Chapter 10 Flashcards
General change to position to elites under Henry VIII
The reign of Henry VIlI witnessed a dynamic period in English society in which remnants of the feudal system still existed, but, in contrast, there was the growth of a professional and commercial bourgeoisie. However, the traditional nobles (or peers) and the greater gentry still represented a social elite which wielded considerable political and economic influence.
What happened to the size of the peerage?
The size of the peerage increased during the reign of Henry VIII, though by the end of the reign there were only nine more peers than there had been at the beginning. The creation of new peers had been to a large extent offset both by ‘natural wastage and by the number of attainders during the reign. Most of the new peers had achieved their rank as a result of successful royal service as courtiers or soldiers. In some cases this was enhanced by a close family relationship; for example the king’s brother-in-law Edward Seymour was elevated to the earldom of Hertford.
What happened to dukedoms?
England had only one duke when Henry VIII came to the throne, Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham, who never enjoyed royal favour.
Henry VIII only promoted two non-royal ducal titles, Norfolk and Suffolk.
Their holders served the king as soldiers and courtiers. There was a distinction to be made between the two. Norfolk was restored to the title which had been enjoyed by his father. In contrast, Suffolk seems to have been promoted on account of the closeness of his personal relationship with the king in a move which prompted criticism in some quarters, for example by Erasmus.
How did Henry use the nobility to maintain authority?
Henry did sometimes bestow property on nobles to enable them to exert royal authority in particular areas. Thus, Suffolk was endowed with property in Lincolnshire after the rebellion there in 1536 and the king ordered him to move there to ensure that he could exert that authority in person. Similarly, John, Baron Russell, was raised to the peerage and endowed with lands in Devon to bolster royal authority in the south-west following the execution of the Marquess of Exeter.
Other roles of the nobility
Nobles were expected to have great households and offer hospitality to their affinity and neighbours. To do so too openly could make a noble an object of royal suspicion, as was the case with Buckingham. On the other hand, noble households remained critical to the maintenance of local influence and to the recruitment of royal armies. (The Earl of Shrewsbury raised over 4000 men for the invasion of France in 1513.) Bastard feudalism had not died away completely.
Evidence the nobility was being brought more under the control of the monarch
Gradually, the nobility was being brought more under the control of the monarch. This helps to explain the fate of Thomas Fiennes, Baron Dacre of the South. In 1541 not only was he tried for the murder of a neighbour’s servant but he was convicted and hanged like a common criminal.
Many other nobles fell victim to Henry VIlI in more orthodox fashion. The Duke of Buckingham was executed for treason on the vaguest of charges in
521. The king’s relatives, Henry Pole Baron Montague and Henry Courtenay Marquess of Exeter, were accused of treasonable conspiracy and executed in
1538. Montague’s mother, Margaret Pole Countess of Salisbury, having been attainted of treason, was held in the Tower for over two years before eventually being executed, arguably the most vindictive of all of Henry’s punitive actions.
Lords Darcy and Hussey were executed for their roles in the rebellion of 1536, Henry’s actions being perfectly justified according to the legal standards of the day.
What happened to the number and make-up of the gentry
John Guy has suggested that there were about 5000 gentry families in England in 1540. Some aspects of gentry status were specific. Knighthoods were conferred as a sign of royal favour, and it was assumed that a knight would possess an income which reflected his status. Susan Brigden has suggested that there were about 200 knightly families in 1524. A gentleman who was entitled to bear a coat of arms was deemed an esquire. Such status was certified by the royal heralds. By 1530 heralds were unwilling to grant or confirm the title to anyone with lands worth less than £10 per annum or goods worth under £300. The term ‘gentleman’ itself lacked legal precision, and gentility was often acquired as a result of the proceeds of office, profession or business.
Though it is difficult to be precise, the number of gentry increased during the reign of Henry VIII.
What happened to gentry role in administration?
Moreover, the increase in the number of justices of the peace (JPs) increased the numbers of those who participated in local administration. In addition to the ]Ps, many other members of the gentry were drawn into unpaid administration on behalf of the Crown. Members of the gentry were increasingly keen on their sons acquiring the legal training which would make them better able to take on such roles as could offer the basis for local advancement. Moreover, whereas the Crown’s local administrators had formerly been likely to be clergymen, increasingly they were laymen, whose office holding often generated the income which would bring about landownership and gentry status.
How did the position of commoners change?
There was little dramatic change in the standard of living of commoners during the first half of the reign of Henry VIII. However, the rise in the rate of inflation did lead to a drop in real incomes which contributed to the ill feeling felt by many towards the imposition of the Amicable Grant. The social structure remained substantially unchanged, with the vast majority of people having very few possessions and little chance of regular and secure employment. Governments were always fearful of such people, with some justification because, while full-scale rebellion was relatively rare, outbreaks of disorder were much more common - and these were held to upset the good ordering of society.
Situation with Wales before 1536
How was the administration of Wales changed in 1536?
The act:
• divided Wales into shire counties which operated on the same basis as their
English counterparts
• gave the Welsh shires direct representation in the House of Commons at Westminster for the first time
• brought Wales into the same legal framework as England.
In practice this meant that Wales became incorporated into England with little of a separate identity except for the survival of the Welsh language in some parts of the country. Control over Wales continued to be exercised on the Crown’s behalf. However, increasingly this became the responsibility of members of the aristocracy, such as the earls of Pembroke, and by members of an anglicised Welsh gentry who controlled county politics, were elected to Parliament and became increasingly prominent within the legal profession.
What happened to the English palatinates?
Three English counties, Lancashire, Cheshire and Durham, were technically palatinates. In other words, they were separate jurisdictions from the rest of the kingdom. This mattered little in Lancashire and Cheshire, where the exercise of palatinate jurisdiction had long since fallen back into royal hands.
Durham was still technically separate, with palatinate jurisdiction being exercised by the bishop. The Act Resuming Liberties to the Crown of 1536 reduced the level of independence enjoyed by the bishop, but did not destroy it completely. For example, the palatinate court of chancery continued to operate. The change therefore seems to have been as much evolutionary as revolutionary.
What happened to the administration of the Anglo-Welsh border?
The lands which were governed as part of the Principality of Wales, along with the four bordering English counties - Shropshire, Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Gloucestershire - came under the jurisdiction of the Council of Wales and the Marches, which was based at Ludlow in Shropshire. This offered relatively cheap and local access to the law and could therefore be seen as a benefit to the area under its jurisdiction.
List of regional gov and administration changes (5)
Wales
Welsh border
Scottish border
Palatinates
Council in North
Why was the Anglo-Scottish border a problem?
The border with Scotland was difficult to police; much of it was remote and often inhospitable in the winter months. Both sides of the border had a reputation for lawlessness. Cattle and sheep rustling were rife and violence
was common.