Kett's Rebellion 1549
The significance of social and economic causes of Kett’s rebellion
The impact of enclosure on Tudor society and why it led to discontent :
Economic problems :
enclosure was blamed for the growth of poverty and vagrancy
when landlords enclosed the land would village common land, this would affect copyhold tenants who used common land for survival as they used this land to graze their animals
these people would be forced out their homes and forced to find somewhere else to live
this also had a knock on effects regarding crops - manure from this land was used to
Social Problems:
Contemporaries blamed enclosure on social problems
So, the govt. imposed a tax on sheep farming
1549 a tax of sheep farming was introduced which restricted the size of flocks and tried to discourage landlords from turning to enclosure to make sheep farms
Landlords used tactics engrossing and rack-renting - a constant source of tensions between
However, the impact of enclosure depended on region - i.e. in Suffork and Norfolk the presence of large flocks of sheep provided the necessary manure to fertilise crops which might have struggled to grow
Foldcourse - allowed landlords to use their tenants land and common land to graze sheep - this lead to tenants enclosing their arable lands to protect them from their landlords - increased tensions when landlords tried to challenge their tenant’s rights
The role of the commonwealth
Composed of politicians, clergymen and intellectuals who criticised enclosure
They saw it as a source of poverty
1540’s people such as John Hales and Hugh Latimer, Bishop of Worcester advocated for social reform and the need to control enclosure
Reform should happen for the good of the commonwealth and they had a Christian duty to look after the poor
Aimed to create a Godly Commonwealth
This was significant because:
The Protector, Somerset was influenced by them to introduce commissions of enquiry into illegal enclosure
Though many rebels were illiterate, they could still hear about the need to reform - influenced their actions
Somerset realised something must be done which resulted in 1584 and 1549 commissions on enclosure
The Impact of the Duke of Somerset’s commission on enclosure
Committed Protestant and wanted to help create a Christian commonwealth in England
Appointed John Hales to oversee govt. reform of social and economic problems
Struggled to pass reforms through Parliament as they represented the elite
Hales and Somerset then issued a series of commissions - inquire about illegal enclosure but landlords refused to co-operate
Somerset continued and ordered the dismantling of illegal enclosures
Affected many elites land such as Thomas Howard and the park of the Earl of Warwick was ploughed up
Consequences:
Somerset alienated the gentry and nobility who were the targets of the commissions. This was a mistake as they could’ve intervened and stopped the rebellion
Commoners thought Somerset was on their side. ‘ Good Duke ‘. Reinforced their beliefs and faith in him. The rebels then thought their actions would be condoned by the Duke
Somerset was isolated from the landed gentry and helped encourage a rebellion - spiralled.
The Impact of Population Growth on Tudor Society:
Surplus of labour in comparison to jobs. This causes grave unemployment as well as low wages.
Demand increases, due to increase in population, causes inflation.
Living standards decrease
Landlords turned to enclosure and sheep to increase their profits
Vagrancy increased which worried authorities. Due to no police force nor welfare state, crime was worryingly increasing
Growth in population caused socio - economic hardship
What was the significance of social and economic causes of Kett’s rebellion?
P - One of the largest socio-economic problems was enclosure which was mostly blamed for the growth of poverty and vagrancy in Tudor England
E - Enclosure = replaced the practise of dividing the land amongst the villagers and sharing the common land to graze animals.
Enclosing the land into larger farms would bring larger profits, especially rearing sheep for the cloth trade. Enclosure involved erecting walls or hedges which ‘enclosed’ an area of land for the landlord.
This also brought about engrossing
E - This affected the poorest in society most as they were reliant on this land in order to graze their sheep
Manure from this common land could have been used on village crops and without this it became harder to grow crops to survive.
L - Therefore, enclosure caused significant economic hardship due to the more vulnerable in scoiety that it hit hardest and it taking away their sources of income
P - Enclosure also caused social discontent as it hit the poorest in society hardest
E - This is because not only were peasants reliant on that land to graze sheep but as a result copy hold tenants were essentially forced out of their homes - fruther inequality on Tudor society
E - This social hardship was also worsened as land lords also undertook a practice of rack-renting and entry fines which made lives harder
rack renting = rapidly increasing rents to get rid of tenants who can’t afford
L - This was blamed for such social problems it even reached parliament in 1517. There was a tax imposed on sheep to attempt to restrict the sizes of farmers flocks but it made minimal difference. Yet this shows the extent of social problems caused by enclosure. - significant due to the inequality it caused as a result
P - There was also great socio-economic tensions in the rural economy of East Anglia - mainly social due to fold course and sheep farming rather than land.
E - This is because the practices of enclosure were more ambiguous. This is because in these areas, where Kett’s rebellion took place, the soil was light. Therefore, flocks of lots of sheep provided sufficient manure which allowed for fertile soil.
E - However, tensions used to rise in these areas due a tradition called foldcourse
foldcourse = Where landlords challenged tenants rights to their own land and used it to graze sheep.
Because of this a few of the rebels requested that the govt. focus more on sheep farming rather than enclosure as a result of this.
L - Therefore, the extent to which enclosure was a big problem varies from region to region and in rural economies such as East Anglia enclosure was a ‘necessary evil’ to allow for sheep farming. However, where tensions did rise is when landlords tries to exploit their powers - social issue.
P - Another economic problem included population growth which ultimately underpinned social problems such as vagrancy due to economic consequences
E - The population in tudor England was growing and because of this causing economic hardship. This is because the more people, results in more AD, this puts an upward pressure on things such as food prices. - This also lead to pressure on land for crops which was made worse by enclosure
Between 1525 and 1551 the population grew from 2.3 million to 3 million.
E - This coincided with rising unemployment because there wasn’t enough jobs for the number of people there were resulted in grave socio-economic hardship for everyone in Tudour England.
L - The unemployed were reliant on poor relief and those unable to work turned to begging. This alarmed the authorities so much that it led to the passing of the 1547 Vagrancy Act which punished vagrants very severely. This led to further resentment from the poor.
P - Landlords also exploited these social problems via enclosure and sheep farming
E - Population growth resulted in rising prices due to inflation. As a result of this, rising profits produced an incentive for landlords to turn to enclosure to increase profits.
E - But this coincided with unemployment and inflation made peoples lives in rural areas harder as they also couldn’t reap the benefits of these profits.
L - Therefore causing greater socio - economic issues
P - The social problems of rising population and its economic consequences were only excaberated in the 1540’s due to poor harvests.
E - As a result of this, there were food shortages. Due to a shortage in supply, prices for foods sky rocketed even more.
E - Similarly, the EU market for wool and cloth was BOOMING which encouraged landlords to switch to sheep farming as well as exploit greed-flation through rack-renting.
L - This was significance because not only did sheep-farming require less labour than arable farming which worsened unemployment - it hit the poorest hardest as they needed common ground to make ends meat.
Another problem was the debasement of coinage to meet the cost of war with France and Scotland. This led to a rise in prices. Those on a low or no income really suffered.
Somerset realised something must be done. The result was the 1548 and 1549 commissions on enclosures, which was the catalyst or starting point for Kett’s rebellion. - So, social and economic problems were so significant, mainly those as a result of enclosure, as it resulted in the commissions on enclosure which resulted in rebellion !
P - The socio-economic problems made predominantly by enclosure were so bad that it resulted in Somerset’s commissions which had the unintended consequence of triggering the rebellion
E - This is because the Duke and John Hale tried to push a series of commissions onto parliament regarding investigation into illegal enclosure - yet the legality of these failed.
E - However, they had the unintended consequences of not only isolating Somerset from the landed gentry - the most of parliament was made up of - it also made the commons believe he was on their side.
L - They declared him as the ‘Good Duke’ and were under the impression that any actions they undertook against corruption and landlords would be facilitated by him - resulted in Kett’s rebellion.
To what extent did Kett’s rebellion pose a challenge to the govt. ?
Overall: Was a substantial threat due to organisation of rebels, weakness of Somerset’s govt. and need to put the rebellion down by using such brutal force despite their peaceful nature!
P - It could be argued that the rebellion posed a threat to the govt. due to its peaceful nature which resulted in support for the cause - indirectly threatened social order
E - The rebels still saw themselves as loyal subjects to the Crown - they did not see themselves as rebels. They wanted social hierachy to remain just progress so they weren’t as heavily exploited.
The rebels were well organised and were able to supply a large number of participants for six weeks.
The local authorities also co-operated with the rebels. As the rebels appeared peaceful and well organised, local administrators, who usually served the government, responded to the rebels’ requests to supply food.
E - Therefore, due to their peaceful nature the rebels were able to show their capabilities of running central govt. and the fact that the rebels’ organisation stretched beyond the camp at Norwich suggests that the Mousehold camp was seen by local officials as the new centre of administration for the region.
L - Therefore, due to the peaceful nature of the rebels and the rebellion which allowed them to show their competence at local govt. without the help of landed gentry - and the evident support they received due to resentment of landed gentry - shows the threat they imposed.
P - However, it could be argued that the rebels didn’t pose as much of a threat to the govt. due to their peaceful nature
E - When the Earl of Warwick’s army arrived - the rebels knew they were no match for the trained professionals
E - On 27th August Warwick made one more attempt to negotiate but the rebels refused.
This was the signal for Warwick to attack. The rebels’ resistance soon collapsed. Kett was captured and 3,000 rebels were killed. Kett was executed for treason in December 1549.
L - Nonetheless, the force Warwick felt he had to use to put down the rebellion still could be used as evidence that the rebellion did pose significant threat - however they still did not manage to break down social hierachy which may inidicate their lack of threat due to their failure .
P - It could be argued that the rebels posed a threat due to the weakness of Somerset’’s govt.
E - The government was already trying to put down the Western Rising. When Kett’s rebellion broke out the government had to divide its forces to fight two rebellions at different sides of the country.
The rebellion was large; the Mousehold camp was 16,000 strong and there were other camps across East Anglia and beyond.
E - The government took longer to respond so the rebels had time to organise their defences. When the Royal army arrived under William Parr, the Marquess of Northampton, the rebels saw off the professional army.
The nobility in the region should have been led by the Duke of Norfolk. However he had been arrested for treason in 1546. His absence created a power vacuum and the local gentry lacked leadership so the rebellion was able to gather momentum more quickly.
L - Therefore, despite the obvious defeat the weakness of Somerset’s govt. coincided by the evident use of large armed forces signals that Kett’s rebellion did impose a substantial threat due to the govt. feels the need to do that.
P - It could also be argued that the rebellion did not impose a threat due to Kett’s military skills in comparison to Warwicks
E - Kett was not a military man and lacked the skill to deal with a well-trained army under the experience of a well- trained soldier, the Earl of Warwick.
E - Warwick cut off the rebels’ supplies and without supplies the rebel camp could not survive. This made Kett panic.
He ordered the rebels to disband the camp at Mousehold and march to Dussindale. This was a disaster!
On the hill at Mousehold the rebels were well protected from attack but Dussindale was flat and it was easy for Warwick’s cavalry to attack the untrained rebels. Sotherton claims Kett tried to flee.
The battle of Dussindale ended Kett’s rebellion.
L - Nonetheless, The brutal way the rebellion was put down suggests that the government had felt threatened even when they knew Kett wasn’t naturally a military leader !
How far do you agree that Kett’s rebellion was driven by a want for better local govt.
The rebels demands in their petitions reflected the socio-economic discontent felt over the resentment over the anger of the East Anglian gentry
P - It could be argued that Kett’s rebellion was driven by a desire for better governance due to focused demands in their petitions fr better local govt.
E - The rebels wanted to end the corrupt govt. of the local gentry.
They resented escheator and feodary (article 12) (Feodaries were officials who searched out the potential heirs of landowners who held their land from the king. They could take bribes from landlords to protect the interest of the landlords and could rob income from the king). - Accused of lining their own pockets at the expense of local govt.
E - They demanded each officer who upset them should pay four pence per day for the duration of the rebellion (article 29).
The rebels demanded that local government officials should be chosen by local people to ensure an honest official. This was radical as officials were nominated by the king.
L - Therefore, despite enclosure triggering the rebellion the extensive mention of the need for local govt. reform in the rebels petition excaberates the role it played in the rebellion.
P - It could be argued that enclosure was the sole reason for the rebellion
E - This is due to the socio-economic discontent it caused for the peasants and copyhold tenants which increased inequality and economic hardship.
E - However, enclosure didn’t dominate the rebels demands which could be argued against the statement I just made.
Their anger was directed to sheep farmers (articles 3, 21 and 23).
They resented landlords’ power and lack of respect for the rights of villagers to common land as they tried to make profits from sheep farming.
The rebels objected to rises in rents (articles 2, 14 and 21). This was an economic complaint which highlighted the role of the local gentry who were blamed for deliberately raising rents to exploit the poor tenants and increase their profits.
L - Therefore, it could be argued that the sole reason for the rebellion was indirectly aimed as ‘better local govt.’ This is due to the anger towards exploitation of landed gentry who predominantly made up parliament / govt.
P - It could be argued that the attack on Flowerdew’s enclosed land revealed the resentment in East Anglia that triggered the rebellion
E - This is because Flowerdew was everything the rebels hated. He was part of the landed gentry and a lawyer who used his enclosed land to exploit profits. As well as this, he used his legal skills to gain local political power and his post allowed him to earn extra money through bribes and intimmidation.
E - Therefore, the attack is symbolic as it represents that the rebels hate the exploitation of power not only through enclosure but through abuse of political power also through the landed gentry
L - Because of this, making it a strong argument that a better local govt. was at the heart of this rebellion
P - However, it coukd be argued that the rebels never wanted to overthrow the govt. or seek societal hierachal change.
E - This is because the rebels saw themselves as peaceful and loyal members of the Crown
E - This can be seen in thier wording of their demands. Most of the demands stated ‘we pray that…’.The rebels did not seek to destroy the nobility and gentry. Some of their articles (10 and 24) wanted to preserve the rights and privileges due to men of rank.
L - Yet the rebels resented the local gentry and wanted their role to change. What the rebels wanted was for the social hierarchy to remain but for the landed elites to play a different role in the hierarchy where they would be prevented from exploiting the commons.
Others:
The rebels were inspired by the Peasant’s Revolt of 1381. The rebels demanded that all bondmen (these were peasants who had very restricted lives) should be made free. Article 16 shows the rebels had a responsibility to look after the interests of the poorest and most vulnerable in society. This was possibly directed at Thomas Howard Duke of Norfolk who used bondmen on his estates in Norfolk.
The rebels called on the landowners to treat their tenants and servants well. This explains why some of their articles, 14 and 28 refer to the reign of Henry VII. They felt this was a time when the government was more just. This was not just tradition but a new radical approach to government which was dangerous for Somerset and the local gentry.
The rebels also had views on religion (articles 4, 8, 15 and 20). Kett’s rebels were sympathetic to the Duke of Somerset’s move to Protestantism. They used the new Book of Common Prayer introduced in 1549. The rebels were concerned about the education of the clergy. They expected them to be able to preach, serve their communities and be better educated. #
WHAT WERE THE ROLES OF KETT, THE DUKE OF SOMERSET AND THE EARL OF WARWICK?
Robert Kett:
When Sir John Flowerdew tried to turn the rebels on him, he chose to support the rebels.
Kett’s Successes:
Kett’s leadership and tactics
Kett agreed with the rebels that he had enclosed common land illegally and destroyed the fences. But he was prepared to go further. He had a strong sense of social justice and sided with the rebels against the landowners.
He promised to stay with the rebels until they achieved their aims and his position in the community meant the rebels were prepared to accept his leadership.
Kett was a charismatic leader and was able to persuade the rebels to follow him, leading an army of 16,000. Even when the government forces arrived the rebels stayed loyal to him, trusting in his leadership.
Kett insisted on good order within the rebel camp, insisting the rebels behave peacefully. Kett also set up courts of justice where members of the gentry were put on trial. The court was at Mousehold under a tree called the Oak of Reformation. This led to their imprisonment. Kett wanted to show central government that local government could be run effectively. This highlighted the gentry’s mismanagement of local affairs.
Kett’s failures:
Kett was not a military man and lacked the skill to deal with a well-trained army under the experience of a well- trained soldier, the Earl of Warwick.
The rebels had defeated Northampton because he remained in Norwich while the rebels had a strong defensive position overlooking the city.
However Warwick cut off the rebels’ supplies and without supplies the rebel camp could not survive. This made Kett panic. He ordered the rebels to disband the camp at Mousehold and march to Dussindale. This was a disaster! On the hill at Mousehold the rebels were well protected from attack but Dussindale was flat and it was easy for Warwick’s cavalry to attack the untrained rebels. Sotherton claims Kett tried to flee. The battle of Dussindale ended Kett’s rebellion.
Kett’s participation was significant as he provided direction for the rebels but he was not match for Warwick
The roles of the Duke of Somerset:
For the rebellion:
Somerset’s style of rule was dictatorial. He bypassed the Council and relied on a group of his own friends and advisors to make policy decisions like William Paget. He carefully controlled access to the young king. His power rested on his ability to control the king and the co-operation of his supporters. However his position was shaken as a result of the risings and he fell from power in 1549.
Somerset’s policies helped to create the atmosphere for rebellion and encouraged the rebels to think they had the support of the government.
Somerset liked to portray himself as a friend of the commons and the poor. His anti-enclosure policy had led to the commission of 1548. He had also set up a court where the poor could seek justice. The result of this was to make the rebels believe that he was on their side. His actions also alienated other members of the landed elites, whose support he needed, such as the Earl of Warwick.
Somerset’s negotiations with the rebels
His response to the rebellion actually made it worse. The Duke was accused of endangering the social and political order by negotiating with the rebels and offering them concessions. These accusations are true. Letters from 1549 show that he gave support to the rebels. Although they revealed the importance of social order and respect for those of higher rank, Somerset revealed he was sympathetic to their complaints, viewing them as ‘great and just causes’.
Somerset had appointed the enclosure commissioners, which were busy inquiring into and taking action against one of the main causes of resentment. This sent a message that the government was supporting them against the landlords.
Somerset inflamed the situation by promising the rebels that the parliament, due to meet on 4th November would be moved forward to 4th October. This was intending that the rebels’ complaints could be discussed more quickly. Although the rebellion was put down before this, in the short term this offer only served to encourage the rebels even more.
Somerset merely encouraged the rebellion !
How did Somerset make Kett’s rebellion worse?
In the summer of 1549 he appeared to be encouraging the rebels but on the other hand he was trying to bring the rebellion to an end.
He offered the rebels a pardon but because the rebels saw themselves as acting in line with Somerset’s policies, his offer was rejected.
He then resorted to force.
He was unfortunate that the Marquess of Northampton was so unsuccessful at the first attempt. This gave the rebels more time to organise themselves. This action led the rebels to believe that Somerset had betrayed them and only hardened their determination to resist.
The end of the rebellion was the result of Somerset’s mishandling of the situation. He was initially seen to encourage the rebels and then disperse them by force.
His intentions were honourable and based on his Protestant faith but the results were disastrous for the rebels and for his political position. His management of the rebellion led to his downfall in October 1549.
The Council resented his power and blamed him for the political and social crises that now threatened England. He was replaced by the man who put down Kett’s rebellion, the Earl of Warwick.
The Earl of Warwick
Warwick’s initial failures
Nevertheless, in spite of his divided loyalties he was a good choice to lead the royal army against the rebels.
The manor of Wymondham, where the rebellion broke out belonged to him. Robert Kett was his tenant.
His army contained German mercenaries and when the rebels saw the approaching army they panicked. Warwick was prepared to negotiate and offered a pardon to all but Kett. The rebels were reluctant but wanted to find a peaceful settlement.
Unfortunately there was an incident between the rebels and Warwick’s troops which led to a young boy being shot. This hardened both Warwick and the rebels.
Kett was still prepared to negotiate with Warwick, he was dissuaded from doing this by other rebels, who feared what Warwick would do to them.
Why was Warwick able to eventually defeat the rebels?
When negotiations failed, Warwick ordered the gates of Norwich to be opened. When the rebels refused to co-operate he ordered the army to open fire and they broke through the city defences. They overran the city and executed some rebels. The rebels did launch a counter attack but despite fierce resistance, Warwick and his army were able to fight back. The royal troops were ordered to remain in the city until they defeated the rebels or died in the attempt.
Warwick was helped by the arrival of additional Swiss mercenaries and the cutting off of the rebels’ supplies. This made the rebels desperate. Kett then made the fatal decision to leave Mousehold Heath for Dussindale on 26th August.
Warwick took advantage of the fact that the rebels had to make new defences at Dussindale. He attacked on the following day. A final pardon was offered and refused. The army charged and the front line of rebels scattered and fled, including Kett. The remaining rebels fought on and Warwick was so impressed by their courage that he offered another pardon!
Up to 3,000 rebels were killed at Dussindale by Warwick’s army whereas Warwick lost 40 men. Warwick had succeeded in suppressing a rebellion where Northampton had failed.
To what extent was the rebellion a threat
Force:
It took considerable force as in the Pilgrimage of Grace to put down Kett’s rebellion. Warwick hanged 49 rebels captured in Norwich and a further 3,000 were killed in Dussindale.
Warwick also ordered nine rebels to be hanged, drawn and quartered at the Oak of Reformation as an act of revenge. Their heads were displayed on the city walls of Norwich and their bodies sent to the communities that had participated in the revolt.
Concession:
There were repeated attempts to get the rebels to disperse peacefully by offering them pardons.
This was inspired by the Duke of Norfolk’s success in 1536 to persuade a large group of rebels to go home without a fight.
But there had been the betrayal of the promise of pardon by Henry in 1537. Somerset had to reassure the rebels that the pardon was genuine and would not be retracted.
The government also used propaganda to persuade the rebels that revolt was against the laws of God and England. Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury preached against rebellion and the idea of a Godly commonwealth.
It was the scale, organisation and leadership of the rebels at Mousehold Heath that led to the government response towards it. Yet violence tended to be the last resort; Somerset simply did not have the men or resources to act in any other way.