More handpicked essays just for you.
Historians views on henry vii foreign policy
Historians views on henry vii foreign policy
Historians views on henry vii foreign policy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
How Successful was Henry VII in fulfilling his foreign policy objectives? By Lydia Cumley
Henry VII’s actions and relations with foreign countries were shaped with considerations towards his three main foreign policy objectives: to ensure national security; to gain recognition for the Tudor dynasty and to defend English trade interests. Henry attempted to fulfil these aims through numerous methods: signing treaties, royal marriages, and invasions, all of which were carried out in order to fulfil a certain aim. However, he was not always successful.
After only four years in power Henry signed a treaty with Brittany known as the Treaty of Redon. When they agreed on this treaty in Feb 1489, it was agreed that the Duchess Anne was to pay for
…show more content…
Luckily for Henry, on their voyage from Burgundy to Spain their ship was wrecked, so they had to take refuge in England. It was at this time Henry’s ability to think on his feet was put to use again as he created the Treaty of Windsor in 1506 in order to develop better relations with Juana and Philip. In order to gain recognition of the Tudor dynasty, the treaty specified that the Earl of Suffolk could return and that Henry would marry Archduchess Margaret. In order to defend English trade interests, the Intercursus Malus restored trade interests between England and Burgundy. And national security was improved through this treaty, as it made it far more unlikely for England to be invaded by Burgundy. Consequently, in theory, Henry has seemingly been successful in fulfilling his foreign policy objectives with Burgundy. However, in practise that was not the case: the marriage between Henry and Margaret fell through and irrespective of Henry’s recognition of Juana as the rightful ruler of Castile, Ferdinand became the regent. Consequently, Henry was made diplomatically isolated and unsuccessful in fulfilling in foreign policy objectives. This was further reinforced by how Henry had betrayed Ferdinand, thus weakening national …show more content…
James IV aided an attack from pretender Perkin Warbeck, and although their attack was thoroughly unsuccessful, due to te lack of support from Northumberland, it caused Henry to prepare a large army to invade Scotland with. A decision with significant political consequences, as the taxes introduced to fund the army caused a rebellion in Cornwall in 1497. At this point, Henry had been unsuccessful in fulfilling his foreign policy objectives, as civil unrest prevented Henry from focussing on relations with other countries. However, luckily for Henry, the rebellion prompted Scotland to realise it was in their best interest to form a truce with England, in the form of the Truce of Ayton. This truce ensured England had more national security, by making peace with their bordering country. This truce was very successful, and as relations improved so, it was decided that Princess Margaret (Henry’s daughter) was to marry King Henry IV. The marriage in 1503 consequently aided Henry in improving recognition for the Tudor dynasty as well as defending English trade interests. Although at the beginning of his reign Scotland and England had tense (though admittedly cordial) relations, Henry succeeded in securing and maintaining peaceful relations until the end of his reign, thus fulfilling his foreign policy
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 foreign support that Henry received was pivotal in starting Henry Tudor’s second attempt at invading England as otherwise he would never have been able to land and gather troops and support from domestic sources. However, once in England the support that Henry gained from welsh and English nobles and Barons meant that he was able to face Richard and defeat him at the Battle of Bosworth. Whilst support is vastly important in explaining Richard’s defeat, other factors such as Richard’s mistakes like policies that drained the Treasury (e.g. the war against Scotland) are to blame. This particular mistake prevented Richard from being able to stop Tudor from crossing the channel, and so it was left up to nobles Richard believed to be loyal to resist the invasion, this belief also backfired when Rhys ap Thomas joined Henry when he was promised the Lieutenancy of Wales.
Margaret of Burgundy provided money and an army of 2000 mercenaries. They landed in Ireland in May 1487. Henry paraded the real Warwick through London, but support of the rebellion did not weaken and this was an unsuccessful move by Henry. He offered pardons to the rebels, but they refused them. This form of negotiating or appeasing demonstrates an unsuccessful attempt at dealing with it.
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.
When we look at Henry as a king we have to look in the context of
war often, for the sake of his country, but when he did he put in a
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
Henry V is not a simple one as it has many aspects. By looking into
...der to maintain success. King Henry showed that he is restricted to one language which resulted him to not gain the lower class power and it then lead him to focus on his political status. On the other hand, Hal presented himself to the viewers as a friendly character, yet he sustained to manipulate and lie to others to achieve his goals. Henry IV n, Part 1 presents the idea of political power and the different characteristics leaders follow. The lesson for audiences, then, is to develop relationships with different people who will expand one’s area of inspiration and the ability to advance success. One can learn from the mistakes of King Henry and remember to be visible and properly positioned, so society can see one’s strengths and talents.
Through high moral character Henry established credibility with the audience through creating a setting that aroused feelings in the people at the convention in order to convince them they had to fight for more than just peace. The goal Henry had when he spoke about war was to be honest with the crowd and point out that they needed to do something now or they would loose not just what he loved, but what they also loved. Henry said “If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending...and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight!”. In this quote the tactic of ethics is apparent in that Henry wanted to achieve a personal level of connection with the audience and establish his credibility. By relating losing the war it also meant the lose of their feelings of comfort and contentm...
I side with Loades on this as despite resentment from the nobles, after the Perkin Warbeck imposture there were no more serious uprisings which strongly support the success of Henry’s policies. Whilst most nobles would see his methods as unjust (especially the wide of use bonds and recognisances) Henry succeeded in increasing the crown’s standing at the expense of the nobility, securing his position whilst weakening the nobles. Through most of his policies Henry was successful in limiting the powers of nobility. Henry sought to restrict the noble’s power and yet at the same time needed them to keep order and represent him at local levels, therefore Henry sought not to destroy the nobles but to weaken them enough that they did not pose a threat, he needed a balance of control over the nobles and strong nobility.
(Bbc-History-VI) the French declared war. Edward was suffering from tuberculosis and would not live long. Lady Jane was queen only for few days than Mary took the throne. (Bbc-History-VI)