In England, Charles’s imposition of such means the “placing of altars”, mentioned in Source B, and the prominence of catholics at court also mentioned in B, created underlying discontent. Furthermore, Charles imposition of the beauty of Holiness and the abolishment of the fed fees impropriations in 1633 made puritans extremely fearful of the apparent catholic tendencies of charles. These changes did not create truly vocalised opposition for several years. The case of John Williams and his challenge to the altar policy and the early use of Prynne are evidence, I believe of how vocalised opposition to the religious reforms was of vital importance to the collapse of the Personal rule. The general build in opposition, e.g.
Source 3 alludes to Sir Peter Carew, being the supposed leader of the Devonshire group. Carew had connections with the French, and as the French saw this as an opportunity to be against Spain, deliberately perverting this English-Spanish alliance, they were very likely to intervene and support the rebels. To such a degree, it can be argued that with Carew as a leader, and even the main initiator of the risings, and his connections to an Imperial force, the threat was very serious. However, with hindsight we can know the French did not support the rebels through its risings, and as Source 1 suggests, Carew thus failed dismally. Other leaders likewise had a prominent role in heightening the threat for example, the Duke of Suffolk as mentioned again in Source 3, who was determined to depose Mary in order to make way for his daughter Jane Grey, however, he was ineffective in rallying support in Leicester and thus his threat to Mary was very much limited.
There is evidence to suggest that when the marriage between Mary and Phillip was proposed in 1553 people were fearful it would lead to Spanish domination. Mary was a woman and so people believed that as a man Phillip would be able to dominate her decisions. Mary received a petition against it and some historians suggest it was the cause of Wyatts rebellion. There was a great fear that Engand would be dragged into the Hapsburg-Valois wars which would drain England economically. However in 1553 when Mary proposed the marriage treaty England was economically drained and therefore vulnerable.
Do you agree with the view expressed in Source K, that the diplomatic situation was the main reason for Henry’s failure to attain an annulment from Catherine by 1529? It is very clear that there was more than one factor that caused some difficulties for Henry VIII’s failure to gain an annulment from his marriage to Catherine by 1529. However, it is possible that the diplomatic situation has role in his failure, as it didn't help his case of getting an annulment and caused an impediment to his situation. Since the Pope was under the influence of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, it made Henry’s situation more difficult due to the fact that he needed the Pope to grant his annulment, and what made it worse was that Charles V was the nephew of Catherine and had a great input into any of the Pope’s decisions. Source K argues that the Diplomatic situation was a highlight of Henry’s failed attempt to gaining an annulment.
The Anglo-French alliance undermined Charles, which they hoped would seek to the freedom of the Pope. In 1527, the treaty of Amiens agreed that England would pay for a French attack on Charles. However with Wolsey’s focus on foreign policy and his efforts to try and obtain a divorce he neglected the domestic affairs of
The idea of Nationalism between the British North American colonies did not seem logical in the ninetieth century due to the vast cultural differences spanning from east to west. John A. MacDonald, leader of the Tories, thought otherwise. With a great understand of sociology and seeing the “bigger picture”, he was able to convince the colonies to come together. The illegal Alabama and Trent Affairs, as well as the raids by the angry American-Irishmen proved to be some of the external pressure for confederation. Political Deadlock initiated internal pressure resulting in multiple conferences to discuss this great coalition.
This is because of many reasons: King Charles (1625-1649) married a French Catholic Princess (Henrietta Maria of France). This didn’t make him very popular with Parliament or the Protestants because they though he was trying to make England Catholic. People felt that she was leading him astray from his Protestant ways. The King’s wife loved the look of Catholic Churches. Charles later did is he got Archbishop Laud to decorate the churches to make them look “more Catholic”.
Between the years of 1625 to 1629, discontent between Crown and Parliament was rife after a number of problems that caused conflict to arise. One of the major issues that caused such discontent was Buckingham’s foreign policy however, there were other reasons too such as Charles promoting Arminianism, Parliament not granting Charles tunnage and poundage and Charles refusing to remove Buckingham to name a few other reasons. Buckingham’s foreign policy is easily a significant factor as to why relations between Crown and Parliament began to get worse. Perhaps the most considerable factor was the failed Cadiz expedition. Buckingham was blamed heavily as the Cadiz expedition was a total failure.
With the introduction of Charles I in 1625, Scotland and England had relative peace. Charles I had hoped to combine the kingdoms of England, Scotland and also Ireland, but the English Parliamentarians were suspicious of this move. With the wars soon approaching, what were the causes of it, or were there more reasons to why the English Civil War had started? The end result of the war was countries without monarchs, who slowly tried to rebuild their political awareness. There were many events in the wars that had an effect on England, Scotland and Ireland, with these wars came many casualties and benefits and because of these facts, the wars were seen as a success or/and failure.
Hector St. John Crevecoeur strongly argued that the colonists emerged towards creating their identity through the molding together of a melting pot. After the French and Indian War, the colonists realized that they were much different than the British. Written law was preferred by the colonists over “word of law” which the people of Great Britain were fond of. The group of colonists in America who opposed the British referred to themselves as the “Patriots”. The colonists also abolished primogeniture and entail which pulled them further and further away from their mother country’s ways.