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
Conservative scandals were the most important reason for why they lost in the 1964 election. Do you agree?
Conservative scandals were the most important reason for why they lost in the 1964 election. Do you agree? For the Conservatives, the loss of the 1964 election was due to a number of factors, including the scandals that affected their party's image during this time. Other factors include the Profumo affair, another more significant scandal, the leadership troubles that the Conservatives faced during this time, and a general lack of spirit from the party after a tiring 13 years in government. As well as this, Labour's growing strength played a part in their winning of the election. Scandals played a major part of 1963 for the Conservatives, with three different occurrences happening during this time. These scandals included the Vassall affair, which made the government look bad as they tried to protect a Soviet spy and ultimately protect themselves from the trouble of not catching him sooner, but it backfired and the truth was revealed to the public. This scandal would reflect badly on the MPs involved as it shows them as untrustworthy, and also links them to the Soviets and could be perceived as them trying to protect them. Another Soviet spy case, the Kim Philby scandal, showed the government to be incompetent as they hadn't caught a spy for decades, reflecting badly on them as it once again highlighted the disorganisation of the government. The third case, the Argyll
To what extent was the 1920s a major turning point in the development of labour and trade union rights in the USA from 1865-1992?
To what extent was the 1920's a major turning point in the development of labour and trade union rights in the USA from 1865-1992? Throughout the period trade union rights, the most basic of which was to exist, and labour rights, which unlike trade union rights were granted by the employer and were individual to the workers, generally failed to develop along the same trajectory. At many points, indeed during the 1920s, the advancement of labour rights appeared to conflict with the development of trade union rights. However, when considering the turning points in the development of trade union and labour rights together during the period, it is evident that the 1920's, far from being a turning point, was an era which saw only superficial advancements in labour rights and limited change for trade unions. In contrast, major turning points can be identified at the very start of the period, which saw the establishment of trade unions, during the 1930's and towards the end of the period between 1980 and 1992, a pivotal time due to the significant regression of union rights. As a decade which enjoyed an unprecedented level of economic prosperity, it is true that during the 1920's workers were indeed granted better conditions and the number of causes of industrial unrest was reduced. For example, workers saw a rise in real wages and employers taking actions to improve working
Was the collapse of the USSR historically inevitable?
Was the collapse of the USSR historically inevitable? The twenty fifth of December 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev resigns as President of The Soviet Union and the country is dissolute in fifteen republics after an existence of nearly seventy years. Before this moment, less or none historians predicted this collapse. Nevertheless, one can ask the question whether this collapse was historically inevitable or not. The aim of this essay is not to rewrite History but explain what has lead to the end of the Soviet Union. First of all, this essay will describe shortly some important steps of the Soviet History after the Second World War and in the context of the Cold War, in order to help the understood of the final collapse. Even though the last years of the soviet regime were crucial, former events and policies influenced the Breakup of USSR. In the second part, I will analyze how some events and factors, such as economy, nationalism, internal and external pressures, personalities and the war of Afghanistan made this collapse inevitable. Even though some scholars, such as Gaddis1, argue that the end of the cold war and the collapse of Soviet Union were not historically expected, this essay will show that it seems inevitable. In order to understand the Collapse of the Soviet Union, some historical facts need to be reminded2. After the death of Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev became General
To what extent was British policy in Ireland a success in the years 1868-1886?
"To what extent was British policy in Ireland a success in the years 1868-1886? The British policy to Ireland was always a changing one with different prime ministers having different ideas, such as Peel in the 1920s first saying he doesn't want to pass catholic emancipation but then passing it. Gladstone in these years was firmly against home rule but was always open to reform. Where he gave split his own party to appease Davit and the home rule party by passing the land acts. Gladstone had started this mission by saying he needed to pacify Ireland, because the social and economic situation in Ireland had become really bad. The first bill that was passed in parliament to pacify Ireland was the Irish Church Bill of 1869, the bill proposed the Tithe not being paid to the Church of Ireland anymore as of the 5.8m population in Ireland 5.3m were roman catholic so paying the Tithe wasn't right for them. The act had a number of effects as it created unity within the Liberal party also it won Gladstone the support of the Roman Catholic leaders, it was welcomed by most Irish Catholics as it had addressed a major injustice. It also raised expectations among the Irish that other major issues such as land would now be looked at by the Liberals. It could also be looked at as one of the starting points of the demand for home rule as it gave confidence to the moderate Irish. Overall,
To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles harsh and short-sighted?
Caroline Sims To what extent was the Treaty of Versailles harsh and short-sighted? The peace treaties of 1919, were an attempt to come to an agreement with the losing powers that they accept their blame and peace would be resolved while they pay the consequences. As Germany was a losing power of the war, she was made to sign the treaties and accept their consequences. This essay will examine the extent to which the Treaty of Versailles was harsh and short-sighted. I will begin with the reasons why the Treaty of Versailles can be justified. Firstly, there were three victorious powers who negotiated the peace treaties; David Lloyd George, for Britain, Woodrow Wilson, for America, and George Clemenceau, for France. The French suffered the most war damage, with the most brutal battles being fort there, including thousands of square miles of trenches dug up and 1.5 million casualties. Therefore, George Clemenceau opted for a considerably higher amount of reparations than the other two winning powers. However this was compromised and ended up at 6.6million, which was substantially lower than Clemenceau's original proposal. Furthermore, as stated by historian William Carr in 'A History of Germany', 'if Clemenceau had his way, the Rhineland would have become an independent State, the Saarland would have been annexed to France and Danzig would have become an integral part of
