what caused religious rebellions essay

The Historian's Apprentice

To what extent were political factors responsible for tudor rebellions in the period 1529-1569.

Though certainly a contributing factor to most of the Tudor rebellions, political grievances were not the most significant factor in explaining the outbreak of Tudor rebellion.

In the case of Wyatt’s rebellion in 1554, political grievances may well have been the most important factor due to the prospects of Mary’s marriage to Philip, England’s fear of losing independence and Spanish interference in court; however, under further inspection, it was unlikely to be the sole reason. Political grievances arise predominantly concerning the issue of individuals’ power in government, such as is the case of the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536. In this rebellion, some of the nobility lost their favour in court and, whilst a contributing factor from the point of view of the gentry, it is highly unlikely that it is the dominating reason as to why 40,000 rebels rose. One of the only rebellions where politics is the most prominent factor is the rebellion of Rhys ap Gruffudd. In this case, the foremost issue was his personal protest against having his Marcher Lordship removed – though it is arguable that this was barely a rebellion at all due to the lack of support it received.

A more significant factor responsible for Tudor rebellions was religion. Religious grievances were a major cause for rebellion in the Pilgrimage of Grace. First of all, the name alone suggests that the rebellion has religious roots and the fact that the rebels sported badges and banners depicting the five wounds of Christ further supported this theory; historian DG Newcombe stated that ‘religious issues dominated the minds of those who rose’. Also, in the case of the Northern Earls’ rebellion in 1569, the aim of rebellion was to replace the monarch with a Catholic queen, obviously suggesting religious motives. Even where Wyatt was driven by Mary’s marriage, the only evidence of violence in the rebellion was the attack on the property of the Catholic Bishop of Winchester implying that there were some religious motives behind the rising.

Another significant factor responsible for Tudor rebellions is economic and social grievances. Kett’s rebellion in 1549 was triggered by economic causes, specifically the use of illegal enclosures. Economic grievances were also present during the Pilgrimage of Grace; at the time of the rebellion the government were trying to collect an unpopular subsidy from communities in the North. Also, the appearance of government commissioners generated wild rumours of increasing taxes, possibly sparking a riot from the commoners. Even the rebellion of Rhys ap Gruffudd had economic roots. The people of Carmarthenshire and Cardiganshire refused to pay legal dues creating further tension between them and the Crown.

In conclusion, there are several factors surpassing politics in importance, significantly religion. However, it is argued by many historians such as DG Newcombe who stated that with regards to the Pilgrimage of Grace ‘the roots of the movement were most decidedly economic, its demands predominantly secular, its interest in Rome almost negligible’. This suggests that rebellions during the Tudor period can be attributed only to a combination of factors.

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• Current Issue
• Past Issues
• Get New Issue Alerts
• American Academy of Arts 
and Sciences

Religionist Rebels & the Sovereignty of the Divine

Existing categorizations of rebel groups have difficulty classifying some of today's most vexing rebels–those, such as the Islamic State, that reject the Westphalian state system and depend on an almost entirely religious justification for their cause. Such rebel groups often have unlimited war aims and are unwilling to negotiate with the states whose sovereignty they challenge. In this essay, I present the new category of “religionist rebels.” I show that religionist rebels have been present throughout the history of the state system, and explore the particular challenges they pose in the civil war context. Religionist rebels are often brutal in their methods and prosecute wars that are especially difficult to end. But the nature of religionist rebellion also suggests natural limits. Thus, religionist rebels do not, ultimately, present a long-term threat to the state system.

Tanisha M. Fazal is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Minnesota. She is the author of  State Death: The Politics and Geography of Conquest, Annexation, and Occupation  (2007) and  Wars of Law: Unintended Consequences in the Regulation of Armed Conflict  (forthcoming 2018). She contributed the essay “Rebellion, War Aims & the Laws of War” to the Winter 2017 issue of  Dædalus .

Rebellion is a defining element of civil wars, in which armed opponents challenge the sovereign authority of the state. But the set of political aims sought by rebels is as diverse as rebel groups themselves. Archetypical civil wars include the U.S. Civil War, in which the Confederacy fought to secede from the Union and create a new, independent state, and the Spanish Civil War, in which the Nationalist rebels sought to overthrow and replace the governing Republican regime. In both of these cases, the rebels not only accepted, but premised their war aims on the continuance of the international state system. Even if they may have sought to change borders or redesign the seat of government, both sets of rebels also sought to control a state.

My aim in this essay is to investigate a type of rebel group that is not new, but may seem so: what I call religionist rebels . Religionist rebels reject the Westphalian notion of the state: that is, a political entity that governs a clearly delimited population and territory and interacts with like units in the international system. Religionist rebels do not seek to carve out a new, independent state that will receive international recognition and, today, the benefits of a seat at the United Nations. Nor do they seek to capture the capital for the purpose of reclaiming the reins of government from those accused of having betrayed the public’s trust. For religionist rebels, sovereignty does not reside in the people or in the recognition provided by other states. Instead, sovereignty is given—or even lent—by the divine.

Understanding the particular challenges posed by religionist rebels is important for three main reasons. First, if the right to rule and represent can only emanate from the heavens, religionist rebels are likely to reject approaches from the state whose sovereignty their rebellion directly challenges, as well as from third parties whose interests may also be at stake. It will, in other words, be difficult to negotiate with a group whose members recognize a divine source of legitimacy. Second and related, classifying religionist rebels can help shed light on their war aims and, in particular, whether those war aims are limited. And third, religionist rebels may also conduct war differently from rebels with other types of war aims, because the prosecution of the war—as well as its goals—may be justified on religious grounds.

Today’s headlines abound with examples of Islamic religionist rebels, such as the Islamic State and Boko Haram. But religionist rebellion is not an exclusively Islamic, or even modern, phenomenon. 1 Armed rebellions in China and Brazil in the mid- to late nineteenth century and even to some extent that of the (Christian) Lord’s Resistance Army in Northern Uganda today all fall into the category of rebel groups whose beliefs lead them to reject the modern state system in favor of a different theology of sovereignty.

These differences suggest that there is a fundamental mismatch between religionist rebels and the current state system in terms of how the sources of the right to rule translate into the commencement, conduct, and conclusion of civil war. This mismatch sets religionist rebels apart from other types of rebel groups. Secessionist rebel groups, for example, have been shown to be less likely to target civilians than other types of rebel groups, in part because they are trying to gain the favor of an international community that disapproves of civilian targeting. 2  And while existing scholarship has done less to tie war aims to the mode of war termination, there is at least some evidence suggesting that power-sharing—a popular postwar governing proposal—may be more likely to succeed in wars in which the rebels seek to replace the existing government than in those in which the rebels are divided from the government by ethnic identity. 3

Many rebellions have a religious focus. Not all of these would be considered religionist, however. Many religious (but not religionist) rebel groups have secessionist aims, and actively seek to join the international states system. The Moro in the Philippines, for example, have a clear Muslim identity, but have often sought autonomy if not secession. Others aim to take over the central government, but maintain the state’s relations with its neighbors, once again accepting the state system as it currently operates. The early part of the civil war between North and South Sudan was driven at least in part by the fear that the North was trying to impose Sharia law on the South, but at the beginning of this decades-long conflict, the rebels still sought to work within the confines of the Sudanese state by reshaping the government in Khartoum. Religionist rebels not only give prominence to religious beliefs, but also explicitly reject a notion of statehood centered on limits to sovereignty and mutual recognition.

Because religionist rebels are not interested in joining the international community as a newly independent state or in re placing the existing government’s role, many recent strategies for war termination are unlikely to be effective when dealing with this type of rebellion. In this, religionist rebels may be somewhat similar to rebels whose main aim is plunder. But insofar as loot-seeking rebels are motivated by money, they can likely be paid off; the same is not true for religionist rebels. Recognizing the particular challenges that religionist rebels pose for war termination is critical to the resolution of religionist conflict.

In this essay, I first present the conventional understanding of the possible array of rebel war aims. Next, I argue for adding a new type of rebel—religionist rebels—to existing categorizations. I lay out my logic via example, and delve into a series of cases of religionist rebels both to motivate and make my argument. I then examine briefly how past religionist rebellions were terminated, and to what extent the nature of their termination was driven by the religionist war aims of the rebels. I conclude with policy implications meant to apply to today’s—and future—conflicts with religionist rebels.

Scholars have classified civil wars on a number of dimensions. I focus here on the classification of civil wars according to the political aims of the rebel group. The Uppsala Conflict Data Program ( UCDP ), an invaluable resource for civil war researchers, identifies two principal “incompatibilities” between governments and rebel groups fighting civil wars. Wars over the government are defined as “concerning the type of political system, the replacement of the central government or the change of its composition.” 4  Wars over territory are defined as “concerning the status of a specified territory, e.g. the change of the state in control of a certain territory (interstate conflict), secession or autonomy (intrastate conflict).” 5 An influential article that preceded a boom of research on civil wars distinguished “ethnic” from “nonethnic” civil wars, and described “nonethnic” civil wars as “revolutionary or other types of war.” 6 In addition to wars over the control of the central government and ethnicity/territory, scholars have sometimes pointed to a third category: civil wars that are described as “resource wars,” in which the rebels’ primary aim is the plunder and sale of natural resources. 7

Many important insights regarding the conduct and termination of civil war have emerged from the analysis of variation in rebel war aims. 8 A focus on the possibly distinctive behavior of groups that seek, at a minimum, autonomy and, at a maximum, a new independent state appears to be most common. 9 And wars in which rebels are motivated primarily by profit are thought, for example, to generate indiscipline and extensive civilian targeting, in contrast to conflicts in which clear political aims govern rebels’ behavior. 10

Connecting rebel political aims to the commencement, conduct, and conclusion of civil war is a sensible strategy. One problem, however, with the execution of this strategy to date has been the great deal of heterogeneity in the reference category. In other words, when we distinguish between “ethnic” and “nonethnic” or “secessionist” and “nonsecessionist,” we push aside the significant variation in the “non” category. For example, another seminal article in the field identifies twenty ethnic civil wars, leaving a remainder of thirty-six nonethnic civil wars. 11 The latter category includes a diverse set of conflicts, from Marxist uprisings such as the Cuban Revolution in 1958 to the attempt by Islamists to take over Algeria in 1992 to southern secessionism in Yemen in 1994. The UCDP data code wars as being over government, territory, or both; a system that can also lead to some confusing coding decisions. For example, a conflict between the United States and Al Qaeda (part of the so-called global war on terror) is coded as being over the type of government, presumably that of the United States.

Exploring this variation can be a risky proposition in that classification schemes can go too far. Overly detailed typologies are often too confusing to be useful. Bearing this caveat in mind, I nonetheless suggest adding at least one more type of rebel political aims: that of religionist rebels.

Before presenting specific examples of religionist rebels, I first want to clarify the claim that religionist rebellion is inconsistent with the Westphalian state system. I conceive of the Westphalian state system as one populated, at least ostensibly, by Weberian states whose governments possess (again, at least ostensibly) “a monopoly on the legitimate use of force within a given territory.” 12 Limits are inherent to this definition of statehood. States control a limited amount of territory. Their right to rule is limited by two kinds of recognition, from the domestic population of the state and from the recognition of other states populating the system.

Many internationally recognized states fail to meet the Weberian ideal of statehood today. Somalia is often taken to be a prime example of this failure. The Somali government created by the constitution of 2012 certainly does not hold a monopoly on the use of force within its internationally recognized borders. But representatives of Somalia nonetheless hold a seat at the United Nations and appear to play by the rules of the international game. That Somali representatives retain these rights points to the fact that today’s state system is Westphalian in a thin sense. States may interfere in each other’s politics. They may even challenge each other’s ownership to particular pieces of territory. But, with only a very few exceptions, they do not challenge each other’s right to exist, at least because they understand that their own existence depends on the maintenance of the system and the sufferance of others. 13

As a weak, even failed state, Somalia faces a series of domestic challenges. For the most part, however, these challenges are to the Somali state in particular and not to the international state system in general. Somaliland in the north seeks to create its own independent state and very much wants a seat at the UN . In the 1980s, the Somali National Movement and Somali Salvation Democratic Front sought to overthrow President Siad Barre. More recently, perhaps partly as a result of Somalia’s prolonged state failure, the religionist group Al Shabaab has gained control over significant portions of Somalia, with the aim of establishing a global Islamic caliphate.

Three related characteristics distinguish religionist rebels from other types of rebel groups. First, religionist rebels are categorized by how they view the source of sovereignty, defined here as the right and fact of ruling a given population and territory. Both center-seeking and secessionist rebels seek to control a state, and view sovereignty as emanating from the people and/or recognition by other states in the international system. Rebels concerned principally with plunder may not seek sovereignty in any form, and may in fact prefer that some other party holds de jure sovereignty as long as they maintain control over resource-rich territory and access to markets through which they can sell their goods. Religionist rebels reject the notion that sovereignty is rooted in the people or in the international community, and their (ostensible) motives for any control of territory are theological rather than pecuniary.

Second, because religionist rebels rely on a divine source of sovereignty, they reject the legitimacy of other units in the world whose sovereignty claims rest on secular sources, such as popular support and/or recognition by other units in the system. If religionist rebels do not recognize the legitimacy of other units in the system, they are unlikely to engage in formal relations with them. This restricts trade, negotiation, and diplomacy, all of which are critical to the current states system. Religionist rebels seek to be a world apart while remaking the world in their image.

Third, religionist rebels do not accept territorial limits on their sovereignty claims, unless those limits have a divine justification. As a scholar of the Holy Spirit Movement described her subject: “The goal of the war, as Lakwena explained, was less the military conquest of foreign territory than the spreading of the Word of God throughout the world. . . . The Holy Spirit Movement had a supra-ethnic, pan-African, and finally universal mission.” 14 If the mandate from heaven is to convert and spread the word of God, there can be no inherent limit to this task.

A historical example of a religionist rebel group is the Yellow Cliffs rebels in mid- nineteenth-century China. At that time, the reach of the Chinese state did not extend to its recognized—and claimed—borders. As a result, there were a number of challenges to Peking’s hold on outlying areas; many of these rebellions exhibited a strong religious cast. 15 For example, the Miao and Hui in the southwest, along with the Tungan and Xinjiang Muslims in the northwest, fought for autonomy if not independence from the Chinese state in the 1860s and 1870s.

Another challenge came from the Nien, bandits who were terrorizing China’s northern countryside. Refugees from the Nien flocked to the Yellow Cliffs in the north, where they were gathered in and then ministered to by religious leader Zhang Jizhong. As time passed, supplicants arrived at the Yellow Cliffs not as refugees, but as pilgrims seeking to join Zhang’s religious group. 16

Zhang Jizhong subscribed to an alternative form of Confucianism known as the Taizhou school. The Taizhou school had been founded by Wang Gen, who had been inspired by “a dream in which he single-handedly prevented the heavens from imminent collapse and restored the sun, moon, and stars to working order.” 17 Zhang’s realization of this theology led him to create what was effectively a small theocracy in the Yellow Cliffs. Zhang controlled entrance to the community and provided safety from local bandits, education, food and shelter, and, of course, a system of worship. Sovereignty was effectively invested in Zhang, who took on the mantle of “high priest.” 18

At their height, the Yellow Cliffs rebels fielded eight hundred soldiers. 19 But these were primarily meant to protect the Yellow Cliffs community from bandits; they had issued no formal challenge to the government in Peking, effectively ignoring its claim to sovereignty over the Yellow Cliffs. The rebels were a group unto themselves, and only took up arms when their ability to self-govern was challenged.

The topography of the Yellow Cliffs region both protected and doomed Zhang and his followers. The cliffs created a geographical refuge, but also enabled a siege by government forces. While the residents of the Yellow Cliffs were offered the opportunity to surrender, none took advantage. All ten thousand souls—with the exception of four hundred women and children who were spared but had not surrendered—perished in the assault, committed to Zhang and his religious teachings. 20

Similar to Zhang’s disciples in the Yellow Cliffs of China, the Canudos of Northeast Brazil rejected the sovereignty of the newly formed Brazilian republic in 1896 without intending to challenge it directly. Antonio Maciel—also known as Antonio Conselheiro—led a Catholic community of twenty thousand who viewed the Republic as the “anti-Christ.” 21 While the Canudos believed in the divine right of monarchy, they did not support the prior monarchy of Dom Pedro; they believed that a Portuguese crusader king would rise from the dead to lead them, and referred to their community as the “New Jerusalem.” 22 The Canudos were organized along the lines of the Church itself. Although he did not claim the status of divine messenger or prophet, Conselheiro was treated as such by his subjects, who referred to him as the messiah. 23

Also like the Yellow Cliffs rebels, the main political aim of the Canudos appears to have been to be left alone. The Canudos neither claimed an independent state nor directly challenged the sovereignty of the Brazilian government. 24 At the same time, they clearly rejected the rules and reign of the state. The Canudos created their own governance structures, based on Catholic teaching, which included a group of apostles to Conselheiro. The group held to a fairly austere ethos, likely driven as much by religious devotion as economic need, given that its membership was extremely poor. 25 The implicit challenge to the government lay in the combination of the rejection of local landowners’ authority and the sheer size of the Canudos revolt. At its height, the Canudos community consisted of fifteen to twenty thousand people and at least four thousand soldiers, and was the second largest community in the state of Bahía. 26

The Canudos rebellion itself occurred only in response to government action. Neighboring communities became nervous about the Canudos, accusing them of primitivism and of being “superstitious zealots.” 27 Four separate government expeditions were launched against the Canudos. The first three were repelled by Conselheiro’s juaguncos , a fighting force whose members were recruited as much for their skill as for their willingness to die for the Canudos cause. 28 The fourth and largest was successful, by starving out the Canudos, who never surrendered. 29  Government forces ultimately killed nearly all the adult male Canudos and burned the community to the ground.

Two additional related cases—the Holy Spirit Movement Forces ( HSMF ) and the subsequent Lord’s Resistance Army ( LRA )—illustrate some of the challenges in identifying religionist rebels. There is no question that the Holy Spirit Movement, which fought the Ugandan government in the mid-1980s, was religiously motivated. The movement’s founding moment is said to have occurred when a holy Christian spirit named Lakwena visited an Acholi woman, Alice Auma, in Northern Uganda. Alice Lakwena (previously Auma) then took on the mantle of prophetess, and called troops to her side in the name of God. While it is certainly the case that the religious beliefs of the HSMF led to poor tactical and operational decision-making on the battlefield and governed the war aims of the group, the HSMF accepted the confines of the state system in that it aimed to replace the central government in Kampala. Indeed, the HSMF was defeated when it launched a failed assault on the capital in 1987. By my coding, the HSMF would be considered religious, but not religionist.

Coding the Lord’s Resistance Army is more complicated. Many accounts trace the lineage of the LRA to the demise of the Holy Spirit Movement Forces, suggesting the possibility of an alignment of war aims. But experts on this case suggest that the LRA ’s war aims are more difficult to discern than those of the HSMF . On one hand, the LRA did seem to accept the idea of the state system—or, at least, did not directly challenge it—on more than one occasion. For example, Joseph Kony, the infamous leader of the LRA , accepted aid from the government of Sudan. The LRA also negotiated directly with the Ugandan government. 30 On the other hand, the LRA appeared to reject the notion of state sovereignty on several fronts. Kony’s stated war aims in support of “the application of the Ten Commandments and the liberation of the people of Northern Uganda” do not necessarily hold the maintenance of the state system dear. 31 According to Kevin Dunn, a scholar of the conflict: “One of the more pronounced features of the conflict is Kony’s limited interest in communicating with the outside world.” Dunn further notes that the LRA was less interested in “seizing the reins of power” from the central government than in creating an “enclave . . . or personal fiefdom.” 32 This description of the LRA bears a striking resemblance to the cases of the Yellow Cliffs rebels and the Canudos: the state system itself is deemed secondary to the desire to be left alone.

The LRA is a borderline case in coding religionist rebellion. Its war aims appear to have been somewhat fluid: it may have sought to overthrow the Ugandan government at some points and rejected the state system in its entirety at others. This rebellion appears to have petered out (at least in terms of battle deaths), but recent reports indicate an increase in child abductions that may mean that the LRA is attempting to rebuild via the use of child soldiers. 33

Most recently, the Islamic State emerged from the wreckage of the 2003 Iraq War, initially to push the United States out of Iraq but, subsequently, to declare a caliphate on earth with no clear territorial borders. Attempts by the international community to engage with the Islamic State have been generally rebuffed, perhaps most clearly when governments have tried—unsuccessfully—to negotiate with the Islamic State to return hostages. 34 Broadly speaking, humanitarian agencies have been frustrated in attempts to reach out to groups such as the Islamic State and its cousin, Boko Haram, although there have been some limited successes, such as when the Swiss government and International Committee of the Red Cross negotiated the return of twenty-one girls taken by Boko Haram. 35 Because religionist rebels do not subscribe to Western and Westphalian notions of sovereignty, the international community has little in the way of leverage to pressure these groups to comply with humanitarian norms.

Note that religionist rebels often provide many of the services of a state. Both the Yellow Cliffs rebels and the Canudos provided security, education, food, and shelter to their residents. Part of the Islamic State’s success has been attributed to its ability to step in and provide basic services, such as garbage collection, at a time when the Syrian and Iraqi states were failing to do so (and notwithstanding the fact that the provision of these services has often been selective and used for recruitment purposes). 36 But essential to the Westphalian notion of statehood is the dual concept of international recognition of boundaries. This implies limits on sovereignty, and such limits are inconsistent with the sovereignty of the divine. It also implies living in a world with other recognized states, which is also inconsistent with the notion that there is one true path that all should follow.

Religionist rebels may also fight differ ently from center-seeking or secession ist groups. While all these groups fight to win, the extent to which religious belief permeates the daily life of religionist rebels can extend to the battlefield. A prime example of this phenomenon is the belief in bullet-proofing. Soldiers of the Holy Spirit Movement were forbidden to kill, relied on holy water and religious songs to protect them, and (confusingly) invoked the name of James Bond as they engaged enemy troops. 37 Another manifestation of the relationship between religionism and warfighting occurs when the belief in religious ends is used to justify brutal means. The Islamic State’s governor in Aleppo drew upon Koranic scripture to endorse killing, crucifixion, and the amputation of hands and feet as punishment for enemies of the Islamic State, and evidence suggests that the organization has engaged in all of these practices. 38

This is not to vilify religion: many if not most religious groups are devotedly nonviolent; see, for example, the Quakers and Jains. But religionist groups that use violence may accept few restrictions on their behavior, unless restrictions emanate from a divine source. This suggests that, in addition to identifying religionist rebels, it may also be useful to make doctrinal distinctions among them to determine which are likely to be the worst-behaved. Allegiance to the sovereignty of the divine may permit, demand, or restrict violence in different cases.

The greatest challenge posed by religionist rebels may be war termination. The historical examples described above offer limited comfort, in that many of these groups have tended to create strongholds in remote locations. While they have gained thousands of supporters, their popular appeal has been limited, and they have typically been defeated by government forces. Indeed, the likelihood of their defeat may be a function of their religionist nature; to the extent that their actions were governed by theology rather than strategy—particularly on the battlefield—they may have, in effect, been “selected out” when facing nonreligionist adversaries. 39

A logic of internal containment may help explain the fate of groups like the Yellow Cliffs rebels and the Canudos. But from a distance of decades, these groups may appear small and weak, especially in hindsight. The Taiping Rebellion—fought in China just a few years prior to the outbreak of the Yellow Cliffs Rebellion—may therefore serve as a more compelling comparison to contemporary examples. The Taipings, also known as the God-Worshippers, fought in Eastern China from 1850–1864, marching on Nanking and Shanghai among other cities. The leader of the Taiping Rebellion, which took over twenty million lives, claimed to be the younger brother of Jesus Christ. While the Taipings certainly contrasted themselves with what they saw as a corrupt Manchu regime, they viewed their own mandate as coming from the heavens, and held that “the whole empire is the universal family of our Heavenly Father, the Supreme Lord and Great God.” 40 What is more, they rejected overtures from diplomats from abroad, unless such delegations swore allegiance to “the Heavenly King, the head of the movement” as well as to the Taiping religion itself. 41 Even though it was orders of magnitude stronger than the Yellow Cliffs and Canudos rebellions, the Taiping Rebellion was ultimately (and soundly) defeated by Western-trained imperial government forces. Similarly, at this writing, the reach of the Islamic State has contracted dramatically, with significant losses in territory, population, and financing and the fall of core strongholds, such as the Syrian city of Raqqa.

Conflict resolution with religionist rebels is difficult because they eschew negotiation. Faith and divine responsibility cannot be negotiated away, and other actors are viewed as illegitimate negotiating partners if they do not subscribe to the same beliefs. This leaves two unsavory options on the table. The first option is to fight to the end, a strategy employed by the Chinese and Brazilian governments when negotiations with religionist rebels in their territory failed. Although ultimately effective, this strategy was also extremely costly, with tens of thousands of government and rebel soldiers—as well as civilians—dying in each war. The second option is to accept a hybrid system in which religionist rebels coexist alongside the Westphalian state system. Some version of this hybrid has existed since the emergence of the modern state system. This particular type of hybridity is problematic not (just) because it upsets the Westphalian apple cart, but more so because of the lack of limits inherent to the evangelism of religionist rebels. It is not only their existence, but also their rejection of alternative justifications and systems of rule, that challenges nearby states. At the same time, however, it is precisely this lack of limits in aspiration that likely places a natural bound on the expansionist tendencies of religionist rebels. Because their attitude toward the state system undercuts third-party support for religionist rebels, they may be especially likely to turn to other, often criminal, sources of financing. The resort to criminality in turn undermines discipline within the organization as well as the credibility of its ideological appeals and governance efforts. 42 At this writing, for example, it appears that both the Islamic State and Boko Haram have begun to fall back, after bumping into limits to expansion, as well as pushback from the international community. 43 An uneasy truce may therefore be possible, albeit neither pleasant nor likely.

Religionist rebels’ plans may appear to resemble the claims of past empires relying on justifications of sovereignty that invoked ideology or the divine right of monarchs. 44 But there are important differences from these historical analogs. Not only was the Soviet Union a member of the United Nations, it participated in its founding, and even argued for the admission of Soviet Socialist Republics that lacked the independence necessary to make their own foreign policy decisions. Similarly, the European monarchs of old certainly had an insatiable thirst for expansion, but also treated frequently with each other, and recognized that there were probably natural limits to the scope of their empires.

Religionist rebels are not new to international politics. And they are likely to continue to emerge and persist in one form or another. The bad news is that their aims are often without limit, their means are frequently brutal, and attempts at negotiation may be futile. The good news is that religionist rebels do appear, historically, to have bumped up against natural limits, precisely because of the claims they make and practices they engage in during the wars they fight. And while the bottom line has been an especially bloody one, as belief in the sovereignty of the divine makes religionist rebellions particularly difficult to end, the key takeaway is the necessity of distinguishing religion from religion ism in identifying these especially challenging rebellions.

• 1 In his contribution to this project, Hendrik Spruyt outlines various schools of Islamic legal thought and shows that some view Islamic law as compatible with the Westphalian state system, while others do not. Hendrik Spruyt, “Civil Wars as Challenges to the Modern International System,” Dædalus 146 (4) (Fall 2017). For a more extensive analysis of Islamic law in this regard, see Emilia Justyna Powell, “Islamic Law States and the Peaceful Resolution of Territorial Disputes,” International Organization 69 (4) (2015).
• 2 Tanisha M. Fazal, Wars of Law: Unintended Consequences in the Regulation of Armed Conflict (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, forthcoming 2018), ch. 7; Virginia Page Fortna, “Do Terrorists Win? Rebels’ Use of Terrorism and Civil War Outcomes,” International Organization 69 (3) (Summer 2015); and Hyeran Jo, Compliant Rebels (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015).
• 3 Caroline Hartzell and Matthew Hoddie, “Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing and Post-Civil War Conflict Management,” American Journal of Political Science 47 (2) (2003): 328; and Thomas Chapman and Philip G. Roeder, “Partition as a Solution to Wars of Nationalism: The Importance of Institutions,” American Political Science Review 101 (4) (2007). For a challenge to this finding suggesting that ethnic conflict is not a good predictor of the success of power-sharing arrangements, see Jason Michael Quinn, T. David Mason, and Mehmet Gurses, “Sustaining the Peace: Determinants of Civil War Recurrence,” International Interactions 33 (2) (2007).
• 4 Uppsala Conflict Data Program, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala Universitet, “ Definitions .”
• 6 Nicholas Sambanis, “Do Ethnic and Nonethnic Civil Wars Have the Same Causes? A Theoretical and Empirical Inquiry (Part 1),” Journal of Conflict Resolution 45 (3) (2001): 260.
• 7 Michael L. Ross, “How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases,” International Organization 58 (1) (Winter 2004).
• 8 Analysts (including this author) who connect the political aims of rebel groups to their behavior do not necessarily assume that all members of the group are committed to the same aims. Even if motivations of individual members are heterogeneous, the assumption is instead that there is a critical mass of commitment to the stated aims of the group.
• 9 Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham, Inside the Politics of Self-Determination (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014); Trace Lasley and Clayton Thyne, “Secession, Legitimacy and the Use of Child Soldiers,” Conflict Management and Peace Science 32 (3) (2014); Barbara F. Walter, Reputation and Civil War: Why Separatist Conflicts are So Violent (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009); and Monica Duffy Toft, The Geography of Ethnic Violence: Identity, Interests, and the Indivisibility of Territory (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2003).
• 10 Jeremy M. Weinstein, Inside Rebellion: The Politics of Insurgent Violence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).
• 11 James D. Fearon and David D. Laitin, “Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War,” American Political Science Review 97 (1) (2003).
• 12 Max Weber, “Politics as a Vocation,” in From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology , ed. Hans Heinrich Gerth and C. Wright Mills (New York: Oxford University Press, 1946).
• 13 This view lines up with Stephen Krasner’s description of international legal sovereignty. Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999), 14–20.
• 14 Heike Behrend, Alice Lakwena and the Holy Spirits , trans. Mitch Cohen (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 56–57.
• 15 Elizabeth Perry and Tom Chang, “The Mystery of Yellow Cliff: A Controversial ‘Rebellion’ in Late Qing,” Modern China 6 (2) (1980): 123.
• 16 Ibid., 132–133.
• 17 Ibid., 127.
• 18 Ibid., 136.
• 19 Ibid., 138
• 20 Ibid., 147.
• 21 Lori Madden, “The Canudos War in History,” Luso-Brazilian Review 30 (2) (1993): 6.
• 22 Micheal Clodfelter, Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures, 1494–2007 , 3rd ed. (Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland and Company, Inc., 2008), 351; and Bradford E. Burns, A History of Brazil (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), 248–249.
• 23 Robert M. Levine, “‘Mud-Hut Jerusalem’: Canudos Revisited,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 68 (3) (1988): 533.
• 24 Teresa A. Meade, A Brief History of Brazil , 2nd ed. (New York: Facts on File, 2010), 99.
• 25 Robert M. Levine and Penny Roberts, The Massacre in History (New York: Berghahn Books, 1999), 195.
• 26 Levine, “‘Mud-Hut Jerusalem,’” 525, 527; and Burns, A History of Brazil , 251–252.
• 27 Susanna Hecht, The Scramble for the Amazon and the “Lost Paradise” of Euclides da Cunha (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013), 10.
• 28 Levine and Roberts, The Massacre in History , 192.
• 29 Robert M. Levine, Vale of Tears: Revisiting the Canudos Massacre in Northeastern Brazil, 1893–1897 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), 183–185.
• 30 Sam Farmar, “Uganda Rebel Leader Breaks Silence,” BBC , June 28, 2006.
• 31 Kevin C. Dunn, “The Lord’s Resistance Army and African International Relations,” African Security 3 (1) (2010): 51.
• 32 Ibid., 51, 57.
• 33 Rick Gladstone, “U.S. Broadens Sanctions on Joseph Kony and His Group,” The New York Times , March 8, 2016.
• 34 “Japan Grapples for Dialogue with isis over Hostages,” CBS News, January 22, 2015; and Steve Almasy, “ ISIS : Japanese Hostage Beheaded,” CNN , February 3, 2015.
• 35 Stephanie Busari, Jason Hanna, and Faith Karimi, “Boko Haram Releases 21 Chibok Girls to Nigerian Government,” CNN , October 13, 2016.
• 36 Yochi Dreazen, “From Electricity to Sewage, U.S. Intelligence Says the Islamic State is Fast Learning How to Run a Country,” Foreign Policy , August 19, 2014; and Megan Stewart, “Why the Islamic State Is so Bad at Being a State,” Political Violence @ a Glance, December 22, 2015.
• 37 Behrend, Alice Lakwena and the Holy Spirits , 58–59.
• 38 Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham, “ Specimen 7F : Statement from the Wali (Governor) of Aleppo Province: October 2013 ” (accessed October 10, 2016). It is important to note that similarly brutal prescriptions can be found in Judeo-Christian scripture. See, for example, the Book of Samuel, in which King Saul is told to commit genocide.
• 39 Jason Sharman, “War, Selection, and the State-as-Firm Analogy: A Critique of Evolutionary Theory in International Relations” (unpublished article, Griffiths University).
• 40 Franz Michael, “Military Organization and Power Structure of China during the Taiping Rebellion,” Pacific Historical Review 18 (4) (1949).
• 41 Eugene P. Boardman, “Christian Influence Upon the Ideology of the Taiping Rebellion,” The Far Eastern Quarterly 10 (2) (1951).
• 42 I thank Karl Eikenberry for suggesting this logic. See also Weinstein, Inside Rebellion .
• 43 Nathaniel Allen, “Charting Boko Haram’s Rapid Decline,” War on the Rocks, September 22, 2016.
• 44 For a discussion of the possible similarities between Marxist and Islamist rebels, see Stathis N. Kalyvas, “Jihadi Rebels in Civil War,” Dædalus 147 (1) (Winter 2018).

“Jihadists” and Religionist Rebels: Responding to the Evolving Profile of Armed Groups

Find Study Materials for

• Business Studies
• Combined Science
• Computer Science
• Engineering
• English Literature
• Environmental Science
• Human Geography
• Macroeconomics
• Microeconomics
• Social Studies
• Browse all subjects
• Read our Magazine

Create Study Materials

The Tudor era was filled with rebellions that threatened each monarch in a specific way. They had a multitude of complex motivations and causes - let's find out what these were.

Explore our app and discover over 50 million learning materials for free.

• Tudor Rebellions
• Explanations
• StudySmarter AI
• Textbook Solutions
• Birth of the USA
• Crime and Punishment in Britain
• Democracy and Dictatorship in Germany
• Early Modern Spain
• Elizabethan Era
• Emergence of USA as a World Power
• European History
• Modern Britain
• Modern World History
• Political Stability In Germany
• Protestant Reformation
• Public Health In UK
• Spread of Islam
• The Crusades
• The French Revolution
• The Mughal Empire
• Cornish Rebellion
• Edward VI of England
• Elizabeth I
• Kett's Rebellion
• Mary I of England
• Mary, Queen of Scots
• Mid Tudor Crisis
• Perkin Warbeck Rebellion
• Pilgrimage of Grace
• Simnel Rebellion
• Stafford And Lovell Rebellion
• The English Renaissance
• The Tudor Dynasty
• Yorkshire Rebellion
• Tsarist and Communist Russia
• Viking History

Lerne mit deinen Freunden und bleibe auf dem richtigen Kurs mit deinen persönlichen Lernstatistiken

Nie wieder prokastinieren mit unseren Lernerinnerungen.

Tudor Rebellions Timeline

Causes of tudor rebellions.

Several common factors motivated rebellions in the Tudor era. It should be noted, however, that rebellions often had more than one cause and political concerns were normally intertwined with religious and economic ones as well.

Economic causes

Economic factors were a large motivator of rebellions in the Tudor era. They came in two forms - economic change and tax. Economic changes, like enclosure and national taxes imposed to fund wars, were a continuing grievance for the people of England.

The fencing off of common land by private landlords.

Let's look at a couple of examples of economic rebellions:

The Cornish Rebellion

The Cornish Rebellion was a tax rebellion that took place in 1497 in Cornwall. It was caused by popular unrest at a tax that had been imposed by Parliament in order to pay for a war in the North of England. The Cornish felt that it was unfair that they should be paying for a war that was happening so far away and had nothing to do with them.

Kett's Rebellion

Kett's Rebellion took place in 1549 during the reign of Edward VI. It was a protest against enclosure, which severely affected the economic circumstances of the common people and made it harder for them to earn money.

Religious causes

Religious rebellions mainly occurred in the second half of the Tudor era, after the English Reformation had taken place. The Reformation occurred under Henry VIII and split the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church and the authority of the Pope. The change from Catholic to Protestant would continue to be a grievance amongst the English people for many years to come. Most of the rebellions that were religiously motivated were Catholic uprisings against the Protestant Church of England.

• The Pilgrimage of Grace

The Pilgrimage of Grace took place in 1537, during the reign of Henry VIII. It was a protest against the English Reformation and the Dissolution of the Monasteries. It was one of the largest rebellions against a monarch to take place in the Tudor era.

Wyatt's Rebellion

Wyatt's Rebellion had multiple causes - it was a rebellion against Mary I's marriage to Phillip of Spain. Of course, there was a political element to it - many feared Spanish influence on English affairs - but equally, there were many concerns that the country would be forced back to Catholicism.

Mary I restored the Pope as head of the Church in England, returning Catholicism to the country and even undertaking religious persecution against Protestants, hence her nickname Bloody Mary. Her marriage to Phillip of Spain would increase Catholic influence in England; understandably, this did not sit well with Protestants in the country.

Political causes

Political rebellions were less frequent as they generally only involved the nobility. Normally, the cause was a desire to gain more power and influence at the Royal Court. However, popular movements could have political causes as well, like an objection to a royal marriage.

The Essex Rebellion

This Rebellion was led by the Earl of Essex against Elizabeth I and the main court faction in order to try and gain more political power. There was no participation by the common people - it was a largely internal affair. It was the last rebellion faced by a Tudor monarch.

The Stafford-Lovell Rebellion

The Stafford-Lovell Rebellion happened within the first year of Henry VII 's reign. It was an attempt to seize the throne from the newly-crowned Henry VII and restore power back to the Yorkist faction.

Dynastic causes

Dynastic rebellions only really concerned Henry VII. A dynastic rebellion was when a faction tried to seize the throne from a monarch. Henry VII had issues with these, particularly in the early years of his reign after the end of the Wars of the Roses.

The Warbeck Rebellion

The Warbeck Rebellion was an attempt to take the throne from Henry VII. A man named Perkin Warbeck pretended to be Richard, Duke of York and the rightful heir to the throne. Backed by members of the nobility, the rebellion lasted nine years but was ultimately unsuccessful.

Summary of the causes of the Tudor Rebellions

As we have seen, Tudor rebellions had a variety of causes - but what type of rebellions did each Tudor monarch face the most?

Henry VII: dynastic and economic

• Dynastic rebellions, like the Simnel and Warbeck Rebellions, occurred because Henry VII's position on the throne was tenuous. He had won the crown from Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth, but there were still many Yorkist sympathisers and those who had a stronger claim to the throne than Henry.
• Economic rebellions normally occurred in response to taxation. Henry had to toe a difficult line between not asking the people for too much money and making sure he could support the army to defend himself from threats he faced.

Henry VIII: religious and economic

• Religious rebellions began with Henry VIII's decision to split from Rome and establish the church of England. This was not a popular decision with the people of England, and some rebellions aimed to restore the authority of the Catholic Church in England.
• Henry VIII desired to be known as a great warrior king, similar to Henry V. Therefore, he undertook many military campaigns that were incredibly expensive to run. He asked parliament for extraordinary revenue for huge amounts of tax, which the English people thought was very unfair and selfish.

Edward VI: religious and economic

• Edward VI was very strongly Protestant and wanted to continue the Reformation and even make it stricter after his father's death. Many had hoped that the rise of Protestantism might be curbed after Henry VIII's death, and so tried to change the balance back to Catholicism.
• Enclosure was a big issue in the reign of Edward VI, with major rebellions occurring due to increased enclosure, which people saw as an infringement of their rights.

Mary I: political

• Mary I faced challenges tied to politics. The major rebellion of her reign, Wyatt's rebellion, was a response to Mary's decision to marry Phillip II of Spain, a Catholic monarch. It should be noted that by this point, religion was a political issue. A marriage to Phillip II would have resulted in increased Catholic influence in England.

Elizabeth I: political and religious

• Elizabeth I faced opposition from Catholic nobles who had gained hope of restoring Catholicism during the reign of Mary I. In addition, she faced threats from a faction that supported Mary Queen of Scots, a Catholic, as queen of England.
• Since religion was pretty much inseparable from politics at this time, there were also other rebellions in which religion was a motivating factor. There were also attempts by nobles to gain more power within the court.

Primary Sources for Tudor Rebellions

We can learn about the rebellions Tudor monarchs faced thanks to primary sources from the time.

Sometimes, a source from the period of the actual rebellion might have been preserved, which can tell us about the proceeding of the rebellion, and the thoughts, actions and feelings of those involved.

Examples of these would be:

• The list of demands sent to Edward VI by Robert Kett during Kett's Rebellion of 1549
• Robert Aske's speech given to the participants of the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1537
• Letters between government ministers and foreign ambassadors discussing potential courses of action or reporting on events
• State papers

Much of what we know about Tudor rebellions comes from Chronicles, usually written after the rebellion had occurred. Examples of key chroniclers are:

• Raphael Holinshed
• Richard Hooker
• Edward Hall

If you want to practice your source analysis, try looking at Hall's Chronicle from 1548 or The Chronicles of England by John Stow.

Tudor Rebellions Summary

How threatening were the Tudor Rebellions? Ultimately, none of the rebellions in the Tudor era were fully successful. Some partially achieved their aims; some achieved nothing. However, this is not to say that they did not present a threat to the Tudor monarchy.

Some rebellions had a physical threat - e.g. the rebels captured major cities, reached London or killed important people, but rebellions could be equally threatening without those aspects. For example, the Amicable Grant Rebellion stopped Henry VIII's ambitions in foreign policy and showed him that the English people could impact government policy. Equally, the Cornish Rebellion was commemorated in Cornwall and stood as a marker event in preserving Cornwall's independence and cultural dignity.

Overall, Tudor Rebellions impacted the shaping of society, politics, economics and religion in the Tudor era.

List of Tudor Rebellions

The table below shows a list of Tudor Rebellions that were considered to be the most threatening.

Tudor Rebellions - Key Takeaways

• Tudor Rebellions had many causes; the main four categories were economic, political, religious and dynastic.
• Different monarchs had to deal with certain causes more than others - e.g. Henry VIII dealt with religious rebellions, while Henry VII mainly faced dynastic or economic rebellions.
• Primary sources like letters, petitions, state papers and chronicles tell us about these Rebellions.
• Tudor Rebellions had varying threat levels and varying amounts of success.
• Nevertheless, some had an impact that wasn't physical - e.g. destabilising the government or weakening the position of the monarch

Frequently Asked Questions about Tudor Rebellions

--> what does tudor mean in history .

The term 'Tudor'  is to denote the royal dynasty of the Tudor family, who ruled England from 1485 to 1603.

--> What is a list of Tudor rebellions?

There were 21 major rebellions over the Tudor era.

--> Which Tudor rebellion was the most dangerous? 

The Pilgrimage of Grace was very threatening, mainly due to its potential to be supported by foreign powers, the number of people who supported it, and how it diminished Henry VIII's credibility.

--> When did Henry Tudor learn of Buckingham's Rebellion?

It is unknown exactly when Henry Tudor decided to join Buckingham's rebellion and try for the throne. However, it is likely that he agreed to join the rebellion quite early on, around its beginning date of 10th October 1483.

--> Which Tudor rebellion occurred during the reign of Henry VIII? 

There were four rebellions that took place during the reign of Henry VIII: 

• The Amicable Grant Rebellion
• The Silken Thomas Rebellion
• Bigod's Rebellion

Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards

Which of the following was NOT a cause of the Pilgrimage of Grace?

Which one of the following was part of Henry’s response to the Rebellion?

Who did Perkin Warbeck pretend to be?

Your score:

Join the StudySmarter App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Learn with 140 tudor rebellions flashcards in the free studysmarter app.

Already have an account? Log in

When did the Yorkshire Rebellion take place?

How long did the rebellion last?

What type of rebellion was the Yorkshire Rebellion?

An economic rebellion

Who was murdered during the Yorkshire Rebellion?

The Earl of Northumberland

Why didn't Henry give Yorkshire an exemption from the tax?

He didn't want to be seen as weak

How much did Henry VII want to raise in extraordinary revenue?

of the users don't pass the Tudor Rebellions quiz! Will you pass the quiz?

How would you like to learn this content?

Free history cheat sheet!

Everything you need to know on . A perfect summary so you can easily remember everything.

Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter App

The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

• Flashcards & Quizzes
• AI Study Assistant
• Study Planner
• Smart Note-Taking

Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.

This is still free to read, it's not a paywall.

You need to register to keep reading, create a free account to save this explanation..

Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!

By signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of StudySmarter.

Entdecke Lernmaterial in der StudySmarter-App

Schoolshistory.org.uk

History resources, stories and news. Author: Dan Moorhouse

Plots and Rebellions in the Elizabethan Age

Elizabeth’s reign saw a number of plots and rebellions. The plots came from a number of sources: disgruntled nobles; Catholics and from overseas. Plots often had an aim of removing Elizabeth from power and replacing her with Mary, Queen of Scots . Many were motivated by Religious belief. Often funded by powerful leaders from overseas, the plots posed a significant risk to Elizabeth’s crown. The best documented of the plots are the Northern Rebellion; Barge Incident; Ridolfi Plot; Throgmorton Plot and the Babington Plot.

The Northern Rebellion

In 1569 the Earls of Westmoreland and Northumberland rose in revolt. The pair had seen their influence in court dwindle following the accession of Elizabeth. They were both Catholic and were further estranged as a result of Elizabeth’s Religious Settlement and the rise of Protestants within court. With the situation in Scotland becoming troublesome for the English crown, the lords had an opportunity. Mary, Queen of Scots was in exile in Northern England. She was a legitimate, Catholic, Queen and in the eyes of many the rightful occupant of the English throne. Perhaps sensing that there was a good opportunity to gather a large supporting force of Catholics and Scots, maybe even with foreign assistance, the Earls rose. The Rebellion was relatively short-lived. They did seize Durham Cathedral and celebrate a Roman Catholic Mass there. However as they marched south the Crown responded. Rumours within the Rebel camp suggested that a large Royal force had been assembled to face them. It is quite likely that the rebels overestimated the size of this force. Even so, it led them to make a hasty retreat.

See also – Society and Government in 1558

The Rebellion was quite poorly organised. The march south began before all of Northumberland’s men had arrived. It lacked cohesion and effective leadership. If the expectation was that other Northern nobles would join the Rebellion, then the leaders were to be disappointed as not many did. Assistance did not come from Scotland, France or Spain before the rebellion had petered out either.

There were moves overseas to support the Rebellion though. The Pope sent a Papal Bull (Statement) that arrived after the collapse of the Rebellion. It could have stirred more Catholics into open rebellion had it arrived sooner, or the rebellion lasted longer.

The Rebellion caused no major harm. Casualties were but a handful. However it showed Elizabeth and her advisors that the loyalty of nobles could not be taken for granted. It made it clear that the Papacy was willing to become involved in English affairs. It also raised concerns of intervention from France, in Support of Mary, Queen of Scots or from Spain in retaliation for privateering.

Elizabeth I website

The Barge Incident

Be of good cheer, for you will never want. For the bullet was meant for me.

It isn’t actually known whether or not the Barge incident was an assassination attempt. What is known is that a shot was fired from the banks of the Thames. It struck one of Elizabeth’s bargemen. Elizabeth is recorded as passing him her handkerchief to bandage his wound. The above quote is attributed to Elizabeth in accounts written several years after the event.

Ridolfi Plot

The Ridolfi Plot emerged in the aftermath of the failed Northern Rebellion. Roberto Ridofi, an Italian banker, had been involved in the Northern Rebellion. Having seen it fail, he became convinced that the only way to overthrow Elizabeth was through a combination of uprising and overseas intervention. With this in mind, he approached a number of leading Catholic nobles as well as making advances to foreign powers. The plot was to have an invasion of England by the Duke of Alba (in the Netherlands) alongside a simultaneous uprising of English Catholics. Ridolfi then intended that Elizabeth would be killed and replaced by Mary, Queen of Scots. Mary would marry the Duke of Norfolk. Ridolfi gained the support of both Mary, Queen of Scots and the Duke of Norfolk for the plot. The plot also gained the support of the Pope and King Philip II of Spain . This plot led to a further deterioration in Anglo-Spanish relations.

In 1571 John Hawkins, one of Walsingham’s spies, learnt of the plot from the Spanish. The spymaster’s men then ensnared Norfolk. Letters and gold were intercepted. Norfolk’s staff were questioned, interrogated and tortured to reveal details of the plot. The letters, written largely in code, were deciphered when the codes key was found in Norfolk’s home.

The letters implicated Norfolk and Mary, Queen of Scots. Norfolk admitted, in part at least, his involvement in the plot. Norfolk was put on trial for three counts of treason. He was found guilty and beheaded in January, 1572. Ridolfi was not in England at the time of the plots discovery. Quite wisely, he never returned and was never put on trial. The Spanish ambassador was expelled from England as a result of Spanish complicity in the plot .

Throckmorton Plot

The Throckmorton Plot was a plan to utilise French and Spanish troops to oust Elizabeth and replace her with Mar, Queen of Scots. The plot was devised by Francis Throckmorton along with his brother, Thomas and agents from Spain. English spies uncovered the plot and arrested Throckmorton. He was sentenced to death and the Spanish Ambassador, who was implicated, was sent back to Spain.

The plot showed that Spain posed a real threat to Elizabeth’s rule. It also showed that Catholic plotters were still active within England. In response to the plot, Parliament passed a Bond of Association. This called on Englishmen to seek out those who sought to kill the Queen. Anybody found guilty of being involved in any plots would be guilty of treason by association. A copy of this act was shown to Mary, Queen of Scots so that she could be in no doubt at all as to the consequences of being implicated in plots.

Babington Plot

The Babington Plot was a plot to assassinate Elizabeth and replace her with Mary, Queen of Scots. The plot was also used by Walsingham to entrap Mary and ensure that her complicity in such plots could be proven. Anthony Babington was a member of the Catholic gentry. He was approached by a Jesuit priest, John Ballard, to be part of a conspiracy. The conspiracy wasn’t as simple as previous plots. Here, there were several plots running alongside each other.

In simple terms the plot was for English Catholics to overthrow Elizabeth and replace her with Mary. This was typical of the conspiracies of the time. However, Mary had been unable to communicate with any of her foreign allies for some time. As such, it was impossible to prove that she were involved in any such plot. Elizabeth’s spymaster, Walsingham, was aware of a plot involving Ballard and Babington. Mary had recently been moved to Charnley House under the watchful eye of a Puritan. Using a number of double agents, Walsingham was sure that he could dupe Mary into betraying herself.

Walsingham’s agents used a brewer as their means of tricking Mary. As she was in a new location, the sudden opportunity to correspond once more would arouse less suspicion. Messages began to be passed to her via the beer barrels. Walsingham’s men could intercept these and send her messages designed to catch her out. It worked. Mary used the cipher system to agree to her rescue and the assassination of Elizabeth. The spymasters men were able to quickly decode the message. With it, they had proof of another plot against Elizabeth, albeit one that they had manipulated, and of Mary’s own involvement in it.

The Babington Plot was the final straw for Elizabeth . Mary was put on trial at Fotheringay Castle, found guilty of treason and sentenced to death. Elizabeth signed the death warrant some time later and Mary was executed by beheading within Fotheringay Castle.

Links: British History – Tudors (KS2)

TudorPlace.com.ar – Babington Plot

Beginner guide to the Babington Plot from the Historypress

• 37447 Share on Facebook
• 2359 Share on Twitter
• 6779 Share on Pinterest
• 2938 Share on LinkedIn
• 5387 Share on Email

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter, Complete with Exclusive History Content

Thanks, I’m not interested

• TOP CATEGORIES
• AS and A Level
• University Degree
• International Baccalaureate
• Uncategorised
• 5 Star Essays
• Study Tools
• Study Guides
• Meet the Team
• British History: Monarchy & Politics

Economic and social issues were the main cause of Tudor Rebellion in Tudor England. Discuss

Stephanie BuenafeEconomic/Social issues – CausesCHE

Economic and social issues were the main cause of Tudor Rebellion in Tudor England.

Tudor England encountered problems with their economy and society. The society suffered from economic issues such as enclosure and bad harvest but also, they encountered problems with the nobility and the government. These issues concerned the majority of the people that started off rebellions. However, there were evidently rebellions that did not emphasise the problems of economic and social issues and saw these problems as one of the reasons for the rebellion. This clearly shows that economic and social issues were not the main cause of rebellions. Therefore, it will be argued that economic and social issues were a contributory cause and that faction is the main cause of Tudor Rebellion in Tudor England.

Henry VII faced two main tax rebellions under his reign – Yorkshire Rebellion (1489) and Cornish Rebellion (1497) while Henry VIII encountered the Amicable Grant (1525). The people in Yorkshire rebelled against the increased in tax in order to financially support the war against France. The people rejected this and rebelled due to the reason that they were supposed to finance a war in the south whereby they were geographically removed. They also saw themselves as a separate country because they had their own Parliament – The Stannery. In addition, counties of Northumberland, Westmoreland and Cumberland had been exempt on the grounds of poverty. Similarly, the people in Cornwall did not support the idea of increased tax in order to finance the war with Scotland in the north thus started a rebellion. Tax rebellion also occurred in Henry VIII’s reign. Amicable Grant was triggered because of Wolsey’s action in 1522 in forcing loans. The Grant also made excessive demands on the laity and clergy. Unlike the Cornish and Yorkshire who were regional rebellions such as Cornwall and York, the Grant was a national rebellion such as East Anglia, Wiltshire and Kent. Another difference is that Cornish and Yorkshire, Henry VII was able to negotiate with the Parliament about the increase in tax whilst Wolsey raised the tax without the consent of the Parliament. In the end, these rebellions were taken down easily by Henry VII and Henry VIII however the fact that these rebellions occurred suggests the instability of the crown as well as the resentment of the people to the king. Later on, the Tudors did not further on encounter any tax rebellions due to the fact that the Crown has been established and that Edward, Mary and Elizabeth focused on issues that threatened their position in the crown. These shows at the beginning of the Tudor reign, economic and social issues were the main causes of rebellions.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Other economic issues caused problems in Tudor England. Kett’s rebellion (1549) and Oxfordshire’s rebellion (1596) was caused mainly by economic problems and social issues such as resentment towards the gentry and enclosure.  Robert Kett rebelled against the enclosing of lands and denied the peasantry to graze their farm animals. They also rebelled against the landlords that had been obstructing government commissions that were investigating illegal enclosures. Similarly, Oxfordshire rebellion encountered the same problems. The villagers were denied the right to pasturage and common lands have been fenced off. The good harvests and pressure from landowners to bring more wasteland to cultivation also led to enclosure. These rebellions attracted support from people because this concerned the peasantry. The peasantry suffered from the changes the government established and also the treatment they received from the nobility. In fact, the gentry saw the problems of enclosure as a positive thing because they benefitted from it. Contrastingly, Pilgrimage of Grace (1536) and Western Rebellion (1549) showed that the economic and social issues were simply a contributory cause. The Pilgrimage of Grace rebellion was caused by one of the item in the 1536 Pontefract article because of enclosures while Western was about the rack-renting and sheep tax. The issue in Pilgrimage of Grace was of no difference from Kett’s and Oxfordshire. The rebels rioted over illegal enclosures against the nobility. For instance, Yorkshire and Cumberland pulled down hedges to attack the lands of the Earl of Cumberland who enclosed his tenants’ lands and denied them grazing rights. As for Western, the increase of tax hit the peasants and the nobility benefitted because of the dissolution of monasteries. During this time, they also encountered problems, which were the main cause for the rebellion, the issue of religion. The Tudors did not experience problems with economy and social resentment during their early years because Henry VII and Henry VIII kept the nobility in control by limiting their powers and their lands. Meanwhile, Mary was not able to encounter this problem because she focused on the problems with religion. Elizabeth saw no threat with problems with enclosure because Oxfordshire was not able to attract support. The problems with enclosure were not seen as a big problem as it was under Edward because of Edward was a minority and was not able to control the problems presented to him. Some rebellions emphasised that the economic issue and resentment to the gentry were the main cause for the rebellion however, economic and social issues were mostly seen to gather popular support as this issue affected everyone nationally because of the economic problems Tudor England had.

Clearly only a number of people were not motivated by economic and social issues. Some rebellions may have used economic and gentry resentment as a subsidiary cause however they may had been driven by other causes, and one of these was faction. For instance, Warbeck (1491-7) and Simnel (1486-7), Essex (1601), Northern Earls (1569), Wyatt (1554) and the Devise for succession (1553) main cause for rebellion was faction. Warbeck and Simnel were pretenders who challenged the throne to overthrow Henry VII. They were supported by leading Yorkists such as John de la Pole, Earl of Lincoln and Sir Edward Brampton, a Yorkist sympathiser. Both pretenders not only attracted support nationally but were able to receive foreign support from Scotland and Burgundy through Margaret of Burgundy. On the other hand, Mary was able to encounter problems with faction. The Devise aimed to exclude Mary from the succession and wished to hold on to power Lady Jane Grey. This also sparked Wyatt’s rebellion due to that if Mary succeeds the throne, Elizabeth will be excluded to the throne, and Catholicism will rule England. This also meant that the parliament seats will be assigned to Spaniards. In contrast to Simnel and Warbeck, Wyatt had no intention of overthrowing Mary to the throne but wanted to prevent the changes that Mary may establish. Another difference is that Wyatt was able to attract support nationally and was not seen as threatening as Simnel and Warbeck. There are other rebellions that occurred on the last years of the Tudors.

Under Elizabeth’s reign, two factional rebellions took place. The revolt of the Northern Earls was caused by the gentry: Northumberland and Cumberland against William Cecil. In the same way, Pilgrimage of Grace had a subsidiary cause of faction. Henry’s divorce with Catherine of Aragon and disinheritance of Mary alarmed the Aragonist faction. This implied that they would lose power in court without Catherin or Mary on crown. Northumberland and Cumberland demanded the return of political power in the north and wealth as this would ensure a restoration of their influence in the government in the northern counties and increase their financial and political fortunes. To finish, Essex’s rebellion was a weak revolt against Elizabeth and Robert Cecil. Essex’s revolt was his last attempt to restore his influence after his humiliating defeat and barging in to Elizabeth’s bedchamber without her permission.  Another reason was because Essex had been banned from court and lost his control on sweet patent wines and has seen Cecil has his rival to rise over him. The Tudors experienced factional rebellions due to the one factor being favoured over the other, the need to overthrow the current ruler and for personal reason such as power and fortune. This shows that the issue of faction was more seen as threatening compared to economic and social issue. This proves that economic and social issue were subsidiary cause compared to faction who can be seen as a main cause.

Finally, the problems with religion can also be seen as a driving cause for rebellion. The Pilgrimage of Grace and Western rebellion emphasised religion and used religion as the main cause for the revolt. The Pilgrimage of Grace was motivated by Henry’s break from Rome, dissolution of monasteries and the attack on religious images. These issues were seen in the demands outlined in York, Lincoln and Pontefract Article. Furthermore, the rebels were seen with the banner of the Five Wounds of Christ and the clergy were seen as rebel captains. Similarly under Edward’s reign, uprising occurred in Devon and Cornwall because of the reforms Edward was trying to implement at that time such as the Book of Common Prayer and the dissolution of chantries. The Northern Earls also used religion to attract support from the peasantry as this concerned them. Northumberland confessed to their supporters that their main aim was religion however it seemed that it was more personal. On the other hand, these rebellions were different. The Pilgrimage was a national revolt while Western and Northern Earls were regional revolts. The Pilgrimage and Western’s main cause for rebellion was mainly because of the changes in religion while Northern Earls simply used religion to gain support.

Kett and Wyatt also made use of religion in different ways. Similar to Northern Earls, Kett rebelled against the lack of quality of preachers and residential incumbents in their diocese. Wyatt, on the other hand, downplayed religion and highlighted faction but motivated by religious grievances against Mary. 8 out of 14 leaders in Wyatt’s rebellion were protestant and supported for the rising in Maidstone where Mary’s martyrs came from. Therefore, religion was an important source of discontent after Henry VIII’s reign up to Elizabeth’s reign. Henry VII did not encounter such problems as he focused on the improvement and the stability of the crown and the economy of England.

In conclusion, economic and social issues were simply a subsidiary cause for a more important cause of rebellions in Tudor England. It can be seen that throughout the period, problems with religion were stated. Many rebellions used religion as a propaganda tool for a bigger cause of rebellion. However, notable for the peasantry, the issue of religion was an important cause of rebellion in the middle of the period. In times of economic disasters such as enclosure and taxation showed that poverty is enough to start a rebellion. Then again, this was not clearly the most important cause of rebellion throughout the period as some rebellions occurred when Tudor England’s economy was stable, for instance, Wyatt and Northern Earls. As a final point, faction were the most consistent cause of rebellion and this was also seen as the most important as people with financial and political resources were capable of launching a threatening rebellion. It is also seen throughout the whole period which suggests its importance.

Document Details

• Author Type Student
• Word Count 1859
• Page Count 3
• Level AS and A Level
• Subject History
• Type of work Homework assignment

Related Essays

Do the sources suggest that local issues caused rebellions in Tudor England...

Assess the role of political factors in causing rebellions in Tudor England

How far was religion a motivating factor for rebels in Tudor England?

Assess the role of the nobility in providing political stability in Tudor E...

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Economic and social issues were the main cause of Tudor Rebellion in Tudor England

Related Papers

Benedict Dyson

It is a false statement to say that Henry’s power over England was diminished in any way whatsoever since the reign of Stephen. However, it is debatable whether Henry’s control continued to grow for the duration of his reign when looking at crises that occurred such as the ‘Becket Crisis’ or, more relevantly, the Great Rebellion. Although Henry I’s control was to a substantial extent re-established by his direct successor, in practice, Henry II, there were areas in which they were not entirely retained, such as the traditional Norman control over the Church.

Paul Latimer

This study attempts a reassessment of the rebellion of 1215–17 in two regions: southwestern England and the Welsh marches. After examining the historiography of the 1215–17 conflict and some problems with the evidence, the article deals with the two regions in turn. In the first, the rebellion is found to be somewhat stronger than has been appreciated and to be, to a considerable extent, one of local county communities, rather than of great barons. In the second, the rebellion is seen as much stronger than it has been portrayed, although here the great rebel barons play a significant role. In both regions, the rebellion appears as one directed against an exploitative and intrusive central government and its aggressive curial servants, while also, in the outcome of the rebellion, a degree of common interest between the rebels and baronial loyalists is suggested. Overall, although there are some contrasts between the two regions, the study stresses the elements of a common cause in the rebellion. In 1961, J. C. Holt's groundbreaking study, The Northerners , based on a detailed analysis drawn from one very important region, offered an interpretation of the origins and course of the 1215 revolt against King John and of the civil war that followed. 1 His conclusions, which in most respects have remained unchallenged, were that the revolt in the north derived from a level of royal financial pressure unprecedented in that region, an over-ruthless political exploitation of the consequent debts, and resentment at King John's aggressive use of patronage to favour a narrow circle of the 'king's friends'. This latter category included some local men, but also those who were from outside the region and, in some cases, from outside England. Grievances over these men and their behaviour are not easily separable from the financial pressure. If 'the harshness and corruption of some administrators' was a grievance, this was partly because of 'the harshness of the policies which they had in any case

Justin Grant-Duff

This has been researched from sources published in England. The books and the articles are founded on sources in the public domain. None of this text can be found elsewhere. It is the sole property and authorship of Justin R Grant-Duff. The period of 15th century Europe was one of the bloodiest and most violent in history. the English had been fighting since 1400 almost continually throughout the reigns of Henry IV, V, and VI and into the civil war known as the War of the Roses. In 1449, duke of Somerset and earl of Shrewsbury surrendered the last main garrison in Normandy, held at Rouen. The duke fled home, as General Talbot was left to take what men were left to defend the Cotentin and the remaining possessions that had most recently been in English hands since the siege of Harfleur in 1415. Driven out and their estates compromised, many soldiers, unpaid and exhausted mercenaries returned to London in search of work and shelter. Many were very angry at the incompetence of the feeble king, his corrupt, greedy minister Duke of Suffolk , and parliament's failure to vote monies for wages to soldiers, who were years in arrears of pay, promised by the court and leaders of the army. The ensuing chaos spilled out onto the streets; all around the kingdom law and order broke down. The bookish king used to sitting in the Court of Chancery heard case after case of pleas from despairing litigants whose lands and estates had been looted and stolen, their inheritance ignored, the title deeds and documents not administered at local shire courts as they should have been. Shire-reeves and bailiffs were often threatened and intimidated by angry bands of knightly squires roaming the countryside on horseback visiting their claims upon unaware manors. This was a time of the blood-feuds; the old gentry certainties had broken down, the Exchequer empty, and the kingdom bankrupt, the government unable to collect taxes, and the king indecisive, dithered over what to do. Meanwhile a young Duke of York, only 24 years old had distinguished himself in battle in France, blamed the court faction led by the General, Duke of Somerset for the loss of the colony in Normandy. He went to parliament and demanded that an inquiry be held into the duke's conduct. The mob broke out onto the streets, threatened to storm the Tower of London, and kill any nobleman found in the open. York was picked up by his friend, Thomas Courtenay, Earl of Devon who happened along in his barge as it floated down the River Thames. Rescued but unrepentant, the duke repaired to the fastness of his castle at Ludlow. A large, new and impressive bastion it controlled vast estates along the Welsh Marches. This was the situation in London, when only Queen Margaret of Anjou protected her benighted husband from intrigue and conspiracy at court. There was a religious taboo that no king should be harmed, or anointed king removed but in the most extreme circumstances; memories burnt of Henry's grandfather's usurpation, and no suggestion prevailed in 1450 of any change. It was economic collapse, however and military failure that would scar Henry VI's kingship.

The Historical Journal

William Robison

Though much has been written about Wyatt's rebellion, it remains controversial. There is, first of all, lively debate about the rebels' motives in rising against Mary Tudor in January and February 1554. It is generally agreed that some rebels wished only to force changes in royal policy, while others sought to replace the queen with her sister Elizabeth and Edward Courtenay, the earl of Devon. But, while D. M. Loades and his adherents contend that the rising was caused almost entirely by opposition to Mary's proposed marriage to Prince Philip of Spain, others argue – to varying degrees – that religion was significant and that many rebels were protestants seeking to thwart a catholic restoration.

This essay is from a variety of published sources by Justin Grant-Duff. The period witnessed a great battle for the control of France. The English soldiery returning from Normandy were unpaid. Left to roam the streets of London, often causing trouble, disturbing the citizenry, looting, robbing, and killing, it was a time of mismanagement at the hands of an enfeebled King. Chief Minister, the Duke of Suffolk hoarded vast wealth to himself, and was to prove a traitor. Sympathy for the French reflected the bankruptcy of the government, and riotous assembly was outlawed, with a sentence of death attached. Challenge to an anointed king was unthinkable, but the martial nobility had it in mind to remove his evil counsellors with the help of parliament. It was into this cauldron of uncertainty that a gentleman farmer stepped up to lead a county revolt in a march upon the great city to demand justice. The petition to be presented to the king was a detailed document, the first in English history to be published for sale, and widespread consumption. It differed from Magna Carta in that it was a petition of grievance by the Commons to parliament and king.

Theory and Society

William Brustein

Darren Baker

Volume 1 of David Carpenter's biography of Henry III for the Yale English Monarchs Series ended on a cliffhanger. Despite all the peace and prosperity England has enjoyed under Henry's rule, the barons think they can do a better job and take control of the government. The king is shuffled off into a corner while their revolutionary regime enacts reforms that will end his favouritism to foreigners and bring justice to the people. It will also terminate his madcap scheme to make his youngest son the king of Sicily, which Carpenter calls the most ridiculous agreement ever made by an English monarch. But he's not surprised, as Henry has always been a woeful king. Lazy, naïve and easily manipulated, it was only a matter of time before far superior individuals intervened. They would put the affairs of the kingdom in order, help him be a king. This being England, it gets messy and the whole thing descends into war and chaos. Lucky for Henry, he's the simple fool that he is, because that's the only thing that saves him and his dynasty in the end. It's a revolution born and died of an idiot.

Elliott Ford

Keir Martland

RELATED PAPERS

Investigaciones Geográficas

Juan Manuel Suárez Japón

Journal of Engineering Research and Reports

Lawal Ismail Olusegun

Sukesh Bartarya

QUEST JOURNALS

2016 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)

Ming-Hsuan Yang

Gedenkstaetten-Rundschau Nr. 28

Karl kleinbach

Agricultural Water Management

Revista Venezolana De Computacion

JUAN FELIPE AVENDAÑO HERRERA

Jurnal Akuntansi Unesa

masayu masayu

Physical Review C

Nguyễn Tuấn Anh Tuấn Anh

Urban Vehovar

DIALEKTIKA: Jurnal Ekonomi dan Ilmu Sosial

abdul fatah fanani

REVISTA ARGENTINA DE CLINICA PSICOLOGICA

Lautaro Barriga

International Journal of Earth Sciences

Alexandre Tarantola

Paola Ardizzola

12th International Conference on High-Power Particle Beams. BEAMS'98. Proceedings (Cat. No.98EX103)

Paul Farrell

Journal of affective disorders

Stefan Hofmann

József Lanszki

Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics

manuel mendez

Revista eletrônica da ANPHLAC

Inés Achával Becú

Chemical Science

Baolin Wang

Knut Sletten

Current Issues of Education and Science. 9th International Conference, CIES-2021, Riga, Latvia – Kharkiv, Ukraine, November 10–13, 2021, Conference proceedings

Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society

Bindu Kutty

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Home — Essay Samples — History — Rebellion — A Study of the Four Rebellions in England

A Study of The Four Rebellions in England

• Categories: British History Rebellion

About this sample

Words: 1548 |

Published: Nov 16, 2018

Words: 1548 | Pages: 3 | 8 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: History

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

7 pages / 3152 words

2 pages / 866 words

2 pages / 1059 words

7 pages / 3333 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Rebellion

Have you ever considered what this very world would look like if African Americans never rose up against injustice? If the 13 colonies never rebelled against Great Britain? How about if Harriet Tubman never rebelled against the [...]

In many parts of the world that experienced colonialism, issue of rebellion is not new to them. The rebellions resulted from the dissatisfaction among the natives by the ways in which the colonial powers treated them. In Peru's [...]

The Sepoy Rebellion, also known as the Indian Mutiny of 1857, marked a pivotal moment in India's history and British colonial rule. This essay delves into the complex web of factors that contributed to the outbreak of the [...]

The Vietnam War was the most publicized war during its era; moreover this was the most unpopular war to hit the United States. All over the country riots began to raise, anti-war movement spread all over the states begging to [...]

The Front de Liberation du Quebec, shortened as the FLQ Crisis, (known as October Crisis) was created in 1963. The leader of this group is Paul Rose. FLQ was considered to be the second worst attack, by fact that they killed 8 [...]

In ancient Greek Society women were not regarded as equals with men, they were viewed as inferior and incapable of doing what a man could. They had to act submissive and be under a man’s control and oftentimes could not do or [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free