‘The King’s minister’s served Henry VIII well’; ‘They served themselves better’; To what extent did Cromwell serve HVIII better than Wolsey? (1515-1540)
Paragraph 1: Wolsey domestic policy Paragraph 2: Wolsey foreign policy
A plausible, if ultimately flawed, case can be made that Wolsey served himself ‘better’ than Henry There is some weight to the view that in foreign policy, Wolsey served himself better than Henry,
in that he implemented domestic reforms designed to ensure his political supremacy. The operating at the centre of England’s diplomatic negotiations. With the 1518 Treaty of London,
clearest example of this is the 1526 Eltham Ordinance, which reduced the number of Gentlemen Wolsey emerged as a leading diplomat, reflecting his Humanist learning and even earning him the
of the Privy Chamber and secured the removal of the Groom of the Stool, William Compton, title of ‘papal legate’. Wolsey thus seemed to eclipse Henry in foreign policy, advancing his own
replacing him with the more complaint Henry Norris. Although this reform did serve Henry ‘well’, pacifist agenda and garnering widespread recognition for his role. Indeed, the 1526 Treaty of
reforming the finances of the council, this appears to suggest that Wolsey was served ‘better’ by Hampton Court was named after Wolsey’s own palace, and also embodied his Humanist learning,
this upheaval of the system as it allowed him to bolster his political authority. Likewise, the Court securing peace between England and France. Although these treaties did serve Henry well,
of Star Chamber served Henry well in that it dispensed affordable and impartial justice – but it protecting England’s national interest by securing peace with countries where necessary, they
was used by Wolsey as a mechanism to enforce greater control of the councillors, the nobility, arguably served Wolsey better, as they allowed him to advance his humanist agenda and
and local magistrates. Wolsey often had underlying aim of pursuing vendetta against those who positioned Wolsey as a leading diplomat.
had previously opposed him – took precedent over dispensing impartial and equitable justice.
Wolsey also overturned common law decisions that adversely affected him. As John Guy notes,
Wolsey ‘offered justice to the poor partly in order to strike back at those among the rich who
were his opponents’, corroborating the view that Wolsey served Henry well, but served himself
better.
However, the more convincing argument remains that Wolsey’s domestic policy served the king’s However, it is more compelling to argue that Wolsey’s foreign policy were more oriented towards
wishes ‘better’ than his own, as the reforms implemented were far more effective in the king’s wishes, as they were directed towards the fulfilment of Henry’s desire for glory. The
strengthening royal authority than advancing Wolsey’s political agenda. For instance, the Star benefits for Henry from the Treaty of London far exceeded the recognition gained by Wolsey:
Chamber ensured that Royal Authority was maintained, particularly in the counties. Wolsey England had been isolated from mainstream European politics (Ferdinand of Aragon had died and
oversaw the execution of the Duke of Buckingham in 1521, eliminating a potential threat to was replaced w/ Charles I, who made peace w/ Francis, as did Maximilian HRE – England’s anti-
Henry’s dynastic authority – thus serving Henry better. Wolsey’s reforms to law and order French policy thus turned on its head. ToL was an international treaty of universal peace which
tightened Henry’s control over the nobility – e.g. between 1516 and 1518, the Earl of was subscribed to by over 20 EU leaders – including Francis, Maximilian Charles and the Pope –
Northumberland, Lord Burgavenny, the Marquess of Dorset, Sir Andrew Windsor, and Sir Robert reintegrated England into diplomatic sphere and ensured was not isolated following Charles and
Sheffield were forced to appear before the Chancellor in the Start Chamber. Moreover, Wolsey – Maximilian’s pacts w/ France.
rather than Henry – absorbed the political fallout from the controversial fixed subsidies forced Equally, at June 1520 Field of the Cloth of Gold, Wolsey demonstrated remarkable organisational
through Parliament in 1523, further illustrating how he served the king better than himself. abilities – served HVIII – e.g. organised a train of 6000 to follow and attend on the King, and
Wolsey also centralised control of the Church – intervened in 20 monastic elections, further showed sensitivity e.g. ensured the French Court reshaped so neither Henry nor Francis had
strengthening Henry’s royal authority. It would be difficult to argue, then, that Wolsey’s domestic geographical advantage. Though a plausible, if tenuous, case can be made that Wolsey’s aim here
policy largely served his own agenda rather than that of Henry, as the repressive mechanisms was simply to win the king’s favour, his actions nonetheless served Henry better by uniting him
leveraged against potential threats upheld royal authority, and Wolsey shielded Henry from any w/ Francis and constructing image worthy of a king.
political fallout. Equally, it was Wolsey who suspended trade with the Netherlands as a diplomatic tool to force
the Habsburgs to further the annulment policy – he absorbed the political fallout/ protest from
the English cloth workers who were dependent on the Antwerp markets.
Paragraph 3 Cromwell Overall judgement
1. Cromwell oversaw creation of specialised departments – e.g. in 1536 the Court of
Augmentations was established to process income from the dissolution of the
monasteries. Crown income increased from £150,000 to £300,000. Elton’s thesis
