Cardinal Richelieu, minister of France, made his country a powerful presence in the Thirty Years War. During this time, the cardinal acted as France’s ruler due to the young age of King Louis XIII. Although being a cardinal of the Catholic Church, Richelieu sided with the Huguenots (Protestants) of the Holy Roman Empire. His goal was to diminish power and any hopes of a centralized government forming in the Empire checking the power of Austro-Spanish Habsburg dynasty. His goal was successful with the Peace of Westphalia, where several treaties were signed, nothing had been solved or changed, and everything went back to the way it was prior to the war.
The nobility of England appeared to increase in power because of the weakness of the king. The King had clear favourites in both the Earl of Somerset and the Earl of Suffolk. The Earl of Suffolk was permitted to ‘dominate’ the royal household during the period Henry was too young to be ruler. When he was accused of treason by the commons due to the business in France, the King stood by him in protection. The king sent him to exile, however in the English Channel, the ship carrying the Earl of Suffolk was intercepted by ‘Nicholas of the Tower’, and Suffolk was beheaded by its sailors in April 1450.
How effective a king was Henry 7th? Henry 7th is very well know as the conqueror of Richard 3rd and father of Henry 8th, but how effective a king was he? He had to secure the Tudor dynasty, secure the nobility, keep financially stable and strengthen his foreign position without appearing weak. He dealt with these problems on the whole, extremely well, suggesting that he was an effective king, but he made some mistakes to. Henry 7th was ruthless in securing the Tudor dynasty.
This huge amount of land that was under his controlled was known as the Angevin Empire, this land meant that Henry wasn’t going to be just King of England but also lord of half of France. This meant that he had immense power which could have intimidated the people that were willing to threaten his rule. As well as his power being something to fear, his power could also have been respected because he was so powerful he was able to keep half of France under control before he became king of England. This shows that he was a very capable leader, with lots of experience which would have aided him in getting a fast and secure kingdom easily. Henry had several advantages that came with becoming King of England, England had well established laws and customs that were in place, despite them being under strain through Stephens reign, they were still in place and waiting to be used.
The government protected its merchants—and kept others out—by trade barriers, regulations, and subsidies to domestic industries in order to maximize exports from and minimize imports to the realm. The government had to fight smuggling—which became a favorite American technique in the 18th century to circumvent the restrictions on trading with the French, Spanish or Dutch. The goal of mercantilism was to run trade surpluses, so that gold and silver would pour into London. The government took its share through duties and taxes, with the remainder going to merchants in Britain. The government spent much of its
Japan’s industrialized economy needed resources, which Japan believed they could obtain through the same methods of imperialism. Japan would use the same military might as exhibited by Europe and America but would control not only the governments of these countries but the people as well. The indigenous people of these regions would suffer due to the greed of the great powers and eventually gain a greater since of nationalism needed to overthrow their aggressors. India Britain took control of India after defeating France and the Indian government during the eighteenth century. India was considered the “jewel in the crown” of the British Empire.
The first two estates worked together to outvote the large third estate to keep them from becoming a threat to the power. Lord Acton, an Englishmen, states that the monarchy being overthrown wasn't the spark of the Revolution. He recognizes the American Independence as the spark of the French Revolution. The French government was inefficient, unjust and corrupt. There were numerous government departments, different laws in different parts of the country and officials.
The first two estates worked together to outvote the large third estate to keep them from becoming a threat to the power. Lord Acton, an Englishmen, states that the monarchy being overthrown wasn't the spark of the Revolution. He recognizes the American Independence as the spark of the French Revolution. The French government was inefficient, unjust and corrupt. There were numerous government departments, different laws in different parts of the country and officials.
How far was foreign policy the most important factor in the failure of the 1621 Parliament? (24 marks) The 1621 Parliament of James I’s reign was mostly conducted in harmony and demonstrated the ability, however rare, of the monarch and the Commons working together towards a common goal. However, discussion over foreign policy led to a breakdown in relations, and ended in the dissolution of the Parliament. James I had summoned the 1621 Parliament to raise funds for a potential war with Spain. Parliament were initially enthusiastic, saying to James “take your sword in your hand… direct the point of your sword at Spain”.
France thought the war would not only help by stopping Germany’s increase in power. It would also help Napoleon III to regain his popularity after some of his failures after the commencement of his dictatorship, such as the Mexican adventure of 1867. I will now go onto the short term reasons. Firstly, Spain needed a king and Bismarck saw his chance to send Prince Leopold to become king there. France protested because they thought that having German influence on both sides would be too much if conflict would have occured.