Britain had used combination of force as well as divides and conquers to control India Up until this point. So the sources limitations towards showing Lord Curzon’s successes come from the lack of successful viceroys previously. From the British point of view of which the source is written this could hold some more significance as what they wanted from the Viceroy varied from the Indians. The British just wanted to maintain control in India, while Indian perspective would be more focused on the way the country is being looked after. Source three goes quite far to indicate that Lord Curzon was in fact a successful Viceroy by highlighting one big mistake made by him “the partition of Bengal would be Curzon’s nemesis”.
This was a more successful achievement compared to the others because there weren’t as many negatives. Some say that the amount of deaths that happened as a result of the war weren’t worth the victory that came of it however Thatcher needed to take that risk of going to war in order to restore faith in her. With the EU for example, even though there were some successes, Thatcher did cause tensions with Europe because of her disagreements (as shown in her Bruges Speech 1988) whereas with the Falklands War, the only negative consequences were the 255 deaths which was inevitable when going to war to show that a country still had influence and
As part of the United Kingdom she would have the direct support and backing of Great Britain in the eventuality of a rebellion or invasion. In addition, a united system of government would discourage division and inefficiency amongst the two fronts, reinforcing instead a sense of camaraderie and loyalty for a united cause. A single government residing in Westminster would secure success in the middle of a great war. Furthermore, becoming part of the wider British economy, Ireland would benefit significantly as it would encourage prosperity, just as had been the case with the Scottish Union of 1707. Finally, in a United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Roman Catholics would no longer be seen as the overwhelming and threatening majority but rather as cooperating fellow citizens, thus transforming Protestant views of fear and loathing.
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.
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 would you agree that conflict between England and Spain was inescapable? (1558 - 88) In some respects, conflict between England and Spain was unlikely and there are many factors contributing to this. One reason for this was a very personal factor and links to Elizabeth’s personality. The Queen of England was a much calmer monarch than her predecessor and father, Henry viii. Her way of dealing with foreign affairs was very different to her Father’s in that Elizabeth tended to be more methodical in contrast to Henry who settled misunderstanding with battles and warfare.
The goals of the United States were to rebuild a war-devastated region, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, and make Europe prosperous again. The act was named after Secretary George Marshall. The Marshall Aid was so important because it was used to restrict the Soviet “sphere of influence” from expanding as European countries preferred the idea of being rich instead of having to share their wealth with others. Many countries that were unofficially owned by Stalin were more interested in joining the USA with the Marshall Aid, but Stalin managed to “persuade” them to protest against Truman’s methods. Despite this, the Marshall Aid was a success and it bolstered the armies of Europe significantly, which put Stalin in a more vulnerable position.
How successful was Bismarck in his attempts to control the political parties in Germany in the years 1871-90? • Bismarck’s attempts to control political parties from 1871-90 was moderately successful since he often did manage to pass legislature on his own terms by securing an alliance with the National Liberals with the 1871 Kulturkampf and the Conservative with the 1879 Tariff Reforms. Though his repressive policies of Kulturkampf and the 1878 Anti-Socialist laws actually strengthened the political parties of Catholic Centre Party and the SPD, I believe that Bismarck did successfully maintain control by forming new alliances as a result you would serve to distinguish any burgeoning threats. Yes, Bismarck was successful during his liberal era of 1871-78 • Bismarck was initially successful in his alliance with the National Liberals since he capitalised upon the nationalist elements of their party. • This meant they often backed his proposals – e.g.
Britain’s need for raw materials and markets to sell in which their goods is what motivated the imperialism of India. British imperialism was beneficial to the Indians because it provided peace for India, developed new infrastructure, and improved their standard of living. First off, British Imperialism was beneficial to Indians because it provided peace. The British pulled up Indian civilization- brought peace, introduced western style education, modern thought, modern science, and modern lifestyles. (Document 4).
As it was nearly impossible for James to neglect the conflicts, he attempted to marry his son Henry to a Spanish princess (dynastic marriage), the scope being to bring Protestants and Catholics at peace. All was followed by the death of Henry, which led James to try and marry his other son, Charles. The English economy was later helped by the Treaty of London, involving Spain, but also helped repair the view on Catholics. In conclusion, England was most certainly destabilised by the religious conflicts, though somehow tamed by James's strategic diplomatic moves, proving that he was not such a reckless king after all. Obviously, the conflicts were still there and did shake England's grounds more than a little, as the Thirty Year War commenced, but the King's delicacy in handling the entire unstable situation was one worthy of