Why did the rebellions fail?

henry viii ordered norfolk to negotiate with the rebels and cleverly offered a general pardon and a promise of a parliament that would listen to the rebels- he fooled aske and used bigod's attempts to further the protest and justification for using military intervention

Aske: Actions of the Monarch

there was also the real fear that a foreign nations would use the disruption that the rebels would have caused to attack england in the south- with henry's army engaged against the rebels, there would have been little to stop a landing on the kent coast- if the pope denounced henry and urged all catholics to assist the rebels, henry's position would have been even weaker - none of the above did happen as the rebels accepted the peace plan put forward by the king

Aske: Lack Of Foreign Support

majority of the nobles in the north remained loyal to henry viii- the duke of norfolk helped the king negotiate with the rebels- nobles feared that they would lose their power if they supported the rebellion

Aske: Lack of Noble Support

it was not one fluid movement but a series of interconnected revolts- the rebellion did not spread beyond the north of england- therefore it had limited impact- with the exception of very limited support in windsor in 1536 the south did not get involved

Aske: Localised Nature of the Rebellion

many rebels believed in this theory and it therefore limited the scope of this rebellion as the rebel's respected the king's authority and feared the consequence of disobedience- they were keen to accept the king's pardon

Aske: The Tudor Theory of Obligation

placed under the control of northumberland who successfully dealt with the rebellion

Kett: Actions of the Monarch

somerset had to redirect troops away from the scottish boarder to help bring the rebellion under control- this compromised his policy of garrisoning the northern border

Kett: Lack of Foreign Support

absence of gentry and clergy was notably significant- no real leadership or armies- kett was a landowner with no real ability to raise an army- lack of noble involvement meant the rebellion was not as dangerous

Kett: Lack of Noble Support

the rebellion was contained in east anglia and didn't spread across the country- there was no attempt to join up with other rebellions taking place in 1549 ee the western rebellion

Kett: Localised Nature of the Rebellion

kett was a landowner and many of the rebels were farmers- they were no match for royal forces

Kett: The Tudor Theory of Obligation

elizabeth did not send royal troops to deal with the rebels- mary queen of scots was moved to coventry, a protestant strong hold, as a result the rebels had no real chance of freeing her so the main objective could not be achieved

Northern Earls: Actions of the Monarch

the pope did not intervene until after the rebellion had been quashed when it was too late to call on catholics throughout england to support the rebellion- spanish support did not materialise as rumous had suggested- this further weakened and demoralised the rebels

Northern Earls: Lack of Foreign Support

the rebellion was run by nobles

Northern Earls: Lack of Noble Support

it's support was limited geographically and northumberland did not even have time to mobilise his tenants

Northern Earls: Localised Nature of the Rebellion

there was no popular enthusiasm to replace elizabeth or to restore the pope's authority - the rebellion had not achieved widespread support appeals from the earls to the catholic nobility had been ignored and there was little support from lancashire and cheshire- it was localised

Northern Earls: The Tudor Theory of Obligation

he is easily arrested and henry deals with the situation decisively and quickly to end the trouble- he is able to fabricate a charge of treason to gain financial benefits too

Rhys ap Gruffudd: Actions of the Monarch

rumours that rhys was joining with scotland against the english however this charge was likely to have been fabricated by henry viii as a way to gain money- wales could've rebelled and united with spain but they didn't

Rhys ap Gruffudd: Lack of Foreign Support

this was more of a personal rivalry between rhys and ferrers

Rhys ap Gruffudd: Lack of Noble Support

the whole rebellion was contained, it didn't spread out of camarthen- the skirmish in camarthen was only serious enough to warrant a censure from wolsey in the star chamber- there was only hundreds of supports so it had limited impact

Rhys ap Gruffudd: Localised Nature of the Rebellion

there were a number of influential individuals who were prepared to put down rebellions and do whatever it took to achieve the divorce

Rhys ap Gruffudd: The Tudor Theory of Obligation

the queen bought herself time by offering a pardon and committee to discuss rebel grievances buying herself time to gather defences in london- mary i was successful in appealing to londoners for loyalty referring to the rebels as 'rank traitors' this resulted in an army under the control of the earl of pembroke which rallied to defend london

Wyatt: Actions of the Monarch

this was a rebellion led by nobles- principally wyatt, carew, croft and the duke of suffolk- it's weakness was the opposite, it did not have popular support of the people across the land and was doomed to failure

Wyatt: Lack of Noble Support

the rebellion reached ludgate, half a km away from the queen at the tower of london- however the queen's army advanced the rebels

Wyatt: Localised Nature of the Rebellion

whilst originally many citizens of london were sympathetic towards the rebellion, the terms dictated by wyatt were so unrealistic that many were turned to mary's cause by a rousing speech from her- they felt obliged to support mary and her cause due to the tudor theory of obligation

Wyatt: The Tudor Theory of Obligation