Finally, Source 4 is from the interrogation of Robert Aske, after he was captured. This source shows that religion did play a big factor in the Pilgrimage of Grace. He talks about how the suppressions, which was the acts that dissolved the monasteries, were the reason that everybody was complaining, or rebelling. And also about the Mass, which is the centrepiece of the catholic service, and that the ornaments and relics of the church were used against God’s approval. So all of his reasoning were religious which supports the interpretation, and he was the leader of The Pilgrimage of Grace, and if it wasn’t for him the rebellion wouldn’t have probably taken place, especially to the scale of which it did. However, source 4 doesn’t give us much information or clues to whether the Pilgrimage of Grace was spontaneous or planned.
There were some rumours that were around in Yorkshire immediately prior to the rebellion happening. One was that Henry was about to order all parish churches to hand over their silver to the government and that they would be replaced with tin ones. Also people said that tax was going to be placed on ‘rites of passage’, which were baptism, marriage and burial. This would have made families who were already financially pressured feel even more vulnerable if it was brought in. Also they said that the poorer classes were to be forbidden to eat certain types of food. These last 2 ‘rumours’ are social and economic problems which suggest that the interpretation is wrong again. There’s nothing to suggest these rumours were true, but in the 1530’s the common people didn’t have much insight to what was going on and believed them so this will have inspired many to rebel.
In conclusion, there can be little doubt that religious changes were a main reason for the Pilgrimage of Grace. Robert Aske wouldn’t have wanted to lead his fellow rebels if the protest had not had a religious input. The Reformation had affected over 100 small monasteries in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, so all religious commoners, as well as priests felt aggrieved. Many of these monasteries had worked with their local communities in both educational and medical aspects of everyday life, and there was a very negative attitude towards the loss of these activities. All commoners had been brought up knowing their religion and the rumours of their religion having to change and the closing of monasteries was threatening to them.
Although we can certainly say some of the rebels also had economic grievances and used the Pilgrimage of Grace to vent their anger. Rent increases seem to have been the primary reason for the anger of some of the ‘commoners’. However, this has always been played down by most historians.
Those who joined the rebellion (not being forced into it) seem to have done so because they believed that their traditional rights were being taken away from them and replaced with more modern methods that took away the power that they believed was theirs by right. The blame for the loss of local power was put on Thomas Cromwell who wanted to see an expansion of power within the localities. It was this supposed policy that angered the nobility in the North.
With so many people involved in the Pilgrimage, it is almost certain that individuals or small groups had their own reasons for joining, this is also shown in Source 1, with the taxation problems. The belief that the Pilgrimage of Grace was primarily a rebellion led by aggrieved nobles backed by ‘commoners’ who had serious concerns about the direction of religious reforms seems to be the best accepted cause. This was shown in Sources 2 and 3. If the rebellion was solely based on religious grievances, then the articles would have been purely about religion, but there were some rebel demands about social and economic problems. Also, as the articles contained statements that were political, we can certainly conclude that the causes of the Pilgrimage of Grace were a combination of all of these ‘underlying’ factors.
So, in conclusion we can say that the Pilgrimage of Grace was most probably down to religion, there were many Social, Economic and Political factors that greatly angered some of the rebels, and many may have used the religious reasoning as an excuse to rebel against the government. Also we can conclude that even though there were certain parts of spontaneity involved in The Pilgrimage of Grace, like in Source 1 as the citizens collected more people from the churches etc. to join them, that The Pilgrimage of Grace was quite well planned out and thought about, especially by the higher and more important people involved in the rebellion, and the common people supposedly just ‘tagged along’. A better interpretation would therefore be ‘The Pilgrimage of Grace was a well thought out rebellion with a hint of spontaneity, of which religion was the main cause, but there were many underlying Social, Economic and Political causes too.’
b) Explain how these sources are both useful and raise problems for historians using them.
Firstly, Sources 2 and 3 show historians what was being demanded and how the demands were worded, therefore showing how they were trying to approach the King. They are useful because they are from The Articles that were written at the time of the Rebellion. But while these articles give a clear indication of what a select group wanted, they cannot be assumed to be what the ‘commoner’ wanted. Because they were written by a select group of nobles, or in the case of the York Articles, Robert Aske. No ‘commoner’ was present, and they weren’t welcome as part of the discussions, and as they constituted most of the rebels, their beliefs are supposedly excluded from these articles. So a historian knows the provenance of the source is very good, but they don’t get the full picture of what all the rebels wanted.
Source 1 was written in a book by Geoffrey Moorhouse, in 2002. So there is no actual evidence or eye witnesses involved, therefore the provenance of the source is not brilliant. It could quite easily have been information from somewhere else, or even a personal view on what Moorhouse thought had happened. However it’s quite useful to tell us that there was a lot of people rebelling due to taxation problems and not just religion, and it shows us how that certain part of the rebellion was successful by forcing the commissioners away with the large amount of rebels involved.
Source 4 is very helpful to historians because it is the exact words of Robert Aske, so it was at the time the Rebellions were taking place. However because Robert Aske had just been captured, we can’t say for certain that all of his words and reasoning are completely true. Because for Aske it will be more a matter of survival and trying to save himself and give the blame to other people, if Aske tells the whole truth, he knows that some of his actions will probably get him killed. So we don’t know which bits of Aske’s statement to believe.
So overall the sources do give us a good idea of what caused the Pilgrimage of Grace, but there are some things, for example, what demands the commoners would have given, and what Aske would’ve said in his statement if he hadn’t been captured and fighting for his life, that we cannot pick up from these 4 sources.
by
chrissief95 (student)
