Do you agree with the suggestion in Source 6 that Henry treated Wolsey more as a partner than as a servant?

From looking at these sources you see that the majority of the sources appear to be in favour of this statement. However when Cavendish writes that ‘he took upon him” he clearly stresses the role that Wolsey played in assisting Henry. Taking into account where these sources are coming from I agree with the suggestion in source 5 that Wolsey was in fact more Henry’s servant although he did like to think he was Henry’s right hand man.

In Source 4 Skeleton is giving us the impression “make him a great astate” suggesting that the king has established Wolsey in this power, thus he sees himself equal to the king, however what it doesn’t mention is that we do not know if the king is thinking of Wolsey as a partner. Source 6 initially supports the fact that Wolsey sees himself as equal to the king as he states in Source 6 that “They walked arm in arm...intimate confidantes to the exclusion of others” implying that they were very close. In source 4 Skelton could simply be putting forward other people’s resentments of Wolsey. The fact that the source begins with “he is set so hye” portrays a sense of importance, which suggests that Wolsey was seen as a very important person in his “ierachy”. Source 6 states that between the 10 years 1515 and 1525 “Henry treated him more as a partner” this is significant as John Guy has officially states that Wolsey was more Henry’s right hand man, then just a servant, which links into Source 4 where Skelton states “No man dare speke a worde” implying that Wolsey has the last say and it was forbidden to oppose him.

This is a preview of the whole essay

In contrast Source 5 suggests that Wolsey was of more assistance “he took upon him”, implying he was his servant. “First make the king privy of all such matters” portrays that the king is above him as he has to inform the king about such matters. Furthermore Cavendish goes on to say “whose mind and pleasure he would fulfil...to the uttermost” this here is suggesting that he is doing what the king wants and therefore disagrees with the suggestion source 6 as Cavendish is implying that Wolsey would do his uttermost to impress the King, almost as though he is trying to gain his respect, almost like a servant would. Cavendish was Wolsey’s household servant and first biographer. Cavendish wrote his ‘Life and Death of the Cardinal Wolsey’ 30 years after Wolsey’s death. Given the proximity of the gentleman usher to his master we might expect Cavendish’s account to be trustworthy. Yet Cavendish did not enter Wolsey’s household until 1522, fully seven years after Wolsey was appointed Lord Chancellor. More significantly, Cavendish was not privy to Wolsey’s Political life only his personal one, therefore he does not fully know about Henry and Wolsey’s relationship

Wolsey’s rise to power was the way in which he gained trust of the king. Traditional historiography views Wolsey as the Alter Rex, the second king. This interpretation suggests that Wolsey held real power at court, and almost resigns Henry to a passive role within the government. Such an interpretation sees Wolsey as the master and Henry as the puppet. Yet this view has been challenged by recent historians, who argue that the relationship between Henry and Wolsey was one of political partnership. This supports source 4 and 6 as it suggests that many historians view Wolsey as the person who held the most power as he had the biggest influence on the king. However the very fact that Wolsey remained his chief minister for 15 years demonstrates that Henry was very much his own man. Wolsey’s wealth and power created inevitable resentment among the other nobles and councillors, but Henry never yielded to criticism if his leading minister because Wolsey served him loyally and effectively. Henry was content to allow Wolsey to get on with mundane matters of state, but major decisions concerning foreign policy or important domestic affairs could not be made independently by the king’s cardinal, thus suggesting that he was more of a servant to Henry. Additionally, the fact that the king was quick to dismiss the cardinal suggests that he was not only but a servant, as the king would inevitably be reluctant to dismiss his partner, or right hand man.

Skelton was Henry VII’s poet laureate and tutor to the future Henry VIII. Skelton mercilessly mocks Wolsey in poems such as ‘Speke’ ‘Parrot’ and ‘Why come ye nat to Courte?’ Yet Skelton penned his verses in order to attain the patronage of the king. His poems were written in order to attract royal favour at a time when Henry was losing faith in his minister. During his career Cardinal Wolsey made many enemies. Many nobles were keen to see Wolsey’s departure from government in 1529 and his death in 1530. Skelton was one of his enemies; Skelton was critical of the Church but even more critical of the most powerful man in the Church. Skelton would have been foolish to have verbally criticised Wolsey. Therefore Source 4 cannot be seen as wholly reliable as Skelton could just be mocking Cardinal Wolsey, therefore this account cannot be trustworthy.

In conclusion, Although Henry at time could have suggested that Wolsey was more of a partner; I believe that it was more that Wolsey would have liked to see himself as equal to the king, but in fact was just his servant. Therefore I do not agree with the suggestion in source 6 as Wolsey was mainly there to do everything Henry expected him to, and thus he would do his best to please his king to the “uttermost”.

Becky Da Silva