• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent were Tudor rebellions caused by factionalism?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent were Tudor rebellions caused by factionalism? Faction within the Tudor dynasty has been seen as pernicious by many historians; Christopher Haigh argues that faction fighting in the counties and at Court was certainly disruptive. Writing about Elizabeth I, he comments on how sources of factional conflict are thought to have tested her political skills, and, as she lost control in the 1590s, to have contributed towards the slide to disaster. On the other hand, it has been reasonably argued that faction was a necessary phenomenon for active and energetic government. Paul Thomas argues that although it did pose a danger, faction returned to its role as an engine of politics, noting how the core of council and administration remained remarkably consistent at least until 1589. Evidence of the threat posed by faction begins in the fifteenth century where weak kingship and challenges to the succession had led to the rapid turnover of factions and rulers; Simnel and Warbeck's rebellion were both politically motivated due to Yorkist and Lancastrian faction. ...read more.


The 'strong' rule of Henry VII and his son until 1540 had seen faction kept within bounds, and so, when faction overthrew Wolsey from 1529 to 1530, its victory was short lived. Thomas Cromwell's promotion from Wolsey's own household and his grasp of many of the essentials of the Cardinal's rule ensured stability. Once Cromwell was himself overthrown in 1540, the king seemed all too willing to allow conservative and radical or Catholic and Protestant factions to compete openly without lasting victory for either. These accounts suggest that faction was an engine to politics rather than a danger to it, and both Henry VIII and Elizabeth (both widely considered successful monarchs) advocated it. Penry Williams upholds this view and suggests that, despite some resistance to taxation and some troubles caused by the ambitions of Essex, government was effective in difficult circumstances and its ends were achieved. ...read more.


These accounts propose that faction needs to more closely defined. Haigh suggests that the bitter disputes between Leicester and Essex have been wrongly termed factional, as 'most of their relations were quite amicable... [and] there was never a Sussex faction of any size'. Ultimately, there was an element of both similarity and continuity in the period as most of the rebellions were politically motivated - starting with Warbeck's rebellion in 1491 until the end of the period with Essex's rebellion in 1601 - and political motivation always involved faction. This displays the clear political motives present across the period, which is an arguably unique consistency. Religious grievances, for example, were not present throughout the Tudor reign; it was only due to reformation in 1532 that religion became a factor that linked the previously disparate groups together. Both the consistency and frequency of the impact factionalism had on rebellion therefore suggest it was undeniably important in causing it. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Assess the reasons for the decline in frequency of Tudor rebellions

    3 star(s)

    Instead they settled for nuisance value and prevented Henry VII from feeling fully secure. After a while however, foreign support failed to materialise at all, for example in the Northern Earls rebellion they relied on Spanish troops but failed to keep regular contact and the foreign rulers realised the pointlessness of the cause.

  2. To what extent did Tudor rebellions have similar causes

    treason but by the end of the period the Tudor dynasty itself was far more secure meaning that Wyatt never made public his desire to overthrow Mary as the Tudor regime was now accepted. Politically motivated rebellions always involved faction.

  1. Arabi israli conflict

    They lost the land in 1948 and since then, and still are today trying to retrieve it. I know that source D is a lie, they make out they are the innocent one's to make them selves look better than they are.

  2. How useful is a visit to the Tudor parts of Hampton Court to find ...

    it was so important for the king to demonstrate his superiors power and wealth to his richest subjects and visiting ambassadors, at the same time he had to make sure that the people he ruled appreciated his power and liked him.

  1. How valuable is a field trip to the Tudor part of the Palace for ...

    and dance, My heart is set all goodly sport to my comfort, who shall me let?' When Henry V111 took over Hampton Court, he pulled down Wolsey's Great Hall, and had a larger grander Great Hall built in its place.

  2. Assess the role of political factors in causing rebellions in Tudor England

    Succession was also a main political factor in the causing of rebellions. Rebellions become more concerned with the succession rather than deposing the existing monarch during this time. Wyatt?s rebellion for example who feared the marriage of price Phillip and Mary thinking that it could lead to Philip to bring

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work