STEP 1 - PREPARE
Importantly you must do the reading of the documents for each section but you should really only have to read them once.
Using the reading and the interpretation sheets of Philip (A3 sheet and yellow card) pull together the interpretations of Philip on this topic area.
Put the reading and interpretations into a few summary sheets from which you can clearly revise.
Now look at the past papers is there anything you have missed and need to include in your summary sheets - add. Get the summary sheets right. Share with friends.
STEP 2 - NOW REVISE - repetition repetition repetition.
Keep revising from your summary sheets don't go back to the reading unless you really need to.
Create question cards about the topic, make lists or spider diagrams, get someone to test you, do plans for past paper essays, look at past passages etc.
Finally - good luck - final sprint now - remember what you put in, is what you take out!
EXAM ADVICE - I would serious spend some time looking at www.accesstohsitory.co.uk
Importantly look at the examiners advice, the exemplar answers which give good knowledge but provide good technique and examiner advice. Have a clear picture of what is expected.
A few key points would be -
Passages - Stick to the question focus throughout, read them quickly but carefully, plan by looking at comparison - do they support or challenge each other in terms of the question focus, use you own knowledge to support or challenge the views - this is the evaluation of the views. DON'T evaluate the provenance of the passages. Pull in alternative interpretations not mentioned. Reach a sound judgement against the question set.
Essays - PLAN focused clearly on the requirements of the question. Ensure there is a sense of debate throughout following a clear pattern of PEE. By starting each paragraph with a clear point connective such as 'Some historians argue...' Or 'Alternative argue ....', 'One key point is that...' 'One interpretations is that ....'. You must also reach a solid judgement that summarises the argument and answers the question. Have this in your mind as you plan and write the essay.
Tuesday 21 April 2009
Monday 20 April 2009
• How effectively did Philip govern Spain and his monarquia?
KEY AREAS OF STUDY
The character of Philip II and the nature of his government and administration, the problem of royal finances, the extent of Philip II's absolutism.
PAST PAPERS
To what extent was Philip II a prudent King?
Main reason for ineffective government was Philip’s personal weaknesses.
How effective was Philip in the administration of Spain?
Was Philip to blame for Spain financial problems?
Assess how far Philip II’s problems in governing mainland Spain were due to the Spanish administration system.
Assess the view that Philip II’s character caused serious problems in his rule of Spain.
How far do you agree that Philip II was a just ruler?
Discuss why Philip was unable to solve Spain’s financial problems.
Explain why historians disagree on the extent of Philip’s power over Spain.
How convincing is the view that Philip was an ‘absolute monarch’ in his rule of Mainland Spain?
Was it Philip’s indecisiveness or his determination that caused more problems in his ruling of mainland Spain?
ADVICE - there are really three aim areas here. Take one at a time.
1) Government and administration and Philip role within it - It is important that initially you have a clear picture of the positives and negatives of Philips government. Look at the personal style of Philip, the policies he followed in terms of running the Spanish government, the nature and make up of Spanish government, examples of successes and failures, his government inheritance.
2) Finance and the economy - clearly poor - but why? factors and their impact. Role of Philip, could it have been avoided? poor policies, reform? good policies?
3) Absolutism - did Philip have the powers to act above the law? what examples are there that he did this? what were the restraints on Philip acting as an absolute monarch? examples are there of these restraints in action? How was Philip's authority challenged by the Cortes, grandees, provinces e.g. Aragonese and Granada with Moriscos.
Interpretations? Overall - perhaps in theory but not in practice? Cortes was not a rubber stamp. Too many constraints etc.
In the final analysis it can be argued that Philip’s government was clearly not efficient – however how much blame can be placed on Philip is questionable. It would be simplistic to say he was totally to blame, yet it would appear mainly due to his style and floored policies that it is fair to say he was the most significant factor.
Philip’s Personal Style
Accused of being the Paper King – micro managing detail – checking consultas – focused on the trival - reluctant to deal with councils direct or as a whole – over reliance on secretaries like Gonzalo Perez – micro managing detail seen as being cautious and hesitant – e.g. Netherland 1566 hesitated eventually sent Alva but rebellion already over. G.Perez claimed the system of government was so slow that even a ‘cripple’ could keep up with it. Claims from the New World that if death came from Spain that they would all be immortal. Spider at the centre of an administrative web, the chief clerk of the Spanish empire.
El Prudente – other contemporaries saw Philip as being informed so that he could see the bigger picture and was making wise and prudent decisions. Following a ‘wait and see’ policy similar to Elizabeth I which frustrated ministers however avoided rash decisions and allowed for events to unfold.
Conciliar System
Created by Charles I for an absentee monarch while he fought in European wars. Philip inherited this system and continued with it despite being an ever present monarch. Expanded councils to meet needs e.g. Council of Portugal after 1580 and Council of war increased four fold. However this made things more difficult given Philip’s desire to micro manage government business. Over reliance on secretaries Perez affair showed the level of faction and influence they had. Later in life resorted to Juntas – which alienated certain advisors and perhaps showed a breakdown of the system.
Attempts to Centralise and codify all laws across his Kingdom
Based central government in Madrid 1561
Relationship with Cortes
Traditionally seen as a rubber stamp to Philip’s demands. However challenged him over taxation e.g. Millones and Aragonese revolt over fureos (liberties).
Ambassadors and couriers
Best in Europe. Ambassador at all the major courts therefore informed. Considering 16th century level of communication every good.
Atmosphere created by Philip
Biased towards Castilian appointments alienated other subjects/provinces. Didn’t leave Liberian Peninsular after 1559, arguable a progress to Netherlands would have helped prevent rebellions, could only speak Castilian with any expertise.
Faction
Encouraged faction – especially Eboli and Alva faction – believed create a healthy competitive environment also divide and rule approach to prevent dominance of one opinion / faction.
Negative effects – in fighting , disruption to government business, Perez affair
Creation of juntas towards end of his reign - alienated the majority outside of these informal committees
Relationship with Provinces
Communication issues made outlying areas such as the new world semi – autonomous
See – Castilian baised, centralization,
Absolute Monarch (acting above the law) – Black Legend of Philip
Theoretically absolute (range of powers), but in practice restricted – so what was he? Alternative interpretation
Absolute – Yes Challenged
Acting above the law – Dutch grandees / Perez Affair But actions in Netherlands legitimised by Spanish court
Desire to control government – paper king / centralisation in Madrid Self defeating
Rationalised laws and customs to increase control Backlash from Dutch – fear losing liberties
Cortes became a rubber stamp 1591 taxation issue forced to negotiate with Aragonese Cortes
Control of military and church
Able to respond to revolts 1566, 1568, 1590
Lynch – Church – Inquisition – taxation – relations with Pope
Patronage from military and church
Conciliar System – ultimately controlled by Philip – structure / appointments / decisions
Faction / Micro managing / size of Monarquia and ‘space-time’ , de-centralisation inevitable
Dutch revolt / Aragonese resisting challenge to Fueros
The character of Philip II and the nature of his government and administration, the problem of royal finances, the extent of Philip II's absolutism.
PAST PAPERS
To what extent was Philip II a prudent King?
Main reason for ineffective government was Philip’s personal weaknesses.
How effective was Philip in the administration of Spain?
Was Philip to blame for Spain financial problems?
Assess how far Philip II’s problems in governing mainland Spain were due to the Spanish administration system.
Assess the view that Philip II’s character caused serious problems in his rule of Spain.
How far do you agree that Philip II was a just ruler?
Discuss why Philip was unable to solve Spain’s financial problems.
Explain why historians disagree on the extent of Philip’s power over Spain.
How convincing is the view that Philip was an ‘absolute monarch’ in his rule of Mainland Spain?
Was it Philip’s indecisiveness or his determination that caused more problems in his ruling of mainland Spain?
ADVICE - there are really three aim areas here. Take one at a time.
1) Government and administration and Philip role within it - It is important that initially you have a clear picture of the positives and negatives of Philips government. Look at the personal style of Philip, the policies he followed in terms of running the Spanish government, the nature and make up of Spanish government, examples of successes and failures, his government inheritance.
2) Finance and the economy - clearly poor - but why? factors and their impact. Role of Philip, could it have been avoided? poor policies, reform? good policies?
3) Absolutism - did Philip have the powers to act above the law? what examples are there that he did this? what were the restraints on Philip acting as an absolute monarch? examples are there of these restraints in action? How was Philip's authority challenged by the Cortes, grandees, provinces e.g. Aragonese and Granada with Moriscos.
Interpretations? Overall - perhaps in theory but not in practice? Cortes was not a rubber stamp. Too many constraints etc.
In the final analysis it can be argued that Philip’s government was clearly not efficient – however how much blame can be placed on Philip is questionable. It would be simplistic to say he was totally to blame, yet it would appear mainly due to his style and floored policies that it is fair to say he was the most significant factor.
Philip’s Personal Style
Accused of being the Paper King – micro managing detail – checking consultas – focused on the trival - reluctant to deal with councils direct or as a whole – over reliance on secretaries like Gonzalo Perez – micro managing detail seen as being cautious and hesitant – e.g. Netherland 1566 hesitated eventually sent Alva but rebellion already over. G.Perez claimed the system of government was so slow that even a ‘cripple’ could keep up with it. Claims from the New World that if death came from Spain that they would all be immortal. Spider at the centre of an administrative web, the chief clerk of the Spanish empire.
El Prudente – other contemporaries saw Philip as being informed so that he could see the bigger picture and was making wise and prudent decisions. Following a ‘wait and see’ policy similar to Elizabeth I which frustrated ministers however avoided rash decisions and allowed for events to unfold.
Conciliar System
Created by Charles I for an absentee monarch while he fought in European wars. Philip inherited this system and continued with it despite being an ever present monarch. Expanded councils to meet needs e.g. Council of Portugal after 1580 and Council of war increased four fold. However this made things more difficult given Philip’s desire to micro manage government business. Over reliance on secretaries Perez affair showed the level of faction and influence they had. Later in life resorted to Juntas – which alienated certain advisors and perhaps showed a breakdown of the system.
Attempts to Centralise and codify all laws across his Kingdom
Based central government in Madrid 1561
Relationship with Cortes
Traditionally seen as a rubber stamp to Philip’s demands. However challenged him over taxation e.g. Millones and Aragonese revolt over fureos (liberties).
Ambassadors and couriers
Best in Europe. Ambassador at all the major courts therefore informed. Considering 16th century level of communication every good.
Atmosphere created by Philip
Biased towards Castilian appointments alienated other subjects/provinces. Didn’t leave Liberian Peninsular after 1559, arguable a progress to Netherlands would have helped prevent rebellions, could only speak Castilian with any expertise.
Faction
Encouraged faction – especially Eboli and Alva faction – believed create a healthy competitive environment also divide and rule approach to prevent dominance of one opinion / faction.
Negative effects – in fighting , disruption to government business, Perez affair
Creation of juntas towards end of his reign - alienated the majority outside of these informal committees
Relationship with Provinces
Communication issues made outlying areas such as the new world semi – autonomous
See – Castilian baised, centralization,
Absolute Monarch (acting above the law) – Black Legend of Philip
Theoretically absolute (range of powers), but in practice restricted – so what was he? Alternative interpretation
Absolute – Yes Challenged
Acting above the law – Dutch grandees / Perez Affair But actions in Netherlands legitimised by Spanish court
Desire to control government – paper king / centralisation in Madrid Self defeating
Rationalised laws and customs to increase control Backlash from Dutch – fear losing liberties
Cortes became a rubber stamp 1591 taxation issue forced to negotiate with Aragonese Cortes
Control of military and church
Able to respond to revolts 1566, 1568, 1590
Lynch – Church – Inquisition – taxation – relations with Pope
Patronage from military and church
Conciliar System – ultimately controlled by Philip – structure / appointments / decisions
Faction / Micro managing / size of Monarquia and ‘space-time’ , de-centralisation inevitable
Dutch revolt / Aragonese resisting challenge to Fueros
• Did Philip successfully honour his obligations to the church as 'The Most Catholic King'?
KEY AREAS OF STUDY
The relationship between the crown and the church (the Inquisition and the papacy), the causes of the Revolt of the Moriscos, the effect of Catholic reforms on popular beliefs in Spain.
PAST PAPERS
To what extent was Philip II the most catholic king?
How effectively did the Spanish inquisition fulfil its role in mainland Spain during the reign of Philip II?
How far did Philip II fulfil his duties as the ‘Catholic King’ in his dealings with the Spanish Church and the papacy?
To what extent did Philip’s policy towards the papacy fulfil his obligations as ‘the Most Catholic King’?
Assess how far Philip’s treatment of the Moriscos was consistent with his religious policy within Spain.
How far did the reign of Philip strengthen the Spanish church?
Explain why the role of the Spanish inquisition under Philip II has been the cause of controversy among historians.
Assess how far Philip's religious policy strengthened or weakened Spain.
How successful was Philip Ii as the ‘Most Catholic King’?
How successful was Philip in his religious policies?
A key area of the course is the religious policies that Philip II followed during his reign. He was given the title of ‘Most Catholic King’ and historians have debated whether he followed this role or acted according to other interests such as power, prestige, security, opportunist.
If Philip had placed Catholicism at the centre of his policies and if he had been successful he would have :
1)Remain a Devout Catholic
2)Eradicated heresy
3)Strengthened and reformed the church through the Tridentine decrees
4)Maintained a good relationship with the papacy
5)Defended Catholicism
6)Uniformity
7)Increase numbers within the Catholic faith
8)Maintain a positive reputation of the church
Devout Catholic
•Clear evidence that he was – attended mass / built Escorial
•Described by historians like Woodward as the ‘ Most Catholic King’
•P2 openly claimed he would not suffer heretics
•Historian Motley claims he was a Religious fanatic
•P2 saw his cause and gods as one
Eradicate Heresy
•Use of inquisition – Auto de fes – persecuting heretics and stamping out heresy
•Protestant Cells in Seville and Valladolid 1558 quickly stamped out
•Tridentine Decrees aimed at improving the faith and church to combat heresy
•Index introduced / Students stopped from studying aboard
•Limpieza (purity of blood) excluded conversos and moriscos from church orders.
•Criticised as being too repressive and leading to ‘black legend’ of P2, cutting Spain off culturally
•Impact debatable – only 45 inquisitors for population of 8 millions, relied on informers
•Nalle argues however that the inquisition was never marginal to the lives of people in Spain
•Kamen sees the inquisition have a role as a gigantic teaching machine helping to reform and educate Spain religiously
•However inquisition part of state not church under control of P2 – power abused over Perez affair when attempted to use inquisition to arrest Perez for political not religious reasons.
Reform the Church – Tridentine Decress
•Clear issues in structure of church and practice of the faith e.g. absenteeism, pagan practices, lack of resources, thinly spread, poor priesthood
•Tridentine Decrees finally introduced 1564 after negotiations being started at the Council of Trent by Philip’s father in 1546
•New bible / Seminaries established across Spain / New bishoprics / New bishops appointed e.g. Ribera
•Historian Kamen claims the decrees revolutionise the church (structure/organisation)
•Difficult to measure how effective in terms of the faith and uniformity – little evidence from lower orders – records from Toledo show that ability to recite Lord’s prayer rose from 40% 1555 to around 82% 1600
•However – church not fully supportive, only 20 seminaries, tridentine decrees only accepted gradually, semi pagan activities remained in rural areas, Kamen claims ‘ no more Christianized in 1600 than in 1500’, attempts to covert those in the New World only dilute the practice of Catholicism
•Reforms not at expense of own control
•P2 more interested in structural / admin change for his own authority than Spanish enlightenment
Relations with the Papacy
•Co-operation or conflict?
•Contemporaries claimed ‘ No Pope in Spain’ which shows P2’s power / control and Pope’s position/relationship
•Carranza Affair
•Excommunication of Elizabeth – P2 attempted to prevent this - clash
•War against Turks 1571 – co-operation however 1578 truce with Turks - clash
•Clashes over England – Pope keen for Armada earlier
•Continued war against Henry IV after conversion to Catholicism resulting in triple alliance 1596 against Spain of France, England and Dutch Rebels.
•Papacy tried to balance position between Sp and Fr didn’t wish to become over reliant on Sp or Fr
Final analysis
Maintained control of church and Spain remained united under Catholicism.
Did not face the civil unrest and religious wars experienced by France.
Very little heresy, church reformed but level of uniformity debatable.
Foreign policy – attempted to defend Catholicism however closer examination suggests more strategic than religious.
The relationship between the crown and the church (the Inquisition and the papacy), the causes of the Revolt of the Moriscos, the effect of Catholic reforms on popular beliefs in Spain.
PAST PAPERS
To what extent was Philip II the most catholic king?
How effectively did the Spanish inquisition fulfil its role in mainland Spain during the reign of Philip II?
How far did Philip II fulfil his duties as the ‘Catholic King’ in his dealings with the Spanish Church and the papacy?
To what extent did Philip’s policy towards the papacy fulfil his obligations as ‘the Most Catholic King’?
Assess how far Philip’s treatment of the Moriscos was consistent with his religious policy within Spain.
How far did the reign of Philip strengthen the Spanish church?
Explain why the role of the Spanish inquisition under Philip II has been the cause of controversy among historians.
Assess how far Philip's religious policy strengthened or weakened Spain.
How successful was Philip Ii as the ‘Most Catholic King’?
How successful was Philip in his religious policies?
A key area of the course is the religious policies that Philip II followed during his reign. He was given the title of ‘Most Catholic King’ and historians have debated whether he followed this role or acted according to other interests such as power, prestige, security, opportunist.
If Philip had placed Catholicism at the centre of his policies and if he had been successful he would have :
1)Remain a Devout Catholic
2)Eradicated heresy
3)Strengthened and reformed the church through the Tridentine decrees
4)Maintained a good relationship with the papacy
5)Defended Catholicism
6)Uniformity
7)Increase numbers within the Catholic faith
8)Maintain a positive reputation of the church
Devout Catholic
•Clear evidence that he was – attended mass / built Escorial
•Described by historians like Woodward as the ‘ Most Catholic King’
•P2 openly claimed he would not suffer heretics
•Historian Motley claims he was a Religious fanatic
•P2 saw his cause and gods as one
Eradicate Heresy
•Use of inquisition – Auto de fes – persecuting heretics and stamping out heresy
•Protestant Cells in Seville and Valladolid 1558 quickly stamped out
•Tridentine Decrees aimed at improving the faith and church to combat heresy
•Index introduced / Students stopped from studying aboard
•Limpieza (purity of blood) excluded conversos and moriscos from church orders.
•Criticised as being too repressive and leading to ‘black legend’ of P2, cutting Spain off culturally
•Impact debatable – only 45 inquisitors for population of 8 millions, relied on informers
•Nalle argues however that the inquisition was never marginal to the lives of people in Spain
•Kamen sees the inquisition have a role as a gigantic teaching machine helping to reform and educate Spain religiously
•However inquisition part of state not church under control of P2 – power abused over Perez affair when attempted to use inquisition to arrest Perez for political not religious reasons.
Reform the Church – Tridentine Decress
•Clear issues in structure of church and practice of the faith e.g. absenteeism, pagan practices, lack of resources, thinly spread, poor priesthood
•Tridentine Decrees finally introduced 1564 after negotiations being started at the Council of Trent by Philip’s father in 1546
•New bible / Seminaries established across Spain / New bishoprics / New bishops appointed e.g. Ribera
•Historian Kamen claims the decrees revolutionise the church (structure/organisation)
•Difficult to measure how effective in terms of the faith and uniformity – little evidence from lower orders – records from Toledo show that ability to recite Lord’s prayer rose from 40% 1555 to around 82% 1600
•However – church not fully supportive, only 20 seminaries, tridentine decrees only accepted gradually, semi pagan activities remained in rural areas, Kamen claims ‘ no more Christianized in 1600 than in 1500’, attempts to covert those in the New World only dilute the practice of Catholicism
•Reforms not at expense of own control
•P2 more interested in structural / admin change for his own authority than Spanish enlightenment
Relations with the Papacy
•Co-operation or conflict?
•Contemporaries claimed ‘ No Pope in Spain’ which shows P2’s power / control and Pope’s position/relationship
•Carranza Affair
•Excommunication of Elizabeth – P2 attempted to prevent this - clash
•War against Turks 1571 – co-operation however 1578 truce with Turks - clash
•Clashes over England – Pope keen for Armada earlier
•Continued war against Henry IV after conversion to Catholicism resulting in triple alliance 1596 against Spain of France, England and Dutch Rebels.
•Papacy tried to balance position between Sp and Fr didn’t wish to become over reliant on Sp or Fr
Final analysis
Maintained control of church and Spain remained united under Catholicism.
Did not face the civil unrest and religious wars experienced by France.
Very little heresy, church reformed but level of uniformity debatable.
Foreign policy – attempted to defend Catholicism however closer examination suggests more strategic than religious.
Inquisition
View more presentations from delnicholl.
• Why did Philip face revolt in the Netherlands and fail to suppress it?
KEY AREAS OF STUDY
The causes (1556-72) and general course (1572-98) of the Dutch Revolt, the responsibility for its outbreak, why Philip II was unable to suppress it.
PAST PAPERS
Was Philip to blame for the failure to crush the Dutch rebels?
Assess the extent to which the revolt of the Netherlands was caused by Philip’s reaction to the spread of Calvinism there during the period 1555-72.
Assess how far religion was the factor that determined Philip’s policy towards the Netherlands.
how far do you agree that Philip’s mistakes explain Spain’s failure to defeat the Dutch rebels by 1598?
Did the Dutch rebels challenge Philip’s rule primarily in defence of their liberties?
A key area of debate centres on Why the Spanish faced a revolt from their Dutch subjects that started initially in 1566 and again flared up in 1572, leading to a temporary alliance of all the 17 provinces against the Spanish with the Pacification of Ghent in 1576. After almost a continual state for war since 1572, the Spanish were eventually forced into the Twelve Year Truce of 1609, however war flared up again with the Dutch secured their full independence by 1648.
It is important to first understand two key things - firstly that the causes for the rebellion are many and can be linked to social, economic, financial, religious and political factors. Secondly that the revolt and its causes must be seen in terms of different phases for example the 1566 revolt arguably had stronger religious causes than the 1572 revolt and subsequent the escalation of the revolt in 1576 leading to the Pacification of Ghent can be linked to political and economic factors.
RELIGIOUS
Philip's intolerance of Calvinism and heresy generally - clashed with Dutch generally tolerant especially given Protestant neighbours who they traded with.
Fear of Inquisition being introduced - repression feared.
Reform - increase in number of Bishoprics led to Philip having greater control was they would be his appointments. This would erode th liberties, rights and political influence of the grandees in the provinces.
SOCIAL
Felt isolated - Dutch treated differently by Charles who was from the region and listened to their demands. Philip - Castilian biased, did not visit Netherlands after 1559, didn;t speak Dutch - alienated many.
ECONOMIC
Anti-heresy laws fear disruption to trade - Protetant neighbours and Calvinsit Dutch
1560's economic slump - linked to Philip's economic problems and bankruptcy
1571 Trade slump
FINANCIAL
10th and 20th Penny taxation demands of Alva - seen as excessive given economic issues and tax used against Dutch rebels.
POLITICAL
Relationship with Grandees and Netherlands - Charles Vs Philip different approach
Appointment of Margaret of Parma - female / lack of experience
Appointment of Granvelle - unpopular / erosion of Grandees role
Attempts at centralisation of political powers to States General by Philip
Philip forced to back down over garrison and Granvelle withdrawn
Exploitation of situation by Grandees - Compromise of the Nobility - forced Margaret of Parma to relax heresy laws only for the Iconoclastic riot to occur - Grandees helped restore order and showed their value and political leverage - showed their worth and therefore illustrated to Philip he should consider them in the governace of Netherlands. Philip ignored and sent Alva.
Sigovia Woods letter - hesitation and lack of decison from Philip.
Philip underestimated the extent of issues in Netherlands and was distracted by Turks e.g. 1560 Djerba 1565 Malta
Alva despatched after MOP and Grandees had resorted order - mistake
Alva's repressive measures e.g. Council of Troubles - harsh
Role of William of Orange - rallying point
Atrocities of Alva exploited by Dutch propaganda - fuelled rebellion e.g. massacre at Harrlem
Spanish Fury 1576 - Spanish troops munity in Antwerp - atrocities united all provinces against Spanish - all provinces agreed to the Pacification of Ghent main aim to rid Spanish from Netherlands. POG did not last as pronvinces disagreed on religious grounds.
Rebellion continued after 1576 largelky led by Northern provinces who later gained support of English (Treaty of Nonsuch 1585) and later the French and English (Triple Alliance).
The causes (1556-72) and general course (1572-98) of the Dutch Revolt, the responsibility for its outbreak, why Philip II was unable to suppress it.
PAST PAPERS
Was Philip to blame for the failure to crush the Dutch rebels?
Assess the extent to which the revolt of the Netherlands was caused by Philip’s reaction to the spread of Calvinism there during the period 1555-72.
Assess how far religion was the factor that determined Philip’s policy towards the Netherlands.
how far do you agree that Philip’s mistakes explain Spain’s failure to defeat the Dutch rebels by 1598?
Did the Dutch rebels challenge Philip’s rule primarily in defence of their liberties?
A key area of debate centres on Why the Spanish faced a revolt from their Dutch subjects that started initially in 1566 and again flared up in 1572, leading to a temporary alliance of all the 17 provinces against the Spanish with the Pacification of Ghent in 1576. After almost a continual state for war since 1572, the Spanish were eventually forced into the Twelve Year Truce of 1609, however war flared up again with the Dutch secured their full independence by 1648.
It is important to first understand two key things - firstly that the causes for the rebellion are many and can be linked to social, economic, financial, religious and political factors. Secondly that the revolt and its causes must be seen in terms of different phases for example the 1566 revolt arguably had stronger religious causes than the 1572 revolt and subsequent the escalation of the revolt in 1576 leading to the Pacification of Ghent can be linked to political and economic factors.
RELIGIOUS
Philip's intolerance of Calvinism and heresy generally - clashed with Dutch generally tolerant especially given Protestant neighbours who they traded with.
Fear of Inquisition being introduced - repression feared.
Reform - increase in number of Bishoprics led to Philip having greater control was they would be his appointments. This would erode th liberties, rights and political influence of the grandees in the provinces.
SOCIAL
Felt isolated - Dutch treated differently by Charles who was from the region and listened to their demands. Philip - Castilian biased, did not visit Netherlands after 1559, didn;t speak Dutch - alienated many.
ECONOMIC
Anti-heresy laws fear disruption to trade - Protetant neighbours and Calvinsit Dutch
1560's economic slump - linked to Philip's economic problems and bankruptcy
1571 Trade slump
FINANCIAL
10th and 20th Penny taxation demands of Alva - seen as excessive given economic issues and tax used against Dutch rebels.
POLITICAL
Relationship with Grandees and Netherlands - Charles Vs Philip different approach
Appointment of Margaret of Parma - female / lack of experience
Appointment of Granvelle - unpopular / erosion of Grandees role
Attempts at centralisation of political powers to States General by Philip
Philip forced to back down over garrison and Granvelle withdrawn
Exploitation of situation by Grandees - Compromise of the Nobility - forced Margaret of Parma to relax heresy laws only for the Iconoclastic riot to occur - Grandees helped restore order and showed their value and political leverage - showed their worth and therefore illustrated to Philip he should consider them in the governace of Netherlands. Philip ignored and sent Alva.
Sigovia Woods letter - hesitation and lack of decison from Philip.
Philip underestimated the extent of issues in Netherlands and was distracted by Turks e.g. 1560 Djerba 1565 Malta
Alva despatched after MOP and Grandees had resorted order - mistake
Alva's repressive measures e.g. Council of Troubles - harsh
Role of William of Orange - rallying point
Atrocities of Alva exploited by Dutch propaganda - fuelled rebellion e.g. massacre at Harrlem
Spanish Fury 1576 - Spanish troops munity in Antwerp - atrocities united all provinces against Spanish - all provinces agreed to the Pacification of Ghent main aim to rid Spanish from Netherlands. POG did not last as pronvinces disagreed on religious grounds.
Rebellion continued after 1576 largelky led by Northern provinces who later gained support of English (Treaty of Nonsuch 1585) and later the French and English (Triple Alliance).
Summary Of Failure
View more presentations from delnicholl.
• How far and why did Philip's foreign relations change in the course of his reign?
KEY AREAS OF STUDY
Philip's aims, strategies and relations with England, France, Portugal and the Ottoman Empire, turning-points in Philip's reign, an overall assessment in 1598.
PAST PAPERS
To what extent was Philip’s foreign policy ‘reactive’?
Consistent FP?
Assess how far Philip’s foreign policy followed a consistent strategy.
How far do you agree that Philip’s foreign strategies were responsible for the decline in relations with England during his reign?
To what extent was Philip’s foreign policy in the Mediterranean similar to that in Northern Europe?
how far do you agree that Philip’s foreign policy was defensive?
How far was upholding of Spanish prestige the main aim of Philip’s foreign policy?
Discuss the view that Philip’s foreign policy was inconsistent.
How far do you agree that Philip’s main priority in foreign policy was religion?
If Philip had died in 1584, his foreign policy would have been considered a success.’ How far do you agree?
How far do you agree that the Battle of Lepanton was the MAIN turning point in Philip's foreign policy?
Evaluate the reasons why Philip's foreign policy failed.
Interpretations: YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THE INTERPRETATIONS OF PHILIP'S FOREIGN POLICY - AS USUAL START B Y LOOKING AT THE YELLOW CARD AND THE A3 SHEETS OF HISTORIOGRAPHY. PULL OUT THE INTERPRETATIONS AND EVIDENCE. NOW LOOK AT THE KEY DOCUMENTS AND FIND THE POINTS, EVIDENCE, LINKS FOR THESE INTERPRETATIONS AND IF YOU CAN THE HISTORIANS YOU CLAIMED THEM. THIS IS CRUCIAL AND LIKELY TO BE IN THE EXAM.
Motives – defensive and dynastic
Aggressive imperialism
Religious = champion of Counter Reformation
National interests of Spain
Inherited strategy – Habsburg encirclement of France
Matrimonial imperialism
Grand Strategy – priorities
Pragmatic and opportunistic
Crisis management, inconsistent, disorganised
Examples: Djerba, Lepanto, Portugal
England – excommunication of Elizabeth, Nonsuch, Armada
France – Cateau–Cambresis, Joinville, war, Treaty of Vervins
Conclusion: generally, inconsistent in practice
HOW SUCCESSFUL WAS PHILIP'S FOREIGN POLICY?
A Grade Essay
If Philip II had died in 1584 his foreign policy would have been considered a success. How far do you agree?
PLAN
England – Mary I, Elizabeth I, Dutch, Nonsuch 1585, Armada, Triple Alliance 1596/ France – 1559 Cateau Cambresis, Elizabeth Valois, Civil Wars, Anjou 1584, Guise Family, Henry IV converted, Triple Alliance 1596 / Portugal – 1580 ‘Tipping Point’ / Turks – 1560 Djerba, 1565 Malta, 1571 Lepanto, ‘empty victory’ Cyprus, cost, truce 1578 criticised
The foreign policy of Philip II has been widely debated by historians. In some ways the foreign policy has been viewed as defensive up until the 1580’s and in the main a success, followed by a more aggressive policy after 1580 which characterised by the armada proved a failure. However this is obviously a simplistic view of Philip’s foreign policy as such events as Lepanto have been reassessed as an ‘empty victory and the need to be aggressive after 1580 a strategic necessity to safeguard Philip’s monarquia.
Philip’s foreign policy can be viewed as successful until 1584. Relations with England at the beginning of Philip’s reign were positive with his marriage to Mary, and following her death Philip made attempts to maintain a positive atmosphere by defending Elizabeth against the pope and even a marriage proposal. Even as the relationship deteriorated before 1584 due trade disputes and England’s involvement in the Dutch revolt relations had not reached war. Similarly Philip had secured the 1559 Treaty of Cateau Cambresis which kept France out of Italian affairs and paved the way for Philip to marry Elizabeth Valois. By 1584 France was becoming hamstrung by its own internal problems. Successes against the Turks and Portugal provide potential highpoints. Philip successful annexed Portugal in 1580 gaining important new lands, precious metals from the new world and Atlantic facing sea ports as well as the Portugese fleet. However these successes should not be exaggerated as the cost of defending Portugal and the fact that Portugal can be seen as the ‘tipping point’ for Philip becoming more Atlantic facing after 1580. Lepanto 1571 is often seen as a success against the Turks following the failure of Djerba 1560 and successful liberation of Malta 1565. However recently Lepanto has been seen as an empty victory, the Turks quickly recovered to take Cyprus, the huge cost to Spain and the resulting much criticised truce of 1578, arguably into which Philip was forced. Overall Philip seems to have successfully defended his monarquia until 1584, uniting the Iberian Peninsula, removing the Turkish threat from the Eastern Med. Added to which a France paralysed and bridges had not yet been burnt with England.
Following 1584 Philip’s foreign policy became more Atlantic facing and challenging given the issues with France and the Spanish Netherlands. The decline into war against England following the Treaty of Nonsuch 1585 and the failed Armada 1588 provide low points. Yet in defence of Philip, England needed to be challenged not just on a religious level but also strategically given its involvement in the Netherlands. However this decline coupled with Philip’s insistent attempts to stop the Protestant Henry Navarre coming to the French throne, despite his later Conversion to Catholicism over extended Spain and resulted in the Triple Alliance against Spain in 1596. Towards the end of Philip’s reign he would face war against France and England, as well as open rebellion in the Netherlands. Added to this a crippling financial costs and backward economy from which recovery was almost impossible.
In conclusion Philip’s foreign policy can be fairly assessed as successful until 1584, however a more aggressive policy, which perhaps could not be avoided, extended Spain’s resources to the limit with little prospect of success from a continuing struggle. Arguably the point at which Spain started to lose control of her Monarquia which would continued fragmenting of her power from this point onwards. 1584 had been the high point in Philip’s foreign policy.
Philip's aims, strategies and relations with England, France, Portugal and the Ottoman Empire, turning-points in Philip's reign, an overall assessment in 1598.
PAST PAPERS
To what extent was Philip’s foreign policy ‘reactive’?
Consistent FP?
Assess how far Philip’s foreign policy followed a consistent strategy.
How far do you agree that Philip’s foreign strategies were responsible for the decline in relations with England during his reign?
To what extent was Philip’s foreign policy in the Mediterranean similar to that in Northern Europe?
how far do you agree that Philip’s foreign policy was defensive?
How far was upholding of Spanish prestige the main aim of Philip’s foreign policy?
Discuss the view that Philip’s foreign policy was inconsistent.
How far do you agree that Philip’s main priority in foreign policy was religion?
If Philip had died in 1584, his foreign policy would have been considered a success.’ How far do you agree?
How far do you agree that the Battle of Lepanton was the MAIN turning point in Philip's foreign policy?
Evaluate the reasons why Philip's foreign policy failed.
Interpretations: YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THE INTERPRETATIONS OF PHILIP'S FOREIGN POLICY - AS USUAL START B Y LOOKING AT THE YELLOW CARD AND THE A3 SHEETS OF HISTORIOGRAPHY. PULL OUT THE INTERPRETATIONS AND EVIDENCE. NOW LOOK AT THE KEY DOCUMENTS AND FIND THE POINTS, EVIDENCE, LINKS FOR THESE INTERPRETATIONS AND IF YOU CAN THE HISTORIANS YOU CLAIMED THEM. THIS IS CRUCIAL AND LIKELY TO BE IN THE EXAM.
Motives – defensive and dynastic
Aggressive imperialism
Religious = champion of Counter Reformation
National interests of Spain
Inherited strategy – Habsburg encirclement of France
Matrimonial imperialism
Grand Strategy – priorities
Pragmatic and opportunistic
Crisis management, inconsistent, disorganised
Examples: Djerba, Lepanto, Portugal
England – excommunication of Elizabeth, Nonsuch, Armada
France – Cateau–Cambresis, Joinville, war, Treaty of Vervins
Conclusion: generally, inconsistent in practice
HOW SUCCESSFUL WAS PHILIP'S FOREIGN POLICY?
Successes Of Fp Summary
View more presentations from delnicholl.
A Grade Essay
If Philip II had died in 1584 his foreign policy would have been considered a success. How far do you agree?
PLAN
England – Mary I, Elizabeth I, Dutch, Nonsuch 1585, Armada, Triple Alliance 1596/ France – 1559 Cateau Cambresis, Elizabeth Valois, Civil Wars, Anjou 1584, Guise Family, Henry IV converted, Triple Alliance 1596 / Portugal – 1580 ‘Tipping Point’ / Turks – 1560 Djerba, 1565 Malta, 1571 Lepanto, ‘empty victory’ Cyprus, cost, truce 1578 criticised
The foreign policy of Philip II has been widely debated by historians. In some ways the foreign policy has been viewed as defensive up until the 1580’s and in the main a success, followed by a more aggressive policy after 1580 which characterised by the armada proved a failure. However this is obviously a simplistic view of Philip’s foreign policy as such events as Lepanto have been reassessed as an ‘empty victory and the need to be aggressive after 1580 a strategic necessity to safeguard Philip’s monarquia.
Philip’s foreign policy can be viewed as successful until 1584. Relations with England at the beginning of Philip’s reign were positive with his marriage to Mary, and following her death Philip made attempts to maintain a positive atmosphere by defending Elizabeth against the pope and even a marriage proposal. Even as the relationship deteriorated before 1584 due trade disputes and England’s involvement in the Dutch revolt relations had not reached war. Similarly Philip had secured the 1559 Treaty of Cateau Cambresis which kept France out of Italian affairs and paved the way for Philip to marry Elizabeth Valois. By 1584 France was becoming hamstrung by its own internal problems. Successes against the Turks and Portugal provide potential highpoints. Philip successful annexed Portugal in 1580 gaining important new lands, precious metals from the new world and Atlantic facing sea ports as well as the Portugese fleet. However these successes should not be exaggerated as the cost of defending Portugal and the fact that Portugal can be seen as the ‘tipping point’ for Philip becoming more Atlantic facing after 1580. Lepanto 1571 is often seen as a success against the Turks following the failure of Djerba 1560 and successful liberation of Malta 1565. However recently Lepanto has been seen as an empty victory, the Turks quickly recovered to take Cyprus, the huge cost to Spain and the resulting much criticised truce of 1578, arguably into which Philip was forced. Overall Philip seems to have successfully defended his monarquia until 1584, uniting the Iberian Peninsula, removing the Turkish threat from the Eastern Med. Added to which a France paralysed and bridges had not yet been burnt with England.
Following 1584 Philip’s foreign policy became more Atlantic facing and challenging given the issues with France and the Spanish Netherlands. The decline into war against England following the Treaty of Nonsuch 1585 and the failed Armada 1588 provide low points. Yet in defence of Philip, England needed to be challenged not just on a religious level but also strategically given its involvement in the Netherlands. However this decline coupled with Philip’s insistent attempts to stop the Protestant Henry Navarre coming to the French throne, despite his later Conversion to Catholicism over extended Spain and resulted in the Triple Alliance against Spain in 1596. Towards the end of Philip’s reign he would face war against France and England, as well as open rebellion in the Netherlands. Added to this a crippling financial costs and backward economy from which recovery was almost impossible.
In conclusion Philip’s foreign policy can be fairly assessed as successful until 1584, however a more aggressive policy, which perhaps could not be avoided, extended Spain’s resources to the limit with little prospect of success from a continuing struggle. Arguably the point at which Spain started to lose control of her Monarquia which would continued fragmenting of her power from this point onwards. 1584 had been the high point in Philip’s foreign policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
