Government Response to the Social and Economic Problems of the 1590s (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
Government Response to the Social and Economic Problems of the 1590s
Introduction
The 1590s was a decade of severe social and economic hardship in England. A series of poor harvests between 1594 and 1597 led to food shortages, rising prices, and widespread distress among the poorer sections of society. This created significant challenges for Elizabeth I's government, which feared social breakdown and popular rebellion. The government's response involved both immediate measures and longer-term legislative solutions.
The 1590s crisis occurred during a period of ongoing war with Spain and high taxation, which compounded the economic hardship experienced by the population. Understanding this broader context is essential for appreciating why the government responded with such urgency and severity.
Context: social unrest in the 1590s
Riots and disturbances
Food shortages and high prices triggered a wave of unrest across England during the mid-1590s:
- London riots: The capital experienced riots, though authorities managed to suppress them
- Kent and Norfolk (1595-96): Reports of protesters threatening to establish 'camps' against farmers and grain hoarders. Alarmingly, Norfolk rebels explicitly referenced Robert Kett's Rebellion (1549), one of the most serious popular uprisings of the 16th century
- Continued unrest (1596-97): Further food riots broke out in East Anglia, the South West, and the Kent-Sussex border
The references to Kett's Rebellion were particularly alarming for the authorities. The 1549 rebellion had involved thousands of rebels and had required significant military force to suppress. Any echoes of that uprising suggested the potential for large-scale, organized resistance that could threaten the entire social order.
Government fears
The authorities were deeply concerned about the potential for violent disorder. Several factors heightened their anxiety:
- Fear of violent vagrants attacking their social superiors
- Widespread publication of pamphlets describing crimes committed by wandering beggars, which fuelled public alarm
- Concerns that social order might collapse entirely
The Oxfordshire rising (November 1596)
This incident, though small in scale, revealed the government's deep paranoia about popular rebellion:
The Oxfordshire Rising: A Study in Government Paranoia
What happened:
- Inspired by the London apprentice riots of 1595, rebel leaders planned to attack Lord Norris (the Oxfordshire Lord Lieutenant), seize his weapons, and march to London
- Only four rebels actually appeared at the meeting point
- After waiting two hours, they disbanded and were arrested
The government's response:
- The Privy Council reacted with extreme severity
- Rebels were brought to London and examined under torture by the Council itself
- The councillors feared gentry involvement, though none was discovered
- The rebel leader, Bartholomew Steer (a carpenter), and his companions (young unmarried artisans or servants) were executed for treason, even though the rising had not been violent
- The government wanted to send a clear warning to potential rebels
The government's response extended beyond punishment of the rebels themselves:
- Special charges were made in local assizes (law courts) against those responsible for enclosure
- The rising may have triggered the Poor Laws passed in 1597 and 1601
Contemporary evidence: Edward Hext's letter (1596)
Edward Hext, a Justice of the Peace from Somerset, wrote to Lord Burghley describing the severity of the situation:
I do not see how it is possible for the poor countrymen to bear the burthens... laid upon him... There be [some] that stick not to say boldly that they must not starve, they will not starve. And this year there assembled 80 in a company and took a whole cartload of cheese from one driving it to a fair, and dispersed it among them...
Hext's letter provides valuable primary source evidence about the scale and nature of the crisis. His estimate that there were three to four hundred wandering vagrants in a typical shire suggests a significant mobile population that authorities struggled to control.
Worryingly, he reported that these vagrants would meet regularly at fairs, markets, or alehouses, making them more dangerous. Most alarmingly for the authorities, he noted that Justices of the Peace and other officers were too frightened to challenge them, indicating a potential breakdown in local law enforcement.
Early government responses: Books of Orders
What were Books of Orders?
Even before the mid-1590s crisis intensified, the government was preparing responses to poverty, disease, and food shortages. From 1586-87 onwards, the government issued Books of Orders - documents sent to all Justices of the Peace (JPs) instructing them on what actions to take during emergencies.
Measures for plague
JPs were instructed to:
- Quarantine houses where disease was present
- Post watchmen to guard infected houses and ensure the sick remained isolated
Measures for famine
First issued in 1586 and republished in 1594 and 1595, these orders required JPs to:
- Conduct searches for grain to combat food hoarding
- Establish compulsory sale of food to those in need
Key Limitation of Books of Orders
These measures were of limited effectiveness during times of real shortage, primarily because there simply was not enough food available to distribute, regardless of administrative arrangements. This highlights a crucial point: government intervention could organize distribution but could not create food supplies where none existed.
Parliamentary responses: 1597 and 1601
The parliaments of 1597 and 1601 marked serious attempts to address the crisis caused by successive bad harvests. In the 1597-98 session, 11 out of 17 bills introduced dealt with poverty - a clear indication of how urgent the problem had become.
The Vagrancy Act (1597)
This Act established harsh measures against vagrants:
Punishments for vagrants:
- Arrest, whipping, and return to their home parishes
- Able-bodied vagrants: forced to work
- Impotent poor (those unable to work due to age or disability): sent to almshouses
- Persistent vagrants: sent to houses of correction or forced to work on English galley ships
- Final punishment: execution for felony
The escalating punishments reflect the government's determination to control the vagrant population through fear and deterrence. The progression from whipping to forced labour to execution demonstrates the severity with which authorities viewed persistent vagrancy as a threat to social order.
The Tillage Act (1597)
This Act addressed the problem of enclosure and its impact on food supplies:
Background:
- There was renewed concern about the effect of enclosure for sheep farming on arable farming
- Less arable land meant reduced food production
Measures:
- Forced pasture land enclosed since 1588 to be restored to arable farming
- Aimed to reverse the effects of enclosure and increase grain production
The Poor Law (1597)
This was the first comprehensive Poor Law since 1576. While it did not introduce many entirely new ideas, it consolidated various aspects of poor relief that had developed over the previous 30 years.
Key features:
The role of Overseers of the Poor
The position of Overseer of the Poor, first introduced in 1572, was more clearly defined:
- Two unpaid overseers elected annually for each parish
- Their work supervised by the JPs
- Given power to put to work those without money or jobs
- Responsible for assessing how much money was needed to support the poor
- Collected and distributed poor relief
- Supervised the poorhouse
Administrative safeguards
To prevent corruption and ensure proper functioning:
- Overseers ordered to meet monthly
- Must submit accounts to JPs annually
- If a parish could not meet its poor relief costs, other parishes were required to contribute
These administrative safeguards were crucial innovations. The monthly meetings and annual accounts ensured oversight and accountability, while the provision for inter-parish contributions created a safety net for parishes overwhelmed by poor relief demands. This system represented a sophisticated approach to local government administration for its time.
Types of relief
The Act established a system based on categorising the poor:
Critical Distinction: The Three Categories of the Poor
Understanding the different categories and their treatment is essential:
Impotent poor (unable to work):
- Received relief in their own homes (outdoor relief)
- Or placed in almshouses
Able-bodied poor:
- Given work in poorhouses
Persistent vagrants and beggars:
- Sent to houses of correction
Do not confuse these categories in your analysis - the government treated them very differently, with harsh punishment for those deemed capable of work but refusing it, and relief for those genuinely unable to support themselves.
The Poor Law (1601)
This Act made minor corrections to the 1597 Poor Law and established the system of poor relief that would last into the 19th century.
Effectiveness of government measures
Limitations
The government's legislative and administrative responses had significant limitations:
Fundamental Constraints on Government Action
- Could not address the root cause: No laws could prevent poor harvests or create more food
- The situation only improved when harvests naturally recovered after 1598
- Food shortages persisted while the crisis lasted, limiting the effectiveness of distribution measures
This highlights an important historical principle: early modern governments had limited capacity to address natural disasters or agricultural failures. Their power lay primarily in organization and distribution, not production.
Achievements
Despite these limitations, the government's response demonstrated:
- Recognition of the problem: Both central government and local authorities acknowledged the severity of the crisis
- Legislative action: The 1597 Parliament showed genuine concern about social and economic breakdown
- Long-term framework: The Poor Law system provided a structure that would last for over two centuries
- Combination of approaches: The government used both repression (harsh vagrancy laws) and relief (poor relief system)
Assessment: was there a genuine crisis?
Arguments for a serious crisis
The social and economic problems of the 1590s created significant challenges:
Impact of hardship:
- Occurred during a time of war and high taxation
- The ageing queen and unsettled political environment added to the sense of crisis
- Created a general malaise (feeling of unease) across the country
Geographic variation:
- Rural uplands of the North and South West suffered disproportionately
- These regions experienced genuine dearth and starvation
- Small towns suffered more than large cities due to limited trading routes and less economic wealth
Nature of the unrest:
- Spread of riots and discontent was genuinely worrying
- References to the 'commotion time' of 1549 and Kett's Rebellion suggested potential class conflict
- Authorities feared the poor would rise up against the rich and that society would break down
Arguments against a general crisis
However, several factors suggest the government's fears exceeded the actual threat:
Social structure changes:
- Husbandmen (farmers with small landholdings) had become more prosperous and better educated since 1549
- They now tended to participate in local government rather than protest against it
- The riots of the 1590s involved only the very poorest in society
- No support from higher social ranks meant riots lacked effective leadership and were easily suppressed
This social change was crucial in preventing a major uprising. In 1549, Kett's Rebellion had drawn support from across the social spectrum, including prosperous farmers. By the 1590s, these middling sorts had a stake in the existing system, leaving the very poorest isolated and unable to organize effective resistance.
Geographic limitations:
- Effects were not evenly distributed across the country
- London escaped the worst food shortages due to access to grain imports from the Baltic
- Larger towns could more easily stockpile food for distribution
- The central Midlands, eastern England, and South East were much less affected than other regions
Mortality rates:
- Although death rates increased, they were nowhere near the scale of the 1550s
- In the 1550s, approximately six percent of the population died (around )
- The 1550s crisis led to an overall population decline
- In the 1590s, the total population continued to grow throughout the decade
- The poor may have switched to cheaper grains, reducing starvation (though this pushed prices higher)
Comparing the Crises: 1550s vs 1590s
1550s mortality crisis:
- Population decline: approximately died
- Overall population fell
- More severe and widespread impact
1590s mortality crisis:
- Death rates increased but remained below 1550s levels
- Population continued growing overall
- Impact varied significantly by region
- Adaptation strategies (cheaper grains) helped survival
This comparison demonstrates that while the 1590s crisis was serious, it was not unprecedented or catastrophic in demographic terms.
Nature of the unrest:
- The Oxfordshire rising involved only four rebels actually turning up
- There was no major popular rebellion despite the severity of economic conditions
- Government fears were based more on paranoia and rumour than genuine risk
Exam tips
Essential Strategies for Exam Success
When answering questions on government response to social and economic problems:
- Distinguish between causes and responses: Clearly separate what caused the problems (poor harvests, food shortages) from how the government responded
- Evaluate effectiveness: Don't just describe what the government did - assess whether measures were effective and why or why not
- Use specific evidence: Reference particular Acts (Vagrancy Act, Tillage Act, Poor Law), dates (1597, 1601), and examples (Oxfordshire rising, Books of Orders)
- Consider different perspectives: The government's fears vs the actual threat; central government vs local authorities; different regions' experiences
- Analyse continuity and change: Show how 1597 Poor Law built on earlier measures from 1572 and 1576
- Link to broader context: Connect to other issues like war costs, monopolies debates, and political instability
Common pitfalls to avoid:
- Confusing the impotent poor (unable to work) with the able-bodied poor (capable of working) - they received different treatment
- Exaggerating the scale of rebellion - the Oxfordshire rising was tiny but the government reaction was huge
- Forgetting to evaluate - don't just describe the Poor Laws, assess whether they addressed the problems
- Ignoring geographic variation - some areas suffered much more than others
- Treating the crisis as a single event rather than a series of interconnected problems over several years
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
-
The government responded to 1590s social and economic problems with Books of Orders (from 1586-87), the Vagrancy Act (1597), the Tillage Act (1597), and the Poor Laws (1597 and 1601)
-
The Poor Law system established Overseers of the Poor in each parish who collected and distributed relief, supervised by JPs - this framework lasted into the 19th century
-
The government distinguished between the impotent poor (given outdoor relief or sent to almshouses), able-bodied poor (given work in poorhouses), and persistent vagrants (sent to houses of correction)
-
While the government feared major social breakdown, the actual threat was limited - riots lacked leadership from higher social ranks and were easily suppressed, though the Oxfordshire rising (1596) provoked a harsh response
-
Government measures could not solve the underlying problem of poor harvests, which only improved naturally after 1598, but the legislation demonstrated serious concern about social and economic stability