Becoming a governor in his region of Rome wasn’t good enough, he wanted to be crowned king and serve as a dictator for life, something that Rome didn’t have for five hundred years. His need for absolute power, to become greedy and to bring Rome under Monarchy corrupted him and altered his thinking. Instead of thinking about the Roman people, he was thinking about himself, and that made him a bad leader. Another reason that he wasn’t a good leader was that he was weak. Although he appeared to be strong to the commoners, he was seen as weak to his own Senate members, especially Cassius.
This process took a very long time to get all the people, train them, give them weapons and to fight. In 1645 Oliver Cromwell’s trained army destroyed the king’s forces at the battle of Naseby. In 1649, Cromwell’s 12,000 strong forces stormed Drogheda, north of Dublin. Charles I was put on trial for treason which lead to execution. Many people blame Oliver Cromwell for this, although there were 59 signatories to the death warrant.
However, wars generally led to very expensive costs to the country. Henry's father, Henry VII, left the country in quite a stable state economically, but Henry devoted most of England's money into his campaigns to take over France, because he believed had a right to the Throne. To some extent source 4 supports the idea that the foreign policy did fail due to the lack of resources, because it states that “the young warrior family accepted the fact that royal finances could not support a repetition of the campaign of 1513”. This quote implies that the lack of resources seems to be the dominant reason for stopping Henry from invading France and therefore source 4 supports the statement to some extent. In source 4 we also learn that much must have depended on diplomatic relations with Maximilian and Ferdinand, however Henry’s allies proved unfaithful and unreliable.
France was brought to glory by its wars and art galleries and the Palace of Versailles, but at the same time all of these things took its toll on the highly taxed poor as they tried to support the bankrupt country. His government was nothing more than a cast of actors in the play of Louis' beliefs. The fact of the matter is this; although the result in the long term may have been a betterment of France, the only reason anything was done, was to stroke and coddle Louis XIV's massive ego. One of Louis' greatest endeavours was the constant
But the Committee of Public Safety killed tens of thousands of people ( making their name ironic ), and Napoleon didn’t promote liberty. Plus women had no rights. The French Revolution lived up to it’s ideals socially and economically, but not politically. Because while they abolished feudalism, and achieved a lot of their goals, Napoleon, the CPS, and Louis XVIII abused their power as leaders of France. Socially,
I personally think that Henry failed in his foreign policy because he didn’t end up gaining a full grasp on France, this was the main precedence. The initial aim was to capture more land, gaining more land meaning capturing France and knowing Henry’s ambitious mindset, he most probably had his whole mind set on creating an empire and France was a good place to start. Had Henry been what he said he was ‘a warrior king’ he wouldn’t have been used as a toy twice throughout this unsuccessful foreign policy. Charles took advantage of Henry. At the Battle of Pavia, the French were defeated and Francis along with his strongest supporters were held captive.
One of the main causes of the war lasting so long was the failure of the Schlieffen plan. This was due to the Belgians putting up a fight that was not expected by the Germans and the British, honouring the 75 year old, ‘Treaty of London’, came to the aid of Belgium. Also, the Russians built up their army quicker than expected and forced Germany to split her forces and fight a war on both the eastern and western front. This was very important because Germany was not prepared for this war on two fronts. The Schlieffen plan predicted a quick victory over France within six weeks, which was the estimated time it would take Russia to fully mobilise.
Many argue that the battle was a disaster, saying that the Battle of the Somme delivered so many deaths for the British. In my opinion, the first day of battle was a disaster however overall wasn’t as unsuccessful as many think it is. As British historian Gary Sheffield said, "The battle of the Somme was not a victory in itself, but without it the Entente would not have emerged victorious in
The French won a major battle at Fort Oswego in 1756. They also won another battle two years later at Fort Carrillon. Than another two years later, the French lost at Quebec, Montreal. They were greatly outnumbered and, with that, they had to surrender to the British. The events during the war aren’t the only things that were important, for the setting and other facts were important as well.
Another reason feudalism lost power was the mercenaries that fought for the English king. After the first of the many treaties during the war was signed in 1360 by France, the English king did not want to release his unruly soldiers on his own land. Instead, they were loosed on France where they were free to loot and pillage as they pleased. Castles that belonged to lords took a beating as the mercenaries took them over and then sold them back to the lords for a large price. New weaponry made in the war made the king stronger against nobles.