‘The Lancastrian council (of Henry VI) ruled economically and well’ do you agree with Gillingham’s interpretation? Henry VI was born on December 6, 1421 and became king of England on September 1, 1422. Problems began almost immediately, though these problems were not seen as such at the time. First, the power of the king, instead of being entrusted to one man, it was given to a council of magnates. They claimed the ‘precedent of Richard II’s minority to support their actions.’ Though the council did rule fairly on the whole, it created a big problem.
Although Henry did eventually get his Heir to crown it didn’t happen till’ Edward VI in 1537. This means that Henry’s biggest and most important aim was technically a failure during the early years of his reign. Another important goal that Henry VIII wanted to achieve in the early years of his Reign was to bring Honour and Glory to England and for him to be known as a true English warrior to the rest of Europe. Henry did somewhat achieve this goal with his wars with France and Scotland. The battle of the Spurs (1513) and the Battle of Flodden (1513), although to some considered small skirmishes, did make the countries of Europe start to notice England as a possible threat and certainly now knew about Henry VIII.
In this article we will be assessing whether Oliver Cromwell was a hero or a villain. In my opinion I think Oliver Cromwell was a villain. For an example he made sure that King Charles didn’t have enough votes in order not to go to trial, as he realised once King Charles was on trial, he would definitely be executed. My first point to prove Cromwell was a villain is when he closed parliament. The Independents had a strong following in the parliamentary army and had the support of Oliver Cromwell.
How successful was Edward VI in restoring royal authority in the period to 1470? Edward IV enjoyed successes and also failures in restoring royal authority in the period to 1470. Edward had some successes in dealing with over mighty subjects, for example, his marriage to Elisabeth Woodville shows that he was not controlled by an over powering Warwick. This was important as it showed both Warwick and the rest of the country that he was not controlled by Warwick and could make his own decisions. Another way that Edward IV proved that he was not a ‘puppet king’ as Henry VI was seen as was by removing Warwick’s brother, George Neville, as chancellor.
One of Henry VIII’s main aims when he came to power was to be as different from his father as possible, and this is what led him to make many of his decisions during the first few years of his reign. Henry’s personal ambition was to invade and take the throne of France; he wanted the fame and glory that came with winning battles and taking over countries. Adding to this, Henry wanted to become a huge part of Europe, trying to form alliances, sign treaties and claim status. Henry knew that if he was going to take over France he would need powerful allies as France was becoming powerful itself, was becoming wealthy and gaining military strength. His last aim was the succession.
Why did Edward IV take the throne in 1461? Edward IV was able to take the throne for a variety of overlapping and interconnecting reasons. 1461 was unusual in that the king took power with violence and had a living rival. The factors include the loss of France, Henry VI’s weakness, Henry VI’s insanity and Margaret’s actions due to theses and Yorkist grievances. The most important factor for Edward being able to take the throne was due to Henry’s weakness as if he wasn’t weak Edward would not have been able to usurp the throne.
The great charter of English liberties ranted by King John in 1215 under the threat of civil war. It was reissued twice, once in 1216 and 1217 with omissions and alterations. As the conqueror of England, William I had secured for himself and his immediate successors a position of unprecedented power. He had been able to dominate not only the country he had conquered but the barons who had helped him win it and the ecclesiastics (priests) who served the English church. He had forced the pope to be content with indirect control over the church in a land, which the papacy (office of the pope) had regarded as bound by the closest ties to Rome.
On the issue of admiration Machiavelli states that a prince ideally should be loved and feared, but it is more important that he be feared. It is more likely that his citizens would be loyal to him if they feared him. I believe that the true nature of man has not changed since Machiavelli’s time. I think that most modern governments still employ many of his general principals for ruling. Laws and punishment are necessary to prevent people from committing crimes.
This view is largely accredited because Pitt came into office in a difficult time but events around him seemed to benefit him rather well. Britain was entering the industrial revolution at the time, industry rose up and trade would boom due to expansion of the industries at home and abroad, the advancements of technology meant that Britain was going through a natural change that arguably Pitt was able to captain through leading to better fortunes. The natural opposition from the Whig party against the king led by Charles Fox meant that Pitt naturally had the Kings support against any opposition which could be thrown at him, the king would back him up. The American Revolution and his lack of connection to it meant that he was seen as a new politician not one of the previously failed governments who’s lack of control and rule in a situation. And lastly the regency crisis of 1788 meant that Pitt could use this to gain favour with the king and gather support from his own party and draw it away from the opposition.
For Obama to be a Machiavellian prince he does not only need power, but it depends on how it’s used through military matters. It is considerable to consider Obama a prince because he focuses on cutting government spending on the military. Also, he deals with being blamed on how a prince should keep his word. – This last sentence does not blend with the paragraph- The opposition claims that he won the presidency not by good fortune and not through his own truthful words. They say he turned the key to “weak masters” and begged to foreign directors.