'Wolsey's foreign policy reveals that he had no other aims than to exalt his master's power and his own glory' How far do you agree with this verdict?

Authors Avatar

‘Wolsey’s foreign policy reveals that he had no other aims than to exalt his master’s power and his own glory’ How far do you agree with this verdict?

Wolsey’s political principles have been subject to much criticism since his death and to this day historians continue to disagree regarding its validity. The title denies that Wolsey had any ‘guiding political principles’, however traditional accounts of his foreign policy have attempted to attribute to Wolsey a coherent policy and motivation. In the eighteenth and nineteenth century the emphasis was on Wolsey as ‘impresario of a European, balance of power’. A.Pollard considered that the motive of Wolsey’s foreign policy was primarily concern for the papacy; he considered that ‘ as long as Wolsey pulled levers of English diplomacy Henry VIII remained the favourite son of the Roman church’. Others argued that Wolsey was first and foremost a crusader of peace, supported by his part in the treaty of London in 1518 and the Field of the Cloth of Gold meeting in 1520. This theory however must account for Wolsey’s tendency to abandon his aims of peace in order to appease Henry VIII’s desire to prove himself through successes on the battlefield. Henry VIII’s attempts to emulate his warrior hero, Henry V, must surely have caused problems, if indeed peace was Wolsey’s ultimate gain. Scarisbrick explains the discrepancy and argues that Wolsey’s foreign policy ‘was a peace policy, and for about fifteen years he struggled to make it work’. Peter Gwyn however considered that peace was not Wolsey’s ultimate aim, neither was the papacy, but that his loyalty to the king drove his foreign policies, ‘Wolsey believed passionately that it was his duty to work for the greater glory of Henry VIII’. The issue of whether Wolsey did indeed have any political principles or aspirations of peace is a complicated one to prove, one thing is certain though, if his policies were aimed to ‘exalt his master’s power and his own glory’ in the end it wasn’t enough to keep him in Henry’s favour against the hypnotising charms of Anne Boleyn.

Join now!

The dynamic of Henry and Wolsey became so powerful that Wolsey was attributed the title of ‘alter rex’ (second king), as a result Wolsey now had additional motives ‘for bringing honour to his master’ since in doing so he brought honour to himself. Certainly one must not forget that ultimately Henry held the power of life or death over Wolsey and this gross difference is evident in Wolsey’s fall from power in 1529. Wolsey’s level of responsibility was however unusual, since not only was he the lord chancellor, papal legate, cardinal and the archbishop of York but he also took ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Avatar

This essay has a really good clear style and confident tone. The student demonstrates good knowledge of the period which is used confidently to support and develop the judgements. There is also good us of a range of historians views. At time these are used to illustrate and it would be even better if the views of the historians were used too.