The power of the factions was mainly determined by the woman in Henry's life at the time. Due to Henry's Marriage to Catherine Howard between 1540 -1542 the conservative faction had the upper hand. She had been a key player in Norfolk's scheme to lure Henry away from Cromwell to ensure the rise of the conservative faction. However, the power of the conservatives was short lived as the fall of Catherine Howard was disastrous for Norfolk and the conservative faction. In 1543 a very weak and ill Henry married his last wife, Catherine Parr.
Do You Agree With The View That Wolseys Fall From Power Was Mainly The Result Of Anne Boleyns Hostility Towards Him? (40 Marks) I agree with the view that Wolsey’s fall from power was mainly the result of Anne Boleyn’s hostility towards him. Both sources 4 and 5 agree also, however source 6 contrasts the idea and suggests other reasons for his downfall. Source 4 is a letter from Anne to Wolsey himself, in which Anne is expressing her severe displeasure with him in his failure to grant Henry a divorce from Catherine. Now this source supports the idea that Wolsey’s fall from power was due to Anne’s hostility towards him.
This lead to Conservatives losing the election because many Christians were outraged and humanist sentiment was lowering in the country due to the way Gladstone spoke of the foreign policy, and Disraeli was in no state to argue back, so the public just followed what Gladstone said. Disraeli was unable to defend himself. The pamphlets Gladstone produced as a result of the Eastern Crisis further contributed to loss of support for the Conservatives. This is because Disraeli had previously
Annual parliaments. Some sympathised with the chartists, and saw this as a cry for help, some saw it as a chance to be openly violent, some saw it as a chance to restructure society and some hoped for prosperity, political rights and libertarian reforms. Chartism was born of hunger,desperation, despair and failure having a number of causes. This movement failed because it torn itself apart, Chartism had no money or strong leadership or following because it was born of poverty and lacked the support it needed to be a success. The Charter was the only bond of unity between the Chartists, different groups and types had different ideas on how the Charter should be achieved,and for these reasons Chartism was seen as a Knife and Fork issue, the people were only acting out due o lack of food shelter and clean surroundings, more than it was pursued for it being a political
Although, she does admit even she was shocked when listening to the speech, as she explains “the line was not believable”. From this I can conclude that source one doesn’t wholly hold Churchill responsible for the 1945 election defeat, however the reliability of the source is questionable as it is bias towards the conservative party. Source two, an extract from Lord Butler’s memoirs, clearly shows opposition to not only Churchill but also the conservative party, Lord Butler for example describes Churchill’s speech as a “negative attack on the labour party” and believed that he should have instead focused on “post-war policies”. By describing Churchill’s use of the word “Gestapo” as a “strategic blunder” shows that Butler is blaming Churchill in having played a role in the defeat of the 1945 election. Although both members of the conservative party, Butler and Churchill were political enemies, this is evident when looking at the extract: “a poor third place to the concentrated exploitation of Churchill’s personality” – this is a personal attack on Churchill’s actions.
Keeler later on told national tabloid, News Of The World, her story which allowed the public to get a better understanding of the details regarding the whole affair. The fact that Profumo, who along with Macmillan was a member of the Establishment, lied in the House Of Commons under oath, tarnished the reputation of the Conservative party and even shook confidence within it. Profumo had also undermined the Establishment which was set in its traditional, Edwardian ways. This brought embarrassment to Macmillan as he too was a part of
This led to Russia being in the control of the German Alexandria, who was hated by the Russian people because of her inability to speak Russian, her reliance on Grigory Rasputin, a mystic who claimed to heal her son, her antisocial, depressed attitude and a general political incompetence to rival Nicholas’s. This was a terrible mistake because it broke the faith of the people, and setting them against their leaders, which would result in them conspiring to bring down the tsardom. This last mistake of Nicholas II turned the people against him, his dynasty, and his tsardom, and the people reacted by causing the downfall of the Romanov
France wasn’t part of the colonies like America was, America was sick of being treated badly, and unfairly so they decided to fight. But as for France they were having trouble with their government and needed to create a new one witch they did. And to me it seems like America had much more at stake. The American and French Revolution both worked out in favor of France and for America they both got what they wanted France got the government they fought for, and America parted ways with Britain. The two revolutions were a big part in both America’s history, and a big part in Frances history.
From then on party leaders were erratic and kept changing, meaning there was little stability in the Conservative party, which made them vulnerable to attack. After Peel was beaten in the Corn Laws crisis, many strong leader figures left with him such as Gladstone. This meant the party was left with the back bench aristocracy who were not all that interested in the wellbeing of the party and let it deteriorate. This was not at all the only problem that the conservatives faced. The truth was that their policies simply did not appeal to the majority of the voting population any more.
The Repeal of the Corn Laws contributed hugely to the downfall of the Tory party as it was the issue that caused an equal divide in cabinet. It was controversial because Peel had once again gone against his party’s word to win over the Irish in a way which betrayed the ultras, essentially his most significant support. Contrastingly to Peel’s social policies, which is the least important factor, the Repeal of the Corn Laws had a much more wider and significant effect on Peel’s position as leader of his own party, he was labelled a ‘betrayer’ by the Disraeli’s and was considered no longer fit to lead the Tories. Peel’s own morality put the nation, which at the time was the starving lower class of the Irish, before party politics, however this