How accurate is it to say that the social structure of Britain was transformed in the years 1625-88?
The level to which Britain's social structure was transformed in the years 1625-88 can be manifested
into three key areas: social hierarchy, social diversity, and finally, social mobility. The word
'transformation' devotes itself to a marked change in form, nature or appearance', meaning it is a more
developed and succinct version of change. Although there is a lot of evidence to say the social
structure went through a massive transformation over the 63-year period, there are also substantial
elements among the society that saw little or no transformation after closer inspection. Although there
were big changes to the social structure, there were significant limitations to these changes, especially
due to continuity, obviously limiting the amount of transformation the social structure can go through.
At first glance, Britain's social structure, more specifically the social hierarchy, saw great
transformation between 1625-88; however, after closer inspection, several limitations can be seen to
affect the level of transformation the social structure goes through. Throughout the period, we see
significant growth from within the country. The population rose from 2.5 million in 1520 to over 5
million in 1680; we see the gentry class size in wealth, importance, and status. Many would argue that
by 1688 the Gentry had more or less eclipsed the Nobility in their wealth and importance. However, at
the start of the century, the Nobility's status was far greater than that of the gentry; the gentry was
looked down upon in the eyes of the Nobility. The nobility was seen and saw themselves as merely
the social group that closely followed the Monarch and their family. The Gentry and Nobility were
seen as the 'great' in society; they were not merely rich but with the highest status in society. Although
the Nobility's titles were those of hereditary, the peerage holders, made up of the Gentry, later became
far more significant in their influence in politics than the Nobility. Unlike the Nobility, the Gentry
were not increasing their landholdings but increasing their power and influence in politics. This was
especially prominent with Parliament becoming more and more important in the build-up stages of the
first Civil War, with many of the key roles in politics being occupied by members of the Gentry, they
used this to enhance there power and status, many Gentry men later found new opportunities in the
government following the abolishment of the House of Lords in 1649. Men like John Pym and Oliver
Cromwell were too extremely influential Gentry figures whose influence had a significant role in
carrying out the regicide in 1649, one of the most controversial actions in the country's history. Oliver
Cromwell, who came from a non-noble background, became so influential that in 1657, he, a member
of the gentry, took on a role almost as highly regarded and important as the Monarchs. This was the
first stage in which the Gentry properly start to eclipse the Nobility, where a member of the Gentry,
with no noble descent, works his way up the social hierarchy and becomes the most important figure
in the country (Lord Protector), more so than any noble living at the time. A contemporary at the time
( Tawny's View) said that the gentry massively benefitted from the decline in the nobility's fortunes
due to inflation occurring in the early stages of the 17th century. With this, many Nobles started
losing their fortunes, including big estates and property collections, as they became so expensive to
run due to the huge increase in population that occurred, whilst the Gentry members continued to
grow powerful, with important roles in government and trade. However, the Gentry had several
layerssects; most of the lowest gentry did not participate in any nation or even regional affairs,
showing that the Gentry weren't all that political and high up in society. Nevertheless, it is accurate to
say that the social structure of Britain was transformed in these years, especially from looking on a
more macro level, with a 300% increase of the Gentry class from the Tudor period until the mid-17th
century and the increasingly important political roles that some members of the gentry held, a
transformation of the social structure was definitely occurring. However, it could be argued that there
were not huge transformations to the social structure as many changes had already occurred at the end
of the previous century. In the late 16th century, society was a very feudal one, with all power
revolving around land ownership. So in many ways, society had already gone through massive
changes, taking the significance of the external changes apparent during the 17th century. Society had
already evolved a huge amount before the 17th century, with William Harrison in 1577 dividing
society into; Gentlemen, citizens, Burgesses and Yeoman. Thomas Wilson later changes in 1700 to
society revolving around the Nobility, Citizens, Yeoman, Artisans and Country Labourers. These
16th-century changes brought about by Harrison and Wilson bring the social structure to a more
The level to which Britain's social structure was transformed in the years 1625-88 can be manifested
into three key areas: social hierarchy, social diversity, and finally, social mobility. The word
'transformation' devotes itself to a marked change in form, nature or appearance', meaning it is a more
developed and succinct version of change. Although there is a lot of evidence to say the social
structure went through a massive transformation over the 63-year period, there are also substantial
elements among the society that saw little or no transformation after closer inspection. Although there
were big changes to the social structure, there were significant limitations to these changes, especially
due to continuity, obviously limiting the amount of transformation the social structure can go through.
At first glance, Britain's social structure, more specifically the social hierarchy, saw great
transformation between 1625-88; however, after closer inspection, several limitations can be seen to
affect the level of transformation the social structure goes through. Throughout the period, we see
significant growth from within the country. The population rose from 2.5 million in 1520 to over 5
million in 1680; we see the gentry class size in wealth, importance, and status. Many would argue that
by 1688 the Gentry had more or less eclipsed the Nobility in their wealth and importance. However, at
the start of the century, the Nobility's status was far greater than that of the gentry; the gentry was
looked down upon in the eyes of the Nobility. The nobility was seen and saw themselves as merely
the social group that closely followed the Monarch and their family. The Gentry and Nobility were
seen as the 'great' in society; they were not merely rich but with the highest status in society. Although
the Nobility's titles were those of hereditary, the peerage holders, made up of the Gentry, later became
far more significant in their influence in politics than the Nobility. Unlike the Nobility, the Gentry
were not increasing their landholdings but increasing their power and influence in politics. This was
especially prominent with Parliament becoming more and more important in the build-up stages of the
first Civil War, with many of the key roles in politics being occupied by members of the Gentry, they
used this to enhance there power and status, many Gentry men later found new opportunities in the
government following the abolishment of the House of Lords in 1649. Men like John Pym and Oliver
Cromwell were too extremely influential Gentry figures whose influence had a significant role in
carrying out the regicide in 1649, one of the most controversial actions in the country's history. Oliver
Cromwell, who came from a non-noble background, became so influential that in 1657, he, a member
of the gentry, took on a role almost as highly regarded and important as the Monarchs. This was the
first stage in which the Gentry properly start to eclipse the Nobility, where a member of the Gentry,
with no noble descent, works his way up the social hierarchy and becomes the most important figure
in the country (Lord Protector), more so than any noble living at the time. A contemporary at the time
( Tawny's View) said that the gentry massively benefitted from the decline in the nobility's fortunes
due to inflation occurring in the early stages of the 17th century. With this, many Nobles started
losing their fortunes, including big estates and property collections, as they became so expensive to
run due to the huge increase in population that occurred, whilst the Gentry members continued to
grow powerful, with important roles in government and trade. However, the Gentry had several
layerssects; most of the lowest gentry did not participate in any nation or even regional affairs,
showing that the Gentry weren't all that political and high up in society. Nevertheless, it is accurate to
say that the social structure of Britain was transformed in these years, especially from looking on a
more macro level, with a 300% increase of the Gentry class from the Tudor period until the mid-17th
century and the increasingly important political roles that some members of the gentry held, a
transformation of the social structure was definitely occurring. However, it could be argued that there
were not huge transformations to the social structure as many changes had already occurred at the end
of the previous century. In the late 16th century, society was a very feudal one, with all power
revolving around land ownership. So in many ways, society had already gone through massive
changes, taking the significance of the external changes apparent during the 17th century. Society had
already evolved a huge amount before the 17th century, with William Harrison in 1577 dividing
society into; Gentlemen, citizens, Burgesses and Yeoman. Thomas Wilson later changes in 1700 to
society revolving around the Nobility, Citizens, Yeoman, Artisans and Country Labourers. These
16th-century changes brought about by Harrison and Wilson bring the social structure to a more
