How Far Do You Agree That Wyatt’s Rebellion Was a Serious Threat

How far do you agree that Wyatts disorder was a serious threat to bloody shames authority? Although Wyatts rebellion was, when compared to the riots and rebellions that visited the Tudor Dynasty, rather bitty in size, it had a large impact in that Queen bloody shames authority as Monarch was questioned and ridiculed by the actions that drove so close to her residence in 1554. historiographers argue that the volatile combination of politics, organized religion and bloody shames personality were major factors in the rebellions formation as well as the fear the mindset of a Spanish King visited upon the nobles.bloody shames ascension to the rear of England was marked with singular policy-making and ghostlike circumstance the return of Catholicism in England marshalled by bloody shame was a decision met with gratefulness and one that pleased some of those citizens supressed under the Tudor dynastys progressive and eventually full Protestant stance. However, Marys gender meant t hat she couldnt enjoy the same directs of license and power as those wielded by her brother and father.Marys announcement that she mean to marry Philip II of Spain in 1554 divided her privy council into two apparent groups one opposing her conjugal union, favouring the possible courter, Edward Courtenay (Earl of Devon), and the other, who stomached the Spanish Monarch. The reasons for these split alliances were deep ingrained in foreign policy, with those sustenanceing Philips prospects seeking the advantages of a strong Anglo-Spanish alliance, and those against it fearing the consequences of a prospective hereditary Spanish claim to the side of meat throne and a possible need to aid Spain in future conflict.Some historians like Rex, believe that these circumstances in combination with Marys personal stubbornness and willingness to marry Philip II against the inclination of her government contend a considerable factor in the fruition of Wyatts rebellion. However, in that location perk up been attempts by historians to counter this appraisal of Marys character, it has been suggested that the milksops indecision in the negotiations over the restoration of Catholicism to England and much specifically her marriage to Philip was Mary being politically shrewd, tailored to pull round greater concessions for the English Crown from the Hapsburgs and the Vatican.Thus, it may be fair to refer Marys personality as one of the largest contri besidesing factors of her marriage to Philip and Thomas Wyatts consequent anti-monarchic movement whether these intended or non. It would olibanum seem that it was Marys personality and the ways in which her choices change those around her which was the greatest motive for Wyatts rebellion. This take can be further much supported when acknowledging the fact that there was very little religious opposition remaining by the time of the rebellion, hence Mary could whole be damaged as a result of her own political err ors regarding the marriage.Turvell and Randall discuss this view, stating At the beginning of the reign even the approximately intent of urban radicals were non prepared to go against the mainstream of public aspect, and waited to see what would happen. Certainly, when Mary, employ the royal prerogative, suspended the second Act of Uniformity and restored the mass, there was no public outcry. Hence, historians may argue that Thomas Wyatts motives were spurred by the prospect of a Spanish king and were not religiously driven. The actual level of threat that the Wyatt rebellion posed to Marys authority is a subject of much debate.On the one hand, historians argue that the rebellion significantly challenged Marys position as queen, whilst on the other the event has been draw by historians such as Diarmaid MacCulluch as a demonstration of the loser of rebellion as a way of solving problems. This diversity in opinion stems for an array of contemporary circumstances. Those who vie w the rebellion as a serious threat are quick to acknowledge Elizabeth, who was at the time considered an apt alternative to her idiosyncratically minded sister.Elizabeths status as a Protestant may not have pleased the public opinion in England at the time but her young age and susceptibility to bare children was something which Mary could not so easily contest. Similarly, the rebellions close proximity to London and Marys residence has bolstered its seriousness. Historian Tony Imparato agrees with this view, stating in his book Protest and Rebellion in Tudor England that Wyatts men marched on London and in doing so presented the most serious threat ever posed to Tudor government In the end, his army came within half a mile of where the queen was staying, but was force to retreat. The view held by Imparato may address the seriousness of the Wyatt rebellion in so far as geographical closeness to Mary, but it does not fully explain the events consequences in show sinful weaknes ses in Marys government and the tenuousness of her position as queen. In his book, The Early Tudors 1485-1558 John Duncan Mackie discusses the greater extent of the rebellion and what it revealed about Marys court The queens Catholic friends had been ineffectual in the crisis and the battle had been won for her by men like Pembroke who had deserted Northumberland at the last minute. In expressing the ineffectuality of Marys Catholic allies, Mackie delves deeper into the rebellions longer term consequences and in demonstrating Pembrokes desertion of Northumberland, highlights an hardly(prenominal) last minute decision by one of Englands most important political figures to support his queen. On the other hand, some historians have viewed Wyatts rebellion as having a lesser impact on royal authority. This view has been fuelled by the rebellions small levels of pop support as well as Courtenays ineptitude.This view is held by Colin Pendrill, who in his 2000 book The English Reformati on Crown, Power and Religious Change, 1485-1558 holds the view that the Wyatt rebellion failed and that three main issued led to this conclusion Anti-Spanish rumours did not claim about widespread support, News of the conspiracy leaked out in January 1554, so the conspirators had to act before they were ready and in the middle of wintertime and that the rebellion lacked support to such a degree that outright opposition was encountered in Coventry and that Wyatt alone managed to raise some troops in Kent.Pendrills supporting of the idea that there was a lack of leafy vegetable support for Wyatts anti-Spanish campaign may best present an target and accurate view of the rebellions preamble. It was indeed the case that Wyatt only managed to gather around three-thousand Kentish men to lead to London, suggesting that his geographical location in Kent played somewhat to his favour as this is where the majority of anti-Spanish support was located. This may indicate that the rebellions support was in fact not at all widespread and that Wyatt was indeed fortunate to gain the support he did.In contrast to Imparatos source, Pendrill remonstrates that Wyatts rebellion was little more than an unorganised march which posed no real threat to Mary or her constitutions authority. Furthermore, Imparatos view can be contrasted against that of historian P. J Hammer, who in his Elizabeth Wars war, government and society in Tudor England states that Wyatt chose to surrender rather than risk a pitched battle without local anesthetic support. Hammers source reinforces the idea that sympathy for Wyatts cut through was not widespread and was confined to the Kent area. In conclusion, on the basis of the evince given, historians may view Wyatts rebellion to have been an unserious yet revealing challenge to Marys authority. Although a severe lack of support and disorganisation had cost Thomas Wyatt from reaching Mary, he had revealed to her the existence of perfume group of dissent ers prepared to die in order to prevent an Anglo-Spanish throne in England.The extent to which Mary responded to the rebellion showed her anxiety and anger at the attempted challenge to her authority and for the execution of ninety rebels (including Wyatt himself), the exile of Courtenay and the executions of manufacturing business Thomas Grey and William Thomas, the Wyatt rebellion should be viewed as ultimately unserious, but instrumental in heightening the anxiety of Mary and the lengths to which she would go to pick up her crown and constitution remained secure.