OCR Specification focus:
‘Causes and nature of rebellion and unrest’
Socio-economic conditions between 1547 and 1558 generated widespread discontent. Inflation, enclosure, poverty, and economic instability created the roots of rebellion and unrest across Tudor England.
Economic Pressures and Inflation
The mid-Tudor period was marked by serious inflation, caused largely by the debasement of the coinage and population growth. Prices of essential goods rose steeply, while wages lagged behind.
Graph of English consumables price index and builders’ wage rates (base 1451–1475=100). Note the sixteenth-century upswing in prices relative to wages—an inflationary squeeze that intensified discontent. The chart spans 1260–1600, so it includes additional context beyond 1547–1558. Source
Inflation: A general rise in prices of goods and services, reducing the purchasing power of money.
The government under Henry VIII and Edward VI had debased the coinage, mixing precious metals with base metals to raise revenue, but this undermined confidence in currency.
Edward VI shilling (1551–1553) showing the young king’s portrait. It exemplifies mid-Tudor silver issues; although some later ‘fine’ shillings were reminted to restore confidence, much earlier debased money still circulated. This visual anchors monetary policy to everyday experience. Source
Poverty, Vagrancy, and Unemployment
Worsening economic conditions produced visible poverty and vagrancy. With population growth outstripping food production, rural labourers were pushed into desperate circumstances. Urban migration increased, swelling the numbers of poor in towns.
Unemployment rose due to declining demand for agricultural labour caused by enclosure and shifting farming methods.
Tudor authorities responded harshly, passing Vagrancy Acts, which criminalised the unemployed and punished beggars.
Poverty was no longer seen merely as misfortune but as a social threat, reinforcing unrest.
Enclosure and Agrarian Change
Enclosure — the practice of consolidating open fields and common land into private holdings — was one of the most contentious socio-economic issues of the period.
Enclosure: The conversion of common land and open fields into enclosed, privately controlled fields, often for sheep farming.
Enclosure reduced peasants’ access to common grazing land, undermining their subsistence economy. Wealthier landowners pursued enclosure for profitable sheep farming, linked to the expanding wool trade, but this displaced many rural families.
Plan of a medieval manor illustrating the open-field system—intermixed strips, furlongs, meadows and commons. Visualising this layout clarifies why enclosure (consolidating strips into private closes) removed access to shared resources and sharpened social tension. The diagram is medieval in origin, but the field pattern persisted into the Tudor era. Source
Enclosure was directly cited as a grievance in Kett’s Rebellion (1549).
Although commissions were set up to investigate illegal enclosure, action was limited, leading to popular frustration.
Agrarian change deepened class divisions between the gentry and commoners.
Taxation and Financial Burdens
Heavy taxation aggravated social discontent. Wars under Henry VIII and Edward VI, and the defence of England under Mary I, required significant financial resources.
The Sheep Tax (1548), introduced under Somerset, was particularly unpopular as it targeted sheep owners, many of whom were small farmers relying on flocks for survival.
Parliamentary subsidies also placed strain on households, especially during times of inflation.
Resentment of taxation was a recurring theme in popular unrest, linking local grievances to national policy.
The Role of Harvest Failure and Famine
Bad harvests in the late 1540s and early 1550s intensified unrest. Grain shortages led to soaring food prices, exacerbating the already dire effects of inflation.
In 1549, a combination of poor harvests and high bread prices fed into the causes of rebellion.
Hunger sharpened grievances against landlords, officials, and the Crown, making the population more receptive to rebellion leaders’ calls.
Social Tensions and Inequality
The widening gap between rich and poor during the mid-Tudor period fuelled resentment. Wealthy landlords and the gentry were perceived to profit from enclosure and economic hardship at the expense of the common people.
Social hierarchy was deeply entrenched, but unrest revealed cracks in Tudor society.
Rebellions were often led by lower-ranking gentry or yeomen, who articulated popular grievances, bridging the gap between elites and commoners.
Rising inequality reinforced the sense that government policies favoured the wealthy.
Religious and Economic Overlap
Though the focus here is socio-economic, it is important to note that economic grievances often overlapped with religious discontent. For example:
The sale of monastic lands after the Dissolution of the Monasteries transferred wealth to elites, deepening inequality.
Some religious reforms disrupted traditional systems of poor relief, leaving vulnerable groups without support.
Economic and spiritual grievances combined to strengthen the resolve of rebels in uprisings such as the Western Rebellion (1549).
Rebellion as a Response to Socio-Economic Pressure
Socio-economic pressures between 1547 and 1558 directly influenced the outbreak of rebellions.
Western Rebellion (1549): Though religious causes dominated, economic issues such as taxation and enclosure were also significant.
Kett’s Rebellion (1549): Enclosure was the central grievance, with rebels demanding the restoration of common land and fairer economic policies.
Wyatt’s Rebellion (1554): Though primarily political, underlying economic dissatisfaction created conditions that enabled mobilisation.
Rebellion was not inevitable, but in times of combined economic hardship and political or religious instability, popular protest erupted more readily.
Government Responses to Socio-Economic Unrest
The Tudor governments recognised socio-economic tensions but often struggled to address them effectively.
Commissions of Enquiry: Somerset ordered investigations into enclosure, raising hopes among commoners but alienating landowners.
Harsh Suppression: Rebellions were typically crushed militarily, with executions used to deter further unrest.
Legislative Measures: Laws were passed against enclosure and vagrancy, but enforcement was inconsistent and often favoured the interests of the ruling elite.
This combination of inadequate reform and repression meant grievances persisted throughout the decade.
FAQ
England’s population rose significantly during the first half of the sixteenth century. This growth put pressure on food supplies and housing.
With demand outpacing production, food prices rose, while wages failed to keep up. Increased competition for land and work pushed many into poverty and vagrancy.
This demographic pressure exacerbated the impact of enclosure, harvest failure, and inflation, helping to fuel popular discontent.
The Sheep Tax was intended to raise revenue and curb enclosure by taxing sheep ownership.
Small farmers, dependent on sheep for survival, were disproportionately affected.
It increased financial hardship at a time of poor harvests and high prices.
Instead of discouraging enclosure, it aggravated tensions, contributing to the grievances that erupted in 1549 rebellions.
The tax was deeply resented as unfair and poorly timed.
The harsh Vagrancy Act of 1547 criminalised the unemployed and treated poverty as a threat to order.
It reflected Tudor elites’ fear of disorder and suspicion of “masterless men” wandering in search of work.
Rather than addressing structural problems like unemployment or enclosure, the law targeted individuals, worsening resentment and highlighting the state’s punitive approach to poverty.
Local grievances, such as disputes over common rights or enclosure of specific fields, often provided the immediate spark for unrest.
However, these were connected to broader national issues:
Crown taxation policies
Currency debasement
Economic legislation such as the Sheep Tax
Rebellions were thus a mix of localised frustrations and wider economic discontent, with local leaders mobilising communities around tangible grievances.
Efforts were inconsistent and often ineffective.
Somerset’s enclosure commissions raised hopes but delivered little real change.
Attempts to legislate against enclosure were weakly enforced, angering both landowners and commoners.
Harsh suppression of rebellions showed reliance on military force rather than reform.
While some currency reforms under Northumberland stabilised the economy slightly, most socio-economic grievances remained unresolved, keeping tensions alive.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks):
Identify two socio-economic factors that contributed to popular unrest in England between 1547 and 1558.
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for each correct socio-economic factor, up to a maximum of 2 marks.
Acceptable answers include:
Inflation and rising food prices
Enclosure of common land
Poverty and vagrancy
Taxation burdens (e.g. Sheep Tax)
Harvest failure and famine
(Any two of the above for full marks.)
Question 2 (6 marks):
Explain how enclosure contributed to rebellion during the period 1547–1558.
Mark Scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Simple or general answer, e.g. “Enclosure upset people because they lost land.” Limited detail, little or no specific reference to events.
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Some explanation with limited development, e.g. “Enclosure restricted access to common land and hurt poorer peasants. This led to anger and demands for change.” Some specific detail but not fully developed.
Level 3 (5–6 marks): Developed explanation with accurate and specific support. For example: “Enclosure was resented because it deprived peasants of traditional rights such as grazing and fuel collection. This was a central grievance in Kett’s Rebellion of 1549, where rebels demanded the restoration of common land. Although government commissions investigated enclosure, lack of real action created frustration that helped spark unrest.”
(Maximum 6 marks)
