Do you agree with the view that Wolseys domestic policies were disappointing?

by adfg2611 (student)

AS and A Level History

Helen French

Source Question- Part B

Do you agree with the view that Wolsey’s domestic policies were disappointing?

Cardinal Wolsey was Lord Chancellor for Henry VIII which meant he was in charge of assisting Henry in all decisions in foreign and domestic policy, examples of this were finance; gaining money from parliament and changing taxes. Also, Wolsey was involved in law as he was part of the Star Chamber and was involved in the cases that went through here. As the Archbishop of York, Wolsey was in charge of a large area of churches in his diocese and after he was made a Cardinal he became the most powerful churchman in England.

The statement that Wolsey’s domestic policies were disappointing is one view that has lots of evidence to support it, on the other hand there is also evidence to support the fact that Wolsey’s policies were successful.

On one side, Wolsey’s policies were successful and were not disappointing. For example in Source 1 Polydore Virgil states that Wolsey has ‘ambition’, we see an example of this because his father was a butcher and he worked his way up to being one of the most powerful men in England. Source 3, Ian Dawson says Wolsey has ‘creativity’ and a ‘capacity for detailed hard work’ which we see when we see his work in the Star Chamber. He worked with a variety of cases and favoured civil law over common law as it was a fairer system. We also see his hard work when we look at all the offices he held such as being Lord Chancellor, Archbishop of York and Durham and being a member of the Privy Council. Source 2 says that Wolsey was ‘thoughtful, and has a reputation for being extremely just.’ This shows that Wolsey was caring and tried to be as fair as possible to the common people and get them the same rights as the nobles had. We see an example of Wolsey being caring when Wolsey set up a school in Ipswich in 1528. This shows that Wolsey was very determined to succeed and tried his hardest when working for the King and for Pope Leo XII, as well as being determined to get justice for the common people even though this would mean the nobles were against him.

In Source 1 Polydore Virgil tries to discredit Wolsey and say that he had ‘hostility towards… the common people’ but in Source 2 from Venetian ambassador Guistinani he says ‘He favours the people exceedingly’ which shows a contradicting opinion to that of Polyore Virgil. We are led more to believe the Venetian ambassador as Polydore Virgil had an ongoing feud with Wolsey and would consequently have an interest in portraying Wolsey in a bad light. Also he is an unreliable source as he wouldn’t feel threatened in writing bad things about Wolsey as his book was from 1535 and Wolsey died in 1529. Whilst on the other hand, as a source of evidence, Guistinani is reliable as Wolsey was still alive at that time. Also as Venetian ambassador, he wrote independent observations and he would have an unbiased view. So if we are to believe the Venetian ambassador then we are to believe that in fact, Wolsey did favour the common people. We see lots of evidence of Wolsey trying to help the common people such as working with the Star Chamber to clear a backlog of cases and let the common people have their cases heard. In source 2 it says ‘hearing their cases and seeking to despatch them instantly’ which shows Wolsey really wanting to help the common people and have their cases seen to as soon as possible. He created a new form of tax, the subsidy, which was a fairer system of basing the taxes people paid on income rather than the land they owned. This is one of Wolsey’s great ideas as the subsidy tax raised £170,000 whilst the 15ths and 10ths it succeeded only raised £90,000 in the same time. He also tried to stop enclosure whereby the common people lose parts of land to people that were rich enough to be a private owner of the land, thus leaving the common people that used the land for farming and hunting with nothing. This clearly shows that Wolsey tried very hard to get justice for the common people and in some cases, such as subsidies, he very much succeeded.

Another argument for Wolsey’s success is that he was in fact just acting upon Henry VIII’s behalf and cannot be held responsible for the failings in domestic policy because he was just following orders. Source 3 shows that Dawson agrees with this when he says ‘ultimate responsibility lay with the King and to criticise Wolsey’s domestic policies is also to criticise Henry for his lack of involvement.’ This shows that Henry didn’t want to be involved in running the country and didn’t care for the responsibility of his position. We see evidence of Henry just wanting to ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Another argument for Wolsey’s success is that he was in fact just acting upon Henry VIII’s behalf and cannot be held responsible for the failings in domestic policy because he was just following orders. Source 3 shows that Dawson agrees with this when he says ‘ultimate responsibility lay with the King and to criticise Wolsey’s domestic policies is also to criticise Henry for his lack of involvement.’ This shows that Henry didn’t want to be involved in running the country and didn’t care for the responsibility of his position. We see evidence of Henry just wanting to have fun when we look at all of the affairs he had whilst married to Catherine of Aragon. First he has an illegitimate child to one Elizabeth Blount and also more famously fell in love with Anne Boleyn. We also see that Henry wanted to fight other countries because he wanted to be seen as a warrior king just like his idol Henry V. He forced Wolsey to create taxes such as the Amicable Grant in 1525. This was a tax where the King took more money from the people and was very unlikely to pay it back. It nearly caused a civil uprising in the east and was very unfair on the people. We also see wolsey being forced into bad situations when he is asked to get a divorce from the Pope for Henry’s marriage to Catherine. This was unachievable for Wolsey as Spanish/ Imperial relations with England had diminished and the Pope was a prisoner of the Spanish at the time.

Source 2 also backs up the claim that everything was left down to Wolsey because it says ‘He alone transacts as much business as that which occupies all the magistrates, offices and councils of Venice’. This shows that Wolsey was left to control the country and solve problems alone and had to figure out how to keep the King happy and fund invasions at the same time.

On the other hand, some people feel that Wolsey was very disappointing in his domestic policies. For example many people feel that Wolsey was in fact being too ambitious. Source 1 says ‘Wolsey with his arrogance’ and ‘he assumed that he could undertake nearly all the offices of state by himself.’ Wolsey was Henry’s Lord Chancellor, as well as a member of the Privy Council and working with the Star Chamber to relieve a long backlog of cases. Whilst some may say that this shows ambition, many, including Polydore Virgil, felt that Wolsey could not be in charge of all of these and run them all as effectively as possible. The nobles also felt that Wolsey was out of his league being so close to the King as he was the son of a butcher and had worked his way up using the church to help him. We see evidence of Wolsey trying to make England and the King seem more powerful than it was when England was at the heart of the treaty of London in 1518 which was a treaty between France and the Holy Roman Empire. This shows evidence that Wolsey’s policies were disappointing because he was always trying to appear more powerful and important than the truth.

We can also see evidence that Wolsey’s domestic policies were disappointing by looking at his failed policies. We see in Source 3 that Dawson states Wolsey ‘promised more than was delivered’ and this can be seen very clearly in the case for enclosure. Wolsey made an attempt to stop enclosure which must have given the common people hope that something would be done but in the end he achieved nothing but aggravating the nobles further. We also see this in the divorce, it was assumed that because Wolsey was a Cardinal, he would have access to the Pope and therefore be able to request an annulment. Unfortunately for Wolsey the Pope was being kept prisoner and was unable to grant a divorce for Henry and Henry blamed this entirely on Wolsey.

We can also see evidence that Wolsey failed in his domestic policies because he didn’t get on with the nobles. We see this in Source 1 where Polydore Virgil says ‘his hostility towards the nobility’ and ‘He was indeed detested by everyone’. This shows that Wolsey clearly didn’t succeed in making the people happy as he failed to gain respect from the nobles and after his failure to stop enclosure and raising taxes he wasn’t the common people’s favourite person either. We see examples of the nobles and Wolsey not getting along as he only called parliament twice between 1515 and 1523 and tried to find ways to carry out the King’s orders without going to parliament such as the Amicable Grant in 1525 which was a forced loan that Wolsey used because parliament refused to give him more money to fund war. The Amicable grant was one of Wolsey’s biggest failures and nearly caused rebellion in East Anglia.

We also see an example of Wolsey and the nobles not getting on as he reduced the Privy Council from twelve people to six, reducing the nobles’ access to the King.

In conclusion I feel that some of Wolsey’s policies were effective such as the creation of the subsidy and his role in the Star Chamber and getting justice for the common people.

Source 2 from the Venetian ambassador agrees strongly with this argument and shows the positives of Wolsey’s personality and the highlights of his domestic policy such as his success in ‘being extremely just’ and how he ‘favours the people exceedingly’.

I also feel that Source 3 backs up Wolsey’s effective policies to an extent because it shows his ‘creativity’ and aim of creating ‘stability and security’ although he didn’t always achieve this due to increasing taxes and not being able to stop enclosure.

Source 1 on the other hand strongly shows Wolsey’s policies in a negative light as Polydore Virgil had an ongoing feud with Wolsey so was more likely to show him in a bad light. Source 1 shows that Wolsey had the ‘hatred of the whole country’ and was ‘detested by everyone’. This shows how Wolsey wasn’t popular with the country after his failures in domestic policy.

Source 3 also backs up this side of the argument to an extent because it shows that Wolsey ‘promised more than was delivered’ and his ‘achievements seem limited’.

In my opinion, I feel that although Polydore Virgil was very anti Wolsey and Source 1 isn’t a very reliable source, he makes good points about Wolsey assuming he could be effective in every position, as well as his point about Wolsey rejecting the nobility.

I think that source 2 is quite reliable as the Venetian ambassador is an independent and unbiased source so can be trusted. He feels strongly that Wolsey was a good Chief Minister but he fails to address some of the key parts of Wolsey’s policy such as increased taxes and enclosure as these were Wolsey’s biggest domestic failures.

I feel that Source 3 shows an even sided argument as it shows that Wolsey’s policies didn’t achieve as much as expected but doesn’t blame it all on Wolsey which I think shows a good representation of how effective his domestic policy was.

In my opinion, Wolsey tried to gain justice for the common people and succeeded to some extent as he gained them a place in the Star Chamber and introduced subsidies. Some of his failures such as not securing a divorce and the Amicable Grant cannot be solely blamed on Wolsey, the Amicable grant is a lot to do with the King being determined to go to war and the divorce was out of Wolsey’s control once Charles V had captured the Pope but I do feel that some things Wolsey did weren’t good and he could have done better. For example I feel that Wolsey could have worked harder to get along with the nobles, went to parliament more often and not pushed them away from the king as this would have given the King more options. Also if Wolsey had a stronger bond with parliament they may have given him more money which would have meant he would never have resorted to the Amicable Grant and wouldn’t have caused a near uprising. I also feel that Wolsey made false promises when he set about trying to stop enclosure as he didn’t really have a plan as to how he was going to stop it and this resulted in the common people suffering. I also feel that Wolsey was a hypocrite because although he said he wanted fairness and wanted the common people to have more rights, he lived in one of the biggest palaces in England at the time, Hampton Court. This shows that Wolsey was very rich and instead of using his money to help the poor people he was building palaces for himself.

All in all, I feel that Wolsey’s policies had some strong points and did help the common people to an extent but because of his failures in domestic policy, not standing up and advising the King and trying to stop him spending too much money like he was supposed to as the King’s advisor and glamorous showings of wealth I have to conclude that I agree with the view that Wolsey’s domestic policies were disappointing.