The research topic I chose is Henry of Blois (Winchester) the brother of King Stephen of England. He was born around 1098/9 and was a very influential man during his time. He was in a sensitive position by being a bishop. He had a great influence with the building of castles and art. Henry of Winchester would also become one of the richest men in England as well, which brings in my specific research topic. Is Henry of Blois based off self-preservation? In other words, was he always looking after his own skin before others?
This I believe is very important to discuss because bishops, especially Henry, were very greedy during this period. It is, of course, a hot topic because no one wants to hear or see the evil part of someone who they believed …show more content…
There are countless accounts from primary sources stating that Henry is a man with no loyalty. As I have described in previous paragraphs Henry was a man of distrust. In one primary source document, it discusses how Stephens’s men can no longer believe in Henry now that he has come back from Empress Matilda’s side. The argument that I am presenting is one that many people do not want to discuss. This is why I want to talk about it, because the evidence presented gives another side to Henry. I want to stir the pot and make people think. This argument is validated by countless primary and secondary sources, but no one has discussed his unfavorable …show more content…
There are sources that talk about Henry vaguely or make a brief statement on his actions. The book King Stephen by Edmund King gives me fruitful information on Henry, but at the same time, it does not. Yes, it gave me answers to my questions on how Henry became elected, and how he was so influential, but it never went further than that. I have found secondary sources dedicated to just Henry of Winchester, but they do not mention my topic; they merely give an overview of his life and career. I kept finding overviews, as I kept looking deeper. This was frustrating. The only other source that has my specific topic on Henry is a classmate. I believe this would not count as a secondary source or any kind of source for that
This I believe is very important to discuss because bishops, especially Henry, were very greedy during this period. It is, of course, a hot topic because no one wants to hear or see the evil part of someone who they believed …show more content…
There are countless accounts from primary sources stating that Henry is a man with no loyalty. As I have described in previous paragraphs Henry was a man of distrust. In one primary source document, it discusses how Stephens’s men can no longer believe in Henry now that he has come back from Empress Matilda’s side. The argument that I am presenting is one that many people do not want to discuss. This is why I want to talk about it, because the evidence presented gives another side to Henry. I want to stir the pot and make people think. This argument is validated by countless primary and secondary sources, but no one has discussed his unfavorable …show more content…
There are sources that talk about Henry vaguely or make a brief statement on his actions. The book King Stephen by Edmund King gives me fruitful information on Henry, but at the same time, it does not. Yes, it gave me answers to my questions on how Henry became elected, and how he was so influential, but it never went further than that. I have found secondary sources dedicated to just Henry of Winchester, but they do not mention my topic; they merely give an overview of his life and career. I kept finding overviews, as I kept looking deeper. This was frustrating. The only other source that has my specific topic on Henry is a classmate. I believe this would not count as a secondary source or any kind of source for that