Course wokr updated
The
rebellions in Tudor England were caused by Religion.’
To what
extent do you agree within the context of 1485-1603? (DRAFT 2)
INTRODUCTION
Tudor
England from 1485 to 1603 saw rebellions which were, to a great extent, a
product of religious discontent. For example, the Pilgrimage of Grace under
Henry VIII and the Prayer Book rebellion under Edward VI were both significant
uprisings which unsettled the Tudor monarchy significantly. For example, upon
Edward VI’s deathbed, he declared his protestant cousin, Lady Jane Grey as his
heir, because his sister Mary who was next in line to the throne was a strong
Catholic, which infuriated the public. Despite the notable factor of religion
as a cause of the rebellions, Henry VII’s reign had multiple rebellions, none
of which were a product of religion, but more so of succession and economic
discontent; the Perkin Warbeck rebellion threatened Henry VII’s position of
power and stemmed completely from succession crises as opposed to the factor of
Religion, which was arguably not of significance until Henry VIII’s break from
the Roman Catholic church. Moreover, by the end of the time period in 1603,
rebellions were much more a product of economy and succession, again as opposed
to religion, for example the Essex rebellion under Elizabeth. Despite the
opposing factors which would suggest the statements invalidity, religion was a
cause of rebellion which was present through the majority of the period and
acted as the indicative motive for major rebellions under monarch’s such as
Henry VIII. The religiously motivated rebellions continued after Henry VIII and
his son Edward VI and his daughters’ Mary and Elizabeth, all felt the strains
of public discontent throughout each of their individual monarchies as a
product of religion.
RELIGION
Religion was a heavily influential cause of Tudor
rebellions as it saw a huge intervention whereby Henry VIII broke
from the Roman Catholic church and introduced Protestantism. Arguably, this
break from Rome triggered the peak of religious grievance- induced rebellions
in Tudor England. Davies
argued that the Pilgrimage of Grace was ‘the most popular revolt’ in Tudor
history and arguably, the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536 reflects how religion was
so heavily influential as a cause because 40,000 people participated in this
rebellion; Sowle (a participant in the rebellion) is said to have declared how
‘40,000 of us will rise upon a day’[1]. Davies’
argument can be credited by Healey’s review of him which declares that Davies
‘wrote one of the best works of historical synthesis available’[2];
Davies was an expert on Tudor England so his claim to the popularity of this
religious revolt does reinforce the value of his argument that it was a major
factor of rebellion. On the other hand, Callaghan argued that Davies ‘played
down’[3]
other causing factors of the rebellion and saw ‘religious motivations as
central’[4] which
would suggest that he was much more focussed on religion as a cause and
consequently failed to acknowledge the other influential factors. Although
Davies’ interpretation is valuable in that he acknowledges the mass amounts of
rebel participants in the Pilgrimage of Grace, there are limitations to the
value of his claim because he focussed too much on the role of religion as a
factor and ignored the other causes which impacted the rebellion such as the
economy or regional grievances. Regardless of his focus on religion,
Davies is accurate because Religion is shown as a key influence of the
Pilgrimage of Grace by the 5 wounds
of Christ[5]; this
was a recognisable emblem of the rebellion; it represented the people’s
grievances with the break from Rome, suggesting that this widespread discontent
was mostly a product of religious grievance. The banner was utilised by the
Lincolnshire rebels and was later adopted by the Pilgrims in 1536, and the
Northern rebels in 1569 under Elizabeth, which clearly suggests the vast
influence that religion had on rebellions and not just under Henry VIII. It is
clearly of significance as it was used throughout different monarchies. The banner
was first made by rebels during the time of the reformation in England,
consequently encouraging people to participate in the rebellion as a result of
this, which could be argued that it was effectively propaganda and the leaders adopted
religious discontent as an excuse to rebel and adopted the 5 wounds of Christ to
encourage people to join their rebellion, when the arguably it was adopted
merely as a driving force to increase rebel involvement as it was the time of
the reformation. Alternatively, the fact that the 5 wounds of Christ was
utilised across so many monarchies, from
Henry VIII to Elizabeth, reflects how
significant and powerful the rebel’s feelings towards religion really were. The
banner was utilised by the Lincolnshire rebels and was later adopted by the
pilgrims in 1536 and even later by the northern rebels in 1569, so the source
is valuable in understanding that as a cause, religion was important across an
extensive period under Henry VIII as well as Edward VI and Elizabeth.
The Prayer Book rebellion under Edward VI in 1549
would credit the argument that religion was a key influence of rebellion
throughout the Tudor era. The heightened radicalisation of his religious
beliefs in comparison to his father was significant, suggesting that the
rebellion under Edward were significantly due to an objection to religion.
There was an [6]assemble
of up to 3000 men to join a group of Parishioners from St Keverne however the
revolt was ended quickly; they were dissatisfied with the monastery and
chantries which had sacrificed funding of nursing and education. It could be
argued that the rebellion was merely a product of personal grievances as some
of the rebels’ grievances strived from the fact chantries were reducing funds
for education and nursing, so religion was just the cause on the surface. Hiding
the underlying grievances beneath. On the other hand, prior to Henry VIII’s
break from Rome, his father, Henry VII, *[corrected up to this point]* never
felt revolt towards his monarchy as a result of religion; most of the
rebellions under Henry VII were a product of succession or economy, but it
wasn’t until the break from Rome which triggered the uproar of religious
revolts. Because of this, one could argue that religion wasn’t as significant
as succession for example because succession remained an issue throughout the
periods entirety whereas religion merely became an issue after Henry VIII’s
break from the Roman Catholic church. Mary’s involvement in the Lady Jane Grey plot is
significant to the argument that religion was the driving cause of rebellion as
despite its links to succession, the main issue behind the controversial
decision of who would be Edward VI’s heir
was the religion of Mary; her strict Catholicism hugely contrasted Edwards
Protestantism and the people felt as though Mary should be heir even if she was
a Catholic. Despite the key role of religion in this rebellion, it is arguably
a subsidiary cause as people cared more about the rightful heir to the throne
and disregarded the religion as if it didn’t matter. Regardless of the evidence to suggest
religion was the driving cause of rebellion in the Tudor era, one can conclude
that despite it being one of the significant factors it was not the most
impacting as it only became an issue after Henry VIII’s break from Rome and
didn’t consistently occur throughout the periods entirety. It did impact
certain rebellions such as the Pilgrimage of Grace and the Prayer Book
rebellion, but other rebellions are a product of opposing factors such as
succession.
*CHECK FOR
REFERENCES
*WRITE MORE
ON ELIZABETH
ECONOMY
Another pressing cause of rebellion in Tudor
England was the role of the economy;
Kirwan argued that some rebellions were a ‘direct result of taxation’[7]
which would suggest that the economic grievances were significant enough to
cause a public revolt, for example the Yorkshire rebellion under Henry VII.
This rebellion was a result of the struggling economy; Henry VII was increasing
tax in certain areas of the country in order to raise money for Britain to
‘maintain independence’ [8].
This resulted in a heightened angst towards Henry VII especially
following his overthrowing of Richard III as most northern cities were supporters
of Richard and the revolt led to the failure of the monarchy’s pursuit to raise
£100,000- they only managed to raise £27,000*. The fact that the economy was an
issue which caused rebellion at the very beginning of the Tudor period in 1489
under Henry VII suggests that it could be a more important factor than religion
as it was a present issue throughout the period and was much more consistent
than religion as a cause. The continuation of the impact of economy is
reflected through the rebellions under Henry VIII; the
Amicable Grant rising of 1525 was a result of Lord Chancellor Thomas Wolsey imposing subsidy tax and forced loans in order to
fund Britain’s invasion of France*. Consequently, the growing threat of armed
revolt caused the grant to be dropped and Henry VIII’s attempt to raise money
failed and Fletcher and
MacCulloch spoke of how people were willing to help, 'but no man in the
country has money to buy or lend'[9]. Fletcher and MacCulloch’s claim
suggests that the rebellion was a direct result of the economic issues as
opposed to religion is a well substantiated by the clear depth in research as
the above quote is from the 5th edition of their book on ‘Tudor
Rebellions’ which suggests… Furthermore, that their book is a specific text
precisely about Tudor rebellions and not a general text just on the Tudor period
as a whole, further shows intensive research to support their claim on the
impact of the economy. Despite this, Moore argued that Fletcher ‘redefined his
historical interests’[10]
which would suggest that his research into Tudor rebellions may have limits as
it wasn’t entirely his field of interest. Although Fletcher’s work may have
limits in this sense, MacCulloch’s sub-disciplinary academic work was ecclesiastical history[11]
so the fact he emphasises the importance of the economy despite his focus on
tendency to focus on the religious aspects of history, reinforces its
influence. The role of the economy in
causing Tudor rebellions is reinforced by the reference to it in the Pontefract Articles (Letters and
Papers of Henry VIII, Vol XI)[12]
drawn up by the rebel leaders during the Pilgrimage of Grace, in which they
state their demands. The articles demand ‘to be discharged of the fifteenth and
taxes now granted by Act of Parliament’; the fact the rebels were referring to
their economic grievances in their demands which are supposedly regarding
religion shows how the economy was still an underlying cause to rebel even
beyond Henry VIII’s break from Rome. The fact that tax[13]
was specifically an issue during Henry VII’s reign as well as Henry VIII’s
reign, as the Pontefract Articles show, the economy was not only an issue at
the beginning of the Tudor period but continued to trigger angst amongst the
people, and furthered being an issue through to Edward VI. Despite the fact
that the economy is referenced to in these articles, it can be argued that tax
was merely a subsidiary demand which was secondary to their main grievance
which was religion; if the economy was more important there would be many more
references to the economy and the rebellion would be significantly more
focussed on the economy as opposed to its primary cause which is religion.
Overall, the Pontefract Articles are significant as they reveal how even during
the controversial break from Rome when religion was matter of huge discontent
amongst the people, they still acknowledged the importance of mentioning tax
within their religious rebellions, showing how it was an underlying factor to
revolt during the Tudor era. During Kett’s rebellion of 1549, ‘Inflation,
unemployment, rising rents and declining wages added to the hardships faced by
the common people’ [14].
This suggests how the economy continued cause rebellion into Edward VI’s reign
as well as under Henry VII and VIII. Furthermore,
enclosures on land put up by wealthy land owners were consequently ‘ripped
down’[15]
by rebels which further shows the importance of the economy in causing
rebellion. The discontent was clearly large as 3,000 rebels are thought
to have been killed [16]
, further revealing that the role of the economy was significant enough to
trigger a mass rebellion. Although there was a significant amount of economic
issues under Edward VI which did lead to the likes of the Kett’s Rebellion, it
can be argued that the discontent under Edward was predominantly a result of
the succession crises and the religious ties to it as opposed to the economy. Following
Edward VI’s death and the execution of Lady Jane Grey, Mary I never
had public discontent as a result of the economy as the most pressing issues
during her reign were a product of the succession crises. Similarly, Elizabeth I never faced economic rebellions throughout her reign
because the biggest issues were surrounding succession complications.
SUCCESSION
Succession was another significant cause of
rebellion throughout the Tudor period and was consistently an issue throughout
the era’s entirety, but especially during the early Tudor rebellions. Early
Tudor rebellions under Henry VII were
predominantly a result of succession; Macleod argued that ‘if Henry VII could over throw Richard, then his enemies could
overthrow him', suggesting that Henry’s initial weak claim to the throne made
him vulnerable to an attempted overthrow. The fact the Tudor era began with a
major succession crisis reflects how the issue of succession is likely to be an
underlying cause throughout the reign of all the Tudor monarchs. The Stafford
and Lovell rebellion was the first Tudor rebellion, and it was indefinitely the
beginning of the succession rebellions which began to occur following it. The
fact that the first rebellion under the Tudors was caused by succession
reinforces the notion that succession was a consistent cause overall. Wernham
argued that ‘Simnel went near to shaking Henry’s throne’[17], and the impact of
succession is further reflected in the Lambert and Simnel rebellion under Henry
VII, his claim to the throne was weak as
a result of the Battle of Bosworth; Richard III’s heir’s to the throne were his
nephews but because they were believed to be dead, so when Simnel attempted to
impersonate one of the nephews. The fact Henry VII was so threatened by a young
boy pretending to be Richard III’s nephew shows how weak his throne was and how
vulnerable he was to rebellions of succession crises; the impact of succession
rebellions in the early Tudor period was significant, as his throne was further
threatened in the Perkin Warbeck rebellion too. Regardless of the impact of
succession under Henry VII, his son’s reign consisted mainly of public revolt
against religious issues as opposed to succession. Succession, although during
some parts of the Tudor period, was inconsistent in its impact on rebellion
throughout the periods entirety, as monarchs such as Henry VIII never really saw a
succession crisis despite the influence it had on rebellions under the likes of
Edward VI and Henry VII. The Lady Jane Grey plot was
a rebellion of which was caused by succession as many civilians were outraged
with the fact Edward
VI chose someone who was out of the
line of succession as his heir, and believed Mary should've been heir regardless of her strong Catholicism.
Morris (1955) argued that the rebellion had ‘very little chance of success’
which would suggest that revolt against the plot was inevitable and therefor a
serious and legitimate reason to rebel as a result of succession. This shows
the importance of succession as an influencing factor because people clearly
cared more about the rightfulness to the throne as opposed to the religion
occupied by the current monarchy. Additionally, prior to his death, Henry VIII wanted Mary to be Edward’s heir
regardless of the situation which further caused people to rebel over Edwards
decision to label Lady Jane Grey as his heir. PRIMARY SOURCE MERVYN PAGE 90
Elizabeth I also faced public revolt as a result of succession crises, most
notably during the Essex Rebellion of 1601. Queen Elizabeth’s position on the
throne was weak due to the fact that no one knew who would be the next ruler
after Elizabeth and she refused to marry anyone, and had no children which
caused the public and the elites to worry about the Tudor dynasty. When the
Earl of Essex attempted to seize power and get rid of Elizabeth he was
unsuccessful, but the fact Elizabeth had no legitimate or legal heir who was
worthy of her succession shows the severity of this situation, and how that
although succession may have been outshined by Religion during Henry VIII’s
reign and the economy throughout Edward VI’s reign, when succession became an
issue it was always of significance and the rebellions threated the monarch’s
position of security.
CONCLUSION
One can conclude that throughout the Tudor
period of 1485-1603, the most dominant cause for rebellion was the economy as
it was a grievance held by the public most frequently during the era and was
the only cause of rebellion which grew to be big enough to actually be
successful. The failing economy and the uprising of the working class revolt
was significant under multiple monarchs such as Henry VIII and Edward VI; these
rebellions such as the Cornish rebellion did actually receive gratitude from
the monarchy and an attempted resolution, unlike opposing factors. Despite the
significance of the Economy as a cause, the role of succession is also a major
factor as it is also present throughout the periods entirety and is arguably
more significant than religion as a cause because religion only really became
significant after Henry VIII's break from Rome. At the beginning of the Tudor
period I would argue that succession was the most impacting cause of rebellion
due to the revolts such as the Perkin Warbeck rebellion or the Lambert and
Simnel rebellion, but despite it being a common cause at the beginning of the period
these rebellions rarely became anywhere close to success and didn't really
oppose that much threat to the economy. Religion was of great significance
following the break from Rome under Henry VIII due to the Pilgrimage of Grace
and the Prayer Book rebellion, as well as the Lady Jane Grey Plot, because
these rebellions show that during Henry VIII and Edward VI's reign, people
cared about religion significantly and felt like it was a justifiable reason to
rebel. Despite religions influence it held weak rebellions which rarely
threatened the monarchy and often ended in execution of partakers. Religion as
a factor cannot be discredited as it was of major significance however one can
argue that economic grievances were the one cause that most civilised people
were willing to revolt over, purely because it was a matter of survival.
Consequently, the statement arguing religion as the most influential cause for
rebellion is discredited by the significance of opposing factors such as
succession and economy.
[1]
https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/ecc/emforum/projects/disstheses/dissertations/dcallaghan/david_callaghan_the_role_of_the_clergy_in_the_pilgrimage_of_grace.pdf
[3] Callaghan- https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/ecc/emforum/projects/disstheses/dissertations/dcallaghan/david_callaghan_the_role_of_the_clergy_in_the_pilgrimage_of_grace.pdf
[4] Callaghan- https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/ecc/emforum/projects/disstheses/dissertations/dcallaghan/david_callaghan_the_role_of_the_clergy_in_the_pilgrimage_of_grace.pdf
[5] Grundy [book], 5 wounds of Christ?
[10] R. I. Moore, Newcastle upon Tyne, October 2006. - http://rimoore.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Anthony-Fletcher.pdf
[17]
R. B. Wernham, Before the Armada
(1966), 30-1
Comments
Post a Comment