Do you agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted and effective foreign policy in the years 1515-1525?
Do you 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 shown in source N by “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 and made hard to sustain.” This source also implies Wolsey’s aim was to serve the king and maintain Henry’s honour and influence despite it being argued that Wolsey was a self interested diplomat and constantly craved for his achievements to be recognised so he would be known as ‘the great peacemaker’ across Europe.
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 shown in source N by “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 and made hard to sustain.” This source also implies Wolsey’s aim was to serve the king and maintain Henry’s honour and influence despite it being argued that Wolsey was a self interested diplomat and constantly craved for his achievements to be recognised so he would be known as ‘the great peacemaker’ across Europe.