Given the logistics involved, I reckon the amateur historians have it right. It's probably just one more of the stories concocted to make historic buildings more "interesting".

How could we prove that it didn't happen? It's unlikely that there are any primary sources on Henry's life that state "He slept soundly without ever having his doorway bricked up at night".

I've shared the link with Greg Jenner (Chief History "Nerd" on BBC's Horrible Histories) on Twitter. Let's see if he has any thoughts ....

@sempaiscuba he's already seen it - I sent it to him :)

He just replied to me too. I think we should stick with the amateur historians on this one! ;-)

@KillingTime The lack of evidence of mortar and marks from removing the wall each morning would probably suffice. Or just showing that the mortar wouldn't have had time to dry in the first place, which seems quite likely.

Well, if the bedroom door opened inwards, stacking bricks on the inside of it would either prevent it from being opened OR cause a massive crash if the door were opened so it would be a practical safety precaution - no mortar required...

In this case, I think the absence of evidence does very, very strongly suggest it didn't happen. For example, the Eltham Ordinance lists many types of royal household workers and their duties, but never mentions the Privy Chamber Bricklayer, who would have had to be close to the King twice a day. It discusses the handling of left over torches and wax, but not the handling of the bricks for the King's chamber. It specifies when the pages and squires have to get up in order to be ready to attend the King at eight in the morning, without saying what time the bricklayer should dismantle the wall.

@PatriciaShanahan I think you should expand that into an answer.

@KillingTime It would be hard to prove that he never had his doorway bricked up. But there may well be evidence of things that contradict it being done regularly. For example, there could be documentary evidence that Henry liked to wake up to find a cup of fresh tea beside his bed, which would be impossible if the doorway was bricked up. Or if he was paranoid about dying in a fire, it would be very unlikely that he'd make his bedroom inescapable.

@mcottle Stacking bricks inside an inward-opening door would have to be done by the king himself or by someone high enough in rank to spend the night in the king's chamber with him.

It is extremely hard to imagine Tudor monarchy or any high-ranking courtier doing anything as demeaning as bricklaying or demolition. More obvious solutions would surely have been used - stouter doors, locks, a bar across the door. One of the richest and most profligate monarchs in Europe would surely not have thought twice about ordering the necessary work be done. Unfortunately for me, personal incredulity is not the same as historical evidence.

I have studied the Tudor dynasty for years and have read pretty much everything there is to read on Henry VIII. I have never heard of this before. Interesting question, though :)

@RedGrittyBrick I find it amusing to see you commenting about bricklaying. Kind of like when Zach Lipton wrote an answer about tea on Travel.SE.

I wonder if this is a case of a metaphor being taken too literally? It'd make a lot of sense for a monarch to "brick up" their door before going to bed, e.g. by using locks on a sturdy door, posting guards, etc.. The silly part just seems to be in taking it literally as with actual bricks, as that's such a grossly impractical and suboptimal way to get the desired effect.

@RedGrittyBrick: Brick-laying was hardly demeaning at that time. Masons and Brick-layers required an extensive knowledge of (advanced at the time) mathematics and geometry to perform their work properly, and consequently assumed the architectural responsibilities for large buildings. From this eventually would spring Freemasonry.

I can only think that during the Field of Cloth of Gold summit with Francis and Charles, this type of stunt might have been engaged as a show of wealth. It would make no sense at any other time of Henry's reign. Far from wanting to brick himself in, Henry welcomed female visitors to his bed chamber

@PieterGeerkens: I was under the impression that attitudes at the time were that bricklaying was work, that nobility didn't do manual work and such work was regarded by the nobles as something only for peasants, tradesmen and lower-classes.

@RedGrittyBrick: I believe you are conflating manual exertion with employment - both commonly referred to as work. Henry, as a trained athlete, enjoyed the former immensely; and as a well educated man enjoyed mental exertion as well. But he would never have accepted money for either such. Even (perhaps especially) filthy rich people need hobbies.

@sempaiscuba Had to throw in my schoolmarmish 2¢ too. Felt a little stalkerish doing so, but then again what is twitter if not a place where randos from halfway across the world barge in on conversations like SCUD missiles?

@T.E.D. Isn't that what Twitter was invented for? ;-)