Comparing the Western Rebellion and Kett's Rebellion in Terms of Causes and Threat
The year 1549 in which both rebellions took place was a troublesome
year for the Lord Protector, at the time, Somerset. It was plagued
with bad harvests, inflation, poverty and war. These factors made 1549
a watershed year for rioting and rebellion. Though these are the only
two rebellions that posed a serious threat, they were definitely not
unique. There were outbreaks throughout the country ranging from
Leicestershire to Gloucestershire for most of the year. Somerset's
style of leadership was not suited to this atmosphere and had in not
been Warwick; he would have been ousted by someone else it was only a
matter of time.
Though the rebellions had different motivations and causes, some
parallels can be drawn. For instance, they both had local grievances
that they wished to voice and neither could have been handled at a
local level. In fact, what distinguished the two rebellions from the
rest during the grave year was its ability to grow beyond a local
level and in effect become a more serious threat to the government. In
addition, the Western rebellion may have been considered more serious
since firstly, the government realised its existence too late and was
slow to act against it, and secondly, it eventually led to the coup by
Warwick. However, had it not been for Kett's rebellion the Western
rebellion would not have been so pivotal. Furthermore, the engagement
of the troops with Kett's rebellion put Somerset in such a weak
position.
A key problem and grievance of both rebellions was inflation.
Somerset's continued policy of debasement o...
... middle of paper ...
...llion was successfully dispersed by Somerset's troops but
required an all the forces he was capable of mustering. Hence the
Western rebels may have overthrown him had Warwick not stolen the
opportunity and crushed the rebellion only for him to soon take power.
Furthermore, the Privy Council did not think much of Somerset since he
consulted them rarely, only adding to the opposition he faced at the
time. The causes of the two rebellions and the threats they pose are a
response to the failure of the Lord Protector to rule as an effective
leader. However, it is not to be said that is it entirely his fault
since many of the problems he or Edward VI had inherited. Though some
were simply out of his control like bad harvest other were worsened by
his judgements such as the continuation of the war and debasing of the
coinage.
Bacon’s Rebellion, King Phillip’s War and the Pequot War were similar in that there were conflicts with Natives over land, however they differed in the ways the wars were carried out and the results of the wars. Bacon’s rebellion was a result of the poorer classes moving west to cultivate land, however they encountered natives and the governor refused to protect them. Likewise the Pequot war was a direct effect of puritans moving westward, additionally all three wars resulted in the colonists as victors. During King Phillip’s war the natives destroyed a fifth of the towns in Masseuses and Rhode Island in contrast to the other wars where the natives did not cause as much damage to the colonists. Bacon’s Rebellion was significant because afterwards
Shays’ rebellion originated from a small group of farmers from Massachusetts fighting against high taxes. These farmers organized their resistance in ways similar to the American Revolutionary War. They called special meetings of the people to protest conditions. They even agreed on coordinated protests involving themselves and other people. The rebels closed courts by force in the fall of 1786 and liberated other imprisoned farmers who would be sympathetic to the rebels’ cause. Later on, the petty revolts flared into fully fledged revolts once the rebels came under the leadership of Daniel Shays. Shays was a general in the Continental Army that fought against the British during the American Revolutionary War; this is why the rebels had similar tactics that were used against the British. The...
The whiskey Rebellion Witten by Thomas P. Slaughter talks bout a rebellion that setup a precedent in American history. It gives us the opportunity to really comprehend this rebellion that thanks to fast action from the Federal government didn’t escalate to a more serious problem like civil war. The book the Whiskey Rebellion frontier of the epilogue to the American Revolution captures the importance and drama of the rebellion. The book is divided into three sections context, chronology and sequence. In the first section Slaughter explain the reason why the taxes was needed in the first place. According to Anthony Brandt in his article of American history name “Rye Whiskey, RYE Whiskey” Alexander Hamilton, secretary of the
There was a short time where all was calm right after the civil war. king charles the second and his father were both dead so Charles brother took over. this is king James the secondf and he was a Catholic sao he appointed many high positions in the government. Most of his sibjects were protestant and did not like the idea of Catholicism being the religion theyd have to abide by. like his father and brother king james the second ignored the peoples wishes and ruled without Parliament and relied on royal power. an English Protestant leader wanted to take the power away from james and give it to his daughter Mary and Her husband William from the Netherlands. William saled out to the south of england with his troops but sent them away soon after they landed
Henry VIII’s reign was a turning point in the Tudor period as it signified an end to Yorkist pretenders to the throne and it was at this point that the idea of regicide... ... middle of paper ... ... to support them in their rebellions. There was now a widening social gap that created tension as the gentry attempted to emulate the nobility. As although the Cloth trade in Kent was declining in 1554 Wyatt’s rebellion had no real socio – economic cause and the Northern Earls in 1569 and Essex in 1601 had no socio –economic causes whatsoever.
The colonists took up arms against their officials because they were unhappy how they were all wealthy lawyers. This all happened because of the population increase during the early 1760´s. People other than farmers started inhabiting the Carolinas. The crops of the farmers failed causing many farmers to go into debt. The lawyers were needed for the farmers to straighten out the money they owed to the government. The lawyers were then able to gain powerful positions in the government because the farmers were indebted to them. By 1764, thousands of colonists were unhappy with the tyranny the rich officials had created. The taxes became high and the tax collectors corrupt. They would remove the records of the taxes they collected just so they could go back and get more money. The Regulators began attacking officials the the government and destroying court houses. The Regulator Movement eventually fell apart because of the lack of control by the many leaders of the rebellion. This event fueled the American Revolution because of the similarities of the the tyrannical leaders of both
The eventual breakdown of severing relations between Charles I and Parliament gave way to a brutal and bloody English Civil War. However, the extent that Parliament was to blame for the collapse of cooperation between them and ultimately war, was arguably only to a moderate extent. This is because Parliament merely acted in defiance of King Charles I’s harsh personal rule, by implementing controlling legislation, attacking his ruthless advisors and encouraging public opinion against him. These actions however only proceeded Charles I’s personal abuse of his power, which first and foremost exacerbated public opinion against his rule. This was worsened
“In the first years of peacetime, following the Revolutionary War, the future of both the agrarian and commercial society appeared threatened by a strangling chain of debt which aggravated the depressed economy of the postwar years”.1 This poor economy affected almost everyone in New England especially the farmers. For years these farmers, or yeomen as they were commonly called, had been used to growing just enough for what they needed and grew little in surplus. As one farmer explained “ My farm provides me and my family with a good living. Nothing we wear, eat, or drink was purchased, because my farm provides it all.”2 The only problem with this way of life is that with no surplus there was no way to make enough money to pay excessive debts. For example, since farmer possessed little money the merchants offered the articles they needed on short-term credit and accepted any surplus farm goods on a seasonal basis for payment. However if the farmer experienced a poor crop, shopkeepers usually extended credit and thereby tied the farmer to their businesses on a yearly basis.3 During a credit crisis, the gradual disintegration of the traditional culture became more apparent. During hard times, merchants in need of ready cash withdrew credit from their yeomen customers and called for the repayment of loans in hard cash. Such demands showed the growing power of the commercial elite.4 As one could imagine this brought much social and economic unrest to the farmers of New England. Many of the farmers in debt were dragged into court and in many cases they were put into debtors prison. Many decided to take action: The farmers waited for the legal due process as long as them could. The Legislature, also know as the General Court, took little action to address the farmers complaints. 5 “So without waiting for General Court to come back into session to work on grievances as requested, the People took matters into their own hands.”6 This is when the idea for the Rebellion is decided upon and the need for a leader was eminent.
The mistake that King George and the rest of Britain made was thinking that they could forever keep the colonies under their thumb. These were not the same colonists who came over as British citizens to set up forts. These men and women thought of themselves and American citizens and they did not need a government across the ocean telling them what to do. Ultimately, Britain lost control when they gave in to the colonists' boycotts and showed them that they had the power to run a country, and that Britain feared that power. Through Parliament's ruthless taxation without representation, restrictions upon what colonists had assumed were civil liberties and British military action, Britain and the colonists were thrown into a revolutionary war.
In late 1600’s, England was in turmoil from events as King Phillip’s War to the Bacon Rebellion. All this chaos caused disorder all throughout England but it reached its height in the 1680’s when King James's policies of religious tolerance was met with an increasing opposition. People were troubled by the king's religion and devotion to Catholicism and his close ties with France and how he was trying to impose Catholicism on everyone, preventing them from worshiping anything else. This made the Protestant unhappy. It was seen that the crisis came to its peak with the birth of the king's son, James Francis Edward Stuart in 1688. In 1688, the struggle for domination of English government between Parliament and the crown reached its peak in the Glorious Revolution. This bloodless revolution occurred in which the English people decided that it’s enough that they tolerated King James and his extreme religious tolerance
The words whiskey and rebellion both have the ability to entice a gambit of emotions, and in 1794 they did. Like most great uprisings the Whiskey Rebellion was preceded by the rich exploiting or taxing those who were already taxed out. Our country is infamous for its rebellion against taxes; one could argue that rebelling against a ruling class is the core foundation of our great country’s history and make-up. My goal is to explore why this rebellion deserves the place in history that it hold, whether it was successful or not, but most importantly what did our nation’s leaders learn from this event?
To begin with, there was a great loss of human lives. Beginning in 1643 England, the closest absolute king Charles I attempted to storm and arrest parliament. His actions resulted in a civil war between those who supported the monarchy, Royalists, and those who supported the parliament, Roundheads, which did not end until 1649. Estimates for this war put the number of casualties at 200,000 for England and Wales while Ireland lost approximate...
During the late 1860s the Red River Settlement was rapidly changing and along with these changes came multiple causes and conflicts that would subsequently to a resistance called the Red River Rebellion. Many profound changes occurred in the Red River Settlement that had caused problems and hostility among the inhabitants to emerge such as:the arrival of Canadians to the settlement, the economic problems and the decline of the Hudson Bay Company. However, the Red River Rebellion was sparked by the Hudson Bay Company selling Rupert’s Land to the new Dominion of Canada without consulting with the inhabitants nor paying any regards to their interests.The colonists of the Red River Settlement, many of whom were Metis, feared for their culture and land rights under the dominion’s control. In order to ascertain that their rights would be protected, the Metis set up a provisional government under the leadership of Louis Riel to negotiate an agreement with the new Dominion of Canada that the Red River Settlement and the lands surrounding it, could enter Confederation as the province of Manitoba under their own terms.
In 1642, King Charles raised his royal standard in Nottingham, marking the beginning of the English Civil War. The next ten years saw the Cavaliers (supporters of the King) and the Roundheads (supporters of the parliament) engaged in a vicious battle for their respective leaders with the Roundheads ultimately victorious. This essay will attempt to explain why civil war broke out in England while summarizing the story behind the antagonism of the two parties.
The need for power dictated much of the decision making process of the leaders during the European Renaissance, and one factor that greatly impacted the struggle of power was the dispute over who should have control over England’s throne and all of its assets. During this time period, power changed hands often and new kings emerged quickly and disappeared frequently. This was a time where the people questioned their authority and who was the rightful ruler of the land. (Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica) The Wars of the Roses, as they became known as devastated most of the upper noble class while the lower and middle classes were indifferent and relatively untouched by it. Starting in 1455, opposing factions met at St. Albans where the first king had been killed, which marked the start of the dynastic civil wars. David Ross noted in regards to the wars that,” In reality these squabbles were an indication of the lawlessness that ran rampant in the land. More squalid than romantic, the Wars of the Roses decimated both houses in an interminably long, bloody struggle for the throne.”(2). It was not until Henry VII defeated a Yorkist r...