Do you agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy in the years 1515-1525? Explain your answers using Sources L, M and N and your own knowledge.

Do you agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy in the years 1515-1525? Explain your answers using Sources L, M and N and your own knowledge. (40 marks)

Source N suggests that both Henry and Wolsey did conduct an effective foreign policy from 1515 – 1525 for the size of England and the finances this country had available .Overall, I disagree with the suggestion in the question and all three sources in one way or another justify my reasoning for disagreeing. However there are some reasons, backed up by sources L and N that agree with the suggestion that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy, which I have taken into account in my essay.

Source N, as the question states, does to some degree, agree that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy. The author, David Grossell, published the book Henry VIII 1509-1529, in 1998; so it’s a secondary source however the dates 1509-1529 is when Henry started his reign till when Wolsey was dismissed from the public office. So the book is mainly focusing on the partnership Wolsey and Henry developed and had. So from that we can analyse that what he is writing in his book will be unbiased and only stating facts. Source N agrees that foreign policy was effective, that ‘Henry and Wolsey did well to preserve an independent and active role and win glory, honour and prestige’. The reason they did well was because of the size and wealth of the country compared to what both Francis I and Charles had. So for both of them to win glory, honour and prestige must mean that their foreign policy was effective if they were able to earn respect amongst what can only be suggested as giants compared to Henry’s ownerships. Source N also says how important that was to Henry. After saying how he had won glory and honour etc it says ‘which meant so much to Henry’; which from my own knowledge I can agree hugely with. Henry had always desired for major success as being a chivalric knight. The Battle of the Spurs in 1513 is a perfect example of that. What genuinely was 30,000 Englishmen chasing a few French soldiers and capturing a few French noblemen, was turned by Henry into a heroic victory for England and most importantly him. So we know how Henry so badly wanted to be seen as a dominant authority figure amongst all of Europe. But as we know from the Battle of the Spurs and what source N states is that it is too unrealistic and ‘hard to sustain’ an effective foreign policy. Source L both agrees and disagrees with the suggestion from the question however it’s not really the source that does the agreeing or disagreeing but more that what the image is of that does that. But source L does agree with what Source N says about Henry winning glory honour and prestige. The Field of the Cloth of Gold was a meeting between Henry and Francis to build their friendship and took place just outside Calais. It was an extravagant event with both Francis and Henry ultimately trying to show off as much as they possibly could. It agrees with the suggestion and what Source N says by the fact the event did earn Henry prestige as it was such a marvellous meeting, as we can see from the painting between the two and all their most important men and kind of put him on the map that was Europe which was dominated by mostly Charles and Francis. It was also good because it was a lot cheaper than war so that benefited the country and also contributed to Wolsey and Henry attempting to maintain an effective foreign policy.