The Realistic Objectives of Henry VII's Foreign Policy
According to the source, Henry's objectives were to ensure the
security of his country and dynasty and to avoid foreign military
intervention i.e. build up good relationships with neighbouring
foreign powers. I also think that trade and prestige came into his
objectives. Trade was important to him as it ensured the power of his
country and, again, was important to England's relationship with
foreign powers. Also prestige was important for Henry, but more for
himself than for the good of the country.
Why was foreign military intervention a problem for Henry VII between
1485 and 1509?
During Henry VII's reign, he was very worried about the threat of
foreign military intervention. He himself had invaded England in 1485
and fought for the crown, so he knew all too well how easily the
throne could be lost to an invader.
At the beginning of his reign, Henry was faced with the problem of the
pretender, Lambert Simnel. Although he didn't really have any claim to
throne, he managed to get a significant amount of foreign support and
did pose a real threat to Henry. He was crowned Edward IV in Ireland,
showing the Irish's contempt for Henry, and was also supported by
Margaret of Burgundy; one of England's traditional allies. This
worried Henry as if one of his 'allies' was prepared to support a
pretender, what would his enemies do? Simnel managed to build up a
decent army of Irish and German soldiers, but was defeated in 1487 by
Henry's troops. Simnel may have been defeated but the fact that he had
gained so much support was what worried Henry the most. He became
suspicious of ...
... middle of paper ...
...y to show his power. He didn't go to
war often, for the sake of his country, but when he did he put in a
lot of effort to show that England was not an easy country to defeat.
He also helped to settle problems between other countries e.g. between
the Netherlands, France and Gelders in 1506.
In conclusion Henry was very successful in achieving his objectives in
foreign policy. He kept the country secure, avoiding large-scale
invasions and maintaining good relationships with most foreign powers.
He also maintained good trade agreements with foreign powers for most
of his reign, keeping the economy of the country in balance. And he
fulfilled his most important objective (to him), that is, ensuring the
success of his dynasty. He was not usurped and the Tudors continued to
reign for successfully for years after Henry died.
Prestige Rather than National Security was the Main Concern of Henry VIII's Foreign Policy from 1529-1547
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 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.
His actions at Holtzwihr, France also showed duty to the men he fought with. The way I can show this in my character is by doing what I need to do for my job. Officially and unofficially. I...
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.
defeat the British in the war, but he did more than that. That is what
...hermore, going to war was an act of cowardice. He had to put aside his morals and principles and fight a war he did not believe in.
War 2. It appears that his leadership helped to make the feeling of the country
Machiavelli’s The Prince offers a model of how to effectively rise and maintain a position of power. As his model is based on the successes of previous leaders in Europe, Charlemagne’s reign uses similar aspects of Machiavelli’s outline. Henry VIII’s reign of England has particular elements of Machiavelli’s model in terms of how he maintained and grew his power by expelling the Catholic Church’s influence in England. Comparing who was a more successful ruler is arbitrary in the sense that both Charlemagne and Henry VIII had reigns that expanded their power and were not overthrown by the people they governed. However, in comparing their reigns by how much they embody Machiavelli’s model of effective rule, Charlemagne’s expansion of power through
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.
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.
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.
against the war with the anxiety and sorrow in his heart. King wanted his country to show
By doing this he showed his love for his country, and history itself, he would do everything to the fullest. He raised his family to the best of his ability, he was a good family man, and a hard worker that endured whatever confronted him. This is why he is my hero, because of his strength and his will to make sacrifices.