In the Disney+ series Shardlake, which premieres May 1, the lead character (played by Arthur Hughes, who has radial dysplasia) is depicted as having scoliosis, the same curvature of the spine seen in the Plantagenet king, Richard III. He is mocked and spat on. People make the sign of the cross as he passes by.
Was this the fate of disabled people living in Tudor times? Disability historian Philippa Vincent Connolly discusses this subject in a 2022 HistoryExtra podcast, revealing just how complicated attitudes towards disability were in the Tudor period.
Here are seven things we learned from that conversation that you really need to know.
People with learning disabilities were considered to be born “stupid” and even to be close to gods.
“The Tudors believed that people who were naturally stupid – that is, people with learning disabilities – had a direct connection to God, and that God would speak truth to people through them,” says Vincent Connolly. “Any Christian of the time would know that God would speak through disabled people as the medium of the Holy Spirit.
“They had no means of gaining political power or advancing economically or materially, so they were seen as having no plan. They just told people what they thought. That’s why they were so treasured by the Tudor nobility and the Tudor court.”
Disabled people were expected to be cared for by their families, at least initially.
“If the family can’t do that for whatever reason, or if the disabled person doesn’t have family, guilds and convents that aren’t closed will step in and do charities to support these people,” says Vincent Connolly.
“They may have tried to get the women to help with farm work or help with basic tasks that they could do, like basket weaving or laundry.”
“After the dissolution of the monasteries in the mid-1530s, special workhouses began to be built on the outskirts of towns to house the elderly, sick and disabled.
“It was all based on charity and helping people who don’t have access to support in their own community. But they didn’t really understand why people are born with disabilities in the first place.”
When a child was born with a physical disability, the parents were often blamed.
A disabled man in the 1539 fresco “Dance of Death” (Photo courtesy of the Getty)
“If a child was born with a severe deformity, they probably wouldn’t survive long,” explains Vincent Connolly, “but if they survived, it was assumed that there was something wrong with the parents.”
“Either the parents must have committed some really terrible sin or witnessed something inappropriate that affected the baby in the womb, or the mother must have been involved in devil worship or witchcraft.”
Aristocrats often accepted people with learning disabilities and treated them as family.
“The religious idea of having to do good deeds led the wealthier middle classes and aristocrats to embrace disabled people,” says Vincent Connolly.
“They welcomed them into their homes as if they were part of the family, educating them, clothing them, caring for them and feeding them.”
One famous example is that of Thomas More, who was Prime Minister early in the reign of Henry VIII.
“He welcomed into his home a gentleman named Henry Patterson, and in Thomas Moore’s family portrait, you can see him in the middle of the painting wearing a yellow gown.
Hans Holbein’s sketch for a portrait of the family of Thomas More. Unlike the painting, Henry Patterson (centre right) is dressed in brown clothing. (Photo courtesy of the Getty)
“Their relationship was so good that More even took him on a diplomatic mission to Europe.”
Henry VIII also had a number of natural jesters living with him: a man named William Summer and a woman named Jane Fool, both of whom appear in Henry’s family portrait of 1545. In fact, in the weeks following Jane Seymour’s death, William Summer was the only person Henry VIII allowed to see.
His father, Henry VII, had populated the Tudor court with natural jesters, as had his first high-ranking official, Cardinal Thomas Wolsey.
People with learning disabilities may have good care but little agency.
“They were bought clothes. William Summer had horse leathers purchased. Catherine Parr bought Jane Hoole a flock of geese to play in the gardens of Hampton Court Palace to give her something to do to pass the time,” says Vincent Connolly.
“But their clothes were purchased and ordered for them, so we can see that these people had no authority over their own money or their own care.
“There were people in those days called keepers, or what we would now call carers. They were paid to look after people like Jane Hoole and William Summer.”
Physical and intellectual disabilities are described as they appear, no diagnosis is made.
“The Tudors literally based their depictions of disability on what they saw,” says Vincent Connolly.
“If you couldn’t walk properly you were considered disabled or lame. If you had any kind of mental disorder or were hysterical you were considered mad. If you had an intellectual disability or any kind of learning disability you were considered born stupid.
All the syndromes that exist today clearly existed then, but the Tudors lacked the medical knowledge to diagnose them and so did not give them names.”
There have been few attempts to treat the disorder in a medical sense.
“The records of disability at this particular time are very poor,” Vincent Connolly said.
“The Tudors saw disability as a normal, everyday occurrence and therefore didn’t think it was serious enough to record every single one.”
Philippa Vincent Connolly is a historian specialising in the history of disability and author of Disability and the Tudors: A Royal Folly (2021).