‘Who was the Queen’s husband to be, and what power was he to have over the
government of the country? If he were a foreigner there was no way of
knowing what power he might get over the Queen, power which he would
very likely use for the good of a foreign country, and not for the good of
England. On the other hand, if he were an Englishman, he must be chosen
from among the Queen’s subjects, and then it was certain that there would be
jealousy and strife among all the great nobles in the country when they saw
one of their number picked out and make king over them.’ Written by the
historian Hugh Oakeley Arnold-Forster, in ‘A History of England’ (1898)
How convincing is this interpretation about the reasons why Elizabeth did not
get married?
Explain your answer using the interpretation and your own contextual
knowledge. (8 marks)
The interpretation gives a clear and detailed explanation of why Elizabeth decided
to never marry. It is very convincing because Arnold-Forster establishes the
consequences of taking a husband, considering how much power he would gain
and what influence he would have over the country. In taking a husband, Elizabeth
would lose a large amount of authority and control over England due to her
husband taking over her position as the ruling monarch. Additionally, it was
unclear to Elizabeth that if she decided to marry, whether a husband would benefit
the country. Arnold-Forster suggests that it might be more beneficial for the
‘foreign’ country rather than England. In the Elizabethan era, a sovereign was
regarded as holding supremacy over the entire country, while a husband would
hold a supreme dominion over his wife. Therefore, Elizabeth acknowledged that if
she married and became a mother, she would lose some of her power and instead,
decided to dedicate herself to the country and protect England’s security as well as
keeping her autonomy as Queen.
In addition, the interpretation is also very convincing as it explores the impact of
Elizabeth deciding to marry a foreign King. Marrying a foreign ruler would have
minor benefits as it would enable England to create a foreign alliance with another
foreign country and guarantee their support throughout any wars, thus creating a
strong alliance. However, in choosing not to marry Elizabeth would be able to keep
her options open in foreign affairs, which would allow her to become a strong
negotiator. Additionally, a foreign monarch would not benefit England as they
wouldn’t have the loyalty of the English people at heart. The country would also
experience foreign entanglements if she married a foreigner, which could lead to
the loss of Calais. Therefore, by choosing not to marry it allowed her to keep all of
her focus on the country as it was clear that there was no apparent successor.
Previously, Elizabeth’s sister, Mary, was married to King Philip II of Spain.
During their relationship, Philip rarely visited England because he was away
government of the country? If he were a foreigner there was no way of
knowing what power he might get over the Queen, power which he would
very likely use for the good of a foreign country, and not for the good of
England. On the other hand, if he were an Englishman, he must be chosen
from among the Queen’s subjects, and then it was certain that there would be
jealousy and strife among all the great nobles in the country when they saw
one of their number picked out and make king over them.’ Written by the
historian Hugh Oakeley Arnold-Forster, in ‘A History of England’ (1898)
How convincing is this interpretation about the reasons why Elizabeth did not
get married?
Explain your answer using the interpretation and your own contextual
knowledge. (8 marks)
The interpretation gives a clear and detailed explanation of why Elizabeth decided
to never marry. It is very convincing because Arnold-Forster establishes the
consequences of taking a husband, considering how much power he would gain
and what influence he would have over the country. In taking a husband, Elizabeth
would lose a large amount of authority and control over England due to her
husband taking over her position as the ruling monarch. Additionally, it was
unclear to Elizabeth that if she decided to marry, whether a husband would benefit
the country. Arnold-Forster suggests that it might be more beneficial for the
‘foreign’ country rather than England. In the Elizabethan era, a sovereign was
regarded as holding supremacy over the entire country, while a husband would
hold a supreme dominion over his wife. Therefore, Elizabeth acknowledged that if
she married and became a mother, she would lose some of her power and instead,
decided to dedicate herself to the country and protect England’s security as well as
keeping her autonomy as Queen.
In addition, the interpretation is also very convincing as it explores the impact of
Elizabeth deciding to marry a foreign King. Marrying a foreign ruler would have
minor benefits as it would enable England to create a foreign alliance with another
foreign country and guarantee their support throughout any wars, thus creating a
strong alliance. However, in choosing not to marry Elizabeth would be able to keep
her options open in foreign affairs, which would allow her to become a strong
negotiator. Additionally, a foreign monarch would not benefit England as they
wouldn’t have the loyalty of the English people at heart. The country would also
experience foreign entanglements if she married a foreigner, which could lead to
the loss of Calais. Therefore, by choosing not to marry it allowed her to keep all of
her focus on the country as it was clear that there was no apparent successor.
Previously, Elizabeth’s sister, Mary, was married to King Philip II of Spain.
During their relationship, Philip rarely visited England because he was away
