Before they were following the orders of British officers, therefore when they revolted they had no common leaders to organize them. This meant they were not united and could not act efficiently, therefore it was easy for the British to defeat them and end the rebellion. This reinforces the view it was not a significant threat as they did not have the same organization as the British making it impossible for them defeat the British. The significance of the mutiny could also be seen in
As the war progressed, the articles agree that the colonists used their sea power and trading power among other towns to wear down the Indians and win the war. The national debt occurred as a result of King Philip’s War.3 They both agree that the war cost the New England colonists a significant amount of money.1 While comparable, the three articles did display unique comments about the war and different levels of credibility. The Wikipedia article discussed the relationship between the Indians being peaceful.1 While true, the Wars and Battles article better elaborated by showing the colonists preaching the gospel, trading, and fighting with the Indians.3 This gives the reader a much better idea of what the relations between the colonists and Indians were like before the war than the Wikipedia article. In the Wikipedia article the importance of Sassamon in the outbreak of the war was mentioned. Sassamon was displayed as “a figure in the outbreak of the war.
The messenger ships travelled the same speed, as the Armada so they were nearly useless and the communication between Parma’s army and the Armada were not good. On top of all of this the Armada had received message that Parma’s army was not ready when they were at Calais, however modern research shows that the army would have been ready in just 5 hours but the Armada didn't know this because of Parma's plan to keep it a secret that the invasion army was ready to give the English a surprise attack, which fooled both English and Spanish. More to the point though, the English attack at Calais did cause the Spanish to fail one of their orders, to keep in the formation and it caused them to fail there main objective. To pick up Parma’s Army. Sources say many different things about the English ships.
Also the Tsar still had the support of the Russian army and the navy which stopped any serious uprising. Some historians believe the October manifesto was important in the survival of the Tsar because of the affect it had on the liberal opposition and the peasantry. However i believe it was not so important because it did not entirely solve the problem it only weekend the threat posed. For example the October manifesto did not entirely appease the liberals, although it promised a Duma/parliament there was still a split in the party. And it was clear one group was not satisfied with what the manifesto promised.
The events mentioned were only a starting point, with many violent acts to come but they do provide the base of which the Nationalist feeling of unhappiness stems from. The events that lead to the immediate intervention by the British, being the riots of 1968, bloody Sunday and the Omagh bombings all helped to stem the conflict, illustrating that it was at the stage where external intervention was required, and tensions were present because of British imperialist action taken in the 17th century. Without the external intervention, the agreement which solidified the peace, the Belfast or Good Friday agreement, the peace process would have been significantly slower if present at all. Had Britain not have intervened in the Irish conflict for the final time with a true interest in ending the violence, we could well be seeing reports of terrorism on our nightly news broadcast today. To understand how actions in 1541 by the British fuelled the fire of conflict, the background of Irish history needs to be covered.
Republican governments of post Restorationist Spain generally didn't fair as well as their Western European counterparts for a variety of reasons. The Second Spanish Republic, as indicated by its name, only had one predecessor, which lasted less than two years. It would therefore be fair to say that a generation of people accustomed to monarchism and dictatorships were unfamiliar with the bipolar system thrust upon them. People lacked confidence in the system, which favoured majority voting and usually unilaterally supported laws. Another contribution was the lack of participation on behalf of two big groups, Anarchists and Syndicalists, who refused to run in elections.
The factors responsible were both short-term and long-term including, the opposition of the political parties, economic troubles, industrialisation problems and most importantly the Bloody Sunday. The war, itself did not prompt the revolution- it was the fact that Russia lost to a much smaller and almost inferior country. Russia’s huge military defeats were caused by the Russo-Japanese war. An example of such a defeat was in January 1905 when the army had to surrender their Port Arthur naval base in Northern China, which they had possessed before the start of the war. This highlighted the weakness of the military and caused national humiliation, thus contributing to the outbreak of the 1905 Revolution.
When they won the French and Indian War, England had to make a few reforms. King George III declared the Proclamation of 1763, which forbid American colonists from settling west of the Appalachian Mountains in an effort the stabilize relations with the Native Americans. However this angered many colonists who had land grants there and in turn, the Proclamation Line was ignored. This was the start of a series of disagreements between the two lands, as the American citizens began to gain a stronger taste for independence. Enlightenment writers such as John Locke, who patented the idea that it
He required that his subjects “loan him the equivalent of five subsidies” and although it was “opposed by significant numbers in the localities,” the taxation still occurred as the government had “employed all its powers to eliminate resistance”. Moreover, the Forced Loan only happened as a result of Charles dismissing the 1626 Parliament, forfeiting his opportunity of obtaining further grants for his wartime expenditure. Parliament had already been antagonised by Charles’ decision to dismiss them and now that Charles was forcing taxation on others in order to fund his wartime expenditure, due to disastrous foreign policy which Parliament largely disagreed with, it is clear that the Forced Loan had worsened relations greatly. In addition to this, the financing of foreign policy also affected the relationship between Crown and Parliament. As stated previously, the Forced Loan existed to fund England’s wars considering that Parliament was reluctant to grant Charles further subsidies.
Over 3,000 ‘DMVs’ (Deserted Medieval Villages) have been discovered in England, with historians such as Chorpa attributing the reason for desertion to the plague. In perhaps the best known example, Wharram Percy in North Yorkshire, the surviving population is thought to have fled to York to avoid starvation as the village became unsustainable due to 85% of the population dying because of the plague. Some villages, including Kilkenny, saw total oblivoration and 100% death rates. However, perhaps the greatest impact was in the major cities, particularly London, England’s biggest city in the middle ages. London was described by contemporise