How Far Do Sources 1,2 and 3 Suggest That Scotland Was, and Remained, a Threat to Henry Viii’s Ambitions in France?

440 Words2 Pages
The sources do suggest that Scotland was a threat towards Henry VIII’s ambitions in France , however only to some extent. Sources 1 and 3 refer to Scotland’s potential to destroy Henrys campaigns in France through invasion and stop him achieving his aim in taking back the regions of Terrain and Thoraine. Source 2 on the otherhand shows us that Henrys troops were strong enough to prevent a Scottish invasion even in his absence, and that he had the support of his first wife Catherine of Aragon. who is acting as regent in henry’s absence, Catherin would have wanted to please henry to keep his moral high as he was also in a battle in France at the time. source 2 shows us that the Scottish had lost in the battle of Flodden in 1513, at a time when henry was absent form his country in France. it shows that henry could therefore fight on two fronts, and in this case be victorious on both. it tells us that James IV was killed. this would certainly put a defeat on Scotland trying to threaten henrys ambitions in France , this source suggests that the victory was a great one. source 2 is different to sources 1 and 3 as it backs up the idea that Scotland was a threat to henry’s ambitions. it shows that England was able to deal with this threat effectively in source 1 we learn that henry was unable to raise a head tax in the northern counties in 1513, and that he did not deal with the counties to pay as of fear of rebellion. not only would the failure to raise money jeopardise henry’s aims and ambitions in France, his ability to wage war in France was also threatened by the prospect that James VI might take advantage of the rebellion in the north to invade, therefore henry had to “strive” to keep his subjects loyal, “supisious” says Vergil of James’s intentions. Vergil writes about the instability of henry’s rule in the north and the strength of the Scottish
Open Document