Critics of Wolsey point to his overt shows of wealth as evidence of his “alter kingship”. As Tarr (2003) states, Wolsey kept a household employing 500 servants, dressed in fine robes, enjoyed good food and wine and lived in sumptuous palaces, this was in Wolsey’s opinion, necessary so foreign representatives would “make glorious report in their country to the King’s honour and that of his realm”. Again it is arguable that Wolsey saw this ostentation as part of the job to reflect the image of Henry and England in a positive light abroad.
One of the earliest examples of Wolsey’s ability to organise and administrate is the campaign that resulted in the English capture of Tournai in 1513. Elton (1999) suggests that Wolsey was keen to remain close to the king and increase the influence he had over Henry, so he took it upon himself to organise and sustain the forces needed to secure victory. The result of this was Wolsey became a vital part of Henry’s inner circle of advisors. Starkey (2002) agrees with this view, noting that Henry’s lack of concern for routine administration was a perfect opportunity for Wolsey to advance his career. Furthermore Starkey notes that Wolsey was far better than Henry’s other ministers at implementing policy and managing the king. Therefore it can be seen that Wolsey was in an excellent position to exert his influence on the king. However, as Scarisbrick (1968) suggests, organising the war with France was an integral part of Wolsey’s job as minister; it was expected of him as the king’s servant, and not a job that Wolsey himself decided upon.
Wolsey is credited with securing the peace with France in 1514. The negotiations led to the marriage of Henry’s younger sister Mary to Louis XII, the regaining of a pension for the king and retention of Tournai (Lotherington, 2003). Gwyn states that historically Wolsey has been seen to be the broker of peace and that control of English foreign policy was now in his hands. Furthermore he quotes a letter from Henry to the Pope extolling Wolsey having “laboured and sweated” more than anyone for the peace. The cost of financing wars was high and Henry spent £1.4 million between 1511 and 1525, whilst his income was only £110,000 per year (Ross, 2001). In order to raise the funds needed to satisfy Henry’s warring intentions, Wolsey implemented the Amicable Grant in 1525. This forced loan was incredibly unpopular with both parliament and taxpayers, eventually leading to signs of armed disturbances in East Anglia and Kent against Wolsey himself rather than the King who was the one really in need of the money (Elton, 1991). Eventually Henry had to perform a dramatic climb down and call off the grant. As Elton suggests, this was the first time that Henry began to question his faith in Wolsey.
At home, Wolsey’s main policy interest was the law and after his appointment as Lord Chancellor in 1515, he oversaw the Court of Chancery and the Court of Star Chamber (Lotherington, 2003). Under Wolsey, the Star Chamber took on a renewed vigour, with Wolsey attending the chamber most frequently, whilst Henry, who rarely attended official meetings, relied on his minister to inform him of the outcomes either in person or in writing. Guy (1995) argues that Wolsey did not seek out the position as Lord Chancellor to fuel his power hungry aspirations, as neither his predecessors nor Cromwell after him managed as much influence over the King as Wolsey achieved.
A perceived threat to Wolsey’s influence over Henry was the king’s Privy Chamber. Made up of younger members of the peerage, they spent much time with the king, both in public and private. Known as minions, these Gentlemen of the Privy Chamber had daily access to the King, whilst Wolsey was away working at one of his palaces. As has been shown already in this essay, Wolsey was happy to allow Henry to pursue his leisure activities whilst he carried out the daily administration. However, as Starkey (2002) argues this threatened Wolsey’s position of influence over the King, so in 1519 they were expelled from the court. It is therefore arguable that Wolsey was conscious that he could be usurped so sought to protect his position by eliminating potential rivals.
However, Wolsey did not always go along with the wishes of his King. The appointment of the Abbess of Wilton being a good example. Wolsey employed his own candidate, contrary to the wishes of Henry and had to make an apology (Tarr, 2003). This shows that Henry was no push over and did not always allow Wolsey free rein. As Guy (1995 pp 40) argues, Henry needed a minister to attain his “will and pleasure” and Wolsey was a resounding success but this does not mean that he endorsed everything Wolsey did nor did he support him when things went wrong. However, the king was willing to claim credit for Wolsey’s successes as in the peace agreement with France in 1513.
Having already gained the bishopric of York in 1514, Wolsey was second only to the Archbishop of Canterbury, William Warham, within the English Church at the time. However, Wolsey’s appointment as papal legate in 1518 ensured that he now had the top position and could control the entire Church (Lotherington, 2003) and as such it could be suggested that Wolsey was a ruler of England, although in much less capacity than Henry. Wolsey’s conduct as a man of the church; he held bishoprics in plurality and was known to have fathered children contrary to his vow of celibacy, was not honest moral behaviour (Elton 1991, Guy, 1990, Gwyn, 2002). This leads to the question why both the Pope and Henry allowed him to continue in this behaviour? Guy (1990) suggests this is because Wolsey was useful to them both. For Henry, this meant Wolsey could exercise control over the Church in the way he wanted and shows that Wolsey was acting on the king’s behalf, as his servant.
For a near decade and a half, Wolsey held a superior position within the court of Henry VIII. However, his zenith was not to last. The arrival of Anne Boleyn to attract Henry’s eye indicates the beginning of Wolsey’s fall from favour. Henry was keen to replace Katherine of Aragon, having fallen for Anne and looked to Wolsey to arrange the annulment (Guy, 1990). Wolsey was dispatched to meet with the Pope to secure the annulment. He failed, and as a punishment, was stripped of most of his offices in 1529 (Tarr, 2003). This could be seen to be the ultimate master over servant battle with Henry, as master, angry at Wolsey’s failure to get the annulment, coming down spectacularly hard on his servant. Elton suggests that Wolsey failed in his task because he was torn between his loyalty to the papacy and his loyalty to the King. Gwyn (2002 pp 598) has a simpler explanation saying that “in the end Henry loved Anne more than he loved Wolsey”. Guy (1990) argues that as Henry did not leave Wolsey entirely bereft of all his offices, leaving him with both the Archbishopric of York and the Bishopric of Winchester, this could demonstrate that Henry intended to re-employ his minister at a later date.
In order to answer the question of whether Wolsey was the master or the servant in policy decisions under Henry VIII, this essay has shown that although Wolsey demonstrated great skill in administration and was an exceptionally hard worker, Henry VIII was still in overall charge. Wolsey could be seen to be a sycophant, courting favour with the King in order to further his own wealth and career. During the early years of Henry’s reign, it is possible that Wolsey could be seen as the master, purely because the youthful Henry was caught up in more amusing affairs. However, Henry always devised policy but left Wolsey to carry it out. Henry recognised Wolsey’s abilities and utilised them, but whilst Henry could easily remove Wolsey, Wolsey as a servant of the King was not able to remove Henry. In conclusion, the evidence suggests that Henry VIII and Wolsey formed an effective partnership, but Wolsey was always Henry’s servant.
Word Count 1816
References
Elton, G. R. (1991) England Under the Tudors 3rd edition, Abingdon: Routledge
Guy, J. (1990) Tudor England Oxford: Oxford University Press
Guy, J., (1995) Thomas Wolsey, Thomas Cromwell and the Reform of the Henrician Government. In MacCulloch, D., The Reign of Henry VIII: politics, policy and piety, New York: St Martin’s Press pp 35-58
Gwyn, P.(2002) The King’s Cardinal, London: Pimlico
Lotherington, J., (2003) The Tudor Years 2nd edition, Abingdon: Hodder Education
Scarisbrick, J., J., (1968) Henry VIII, California: University of California Press
Starkey, D. (2002) The Reign of Henry VII Personalities and Politcs, London: Vintage
Tarr, R., (2003) Profiles in Power The Rise and Fall of Thomas Wolsey, History Review, March 2003 (45) pp 20 - 25