THOMAS MORE Do you accept the view that More was a cruel man with little compassion for others? BREAK WITH ROME/REFORMATION Do you agree with the view that the main cause of the English Reformation was the character and influence of Anne Boleyn? Do you agree with the view that the most significant changes of the 1530s were political rather than religious? OPPOSITION Do you agree with the view that the main cause of the Pilgrimage of Grace was widespread dislike of religious changes? Do you accept the view expressed in source X that the Holy Maid of Kent remained important until 1533?
He presented an article to the king in 1452, criticising Somerset for his failure to defend Rouen from attack and his surrender of Rouen in 1449 despite soldiers protesting. Despite Somerset being lieutenant-general in Normandy since 1445, York was still captain of Rouen and it was his responsibility to govern his appanage. The surrender of Rouen was a treasonable offence and York was dishonoured because of this, despite not being there in person to defend. York demanded Somerset be tried for the treasonable surrender of Rouen and other towns in order to clear his name. York’s bitter feud with Somerset was centred on the loss of English territories in France and said that this was his main reason for opposing Henry.
Starting with the source in question, Dawson claims in Source V that ‘conclusions on Wolsey seem to carry an air of disappointment’. It is easy to see how this may appear to be the case when you consider some of the policies put into place by Wolsey, for example, the Amicable Grant of 1925, a non-parliamentary tax put into place in order to raise the funds that Henry required to be able invade France, backfired greatly and had violent repercussions, starting with refusal to pay and developing into full-blown riots in areas such as Suffolk and East Anglia. This made Wolsey extremely unpopular, which is alluded to in Source T, which claims that his ‘arrogance and ambition aroused against himself the hatred of the whole country’. The source works hard to paint a negative picture of Wolsey, describing him as ‘destested by everyone’. Also, as Source V comes from a modern historian, there are no personal affiliations had with Wolsey that may cloud the judgment of the writer, which therefore means there is no reason that the source would deliberately attempt to portray Wolsey in a biased way, making the Source more reliable.
Shehab Amin How important was Buckingham in the breakdown of relations 1625-29? Between the years 1625 and 1629 Charles’ favourite the Duke of Buckingham had a huge influence on English politics, the breakdown of relations between Crown and Parliament can be said to be because of how he used this power directly, for example the military failures at this time and relations with France, which he was directly behind. But as a separate point of conflict was religion, the rise of Armenianism. Other factors however such as tonnage & poundage, did cause problems with Charles but again without Buckingham these wouldn’t have been major points of conflict. In 1625 Buckingham decided England needed a new ally in Europe in France after the failure of the Spanish match, they could see diplomatic advantages, France was becoming worried about the successes of the Hapsburg Spanish and might be persuaded to take part against them.
However, there were many people that were critical of Wolsey and believed he was arrogant. Overall I think sources 2 and 3 agree fairly strongly with source 1’s opinion of Wolsey. Source 1 talks about how Wolsey considered himself equal to king’s, showcasing his arrogance, backed up by when it says he was hostile to nobles and the public suggesting he thought he was above them. It then went on to talk about how he was hated by all people showing his unpopularity. However this source was written by Polydore Vergil, an Italian humanist who came to England and wrote the History of England, his analysis of Wolsey wasn’t very good as they’d had a personal feud due to Wolsey being jealous and Vergil spent a brief period in prison.
Study Sources G, H and I. How far do these sources suggest that the smaller monasteries were dissolved in 1536 because of their corruption? (20 Marks) All three sources provide evidence for and against the argument that the monasteries were dissolved as a result of their corruption. At face value source G takes the line of argument that the monasteries were corrupt and this is the cause of their dissolution because it suggests they were deceitful by claiming that they had religious relics. Source H supports the arguments of G because it argues the monasteries are sinful and vicious.
This shows how unfair the targeting of Othello to be sabotaged was. These facts about the play tell us that Othello was targeted unjustly. The way Shakespeare writes Othello as being a noble and loyal man to those people of greater status in Venice such as the Senator, Brabantio, but is played by the strings of Iago, a standard class Venetian citizen. This shows how out of control Othello was of the whole situation that unfolds with Iago. Iago begins to tell Othello things that make Othello finally become doubtful of his wife’s faithfulness.
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
How important was the Duke of Buckingham to the breakdown in relations between Crown and Parliament in the years of 1625-1629? Charles’ main advisor and partner in foreign policy was the Duke of Buckingham. Due to Buckingham being a wicked advisor led Charles to a disastrous foreign policy. This propelled him into confrontation with parliament. Buckingham had too much influence with the King; this meant he was seen as one of the main causes to the break down in parliament.
28) In this confrontation the difference between the social classes are shown. It shows how Tom looks down on gorge just because he is poor, and how Tom thinks that because he has a higher social status and because he is rich has the power to treat him badly. Tom’s self center and prepotent attitude is shown in the dialogue, and thus representing the moral and social decay that the wealthy people had due to their excesses. In conclusion Fitzgerald exclude the middle class as a critique to the extremes in the social classes, because he wanted to show the contrast between them and the repercussions the social class had on the characters. Through the novel the duality between the rich and the poor is always present, and the effects of the extremes and the insatiable aim of wealth is represented by the valley of ashes.