Do you agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted and effective foreign policy in the years 1515-1525? By StHoldsworth Do you agree with the suggestion in Source N that Henry and Wolsey conducted and effective foreign policy in the years 1515-1525? Sources L and N agree that Henry and Wolsey conducted an effective foreign policy in the years 1515-25 although as source L is a painting it has a motive and probably a bias one whilst source M disagrees with the statement by highlighting troubles associated from the Amicable Grant’.
In source N (which is featured in a book wrote bout Henry VIII at the time in question) contradicts itself to make its point. “Failed to bring great gains to the country, but it did thrust the country into a major role which that its wealth and population scarcely Justified… ” this makes the reader think that this was worth it for the positives it brought. There were many successes of their (Henry and Wolseys) foreign policy. Wolsey was a successful peace broker, and the treaty of London in 1518 was a great example of him ability.
This treaty in 1518 was an agreement of peace which seemed to put England in to the centre of diplomatic ffairs in Europe (which was what Henry wanted). The treaty bound France, Spain, the Papacy, HRE and England against the Turkish. At the time it seemed like a great success as it seemed to signify the end of fear of England being isolated in Europe, however in the long term it failed despite the short term success. Another success was the foreign policies flexibility despite England and the King having such low income and money.
This is shown in source N by “Failed to bring great gains to the country, but it did thrust the country into a major role which that its wealth and opulation scarcely Justified and made hard to sustain. ” This source also implies Wolseys aim was to serve the king and maintain Henrys honour and influence despite it being argued that Wolsey was a self interested diplomat and constantly craved for his achievements to be recognised so he would be known as the great peacemaker’ across Europe. Wolsey also managed to recognise the need to pick effective allies e. . powerful countries to protect the security of England and interests. Because of this the Treaty of Bruges is signed. The treaty of Bruges was hen in 1521 Wolsey arranged a conference in Calais and the agreement was that an English force would invade France unless the French king agreed to make peace. The final success was the Field of the Cloth of Gold (referred to in source L), in 1520 Henry and Francis met near Calais and over 3,000 nobles from each kingdom were present at this extravagant feast.
No expense was spared as both sides tried to show off their Renaissance credentials. Source L shows this success as the painting seems very royal. This celebration was a good way to improve relations but was also cheaper han war which at a time where England had no money was crucial. ON the other nand there are many examples which deemed toreign policy inettective. Firstly, even though the Field of the Cloth of Gold had a few advantages, there were also some negatives.
The biggest negative was it was essentially an expensive nothing. Nothing was signed or bound in writing it Just was essentially a big party between the two. As well as this but there was a wrestling match between Henry and Francis which Henry lost. Henrys campaigns had few gains. The campaigns of 1512-13 were expensive and ultimately fruitless in the long term. It is clear that most of the foreign treaties failed and/or were ineffective, even though at the time they worked for a short amount of time.