pls, can someone tell me, pls.
Why Did The Spanish Armada Attack England?
#1
Posted 13 January 2008 - 06:21 PM
pls, can someone tell me, pls.
#2
Posted 13 January 2008 - 11:10 PM
This is a good simple overview - http://www.historyle...nish_armada.htm
Some detailed pages from the BBC - http://www.bbc.co.uk...armada_01.shtml
And is is a VERY detailed article if you want to go deep - http://www.historybu...refarmada1.html
#3
Posted 04 February 2008 - 10:50 PM
Hey ,, ii think the spanish armada attacked England because Phillip 2nd wanted to put an catholic back on the thronewhy did the spanish armada attack England?
pls, can someone tell me, pls.
#4
Posted 04 February 2008 - 11:05 PM
Welcome, Becca BabesHey ,, ii think the spanish armada attacked England because Phillip 2nd wanted to put an catholic back on the thronewhy did the spanish armada attack England?
pls, can someone tell me, pls.
You think 100% right.
He wanted Phillip II on the English throne!
#5
Posted 18 February 2008 - 08:03 PM
didnt King Phillip II want to place not himself or any other from his country but except place an English Catholic, I think it was the Cardinal at the time, so I didnt invade as such, I would call it an religious invasion, trying to invade and then changing the religion round not invading it for ownership of the land.
#6
Posted 18 February 2008 - 09:01 PM
Secondly - WHAT AN INTERESTING IDEA!
It's no wonder you got an 8a for your essay!
I do, however, fear that you've got hold of the wrong end of the stick.
It IS true that Philip claimed that he was invading England for religion, not for the throne.
After the Armada, he wrote:
But this does not mean that he did not intend to become king when the Armada had succeeded.'God is my witness, that it was not the desire to gain new kingdoms that guided me, but the zeal for his service and the hope of glorifying the holy faith.'
Philip had a claim, through his marriage to Mary, to the English throne - I cannot see him overturning all the rules of legitimate succession to put a Cardinal on the throne.
And as for this 'Cardinal' I am almost certain that you mean Cardinal Allen, whose attack on Elizabeth after the execution of Mary Queen of Scots can be said to be the start of the war between Spain and England. Note what wikipedia (I grant, hardly the most reliable source - but nevertheless) says:
William Allen (1532 – 16 October , 1594) was an English Roman Catholic priest and cardinal. Allen helped plan the Spanish Armada's invasion of England, and was to have been Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor had it succeeded.
Philip had Allen created Cardinal to give his invasion moral clout, and he intended to make him Archbishop after the Armada succeeded, but king? Nah.
Philip did not WANT to be king of England, and would have preferred to see another Catholic on the throne, but the death of Mary QofS removed the last possible alternative candidate, and forced him to pursue his own claims.
I would be happy to be wrong on this - what is your evidence to the contrary?
1. What's your source?
2. Can you track down the name of the Cardinal whom you think was to be king?
#7
Posted 21 February 2008 - 03:14 PM
http://www.theothers...span-armada.htm - Source
Cardinal William Allen was the name
Who knows what could of happened. King Phillipe could of decided to make England part of the Spanish Empire or leave it independant but under religious control of the catholic relgion.
#8
Posted 24 February 2008 - 09:15 PM
#9
Posted 25 April 2009 - 01:30 AM
#10
Posted 01 November 2011 - 06:28 PM
I am now going to put that in MY piece of work if you don't mind
THANKS EVERY ONE
#11
Posted 22 April 2012 - 06:16 PM
#12
Posted 22 April 2012 - 06:26 PM
Said by: MrJohnDClare
'God is my witness, that it was not the desire to gain new kingdoms that guided me, but the zeal for his service and the hope of glorifying the holy faith.'
Am I right in saying that Philip Himself said this??
Please get back its for my essay for school in for thursday!
#13
Posted 22 April 2012 - 07:18 PM
I'm glad you've found it helpful so far. We will get back to you on the quote soon.
#14
Posted 23 April 2012 - 06:38 PM
#15
Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:23 PM
I can't find where I got it from now, but Philip II DID say it, and it is quoted in John C Rule, The character of Philip II: the problem of moral judgments in history, and also in Neville Williams, The sea dogs: privateers, plunder and piracy in the Elizabethan age.ok thanks
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users










