To what extent was the increasing use of royal progresses beyond London and the Home Counties a key factor in maintaining royal authority over the country?

Question 1

Royal progresses: symbolic projection of authority but geographically limited

Answer 1

• allowed monarchs to visibly demonstrate power and connect with regions beyond London
• Henry VII used them early in his reign to consolidate power, while Elizabeth I revived them more frequently
• Elizabeth’s progresses included visits to Norfolk (1578) and the West Country (1574), reinforcing loyalty among noble hosts
• extent of involvement = limited - progresses mostly involved elites and avoided remote or volatile areas like Cornwall or the far North
• effective in reinforcing elite loyalty and prestige but did little to enforce policy or address local unrest
• breadth of impact = narrow - they engaged elite households and towns, not the broader population
• progresses - occasional and ceremonial, not permanent tools of royal administration
• helped legitimise royal presence but not central to maintaining control across the country

Question 2

JPs: institutional foundation of royal authority in localities

Answer 2

• provided a permanent, practical mechanism for enforcing Crown authority at local level
• responsibilities included law enforcement, poor relief, tax collection, religious policy, + wage regulation
• extent of involvement grew throughout the period, making them the most consistently engaged local officials
• effective in preventing rebellion, particularly during crises like the 1590s economic distress
• JPs ensured the Crown had year-round presence in every county, unlike progresses which were irregular
• breadth of their impact = national - JPs operated in all localities and dealt with all classes of society.
• local origins gave them legitimacy BUT royal appointments ensured loyalty
• did the daily work of royal government that progresses could not achieve

Question 3

Regional councils: structural enforcement in rebellious zones

Answer 3

• council of the North (1537) + Council of Wales offered targeted royal oversight in traditionally unstable regions
• councils = empowered to enforce royal law, conduct trials, + manage local administration.
• extent of involvement was deep within their regions - especially in the North after the PoG
• proved effective in preventing further rebellion in those areas, particularly throughout the mid-Tudor period
• BUT effectiveness declined under Elizabeth bc southern councillors were appointed, eroding local trust
• breadth of impact = geographically limited but structurally significant in frontier areas
• councils were part of a broader centralisation effort but did not have national scope
• unlike progresses, they provided institutional stability and continuous enforcement in volatile regions