To what extent was England’s government fundamentally transformed in the years 1509 to 1547?
[25 marks]
To argue that England’s government was fundamentally transformed in the years 1509 to 1547 is to
suggest that there was radical and far-reaching change to Parliament, to the conciliar form of
government and to regional governance. It would be difficult to argue that there was no significant
change in certain areas of government: Parliament underwent a transformation into medium to
exercise royal power and there was some significant change to the conciliar form of government.
However, viewed holistically, it is not convincing to argue that England’s government was
fundamentally transformed in the years 1509 to 1547. The conciliar form of government had
persisted by 1547, despite fluctuations due to Wolsey and Cromwell, and regional control was still
exercised primarily through the nobility and day-to-day life in the localities was largely the same. In
this way, despite the fundamental transformation of Parliament, holistically the change to England’s
government was largely evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
A plausible, if ultimately flawed case, can be made that Parliament – the legislative branch of the
government – was not fundamentally transformed by 1547. As Elton notes, Parliament ‘had little or
no independent power base, beyond the will of the monarch’. Parliament could not call or prorogue
itself and functioned solely at the monarch’s whim, even by 1547. Furthermore, by both 1509 and
1547 Parliament had been called a limited number of times under the monarchs: Henry VII met
parliament only twice in the last 14 years of his reign while his son summoned only one in the
fourteen years between 1515 and 1529. However, this argument is not convincing as although
Parliament had not independent power base beyond the will of the monarch, it did not need one
under Henry VIII as his major policy was almost invariably implemented through Parliament. Firstly,
whilst Henry VII did not want to request direct taxation through Parliament following the Yorkshire
rebellion in 1489 and the Cornish rebellion in 1497, Henry VIII relied on taxation during the First
French War (1512-14). He consciously chose parliamentary taxation as an alternative to the
extortionate methods employed by the crown up until 1509. However, what ‘fundamentally
transformed’ Parliament was the crisis of the divorce in the 1520s and early 1530s and the
Reformation. As Elton notes, Parliament was an ‘essential element in the establishment of the whole
revolution and its protection it law’. Cromwell was well aware of the importance of Parliament in the
revolution as a legitimising force: supremacy could not be enforced without Parliament until it
decreed subversive acts such as the denial of supremacy criminal. Therefore, it was used to pass
ground-breaking legislation which fundamentally transformed it into integral part of the monarch’s
power. In November 1534 The Act of Supremacy established Henry as the head of the Church of
England and legislated away the Pope’s legal authority, and the 1534 Succession Act vested the
succession of the English Crown in the children of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. The Dissolution of the
Monasteries was also legitimised by an Act of Parliament in 1536. Therefore, although Parliament’s
power was contingent on the will of the monarch, Henry recognised that royal power was at its
strongest when it was expressed through parliamentary statue and could best effect his will through
the assent of Parliament. The omnicompetence of statute fundamentally transformed Parliament by
enabling it to legislate on an unprecedented range of matters such as the succession, the pope’s
jurisdiction and the dissolution of the monasteries. As T.A. Morris notes, Parliament ‘…proved an
invaluable ally in the implementation of Royal policy, and was transformed to the extent that it was
dubbed the ‘Reformation Parliament’. Overall, therefore, it is compelling to argue that Parliament
underwent a fundamental transformation by 1547, becoming the institution that was the medium
through which Henry VIII could implement policy.
However, it is less convincing to apply the same argument to the form of the government from 1509
to 1547. There is certainly some evidence to suggest that the English government was radically
transformed from a body conciliar in form to one run by Henry’s chief advisor or minister. From 1514
[25 marks]
To argue that England’s government was fundamentally transformed in the years 1509 to 1547 is to
suggest that there was radical and far-reaching change to Parliament, to the conciliar form of
government and to regional governance. It would be difficult to argue that there was no significant
change in certain areas of government: Parliament underwent a transformation into medium to
exercise royal power and there was some significant change to the conciliar form of government.
However, viewed holistically, it is not convincing to argue that England’s government was
fundamentally transformed in the years 1509 to 1547. The conciliar form of government had
persisted by 1547, despite fluctuations due to Wolsey and Cromwell, and regional control was still
exercised primarily through the nobility and day-to-day life in the localities was largely the same. In
this way, despite the fundamental transformation of Parliament, holistically the change to England’s
government was largely evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
A plausible, if ultimately flawed case, can be made that Parliament – the legislative branch of the
government – was not fundamentally transformed by 1547. As Elton notes, Parliament ‘had little or
no independent power base, beyond the will of the monarch’. Parliament could not call or prorogue
itself and functioned solely at the monarch’s whim, even by 1547. Furthermore, by both 1509 and
1547 Parliament had been called a limited number of times under the monarchs: Henry VII met
parliament only twice in the last 14 years of his reign while his son summoned only one in the
fourteen years between 1515 and 1529. However, this argument is not convincing as although
Parliament had not independent power base beyond the will of the monarch, it did not need one
under Henry VIII as his major policy was almost invariably implemented through Parliament. Firstly,
whilst Henry VII did not want to request direct taxation through Parliament following the Yorkshire
rebellion in 1489 and the Cornish rebellion in 1497, Henry VIII relied on taxation during the First
French War (1512-14). He consciously chose parliamentary taxation as an alternative to the
extortionate methods employed by the crown up until 1509. However, what ‘fundamentally
transformed’ Parliament was the crisis of the divorce in the 1520s and early 1530s and the
Reformation. As Elton notes, Parliament was an ‘essential element in the establishment of the whole
revolution and its protection it law’. Cromwell was well aware of the importance of Parliament in the
revolution as a legitimising force: supremacy could not be enforced without Parliament until it
decreed subversive acts such as the denial of supremacy criminal. Therefore, it was used to pass
ground-breaking legislation which fundamentally transformed it into integral part of the monarch’s
power. In November 1534 The Act of Supremacy established Henry as the head of the Church of
England and legislated away the Pope’s legal authority, and the 1534 Succession Act vested the
succession of the English Crown in the children of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. The Dissolution of the
Monasteries was also legitimised by an Act of Parliament in 1536. Therefore, although Parliament’s
power was contingent on the will of the monarch, Henry recognised that royal power was at its
strongest when it was expressed through parliamentary statue and could best effect his will through
the assent of Parliament. The omnicompetence of statute fundamentally transformed Parliament by
enabling it to legislate on an unprecedented range of matters such as the succession, the pope’s
jurisdiction and the dissolution of the monasteries. As T.A. Morris notes, Parliament ‘…proved an
invaluable ally in the implementation of Royal policy, and was transformed to the extent that it was
dubbed the ‘Reformation Parliament’. Overall, therefore, it is compelling to argue that Parliament
underwent a fundamental transformation by 1547, becoming the institution that was the medium
through which Henry VIII could implement policy.
However, it is less convincing to apply the same argument to the form of the government from 1509
to 1547. There is certainly some evidence to suggest that the English government was radically
transformed from a body conciliar in form to one run by Henry’s chief advisor or minister. From 1514
