The tudors

• H7's consolidation of authority was due to his personal strengths ?

  Theme 1 - Personal strengths - Control of nobility + financial reforms

  
  

  - Bonds and recognisances

  - Council learned in law , Empson and Dudley

  - increase rev + sustain law and order

  - 1487 earl of northumberland reinstated in north , to neutralise the R3's power base , heavily yorkist

  - strategic and opportunistic planning = personal strength

  
  

  
  

  Evaluation - control of nobility + financial reforms led to breakdown in authority

  - boosting royal rev came with ramifications

  - 1489 Yorkshire rebellion - resentment of 1489 parliament tax to finance military campaign to brittany - led to the death of the Earl of Northumberland- key figure in neutralising Yorkist and Lancastrian conflicts.

  
  

  - 1497 Cornish rebellion - 15,000 rebels only stopped in Blackheath - threats to the heartland of the Crown

  
  

  - 2x rebellions - questioning about the effectivity of H7 personal strength in maintaining law and order - security of his regime was consistently questioned due to domestic issues.

  
  

  - *Counter Eval* : However, it can also be argue that the quick suppression of the rebellions displayed Henry's personal strengths in maintaining somewhat peaceable conditions in England. The rebel leaders of the Cornish Rebellion were punished and executed thus allowing the rebellion to collapse, demonstrating Henry's personal strengths.

  
  

  Theme 2 : Personal strength - getting rid of threats/pretenders

  
  

  - After Bosworth : predated reign to the 21st August 1485 (day prior), ensured that all those who were fighting against Henry on the yorkist side, could be designated a traitor and thus subject to treason. This allowed Henry to publically reward many of his key supporting, establishing a circle of strong alliances, and assert himself as a powerful monarch.

  - In this, Henry conferred 11 knighthoods and treated Yorkist supporters with leniency. Part of those who were rewarded with knighthoods included Sir William Stanley who was rewarded with the post Lord Chamberlain, giving him considerable political influence and develop his landed estate in Cheshire and North Wales.

  - Because of this, Henry established himself as a respected yet feared monarch, thus indicating that his intelligence, and therefore his personal strengths, were primary factors in leading to his consolidation of power.

  - Talk about getting rid of warbeck

  
  

  *Evaluation*

  
  

  - H7 still relied on foreign powers to help get rid of threat of pretenders to thus consolidate power

  - Counter Eval - still ultimately h7 who used his own discretion to culminate alliances with powerful foreigners

  
  

  *Theme 3 - weak argument - not his personal strength but instead relied on influence of political institutions i.e parliament , council learned*

  
  

  - Alternatively, it can be argued that Henry did not consolidate power through his key strengths, rather through the help of political institutions such as Parliament.

  - This can be seen in Henry's dependence of Parliament in order to pass the Acts of Attainder and thus sufficiently limit the nobility from being significant threats to his position. The first two Parliament meeting were to pass numerous Acts of attainder. This declared landowners of being guilty of rebelling against the monarch and thus the attained noble would lose their title and subsequently their political power and influence.

  - This shows that consolidation of power was due to Parliamentary legislation as opposed to Henry's personal strengths as without cooperation, Henry would've been vulnerable to threats and rebellions within his kingdom.

  The first parliament also granted tonnage & poundage for life with increase revenue from £34,000 to £38,000 therefore helping him consolidate power, reinforcing the view that Henry was only able to effectively consolidate power though the support of political institutions such as Parliament

  
  

  *Evaluation*

  
  

  - did not completely rely on parliament - only utilised them for a limited no.time

  - Henry took his own initiative before using parliament to consolidate power - state all the things he did prior to the use of parliament to consolidate power i.e marriage to Elizabeth reduced yorkist threat , Coronation etc - illustrated his personal strength

  
  

  *Conclusion*

  
  

  - Overall, it can be argued that consolidation of power was primarily through Henry's personal strengths as opposed to external factors. This can be seen in his control of the nobility in preventing them from rising against him whilst keeping them nearby to ensure maintenance of law and order. His intelligence also allowed him to increase royal revenue through bonds and recognizances and the Acts of attainder, subsequently strengthening England's economic position. This certainly indicates that consolidation of power was due to his personal strengths. However, it is also important to consider that consolidation of power wasn't solely through Henry's strengths as he also relied on Parliament to assert authority over the nobility.
• The main reason that Henry VII succeeded in establishing the dynasty was due to the strength of his royal connections'. Explain why you agree or disagree with this view.

  *Theme 1 :strength of royal connections***

  
  

  - marriage to E1 of York , birth of Arthur's - this united the houses of York and Lancaster, who both had claimants to the throne, which reduced the threat and secured HVII's place more.

  
  

  *Eval* :

  
  

  - didn't exploit all connections - missed opportunity to remarry after his wife died

  - The fact that his claim came through his mother made it weak ( from mother + illegitimate line (3rd son of E3), Other living claimiants with better claims = Edward , earl of Warwick ( nephew of E4 and R3) . John de la pole ( R3's intended heir) ,Edmund de la pole

  
  

  **Theme 2 : Removing threats of pretenders**

  
  

  - i.e via control of the nobility - didn't allow the nobility to be a threat or have too much control. Did this mainly through financial control.

  
  

  *Eval :*

  
  

  - Even if he removed threat of pretender this did not ensure dynasty would continue without an heir

  - Discuss limitations to removing threat of pretenders

  
  

  **Theme 3 : Foreign policy to secure marriage alliances**

  
  

  - Spain - powerful country

  - helped to secure the Tudor succession in order to establish the dynasty.

  - In accordance with the terms of the Treaty of Medina del Campo (1489), Henry's heir, Arthur, was promised in marriage to Catherine of Aragon, daughter of king Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain. When Arthur died in 1502, it was agreed that Catherine would marry Arthur's brother, Henry.

  - In accordance with the terms of the Treaty of Ayton (1502), Margaret, Henry VII's eldest daughter, was married to James IV of Scotland in 1503.

  
  

  *Eval :*

  
  

  - Limitations of these marriage alliances
• Henry VII was very successful in establishing his dynasty between 1485 and 1509.' Assess the validity of this view.

  Theme 1 : successful in establishing his dynasty via actions taken to consolidate power - marriage and male heir18 jan 1486 H7 married E4's heir Elizabeth of York . Waited until coronation to marry - no indication he gained throne via wife . Used marriage as propaganda - tudor rose - symbolised reconciliation/unification of both houses after years of civil war , by ending it, there would be a lesser chance of a Yorkist rebellion or uprising which could put Henry’s throne in jeopardy. Sep 1489 - Arthur born - establishing future for new tudor dynasty - greater sense of permanenceEvaluation : only effective in the short term1st parliament = 7th Nov 1485 - H7 depended on parliament to pass acts of attainder against nobility - yorkists - This declared landowners of being guilty of rebelling against the monarch and thus the attained noble would lose their title and subsequently their political power and influence. - seize yorkist/ R3 supporters lands . Awarded H7 custom duties of tonnage and poundage with increased revenue from £34,000 to £38,000 thus helping him consolidate power , reinforcing the view that Henry was only able to effectively consolidate power though the support of political institutions such as Parliament . Acts of Attainder brought financial boost to the King whilst controlling the nobility by confiscating their property. The wealthier the King was in relation to his nobility, the greater his authorityTheme 2 :successful in establishing his dynasty by removing threat of pretenders and yorkistsPredated reign to 21 aug 1485 - day before bosworth = meant R3 supporters declared traitors - estates became property of crown by act of attainder . This allowed Henry to publically reward many of his key supporting, establishing a circle of strong alliances, and assert himself as a powerful monarch. In this, Henry conferred 11 knighthoods and treated Yorkist supporters with leniency. Part of those who were rewarded with knighthoods included Sir William Stanley who was rewarded with the post Lord Chamberlain, giving him considerable political influence and develop his landed estate in Cheshire and North Wales. Because of this, Henry established himself as a respected yet feared monarch, thus indicating that his intelligence, and therefore his personal strengths, were primary factors in leading to his consolidation of power.Evaluation : removing pretenders doesnt secure dynasty + talk about how he wasnt successful consistentlyTheme 3 :successful in establishing his dynasty - foreign marriage alliancesEvaluation : discuss limitations to the marriage alliances - delayed and Arthur died
• To what extent do you agree that Henry VII’s claim to the throne was weak?

  Theme 1 : Claim to throne was weak due to his weak royal connections and how proactive he has to be to consolidate powerH7 held weak claim. The claim was matrilineal (came through his mother) and via illegitimate line back to the 3rd son of E3– John of Gaunt.Victory in battle - 1455-1485 dynastic warfare between houses of Lancaster and York , R3 had become unpopular - believed he murdered princes in the tower , H7 raised troops to meet R3 22 aug 1485 , H7 won crowned on battelfieldMarried Elizabeth of York : 18 jan 1486 H7 married E4's heir Elizabeth of York . Waited until coronation to marry - no indication he gained throne via wife . Used marriage as propaganda - tudor rose - symbolised reconciliation/unification of both houses after years of civil war , by ending it, there would be a lesser chance of a Yorkist rebellion or uprising which could put Henry’s throne in jeopardy. Sep 1489 - Arthur born - establishing future for new tudor dynasty - greater sense of permanenceEvaluationhowever these actions h7 took helped to consolidate his power , royal propagandaHenry’s marriage to Elizabeth of York strengthened his claim as unifying the 2 houses.However - victory in battle acted as a sign that God had approvals Henry’s assumptionTheme 2 : Claim to throne was weak due to consistent need to remove threats . Many pretenders se they capitalised off of Henry’s weak claimThere were always other claimants to the throne with better claims who launched rebellions and de la Pole was at largeOther living claimiants with better claims = Edward , earl of Warwick ( nephew of E4 and R3) . John de la pole ( R3's intended heir) ,Edmund de la poleLambert Simnel and the Earl of Lincoln, 16 June 1487, Battle of StokeYorkists changed their tactics : figurehead to pretend to be yorkist prince +wealthy financier (Margaret of burgundy -R3 sister)Led by john de la pole , revolved around lambert simnel who pretended to be Edward , earl of WarwickGained support of earl of Kildare who crowned him king of England in Ireland . In response , H7 presented the real Warwick in LondonMargaret of burgundy sent money and 2000 mercenaries .H7's army under earl of Oxford prepared and the 2 armies met at east stoke on 16 June 1487 . Lincolns army was crushed , Lincoln killed .As a deterrent to others in the future , 28 nobles were attained and had lands confiscatedPerkin Warbeck, 1491 - 1499Warbeck pretended to be Richard , duke of York1491 - welcomed at french court until treaty of etaplesMoved to Flanders where Margaret supported + trained him to be a yorkist prince to attract english nobles into his conspiracy . In response , H7 broke lucrative cloth trade - his willingness to sacrifice considerable income demonstrates concernSuppoted by influential HRE Maximilian . But , Maximilian lacked financial resources to support.Supported by William Stanley - lord chamberlain of kings households - trusted official - indicating conspiracy went to heart of H7 courtSupported by Scotland - married J4 cousin .Foreign support prolonged the threat as J4 provided warbeck with 1500 troops to invade northern countries of England - however unsuccessful . J4 abandoned warbeck due to marriage alliance with Margaret tudor (treaty of ayton , 1497)Warbeck attempted to exploit unrest of Cornish rebellion (1497) - unsuccessful- capturedH7 initially lenient - but after escapee attempt from tower - he wand earl of Warwick were executedHow dangerous was this threat?{{c1::lasted over a decade - prolonged due to foreign support e.g Margaret of burgundy + J4Warbeck posed problems in domestic sphere and foreign arena. This can be seen in the fact that arrangements for the royal. marriage, in the treaty of Medina del Campo (1489), didn't go smoothly as Ferdinand was reluctant to agree on the marriage so long as the dynasty displayed relative instability due to the threat posed by Perkin Warbeck. This shows that Henry's plight against Warbeck achieved international recognition an prevented Henry from achieving his foreign policy objectives. This certainly poses a serious threat to Henry as it hindered Henry's efforts in consolidating power within the global arena and thus establish the tudor dynasty.H7 had to use foreign diplomacy to weaken warbeck support from Scotland yet he continued to threaten H7 attempting to invade in Cornish rebellion .However , Warbeck never gained much support and was never able to force H7 into battle like simnelRebellion may have been more of a threat to foreign relations than internallywas accused to treason and executed after having tried to escape from the tower. This shows that the threat can be overcome.Apart from Perkin Warbeck the other pretenders didn’t pose a threat to the throneLambert Simnel and the Rebellion of the Earl of Lincoln – Henry defeated the invaders as he was able to plan his response. At the Battle of Stoke his army was led effectively and the rebels had been unable to add sufficient followers to the army of monasteries.Evaluationmanaged to suppress threats etcMany of the rival claimants were killed or imprisoned by 1506.Earl of Lincoln defeated and killed at the Battle of Stoke in 1487Warbeck was executed in 1499Edmund de la Pole was made Henry’s prisoner in 1506Lambert simnel and earl of lincoln :H7 immediately produced the real earl of Warwick to demonstrate falseness of simnel claims • simnel couldn't gain enough support and H7's army under the earl of oxford crushed simnel at stoke -josh de la pole (earl of Lincoln )killed • Used bonds and recognisances to deal with the rest - demonstrates he is in controlTheme 3 : claim to throne was weak due to need to consistently control the nobilityFirst parliament - acts of attainderFinancial threatsEvaluationclaim was not consistently weak
• Henry VII’s policies weakened the nobility in the years 1485 to 1509.’ Assess the validity of this view.

  Theme 1 : Policy - Financial threats - Bonds and Recognisancescouncil learned in law - empson and Dudley acted as royal debt collectorsBonds and Recognisances (most important method of controlling nobility) : places noble in debt to crown , so he would remain loyal in future and . This was effective in discouraging disloyal nobles as sums involved reached £10,000 e.g marquess of Dorset after he was implicated in simnel rebellion . By 1509 36/62 noble families involved. Through this, Henry was able to restore law and order whilst simultaneously increasing the royal revenue. This role was largely controlled by his royal debt collectors in the council leaned in law - Empson and Dudley. This certainly reflects consolidation of power through personal strengths as Henry was able to control and regulate issues in the social and economic sphere by ensuring the nobility were no longer a threat and by exploiting financial opportunities.Evaluation - did not weaken the nobilitynobles were still disloyalWilliam Stanley supporting pretenders - warbeck .Counter Eval - only a small section of nobility were disloyalTheme 2 : Policy - political institution - Parliamentary legislation - acts of attainder / limiting retainersActs of Attainder brought financial boost to the King whilst controlling the nobility by confiscating their property. The wealthier the King was in relation to his nobility, the greater his authority.Acts of attainder: laws passed by parliament allowing someone to be declared guilty of treason without going to trial , enabled H7 to seize titles and possession of nobles suspected of disloyalty causing social and economic ruin for families . These were effective because good behaviour could result in reversal and therefore encouraged loyalty. Used against men in boswoth . 138 attainders were passed . Acts of Attainder brought financial boost to the King whilst controlling the nobility by confiscating their property. The wealthier the King was in relation to his nobility, the greater his authority.Parliament passed laws against retaining. in 1504 issued proclamations that ensured nobles needed to licence to retain , underpinned by threat of heavy fines if not followed . E.g lord Burgavenny in 1506 had fine of £70,000 , H7 used him as example/warning to others . This also helped finances . However nobles found ways to avoid getting licence , i.e covering records of wages they paid to servants, so no one knew exactly how men were being retainedEvaluation - did not weaken the nobilityH7 didnt necessarily weaken the nobility as he recognised their importance - his policies were not completely repressiveEarl of Northumberland controlled the north - controlled the provinces in absence of a standing army - maintain law and orderHowever, H7 recognised the nobles importance in controlling the provinces in the absence of a standing army - reinstated the Earl of Northumberland in 1487 to power the North, in order to neutralise Richard Ill's old power base and ensure that traditionally Yorkist supporters wouldn't revolt against him. Area had many powerful nobles who didn't like Henry but because Northumberland was related to them they could go against him therefore showing how consolidation due to personal strength. By limiting the role of the nobility enough to prevent his demise, but whilst also maintaining the power to regulate social issues; demonstrates that Henry indeed consolidated power through his personal strengths. Such strategic and opportunistic planning could certainly be credited due to his own strengths.Theme 3 : Policy - patronage / reduced size of nobilityweakened the nobility by increasing their reliance on himLimited noble size - peerage shrank from 62 in 1485 to 42 in 1509 - easier to control - where E4 created 9 new earls H7 not had 3 . Meant elevation to peerage was highly valued when it occurredPatronage - binding nobles to him in terms of loyalty by restricting their power with promises for good service , this allows for nobility to be under H7’s authority - a big factor in weakening the nobilityEvaluation - did not weaken the nobilitynobles were still disloyal
• Henry VII’s reforms in government were limited both in scope and success’. Assess the validity of this view

  Introduction:Henry reformed government in a manner that ensured he able to achieve several objectives simultaneously. This included protection from potential threat, increasing royal revenue and successfully maintaining law and order. In this, Henry's reforms of the Council and finance were not limited in scope and success as he was able to achieve such objectives. However, it can be argued there were elements in which reforms were limited such as the resentment that such reforms brought about, such as the Cornish and Yorkist rebellions. Despite this, reforms were largely successful.Theme 1 : Was not limited in scope and successFinancial reformsControl the nobilityCouncil Learned in Law - proved to be much more efficient than the exchequer - came about that empson, joining 1504, made up feudal dues in more than 80 cases and 36/62 noble families were under bonds and recognisances during henry's reign.Council learned in law - Council's main offshoot and developed to maintain revenue i.e via B&R and exploit prerogative rights.36/62 of the noble families were under bonds and recognizances indicating that they reform wasn't limited in scope as it impacted more than half of the nobility.This system also allowed Henry to exploit prerogative rights, successfully fulfilling its function, as the Council Learned bypassed the normal legal system.EvaluationLed to social disorder - Yorkshire and Cornish rebellionCouncil learned in law : However, his advisors didn't like them e.g. bishop fox and sir thomas lovell. they help to get them executed in 1510 under hviii showing the hatred caused.Theme 2 : Was not limited in scope and successReformed privy chamberaimed to create a chamber in which it would be difficult to regain the king's support and reduce potential threats to the monarch. This had a big impact on government because shifted balance of power away from nobles to king and councillors, indicating the the reform was not limited in scope.This was successful because it prevented potential danger to the king, as seen in the treasonable plot by Sir William stanley and pretender Perkin Warbeck. This therefore made the chamber more secure as access was granted to a selective few as opposed one open for household officials and influential courtiers. This was also successful because it decreased factional rivalry since people more busy with trying to gain access to king and that treason/danger decreased due to strictly controlled access.huge effect on how government as as whole ran since it excluded many traditional players like nobles and changed the layout & dynamic of the court. These reforms were also beneficial because government became more efficient due to reduced factional rivalriesJPs - supersede traditional authority of county sheriffs who were often loyal to nobility - various acts of parliament increase their powers enabling them to perform alehouse regulation, tax assessments, investigation of complaints against local officials, however, cornish rebellion 1497 sees rebels capable of marching from cornwall to london, only being stopped in Blackheath.EvaluationWilliam Stanley, Lord Chamberlain, discovered to be working with perkin warbeck in 1495.Limitations of local govt - JPs - cornish rebellion 1497 sees rebels capable of marching from cornwall to london, only being stopped in Blackheath.Theme 3 : Was not limited in scope and success -parliamentary reformsUtilised parliament to enhance his authorityControl the nobilityParliamentary functions included granting taxation as well as passing legislation.The first two Parliament meeting were to pass numerous Acts of Attainder. This declared landowners of being guilty of rebelling against the monarch and thus the attained noble would lose their title and subsequently their political power and influence. Suchlegislation was successful as it meant that the nobility was now regulated by sanctions and could subsequently lose their political influence and power once they step out of line.Therefore, Henry was able to successfully assert authority over his kingdom and maintain law and order, demonstrating a wide scope as the judicial sentence was frequently used, subsequently increasing royal income.Furthermore, Henry used Parliament in order to grant extraordinary taxation, yielding the grand total of over £400,000 throughout his reign. This was used to finance the military campaign in Scotland and Brittany. This displays that Parliamentary reforms were successful as this allowed Parliament to increase royal revenue and thus allow Henry to consolidate powerEvaluationParliament still had limited scope - not until h8 reign scope of use increasedBUT only uses it 7 times during his reign, and last one in 1504 limits his demand for extraordinary revenue, king promises to not use taxation for these means.Counter Eval - still successfully reformed its use
• ‘


  Henry VII’s success in government was due to the elite group of councillors who advised him in the king’s council’. Explain why you agree or disagree with this viewTheme 1 : Success In government due to elite group of councillors who advised him in kings council- small actual working Council6/7 members This elite group included the chief officers of state, which gave stability to the new regime. The elite councilors who emerged later in Henry’s reign gavestabilityto the new regime because Henry kept them in power for solong. For example, Morton served 14yrs while Fox served as Lord Privy Seal for 22 years until the king’s death in 1509.King placed trusted members into his council who have been in exile with him such asJohn Morton, Richard Fox, Jasper Tudor.John Morton deals with taxation of the nobility by means by benevolences.Work and advice of the elite group of councillors in the King’s council. The functions of the King’s Council were to advise the king on matters of state, to administer law and order, and to control local government.Evaluation : contributed but is not the sole factor leading to success in governmentWilliam Stanley, Lord Chamberlain, discovered to be working with Perkin Warbeck in 1495.Theme 2 : Success in government due to his reforms of govtlocal govt - JPsControl the nobilityJPs – who owed their offices to the king – Henry was also exerting his control more effectively over the localities. This arrangement worked relatively well under a strong king, who could ensure that his instructions were obeyed and that the local nobility did not develop too much power, or seize the opportunity to pursue their private feuds. Although the problem of keeping the peace had not been completely solved, Henry had gone a long way towards extending his control of the situation by centralizing the system of local government.Evaluationstill due to working of council members - The key men entrusted with responsibility for the regional councils.JPs - cornish rebellion 1497 sees rebels capable of marching from cornwall to london, only being stopped in Blackheath.Theme 3 : Success in government due to financial reformsFinancial reforms - Henry’s more efficient management and exploitation of the crown lands had extended the authority of the monarch to all parts of the country, as well as increasing the income that he received in rentsControl the nobilityCouncil Learned in Law - proved to be much more efficient than the exchequer - came about that empson, joining 1504, made up feudal dues in more than 80 cases and 36/62 noble families were under bonds and recognisances during henry's reign.EvaluationYorkshire and Cornish rebellion
• ‘The methods used by Henry VII to increase the wealth of the Crown were successful’. Explain why you agree or disagree with this view

  H7 left plate and jewels worth around £300,000 and £10,000 in cashTheme 1 : Successful method - Council leaned in lawbonds and recognisancesoffshoot of main council • Role - maintain revenue via B&R and exploit his prerogative rightsEmpson and dudleyproved to be much more efficient than the exchequer - 36/62 noble families were under bonds and recognisances indicating that they reform wasn't limited in scope as it impacted more than half of the nobility.Evaluationpolitical issues ( unpopularity of Henry and his ministers, tensions with Parliament)Weakened government (Empson and Dudley unpopular with other key ministersThe Council Learned became detested when it was controlled by Empson and Dudley because of their harsh enforcement of penalties and because they fabricated cases in which people owed money to the king, when they actually didn’t.Counter Eval - still raised financesEval : Hated due to links with collection of bonds and recognisances - entrap subjects and control nobility . It was recognised as a court of law and those summoned had no chance to appeal , bypassed normal legal system causing anger.H7 advisors didnt like them - falsely claiming people owed feudal dues e.g wardship, where no such obligation existed. e.g. bishop fox and sir thomas lovell. they help to get empson and dudley executed in 1510 under hviii showing the hatred caused.Counter Eval - but important in maintenance of authorityTheme 2 : Successful method - via parliament - increase income from extraordinary revenue via parliamentary grantsParliamentary grants : Parliament granted subsidy- a 15th was the rate of tax on the moveable goods of laymen and a 10th on the income of the clergy.Each subsidy yielded £29,000. H7 achieved efficient tax collection. £400,000 raised in total However were unpopular and triggered 2 rebellions in yorkishire in 1489 and Cornwall in 1497. H7 had to promise parliament of 1504 not to raise money in this methodEvaluationLed to social distress and thus Yorkshire and Cornish rebellion indicating a breakdown in social orderTheme 3 : Successful method - reorganising financial administrationIn 1492 that Henry decided to revert to Edward’s system of administration through the chamber, where policies were formulated and decisions were made. Finances improved markedly and the income from land had increased by the end of the reign to around £42,000 per year. This was partly achieved by effective treasurers of the Chamber, such as Sir Thomas Lovell and Sir John HeronEvaluationHenry’s financial demands made him unpopular with landowners upon whom he depended for supportMuch energy was spent on improving Henry’s revenues, but there was a political price to be paid. The main victims of Henry’s policies were the nation’s landowners, precisely the people whose support Henry would need if his throne was threatened. Yet Henry treated them in a way which might have made them threaten the Crown.At the beginning of Henry’s reign income had dropped to about £12,000 per year. This was because the income from lands was collected and administered through the inefficient Court of Exchequer, which exemplifies Henry’s inexperience in such financial matters.Caused disagreement with Parliament (in 1504, had to agree not to raise any more funds through extraordinary revenue
• Rebellions in the reign of Henry VII stemmed mainly from the weaknesses of central government’. Assess the validity of this view.

  Introduction :Theme 1 : Weaknesses of central governmentPersonal monarchy - role of the king, who was the head of the kingdom's administration. Henry had been in exile for half his life, so he was denied the opportunity to learn the mechanics of estate management, let alone the structures of central and local government.In short, Henry lacked the necessary experience to run a government. In an era of personal monarchy, where the king played a pivotal part in the exercise of power, it can be argued that Henry's lack of experience might have undermined the effectiveness of centralgovernment. For example, Henry tried, but failed, to win over some Yorkist nobles, such as the Earl of Lincoln, who was invited to participate in government. However, within 18 months of Henry's accession, Lincoln fled the government and led a rebellion that ended in disaster at the battle of Stoke.government's failure to prepare properly for Lincoln's rebellion highlights its weakness.Central govt was dependent on local nobles and JPs to carry out its orders. This dependency, by its very nature, must have weakened the king's government. In the early years of his reign, Henry, along with the men he appointed to run his government, was treated with suspicion. If the nobility and JPs refused to co-operate, there was little the king could do.Unloyal councillors in government helping pretenders - William Stanley.Evaluation : central govt was strongLincoln rebellion was easily crushedCentral govt was not weak , it must be borne in mind that the central govt established at the beginning of the reign was still operating at the end . There was a continuity of personnel that contributed to its stability and longevity. The men h7 appointed to run his govt were experienced professionals i.e sir Reginald brayTheme 2: Local and regional loyalties being stronger than national feelingsThe centralisation of government had yet to be firmly established, which meant that local and regional loyalties were stronger than national feelings.The people of Yorkshire and Cornwall rebelled, in large part, because they did not have an affinity, let alone a sense of loyalty to a London-based central government. They resented what they perceived to be interference in their affairs by an alien government.Their first loyalty was to their local community, and their second was to their region. The role of the local nobleman was crucial in fostering this sense of community, for the noble families often commanded a great deal of respect. If the noblemen remained loyal to the king and followed the instructions of central government, then rebellion was far less likely to break out.H7’s drive to forge extend central gov to local gov caused friction in these distant regions . Regional loyalties were strong and there was growing resentment at what was regarded as outside interference . Officials appointed by London based gov were unwelcome in regions where local lords had been passed over in favour of royal nomineesThe weakness of central government is most evident in the Yorkshire rebellion of 1489, when the king sent a former Yorkist, the Earl of Northumberland, to appeal to the rebels. As a northerner, it was hoped that his appeal for calm would quell the rebellion, but he was murdered because he was seen as an agent of an unpopular, southern, central government.E.g cornish rebellion : rebellion arose in Jan 1947 when parliament voted for a heavy tax to finance campaign against Scotland . The Cornish who were traditionally independent refused to contribute . The rebels marched through the western counties with leader lord audley .Evaluationultimately still central govts fault for not culmunitating greater sense of unityTheme 3: Economic issues - resistance to taxationYorkshire Resistance to taxation. The parliament of 1489 granted HVII a subsidy of £100,000 to help Brittany. The tax was least welcome in Yorkshire which had been badly hit by poor harvest . Another cause of angst was that the other northern counties were exempted from the taxCornish Resistance to taxation due to the January 1497 parliament voting for a heavy tax to defend from Scottish threatAsking for more money through taxation in areas that traditionally did not pay to protect areas of the country which had little effect upon them.EvaluationUltimately still the role of central govtcentral government had little understanding of local economic problems, although it was often blamed for them. Thus when Henry set about raising taxes to fund his wars against France and Scotland, the poorer regions, particularly the north of England, were unable and unwilling to pay. This lack of empathy and sympathy with the plight of the poor in the more remote parts of the kingdom underlines how weak the central government was.Counter Eval : Sir john Egremont led the York rebels . The earl of Surrey easily put down the rising with and egremont fled to Flanders . H7 issued pardons for those involved in uprisingEarl of Surrey was made lieutenant in the area governed by murdered earl . H7 faced no more problems in north though he failed to collect the regions tax quota for Brittany campaign
• ‘The popular rebellions faced by Henry VII gave him more problems than the threats posed by pretenders to the throne’. Explain why you agree or disagree with this view.

  Introduction :At the time where Henry claimed the throne, his position was consistently threatened by pretenders such as warbeck who hindered his consolidation of power. This was made even more threatening due to Henry's considerably weak claim to the throne and thus the presence of pretenders placed Henry in a position of instability. That said, the popular rebellions faced by Henry were arguably more problematic, as seen in their scope and impacts.Theme 1: Yorkshire rebellion 1489Caused : whilst extraordinary taxation had significantly boosted royal revenue in providing Henry with the sum of 400,000, this also came with many ramifications. resentment of £100,000 subsidy granted by parliament in 1489 to finance army for the Brittany campaignproved to be a problem for Henry because of the death of Northumberland; who was needed to neutralize the Yorkist threat in their power base.This meant that a strategically important place destabilised, allowing the region to foster rebels and pretenders conspiring against him.In this, popular rebellions were indeed more of a threat to Henry compared to pretenders as this left Henry vulnerable to further attacks on his claim.The fact that Northumberland was killed by guards shows that people still didn't view Henry as rightful king and would even go as far as killing a powerful noble, undermining Henry's authorityThis demonstrates that popular rebellions were indeed more threatening to Henry as they led to Henry being left vulnerable in Richard IIl's old power base and thus made way for continued conflicts between the Yorkists and Lancastrians. Such and impact on domestic policy was not made by the pretenders, insinuating that threats weren't that significant.EvaluationThe Earl of Surrey suppressed the rebellion straightforwardly.H7 faced no more issues in north though he failed to collect regions tax quota for brittany campaign - only £27,000Compared to pretenders, it created little problems, most of the ringleaders of the rebellion were executed and more than 1500 were pardoned.Theme 2 : Cornish rebellion 1497Jan 1497 • Cause : Parliament granted heavy tax to finance campaign against Scotland . The Cornish refused to contribute . Rebels marched the western counties with leader lord audley • On 16 June 15,000 reached the outskirts of London and encamped on blackheath . • Rebellion caused problems for H7 - to suppress he needed to withdraw lord daubeney and his troops from defending the Scottish border . In the end it was easily crushed . This reflects that whilst the rebellion was wide in scope, it wasn't stable enough to create future problems within the social affairsa significant 15,000 rebels involved conspiring against Henry, with serious attempts to stop them being made only in Blackheath.In this, the rebellion created so much fear that even great landowners such as William Stanley didn't make any attempt to halt the rebellion, allowing them to pass through. It can therefore be argued that the popular rebellions faced by Henry were indeed a serious threat and thus the pretenders were no match for this.The threat of the rebellion can also be seen to have and impact on foreign affairs with Scotland, forcing Henry to make a truce with James IV. This also prompted the 1504 Parliament decision to no longer grant extraordinary taxation. This means that popular rebellions were more threatening compared to pretenders as they impacted Henry's foreign relations as well as reducing hisprerogative rights in granting extraordinary taxation.EvaluationThat said, it is also important to consider that once the rebellion entered Blackheath, it was easily crushed by Lord Daubeney, with key leaders being executed. This reflects that whilst the rebellion was wide in scope, it wasn't stable enough to create future problems within the social affairsConcern for the crown as rebels marched a long distance without any serious attempt being made to stop them – how effective was the crown’s system at maintaining law and order in the countryside. Challenging the security of the regime.Warbeck was given a platform to exploitTheme 3 : PretendersIt would be an oversimplification to argue that pretenders during Henry's reign weren't problematic at all.Warbeck posed problems in domestic and foreign affairs. This can be seen in the fact that arrangements for the royal marriage, in the treaty of Medina del Campo (1489), didn't go smoothly as Ferdinand was reluctant to agree on the marriage so long as the dynasty displayed relative instability due to the threat posed by Perkin Warbeck.This shows that Henry's plight against Warbeck achieved international recognition an prevented Henry from achieving his foreign policy objectives. This certainly poses a serious threat to Henry as it hindered Henry's efforts in consolidating power within the global arena and thus establish the tudor dynasty.E.g. relations between England and Margaret of Burgundy, Margaret offered explicit support to pretenders such as Warbeck and rebellions sparked within England. For example when Warbeck was forced to flee from France, he sought refuge in Margaret of Burgundy's court and was trained as a potential Yorkist prince. This was a considerable blow to Henry's authority as his claim to the throne was relatively weak, especially when there were other potentially more justified claimants around, such as the Earl of Warwick. This shows that Henry faced a larger threat from pretenders compared to popular rebellions as this affected his position on the throne. This was enhanced by the fact that Margaret of Burgundy didn't recognise Henry as the rightful monarch and thus jeopardised his reign. This displays that pretenders were more serious in the sense that they made Henry appear considerably weaker within the foreign sphere an prevented himEvaluationHowever, it must be noted that Warbeck was easily crushed as seen in the agreement in the Treaty of Perpetual Peace. In 1499 Warbeck was executed and thus his threat diminished after James IV handed him over to Henry.Furthermore, the threat of pretenders was arguably more serious within the international arena as opposed to the domestic sphere.was accused to treason and executed after having tried to escape from the tower. This shows that the threat can be overcome.Apart from Perkin Warbeck the other pretenders didn’t pose a threat to the throneLambert Simnel and the Rebellion of the Earl of Lincoln – Henry defeated the invaders as he was able to plan his response. At the Battle of Stoke his army was led effectively and the rebels had been unable to add sufficient followers to the army of monasteries.
• To what extent is it accurate to say that there were increased opportunities for social mobility during Henry VII’s reign? ( comeback to this question )


  Introduction :Social mobility : change in social statusThe different ranks in society were determined by title, wealth and breeding, which made it virtually impossible for members of the lowest rank, the commoners, to improve their social status.However, by developing the economy and promoting the increase in trade, Henry VII provided the means by which enterprising members of the commons could make a fortune.Theme 1 : increased opportunities for social mobility - impact of Black Death and subsequent drop in population on the gentryTudor society was hierarchical and based on a class system . Social status dominated society ,This pyramidal structure was firmly held together by the feudal system . At the top was the king , followed by nobility , gentry and higher clergy . Next came merchants , burgesses , artisans , lower clergy and yeomen . The base of the pyramid was occupied by commoners : servants , labouring poor , vagrants etc .The impact of the Black Death and the subsequent drop in population and relative economic decline of landowners meant some were forced to lease or sell parts of their estates creating a market in lan , available to wider cross section of society . This led to an expansion in the size of the elites and to their being less exclusive . They became divided into 2 parts : nobles , whose rank placed the, just below the king . A new social category , gentry , the lesser elite group .EvaluationTheme 2 : increased opportunities for social mobility - developing the economy and promoting increased tradeEvaluationTheme 3 - increased social mobility for the peasantsBlack Death + subsequent drop in population and relative economic decline of landowners had a profound effect on peasants at bottom of social hierarchy . The decline in econ power of landowners began the breakdown of the feudal system . By the start of the 16c serfdom (social and economic system whereby peasants are tied to land on which they live and work) was almost non-existent ,and peasants were free to move around . Some taking advantage of the availability of lad and became commercial farmers . These better off peasants were yeomen . Others took advantage of increased wage levels created by reduction in labour force to work for wages . It was this element of choice created by greater geographical mobility and fewer people that was the most significant change in society in 15cEvaluation
• How successful was Henry VII in fulfilling his foreign policy objectives?

  Theme 1: preserve/ Securing dynasty through marriage alliancemarriage between Arthur and catherine of Aragon strengthened england trade and political links with Spain in treaty of medina del campo 1489 . Recognised as equal by leading royal family in Europe , important to usurper who needed to secure international recognition and legitimacy . Both created potential anti-French partnershipmarriage between Margaret and J4 of Scotland secured England’s northern border and prevented Scottish aid for pretender warbeck in truce of Ayton 1497 , no such agreement had been made since 1328. However scotland didn’t abandon relations with France meaning peace depended on continued good relations between England and France , but H7 didn’t live to pose a problemmarriage with foreign powers added to prestige and stability of tudor dynastyEval :However after the death of Arthur in April 1502 , H7 dynastic security was weakened as the new heir Henry was a child , Yorkists had a powerful claimant the earl of Suffolk and H7 health was deteriorating. Furthermore the death of Elizabeth of York in 1503 meant no more children . Despite the imprisonment of earl of Suffolk in 1506 , the succession remained insecure as it rested on the survival of H7Theme 2 : Defeat pretenders and threats to throne and maintain national securityTreaties with spain and Scotland show that security was important element of FP . Also defending territorial security links to Brittany and Breton crisis1497 : The truce of ayton . The realty was sealed in aug 1503 by the marriage of J4 to H7's daughter , Margaret. James IV of Scotland didn’t take advantage of England’s weakness during the Cornish Rebellion and impersonation of Warbeck, so signed a peace treaty. There had been no similar agreement between countries since 1328. Henrys northern border was thus secure for the remainder of the reignTreaties with burgundy and France show how trade and prestige were importantH7 preoccupation with dynastic security is seen with treaties with spain and Scotland and treaty of etaples . This links to preventing support for H7 challengers and strengthening dynasty via marriage allianceEval:Margaret of burgundy was initially an enemyTheme 3: increasing international prestigePrestige is evident as a motive in the treaty of medina del campo in 1489 with Spain where aforementioned Politically beneficial marriage was secured with Catherine of Aragon and prince Arthur who was first in line with the English Throne. Due to this marriage we can see that Spain viewed England as an equally powerful counterpart derived from Henry VII's concurring of Richard the third at Bosworth with ended the war of the roses a notorious war known across Europe. Henry was able to further reinstate his prestige when Arthur dies in 1502 (just 6 months after his marriage) when he was able to gain permission from the pope which allowed Henry VIII to marry Catherine of Aragon- this clearly displays the power of England at the time due to having only one remaining male heir yet Spain still wanted to marry into the English throne.The desire for international prestige can also be seen in the treaty of Ayton also known as the treaty of perpetual peace in 1497, a treaty struck with England’s long standing traditional enemy Scotland. James IV had come to support and welcome perkin warbeck who subsequently helped an invasion in the same year as the treaty. Scotland was indeed a prestigious enemy with support from France (who was possibly the wealthiest country at the time) and who held the easiest course of invasion due to having a neighbouring border with England. This was particularly significant due to a peace treaty not being established with Scotland since 1328 (over a hundred and fifty years earlier) this held significant prestige due to painting Henry as a powerful political European monarch ; reaffirmed in the marriage of King James IV with Margaret Tudor in 1503.The dominative way Henry dealt with Foreign trade; as seen in the navigation which were passed stating that if english ships were available they were to be used instead of foreign ships and the 1489 laws which forbade the trade of raw wool with foreign merchants who intended it for foreign manufacturing and also forbade selling raw wool to foreigners before english merchants had bought what they wanted. Subsequently this gave Henry the monopoly on wool and cloth and portrayed England as prestigious traders with an excessive amount of power of foreign tradersEval:after the death of Arthur - England was isolatedThe northern border with Scotland was most vulnerable land border. Scotland was England's traditional enemy , made more dangerous due to the 'auld alliance; with France. 1485-1495 : Anglo-Scottish relations were tense . In 1495 J4 supported Warbeck and provided a small army to invade England in 1496 . War threatens .ConclusionIt would be unfair to place emphasis on coherence/consistency of H7's diplomacy because deaths of key figures in his own (Arthur -1503 , Elizabeth - 1503 ) and other royal families meant he couldn't pursue his fully policy - these events tested his flexibility and resourcefulness • He responded skilfully to changing circumstances , England was in goof terms with most of Europe , dynasty secured , recognised by other rules - all achieved without draining the treasury
• How successful was Henry VII’s foreign policy?

  Theme 1 : Spain ( most successful here )Treaty of medina del campo , march 1489 secured marriage of Arthur and Catherine of Aragon , agreed not to harbour rebels or pretenders - dynastic recognition - marriage eventually took place in 1501 BUT Arthur died in 1502Eval :Failure to secure marriage after Arthur’s death - Ferdinand reluctant to agree to marriage between Catherine and Henry due to problems of papal dispensation - in 1504 Henry lost enthusiasm due to dynastic struggles in SpainSupporting the wrong side in Spanish succession struggles - after isabellas death Henry backed Juana against Ferdinand in the succession struggles - signed treaty of Windsor (1506) with them - big error after Philip of burgundy died Ferdinand secured Spanish throneLeague of cambrai , 1508 : Henry’s plan for a triple anti Spanish alliance against Ferdinand between England , Netherlands and France was hijacked by the french who instead signed a treaty between Spain , France and burgundy - left England isolated at the end of reignTheme 2 : Burgundy , Netherlands and Holy Roman EmpireIn 1496 the intercursus Magnus was signed resuming friendly relations and trade between 2 countries , warbeck was made to leave burgundyThe Treaty of WindsorThe intercursus malus : H7 position in trading with Netherlands improved and Maximilian agreed to hand over the yorkist earl of SuffolkEval :The ports of Netherlands were important for English trade in clothBurgundy was the greatest threat as Margaret supported simnel and warbeck with finance and mercenary troops . She also threatened not the important English cloth industry as burgundy was a major trading partner of England .In 1493 following Margaret's support for warbeck , H7 broke trade relations with burgundy (He was more concerned with securing his dynasty than protecting commercial interests of London and east coast merchants, but the embargo harmed both English and Flemish economiesIn 1496 : H7 and P4 agreed the intercursus Magnus which ended the trade embargo , Margaret recognised H7 position as kingSuccess wasn’t consistent reflected - supported burgundyH7 angered his merchants and impacted his economy with the trade embargo with burgundy following Philip, Maximilian and Margaret’s support of warbeckThe intercursus malus was never fully followedTheme 3 : france + brittanyTreaty of Etaples , Nov 1492H7 intended to asset his claim to french crown in 1492 and sent army across channel which laid siege on Boulogne . • C8 wished to avoid war and signed treaty of etaples , 1492 in which he agreed to withdraw support of warcheck which helped to secure peace at home . He payed pension to compensate invasion - £159,000 in annual instalments of £5000 (5% of kings annual income) • Anglo-french relations remained intact , french payments offset cost of conflict • Perhaps it would be unreasonable to expect H to have achieved more , given the situation . • Overall , H7 defended national and dynastic interests and improved financial positionEval :Loss of Brittany - Under the treaty of Redon ,1489 a small English army had been sent to defend Brittany from french threat etcIn 1487 france invaded the Dutchy of Brittany . Under the treaty of Redon H7 agreed to support Duchess Anne's claim - sent 6000 english to defend brittany from french threat . • However ,Duchess anne of brittany ended up marrying C8 as a result England list an ally across the channel - increased threat of invasion and H7 looked weak . • All of the southern shore of English channel except Calais was in french hands . • H7 had filed to restore english glories in Europe . Brittany became a satellite of the french
• Henry VII’s foreign policy was driven by the need to preserve the Tudor dynasty.’ Assess the validity of this view of the years 1485 to 1509

  Theme 1 : FP was driven by the need to preserve the tudor dynasty through marriage alliancesSecuring the Tudor dynasty through politically beneficial marriagesAnother key desie behind Heny Vi's FP was securing the succession though marriage allilances with powerful countries that would seek to support him and his successorsTreaty of Medina del Campo (1489): Arthur + Catherine of Aragon.Treaty of Ayton (1502): Margaret + James IV of ScotlandThese marriages helped to secure the succession because the Spanish and Scottish royal families had a personal connection with the Tudor dynastyAlso showed that Heny hod been accepted internationaly as the rightful king of England, thus consolidating authorityEvaluationH7 failed to marry after his Elizabeth’s death did not capitalise off key opportunity - was not as importantIn the treaty of medina del campo trade played a feature in the treatyTheme 2: FP was driven by the need to ensure national security by removing threat of pretenders - defensive - diplomacy used to remove threatHenry’s FP was plainly a defensive one. He lacked the power to dictate events, especially in the context of the emergence of a united Spain, various pretenders and the beginnings of the Italian wars.The need to cut the foreign support for the pretenders who had a spread of support across Europe in France, Burgundy and Scotland- this can be seen in the treaty of Etaples with the French king Charles VIII in 1492 where one of the clauses embedded in the treaty was the promise to end all support for Perkin Warbeck who was a possible contender for the throne due to posing as Richard of York (one of the princes in the tower).Henry’s foreign policy was closely entwined with his domestic policy objectives, and especially the ability to confront pretenders and undermine their support, e.g. Henry’s support of Philip after 1504 was motivated by Maximillian’s decision to harbour Edmund de la Pole.Evaluationnot all foreign policy had removing pretenders as the focus point , it was a subsidiary effect of the alliancesTheme 3 FP was driven by the need to preserve overseas tradeat face value it seems that desire to extend englands overseas trade was the key factor that underpinned henry VII’s FP1489: Treaty of Media del Campo allowed equal trading rights for merchants between Spain and England and fixed customs duties at a rate that proved favorable to English tradersMaintaining the cloth hade with burgundy also remained a high priority, and the most significant step he made towards this wat the Intercursus Mopnus agreement (1496)the Navigation Aels (1485-86) were passed in an attemot 1o promote and protect english trade And thereby break the monopoly enjoyed by the German Hanseatic LeagueTrade agreements may have been made under the motivation for money and Henry's perceived greed due to the 1489 cloth trading laws being highly beneficial to english traders to allow them to sell cloth which was in greater demand and sold at greater prices therefore allowing henry to collect more in custom duties. This hunger for money can also be seen in the Magnus Intercursus a trade deal signed with burgundy which allowed English merchants to trade throughout Burgundy freely without the implication of taxation. The motive of pure greed can be supported by numerous accounts which called Henry a miser saving great sums counted and checked through his own hands.Evaluationtrade did not underpin all Henry’s FP agreements just a select few1493 : H7 initiated a trade embargo with the Netherlands over warbeck leading to severe depression in the cloth industry and hindered english trade and prosperity . This suggests that preventing the threat of pretenders was a greater desire than improving overseas trade
• Henry showed himself to be a capable ruler in his dealings with spain in years 1485-1509

  Introduction :In order for henry to present himself as a capable ruler in his dealings with Spain, he would need to successfully achieve his foreign policy objective; which includenational security,recognition of the Tudor dynastyanddefence of English trading interests. In this, Henry showed himself to be a capable ruler to an extent as he was able to negotiate treaties which fulfilled such policies.However, Henry still was largely incapable due to events such asdiplomatic isolationwhich hindered his success in his dealings with Spain, reducing his authority within the foreign sphere.Theme 1 : Treaty of medina del camp 1489 - achieved national security + dynastic recognitionimportant development as it provided international peace and security, achieving his foreign policy objective ofnational securityThe 2 monarchies offered mutual protection in the event of an attack, agreed not to harbour pretenders and arranged a marriage alliance between Prince Arthur of Wales and Catherine of Aragon.This meant that Henry was also able to achievedynastic recognitionon a global scale and thus achieve his foreign policy objective. This also secured theTudor dynasty.Considering Henry's claim to the throne of England lacked almost all validity by heredity; Ferdinand and Isabella were able to provide validate Henry's claim to the throne though support of the monarch.Evaluationfailed to successfully activate the Treaty into practice.This can be seen in the fact that arrangements for the royal marriage didn't go smoothly as Ferdinand was reluctant to agree on the marriage so long as the dynasty displayed relative instability due to the threat posed by Perkin Warbeck. This shows that Henry was arguably incapable of his dealings with Spain as he wasn't able to successfully assert authority over his own kingdom, thus leading to unfortunate outcomes in the foreign sphere.Henry's incapabilities can also be seen in the fact that the two monarchs argued over the size of Catherine's dowry, leading to a delayed agreement by 1499 and the marriage by 1501. This delay insinuates that Henry was certainly incapable in his dealings with Spain as he wasn't able to immediately and efficiently assert authority in the marriage 5negotiationsTheme 2 : Treaty of WindsorAfter Juana and Philip of burgundy were forced to take refuge in England after their shipwreck, Henry was able to exploit this situation in this, Henry was indeed presented himself as a capable ruler as the Treaty of Windsor secured the Intercursus Malus and the return of the Earl of Suffolk.The Intercursus Malus restored trading relations between England and Burgundy, achieving Henry's foreign policy objective of defending English trading interests.The Treaty of Windsor also enabled Henry to recognise Juana and Philip of Burgundy as the rulers of Castile, thus strengthening the couples claim to the Spanish throne. Through this, Henry is able to have the opportunity to sway negotiations with Ferdinand in his favour, thus reflecting himself as capable in dealing with Spain.EvaluationDespite attempts to amend foreign policy with Spain, the death of Philip of Burgundy soon after the couple's arrival in Spain proved to be disastrous for Henry. Due to Juana's grief, Ferdinand was able to once again, become regent of Castile, leaving Henry diplomatically isolated as he had once again been diplomatically outsmarted by a major European monarch. This was also worsened by the fact that ferdinand ensured that the marriage between Prince Henry and Catherine of Aragon didn't take place in Henry's lifetime. This therefore indicates that Henry didn't show himself as a capable ruler in his dealings with Spain due to his inability to successfully and effectively maintain relations with Spain. By continuously being outsmarted by a European monarch, Henry therefore displayed weakness within the international arena.Theme 3 - after death of Arthur - pragmatismAfter Arthur died in 1502 Henry displayed his capability by being immediately pragmatic, suggesting that Catherine marry Henry VIII.Evaluation: weak argument - failed to capitalise off of marriage opportunities , England was isolatedhowever the proposed marriage would occur at a price. This is when the the Pope's permission was required in order to be exempted from the laws and the observances of the Church. Therefore, Henry's incapabilities to swiftly neqotiate the marriage terms in 1489 placed Henry in a relatively weak position within the foreign stage as the marriage failed to bring significant political and foreign authority, reinforcing the view that Henry failed to show himself to be a capable ruler in his dealings with Spain.Relations with Spain took a major downturn in February 1503. Queen Elizabeth died and aside from his own personal grief.2/3 sons had died. To ensure that the Tudors had a surviving male heir, it seems that Henry wanted to find a new wife. This, ironically, led to a clash with Ferdinand whose wife, Isabella, had died in 1504. With two kings seeking a wife, and the options open to them being limited, the two former allies were on course to becoming major rivals.Henry never remarried but he tried to develop closer ties with Burgundy. This pushed Ferdinand into the arms of the French and he married Germaine de Foix, in October 1505. With Spain and France now linked by marriage, Henry was in a vulnerable position.EvaluationOverall :Overall ,whilst developments in the dealings with Spain were successfully, this only remained successful in theory as such agreements were never placed in practice. This can be seen in the fact that the marriage alliance between Prince Henry and Catherine didn't occur in Henry's lifetime and the Treaty of Medina del Campo never being placed into action. This is also enhanced by the fact that Henry continuously displayed weakness within the foreign sphere during these dealings. However, this is hindered by the fact that Henry remained somewhat capable as he was still able to achieve his foreign policy objectives.In order for henry to present himself as a capable ruler in his dealings with Spain, he would need to successfully achieve his foreign policy objective; which includenational security,recognition of the Tudor dynasty* anddefence of English trading interests. In this, Henry showed himself to be a capable ruler to an extent as he was able to negotiate treaties which fulfilled such policies.However, Henry still was largely incapable due to events such asdiplomatic isolationwhich hindered his success in his dealings with Spain, reducing his authority within the foreign sphere.Overall ,whilst developments in the dealings with Spain were successfully, this only remained successful in theory as such agreements were never placed in practice. This can be seen in the fact that the marriage alliance between Prince Henry and Catherine didn't occur in Henry's lifetime and the Treaty of Medina del Campo never being placed into action. This is also enhanced by the fact that Henry continuously displayed weakness within the foreign sphere during these dealings. However, this is hindered by the fact that Henry remained somewhat capable as he was still able to achieve his foreign policy objectives.
• "Henry VIII's actions as king destroyed Henry VII's legacy"

  “Henry VIII’s actions as king destroyed Henry VII’s legacy”IntroductionHenry VIl's legacy consisted of a stringent policy towards monetary issues, a peaceful approach to foreign policy and a councillor form of government. In this Henry VIll did destroy his father's legacy due to his approach to politics which directly contrasted that to his father's, as seen in his huge dependency on his chief ministers which Henry VIl wasn't entirely fond of.That said, there are elements in Henry's reign that indicate Henry didn't completely destroy Henry VIl's legacy.Theme 1 : Government - H7 - personal monarchy / h8 - conciliar govtUnlike H7 , H8 preferred a government ruled by chief ministers. This contrasted with Henry VIl's who preferred a councillor approach to government.H7 was a very hard worker who surrounded himself with councillors like Sir Reginald Bray who could advise him and help him rule the kingdom. In contrast, Henry VIII destroyed this legacy because he liked to have a more hands off approach and this inevitably meant that a chief minister would arise and take the place of the council which would become less important. This wouldn't have settled with Henry VIl as he preferred to exploit his prerogative right and uphold his status as supreme leader.H8 instead surrounded himself with powerful men like Wolsey and Cromwell who dominated and ran government rather than a council. Therefore, H7's legacy was destroyed because H8 did not like to hear wide ranging opinions or get too involved in matters of government because he asserted his royal prerogative more and wanted to enjoy himself.EvaluationWhilst H8 did conduct a style of government led by his chief ministers, this wasn't always true, indicating that H8 still maintained elements of his father's legacy throughout his reign.A councillor approach to government was adopted at the start of Henry Vill's reign and lasted from 1509-1514 and again in his last years as monarch. This can also be seen in Henry's use of Parliament, which was primarily used to secure revenue, much like H8 in his early years. In this, H8 didn't completely destroy his father's legacy as he did share similarities in his approach to government which allowed Henry to increase royal revenue. For example, the 1512-1514 Parliament was used to provide extraordinary parliament which allowed Henry to finance the military campaigns in Scotland and France. This reinforces the viewpoint that Henry shared elements of his father's legacy through the use of a councillor government which was used to call Parliament for financial purposesTheme 2 : Foreign policy - H7 peaceful FP , H8 aggressive - military glory FPHenry's early years as a monarch were defined by his desire to be a warrior king, destroying his father's legacy, who was careful to maintain peace within his kingdom. H7 viewed peace as necessary, ensuring that he wouldn't provoke another Hundred Year war.This wasn't recognised be H8, who unlike his father, didn't recognise that England was relatively small and weak compared to its foreign counterparts such as France and the Holy Roman Empire. In 1512, Henry engaged in war with southwest France, destroying his father's legacy because this essentially displaced H7's French alliance following the Treaty of Etaples in 1492. This reflects Henry's conflicting approach to FP which effectively destroyed H7's legacy. Such an approach to FP carried on throughout his reign until a year before his death 1546.This continued despite the fact that Henry's approach brought forward minimal victories, thus showing how he destroyed his father's peaceful FP because unlike his dad he was impulsive and delusional.EvaluationAlternatively, it could be argued that H7’s legacy wasn't entirely destroyed because H8 still maintained elements of his father's foreign policy. This can be seen in the fact that H8's key aims in his early years consisted of establishing his status among European monarchs. This is similar to Henry VIl's foreign policy objective of recognition of the Tudor dynasty. This can be enhance by the fact that Henry carried out the marriage to COA, which was part of Henry VIl's objectives whilst he was king. This indicates that H8 didn't completely destroy his father's legacy because he did carry out the main objectives of his foreign policy, as negotiated between Henry VIl and Ferdinand of Spain. This also established recognition of the Tudor dynasty because Henry essentially had and alliance with Spain due to the marriage alliance, following through Henry VIl's legacy.Theme 3 : Finances - H7 strategically didn’t spend crown finances . H8 spent on FPHenry VIl had the reputation of a miserly king due to his strategic approach to royal finances and his close control of royal revenue.This was completely destroyed by Henry VIll due his irrational spending. Henry VII had left around £300,000 in plates & jewels and £10,000 cash. This money was quickly spent on Henry VIII 's foreign policy objectives and left Henry with painfully small gains.This directly contrasts with Henry VIl as he maintained the legacy of taking calculated steps in regards to finance in order to achieve multiple objectives simultaneously and maximise royal revenue. This cannot be said for Henry VIII as he essentially spent all the money his father saved for him within the first few years of his reign indicating that he didn't share the same miserly trait as his father. Henry VIll further destroyed his father's legacy by selling off Crown lands and ex-monastic lands at a relatively cheap price.H7 would not have followed this policy because he reformed the system of Crown lands to ensure increased control and profit by administering it through Chamber rather than Courts of Exchequer, raising income from 12,000 to 42,000 pounds.In this, H7 destroyed his father's legacy as he didn't place the same focus and emphasis on financial regulation as his father did making Henry desperate for money later on in his reign - which wasn't shared among Henry VIl.EvaluationConclusionOverall, it would be an oversimplification to argue that H7 completely destroyed his father's legacy because he did indeed adopt elements of his legacy as seen in his marriage to Catherine of Aragon and his approach to government and Parliament. This was shared by Henry VI.That said, Henry did destroy parts of his father's legacy due to his aggressive foreign policy which led to crippled alliances between France, which Henry VIl worked hard to maintain. This is also true for the fact that Henry VIll adopted a government led by chief ministers and his immediate spending of money.
• "Henry VIII was content to allow ministers to rule for him"

  IntroductionIt can be argued that Henry was content with his key ministers 'ruling' on his behalf, as seen in the role of Wolsey (1514-1529) and the role of Cromwell (1532-1540). In this, ministers had the main role of handling domestic issues such as reforming the judicial system and handling royal supremacy, and eventually under Cromwell, the reformation of the Church.Through this, it can be argued that Henry was content. Although it can be argued that Henry wasn't entirely content as he eventually returned to a councillor form of government in his later years.For the ministers to rule for him, they would be making most of the decisions, and Henry must have supported this.However, large decisions were still dictated by Henry, and he had overall say, not his ministers.Theme 1 : PoliticallyH8 was content to allow his ministers to 'rule' on his behalf due to the political influence and power that Wolsey wielded. This can be seen in the fact that Wolsey assumed the function of reforming the judicial system.As Lord Chancellor Wolsey had the role of overseeing the legal system, upholding "fair justice. This led to Wolsey developing the Court of the star Chamber which was established by the 1487 Act of Parliament. This was extended in 1516 and increased cheap and fair justice. This development was very successful in practice, forcing Wolsey to set up separate tribunals to prevent the overflow of cases.This indicates that Henry was indeed content with allowing his key ministers such as Wolsey to rule on his behalf as this behaviour is in stark contrast with his father who was keen to maintain royal prerogative and regulate the power of those supporting him. This is also reinforced by the fact that Henry abstained from involving himself in domestic policies, leaving such roles to his key ministers.This went to the extent that Wolsey was labelled as the 'Alter Rex' due to his great assertion of power and influence within the political realm.EvaluationIt can also be argued that Henry wasn't content with his ministers ruling on his behalf because he did end up returning to his councillor form of government between the years 1540-47. In this, government worked as a collective as opposed to one run by a single minister. In this reformed structure, the key features of government were collective responsibility indicating that Henry is no longer content with ministers ruling on his behalf. This therefore suggests that Henry was only content with a form of government that proved to function effectively without any divisions. This justified Henry's change from a government essentially ruled by ministers to one of collective responsibility because 'rule' by minister proved to be ineffective, hence the execution of Wolsey and Cromwell.Theme 2 : Kings great matterIt can be further argued that Henry was content with his ministers ruling on his behalf due to their role in the 'King's Great Matter.This led to the short term establishment of royal supremacy over the church which was headed by the ministers as opposed to Henry himself, implying tha Henry preferred a 'hands off approach to politics, allowing his ministers to yield enough power to carry out their functions. In this Wolsey had to secure papal dispensation for the annulment of his marriage to Catherine. By keeping this matter exclusively to Wolsey an abstaining from the negotiations, this illustrates that Henry allowed his ministers to essentially rule on his behalf because of the great influence they exerted onto policies.Whilst Wolsey wasn't successful in his negotiations with the Pope, the fact that his main function at the time was resolve the King's Great Matter' indicates that Wolsey effectively had the power to influence domestic and foreign policy to resolve the annulment issue. This certainly suggests that Henry was content to allow his ministers to rule on his behalf because they wielded enough power to make drastic changes to England.This change can be witnessed under Cromwell who arguably had the greatest impact in Tudor England, implying that Henry was content to allow such changes to take place. Cromwell successfully resolved the King's Great Matter by asserting royal supremacy which subsequently led to the radical reformation of religion under Henry. In this Cromwell secured the marriage by igniting the break away from Rome. Cromwell exploited Church weaknesses, challenging the supremacy of Church supremacy to English law, headed by lawyer Christopher St German in 1528. Under Henry VIl this would have been regarded as an issue that lay within royal prerogative and therefore could not be discussed by ministers. It can also be argued that this was seen as a step towards heresy by the population as Cromwell essentially minimised the supremacy of the Church by attacking its legal jurisdiction. This indicates that Henry went to the extent that his ministers were allowed to ignite the break away from the Catholic faith and head Protestantism. This change wasn't one developed an led by henry, despite the fact that this is a defining feature of Henry's reign. This therefore shows that Henry was content to allow his ministers to rule on his even in matters that regarded reformation of the Church.EvaluationAlternatively it can be argued that Henry wasn't entirely content with his ministers ruling on his behalf because ultimately they did experience a downfall in their political power and influence. For example, Wolsey's failure to resolve the King's Great Matter' increased Henry's frustration as well as his pre-existing popularity due to the 1523 subsidy. This led to his death in 1530 on the 29th November. The same is also true for Cromwell who experienced a decline in his influence by 1540. His downfall was due to his failure to satisfactorily handle the kings marital affairs. This allowed his enemies such as Norfolk to exploit these divisions. Norfolk convinced Henry that Cromwell was plotting to bring in a full version of Protestantism to England despite knowing that the king was adamantly against this. This essentially sealed Cromwell's fate, leading to his execution in July 1540. This therefore indicates that Henry only allowed his ministers to rule on his behalf if they satisfactorily met certain standards. By falling behind this, they were liable to execution, reinforcing the viewpoint that whilst Henry adopted a 'hands off approach to politics, the power and influence that such ministers were regulated was by Henry. Through this, Henry established himself as the overall ruler as ministers remained in check throughout their reign.Theme 3 : Foreign policy - weakest argumentHenry VIII inherited a councillor from his father and quickly became disenchanted with them due to his desire to go to war with France in 1512.His council was primarily composed of more conservative members who didn’t want to go to war.He had frequent clashes with his government, which suggests he would not let his ministers rule for him as he had his own objectives he wanted to achieve.Henry did not support the decisions of ministers who did not seek to meet his agenda.EvaluationHenry was often disinterested in government business - he would often only discuss government affairs following mass or dinner).Therefore it can be argued that he would happily allow his ministers to have a degree of control.Henry would often intersect in government business.He would allow ministers to rule day to day affairs but would dictate decisions as his interjections into policy making and decision to go to war with France shows.ConclusionOverall, it can be argued that the change from a government ruled by ministers to one of a councillor approach reflects that ultimately Henry wasn't content with this style of government. If Henry was so adamant to continue with a government ruled by ministers then his later years as monarch wouldn't have experienced a change in the style of government.Henry was not content to allow his ministers to rule for him, but instead allow them to rule with himSome ministers had significant influence and power, but their decisions surrounded around helping Henry fulfil his aims.Henry allows them to govern the country and administer day to day business, but didn’t allow them to make key decisions that affected England, instead making those decisions himself.
• Administrative reform was the most significant development of the government during Henry the eighths reign until 1547. Assess the validity of this view

  Judgement

  Taking administrative reform to mean reform is purposefully considered for the betterment of the public sector, restricts it to meaning reforms which helped wider society during tutor times. Therefore, it is valid to argue that administrative reforms were the most significant development of government up until 1529 - Wolsey Infamously name friend of the poor, was the driving Force for government to develop administration such as the legal and tax system. Henceforward, though, the most significant development of the government during Henry's rain was the revitalise use of Parliament, Inspired by Cromwell. Something which acted as a through line, as was still an important and contributing development, was the Reformation of government structure and that's impact on wider reforms. Therefore, they will minister to reform was at the forefront of Wiles government, and changes to government structure where effective in considerable, across the rain the most significant development in the success

  The significant development of administrative reforms

  Under Wolseys government administrative reforms took the forefront of government legislations - Most significantly the setting up of the court of Chancery. This card listened to the claims of enclosure, contracts and land ownership And practice equity loan rather than common law, it's encouraged poorer people to come forward because it also allowed for the suppression of the nobles As well as offering the lower members of society away into the legal system and a method of protection of the rights. The only prevention to development this reform cast was that it became too popular and therefore justice was slow due to the court being clogged up. Furthermore the star chamber permanent committee set up in 1519 dealt with cases also involving the Poor Which increased the likelihood of a variety of peoples cases being heard and extended the capabilities of equity Law.

  Significant development of government structure

  During Henry the eighth's rain governance via councils broke down for the first time in a long period of history, and was replaced by ministerial structure instead. Henry the eighth was annoyed that experienced counsellors such as More didn't want to go to war with France - which is one of his main foreign policy aims - and he was also impressed by the rising star of Wolsey His organisational skills as a leader would prove to be beneficial to Henry's cause, And was also spending a lot of time with young nobles and courtiers who were like-minded And who we had grown up with - and this was the reason Henry's minions were created who then became privy chamber. These minions distrusted Wolsey , and thus in 1519 Wolsey edited government structure again when he eradicated them and replace them with his own followers. Following the fall of Wolsey a conciliar government was temporarily adopted however this was broken by Cromwell three years later he replaced Wolsey as the figurehead of government. Cromwells occupation with handling the kings great matter and concerning himself with other affairs meant he made a little further changes to administration. This can be noted in that following the fall of Cromwell a conciliar government style was once again adopted.Therefore although changes to government structure were significant reforms throughout Henry's reign it is clear that the longevity of any changes was severely impaired by the lack of attention given to these reforms.

  Significant development in the use of parliament

  Before 1530 there was no evidence that Henry the eighth and any different approach to Henry the seventh towards parliament- He saw it as being able to pass laws and grant taxes. Henry the seventh and early how many eights did not see the need to use Parliament for advisory or legislative purposes. This can be seen in the fact that prior to 1529 Parliament was called only 4x 1510-1523 - only one of these being under Wolsey. However, Cromwells reformation parliament Which was used between 1529 and 1536 to secure the acts following the Reformation for example the act of restraint of appeals in 1533, and the act of succession in 1534.Effectively this decision meant that Henry and Cromwell could claim any religious Reformation was done in the interest and by the choice of the people of England, and therefore could not be challenged. This was an effective decision because had they break from Rome been handled differently it may have resulted in significant unrest. This decision legitimise the break from Rome and set a precedent for further Parliament use to ensure the legality of any legal reforms. This was a significant development of government as for the first time in a long time the Monarch was making use of The parliament as a form of consolidation of power as opposed to only using it for basic functions

  Eval :

  Parliament developed only because the king needed its support .it was used less under later tudors and Elizabeth successfully controlled its claims to be a partner in government

  The increase in the power of Parliament was only temporary: this was not a lasting change. It occurred only because Henry needed Parliament to enact his religious changes. • This is evident from Elizabeth I's reign, during which Parliament's role was very limited.

  Conclusion

  not revolution - instead a revolutionary process spanning over a longer period
• Who was Henry VIII's greatest chief minister ?

  *Introduction- A great minister can be seen in the fact that they would be able to effectively perform their functions within the social, economic and foreign sphere. This is indeed true for Wolsey who was able to exert his influence on all aspects of government, whilst simultaneously diminishing threats to his position. This establishes Wolsey as Henry's greatest minister. - However, it can also be argued that both ministers were equally successful. This can be seen under Cromwell used his abilities to resolve foreign matters as well as marital issues, making him appear equally powerful and influential.Theme 1 : Social sphere- Within the social sphere, Wolsey certainly was Henry's greatest minister because of the reforms he made to the judicial system. This can be seen in the Court of Chancery and the Court of Star Chamber. The Court of Chancery in which the court proved to be so successful to the extent that the court became clogged with many cases, demonstrating Wolsey's accomplishment. - In regards to the Court of Star Chamber, this was extended in 1516 to increase cheap and fair justice, hearing cases of alleged misconduct by people who were dominant in their localities. - Wolsey was indeed a great minister who was able to accomplish several successes within his period in office. Therefore, this implies that Wolsey was arguably greater than Cromwell because he was able to resolve public grievances within a local level, which proved to be extremely successful to the extent that he set up a set of 'overflow tribunal'. In this, Wolsey is arguably Henry's greatest minister.Evaluation- Cromwell's credibility can be seen in his legal reforms following the break from Rome, demonstrating his accomplishments in the domestic and economic sphere. For example, the Court of Augmentations controlled land and finances formerly under the control of the Catholic church. This meant that by 1540, there was increased specialism within the handling of royal finances, making way for more efficiency and effectivity. There were also new creation that accommodated to funds that was previously sent to Rome. This was now handled by the Court of First Fruits and Tenths, which now collected money that was previously sent to Rome, insinuating that Cromwell was a great minister because he was able to handle the repercussions that came with the break from Rome, allowing a smooth transition. This was also useful because there was now greater royal supremacy, which Henry was keen to exercise. - This depicts Cromwell as a far more competent minister because he was able to achieve Henry's objectives of increasing royal supremacy as well as catering to the newly found changes to the economy.Theme 2 : Political sphere- Wolsey can also be seen as Henry's greatest minister due to his influence on the political sphere, proving himself to be a powerful and ruthless figure, securing his position in government. - This can be seen in the Eltham Ordinances in which Wolsey was able to restructure the composition of the Privy Chamber in his favour by removing the threats to his position, such as the Groom of the Stool, Sir William Compton who posed a threat to Wolsey. Instead, he was replaced with a more compliant Henry Norris, demonstrating Wolsey's intelligence because he was able to alter structures that he had no control over to minimise threats to his position. Whilst his efforts to reform the Privy Chamber were introduced as financial reforms in order to cut finances, this was used to disguise his true aim; to remove his enemies from positions of power. - Therefore, Wolsey can be seen as Henry's greatest minister because he was able to use his position of power to assert himself in all aspects of government, allowing him to exercise his functions with easeEvaluation- It can be argued that the Ordinances were about weakening Wolsey's rivals, rather than a genuine attempt to improve efficiency. They lapsed once Wolsey was secure in power. - Wolsey made few major changes to government; those he did make were mainly in order to increase his own or Henry's power. - It could be argued that Wolsey misused the Star Chamber at times, to attack those nobles he viewed as rivals. Wolsey (who was not a trained lawyer) never intended to set up a new system; his reforms were unlikely to last beyond his death.Theme 3 : Kings great matter - foreign sphere- Conversely it can be argued that Cromwell was Henry's greatest minister because he was able to resolve the King's 'Great Matter' as well as handle the changes that came with this solution. Through this, Cromwell secured the divorce from Catherine of Aragon by excessive use of Parliament to legitimise his reforms allowing Parliamentary statute law to prevail over canon law. This was through the Act of Restraint of Appeals in (1533) which declared that the monarch possessed an imperial jurisdiction which declared that appeals could not be made to Rome regarding Church court decisions. - This indicates that Cromwell proved himself to be a greater minister to Henry because he was able to secure far reaching religious change and use his legal expertise to prevent Catherine of Aragon to appeal to Rome against the marriage annulment. This surely presents Cromwell as a great minister because Wolsey wasn't able to utilise his expertise in the same manner that Cromwell did, preventing him from achieving the same victoriesEvaluation* - That said, it must also acknowledged that Wolsey also had a series of weaknesses which makes Cromwell appear to be far more competent. - This can be seen in Wolsey's failure within the foreign sphere, in which he failed to assert England's power within the international sphere, therefore jeopardising Henry's 'Great Matter'. This ultimately led to Wolsey's downfall because he failed to seek a dispensation for the annulment of Catherine's marriage based on the Levitical argument. In this, it can be argued that Wolsey wasn't Henry's greatest minister because he failed to display competence in his diplomatic negotiations with the Pope in regards to Henry's divorce. This furiated Henry, which led to Wolsey's downfall in November 1530, demonstrating that Wolsey wasn't Henry's greatest minister because he lacked the capability to sufficient handle the 'Great Matter' dealings with the Pope. Conclusion : - Overall it can be argued that both ministers were indeed equally as successful because of the influence they both had into social, judicial and legislative aspects of England. In this, reforms were wide in scope and success as they reconciled with Henry's own objectives; as seen under Cromwell who increased royal supremacy. This was also true for Wolsey who was able to reform the judicial system in a way that accommodated to the public
• “Henry VIII might have himself supreme head of the Church of England, but he did little else to change the church.” Assess the validity of this view.

  JudgementBy freeing England from the jurisdiction of the Pope Henry VIII instigated a hugely significant change in the notion of religion in England - a change which would be developed Throughout the rest of the Tudor dynasty.It is however therefore clear that Henry’s changes to the church were limited as further progress was needed to sway the church further towards its claimed Protestantism.The changes to the church, or lack there of, can be grouped into changes to doctrine, changes to structure, and legacy of the church - each increasing respectively in their degree of change.It is true that many elements of the church were not reformed, and the areas which were Often lacks authority or conviction, however it is not necessarily valid to claim that little else was changed - perhaps more accurately little else which is fundamentally reformed as the establishment of Henry a supreme head of the church.Henry himself had never been fully convinced by Protestant beliefs. His need for a divorce led to his establishment of the Church of England, but he retained a core of Catholic beliefs. As a result, there was no widespread programme to make local churches look more ProtestantTheme 1 : Structural ( changing the structural set up of the church ) - Limited changeChurch was structurally little changed from 1529 . Clerical structure remained the same and the country was still divided into dioceses and parishes .No other changes were made to structure of church . Spiritual jurisdiction remained in the hands of archbishops and bishops .Furthermore Henry maintained the traditional structure of the Church, insinuating that Henry sought to preserve Catholicism in England.The structure of church and religion stayed the same because even though Henry VIll was now the Head of Church, and Cromwell was the vicegerent of the spirituals, all the other roles stayed the same. For example, jurisdiction continued to be in hands of archbishops and bishops. This therefore shows he did little else to change church because he did not fully change the deep-rooted traditional structure of the church, which made him different to continental reformers. Not only was the structure of the church the same, but the structure of religion prevailed because services, interiors and music still continued despite the religious reforms that took place.This again shows that little else changed because religious experience of population was still the same, thus showing the limited scope of reforms.Evaluation :Henry did manage to ensure that the jurisdiction of the Pope was destroyed and that the king was the new figurehead of the church - this was a really significant alteration to the structure of the church1531 Clergy accused of praemunire and fined (forced clergy to acknowledge that King was ‘Supreme Head of English Church’) → surrendered its right to make ecclesiastical laws independently of the king, promised not to issue new laws and agreed to submit existing laws to a royally appointed committee→ gave King larger control of the church and the began the process of moving away from Church and State to Church-in-StatAct of Supremacy 1534- officially made Henry the head of the Church, re-established the king’s territories as a ‘sovereign empire’ - completely changed the structure as many believed that the rulers of england had enjoyed sole power until the Pope had established a variety of legal and financial claims . This also achieved a full break with Rome- Cromwell convinced Henry this was the only way as Pope was not prepared to bow to any threatTheme 2 : Ceremonial/ Doctrinal - limited changeInitially took a Protestant direction (e.g Royal Supremacy), H.E- towards the end of his reign Catholic doctrine had to be restored to some extent to reassure opinion and therefore by the end there was a compromise between Protestantism and Catholicism . Change but limitedThe act for the advancement of true religion in 1543 men the only upper-class males could read the Bible showing how the crown has justadapted the control and manipulations of the church over doctrine and who had access to information rather than changing it.Act for the advancement of true religion 1543 : This demonstrated limited change to the Church because this meant that only upper class men could read Bible. This ensured that changes to the church were limited in scope because the lower classes were uneducated, and could therefore spur religious divisions due to misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the biblical text. This demonstrates a conservative stance to religious reform as this followed through on Catholic belief, who also opposed translations therefore reflecting that Henry done little to change the Church since he just reasserted Catholic beliefs within legislation. The fact that this occurred towards the end of his reign shows that even after all the religious turmoil and drastic change towards religion, he was willing to backtrack on his steps and reassert Catholicism. Therefore, this shows that Henry did little to change the Church since he didn't strongly believe in the Protestant reforms himself, willing to reverse the radical reforms he enforced into England.The altering of church practices and doctrine such as in the 10 articles in 1536 which were Protestant to an extent but with a Conservative through line (include prayer for the dead, seen as a Catholic practice. The wording of the Mass was also Catholic, suggesting a continued belief in transubstantiation)and then the six articles in 1539 ( re-emphasised belief in transubstantiation, communion in one kind, the seven sacraments, and celibacy of priests) further derailed from radical Protestant reform, making changes to the Church narrow. The Articles reasserted the Catholic doctrine by making denial of transubstantiation an act of heresy. Henry evidently reverted back to his Catholic beliefs shortly after the strongly Protestant 1536 Royal Injunctions. This indicates that Henry wasn't even willing to implement long term radical Protestant reform because he backtracked on such legislation 3 years after. This therefore shows that Henry did little else to change Church since he didn't continue wish to continue his reforms; perhaps because he had already achieved his objective of divorce and wasn't interested in changing doctrine. This implies that Henry didn't implement radical changes to the Church as his objective wasn't to reform religion, rather to achieve a divorce from Catherine of Aragon in order to secure the succession to the throne. It can be argued that this was done because religious controversy was undermining order (as seen in the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536, the largest rebellion in Tudor history), therefore showing yet again that Henry did little else to change by making Church more conservative again through Six Articles Act.The 1543 kings book featured an emphasis on catholic and Conservative notions, and despite some arguable Lutheran elements this demonstrates how doctrine was not being reformedEvaluation1538 Injunctions- introduced Protestant practises→ each Church requires English BibleRadical change in the church can also be seen in the Tyndale Bible, which made Protestantism a widespread phenomenon. The Injunctions of 1538 made every parish church have copy of the English Bible, forcefully asserting Protestantism into English society. Parish churches stood at over 8000, indicating that religion was central to everyday life, with a parish church in every community. Therefore, by placing a Tyndale Bible in every parish church, there is a significantly wider access to the Protestant reforms, a feature that wasn't available under Catholicism, indicating a great change in the church. This was a radical reform because for the first time people could read Bible and understand the text especially for the wider public and uneducated. This undermines that statement that Henry had little change on the Church because changes were forcefully implemented onto Catholic communities, making way for radical change.However, the scope of this reform was limited since majority of the population was illiterate so even though there was a change de facto, there wasn't a change de jure. The extent of reform wasn't big since it wasn't far-reaching therefore he did little else to reform since majority not affected by it.Theme 3 : practices / Ceremonial / Communities , How if affected the people ?In 1545 Henry VIII dissolved a number of chantries; and in the 1540s monastic land was sold off and no new monasteries were founded.That said, it would be an oversimplification to ignore the radical and profound religious reforms that Henry implemented, that had a large and long lasting change on the Church.This can be seen in the dissolution of the monasteries, which occurred after the Valor Ecclesiasticus (1535) was completed. This began the process of dissolving the monasteries an its seizing assets in 1536. This was a huge reform because it had a big impact in every part of the country and on all individuals. This is because monasteries provided a wide range of roles such as education, poor relief, entertainment, and displaying a community,This had a wide reaching change on the Church as religion was a central part of everyday life, and with the dissolution of the monasteries, people felt that Henry was targeting their most valuable beliefs. Therefore, it would be incorrect to say that Henry did little else to change the Church because this reform was wide in scope since this changed the structure of society, especially since it meant a whole institution was destroyed.EvaluationHowever, many people still clung n to traditional practices in private.ConclusionOverall, to ignore the radical changes that Henry had on the church would oversimplify the religious reforms he implemented. This is because such reforms had a profound and long lasting impact on religious life in England. The dissolution of the monasteries impacted virtually all of England, suggesting a change that was wide in scope. That said, it is also important to consider that Henry's reforms maintained varying degrees of Catholic tradition, as seen in the maintenance of tradition in Parliamentary legislation- the Six Articles Act (1539) and the Act for the Advancement of True Religion (1543).However,t many practices and doctrines remained a compromise and that there were many inconsistencies
• Opposition to the Reformation of the Church in England failed in the years 1530 to 1547 because it lacked leadership.’ Explain why you agree or disagree with this view.


  IntroductionDefine opposition to the reformation of the church in England - opposition by clergy , court and countryLack of leadership : lacks strategy , key individuals , coordination , key aimReasons why opposition to the reformation failed - royal authority , succession , lack of external supportTheme 1 : resistance within the CourtThomas mores reluctance to lead ( passive )Most high profile opponent (had been Chancellor after Wolsey 1529).He fell from favour for refusing to support Henry’s divorce.He was sent to the Tower of London for refusing to accept the succession act of 1534. He refused to explain why he would not take the oath (we think it was because it would involve going against the Pope’s authority).he did not accept Henry as head of the Church. Slender proof of treason but enough to order his execution.More had used passive resistance, but was too famous to avoid persecution.Evaluationother reason : court - role of Cromwell/Boleyn / Aragonese factionBefore 1534, those who opposed the attack on the Church expressed their concerns by being sympathetic to Catherine of Aragon (Aragonese faction).Individuals involved: Henry Courtenay; Lord Darcy and Hussey; Sir Henry Guilford.From 1532 the presence of Anne Boleyn and Thomas Cromwell largely silenced this group.They remained hopefully that Mary (Catherine’s daughter) would be recognised as heir. Her exclusion from the succession pushed Darcey and Hussey into supporting the Pilgrimage of Grace.They were executed for treason.Courtenay was not involved in the rebellion but was executed for being linked to Reginald Pole.Theme 2 : resistance within the clergy ( variation amongst monks)Evaluationother reason : role of cromwellTheme 3 : resistance within the country (waves of violence suggest it was not coordinateddissolution of monasteries - fear for parish churches and traditional religious practicePilgrimage of graceNews of Rising in Lincolnshire spread to Yorkshire, Northumberland , Durham etc . In common with those in Lincolnshire men marched under the banner of the 5 wounds of Christ, the series of regional armies under leadership of Robert aske comprising of 40,000 people. Rebels were able to seize York and most significantly lord darcy who held pontefract castle , the key to the north . Rebels constructed a list of demands ( pontefract articles) to be presented . H8 sent army under duke of Norfolk . A truce would be called whilst the petition of pilgrims was taken to London - during this time no further dissolutions occurred.How did it end ? Once situation settled and ringleaders were dealt with , dissolution began again . First to be closed were houses that supported by rebels , but this gave way to more widespread dissolution .Why was the pilgrimage of grace serious ?Rebel forces outnumbered those of the kingRebels had control of the major city in the north , York -threaten maintenance of law and order in the north .Rebels controlled pontefract castle , seen as the gateway to the southwell organised under leadership of rivers askeattracted support from all classesGeographical scale of rebellion (Lincolnshire , Yorkshire , Cumberland and Westmorland)Limitations to seriousness of pilgrimage of grace : rebellion didn’t move south towards London and directly threaten the king .Overall the pilgrimage of grace alarmed , it was significant as it was the most popular in terms of pps and most geographically widespread .H8 but did not slow down the pace of religious change.Evaluationgovt strength in putting down rebellion
• ‘Changes in religion in the reign of Henry VIII up to 1540 occurred because of Cromwell.’ Assess the validity of this view.

  Introduction :changes in religious occured lorgely because ofHenry Vill's greed for power and money. which motivated the Break with Rome and the Dissolution of the monasteries.However, these changes were also partly motivated byProtestant ideas and influential reformerswhich encouraged Henry to move ahead with religlous change.However, althoughHenry's greed and the ideas of reformistswere necessary in bringing about religious change, they where not sufficient without Cromwell, who used the Reformation Parament to push through the legislation that feed the king to Rome and established the Royal SupremacyTheme 1 : CromwellChanges in religion occurred because of Cromwell, who succeeded where Wolsey had failed by granting the King's annulment and Brecking with RomeCromwell introduced - The Supplication ageinst the Ordinaries (1532) and Submission of the Clergy into parliament in order to bully the clergy into submission so that they would not resist Henry's authority or the changes in religious doctrine. In a series of laws passed through the reformation parliament between 1533 and 1534, Cromwell loosened the ties between England and Rome. • The most significant were the acts in restraint of Annates (1532) and Restraint of Appeals (1533) which broke Rome's financial and legal powers in England The Act of Supremacy was also extemely significant as it denied the Pope's title and status, and instead recognized Henry Vi as Supreme Head of the Church in England,Therefore , it is clear that changes in religion occurred largely because of Cromwell, who used the Reformation parliament to push through the legislation that freed the king from Rome and established the Royal SupremacyEvaluationCromwell was only a catalyst for changeRevolution from below that was inevitable- cracks in Catholic Church already existed Anticlericalism rising - created an environment in which a break from the power of the Pope was at lest conceivable. This encouraged Henry to move ahead, knowing that his initiatives would win supportTheme 2 : Protestant ideas and reformersProtestant ideas from reformers - placed the seed of changeHenry was helped by the common ground he had with reformers wanting radical religious changeThe Lollards, the predecessors to the Protestants, and humanists, elites who called for an improvement of the clergy and a return to the original scriptures, all came together in support of Church reformTyndale: • Tyndale's translation of the Bible, although from aboard, was critical in keeping the reformist tendencies current in Engiand. • infuential in the 1539 Great Bible, which was largely based upon Willam Tyndale's version in 1526, but with the more radical lutheran elements removed •Anne Boleyn: • She shared the work of Tyndale and another key reformers $1 German, which argued that Henry had the right to govern the church and its kingdom • The king read these sources and it is likely that they played a role in persuading him that unless he took control of the church, his powers would be compromised.Protestant ideas from the continent circulated widely thanks to the development of the printing press and increasing literary levels • Enabling factor • More people became aware of the criticism of the Catholic clergy • However, spread of ideas still generally limited to the elites, as the average commoner would have more pressing matters to considerEvaluationHowever , although their ideas attracted some Christian humanists , there was little committed attempt to spread Lutheran Protestantism before 'kings great matter' brought discussion of religious issuesshouldn’t be seen as vital cause , but rather a contributory factor , it created an environment in which a break from the power of the pope was conceivableTheme 3 : H8 greed for money and powerThe development of the Engish Reformation was largely due to Henry's desire to increase revenue, rather than due to Protestant ideas •Break with Rome / Divorce: important in planting in H8’s mind the question of who should exert control over the church in England . H8’s questioning of papal authority came with his denial of julius II’s right to dispense Arthur’s marriage to COA. However H8 wet to great lengths to find a solution that included the pope suggesting that he wasn’t completely against the popes authorityEvaluationthis was more of a fringe benefit than a major motivating factor . It was not until the dissolution of monasteries that the urgent need for money became apparent .Break with rome : There was not a change of doctrine - there was no rejection of Catholicism but rather a denial of papal supremacy and then a stripping of church in lone and assets . From 1533 , Cromwell passed a series of A0P to establish royal supremacy . This was the henrician reformation . -The reformation parliament brought the church and the state together (1529-36)Break with Rome : term should be used only for the technical and legal change in the status of the english church brought about through the legislation of the ‘reformation parliament’ . Whilst this legislation removed the power of the pope in England , it did not lead to the end of Catholicism in the country . Many catholic practices remained and many peoples beliefs were not changed from Catholicism to Protestantism - this included H8 himself . So it shouldn’t be assumed that the break with Rome led inevitably to a full reformation in EnglandConclusion
• The foreign policy of Henry VIII failed to achieve its objectives in the years 1509-1547”. Assess the validity of this view.


  Introduction :Beyond the early military successes against France and England’s more prominent role on the European stage Henry VIII achieved little success from his foreign policy. His wars proved costly failures that caused financial difficulties and unrest at home.Theme 1 : Military glory - conquering france - limited success1513- Wolsey organised 2nd expedition to France . Successful in Battle of the Spurs (propaganda victory)and the capture of Thérouanne and Tournai giving H8 glory he desired .Negotiated French pension. However campaign exhausted english finances and meant H8 was unable to return to france in 1514 to pursue his claim to throne . Instead he was forced into peace policy1544- Boulogne captured and kept under the Treaty of Ardres (1546). Pension secured.Eval :1512- (due to alliance with Ferdinand)embarrassment of first expedition against France1513- Tournai sold back to French for less than it cost to repair defenses, pension lost1522-23- costly and failed campaigns in France- causes unrest at home through Amicable Grant taxation1544- hugely expensive war at a cost of £2 million, little achieved1545- the French launched counter-invasion of the Isle of Wight and sent forces to support the Scots- ventual peace treaty in 1546Theme 2 : Protecting the security of England’s borderDefeat of scottish at flodden in 1513 - earl of Surrey led english army against Scots , who as part of auld alliance with france had invaded england while H8 was fighting french . 10,000 killed including scottish king J4 , large no.nobles while securing northern border -(removed scottish threat for many yrs) ,Ireland- Irish rebellion crushed in 1536 and the country brought to heel in the 1540sEval :Scotland- the policy of the ‘rough wooing’ to wed Prince Edward to Mary Queen of Scots failed despite the agreement of their betrothal at the Treaty of Greenwich in 1532- powerful Earl of Arran withdrew his support- chance to unite kingdoms lost- instead invasion of Scotland in 1544 achieves little and enrages the ScotsTheme 3 : securing dynasty through foreign marriagesMarriage to Catherine of Aragon, 1509- produced female heir in MaryEval :Catherine of Aragon failed to produce male heir1533- Succession Act undid dynastical work of marriage with Catherine of Aragon •1540- Marriage with Anne of Cleves- divorce within months- no new heir and foreign alliance undone •His eventual heir Edward did not come from foreign marriage •1543- Edward’s arranged marriage to Mary Queen of Scots isn’t ratified by the Scottish Parliament and the unification of the two kingdoms fail
• ‘Henry VIII’s government was strengthened by its international position in the years 1534 to 1547.’ Assess the validity of this view.

  How was government strengthened ?Theme 1 : International positionNo immediate prospect of a crusade besides a brief period of 1538-40 from France and the Holy Roman Empire1544: the auld alliance had been reestablished , treaty of Greenwich had been repudiated H8 , in alliance with C5 , invaded France in 1544 . He captured Boulogne but C5 made separate peace with F1 . The french didn’t recapture Boulogne and the invasion of northern England never materialised . Peace between France and England was agreed in 15461542: Successful invasion of Scotland in battle of slowly moss - J5 died . Heir , 1 week old Mary , H8 didn’t invade France but sought to marry E4 to Mary queen of Scots . The treaty of Greenwich in 15423 , formally betrothed the children . However , since the Scots refused to ratify the treaty , the earl of Hereford was sent to raid Edinburgh , leith and St. Andrews; this achieved little .Eval :1538: C5 and F1 signing treaty of nice was critical in ending the Habsburg-Valois war and focusing European catholic antagonism on to England , leading to fear of invasion in 1539 .The break with Rome isolated England and made it a target for foreign aggression . Pope Paul III deposed H8 and absolved english catholic’s from obedience to their ruler1539: England came close to invasion - Pope 3 sent cardinal Beaton to Scotland and cardinal pile to France to rouse support for a catholic crusade against H8 . H8 responded by marrying the German Protestant princess anne of cleaves , seeking an alliance with the Protestant league of schmalkalden . However this became unnecessary when relations between C5 and F1 broke down , making H8’s position more secureTheme 2 : Wolseys reformsThe 1526 Eltham Ordinances reorganised the chaotic finances of the Privy Chamber, and made government more efficient.Wolsey made attempts to introduce civil law (based on justice and evidence) at the expense of common law (where verdicts were based on similar cases in the past.) Wolsey made more frequent use of the Star Chamber (around 120 cases per year) than Henry VII- this was a good thing when it involved nobles and local officials being tried for abuse of power. He encouraged commoners to bring cases before the Chamber.Wolsey was seen as a friend of the poor, supporting laws against enclosure, and using the Court of Requests to hear cases from poor people. This court charged low fees for bringing a case, and made decisions quickly.Eval: relied on foreign policy / use time as an EvalDespite his masters pro-war stance Wolsey fancied England as an arbitrator of peace (a clever move considering England’s lack of funds and resources)Wolsey ended isolation with Treaty of London in Oct 1518 -signed by England ,France ,Spain , HRE etc. Signatories agreed to commit to a policy of peaceful cooperation and to make war on any ruler who broke the terms . Binded the leading states of Europe to a policy of perpetual peace . Wolsey demonstrated negotiation skills , h8 basked in the glory of the diplomatic triumph . Evaluation : within 2 yrs there was renewed tension C5 of Spain competed with F1 of France for crown of Holy Roman Empire and C5 won . Wolsey forced to mediate in an effort to preserve peaceTheme 3 : Cromwells reformationPOWER OF THE MONARCHThe power of the monarch increased as Henry became Head of the Church: in the introduction to the Act in Restraint of Appeals (1533), Cromwell wrote that everyone owed the King (who was chosen by God) total obedience; all power derived from the King.The Act of Union with Wales (1536)reorganised local government in Wales and the Marches, giving the monarch greater control.An Act against Liberties and Franchises restricted the special powers ofregional nobles, such as the Prince Bishop of Durham.PARLIAMENT • Parliament began to play a central role in the political system. This was because Henry needed it to agree to the various Acts confirming his Supremacy over the Church. It met for an unbroken period between 1529 and 1536. • By the end of this period, it was accepted that statute law (law made by Parliament with the King’s consent) represented ultimate authority in England. • The dissolution of the monasteries meant that abbots were now longer represented in the Lords. This meant clergy were in a minority in the upper house for the first time.Eval :The increase in the power of Parliament was only temporary: this was not a lasting change. It occurred only because Henry needed Parliament to enact his religious changes.This is evident from Elizabeth I’s reign, during which Parliament’s role was very limited.The power of the monarch was immense even before Cromwell’s changes.These powers included significant influence over appointments to church positions and emergency taxation.
• To what extent was Henry VIII himself responsible for the failures of English foreign policy during his reign?

  Introduction :

  Henry was arguably responsible for the failures of his foreign policy due to his impulsive behaviour due to his desire to become a warrior king; leading to him rushing into wars without fully understanding the situation, therefore lacking any strategy.

  Alternatively, Wolsey and Cromwell could also be blamed because they were chief ministers indicating that they wielded enough power to formulate efficient strategies that would have resulted in victory.

  Despite this, Henry is largely responsible due to his impulsive nature.

  Theme 1 : Henry was responsible - due to his desire to be a warrior king

  It can be argued that the failure of foreign policy was largely due to Henry Vill's desire to be a warrior king. This is the ultimate cause of FP failures since it made him impulsive and therefore motivated by emotion as opposed by rationale, making him vulnerable to defeat.

  This desire was the primary factor in leading to defeat, as seen in the Battle of Flodden (Sept 1513) which killed James IV. In this, Henry could've taken over Scotland but his desire to take over France clouded his judgement, preventing him from pursuing Scotland. This reinforces the viewpoint that Henry is to blame for the failure of foreign policy because he ultimately failed to capitalise off of the weaknesses of an insecure Scotland.

  This can also be seen in the fact that Henry failed to listen to the advice of his councillors who advised Henry to abstain from a war against France and subsequently urged him to renew the Treaty of Etaples in 1510 as proposed by his father. This shows that whilst Henry received advice from individuals who weren't clouded by emotion, he failed to take on the advice by individuals who weren't swayed by emotion.

  Eval :

  Theme 2 : wolseys fault

  Alternatively, it can be argued that Wolsey is to blame for the failure of foreign policy because of the influence he wielded and therefore could've exerted onto issues relating foreign policy. Cardinal Wolsey had great power to the extent that he was called the 'Alter Rex', giving Henry a passive role within the Court. This suggests that Wolsey was arguably the master and Henry was the puppet.

  Therefore, Wolsey should've used this power to reorganise foreign policy in a more coherent manner or restrain Henry. Instead, Wolsey contributed to the failures in foreign policy because he lacked the ability to raise sufficient finances to fund the aggressive foreign policies.

  For example, since Henry ran out of money in 1512/1513 due to the wars with France and Scotland, he couldn't succeed. The same could be said for the Battle of Pavia in 1525 which failed to raise sufficient public support because of Wolsey's unpopular methods of raising money. This therefore means that the failures of foreign policy were to an extent due to Wolsey's inability to effectively influence the King into a more logical approach to foreign policy.

  Eval :

  That said, it can yet again be argued that this was ultimately Henry's fault because Wolsey was very skilled when it came to organisation to the point that he rose from a very humble background (the son of a butcher) to and esteemed figure who rivalled the aristocracy. Wolsey was extremely successful in regards to organisation, as seen in the 1512 war.

  Moreover, the Treaty of London 1518 showcased his impressive foreign policy handlings and diplomacy skills, allowing Wolsey to become one o the top European diplomats. Therefore, the skills that lay within Wolsey indicate that the failures of foreign policy are due to Henry's mishandlings as opposed to anyone else. Henry was far too indulged with the image of a warrior king' to the extent that this led to the crumbling of the English economy.

  Theme 3 :

  On the other hand it can be argued that the failures of foreign policy are due to Henry's next chief minister, Cromwell. In this Cromwell was far too invested in the Protestant reformation that he wasn't able to fulfil his function. The break away from Rome failed arguably led to a failure in foreign policy objectives, as headed by Cromwell.

  After breaking away ties from the Pope, it is expected that England would seek to enhance its foreign allies to prevent a future attack. This approach wasn't conducted by Cromwell and instead led to more diplomatic isolation. For example the 1538 bull deposing VIll, he isolated England further because of the failed marriage with Cleeves in 1540. This subsequently weakened ties with the League of Schmalkalden, a renowned trading alliance. Therefore the failures of foreign policy aren't entirely Henry's fault since his chief minister also allowed foreign policy failures by pushing his foreign policy objectives as opposed to furthering English interests as a whole.

  Eval :

  However, Cromwell did manage to successfully resolve the King's Great Matter, one of Henry VIll's foreign policy objectives. Cromwell managed to achieve the annulment that Henry desired by breaking away from Rome. This shows that responsibility for the failure of foreign policy couldn't be due to Cromwell because he managed to achieve extremely difficult successes that even his predecessor, Wolsey, couldn't achieve;

  He was intelligent by recognising that England was too weak to physically fight with foreign powers so he created the "Reformation Parliament' to break with Rome through pieces of legislation like the Act of Supremacy (Nov 1534). Therefore Cromwell not responsible since he succeeded- it was Henry VIll since he was uncontrollable and asserted himself in FP that proved to be detrimental in the international sphere as well as in the economic sphere. No matter how skilled Henry's ministers were, Henry was insistent on taking his aggressive foreign policy into practice.

  Conclusion :

  Overall, Henry is largely responsible for the failures of foreign policy because of his impulsive nature which led to the breakdown of the Treaty of Etaples, as asserted by his father, an engaging in military campaigns despite lacking the funds to successfully carry them out. This trait arguably led to the breakdown of foreign policy objectives. That said, it is also critical to consider the failings of his ministers who lacked the ability to enforce a successful foreign policy whilst simultaneously fulfilling their additional roles.
• Henry VIII's foreign policy failed to achieve its aim of making England a major power in Europe.' Assess the validity of this view.

  Foreign policy , 1540-47

  The 1540s saw H7 return to an aggressive FP

  1542: Successful invasion of Scotland in battle of slowly moss - J5 died . Heir , 1 week old Mary , H8 didn't invade France but sought to marry E4 to Mary queen of Scots . The treaty of Greenwich in 15423 , formally betrothed the children . However , since the Scots refused to ratify the treaty , the earl of Hereford was sent to raid Edinburgh , leith and St. Andrews; this achieved little .

  1544: the auld alliance had been reestablished , treaty of Greenwich had been repudiated H8 , in alliance with C5 , invaded France in 1544 . He captured Boulogne but C5 made separate peace with F1 . The french didn't recapture Boulogne and the invasion of northern England never materialised . Peace between France and England was agreed in 1546

  Foreign policy at the end of Henry's reign 1527-40

  From 1527 it was clear that C5 was the dominant player in Europe . This made H8's annulment attempts difficult , and domestic issues affected his foreign moves .

  1527: H8 allied with the french in the treaty of Amiens - as H8 was weak and minor power in Europe .

  1532: H8 formed a further alliance with France , in an attempt to pressurise C5 into supporting H8's marriage annulment - tactic failed .

  1538: C5 and F1 signing treaty of nice was critical in ending the Habsburg-Valois war and focusing European catholic antagonism on to England , leading to fear of invasion in 1539 .The break with Rome isolated England and made it a target for foreign aggression . Pope Paul III deposed H8 and absolved english catholic's from obedience to their ruler

  1539: England came close to invasion - Pope 3 sent cardinal Beaton to Scotland and cardinal pile to France to rouse support for a catholic crusade against H8 . H8 responded by marrying the German Protestant princess anne of cleaves , seeking an alliance with the Protestant league of schmalkalden . However this became unnecessary when relations between C5 and F1 broke down , making H8's position more secure

  Foreign policy , 1540-47

  The 1540s saw H7 return to an aggressive FP

  1542: Successful invasion of Scotland in battle of slowly moss - J5 died . Heir , 1 week old Mary , H8 didn't invade France but sought to marry E4 to Mary queen of Scots . The treaty of Greenwich in 15423 , formally betrothed the children . However , since the Scots refused to ratify the treaty , the earl of Hereford was sent to raid Edinburgh , leith and St. Andrews; this achieved little .

  1544: the auld alliance had been reestablished , treaty of Greenwich had been repudiated H8 , in alliance with C5 , invaded France in 1544 . He captured Boulogne but C5 made separate peace with F1 . The french didn't recapture Boulogne and the invasion of northern England never materialised . Peace between France and England was agreed in 1546
• To what extent did the english government respond effectively to the domestic problems which it faces in the years 1529-1553?

  Introduction :This period has been labelled as the beginning of the Mid-Tudor crisis due to being ridden with more troubles compared to other parts of the Tudor dynasty.During this period responses to domestic policy considered weak due to its treatment of rebellions, religion and royal finances.However, that's not to say domestic policy was never strong during this period since Cromwell & Northumberland since they both exerted a degree of influence into the domestic sphere that helped stabilise it.Theme 1 : Social - RebellionsIt can be argued that English government didn't respond to domestic problems effectively because of the large scale rebellions that took place. This is because Henry VIll failed to see rising discontentment in his kingdom and consequently ignored any warnings of this. This can be seen before Pilgrimage of Grace (1536) in which henry ignored warnings of the rising discontentment, indicating a weak government because they didn't want to trouble themselves with complex issues such as societal divisions. This weakness has been continued in Edward's reign, because government failed to realise how radical religious change led to instability and resentment within the social sphere, as seen in the Western rebellion (1549).This can be seen in the maladministration of the Kett's rebellion, in which government brutally suppressed the rebellion, leading to high treason and execution. Therefore, government didn't respond effectively to domestic problems since government did not know how to solve issues till after a crisis/incident which can sometimes proved to be brutal. Moreover, the use of foreign mercenaries in the Kett's Rebellion fuelled even more resentment because it made way for little empathy, making way for greater casualties. This can be seen in the fact that the public never forgave Edward even after 4 years of the rebellion.EvaluationThat said, it is also important to acknowledge government did eventually suppress the rebellion, demonstrates government effectivity because they were ultimately able to resolve societal resentments. For example, even though the Pilgrimage of Grace was the largest rebellion in tudor history (standing at 410,000 rebels), it was crushed relatively easily by the Duke of Norfolk. This therefore shows that government had the capacity to coordinate effective responses to domestic issues, exerting control in the domestic sphere. This also means that government was able to withstand threats to their credibility, demonstrating that government was ultimately strong and stable as they didn't collapse nor fail. In this, government maintained law and order within the social sphere, indicating effectvity.Theme 2 - ReligionGovernment infectivity can also be seen within religious reforms since they didn't listen to the concerns of the masses, forcing change upon them. By implicating mass change on the Catholic majority, this was bound to spur social upheaval. This is because even in the most Protestant cities, such as London, Protestantism stood at a minority of 20% by 1547. This therefore shows that attempts to create radical religious reform wouldn't have been accepted by the public. This demonstrates ineffective government because they were willing to implement drastic change at the expense of the nation - as encouraged by radicals such as Hooper and Ridley. The prioritisation of the monarchy as opposed to the people displays a government unable to effectively govern, because this has acted as a catalyst for the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536 because people felt resentment towards the monarchy thus proving that government is ineffective in issues regarding domestic and religious affairs leading to negative reactions by the public.EvaluationTheme 3:Government infectivity can also be witnessed in the way that government handles royal finances. Throughout 1529-53, royal finances have continuously ruined by expensive foreign policy against France and Scotland, with wars in 1542, 1544, 1547, and a threat in 1549.This shows how little Henry VIll & Edward understood about the importance of royal finances unlike Henry VIl who understand that good finances were vital for an effective government because need stable finances to respond to domestic issues like rebellions, law and order and the economy. Therefore, the fact that government failed to recognise the importance of royal finances illustrates ineffective government because this subsequently led to selling Crown lands for much cheaper than they're worth to raise funds for war. By focusing on short term policies, this further emphasises a weak government because this eventually led to a weak foundation for future government, due to the debasement of coinage - which continued until Elizabeth's reign.EvaluationAlternatively, it can be argued that issues regarding royal finances aren't as severe as they might appear. This is because Northumberland was able handle issues, thus reducing the impact of royal finances, allowing government to function effectively to an extent in 1549-53. For example Northumberland stopped the wars with France and Scotland, even though this was regarded as an unpopular decision, relieving the strain on the economy. This subsequently proved to be advantageous because Northumberland then gave Boulogne back to France, receiving a sum of £133,333 in March 1550 from the Treaty of Boulogne . This displays an effective government because this helped improve finances in England, stopping the continuity of debasement. This ultimately aided domestic issues because government expenditure is reduced, which thus reduced inflation.Conclusion:Overall, government did indeed face threats to their positions because of the large scale rebellions and issues regarding royal finances. This hindered government ability to function effectively because they failed to recognise and therefore act upon the grievances of the kingdom.However, government wasn't entirely ineffective because they were able to withstand rebellions and suppress them with relative ease.
• ‘In the years 1547 to 1558 English government was at its most effective during the rule of Mary I.’ Assess the validity of this view.


  Intro:define government- the structure and policiesFirst paragraph- start with government and governent insittutionsThen talk about policiesGovernment structureRebellions (can incorporate social and economic policies here)Religious policiesForeign policiesEdward’s government under Somerset → ineffective and weak● Autocratic rule- unpopular ○ Proclamations ○ Using people from his household only Robert Smith was an actual member of his privy council ● Rebellions → Kett and Western rebellion, alongside foriegn policy failings ○ Showed unpopularity of policies which ultimately led to decline in authority as there was a threat ● Northumberland able to exploit this and led a coup (after foreign policy failings, edward being minor) → took power ○ Somerset did not have legitimate authority as Edward was a minor- his rule would only last until Edward was of age to rule himself ○ This meant he was susceptible to threats - authority was weak ● Factional rivalries within government H/E: Somerset managed to successfully pass some religious policy, introduce more protestant reform CC: such changes were still quite limited, more legislation passed under Northumberland, and did not outweigh the failures of his government in other areas.Edward’s government under Northumberland → strong and effective● Sir John Gates had control of Dry Stamp- Northumberland’s ally - significant in controlling administration ● Removed conservative opposition from government- able to establish his authority ○ Successfull passing of religious policy as a result ● Successful economic policy → repaid £300,000 antwerp debt, Treaty of Bolougne brought 400,000, reduced somersets debt from 300,000 to 180,000 through Chantries land, crown land etc. ● Restored order - especially through plans for recoinage H/E: devyse showed that Northumberland tried to intefere with succession, and its failure shows his hold on government was not strong enough to overcome legitimate ruler CC: the majority of his rule was characterised by social and economic stability, BUT devyse did show that Mary’s authority was strongerMary:Successful implementation of religious policy → despite the Wyatt rebellion, which showed some opposition, the general population was happy with her accession and limited opposition to the passing of Acts of Repeal etc. Good relationship with government alsoEconomic success: book of rates, naval reforms, reiconage → all helped to make Elizabeth’s reign successful as well ○ Book of rates brought more efficient methods of collecting custom duties, helped to improve finances H/E: influence of Philip in English government e.g. in involving England in a war against FranceCC: his influence was largely diminished through the laws passed by Parliament not allowing him to exercise any right to the throne. Argubaly English reasons for joining war against France also. Generally the success of the Marian regime in other areas outweights the loss of Calais
• Rebellions in the years 1549 to 1571 stemmed from the weakness of central government’. Assess the validity of this view

  Intro:define weakness of central government: failure in having authority and control over subjects in all regionsKetts → YESCause :July 1549 Economic issues were principal cause -resentment of landowner abuse ,wanted landowners to stop enclosing common land so they could graze their livestock of cattle and sheep -hatred of local gov officialsEventsforce of 16,000 led by Robert kett captured Norwich . Kett showed organisational and decisive leadership skills -gov troops were pushed back -27 aug rebellions suppressed by troops led by John Dudley (Warwick) de feated rebels at battle of mousehold heath . 3000/16000 killed -kett was captured and executed -rebellion took a long time to suppress because gov underestimated seriousness● Local/ economic factors → enclosure, sheep tax - attempt to control society through preventing enclosures as enclosures were bringing economic problems that Somerset thought to control ○ There was even opposition to this policy from privy council ○ Enclosures were not able to be enforced due to ● Norwich was taken by rebels as Northampton was weak and unable to subdue the rebels→ this is when it turned into a fullscale rebellion - therefore rebellion stemmed from weakness as they were unable to put down an initial smaller rising ● Somerset was distracted by foreign policy → weakness in central government, as they allowed this rebellion to get out of hand by not letting troops return from ScotlandH/E- the rebellion did not aim to overthrow government, it was only caused by an unpopular policy, this policy was bound to have opposition, but the government felt it was needed to be implemented to prevent vagrancy CC: it was unpopular but was more of smalll uprising until the government had turned it into a rebellionWestern →NOCausesApril 1549 in Devon and Cornwallin response to religious reforms imposed by gov: catalyst being new 1549 book of common prayer in english and objection to chantries actreverse religious reforms destroying way people experienced religion as the traditional rituals of church services and church’s wider role in community had gonere instalment of 6 articlesreturn to old catholic forms of worshipreaction to Edwardian reformation demonstrates constraining experiences and diversity of beliefsheep tax: seen as imposition of uncaring gov in london hitting local farmers , shows underlying economic discontentEvents2 July, Opponents besieged exeter -gov had no control over area for 2 months -somerset sent lord Russell who used forces +foreign mercenaries to remove rebels at clyst heath 4 aug -several small battles resulted and rebels were scattered. 2500 killed● Western took 2 months to put down- therefore the government dealt with it weakly, showing that at this point central government was weak domestically, Somerset was too involved in foreign policy to give his attention to domestic problems arising from policy changes H/E- western did not show that the rebellion stemmed from weakness of central government, but more than central government was strong in implementing its policies among society and was implementing the change that they wanted ○ There was obviously going to be opposition as there were sweeping reforms to a majority catholic stateWyatt→ NO was due to a fear of percieved weakness in central governmentMary’s marriage to Philip caused distress- people thought she would be ruled by Spain and Philip - therefore there was percieved weakness among societyPercieved weakness stemmed from: phillip, Mary being womanPeople rebelling as they thought there would be future weakness of central government as Philip would dominate English policyreligious reasons also started the rebellion, the lack of the support for the rebellion also shows it was a small amount of people who were motivated by their xenophobia ○ Small amoutn of protestants joined the rebellion shows that government was exerting their power well as protestants feared being part of the uprisingMary was not actually weak, shown through her decisiveness in getting the crown after the devyse, she had strong authority - central government was not weak at this point H/E: in hindsight her marriage to phillip did weaker central governmentPeople viewed her marriage to Phillip as a weakness in central government and ultimately he did make England involved in France→ showed Mary made bad decision in her marriage (possibly due to her lack of consultation with parliament- showed central government was weak)Devyse YES● Northumberland lost the support of the council- William Cecil pledges loyalty to Mary, whilst he went to recruit soldiersNorthern → NO- was actually due to strength of central governmentReligious factors influenced both leaders and ordinary people → ordinary participants were upset by very protestant people e.g. Bishop Pilkington who replaced altars with communion tables, holy water stoops in Kitchen → shows strength in central gov in enforcing religiousThe government had taken action to suppress catholocism in the North and ensuer uniformity through the destruction of catholic practises- e.g. cult of `st Cuthbert’s last remnants were destroyed and vandalisation of St Andrews ChurchResentment towards government policies such as religion as well as northerners being isolated from government → in order to STRENGTHEN central governmentH/E: ● Political factors- nobles were being isolated from government this caused resentment towards central government ● Plot to make MQS queen and marry Norfolk → Elizabeth’s authority not felt strongly enough in central government - courtly conspiracy ● Discrimination towards Catholics by Dean- showed weakness of central government- Elizabeth did not want to fully alienate Catholics as she knew this would cause uprisingCC: arguably strength since the Northern nobles were being limited in order to reduce their power, so central gov. Control was strongerAfter rebellion she was able to exert more authority in the north- noble influence completely declined - the fact that she imposed the puritan Ealr of Huntingdon in 1572 shows she did want to completely eliminate catholics in the northLittle evidence to suggest that it the courtly conspiracy had led to the rebellion
• ‘All rebellions were motivated by religion. // ‘The rebellion that occurred during the reigns of Edward VI and Mary I were mainly political in origin.’ Assess the validity of this view.

  Pilgrimage of grace- YESThe rebels once they had reached pontefract castle had drawn up demands to the government, which the articles stating a revival of mas When Norfolk had come to suppress the rebellion but was forced to make a settlement due to his army being serverly outnumbered, he promised the rebels that the monastries would be re-openedH/E: arguably a courtly conspiracy to get Mary as successor also the rebels had demanded a parliament to meet in York showing there was mainly regional resentment There were a range of grievances that were included in the articles and they are considered to be the most broad yet comprehensive articles out of the rebellions Historians also argue that the rebellion was at the heart of the political factions who deeply supported Mary Tudor - say they took advantage of the religious, social and economic grievances in the north to spread the rebellion, meaning in reality there was not widespread resentment but it was caused by factions stirring up hatred towards the government, therefore there was little religious motivation.CC: religion is main reason- rebellion had renews in 1537 as a result of the further dissolution of monasteriesWestern - YESH/E: sheep and cloth tax motivated people » shown through first articles produced - ANTHONY FLETCHER- 'to interpret the rebellion as solely religious would be a vast simplification' In early stages on rebellion, economic grievances figured more highly, by time second list was made a small group of clergy led by Welsh had hijacked control of the movement and their concerns were reflected in second articleCC: robert welsh directed the rebellion so it became about religion H/E- fact that they wanted reinstatement of Henry VIll six articles act showed the rebellion had political tendanciesKetts - NOEnclosures, sheep taxLack of gentry and nobles showed religionMass was used with new BOCPH/E- Protests about bad governments in East angliaWyatts- NOmain reason was marriage to Philip/YES main reason was due to resentment to marriage to Phillip - fear of Phillip taking controlLack of support from ProtestantsXenophobiaEdward courtenay also supposed to revolt (potential suitor for Mary) - obviously about marriage H/E- main leader was protestant and protestant leaning in MaidstoneNorthern - YES religionThe northern region was largely catholic and the leaders of the rebellion had dissatisfaction with the imposition of protestantism with such vigor in the northOrdinary participants were mostly motivated by relgious grievances, the Bishop Pilkington who currently had jurisdiction of the county palentine in Durham was rigorously enforcing protestantismE.g. there was a replacement of altars with communion tables and holy water stoups being used in kitchensSt andrews church had been vandalisedThere were cases of discrimination towards catholicsMain reason= destroying the last remnants of the cult of St CuthbertNorton carried the Five Wounds banner - showed direct affiliation with pilgrimage of grace which was religiously motivatedWhen durham was siezed catholic mass was heard in the cathedral- 14th novH/E:motives of leaders was also due to them being isolated - political reasons The leaders of the rebels were 2 earls and a member of the noble cumbrian family, resentment was built up within them as they felt increaisngly isolated from the northern government. Elizabeth had chosen to instate non-northernrs to control the government in the North, it was under Sussex at the time and the leaders had felt resentment towards this. There was also disattisfaction towards the government through the fact that the rebels relatives had been isolated from government tooCC: ordinary rebels who made up bulk of rebellion motivated by religion and Westmorland had shown discontent with Bishop Pilkington and Protestantism being enforced in DurhamTyrone- resentment towards English controlH/E- YES religion- after Elizabeth proclaimed herself as Supreme governor, Ireland was mainly Catholic, tried to involve Spain who was a Catholic power → religion did play a large part but not the overall reason
• ‘

  The Pilgrimage of Grace posed the largest threat to authority.’IntroductionThreat: threat to authority → whether would remove from power → MOTIVES show whether it was a threat, and how large rebellions got Judgement: Simenl posed largest threat, the pretenders in Henry VII’s reign were the largest threat to authorityJudgement (for midtudor crisis rebellions):Pilgrimage of grace threat due to size and geographical nature, Wyatts and Northern threatening due to wanting to remove queen, BUT- Northern most threatening as it was more successful than Wyatt in size and execution, but mostly because of motive.Edward rebellions were most threatening due to their context and the fact that Northumebrland was able to overthrow somerset - both the rebellions had killed 3000 peopleReligious context of Northern was also threatening but due to the fact that it was able to be suppressed quickly showed that it was less threatening1: Simnel: biggest threatHenry feared the rebellion as he did not have a secure position on the throne as he had been a usurperAlthough the rebels were a smaller force than the army deployed, Henry had grown fear of the rebellion as this was the similar circumstance that he had been in when usurping the crownHe had managed to overthrow Richard with a smaller armySimnel threatened his aim of securing the dynasty- Ferdinand and Isabella would not want their daughter to be married to the son of a king on a contested throneSimnel had recieved ample foreign support- Margaret of Burgandy supplying Simnel with 2000 German soldiers and Kildare had proclaimed Simnel as King Edward VI - shows there was less recogition of his claim to powerOverall showed he had a fragile grip on the crown and showed how vulnerable his kingship wasH/E: did not attract as much foreign support as Warbeck CC: domestically more important, caused battlePerkin Warbeck → a large threat but not the most threatening● Perkin Warbeck acted as the second most threatening rebellion- it was a direct attack on the throne and an effort to replace Henry’s fragile grip on the crown BUT it was not as threatening as Simnel - therefore a large threat but not that threatening because: ● Foreign support that it attracted was not successful and he was able to get the foreign powers to be loyal to him ○ first welcomes at the French Court but Warbeck had to find a new refuge as Henry able to skilfully negotiate Treaty of Etaples ○ His unsuccessful landing in south of the border witht he help of the Scots -- there was little popular support that he had hoped to reiceve ■ Henry sought peace treaty with Socts ○ When he went to Ireland Kildare was temporarily loyal to Henry ● Henry able to successfully establish himself and defeat foreign support despite english being a small power ● Spy network was established helped to maintain control - had ensured the fialure of Warbecks landing in 1595 in Kent as Clifford had informed Henry already - Acts of Attainders passed for those involved- may have contributed to the lack of support for Warbeck laterH.E-Amount of foreign supports that he received, showed that Henry had lack of recognition in Europe and had not established himself - and the fact that it was a direct threat to authority rather than policy grievances showed Henry’s position on the throne was weak as a usurperHenry imposed trade embargo 1593Pilgrimage of grace → threat but not large● 30,000 people rebelled, most geographically widespread set or rebellions- stemmed from the East and West riding of Yorkshire ● Captured Pontefract Castle ● People exploited the rebellion- there were many different people and different reasons people were rebelling ○ Involvement of gentry, not just commoners - they were concerned about the economic results of the dissolution of the masteries and there was strong personal dislike of Cromwell ● Duke of Norfolk was unable to suppress at first, had to make concessions ● Henry VIII saw it as a large threat - Large and armed force, and outnumbers Henry’s forces ○ Aske had 30,00 forces and Norfolk only had 8,000H/E:did not want to remove Henry from power, just a protest, did not halt speed of religious reformation ● All remaining monasteries to be closed in 1539 ● Monasteries were becoming less important e.g. Wolsey ● Although Norfolk outnumbered he was able to grant a peaceful settlement with the rebels, even though Henry knew these would not be followed through, it successfully dispersed the rebels and when the rebellion was renewed violent action was taken and 74 were hungWestern- threat not largestWestern rebellion posed a large threat to authority due to its context- 1549 England faced a possible invasion from France, a full-scale rebellion in both East Anglia (ketts) and Devon and Cornwall (Western), as well as localised rioting in many other parts of countrySomerset could not provide an adequate army to Russell as they were being used on the Scottish border - Russel therefore did not confront the enemyLed to loyal subjects in Exeter defending themselves against rebels for 6 weeksRussel only again tried to suppress the rebellion after pressure from Somerset and with the help of Lord Grey 3rd AugWhen it was supressed on 16th aug there was still pockets of resistance and 3000 more people had to be killed until unrest was completely subduedKett → threat but NOT largest threatMotives not to remove authority, just a protestThe rebels had siezed Norwich after the failure of local authorities to suppresss the uprisingNorthampton was sent with an army of 1,800 ordered to cut the rebel supply lines, he was unsuccessful in doing so and only 20 rebels had responded to the full pardon and disperesed- Northampton had turned a popular uprising into a full scale revoltThis created a crisis for government as they had a deploy troops that were previously garrisoning scottish border in the outskirts fo Norwich- Northumererland headed the army of 18,000Contributed to Somerset’s downfall, Northumebrland led coup d’etat - showed that central authority was weak and unpopular -H/E:never affected Edwards position and actually improved government once Northumberland had taken over- no threats after thisDevyse - was a threat, could have removed Mary from succession → threat to Royal authority and successionH/E- decisiveness of Mary, already had Kenninghall faction, Northumberland was unpopular and council decalred loyalty to MaryWyatts → a large threat because wanted to remove Mary, BUT not a successful in executionAuthorities already knew about the rebellion and therefore was only able to be taken out from Kent, rather than the Welsh border, Devon and LeicestershireAlthough it reached London it had little popular support when Wyatt’s arrivedMary had strong authority Protestants wer afraid of persecutionToo many of the leaders had close connections to the unpopular northumberlandPhilip marriage not strong enough reason to rebelH/E- wanted to remove MaryCC: this would not happen due to th lack of popular support as well as Mary’s strong authorityNorthernThe fact that the executed over 400 ppl showed Elizabeth thought it was threateningShowed her reliance on LeicesterIn religious context was also more threateningH/E- the rebellion was put down with considerable ease and the rebellion had sparked more from the strength of central government and control over the North and imposition of the settlementShowed the skills of Cecil - he was able to conjure a plan to suppress the rebellion and studied the maps carefullyEssex - not a threat to authorityPoorly planned, doomed to fail - Cecil strengthEssex had no support in government and failed in interferring with the successionClose followers such as Francis Bacon and Sir William Knollys had abandoned him, and he held Cecil largely responsible for his plight. He actually had largely treasonable contact with James IV seeking to remove CecilThis was doomed to fail and was poorly plannedCecil had discovered Essex’s original plans and siezing Whitehall Palace and he ensured that it was fully fortifiedH.E- showed her authority was diminishig in last yearCC: ultimately still in power, Cecil loyal to her
• Mid tudor crisis

  IntroductionA situation involving imminent danger of what might be termed fundamental systemic collapse in political, social or economic termsSocial and economic crisis Succession crisisJudgement: While the problems listed above were by no means unique in the Tudor period, the conjuncture of all of them within the space of 25 years was unique, and made the period particularly volatile, YET there was no fundamental collapse on a social, economic or political front.Theme 1 : foreign policyForeign policy: Foreign policy was not a mid tudor crisis, as did not threaten royal authority of Edward’s reignNO crisis→ Henry VIII achieved short term successes through his foreign policy, for example his victory in Scotland- Battle of Solway Moss 1542 as well as Somerset’s success in the Battle of Pinkie 1547 ○ Although these were overshadowed by territorial losses, such problems still did not create a crisis as there was no danger to authority or to the state as a wholeLoss of Boulogne (Edward) 1550 - ○ Although was a defeat to English prestige, it in fact helped to reduce financial pressures caused by war with france and scotland e.g. from 1547-49 campaigns costs £580,000. Immediately improved financial position → french paid 400,000 crowns. ○ Was NOT a crisis, as never any danger to Royal authority- a financially stable crown was more important than retaining BoulogneLoss of calais (Mary) 7th jan 1558 ○ Calais Pale was used as a springboard to launch Henry VIII’s attacks in 1520s and 1540s but had become of strategic irrelevance→ it was now difficult to maintain and permanently garrison-- burden ○ NOT a crisis as there was no danger to royal authority. ○ Damaged English nationalism and contrast with the relatively successful ventures of H8EvaluationH/E: Henry VIII’s foreign policy caused deep financial problems- led to debasement of coinage in 1541 which caused long term decline in living standards and inflation which became difficult for the next monarchs to deal with→ felt in Edward’s reign and made worse through SomersetHis invasion in France was a failure → he captured Boulogne, but this was not that significant compared to the financial costs again, nothing much was achieved and they came to a stale mate- Henry was not able to persue his aims in France of exerting his right of King, instead he caused further debts and problems CC: Northumberland addressed these issues in 1550Theme 2 : Domestic policyAlthough Henry VIII, Edward VI and Mary I experienced full scale rebellions during their reign, these rebellions took place throughout the whole tudor period.Pilgrimage of Grace→ although largest rebellion directed at policy it did not impact Henry’s religious policy→ 1539 Act to dissolve remaining monasteries and religious houses dissolved 1540 -religious houses were becoming irrelevant anyway -74 hangedWestern rebellion and Kett’s rebellion were also crushed easily, policy was also not impacted by the rebellion ○ June: Outbreak of full-scale rebellion in Cornwall and Devon- WESTERN REBELLION (prayer book rebellion) ○ July: Outbreak of full-scale rebellion in East Anglia- KETT’S REBELLION (against enclosure) - supressed by Earl of Warwick in Aug.Wyatt’s rebellion- successfully and quickly suppressed- 90 executed→ rebels were found out and therefore it could not gather enough support as expected. ● None of these rebellions challenged Royal authority, only to express social and economic grievances-- there was no fundamental systemic collapse ● During Henry VII’s reign there was a large threat to authority which could have led to a fundamental collapseEvaluationH/E: Wyatt rebellion 1554 got close to City of London and Pilgrimage of Grace was the largest rebellion in tudor history H/E: rebellions led to somersets downfall CC: but only led to fall of somerset, he was not representative of a systematic collapse, as tudor dynasty still secure after (Edward), northumberland capable to take over, did not affect rest of country → could be argued Northumberland gave a more stable and secure England, therefore, opposite of a crisis. CC: but crushed by Mary easily once reached London- demonstrated her decisiveness→ also got rid of Lady Jane Grey, helping to remove potential threat to her succession. The PIlgrimage of Grace did not pose as large a threat to Henry VIII as pretenders in Henry VII, which could have potentially collapsed his power, therefore, there was no crisis and rebellions took place in other tudor reigns including Henry VII and Elizabeth (Northern rebellion 1569, catholics tried to replace Elizabeth with Mary Quen of Scots)1536 Pilgrimage of Grace1549 Kett and Western (May, June, July)1554 Wyatt’s rebellionTheme 3 : Religious policyThis period was one of constant religious uncertainty, with England vacillating between moderate and radical Protestantism and reactionary Catholicism within the space of two decades, although there was still much continuity in religious belief, people still did not oppose monarchAll 3 monarchs were able to pass their doctrinal and structural changes successfully and somewhat smoothly→ although there were rebellions against religious policy they were crushed and religious policy was still finished - people did not oppose the monarch, they opposed the policy E.g. Mary managed to pass 2nd act of repeal 1554 , Northumberland able to pass second act of uniformity 1552 Northumberland had a strong council after Conservatives were kicked out-- despite his racial changes there was no rebellions under Northumberland 1550EvaluationH/E: Henry experienced the largest rebellion as he was the first one to bring in religious change into the country CC: yet even the Pilgrimage of Grace was crushed - did not stop him pursuing his religious policy.People also had loyalty to the monarch, therefore, rebellions in religious policy did not conjure up enough support in Mary and Edwards reign for a systemic collapse. They may have in Henry’s merely because he was first to bring religious change in the country, but they were defeated.List the varying religious policies introduced under Henry and Edward and Maryonly pockets of Protestant support- Only 20% of Londoners were Protestant by 1547Under Somerset, 9 Bishops supported changes, 10 were againstTheme 4 : SuccessionHenry:Henry himself had his own succession crisis due to his marriage issues, however, this posed no threat to the authority or power of England as Henry had claimed all his children legitimate in the 1544 Succession Act- therefore, he had established his dynasty.Henry wanted a male heir, but this didn’t lead to a crisis as it was his own personal problem although it did lead to religious changes → would have most likely have happened under Edward anyway due to his Protestant upbringingEdward: Succession created a ‘crisis’ as it caused the most instability under Northumberland, who lost support from councillors as well as people, who supported Mary. therefore closest thing to mid-tudor crisis, as this was when government system was most unstable.Created instability as the clear pathway for a new monarch was being blocked by Edward and Northumberland due to religious matters: no clear succession - significant as it would affect the whole of the country, and could cause an end to tudor dynastyDevise was seen as a rebellion- considered an act of treason and patently illegal as Northumberland was interfering with the law → Northumberland had lost complete support eg. Sir William Cecil declared loyalty to MaryMary was a woman→ this also caused instability- first female monarch (although there has been regents), people considered women weak and there was fear she would be overpowered due to marriage → but also if she was queen there was a large focus on who she would marry to take more charge, as women were seen as incapable of ruling a country.H/E: Mary’s decisiveness and ability to establish herself on the throne quickly meant that government authority was soon felt again Edward’s succession was the closest it came to a crisis, however, it still was not a crisis as there was no fundamental systemic collapse of tudor authority and the instability lasted for a very short period of time- it mostly affected Northumberland not England as a whole.Mary:Religious policy was an issue as Elizabeth would inevitably introduced protestantismBut there was no systemic collapse due to this and Elizabeth would at least carry on the tudor dynasty H/E- could be argued that Mary was more focussed on religious policy than continuing the tudor dynastMary’s attempts to change succession through parliament came to nothing, who opposed her (parliamentry sovreignty) therefore elizabeth was always gonna be successor if mary died without children as stated in the 1544 succession act. Mary formally declared Elizabeth as her successor on 6th Nov 1558.Philip/spain posed no threat to English authority as Mary was unable to bare a child with Philip meaning England would not be overpowered by foreign affairsPhillip marriage to Mary could have posed a threat to England, as he was a Spanish King, so he could have ended up dominating England, and reduced power of Mary as well as English sovereignty. However, parliament passed an actthat stated that if Mary predeceased Phillip, then the latter could have no claim on the English Crown. Meant that future of England would retain independence from SpainGiven the title of King, but not allowed to exercise any rights that went with it- parliament refused to coronate himNone of his followers were to hold public office in EnglandEconomic crisisHenry:Debasement of coinage 1544→ caused problems for Edward, there was no strong financial inheritance for Edward due to costly wars - did not die solvent like Henry VIIHenry had little strategic objectives when invading Scotland after Treaty of Greenwich was not ratified in 1543- invaded edinburgh, did not have sufficient funds to simply antagonise the ScotsBut did not create a systematic collapse in authority or society, did cause financial problems and instability for EdwardEdward:Expensive campaigns in Scotland 1547-1549 £580,000Last debasement of the coinage 1551H/E- Northumberland decreased debt levels, 1550 debt was at its highest decreased the debt from £300,000 to £180,000 Raised parliamentary taxes- £336,000 Debasement of the coinage- £537,000 Crown lands and chantry lands- £200,000Mary:Set up plans of financial policyIntroduced financial reforms The court of the exchequer took over both the court of first fruit and tenths and the court of augmentations → dealt with new revenue streams which the crown acquired→ increased the efficiency of augmentation methods and revenue from crown lands increasedPlans for recoinage drawn up from 1556-58 → successful in implementation by Elizabeth1554- Mary implemented the changes that Northumberland had set up up to investigate the Crown’s financesLord Treasurer Winchester (Stephen Gardiner) took over exchequerbrought the Court of the First Fruits and Tenths (set up to administer the firsts fruits and tenths now they wee payable to the crown)Set up the Court of Augmentations into Exchequer = administered the lands and property which had/would come into hands of Crown as a result of the Dissolution of the Monasteries - His status was increasedIncrease in crown land revenueThis arrangement lasted the whole of the Tudor period- introduced more efficient augmentation methods into exchequerStatus of Lord Treasurer increased and increase in revenue from Crown Lands1558- intro of new Book of Ratesexisting custom rates were outdatedadditional duties placed on import of non-essential goods→ increased custom revenues substantiallyMary’s changes were ‘fundamental for Elizabeth’s solvency’- Alan Smith
• To what extent was the english church in 1553 different from what it had been in 1532

  Henry- Edward - MaryIntroductionThe English Church In 1553 was very different from what it had been in 1532, in the sense that chantries and religious guilds were dissolved and doctrine had been changed. This is mainly because when Edward became king, it opened the doors for more radical protestant reforms. Having said this, it must be noted that it was not completely different because the overall structure of the church was still similar.Theme 1It could be argued that the extent to which the English Church in 1553 was different from 1532 was significant because of the dissolution of chantries and religious guilds being from December 1547. This was a huge reform because it deepened the impact of religious change and had a wider scope in terms of the parts of society it affected since before it was only monasteries (1536) but by 1553 far more religious institutions were dissolved. This meant that people's relationship and exposure to religion was changed in a big way because they now had a more different religious experience especially compared to 1532. This is because chantries and religious guilds provided entertainment and charity to locals on the fact that had gone men that people became less affectionate towards the English church. Therefore, it is that argued that the English church was very different from what it had been in 1532 because compared to before, there now less candidates for ordination as well as decreased attendance (Exeter) because of the fact that there was a dissolution of chantries and that impacted the way people saw religion in their daily lives.EvaluationTheme 2 - Doctrinal changeAnother way in which the English church was significantly different in 1553 from what it had been in 1532 was that now that was actual doctrinal change.Compared to Henry VIll, who was far more conservative in his religious outlook, Somerset and Northumberland were more Protestant. As a result of influential radical clergyman like John Hooper (Bishop of Gloucester) and Nicholas Ridley (Bishop of London), there was radical royal injunctions issued in July 15 47. These injunctions attacked many popular Catholic practices such as lights, images, and practices associated with religious holidays like Candlemas, Ash Wednesday and Palm Sunday. Moreover, the very radical Book of Common Prayer of 1552 removed remaining conservative ceremonies and rewrote the communion service to remove the ambiguity of the 1549 Eucharist statement.Therefore, this shows that the extent to which the English church in 1553 was different compared to 1532 was radical because whereas Henry VIll only wanted to superficially change the English Church to allow his divorce while still keeping it very conservative for example the Six Articles Act of 1539, Edward genuinely wanted reform and so achieve that by going as far as changing the doctrine of the English Church (like repealing the 6 Articles Act).EvaluationTheme 3 - Structural changethe structure of the English Church had been fundamentally changed compared to 1532 because they removed the next highest power to God from the hierarchy and replaced them with a monarch which showed the influence of reformer humanists and Protestants.Having said this, it doesn't mean that the extent to which the English Church was different in 1553 was significant because the change in the highest parts of the hierarchy did not affect the majority of the population and religious institutions who still had the same experiences therefore the scope of change was limited and the church remained very similar to what it was in 1532 in terms of structure.EvaluationHowever, it could be argued that the English Church was still similar to what it had been in 1532 because the overall structure of the church was still relatively the same.While in 1532 when the Pope was the head of the church in England, in 1553 it was Edward that was the supreme head due to the Supremacy Act of November 1534.Apart from this, the structure was still similar since there was less change in the structure of the church compared to the changes of religious doctrine as Protestants had different ideas as to how the church should be organised. there was no attempt to physically organise the church in a Protestant way so bishoprics and dioceses were not restructured (they remained as they had been under Catholicism) therefore suggesting that England was not completely different by 1553.ConclusionTo conclude, it is clear that the English Church was very different in 1553 than it had been in 1532 because of the radical Protestant influence during Edward's reign which resulted in significant changes in doctrine as well the dissolution of more religious institutions which had a big impact on people's religious experiences.Despite this, it must be noted that even though the Church of England had been changed, churches in England remained similar due to keeping the same structure and sometimes even the same doctrine.
• Religious changes in the years 1532-1558 enjoyed little support

  IntroductionIt can be argued that England was in religious turmoil between 1532-1558 due to the radical reforms that took place under Henry Vill, which were continued under Edward, and then the drastic change again under Mary. Through, religious changes were unpopular due to the reactions by the public. That said, it is also important to recognise that there was arguably more support for religious reforms compared to economic reforms.Theme 1 - HenryThe dissolution of monasteries had a profound impact on the public, rallying little to no support. The dissolution of monasteries in 1536 brought up social upheaval as seen by the Pilgrimage of Grace in Autumn 1536. In this there were 40,000 rebels who sought to reverse religious reforms, therefore classifying as the largest and ultimately greatest threat in Tudor history. This is because the rebellion was large in size and scope, spreading across England; such as Lincolnshire, Yorkshire and parts of West Riding. There was indeed little support in religious reforms because the public were willing to go against the say of the monarch in order to establish their secular motives, ultimately going against the Divine Right of the King. The fact that the rebellion lasted 3 months (October 1536 - January 1537) indicates that resentments were deep-rooted as opposed to short lived. Moreover, it has been analysed by historians such as John Scarisbrick that the rebellion was organised by members or the aristocracy, illustrating that even members of the nobility were willing to go against the king; thus showing that the religious reforms indeed had little support.EvaluationTheme 2 - EdwardGrievances towards religious reform can also be seen under Edward's reign, indicating that resentments towards religious reform were internalised. In this, the rebellion Western Rebellion (June, 1549) has been described as the 'prayer book' rebellion. People wanted to reverse religious reforms which destroyed the way that people experienced religion. This is because, traditional rituals of the Church services and much of the Church's wider role within the community had virtually disappeared. This rallied very little support because religion was central to social life, with people centralised their daily routines around religious experience. The religious reforms were bound to fuel resentments, as seen in the fact that the rebellion lasted 2 months, further demonstrating deep rooted resentments - much like the Pilgrimage of Grace.EvaluationTheme 3 - MaryThere was indeed a continuity of dissatisfaction towards government in regards to religious reforms, as witnessed under Mary's reign. The Wyatt Rebellion (1554) was motivated by religion as the implementation of Catholic reforms failed to cater to the Protestant minorities hence why many Wyatt supporters came from Protestant stronghold, Maidstone. This displays that even whilst government attempted to alter religious reforms in favour of the Protestants, they failed to recognise the substantial Protestant minority. This means that the fact that government failed to coordinate a coherent religious policy that could cater to both the Protestants and Catholics, making way for little support towards such reforms. This has been a trend with Tudor monarchs after Henry Vil, as this feature has characterised the reigns of Henry, Edward and Mary.EvaluationThat said, it is also important to acknowledge that whilst support for the religious reforms was limited, support for the rebellions was also limited in the sense that it wasn't very stable. This can be seen in the fact that the rebellions were crushed with relative ease. In regards to the Wyatt rebellion, this only lasted 13 days, with Wyatt surrendering by the 7th February 1554. This implies that the rebellion was relatively unstable and had a weak foundation as it was unable to withstand even the slightest retaliation by the nobility. This means that the Wyatt rebellion was inherently weak and that whilst reforms weren't very appreciated, neither were the religious rebellions that came about. Therefore, religious rebellions also enjoyed little support because people were unwilling to indulge into treasonous actions against the monarch, as seen by the fact that the Wyatt rebellion wasn't restarted by a later date. In this religious reforms were only unpopular to an extent as members of the public didn't trigger multiple rebellions simultaneously.ConclusionOverall, it is critical to acknowledge that religious reforms failed to rally widespread support within the kingdom. This can be seen in the 3 large scale rebellions that took placed between 1532-1558, exerting instability in the Tudor dynasty. However, it is also true that economic factors were also unpopular, often more so than religious reforms. This is because financial grievances had greater emphasis in the Western and Wyatt rebellion, implying that rebellions motivated by purely religious reforms were largely exclusive to Henry VIll's reign.
• Religious change from henry - Edward - Mary

  Theme 1 : DOCTRINALH8Henry VIll10 Articles 1536: Shows move towards Protestantism but there is great compromise shown in ambiguity of eucharist, Confession was praised (Catholic), only 3 sacraments (Lutheran)1537 Bishop's Book restored 4 sacraments, omitted from 10 ArticlesModerate Lutheran ideas under Cranmer1538 Injunctions- introduced Protestant practises-› each Church requires English Bible, first Great Bible appeared 15396 Articles› reassured Catholic doctrine- states that denial of transubstantiation was hereticalHoweverInitially took a Protestant direction (e.g Royal Supremacy), H.E- towards the end of his reign Catholic doctrine had to be restored to some extent to reassure opinion and therefore by the end there was a compromise between Protestantism and Catholicism. It is difficult to asses doctrinal success for Henry VIll as his drive towards religious changes was to do with the annulment, rather than clear religious religious direction - it can be seen that he still had belief in catholicism (e.g. trial of John Lambert 1538) but his aims of religious reform were financial and due to his succession problem - he may have been under the pressure of Cromwell too.E6First Act of Uniformity- Services conducted in English, English Bible, only 5 sacraments and permission given to Clergy to marry . H/E- there was still transubstantiation and Cranmer's Book of Common Prayer still had some Catholic belief e.g. no clear statement of existence of purgatory. Also , Proclamations 1548- reassured Catholic opinionCC: Under Northumberland these were corrected in the Second Act of Uniformity- eucharist clearly defined- consubstantiation, no Popish vestments.In New Prayer Book- all traces of Catholicism and mass had been removed- only based on scriptures -Overall Edward's doctrinal changes were very protestant. Successful in implementing main protestant ideas, shown through second act of uniformity and 42 articles (included the protestant doctrine of justification by faith and denial of purgatory) Although Somerset was slower in reform, this was corrected by Northumberlands radical and faster drive towards Protestantism.M1First Act of Repeal, Church restored to 1547 Act of 6 Articles, religious laws under Edward repealed, mass is revived1554 March Royal Injunctions issued which ordered Bishops to suppress heresy, remove married Clergy, restore Holy days H/E-Cranmer's Prayer Book→ copies were still available and were in circulation in London- still 19,000 copies of 1552 prayer bookMary had her own propaganda campaign, and this was the only form on Protestant doctrinal opposition→ Mary was still able to pass Catholic doctrine, legally England was doctrinally Catholic (more important)Second Act of Repeal→ repealed all anti-Protestant legislation since Henry VIII- e.g. 10 articles Atm number of sacramentsOverall : Mary was successful doctrinally, she managed a smooth repeal of Protestant doctrines and was able to restore the Church to its Catholic state.EvaluationTheme 2 : STRUCTURALH8Henry VIII1531 Clergy accused of praemunire and fined (forced clergy to acknowledge that King was ‘Supreme Head of English Church’) → surrendered its right to make ecclesiastical laws independently of the king, promised not to issue new laws and agreed to submit existing laws to a royally appointed committee→ gave King larger control of the church and the began the process of moving away from Church and State to Church-in-StateAct of Supremacy 1534- officially made Henry the head of the Church, re-established the king’s territories as a ‘sovereign empire’ - completely changed the structure as many believed that the rulers of england had enjoyed sole power until the Pope had established a variety of legal and financial claims . this also achieved a full break with Rome- Cromwell convinced Henry this was the only way as Pope was not prepared to bow to any threatApril: Act in Restraint of Appeals: Final authority in all legal matters resided in monarch. Ensured that: Final verdict of Henry and Catherine’s marriage taken out of Rome’s hands, right of Pope to make decisions affecting Henry was declined, Catherine could not appeal to Pope —— led to excommunication of King by PopeAct to dissolve smaller monasteries (those with income of 200pa or less) H/E→ pilgrimage of GraceHenry VIII was successful in his political and personal aims through changing the structural setup of the Church.E64th Nov- 24th Dec- Chantries Act- dissolved all chantries (Act of Dissolution was revived from Henry’s last parliament in 1545)Replaced Catholic Bishops with Protestant Bishops e.g. Ridley replaces Bonner ○ H/E- did not achieve pure form of Protestantism, still had bishops, not system of eldersAdministrative structure of the church remained unchanged H/E- bishops and ruling elite failed to enforce the new legislation and education programmes in Cornwall, devon, dorset, yorkshire under Somerset (mention Henry’s previous structural changes if essay just about Edward, and how he had already panned out the changes needed)OVERALL : Edward continued the structure of the Church during Henry’s reign, however, he managed to further implement more Protestant structures through replacing Bishops and dissolving chantries.M1● First Act of Repeal→ resrtored Church to 1547 ● Gave up post as Head of Church 1553 ● Second Act of Repeal→ repealed all anti-Papal legislation since 1529, ended royal supremacy ● Replaced bishops- 3rd Parliament reversed Henrician Act of Attainder that were passed against Pole abnd he was able to return to England and replace Cramner as Archbishop ● H/E- relations with Pope were severed after England siding with Spain, damaging Mary’s Catholic structural position ● H/E- Parliament would not allow her to reclaim monastic lands and she had to abide to this ○ 554 to ensure passing of the Act of Repeal, Mary forced to continue Laymen ownership of monastic lands ○ 1555→ bill to seize land of Protestant exiles abroad was defeated in both HOC and HOLPopes bad relationship with Mary damaged Church strcutureMary’s refusal to give back Pole and Pope dismissing Pole- going against the Pope, undermining fundamental Catholic hierachy and church structure in EnglandMorever, by the Pope not recognising the Papal Legate. Yet morover, Pope removed Pole as Papal legate, therefore he was not able to appount Catholic bishops as a resul (7 sees deprived) t, structurally Church was deprived of Catholic bishops -- aslo affected doctrine as could not enforce Catholic policie ● Not successful in implementing Synod’s 12 Decrees of clerical discipline Mary was not entirely successful structurally in restory Cathocism as she had to accept monastic lands to be in hands of the landed elite and had an extremely bad relationship with the Pope after England sided with Spain against French and the Papacy.EvaluationTheme 3 : IMPACT (HOW DID IT AFFECT PEOPLE , SUPPORT ?)H8● -own personal needs ● -his desire to divorce Queen Catherine- succession problem ● -new love for Anne Boleyn led to his quarrel with the Pope Clement VII ● -Catholicism was not in decline when he introduced the changes ● - Pilgrimage of Grace 1536 → religious motives ○ Resentment towards the government ○ undesirable effects on the people: the loss of tradition of charity and education, fear that the north would be stripped of monastic land and succumb to the south. ○ The fear of the loss of parish churches and religious tradition ○ 1536 injunctions attacked the tradition of pilgrimage and the celebration of saints.H/E- also had social and economic grievances CC: ● -Robert Aske was a religious leader, convinced supporter monasteries, made his religious views clear ● -Pontefract Articles had many religious demands ● -6 Articles Act- reasserted catholic doctrine H/E- also had social and economic grievances There was little popular support, no decline in Catholicism evident through the Pilgrimage of Grace meant there was no consensus or demand for religious changes- it was merely his personal motives. Henry recognised this which is evident through his release of the Act of Six Articles.E6only pockets of Protestant support- Only 20% of Londoners were Protestant by 1547 H/E- 40% Protestants in 1553→ increase of Protestantism CC:only in London, still small amount, not a majorityWestern rebellion→ demands of the rebels showed they wanted restoration of Catholic practises e.g. chantries, latin services and opposed new Prayer Book H/E- local grievances, economic grievances too- sheep tax CC: religious was main reason- known as prayer book rebellioUnder Somerset, 9 Bishops supported changes, 10 were against -Bishops in Cornwall and Devon did not enforce Church services in England- little popular support among them -Quick restoration of Catholicism when Edward died with lack of oppositionGovernment attention- steered towards seizing money from the Church→ review carried out in 1552 estimated the Church was worth over one million pounds demonstrating that this inquest was due to Northumberland’s greed→ 1552 Northumberland transfered money from bishops land to the crown, worth over £1m There was litttle popular support, Protestantism lived in pockets (e.g. London), but majority of the population wanted restoration of catholocism, shown through Mary’s reign and WESTERN REBELLIONM1when she imposed first act of repeal there was no opposition -H/E- burnings of Protestants showed there were significant numbers of Protestants in EnglandH/E Wyatt’s rebellion 1554 (Wyatt was a protestant) CC: Although had some religious motives, was mostly due to the threat from the Spanish marriage CC: -there were only pockets of Protestantism, London- (STATISTICS) -laymen were often involved in rooting out heretics -1558 the burnings were decreasing- showing conformityEvaluation
• ‘Tudor monarchs experienced more failures than success in dealing with religion in England in the years 1547-1587.’ Assess the validity of this view.

  Intro: in order to assess it→ split into legislative success, success of impact on subjects/society (whether people conformed to the religious changes)Edward- change over time● Legislative success→ 2 act of uniformities, injunction, 42 articles ● Northumberland did not have any opposition H/E- failure: ● Western rebellion ● Somerset does not impose consubstantiation CC: rebellion had other tendencies too and once Northumeberland had gained power he was able to pass even more radical reforms than Somerset did without any oppositionMary● Acts of repeal ● Injunctions H/E- Failure: ● Existence of propaganda, burnings were not accompanied with positive reinforcement of Catholicism-- therefore there was increased sympathy for Protestants ● Wyatt’s rebellion ● Monastic lands- failure in parliament ● Did not have money or time to restore the monasteries CC: Wyatt’s rebellion more focused on marriage to Philip and it was seen that overall ‘men breathed easier for the accession of a Catholic Queen’ - Mary had support for her religious policies and was therefore able to implement them well, the greatest limitation for her was her early death and it is widely viewed that if she had lived longer a stable catholic state would be won.
• “Elizabeth’s policy towards Spain was always weak and unconvincing 1568-1603”

  IntroductionElizabeth displayed elements of weaknesses and an unconvincing foreign policy towards Spain, however, not all of her foreign policy towards Spain can be called unconvincing.At the start of her reign it can be called unconvincing due to the lack of strategy.This issue was later overcome as Elizabeth managed to achieve her foreign policy objectives such as national security and enhancing England’s reputation.Theme 1 : national securityElizabeths policy towards Spain was weak and unconvincing at times due to the inability to achieve constant national security . England was often under national danger due to the overshadowing power of spawn .Argument 1: Wilson argued E1’s policy was reactive and lacked any overall aim or objective , just reacted to external events to safeguard national interest. He maintains this was because England was a second rate power and could not afford to wage war for long.Half of the original Armada was lost & around 15,000 men had perishedBy 1595, the Spanish warships had been rebuilt and could threaten invasion once more. However were dispersed by the weather, but they could easily have posed a threat if they had remained intact.Why were the Spanish Netherland so important?For England , it had economic and strategic importancemost export trade in English cloth was organised through ports in Netherlands , i.e AntwerpEnglish national security had reduced as france and spain gained more control . France had defeated brittany under H7 and gained Calais in 1558 and Philip had inherited Netherlands in 1558 . All this made invasion of eng possible.The Revolt in the Netherlands helped to undermine the relations London had with MadridRevolt put Elizabeth in a difficult position: encouraging the rebels could encourage rebels in England BUT Alba & his troops were a major threat to EnglandEval:However , over the entirety of Elizabeth’s reign England was never invaded. Elizabeth defeated the great threat of spain due to her consistency and clearly defined aim of suppressing Spanish aggression , in turn demonstrating that english policy was certainly strong and convincing with national security being achievedAble to achieve objectives - national security • England saw themselves in war for national and religious survival, and therefore by ensuring their survival Elizabeth’s policy cannot be labelled as unconvincing. • The war was fought on several fronts such as Western European, Caribbean, French and Dutch Fronts. • This is enhanced by the fact that Elizabeth was tight on money and the war proved to be extremely costly. • Her spending in order to ensure successes reflects her determination and strategic awareness in terms of importance of foreign policy with Spain. • She knew what she wanted to achieve and was aided by the support of her ministers who planned military strategies. • Regardless of monetary issues and vulnerability, as brought by war at several fronts, England was still able to prevail against a global superpower - establishing national securityTheme 2 : enhance english international reputationWhilst Elizabeths policy towards spain was strong and convincing at times ,it is necessary to state that Elizabeth did achieve her aim of enhancing englands international reputation , thus policy was not consistently weak , instead it would be better to argue there were certain changes points in which englands reputation suffered‘The reign of Elizabeth as an age of greatness where England began to establish itself as a leading power in Western Europe’.Able to achieve objectives - reputation • England was a relatively small and weaker power compared to Spain which was regarded as one of the worlds greatest powers, who had prepared for this Anglo-Spanish war from 1585-7. • England hadn’t stabilised its power nor its power internationally. • Elizabeth’s policy towards Spanish was strong as it was able to exploit weather in their favour, ultimately leading to Spanish failures. e.g. the English sent fireships to destroy some of the Armada whilst it was at anchor. • The fact that the English were still able to gain victories through this method indicates the policy was not weak as they were prepared to ambush the Spanish into losses. • By securing a victory as a relatively small country against a global superpower, Elizabeth was able to increase the reputation of England.Eval :Weak leadership by English • When Anglo-Spanish relations deteriorate over the Netherlands, Elizabeth sent the Earl of Leicester after after the Treaty of Nonsuch in 1585. • Leicester however, proved to be incompetent in fulfilling his role in enforcing the alliance. • This is because the troops were ill disciplined, Leicester quarrelled with the Dutch, and England commanders quarrel among themselves. • This proved to be a weak and unconvincing policy as Philip II viewed the treaty as a declaration of war as opposed to one of peace. • Failures were even recognised by Leicester himself - resigned from his position in January 1588. • Elizabeth failed to coordinate and organised a clear and coherent policy towards the Spanish.Theme 3 : trade protection - to protect the english cloth trade with the NetherlandsIn addition to this there is a strong case to show Elizabeth’s policy most certainly proved itself to not be weak and unconvincing due to the enhancement in english tradeActivities of English privateers in the New World had some positive results in the LT. Although they could not stop the flow of bullion from the New World to Spain, they did succeed in capturing over 1,000 Spanish and Portuguese ships. By the end of his reign, Philip II realised that Spain would not be able to maintain its monopoly over trade. The activities of the privateers paved the way for the establishment of the East India Company in 1600, formalising trade with Asia.Eval :However , there were drastic changes to the strength of Elizabeth’s policy at times that supports the claim her policy was weak and unconvincing .Economic depression of the 1590s was partly caused by the loss of legitimate trade with Spanish possessions as well as by the poor harvests of the 1590s( Eval across time )ConclusionArgument 2 : Wernham argued E1’s policy aims were very clear, but she was often restricted by events in Eng and the actions of foreign powers.Possible theme : weak and convincing as victory was solely due to luck and weaknesses of opponentsElizabeth's foreign policy towards Spain can be seen as weak and unconvincing as victory was solely due to luck and the weaknesses of their opponents, both in 1588 and 1596, as opposed to calculations and strategy. During the Battle of Gravelines (1588) there was a Spanish attempt to invade England, as commanded by Duke of Medina Sidonia. However, the weather conditions meant that Sidonia's initial plans were obstructed. This was because after the Battle of Gravelines around 600 men were killed with many injured, as well as the fact that the wind changed the direction of the ship, instead heading them towards the North Sea. this essentially made the ships vulnerable as their plans had to be abandoned due to the extreme weather conditions. Through this, England was able to secure a victory because of the vulnerability that the Spanish men were placed in. This didn't occur because of the planning nor the strategy by Elizabeth, rather by pure luck. Therefore, Elizabeth's plans regarding the Spanish invasion are characterised more by weakness than strength because her victories essentially came about because of the Spanish failures to withstand the weather conditions, essentially being forced to take a hazardous route home which pilled greater defeat onto her enemies. Through this, the victories were not due to her strengths rather because of pure luck.
• How successful, and why, was Elizabeth in dealing with foreign threats to her rule?

  Consequences and causesTheme 1: SpainP : Spain was a threat due so its support of Catholic piots against Bizabeth E: Spain supported RIDOLFI %) and throckmorton plot (1583) A: These plots were a threat as they aimed to depose Elabeth and make Mary Queen c/ England, International aid from Spein meant thet they poled a great threet to Elzabeth On she other hand, both plots were uncovered and conspirTORS were executed,P: Spain was a threat due to its domination over the Netherlands due to its economic and strategic importance No EnglandE :Economic importance: much of the export trade in English cloth was organised though ports in the Netherlands, such as Antwerp), in 1563 Phlip il banned Engish cloth imports (AFV to protect Horn the plague, but more at annoyance te Engish prosperity) E: Strategic importance: English national security was believed to depend on ensuring that no powerful countries controlled the coastline across the Channel. During the Tudor period, this sense of security hod been reduced as France goined Bittany and Calais and Philip inherited the Netherland A: If Spain won complete control of the Netherlands, invasion of Engiand would be much easie and tade would be seriously hindered - a great international threat to ElzobenP.: Spain was a threat due to Spanish Armada E: Elizabeth direct support of the rebek following the beaty of Nonsuch arguably caused the Spanish to invade in 1588, Philips internion for the invasion was for the Engish to lecte the Netherlands. Medina Sidonia was the Captain in charge of the Amada (130 ships). Consisted of 6000 soldiers soling tom Spain and collecting 17.000 ore from the Netheriands, A: me threat of the invasion appeared a great international threat as the purpose was to overtvow Elabeth and the Tudor establshment of Protestantism in England, with the expectation that his would put a stop le Enginh interference in the Netherlandh, Spain was the only foreign power to drecty attempt on invasion and thus pose a danger to her key aim of preventing an invasion of England However, fortunately for Elizabeth bad weather forced the Armada to rebeatEval :Theme 2: Scotland - successE1 often reluctant to take action against Mary.Used as a Catholic figurehead - not an individual motivation. Danger came not from Mary herself but the fact that her arrival coincided with a major shift in circumstances which threw Eng into mainstream European politics.Francis Walsingham had developed a superior spy service which ultimately eradicated any threat before it was able to put Elizabeth in danger. So yes, MQS was a serious threat to Elizabeth but by imprisoning her in England, E1 was able to keep an eye on her - never allowed threat to develop . Evident with None of the plots developing into anything seriousSome historians think that Mary was only a threat because of Elizabeth’s weakness to remain unmarried & childless.Eval :PC had established a good relationship with Scotland, by helping the Protestant lords overthrow the French regency. The return of MQS , to Scotland threatened this.During Mary’s 8yr reign in Scotland she concentrated on getting her claim to the English throne recognised by Elizabeth.Mary’s flight to England in 1568 placed the govt in a difficult position. As the natural leader of English Catholics she was a threat to national security.During her 19 years in captivity, she was involved in 4 conspiracies against Elizabeth. - Elizabeth had been trying to stabilise religion in England. Mary, Queen of Scots, threatened this stability. Mary represented a continuous threat to E1 , was Catholic & a figurehead for many Catholics in England who wanted to usurp Elizabeth & replace her with Mary. This problem increased when E1 was excommunicated in 1570, meaning that the Pope freed her Catholic subjects from the need to obey her.Her presence gives people a Catholic figurehead -As Catholics in England gathered more support from Italy & France, there were dangers for Elizabeth & many plots to have her assassinated.Mary was the next legal heir to the throne of England if Elizabeth continued to stay unmarried without childrenFrance had already recognised Mary as the rightful Queen of EngTheme 3 : France - unsuccessful1562 the French Wars of Religion began between the Huguenots & Catholics & E1 reluctantly agreed to help the Huguenots - In 1562 E1 gave Huguenot leader Louis I de Bourbon 140,000 crowns in the Treaty of Richmond/ Hampton court in return for Calais if they won . In 1563 the French Catholics & Huguenots united against Elizabeth to expel English troops from Le Havre. -1564 Treaty of Toyes ended all English involvement in the French Wars of Religion & Elizabeth gave up all rights to Calais in return for 120,000 crowns → significant blow to prestige and became more cautious about supporting Protestant causes on the continent and supporting rebels.Eval:Later on in 1560 the Treaty of Edinburgh - Replace the Auld Alliance with with a new Anglo-Scottish alliance, while maintaining peace between England and France agreed by the Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis. French and english troops withdrew in Scotland and a new Protestant government was established. RESULTS - ‘Auld Alliance’ between France and Scotland no longer existed → a threat to English security was largely removed-problem had been removed without a war against France- Protestant rulers in Scotland - Northern border became more secure.
• To what extent was the execution of Mary Queen of Scots in 1586 the key turning point in England’s relationship with Spain in the years 1558 to 1603?

  Summarised version - what factors where a turning point in englands relationship with SpainTheme 1 : execution of MQOS in 1587englands relations with spain was adversely affected by Mary’s presence in England - played a role in causing the armadaExecution contributed to the breakdown of relations with spainPhilip supported rebellions activity against E1 : the Northern Rebellion (1569) and the RidolfiPlot to replace Elizabeth with Mary, Queen of Scots (1571).Spanish sympathy for the plight of a Catholic monarch, Mary, Queen of Scots,Eval :the breakdown of relations with spain was something that was already underwayExecution did not directly cause the Spanish Armada as Philip had begun to plain it earlierTheme 2 : Religious- Was becoming a war between Protestants and Catholics- main areas of contention were the Netherlands- english intervention /sympathy to the Protestant rebels on the NetherlandsTreaty of NonsuchThe 1585 Treaty of Nonsuch was an agreement between E1 & the Dutch rebels to counter treaty of joinvilleIt was a key turning point as E1 became directly involved in Spanish / Dutch affairs . Signalled english entry in war with spainElizabeth agreed to send 600,000 florins & 8000 troops under the command of the Earl of Leicester. However, the English commanders quarrelled among themselves and the troops were ill-disciplined.The role of the Earl of Leicester in the treaty of nonsuch and revoltRobert Dudley urged E1 to help the Dutch ProtestantsHe persuaded her to agree the 1585 Treaty of Nonsuch where she sent the Netherlands 8,000 troopsLeicester led the English troops but ignored Elizabeth's advice to be cautious instead making himself Governor-General of the NetherlandsDudley’s help boosted Dutch moraleEval :Theme 3 : economic - Spain tried to monopolize trade to isolate England- activities of english pirates in Spanish watersEnglish aggressionJohn Hawkins’ disrupted the Spanish trading monopoly in the Caribbean- captured considerable quantities of Spanish bullion on its way to Europe from the New World.E1 adopted a more overtly anti-Spanish position, e.g. by :Knighting Francis Drake (who captured Spanish ships and robbed them) on circumnavigating the globe Heightened tensions.New world : The Spanish had taken advantage of the discovery of the “New World” (North and South America), conquering Mexico, Peru, Chile and the Caribbean. Spanish wealth increased dramatically thanks to the silver mines of Mexico and Peru. When English sailor John Hawkins made three voyages to the New World (in 1562, 1564 and 1568), the Spanish saw this as a threat to their dominance of the region. Elizabeth encouraged Hawkins, supplying him with ships- she saw this as another way of distracting the Spanish from conquering the Netherlands. This increased Spanish anger, and in 1568, the Spanish blockaded Hawkins’ ships in Mexico. Only two ships escaped.Eval :
• Elizabeth had overcome her vulnerabilities with regards to foreign policy by 1564’. Assess the validity of this view.

  Had Elizabeth overcome her vulnerabilities with regards to foreign policy by 1563?

  What was the situation when Elizabeth inherited the crown?

  Eng was still at war with France, who had troops in Scot, while MQOS, had declared herself to be the legitimate Catholic claimant to the English throne.

  Pope had declared E1 a bastard, leaving her dependent on an alliance with Spain as a means of protection. Philip was willing to support E1 in the peace negotiations with France, which commenced in 1559 at Câteau-Cambrésis.

  Main issue : Calais - E1could not afford to take it back and H2 didn't want to surrender it. She negotiated directly with H2 to bring about an acceptable compromise: the French would retain Calais for 8 yrs and would then either return it to England or pay a form of compensation. The French also conceded one of their fortresses on the Scottish borders.

  France

  E1 was fearful France would rekindle their loyalty to Scotland and threaten Eng from the north and south together. If this union between Scotland and France became something, Spain could help Eng by attacking France from below.

  There was a mutual need for France and England to form an alliance. The traditional bonds between Eng and Spain were deteriorating and Eng needed the support of France for protection from Spain. The French were Catholic but did not have the same hostility to English Protestantism as Spain was.

  What were Elizabeth's specific aims? (All her aims were defensive ― priorities also changed during her reign)

  To secure independence from France and Spain.

  Limit the power of France.

  To secure the Northern border with Scotland.

  To protect the English cloth trade with the Netherlands.

  To ensure that the Channel coastline was not under the control of any other power -Avoid wars as they were costly and risky -Unwilling to help rebels fights against their legitimate leaders. (This would become a problem because many Catholics didn't regard her as legitimate). -Unwilling to act as a Protestant champion in Europe.

  Using her unmarried status as a diplomatic weapon

  Historiography of foreign policy aims:

  Argument 1: Wilson argued E1's policy was reactive and lacked any overall aim or objective , just reacted to external events to safeguard national interest. He maintains this was because England was a second rate power and could not afford to wage war for long. -Argument 2 : Wernham argued E1's policy aims were very clear, but she was often restricted by events in Eng and the actions of foreign powers. -Argument 3 : Rowse - 'The reign of Elizabeth as an age of greatness where England began to establish itself as a leading power in Western Europe'. -Argument 4 : Crowson - 'the 45 years of Elizabeth's reign was a time of pessimism, of insecurity and of agonising national danger under the overshadowing power, first of France and then of Spain'.

  Scotland - How successful was E1's policy towards Scotland

  1559, Mary of Guise was regent for Scotland ,France was heavily involved in ruling Scotland

  late 1559, a Protestant rebellion started in Scotland - Catholic France sent over 9,500 troops & England sent ￡5,000 to aid the Protestants

  In the 1560 Treaty of Berwick, England sent 8,000 troops to Scotland

  Later on in 1560 the Treaty of Edinburgh - Replace the Auld Alliance with France with a new Anglo-Scottish alliance, while maintaining peace between England and France agreed by the Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis. French and english troops withdrew in Scotland and a new Protestant government was established. RESULTS - 'Auld Alliance' between France and Scotland no longer existed → a threat to English security was largely removed-problem had been removed without a war against France- Protestant rulers in Scotland - Northern border became more secure.

  1559 - Lords of Congregation take over Scotland -overthrow Mary of Guise. Protestant takeover. -In 1560, MQS's husband King Francis II of France died & Mary was sent back to Scotland

  How well did Elizabeth manage the relationship with Scotland, after Mary, Queen of Scots' return?

  Treated as a prisoner- continued MQS being made a Catholic figurehead for Catholics.

  France - In the early and mid-1560s how well did Elizabeth manage the relationship with France?

  1559 the Treaty of Cateau-Cambresis ended the Habsburg-Valois wars

  1562 the French Wars of Religion began between the Huguenots & Catholics & E1 reluctantly agreed to help the Huguenots - In 1562 E1 gave Huguenot leader Louis I de Bourbon 140,000 crowns in the Treaty of Richmond/ Hampton court in return for Calais if they won . In 1563 the French Catholics & Huguenots united against Elizabeth to expel English troops from Le Havre. -1564 Treaty of Toyes ended all English involvement in the French Wars of Religion & Elizabeth gave up all rights to Calais in return for 120,000 crowns → significant blow to prestige and became more cautious about supporting Protestant causes on the continent and supporting rebels.

  Was Elizabeth's early Foreign Policy Successful? -Early foreign policy was largely defensive. She managed to establish diplomatic relations with some of the most powerful contemporary empires and supported Protestant struggles across Europe. -Relied heavily on William Cecil who was a great statesman & negotiator & as a result, he negotiated peace with both France & Scotland. -In addition, Elizabeth used her marriage negotiations as a tool for foreign policy, delaying any decisions on marriage & string along Spain & France, especially with her dithering to ensure peaceful relationships between countries

  William Cecil's Role in Foreign Policy

  Cecil was highly influential in foreign policy

  Saw France & Spain as threats to England - because of their Catholicism & Spain's expansion in the New World because he was appreciative of the potential value of colonies

  Recognised the great rivalry between France & Spain & at first supported Spain

  Cecil believed that if France felt threatened on both her northern and southern borders, she would be less of a threat to England but this policy changed when the Revolt of the Netherlands started as Cecil did not want thousands of Spanish troops just a few hours sailing from the English coast

  England's support of the Dutch rebels led to a break with Spain & along with the trial & execution of Mary, Queen of Scots, the former ally became a deadly enemy

  With the Treaty of Nonsuch, England sent military aid to the Dutch rebels & Cecil took charge of organising the whole venture

  Cecil was also instrumental in the Scottish treaties of Berwick & Edinburgh