In this well-organised compilation of articles on ‘The Impact of the English Reformation 1500-1640’, Peter Marshall shares the views of a vast range of historians on the English Reformation. The book consists of twelve essays published between 1982 and 1995, and is organised into three sections: origins, implementation, and the outcomes of the Reformation. Specifically, what stands out are Marshall’s introductions at the start of each section which help to guide the reader through each essay’s views, and provides necessary context to what is being written. Furthermore, Marshall outlines his intentions in the preface of the book, stating that this volume aims to direct students to examples of significant recent work on the Reformation changes in England, specifically essays which have been published in the nineteen-eighties and ninety’s. The compendium of articles draws attention to different patterns, methodologies and particular concerns in current scholarship. It is also important to highlight that Marshall does not attempt to impose a view on the reader. Instead, Marshall creates a platform for the reader to make their own decision. From my readings, the main questions appear to be concerning whether there was any enthusiasm for religious change prior to the sixteenth century, whether central or local authorities implemented change and how the locals reacted, and, lastly, whether or not England had become a ‘Protestant nation’ by the seventeenth century. Consequently, this book stands out in comparison to other books on the Reformation as there is no unified argument, allowing the reader to formulate their own argument.
The first section, titled ‘origins’, focuses on the nature and extent of grass-roots enthusiasm for religious change in the half-century before the accession of Elizabeth. This is known as the ‘early Reformation’, and discusses the reason as to why the Reformation came about, and whether there was any dissatisfaction with the church at the time. The first essay in this section is written by Christopher Harper-Bill, who states that there were no significant problems with the English church and clerical discipline was not an issue at the time. Specifically, the essay argues that John Colet’s “admonition” to the clergy in fifteen-twelve was a warning to improve their living style, rather than implying that the clergy had failed. Consequently, Harper-Bill is posing an answer to Marshall’s question by suggesting that Henry VIII’s problems regarding his marriage were the cause of the rise of Protestantism, rather than religious problems. Furthermore, J. F. Davis focuses on the Lollards, arguing that they were significant in shaping the ideas of the Reformation, as well as remaining distinctive. By contrast, Susan Brigden and A. G. Dickens’s arguments are more unified. Brigden states that the lack of economic opportunities for the younger generation in the sixteenth century was the core reason for the Reformation in England. They acknowledged crucial problems with pre-Reformation England and, therefore, were responsive to change. This coincides with A. G. Dicken’s argument who also believes that a group of people had emerged in England by the sixteenth century who were responsive change. Subsequently, I am more convinced by the arguments of A. G. Dickens and Brigden as for dramatic change to occur, people have to provoke it. Consequently, it seems convincing that the younger generation would want change as they were restricted in their opportunities.
In addition to this, the second section involves contrasting ideas surrounding the implementation of officially sanctioned reform in the localities from the fifteen-thirties, until Elizabeth’s death. Specifically, it highlights the role of central and local authorities in enacting or reversing reformation, as well as the reaction of local communities to these reforms. In Robert Whiting’s essay, he argues that discontent with religion was caused by the Tudor state. The people of England had no enthusiasm for reform, but conformed anyway due to Henry VIII’s policies. Similarly, Ronald Hutton agrees with Whiting, and furthers this argument by stating that the government had ruined a ‘flourishing’ and ‘popular’ religion. This puts the implementation of the Reformation onto the state, rather than the localities, implying that the response was one which involved little enthusiasm. Moreover, Margaret Aston highlights the importance of the centralities within the state as they were able to undermine beliefs which were not well-rooted, allowing the state to implement reforms. By contrast, Eamon Duffy claims that the triumph of Protestantism was not inevitable. He puts the situation into context, arguing that if Mary’s reign had lasted longer, the implementation of these reforms would have been completely different. She intended to create a realistic model of Catholicism that encompassed both tradition, as well as the positive reforms of Henry and Edward, rather than an anti-Catholic attitude. Whilst these arguments direct control towards the state, one would question this religion does not appear to be imposed. Although Elizabeth was Protestant, she attempted to create a ‘middle-way’ between the religions, which shows how there must be other reasons as to why the Reformation occurred.
Consequently, the third section assesses how the reformation had affected the religious sensibilities and attitudes of the England by the last decades of the sixteenth and first decades of the seventeenth century. The main question Marshall asks is how far England could be seen as a ‘Protestant nation’ by the seventeenth century. Christopher Haig takes a similar view to what Marshall discussed in the introduction, arguing that the seventeenth century was not the end of the Reformation process, but the beginning. In particular, he highlights how different parts of the country had been impacted differently, with resistance to Reformation continuing well into Elizabeth’s reign. Furthermore, Judith Maltby looks back at the evidence and argues that historians have ignored those who quietly conformed to the religious changes without any revolt. She states that there may have been more conformity than has previously been explained by historians. By contrast, Patrick Collinson and Tessa Watt differ from these by stating that the mid-Elizabethan period marked a ‘Second Reformation’ as Elizabeth enforced rules more forcefully. They encourage us to regard Elizabethan and early Stuart periods as an essential part of the Reformation ‘process’.
Although this book attempts to cover the period from 1500-1640, important aspects of the impact of the Reformation are missing, such as the dissolution of the religious houses. Marshall’s statement that work was not represented due to ‘reasons of space’ might suggest that Marshall used a time-frame which was too broad for him to cover in depth. Whilst the essays emphasise different arguments, the specific details seem to be missing. Consequently, it is important for the reader to acknowledge that bias could exist both within the essays and by the editor as Marshall selected the essays, making it subjective. The book is also missing historiographical pieces and key historians, even though there have been a number of excellent essays written in recent times. For example, Michael Questier’s ‘Conversion, Politics, and Religion in England, 1580-1625’ would have been useful for discussing the conversion from Catholic to Protestant. Furthermore, it fails to deal with Elizabeth’s successors. Whilst it states that it deals with the period up until 1640, the essays fail to show how society reacted after Elizabeth had died. Subsequently, as William J. T argues, the collection focuses almost exclusively on the “main-line” reform which took place in the reigns of Elizabeth and James I . This becomes a problem when comparing this book to other books which cover a more distinctive period of time, such as Margo Todd’s ‘Reformation to Revolution: Politics and Religion in Early Modern England’, which covers the Tudor and early Stuart periods in more detail. By reading this review, the restrictions of the book became apparent. Whilst reading the book, I valued the varied opinions on how the Reformation progressed. However, William J. T’s review has made me question how I can form an opinion when Marshall focused too much on the “main-line” reform, and ignored important parts of the Reformation process.
However, whilst there are clear problems with this book, overall one would argue that this book allows us to understand the chronological order of the reformation, and provides various answers to the questions Marshall inquires. When reviewing this book it is important to remember Marshall’s aim; ‘to use these essays to help students to determine for themselves whether or not the English reformation actually happened, and if it did, what significance we should attach to it as a formative episode in our history. In my opinion, Marshall reaches his aim for the book. I agree with Christopher T. Dally in his statement that ‘it is a measure of Marshall’s success that no single, unified perspective emerges’, highlighting how he’s allowing us to form our own opinion as he intended . Whilst Marshall provides no methodological coherence, the essays provided are consistent and chronological. Although other reviews made me question how much of the Reformation these essays cover, overall it differs to other books as it has broader focuses on the social impact and implementation of Protestantism, rather than simply blaming the Reformation on government and clerical abuse.