THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED

THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED

A DISCUSSION OF THE CAUSES OF THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE MAY SEEM

either superfluous or premature.1 The massive study by the MissesDodds has been followed by a number of short discussions, ingeneral works on the period, in studies of monasticism, in studies ofgovernment in the north, and so on.1 It will not be possible to writeconfidently about the Pilgrimage until Mr. M. E. James has completedthe work which, in a series of remarkable short studies, has alreadybegun to show the importance of patronage, of tenurial relationship,of kinship and connection, and, not least, of personality in northernsociety at this time.3 Obviously, too, a good deal of work has yet tobe done on the comparative study of social structure in the north,a study which would undoubtedly show up important regionalvariations.* Nevertheless, I believe that an interim discussion isworth-while. So much of what has been written seems to dodge themain issue. It tries to apportion the causes of the Pilgrimage betweenvarious "factors" and, by implication, to consider, for instance,"economic" and "religious" factors as mutually exclusive. What isneeded is rather an attempt to see how the various factors were inter-related, to consider why the Pilgrims, whatever their other grievances,marched behind the Banner of the Five Wounds and, ostensibly atleast, were prepared to fight for the defence of the church as theyknew it. It may be possible, as a result of this, to reconsider some ofthe accepted views on the nature of the English Reformation.

At this stage, it will be objected that to talk of the causes of thePilgrimage is in any case misleading, since the Pilgrimage was aconcatenation of various local risings. Obviously, in a revolt inwhich the commons of some seven counties covering a third of thearea of England played a leading, or perhaps the leading, part, a

1 Mr. K. V. Thomas and Mr. M. E. James were good enough to criticize anearly draft of this paper; though neither can be held responsible for the viewsexpressed.

1 M. H. and Ruth Dodds, The Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536-7, and the ExeterConspiracy, 1538, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1915).

• Change and Continuity in the Tudor North and A Tudor Magnate and theTudor State (University of York, Borthwick Papers, nos. xxvii and xxx, 1965-6);"The First Earl of Cumberland (1.493-1542) and the Decline of NorthernFeudalism", Northern History, i (1966), pp. 43-69.

4 On the lines of Charles Tilly's study of The Vendie (London, 1964). For anexcellent start to such studies, see R. B. Smith, "A Study of the Landed Incomesand Social Structure of the West Riding of Yorkshire, 1535-46" (Leeds Univ.Ph.D. thesis, 1962). Cf. also The Agrarian History of England and Wales,1500-1640, ed. Joan Thirsk (Cambridge, 1967), ch. i.

Dow

nloaded from https://academ

ic.oup.com/past/article/41/1/54/1403017 by guest on 24 June 2022

THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED 55

variety of grievances was expressed, a variety of "causes" inducedindividuals to join the Pilgrims. Clearly, once the framework oforder, of obedience to established authority, had been removed, allsorts of normally repressed local grievances found an outlet. Never-theless, it is possible to isolate five main revolts, following thetraditional pattern; the Lincolnshire revolt, the revolt in the EastRiding, that of the north-western counties (including the Craven areaof the West Riding of Yorkshire), all in October to December 1536,and the revolts in the early months of 1537 in both the East Riding andthe north-west.'

These last, though interesting in themselves as revolts of the com-mons, with little participation by the gentry and nobility, are notrelevant to a study of the causes of the Pilgrimage proper. They wereclearly outbursts by frightened commons who believed that they hadbeen betrayed by their social superiors, that the king would do littleor nothing to meet the grievances of the rebels, and that he would notconsider himself bound by the general pardon.8 Again, there seemsto be universal agreement that, in the rising in Cumberland andWestmorland and in the Craven district of the West Riding in 1536,economic aims figured much more prominently than elsewhere. Therebels demanded that "gressums" [entry fines] and other extraordinarydues should be moderated or abolished, and complained aboutenclosure of waste and forest. Moreover, as M. E. James points out,and contrary to the usual impression, many of the gentry, themselvesmesne tenants of the great lords, were afflicted by increased rents anddues, and encouraged, or at least tolerated, the commons' rising.7

Plainly, conditions in these highland areas were hard, probablyincreasingly so. The population rise of the sixteenth century seemsto have been very much more acute in these areas, and the enclosureof common, the increase of dues, or the incidence of bad harvests,could have a disastrous effect on an economy balanced at the best oftimes dangerously near the edge of subsistence.8 These conditionshad certainly produced a serious riot (or a small-scale rising) in Cravenin 1535, in which the hard-pressed tenants of the earl of Cumberland

1 A complete study would also deal with Durham and the North Riding, whichbecame linked to the West Riding revolt; and with Northumberland, where thedefence of Hexham Priory became involved with border free-booting and thedefence of the Percy interest. See Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, cap. ix.

• Dodds, op. cit., pp. 55-98; A. G. Dickens, in Lollards and Protestana in theDiocese of York (London, 1959), pp. 97-102; James, "Earl of Cumberland",p. 58, n. 84.

7 James, Change and Continuity, pp. 24-5; Letters and Papers of the Reign ofHenry VIII ^hereafter L.P.), vol. xi, no. 1080 (cf. Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, pp.370-1); vol. xii, pt. i, nos. 163, 478, 914; James, "Earl of Cumberland", pp. 53-62.

Dow



56 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 41

seem to have been encouraged in their defiance by agents of the earl ofNorthumberland, in pursuit of a family feud.* But while suchconditions may well have produced yet more rioting in 1536, it wouldbe hazardous to guess that they would have resulted in peasant revolt,at least on the scale of that of 1536-7, without the precipitating factorof revolts in Lincolnshire and in the rest of Yorkshire.

These last, then, constitute the core of the Pilgrimage, revolts, inappearance at least, about high politics: the nature of the Supremacy,the continuation of monasticism, the suppression of heresy, thecomposition of the Ring's Council, the conduct of business inParliament. Inevitably, the issues were complex. Enumeration isfacilitated by the vast amount of evidence available, but evaluationis made difficult by the nature of that evidence, so much of whichconsists of depositions in which suspects blame their neighbours,especially those of a different social class. Discussion naturallyrevolves around the question of how much weight to put on the"secular" and how much on the "religious" factors. Fr. PhilipHughes, Dom David Knowles and Dr. Scarisbrick, while acknow-ledging social and political factors, insist nevertheless on the defenceof Catholicism as the necessary unifying element in the situation.Dr. Rachel Reid, on the other hand, concludes that "even if therehad been no Reformation, there must have been a rising in the Northabout this time".10 Professor A. G. Dickens, whose knowledge ofnorthern society at this time is unrivalled, whose perceptive andsensitive studies of religious sentiment have transformed our under-standing of religion in its social setting, endorses Dr. Reid's view; heconcludes a general account of the Pilgrimage, "the roots of themovement were decidedly economic, its demands predominantlysecular, its interest in Rome almost negligible.. . . In short theEnglish remained incapable of staging genuine Wars of Religion".11

• James, "Earl of Cumberland", p. 53, and the authorities cited there; see alsoAgrarian History, ed. Think, pp. 10-12.

• James, "Earl of Cumberland", pp. 60-2.'• D. Knowles, The Religions Orders in England (Cambridge, 1950-9), iii,

pp. 320-35; Philip Hughes, The Reformation in England (London, 1954), i,pp. 296-320; J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII (London, 1968), pp. 338-48;R. R. Reid, The King^s Council in the North (London, 1921), p. 126.

11 A. G. Dickens, The English Reformation (London, 1964), pp. 122-8; cf. alsoThomas Cromwell and the English Reformation (London, 1959), pp. 95-104; and"Secular and Religious Motivation in the Pilgrimage of Grace" in Studies inChurch History, ed. G. J. Cuming, vol. iv (1967), pp. 39-64. I must thankProfessor Dickens and Canon Cuming for their generosity in allowing me to seethis article in proof. Professor Dickens' particular studies are too numerous tolist here. See especially, Lollards and Protestants in the Diocese of York, TudorTreatises, ed. A. G. Dickens (Yorks. Arch. Soc., Record Ser., exxv, 1959), and"The Writers of Tudor Yorkshire", Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc, 5th ser., jail (1963),pp. 49-76-

Dow



THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED 5 7

Economic grievances there were, of course. The general agrariansituation was certainly serious. A rising general price level forcedlandlords to increase dues traditionally regarded as fixed (whether bychanging copyholds to leases, or by increasing the amount orfrequency of entry fines), or find themselves unable to maintain theirtraditional way of life. Moreover, there had been an unusually badseries of harvests since 1527.11 But, within this context, it is moredifficult to explain why the Pilgrimage happened just when it did.Here Professor Dickens and Dr. Reid instance a particular badharvest. But the bad harvest concerned is that of the summer ofT535> which was no longer directly relevant to the economic situationin October 1536. Dr. Reid's detailed evidence refers entirely to theharvest-year 1535-6, which was undoubtedly very bad. Wheatprices were 82% higher than the previous year, and there wereextensive grain-riots, for instance in Somerset in April 1536, whilethe serious Craven riots of June 1535 were obviously connected withthe approaching bad harvest, the expectation of which would havealready raised grain prices. The new harvest of 1536, however, wasconsiderably better. The harvest of wheat and barley was mediocre,but not disastrous, as it had been in 1535. Oats were dear, and thiswas obviously dangerous for pastoral farmers. But rye, the principalbread-grain of the lower classes in most of the north, was fairlycheap.13

INDEX PRICESHarvest-Year

1533-41534-51535-61536-7

OF GRAINWheat

133116213156

1533-7Barley

127106199124

(1450-99Oats156145184182

= IOO)Rye202225303154

Of course, these are annual average prices, which conceal seasonal orregional variations. I have not been able to discover a reliable priceseries referring specifically to the north. From scattered evidence it

11 On W. G. Hoskins' classification there had been 1 year of dearth, 2 of badharvest, 1 deficient, 4 average and 2 good. Nevertheless the "average" iscalculated as a 31-year moving average. As far as contemporaries wereconcerned, only 2 of these years were "average" by the standards of 1522-6 or1537-42: W. G. Hoskins, "Harvest Fluctuations 1480-1619", AgriculturalHistory Review, xii (1964), pp. 28-46; Agrarian History, ed. Thirsk, StatisticalAppendix, Table I.

11 Dickens, Thomas Cromwell, pp. 95-6; Reid, Council of the North, p. 126;LJ3., x, nos. 702, 1015(26); L.P. Addenda, i, nos. 1056, 1058, 1063, i°75JWriothesley, Chronicle (Camden Soc., new ser., xi), i, p. 61 (1536 in Wriothesley,wrongly amended by the editor to 1537); Agrarian History, ed. Thirsk, StatisticalAppendix, Table I.

Dow




seems that Durham wheat prices, which tended normally to be belowthe national average, were rather above it in the harvest-year 1536-7.Rye, moreover, seems to have been more expensive in Durham thanin Dorset. A few indications of prices can be gleaned from the StatePapers. The earl of Derby reported "dearth" in Lancashire inNovember 1536. At the same time wheat was 10s. 8d. a quarter,and rye 9s. 4d. in Nottingham. Wheat was 10s. 4d. at Pontefract inFebruary 1537. But these were areas in which armies had probablydriven up local prices. Even so, they are not far above ProfessorHoskins's calculation of a "general average" (in fact, predominantlyLondon), wheat price of 9.17s.14 The short-term situation, then,was at best difficult, perhaps worse; but below the peak-levels of theharvest-year 1535-6. An explanation based on harvest failure toutcottrt should have produced a revolt six months before the outbreak ofthe Pilgrimage. Moreover, there is no clear correlation between badharvest and peasant revolt in sixteenth-century England. There was,for instance, no major peasant revolt in 1527-30 (a sequence of dearth,bad harvest, and deficient harvest), though there was a cloth-workers'revolt directed against the embargo on trade with the Netherlands in1528. Nor were there in 1555-7 a n ^ 1596-8, all much worse than1535-7, although obviously there was a good deal of discontent inthose years." The harvest situation, then, is not a sufficient explana-tion of the Pilgrimage, though by embittering class-relationships andcausing riots it helped to prepare the way for it.

The very nature of the Pilgrimage makes an agrarian explanation,whether short- or long-term, insufficient. Obviously, if an unpopularlandlord took the king's side in the revolt, his tenants could give freerein to pent-up resentments. Thus the loyalist earl of Cumberland,victim of the Craven riots of 1535, was besieged by his tenants inSkipton Castle in 1536." The breakdown of order led to the refusalof rent and tithe, and the expression of long-festering resentments.When the Horncastle commons captured Sir William Sandon they

11Y. S. Brenner, "Prices and Wages in England 1450-1550" (London Univ.M A thesis, 1960), pp. 1401. Wheat was 6.8s. per qr. in Durham in 1532-3,where Brenner calculates the national average at 8.82s.; in 1536-7, it was 9.74s.in Durham, and 9.17s. on the national average. Rye in Dorset was 12s. a qr.in 1534-5, and 5.33s. in 1536-7; no figures exist for Durham in 1535-6, but9.73s. is given for 1536-7. LJ3., jri, nos. 1066,1155(5); *", ' , n 0- 35°J Hoskins,"Harvest Fluctuations", pp. 44-5.

111 omit i55O-2lbecause of the deterrent effect of the suppression of the 1549revolts. The London riots of 1595, or the attempted Oxfordshire rising of1596, though interesting, are hardly "major".

** James, "Earl of Cumberland"; Clifford Letters of the Sixteenth Century,cd. A. G. Dickens (Surtees Soc., vol. clxxii, 1962), p. 25; LJP., xii, i, no. 919.

Dow




"struck at the horse and said he could go a-foot as they did". Thesmith of Wragby, in Lincolnshire, thought that "if we kill not [thegentlemen], we shall lose all, for they will deceive us". The priest ofCroft exhorted his parishioners "to take the Commons part, for theydid intend a commonwealth".17 Suspicion of the intentions of thegentry was, of course, the main cause of the second East Ridingrebellion, led by Bigod and Hallom, in February 1537. But if suchfeelings were widespread, they did not determine the main course ofthe Pilgrimage; even in the north-west, where class-hatred istraditionally considered to have manifested itself most violently, therebels pressed the gentry into the lead, demanded the replacement ofCromwell and his associates by "noble men of true blood", and onlyelected their own "captains" when the gentry showed themselvesunable to defend them against the Scots.18 The leaders of theYorkshire Pilgrimage were unlikely defenders of an oppressedpeasantry against the landlord class. Lord Darcy*s estate wasremarkable for the extent of its grassland, the object of enclosure riotsthree years before. The Percy family had extracted frequent, thoughnot necessarily high, gressums, and had introduced the customs ofCumberland, less advantageous to the tenants, to their Yorkshire andNorthumberland estates.1' Agrarian discontent, then, will explainneither the timing of the Pilgrimage, nor its form as a revolt ofnorthern society against the central government, rather than asclass-warfare within that society.

Other economic factors are frequently mentioned, but again seemless compelling on closer examination. The positive evidence forcattle-plagues seems to be confined to one explanation (or excuse) bythe Pilgrims for their dislike of the subsidy.10 Another possibleeconomic grievance was the recent Act attempting to improve thestandard of cloth production; the government promptly ordereda stay of execution. But Tudor governments, after their experiencesof 1525 and 1528, always tended to exaggerate the rebellious nature ofcloth-workers. In fact, as Dr. R. B. Smith has shown, the WestRiding clothing area was not one of the main centres of revolt.11

17 LJ>., xi, no. 1293; P.R.O., S.P. I/no f. 139 (L.P., xi, no. 967); E 36/118f. 1 (/..P., xi, no. 975).

"P.R.O, S i \ I/i 17 f. 55 (L.P., xii, i, no. 687, p. 303); James, "Earl ofCumberland", pp. 53-62.

11 L.P., vi, nos. 355, 537; two-thirds of the income from Lord Darcy's WestRiding estate came from pasture, "a remarkable example of the exploitation ofgrassland by a large landowner" (R. B. Smith, thesis cited, p. 95). J. M. W.Bean, The Estates of the Percy Family, 1416-1537 (Oxford, 1958), pp. 62-7.

" LJ3., xi, no. 705.11 Tudor Royal Proclamations, 148}-IS53> ed. P. L. Hughes and J. F. Larkin

(New Haven, 1964), no. 166; L.P, xi, no 603; Smith, thesis cited, pp. 304-5.

Dow




A great deal is made, especially by Dr. Reid, of urban class-conflict,especially in Beverley in 1535-6 and in York. The trouble in Beverleycertainly merged into the Pilgrimage. But are not such disputesa normal feature of sixteenth-century urban life, which would havepassed unnoticed but for the Pilgrimage ? After all, Newcastle hadalso seen the recent victory of a merchant oligarchy over the artisanguilds, yet was held by the mayor for the king in 1536 at the cost ofa few concessions." All told, then, economic conditions, whileundoubtedly serious, do not seem to have been so unusual as to haveprovoked a major rebellion on their own account.

One economic grievance, taxation, undoubtedly did play a majorpart in the rebellion; there was considerable resistance to the levy ofthe second instalment of the subsidy voted in 1534. Even here,however, matters are more complicated than they seem at first sight.The northern counties (Cumberland, Westmorland, Northumberland,and Durham) were exempt. Only those possessing goods worth £20or an annual income of £20 were liable; Henry VIII reckoned thatless than 10% of the rebels were directly affected. Even fewer mayin fact have paid. The Lincolnshire subsidy commissioners explainedto an angry mob "there was none within the shire that paid after xx li,but he was worth xl li. and further". One modern estimate is that"only about 1.4% of the population normally liable to assessmentwere in fact being assessed" in 1536." Opposition to the subsidy,then, was not due to straight-forward taxpayers' resentment; butrather to the belief that the subsidy would drain the north of coin,especially if the tenants of the smaller monasteries would thenceforthbe paying their rents to London, and that the resulting lack ofliquidity would cause considerable unemployment. It was this whichhad caused cloth-workers in 1525 to protest against the forced loanlevied on their employers.14 Nevertheless, as we shall see, taxationwas primarily important as an aspect of those irrational elements onwhich Professor Dickens so rightly concentrates; the fear, presumablyinspired by the relatively unusual imposition of peacetime taxation,that taxes were going to be enormously increased, that they were to belevied on baptisms, marriages and burials, on cows and sheep, and on

" Reid, Council of the North, pp. 126-8; cf. also A. G. Dickens in V.C.H.,City of York (London, 1961), pp. 137-9; LJ*., xii, i, no. 392, p. 183; Dodds,Pilgrimage, i, pp. 204-7.

"26 Henry VIII c. 19, 8. xvii; LJ>., xi, no. 569; P.R.O., S.P. I /uo f. 165(LJ>., xi, no. 971); R. S. Schofield, 'Tarliamentary Lay Taxation, 1485-1547"(Cambridge Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 1963). PP- 327-9-

" Aske*s narrative (Eng. Hist. Rev., v [1890], pp. 331-43), p. 336; cf. Smith,thesis cited, pp. 45-8. For 1525 see LJ>., iv, introd., p. lxxxiii.

Dow




men of low degree who dared to ape their superiors by eating whitebread or white meat." The extent of these fears, and their form,betrays a crisis of confidence, a profound distrust of the Londongovernment among the commons of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

A similar distrust, of course, was felt in the upper reaches ofnorthern society. The king was deliberately trying to undermine thepower of the great northern families. In 1534 Lord Dacre of theNorth had been accused of treason, a charge which was probablytrumped up and certainly exaggerated." The Percy family had alsofared badly. The fifth earl of Northumberland, in spite of anapparent willingness to serve the crown loyally, had never been givenoffice commensurate with his rank, or standing. The^sixth earl,although entrusted with the great offices which his family hadtraditionally held, had been induced to disinherit his brother and heir,Sir Thomas Percy, by making his lands over the crown in return fora pension.17 But the crown's attack was not confined to particularfamilies. As Dr. Reid has shown, the Acts of 1535-6 against libertiesand sanctuaries had involved the rights of several of the great lords,and especially those members of the embryonic Council of the Northwho, during the Pilgrimage, took refuge with Darcy at Pontefract andsubsequently countenanced, to say the least, the activities of thePilgrims. In these conditions the fining of the Yorkshire Grand Jury(consisting, of course, of gentlemen) for its alleged perversion in notpreferring an indictment against a suspected murderer, could take ona notoriety far in excess of its intrinsic importance." Moreover theStatute of Uses (forced through Parliament in the face of con-siderable hostility by a skilful and somewhat dubious legal manoeuvreon the part of the government) was extremely unpopular among thegentry at large; so much so, that its most drastic provisions, whicheffectively prevented land being devised by will, and thus made itdifficult to provide portions for younger sons or to raise loans on thesecurity of land, had to be repealed in 1540." Many of the nobilityand gentry demonstrably played a more active part in the Pilgrimagethan they afterwards admitted. Percy agents seem to have been veryactive throughout. Robert Aske himself was probably one of them.

11 English Reformation, pp. 126-7; Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, pp. 63-86." LJP., vii, no. 962." James, A Tudor Magnate; "Earl of Cumberland", pp. 65-7; Bean, Estates of

the Percy Family, pp. 144-57.11 Reid, Council of the North, pp. 137-9; Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, pp. 59-60." E. E. W. Ives, "The Genesis of the Statute of Uses", Eng. Hist. Rev.,

boorii (1967), pp. 673-97; J. M. W. Bean, The Decline of English Feudalism(Manchester, 1968), pp. 257-301.

Dow




(The story of his being spontaneously taken by the commons ofHowdenshire to be their captain only because he had recently returnedfrom Lincolnshire, and his denial of any advance preparation for theEast Riding revolt, hardly ring true.) Obviously the attitude of someof the great magnates was an important, and probably an essentialcontributory factor to the revolt. Even during the 1537 rising, whendistrust of the gentry was at its height, it was said "that the country. . . was ready to rise again if Sir Thomas Percy would have setforward for they trusted him before any other man".30 Nevertheless,the Pilgrimage was obviously far from being a mere feudal revolt. Itoccurred, after all, in spite of the ambiguous attitude of the earl ofNorthumberland, whose younger brothers, for all their energy, werehardly an adequate substitute; in spite of the earl of Cumberland'sloyalty to the crown; in spite of Lord Dacre's wariness, anxious afterhis experiences of 1534 not to incriminate himself." Lincohishire,indeed, had no great feudal magnate to arouse ancient loyalties.(Lord Hussey, who was certainly involved, hardly fits into thiscategory, nor does the duke of Suffolk.) Moreover the willingness ofthe magnates to accept Aske as "Great Captain" (or perhaps theirconspiring to make him so), however prudent a political move, hardlyindicates that aristocratic charisma which might have raised northernsociety against the king on its own account. The lead given by thegentry and nobility was, of course, vital; indeed, it was more importanteven in the north-west and in Lincohishire than is often alleged.Loyalty to ancient families, however, was apparently not enough.The Pilgrims needed an ideology. In certain circumstances thiscould have been northern patriotism, of which a considerable elementappeared in the Pilgrim's programme and slogans. But it was, infact, religion.

The extent to which religion provided the slogans, at least, of thePilgrimage, hardly needs setting out in detail. But it would be as wellfirst to define terms. By contending that the Pilgrims fought for"religion", I intend only to argue that they fought about ecclesiasticalmatters. I do not intend to pass judgement on the extent to whichtheir motives were, in any sense, "spiritual". If by "War ofReligion" we mean a war fought only, or even primarily, aboutdiffering interpretations of the means of salvation, then certainlyEngland was "incapable of staging genuine Wars of Religion". But,on this basis, the rest of sixteenth-century Europe was equally

" Reid, Council of the North, pp. 133-4; Eng. Hist. Rev., v (1890), pp. 331-4;P.R.O., S.P. I/115 f. 218 b (LJ>., xa, i, no. 369, p. 166).

11 James, "Earl of Cumberland", p. 62; Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, pp. 224-5.

Dow




incapable. If, on the other hand, we mean a war in which ecclesiasti-cal afiairs bulked large, then the question is why the Pilgrimage failedto develop from an armed demonstration into a civil war. I wouldsuggest that this was due less to inherent weaknesses in its "religiousmotivation" (though I do not rule these out) as to various short-term,almost accidental, factors; above all, to certain nicely-balancedpolitical decisions taken by a few key individuals. The relativefervour, or otherwise, of the contenders, is not a constant; the veryact of fighting a war about ecclesiastical issues can result in increasedzeal, can turn a tepid, rather habitual, Catholicism into something verymuch more vigorous. (Thus the "spirituality of the Counter-Reformation", undoubtedly a key factor in the later French ReligiousWars, stemmed, at least in part, from the passions roused in theearlier wars.) In this context, it is surely unreasonable to polarize"religious" and "material" factors in men's attitude to ecclesiasticalinstitutions, and to adduce from this that men were not "really"fighting a religious war; "material" factors reinforce rather thandetract from "religious" ones.

Of the major ecclesiastical demands, that for the ending of the royalsupremacy was probably the least important. As Professor Dickenspoints out, the Lincolnshire rebels mentioned the royal supremacyonly once, and then to accept it (though, be it noted, grudgingly ratherthan gladly).32 At Doncaster, the Pilgrims demanded the restorationof the Pope, as far as cura ammarum was concerned, but the limitationof the payments traditionally made to him. The clergy were dividedon the supremacy; though the fact that it was treason to deny theRoyal Supremacy is relevant here." As for laymen the evidence iscontradictory; at one stage Aske said that "all men much murmured"at the Supremacy Statute, and that he himself inserted the qualification"touching curam ammarum" into the Pilgrims' demands; at another,he maintained that the article about the supremacy was only includedat his own request.34 The commons of Westmorland and Cumber-land, on the other hand, seem to have adopted Papalist slogans, evenduring the second, 1537, insurrection."

As far as the clergy is concerned, the reasons seem obvious enough.The stress is less on the papal supremacy than on the rejection of thatof the king. What was anathema was the rule of the church by

"P.R.(X, E 36/118 f. 56 (L.P., xi, no. 853, p. 342); cf. Dickens, EnglishReformation, p. 125.

" L.P., xi, no. 1246; xii, i, no. 786(ii); Dickens, "Secular and ReligiousMotivation", pp. 59-61.

" Ens. Hist. Rev., v (1890), pp. 565, 570." LJ1., xii, i, nos. 384, 671(2), 687(2), 914.

Dow




laymen; a sentiment amply confirmed by 1536, both by the increasingtendency towards Protestantism under Cromwell's aegis, and by thegreat increase in clerical taxation which followed the break withRome.36 Laymen's interest in the supremacy was probably lessimmediate. It was resented less for itself, than for its associations;the king's matrimonial proceedings, and the apparent attempt todespoil the church. Obviously the divorce was no longer an immediateissue, since Catherine had died in January 1536, and in May Henryhad had Anne Boleyn executed, and her daughter bastardized, and hadpromptly married Jane Seymour. The ghost of the divorce may have

„accounted, for the Lincolnshire rebels' dislike, of their diocesan,Lbhgland, who did nofffeasiry into the'category"of "heretic bishops"but who had been deeply involved in the king's matrimonial affairs,especially as the king's confessor. But now the Pilgrims could onlydemand the restoration of Mary's rights. Dislike of new threats tothe church in 1536 could conveniently centre on heretics in highplaces, especially Cromwell and the new bishops, rather than on thesupremacy. Nevertheless, it is worth stressing the point that thePilgrims did not show themselves implacably opposed to the papacy.Provided that papal influence was not too pervasive, it was not initself a bad thing. Darcy himself had alleged two things, amongstothers, to Wolsey's discredit: first, that when Wolsey had ruledChurch and State in England, some foreign princes had unfortunatelyceased to obey the papacy; and secondly, that papal power in theprovision to benefices and in levying money had increased in Englandin Wolsey's time. The Pilgrims' attitude was lukewarm, not hostile;and in this, surely, typical of pre-Tridentine Catholicism.37

The Pilgrims' attitude to the monasteries is more complex.Undoubtedly much of the rebellion was instigated or at least fannedby the religious. For instance, the abbots of Holme Cultram andFumess allegedly ordered their tenants to join the rebels, and thecanons of Watton financed the Pilgrims, perhaps under threat. Thefriars of Knaresborough played a leading part in spreading the

•• Cf. d. 2 of the opinion of the Northern Convocation (Strype, EcclesiasticalMemorials [Oxford, 1822], i, pt. ii, pp. 266-8); L.P., n, no. n82(ii);J. J. Scarisbrick, "Clerical Taxation, i4Ss-i547",Jl. of Eccles. Hist., xi (i960),pp. 41-54-

11 G. E. Wharhirst, "The Reformation in the Diocese of Lincoln, as illustratedin the life and Work of Bishop Longland", Lines. Architectural and Archae-ological Society, new ser., i (1939), pp. 137-76, especially pp. 150-1, 155, 158,166 ff.; Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, pp. 153, 256; G. Mamngly, Catherine ofAragon (London, 1942), pp. 179, 233, 240, 269-70; L.P., iv, pt. iii, no. 5749;vol. xi, nos. 714, 1246.

Dow



THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED 65

rumours which were, perhaps, the major single cause of the revolt.38

Sometimes, of course, motives were clearly less than idealistic. Dr.Elton has entertainingly told the story of the quondam abbot ofRievaulx's attempt to use popular force to re-acquire the office fromwhich he had been ousted. Many, however, must have acted froma desire to preserve the institution of the religious life; not in itself anunworthy motive to those possessing a sense of vocation, though,inevitably, inextricably mixed with a liking for their present style oflife. (Dr. Woodward notes that a large number of Yorkshire monksfrom the smaller houses elected to remain in religion, with the resultthat an exceptional number of smaller houses was granted exemptionfrom suppression for their benefit.) But conspiracy by the monksthemselves is obviously an inadequate explanation; we must stillexplain why laymen followed them, why, for instance, some sixteenof the fifty-five smaller houses suppressed or threatened withsuppression in the north (though none in Lincolnshire) were restoredby the Pilgrims.3'

Plainly there was a certain degree of ambivalence here. Aslandlords and as rectors of parishes (and therefore receivers of tithe)the monasteries were deeply enmeshed in the economy and objects,therefore, of resentment; quarrels were carried on with vigour in thecourts, and frequently erupted into violence.40 The Pilgrimageobviously provided the opportunity for settling old scores. Theevidence here, however, is not easy to handle. How far, for instance,can one believe the story that the abbot of Jervaulx was forced to avoidthe threatening commons during the first insurrection by fleeing toWitton Fell, and that he eventually took the Pilgrim oath to save hisown life and to prevent the burning of his house ? The abbot, afterall, played a major part in the second insurrection, for which he washanged. Can we accept his self-exculpatory account of the firstrising, and adduce from it evidence of strong anti-monastic feeling ?41

What is surely striking is the degree to which, by-and-large, monasticpossessions generated not hostility but, apparently, loyalty, or atleast the seeming belief that they formed a necessary part of the social

" LJ>., xi, no. 1047; xii, i, nos. 201 (pp. 91, 96, 100, 102), 841 (2-3), 1259.See also L.P., xii, i, no. 192 for a rather extreme example of the "clerical plot̂ 'theory.

•• G. R. Elton, Star Chamber Stories (London, 1958), pp. 147-73;G. W. O. Woodward, "The Exemption from Suppression of Certain YorkshirePriories", Eng. Hist. Rev., lxxvi (1961), pp. 385-401; idem., The Dissolution ofthe Monasteries (London, 1966), p. 94.

" Monastic Chancery Proceedings, ed. J. S. Purvis (Yorks. Arch. Soc., RecordSer., lxxxviii, 1934).

41 L.P., xii, i, nos. 369 (p. 164), 1012, 1035, 1285.

Dow




order. Monasteries were exceptionally thick on the ground inYorkshire and Lincolnshire. In the West Riding, for instance,ecclesiastical property comprised some 30 per cent of the whole, threetimes that of either crown or nobility; and two-thirds of theecclesiastical property was monastic. The religious, too, seem to haveappropriated an exceptionally large proportion of livings in thesecounties; about hah0 in the county of Lincoln, about two-thirds inYorkshire, compared with a national average of about one-third.41

Involvement to such a degree in the economic framework could haveworked against the interests of the religious. But it does not seemto have done so in this case; thus Robert Parkyn, curate of theimpropriated parish of Ardwick-le-Street, drawing £4 3s. 4& a yearfrom the lay rector, successor to the canons of Hamploe Priory, wroteabout 1555 a conservative account of the Reformation in which hedescribes the Pilgrimage as intended "for the maintenance of holychurch".43

Ecclesiastics in general, sensing coming dangers, may have goneout of their way to appease their more influential tenants; "there isnot a head tenant of the abbey lands, bishops' lands [etc] . . . but theyhave great familiarity and practices other than they have found intimes past of their land lords", reported Sir William Fairfax.Nevertheless, the landlord-tenant tie was not merely one of temporaryappeasement; Fairfax went on to stress the pivotal position, the socialinfluence, of bailiffs who "be made fellows and brought up with priestsof children". John Hallom, a yeoman, a key-figure in both EastRiding revolts, said that he was easily persuaded that Robert Holgate(the future archbishop of York) was "Cromwell's chaplain" and oughtto be replaced as prior of Watton because

all the time he was here he was good to no man, and of this nominate he tookxx marks in money which he should have been paid in corn when God shouldsend it, and giveth many unkind words and rebukeful to his tenants, sittingin his court more like a judge than a religious man

Reinforcing the tie of landownership was the fear of economic change;the belief which we have already mentioned that the rents of monastictenants would henceforth be paid to Westminster, and that there

41 D. Knowles and R. N. Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses in England andWales (London, 1953), maps; Hughes, Reformation, i, pp. 295-9; A. HamiltonThompson, The Engush Clergy in the Later Middle Ages (Oxford, 1947), p. 115.See also P. Tyler, "The State of the Elizabethan Parochial Clergy" in Studies inChurch History, ed. J. G. Cuming, iv, pp. 76-81. I must thank Mrs. MargaretBowker for clearing a confusion in my mind on this point; she warns me thatHamilton Thompson's figures may not be absolutely reliable.

" Tudor Treatises, ed. A. G. Dickens (Yorks. Arch. Soc., Record Ser.,v, 1959), introd. pp. 17-27; Eng. Hist. Rev., brii (i947)> P- 65-

Dow



THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED 6j

would be a shortage of coin in the north; a general fear of what a newlandlord might do to "improve" his estate.44 And, as Aske stressed,the monasteries performed a variety of useful social functions, evenif these were less than they were capable of: alms-giving; the provisionof employment; acting as inns and as boarding-schools for childrenof the gentry; even, allegedly, keeping roads and bridges in goodrepair.46

It would be wrong to rule out the spiritual functions of the monks,even if these in restrospect fell far below the standards of St. Benedictor St. Bernard. Aske stressed equally that the dissolution would befollowed by the diminution of divine service, sacrilege to relics andtombs, and a decline in religious instruction in the highland areas,where the inadequate parochial structure would have to shoulder theentire burden of ministry and instruction.4' (This last point shouldnot be over-stressed; the highland areas, after all, were not the maincentre of revolt.) Fear of the effect of the dissolution on prayers forthe dead, and hence on prospects in purgatory, presumably bulkedlarge. Professor Jordan notes that in Yorkshire a rather old-fashioned piety was still alive, that there were frequent legacies forprayers for the dead, including the establishment of chantries (indeed"more was given for prayers alone than for all the non-religiouscharitable uses combined") and that gifts to monasteries continuedon a generous scale into the 1530s. Lancashire presents much thesame picture, though with a good deal less accent on monasteries,presumably because the county contained so few.47 UnfortunatelyProfessor Jordan has produced no studies for the border counties or,what would be in this connection the most interesting example of all,Lincolnshire. Nevertheless, the materialistic, superstitious natureof so much of immediate pre-Reformation popular religion must haveeverywhere strengthened the fear of the consequences of the dissolu-tion, at least until an alternative creed was efficiently expounded; moreespecially in that the attack on the monasteries was linked, or so it wasbelieved, with an attack on the parish churches.

44 P.R.O., S.P. I/115 ff. 2-3; E 36/119 f. 30 (LJP., xii, i, nos. 192, 201, p. 92);Reid, Council of the North, pp. 123-4. The reports of the Cromwellian agentstend, of course, to exaggerate the degree to which the monasteries were makinguneconomic leases; see Joyce Youings, in Agrarian History, ed. Thirsk, pp. 324-32-

" Eng. Hist. Rev., v (1890), pp. 561-2; cf. ibid., p. 338.4« Ibid., p. 561.47 W. K. Jordan, The Charities of Rural England, 1480-1660 (London, 1961),

pp. 217-20, 360-75; The Social Institutions cf Lancashire (Chetham Soc., 3rdser., xi, 1962), pp. 5-6, 75-8; cf. also R. B. Dobson, "The Foundation ofPerpetual Chantries by the Citizens of Medieval York" in Studies in ChurchHistory, ed. J. G. Cuming, iv, pp. 22-38.

Dow




On the parochial level we have the same sort of apparent contra-diction as we had with the monks. On the one hand, the existence ofa good deal of anti-clericalism; on the other, the ability of the parishclergy to enlist mass support. Anti-clericalism has, I believe, beenexaggerated. The strongest manifestation came from Westmorlandand Cumberland, where the commons demanded the deprivation ofnon-resident clergy, excusing themselves by noting that several ofthese were not in priests's orders, and that some were "Cromwell'schaplains". In January 1537, 800 men helped themselves to grainfrom the tithe-barns. Presumably, the exceptional economicconditions in the north-west produced a dislike of priests as well as oflandlords. Indeed, the north-western rising adopted the phraseologyof the "Piers Plowman" tradition, with its outlook of down-to-earthanti-clericalism combined with doctrinal orthodoxy." Outside thenorth-west, however, attacks on tithe-barns seem to have been veryrare. (Dr. Reid talks of "frequent" riots against tithes, but all herevidence refers to events in the north-west, except for one StarChamber case, in which the alleged exorbitancies of a tithe-fanner,rather than the principle of tithe itself, was the issue.)4' Even in thenorth-west much of the alleged anti-clericalism is plainly a feeling ofbitterness at the refusal of certain priests to involve themselves whenthe commons were risking their lives for their religion. Thefrequently quoted case of the Cumberland rebel exclaiming that itwould be better if all the priests' heads were cut off is obviously of thistype; it followed the refusal of the abbot of Holme Cultram and twopriests to go and negotiate on behalf of the rebels at Carlisle. More-over, the only source for this story is the evidence of a priest who wasusing it, and probably exaggerating the rebels' anti-clericalism asmuch as he could, to defend himself when accused of taking a leadingpart as "chaplain and secretary of Poverty".50

For the positive influence of the parish clergy, on the other hand,there is a wealth of evidence. Objecting to, and perhaps with reasonfearing, an examination of their morals, they played a vital part inspreading rumours, promising spiritual and material profit ("Be ofgood comfort and proceed in this journey" the Vicar of Louth told"Captain Cobbler", "for it is both for the faith of Christ andp ,ing of his service and in doing this you should lack neither gold nor

41 LI1., xi, no. 1080; xii, i, no. 319; Dickens, "Secular and Religious Motiva-tion", p. 63; cf. H. C. White, Social Criticism in Popular Religion of the SixteenthCentury (New York, 1944), ch. i; Mr. M. E. James stressed this point to me.

" Reid, Council of the North, p. 123; Yorkshire Star Chamber Proceedings,vol. i (Yorks. Arch. Soc., Record Ser., xli, 1909), pp. 95-6.

M L.P., xii, i, no. 687(2), pp. 303-4.

Dow




silver".), and threatening the recalcitrant ("If they should not assentthey should be hanged and killed at their own door posts", the priestof Croft told his parishioners.)61 Obviously the demands in thePilgrims' programme that full benefit of clergy should be restored,right of sanctuary extended, and clerical taxation reduced, camedirectly from the clergy, and were conceived in terms of their ownself-interest; as was the parson of Sotheby's reason for calling theKing's Council "false harlots, in devising of false laws to spoil thegoods of the spirituality". The parish priests (to an extent whichshocked many of the more earnest clergy) shared many of the moreviolent characteristics of their parishioners; one "having a great clubin his hands, said that if he had Cromwell there he would beat outhis guts"; another, harnessed and armed, said, "it was the best worldthat ever he did see" and wished to have the Sacrament carried beforethe Pilgrims."

Yet once again we must ask why the people were so ready to followthe priests. Obviously spiritual sanctions played their part; so didthe position of the priest as a principal intermediary, a major dispenserof news, between the world at large and his parishioners. But thereadiness of the people to follow (or in some cases to take theinitiative) stemmed largely from the "ecclesiastical" grievances whichmost immediately concerned them: the state of their own parishchurches, and the efficacy of the traditional sacraments. The TenArticles of July 1536, backed up by Injunctions issued (significantly)in the name of Cromwell as vice-gerent, drastically curtailed thenumber of saints' days, because they led to idleness and sin. Inparticular the festivals of parochial patron saints were not in future tobe observed as holy-days. They were to be replaced by a generaldedication feast, to be celebrated in all parishes on the first Sunday inOctober. In the cirumstances rumours that the parochial organiza-tion itself was to be similarly and drastically rationalized, that churcheswere not to be maintained if less than five miles apart, and that plateand jewellery were to be confiscated, seemed credible." The failureof the Ten Articles to mention four of the seven sacraments couldseem significant as a pointer to drastic doctrinal change in the future.

" L.P., xi, nos. 972, 975 (p. 401); jrii, i, nos. 70, 380,481; P.R.O., S.P. I /nof. 148 (LJ*., xi, no. 968); £. 36/118 f. 1 (L.P., xi, no. 975, p. 399).

" P.R.O., SJ\ I/112 ft 143-5 (L.P., xi, no. 1246); F, J6/118 ft 3-5 (L.P., xi,no. 975). F. W. Brooks, "The Social Position of the Parson in die SixteenthCentury", Jl. of the British Archaeological Assoc., 3rd scr., x (1945-7), PP- 23-7,shows that only 4 of a sample of 32 Lincolnshire parsons in the 1530s had books,although their material comforts were rather better than a husbandman's.

" Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, pp. 63-86. For holy days see Hughes, Reformation,i> P- 353-

Dow




(I cannot share Professor Dickens' view that the Pilgrims "should haveknown that the King disliked both Lutherans and Anabaptists atleast as much as they did". This was hardly obvious in 1536.)"

Trouble at Louth began with Thomas Foster, a yeoman andsinging-man, proclaiming on Sunday, 1 October 1536, that "we shallnever follow [the cross] more" in procession; the same evening acrowd, spurred on by rumours and by payments from the clergy,demanded the keys of the treasure-house from the churchwarden, toprevent the King's commissioners taking away the plate and jewels."The East Riding rebels ascribed their initial rising to rumours fromLincolnshire, in which the concept of a spoliation of the church waslinked with a general spoliation which would follow; trouble atWatton began with a riot when St. Wilfred's day was not proclaimed.Even in Westmorland the rebellion began with a protest when St.Luke's Day was not proclaimed as a holiday."

There are, naturally, a number of motives mixed up here. As wehave seen, large numbers of Yorkshiremen continued to trust in thesacraments of the church, and were likely, therefore, to fear drasticchanges. They were therefore prepared to join in the attack on"heretic bishops". This was a threat for the future; and, as Baconobserved in his essay "Of Seditions", "they are the most dangerousdiscontents where the fear is greater than the feeling". And fear forthe sacraments obviously increased the determination to defendchurches and church-furnishings as symbols of the faith. Moreimmediately, a reduction in the number of churches would obviouslybe a major inconvenience to the poorer classes, as it was in 1549 whenmany chapels-of-ease were suppressed." A good deal of communalpride was invested in the parish church and in its fittings. Louth,significantly enough, had only in 1515 completed the building of itschurch spire, an operation supervised by the elected churchwardensand financed largely from donations and legacies." There was astrong feeling that plate was the parishioners' own, and itsconfiscation, therefore, a direct attack on the parishioners by the king.The church-plate issue, especially in conjunction with the suppressionof the monasteries, might be seen as symptomatic of the royal policy.

" L. B. Smith, Tudor Prelates and PoHtici (Princetown, 1953), pp. 189-91;Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, p. 337; Dickens, "Secular and Religious Motivation",P-58.

" L.P., xi, nos. 828, 854, 967-75; xii, i, nos. 70 (passim), 380." L J'., jrii, i, no. 201 (passim), 687(2)." A. G. Dickens, "Some Popular Reactions to the Edwardian Reformation in

Yorkshire", Yorks. Arch. Journal, xxxiv (1938-9), pp. 160-1." The First Churchwardens' Book of Louth, 1500-24, ed. R. C. Dudding

(Oxford, 1941); cf. Dickens, English Reformation, p. 10.

Dow




Thus "Captain Cobbler", a Louth shoemaker, heard that there was tobe a recoinage of gold coin, and a confiscation of church plate; if "itwas suffered in that town of Louth, all the whole country should belikewise". John Hallom thought that the East Riding revolt wasbecause "the abbeys were plucked down, and for making of new laws,which were thought to be made by my Lord Cromwell's counsel";or, put another way, "for the pulling down of abbeys and diverspayments". In the West Riding it was reported "surely they willpay no more money for they have it not, and for the jewels of theirchurch, surely they speak it openly, they will depart with none".88

It has been necessary so far to separate out the various factorsmaking for revolt. But what has become increasingly apparent is theimpossibility of fixing on a single factor or group of factors and sayingthat this is fundamental, in the sense of being in itself sufficient causeof the Pilgrimage. Quite obviously the factors interact; rumours feedon each other; a general feeling of distrust is created. The confirma-tion of one rumour can lead to a general conflagration. To quoteJohn Hallom once more, "the people saw many abbeys pulled down indeed, they believed all the rest to be true".80 This, indeed, may wellbe the explanation of why it was the North which rose in 1536, whilethe equally conservative West Country did not do so till 1549, andWales (where the magnates were threatened with a loss of privilegesas drastic, or even more drastic than in the North) failed to do so atall. In Lincolnshire and the eastern half of Yorkshire (includinghere the lowland areas of the West Riding) there were many smallermonasteries; in Wales and the West Country there were very few.In the former, then, a base for discontent existed. Fear of a wholesaleattack on church property, indeed on property in general, was stimula-ted by the near-simultaneous activities of the commissioners tosuppress the smaller monasteries, the subsidy commissioners, and thecommissioners enquiring into the morals of the clergy. All thesewere at work in Lincolnshire in the late summer of 1536; trouble atLouth began the day before the commissioners arrived to examine theclergy; at Caister, on the day when the clergy and subsidy commis-sioners were both meeting there. For the East Riding, WilliamStapleton listed a number of causes, including a large number ofeconomic ones (entry fines, enclosures, etc.) and the abolition of holy-days, but believed that trouble was set off by a royal commissioner

" P.R.O., S.P. I /no f. 147; E 36/119 ff. 21, 27, 37; S.P. I/108 £ 11 {L.P., xi,nos. 678, 968; xii> i, no. 201;; cf., too, the reaction in Dent, L.P., xi, no. 563(2).

" P.R.O., E 36/119 f. 54 (L.P., xii, i, no. 201, p. 90).

Dow




demanding an inventory of church goods, thus apparently confirmingthe rumour that they were to be confiscated."

The activity of the commissioner is, of course, a "precipitatingfactor". But to recognize this is not, I think, to diminish itsimportance. Historians and sociologists prefer to concentrate onlong-term strain and then to slip hurriedly past "precipitating factors"on the grounds they are unimportant. Dr. Woodward, for instance,writes that "the dissolution of the lesser monasteries was not the'cause' of the Pilgrimage of Grace, in the sense that without it therewould have been no rebellion: at the most it was the proverbial 'laststraw" which provided the rebels with a popular cause and a goodrallying cry"." But, as we have seen, social strain is most intenselystudied when there is a revolt to explain. Historians tend to neglectits existence at other times, and then to underestimate the importanceof precipitating factors in changing a situation in which a rebellion ispossible (of which there must have been several, most of themabortive) into an actual rebellion. The precipitating factors are surelystraightforward: in Lincolnshire, the coincidence of subsidy commis-sioners, the dissolution of the smaller monasteries, and the enquiryinto the clergy; in Yorkshire, the dissolution and the subsidy, theignoring of saints' days, and the Lincolnshire rising; in the north-west, the dissolution, the ignoring of saints' days, and the Yorkshirerising. Without the Lincolnshire rising, it is surely probable thatconditions of strain would have lessened in the other counties, thatthe rumours would gradually have been forgotten as the predicteddire events failed to materialize.

Ecclesiastical factors, then, seem to have been a necessary element(though obviously not the only element) in the Pilgrimage of Grace;and ecclesiastical grievances were plainly inflammatory, preciselybecause they could produce in participants a self-righteousness whichwas more formidable than material interests were likely to be on theirown. Revolts, moreover, seem to need a simple objective; cohesionseems to be possible only when men come to believe that a complexset of grievances has a single cause, that if only that cause could beremoved, if only "noble men of the true noble blood may reign orrule about the king, all should be well"." "If only" is the key here;in this case, if only the king would free himself from Cromwell,Audeley, Riche, and the heretic bishops, then the assorted grievances

" Dodds, Pilgrimage, i, pp. 89-96; L.P., xii, i, no. 392 (printed by J. C. Coxin Trans. East Riding Anaq. Soc, x [1903], p. 82).

" Woodward, Dissolution, p. 91." See the illuminating analysis by N. J. Smelser, Theory of Collective

Behaviour (London, 1962), ch. v; L.P., xii, i, no. 1013, p. 458.

Dow




of gentry, clergy, and commons could be met. And, in a society inwhich clergy, however crude and unlearned, were by-and-large themost articulate members, it is hardly surprising that the programmeshould give priority to ecclesiastical grievances, or that the rebelsshould sum up their programme in ecclesiastical slogans. Indeed,even when the rebels turned against the interests of the churchmen(as did those in the north-west) they forcibly expressed, with nosense of contradiction, their devotion to the papacy and dislike ofliturgical innovation. Religion, then, provided the necessary sloganswhich gave coherence to the movement.

Religion, too, was useful in legitimating rebellion. Of course, thePilgrims preferred to believe that they were not rebels at all; they putforward the traditional belief that the king was really on their side,that he would thank them for ridding him of his evil counsellors.Henry may. be said to have encouraged this belief, by his attitude in1525, when the forced-loan was withdrawn under popular pressure,the king proclaiming that he had not realized how much his subjectswere being oppressed. Indeed, the fall of Wolsey (as later that ofCromwell) is a striking example of Henry's tendency to seek scape-goats. Hence the men of Dent could believe, or at least profess tobelieve, that the pulling down of churches "is not the king's deed butthe d[eed] of Crumwell, and if we had him here we would crum him[and crum] him that he was never so Crumwed, and if [the king] were[here] we would new crown him"." But if-the king were not tolisten to the Pilgrim demands, then they would go further. Ancientprophecies, such as the alleged prophecies of Merlin which talked ofthe overthrow of the "Molewarp" (curiously identified with HenryVIII) and the division of England into three kingdoms, of which theNorth would be one, ceased to be merely a subject of alehousespeculation, and acquired an unwonted importance as indications ofthe immediate future; and hence to a certain extent as legitimation ofaction designed to overthrow the king." But legitimation in termsof the superiority of the laws of God to the laws of man was likely tohave greater effect, and it was to this that the Pilgrims appealed; hencetheir rage when Archbishop Lee, either from conviction or because ofthe sudden arrival of Lancaster Herald in the congregation, preachedthem a politically orthodox sermon on the duty of obedience. Askepreferred not to face the conflict of loyalties, but he was quite clear"that if his grace had refused their petitions, that then their cause had

" A. F. Pollard, Wolsey (London, 1929), p. 146; L.P., xi, no. 841.•• M. H. Dodds, "Political Prophecies in the Reign of Henry VIH", Modern

Language Review, xi (1916), pp. 276-84. I owe this point to Mr. K. V. Thomas.

Dow




been just". So, too, Captain Cobbler thought that "their purposewas to advance themselves towards the king's highness, and to fightagainst his power if he would not grant them such things as theywrote to him for".'"

Religious factors, then, were an essential feature of the Pilgrimage;they figured large among the causes, they served to give the move-ment cohesion, to bind together different classes with widely differentinterests, providing slogans and scapegoats, in the last resort legiti-mating resistance to the king. But it can be argued that suchcohesion as the Pilgrimage possessed evaporated very quickly; thatby December 1536 the Pilgrims were prepared to accept the king'spardon and return home; that in the New Year class division hadreasserted itself and the commons of the East Riding rose againbecause they believed they had been betrayed by the gentry.

There is obviously a good deal of truth in this. Certainly earlysixteenth-century Catholicism seems very largely to have lost itsdynamism, inspiring solid piety rather than enthusiasm, acceptancerather than action. But, as I have argued, religious zeal is a variable,not a constant. Prolonged religious fighting could (and probablywould) have produced a vigorous, crusading Catholicism. Thefailure of the Pilgrimage to reach this stage was due at least as muchto short-term, almost accidental factors, as to more profound ones.

Some of these have been stressed by Dr. Scarisbrick." ThePilgrims, or at least their leaders, trusted the king and were trickedinto disbanding by his promises of redress. A pitched battle, unlessit had been a shattering defeat for the Pilgrims, would have strength-ened their cohesion. The Pilgrimage did not develop into a succes-sion war, which it could have done, had, for instance, a crediblealternative candidate for the throne existed. Had the divorce issuestill been a live one, or had Bishop Tunstall of Durham persisted inhis earlier opposition to Henry's assumption of the supremacy andfollowed John Fisher to the block, passions might have been moreinflamed than they were. But, above all, the particular decisionstaken by a small group of men seem to be of vital importance here.Such success as the Pilgrims had, depended on the (at best) half-hearted opposition put up by the effective representatives of govern-ment in the area. Lord Hussey and the gentry, led by the sheriff,Sir Edward Dymmoke, in Lincoln; the earl of Northumberland andthe Council of the North, led by Lord Darcy, elsewhere. Mr. M. E.

ML_P., xii, i, nos. i o n , 1021-2; Eng. Hist. Rev., v (1890), p. 571; P.R.O.,S.P. I/109 f. 2a (LJ>., 3d, no. 828).

" Henry VIII, pp. 341-8.

Dow




James has noted how important for the king's cause was the continuedloyalty of the earl of Cumberland; and how important, too, was thefact that the earl's heir held Carlisle, and his half-brother heldBerwick, for the king." Moreover, if the earl of Northumberlandhad been able or willing to play a less ambiguous rdle, the rebels'cohesion would have been greater. Most important of all was thepersonality of a handful of peers who commanded the royal army.The earl of Derby was an opponent of Cromwell, and was expectedby the Pilgrims to join them. The earl of Shrewsbury was a man ofdefinite conservative opinions, although too loyal or too cautious torebel and, indeed, distinguished by his promptness in raising troops tocrush the rebels. Above all, the duke of Norfolk, recalled from semi-disgrace to lead the royal army, many of them his own East Angliantenants, sympathized with a large part of the rebels' demands, andespecially with the hatred of Cromwell and the heretic bishops.Professor Dickens argues that the adhesion of Norfolk and Shrews-bury to the king shows that the Pilgrimage "was not a struggle betweenCatholics and Protestants"." In the event, of course, it was not.But the Pilgrims obviously intended that it should be, and this issurely the point at issue. Their aims were directed against Protes-tants in the government; it was against that ill-perceived evil summedup in their minds by the parrot-cry Cromwell that they had taken uparms, not against Norfolk. They obviously had no means of tellingin advance that it would be Norfolk who would lead an army againstthem. Norfolk's decision to oppose them was surely a matter ofexpediency and calculation. He evidently preferred to fight Crom-well by intrigue (and to gain many of the Pilgrims' points in 1540)rather than by force of arms, putting up meanwhile with insult andhumiliation. Possibly, too, he looked forward to a grateful kingestablishing him as the leading magnate in the North on the ruins ofthe Perries, a hope fostered in the Howard family since 1489.70 HadNorfolk possessed a less calculating temperament, the temptation tojoin the rebels would surely have been overwhelming. In thesecircumstances Henry would probably not have lost his throne; buthe might have found it expedient to anticipate the Catholic reactionwhich set in in 1539.

" "Earl of Cumberland", p. 68."Diet. Nat. Biog. (sub Edward Stanley and George Talbot); Dodds,

Pilgrimage, i, p. 116. For Norfolk's character, see G. R. Elton, "ThomasCromwell's Decline and Fall", Cambridge Historical Jl., x (1950-2), pp. 150-85;Dickens, Thomas Cromwell, p. 99; "Secular and Religious Motivation , p. 63.

'• See M. E. James, "The Fourth Duke of Norfolk and the North", NorthernHistory, ii (1967), pp. 150-2: a review of N. J. Williams, Thomas Howard,Fourth Duke of Norfolk (London, 1964).

Dow




Beyond all these hypotheses lurks an even larger one. What wouldhave been the attitude of the rest of the country had the Pilgrimspressed on, rather than dispersing in December 1536 ? As we haveseen, many of the factors predisposing towards revolt were morepronounced in the north, including, in Professor Jordan's analysis,catholic piety — though there is evidence that belief in prayers for thedead was more widespread, even in London, than Jordan allows.71

Nevertheless, there seems to have been a good deal of sympathy forthe rebels. There were murmurs in Kent, which, after all, hadalready seen large-scale riots against the dissolution of certain monas-teries by Wolsey in 1525. Walsingham was a centre of considerabledisturbance; had the duke of Norfolk wished to swing East Angliabehind the Pilgrims, he might well have done so. The governmentthought that Wales was likely to revolt, and postponed the bringinginto operation of the Act of Union, which was designed to reducedrastically the privileges of the Marcher lords. Above all, it is easyto overlook the degree to which 1549 was to demonstrate popularecclesiastical conservatism, not only in the West Country, but in suchcounties as Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire, and Hampshire." Allin all, the elements making for change, the degree of anti-clericalism,the survival of Lollards and so on, have been commonly over-stressed,in order to explain how the Henrician Reformation was possible. Iam not denying that had a fervent Catholicism been widespread, hadmore people been prepared to risk then- lives for their faith, Henry'spath would have been impossible. But it is important, too, to stresshow far, given the right circumstances, a not very heroic piety mighthave been transformed into a much more dangerous enthusiasm; andto what extent the chance of such a transformation depended on suchincalculables as the death of Queen Catherine or the temperament ofthe duke of Norfolk. It was to the accident of political circumstances,not to any peculiar lukewarmness of religious feeling, that Englandowed its immunity from religious war in the sixteenth century.

Wadham College, Oxford C. S. L. Daoies71J. A. F. Thomson, "Piety and Charity in Late Medieval London", Jl. of

Eccles. Hist., xvi (1965), pp. 178-95." See the references given in Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, p. 341; cf. also Dodds,

Pilgrimage, i, pp. 324, 326; ii,pp. 167-8, 174-55 P.R.O., S.P. I/109 f. 44 (L.P.,xi, no. 841); T. H. Swales, "The Opposition to the Suppression of the NorfolkMonasteries", Norfolk Archaeology, xxriii (1962-5), pp. 254-65; G. Baskerville,EngUsh Monks and the Dissolution of the Monasteries (London, 1937), pp. 156-7;R. Robinson, "Early Tudor Policy towards Wales", pt. iii, Bull, of the Board ofCeltic Studies, xxi (1966), p. 349. For 1549, see A. Vere Woodman, "TheBuckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Rising of 1549", Oxoniensia, m i (1957),pp. 78-84; and P.R.O., S.P. 10/8, no. 41, quoted in part by E. F. Gay, in Trans.Roy. Hist. Soc, new ser., xviii (1904), pp. 203-4.

Dow



THE PILGRIMAGE OF GRACE RECONSIDERED

Documents