Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
View on henry vii foriegn policy
The renaissance in england
The renaissance in england
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: View on henry vii foriegn policy
Prestige Rather than National Security was the Main Concern of Henry VIII's Foreign Policy from 1529-1547
During the 1930's, much of Henry's foreign policy was distracted by
reformation and as England had broken away from Rome, England was on
its own and to some degree in a vulnerable situation especially when
England was threatened by a Catholic crusade from The Empire and
France. Henry was alarmed by this threat and used monastic wealth to
build up England's defences. Henry spent a staggering ₤600.00 on
coastal forts and on the navy; therefore, showing that during the
1930.s Henry's main concern was national security rather than
prestige, because of the reaction he took by building forts and the
amount of money he spent.
Also during the 1930's he made an alliance with German Princes and
cemented this with the marriage to Anne of Cleeves, this alliance was
in order to protect Henry's national security due to the Emperor's and
Frances threats and their alliance.
During the 1540's, foreign policy became a key part for Henry.
In 1942, England went to battle with Scotland at Solway Moss even
though it was later on in his reign, as he had been distracted with
reformation, Scotland was a traditional enemy who was a 'backdoor'
threat to England in times of crisis-especially as Scotland had the
auld alliance with France. Therefore, Henry's main concern was
national security because before Henry could attack France, he had to
neutralize Scotland otherwise England's security was at risk, which
was shown during Henry VII's reign with the battle of Stoke. Also the
Battle at Solway Moss and the Greenwich treaties opened a new
oppo...
... middle of paper ...
...r
intention
However, I wouldn't stay that during 1529- 1547, Henry's main concern
was national security for his foreign policy, put other factors like
succession came into play, because compared to the other great powers
of Francis I and Emperor Charles, Henry was a minor, therefore,
capturing Bologne and invading France and Scotland would improve his
succession and make him into a great power. Also dependable on the
situation Henry concerns for his foreign policy may have been
different every time, and also his main concern for his foreign policy
may have been all the factors of Great Power, Succession, prestige and
National security, all together. When he invaded France it was because
he would gain glory from attacking a great power, but also because he
wanted to secure his national security and his succession.
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.
How important was foreign support for Henry Tudor in explaining Richard III’s defeat at Bosworth?
Henry uses logos to appeal the colonists. An example of this is, “Has Britain any enemy in this quarter of the world, to call for this accumulation of navies and armies… it is meant for us.” This appeals to the colonists because it logical, why else would Britain have their military over here? Henry make it seem like there is only one logical answer. Henry uses rhetorical
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
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.
war often, for the sake of his country, but when he did he put in a
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.
Peace of London in 1518, the Field of the Cloth of Gold and the Calais
honorble ruler. Henry IV was king of France between 1589 and 1610. He was supported
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".
One of the key words in his dialogue is 'honour' because in Elizabethan times honour was bound up with ideas of nobility and manliness. Henry has constant reference to the divine, to get permission for his actions, 'God's will.' Additionally there is various uses of semantic fields, associated with religion, God, covet, honour and sin; all taken from the bible. Henry applies a very close relationship term, 'cuz.'
Henry V is not a simple one as it has many aspects. By looking into
The concerns of his countrymen over English rule take second place to his pursuit of the
These types of decisions define why Louis XIII is an important example of the primacy of the king over all other sources of political and governmental power in the 17th century. Certainly, Louis XIII’s rise to power defines the lack of checks and balances that would typically be a part of a lesser monarchy in which the aristocracy could have an influence on governmental decisions. However, this was not the case with Louis XIII, since he had gained complete control over the government through military might and the wealth of the royal family. This historical example defines the primacy of the absolute monarch within the context of the king’s role in governing in 17th century