The Mid-Tudor Crisis denotes the period of English history between 1547 and 1558, when, it has been argued by Whitney Jones and others, English government and society were in imminent danger of collapse in the face of a combination of weak rulers, economic pressures, a series of rebellions, and religious upheaval in the wake of the English Reformation, among other factors. Recently, historians such as David Loades have disputed the underlying assumptions of the thesis and have argued that this period was actually one of success and even outright achievements.
'Mid-Tudor Crisis' thesis
Whilst it had always been implicit in the works of historians such as Albert Pollard and Stanley Bindoff that England faced a crisis between 1539 and 1563, Whitney Jones was the first historian to present a systematic analysis of the state of the country's government and society in these years. In The Mid-Tudor Crisis 1539-1563, he argues that eight factors combined to create a crisis in mid-Tudor England:
In recent decades revisionist historians, most notably David Loades, have proposed a new interpretation which almost completely reverses the traditional mid-Tudor crisis thesis:
Definition of 'crisis'
Strength of central authority
Continuity within the period
Continuity and comparison with other periods
Scale of the problems faced
* Economy
: While the Phelps Brown and other price indexes suggest a severe deterioration in the state of the economy, they only consider the fortunes of agriculture, they ignore the fact that wages were often received in kind, and they ignore the decline in the number of holidays as a result of the introduction of Protestantism and its abhorrence for the veneration of saints. Thus, while statistically the economy may have been struggling, the lives of ordinary English citizens were not as adversely affected as might seem.
* Rebellions
: The inherently conservative nature of all three rebellions, but particularly those of 1549, is emphasised, as is their protagonists' focus on local issues and avowed subservience to Edward VI. The class antagonisms underlying the rebellions are considered to be exaggerated, and, in any case, what antagonisms existed merely weakened the rebellions. On a practical level, the rebellions were marred by chaos and blunder. They never, then, in any way directly challenged the state.
Achievements and strengths of the rulers
Post-revisionist perspective
In an article written for History Review, John Matusiak, specialist in the mid-Tudor period, opened a new chapter in the debate by arguing that both traditionalist and revisionist historians have been prone to over-simplifying their arguments, and that neither side paints an accurate picture of the mid-Tudor years, which he terms "Years of Trauma and Survival". The four main aspects of his argument are:
There was no crisis
Reappraisal of the scale of failure
Reappraisal of the scale of the problems faced
* Economy
: England was facing severe economic hardship. Even accepting the mitigating factors offered by the revisionists, the "big fact" is that 80% of wages were spent on food during this time, but that those wages were 60% less in 1559 than 50 years earlier. Compounded with consecutive harvest failures following heavy rains in 1556 and 1557, and an outbreak of sweating sickness in 1551 and 1552, the commons were facing a traumatic situation. The epidemics of 1556 and 1558 reduced the population by 200,000, with the death rate at twice its normal level.
* Religion
: This period was one of constant religious uncertainty, with England vacillating between moderate and radical Protestantism and reactionary Catholicism within the space of two decades.
: The fact that Parliament had to be dissolved in 1549, 1550, 1552 and 1553 demonstrates the instability faced at the upper echelons of government.
Comparison with other periods
Matusiak concludes by stating that "while there was no apocalypse in mid-Tudor England, there were many who sensed keenly enough the passing of the four horsemen". He argues that this period was no crisis because the essential state machinery was not under threat, but that it was a time of trauma during which the state's efforts were focused on survival rather than achievement.
