Y13 Tudors Revision

Essay Skills

2. How well did Henry VII control

government?
 Tudors Topics
• Henry VII at home
• Henry VII foreign policy
• Henry VIII 1509-29
• Henry VIII 1529-47
• Stability of the Monarchy 1547-58
• Religious reform 1547-58
• Rebellion and Unrest 1547-58
 I am going to show you a Tudors essay
question, you have 2 minutes to write
down…
• What this question is asking you to do
• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
To what extent was Henry VII able to restore law and
order in England? 
• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 To what extent was Henry VII able to restore law
and order in England?  
This question requires you to consider the different ways Henry VII used to restore law and order and
evaluating how effective they were, before making an overall judgement. 
Ways Henry tried to Evidence that this helped  Evidence that this didn’t 
restore law and order 

Central Government- The King was at centre of government but was supported by the King’s Council who Royal rights were increasingly exploited and this led to hatred towards men such as Empson and Dudley, who played
Uses an inner core of would provide advice. 8 people were in the inner core including Morton (Lord important roles in enforcing bonds and recognisances. Between 1504 and 1509 the number of Acts of Attainder
advisers  Chancellor), Fox (Lord Privy Seal), Dynham (Lord Treasurer). Henry’s management of reached 51. Similarly 36 out of 62 noble families were involved in bonds and recognisances. Civil war might have
  the nobles and the carrots meant that lots of nobles were keen to show their broken out again had Henry not died in 1509, such was the harshness of the methods he was employing.  
support and receive rewards like attending meetings of the King’s Council. Henry VII
established three courts, the Court of Requests, Court of General Surveyors and
Council Learned in Law. The Council Learned in Law dealt with the problems
concerning royal lands and rights, enforcing bonds and recognisances so was feared
and hated. Empson and Dudley were in charge from 1504 onwards. 

Regional Councils- Henry ensured the authority of central government was upheld in the regions by
uses a regional council developing the Yorkist use of regional councils in the north, Wales and Ireland. Henry
system  had greater control of the North after Northumberland’s by appointing the Earl of
Surrey, this ensuring greater influence and control. In Wales he revived the Council
of Wales in 1493, headed by his son Arthur.  
In Ireland Poynings’ Law was passed in 1494 that said that Irish Parliaments could only be called and pass laws with
the King’s approval, but has very limited success and Ireland was a particular problem as there was support for
Yorkists.  

Local government- Henry relied on the use of unpaid officials to ensure that his laws were enforced in They were still often reluctant to act though because in doing so they would become very unpopular (but by relying
Relies on JPs  the localities called Justices of the Peace. JPs were the workhorses of the on second rank men they were more likely to be loyal and carry out the king’s wishes). 
administration, between 30 and 60 local landowners appointed for each country.
This was not new, but Henry increased their role and this now included imposing
economic and social laws and dispensing justice. Henry’s spies in the localities
helped him put down the Lovell rebellion of 1486. 

Parliament- Tries not Only called Parliament when he needed money or to pass laws, and only called When he does call Parliament on two occasions it led to taxation which contributed to the Yorkshire Rebellion
to call Parliament that Parliament 7 times in his entire reign. He did not want to ask for money as it would (1489) and the Cornish Rebellion (1497). The northern counties objected to a tax to support Brittany against France
often.  often lead to discontent, and as his foreign policy was all about avoiding war and as a result Northumberland was murdered. The rising was easily crushed but no tax was collected. The Cornish
Parliament were not needed as much. Parliament’s responsibility as a Court of Law rebellion was more serious after refusing to pay a tax for war against Scotland. The rebels gathered at Bodmin and
was being fulfilled by other courts such as the Council Learned in Law.  marched to London before they were crushed at Blackheath by a royal army of 25,000. 

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout and will consider which
method was the most/least effective and why? 
How successfully did Henry VII strengthen government?
• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 How successfully did Henry VII strengthen government?

This question requires you to consider what Henry’s aims were when trying to strengthen government, and whether each was successful or not, as well as an overall
judgement that considers the relative importance of each factor.

Aim Why did Henry want to do this? Success Failure

Restore royal Henry was keen to try to restore royal finances if needed to Switches to the Chamber system.  Yorkist and Cornish rebellion. 
finances raise an army (no standing army remember), and to help Income had risen to £113,000 per year by the end of his reign and the Henry becomes very unpopular as he is seen as corrupt and
him look and act like a powerful monarch.   Crown was solvent again by 1509.  greedy. 
Exploits ordinary revenue (custom duties, has 5 times as much land) and Still nowhere near France’s income of £800,000 a year. 
increases extraordinary revenue (French pension, loans).  

Manage the Henry was a usurper. Many nobles still owned lots of land
nobility (like the Earl of Northumberland in the north-east, and the
Stanleys in the north-west). Henry needed their help as he
was inexperienced. Henry needed their help to fill key
offices and help keep peace throughout the land. Many
had supported Richard III as they had gained rewards from
him. They could rebel (and you know this happened). 
Even control The crown had uneven control over the kingdom, stronger
over the in the populated areas of the south and east, but looser in
kingdom the borderlands
‘Carrot’ approach like Order of the Garter, patronage, King’s and Great As 36/62 noble families in bonds and recognisances and the
Council. ‘Stick’ approach like Acts of Attainder, illegal retainers banned, number of Act of Attainder reach 51 in the period 1504-1509,
feudal dues, Act of Resumption, bonds and recognisances. As a result little Henry was very unpopular. 
noble unrest after the Simnel rebellion.  Evidence of nobility involved in Cornish and Yorkshre rebellions.
Central- King’s central role, use of courts like Council Learned in Law Council Learned in Law unpopular
Regional- Council of North, Wales and Ireland, Poynings Law Poynings Law limited success
Localities- More powers to JPs. JPs reluctant to act
Parliament- Only called Parliament 7 times

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout, consider which reason was the most important, is
this factor linked to any other and how, and which factor(s) were less important and why?  
 ‘The most serious challenge to Henry VII was weak royal finances’.
How far do you agree with this view?  
• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
  ’The most serious challenge to Henry VII was weak royal finances’. How far do you agree with this view?  
This question requires you to consider whether HVII’s most serious challenge was weak finances or was it something else. So you will need to consider why it could
be argued that the quote is correct, why it isn’t, before considering other challenges. 
Problem/factor Why was this a problem?  Yes, Henry solves this problem  But, no he doesn’t solve this problem 
 
Weak royal No money to raise an army if needed. In the first Switches to the Chamber system.  Yorkist and Cornish rebellion. 
finances  year, by using the Exchequer system, Henry only Income had risen to £113,000 per year by the end of his reign Henry becomes very unpopular as he is
takes £11,700 in first year in comparison to and the Crown was solvent again by 1509.  seen as corrupt and greedy. 
Richard’s £29,000. Need loans for his coronation Exploits ordinary revenue (custom duties, has 5 times as Still nowhere near France’s income of
and marriage.   much land) and increases extraordinary revenue (French £800,000 a year. 
pension, loans).  
Henry’s claim  HVII’s claim was weak, largely through his Coronation dated for 30th October importantly before Still Yorkist rebels around who could pose
mother Margaret Beaufort, who was a Parliament met. Dates his reign from the day before as a threat (the two princes in the tower
descendant of Edward III. HVII held the throne Bosworth. Marries E of Y in Jan 1486 to unite the houses of Y not confirmed dead). And his usurpation
because he defeated Richard, not because he and L after asking for papal dispensation and again of the throne coming from exile to king
was the legitimate ruler. Spent most of his life in importantly after his coronation.  inspires others (hence Yorkist opposition
exile.  is a factor). 
Yorkist HVII is a Lancastrian and Yorkists do not Defeats the Lovell, Simnel and Warbeck rebellions, and Warbeck issue and Edmund de la Pole
opposition  recognise him as the true king. There are eventually gets his hands on Edmund de la Pole.  caused financial problems due to trade
rebellions given financial and military backing embargos with Burgundy and the
from Margaret of Burgundy.  Hanseatic League. 
The power of 50 peers and 16 major peers who had been loyal ‘Carrot’ approach like Order of the Garter, patronage, King’s As 36/62 noble families in bonds and
the nobility  to the Yorkists. Some had retainers. Richard had and Great Council. ‘Stick’ approach like Acts of Attainder, recognisances and the number of Act of
given out lots of titles and land to ensure that illegal retainers banned, feudal dues, Act of Resumption, Attainder reach 51 in the period 1504-
the nobles were loyal. Henry needs their help bonds and recognisances. As a result little noble unrest after 1509, Henry was very unpopular. 
and advice to rule, to enforce royal will in the the Simnel rebellion. 
localities and were required to fill key offices. 

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout, consider why weak finances was/was not the most
serious challenge, is this factor linked to any other and how, and which factor(s) were more/less important and why? 
 ‘Henry VII’s financial policy was a great success’. How far do you
agree?  

• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 ‘Henry VII’s financial policy was a great success’. How far do you agree?   
This question requires you to consider the different ways Henry tried to strengthen his royal finances, considering the success of each and then overall. You need to be clear
what his aims were  in order to have clear criteria for success.  
Policy  What was this?  How did this help  How did this not help? 
Financial Henry was keen to try to restore royal finances if Henry had more control over the Chamber system, and quickly increased his finances. In the first year of Henry’s reign he received
administ needed to raise an army (no standing army only £11,700 from his lands, whereas
ration  remember), and to help him look and act like a Henry’s total by the end of the reign was only £113,000, which helped Henry raise armies when needed, and Richard gathered £29,000. Henry even had
powerful monarch. He had to consider how best to also impress foreign diplomats. Munificence. to get loans to pay for his coronation and
organise his financial administration. At first he had marriage and there was not enough money
used the Exchequer system to manage his finances, to pay for the celebrations on St George’s
but it was too slow. So he quickly switched to the day in 1487.
Chamber system, so that he could directly supervise
it. 
Ordinary Money that was collected regularly, without the Crown Lands- Not only did HVII maximise his income from crown lands but also increased the amount of But he did not take back all the land to
revenue  need to obtain the permission of Parliament  land the crown held- 5 times more land than under Henry VI. Due to the 1486 Act of Resumption and seizure which he was entitled in order to avoid
of land from attainders. Income rose from £29,000 in 1485 to £42,000 by 1509. The greatest success was the antagonising the nobility. 
Duchy of Lancaster as Henry increased his income from its lands ten-fold. During Henry’s reign there were Custom duties (tax on trade)- Under Edward
138 attainders, although 46 were reversed.  IV custom duties had brought in about
Profits of Justice- Henry did his best to exploit the system and often punished people financially for their £70,000 per annum. During Henry’s reign it
crimes rather than imprisonment (Northumberland was fined £10,000 for rape.  only went from £33,000 to £40,000.  
Feudal dues- Income from feudal dues rose dramatically during Henry’s reign, from under £350 per annum in  
1487 to over £6000 in 1507.
Bonds and Recognisances- Good of way of controlling the nobility as well as raising money. 
Extraordi Revenue for emergencies only, such as war. Parliamentary grants. Henry only asked for money from parliament in exceptional circumstances, such as The amount collected varied and did not
nary Parliamentary approval was needed, but it also came defeating Simnel or Warbeck, and   bring in the amounts they should have
revenue  from other sources as well    done. 
Loans- Brought In £203,000 from his wealth subjects but had to pay it back.  Benevolences could not be used regularly
Benevolences- Forced loans that he did not have to pay back, in times of crisis for example when going to as it would provoke resentment. 
war with France in 1491, bringing in £48,500.   He had to be careful due to the Yorkshire
Clerical (church) taxes/simony and Cornish rebellions when raising taxes. 
Feudal aid was levied on special occasions for example the knighting of Prince Arthur brought in £30,000 and Yorkshire Rebellion led by a member of the
on the marriage of his daughter Margaret to James IV of Scotland.  nobility, John Egremont, after
French Pension- Negotiated as part of the Treaty of Etaples in 1492 after the English agreed to remove their parliamentary taxation. 
armies from French soil. Henry was promised £159,000 which was paid in an annual income of £5000.  Cornish Rebellion involved Lord Audley,
  after parliamentary taxation. 

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout, considering which reason was the most/least successful and why, and how they link together.  
 ‘How serious was the opposition to Henry VII’s financial
policies?   
• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 How serious was the opposition to Henry VII’s financial policies?     
This question requires you to consider the different opposition that Henry faced as a result of his financial policies, considering how serious each was, and whether they were the most/least
serious.  You need to be clear why Henry needed to restore royal finances (to raise an army (no standing army remember), and to help him look and act like a powerful monarch, but in
doing so needed to spend money to deal with opposition to his financial policies. 
 

Opposition What caused this opposition?  Why was this serious?  Why was it not serious? 
factor

Cornish Started because of unrest caused by being forced to pay Rebels assembled at Bodmin and grew in size as they They only attracted the support of one noble,
Rebellion  taxes to fund a war with Scotland.    marched through Devon into Somerset, but reduced in Lord Audley, but They were easily crushed at
numbers as they approached London.  Blackheath in June 1497 by a royal army of
complained about ‘evil counsellors’ such as Morton 25,000 men. 
and Bray, and attracted 15,000 supporters.   

Yorkshire Caused by Henry’s attempts to raise money to aid Brittany This rebellion was led by Sir John Egremont, a Yorkist Henry then appointed the Earl of Surrey, a
Rebellion  in its struggle against France. It began when a royal official supporter, but was easily crushed by a royal army.  Yorkist, as his representative in the north.
Earl of Northumberland was murdered after trying to Surrey went on to successfully run the Council
collect tax.   of the North, proving his loyalty to Henry 
 

Nobles who Henry  used bonds and recognisances to control the Left many nobles in financial penury, and brought England Although it provoked unrest, civil war did not
disliked his nobility. Bonds were written agreements in which people close to civil war.  happen, and only some nobles were involved
exploitation promised to pay a sum of money if they failed to carry out in rebellions. 
of bonds and their promise and recognisances were a formal
recognisances acknowledge of a debt. Between 1485 and 1509, 36 out
  of 62 noble families were involved in such agreements.
This compares to only one peer during Yorkist rule. 

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout, considering which
opposition was the most/least serious and why, and how they link together. 
 ‘Assess the reasons why Henry VII was able to
reduce the power of the nobility?  
• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 Assess the reasons why Henry VII was able to reduce the power of the nobility?    
This question requires you to consider the different reasons why HVII was able to reduce the power of the nobility, so what did Henry do and you could also
consider the fact that the nobility arguably wasn’t as strong as it could have been, which is another reason why Henry was able to reduce their power.   
 
Reason What was this?  How this helped reduce the power?  How this didn’t help 
Weakness of Some historians suggest the It meant that that nobility were not a significant problem anyway, which means it will be easier However some historians claim the nobles were very powerful
the nobility  Wars of the Roses had killed for Henry to reduce their power further using his carrot and stick polices to sanction and when Henry became King (A. Grant described them as ‘super
off many so the incentivise the nobility.  nobles’), as the beginning of Henry’s reign nobles still owned
nobility were not a serious England had 50 peers and 16 major peers when Henry took over as King. He reduced this to 35 lots of land (like the Earl of Northumberland in the north-east,
threat.  and 10 by the end of his reign.  Edward IV had increased the number of peers from 42 to 36 and the Stanleys in the north-west).  
and major peers from 7 to 12. 
Carrots  Incentives for the nobility to Only created 3 new Earls in comparison to Edward IV’s 9, for example John De Vere became the Yorkshire Rebellion led by a member of the nobility, John
provide good and loyal service Earl of Oxford after supporting Henry at Bosworth. Henry also used the Order of the Garter 37 Egremont. 
to the king.  times as it was a better way of rewarding the nobles than granting land, for example Cornish Rebellion involved Lord Audley. 
Lord Debauney who had led the royal forces to defeat the Cornish rebellion. Henry could also
give you a position on the King’s Council and does this if you particularly loyal and trusted, like
with 5 of his key councillors who had supported hum at Bosworth. Henry also gave positions on
the Great Council which was called to discuss high matters of state, and in doing so ensured
noble support for measures. There were 5 meetings of the Great Council in Henry’s reign. 
Sticks  Sanctions if the nobility did Acts of Attainder with special conditions so that they could be reversed for good behaviour. Some nobles don’t listen. For example Lord Burgavenny was
not provide good and loyal Edward IV passed more attainders than Henry (140 to 138), but Henry often attached harsh fined £70,000 for illegally retaining. 
service.  conditions and Henry increased the use of Attainders in the later years of his reign, with 51 in Between 1485 and 1509, 36 out of 62 noble families were
the period 1504-1509.   involved in such agreements. This compares to only one peer
Henry also used bonds and recognisances to control the nobility.   during Yorkist rule. The fact that Henry uses this so much
Henry also insisted on his feudal rights such as marriage, wardship, relief and livery.  particularly towards the end of his reign would suggest that
Henry also limited retainers (private armies). In 1485 nobles were sworn not to retain illegally Henry is still concerned about the potential power of the
and in 1504 proclamations were introduced which ensured nobles needed a license to retain.   nobility.  
Henry also regained former crown land from the nobles and through the 1486 Act of  
Resumption managed to acquire 5 times more land by the end his reign than in the reign of
Henry VI. 

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout,
considering which reason was the most important and why, and how they link together. 
 How successfully did Henry VII
manage the nobility?   

• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 How successfully did Henry VII manage the nobility?       
This question requires you to consider the different ways Henry tried to manage the nobility, considering the success of each and then
overall. In order to clearly argue where Henry saw success and failure, you need criteria for success and that would be his aims.  
Aim  Why did Henry need to do this?  What went well?  What didn’t go well?
Reduce the Henry was a usurper. Many nobles still owned lots of land England had 50 peers and 16 major peers when Henry took Sticks meant he was very unpopular and often
power of the (like the Earl of Northumberland in the north-east, and over as King. He reduced this to 35 and 10 by the end of his they broke the rules 
nobility  the Stanleys in the north-west). Henry needed their help reign.  Edward IV had increased the number of peers from Some nobles don’t listen.
as he was inexperienced. Henry needed their help to fill 42 to 36 and major peers from 7 to 12.  For example Lord Burgavenny was fined
key offices and help keep peace throughout the   £70,000 for illegally retaining. 
land. Many had supported Richard III as they had gained Carrots- patronage/Order of the Garter/ King’s Council/ Between 1485 and 1509, 36 out of 62 noble
rewards from him. They could rebel (and you know this Great Council   families were involved in such agreements.
happened).  Sticks- Acts of Attainder/ bonds and recognisances/ limited This compares to only one peer during Yorkist
Some historians claim the nobles were very powerful retainers (private armies)/ regained former crown lands rule. The fact that Henry uses this so much
when Henry became King (A. Grant described them as from the nobility  particularly towards the end of his reign
‘super nobles’). Others suggest the Wars of the Roses had   would suggest that Henry is still concerned
killed off many so were not a serious threat.  about the potential power of the nobility. 
Prevent Many had supported Richard III as they had gained Very limited evidence of the nobility being involved Yorkshire Rebellion led by a member of the
rebellions  rewards from him, and as a usurper and a Lancastrian, in the rebellions.  nobility, John Egremont. 
there were likely to be challenges.  Cornish Rebellion involved Lord Audley. 
 
Henry needed Henry needed their help to fill key offices and help keep Filled the Great Council and King’s council  Sir William Stanley, a member of the King’s
their help as peace throughout the land. Henry was inexperienced and Northumberland and then Earl of Surrey in charge of the Council, was accused of supporting Warbeck
he was had spent most of his life in exile. He also had not been Council of the North   and was executed for treason in 1494. 
inexperienced prepared for kingship.
   

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout, considering which
reason was the most/least successful and why, and how they link together. 
 ‘Henry VII’s measures of dealing with the nobility were
unnecessarily harsh’. How far do you agree?    

• Your argument
• Your 3 or 4 factors
• Which factor best supports your argument (and therefore you would
start with this one, unless you gave been given a factor in the
question)
• What order would you do the other factors
• If you have time… any particular evidence that you should mention in
your response
 ‘Henry VII’s measures of dealing with the nobility were unnecessarily harsh’. How far do you agree?      
This question requires you to consider the different ways Henry tried to manage the nobility, considering the success of each and then
overall.  
Measure/factor What did Henry do?  Harsh  Not harsh 
Carrots  Patronage/ Order of the Henry does not use incentives that much.  Provided rewards for the nobility who had provided good and loyal service, and not in
Garter/ King’s Council/ Great England had 50 peers and 16 major peers when Henry took over as King. He hope of this. 
Council  reduced this to 35 and 10 by the end of his reign.    Henry also used the Order of the Garter 37 times as it was a better way of rewarding
    the nobles than granting land, for example Lord Debauney who had led the royal
Only created 3 new Earls in comparison to Edward IV’s 9.  forces to defeat the Cornish rebellion. 
  Henry could also give you a position on the King’s Council and does this
if you particularly loyal and trusted, like with 5 of his key councillors who had
supported hum at Bosworth. Henry also gave positions on the Great Council.
Sticks  Acts of Attainder/ bonds and Sticks meant he was very unpopular and often they broke the rules  But he did not take back all the land to which he was entitled in order to
recognisances/ limited During Henry’s reign there were 138 attainders, although 46 were avoid antagonising the nobility. 
retainers (private reversed.  Edward IV passed more attainders than Henry (140 to 138), but Henry In 1485 nobles were sworn not to retain illegally and in 1504 proclamations were
armies)/ regained former often attached harsh conditions and Henry increased the use of Attainders in the introduced which ensured nobles needed a license to retain. But some nobles don’t
crown lands from the nobility  later years of his reign, with 51 in the period 1504-1509.  listen. For example Lord Burgavenny was fined £70,000 for illegally retaining, which is
Between 1485 and 1509, 36 out of 62 noble families were involved in a bond. why he had to be harsh. 
This compares to only one peer during Yorkist rule. The fact that Henry uses this  
so much particularly towards the end of his reign would suggest that Henry is  
still concerned about the potential power of the nobility. 
Henry also insisted on his feudal rights such as marriage, wardship, relief and
livery. 
Henry also regained former crown land from the nobles and through the 1486
Act of Resumption managed to acquire 5 times more land by the end his reign
than in the reign of Henry VI. 
Financial policy  To restore royal finances if Not only did HVII maximise his income from crown lands but also increased the In 1495, an Act of Parliament confirmed to Henry all the land of Richard III. But he did
needed to raise an army (no amount of land the crown held- 5 times more land than under Henry VI. Due to not take back all the land to which he was entitled in order to avoid antagonising the
standing army remember), and the 1486 Act of Resumption and seizure of land from attainders. Income rose nobility. 
to help him look and act like a from £29,000 in 1485 to £42,000 by 1509.  
powerful monarch. Taxes fell Yorkshire Rebellion led by a member of the nobility, John Egremont. 
mostly on nobility. Cornish Rebellion involved Lord Audley. 
 

The best responses will use the ‘Yes, but, so’ structure to make judgements throughout, considering which reason was the most/least harsh and why, and how they link together. When coming to a
judgement, you might argue that Henry was harsh but this was necessary.