Source 1 highlights the main factor in this controversy, the Flight to Varennes, and underlines its significance as the ‘most immediate consequence’ in Louis reign as King. The Flight itself on the 17th June 1791 showed that the king could not work with the National Assembly and that it proved he didn’t support the revolution. Sutherland reveals in the source that the Flight directly led to the failure of the Monarchy stating it had ‘momentous and extensive consequences’. He also emphasises the ‘decline in popularity of the King’, that ‘showed he could no longer be trusted’, and
However after Karakazov attempts to assassinate the Tsar in 1866, he becomes much more autocratic, revealing that he had no intention of significantly developing politics, his use of the Zemstvas were in fact to help sustain autocracy, through making local administration more efficient. It can be suggested from this that Alexander II had put the Zemstva Act in place to appease the nobles angered by the Emancipation Act. Alexander III was much more of a successful autocrat. His reactionary attitude led to the reversal of many of his father’s liberal reforms, and was in some cases angered by them. Alexander III re-implements Tsarist form, through the use of repression and terror.
One of the major events that assisted the fall of the Holy Roman Empire was Thirty Years’ War. The event that started the Thirty Years’ War was “defenestration of Prague.” Two of Ferdinand’s officials were thrown out a window. The Lutherans violated the Peace of Augsburg by acquiring German Bishops, Calvinists converting princes, and Jesuits reconverting princes to Catholicism. The Calvinists and Catholics had many advantages because of that which made the Lutherans fear the Peace of Augsburg would be negatively impaired. The Lutheran Princes felt it necessary to create the Protestant Union and in retaliation the Catholics formed to Catholic League.
But that’s not the only reason religion caused the civil war, King Charles believed in the divine right. It was when the king/queen believes that god put them on the throne. So Charles took all the power because of this and Parliament didn’t want to go with his decision which contributes to the civil war. Also he made Scottish churches uses English prayer books which caused riots and England went to battle with Scotland. England lost.
These problems can be divided into two major components. The first is the internal church politics that the Avignon and Roman sides engaged in against each other. These politics lengthened the duration of the Schism and also reduced the effectiveness of the solutions proposed in ending the Schism. The second is the effect of external politics playing on the internal church politics. The external politics had contributed to the Schism becoming a secular problem and split the loyalties of Europe.
He required that his subjects “loan him the equivalent of five subsidies” and although it was “opposed by significant numbers in the localities,” the taxation still occurred as the government had “employed all its powers to eliminate resistance”. Moreover, the Forced Loan only happened as a result of Charles dismissing the 1626 Parliament, forfeiting his opportunity of obtaining further grants for his wartime expenditure. Parliament had already been antagonised by Charles’ decision to dismiss them and now that Charles was forcing taxation on others in order to fund his wartime expenditure, due to disastrous foreign policy which Parliament largely disagreed with, it is clear that the Forced Loan had worsened relations greatly. In addition to this, the financing of foreign policy also affected the relationship between Crown and Parliament. As stated previously, the Forced Loan existed to fund England’s wars considering that Parliament was reluctant to grant Charles further subsidies.
These problems progressively mounted so high that they obscured Lloyd George's successes and toppled him from power, ultimately helping the Conservatives engineer his downfall. This essay will assess both internal factors, such as problems as home, centred on unemployment, coupled with external factors, including the Chanak Crisis. It will be argued that the Conservatives reaped power as a result of the combined internal and external problems, all of which amounted to a loss of confidence at home, and thereby created negative public perceptions of the Liberals. Lloyd George's post as Prime Minister was in a way doomed from the beginning. He came to power at the head of a coalition party making enemies along the way.
For instance, “the sale of indulgences for the benefit of the church of Rome specifically for the rebuilding of St. Peters Cathedral provoked harsh criticism, especially by those who saw the luxuries of the papacy as a betrayal of apostolic ideals ” (Fiero 119). Martin Luther stated a list of objections, called the Ninety-Five Theses, against the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant Reformation changed the course of Western civilization for the long term which led to the impact on the arts using Northern Renaissance art, music and literature. Protestant reformers made two new printmaking processes, which were woodcut and engraving. Compared to the too expensive hand-illuminated manuscripts, books with printed pictures became an inexpensive option for all (Fiero 127).
This is essentially because the Roman Catholic Church was split into two. Therefore the people were divided down the middle on who to side with. The Church essentially tied itself into a knot. The Great Schism led to the downfall of the Roman Catholic Church because it decentralized the Church’s base of power, caused people to question the Church’s authority, it created a vacuum of power, drained the Church’s funds, and let heretical movements get a stronghold. The Great Schism started when Pope Clement VII V moved his presidency to Avignon.
It has been argued that Charles I was the main reason that war broke out. I will be investigating whether this is a far accusation by looking at the long-term and the short-term causes for the English Civil War and assessing how far Charles was really to blame. Firstly, it has been argued that Charles was to blame for the long-term reasons such as wanting to make changes to religion, the power of the king and money. For example, Charles was partly to blame for money because he was trying to buy off the Scottish with £850 a day (which he could not afford) as a result from trying to make the Scottish Puritans. They rebelled and tried to attack.