I personally believe that pre- conquest England was a fairly well governed and a relatively prosperous kingdom. Things that suggest that England was well- governed and prosperous pre- conquest included the division of land, trade, the hierarch and currency. The frequent invasions and towns also suggest this. The possible threat to 6the Danegeld, the king of the Earls, and the countries underdeveloped economy all suggest that England was less prosperous and more unstable. The land was split into several parts.
Henry had several advantages that came with becoming King of England, England had well established laws and customs that were in place, despite them being under strain through Stephens reign, they were still in place and waiting to be used. Henry’s own character traits could have been an additional factor that led to Henry being able to establish himself quickly in England. He was a very intelligent, witty and well liked man. People would have trusted him and liked him because of his personality and because he spent the first few years of his reign trying to straighten out the mess that Stephen had left behind and restore the support of the people in the monarchy. Henry spent the first year of his reign settling disputes and grievances that the people of England had.
Therefore I believe Lord Curzon was indeed a successful viceroy. Of the Sources, source two is intended to convey Lord Curzon’s tenure as Viceroy in the most positive manner .It lists his positive qualities that made him “India’s best ruler under the raj” . However given the nature of the British Empire in countries such as India the main priority is not always the well fair of the country. For instance many believe Britain was draining India of its wealth rather than helping develop the country, Dadabhai Naoroji's created this “drain theory”. Britain had used combination of force as well as divides and conquers to control India Up until this point.
Henry also needed to control the nobility because if he didn’t, or only managed to control a minority, he could have a revolution, and Nobles, together, had a lot more money and power than the king himself. Firstly he gave the Earl of Surrey his lands back, bits at a time to ensure his loyalty, while having him as a key figurehead in the north to stop rebellions, since the north largely supported Richard and Henry needed to find a way of controlling them. Also Henry didn’t get rid of all the Yorkist nobles in the council, only those who thought against him. He did this so that he wouldn’t have a full scale Yorkist rebellion on his hands, but he couldn’t have people who wanted him dead and had fought against him on his council. As well as this, Henry needed to be effective at getting England onto a secure financial footing.
This made his position a weak one, forcing Edward to bind himself to Godwin, as the Earl of Wessex and most powerful man in England at this time. Earl Godwin was the only member of the witan offering to support Edward. The reasons for this are unclear though it is likely Godwin felt that he could exert influence over the inexperienced King and therefore gain yet more power over England. Despite the odds being stacked against him, Edward took the English throne from the Danish royal family and established himself as a strong and wise King. Clearly his success had to be dependant on a number of weighty advantages, his growing up in Exile for example.
How far do you agree that Alexander II was the most successful of the Tsars? Although Alexander II was the most successful in modernising Russia, the most successful in achieving their aims, closest to their ideology, was Alexander III. He improved the economy of Russia quite substantially, as well as upholding the autocracy. His reign, unlike both Alexander II and Nicholas II’s reign, saw virtually no open opposition, The reason why he was so successful is partly due to the fact that his reign was the most repressive of the three, and war and revolution did not hinder the development of Russia or jeopardise the traditional autocratic system of government. Alexander II, Alexander III and Nicholas II all had similar ideologies and wanted to uphold the traditional values, “Autocracy, Orthodoxy, Nationality”.
The Phoenicians were a peaceful people focused on trade and had a somewhat balanced legal system. The Assyrians were ruthless warriors ruled by a king that were focused on expanding their empire. Even though both these two communities were very different, they both had successful time periods and lead great
How did William gain control of England by 1086? William, Duke of Normandy and King of England, needed to gain control of England after a big victory when the Normans defeated the English in 1066. Some of the short-term problems were the fact that Dover castle was full of English soldiers, London was under the control of the English troops and there was also a threat of invasion in the north by Vikings with English support. William overcame these problems quickly and with ease. However there were still some long-term problems.
Occupied with other matters, the British Empire wasn’t able to completely control the colonies and as a result they developed independent governments. While still only the wealthy could hold positions, the government was fairly democratic. In addition to the large voting percentage, many states formed assemblies that were similar to the House of Commons in England. These were effective because they better represented the people and put a check on the power of the Governor. Further advances in free speech rights also made their way into the colonies.
One aspect that Wolsey did have great impact was justice, with him introducing many new ideas. Although, some of his policies were unsuccessful such as the Enclosures, the policy that was the most unsuccessful and almost a complete failure was the amicable grant. This was a factor in Henry’s lack of trust in Wolsey during the latter part of his position as Lord Chancellor. The first part of his domestic policies, and arguably the most successful one is justice. Unlike his other policies, the justice system was now greatly improved by Wolsey.