Mid-Tudor Society (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
Mid-Tudor Society
Introduction
Mid-Tudor society experienced considerable transformation during the sixteenth century. This process resulted partly from religious upheavals, but economic and social factors also played important roles. Population growth and shifts in trade patterns contributed to these changes. While developments appeared to accelerate during the middle decades of the century, understanding them requires placing them within the broader context of the entire Tudor period.
The changes in mid-Tudor society were driven by multiple interconnected factors: religious reformation, economic pressures, demographic shifts, and evolving trade patterns. Examining these changes requires both a focus on the mid-century decades and an awareness of longer-term Tudor trends.
Main divisions within Tudor society
Historians have debated whether the 1549 rebellions and political instability of the mid-sixteenth century indicated a social crisis affecting all levels of society. The evidence suggests a more nuanced picture. The fundamental structure of social divisions remained largely intact. The church hierarchy continued to function without major disruption, and the monarchy maintained order with support from the ruling classes. Few exceptions to this pattern emerged.
Opportunities for moving between social ranks existed but remained restricted. Social advancement through education probably became more difficult towards the end of the century. Women found their scope for advancement particularly limited, though occasionally marriage provided an avenue for advancement.
Men had several potential routes to higher status:
- Land ownership represented one path
- Gaining a position of standing within a town offered another option
- Some achieved status through becoming merchants
- Entering one of the professions provided advancement opportunities
Understanding Economic vs Social Status
Economic status (wealth and income) did not always correspond to social status (position in the hierarchy). This distinction is crucial for understanding Tudor society:
- Professions conferred social standing without necessarily bringing wealth
- Merchants might accumulate considerable wealth without gaining equivalent social recognition
Nobility and gentry
Tensions and stability
Rising population and the redistribution of land following the dissolution of the monasteries generated tensions. Some historians have argued that aspirations of the rising gentry class, encouraged by Crown appointments, clashed with the interests of the traditional nobility. However, examining the actual numbers reveals a different picture. The number of nobles and gentry showed little variation between 1500 and 1550.
Size and composition of the nobility
The gentry class comprised approximately one per cent of the population. According to Wolsey's survey conducted in 1524, this equated to about 4,500 families. The gentlemen class (those below the gentry) did increase, but probably in line with overall population growth.
The redistribution of Church land following Henry VIII's assumption of control over the Church's land and wealth, and the subsequent dissolution of the monasteries, mostly strengthened the established hierarchy. Only a small amount of land appears to have passed into the hands of new landowners.
Some old noble families did fall from positions of power, usually because of royal disfavour or the failure to produce a male heir. The de la Pole family, who had supported the Yorkist cause, exemplifies this pattern. However, such cases represented normal occurrences in any century and did not indicate systemic change.
The number of peers remained similar throughout the period: 51 in 1547 and 55 in 1603. They continued to hold roughly ten per cent of the land available for cultivation.
Royal policy on peerages
Henry VIII created the most new peerages during the 1530s. He did so mostly for political reasons, ensuring that lay peers in the House of Lords could outnumber the bishops. Most of the new creations under Henry were successful courtiers or soldiers. This provided some scope for upward mobility based on merit for a few families.
Elizabeth pursued a different approach. Her policy aimed to limit the number of new creations and rely as much as possible on the old families. The main exception was Lord Burghley, who served her for 40 years.
The rise of the gentry
Some of the greater gentry began to rival the aristocracy in land, wealth and power. While not entirely new, this became more evident in the sixteenth century because of the particular political background. The leading gentry families held the status of knights. The number changed from about 300 to 600 during the Tudor period, but the large increases were more to do with successful soldiers being dubbed knights on the field of battle rather than the active policy of the monarch. Elizabeth proved sparing in the number that she personally created, despite the upward aspirations of many landed families. Knights owned slightly less than ten per cent of the land held by the nobility.
Changing expectations in society also tended to help the gentry class. Their numbers increased during the Tudor period, but not much at the expense of the nobility. The overall increase in numbers of gentry masks the fact that many families died out or became impoverished and lost status. Together with the nobility, they were the prominent local landowners who dominated society in the localities.
Routes to Gentry Advancement
Those who rose often benefited from multiple sources:
- Acquisition of positions at court and gaining offices
- Making fortunes in trade
- Success in the law
- Land ownership (which provided status but not necessarily wealth)
The gentry were often at the centre of the increased interest in learning, greatly helped by the printing revolution. Many could read and studied new literature from England and from Europe. Some saw themselves as intellectually superior to the lazy nobility who relied on their inheritances and their traditional status.
Lower orders of society
Population pressure and living standards
Popular uprisings might suggest social conflict and crisis. In fact, tensions existed in any century. In the fifteenth century, because of depopulation after the Black Death, living standards for the poorest had become less bleak. Economic pressures in the sixteenth century led to a fall in living standards for those groups of society.
The population had risen from something like 2.3 million in the 1520s to about 3 million in the 1550s. The surplus of available labour led to wages not keeping pace with inflation. Increased numbers put pressure on food supplies. About fifty per cent of the rural and urban poor lived at or below subsistence level. When the harvest was bad, as in 1549, substantial suffering resulted.
The Poverty Crisis
By the mid-sixteenth century, approximately 50% of the rural and urban poor lived at or below subsistence level. This meant that:
- Any bad harvest could cause severe hardship
- The 1549 harvest failure resulted in substantial suffering
- Wage growth failed to match inflation, worsening conditions
- Increased population created intense pressure on food supplies
Economic opportunities
Opportunities existed for some. The number of wage labourers increased as more opportunities arose in local industries and in trade. Mining of iron and coal provided employment for some, as did weaving. These opportunities were limited to particular locations, thus encouraging geographical mobility.
While economic conditions were harsh for many, new opportunities did emerge in specific sectors and locations. This created a more mobile workforce, with people moving to areas where mining, weaving, and trade offered employment. However, these opportunities remained geographically concentrated and could not absorb the entire surplus labour force.
Long-term perspective
When considering a possible crisis in society, looking at the long-term situation proves essential. Any short-term changes should be seen as relatively minor fluctuations from the long-term trend.
Key Points to Remember
-
The social hierarchy remained fundamentally stable during the mid-Tudor period, despite claims of widespread crisis. The church hierarchy stayed intact and the monarchy maintained order with ruling class support.
-
The nobility showed little change in numbers (51 peers in 1547, 55 in 1603) and continued to hold about 10% of cultivable land. Henry VIII created new peerages mainly for political purposes in the 1530s, while Elizabeth limited new creations and relied on established families.
-
The gentry comprised approximately 1% of the population (around 4,500 families) and grew in line with population increase. Many became interested in learning and intellectual pursuits, sometimes viewing themselves as superior to the traditional nobility. Land ownership conferred status but not necessarily wealth.
-
Population growth from 2.3 million to 3 million (1520s-1550s) created economic pressure. Wages failed to keep pace with inflation, and roughly 50% of the rural and urban poor lived at or below subsistence level.
-
While some opportunities existed in wage labour, mining, weaving and trade, these were geographically limited. Short-term fluctuations must be understood within the longer-term trend rather than as evidence of fundamental social crisis.