The most important reason for Wolseys fall from power was his failure to obtain a divorce for Henry VIII- How far do you agree with this statement?
'The most important reason for Wolsey's fall from power was his failure to obtain a divorce for Henry VIII'- How far do you agree with this statement? Due to Wolsey's constant victories, he was able to sustain power for 15 years, outlasting the King's other advisers. Yet unlike his role as 'alter rex' his fall was swift and dramatic, which came after his failure of obtaining Henry's divorce from Catherine of Aragon. In regards to this, it seems clear that this is the reason why Wolsey fell from power, yet there are possible contributing factors that one must take into consideration. One reason is that Wolsey was undoubtedly unpopular in court throughout his time. Within his time at court he acquired many enemies such as the King's minions because of his less than wealthy upbringing. This may have impact the king due to the closeness of him and the minions- who were influencing the King to oppose Wolsey. This is evident in his rivalry against the Duke of Norfolk and Suffolk who were the figureheads in the Tudor court. The Duke of Norfolk was also related to Anne Boleyn, therefore Henry was influenced by the Boleyn faction to rid of Wolsey thus providing reason for his downfall. Wolsey himself could easily influence Henry to get rid of his enemies in addition to acquiring more power, therefore the fact that the King was easily influenced also suggests a reason as to why
Using these four passages and your own knowledge, asses the view that the US policy of Marshall in 1947 was motivated mainly by the altruistic desire to help the economic recovery of Europe
Using these four passages and your own knowledge, asses the view that the US policy of Marshall in 1947 was motivated mainly by the altruistic desire to help the economic recovery of Europe. The situation in Europe after the Second World War was truly desperate; many states were in ruins due to the devastation that caused unimaginable poverty and distress. At the surface, the US's plans to help Europe through the Marshall Plan are altruistic; however, looking deeper, the benefits that the US receives are high and rewarding. So much so, that it could be construed that the US had ulterior motives within their altruistic attempt on rebuilding the European Economy and thus benefiting themselves. During the interwar period, the US had based its foreign affairs on a "policy of glorious isolationism" - a policy that would have separated the US from the affairs of the world that did not concern them. At the end of the Second World War, the US's view had changed considerably in that they now wanted to help the European Community through 'the offer of aid through Marshall's new programme...'1 it was 'made available to all European countries without distinction,'2 making it seem that the US were being all inclusive within their scheme to help. At the surface, this would have been altruistic in that Marshall was helping Europe because he saw the devastation left behind from the Second
Assess the significance of the role of individuals in reducing racial discrimination in the USA throughout the period 1877-1981.
History Coursework: Part B Assess the significance of the role of individuals in reducing racial discrimination in the USA throughout the period 1877-1981 Between the periods of 1877-1981 there were many significant figures who contributed towards reducing racial discrimination in the USA. Although without events such as the Montgomery Bus Boycott, WWII or the actions of the NACCP to change attitudes towards African Americans, these individuals would have had little effect. The likes of Booker T Washington and Du Bois set the foundation for civil rights along with the Second World War; however other individuals such as Martin Luther King help to actively progress the movement. Along with this the government and various presidents more so in the latter of the period of 1877-1981 helped to change attitudes and enforce legislation which was vital in reducing racial discrimination in the USA. Booker T Washington began to provide the foundations to the civil rights movement in his actions. Although I believe that during this early period of the movement little was achieved, Washington was still able to provide education, and show African Americans that they had a future and it was at their own mercy. This helped to relieve some who were less fortunate. On the other hand Du Bois took a route which directly campaigned for civil rights for African Americans; alike to Washington he
Why did the League of Nations fail?
Why did the League of Nations fail? By Richard Ward [email protected] The objectives of the League of Nations were to 'promote international co-operation and to achieve peace and security'. The League failed these ideals as early as 1921, when Poland occupied Vilna. It failed these objectives once more in 1923 when Mussolini held Greece ransom by occupying and bombing the island of Corfu. Yet the League was not dissolved until 1946. It continued to meet and its agencies continued their work. It was only after 1936 and the collapse of Abyssinian resistance that public opinion swung against the League on a great scale. Until the early 1930s, the League of Nations had been displayed in a favourable light as a success. The failures at Corfu and Vilna had been overshadowed by successes at the Åland Islands and in the Greek-Bulgarian war and the booming world economy. Added to that, improvements in international relations had cast a general aura of wellbeing over the world. In hindsight, it is arguable that the League had failed shortly after it had started, but at that time everyone was shocked at the realisation that the League was not everything it said it was. On October 24th 1929, the US stock market in Wall Street crashed. The value of shares plummeted as the stock market was ordered to 'sell at any price'. Herbert Hoover, US President, had advocated the
In what ways and to what extent does the concept of Spain's Golden Age apply more specifically to the reign of Philip II than to the whole period 1474 - 1598?
In what ways and to what extent does the concept of Spain's Golden Age apply more specifically to the reign of Philip II than to the whole period 1474 - 1598? Justify your answer by reference to the similarities and differences you detect between the periods before and after the accession of Philip in 1556 The concept of a Golden Age is a highly contested issue among modern and contempory historians. There is debate over the dates of such an age, or even its existence at all. Working on the assumption that a golden age occurred in some form, to deduce whether it was more specifically under Philip's reign, we must look at the condition of Spain in key areas before and after Philip's accession in 1556. If differences arise a judgement must be made on whether they were an improvement for Spain, or signify a decline. The keys issues include religion, the military, territory, the economy, law and order and the organisation of government. The Golden Age over all should be the period where most of these concerns have reached their peak. The point of entry into the Golden Age in terms of the army is complex, and depends on the definition, i.e. whether it is the number of troops or their individual skills, loyalty and motivation which determines it. In the period 1525 - 1536, the army was highly thought of and comprised of members of the aristocracy fighting for social pride and
