How far do these sources agree that supplying the troops was a significant problem for Henry in the French War of 1513?
Explain using sources 1, 2 and 3.
These sources all agree to an extent that supplying the troops for the French War was a significant problem for Henry, whether it was because he couldn’t transport the large scale of his troops, support them with necessary victuals or he had been over ambitious about the whole campaign. All sources give sufficient evidence that Henry and Wolsey physically couldn’t provide for England’s Army, however each source support that supplying the troops was a significant problem to a degree, but some situations were worse than the other situations that Henry was facing, as well as rooting from separate issues with nothing to do with the troops. For example the transportation aspect was a major problem which source 2 and 3 explains.
Source 2 and 3 agree on the potential problem of transporting ‘supplies, ordinance, artillery, victuals’. Source 2 voices this problem, ‘tonnage of fifty ships’ as it highlights that the large scale was the problem. Whereas source 3 highlights again another problem with supplying- how the actual transportation of the army and its supplies and getting it safely across the continent. However both show that supplying was a great problem. In source 3, for example it states ‘it is too great a shame to lose the ships that be lost.’- could not risk losing more men.
Source 1 and 2 disagree on the problems of supplying troop. Could argue that source 1 states that the problem is rooted from not having enough supplies, ‘no provision’. However source 2 written by Wolsey himself suggests that Henry VIII and Wolsey had their many ships under control with no problems at all, therefore supplying the troops was not a significant problem.
All 3 sources show that supplying the troops was a huge issue, and each focus on specific different issues. Source 1 the amount of fodder for the horses was unattainable and an unrealistic ambition. Source 2’s massive demands for provisions. Source 3 focuses on the dangerous crossing of the channel. Each source has an unattainable aspect to its aim because of Henrys large scale which was over ambitious completely.
The first source specifically agrees that Henry VIII was far too over ambitious in the French War, as it gives an insight to how areas were ‘consumed and destroyed’ which meant there were ‘no provision for hay for the horses’. This states how there was not enough food for animals and hardly any provisions in general. Source 3 reinforces and backs up source 1 as it shows how the crossing of the channel was dangerous but troops needed the provisions fast before starvation occurred, ‘I pray you send them in time’
It’s not surprising Source 1 states there were problems as both Richard Fox and Bishop of Winchester who wrote the source were loyal men to Henry VII and were Pro-peace, therefore that’s why the source presents the War as being problematic and bad. However as it was written in hindsight aspects were on point as significant problems were faced when not enough supplies were available. Source 2 written by Wolsey himself displays that his organisation with such a large scale was good and suggests that he was proving to Henry that he was a major asset to him, with his attempts to prepare for this large scale war. Through this source it becomes clear that Wolsey was trying to gain power and climb higher in Henrys eyes, therefore this is why it suggests completely different opinions of the French War to source 1 and source 3. Again source 3 written by Henry VII key advisers who didn’t like war and were pro-peace, which meant that at the time of War they were trying to re-enforce the true extent of problems when it came to getting supplies.
In conclusion, we could argue that all three show the importance of adequate supplies and source 1 and 3 focus on potential problems, source 2 shows the extent of the provisions and in so doing suggests the problems may be surmounted by careful preparations and logistics.