• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Why was Thomas Cromwell able to make such extensive reforms in Government, when Cardinal Wolsey had achieved so little?

Extracts from this document...


Why was Thomas Cromwell able to make such extensive reforms in Government, when Cardinal Wolsey had achieved so little? Several reasons can account for the fact that while Cardinal Wolsey made very little change in the system of Government during his fifteen years as Chief Minister, Thomas Cromwell greatly modernized the machinery of it, even to the extent that Elton describes it as "revolutionary." He reformed what used to be a very medieval style feudal system, where it was easy for one person to dominate, such as Wolsey, into a modern government, based on a bureaucracy, organized by capable people following specific rules and procedures. The best way to approach this argument is to realize that both men were working at very different periods in history; one before the colossally impacting break from Rome and one after. Their personalities, aims and goals were also very dissimilar, therefore affecting their priorities while holding such significant positions of power. One could even go as far as saying that Cardinal's Wolsey's time did not lend itself to reform and this could explain why it was a relatively stagnant period of Tudor history in terms of reform in Government. Wolsey was very much more interested in gaining a power base and wealth for himself more than anything else. Henry was happy to let him do this since he was an extremely intellectual and talented politician and orchestrated situations for him whenever he needed, allowing Henry to get on with hobbies he enjoyed like hunting and jousting. ...read more.


We must realize however, during Cardinal Wolsey's time that one of the few things that he and the nobility agreed on was the fact that Government should be small and not trespass too much on other people's lives. The classic feudal view was that the King and his advisers should concentrate on law and war rather than get too involved in domestic affairs, which is exactly what was done before Cromwell's arrival. Randall sums this up by saying that "there was little contemporary disappointment that Wolsey did not do more." Therefore, Wolsey cannot be seriously blamed for leaving the Government when he died as a very much medieval one. Before the break from Rome happened, there was no burning need to reform how the country was run in the localities and make sure the King's wishes were being upheld as opposed to the situation Cromwell faced in 1533. We can see this through the way that during Wolsey's fifteen years of power, Parliament was called only a few times, because it was not necessary. When it was called, for example in 1523, it was only to raise a tax for the pending war with France rather than to represent the people and help govern the country. This can be compared to Cromwell's much more frequent use of the institution to help the Reformation seem less dictatorial to the people. ...read more.


into instability otherwise without his use of Parliament and Courts in order to improve finances and administration (though the Reformation was a very piecemeal one). We cannot strongly argue that whether Wolsey or Cromwell was better than the other, not only because they were working at different periods of time, but also because even Cromwell's reforms were not long lasting. Since they required his very personal network of patronage and skill, many of the Courts that he created decayed after his death and Smith concludes that it is very dangerous to argue that Cromwell created some kind of Revolution. It was more the concepts he created that outlived him, such as the greater power and influence given to Parliament, the secularization of Government and uniform law. To answer the question of why Cromwell was able to make such extensive reforms when Wolsey did no such thing, I would say that Cromwell's reforms must not be exaggerated and Wolsey's must not be underestimated. Both men were very personal to Henry and served him to the best of their ability at the time, in their own circumstances. Particularly the difference in situation regarding the break from Rome would have led Cromwell to make sure that the King's unit ran throughout the country, whereas Wolsey didn't need to. It can be mentioned here, that Wolsey was behaving like a typical medieval politician, working for his own wealth and gain, and concentrating much more on foreign policy. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    How successful was Wolsey in his Domestic Administration 1515-29?

    4 star(s)

    him convicted of 'praemunire' in which he was being more loyal to the pope than to his King. He was also criticised of being a 'pluralist' controlling many bishoprics and not being there to operate them. As papal legate he could have brought reform to England but he was unsuccessful by not doing this.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    'In His Domestic Policy Between 1515 and 1529 Wolsey Promised Much But Achieved Little' ...

    4 star(s)

    Here, he reduced the number of Gentlemen in the Privy Chamber by half; from 12 down to 6, halving their influence. He removed the Groom of the Stool, William Crompton, and replaced him with somebody who would not challenge his influence, Henry Norris.

  1. Was Kenilworth a typical medieval castle?

    The damning provided a dual purpose as it also allowed the development of the Tiltyard. The Tiltyard was used for practicing military skills and as an entertainment purpose, two viewing gallery's stood either side of this. These defences were proved in the siege in 1266.

  2. Constitutional Nationalism succeeded in achieving its aims whereas revolutionary nationalism failed and cultural nationalism ...

    The Fenians were formed in 1858, in both Dublin and America, after the failed Irish Confederation rebellion and the Great Famine, and thus were embittered and dedicated to establish an independent Irish republic, rejecting absolutely all forms of constitutionalism and looking only to extreme violent means of achieving their aims.


    Internal Parliamentary Pressures Women * Liberal government (1906-) believed to be more sympathetic than Tories. Lloyd George known to be in favour. * Succession of parliamentary bills brought forward by backbenchers 1908-11. In H of C, majority voted in favour of women gaining the vote 1912/13. * NUWSS supported Labour with a fighting fund and a number of Liberals lost by elections 1911-14 as a result.

  2. The British reforms to change India failed because the British would sometimes use force ...

    Now the British tried a different approach to getting their views across by trying to get all the leading members of each party to talk to each other. This method was used in the Round Table Conferences. In November 1930 the First Round Table Conference took place.

  1. To what extent was Henry's decision to break with Rome influenced by Thomas Cranmer ...

    idea to break with Rome, and was instrumental in leading Henry toward the idea of a royal supremacy, as supported by Newcombe who claims that "in 1532, Cromwell brought forward a solution to the king's problems."3 Cromwell drafted many of the acts that were used to carry out the dissolution

  2. Betrayal In The Song of Roland and The Romance of Tristan and Iseult.

    time where such things were difficult to come by, the idea of upsetting the balance of service was unimaginable. Works such as The Song of Roland reflect the importance of the lord-vassal bond, and Ganelon's ultimate betrayal - the betrayal of his lord - caused the gory deaths of thousands of good men, and eventually his own nasty demise.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work