To what extent was the reign of Tiberius successful? An evaluation of Tiberius’ success or otherwise is difficult. Ancient sources are quick to point to his failings, right from his accession to the ‘princeps’, which Suetonius claims only came about by default, “for want of any better choice”. Tacitus may not be as theatrical in his treatise on Tiberius, but he too was often critical of the emperor, highlighting how Tiberius was cruel and arrogant, and how Tiberius’ murder of his potential rival, Agrippa Postumus, was callous. Such subjectivity clouds much of the ancient appraisals of Tiberius.
During his reign Phillip II faced problems domestically. Phillip II was sometimes described as an absolute monarch but he faced many constitutional restraints on his power, the rise in power of the bureaucracy during his reign would challenge his power and authority, in response to this Phillip II would put those who he would benefit from politically in power, one of the first he would put to power was Gonzalo Perez who would die and be replaced by Antonio Perez. These would serve a assets at the time, and although they relations with them would eventually go awry, he gained powerful control over the nobles of Castile which would also lead to his crave of wanting grater control over the beauracracy that challenged his power, he seems to handle this issue swiftly and correctly. Domestically he would also face challenges financially, this reduced income to the thrown. Phillip would face many difficulties trying to raise taxes, but Spain would gain large income from the New World, and Philip would try to invest more money into exploration and oversea expedition in an attempt to spend money in order to make money, this would be futile and nonetheless with these attempts Spain would eventually
The magistrates made laws and decided the most important decisions affecting the state. When Emperor Augustus died, popular elections were outdated. It was expected instead that the imperial household would produce the successor to Roman power. The power had moved from the hands of the people, to imperial rulers, their households, and their heirs. This dramatic change was the culmination of civil strife and open warfare that created the conditions for powerful men to dominate the state, and to exclude the will and
However, wars generally led to very expensive costs to the country. Henry's father, Henry VII, left the country in quite a stable state economically, but Henry devoted most of England's money into his campaigns to take over France, because he believed had a right to the Throne. To some extent source 4 supports the idea that the foreign policy did fail due to the lack of resources, because it states that “the young warrior family accepted the fact that royal finances could not support a repetition of the campaign of 1513”. This quote implies that the lack of resources seems to be the dominant reason for stopping Henry from invading France and therefore source 4 supports the statement to some extent. In source 4 we also learn that much must have depended on diplomatic relations with Maximilian and Ferdinand, however Henry’s allies proved unfaithful and unreliable.
Wolsey changed areas of government such as the justice system and revised areas such as finances and parliament structure. His relationship with the King was significant, as he would be the higher power and would need to negotiate with the King and yet still get the correct decision. Wolsey managed his relationship with henry well, he tried to get the right outcome for the country but never forced it upon Henry, not damaging their relationship and keeping Wolsey in power. Wolsey had a poor approach with justice; in court he gained a poor reputation for taking bribes and his relationship with England’s nobility was poor to say the least. The financial approach was a tough period in finance; with a King that wanted to spend and go to war, and Wolsey had no choice but to bow to his majesty’s request.
Power is a privilege and should only be given to those who can handle it. The act of counterfeit can often hinder success. King Henry himself rose to the thrown with help from the Percy’s as he “stole all the courtesy from heaven” and broke Richard’s “divine right” to being King. Although he is successful in gaining power, because of its illegitimacy, Henry struggles to use his this effectively. As he suggests to Hal, he wants to be “like a comet” to be seen on a rare basis to be “wondered at” by his subjects.
Because the British government was not fulfilling Jefferson’s previously mentioned definition of a government’s duties; they were forced to take the very necessary step of removing themselves from the King’s rule and ruling themselves. In what has become one of the most identifiable phrases in political theory, Jefferson declares certain truths to be “self-evident”. These truths that all men are created equal and that men are endowed with certain unalienable rights became increasingly integral to the cause championed by Jefferson and the other creators of the
Tojo Hideki undeniably played an important role in Japan’s history, however it was one of destruction and devastation. “In public, Prime Minister Tojo Hideki was self-effacing, insisting he was merely an ordinary citizen doing his job at the emperor’s request, but in fact he was an adept bureaucratic politician who gathered power into his own hands.”(Duus, 1998) Ultimately in the end, Hideki was the cause for the blockade of Japan’s evolution. Due to the confinements of the word limit, I will be primarily focusing on the time period of 1920 to 1945. It is within these years that military leader; Tojo Hideki influenced significantly the evolution of Japan and its people. Born in Tokyo 1884
Augustus seems to rule with his wealth and influence over the people, and those in government positions. In my opinion he is more focused on keeping the Aristocracy happy, for as according to Crone in her examination of pre-industrial societies, the holders of wealth are the key to maintaining leadership and order. Michael Haukaas made an excellent statement as well saying “Himself being wealthy is not enough, as evidence by the war following the death of his father at the hands of Brutus et all”. This statement shows how Augustus also had control over the soldiers as well as the power of his wealth. Just like the podcasts mentioned, Augustus was a powerful man due to his financial stability and the fact that he had made a lot of loyal and close friends with the men of elite
Being king of Spain and the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V had alot of power. But being so powerful is not always a good thing. Having a lot of power means having more responsibilities which equals more problems, and Charles had his share of problems during his reign. He had his political problems with the French, the papacy,and the Turks. He battled trying to over come the Luthereanism momvement, and with his conservative thinking led him to havin social problems.