Henry VIII practice essay 4
Question
Assess the reasons for Wolsey’s fall from power.
Response
Failure of domestic policies, lack of support among the nobility
Failure of foreign policy, Battle of Pavia
Inability to secure Henry’s divorce
Wolsey’s fall from power was caused by a number of factors, the first of which lies in the
dislike of his domestic policies among the nobility. In view of Wolsey’s humble background – he was
a butcher’s son – the nobility resented his rise to the position of the Henry VII’s right-hand-man, as
they believed themselves to be the natural advisors to the king. The relationship was worsened by
Wolsey’s modification to the law of Star Chamber in 1516, which stated that nobleman should not
see themselves as above the law. The clash between the Lord Chancellor and the Duke of
Buckingham has led some historians to label Wolsey a ‘tyrant’, as the Duke was executed for treason
in May 1521 for simply opposing Wolsey. It is possible to argue that the support of the nobility could
have saved Wolsey when he needed powerful backers to counter the king’s growing dissatisfaction
with his policies, so his unpopularity was crucial to his fall from power. Bindoff (1969) has contended
that Wolsey’s failed domestic policies were a contributing factor to Henry VIII’s increasing lack of
trust in him and that ‘Wolsey’s administration was a period of much promise but little performance’.
It is true that Wolsey did not exploit the usefulness of Parliament, unlike his successor (Thomas
Cromwell), and the mistrust with which he viewed the democratic institution gives credence to the
view that he was a tyrant, who was therefore not saved by the ruling elites when the king lost faith
in him. Furthermore, the Amicable Grant of 1523 proved to be a huge source of opposition and a
great failure on Wolsey’s part; he only managed to raise £300,000 instead of the intended £800,000
because of the widespread resistance that met the tax. As a result, there was a genuine danger of
popular revolt against the government, which to Henry VIII meant that Wolsey’s position had
become untenable.
The Amicable Grant was an attempt to satisfy the king’s xenophobic desire for success in
war, so there were damning consequences also in Wolsey’s foreign policy. Although the cardinal’s
rise had been characterised by his prowess as a wartime organiser in the First French War, his
performance thereafter had arguably been less successful. Wolsey’s position as a yes-man to the
king helped lead to the economic crisis of the nation that pervaded the rest of the reign. This
frustrated Henry, who was subsequently not able to achieve his aims of gaining the French crown.
Wolsey focused on a policy of diplomacy to mask England’s financial weakness, however this proved
to be unsuccessful and did not appease his master. The Field of the Cloth of Gold was more a case of
style over substance as no useful agreement was reached between France and England, actually
exacerbating the mutual dislike of the two kings according to the Venetian ambassador. More
importantly, the event organised by Wolsey led to a deterioration in Anglo-Imperial relations
because Charles V felt that Henry was siding with Francis I. As a result, Wolsey had procured the
political isolation of the kingdom, which further encouraged the king that his fall from power was
necessary. The Lord Chancellor’s greatest failure in foreign policy came during the Second French
War, as he made the decision to abandon Charles V only moments before the Imperial monarch’s
stunning victory at the Battle of Pavia. Consequently, the opportunity was missed to declare Henry
VIII king of France, as Charles resented England’s desertion and viewed them with mistrust
Question
Assess the reasons for Wolsey’s fall from power.
Response
Failure of domestic policies, lack of support among the nobility
Failure of foreign policy, Battle of Pavia
Inability to secure Henry’s divorce
Wolsey’s fall from power was caused by a number of factors, the first of which lies in the
dislike of his domestic policies among the nobility. In view of Wolsey’s humble background – he was
a butcher’s son – the nobility resented his rise to the position of the Henry VII’s right-hand-man, as
they believed themselves to be the natural advisors to the king. The relationship was worsened by
Wolsey’s modification to the law of Star Chamber in 1516, which stated that nobleman should not
see themselves as above the law. The clash between the Lord Chancellor and the Duke of
Buckingham has led some historians to label Wolsey a ‘tyrant’, as the Duke was executed for treason
in May 1521 for simply opposing Wolsey. It is possible to argue that the support of the nobility could
have saved Wolsey when he needed powerful backers to counter the king’s growing dissatisfaction
with his policies, so his unpopularity was crucial to his fall from power. Bindoff (1969) has contended
that Wolsey’s failed domestic policies were a contributing factor to Henry VIII’s increasing lack of
trust in him and that ‘Wolsey’s administration was a period of much promise but little performance’.
It is true that Wolsey did not exploit the usefulness of Parliament, unlike his successor (Thomas
Cromwell), and the mistrust with which he viewed the democratic institution gives credence to the
view that he was a tyrant, who was therefore not saved by the ruling elites when the king lost faith
in him. Furthermore, the Amicable Grant of 1523 proved to be a huge source of opposition and a
great failure on Wolsey’s part; he only managed to raise £300,000 instead of the intended £800,000
because of the widespread resistance that met the tax. As a result, there was a genuine danger of
popular revolt against the government, which to Henry VIII meant that Wolsey’s position had
become untenable.
The Amicable Grant was an attempt to satisfy the king’s xenophobic desire for success in
war, so there were damning consequences also in Wolsey’s foreign policy. Although the cardinal’s
rise had been characterised by his prowess as a wartime organiser in the First French War, his
performance thereafter had arguably been less successful. Wolsey’s position as a yes-man to the
king helped lead to the economic crisis of the nation that pervaded the rest of the reign. This
frustrated Henry, who was subsequently not able to achieve his aims of gaining the French crown.
Wolsey focused on a policy of diplomacy to mask England’s financial weakness, however this proved
to be unsuccessful and did not appease his master. The Field of the Cloth of Gold was more a case of
style over substance as no useful agreement was reached between France and England, actually
exacerbating the mutual dislike of the two kings according to the Venetian ambassador. More
importantly, the event organised by Wolsey led to a deterioration in Anglo-Imperial relations
because Charles V felt that Henry was siding with Francis I. As a result, Wolsey had procured the
political isolation of the kingdom, which further encouraged the king that his fall from power was
necessary. The Lord Chancellor’s greatest failure in foreign policy came during the Second French
War, as he made the decision to abandon Charles V only moments before the Imperial monarch’s
stunning victory at the Battle of Pavia. Consequently, the opportunity was missed to declare Henry
VIII king of France, as Charles resented England’s desertion and viewed them with mistrust
