Why did Henry dissolve the monasteries Essays

Why did Henry dissolve the monasteries Essays Why did Henry dissolve the monasteries Paper Why did Henry dissolve the monasteries Paper Essay Topic: History During the late 1530s a significant social, political, economic and religious event took place. This was the dissolution of all the monasteries and convents in England. This was done by first bringing them under government control and then closed down. However it is highly disputed why this was done. The first step towards the dissolution of the monasteries was brought about in 1535 by Cromwell, he set up two offensive programmes. The first being visitations in which his agents would check on the standards of the church and report of any evidence that could be used against the church. The second was Valour Ecclesiasticus, which was a huge survey to examine the wealth of the church. Cromwell soon built up a dossier illustrating the corrupt morals and spiritual laxity of the clergy; these findings were presented before parliament in 1536. These reports combined with Henrys intervention secured the passing of an act to allow the dissolving of the smaller religious houses. These houses and there estates were now the property of the crown, there inmates could either transfer to other houses or join the secular clergy. After several protests a second act was passed in 1539 allowing Henry to claim all the monasteries and by 1540 all the monasteries in England had been dissolved. But why did Henry decided to close the monasteries at all? First of all it should be noted that the dissolution of the monasteries was not an obligatory consequence after the break with Rome. Nor was the split with Rome compulsory in order to close at least some of the monasteries, closure of monasteries had been done in the past in order to redirect resources to other uses. For instance Wolsey in 1518 closed a number of houses to fund his new college. Therefore the mere act of closing monasteries could not mean a move away from Catholicism although this is highly disputed. The dissolution of the monasteries is often viewed as a concerted move towards Protestantism for several reasons. With hindsight this is easy to highlight, as the closure of the monasteries can appear as part of a campaign on the behalf of Protestant supporters to replicate what had already happened in both Germany and Switzerland. It also goes without saying that those who had a further progress towards Protestantism on there minds would obviously see the monasteries as a very important part of the Roman Catholic Church and therefore a threat. As I mentioned earlier, the closure of monasteries however did not necessarily mean a move away from Catholicism and can be looked at as a positive event. The closure of the houses could be viewed as an attempt to stop the abuses that could arise in monasticism and so emphasising the good work continued in the remaining houses. This was the official line that was expressed in the dissolution act of 1536 however this argument carries little weight as by 1540 all the monasteries had been dissolved; therefore it could not be an attempt to reform and is more likely a resolute move towards Protestantism. It is also widely held that the conditions in the church at this time were over exaggerated and abuses and corruption were not common, it is often thought that visitations were rigged and the evidence compiled and presented to parliament was misleading. One of the most supported theories of the dissolution of the monasteries was Henrys need for money. There was no doubt that the church was significantly wealthy. This is supported by plan devised in 1534 but never put into action, it was suggested that bishops should be paid salaries and monasteries would be granted money based on the number of inmates. All income of the church would therefore be taken by the crown. The plan was too radical but it shows that by the 1530s the church was being seen as a potential source of money and by this time it was greatly needed. The value of English money was still falling, the buying power of English coins declined and the kings income stretched less and less far. Both Spain and France were considerably greater, wealthily, catholic powers. The pope could easily ask one to attack England and overthrow Henry. Henry needed ships and coastal defences however he had very little money to pay for them. The monasteries owned vast lands and were extremely affluent. Whether the monasteries were really in a bad state or this was over embellished is unclear but monastic life was now old fashioned and writers such as Erasmus had taught many to be scornful of it. From 1536 to Henrys death over 1. 3 million pounds was made from the dissolution. This figure was likely to be a large factor in Henrys decision to dissolve. It is indubitable that one of the main reasons the dissolution began was due to financial issues, however the question has to be asked whether Henry planned complete termination from the start? The words in the dissolution act of 1536 would seem to deny this. I would assert that Henry began the closure of the lesser monasteries to promote reform and to raise revenue however his greedy personality and his Protestant minister persuaded him to continue with complete dissolution. Professor Scarisbrick would disagree by stating that any plan should be kept secret and the first move should be given the impression of just reform. Reassuring the clergy and winning over their trust with a barrage of promises. Henrys failure to live up to these promises suggested that he had practised what he now preached. However it is still unclear whether Henry was lead to dissolution by Cromwell or whether it was Henry that held the Mens rea.

All About the British Princess Who Defied Her Father

All About the British Princess Who Defied Her Father Known for: her second marriage in which Joan rebelled against protocol and expectations; supposed miracles at her grave Occupation: British princess; countess of Hertford and Gloucester Dates: April 1272 - April 23, 1307 Also known as: Joanna Background and Family Mother: Eleanor of Castile, Countess of Ponthieu in her own rightFather: Edward I of England (ruled 1272-1307)Siblings: sixteen full siblings (of whom five survived to adulthood), at least three half-siblingsJoan was descended on both sides from King John of England; on her mothers side, through Johns daughter Eleanor of England.Husband: Gilbert de Clare, 7th Earl of Gloucester, 5th Earl of Hertford (married April 30, 1290, died 1295)children: Gilbert de Clare, Eleanor de Clare, Margaret de Clare, Elizabeth de ClareHusband: Sir Ralph de Monthermer (married 1297)children: Mary de Monthermer, Joan de Monthermer, Thomas de Monthermer, Edward de Monthermer Birth and Early Life Joan was born the seventh of her parents fourteen children, but only one older sister (Eleanor) was still alive at the time of Joans birth. Four of her younger siblings and one younger half-sibling also died in infancy or childhood. Her younger brother, Edward, born 12 years after Joan, became king as Edward II. Joan of Acre was called by that name because she was born while her parents were in Acre at the end of the Ninth Crusade, during the year before Edward returned to England to be crowned as Edward I on his fathers death. A sister, Juliana, had been born and died the year before at Acre. After Joans birth, her parents left the child for a time in France with Eleanors mother, Joan of Dammartin, who was the Countess of Pointhieu and widow of Ferdinand III of Castile. The little girls grandmother and a local bishop were responsible during those four years for her upbringing. First Marriage Joans father Edward began to consider marriage possibilities for his daughter while she was still very young, as was common for royal families. He settled on the son of Germanys King Rudolph I, a boy named Hartman. Joan was five years old when her father called her home so that she could meet her future husband. But Hartman died before he could come to England or marry Joan. Conflicting reports at the time had him dying in a skating accident or drowning in a boat accident. Edward finally arranged for Joan to marry a British nobleman, Gilbert de Clare, who was the Earl of Gloucester. Joan was twelve and Edward in his early 40s when the arrangements were made. Gilberts previous marriage ended in 1285, and it took another four years to get dispensation from the Pope for Gilbert and Joan to marry. They were married in 1290. Edward struck a hard bargain and got de Clare to agree to a large dower for Joan, with his lands held jointly with Joan during their marriage. Joan gave birth to four children before Gilbert died in 1295. Second Marriage Still a young woman, and one controlling quite a lot of valuable property, Joans future was being planned by her father again, as he sought out a suitable husband. Edward decided on the Count of Savoy, Amadeus V. But Joan was already secretly married by then, and likely quite fearful of her fathers reaction. She had fallen in love with one of her first husbands squires, Ralph de Monthermer, and had urged her father to knight him. A member of the royal family marrying someone of such a level was simply unacceptable. First Edward found out about the relationship itself, not knowing it had already progressed to marriage. Edward took possession of Joans lands that she had as dower from her first marriage. Finally, Joan told her father that she was already married. His reaction: to imprison Sir Ralph. By this time, Joan was noticeably pregnant. She wrote her father a letter which contained words that have come down to us as an early statement protesting the double standard: It is not considered ignominious, nor disgraceful for a great earl to take a poor and mean woman to wife; neither, on the other hand, is it worthy of blame, or too difficult a thing for a countess to promote to honor a gallant youth. Edward gave in to his daughter, releasing her husband in August of 1297. He was given her first husbands titles though at his death they went to a son of her first husband, not one of Ralphs sons. And while Edward I accepted the marriage and Monthermer became part of the kings circle, Edwards relationship with Joan was cooler than it was towards her siblings. Joan was also close to her brother, Edward II, though she died earlier in the year he became king, and so was not around through his more scandalous escapades. She did support him through an earlier episode when Edward I took away his royal seal. Death History does not record Joans cause of death. It may have been related to childbirth. With Joan and then Edward I dead, Edward II took the title Earl of Gloucester from her second husband and gave it to her son by her first husband. While we dont know her cause of death, we do know that after her death, she was laid to rest at a priory in Clare, established by her first husbands ancestors and to which she had been a benefactor. In the 15th century, a writer reported that her daughter, Elizabeth de Burgh, had her mother disinterred and inspected the body, found to be intact, a condition connected with sainthood. Other writers reported miracles at her burial site. Â  She was never beatified or canonized.