How Successful Was Wolsey’s Foreign Policy in the Years 1515-1525?

In: Historical Events

Submitted By oonaghhughes2
Words 739
Pages 3
How Successful was Wolsey’s Foreign Policy in the Years 1515-1525?
(30 marks)

Wolsey became Henry VIII’s Lord Chancellor in 1515, he was extremely able and determined; his foreign policy was mainly directed at preserving peace and trying to make England a negotiator between other countries. During the years 1515-1525 Wolsey’s power was undisputed, this was due to the fact that Henry VIII delegated more and more state business to Wolsey including near-complete control of England’s foreign policy. The extent of Wolsey’s success can be measured in several ways; these include the financial stability of the country, loyalty from England’s allies and respect for Wolsey (and Henry VIII) from English subjects and foreigners.
Wolsey’s greatest achievement in creating a successful foreign policy was the Treaty of London, in 1518, which was known as a ‘universal’ treaty of peace, it united all of Christendom under Henry VIII’s sponsorship with a mutual non-aggressive pact that provided collective support and aid in the case of conflict. While doing this Wolsey also saw the opportunity to re-unite France and England by betrothing Henry VIII’s first daughter, Mary, to the dauphin (first son of the King), by doing this Wolsey also achieved Tournai for England again for 600,000 crowns. Bishop Fox described Wolsey’s maneuver with France as “The best deed that was ever done for England; and, next to the King, the praise is due to Wolsey”.
Many people have questioned whether Wolsey’s foreign policy was actually his own policy or if Wolsey was simply a pawn for Henry to exploit and use to his every advantage, whereas some others say Wolsey was entirely in control of his correspondence and dealings with other countries and that Henry was not at all controlling Wolsey; I personally believe that Wolsey strived to create a peaceful foreign policy, but Henry yearned for honour and…...

Similar Documents

Do You Agree with the Suggestion in Source N That Henry and Wolsey Conducted an Effective Foreign Policy in the Years 1515-25?

...Do you agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy in the years 1515-25? There are many different interpretations of the effectiveness of the foreign policy in the years 1515-25. Some sources say that it was successful given England's poor resources and Henry's relatively low income and some criticise it and the way Henry and Wolsey conducted it as they think that Henry's aims and ambitions were often unrealistic. Source N suggests that Wolsey and Henry conducted an effective foreign policy. David Grossell says 'Henry and Wolsey did well to preserve an independent and active role and win glory, honour and prestige...'. It shows us that Wolsey was able to direct an effective foreign policy given the circumstances and England's resources. One example of how effective his policy was the Peace of London in 1518 which was one of his greatest achievements. The treaty bound the twenty foremost states in Europe together in a pact of perpetual peace. Wolsey was seen as an architect of the peace and this made London the centre of international relations and also England was no longer under threat of diplomatic isolation. Source L supports this as it shows the brilliance of Henry's foreign policy at the Field of Cloth of Gold on French territory in 1520. We can see in the painting that many people are gathering there and also in the background you can see the tent that is made out of gold cloth. Henry and Francis met at the......

Words: 744 - Pages: 3

Do You Agree with the View That in the Years 1515-1525 Henry Viii Wholly Surrendered Power in Government to Cardinal Wolsey? the years 1515-1525 Henry VIII wholly surrendered power in government to Cardinal Wolsey? To a certain extent within 
Source 4 (by J.J. Scarisbrick 1968) supports the idea that possibly Henry VIII actually did surrender power over to Wolsey. The evidence within the source that suggests this possibly for being the truth is ‘a self-indulgent King had wholly surrendered the cares of the state into the Cardinals hands’. To further support this case, it is clear that Wolsey was extremely powerful, he had vast amounts of bishoprics (Archbishop of Canterbury, Tournai, Durham just to name a few) and was the head of things such as the Star Chamber where Wolsey got himself heavily involved with. This is shown when you compared the number of cases Wolsey took on (120) compared to that of Henry VII who dealt with only 12. Also Wolsey had control of all of the state finances and could make large changes to things such as the taxation system he was able to introduce a new form of tax known as the ‘Subsidy’ which was more popular since it meant the poor payed far less tax than previously than with the old 15’s and 10’s taxation method. This new taxation method allowed Wolsey to pay for king’s foreign affairs. As well as this ‘subsidy’, since Wolsey had such significant power he was able to also raise considerable amounts of capital through other means, such as through ‘benevolences’ and enforced loans from the nobility, which raised £200,000 in 1522. This shows that Wolsey was......

Words: 902 - Pages: 4

How Successful Was Louis Xviii’s Foreign Policy Between 1815 and 1824?

...Q.13 How successful was Louis XVIII’s foreign policy between 1815 and 1824? Louis XVIII’s foreign policy was mostly successful between 1815 and 1824. France had a stable relationship with the Quadruple Alliance to start off with which could be further built upon with successful foreign policy. • The Second Treaty of Paris was more punitive than the first but it is important to notice that France was involved in the Treaty and attended the Congress of Vienna. • France was not treated like a leper within international relations as was Germany a century later. Louis XVIII’s first success in foreign policy was in 1818. • Rapid payment of the indemnity, organised by Richelieu, meant that all foreign troops had withdrawn from France two years ahead of schedule. • This enabled France to resume her independent role in European politics. • The conference of Aix-la-Chappell saw France joining the Quadruple Alliance and made it the Quintuple Alliance. =This meant that France regained some of her international prestige and was no longer ‘the defeated power’ However, the Spanish colonies in South America were an area of failure in foreign policy for Louis • The French regime had strived to establish French influence in South America when the trouble in Spain had allowed some of the areas she had controlled to break away. =France came up against the British foreign minister, Canning, who made it very clear that the French should not meddle in that......

Words: 499 - Pages: 2

Do You Agree with the Suggestion in Source N That Henry and Wolsey Conducted and Effective Foreign Policy in the Years 1515-1525?

...agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted and effective foreign policy in the years 1515-1525? Sources L and N agree that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy in the years 1515-25 although as source L is a painting it has a motive and probably a bias one whilst source M disagrees with the statement by highlighting ‘troubles associated from the Amicable Grant’. In source N (which is featured in a book wrote about Henry VIII at the time in question) contradicts itself to make its point. “Failed to bring great gains to the country, but it did thrust the country into a major role which that its wealth and population scarcely justified...” this makes the reader think that this was worth it for the positives it brought. There were many successes of their (Henry and Wolsey’s) foreign policy. Wolsey was a successful peace broker, and the treaty of London in 1518 was a great example of him ability. This treaty in 1518 was an agreement of peace which seemed to put England in to the centre of diplomatic affairs in Europe (which was what Henry wanted). The treaty bound France, Spain, the Papacy, HRE and England against the Turkish. At the time it seemed like a great success as it seemed to signify the end of fear of England being isolated in Europe, however in the long term it failed despite the short term success. Another success was the foreign policies flexibility despite England and the King having such low income and money. This is......

Words: 795 - Pages: 4

Do You Agree with the View That, in the Years 1511-27, English Successes in Foreign Policy Outweighed the Failures?

...the years 1511-27, English successes in foreign policy outweighed the failures? I agree with the view that English successes in foreign policy outweighed the failures in the years 1511-27 to a certain extent. England managed to successfully pursue a policy of peace making in the years 1514-21 and wolsey was flexible in his diplomacy. However, it could also be argued that Henry’s chief aim, the invasion of France, was unpopular with people at the time and that Henry’s foreign policy was too costly given how little of long term value it brought to England. His allies also often let him down and put their own aims before those of England. In this essay I will be looking at three sources and weighing up the two sides of the argument. A point in support of this view is that that England managed to successfully pursue a policy of peace making in the years 1514-21. This is shown in source 4, where MD Palmer tells us that Wolsey successfully brought about peace between England and France in 1514 and that he engineered the universal peace of London in 1518. He also planned the Field of the Cloth of Gold of 1520 and negotiated peace between the Empire and France at Calais in 1521. Wolsey’s peaceful approach also benefitted England in that it reduced costs at a time when the country could not afford another war, and successfully made England a major ‘player’ in Europe, which was a desire of Henry’s. Another point in support of the view that the successes in foreign policy......

Words: 710 - Pages: 3

Vdid Wolsey and Henry Have an Effective Foreign Policy During the Years 1515 – 1525?

...vDid Wolsey and Henry have an effective foreign policy during the years 1515 – 1525? In some respects it can be said that Henry and Wolsey had an effective foreign policy in the years 1515 – 1525. Henry and Wolsey were responsible for the Treaty of London and were also sought after as a useful ally by other more important European powers. However some would argue that their policies were not effective due to the amount of money that was spent on international events and warfare and the fact that nothing was really achieved. Firstly it could be argued that his policies were effective due to the fact that Henry and Wolsey were responsible for the Treaty of London, the signatories were France, England, Holy Roman Empire, the Papacy, Spain, Burgundy and the Netherlands, all of whom agreed not to attack one another and to come to the aid of any that were under attack. This was a great achievement for Henry and Wolsey as England managed to aucestrate a treaty that was way above its size and importance, this therefore brought England to the table of European politics this means that Henry and Wolsey had an effective foreign policies. In addition source L supports this because Henry is large and this implies that he was considered important and this implies that his policies must have been successful as he was considered godlike. However the painting might have been painted to demonstrate Henrys power and wealth. There is also a dragon in the painting implicating that it is not...

Words: 582 - Pages: 3

Wolsey's Domestic Policies

...Wolsey's domestic policies: WOLSEY AND LAW Positives Wolsey was Lord Chancellor, and often sat in the Star Chamber to ensure he was at the heart of all things legal (that wasn't his catchphrase though) In 1516 Wolsey put forward a plan to try and make the legal system cheaper and more efficient The Star Chamber took on many more cases. In Henry VII's reign it took on roughly 12 cases per year, but under Wolsey this reached an average of 120 cases a year. An example is the case of the Earl of Northumberland, who was sent to Fleet Prison in 1515 Wolsey also sat as a judge in the Court of Chancery Land enclosure was banned, making it fairer on ordinary people Negatives The huge number of cases the Star Chamber took on led to the system becoming overworked The popularity of the Star Chamber somewhat overshadowed Wolsey's work in the Court of Chancery Wolsey may have banned enclosure to spite nobles who hated him as opposed to banning it in the name of equality and fairness WOLSEY AND FINANCE Positives Wolsey invented the parliamentary subsidy, which was flexible and based on the taxpayer's wealth - this raised £300,000 for the crown There was a tax reform, which was overseen by John Hales Wolsey got a subsidy from the Southern Convocation Wolsey carried out a military survey called the General Prescription, which allowed for loans of £260,000 to be collected Negatives People didn't like the parliamentary subsidy, believe it or not... Despite the......

Words: 603 - Pages: 3

How Successful Were Wolsey's Domestic Policies

...How successful were Wolsey’s domestic policies? Law One area that Wolsey did try to reform was England’s legal system. England mainly used common law at that time however civil law was seen as more modern and was favored in southern Europe. Civil law was used in the King’s council when it acted as a court of law. As Lord Chancellor Wolsey had oversight over the legal system in England. The law awakened Wolsey’s intellectual interest. He was a judge in the Chancery Court and handled disputes over wills, contracts and property. He had successfully reformed the Star Chamber where he was determined to get rid of corruption. He made it much fairer, cheaper and more efficient and was not afraid to take on the powerful. He had the Earl of Northumberland jailed for contempt of court. Wolsey Had genuine concern and wanted to improve the administration. He knew that common law courts were controlled by money which made it impossible for the poor to use so they could not get any justice. There were many problems with Common law for example the decisions of courts could be corruptly influenced or ignored by the powerful, cases took too long to resolve causing them to be very expensive which most people could not afford. Wolsey’s solution to all these problems was to increase the role of the prerogative courts which developed from the king’s council. The system that these courts would use was called “equity” and it was based on common sense and what seemed fairer rather that the common......

Words: 1400 - Pages: 6

To What Extent Was Khruschev Successful in the Destalinisation Policy

...How successful was Khrushchev’s policy of destalinization Destalinization was a political reform launched by Soviet Communist Party First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev at the 20th Party Congress, otherwise known as the secret speech. The main components of the reforms were changing or removing prominent institutions that had helped Stalin remain in power; the Stalinist political system, political party members that had supported him (beginning with the arrest and subsequent execution of political rival Lavrentiy Beria) and the removal of the Gulag labour camp system. Khrushchev was desperate to present himself as a reformer, completely breaking away from the reliance of ‘fear into submission’ tactics of the Stalinist era, by presenting himself as a ‘man of the people’. He wished to lessen the gap between the soviet leadership and the people, whilst undermining his predecessors’ dictatorship rule. It has been argued that his attempt to end the use of terror both in political and public life and the reintegration of those who had fallen victim to said terror, was one of the successes of the destalinization policy. This included the released of five million prisoners from labour camps. A total of eight million prisoners had been released by the end of 1956. Shortly after, in 1961, Khrushchev initiated a campaign to rename cities that previously honoured Stalin; Stalingrad was renamed Volgograd. Stalin’s persona was publicly attacked; most importantly in destroying his image...

Words: 785 - Pages: 4

Do You Agree with the View That in Domestic Policy, Wolsey Was Successful as the King’s Chief Minister?

...Do you agree with the view that in domestic policy, Wolsey was successful as the king’s chief minister? By looking at the sources the majority of the evidence points to Wolsey being unsuccessful as Henry’s chief minister, they do however point out some successes Wolsey had such as justice but it is clear that Wolsey was unsuccessful as the chief minister. Firstly, source 9 clearly supports the claim that Wolsey was a successful chief minister as it says “ I never saw this kingdom in better order… Wolsey’s authority and rule, nor justice better administered”. The source suggests that the kingdom was in such good shape because of Wolsey and that he was a very helpful man. This claim can be supported by source 8 as it also comments on Wolsey’s heavy presence within justice. Source 8 tells us about Wolseys time in Star Chamber, which was one of the royal courts to be used by the King’s subjects to get justice. During Wolsey’s time in Star Chamber the number of cases dealt with was over 120 each year compared with only 12 per year in Henry VII reign. This highlights Wolsey's success in getting justice for not just the rich and wealthy but ordinary people too. The Star Chamber dealt with problems such as enclosure where Wolsey launched a national inquiry and was able to make those who took land rebuild houses and return land to arable farmers. Also with source 9 being by Cavendish who had a personal connection with Wolsey it allows us to question as to whether it is......

Words: 741 - Pages: 3

How Successful Was the Third Crusade

...DATE \@ "d MMMM y" 19 November 2014 History Essay How Successful was the Third Crusade? The Third Crusade’s ultimate objective was to recapture the Holy Land. When they returned without this the overwhelming opinion was that they had failed on there efforts. However, they returned with far more than they had left with, gaining new territories and matching the previously “immortal” Saladin throughout the expedition. They managed to gain a highly useful treaty with him. These successes were met with substantial failures though, including the death of the German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa whilst crossing Anatolia and the return of Philip II to France to deal with internal threats. However, the Crusaders took the port of Acre as well as taking Cyprus from the Byzantines. Overall I would say the Crusade failed because they did not retake Jerusalem, but the Crusader’s achievements were still considerable considering how tough the task was originally, and the fact they were fighting a full strength Muslim army. A major success of the second Crusade was how well prepared the Crusade troops were thanks to Richard I’s vast preparation. Richard was an experienced soldier and he knew exactly what was required for a successful Crusade. As soon as he was crowned king in 1190, he channeled all his resources (Normandy, Aquitaine etc) towards applying the Crusader’s with what they needed to be successful. Richard knew just how tough it was to even get to the Holy Land, let alone......

Words: 1040 - Pages: 5

Do You Agree with the Suggestion in Source 3 That Henry and Wolsey Conducted an Effective Foreign Policy in the Years 1513-1529? Use Sources 1,2 and 3 and Your Own Knowledge.

...English foreign policy in the years between 1513 and 1529 tried to mainly implement as much honour and prestige to the crown of England whilst restoring a once great nation with credibility for European politics. Overall it is clear that the foreign policy methods used by both Wolsey and Henry were effective in this period such as the Battle of floodin (1513) or The Treaty of London (1518) however the effectiveness of their foreign influence came at great costs such as the events of 1525 (amicable grant) and the Aftermath of Pavia (1525) in which Henry was left as a weak, lonely power in Europe, possibly hinting at a sense of ineffectiveness within the period given. On one side of the argument, it was clear that Henry and Wolsey did carry out an effective foreign policy in the years 1513-1529. A clear display of this effectiveness is presented in source one, featuring the ‘Field of the cloth of gold’ painting. From this painting we can clearly infer that it was an effective display of Henry’s wealth and power, which was a fundamental aspect of English foreign policy, specifically to the king. We can tell that it was an effective display of wealth and power due to the fact that Henry was meeting with the French at the time of the Hasburg wars between Charles and Francis (1520), crucially putting Henry as a key figure within the table of European politics, being between the two largest powers at the time. Also considering the fact that in the Painting from source 1 Henry is......

Words: 1237 - Pages: 5

How Successful Was the Usa’s Policy of Containment?

...How successful was the USA’s policy of containment? The policy of containment was not a success, As after the war, The USA aimed to quarantine communism to the only place it existed, Russia. However soon despite this, communism spread and communist dictatorship controlled most of Eastern Europe, soon after this the most populated state on earth, China, fell to a communist regime, as well as the creation of communist states in Vietnam and Korea. This consistent creation of communist states and the failure of the USA to prevent this, shows how ultimately, despite apparent success in some of Europe and Asia, the Policy of Containment failed in its primary function, to contain and prevent the spread of communism and therefore it was not a success. However it is arguable that in some ways the USA’s Policy of Containment was a great success in preventing the spread of communism early on during the Cold War. One piece of evidence that supports the argument that the USA had early success with their policy of containment is The Greek Civil War. The USA’s decision to intervene due to the “strategic significance of Greece in the Balkans and the Mediterranean” arguably was successful. With this clear threat of communist expansion into Western Europe, Truman called for congress to uphold the Truman Doctrine and provide funding to aid the battle against the spread of communism that clearly threatened the USA’s interests in Europe. This resulted in $400 million dollars of funding......

Words: 2612 - Pages: 11

How Successful Was Henry Vii in Achieving Foreign Policy Objectives

...How successful was Henry VII in fulfilling his foreign policy objectives? Generally speaking, overall, Henry VII was successful in fulfilling his foreign policy objectives. Although he did not achieve a number of things in the way he endeavoured to, Henry VII achieved the majority of his foreign policy objectives one way or another. Firstly, Brittany, a part of Europe where Henry spent a large part of his life, was under attack by the French and faced losing their independence, following an invasion in 1487. Henry felt as though he had a duty and sense of obligation to the Britons, and therefore summoned Parliament to grant him extraordinary revenue in order to raise an army sufficient enough to battle against the French. Crushing the potential French control of Brittany was very important to Henry, as by doing so would decrease the possibility of France invading England. This soon became one of Henry's main foreign policy objective, to defend Brittany and potentially, England. Additionally, England and Brittany signed the Treaty of Redon in 1489, in which, Duchess Anne would pay for a small English army to defend Brittany. Henry strived to strengthen is position by forming an alliance with Maximilian. Maximilian had contracted a marriage-by-proxy with Anne, and had no desire fro the Duchy of Brittany to fall into the French hands. The army went to Brittany to support their freedom, but Anne had lost her motive, and reluctantly married Charles VIII. To make things......

Words: 907 - Pages: 4

How Successful Was Mussolini's Foreign Policy in the Years to 1939?

...How successful was Mussolini's foreign policy in the years to 1939? During the years 1922-39 Mussolini committed to many different foreign policies. Mussolini’s foreign policy aims for Italy were to build national prestige, increase domestic support for the regime, gain dominance over the Mediterranean, and spread fascism abroad to establish his empire. He had to consider factors whilst formulating his foreign policy plans such as trading, alliances (military back-up/defence), resources within the empire and war to ensure that his regime would be a success. In many ways, Mussolini’s foreign policy was a success in the short term. His foreign policies can be judged whether or not to be successful by looking at his aims, as previously stated, and if these aims were achieved. Mussolini entered the Spanish Civil War in 1936 as part of an anti-Bolshevik campaign and to help spread fascism abroad, one of the clear aims of Mussolini. Italy sent planes and troops to help nationalist General Franco’s revolt against Spain’s socialist government and despite Mussolini expecting a short war it lasted 3 years. Mussolini’s intervention of this war was to achieve dominance over the Mediterranean, to spread fascism abroad, stop French left-wing influence in Spain and to gain an ally in a strategic area. In the battle of Guadalajara, in March 1937, Italian troops were defeated and 400 soldiers were killed and 1,800 wounded, 500 were taken prisoner and 25 artillery pieces, 10 mortars,...

Words: 1157 - Pages: 5