Rural discontent – Kett’s rebellion 1549
Social and economic reasons for rebellion
Social and economic problems
- Edward’s rule dominated by Lord Protector: Edward Seymour (Duke of Somerset), Edward’s uncle – after Henry died in 1547
- price inflation, growing population, rising unemployment, enclosures and the debasement of the coinage, divided by the
religious tension – population was 3 million by 1549
- wet summer in 1549 = poor harvest and when agriculture was struggling to feed the rising population
Reasons for the rebellion
- Somerset refused to end debasement of the coinage to help price inflation
- instability of Antwerp cloth market = unemployment for textile workers – cloth industry was biggest industry
- rising crime coincided with bad harvests and hunger proved the spark for the rebellion
- by 1549 the country was simmering with discontent
The Vagrancy Act 1547 and 1548 Sheep Tax
- Sheep tax by Hales: restricted size of flocks and discouraged sheep farming – only success by Hales
- Vagrancy Act: any able-bodied person out of work for more than 3 days was branded with a V and sold into slavery for 2
years. Further offences meant permanent slavery and their children were made apprentices – widely unpopular, many urban
and county authorities refused, damaged reputation, did propose housing and collection for disabled
Maintenance of law and order
- Somerset aimed to reduce rural poverty, increase grain production – but didn’t understand scale
- weak insolvent govt overstretching its resources by trying to fight a war on 2 fronts: France and Scotland
- 1533 Sheep and Farms Act tried to restrict number of sheep kept per farmer to 2400 and engrossing to 2 farms
Enclosures and the Duke of Somerset’s commission
Enclosures
- consolidating small landholdings into larger farms and no longer common land – varied (due to soil common in E. Anglia)
- land could no longer be villagers for subsistence farming – fewer jobs as sheep looked after by fewer people
- Godly commonwealth: source of poverty, unemployment and vagrancy – believed in social reform
- landlords saw: little man power and vast profits i.e. Sir William Fermour of Norfolk owned 17,000 sheep
- engrossing = joining of 2 or more farms and rack-renting = increase in rents
- government blamed all economic problems on enclosures
Somerset’s enclosure commission
- June 1548: Somerset appointed John Hales to lead a 6 member commission to investigate enclosure practices – blocked
from conducting their surveys i.e. Buckinghamshire: when people supported commissioners harassed by local landowner
- Somerset: ploughs up illegal enclosures which affected Norfolk, Thomas Howard, Earl of Warwick
- Somerset alienated landed gentry and nobility – reliant on this group for support in the govt of the country
- April 1549: new enclosure commissions announced
Impact of the enclosure commission
- false hope i.e. rumour that Somerset’s reformist govt would establish a commission to remove recent enclosures
- sent a message that any action would be condemned by Somerset – isolated Somerset from the rest of the landed elites
- landlords: vital to maximise profits – could develop lucrative practice of sheep farming
- common people annoyed when the commissioners failed to resolve enclosure disputes
The Challenge imposed by Kett’s rebellion 1549
Kett’s rebellion
- causes: power of local gentry and govt, enclosures, high rents and landlords who bought up church property
- market town of Wymondham 6-8th July – during festivities a crowd decided to pull down enclosures – attacked Flowerdew
who used enclosures and started to demolish local abbey – turn rioters to Kett but he offered to be their leader
Social and economic reasons for rebellion
Social and economic problems
- Edward’s rule dominated by Lord Protector: Edward Seymour (Duke of Somerset), Edward’s uncle – after Henry died in 1547
- price inflation, growing population, rising unemployment, enclosures and the debasement of the coinage, divided by the
religious tension – population was 3 million by 1549
- wet summer in 1549 = poor harvest and when agriculture was struggling to feed the rising population
Reasons for the rebellion
- Somerset refused to end debasement of the coinage to help price inflation
- instability of Antwerp cloth market = unemployment for textile workers – cloth industry was biggest industry
- rising crime coincided with bad harvests and hunger proved the spark for the rebellion
- by 1549 the country was simmering with discontent
The Vagrancy Act 1547 and 1548 Sheep Tax
- Sheep tax by Hales: restricted size of flocks and discouraged sheep farming – only success by Hales
- Vagrancy Act: any able-bodied person out of work for more than 3 days was branded with a V and sold into slavery for 2
years. Further offences meant permanent slavery and their children were made apprentices – widely unpopular, many urban
and county authorities refused, damaged reputation, did propose housing and collection for disabled
Maintenance of law and order
- Somerset aimed to reduce rural poverty, increase grain production – but didn’t understand scale
- weak insolvent govt overstretching its resources by trying to fight a war on 2 fronts: France and Scotland
- 1533 Sheep and Farms Act tried to restrict number of sheep kept per farmer to 2400 and engrossing to 2 farms
Enclosures and the Duke of Somerset’s commission
Enclosures
- consolidating small landholdings into larger farms and no longer common land – varied (due to soil common in E. Anglia)
- land could no longer be villagers for subsistence farming – fewer jobs as sheep looked after by fewer people
- Godly commonwealth: source of poverty, unemployment and vagrancy – believed in social reform
- landlords saw: little man power and vast profits i.e. Sir William Fermour of Norfolk owned 17,000 sheep
- engrossing = joining of 2 or more farms and rack-renting = increase in rents
- government blamed all economic problems on enclosures
Somerset’s enclosure commission
- June 1548: Somerset appointed John Hales to lead a 6 member commission to investigate enclosure practices – blocked
from conducting their surveys i.e. Buckinghamshire: when people supported commissioners harassed by local landowner
- Somerset: ploughs up illegal enclosures which affected Norfolk, Thomas Howard, Earl of Warwick
- Somerset alienated landed gentry and nobility – reliant on this group for support in the govt of the country
- April 1549: new enclosure commissions announced
Impact of the enclosure commission
- false hope i.e. rumour that Somerset’s reformist govt would establish a commission to remove recent enclosures
- sent a message that any action would be condemned by Somerset – isolated Somerset from the rest of the landed elites
- landlords: vital to maximise profits – could develop lucrative practice of sheep farming
- common people annoyed when the commissioners failed to resolve enclosure disputes
The Challenge imposed by Kett’s rebellion 1549
Kett’s rebellion
- causes: power of local gentry and govt, enclosures, high rents and landlords who bought up church property
- market town of Wymondham 6-8th July – during festivities a crowd decided to pull down enclosures – attacked Flowerdew
who used enclosures and started to demolish local abbey – turn rioters to Kett but he offered to be their leader
