Tudor Revolution in Henry Viii

Tudor Revolution in Henry Viii After the Tudor dynasty English government and kingship was never the same. The way the kings power switched from a Medieval system of hierarchy his control over his land was limited, to rule he needed support of the nobility and church and his parliament ineffective to an oligarchical government where the kings influenced penetrated his land, his nobility and within the government the power of the nobility shrank and the church became a secular concern. Government modernised through the centralisation of power and royal supremacy would rule. Parliaments importance would be re-invented and reforms to administration, law and justice, sovereignty and church power could be described as a revolution in government which under Henry VIIIs reformation of the church brought new opportunities for the consolidating of royal power. Cromwell reforms in the 1530s appear to be the turning point  [1]  . Although to say royal supremacy was an achievement, to say it occurred within the space of o ne decade seems restrictive and to say one man reformed a national government seems to simplistic, but looking at Henrys reign post-Cromwell Henry seemed more interested in his love life and war than gaining further reforms. Also Edward VI and Mary Is rules brought the return of factionalism, the return of power to the nobility and a decline in an effective government and Elizabeth, however, may have ruled stronger than her siblings the crown was never quite the same after Henry VIII died  [2]  , considering the damaged inflicted and the rising threat of the gentry and Puritanism which restricted her abilities to passstatueo prove that if there was a Tudor revolution, it must have happened under Cromwell. However, were Henrys and Cromwells reforms really a revolutionary? Hoak claims the rise of royal supremacy was emittable  [3]  but Elton, the theorist who invented the concept of the Tudor revolution believes although ideas may have been present, he remained the man who tur ned ideas into reality  [4]  , but surely this is admits if not him then someone else would have done it? Throughout this essay I will examine the areas of reforms instigated under Cromwell and Henry VIII as previous mentioned and examine whether they brought revolutionary change or were an obvious step towards secularisation. If there was a revolution in government it is necessary to look at the effects of the reformation on government control as the centralisation of the church was the first real break from Medieval tradition and ignited the want for royal supremacy. The church was the centre of life for the English population of all social rankings and therefore was the real center of power and whos alignments rested not with the king but with a foreigner power, the pope. The church had a separate court for which the kings power was exult  [5]  and bishops like Worsley had direct influence in the running of the government, and its law system and corruption within the church was greater than in government as Skeleton notes people did not come to court because there was better profit in attending cardinals rival court  [6]  . The church was a rival government within a government, it seems logical that to bring it under state control and historically, very much like the actions of Constantine the G reat, kingship has been restored to its full inheritance and endowed with the authority of the early Christian emperors  [7]  , however, although ironically it was a step back to go forward, how is learning from history revolutionary? The fact the backlash received from the nobility and populas was due to the feeling the church had too much land and power and disdain for the influence that a foreign body had within England  [8]  , suggest it was not such a radical idea as some made out to be, suggesting that others had contemplated it before. From this we can see a reformation of the church also caused a reformation of politics, but not necessarily a revolution. The break with the church inspired the idea of sovereignty and of commonwealth but where these new concepts? The idea of sovereignty of a unified self-governing free state, away from the authority of any sovereign potentates  [9]  appears certainly as a revolutionary in the history of English ruler-ship and as Elton suggests would have been the main driving forced spurring revolutionary change  [10]  as sovereignty consolidated Henrys land and government under Henrys control. Both Henry and Cromwell believed the House of Commons had to represent the whole nation  [11]  for the first time the entire nation would be under Westminsters control. The eliminated other small rivals courts those in Buckinghamshire and Sheffield  [12]  and brought Wales and northern counties under the kings rule for the first time, i.e. places like Durham  [13]  through Cromwell uses of councils and the influence of parliament in all the kingdom, i.e. even Calias had two seats in parliament  [14]  . Of course if under the control of parliament laws would be easier to enforce, regulate and to put the most loyal in control. On the other hand, this idea perhaps again is nothing but new, as Edward III during the Hundred Wars Year had created a national nobility and joined the country against the free of the French  [15]  , Henry and Cromwell likewise could have used the situation of the reformation to unite England using the same mentality against the Catholic church. The shifting use of power and effectiveness of parliament, however, does not seemed copied from the pages of history. Parliament Elton argues Henry VIIIs turning to parliament proved his supreme political genius; that his deliberate decision to take the nation â€Å"into partnership‚ was the most momentous step in the rise of parliament  [16]  , for Elton sovereignty created a duty and purpose for Parliament, however, it it seems Henry used parliament as a propaganda tool to promote the acceptance of change and show the link between the king and people  [17]  as Henrys supremacy was dependent on divine appointment and not parliament. However, from an administrative point of view Henry hereafter had a greater control over his kingdom, but parliament did not restrict Henrys decisions. This seems to point towards less of a governmental revolution and more towards a despotic government, historians like Gardiner have alleged Cromwell used his power more as an autocratic weapon  [18]  and Pollard portrays Cromwell especially like some Machveillian monster  [19]  , which both suggest the real intentions of Henry and Cromwells government. However, perhaps this could be interpreted as the Tudor revolution, considering other historic despotic governments, like Communist Russia, although a modern comparison, it was still a revolution of politics and considering politically, socially and economically almost resembled a Medieval state, it does become a fair comparison. Regardless of this parliament became an effective organ of government and brought reforms to the law and juridical system, the church and administration. Cromwells administration produced the largest body of statues seen before the 19th Century  [20]  , most centred on the church and many laws were to do with kings affairs i.e. Henry VIII passed 81 bills in his interest, though considering he was trying to legitimise a marriage to Ann Boleyn, its hardly surprising, but none the less a groundbreaking swift from Medieval politics. However, Roskel believes parliament developed from its Medieval roots and that by a natural process (the need for secularisation perhaps) and not the product of a Tudor revolution as the only change was a new theory of parliament and in the process drastically altered the practice  [21]  . The perfect example of this is the Privy council and demonstrates the need to remove the problems of factions and power which the nobility held. The Privy council had existed before Henry and Cromwell but the way it was used differed greater. The council would be an important link between parliament and the king and power came down only to those the king choose and old knightly elements were reduced to a few significant roles. The number of members decreased and meant those in power could not and made it easier to pass laws and to avoid factions, i.e. Henry VIIs council of 1472 included 72 men, whereas Henrys first had only 19  [22]  and members now had to have worked within the government before they could be in the council  [23]  , therefore this new system would exclude the majority of the nobility who might only serve their own interests. This can certainly be viewed as a revolutionary change, like the church the nobility was another thorn in the side of many English kings, although the council cut out the use of the nobility it was not a political instrument for assuaging opposition  [24]  , concessions still had to be made and therefore could not be completely revolutionary as the nobility were key important in keeping regional control. The most significant change perhaps was that the council could pass laws by proclamation and unlike its European counterparts in Spain and France who could only advise the king  [25]  , whereas the English privy council was able to influence and intervene the kings decisions, this reflects a comprising relationship where although Henry had royal supremacy he did not have a complete free reign over policy which shows policy being built on the existing governments foundations which lead to the improvement of the common law and the function of parliament  [26]  , but were these improvements revolutionary? Henrys reign was built on law and reforms to the common law and the judicial system from the 1530s onward they began to obey statue in a way they had never done before  [27]  , for the first time on a national level the process by which parliament made laws and court administrated them was enforced throughout the land. From 1532 for the first time the government conceived legalisation became the new focus in the houses, this was something which Elton says no one ever dreamt of establishing  [28]  changes in the law through Parliament, this was truly revolutionary. This shift towards the creating and then enforcing on law was something which had not happened under Medieval governments. Henry had control over both religious and regional courts, he had the ability to appoint judges and juries and unlike any other point made it seems a decision that was not emittable or the result of natural change as there had been no demand for a stricter enforcement of the law. Changes within the administration system also could be described as revolutionary. Administration benefited hugely from Cromwells policies and the outcome of the reformation. The change of law lands over church properties brought plenty of money into the The crowns new revenue courts showed the move towards the elimination of purely personal in favour of lasting bureaucratic control  [29]  . Henry said wherein we as head and you members are conjured and knit together into one body of politic  [30]   basically organic view of state in harmony and mutually dependent on its subjects. Although idea around since Dudleys Tree of Commonwealth (1509) and practised by Henry VII though Cromwell brought a renewed vigour in the practice.

I Have Limitations :: Personal Narrative, Autobiographical Essay

I Have Limitations As I sat in the grass of Burke County's football field that fateful day in May, my brain was cluttered with questions and thoughts. I was busy making mental notes. Stay low, snap your trail leg, and run when you hit the ground, my mind nagged. Instinctively, I put on my running spikes, removed my warm-ups, and stretched my muscles. My concentration was interrupted as the speakers boomed, "Third and final call for all 100-meter low hurdles." In a blur I was on the starting line, staring down a horizon filled with hurdles. Beat them to the first hurdle with a quick start, and you have a chance to win. CRACK! The startling noise the gun made brought me back to reality. Clearing the first hurdle in perfect form, I ran with all my might. I lunged toward the finish line after I soared over the final hurdle. Looking ahead of me, I saw only one other runner. I had qualified for the regional finals! My coach's smile said everything I wanted to hear. Walking off the rubber track, my heart was at the same time both light and heavy. I was thrilled by my qualification, but I knew the next day would be horrid. Coach Gaddy firmly said, "You know what you have to do to advance." Finally, following what seemed like an eternity, Friday arrived. After dwelling on the race, I had butterflies the size of pelicans waiting for the opportunity to take me away. While running a warm-up lap, I realized I had let my tension get the best of me. My leg muscles felt like rocks. All you need to do is focus and put things in place. Just then, coach tapped me on the shoulder. He had been informed that I had the third fastest time in my heat, and I would be running in lane five. "Run the best race of your life, and you have a great chance at going to state," he said. I was relieved to know I only needed to recover one place to advance. My fears slowly and gently began to subside, and my confidence started to build. While I was engrossed in my wind sprints, I heard, "Second call, all 100-meter low hurdles.

Hamlet Gray or Dorian Hamlet

Throughout the play Hamlet we see the themes of obsession and good vs. evil, Hamlet struggles with his inner demons until his tragic and untimely death. In the novel The Picture of Dorian Gray we meet a character that is very similar to Hamlet in his continuous struggles with his good vs. evil persona and obsession with youth. Many character is Oscar Wilde’s, Dorian Gray represent those of Hamlet. Both Dorian Gray and Hamlet who have love interest that both happen to die in the midst of Hamlet and Gray’s battle within them selves. All though not all characters are represented you see a pattern with the minor character that help show the tragic hero’s true intentions. Both Hamlet and Dorian Gray struggle with obsession through their lives. While Hamlet’s is more of an obsession with avenging his father’s death while Dorian Gray obsesses over youth and beauty. Hamlet is obviously the more likable character but is makes you wonder how did Oscar Wilde m ake his audience able relate to Dorian, a greedy, evil and selfish human being?Although Hamlet had a peculiar way of showing his love and devotion to his father the reader can still understand why he would seek revenge and obsess over his death, Shakespeare show’s us Hamlet’s true intentions with his famous and lengthy soliloquys. Dorian Gray’s entire philosophy is based off selfishness. Hamlet, unlike Dorian feels guilt for is crimes until the death of Claudius while Dorian Gray puts himself in a false sense of security, while his conscience often thinks about repenting he slowly falls deeper and deeper into evil with the help of The Yellow Book and Lord Henry.Good vs. Evil is large contrast in both novels; both characters suffer with their Evil side but only Hamlet makes an attempt to redeem himself. Towards the end of his life Hamlet attempts to apologize for the deaths of Laertes father and sister, Ophelia and Polonius, He is even upset about the death of La ertes whom he didn’t mean to kill. Dorian Gray on the other hand hardly mourns for the death of his ex-fiancà © Sybil, and take’s great relief in the  deaths of James, Sybil’s brother who comes to avenge her death, his admirer Basil and former friend Alan.While he tries to hide his hypocrisy by constantly false repenting his portrait continues to grow in horror and eventually shows the transformation of what an evil soul he has become. Hamlet, the tragic character who finally realizes toward the end of the play all the pain and suffering he has caused apologizes, dying and noble and honorable death. Dorian Gray on the other hand dies by his own hand, killing himself by stabbing, a death that is neither honorable nor noble.Although the reader could see that Dorian Gray’s last action before death is his way of showing guilt. He can no longer stand the stain on his empty and black soul and kill’s himself, finally showing the true Dorian Gray. Doria n and Hamlet both resemble the obsessive and even murderous side but where they differ is that Hamlet has a conscious unlike his counterpart, Dorian Gray

The Top 5 Flawed But Brilliant Ancient Philosophers