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

Did the acquisition of Portugal in 1580 represent a greater success for Philip II than the victory at Lepanto in 1571?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Did the acquisition of Portugal in 1580 represent a greater success for Philip II than the victory at Lepanto in 1571? To judge whether the acquisition of Portugal represented a greater success for Philip II than the victory at Lepanto, the benefits and drawbacks of these two events must be compared. Their impact on the defence of Spain and Catholicism, Spanish finances, and Philip's reputation, must be considered. In 1580 Spain invaded and annexed its smaller neighbour Portugal, whose king had died without naming a successor. It can be argued that this acquisition was 'the greatest triumph of [Philip's] reign' 1. For Philip the annexation meant the unification of the Iberian peninsula under his rule, the acquisition of the sizeable Portuguese navy, and the wealth of Portugal and her New World territories. However, the acquisition did not bring Philip glory in the way that the 'spectacular victory of the Christian forces' 2 did at Lepanto in 1571, and although the Lepanto battle was costly, it helped protect Catholicism and Europe from the aggressive expansionism of the Turks. It can therefore be argued that the victory of Lepanto was more of an all-round success for Philip than the acquisition of Portugal. With respect to defending Spain and Catholicism, the victory at Lepanto appears more successful than the acquisition of Portugal. Elliott said that 'the danger in the Mediterranean receded after the victory at Lepanto' 3, a view supported by two paintings depicting the event: Titian's 'Spain Succouring Religion' 4 (1575) ...read more.

Middle

Therefore the defeat of the Turks at Lepanto, which marked the beginning of decline in Muslim threat to Catholic Europe, was a greater success for Philip in terms of protecting Spain and Catholicism than the annexation of Catholic Portugal, which on balance caused more defensive problems than it solved. However, in financial terms the acquisition of Portugal was certainly a greater success for Philip than the victory of Lepanto. McKinnon-Bell observes that 'the acquisition of Portugal brought [Philip] huge new sources of revenue' 22, something echoed in a despatch sent by the Venetian Ambassador on Philip's death in 1598, which described Philip's acquisition of 'the important kingdom of Portugal, with all its territories and treasure' 23. It is possible the Ambassador exaggerated the importance of the annexation out of respect for the recently deceased, but records of bullion import suggest that his assessment of the wealth of the Portuguese empire24 was accurate. Following the acquisition of Portugal, imports of treasure into Spain increased by 70% (from 20.7 million ducats between 1576 and 1580, to 35.2 million ducats in the five years following 158025). It seems then that the annexation of Portugal, which allowed Philip to exploit the Portuguese empire, was a triumph for Spanish finances. The victory of Lepanto, on the other hand, damaged Philip's treasury. Not only did Spain have to bear to the cost of building the 79 ships26 it contributed to the fight, it also did not gain anything financially from the victory, and there is evidence that Philip realised it would be detrimental to his finances. ...read more.

Conclusion

Even Elizabeth I of England (who was excommunicated from the Catholic Church in 1570 and therefore had no reason other than genuine admiration for Philip) sent congratulations after the victory44. The prestige Philip gained from the victory at Lepanto meant it was a greater success in this area than the acquisition of Portugal, which enhanced his standing in Europe only on paper. The victory of Lepanto represented a greater success than the acquisition of Portugal for Philip in terms of defence of Spain and Catholicism, as well as in glorifying himself and his empire. It reduced the immediate threat to Catholic Europe from the aggressive Ottoman empire, and was the beginning of the end of conflict between the Spanish and the Turks. The possession of Portugal, on the other hand, presented a range of new defensive difficulties: the Portuguese Atlantic coast was long and not easily protected from piratical raids, even with the addition of the Portuguese fleet. And while the victory at Lepanto gave Philip a popularity boost across Europe and helped portray Spain as a glorious empire, the acquisition of Portugal instilled fear in Spain's neighbours and did nothing positive for his reputation. It was only financially that the annexation of Portugal represented a greater success, because whilst the battle of Lepanto drained resources, the possession of Portugal brought Philip wealth from New World territories, as well as resources and revenue from Portugal herself. Comparing the two events therefore, the victory at Lepanto was a greater success for Philip than the acquisition of Portugal, because while Portugal benefited Spain financially, Lepanto improved Philip's standing in Europe, and helped ensure the safety of his people and his faith. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree 1500-1599 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 University Degree 1500-1599 essays

  1. Assess the view that the Dutch rebels challenged Philip IIs rule primarily in defense ...

    One of the aims he outlined was; 'that political matters be dealt with.. by the States which are chosen in every province and not be dispatched secretly by hired foreigners'12 This source is only partially credible however, as Orange developed a personal vendetta against Alva, who in 1566 had had him excommunicated, later confiscating his property and possessions.

  2. The Authority Conflict: Machiavelli & Martin Luther

    He recognized the importance of theological virtues like faith, hope, and charity in Christians, so that they act well and rightly. Since Luther believed in the authority of the textual scriptures and God's word, he would have been opposed to Machiavelli's definition of virtue that was based on man having the ability and means to disregard morals and gain power.

  1. Assess the role and importance of Hernan Cortes in the Spanish conquest of Mexico.

    For a few hundred Spaniards to bring a civilisation of what is conservatively estimated to be 25 million to its knees in less than three years is hardly credible. Cortes undoubtedly must take credit from the achievement. His skill and tenacity in dividing and turning the native peoples against one

  2. Assess the impact of the opening of the Atlantic World in the 15th, 16th ...

    Moreover, they did not have to work especially hard to do this; conquerors completely subjugated huge Amerindian populations and forced them to labour for the benefit of people who lived across the ocean and whom they would never meet (The Encomienda system: An encomienda consisted of a grant by the

  1. How far was the church in need of reform during your chosen period of ...

    Neale also believes that there was a significant body (supposedly) in the House of Commons that were in favour of radical religious change. Led by Sir Francis Knollys and Sir Anthony Cooke, one quarter of the four hundred and four members of the House of Commons acted against the Queen forcing her reluctantly into a Protestant settlement.

  2. Is the English Civil War best described as a war of religion?

    It is very difficult not to regard this issue as a religious one, although politics comes into play somewhat, all moves are being made in the name of religion at this point. The Long Parliament opened on Novermber 3rd 1640 and saw more wrangling for power, with most of the concessions coming from the monarchy.

  1. How did the reign of Elizabeth transform the Tudor state?

    Elizabeth was pragmatic and decided to try and negotiate with the Spanish army and Alva, and at first Philip II agreed to restore trade with England and restore religious toleration with the Netherlands. It was soon made clear Philip II wanted the rule of England completely, and would not maintain religious neutrality.

  2. How far has the importance of the missionary priests in ensuring the survival of ...

    The neglection of the Catholic population in the North and West of the country can be seen from two different viewpoints. Historians such as Haigh have taken a very cynical standpoint on this matter, suggesting that the priests aspired to a sort of 'martyr cult', and chose to live near

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