The crown and the country, 1485–1603:
The development of a network of personal relationships by patronage
How did the relationship between the nobility and the monarch change from 1485 - 1603 ?
The relationship between the monarchy and the nobility changed considerably during the Tudor period.
In 1485 the nobility were traditional medieval military leaders whose power was based on how much land they owned.
They used their land to raise armies and this equated to power.
This relationship with the monarchy suffered during the Wars of the Roses as the nobility rose against the monarchy i.e. Henry VII.
Tudor monarchs wanted to change this threat to their power.
By Elizabeth’s reign a new kind of nobleman, whose power rested on their access to the monarch had emerged. The monarch gave them patronage in exchange for loyalty.
Their relationship with the monarch was also based on the granting of lands, offices and titles. This was referred to as patronage.
By the end of the Tudor period it had become much harder to raise an army against the monarch. The nobility needed and cooperated with the monarchy for favour and patronage.
Nobility also had a vital role in the government of the localities as JP’s.
The role of the gentry was also enhanced (as JP’s)
Monarchy, Nobility and gentry were generally all on the same side. The threat of rebellion from the nobility lessened.
What was Henry VII’s attitude to the nobility?
Henry was sceptical of the nobility due to the War of the Roses as the nobility rose up against the monarch
He heavily rewarded those who were loyal to him i.e. Jasper Tudor yet punished those who committed ‘treason’
He preferred to use a small group of trusted nobility, gentry and lawyers to help him control the localities.
How did this enhance his control over the region?
It meant Henry could control this region more personally and could add to his wealth.
Administrators, such as Reginald Bray were also rewarded by Henry and used their positions to build up land, power and influence.
Bray was a royal councillor and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. This allowed him to gain lands in 18 counties and gain an incomes of £1000 a year. This only happened because Henry trusted him. This allowed Henry to extend more influence into the localities.
Other members of the nobility had to work hard to earn Henry’s trust. Thomas Howard had fought against Henry at Bosworth and had been imprisoned.
He released Howard and gave him back not all his titles but control over the North in Henry’s absence - therefore, indirectly extending control over the localities also
In what ways can it be argued that Henry VII was successful in his treatment of the nobility?
After 1497 there was no rebellion against him from the nobility.
Patronage under Henry VIII
Henry’s relationship with the nobility was very different to his farther’s
He saw them as companions and did things such as hunting, jousting and military campaigning with them
Henry VIII was also more generous with his money, rewarding his companions. This caused the relationship between the king and his nobility to change.
How did their relationship begin to change?
The nobles now took up positions in the Chamber where they would serve and advise the King and where they could represent their own interests and gain patronage from the king.
This influence included suggestions about where the king's patronage should be deployed, e.g. Sir William Compton, who was a Gentleman of the Chamber and Groom of the Stool was able to raise his income from his estates from £10 to £1,700 a year by acquiring grants of royal lands and offices. Compton’s success made his family a fortune and his grandson was promoted into the peerage by Elizabeth I.
Similarly one of Henry’s closest friends was Charles Brandon. Henry made him Duke of Suffolk and granted him estates in East Anglia.
Henry used his good relationship with Suffolk to extend control in the localities. Henry also used his relationship with Suffolk to help during the Pilgrimage of Grace.
Power and influence was dictated by a person's ability to gain access to the King, Thomas Wolsey or Thomas Cromwell. This created a group of men who owed their titles to their connections rather than their landed estates. Cromwell himself got his start from Wolsey. - rather than just friendships at the beginning of Henry’s reign
Professional administrators, like Cromwell were becoming increasingly influential under Henry VIII?
They had legal training and could help formulate policy
They could have royal patronage. They could rise in government service and become ennobled
BUT power of the nobility was slightly undermined by attacks from people Henry didn’t trust i.e. The Duke of Buckingham was executed in 1521 and his land forfeited to the king. Similarly the childless earl of Northumberland was forced to bequeath his estates to the king. The lands did eventually go to Northumberland's nephew, but until that happened Henry used it to grant rewards to his loyal followers and enhance his control in the north.
How did the sale of monastic lands help to strengthen the royal position?
Monastic lands were used to create a group of gentry and nobles who were rewarded for supporting the Reformation as they benefited from it.
An example of this is Sir John Russell who was granted land in the South West in the 1530’s, an area that was difficult for the Tudors to control. In return for his service he received land from a former abbey.
This shows how some of the nobility owed their advancement to royal patronage.
What were the problems caused as a result of patronage?
The Tudor system of patronage did have it’s disadvantages;
It relied on the presence of a strong, active and decisive monarch
A ruler who was too old, too young or too ill could be easily manipulated
Patronage could cause jealousy and lead to political instability.
This was increasingly the case in the last years of Henry VIII’s reign and under the young Edward VI.
As Henry became more infirm there was increased rivalry between the factions, especially over religion.
Edward Seymour’s faction wanted reform whereas the conservatives, led by Norfolk wanted to return to the Catholic faith. Both sides tried to influence the king and gain patronage for their followers and undermine their rivals.
Seymour's family ultimately won the battle and used their control to access the dying Henry VIII to manipulate royal will in Seymour’s favour;
Seymour made himself the regent or Lord Protector for the young Edward VI
In this case Henry’s patronage created a member of the nobility who was almost too powerful. Although by 1549 he was overthrown in the aftermath of the 1549 rebellions (Ketts)
Conclusion : Henry VII and Henry VIII’s system of patronage had succeeded in creating loyalty and had weakened the traditional military power of the nobility as Seymour could not raise an army to protect his position.
How did Elizabeth strengthen links between central govt. and the localities?
Elizabeth I used a complex system of patronage and a network of formal and informal connections to strengthen the link between the centre and the localities closer together. Her nobility were both courtiers and politicians, active locally and in central government.
Led by William Cecil, a key group of noblemen served Elizabeth as councillors, MP’s, Lord Lieutenants and JP’s. Often these men would hold multiple positions but gained their power from their close working relationship with the queen.
A new element was added to the importance of patronage by the fact that Elizabeth wasn’t married. Her favourites were men who she had flirtatious relationships with. This was a good way for Elizabeth to keep control in a man's world.
A good example of this type of patronage is Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester;
He received generous grants of land and control of Chester. He was to be the Queen’s eyes and ears in the localities where he dominated.
However, Elizabeth was careful to keep the distribution of patronage in her own hands. Although she allowed Cecil and Dudley to develop their own networks of patronage, they still had to maintain her trust, Elizabeth’s handling of these two men helped to maintain political stability until the 1590’s.
How did Elizabeth extend power in the localities?
Another important aspect of Elizabeth's patronage was the increasing extension of royal power into the localities especially the hard to control regions of the North. The South West and Wales were now under royal control, but the northern nobility still remained a threat.
Some nobles like Thomas Percy , the Earl of Northumberland was sympathetic to the catholics and could not be trusted to remain loyal to protestant Elizabeth. To prevent rebellion she placed Southerners into positions in the North and the potentially disloyal Northern nobility were deprived of their positions.
Was this successful ?
In the short term this policy backfired as it created resentment among the northern nobility and led to a court based plot against Cecil. Eventually this all boiled over to become the Revolt of the Northern Earls in 1569.
In the long term, however, this played into Elizabeth's hands as she now had the perfect excuse to destroy the traditional northern nobility for good. The forfeited lands were granted to loyal members of the nobility. The Council of the North was reformed and the puritan Earl of Huntingdon was placed at its head.
What problems developed as a result of patronage in the 1590’s for Elizabeth ?
In the 1590’s, Elizabeth’s system of patronage began to break down and the aging queen began to lose control of her government. Many of her most trusted councillors had died (Dudley and Walsingham) and Cecil was also ageing.
New positions were taken up by Robert Cecil ( William Cecils son ) and the Earl of Sussex
This created tension due to rivalry over the control of patronage as William Cecil had used his position to advance his son’s career. In 1591, Robert was admitted to the Privy council.
Essex was a noble but not very wealthy. He relied on the Queen for his power and influence.The Cecils however were able to build up power and influence more effectively mainly because William Cecil had monopolised so many positions in government.
In 1596, Robert Cecil became Secretary and so the family could tighten their grip on the control of patronage still further, this made Essex jealous.
He attempted to stage a rebellion and was executed for treason, leaving the Cecil’s dominant at Court.
Essex’s failed rebellion shows that the Tudor system of patronage, when mismanaged, could lead to serious political instability.
However… could be argued that - the fact that Essex was unable to raise any opposition shows both the loyalty that the Tudors had generated and the changing nature of the role of the nobility who were now completely reliant on access to the monarch.
It was primarily patronage that allowed monarch’s to extent control over the localities
P - It could be argued as the primary source regarding Henry VII and Henry VIII.
E - Henry VII was sceptical of the nobility following the War of Roses, thus he punished those who betrayed him. However, he was also overly rewarding to those that were loyal to him
This can be seen by Administrators, such as Reginald Bray were also rewarded by Henry and used their positions to build up land, power and influence. Bray was a royal councillor and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. This allowed him to gain lands in 18 counties and gain an incomes of £1000 a year. This only happened because Henry trusted him. This allowed Henry to extend more influence into the localities. Therefore, Henry was able to control the region whilst adding to his personal wealth, which considering his role as usurper proves vital and after 1497 there were no more rebellions.
E - For Henry VIII patronage proved important over the localities but was utilised in a different way. Henry had a far more friendly relationship with the nobility, thus he went jousting and hunting with them. Later on his reign, nobles were able to offer Henry advice as to where his patronage should be redirected to.
L - Therefore, throughout the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII the roles of patronage were vital in obtaining a degree of control, however due to rebellions against Henry VIII by people he trusted it would be inaccurate to declare patronage the primary control
P - Moreover, under Henry patronage came with its problems. The aspect of patronage relied heavily upon the presence of a strong decisive leader in order to grant it to the nobility.
E - However, in the later years of Henry’s reign as he got older, it was far easier for nobility to manipulate him via patronage and because of this resulted in rivalry factions within regions and therefore political instability. i.e.
Edward Seymour’s faction wanted reform whereas the conservatives, led by Norfolk wanted to return to the Catholic faith. Both sides tried to influence the king and gain patronage for their followers and undermine their rivals.
Seymour's family ultimately won the battle and used their control to access the dying Henry VIII to manipulate royal will in Seymour’s favour;
Seymour made himself the regent or Lord Protector for the young Edward VI
E - The same can be seen under Edward VI’s reign yet due to his youth, as seen by Seymour who was now overly powerful as a result of patronage and now had utmost access to the young king.
L - Therefore, despite the advantages of patronage in extending the monarch’s control over the nobility, it also arises significant disadvantages due to the potential for exploitation therefore undermining the extent of its control.
P - Moreover, it could be argued that patronage was the primary cause of control under Elizabeth, which was vital considering the extent of opposition to her reign due to her gender
E - Elizabeth was able to extend control over the localities via patronage by placing loyal Southerners into potentially unloyal Northern Earl’s posts such as Northumberland and Percy, in an attempt to suppress opposition
E - However, this was ultimately only a short term method of control for Elizabeth as the Northern Earls 1569 resulted in rebellion despite the use of patronage.
Similarly, to Henry VIII and Edward, there were extensive problems with Elizabeth’s patronage in her old age as it resulted in rivalry competing for royal positions as by this point Cecil and Dudley had already passed.
This caused large scale disputes between the Earls of Sussex and Robert Cecil regarding who should be the next Royal adviser, therefore providing evidence of the lack of control Elizabeth had at this point
L - Therefore, due to the evidence of the Revolt of the Northern Earls in 1569, it is evident that patronage did not extent full control over the localities and certainly did not in the final years of her reign, therefore would be inaccurate to declare it as the primary cause of control.