How effective was Henry VII’s government?
How effective was Henry VII's government?
To judge how effective Henry's government was, many factors have to be considered. A government at the time consisted of different sections that could all be effective in one way or another. Due to the situation before and during the reign, this has to be taken into account when summing up Henry's government. The situation when Henry took the crown was very different to that when he died, leaving his successor, Henry VIII with a chance to continue the dynasty. The length of Henry's reign (24 years) and the fact that the dynasty he founded would occupy the throne for the whole of the sixteenth century are testimony to his adept handling of the day-to-day business of government. This way it already shows that Henry's government must have been effective to some extent.
The situation in England after the Wars of the Roses was crisis. After the years of rule under Richard III, Henry had a big task in securing the throne due to his weak claim. Many of the powerful nobles in the kingdom had been killed during these wars, leaving Henry short of support from the established nobility. Henry faced some other immediate problems that he had to raise enough money to defend himself while imposing his influence on the situation in the kingdom. His government can be divided into different sections of different policy: finance, law and order, administration and foreign. All are important when deciding whether his government was effective.
The conventional view of Henry's skill with finances was that he was a very miserly man. This reputation was founded on the fact that, despite his spending, he managed his financial affairs well, making the most of all the opportunities for increased income. When he died he didn't leave a great fortune, but spent his money wisely, so contradicting the argument that he was tight. Henry followed in the footsteps of Edward IV in trying to extend his personal control over financial matters. He made sure that his most trusted servants took positions in the treasury, so he could be sure that the maximum income could be collected. Ways Henry achieved this was by changing some of the methods of collection. Under the guidance of Sir Reginald Bray, his estates were managed more profitably from the early 1490's and the annual income from the crown lands increased from £29,000 in 1485 to £42,000 in 1509. This would suggest that this section of government was managed effectively due to the increase in revenue under the influence of the king.
Other normal methods of collection were changed, like the collection of feudal dues, where special commissions identified ways of increasing the revenue. Henry introduced the book of rates, which clarified valuations of particular goods and rates to be paid, placing a greater need for documentary evidence. Henry cracked down on the number of corrupt officials in his financial system by placing large fines on them, which turned out to be a reliant source if income due to the success of finding the smugglers. To do this, an effective system was needed, so adding to the evidence that Henry made this part of government very successful by using direct action and employing the right people around him.
Much of the money Henry gained came about because of the management of land. He made sure that all land that he could have either by claiming it or inheriting it, was his. Constant additions were made to the royal estate by the clever way his government used the acts of attainder. Henry used this on his enemies to claim their land for himself, therefore increasing his revenue by renting it off to his supporters. Linked to this was the way his government exploited the extent of his feudal rights. They pursued enquiries, ferreting out under age heirs ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Much of the money Henry gained came about because of the management of land. He made sure that all land that he could have either by claiming it or inheriting it, was his. Constant additions were made to the royal estate by the clever way his government used the acts of attainder. Henry used this on his enemies to claim their land for himself, therefore increasing his revenue by renting it off to his supporters. Linked to this was the way his government exploited the extent of his feudal rights. They pursued enquiries, ferreting out under age heirs who tried to evade wardship. As a result, his income rose substantially. In 1487 he obtained less than £300 from this source, but by 1494 receipts were running at over £1,500 and by 1507 they had soared to more than £6,000 a year. Again, this suggests that Henry's finances were very well managed, so contributing to an effective government. Some of this was due to the fact that Henry held more property than any sovereign since the Norman Conquest.
Edward IV's policies did influence that of Henry VII. Edward had used the chamber to distribute his finances, and had been reasonably successful in doing so. Henry changed from the exchequer system to the chamber in his reign. He needed this to make his government more effective, as it possessed some distinct advantages from the older exchequer system. The main advantage seen by Henry was that it would allow him to lay his hands on ready money in an emergency, which was very important to him considering his weaker position on the throne earlier on. It could be argued that as a move to centralisation, Henry's use of the chamber is a characteristic, as it allowed him to distribute money from the centre as he was in total charge of it. In improving the effectiveness of his government, the chamber speeded up the financial process by cutting the administration needed. Its judicial functions in matters such as the pursuit of debtors also remained vital.
Henry's government did not just consist of a financial side, but an equally important law and order section. No matter how effective his finances may have seemed to be, a poor law and order policy would reduce the effectiveness of government as it was the people Henry was meant to rule.
When looking at law and order, it is important to look at how he used different systems in government to rule, such as the council and parliament. This will decide whether it can be called effective or not. Fifteenth century government was centred upon the king and his immediate circle of advisers, the king's council. Henry surrounded himself with a number of able councillors, around 70 at one time. In many ways he used a traditional approach to kingship and government. Although he took initiatives in ways of setting up government, he was more concerned with making the old system work effectively than replacing it with a new one. This is another example of Edward IV's influence on Henry's policies.
Government was centred upon the king and the members of the king's council. In Henry's council, councillors were chosen on merit and expected to provide a real service. It was clear however; that the king was very much in control of his council and the other institutions which he governed realm. Some of Henry's councillors had served on the councils of Edward IV and Richard III. What this provided Henry was an excellent level of estate management, which was invaluable to a king anxious to get the greatest profits. By surrounding himself with influential and intelligent nobles, Henry's government had a very effective centre that the other sections could be managed from. The council also fulfilled a judicial function, maintaining law and order. This way the council could issue an executive order and summon people before it, as it had great power with the support of the nobility. Henry may have initially hoped that his council would take the lead in imposing order upon a turbulent society, but this swamped the council with civil actions. Therefore it could be said that while the king's central government had a very effective system, the needs of Henry may have reduced it effectiveness and made it less of a success.
Since Henry governed England through his council and household, parliament played little role in the policy making. Parliament sessions totalled a mere 21 months in a reign of over 23 years. Parliament did have some use to Henry's government, in allowing him greater control over his finances, like preventing the keeping of retainers, and allowing him to impose more extraordinary taxes. It could be said that Parliament in Henry's reign was not yet a regular part of the machinery of government, so its effectiveness with the government are not to be taken to seriously. What parliament did though was to help the king gain more authority. Statute law made by parliament was the highest law in the land, and parliament's recognition of Henry's right to rule was highly important to a king trying to establish the credibility and strength of a new dynasty. Why this may not prove that Henry's government was effective, gaining authority and creditability was an important step to improving his rule of the kingdom.
During his reign, Henry's government had many chances to prove its effectiveness. Due to his situation, Henry faced some challenges to his throne earlier in his reign, when his government was still developing. In 1497 he demanded extra taxes needed to raise revenue with which to pay for a projected invasion of Scotland. This was met with discontent in some parts of the kingdom and this resulted in 15,000 Cornish rebels marching on London before being defeated on 17 June 1497. Despite this, it showed that people weren't happy with the methods of raising money from Henry's government. Even with all the other ways of raising money used by Henry, he was unable to raise the money needed to invade Scotland, needed after Perkin Warbeck. As his government was unable to raise the money, and because of the response it got, this questions the effectiveness of his government in handling financial matters, and judging public opinion. Overall, this could have resulted in a more difficult situation for Henry, and really, a government should not allow this to happen as it could endanger the king's position.
The final aspect of Henry's government was his relations with other countries, as depicted in his foreign policy. Having come to the throne with the help of France, it was Henry's policy to be friendly to France. What this did to his government was that Henry no longer had to fear invasion from the French, so he could redirect finances to other places, mainly keeping Scotland out. He achieved this when he signed a treaty with the Scots in 1497, so gaining greater security for his kingdom. The net result of this was that Henry's government was effective in staying out of any major war, which allowed more time and finances to be placed on other sections. Therefore the effectiveness of government would have improved.
Henry's government could be seen as effective in different areas and for different aims, and this could relate to the New Monarchy Theory. If the New Monarchy Theory could be applied to his government, then it would increase the chance of it being a success. Henry was one of the only kings of his time to remain solvent when he died. This was a great achievement considering the ever increased spending levied on monarchs to govern their realm. One reason for this could be the variety of methods used to generate revenue. Not going to any great lengths for war also saved Henry money. Being solvent must mean that his government was effective to some extent, otherwise he couldn't have raised the amounts he did.
It could also be argued that Henry centralised government to some extent, another feature of the New Monarchy Theory. By relying more on the council and allowing his most trusted advisors to govern for him, the king created a strong central administration system. By reducing the amount of nobles created during his reign, and removing much of their land through attainder's, Henry made his government around a small section of his advisors and supporters. This is a form of centralisation, with all laws and directives coming from the king's council. To do this he must have had a very effective and well-managed government otherwise running a kingdom from the extreme centre would have been impossible. Therefore the evidence would suggest that Henry's government was effective at running itself.
To fully determine how effective the government was you have to look at Henry's aims. His main aim was to set up the Tudor dynasty, so leaving an heir to the throne. To do this he needed strong control of the kingdom, as well as his supporters, so that he stayed on the throne. In achieving this aim we have to say that it was effective, as Henry had a long reign compared to other monarchs of the time, 24 years. At the end of this he was able to leave Henry VIII with a stable kingdom as well as a small amount of money. Being solvent at the end of his reign also shows that all the evidence suggests that the government was successful.
In achieving his other aims, Henry's government could be judged as effective in some areas. Evidence would suggest that his financial policy was a great success. This was a result of careful management and the great skill and spending limits of Henry himself. Having a government centred on the council was less effective as the king had hoped that it could perform the roles of more than one section. As a result it lowered the governments effectiveness as it had more administrative work than the councillors could manage. Despite this it could be still said that the government was successful for Henry's main aim. Where the government was not successful was with the Cornish Tax Rebellion, where the failure of the government could have put Henry himself in danger. The actual threat posed by this was not so great but reminded the king that the government couldn't achieve all that he wanted. Taking all the evidence into consideration, I would be fair to say that in achieving the aim of continuing the Tudor dynasty, Henry's government was very effective, as the king had a long reign and left a son, Henry VIII. In running England, the majority of the government could be seen as effective. Finances were in good order and law and order was run sensibly. By copying many of the successful policies of Edward IV, it allowed Henry to have a successful base with which to build his own centralised and effective government on.
David Bond 6KY
How effective was Henry VII's government?
