How far do you agree that the Tudor subsidy of 1513 was the most significant
development in increasing royal control of the localities in the years 1485-1603? - 2019 B
Agree 1: enhanced taxation which boosted royal revenue
Henry VII (1485–1509):
relied on Benevolences (1491) and feudal dues, which were arbitrary and
inconsistent, often leading to local resentment
the Cornish Rebellion (1497) was a direct result of tax demands, showing the inefficiency of
existing systems
Henry VIII (1509–1547):
1513 subsidy (introduced by Wolsey) was radical because it assessed individuals
based on actual wealth, not fixed rates
local officials (e.g., JPs and commissioners) were appointed to conduct detailed tax
assessments, increasing government knowledge of local economies and reducing the
nobility’s ability to manipulate tax rates
increased revenues allowed Henry VIII to raise armies, notably for the French campaigns
(1513, 1544) and to deal with internal uprisings like the Pilgrimage of Grace (1536–37)
Elizabeth I (1558–1603):
continued reliance on the subsidy system to fund wars against Spain (1585–1604)
and suppress rebellions in Ireland (1594–1603)
corruption crept into the system, with wealthier subjects under-assessed by local gentry,
leading to declining revenues by the late 16th century
golden thread: the subsidy directly increased royal oversight of local wealth, enhancing
financial control, but its effectiveness was limited by local corruption
Agree 2: The Subsidy as a Long-Term Tool of Control
Henry VIII:
the 1513 subsidy set the precedent for future taxation, becoming the primary
method of raising extraordinary revenue until the early 17th century
the taxation process ensured regular local interaction with central government, extending
the Crown’s bureaucratic presence in the localities
Edward VI (1547–1553) and Mary I (1553–1558):
continued to use the subsidy system, with no return to arbitrary taxation
Mary’s government (1558 subsidy) used tax revenue to support efforts to recover Calais
from France, although unsuccessfully
Elizabeth I:
the 1570s reforms led by William Cecil improved tax collection, ensuring that local
commissioners became central figures in administration
however, by the 1590s, the subsidy’s effectiveness was declining due to gentry under-
assessments, leading to shortfalls in war funding
golden thread: the subsidy’s long-term adoption suggests its importance in extending royal
control over localities, though declining efficiency limited its impact
development in increasing royal control of the localities in the years 1485-1603? - 2019 B
Agree 1: enhanced taxation which boosted royal revenue
Henry VII (1485–1509):
relied on Benevolences (1491) and feudal dues, which were arbitrary and
inconsistent, often leading to local resentment
the Cornish Rebellion (1497) was a direct result of tax demands, showing the inefficiency of
existing systems
Henry VIII (1509–1547):
1513 subsidy (introduced by Wolsey) was radical because it assessed individuals
based on actual wealth, not fixed rates
local officials (e.g., JPs and commissioners) were appointed to conduct detailed tax
assessments, increasing government knowledge of local economies and reducing the
nobility’s ability to manipulate tax rates
increased revenues allowed Henry VIII to raise armies, notably for the French campaigns
(1513, 1544) and to deal with internal uprisings like the Pilgrimage of Grace (1536–37)
Elizabeth I (1558–1603):
continued reliance on the subsidy system to fund wars against Spain (1585–1604)
and suppress rebellions in Ireland (1594–1603)
corruption crept into the system, with wealthier subjects under-assessed by local gentry,
leading to declining revenues by the late 16th century
golden thread: the subsidy directly increased royal oversight of local wealth, enhancing
financial control, but its effectiveness was limited by local corruption
Agree 2: The Subsidy as a Long-Term Tool of Control
Henry VIII:
the 1513 subsidy set the precedent for future taxation, becoming the primary
method of raising extraordinary revenue until the early 17th century
the taxation process ensured regular local interaction with central government, extending
the Crown’s bureaucratic presence in the localities
Edward VI (1547–1553) and Mary I (1553–1558):
continued to use the subsidy system, with no return to arbitrary taxation
Mary’s government (1558 subsidy) used tax revenue to support efforts to recover Calais
from France, although unsuccessfully
Elizabeth I:
the 1570s reforms led by William Cecil improved tax collection, ensuring that local
commissioners became central figures in administration
however, by the 1590s, the subsidy’s effectiveness was declining due to gentry under-
assessments, leading to shortfalls in war funding
golden thread: the subsidy’s long-term adoption suggests its importance in extending royal
control over localities, though declining efficiency limited its impact
