Do Source 2 and 3 Agree with Source 1 That Wolsey Was Unpopular?

891 Words4 Pages
When Henry VIII became king of England in 1509, Wolsey became the King's almoner. By 1514 he had become the controlling figure in virtually all matters of state and was extremely powerful within the Church. The highest political position he attained was Lord Chancellor. There are many reasons that got him to such high positions of power and importance, one of these reasons being his character, although he did have traits such as being hard working, organised, being persuasive, intelligence and effective. However, there were many people that were critical of Wolsey and believed he was arrogant. Overall I think sources 2 and 3 agree fairly strongly with source 1’s opinion of Wolsey. Source 1 talks about how Wolsey considered himself equal to king’s, showcasing his arrogance, backed up by when it says he was hostile to nobles and the public suggesting he thought he was above them. It then went on to talk about how he was hated by all people showing his unpopularity. However this source was written by Polydore Vergil, an Italian humanist who came to England and wrote the History of England, his analysis of Wolsey wasn’t very good as they’d had a personal feud due to Wolsey being jealous and Vergil spent a brief period in prison. So this source can be taken with a pinch of salt however it may have some truth as it was written after Wolsey had fallen from power, so Vergil was looking back at an entire career of Wolsey’s and knew that whatever he did write, Wolsey could not have him punished for. Source 2 agrees with source 1, as source 2 talks about how Wolsey treated the nobility which supports where source 1 says ‘his hostility towards nobles created great irritation’ also in source 2 it talks about bowing ‘before his Majesty’ while this would technically mean king Henry, as it says in source 1, Wolsey ‘considered himself the equal of kings’ and so it shows how arrogant
Open Document