-clerical element existed in Parliament, the opposition to the Act against annates showed this was not a commonly held view. Moreover, the Pope held the power to excommunicate (the Pope had the power to cut off anyone from receiving the sacraments of the Church, which meant, in effect, cutting them off from God and salvation).
For a King, excommunication meant that oaths of loyalty taken by subjects no longer applied, and that rebellion could be sanctioned, or even regarded as a duty, by the Church. This represented a genuine existential threat to Henry's authority and personal safety.
Key Points to Remember:
-
Progress on Henry's divorce was exceptionally slow between 1529 and 1531 because there was no easy solution to his problem and his new Chancellor, Thomas More, was a man of rigid religious principles unwilling to bend Church teaching for royal convenience.
-
More differed from Wolsey in his inflexibility; while Wolsey acted pragmatically to serve Henry's interests, More placed his religious principles above royal demands, creating difficulties when the divorce remained the central unresolved issue.
-
Anne Boleyn's presence at court complicated matters, with historians offering contrasting interpretations of her character—from 'goggle-eyed harlot' to an intelligent woman genuinely interested in religious reform who was destroyed by court politics.
-
Between 1529 and 1534, Henry pursued two objectives: pressuring the English clergy to support his divorce and challenging papal control over the English Church, finding common ground with religious reformers who also viewed the Church as an obstacle.
-
Historians debate whether Henry had a clear plan from 1527 (Russell's view) or whether he proceeded hesitantly and feared direct confrontation with the Pope (Elton and Haigh's interpretation), using policies like the suspension of annates as bargaining tools rather than definitive breaks.