The 1553 succession crisis marked a pivotal turning point, showcasing dynastic conflict, political miscalculation, and the struggle between Protestant and Catholic factions in Tudor England.
Edward VI’s “Devise for the Succession”
Exclusion of Mary and Elizabeth
Edward VI, a devout Protestant and minor king, sought to ensure the continuation of Protestantism after his death. His "Devise for the Succession", drafted in 1553, attempted to alter the natural line of succession set by his father, Henry VIII, which had reinstated both Mary and Elizabeth in the succession (despite their illegitimacy) through the Third Succession Act (1543).
Edward’s primary concern was that his half-sister Mary, a committed Catholic, would reverse Protestant reforms.
Elizabeth, although Protestant, was also excluded—likely due to fears about the stability of her position as an unmarried, young woman and potential doubts about her legitimacy.
Edward’s religious zeal outweighed dynastic precedent, leading to a plan that was legally and constitutionally dubious.
Choice of Lady Jane Grey
Edward’s preferred successor was Lady Jane Grey, his cousin and a Protestant with strong reformist sympathies.
Jane was the granddaughter of Mary Tudor, Henry VIII’s younger sister, placing her in the line of succession through the Suffolk line.
Her Protestant upbringing and marriage to Guildford Dudley, son of John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, made her an ideal candidate for Edward and his advisers.
Jane was designated "heir male" in early versions of the devise, but this was later revised to include Jane directly after Edward realised he would not live long enough to father a male heir.
The Devise was finalised only weeks before Edward’s death and had not received full parliamentary ratification, making its legal status tenuous.
Northumberland’s Motives and Actions
Political Calculations
John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, was instrumental in implementing Edward’s succession plan.
Northumberland aimed to maintain political power after Edward’s death and manipulated the succession to favour his own interests.
He arranged the marriage between his son, Guildford Dudley, and Lady Jane Grey, thus securing a direct link to the throne.
Northumberland persuaded leading councillors to sign the Devise and sought to legitimise it through legal instruments, though time constraints prevented full parliamentary approval.
His involvement in the Devise appeared self-serving and opportunistic, driven by a desire to retain authority through familial proximity to the new monarch.
Misjudgements and Miscalculations
Northumberland’s plan quickly unravelled due to several significant miscalculations:
Public sentiment heavily favoured Mary as the legitimate heir, given her status as Henry VIII’s daughter and the widespread adherence to hereditary principles.
He underestimated Mary’s political skill, her capacity to gather support, and the extent of Catholic sympathy in the country.
He over-relied on the support of the Privy Council and the loyalty of the gentry, many of whom quickly abandoned him when the crisis escalated.
Northumberland’s decision to march with troops to suppress Mary’s support in East Anglia backfired; while he was absent from London, support for Mary surged and his political base collapsed.
Popular Support for Mary
Mary’s Swift Victory
Mary Tudor launched her claim to the throne from Kenninghall in Norfolk and rapidly built a coalition of supporters.
She was joined by nobility, gentry, and ordinary people, many of whom valued her dynastic legitimacy and preferred her to the unfamiliar and unproven Jane Grey.
Key supporters included Henry FitzAlan, Earl of Arundel, and Stephen Gardiner, who had long-standing Catholic affiliations.
Mary effectively utilised proclamations and letters to rally support across the eastern counties.
Within just nine days, Mary’s cause gained momentum, and the political tide turned decisively against Northumberland and Jane.
Collapse of Northumberland’s Regime
The Privy Council switched allegiance, proclaiming Mary queen on 19 July 1553.
Northumberland, realising the futility of his position, surrendered without resistance and was imprisoned in the Tower of London.
Lady Jane Grey, despite being queen in name for just over a week, was also imprisoned.
Northumberland was executed on 22 August 1553 after publicly recanting his Protestant beliefs, a move likely intended to appeal for mercy, but which also underscored the swift reversal of fortunes.
Mary’s triumph was seen as a victory of dynastic legitimacy and divine providence, bolstered by her Catholic supporters’ framing of her accession as a religious restoration.
Implications of the Succession Crisis
Constitutional Crisis
The 1553 events constituted a major constitutional and dynastic crisis:
Edward VI’s attempt to override parliamentary legislation (Third Succession Act) and the will of Henry VIII through a royal devise lacked legal grounding.
The episode raised serious questions about the limits of royal authority and the legality of bypassing the established line of succession.
It exposed the fragility of the Tudor succession, particularly given the reliance on legal manipulation and the absence of direct male heirs.
Mary’s accession restored the legal and hereditary principle, reinforcing the idea that monarchy could not be arbitrarily altered, even by a reigning sovereign.
Reaction of Protestant and Catholic Factions
Mary’s victory had profound consequences for both religious camps:
Protestant Reaction
Protestants were deeply alarmed by Mary’s accession, anticipating the reversal of Edwardian reforms.
Key Protestant figures, including Archbishop Cranmer, were imprisoned, and Protestant clergy began fleeing into exile.
The political backing of Protestantism, which had flourished under Edward VI, was now severely undermined.
Catholic Reaction
Catholics celebrated Mary’s return as a divinely ordained correction to the Protestant heresy.
The Catholic Church was expected to be restored, though immediate changes were cautious to avoid backlash.
Mary’s accession reinvigorated conservative religious forces, setting the stage for a return to Roman orthodoxy.
The crisis also foreshadowed the religious turbulence that would define Mary’s reign, marked by efforts to reverse the Protestant Reformation and restore papal supremacy.
Wider Political Consequences
The episode damaged the credibility of the monarchy, as it revealed how factions could manipulate succession for personal and ideological aims.
It illustrated the importance of popular legitimacy and support from key elites—without which even the most legally justified claims could falter.
It left a lasting impact on Elizabeth I, whose own approach to religion and succession would reflect caution shaped by the events of 1553.
The 1553 succession crisis was thus not merely a brief political misstep but a watershed moment in Tudor history, revealing the volatile interplay between religion, law, and monarchy.
FAQ
The Privy Council played a pivotal but ultimately unstable role during the succession crisis. Initially, most councillors supported Northumberland's plan to install Lady Jane Grey as queen, largely due to political pressure and the authority he held as Lord President. They signed Edward VI’s Devise for the Succession and helped proclaim Jane queen on 10 July 1553. However, many councillors were reluctant and only gave nominal support. As public backing for Mary surged and Northumberland marched out of London to intercept her, the Privy Council remained behind and reconsidered its position. Lacking confidence in Jane’s legitimacy and fearing reprisals under a Mary-led regime, the council rapidly shifted allegiance. On 19 July 1553, they proclaimed Mary queen, arrested Jane’s supporters, and secured the Tower of London. This reversal shows how the Privy Council prioritised political survival over loyalty and how fragile support for Jane was once faced with broader public and dynastic pressure.
Edward VI believed he had the authority to alter the succession due to a combination of legal precedent, personal conviction, and his royal prerogative. As king, he considered it within his power to determine his successor, particularly to safeguard the Protestant reformation he had championed. He drew inspiration from his father, Henry VIII, who had changed the line of succession multiple times through both statute and will. Edward, as a minor yet highly devout Protestant, viewed the inclusion of Mary—an outspoken Catholic—as a direct threat to religious reform. He was also influenced by his advisers, especially Northumberland, who reinforced the idea that a monarch’s will could override previous acts. Edward’s “Devise for the Succession” thus reflected a belief that the king could establish a new succession through legal documents and council consent. However, lacking parliamentary confirmation, Edward’s claim of authority proved constitutionally fragile and ultimately unsuccessful.
Propaganda played a subtle but important role in shaping public perceptions during the 1553 crisis. Mary Tudor issued a series of proclamations asserting her legitimate claim, framing herself as the true heir under both divine and legal authority. These proclamations circulated widely in East Anglia, where she was gathering support, helping to consolidate loyalty among both elites and commoners. Her use of carefully worded appeals invoked Henry VIII’s will and the Third Succession Act, resonating with traditional beliefs about hereditary monarchy. In contrast, Jane Grey’s regime struggled to produce persuasive propaganda. While Northumberland attempted to present Jane as the lawful heir via the Devise, this narrative failed to gain traction outside court circles. There was also no major public enthusiasm for Jane, whose rule was largely unknown to the public. The effectiveness of Mary’s messaging—combined with her ability to present herself as the defender of order and legitimacy—contributed significantly to the widespread support she received.
Foreign powers observed the 1553 succession crisis with caution, recognising the instability it posed for England’s internal politics and international alliances. The Holy Roman Empire, under Emperor Charles V, who was Mary’s cousin, strongly supported her claim. He instructed his ambassadors in England to discreetly back her but avoided direct military involvement to prevent worsening tensions with the English government. The Spanish and Imperial courts viewed Mary as a means of restoring Catholicism in England and re-aligning England with Habsburg interests. Meanwhile, France, under Henry II, was more sympathetic to the Protestant cause and wary of a strengthened Habsburg-England alliance under Mary. However, the French response remained diplomatic and non-interventionist, preferring to wait and see who would emerge victorious. Overall, while no foreign power intervened directly, their preferences and subtle support—particularly the Holy Roman Empire’s diplomatic backing—bolstered Mary’s confidence and international standing during her campaign to claim the throne.
Mary initially refrained from executing Lady Jane Grey out of a combination of political prudence, personal reluctance, and public optics. Jane was widely perceived, even by Mary, as a pawn rather than a principal instigator. She had been manipulated by her father-in-law, Northumberland, and her parents into accepting the crown, and her reign had lasted only nine days. Executing a young woman who posed no immediate threat might have seemed unnecessarily harsh, especially as Mary sought to consolidate support across a divided nation. Moreover, Mary wished to project an image of clemency and lawful governance, distinguishing herself from the factional manipulation that had characterised the previous weeks. Jane was initially held under house arrest in the Tower with minimal privileges but was not immediately condemned. However, Jane’s eventual execution in February 1554 followed the Wyatt’s Rebellion, where her father’s involvement and fear of Jane becoming a Protestant figurehead convinced Mary that leniency was no longer viable.
Practice Questions
‘The failure of Northumberland’s attempt to alter the succession in 1553 was due to poor political judgement.’ Assess the validity of this view.
While Northumberland’s poor political judgement played a role, particularly in underestimating popular support for Mary and miscalculating the council’s loyalty, other factors were equally significant. Mary’s dynastic legitimacy and swift mobilisation of supporters ensured her success. The Devise for the Succession lacked parliamentary approval, weakening Jane Grey’s claim. Additionally, religious divisions fuelled resistance to Protestant manipulation of the throne. Ultimately, Northumberland’s misjudgement coincided with strong legal, political, and religious support for Mary, making his position untenable.
To what extent was Mary’s accession the result of popular support?
Mary’s accession owed much to widespread popular support, particularly in East Anglia, where nobles and gentry rallied around her dynastic legitimacy. Her image as Henry VIII’s daughter and a symbol of rightful monarchy attracted loyalty from both Catholic and neutral factions. However, institutional factors also played a role: the Privy Council’s defection from Northumberland and the legal precedent set by the Third Succession Act undermined Jane Grey’s position. While popular backing was crucial in energising resistance, Mary’s legal claim and political acumen were equally decisive in securing her rapid and bloodless accession to the throne.
