Essay #1 on new monarchies:

The new monarchies were a period of diminishing elite’s with growing influence of middle class. The middle class is gaining more control and power. In France, Charles VII created the first royal army and used it to control nobles separate militias. When he died his son Louis XI improved upon his father’s army to control noble’s militias and curb urban independence. He used ruthlessness, something Machiavellian would have praised, so they called him the Spider King. Francis I and Pope Leo X established the treaty of Concordat of Bologna, which approved Pope’s right to receive income of the new bishops and Abbots and in return, Leo X recognized French rulers right to select bishops and abbots. Another development that strengthened the monarchy was the marriage of Louis XII to Anne of Brittany. This helped secure an International agreement just like the marriage of Henry VII eldest son, Arthur, to Ferdinand and Isabella’s daughter, Catherine of Aragon, in England. This marriage helped secure recognition of the Tudor Dynasty. Three rulers in England used methods that Machiavellian would praise like efficiency, secrecy and frugality to establish order. Edward IV and his brother Richard III, both had a foreign policy based off diplomacy to avoid expensive wars and this allowed them to not rely on parliament so to not give nobles power. Henry VIII didn’t do this so he had to call meeting of parliament a couple of times. This revealed his distrust of nobles and just like France; the center of royal authority was the middle class so most of his advisors were merchants and landowners. Another example that proves Henry’s distrust was his creation of the Star Chamber, which went after aristocratic threats to the monarchy and diminished their power. When Henry died he left England at peace domestically and internationally, which is another thing Machiavellian would have praised, results.

Essay #2 on Henry VIII and Luther

Henry VIII and Luther lived at the same time but had very different lives. However, in some ways their lives had interesting parallels. For both of them, their lives were all about changing the church. Luther’s motive was his need to have acceptance by god and see things right. Henry’s motive was his need for an heir. After studying St. Paul’s letters Luther arrived at a new understanding of the church; “Faith alone, grace alone, scripture alone”. He wrote his Ninety Five Theses on the power of indulgences and how it undermines the seriousness of penance and downplayed the importance of charity. His goal of the ninety-five theses was to reform the church, not overthrow it. Henry was married to Catherine of Aragon. Since she was his brother’s widow he needed special dispensation to marry her, which he got. After she didn’t give him a son he wanted to get the marriage annulled so he could marry Anne Boleyn. This would be unlikely that the pope would grant him this because when the pope gave him the dispensation to marry Catherine he was saying that the kinship was not an issue. To now grant an annulment saying that it was an issue would be admitting that he made a mistake in the first place. This would be supporting Luther’s claim that popes substituted their evil judgments for god and he doesn’t want to conceive fallibility. The Catholic Church had problems and Luther wanted to get them fixed. On the other hand, Henry had problems and he wanted the church to fix them. Since they weren’t, Henry decided to remove the English church from papal jurisdiction. In contrast, Luther never wanted to leave the church, only return it to its early teachings, although, with a move towards modernity. He believes any calling is genuine is gods eyes, he rejects celibacy, and a church is a “priesthood of all believers”. Lutheranism was attractive because it was simpler, more personal religious based on desire to return to early church. It also appeared to German nationalism when Luther translated the