The Student Room Group

Henry VII essay help

Just wondering if anyone could help with this question. "How far was Henry VII successful in consolidating his Royal authority" (1485-1509)
DID consolidate: you could include his marriage to Elizabeth of York, he avoided involvement in foreign wars, use of parliament in 1485 to legitimise his kingship, reduced rebellion threats by only demanding taxation from Parliament 3 times (1489, 1491, 1497)

DIDN'T (I think this is the weaker side personally) His 'antinoble' attitude alienated the gentry, England was isolated from other foreign countries and left out of the Leaugue of Cambrai, the long and serious threats of rebellions (he failed to deal with them
effectively) BUT his reign was never under serious threat...

.... There's a lot here so I hope it makes sense and helps! Best of luck writing the essay x
Original post by Beccaaaaaaaaa
DID consolidate: you could include his marriage to Elizabeth of York, he avoided involvement in foreign wars, use of parliament in 1485 to legitimise his kingship, reduced rebellion threats by only demanding taxation from Parliament 3 times (1489, 1491, 1497)

DIDN'T (I think this is the weaker side personally) His 'antinoble' attitude alienated the gentry, England was isolated from other foreign countries and left out of the Leaugue of Cambrai, the long and serious threats of rebellions (he failed to deal with them
effectively) BUT his reign was never under serious threat...

.... There's a lot here so I hope it makes sense and helps! Best of luck writing the essay x


This is a good answer, except the thing I've highlighted. He did deal with rebellions effectively as he stayed in power!!!

I'd do this question in a more thematic way, though.
So like:
He did = Ended WoR and established dynasty (with marriage, heirs and spares and Battle of Stoke), tamed the nobility (he wasn't anti noble, tbh, that's a very old fashioned view), and left a solvent and lawful country
Duda't: Plagued by rebellion, alienated nobility, left isolated country
Original post by Rachel58
This is a good answer, except the thing I've highlighted. He did deal with rebellions effectively as he stayed in power!!!

I'd do this question in a more thematic way, though.
So like:
He did = Ended WoR and established dynasty (with marriage, heirs and spares and Battle of Stoke), tamed the nobility (he wasn't anti noble, tbh, that's a very old fashioned view), and left a solvent and lawful country
Duda't: Plagued by rebellion, alienated nobility, left isolated country


I agree with you, that's why I included that his reign was never under serious threat... A high level essay will consider the weaker side but then state why it is not as significant as the stronger side.
Original post by Beccaaaaaaaaa
I agree with you, that's why I included that his reign was never under serious threat... A high level essay will consider the weaker side but then state why it is not as significant as the stronger side.


Yes, but to say he didn't deal with them effectively is just wrong, rather than considering both sides of the argument.

To discuss the negatives of the rebellions, you can say how they were constant through his reign so he never felt secure in his throne and how he couldn't have have an amazing foreign policy as rebellions stopped him being able to tax Cornwall and Yorkshire.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending