This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

OCR History, Synoptic Paper - Tudor Rebellions

Scroll to see replies

Still useful for others doing the exam!
I'm doing Tudor Foreign Policy this year and very stuck for technique...any help??
Cheeers

Reply 21

lady-stardust

not sure about tudor foreign policy... what unit is that for? :s-smilie:

http://www.ocr.org.uk/Data/publications/past_papers_2007_January/A_GCE_History_2590_January_2007_Insert.pdf

this is the link for the date sheet we get in the exam which thought people might find useful...

Reply 22

whatwhywhen100

for the Key Themes...the synoptic paper. it's not really the content i'm worried about, more essay style

Reply 23

*anon*

i could have sworn i have this paper on the 12th June... its a thursday morning..........:s help!?!?!! im panicking!!!!

Reply 24

Zetetic

It's when you think it is. Don't worry.

Reply 25

lady-stardust

yeah, don't panic... i think those posts are from many many years ago hehe. but i had a similar spag out when i first saw it...

has anyone done any work on why the frequency of rebellions changed throughout the peroid??

Reply 26

laced

Hmmm not too much but I think I remember something to do with people like Henry VIII and Edward (well, the Protectors) implementing more radical changes, whilst Henry VII woulnd't because he was more concerned with stablising the country...something to that effect.

I've been concentrating so much on English that I've done next to NO revision on this. Panic!

Reply 27

lady-stardust

laced

I've been concentrating so much on English that I've done next to NO revision on this. Panic!

urgh, tell me about it... i'm feeling some last minute crazy learning of rebellions is going to be necessary tomorrow night.
around 'the apprentice', that is... damn the bbc/ocr's scheduling...

Reply 28

laced

lady-stardust

urgh, tell me about it... i'm feeling some last minute crazy learning of rebellions is going to be necessary tomorrow night.
around 'the apprentice', that is... damn the bbc/ocr's scheduling...

Ditto! Seems like we're in the same boat then! Exam boards should co-ordinate more I reckon, my brain doesn't hold enough information for all of this :frown:

Reply 29

Tinny

Can anyone tell me what factions are?? Can't believe my teacher has never mentioned the word, yet when I look back at the past questions, it appears!

And therefore, what sort of thing would you put in an essay titled:
Assess the view that the Tudor government were threatened by policital factions?

I'm really hoping for a changes over time question, and maybe a causes one. :smile:

Reply 30

*anon*

*phew* lol and i too will be revising while the apprentice final wil be on... or i may just have to watch it on the old IPLAYER later since i havent done much revision....

and i would sssoo wish for a question on the strength of the tudor state changing through time! but then with my limited knowledge i think i would run out of things to say for a second essay!!! aargh

Reply 31

frankie_sez_relax

Tinny

I struggle a little bit wit faction. I wrote an Essay on it and got an E :biggrin:

Reply 32

laced

Yeah faction is difficult, I don't really know how to describe it. It's like...groups within court that share a similar idea. The Aragonese faction under Henry VIII for example were (evidently) against the divorce and the break from Rome.

The Pretenders were faction - they were orchestrated by that woman...I can't remember her name off the top of my head! Essex in Elizabeth as well. I'm sure there's more but I'm gonig to have to cram it tonight I think :frown:

Reply 33

nka389

Can anyone post a list of Acts of Parliament we need to know?

Like the Act of Supremacy in 1534. But wasn't there another one during Elizabeth?

Reply 34

laced

Poor Law? I don't know much about it tbh..

Reply 35

nka389

This is a list of causes of each rebellion and the general story behind it. Hope it helps, but there are points missing or lacking detail. Please correct and add :smile:

1487 - Simnel, Political (Yorkist attempt to usurp the throne)

1489 - Yorkshire, Economical (against the subsidy levied to help Brittany fight against France)

1497 - Cornish, Economical (against the subsidy levied to fight Warbeck if he attacked?)

1525 - Amicable Grant, Economical (against the "Amicable Grant" and general heavy taxation for the war with France) Were the gentry joining this because of the forced loans of 1523 and 1525? Were forced loans levied only on the gentry and other propertied classes?

1536 - Pilgrimage of Grace, multi-causal with Religion being the unifying factor. There are some political motives from disaffected Nobles like Percies, gentry and peasants join due to bad harvests, heavy taxation and rumors of new taxes on sheep and baptism. Dissolution of the Monasteries takes away "jewel and plate" that the commons bought for their churches and it also takes away the last place of charity for them.

1549 - Western/Prayerbook Rebellion, Religious mainly, but some economics and maltreatment by the local gentry involved? Courtenays absent fighting in Scotland (right?). Cornish people resented reading the Prayerbook in English (is this it?). Were there any enclosures there? I know that the rebellion was accompanied by the crowds shouting "Kill all the gentleman", so they definitely did not like the ruling classes.

1549 - Ket's, Economical, Somerset sending out commisions to check on enclosures has sparked the commons into action. They teared down the hedges and complained about the local gentry government. They established their own organised system to show the king that they were capable of ruling themselves. Howard is absent, because he is in the tower (why?)

1554 - Wyatts, Nationalistic/Political? Wyatt rebels against the marriage of Mary to Philip of Spain. He wants to depose Mary and put Elizabeth on the throne. Is the marriage to spain the ONLY reason for this whole thing?

1569-70 - Northern Earls, Political but religion used to cover it up and give the rebellion some credibility, as well as to try and attract foreign support. Political because the Nobles of Westmoreland and Northumberland (?) resent the domination of court by non-nobles like the Cecils. They feel the Nobles should have more say in advising the Monarch. Religious because they protest against the Church reforms and want to restore Mary (this is the Queen of Scots Mary, not Mary daughter of Catherine of Aragon? right? that one died in 1558? correct?) They also want to attract support from Spain? or was it France? But it is unlikely that the help was ever gonna come because...?

1595 - Oxfordshire, Economical - three men and a dog protest against enclosures? or was it taxation? The rebellion mainly shows the lack of enthusiasm for rebellion towards the end of the century.

1601 - Essex, Political - Essex is bankrupt and been slapped by Elizabeth, so he feels a rebellion is his last chance to restore his position. Does he actually want to kill Elizabeth? or just the Cecils? :smile:

Please feel free to correct me and add to points where I put question marks. I've done this off the top of my head without any revision for the past 2-3 weeks. I'm gonna cram it all today :/

Reply 36

nka389

Also, I'll post the result of each rebellion, so everyone can learn from this and correct me where I'm wrong.

1487 - Simnel, failed, but came dangerously close to succeeding because it put together an army and challenged Henry VII on a battlefield. Some Nobles did not join the fight until they knew who was gonna win. Very close to success.

1489 - Yorkshire, failed, everyone got killed?

1497 - Cornish, marched all the way to Blackheath, been asked to dispurse by the King but didnt, so everyone got killed.

1525 - the only Successful Rebellion! 100% success, Amicable Grant dropped, War ended and noone got killed.

1536 - PoG, wow, very complex. Failed mainly with only the ringleaders getting killed during 1537 Bigod's Uprising (correct?). Six Articles changed to 10 Articles? Or is it the other way around? THe result was a less radical religious policy. Arguable, succeeded in the Long Run or at least contributed to the removal of Cromwell. Anything else?

1549 - Western, failed, everyone got killed. The prayerbook was never changed right?

1549 - Ket's, failed, everyone got killed.

1554, Wyatt's, failed. first of all, it was meant to be only one of four simultaneous rebellions, but the other three were discovered and failed without even starting. Wyatt failed and everyone got killed, however he came dangerously close to succeeding. He put the monarchs life at risk.

1569/70 - Northern Earls, complete failure. Dispursed before the army got there due to lack of genuine popular support. Unrealistic aims, ******* leaders who were urged by their wives to start the rebellion and had to pay the Commons to follow them.

1595 - Oxfordshire, total failure. Three men and a dog turned up, they all got executed and their bodies were shown off across the country? correct? Elizabeth made a big deal out of this right? Do you think this could be used to show how she felt insecure? i.e. she was afraid that more rebellions could erupt? No idea what happened to the dog.

1601 - Essex, total failure. Only 300 people supported him and failed and got executed.

Please please, correct me and add your own knowledge!!!

Reply 37

laced

nka389

Also, I'll post the result of each rebellion, so everyone can learn from this and correct me where I'm wrong.

1487 - Simnel, failed, but came dangerously close to succeeding because it put together an army and challenged Henry VII on a battlefield. Some Nobles did not join the fight until they knew who was gonna win. Very close to success. (1)

1489 - Yorkshire, failed, everyone got killed?

1497 - Cornish, marched all the way to Blackheath, been asked to dispurse by the King but didnt, so everyone got killed.

1525 - the only Successful Rebellion! 100% success, Amicable Grant dropped, War ended and noone got killed.

1536 - PoG, wow, very complex. Failed mainly with only the ringleaders getting killed during 1537 Bigod's Uprising (correct?). Six Articles changed to 10 Articles? Or is it the other way around? THe result was a less radical religious policy. Arguable, succeeded in the Long Run or at least contributed to the removal of Cromwell. Anything else?

1549 - Western, failed, everyone got killed. The prayerbook was never changed right? (2)

1549 - Ket's, failed, everyone got killed.

1554, Wyatt's, failed. first of all, it was meant to be only one of four simultaneous rebellions, but the other three were discovered and failed without even starting. Wyatt failed and everyone got killed, however he came dangerously close to succeeding. He put the monarchs life at risk. (3)

1569/70 - Northern Earls, complete failure. Dispursed before the army got there due to lack of genuine popular support. Unrealistic aims, ******* leaders who were urged by their wives to start the rebellion and had to pay the Commons to follow them.

1595 - Oxfordshire, total failure. Three men and a dog turned up, they all got executed and their bodies were shown off across the country? correct? Elizabeth made a big deal out of this right? Do you think this could be used to show how she felt insecure? i.e. she was afraid that more rebellions could erupt? No idea what happened to the dog.

1601 - Essex, total failure. Only 300 people supported him and failed and got executed.

Please please, correct me and add your own knowledge!!!

(1) - I think you're confusing this with the battle of Bosworth. They didn't come close to toppling the King. There was an army, though not a big one and the King defeated them pretty easily... I think.

(2) - just because the rebellion failed doesn't mean that everyone got killed, which is what you seem to think. SOME people got executed, but not everyone. Pardons were used in some cases (PoG being the main one I can think of off the top of my head) - not sure that they used pardons in any of Edward's rebellions though.

(3) I wouldn't say it was a complete failure in the long run. Part of what the were rebelling about was that they thought that if Mary married Philip, England would be ruled by Spain. Mary took heed of this and so her marriage agreement was drawn up. I'd say partially successful.

Sorry this is all I can think of atm, have an exam in 35 minutes and ****ting myself :frown:

Reply 38

nka389

Wow, good luck :smile:

Thx for the feedback, I'll try and find more about this stuff in the books... =/

Reply 39

Tinny

Religious because they protest against the Church reforms and want to restore Mary (this is the Queen of Scots Mary, not Mary daughter of Catherine of Aragon? right? that one died in 1558? correct?)

correct

497 - Cornish, marched all the way to Blackheath, been asked to dispurse by the King but didnt, so everyone got killed.

Yep, and there was a fine for all those were invovled, but survived, and so this raised the money to defeat Warbeck, as well as being a heavy deterrent to the Cornish shoud they want to do similar again (think...next rebellion from Cornwall is 52yrs later - longer than the average lifetime)

1554, Wyatt's, failed. first of all, it was meant to be only one of four simultaneous rebellions, but the other three were discovered and failed without even starting. Wyatt failed and everyone got killed, however he came dangerously close to succeeding. He put the monarchs life at risk

Another viewpoint could be that Wyatt's failed, but succeeded in the long term, because the rebellion made it clear to the Spannish King that the marriage was unpopular, and take he would never gain support in England. Therefore he spent long periods away from England, which resulted in lack of heir (although I suspect that there were many other health reasons also...but this is one argument), and therefore resulted in Elizabeth being restored to the succession, and taking the throne on Mary's death.

Thank you for putting those up, much appreciated it as a memory refresher (and I learnt a few things to... :biggrin:

)