mid-tudor

• wanted 16 members of the P.C to rule.
• but councilar system had always worked with the king as its head/making final decision; couldn't work without a chief executive (either 1 member to act or the monarch).

• conservatives and reformers approved him as leader of the council "for better conduct of business" - natural regent.
• high in favour during the last part of Henry's reign.
• successful campaigns in the scot. war = better rep.
• support of paget - rally support among the reformers.
• edward's uncle.
• soldier = respect from his fellow nobles.
• 'Duke of Somerset' - monastic lands to finance his title.

• form stayed the same but authoritarian style = resentment - bypassing P.C.
• relied on his own men in his "new council" (e.g. Sir Thomas Smith).
• ignored his fellow nobles (e.g. Paget).
• Paget brought him to power - Warwick/Russel/Herbert also who had been soldiers and counciors. All would bring his downfall.
• increasingly used proclamations (laws not passed through parliament but issued by King through the P.C.) reflected his increasing need for emergency measures (not his wish to bypass parliament) - situation at home deteriorating to the 1549 rebellions.
• religious reform through parliament = increasing authority and importance of it.
• to survive once the king was of age in 1555, P.Cs needed to stay on Ed.'s good side but Som. neglected him and failed to build up his confidence.
• anything the king signed was counter-signed by Som. - he had the use of the dry stamp and he ruled in the name of Ed. rather than under his authority.

• factions were formed to protect the nobility position - Warwick turned Thomas Seymour against his brother who then insisted on joint guardianship of Ed. although he didn't get it. Ed. preferred Thomas as he encouraged him to look to his days of ruling properly and so the nobility tried to use Ed. against Som. = most serious threat the Som.
• Thomas also tried to marry Princess Eliz. - Som. executed him for treason in Mar. 1549. Undermined his authority before rebellions.
• Guy - the key to Som.'s fall was his character. He was arrogant, ambitious, inflexible as well as an authoritatian. But his power did not produce a strong rule. He was often indecisive and his gov't lacked direction.
• He allowed inherited problems to become worse - finance/war/religion. Didn't reform or stabilize gov't. He was solely responsible - bypassed parliament/the council - he decided failures.

• Ed. to marry MQS and retain support for war-like nobility. Henry's dying wish (in his will), no formal agreement - power and control over Scot. and solve Scot. problem/secure from Fr.
• Henry left and uneasy peace with S+F. Stability was needed with a minor on the throne, not an active F.P.
• Heard - war against Scot. = necessary for MQS. Obliged by will.
• Conquest of Scot. - nobility expected it. Desirable: Ed. = minor and MQS marriage to Fr. heir meant opportunity to challenge Eng.'s regency gov't. They already had the moral excuse of restoring catholicism and so it was probably not the wrong policy to persue although not the best in circumstances when peace = better for the economy and stability during the royal minority.
• Renewal of Scot. War - isolate scots for a defensive alliance by negotiating with Fr. - death of Francis I and accession of Henry II ended hopes of Fr. compromise - faced war on 2 fronts as Henry II renewed  Franco-Scot. alliance. Had to strengthen defenses at Calais, Boulogne and New Haven, fleet sent to patrol the Eng. channel. June 1547 = fleet of galleys with 4,000 troops sent to Scot. - intervene in affairs on arranging marriage (1543). Sept. 1547 = land and naval invasion of Scot. - victory = occupy all main boarder strongholds. Eng. army not strong enough and anxious about Eng. domestic affairs. - left Scot. with his main army Sept. 18.

• Som. underestimated Fr. support for the scots - scale of Fr. invasion = Eng. failure - they sent 18,000 troops to Scot.
• Battle of Pinkie -  failed to follow up this early victory from 1547 - failed to commit enough troops to over-run Scot.
• Failure of the Anglo-Scot. Marriage Scheme - Fr. marriage suited scots better - they were catholic and it would mean more political independance because of distance and the channel. (Defeat united Scot. nobles - support Mary of Guise (MQS mum) in her opposition to Eng. - met in Stirling asking for Fr. military aid).  Eng. still negotiating = obvious war would break out and Fr. would intervene. Jan. 1548 = Som.'s appeal to Scot. - 'Epistle of Exhoration' = proposing union. June 1549 = Ft. fleet landed an army of 10,000 and Aug. = MQS taken to be educated in Fr. making S+F one country.
  This meant it was pointless to continue the conquest - holding boarder fortresses = expensive as Fr. attacked them. Som. blamed Eng. commanders' inadequacy - lost their support in 1549 when he fell.

• Stalemate in the Anglo-Scot. War - Som. in London with domestic issues, main Eng. bases of the n. boarder strengthened - Som. unwilling to make decisive action (army of 10,000  at boarder - no instructions from London and neither used initiative; Lord Gray - East March at Berwick/Lord Wharton - West March at Carlisle. Fr. troops in Scot. reinforced with 8,000 scots = beseige Haddington - garrison of 5,000 men. Som. wouldn't leave London and worried about Fr. forces around Boulogne. Earl of Shrewsbury - 12,000 infantry and 1,800 cavalry to revive Haddington. Som. ordered withdrawal - high cost of maintaining army - seige resumed after unsuccessfully assaulting the castle in Oct. Fr. began to tire of war expenses and Scot. nobles began to resent Fr. = Franco-Scot. relations deteriorating. 
  1549 - Wharton and Gray failing to take advantage. Replaced by Lord Dacre and the Earl of Rutland - Lord of Shrewsbury made Lord Pres. of North Council - before changes could take effect affairs in the N. were overshadowed by Peasant uprisings. Political delay of Som. (his indecision) was to delay moving his troops down from boarder fortresse/garrisons to restore law and order - allowed the situation to go out of control, causing rebellions to escalate and spread. Forced in Aug. as he now faced war on 2 fronts; needed to put down 1549 rebellions - guard British channel against the Fr. - beseige Boulogne. Abandon Haddington. BUT Scots too weak.

• Henry was the one with the best chance to secure the Scottish marriage and he had failed.
• Som.'s obsession with Scotland had influenced him to delay dealing with the rebellions at home.
• Franco-Scot. alliance, weakness of the Eng. military position in Fr. and the chronic shortage of money mean that this was a war that could not be won.
• Fell as Regency Council blamed him - followed policy without taking their advice (even if they had supported it).

• Finances - expensive - by 1547 the country was virtually bankrupt. Som. had spent 2x as much as H. in half the time. He needed to reform the taxes and customs systems and bring financial admin. up to date - he didn't. War against Fr. also meant the added cost of fortifying Boulogne and Calais.
  It was paid for by: Debasement (£500,000 prof. but meant that by 1551 = 25% of its value before H. debased in 1543), dissolution of chantries (£100,000 prof. for gov't), parliamentary taxation (added £200,000 to war costs). But none of this was enough and Som. was still short of money = had to sell crown lands and increase borrowing. 
  He rejected advice to restore the coinage - he needed the money for Scot. garrisons.
  In total it cost over £500,000 and the total military expenditure during Ed.'s reign was £1,300,000. 
  Sheep taxes to pay for war = contributed to western rebellion. 
• Social and economic problem - debasement of coinage = increased inflation = increased social problems (increasing poverty and distress - e.g. 1548 harvest failure...) = 1549 unrest/riots/rebellions in Cornwall/Devon/East Anglia.
• Religion - Act of 6 articles of 1539 = catholicism on H.'s death but Som. and Ed. = prot.
  Guy - 'chaotic' = Som.'s religious policy (grevience expressed in the western rebellion). 
• See handout + back of:'What problems did Som. encounter in implementing H.'s F+S Policies?'

• People's attitudes to religious change:
  Elites (Nobles and Rich) - in favour of religious reform (major) - money and gained power. Land and sales from dissolution of monasteries. BUT few catholic nobles (support of Mary) in the n. of Eng. 
  Lower Clergy - opposed religlious change - uneducated and anxious to maintain trad. way of life with no complications. No detailed knowledge of theology - couldn't read well. 
  Mass population - v. conservative outlook. Culture based on rituals (e.g Pilgrimage of Grace - disliked religious changes under H.)and festivals associated with the farming year and their belief in magic and witchcraft all formed parts of the ceremonies of the old church.  
  East Anglia, London, Larger towns, Ports - East - support for reliligious reform. London & larger - better educated clergy - vocal minorities demanding more rapid and radical religious change, extreme areas. Ports - change continent (trade exposes).
  Bishops - 9 led by Cranmer (prot.) and Ridley = reform support - 10 led by Gardiner and Bonner (Bishop of London) opposed change. Remaining 8 undecided on doctrinal issues. All fully supported royal supremacy and separation from Rome.
• See table: The Edwardian Church in 1547-49 (typed up A3)

• Aims - doctrinal change, Ed. had been educated by reformers. Reforming faction had been brought to power with Som. - H.'s religlious policy would end. Som. was a reformer - no belief in Transub. Determined to reform the church (but his attempt at reform in the end was to control religious disorder).
• Problems Som. inherited in 1547 - the country was cath. in doctrine and religion. Bishops were split: 10 cath. under Gardiner/Bonner, 9 prot. under Cranmer/Ridley. Parish preists tended to be cath. and against change. Princess Mary practiced her cath. faith and cath.'s saw her as the figure head, thinking she should be queen. Religious effects on invasion of Scot. and so he needed Charles V to close ports to Fr. ships in Scot. war - only Northumberland could make Eng. Prot. as Charles was distracted by the turks.
• Som.'s moves to prot. in 1547 - reissued Crom.'s injunctions; Eng. bible to parishes and destruction of statues, windows and white washing. Cranmer's homilies (prepared sermons) were to be the basis of sermons that had to be preached and so prot. teaching would be put across to the congregation (e.g. justification by faith alone rejecting the doctrine of works).

• Problems caused by these - Injunctions resulted in the destruction of statues, stained glass windows and whitewashing church walls. Homilies caused problems for religious reforms of working through uneducated clergy (lower clergy thinking skills limited though literate), preaching was a fundamental way of putting across beliefs; these also meant that laity did not have to go to priests which was a cath. idea, taking against what they believed would not be done. Treason act being repealled opened the hood gates to calvinist lit. (also the act of 6 articles). Chantries act 1547 confirmed the 1545 act that closed chanties - money for Scot. war; rejected the belief in purg. and masses for the dead.  Statute of 6 - move for further change but the reason act destroyed religious uniformity and encouraged disorder; lincs and E.A = riots and iconoclasm. Religious radicalism as areas with refugees from the Netherlands settling, extremists (millenarianists) redistribution of wealth and an equal society wanted so church plate was seized, sold and profits went to poor; LAW AND ORDER WAS BEIG THREATENED BY LACK OF RELIGIOUS CONTROL which made Som. unpopular with the ruling classes - he also banned public preaching and imprisoned Gardiner and Bonner (cath. bishops) to set an example for those who opposed chantries. NO AGREEMENT ON WHAT FORM OF PROT. DOCTRINE SHOULD BE INTRODUCED.

• Successful
  Cranmer's Homilies, July 1547 (objecters were imprisoned and homilies and paraphrases established in most parish churches by 1549 BUT unpopular with catholic clergy - problems for religious reform. Act of 6 articles.)
  Chantries Act, Nov. 1547 (closed and assets seized to pay for Scot. war, preaching in public ban = stop criticism of gov't and opposers imprisoned BUT rejected belief in purgatory and masses for dead, banned in public preaching, opposition from cath.'s and no agreement on prot. doctrine.)
  Images removed from churches, Feb. 1548 (achieved with little opposition.)

• Unsuccessful
  Injuctions, July 1547 (didn't satisfy prot.'s and offended cath.'s.)
  Treason & Censorship  Laws Repealled, Nov. 1547 (radical reformers attacked catholic practices - unrest and religious confusion.)
  Act of 6 Articles Repealled, Nov. 1547 (left church with no official doctrine, encouraged disorder and destroyed religious uniformity.)
  Lack of Religious Control from Gov't, Nov-Dec 1547 (riots and iconoclasm in prot. areas.)
  Edwardian Act of Uniformity, Jan. 1549 (Cranmer not happy as it was a compromise = confusion. Satisfied noone and changes opposed by cath. and prot. (reformers - angry no attempt to redefine belief in the eucharist transub.) lead to 1549 rebellions.Cranmer's prayer book = Eng. and used by clergy but people didn't have to attent services so it was ineffective. Catholic vestments stayed and so did transub. BUT communion was allowed in both kinds. Sacraments were reduced to 5 BUT kept transub. No official rejection of purgatory although sung masses for dead gone. Majority of priests remained celibate although could marry.)

• Protestant:
  Cranmer's book of common prayer  1549 in English and had to be used by the clergy.
  Communion was allowed in both kinds.
  Sung masses for the dead no longer allowed - believed by Catholics to make your time in purgatory shorter (undermining importance of purgatory and priesthood).
  Sacraments were reduced to 5 - removing ordination (important Catholic doctrine along with confession). Undermining purgatory and priests - everyone is a priest in the eyes of Protestants.
  Clergy marriage allowed - although majority remained celibate and only 1/3 married.
  English communion service, lords prayer and 10 commandments.
  Removal of statues, paintings and images. 
• Catholic:
  People didn't have to attend services, making it ineffective.
  Transubstantiation stayed (kept the importance of a priest).
  Catholic vestments stayed.
  Kept 3 important Catholic doctines and only removed 2 - confirmation, last rites and marriage kept).
  No official rejection of purgatory. 

• attempt to impose uniformity not religious revolution.
• Reformers - no attempt to redefine belief in eucharist transubstantiation.
• neither prot. nor cath. would accept it -neither side satisfied.
• failure to break catholicism.
• moderate prot. reform introduced but fundamental cath. practices remained.
• no punishment for laity not attending communion.
• Cranmer's homilies - contradicted current cath. practice with reforming ideas.
• dramatic not moderate change - prayer book rebellion in west country 1549. Also opposition in York. (BUT MOST FOLLOWED GENTRY AND NOBILITY - ACCEPT PROT. REFORM).
• reformed through paliament - political control over church.

• Som. defended the inconsistencies within the act as he needed to keep Charles on side. The council felt that moderation was expedient so as not to upset the majority of people. It was an attempt to impose uniformity and order NOT religious revolution.

see folder - powerpoint notes and essays.

• not because of any threat to internal security but because the rebellions had been put down savagely. 
• he fell because of the way he had governed. His autocracy had not produced successful policies. 
• the rebellions indicated that his rule had been incompetent and the P.C. made him take full responsibility for the failures. He had taken the decisions without consulting them. All the factions united to bring him down.
• in the end he panicked - tried to use the mob at Windsor against the P.C. as the council asserted its control of the country - opened him up to the charge of being a revolutionary and using the commons against their social superiors, breaking the theory of obligation.
• imprisoned in Oct. 1549 (then released) and executed for treason in Jan. 1552.
• see mrs Scott's typed up notes: 'Som.'s fall from power 1549' and 'how far was Som. personally responsible for problems which the gov't faced 1547-1549?'

• he led the coup and intended to oust Som. from power - shown with his suppression of Kett's in August, Late October and his removal of Peckham from the council; trying to remove the majority of cath.'s in the P.C. also 13th Dec - with St.John and Russel's support = leading by example, they changed sides so got rewarded Earls of Wiltshire and Bedford.
• Appears to be attempting to gain full power for himself - anyone who sought Som.'s blood also sought his own - trying to get people to take his side, rewarding those who change sides with St.John and Russel as examples; clever tactics. Also end of Jan. 1550 = removal of Southampton and Arundel from the P.C. - removal of those not on his side. Also shown earlier with him wanting a prot. majority (rejecting Som. ideas and ousting him from power) - Oct. - Dec 1549. 
• Som.'s general summons on 5 Oct. and the subsequent support of the ordinary peasants = fatal for his cause as with his anti-enclosure measures leading him to be 'friend of the commons' and the P.C. saw him as a traitor = befriending the commons more when poorly armed peasents were defending the king at hampton court. Looking an irresponsible revolutionary = his downfall. 
• North. was an opportunist - took advantage of Som.'s failing. 

• Successes:
  Political coolness shown and skill in resolving a serious financial crisis. 
  Delegated authority and selected the right people for the task.
  Dismissed gendarmes in 1552 - saved gov't spending.
  Gresham - successfully manipulated foreign money markets in the Netherlands allowing crown                 debts to be paid, restored the value of the stirling and paid off loans. Coinage                           restored to value of 1547 (called in and resissued in March 1552 - restored                             confidence; more valuable silver/gold metal).
  Gov't money was audited regularly to stop pilfering.
  Exchequer = central to treasury controlled by P.C.
  Introduction of a limited edition of a very fine high value coin - brought down prices for a time.
  Strict economies in gov't spending and paid off remainder of mercenary troops - overseas debt                liquidated. 'Privy coffer' and cintingency fund.

• Failures:
  Debasement of coinage - done in order to make quick monet (1551 = 25% of its value in 1543).            When they tried to restore the value the gov't went bankrupt - treasury didn't have                    sufficient prescious metal to complete it (£24,000 borrowed from banks + high                        interest). 
  Attempt at reforming financial administration - Ed. died too soon (completed by Mary).
  Selling crown lands - only short term (chantry lands+church plate). 

• No:
  North. = more positive approach. 
  Continuency of policy for poor relief: 1547/52 based on Thomas Cromwell's short lived statute              of 1536 - poor rate, begging illegal, provision for putting adults to work, sturdy rogues                into the brideswell (Ed. > London). 
  Not persisted within short term (changes of monarch/attitudes) - Mary backed monks'                       response to welfare initiatives - responsibility of old monasteries and not local gov'tt (no           support). London hospitals founded by Ed. 1547 = poor relief (BUT NO FUNDING). Lord           Lietenants = social order locally.
  Prot. policies helped impose social order, ale houses had to be lisenced and may-pole                      dancing banned - prevent disorder resulting in rebellions. 
  New treason act 1550 - restored censorship and gave authorities more power in law and order,          helped prevent whole-spread popular discontent turning into a threat. 
  Anti-enclosure rigeriously enforced and unpopular enclosure commissions withdrawn.
  Reevaluation of coinage 1552 halted inflation and reduced prices.
  Acts to protect arable farming and stop charging of excessive interest on debts.
  New poor law - easier for parish and town authorities to support aged, infirm and crippled. 

• Yes:
  North. unpop. due to his part in the suppression of the 1549 reb.'s - 1547 vegerancy act, 1548                 sheep tax in 1550 = both repealled. 
  Little done to help the poor at a time of severe price rise - made worse by debasement.
  1550 - Anterwerp cloth market collapse = unemploy. and social distress - gov't responsible for                 commonwealth. 
  Increasing social distress over the middle years of the century. Increasing popularlity =                           pressure on food prices, bad harvests of 1549-51, results aggravated by swearing                     sickness which killed thousands in 1551. Living standards decreased, work difficult                 to find. 
  Set food prices at a low rate but idea failed in practice. Attempt to restore coinage forced down                 prices for a short time. 
  1552 debasement = inflation = increased grain prices. Situation worsened by bad harvest.
  1550 struggle among prive councillors.
  New poor law - didn't aid getting work, not throughly enfoced (poor rate = local JP in charge of                  raising money in the area). Didn't work effectively.

• he had a strong leadership with no rebellions and disorder - kept law and order.
• harvest failure was out of everyone's control.
• he did not have enough time to fix the problems H+S left him.
• inflation and the war were inherited.
• could have enforced poor laws better but he didn't want to make the same mistake as Som. and be seen as a befriending the commons.
• BUT HE COULD HAVE HELPED BY NO DEBASING THE COINAGE AND COULD HAVE HELPED WITH THE ANTWERP UNEMPLOY. AND WITH THE HARVEST AND GRAIN HE COULD HAVE DEALT WITH IT BETTER.

• 1549 = more interested in gaining control of the gov't = Fr. boarder forces in Boulogne and Eng. lines of communication between Bou. and Calais - threaten to isolate garrison of Bou. under Lord Haddington. 
• fleet of Eng. defeated Fr. galleys in Chann. Islands BUT Bou. supplied by sea although Eng. in control of Chann. and gov't bankrupt - no army left to seige.
• Charles V - fail to persuade to extend the treaty Bou. + Cal. - Prot. 
• he wanted the war to end - expenses and danger of Fr. invasion = end still political crisis.
• he wanted more consolidation of his position. 
• 1550 - N. = general warden of North = control of arms 
• 1552 - boarder line = that of before H. Scot. campaigns.
• 1550 Jan. terms: Fr. bought back Bou. (25 April) for more than H wanted but spent a lot fortifying = Fr. bargain. Eng. withdraw (400,000 crowns) and garrison to reinforce Cal. Remove remaining garrisons from Scot. = no war unless provoked - Fr. = total control. BUT Prot. landowners in S. = more hostile and fears of Fr. taking S. 
• Peace was humiliating - N. unpop. with ruling class. Despite the arr. Henry II's daughter & Ed. to marry (Eliz. of Valois) - counter balance of MQS and Daulphin BUT ratified in Dec. 1550 - neutrality in cont. wars (despite HII pressure at flanders - 1552 Fr. + Lorraine + Charles V and N. = treaty but remained neautral - effected Fr. + Eng. relations. In Jan. N mediated as Ed. and ChV = ill, they didnt want peace, June 1555 = negotiation collapse) - couldn't afford/cut down army and navy. 

• N. didn't want Ch. to actively bring Cath. fac. to power in En. and he wa annoyed at Eng. ref's for remaining Mary's cath. faith (Ed. = pressure to stop mass) - Ch. stopped Magnus Intercanis 1496 (arrest heretics in Neth.'s) - helped cause antwerp.
• Dec. 1550 - restore of good trading relations and trade cont. with Neth.'s on old terms - only because Ch. feared Eng. close alliance to Fr. Defences at Calais increased but no fighting - Anglo-Imperial = stop Fr. open war against Eng.

• 1547 - italian explorer Sebastian Cobot - £100 p/a to live in Eng. and discover new lands.
• 1551 - William Hawkins - cloth, timber, saltpetre, iron and sugar along Barbary Coast.
• 1553 - gold coast in west africa.
• Antwerp collapse and cutting of Neth. trade = Eng. merchants looking for new markets. 
• Too poor navigation to attempt sea routes around cape of good hope. Couldn't trade with far east. Until after 1558 - fear of offnding spain with atlantic exploration = endangering Anglo-Hasburg alliance.
• John Dee - N-E passage to the east.
• 1552 - joint stock co - Sebastian Cabot as its gov'nr (city merchents and members of P.C = £25 contrib.)
• May 1553 - Sir High Willoughby - 3 ships and sailing orders by Cabot - letters of intro. to china. Lost in Lapland in 1554 - 2 ships and him. (Richard Chancellor - 2nd in command - reached port of Archangel in white sea - Ivan IV and Tsar of Muscovy diplomatic links).
• 1553 - Muscovy - trade between 2 co.'s - death of Ed. = reign of Mary - attatchment to Hasburgs = war on imperial side. Ch.V = in favour, enhance war effort and restore Cath. in Eng. Fr. say far from ideal - want N. but LJG failed - lack of Eng. aristocracy/gentry support.
• Improvements to dockyards and navy 1555 during Eliz. = FAR SIGHTED, ENG. WELL BEING IN FUTURE DEPENDED ON OVERSEAS EMPIRE.

• no he didn't make the right decisions - he lost Bou. which caused damage to pride and image of Eng. Also he lost defenses - E+S boarder (damaged rep. in eyes of gentry and nobility) BUT Eng. not in danger.
• BUT he did make the right decisions - saved expenditure, etc.
• he was a realist and a diplomat (balanced). Made decisive action with making himself gen. warden of the North and he showed his delegation of authority when he appointed Lord Dacre who was experienced in northern affairs to make a final settlement.
• Bou. had no real value to Eng. and even with the Hasburgs support it would have been impossible to hold. 
• Pointless prolonging hostilities when Mary was safe in France.
• Eng, economic position was poor - impossible miliatary position and a bankrupt exchequer and so making peace was sensible. 
• Ch.V had problems himself - not interested in invasion. Also Fr. were already at war.
• Criticised for his defenses but balanced diplomacy so equalled out. BUT still damaged image. 

• If N.'s financial policies were to succeed he needed to end Som.'s wars.
• Fr. exploited 1549 rebellions in Eng. by declaring war Aug. 1549.
• Eng. at war on 2 fronts.
• War was unpop. in Eng.
• Increasing tax = harmful to Eng. economy = increasing hostility to gov't.
• N. keen to end war to consolidate his position in Eng.
• BUT - March 1550 = Treaty of Bou. between Eng. and Fr. which was humiliating peace for Eng. - led to unpop. of N.

ChV:

• N. favoured Fr. because he did not want Ch. to actively bring Cath. faction to power in Eng.
• Relations with Ch. and Neth.'s were coloured by pressure Ed. put on Mary to stop her hearing mass. This harmed trade when Ch. suspended the Manus Intercursus of 1496.

Scot.:

• 1550 N. = gen. warden of N. and took personal control of the boarder. Berwick and Carlisle strengthened.
• Feb. 1551 Fr. fleet landed supplies and troops. Negotiations of boarder between Eng. and Scot. March 1552 boarder restored to line held before H scot. wars.

• April 1550 - ChV issued edit allowing cath. inquisition to arrest heretics in Neth. This excluded foreigners, but let to collapse of Antwerp because flemmish cloth workers fled to Eng. to escape persecution.
• New policies to increase trade therefore needed. Eng. merchants looked for new markers in Barbary coast and gold coast in Africa, the Muscov Company (sugar) was set up in 1555. This was to be effective in the future - Eng. developed its trading empire overseas.

• how did he exercise power - he was a more able politican than Som. - learned from Som.'s mistakes and was to rule through the P.C. He was appointed 'Lord President of the Council', a position he was to hold. He rejected 'Lord Protector' which was wise - Ed. was getting older and more aware of his position. He got on well with the king and appeared to rule by concesus BUT HE EXERCISED EXTREME POWER - manipulated the king through his own men in the househole (Sidney and Cheke) and the council (Cecil). He controlled appoitnments to the council initially backed by gendarmes (palace guards) of 850 men - first step towards a standing army in Eng. Imposed military rule as he established himself in power. Was important that the lawlessness of Som.'s last year was not repeated - he took Paget's advice and appointed Lord Lieutenants to the counties from among the powerful nobility. P.C. grew in importance - country being run by it.

• influenced by the ideas of Bucer (from Strasburg) - believed in the real prescence in communion.
• Cranmer wanted reforms and a complete break with the old popish ch. Rid of idolatry and included mass in this. Backed by Ed. - trusted him and made him feel important.
• doctrinal change reflect the advance in Cran.'s beliefs - Ed. made him accept Hooper's recommendations over vestments - mass vestments rejected.
• John Knox black ruberic - included at last moment by king (allowed it).
• rejected belief in the sacrafice of mass (transub.) and replaced it with calvinist communion service.
• 1549 prayer book withdrawn by Eng. remained as the lang. of the 1552 prayer book (2nd Ed. Prayer book = Prot. Cranmer).
• Eucharist renamed holy communion and word mass dropped.
• Altar replaaced by a communion table and idea of sacrafice of mass was dropped. Communion was just a commemoration of the Last Supper. Reinforced by John Knox black ruberic - kneeling to make communion no longer signified transub. only to maintain order. Communion not a sacrament.
• Vestments were abolished - surplace only (priests word black and white only).
• Compulsory to attend communion service and to use prayer book - fines imposed.

• Positive: calvinist influence within the Tudor ch. was at its strongest with these reforms.
  Reforms paved way for doctrinal reform of Eliz. - contructive. CH. WAS OFFICIALLY PROT. BY 1533 WITH CHANGES IN DOCTRINE AND PRAC. - parishes had to carry out reforms. (but parishes remained cath. at this time as no time to enforce (Ed. dying) - no impact at time but long term importance (Eliz. 1559 religious settlement based on Cran.'s doctrine reform).)
• Negative: North. rule and prot. = unpop. - associated prot. with the looting of ch.'s for gain by gov't officials (law of 1549 - ordered the shattering of images which the people saw as mindless and destructive - 1553 ch. plate and valuables seized at the same time. - ch. was being used to strengthen crown finances). Outside London and S-E most of the country was largely unaffected by prot. although 1552 prayer book would've reached local areas. Clergy lost respect - prot. belif in the miracle of the Eucharist and as clergy lost lands they lost their local status. North.'s religious policies reflected his wish to hang on to power and his political independence on the prot. faction - policies discredited ch. in the eyes of the people. North. envied Cran.'s inf.? - complete opposite of him, Cran. = man of doubts, hesitation and developing ideas so to N. he was gray and stuffy - N. was tempramentally attracted to stronger, more open personalities - hoped Hooper and Knox would replace Cran. in king's favour but Cran. emerged with his death. Ed's death came too soon to assess impact.

• prot. had more influence in the gov't by 1553. Oct.-Nov. 1549 pol. power struggle in P.C. between cath. and prot. reformers. Feb. 1550 N. in control - conservatives drive out of office. Cath. bishops Gardiner and Bonner in prison and replaced by prot. bishops. Therefore cath.'s deprived of their leaders. Opened the way to prot. reform.
• Cran.'s role v. imporant in Ed.'s reign - he played crucial role in bringing the prot. faction to power and he had the king's confidence. Cran. wanted complete break from old popish ch.
• Treason act 1552 - increased power of the ch. of Eng. to enforce doctinal uniformity. It became and offence to question royal supremacy of articles of fair to the CoE.
• N.'s relig. policies reflected his wish to hang onto power and his political dependence on the prot. faction - N. was not religious at all.

• see in essays as it is more clear - also S/N

• role in gov't - mary was the gov't, she shaped policy, just as all other tudor monarchs did. No such thing as a 'tudor regime' - councilar gov't; was personal so monarch was the gov't, crown was the heart of gov't and admin. System of central and local gov't remained fundamentally unchanged during Mary's reign - P.C. remained centre of admin.
• achieved the restoration of the Roman Cath. Ch. and the spanish marriage - P.C. blieved this was impossible and Som. believed only one was possible.
• mary and the P.C. - political acumen shwon by selecting her P.C based on experience and ability; Gardiner appointed councillor so a churchman was the chief minister - represented interests of the clergy in P.C. and Paget (represented the laymen who bought ch. lands)/Gardiner although in disagreement were two able politicans who restored effective gov't.

  Wanted her advisors to work together but she did not choose just catholics - she excluded only extreme prot. and close North. supporters - 50 P.C's (too large to conduct business effectively? caused rilvary between moderates and cath.) but she worked through an inner ring of 19. 8 of which had been there before (never fully in queens confidence though) - continuity in gov't. 

Imperial envoy (Simon Renard - SPANISH) - always present to advise mary but resented and has been criticised - understandable though after the way Eng. courtiers had ignored her as she grew up that she should've felt that spain was more dependable. Spain = ally and Ch.V = counsin. MEANT SHE DIDN'T ALLOW LEADERSHIP/CONFIDENCE IN THE P.C.

Inner ring collectively decided her policy - marked a development in gov't following the increase in status of the council in North.'s rule. 3 crucial issues directed to them - marriage, reunion with rome and war against fr. - all controversial but P.C. came round to supporting her although sometimes opposed.

Was it a mistake? Opposition? - No

• much to commend - she was half span. and would be marrying the most powerful king in europe and it was the most generous of marriage settlements: her son would inherit the Neth.'s which would protect Eng.'s trading interests. Also the span. alliance would protect Eng. against Fr.
• P.C. marriage treaty of Dec. 1553 went a long way to protect Eng. against the fears of span. domination.
• Philip was to have the title of king during mary's lifetime but philip could not take mary or their children out of the country without concent - he could nto appoint Eng. gov't officials or give out patronage, he could not drag Eng. into span. wars abroad >  Phil. and spain were insulted by these conditions but they went a long way towards safeguarding Eng. interests.
• Philip never being crowned shows how politically astut mary was. She knew it would create concern for the future among the politically important classes on whom her power depended.
• marriage was important - she was 37 and needed a son to succeed her for cath. policies to survive -immediate issue. (heir was prot. Eliz.). Philip already had a son so could concieve, advised by Ch.V - right to marry who she liked, safeguards in place (essential).
• Phil. married only to revive Anglo-Burgundian-Spanish alliance achieved by the marriage of Cath. to Hen. - close hasburg circle surrounding Fr. - interest in Eng. not to govern. MARRIAGE TREATY MADE THIS IMPOSSIBLE, use its resources to further spanish interests abroad.

Yes

• All the inner ring of the P.C. except Paget wanter her to marry Ed. Courtenay (cath. with royal bloodw hich set him above Eng. nobles) - he was the great grandson of Ed. IV. Paget made a bid to ouste Gardiner as mary's leading councilor by backing her over the marriage.  Gardiner was isolated when she carried her council with her in the end with regards to the marriage - he put forward Courtenay.
• marriage took place in Winchester cathederal 25th July 1554 despite rebellion. Popular opposition to the marriage stemmed from H's anti-papal anti-span propaganda (mary ignored).
• without the marriage Eng. could still have kept the span. alliance because it was in spain's interest.
• still considerable anti-spanish feeling in London - disturbances were reported in the summer of 1555. Also, anti-english sentiments in spain - Eng. = heretics and savages.

Strengths

• protected Eng. against fears of span. domination (marriage treaty 1553) - in Eng.'s interests.
• Philip couldn't appoint eng. gov't officials or give out patronage. He could not drag eng. into span. wars abroad - safeguarded eng. interests.
• Phil. was never crowned, mary was politically astute - meant no problems in politically important classes (her power depended on).
• marriage meant heir - cath. policies survive and heir possible as Phil. already had a son.
• P.C. soon gave way to support marriage as she was serious about it.
• closing hasburg circle was Phil.'s interest - not to govern Eng.
• Marraige most powerful king in Eng.
• Neth. inherited by son - trading.
• Span. alliance = protect against Fr. 

Weaknesses

• P.C. were divided on the matter - Ed. Courtenay.
• popular opposition - H's anti-papal anti-span. propaganda.
• didn't need marriage for spanish alliance, it was in spain's interests.
• anti-span. feeling in London - summer 1555 disturbances and anti-eng. sentiments in spain (heretics and savages).
• 27 Oct. - mary raised issue in council and then simply announced that she was going to marry Phil. anyway.
• disregarded all opposition to her plans.
• mary's popularity began to ebb - many people still feared Eng. would be drawn into Phil.'s wars and become a mere province of the hasburg alliance.
• Wyatt's rebellion and other unrest - provoked early opposition to her (cut 'honeymoon period' short).
• fear of Phil. using Eng.'s resources for himself.

• it was exceptional that the rebels marched on London the political capital and trading centre. This should have been a stronghld for the gov't. This has to make it dangerous.
• Mary had stayed in the capital to rally the people to support her  so she considered it a threat. She showed conspicuous courage in taking a firm stand against the opposition.
• motives to the chief conspirators might have been to topple mary BUT lesser may have only wanted to make a protest against the marriage.
• Duke of Norfolk - failed to stop marching - strong forces.
• Guildhall speech.

BUT

• Wyatt delayed his march into London by stopping with Lord Cobham - this reduced the threat because Wyatt and his cannons subsequently got bogged down in the mud as they tried to advance on London - poor tactics.
• Wyatt's supporters from Kent refused to leave their county so he picked up other men in London - these men joined him just to see through their home areas with minimum plundering and that they were not committed to the cause?
• When Pembroke and Russel and their 9000 troops moved on the rebels, who were caught in the narrow confines of the strand and fleet street, they fled. Even Wyatt's conviction to push on into London has been called into question - the rebellion was easily crushed by gov't troops.
• March on London had been intended to be nationwide rebellion - clearly failed and was not the threat it could have been.
• Devon failed to rise to prevent Philip landing - the west country had not forgotten the viscious suppression of the pro-cath. prayer book rebellion in 1549 by local gov't officials (e.g. Carew who had now tried to make them rise against Mary - they were not interested).
• Coastal regions of Kent preferred alliance with sp. rather than Fr. because of the trade advantages - didn't support Wyatt's the only one that got off the ground.
• Leicestershire and the East Midlands - did not rise in support of the Duke of Suffolk, disliked him. Earl of Huntingdon stayed loyal to Mary and he was far more popular/supported.
• The monarchs of Wales failed to rise.

• great nobility stayed loyal to Mary so Suffolk and Wyatt were isolated (both gentry).
• Fr. assistance that Wyatt had hoped for did not come on time. They took too long to make up their minds to interfere.
• Opposition to marriage not that strong - wanetd Mary on the throne.

Mary's firm stand in London and the crushing of Wyatt strengthened her rather than weakened her position. Emerged more resolute to implement her policies - ch., Phil. and Prot. - removed her opposition.

Rebels dealt with firmly - 90 executed (few compared to 3000 who rose), she may have felt that leniency would make phil. more acceptable to the people. Leaders were executed - the Earl of Suffolk, LJG and her husband Guildford-Dudley were executed. Wyatt = hung, drawn and quartered. Eliz. survived - Gardiner prevented her being implicated in an effort to save Courtenay and his own political position. Courtenay was allowed to leave the country.

how was the cath. ch. restored:

• mary was fundamentally important to the reconciliation of Eng. to Rome - Phil. supported her in this but did not trust Cardinal Pole (her cousin) - he believed Pole would create political problems by trying to restore the ch. lands and this would increase anti-span. feeling as people would have associated the policy with sp./cath. reformation. Mary didn't want ch. lands restored - needed support of the gentry and P.C. - with regards to Parliament it was THEIR land. Mary was politically astute and made a wise decision regarding lands, showed her cool political head.
  Church lands were therefore the main issue of restoration of papal supremacy - gentry (MPs) would not have supported Roman Catholicism if their livelihoods had been threatened by losing lands.
  Mary showed her political wisdom in delaying Poles return to Eng. until the end of 1554 when the issue of monastic lands had been approved by the Pope.
  In 1553 Mary decided to dismantle prot. and the work was completed by 1555, North.'s act of uniformity was repealled and the 2nd Ed. prot. prayer book of 1552 was withdrawn.
  Henrican legis. was repealled/laws of the reform. parliament - the royal supremacy was abandoned and not restored until 1555.

North.'s treason law was repealled so that it wasn o longer treason to deny the royal supremacy. The old treason law was restored, action and words treason - protecting phil. (she strengthened the treason law in 1555 punishing treason by laws to protect phil. - shows his unpop. during the fr. war).
Clerical marriage was made illegal and married priests were dismissed.
Heresy laws were reinacted in 1555 which made possible the burning of heretics (those denying transub. and cath. doctrine - prot.).

Roman cath. ch. had been restored by 1555. The voting in the house of commons in favour of dismantling Prot. was 270-80. House of commons were more likely to be prot. where as house of Lords tended to be cath. btu they accepted due to her not taking back lands. MAJORITY OF ENG. WAS STILL CATH. - NO DEAL TO GO BACK.

Guy - emphasises the strength of opposition but it was also an easy majority - makes it convincing.

Cath. bishops were restored, foreign exiles were expelled and prot. preachers were arrested.

• not as important to Mary as Cran. was to Ed. - pole did not initiate policy, the vital work here was done by Gardiner.
• his unwordly attitude came close to upsetting things because he was reluctant to accept monastic lands staying with their lay owners and there was always a fear that a change of pope would mean the monasteries being restored so the land owning classes committment to R.C was limited (7 monasteries were refunded during Mary's reign but monster were the old ones and they lacked young recruits. Eng. life had lasted 20 yrs without monks so there was no enthusiasm for their return).
• Pole wanted a quiet restoration and he would not have the Jesuits in Eng. because their methods were too harsh and he did not want to upset the people and personally he feared them - his own early beliefs (liberal) - e.g. justification by faith.
• his great contribution to the restored R.C ch. was the 'legatine decrees 1555' - blue print for the discipline of bishops (avoid secular employment, preach in the discese, see people were educated in the cath. faith and seminaries were to be closly regulated and candidates for the priesthood examined closely. Idea was to impose discipline - improve preaching/teaching standards (raise standards within the cath. ch.) - educated and invigerated clergy was the only effective way to counter prot. enthusiasts such as Ridley.

• new marian bishops were of high calibre and shared these ideas - not just coming from pole they were a common programme - greater unity and higher standards.
• The reformed discesan seminaries did not come to anything, the homilies were worked on by Bonner and Watson which would raise the standards of preaching and behaviour.
• Mary was throughly committed to the ch. restoration and supplied vital support: in the face of considerable opposition in par. she gave up the tax of the 1st fruits and tenths - lucrative for crown. She resisted the refounding of monasteries.
• Restoration of the R.C. ch. was initiated by Mary.

• she was more likely to achieve cath. of 1547 than 1529.
• doctrine - needed to be changed from prot. beliefs to cath. (e.g. latin).
• appearance of churches and priests would need to be changed from the prot. view.
• priests need to be brought back and need to be of high status again as well as celibate.
• monastic lands couldn;t be returned - gentry and nobility support needed who owened lands.
• proclamations/statues to enforce. Also would need agreement of the council for support and passing laws, etc. (e.g. act of supremacy).
• would need children to secure the dynasty and catholicism.
• had to decide what she would do with prot.'s.

overcome for religious changes

• Autumn 1553 - parliament refused to repeal the act of supremacy because of ch. lands - meant she could not make the pope the head of the ch. if she was but in Dec. she gave up her title as supreme head. At the end of 1554 the pope was the supreme head.
• April 1554 - monstic lands couldn't be restored to ch. - also heresy laws.
• poor pope realtions - anti-span. 1555.

• essential for her to accept statute law through parliament  - dominant over canon law.
• eager to restore papal supremacy - except into 1547, restore cath. doctrine quickly. Restored as in 1547 act of 6 articles.

methods used:

• willing to remove all opposition (prot.).
• changed clergy to cath.
• tried her best to enforce - royal injunctions (restoration of cath./suppress prot. doctrine), 2nd act of repeal nov. 1554 (undid anti-papal since 1529 under H.), 4 Feb. 1556 improve clerical discipline, Pole. 
• uses parliament - legal status. 
• Aug. 1553 - proclamations - not enforced to confrom unless passed by parliament, respect parliamentary rule.
• removing prot. - including clergy. Giving up head of ch. (Dec. 1553).
• sacraficed monastic lands (April 1554). 

counterproductive?

• if recounted and admitted the error of their ways by asking for forgiveness and embracing cath. once again their life would be spared - effective to get people to follow cath. but if people knew this they would do it to just spare their lives?
• in the case of prominent prot. the case would be very lengthy - Hooper after convicion in Newgate prison visited by Bonner and several chaplains to get him to conform, wouldn't change his true religion but if he conformed he wouldn't be burned. Lesser victims were released and rearrested when not conforming. 
• process didn't always run smoothly - e.g. in Kent, Suffolk, Staffordship, Rochester and Colchester - July 1557 - council contracted the responsible authorities to ask why certain executions had not been carried out - concerns with war against fr. in June rather than ease up on heretics.
• Foxe gives impression matyrs in London were supported by the crowds who watched them die (Eliz. propaganda). BUT propaganda opportunity - he wasn't there - recieved version of events (aim to destroy Mary's ch. and bond with new reformed ch. under Eliz.).
• Other prot, writers - fortitude with which 'heretics' died showed they gave their lives in good cause.
• Other than London - no evidence of strong reaction against.
• Mary's gov't able to recruit laymen to hurt heretics (e.g. Earl of Derby in Lancashire and sir John Tyrell in Suffolk). 
• A lot of burnt poor - had nothing other than prot. but of 1549 not 1552, impact of burnings not that great. Not so shocking at the time, not all top bring burnt - poorer who wouldn't compromise, very committed.

• showed strength of policy needed to reestablish the R.C. ch. in eng. 
• Cran. always going to die - archietect of prot. heresy in eng.
• Guy - prot. in areas like Bristol wouldn't have abandoned their faith without persecution. 
• no rebellions against burnings.
• gentry escaped abroad if didn't want to conform - wrote pamphlets criticising mary's gov't. (bishop Bonner - cath. propaganda to counter this - limited effect as half printing presses closed when prot. fled).
• public perception of burnings not helped in S-E by enormous social problems - end of Mary's reign = the war and influenza epidemic. Had Mary lived longer/had a cath. heir - minimal impact on public consciousness, similar to massacre of 4,500 rebels in west country 1549.
• burning of ch. leaders = propaganda, young men - too young to remember old cath. ch. Prot. ch. given respectability that didn't have under North. when associated with faction and greed. Phil. against as added to unpop. of him - anti-span. prop. = associated him to inquisition. 
• only way of achieving unity and uniformity within the country.

strengths:

• returning Eng. ch. to Rome in an organisational sense succeeded.
• Mary was helped chiefly by cardinal Pole but her actions had the support of the council.
• proactive tactics were used to restore catholicism.
• Mary successfully used parliament to restore catholicism. She had to bow to pressure and recognise that monastic land couldn't be returned to the ch.
• emphasis placed on reforming the cath. ch. by improving the quality of the clergy, through training and removing abuses, etc.

weaknesses:

• Marian gov't didn't maximise propaganda opportunities.
• prot. beliefs still succeeded in Eng.
• Mary burning 300 heretic prot. during her reign - effectiveness in converting people back to catholicism was limited.
• Mary's rep. as 'bloody Mary' has largely been the result of work by Foxe and Eliz. propaganda - effects us but not people in Mary's reign, maybe people in Eliz.'s.
• restoration of cath. - Mary no children and Eliz. wouldn't countenance it.

see printed out sheet - did Eng. benefit.

• continued North.'s policy of retrenchment, raised peace-time tax and to raise money from Fr. war - sold crown lands, raised forced loans, debased coinage (100% profilt) - also committee to restore coinage which was carried to Eliz.
• completed admit. reform started under North. - 1554 Exchequer restored as main financial dept. (now handling ex amount of money) taking over the work of: court of 1st fruit and tenths (clerical tax), court of augmentations (monastic and chantry land income). 
• forced to give up crown lands to reestablish 7 monasteries so ew sources of revenue: 1552 plans to update customs duties for 1st  time since 1507 carried out and income from customs trebled.
• 1555 - full survey of crown lands - rents and entry fines raised in 1557. 
• Fr. war = no economic crisis (death rate from flu worse/process of recovery tangiable under North. - continued Eliz.), increase of £300,000 p/a in revenue (Eliz. benefit).
• Opposition to 1st fruits and tenths in ch. but issue gone with settle of ownership of old church lands - parliamentary complaint, crown and parliament worked together in common interest - both wanted to prevent 1549 reb.s repetition - aimed at gentry.
• system of national army recruitment in 1558: every section of society had to contribute, lord lieutenant was responsible with the JPs for the annual local munsters in each county (nobility before), reform lasted through Eliz.'s reign, shared cost of raising army when needed - Eliz. built on this, system of trained bands - skilled soldiers.
• No control over social and economic problems - gov't policies were effective as any contemp. regime could be.

• still faced with the financial problems North. had tried to resolve.
• gov't reaction - although not her fault increase in crime,etc. and unemployment help needed.
• had her own treasurer manage accounts for her own use to pay for the war - financial admin. reamined a mix of old and new methods - left only court of wards and the duchy of lancaster as indep. rebemue courts.
• Mary left a debt of £300,000 at the end of her reign although this was easily removed by Eliz. she inherited £185,000 to increase it to £300,000 (Fr. war) - the debt she left was greater than inherited but less was raised by her (increased by £115,000).

there were no strategies to deal with these/lack of gov't strategies to help:

• harvest failures of 1555 and 1556 - worst = widespread malnutrition which lowered resistance to disease. 
• 1556 - 1558 epidemics of typhus and other famine related diseases were followed by an outbreak of influenza: "worst demographic disaster in modern english history" (guy). 
• deaths only surpassed by those resulting from the black death of c14th - dropped pop. by 5% between 1556/61. Towns = badly hit - high morality and severe blood shortages.
• by 1559 the purchasing power of agricultural workers wages dropped to 59% - inflation (of 50 years earlier). 
• gov't continued H.'s policy of restricting the movement of industrial workers from the towns to the countryside - needed increase in the no. and variety of industries in towns to create employment. Meant gov't needed to encourage search for new overseas markets - had been developing over the mid-years of the century (e.g. muscovy). 

• Rampant disease was interpreted as symptom of general social decay - linked to religion in the public mind.
• Widespread rumours of rebellion.
• Economy worsened, etc - hit towns.

Loades - she was always prone to put her conscience before her purse.

Williams - financial record was 'aqequate'.

Loades - considerable achievement (£185-300,000 debts).

• Situation would've been better had she not involved in the war with Fr. for the last 18 months of her reign
• with regards to trade - she did not want to offend spain or portugal.