The Anti-Noble Policy of Henry VII Henrys policy to the nobles during his reign could be considered as antagonistic. Henry had realised how easily the nobles could pose a threat to him, due to their power and responsibilities in his country, and so reduced this power thus reducing the possibilities of his downfall. This essays intention is to determine why Henry pursued such a dangerous policy, yet also reviewing the claims that his policies were anti-noble. This essay will also be interpreting the reasons for Henrys actions and the views of historians on the subject. Before the reign of Henry VII, the role of the nobles was highly significant in comparison to that during his reign due to the policies he introduced. Previous to his accession, the nobles had controlling, highly rated responsibilities, for example the Kings' lieutenants, which kept control of law and order in their locality. This position gave them power over many citizens which surrounded them, the problem for Henry being that these people were more likely to support their local noble, rather than a king whom they rarely or possibly never had contact with. Previous to his reign, the nobility also maintained large amounts of land, provided by the king of that era, as well as many new lords being created under the ruling of his previous accessors. King Henry VII's reign introduced a new way of ruling a country. With his accession there were many other alterations made to the monarchy. The actions he took are considered by some as being anti - noble, but this issue is the key point reviewed by this essay. Henry made alterations because he came to realise ... ... middle of paper ... ...rptions, he remained in power until his death in ......, unlike many before him, who were forced to abdicate due to actions taken by the nobility. The main issue brought to attention in this essay is concerning the claim that Henry was anti-noble deliberately, to secure his throne; however, this is not the only issue. There are three main others. The initial exploration by this essay is into the financial prospects. Previously, before Henrys' policies, the nobles requested money from the king for amenities such as private armies. Henry's policy decreased the expenditure for these requests. --------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] "England" Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 99. [2] Seminar Sheet page 1 [3] Seminar sheet. Page 1 [4] Seminar Sheet [5] Seminar Sheet
training when he came to power in 1485, had managed in the time he was
Henry VI had a lot of weaknesses with foreign policy, his inability to make decisions, patronage, Richard duke of York, finance and evil council. With foreign policy he showed weakness in defending his country, after his father Henry VII had conquered land in France, he lost it. He lost Normandy and Gascony in 1451 due to defeat in France. This affected morale and the incomes of nobles because they had lost, reducing their reputation, especially as they had lost some of their own land, and the incomes went down because money was spent on war, so less money was available to give as income. This could have been a reason for the outbreak of conflict because the people would not have been happy with their situation. Henry's next weakness was his inability to make decisions.
The series of various reformations shows in the European Continental 1 whereby the monarch plays vital affair in formulating the law regarding personal life. The history meddles much into the life of Henry VIII bringing his marriage close to format. Nevertheless, the history holds the best for him allowing him to marry once again and bear an heir. The essay is going to explore the concepts
Passage Analysis - Act 5 Scene 1, lines 115-138. Shakespeare’s ‘King Henry IV Part I’ centres on a core theme: the conflict between order and disorder. Such conflict is brought to light by the use of many vehicles, including Hal’s inner conflict, the country’s political and social conflict, the conflict between the court world and the tavern world, and the conflicting moral values of characters from each of these worlds. This juxtaposition of certain values exists on many levels, and so is both a strikingly present and an underlying theme throughout the play.
Peace of London in 1518, the Field of the Cloth of Gold and the Calais
In northern Europe after the Middle Ages, monarchies began to build the foundations of their countries that are still in affect today. During the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries these “New Monarchs” made many relevant changes in their nations. During the middle of the fifteenth century Europe was affected by war and rebellion, which weakened central governments. As the monarchies attempted to develop into centralized governments once again, feudalism’s influence was lessened. This “new” idea of centralization was reflected in the monarch’s actions. Rulers tried to implement peace and restore the idea that the monarchy represented law and order in the nation. These New Monarchs were able to build armies due to taxation, and they enlisted the support of the middle class. The middle class was tired of the noble’s constant conflicts and demanded a change from feudalism. Instead, the New Monarchs turned to Roman law. Nations that were run by the New Monarchs include England, France, Spain, and the Holy Roman Empire.
It has been shown again and again throughout history and literature that if there is a perfect human he is not also the perfect ruler. Those traits which we hold as good, such as the following of some sort of moral code, interfere with the necessity of detachment in a ruler. In both Henry IV and Richard II, Shakespeare explores what properties must be present in a good ruler. Those who are imperfect morally, who take into account only self-interest and not honor or what is appropriate, rise to rule, and stay in power.
The father and son relationship is one of the most important aspects through the youth of a young man. In Shakespeare’s play Henry IV, he portrays the concept of having "two fathers". King Henry is Hal’s natural father, and Falstaff is Hal’s moral father. Hal must weigh the pros and cons of each father to decide which model he will emulate. Falstaff, who is actually Hal’s close friend, attempts to pull Hal into the life of crime, but he refuses.
In Henry V, the actions of King Henry portray him as an appalling leader. Among Henry's many negative traits, he allows himself to be influenced by people who have anterior motives. This is problematic because the decisions might not be the best decisions for the country, or neighboring countries. The bishops convinced Henry to take over France because they would be able to save land for the Church. Henry doesn't have the ability to accept responsibility for his actions, placing the blame on others. Before Henry begins to take over a French village, he tells the governor to surrender or risk having English troops terrorize civilians. This way, if the governor declines, it would be the governor's fault for the atrocities that would occur. Henry has gotten his troops to go along with the take over by manipulating them. He tells the soldiers that what they're doing is noble, and that they should be proud. In fact, they're attacking another country in order to conquer it. Henry's character comes off as coldhearted and careless. Henry shows ruthlessness towards civilians, threatening them with atrocities. He's careless with his soldiers, thoughtlessly allowing their executions, or playing hurtful games with them.
King Henry VIII was one of the most powerful rulers in the fifteenth century, who had a very captivating life many people are not aware of. Most people know Henry VIII as a berserk king with too many wives, but there is more to Henry VIII than that. Many few people know about his life and what he truly contributed to our world. Henry VIII was an almighty leader in England who won’t soon be forgotten.
For hundreds of years, those who have read Henry V, or have seen the play performed, have admired Henry V's skills and decisions as a leader. Some assert that Henry V should be glorified and seen as an "ideal Christian king". Rejecting that idea completely, I would like to argue that Henry V should not be seen as the "ideal Christian king", but rather as a classic example of a Machiavellian ruler. If looking at the play superficially, Henry V may seem to be a religious, moral, and merciful ruler; however it was Niccolo Machiavelli himself that stated in his book, The Prince, that a ruler must "appear all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, [and] all religion" in order to keep control over his subjects (70). In the second act of the play, Henry V very convincingly acts as if he has no clue as to what the conspirators are planning behind his back, only to seconds later reveal he knew about their treacherous plans all along. If he can act as though he knows nothing of the conspirators' plans, what is to say that he acting elsewhere in the play, and only appearing to be a certain way? By delving deeper into the characteristics and behaviors of Henry V, I hope to reveal him to be a true Machiavellian ruler, rather than an "ideal king".
Henry implemented many methods in order to control the nobility with varying success. Henry sought to limit the power of the nobles as he was acutely aware the dangers of over mighty subjects with too much power and little love for the crown or just wanted a change like Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick who deposed two kings to replace them. Also Henry’s own rise to the throne was helped by nobles dislike towards Richard III. By restricting the nobles Henry wanted to reduce the power of the nobles and possible threats against him and return the nobles from their quasi king status to leaders in their local areas but under the power of the crown.
In Political Testament, Cardinal Richelieu explains that the nobility is something to be used as a tool, a perpetual game of appeasement and request of services. He understood that the nobility could be a nuisance and a body of dissent against the King, but that they were necessary to the crown to provide military aid and money. Richelieu explains that one must know how to manage and manipulate them: “To take away the lives of these persons, who expose their lives every day for a pure fancy of honor, is much less than taking away their honor and leaving them a life which would be a perpetual anguish for them. All means must be used to maintain the nobility in the true virtue of their fathers, and one must also omit nothing to preserve the advantages they inherited.” ...
Henry V is not a simple one as it has many aspects. By looking into
King Henry IV held power in 1399 (Griffiths 1). He was very ambitious causing rebellion in his reign, which all began once he celebrated his first yuletide (Lunt 259-260). During his reign, the commons established precedents that secured privileges of freedom of speech and arrest. This declaration helped them have a say in political and local issues (Lunt 270). After Henry IV’s reign was terminated, Henry V accepted power (Phillips 1). Once he was crowned in 1413, he controlled the majority of England’s army, which at the time England needed a reliable army (Lunt 261).