vDid Wolsey and Henry have an effective foreign policy during the years 1515 – 1525?

In some respects it can be said that Henry and Wolsey had an effective foreign policy in the years 1515 – 1525. Henry and Wolsey were responsible for the Treaty of London and were also sought after as a useful ally by other more important European powers. However some would argue that their policies were not effective due to the amount of money that was spent on international events and warfare and the fact that nothing was really achieved.
Firstly it could be argued that his policies were effective due to the fact that Henry and Wolsey were responsible for the Treaty of London, the signatories were France, England, Holy Roman Empire, the Papacy, Spain, Burgundy and the Netherlands, all of whom agreed not to attack one another and to come to the aid of any that were under attack. This was a great achievement for Henry and Wolsey as England managed to aucestrate a treaty that was way above its size and importance, this therefore brought England to the table of European politics this means that Henry and Wolsey had an effective foreign policies.
In addition source L supports this because Henry is large and this implies that he was considered important and this implies that his policies must have been successful as he was considered godlike. However the painting might have been painted to demonstrate Henrys power and wealth. There is also a dragon in the painting implicating that it is not a realistic interpretation of the events at the Field of the Cloth of Gold also we do not know who was commissioned to pain the painting or what its purpose was.
On the other hand it can also be argued that it was not effective. The field of the Cloth of gold was not effective due to the fact relations between the France and England worsened soon after the event when Cardinal Wolsey arranged an alliance with Charles V, who declared war on France later that year commencing the Italian War of 1521–1526. Also source L shows that the Felid of the Cloth of Gold was extravagant and not effective and this shows that it was very expensive and achieved next to nothing and therefore it could be argued that Henry and Wolsey’s foreign policy was not effective. However the painting might have been painted to demonstrate Henrys power and wealth. There is also a dragon in the painting implicating that it is not a realistic interpretation of the events at the Field of the Cloth of Gold also we do not know who was commissioned to pain the painting or what its purpose was.
Also source M shows that Henry was so focused on war he ignored other important issues and this implies that his policies were very narrow and not effective. However the lords who wrote source M could be being bias against Wolsey because they hated hi because he was not a Nobel and born to a merchant therefore they would not have wrote a letter in favour of Wolsey and would be trying to cause his fall from power. Also Henry is show by many historians to be disinterested in his politics and left them to Wolsey, this is shown if the fact that Henry did not know about Wolsey’s “Amicable Grants”.
In conclusion I believe that Henry and Wolsey’s foreign policy was ineffective through the years 1515 – 1525.