INTERPRETING THE
PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE
RELIGION & RELIGIOUS CHANGE IN ENGLAND,
C.1470-1558
REBELLION: WHY BOTHER?
• Historical interest in rebellion because:
•
•
•
•
Evidence of ‘ordinary’ people
Revealing of social/economic/political attitudes
Seen as part of the political system (rather than anomalous)
Attitudes towards authority & monarchy.
• IT IS INTERESTING
• IT SELLS LOTS & LOTS OF BOOKS
THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE
• Royal Supremacy only 3 years old – a profound
challenge:
• Attacked RS as ‘heresy’ & called for Mary to be made
legitimate; upheld monasticism – Parliament could not speak
on these issues without the King’s permission.
• Memory: Wars of the Roses; Tudors a ‘new’ dynasty with little
legitimacy
• Serious – HVIII had to negotiate:
• Promised that Parliament would meet at York to discuss RS; that
dissolved monasteries would stand.
• Wide geographical scope:
• Yorks/Lincs/Lancs/Westmorland
• Crossed the social spectrum:
• 30-60,000 (largest ‘popular’ revolt in English history)
• Nobles/gentry/commons/clerics unified (on some points)
• Nature of the Tudor State:
• No standing army/police
• ‘Rise of the State’ part of the problem?
THE NORTH – A PROBLEM:
Mighty feudal overlords (Percys)
Periodic lawlessness
1489 – a significant rebellion (Yorkshire)
Hostility/resistance to taxation endemic – instability
CHALLENGE TO MONARCHICAL POWERS PREVALENT
& PERSISTANT.
• Was this an opportunity for Henry to expand the
Tudor state?
•
•
•
•
•
THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE –
CONTEXT:
• Context in HVIII’s reign:
• Royal Supremacy new
• Dissolution – novel & ‘heretical’
• New taxation
‘Novelty’ = illegitimacy in early modern minds.
It was rarely the RATE of taxation, but its basis in custom which
was significant in causing instability.
• Court factions surrounding Aragon; Seymour; Boleyn
spanned out into the localities.
• Some historians see PofG as a court conspiracy.
ARE REVOLTS REVOLTING?
PARADOX – A
REBELLION WHICH WAS
ACTIVELY AGAINST
DESTRUCTION
THE LINCOLNSHIRE RISING, 1536:
• Based on 3 towns: Louth, Caitor, Horncastle
• Lasted 2 weeks in October 1536.
• Royal commissions 1536:
• Dissolve smaller monasteries/ Collect Subsidies/ Assess the clergy.
• Arrival in Louth trigger – seized by men guarding Church treasures.
• Rumour (fear, anger, not understand crown intentions):
• Plate/jewel to be taken from parish Churches/ tax on cattle/ all gold to be
confiscated.
• Churches to be pulled down
• No one allowed to eat white bread/ goose without paying a tribute to HVIII
• Gentry involvement often contradictory:
• Assumed leadership after 2 days
• Muster ‘troops’ through normal State methods
• But in negotiations with Duke of Suffolk (claiming that they were attempting
to contain the rebellion from proceeding further South).
• Traditional mechanisms of containment failed:
• Lords Hussey, Clinton and Burgh fled
• So many gentry/JPs involved – legitimacy
Filtered out when Duke of Suffolk’s army within 40 miles – gentry fearful of
prosecution for treason & sued for peace.
THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE:
• Series of different risings under the (loose)
leadership of Robert Aske (lawyer):
• West & East Ridings (Yorks)/ Westmorland /
Richmondshire
• Proclamation at York October 1536:
• ‘This pilgrimage we have undertaken it for the
preservation of Christ’s church of this realm of
England, the king our sovereign lord, the nobility and
commons the same, and to the intent to make
petition to the king’s highness for the reformation of
that which is amiss within this realm and for the
punishment of heretics and subverters of the laws.’
• Defence of Church/realm/king/community one and
the same.
‘ELITES’ AND ‘COMMONS’:
• Involvement of the North’s leading families.
• Henry Percy, 6th Earl of Northumberland (most powerful
man in the North):
• Suspected in London (‘too powerful’).
• Not active, but passive acceptance of rebellion.
• Surrendered Wressle Castle to Aske & acknowledged him as
‘captain of the baronage’.
• Other family members had prominent roles: Sir Thomas Percy
(marched with 5000 to York); Sir Ingram Percy (swore people to
the Pilgrim’s cause); gentry leaders Percy tenants.
• Tension/mistrust of gentry by commons
• But insist on gentry leadership: why?
• Note – ‘leadership’ is loose, not militaristic
• Parish by parish organisation far more significant in an active
sense than the gentry
‘ELITES’ & ‘COMMONS’
Commons
• All nine rebel groups
tried to secure gentry
leadership:
• Symbolic: Lord Neville (13)
• Society of Orders a
natural concept:
• SHOULD lead them
• An obligation
• Clergy not permitted
active fighting roles.
Gentry
• Bush: ‘aristocratic
conspiracy of inaction’.
• Had contained agrarian
unrests of 1535
• Stood aside here (tacit
approval?)
• Fall of Pontefract Castle
(hiding place) forced them
to become involved.
• Damage limitation
• ‘We were only trying to
maintain order’
• Fearful of lives/property if
refused.
CAUSES: OVERVIEW
• Whose rebellion?
• ‘Popular’ – people vs regime? Genuine access to ‘ordinary’
sentiment?
• ‘Feudal’
• High politics (Elton) – a conspiracy led by ostracised courtiers;
utilising power-bases in the locality to achieve a political
victory at Court.
• Motivations?
• Religion? (Moral)
• Economic/Social? (Banal)
• Dodds Sisters (1915) – Aske unable to halt ‘popular’ movement;
two ‘movements’ (‘religious’ – gentry led – social/economic –
anti-gentry).
• Documentation – did Cromwell distort issues to detract from
religious motivations (thus safeguarding Crown policy)?
A ‘COURT CONSPIRACY’?
• James/Elton: national politics more important than local
social/economic factors.
• 1530-35 – Darcy/Hussey & Aragonese faction at Court:
• Support KofA/Mary & oppose Boleyn marriage.
• Side-lined at Court – affront to noble honour.
• Rumours that contemplated revolt in 1534.
• 1536 – potential return to royal favour:
• Aragon dead; Boleyn executed
• BUT: Hussey wanted Mary reinstated as legitimate
• Cromwell prevented; ensured Hussey lost position in Mary’s
household.
• Hussey’s wife imprisoned (allegations of encouraging
resistance to the RS).
• Elton: PofG borne of frustration, manipulate popular
discontent to their own ends.
A ‘COURT CONSPIRACY’?
• Some articles could be read as interpreting Elton’s
view:
• Attack on Cromwell/Audley/Rich (& Cromwell’s key policies
– Treason Act/Royal Supremacy/ ‘Heresy’)
• Second Succession Act (key to Aragonese party)
• Attack Henry’s Scottish claims – fearful of HVIII perusing heir
through his sister Margaret (not want a foreign ruler).
• Gunn – remove Hussey, undercut Elton:
• Hussey = old, politically marginalised (local & national)
• At no point a significant leader of the PofG (actually
indecisive).
A ‘FEUDAL’ REVOLT?
• Historiographical context – English medieval history
littered with ‘baronial revolts’:
• Brought their tenants with them because they were bound to
their lords.
• Here pilgrims volunteered – took an oath; not feudal
loyalty.
• PofG – noble involvement came from minor figures:
• Barons: Conyers; Latimer; Lumley; Scope.
• Powerful men not really take part:
• Earl of Derby (support HVIII); Lord Dacre (besieged); Earls of
Cumberland (deserted by gentry clients – son married HVIII’s
niece) & Westmorland (captured)
• Landed elites not stand together: Darcy’s sons not support him;
Aske’s brother defended Skipton Castle.
IF NOT A ‘FEUDAL’ REVOLT, WAS IT A ‘POPULAR’ ONE?
A ‘POPULAR’ REBELLION?
• Question of all early modern rebellions: do the articles reflect
the views of the rebels themselves?
• Aske not use materials from some petitions (re: landlords/gentry)
• Unpopular recent taxation:
• New subsidy issued in peace time (unique)
• 1534 Subsidy Act (sold as a benefit to society)
• But, rebellion conservative:
• Not taxation per se; but novel taxes which breached custom
• Lincolnshire – articles demanded that the King claim no money unless
in defence of the realm.
• Attack tithe barns – not Church itself that the target, but unpopular
landlords in general
• Context – two years of poor harvests + new taxes make living
hard.
• Pontefract manifesto – two articles relating to economic issues:
• Enclosure (fencing-off the common land)
• Much more significant in later rebellions.
• Entry fines (payment upon taking upon a tenancy)
• More prevalent concern.
CAUSES – RELIGION:
Against:
For:
• Not ‘spiritual’:
• Dissolution:
• A cloak/ banner/ slogan /
justification for other
motivations:
• Fear/uncertainty:
• Religious
objects/taxation/practices,
but not spirit/doctrine.
• ‘Functional’ approach to
religion (remember Gregory)
• Real motivation material –
greedy king.
• Mendacious clerics:
• Propaganda to dupe people
into rebelling
• Confused:
• Continental & English
reformers tied together in
demands.
• Co-incidental
• Visible & a moral issue.
• BUT – too easy (not
reactionary)
• Rumour – what did the
Reformation mean for them?
• What of parishes run through
impropriation?
• Material fabric of latemedieval Catholicism:
• Purgatory; prayers for the
dead; saints – all dependent
on ‘material’ aspects of LMC.
RELIGION: EXAMPLES
• Traditional patterns of
sanctity:
• East Riding (Yorks) – St. Wilfrid’s day
• Banning of prayers to the Pope
• Benefits of monasteries:
• Praised ‘ghostly living’ as a part of
being Christian – ‘speritual
informacion, and preching’.
• Also soc/ec roles –
food/gifts/charity/travellers.
• Help tenants: store documents/look
after unmarried daughters & elderly.
• ‘Commonwealth’ – united
social/economic/religious.
• Re-establish dissolved
houses:
• Cartmel/ Conishead/ Sawley/ St.
Clements (York)
• Popular initiative; clerical lead
elsewhere.
• Oaths to join:
'Ye shall not enter into this our
Pilgrimage of Grace for the common
wealth but only for the love ye bear
to God's faith and church militant
and the maintenance thereof, the
preservation of the king's person, his
issue, and the purifying of the nobility
and to expulse all villein blood and
evil counsellors against the common
wealth of the same. And that ye shall
not enter into our said pilgrimage for
no peculiar private profit to no
private person but by counsel of the
common wealth nor slay nor murder
for no envy but in your hearts to put
away all fear for the common wealth.
And to take before you the cross of
Christ and your heart's faith to the
restitution of the church and to the
suppression of heretics' opinions by
the holy content of this book’
WHAT DID THEY
ACTUALLY DO?
Banner of the Five
Wounds of Christ –
Crusades
- Christ’s cause
- Made
traditional offerings
of pilgrims
Ritual procession to
York.
How do we interpret
behaviour as
historians?
THE CROWN’S REACTION:
• Divide & rule (gentry & commons); propaganda on
sinfulness of rebellion.
• Renewed rebellion in 1537 a mandate to display State
power:
• Francis Bigod & followers believe Aske had been fooled by
HVIII’s promises.
• HVIII’s reaction:
• Duke of Norfolk declared martial law.
• Proceed ‘without pity of circumstance’ to ‘such dreadful
execution a good number….as shall be a fearful warning’.
• 144 executions (known): public/ confession showing breach of
Royal authority.
• Vindictive – legally could only prosecute for actions after the
Doncaster pardon (‘evidence’ convicting Darcy/Aske largely
invented).
CONSEQUENCES:
Long-term:
• The solidification of the
Tudor regime in the North.
• Council of the North:
• Curb endemic violence
• Resolve local feuds
• Control Scottish border
• Increased the power of
loyal families
• 1537 – Northumberland
signed over all lands to
HVIII:
• Percy interest now
destroyed.
Short-term:
• Henry convinced of the
need for obedience.
• Persuaded that the
monasteries were now a
problem:
• Resistance to the RS
• Disobedience/pro-Pope
• Superstition/Error
• Irony – if the ‘pilgrims’
intended to preserve
LMC, their actions
ultimately persuaded the
king to proceed against it
with greater vigour.
GOD’S OWN COUNTRY.