Do you agree with the view that in 1515-25 Henry VIII wholly surrendered power in government to Cardinal Wolsey?

A reason for Wolsey’s power was that although he was rarely in the same place as the king, who spent a significant part of most of the years ‘progressing’ around the southern part of kingdom, whereas much of Wolsey’s time was spent committed to building up and maintaining his power base, without which he would ‘have been nothing’. Although Henry’s like of Wolsey was seemed too much; Henry would bring financial ruin to any family when one of its members was reported to have said something unflattering about Wolsey in hearing of the King, the like from Henry gave Wolsey heads above his station. However, it seems that Henry did wholly surrendered power in the government to Wolsey because Wolsey wanted it; by 1515 Wolsey had the Lord Chancellorship from Archbishop Warham within two years of the invasion of France.

However, on the other hand there is contradiction in the statement because the Wolsey couldn’t have had definitive power because Wolsey is not King. ‘Wolsey held a dominant position in the government and controlled the distribution of patronage. However, he lacked the daily contact that the king shared with the minions, his friends and associates among the nobility. And of course the ultimate source of power’ Henry couldn’t have wholly surrendered his power because he was the nobles patron where as Wolsey was merely a pawn in which Henry used for doing his bidding whilst he went ‘progressing’ around the southern part of kingdom. In the short term it seemed that Wolsey had really did get all the power but when it came to matters that involving the Pope and Henry, Wolsey had very real little power over what happened because either way Wolsey would have had displeased one party. Wolsey’s power was superficial; Wolsey dealt with the day-to- day basis and occasionally took major initiatives without the prior agreement, or even knowledge, of his master, it is equally certain that Henry intervened decisively at times to redirect events as he wished them to go. However, Wolsey he was still given the power even though he was at the King’s mercy.

In conclusion I don’t agree with the statement because Henry couldn’t of given exclusively power Wolsey but certainly gave as much as Wolsey would take to make him powerful and wealthier than the King. Even in 1520 Wolsey was doing the King’s bidding ‘writing is somewhat tedious to me… not to allow anyone else to bear this message. I desire you to keep a careful watch… any other others of whom you are suspicious’ when the King didn’t want to do himself. He was the end of something rather than the beginning; as someone who and little long term effect on anything, and therefore as being of little significance even if he did managed to have some sort of power in the short term.