Historians’ opinions about which consequences of the reformation are the most important are very diverse and widespread. Often, for every opinion in favour of a particular consequence as being the most important there will be a valid argument by another historian against it’s importance. In this essay I will attempt to lay out the arguments of at least five major historians as to why their chosen consequence is the most important. The historians that I have chosen to study have opinions of different consequences and, for many of them, their opinions are influenced by their background and personal experiences. Economic historians such as R.H. Tawney believe that the reformation had a bearing on the national layout of England. Social historians such as Susan Brigden have argued that the role of youth in society changed as a result of the reformation. I will present each opinion and attempt, though I do not expect to, reach a solid conclusion as to which is the most important consequence of the reformation.

        Firstly, I shall present the argument stressing the importance of land and economic reform as a consequence put forward by R.H. Tawney.
The main stem of Tawney’s argument is that the acquisition of  monastic lands by the crown as a result of the dissolution of the monasteries was important in shaping the economic future of England. He argues that, although the shape of the land was changing before the reformation, the effects were magnified by it  producing a “sweeping redistribution of wealth” ⁽¹⁾. By this he is referring to the sale of monastic lands to businessmen by the crown causing land to become, in Tawney’s view, more of a commercial asset with small businessmen buying land for low prices and selling at a profit ⁽²⁾. Previously, land had been the main currency for many generations but, as a consequence of the reformation, Tawney believes that there was a shift from land as a symbol of wealth to capital. He also goes on to say that land was bought by syndicates of businessmen from all trades to use as a base for their industries, converting previous religious pastures into arable lands was “a natural result” ⁽³⁾. Clearly, from these arguments, Tawney believes that the reformation had a huge impact upon the economic future of England and appears to be hinting that the origins of England’s capitalist society stemmed from the reformation. Indeed, this belief can be found even in the title of his book. Another area covered by Tawney in his chapter titled “The Land Question” is the idea that this redistribution of land had religious influences which became law following the reformation. The gap between peasant and lord became narrower with the church reserving the right to prosecute anyone who used their profits for personal gain over the needs of the state ⁽⁴⁾. This idea of linking church and state spreads into the idea that the English nation was fostered on the influences of the reformation. Tawney is clearly very passionate about his belief in the rise of capitalism as a result of the reformation but is quite obviously of the opinion that capitalism is not a good thing. His opinionated stance against capitalism is evident throughout the text which casts doubt as to how selective his evidence of capital greed is.

         This idea that a consequence of the reformation was the emergence of elements of what would now be considered the English nation is also evident in the writings of Patrick Collinson. Collinson makes a series of points showing how the reformation altered people’s views about England. He is, however, very objectionable to this idea and brings in a series of points arguing against the idea that the reformation defined the nation of England. Collinson’s work is very useful, however, in showing the views of other historians as he uses extensive quotations from other works. He presents the views of several historians, old and modern, on the subject of nation but Collinson’s own views are perhaps not as clear from the text.
The first example Collinson presents is the view of Christopher Hill writing in 1985 who suggests that the reformation changed the idea of worship from personal prayer to “single minded devotion of the nation to a God who was assumed to be no less devoted to his people” ⁽⁵⁾. This idea of God being devoted to the country of England is one of the central arguments in Collinson’s piece and he goes on to say that loyalty to God was a collective term for loyalty to the king and state ⁽⁶⁾. The striking argument of this chapter is the notion that “God is English” which arose from the reformation. He cites several examples of this words, or similar words, appearing in several places after the reformation notably with the exact words “GOD IS ENGLISH” appearing in writings by John Alymer ⁽⁷⁾. Another prominent example is the quote from preacher William Whateley:

“Ah England! God’s signet, God’s Jewel, Which he hath fostered as tenderly and adored as graciously as he ever did Judea” ⁽⁸⁾.

Through this we see the impact the reformation had on linking church with state. Another way in which this occurred was the linking of God with the monarch by not only legal, but ideological means. The symbolism used in Henry VIII’s bible of him handing out copies of the scripture to his people shows him to be a vessel carrying the word of God to the people ⁽⁹⁾ on this page Collinson also suggests that the term “God save the King” also began here and that from the Reformation years the royal coat of arms appeared in every church.

Collinson gives a lot of evidence that the way of thinking about England as a nation and the monarch changed after the reformation but it can’t be ignored that he also points out a number of instances, predating the reformation, where national awareness was shown. The key point that I would pick out of this text is the consequence of the king being shown as a representative of God, which is only found in England after the reformation.

             This brings me on nicely to the argument of my next historian: Geoffrey Elton who expands on this idea of the alteration of royal authority being a consequence of the reformation. Elton was a legal and constitutional historian who presents his argument with a string of solid facts and dates in the form of a narrative account which is thin on personal input. It is however clear that he believes the legal acts passed in order to cement the king’s authority were an important consequence of the reformation. His narrative follows the influence of Thomas Cromwell in forcing many important acts through parliament.

The first major act which Elton picks out as important is the Treason act passed in 1531 which was a very severe act allowing punishment for any verbal treason towards the king ⁽¹⁰⁾. Elton holds this in high regard suggesting that the treason act gave him “all the power he needed to extinguish the opposition” ⁽¹¹⁾.

Another unique act was one which allowed the king to take some of the church revenue for state use. Henry established an income of “about ten times what had previously gone to Rome” ⁽¹²⁾. This was something new, in pre-reformation times the king could not simply demand money from the church, in fact all church lands were tax exempt as can be seen on medieval tithe maps. This now meant that the church and the people were fully answerable to him and not the Pope in Rome.

Elton’s conclusion is that the reformation turned the king’s initial claims for supremecy into a “coherent constitutional structure”.

        So now we have looked at a political change, a religious change and a legal consequence of the reformation. Now we turn our attention to another important set of consequences, ones which caused another major split from the continent and Rome.
I am referring to the impact the reformation had on the scriptures of Christianity, the bible. The translation of the bible into English, according to A.G. Dickens, was intended to create “a scripturally educated laity” ⁽¹³⁾, which would cause an even bigger split from Rome as they no longer had to listen to the preaching of the catholic priests in order to access the scriptures.
This liberty given by the translation is something Dickens stresses upon, suggesting that the on the bible stood “Anglicanism and nonconformity” ⁽¹⁴⁾, an idea which is also picked up by Susan Brigden, referring to the priesthood of all believers, many young people used the scriptures to seek “independence and spiritual liberation” ⁽¹⁵⁾.
This idea of liberation by means of having a bible translated into vernacular is one which appears to be very important to social historians. Gilbert Burnett also touches on this issue in his writings suggesting that an important consequence of the reformation was the liberation of the people from the priests as the translation put the bible into the hands of the people for them to study personally ⁽¹⁶⁾.
A.G. Dickens clearly sees much more to the translation than mere spiritual liberation of the people. He goes on to explain that the translation of the bible was the catalyst for hundreds of years of literature. He suggests that works such as The Pilgrims Progress and many works by Milton were based around the English bible ⁽¹⁷⁾. Milton’s ideas of God employing the English people to carry out his duty are also credited by Patrick Collinson as being a good example of Protestant doctrine influencing the nation. Dickens also upholds Burnett’s belief that the bible’s translation “clinched the victory of the regime over papal authority and the saint cults” ⁽¹⁸⁾. So we can see now that the transition of language brought on by the translation of the bible is considered to be very important but it also necessary to say that it is a well known fact that certain languages such as Manx, Cornish and Gaelic survived long after the reformation so the translated bible could not have had immediate impact on everyone.

         I’d like to concentrate a bit more on Susan Brigden’s work about the reformation as a youth movement. She argues that a consequence of the reformation was a feeling of liberation from paternal authority by the younger generation. This also stems from the translation of the bible into English as she suggests that youth found in the scriptures “the perfect excuse and legitimation for their natural tendency to disobedience” ⁽²¹⁾. She also shows a sweeping change in authority. While the youth of the medieval world were powerless, the youth during the reformation banded together and rebelled against their masters ⁽²²⁾.
She also goes on to suggest that there was a shift between youth being well educated in their craft but being illiterate to youth expanding into academic areas and would “talke muche of the scripture, goodes worde, and yet wyll not learne therof to be obedient” ⁽²³⁾, again this stems back to the priesthood of all believers and the translated bible.

        We have seen some very strong consequences of the reformation, now I feel it is important to look at some more minor ones. Christopher Haigh presents a very interesting argument, which somewhat links into the idea of liberation, that the reformation caused anticlericalism amongst the people.
Haigh goes against the common conception that anticlericalism was a cause of the reformation stating that “anticlericalism…was not a cause of the Reformation; it was, however, a result”. His reasons behind this thinking are social ones. He suggests that the reformation isolated priests by giving them wealth, housing and separating them from the community in general, he even suggests that they only appeared in villages to complain about the local ale houses ⁽¹⁹⁾. He contrasts this to the priests of medieval times who were devoted to poverty and piety and lived in the community with the people. He also cites that anticlericalism stemmed from the different beliefs of the new ministers. Where as previously priests had been there to guide the dead into the afterlife, rituals such as the last rights were now not allowed and the comfort of this practice was taken away from the people ⁽²⁰⁾.
No doubt this would have healed over time but, as an immediate consequence, it can be considered important as it would have been hard for older villagers, who had been brought up on Catholic beliefs, to accept that their passage to the afterlife would not be assured by a priest. It is understandable that it would have caused some worry.

There were many more consequences of the reformation. In my opinion, a consequence of the reformation was Puritanism.
Just as in Catholic times there had been extreme forms of worship in the form of monks and monastic orders, there now came out of Protestantism a new form of extremist religion. One which stuck strictly by the scriptures almost word for word and condemned all those who strayed from them. This undoubtedly stemmed from the priesthood of all believers and the idea that the scriptures could be abused by some.

Another minor consequence that I would personally point out is the abolition of the Knights Hospitaller in England by Henry VIII which allowed Henry to confiscate even more land and wealth. Much of this was land which had previously belonged to the Knights Templar before their abolition in 1312 and which had effectively been in the hands of the papacy for over three hundred years. In my opinion, this marked a further split from papal authority. It also began the downfall of the order across Europe as protestant doctrine spread though it is rather narrow minded to attribute this purely as a consequence of the English Reformation.

             In conclusion, we have seen that the consequences of the reformation are very wide ranging. According to historians the reformation had an impact on everything from the liberation of youth in the 1500s to the literature of some two hundred years after Henry’s reforms. After considering all of the opinions, now comes the difficult task of determining which consequence was actually the most important. No matter which consequence I were to pick out there would be many who would disagree. Many historians seem to gravitate around the belief that social consequences were the most abundant and important. Most of the historical opinions that I have looked at appear to stem back to the notion of the priesthood of all believers and the translation of the bible which historians have argued caused youth movements, improved literacy levels and a shift from papal authority to individual enlightenment, amongst other things. But it is clear that there are, more often than not, no two interpretations the same. There are about as many opinions about the consequences of the reformation as there are historians who have studied it. Some arguments are more convincing than others but there isn’t one which stands out as the definitive cause.

 

 

Footnotes

 

1)      R.H. Tawney, Religion and the rise of capitalism: An historical study, Page 138

2)      R.H. Tawney, Religion and the rise of capitalism: An historical study, P. 139

3)      R.H. Tawney, Religion and the rise of capitalism: An historical study, P. 140

4)      R.H. Tawney, Religion and the rise of capitalism: An historical study, Page 149/150

5)      Patrick Collinson, The Birthpangs of Protestant England: Religious and cultural change in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, P. 2

6)      Patrick Collinson, The Birthpangs of Protestant England: Religious and cultural change in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, P. 3

7)      Patrick Collinson, The Birthpangs of Protestant England: Religious and cultural change in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, P. 4

8)      Patrick Collinson, The Birthpangs of Protestant England: Religious and cultural change in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, P. 8

9)      Patrick Collinson, The Birthpangs of Protestant England: Religious and cultural change in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, P. 9

10)  Geoffrey Elton, Reform and Reformation: England, 1509-58, chapter 8, P. 189

11)  Geoffrey Elton, Reform and Reformation: England, 1509-58, chapter 8, P. 191

12)  Geoffrey Elton, Reform and Reformation: England, 1509-58, chapter 8, P. 190

13)  A.G. Dickens, The English Reformation, second edition, P. 157

14)  A.G. Dickens, The English Reformation, second edition, P. 157

15)  Susan Brigden, Youth and the English Reformation, Past and Present, P. 38

16)  Gilbert Burnett, The history of the reformation of the Church of England, P. 86

17)  A.G. Dickens, The English Reformation, second edition, P. 157

18)  A.G. Dickens, The English Reformation, second edition, P. 158

19)  Christopher Haigh, Anticlericalism and the English Reformation, P.407

20)  Christopher Haigh, Anticlericalism and the English Reformation, P.407

21)  Susan Brigden, Youth and the English Reformation, Past and Present, P. 39

22)  Susan Brigden, Youth and the English Reformation, Past and Present, P. 48

23)  Susan Brigden, Youth and the English Reformation, Past and Present, P. 49

 

 

                      Bibliography

 

 

·        Brigden. S, Youth and the English Reformation, Past and Present, 1982

·        Burnett. G, The History of the Reformation of the Church of England (1679), London, 1983

·        Collinson. P, The Birthpangs of Protestant England: Religious and Social Change in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, London, 1988

·        Dickens. A.G, The English Reformation, Second Edition, Batsford, London, 1989

·        Elton. G.R, Reform and Reformation: England 1509-58, London, 1977

·        Haigh. C, Anticlericalism and the English Reformation, 1983

                  .    Tawney. R.H, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism: an Historical Study, London, 1936