The high medieval period in Europe was dominated by a succession of royal governors, an elite class who controlled the political landscape. Their rule was facilitated by a number of factors; first, by the force of their armies they maintained control of their respective territories, quelling any challenge or rebellion. Second, they performed the function of delivering justice and were thus a valuable source of law and order for their populace. Third, the support of the church, which influenced much of the population, inspired the belief that kings were a representative of god and had a god given right to rule. Fourth, their use of the feudal system, as well as the administration which accompanied it enabled them to keep their kingdoms and subjects in check.
Although we are currently in a coalition the government still has a majority through the combination of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. This therefore often renders opposition as a form of scrutiny meaningless and also means that it is difficult for the executive to be held to account. Party loyalty is also very strong. The power of prime ministerial patronage renders many MPs excessively docile and loyal, hence the term ‘lobby fodder’. With the rise in the professional politician many prefer to remain loyal in order to gain power and move up in the hierarchy as opposed to become a rebel who remains in the back benchers.
One reason why the opponents of the Tsars were more successful than those of the Communists was the fact that, under the Tsars, opposition attained a legal status. It can be argued that the implementation of the Zemstvos under Alexander II paved the way for the full legalisation of opposition, as this allowed the spawning of political ideas. However, under Nicholas II this was more prevalent, as the October Manifesto allowed for the full legalisation of opposition through the implementation of the Dumas. Though the Dumas acted as unsuccessful opposition to the Tsar – as he declared the Fundamental Laws almost immediately after the Dumas came into existence – this was important as it allowed the opposition groups to burgeon. Unlike the regimes of both Alexander II and III, political discussion was allowed, and as such it developed more so than at any other time in the period.
However the monasteries had money in abundance, both in terms of currency and in land. One conclusion is therefore, is that Henry dissolved the monasteries in order to tap their wealth. However, there are also other possible reasons that I believe influenced Henry’s decision to dissolve the greater monasteries. There are also suggestions that Henry believed the dissolution of the monasteries was necessary because the Church and the clerical order as a whole was becoming increasingly corrupt. The three sources also mostly agree with the view that the dissolution of larger monasteries was largely driven by financial motives.
ZINN CHAPTER 4 1. What is the thesis of this chapter? Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.When we look at the American Revolution this way, it was a work of genius, and the Founding Fathers deserve the awed tribute they have received over the centuries.
This was most likely why the British government did not support the plan, as it would have given the colonists even more power to self govern, and would have allowed the Colonies to have more power of taxation during a time where Britain was beginning to levy more taxes on them. However, had
Henry had to bring stability back to England. The king needed to win over the nobles if he was to remain secure as king, he needed a positive relationship with them. There were some nobles who did support Henry because of their Lancastrian backgrounds, then there were some that supported him due to them seeing him as mean to social and political advancement, then there were the nobles that opposed him; the Lambert and Warbeck rebellions show this. Getting the nobles to support him was a huge challenge that would take years for the king to accomplish as there were more nobles than the king. Over the course of the fifteenth century the English nobility had grown in power, however Henry VII was quite fortunate that 25% of leading noble lines had died out.
And lastly the regency crisis of 1788 meant that Pitt could use this to gain favour with the king and gather support from his own party and draw it away from the opposition. These circumstances proved effective in propelling Pitt’s domination but without his own skill he would not have been able to dominate, for example his financial skill ensured that Britain benefitted from the industrial revolution as was the handling of the regency crisis which completely favoured Pitt but he
The reign Ferdinand and Isabella was one which brought unity and stability both in government and in religion for Spain. Unlike the reigns of Charles and Philip, which were engulfed by economic problems, Ferdinand and Isabella held a continuously strong leadership as they brought the areas of Aragon and Castile together later furthering themselves in the Conquest of Granada and then placing the roots for the growth of the Spanish Empire with the discovery of Hispaniola. Without the accession of Ferdinand and Isabella Spain may have still been a country divided into states which could have led to Spain being of less significance both as a strong power in Europe but also a strong Christian power, with its continual control and inflexibility about religion within
John Smith Mr. Fitz AP US History 29 September 2013 The Political, Diplomatic, and Military Advantages Leading to the American Victory The American victory during the Revolutionary War was complete luck. It was hard to imagine the new, still growing America, going against one of the largest empires in the world, Great Britain, and surviving. Americas strive for independence did not happen overnight, and was not an easy victory. But the Americans’ growing political strengths, their diplomacy with foreign countries, and their later strategic military allowed them to somehow overwhelm the British and finally gain their independence. In 1775, the Second Continental Congress met in response to the battle of Lexington and Concord, to discuss what the next move for America should be.