How Far Was Henry Vii’s Control over the Nobility in the Years 1485 to 1509 Due to His Financial Policies?

Henry’s attention and rewards by trying to make the ladies in their families his mistresses. However, that strategy changed when Anne went from being his mistress to becoming queen of England. This meant that they weren’t just playing for money and power but they were now fighting for a place on the throne. This became increasingly more difficult after Anne’s execution when Henry showed that no one was safe and wining the throne was a dangerous play. Still, families like the Seymour and the Howards tried to gain power this way. For the most part, the Seymour succeeded in this endeavor by giving Henry what he most desired, a male heir. The Howards however failed with Anne and her daughter Elizabeth and then with Catherine who though young and fertile gave Henry no children and was later discovered as an

The powerlessness of Henry VI is a central factor of the outbreak of the war. He was known to be too soft and malleable to the wishes of his surrounding that had influence and control of him. Henry was considered to be a person who was very uninterested in the politics of the country. He also felt the lack of cleverness and strong features of character that were fundamental

Henry VII ascended to the throne in 1485 with a weak claim due to dynastic issues following on from his mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort. Despite discontent and rebellion within Henry VII’s reign, it is debatable whether the monarch was actually threatened by rebellions due to the simple reason that Henry VII was able to remain on the throne and secure a succession until his death, however the challenge to his authority and succession seen in Lovell, Simnel and Warbeck shows clear instability throughout areas of his reign. However the Yorkshire and Cornish rebellions, which aims were focused around issues of tax, did not pose as much of a threat during

Henry had no intention of giving the nobles back power so another strength he had was that he was an all-powerful figure. Prof. Ronald Hutton says "he managed the nobility by honouring and flattering them". Henry went through Parliament to get reforms when he wanted them. By doing this he increased power of democracy as well as for himself. The early years of Henry's reign saw great rivalry amongst the noblemen to secure Henry's favour and to try to regain power, which Henry VII had taken away.

Henry IV Part 1 deals heavily with the question of Henry IV’s legitimacy. Henry was a usurper king who deposed

As a youth, Henry gained many allies due to his boundless charm, but as he grew older, he began to transform into a bitter and suspicious man who arrested and executed others for no valid reason. Many of his marriages were political advantages, as some of his wives had strong political ties to other countries and therefore created strong ties between those nations. In Louis's case, he tended to make more enemies than allies. The English and Dutch wanted him dead and gone for one reason or another. Many people worked in businesses or were artisans, so when they were driven out of France due to persecution, France lost a vital part of its industry. Very few people supported Louis and his own people spat at

Source 4, an extract from Scarisbrick ‘Henry VIII,’ gives the impression that Henry gave all power to Wolsey, whilst he “hunted and jousted.” Cavendish then states how the king had “surrendered the cares of the state into the Cardinal’s hands.” This gives the impression that Wolsey had the powers of the king and was in charge of running the country efficiently. This is supported by source 6, where Henry asks Wolsey to watch some of the key nobility as well as “any others of whom you are superior.” This is clearly Henry giving Wolsey freedom to act as he wishes, thus

Louis would make the nobles do many embarrassing things, such as dress him, and even take out his chamber pot after going to the bathroom. Nobles would also be honored to see the king wake up in the morning, and watch him eat, things that had never been seen done by nobles for any other leader in history. By making the nobles do things like this, it made them feel less highly about themselves, less powerful, and less likely to try to overthrow him.

As Tony Imperato points out, 'Medieval feudalism placed the monarch in the position of owner of all the lands in the realm, which he distributed to his nobles in return for their loyalty and service. As their overlord, the King could demand a payment whenever changes took place in landholding arrangements.' This paved the way for the exploitation of his nobles in order to gain revenue. There were many means in which he did this. One was the system of 'wardship', and 'relief'.

However, Source 5 written in 1994 by John Lotherington, appears to disagree with that of the view of source 4. In parts it appears to actually agree with source 4, ‘Wolsey held a dominant position in government and controlled the distribution of patronage’ but then the source continues to say, ‘And of course the ultimate source of all power was the King’. This quote can be proven true with examples of Henry preventing Wolsey from doing something, such as in 1523 when Wolsey launched a sea attack upon the French without the kings permission, this led to Wolsey having to apologize for his actions. This shows that Henry still had control over Wolsey and that he couldn’t get away with something so easily. Also even though source 4 claims that Wolsey had very strong control, that even with this power he couldn’t prevent such things like The Amicable Grant of 1525 from being a disaster, and without aids from The Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk it could have been an even more disastrous, this proves Henry was more in control than Wolsey because the Dukes only subdued the rebellions on Henry’s behalf, not Wolsey’s. This is showing how Henry had not wholly surrendered his government power, and could still contest Wolsey’s decisions and problems. The source was also written in 1994, therefore the historians view is likely to be more factual rather than written in the period and being more biased, as can be the case, especially if that figure in

From his fifteen year minority to the inept rule of the rest of his reign, Henry VI was a "child", at least as far as governing ability was concerned. The period of his minority and the time that he was the titular king laid the groundwork for the Wars of the Roses. Had Henry been an intelligent king, with at least some political acumen, and the ability to win the respect of his nobles, their may have never been any Wars of the Roses. But his weakness in allowing government by favorites and governing foolishly on his own, at the very least directed his country down the road to a bloody civil war.

As an absolutist ruler, Louis naturally wanted no checks to his power and the nobles could pose a serious risk to this policy. To weaken the nobles, Louis confined them to the Palace of Versailles and gave them no say in major political decisions. English nobles were given much more power than French nobles under the English constitutional monarchy. They had positions in the Parliament and they had a say in what was happening in England. There was no absolutist ruler in England to attempt to limit their power. French nobles couldn’t vote on legislation while English nobles could in

The Restoration of Strong Government Under Henry VII Henry VII’s relations with the nobility are controversial, but views of his success are subjective. When discussing degrees of success, there must be criteria on which to judge the subject. In this case ‘restoration of strong government’ can be measured by a close study of what Henry VII set out to achieve and whether he fulfilled his aims. He appreciated the nobility’s importance in local governance and did not want to ‘crush’ them, but merely control and limit their power, preventing rebellion and civil war. This essay examines the level of success Henry had in implementing his methods.

During the initial years of Henry II’s reign as king of England, he attempted to restore the authority that had lapsed during the reign of King Stephen from 1141 to 1154. In order to do this, Henry II worked to limit the power of the nobles, for example, by destroying adulterine castles. In addition, he standardised the legal system, which meant that the nobility was reliant on him for justice and also became more involved with financial matters, which helped to reinforce his control. However, he also had some shortcomings, which affected his success such as the facts that he spent such vast quantities of time on the continent and that he failed to prevent uprisings.

During the reign of Louis XIV, France's stability and success was threatened by the power of the nobility. When Louis looked back at the Fronde, a nobility revolt that occurred during his childhood, he realized the thirst for power the nobility held, and as a result limited their power. To begin with, Louis forced the nobles to move to Versailles where they could cause less trouble, and Louis could keep a close eye on them. Louis achieved this by threatening to deny them their pensions if they didn't move. Louis also instituted heavy taxing for the nobles, in the form of a 10% income tax as well as a head tax. These measures prevented a Noble uprising during Louis' reign as king, and allowed France to develop positively as a country.