The Pilgrimage of Grace (1536–1537) was the largest Tudor rebellion, rooted in grievances against Henry VIII’s religious changes and economic pressures, with strong regional differences shaping protest.

Religious Causes of the Pilgrimage of Grace

The Break with Rome and Royal Supremacy

The rebellion’s most significant trigger was Henry VIII’s religious revolution. The Act of Supremacy (1534) declared the king head of the Church of England, undermining the Pope’s authority. For many northern Catholics, this was a direct attack on long-standing faith and tradition. The introduction of royal supremacy and subsequent reforms challenged their spiritual security and created widespread fear of heresy and damnation.

The dissolution of the monasteries caused particular anger. Monastic houses were central to northern society, offering charity, education, and healthcare. Their destruction threatened both religious devotion and essential welfare services, making this a deeply resented policy.

Doctrinal Changes and Ritual

The fear of religious change extended beyond papal authority. Moves towards Protestant doctrine — such as reduced emphasis on traditional rituals, saints, and pilgrimages — appeared threatening. Many communities interpreted reform as an attempt to dismantle centuries of Catholic tradition, fuelling unrest across the north.

Economic Causes of the Pilgrimage of Grace

Taxation and Fiscal Demands

The north of England already felt economically marginalised, and taxation demands under Henry VIII exacerbated tensions. The unpopular 1534 Subsidy Act was widely resented, as it extended taxation into less wealthy communities. This was perceived as unfair exploitation of poorer regions by a distant government.

Enclosure and Rising Prices

Enclosure — the process of converting common land into private holdings — disrupted traditional livelihoods, particularly in rural communities reliant on shared pasture. Combined with inflation and rising food prices during the 1530s, this heightened resentment. Economic grievances therefore often fused with religious anger, creating a powerful multi-causal motivation for rebellion.

Debates over enclosure of common fields—curtailing access to woodland, pasture and gleaning—fed local anger, particularly where landlords accelerated change.

Plan of a medieval manor showing open-field strips, commons and demesne. Use it to contrast customary access and communal regulation with later enclosure pressures referenced by rebels. The diagram is generic to England and not specific to 1536 (extra contextual detail). Source

Role of Local Grievances

In addition to broad national concerns, communities had specific local grievances. These included disputes over land rights, resistance to changes in local governance, and anger at the erosion of customary rights. Such grievances fed into the wider cause, making the rebellion feel both nationally significant and locally urgent.

Regional Variations in the Causes

Lincolnshire Rising

The Lincolnshire Rising of October 1536 was the immediate precursor to the wider Pilgrimage of Grace. Local concerns centred on the closure of smaller monasteries under the 1536 Act of Suppression. Parish churches feared losing access to holy relics, shrines, and the charitable support monasteries provided. Importantly, Lincolnshire rebels were among the first to articulate opposition in petitions, reflecting localised priorities.

Yorkshire

Yorkshire was the heartland of the movement, where Robert Aske’s leadership transformed sporadic unrest into a highly organised rebellion. Yorkshire grievances combined:

• Religious outrage at the destruction of monasteries.

• Economic complaints, including taxation and food shortages.

• Political discontent, with distrust of southern ministers like Thomas Cromwell, seen as driving unwelcome reforms.

Rebels in Yorkshire mustered beneath the Banner of the Five Wounds, signalling conservative Catholic identity and defence of the old rites.

Banner associated with the Pilgrimage of Grace showing the chalice and the Five Wounds motif used by the rebels in 1536. It highlights the movement’s Catholic framing and the defence of traditional ritual. The device makes plain that religious grievance sat at the heart of much northern mobilisation. Source

Lancashire

Lancashire grievances were strongly shaped by religious loyalty. The county had an exceptionally high density of monasteries and a deeply Catholic culture. Monastic closures here caused acute resentment. Lancashire also had strong networks of gentry support, which helped sustain the rebellion in this region longer than in Lincolnshire.

Cumberland and Westmorland

Cumberland and Westmorland showed variations from Yorkshire and Lancashire. Here, socio-economic pressures weighed more heavily than purely religious ones. Tensions over enclosure, local governance, and economic hardship in upland communities led to greater emphasis on material concerns. The Cumberland Rising of 1537, though linked to the wider Pilgrimage, reflected these distinct local issues.

Interplay Between Religious and Economic Causes

The Pilgrimage of Grace cannot be explained by one set of grievances alone. Its causes were multi-causal, with religious and economic concerns intertwining:

• Religious: fear of heresy, loss of monasteries, attacks on Catholic ritual.

• Economic: taxation burdens, enclosure disputes, inflation.

• Political: distrust of Cromwell and the central government’s policies.

These overlapping causes meant that while different regions prioritised different issues, the rebellion presented itself as a united movement. Rebel articles from across the north combined religious restoration with demands for economic relief, demonstrating the inseparability of the two categories.

The Role of Regionalism in Shaping Causes

The Pilgrimage of Grace was not uniform. Regional variation meant that while Lincolnshire rebels were primarily motivated by monastic closures, Yorkshire emphasised broad religious and economic grievances, Lancashire leaned heavily on Catholic loyalty, and Cumberland highlighted socio-economic hardship. This mosaic of local concerns created both the strength and fragility of the movement. It enabled mass mobilisation but also made the rebellion vulnerable to division once the government applied pressure.