Previous kings had only used the Chamber erratically in times of war however Edward decided to make it more systematic, which in turn siphoned in much more money. This point does support how Edward was a good king because all sources show that it was his idea, not his exchequer. Edwards new policy showed that he managed the royal finances well because it meant that more revenue was coming in therefore he could run the country, as well as start paying of Henry’s debts. Additionally it meant that he could live of his own because he did not have to ask parliament to raise a tax. I think that this was possibly the most important cause to
He nearly always had his family around, sometimes bringing his sons with him on campaigns. • 9 illegitimate children and 11 legitimate only one of which was a son, Louis, who survived him to inherit the empire. • When Pippin died, the kingdom was divided between Charlemagne and his brother Carloman. Charlemagne proved himself a capable ruler unlike his brother who had a very weak character so Charlemagne was quickly able to control much of the kingdom. • At Carloman’s death in 771 Charlemagne gained total control of his father’s kingdom and he began to expand his territory through conquest.
These overmighty nobles especially demonstrate how one of Edward’s weaknesses could lead to usurpation. There were also deep divisions within the Yorkist nobility, made worse as the power of the Woodvilles increased, which led to conflict, particularly between the two aforementioned nobles. The Herbert family was forced to give the
England was effectively bankrupt and on the edge of internal demise via privet feuds. The battle of St Albans can be pinned as the marking point for the start of the war,, but this would be highly unconventional to blame the conflict on one point such as this, as many other factors had been building up to this event since 1427 such as when Henry VI came of age. He was known as a puppet King, led by the government. It was this governmental rule that caused chaos amongst England and divided it as such, hope for the king to rule England efficiently with an iron hand seemed like an improbable dream. There was a massive loss of resources and income after the recline of land in France, leading to the powerful men of England to take arms in aid of their lords this lead to the battle of St Albans The weakness of royal power can be pin pointed to the king.
Certainly these changes were massive, quite abrupt and differed drastically from the norm; however that does not necessarily make them bad. Except, that is how they are viewed by many historians today. The historian N.Reeves believes Akhenaten was unsuccessful, but more in his religion reforms. 'For ordinary folk, there is little doubt that Akhenaten's actions as king over time inflicted the greatest misery: the people were confused by the man's religious vision, frightened by the ruthless manner in which it was imposed and quite likely appalled by his personal behaviour.' Reeves believe that the changes would have confusing and scary for the common people.
Why did Edward IV take the throne in 1461? Edward IV was able to take the throne for a variety of overlapping and interconnecting reasons. 1461 was unusual in that the king took power with violence and had a living rival. The factors include the loss of France, Henry VI’s weakness, Henry VI’s insanity and Margaret’s actions due to theses and Yorkist grievances. The most important factor for Edward being able to take the throne was due to Henry’s weakness as if he wasn’t weak Edward would not have been able to usurp the throne.
Assess the impact of the Emperor Tiberius on the Principate The impact that the Emperor Tiberius had on the principate was contested by both the ancient and modern historians through time. Ancient historians mostly comprised detested Tiberius as it was their obligation to expose the evils of the principate under the Julio-Claudians and portray its degeneration into tyranny. His flaws are highlighted by the end of his reign particularly caused by his enigmatic personality, deteriorating relationship with the senate, influence of Sejanus and the repercussions of the treason trials. Whilst modern sources illustrate him from a more positive perspective pointing out his good intentions, effectively administrating the state, vastly improving
Whereas Roger Bigod was an Earl so he was very powerful and led one of the richest groups in the country. During wartime they supplied John with an army and in return they expected a say in how the country is run. However, if the King angers them the barons may refuse to obey him. This was a big problem for John! Barons have their own castles and armies so they are protected when the King decides to attack them.
Why do we need a king that’s so selfish and disrespectful to rule our country? Religious conflicts permeated Charles’s reign. He married a Catholic princess over the objection of our parliament and public opinion. He also allied himself with controversial religious figures like Duke of Buckingham and Archbishop Laud. As his subjects, we think that this brought our Church of England too close to Roman Catholic.
However we know that had passed enough policies to cause a stir in society especially with the nobility where he would treat the ‘equal’ to the less privileged by for example taking away their enclosures of land and prohibiting any further enclosures to take place. Source T has backed up the negative stance on Wolsey’s domestic policies as seen with source, stating “his hostility towards the nobility…caused him the greatest irritation” suggesting Wolsey to have be intimidating towards the nobility in terms of introducing the new domestic policies which would have caused hatred on the nobility side towards him. However I cannot agree with this viewpoint as we must take into account the nature and origin of the source as we know the creator