Foreign Policy can be seen as the most significant part of Henry VII’s reign for many reasons; this includes the many treaties and alliances made throughout his reign, such as the Treaty of Perpetual Peace with Scotland, the Treaty of Etaples with France, and the alliance Henry made with Maximillian I of the Holy Roman Empire. These events occurred due to Henry’s foreign policy simply being to retain peace among Europe, and to ensure prosperity in trade and England’s power when possible. This attitude towards foreign policy was highly impactful, as it allowed Henry to improve other areas of his reign, such as help to remove threat from pretenders by, through alliance with Maximillian I, persuaded the then current pope, Pope Innocent VIII, to …show more content…
excommunicate all pretenders to the English throne, an action that was not only a great advantage in his reputation among other notable figures in Europe at the time, due to having the Pope’s support and a large portion of Europe being Catholic, but also helped him to establish his dynasty, and carry on the Tudor house as the monarchy, as it made Henry seem more like the rightful king in his subjects’ (and foreign figures’) eyes, as the Pope was seen as God’s representative on earth, and to be supported by the Pope, implies being supported by God as a monarch. Henry’s foreign policy was also a great achievement due to the impact it had on the money possessed both by Henry himself, and England as a whole, as the treaties and he made alliances - particularly the Intercursus Magnus formed with multiple foreign powers - allowed a flourish in trade amongst other European countries, increasing the country’s wealth. Another factor of success to consider was his handling and victories over the pretenders and uprisings during his reign. There were two main pretenders during Henry’s reign, Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck. First came Lambert Simnel who, after originally planning to imitate Richard, Duke of York (one of the two Princes in the Tower of London, son of Edward IV), was pretender to the throne by claiming to be Edward Plantagenet, another claimant to the throne. Simnel managed to gain the support of Margaret of Burgundy, sister of Richard III, and John de la Pole, from whom Simnel was given troops and later battled with the King’s army in 1487. Henry quickly defeated Simnel, and proved his claim wrong by revealing Edward to still be alive, under his custody. Henry, however, pardoned Simnel, and allowed him to live as a servant in the royal kitchens. This mercy to a significant pretender made Henry seem calm and powerful against challenges to his claim to the throne, particularly when faced with threat from significant, powerful figures such as Margaret of Burgundy. After Simnel, came Perkin Warbeck, who claimed to be Richard, the Duke of York. This time, however, not only was Margaret of Burgundy a supporter of a pretender, even more powerful allies were made with Warbeck, the King of France, and the King of Scotland. Henry dealt with this pretender by quickly defeating him when there was conflict, forming treaties that caused Warbeck’s alliances to fall, and soon Warbeck was captured. Henry once again decided to be a merciful king, and spared Warbeck’s life, however Warbeck abused the clemency shown by Henry and was executed. This again showed Henry’s power not only to his subjects, but other powers, as it showed that whilst Henry was willing to forgive and give clemency to those who had crossed him, he was not willing to do it for a second time, and would execute those who abused his mercy. Whilst much of Henry’s success was due to his stoic nature when faced with opposition, and use of his power, a large reason for his successes against the pretenders was his success in foreign policy, particularly in the case of Perkin Warbeck, and the treaties made with countries that allied him. This may have made foreign policy a more significant “triumph” than his defeat of the pretenders, due to its reliance on foreign policy to succeed. Additionally, Henry had large success in increasing the power he held, and the increased the affluence of the English monarchy.
By the end of his reign, Henry had managed to more than double the money possessed by the monarch, through many means, such as his taxation policies, but his main source of monetary increase was from the nobility. One example of the methods used by Henry to obtain the money and land of the nobility, to strengthen his own power over them, was through his Lord Chancellor, John Morton, who put into effect “Morton’s Fork”, an idea stating nobility that wore expensive clothes were well off enough to give money to the king, but if they appeared poor and struggling, it was because they were a miser, and could still afford to give money to the king. Morton encouraged the nobility to offer “loans” to the crown, to show their loyalty to the king, and through Morton’s Fork, convinced many to do so, and while gave him great financial gain, it also asserted his power over them and discouraged them to oppose him. Henry also showed his power over the nobles –again gaining money in the process- by no longer giving land to nobles who showed their loyalty, but by giving them titles, such as the Order of the Garter, which cost him no money. He also gained loyalty from those who had fought against him in the Battle of Bosworth by providing them with the ultimatum of either paying for their previous disloyalty by a large sum of money and land and/or imprisonment, or by paying smaller amounts over a period of time and possibly providing the king with their men. This caused fear in the nobles, as they did not wish to anger the king and risk loss of all their fortune and possibly their freedom. A notable example of this is Lord Burgavenny, who was forced to remain in the king’s favour to remove his risk of ruin. Financial and power gain did not come solely from the nobles, however, as Henry enforced taxes upon the general population which not only showed his
power over the lower classes and citizens of his country, but also made profit from them. Taxes were brought in from previous times and monarchs, allowing any disdain for the taxes to not be placed on Henry, whilst gaining money from many aspects of life. Examples of these taxes were clerical taxes, which taxed churches, and custom duties taxing anything entering or leaving the country, affecting merchants and traders. Whilst this success of Henry’s reign had little to do with foreign policy, it allowed for other successes such as the establishment of the Tudor dynasty, as his successor, Henry VIII, inherited from Henry VII a magnitude of money, and the power he had managed to obtain over the people and nobility.
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.
According to Loach, Henry between 1540 and 1544 had dispensed £250 000 using the money for military expenses, palace building and "pocket money". This shows that Henry was very extravagant in his spending of money and to some extent left Somerset with an impossible legacy. Diplomatically Henry left Somerset with an impossible legacy because at this time Scotland was a threat to England due to the support they had from France. Another reason why Scotland was a key area for Somerset was because of the Treaty of Greenwich 1543 and a specific clause in it.
Prestige Rather than National Security was the Main Concern of Henry VIII's Foreign Policy from 1529-1547
Foreign support was instrumental in allowing Henry Tudor to defeat Richard at the battle of Bosworth, if it were not for the support that Henry gained from foreign sources he could not have invaded England. Henry Tudor spent 14 years in exile in Brittany and France, with his chances of claiming the throne of England fading as Edward IV’s second reign proved stable and his heir approached adulthood. However after Richards usurpation of his nephews throne Henry’s court in grew especially after the Buckingham Revolt, but required assistance from the King of France (men and ships) before he could land in Wales and begin the march to Bosworth. When the French king heard about the alliance between Richard III and the Duke of Brittany he decided to back Henry Tudor as he felt they might have joined together against France also he thought that Duke of Brittany was too powerful and by helping Tudor would weaken Brittany. Charles VIII of France supplied Henry with the means by which to invade and the nucleus of an army. When Henry Tudor was in France he did not know if h had any support for when he arrived so the men he had been given by the French king were extremely important as they were the ones who would help him defeat Richard III at the battle of Bosworth. Clearly foreign support made the invasion possible, but it could not mean the invasion would be a definitive success.
The Challenges to Henry VII Security Between 1487 and the end of 1499 Henry VII faced many challenges to his throne from 1487 to the end of 1499. These included many rebellions and pretenders to his throne. To what extent was the success he dealt with them differs although the overriding answer is that by the end of his reign he had secured his throne and set up a dynasty, with all challengers removed. Lambert Simnel challenged Henry’s security when Richard Symonds passed him off as Warwick. Simnel was taken to Ireland, which had become the centre of Yorkist plotting.
training when he came to power in 1485, had managed in the time he was
After many failed attempts to obtain a divorce from his first wife Catherine of Aragon, King Henry VIII took momentous steps that led to "The Reformation," a significant occurrence in the history of religion. Prior to the reformation, all of England's inhabitants including King Henry VIII prescribed to Catholicism. In fact, King Henry VIII was such a strong supporter that he was given the title "Defender of the Faith" by the pope for his efforts in protecting Catholicism against the Protestants. However, all these changed upon the pope's denial of Henry's request for a divorce.
The most widely used method of control was financial forfeits such as bonds and recognisances. These could be placed on a noble even if they had not done anything which meant that they were very widespread in their use and were payable if certain conditions were not met. However the heavy and widely considered unjust, use of bonds and recognisances brought widespread hostility towards Henry. These were often used in conjunction with other policies such as retaining in order to enforce them and ensure that the nobles would be loyal.
Another cause for his unpopularity was the question of benevolences. When he was crowned Richard promised to stop the use of benevolences as this was particularly disliked by the nobles. However because of the war with Scotland , the threat of Henry and rebellions Richard had to later ask for benevolences once again. This made him even more
Also, as part of the treaty, the King of France’s son was to marry Edward’s daughter, so Edward had also ensured a diplomatic marriage for his daughter. Another aspect of the treaty was the removal of restrictions on trade between the two countries, leaving England to trade freely with France. It seems that Edward was very successful with his foreign policies. Edward took a personal role in running the country and was at the heart of his own government. He chose to use men with ability rather than nobility and even us... ...
However, he didn't listen to the duke of york who desperately wanted a say. This could have been another reason for the outbreak of conflict because the people didn't think he always made the right decision and the duke of York didn't like not being listened to. Another problem was with patronage, as Henry was overgenerous, but only to some people, he would give lots of patronage to Somerset and Suffolk but none to York. This was even worse because he had borrowed from York and instead if paying him back, gave patronage to others. He gave away more and more money and land so that there wasn't much left for important times like war and to make people happy or come onto his side.
In the play Henry V written by Shakespeare. Henry was presented as the ideal Christian king. His mercy, wisdom, and other characteristics demonstrated the behavior of a Christian king. Yet at the same time he is shown to be man like any other. The way he behaves in his past is just like an ordinary man. But in Henry’s own mind he describes himself as “the mirror of all Christian kings” and also a “true lover of the holly church.
Peace of London in 1518, the Field of the Cloth of Gold and the Calais
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".
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.