TO WHAT EXTENT WAS THE REGIME OF EDWARD VI DEFINED BY HIS MINORITY?
King Henry VII’s legitimate son, Edward VI, born in 1937, ascended to power in 1957 to become the England and Ireland King from 1547 to 1553. Edward’s reign began in 1547 following the death of his father, Henry VIII, at The Palace of Whitehall on 28th January that year.[1] Parliament had empowered Henry VIII to determine succession to the crown. In his will, Henry VIII established a Council of Regency to take charge during his son’s minority and identified the individuals who would establish the Council. Since Edward VI was only nine years old when he ascended to kingship in 1547 on his father’s demise, the Council decreed in Henry VIII’s will reigned in Edward VI’s name.[2] His council members appointed Edward VI’s uncle Edward Seymour, the Earl of Hertford, as lord protector, and Hertford soon was formed Duke of Somerset. Somerset ruled the kingdom in loco parentis; the crown’s divinity lived in the young king, but power was exercised by an uncle who demonstrated himself to be more compassionate than considerate and more ideological than practical.[3] Good governance and civility were replaced with the old king’s inhumane legislations. The treason and heresy acts were ratified or amended, and the result came close to ruining the Tudor state.
Protectorate of Somerset
.The immediate major worry of Duke of Somerset was to consolidate England and Scotland through the wedding of two young royals Edward VI and Mary Queen of Scottish people. Henry VIII first suggested this union as early as 1543, and the Scottish Government agreed to it. Somerset strived to accomplish the deal and end the age-long antagonism between England and Scotland. He failed in this quest as he opted to use force when moderation could not work. Somerset convened his first national assembly and enacted reformed opinions about religious belief. It quickly became clear that the Somerset-led progressives wanted to relinquish Henry VIII’s religious doctrine and stance. Numerous bills were signed into law to endorse and intensify the Reformation. The sedition and blasphemy legislations, including the Six Articles’ Act of the former king, were abolished. Congregation of both sorts for the church hierarchy and the clergy was adopted. However, the king’s priests were to be appointed, and the operation in the chancery division was to operate in the king’s name. Uniformity of religious services was documented in the next parliament of 1549, and all church clergy were obligated to use only the Book of Common Prayer, compiled by the primate.
Somerset’s challenges were not limited to the religious realm alone. He had sincere compassion for the citizens and learned that the living spaces and the open areas’ deprivation had forced the poor people out of their livelihoods. He then proclaimed enclosures and ordered the royals to break down their gardens.[4] The declining value of the currency due to the upsurge of gold from America, the subversion of coins by Henry VII, and the subsequent increase in inflation brought endless suffering to the citizens. When it was established that the landowners disobeyed Somerset’s proclamation, the troubled ordinary citizens became defiant. These were quashed but not without death and destruction. The condition showed, however, the persistence of dangerous frustration.[5] His gentle and benevolent personality and his moral feelings may have prompted him to seek a life of tranquility and prosperity in peaceful times. He exhibited himself to be one of the most far-reaching great leaders of Tudor times in his aspirations. Yet Somerset remained isolated when he served as an aristocrat caring for the needs and demands of the individuals’ lower classes.
Duke of Northumberland, Earl of Warwick
Somerset’s dismissal introduced the Duke of Northumberland to power. Even though he was invested with no authority as Protector or state legislature of the king, he was now directing the realm’s regulating authority.[6] He had overthrown Somerset, his fiercest rival from power. In personality, Northumberland, son of Henry VII’s widely disliked minister Dudley, was self-seeking and opportunistic, and deficient as Thomas Cromwell. Northumberland initially displayed some indulgence to Somerset, whom he released from prison and re-admitted to the Council.[7] He was now able to initiate so-called religious legislation into a comprehensive strategy. However, Northumberland had received the most luxurious grant of properties from the Crown and continued a profession of high-handed dictatorship. He cared less about religion but, out of selfish reasons, associated himself with the progressive revolutionaries.
Committees were authorized to invade all the residual plates and decorations of the places of worship. The earnings were assumed to have been used for constructing educational institutions and liberating the poor. Some abandoned educational institutions were reinstated and were recognized as King Edward VI’s Grammer Schools.[8] Northumberland was not a Protestant by acquittal, but he initiated a radical religious policy framework, partially to satisfy the Protestants and partially for financial resources. Edward VI was a heartfelt reformer and was inclined to accelerate the new religion. Northumberland found this to be a medium to preserve his control upon his aristocratic master. In 1552 he authorized a Second Prayer Book, which was enacted under German Protestantism’s authority, and in it, the Congregation was not termed as the Mass.[9]
The Second Prayer Book’s implementation was pursued to be protected by a Second Act of Uniformity (1552). The interactive exercise of any devotion except that prescribed by legislation was accounted for punishable contumacy. The preceding year, the Forty-two Articles outlining the English Protestant church’s orthodoxy were enacted by Cranmer, and all priests were bound to adopt this synopsis of doctrines.[10] Spoliation of the church premises culminated in the weakening of nationalism due to Northumberland’s theological amendments. The continuing invasion of church lands and widespread misuse of supremacy became the everlasting crisis. The misunderstanding could not be eliminated even by directives of religious service management. Not only this, the widespread opinion was maimed due to the flagrant abuse of the places of worship as stables.
Northumberland’s sponsorship of progressive Protestantism triggered Mary’s dissatisfaction. To safeguard himself, Northumberland sought to change the string of succession established by Henry VIII’s will and ensure the Protestant inheritance. All this was appropriate, for the wellbeing of Edward VI was increasingly deteriorating. Consequently, he tried to persuade Edward VI to leave by will the Throne to Lady Jane Grey, Henry VII’s grand-daughter.[11] But Lady Jane Grey’s assertions were weaker than those of Henry VIII’s daughters: Mary and Elizabeth. Later, the Council repudiated Lady Jane’s claim and declared Mary Queen of England. Somerset summoned a Parliament from which he expected the accustomed subservience.[12] The House of Lords passed a stringent law of treason, but the Commons revised many of its provisions and enacted that no individual should be prosecuted or charged with treason except by the proof of two witnesses.
Doctrinal Change during Edward VI’s Reign
Edward VI’s minority and the regency under Seymour and Dudley encompassed a breakthrough in England’s Reformation advancement. The Protestants had become more monumental by the end of Henry VIII’s tenure. Their power rested in the major cities on the eastern and southern shores and among society’s resourceful classes. But it was still unclear whether the large percentage of people had switched tack by the end of Henry’s rule. The country became almost entirely Protestant with Edward VI’s unification and the Protectorate of Somerset. The government progressed to the purpose of finalizing the religious uprising and setting up a church independent of Rome and rejecting and differing from many belief systems that had been for decades held sacrosanct by the Catholic Church.[13] Even though Henry’s enlightenment was partisan and only supposedly nudged towards Protestantism, his policies had at least launched Protestantism’s sluice gates.
Somerset desired to engage people who believed in Protestantism in addressing the administration’s financial problems placed England on a path of spiritual and economic transformation. Somerset abolished the former king’s heresy and treason provisions and lifted prohibitions on publishing and distributing the Bible scriptures.[14] The implication of the abolition of the laws of heresy was experienced Evangelists instantly from European states rushed into England. Anglicans and Pentecostals ministered their reformed teachings comfortably in England. Ridley, Latimer, and Hooper began to preach a theological revival in England. Somerset’s Protestant conservatism and the teachings of theological enlightenment shaped the government. Thomas Cranmer, who was Canterbury’s archbishop, granted liberty to partake in his Protestant propensities and rallied for the amendment of Henry VIII’s six Articles in 1547.[15] Cranmer also dissolved the chantries in 1547.
Cranmer championed an English Prayer Book that outlined a novel spiritual service through the Act of Uniformity in 1549. This Prayer Book was eventually updated through the Second Act of Uniformity in 1553. Edward VI’s First Prayer Book was an English version of the old Latin service novel, and it constituted few remnants of the German progressives’ doctrines. The First Act of Uniformity enforced this uniformity in service. Every person in England was compelled to use it and embrace the Protestant worship model. In 1549, the first Prayer Book triggered a reaction that led to the Western Rebellion in Cornwall.[16] The Forty-two Articles of Religious Faith enacted by the legislative body in 1551 showed further progression towards Protestantism teachings. Eventually, they laid the foundations of the Thirty-nine Articles of Elizabeth. Rebellion to a new tax hike on sheep in 1548 and an investigation into enclosure resulted in Ket’s revolt in Norfolk in 1549, which was integral in triggering Somerset’s fall.
Under Duke of Northumberland’s regency, the Protestant teachings were all embraced in England. Although not a Protestant by faith, Northumberland adopted an extensive reform program to appease the Protestants whose population had risen in the interim and for personal benefits. In 1552 a Second Prayer Book was obliged upon the citizens. It was put in place under the influence of the Protestants.[17] The Second Act of Uniformity enacted its use. In 1553, Cranmer drafted forty-two articles outlining the English Protestant church’s doctrines, which were to be agreed to by all religious leaders. Northumberland’s effect on Edward VI was also quite significant.[18] When the young king’s wellbeing was increasingly deteriorating, Northumberland convinced his imperial master to alter the succession trajectory by a will in favor of Lady Jane Grey to preserve a Protestant inheritance to the kingship.[19] Such was the impact of Protestantism upon Edward VI that in July 1553, he passed away proclaiming, ‘Oh my Lord, deliver this nation from papistry and defend thy true religion.’
Economic Point Of View
From the economic perspective, Edward VI’s tenure was an era of regressing. The enclosure scheme and ownership of public lands by nobles and property owners ushered in pervasive sufferings and subsequent dissatisfaction. Somerset’s willingness to come to the underprivileged people’s assistance and the commoners could neither end up saving them nor save him.[20] The number of people seeking employment and accommodation in England increased at this time. Even Somerset and Northumberland were not free from lust for money. Churches were besmirched, chantries, and cathedrals stripped of the antiquities. The ruling administration required finances as it was in debt. Coins were devalued, which placed the currency very low down. Prices instinctively spiked. The initial Tudors’ legislation was abolished both in religious and economic areas. The government’s watchful eyes upon its agricultural and commercial affluence were no longer there.
There was a gradual but persistent rise of the aristocracy and elite classes, supported in its progression by selling lands owned by churches. There was population growth, albeit the significant gaps triggered by diseases and poor harvests.[21] The municipalities were expanding, resulting in vandalism and housing problems; combined with increasing prices and joblessness, the officials in the major cities were progressively worried about the fear of an uprising. Yet, the end of Henry’s time in power had seen no significant uprisings. The economy was affected negatively by the Antwerp cloth trade’s downward trend.[22] Uncertainty, spiritual, cultural, and economic was poorly perplexed due to the government’s lack of effectiveness. People in anguish longed for Henry VII and Henry VIII’s good old times; the nation’s progress was at a stalemate.
Conclusion
Edward VI’s reign marked the emergence of the English Prayer Book and the Forty-two Articles, and consequently, this period was significant in the growth and expansion of English Protestantism. The introduction of his Book of Common Prayer introduced a uniform service manner throughout all Protestant churches in the country. These developments were possible because Edward had a devouring desire to participate in religion. Holy Scriptures pleased him more than other studies. Edward VI also played his part in resolving the friction between his uncles, Edward, Duke of Somerset, and Thomas Seymour. With advice from John Dudley, later Protector Northumberland and his schoolmasters, particularly John Cheke, steered into realizing their shortcomings and signed their death warrants. While this involved a power game in the Council, Edward was sufficiently astute to make a balanced judgment of their flaws.
Bibliography
Alford, Stephen. Kingship and Politics in the Reign of Edward VI. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Amussen, Susan D. “Gender, family and the social order, 1560-1725.” Order and Disorder in Early Modern England 7 (1985): 196-210.
Ayris, Paul. “The Edwardian Reformation.” Reformation & Renaissance Review 3, no. 1 (2001): 188-214.
Barnhart, Michael A. “The Origins of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific: Synthesis Impossible?.” Diplomatic History 20, no. 2 (1996): 241-260.
Bernard, George W. “New perspectives or old complexities?.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 113-120.
Bernard, George W. “The making of religious policy, 1533-1546: Henry VIII and the search for the middle way.” Historical Journal (1998): 321-349.
Bush, Michael L. “Protector Somerset, and the 1549 rebellions: a post-revision questioned.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 103-112.
Darsie, Heather R. “Our English Legal Forebearers and Their Contributions to the Practice of Law and American Jurisprudence: Sir Thomas More, Sir Edward Coke, and Sir William Blackstone.” N. Ill. UL Rev. 40 (2019): 227.
Duffy, Eamon. “4. The English Reformation after Revisionism.” Renaissance Quarterly 59, no. 3 (2006): 720-731.
Érasme, D. The Education of a Christian Prince. Columbia University Press, 1936.
Litzenberger, Caroline. The English Reformation and the Laity: Gloucestershire, 1540-1580. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
MacCulloch, Diarmaid. “The impact of the English Reformation.” The Historical Journal 38, no. 1 (1995): 151-153.
MacCulloch, Diarmaid. “Henry VII and the Reform of the Church.” The Historical Journal 38, no. 1 (1995): 159-283.
Manning, Roger B. “The Spread of the Popular Reformation in England.” Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies 1 (1970): 35-52.
Manning, Roger B. “Violence and social conflict in mid-Tudor rebellions.” The Journal of British Studies 16, no. 2 (1977): 18-40.
Marshall, Peter. “(Re) defining the English Reformation.” Journal of British Studies 48, no. 3 (2009): 564-586.
Shagan, Ethan H. “‘Popularity’and the 1549 Rebellions Revisited.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 121-133.
Thompson, William Keene. “Local Reception of Religious Change under Henry VIII and Edward VI: Evidence from Four Suffolk Parishes.” (2012).
Westminster, England. St. Martin-in-the-Fields (Parish), and John Vivian Kitto. St. Martin-in-the-Fields: The Accounts of the Church Wardens, 1525-1603. Simpkin, Marshall, Kent, Hamilton & Company, Limited, 1901.
[1] Darsie, Heather R. “Our English Legal Forebearers and Their Contributions to the Practice of Law and American Jurisprudence: Sir Thomas More, Sir Edward Coke, and Sir William Blackstone.” N. Ill. UL Rev. 40 (2019): 227.
[2] MacCulloch, Diarmaid. “The impact of the English Reformation.” The Historical Journal 38, no. 1 (1995): 151-153.
[3] Marshall, Peter. “(Re) defining the English Reformation.” Journal of British Studies 48, no. 3 (2009): 564-586.
[4] Amussen, Susan D. “Gender, family and the social order, 1560-1725.” Order and Disorder in Early Modern England 7 (1985): 196-210.
[5] Bush, Michael L. “Protector Somerset, and the 1549 rebellions: a post-revision questioned.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 103-112.
[6] Alford, Stephen. Kingship and Politics in the Reign of Edward VI. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
[7] Litzenberger, Caroline. The English Reformation and the Laity: Gloucestershire, 1540-1580. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
[8] Bernard, George W. “The making of religious policy, 1533-1546: Henry VIII and the search for the middle way.” Historical Journal (1998): 321-349.
[9] Barnhart, Michael A. “The Origins of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific: Synthesis Impossible?.” Diplomatic History 20, no. 2 (1996): 241-260.
[10] Westminster, England. St. Martin-in-the-Fields (Parish), and John Vivian Kitto. St. Martin-in-the-Fields: The Accounts of the Church Wardens, 1525-1603. Simpkin, Marshall, Kent, Hamilton & Company, Limited, 1901.
[11] Manning, Roger B. “Violence and social conflict in mid-Tudor rebellions.” The Journal of British Studies 16, no. 2 (1977): 18-40.
[12] Thompson, William Keene. “Local Reception of Religious Change under Henry VIII and Edward VI: Evidence from Four Suffolk Parishes.” (2012).
[13] Amussen, Susan D. “Gender, family and the social order, 1560-1725.” Order and Disorder in Early Modern England 7 (1985): 196-210.
[14] Bush, Michael L. “Protector Somerset, and the 1549 rebellions: a post-revision questioned.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 103-112.
[15] Manning, Roger B. “The Spread of the Popular Reformation in England.” Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies 1 (1970): 35-52.
[16] Manning, Roger B. “The Spread of the Popular Reformation in England.” Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies 1 (1970): 35-52.
[17] Litzenberger, Caroline. The English Reformation and the Laity: Gloucestershire, 1540-1580. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
[18] Bernard, George W. “New perspectives or old complexities?.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 113-120.
[19] Ayris, Paul. “The Edwardian Reformation.” Reformation & Renaissance Review 3, no. 1 (2001): 188-214.
[20]Alford, Stephen. Kingship and Politics in the Reign of Edward VI. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
[21] Marshall, Peter. “(Re) defining the English Reformation.” Journal of British Studies 48, no. 3 (2009): 564-586.
[22] Shagan, Ethan H. “‘Popularity’and the 1549 Rebellions Revisited.” The English Historical Review 115, no. 460 (2000): 121-133.