We talk a lot about Henry VIII’s dissolution of the monasteries and how it affected the country, but rarely of what happened after.
Because the evolution of welfare in Tudor England took decades, let’s focus today on the reign of Edward VI, who took very decisive steps towards a new system. Since there’s so much to say, I’m splitting this into 2 parts. TL;DR at the end!
*** Background: the result of Henry’s policies ***
..If you read The Prince and the Pauper, you might remember Twain’s message that Edward VI was well aware of his people’s woes and eagerly acted to relieve them. The many “King Edward Schools” standing today seem to back this up.
At the same time, some scholars, like the Victorian Arthur Leach, go as far as to claim that Edward VI in fact destroyed a functioning welfare system in England, and all of the “King Edward schools” were mere rebranding of what had existed before.
Where is the truth?.. Let’s try to break it down.
The secularisation of education had begun under Henry VIII, guided by two Thomases: Wolsey, and Cromwell. Across Europe, Humanism and Reformation were driving the process. But while Luther and Melanchthon were designing brand new educational and poor relief frameworks for a Protestant Germany, Henry VIII’s regime did destroy the old monastic system, but… didn’t build a new one to replace it.
While Wolsey did found the Cardinal College and promoted humanist principles at schools, he “was not concerned with furthering learning among laymen so much as to counteract the effect of growing literacy, and [his policy] was to animate the Counter-Reformation.” (J. Simon) Cromwell had far-reaching plans to bring education under state control, but ran out of time.
As a result, by the end of Henry’s reign,
>There had been a wholesale transference of rights over schools to the crown, [...] But no concerted programme for refounding schools, and those established were connected with an ecclesiastical foundation in the traditional way.
Then in 1547, Henry dies. This is where we see some real transformation.
*** Uprooting the old system ***
Edward’s reign started with another dissolution — this time, of chantries. That had already been on Henry VIII’s mind to fund his wars, but Parliament turned down the project.
In December 1547, after a lot of debate, the Chantries Act passed. Chantries were less of a social safety net than monasteries, but still managed a number of schools and hospitals. (Though, as W.K. Jordan points out, only a few hospitals fulfilled their original function by that time, and the number of schools is hard to estimate, as Leach admits.)
To make up for their loss, the Chantries Act foresaw allocation of lands for school foundations. The King would appoint commissioners. The priests of former chantries would receive pensions. Each county would get at least two schools, and each school, a good master with a decent salary. It was all well thought-out on paper.
In reality… It didn’t work as intended. Very few schools received endowments, pensions were abysmally low. In 1548, many chantry lands were sold to finance Somerset’s war in Scotland, just like in Henry’s time.
Promises mostly unfulfilled, many were disappointed: from preachers like Latimer and Ridley to royal tutors like Roger Ascham. At last, in February 1550, they were heard. After the fall of the Lord Protector, war with France and Scotland was over, and the new government finally prioritised domestic policies. The Court of Augmentations received the power to erect grammar schools, and many petitions from cities were answered.
*** Wave of foundation ***
Between 1550 and 1553, schools were (re)founded in 29 counties. What strikes me most is the genuine, if naive, attempt by Edward’s government to promote better social equality.
Look at the royal charters. The statute for Bury school (1550) commanded that:
>“Poor men’s children be admitted before others and taught without partiality as soundly as the richest.”
The statute of King’s Lynn school:
>“Let rich and poor have the same consideration. Let it be exhibited in teaching and everything else without distinction.”
The same went for universities, where the monarchy encouraged a more socially just governance: “In the election of fellows and scholars, the sons of poor persons, being apt and of good abilities, are to be preferred to the sons of rich and powerful persons.” This well aligns with Edward’s own writings. In them, his commitment to a fairer society where laws applied to all "without the respect of persons” is obvious.
Healthcare wasn’t neglected either. In 1552, two institutions opened to provide free medical care: the refounded medieval St Thomas and the wholly new Christ’s Hospital. This latter was to give shelter, medical care, and education to the orphans of London. A generation later, it became a grammar school.
How were these institutions funded? Some, like Sherborne, Bury St Edmunds, or Christ’s Hospital, received rents from former chantries and endowments of lands or royal palaces. Others, like the school in Southampton, were financed by generous local benefactors or city councils. Many were a mix. Some provided free tuition, others charged a fee. It was not an ideal setup, as not all families would send their kids to a school, even a free one, but still a big step forward.
*** Philanthropic boom ***
Speaking of private benefactors. Charity was a central element of Edward’s reign, especially in 1550-53, under the Duke of Northumberland. In today’s currency, charitable donations in 1550-53 reached an incredible £33.7 million (ca. $45.8 million), with 51% intended for sick care and 18% for education. Not a single decade of the Elizabethan Golden age was that generous. In fact, this amount of charitable giving would not be equaled until James VI and I. And what strikes even more — and that amidst very radical Protestant reforms — is the clearly secular character of the Edwardian charity, with only < 5% meant for religious purposes.
On top of private donations, in six years between 1547 and 1553, the Crown assigned £19.6 million ($26.5 million) for charitable purposes, although we can’t be sure how much of that was “new money” and how much was reallocation of former chantry rents.
How about the King’s personal charity? Edward VI donated quite a lot from his own wealth, limited though it was (especially under the Lord Protector). In 1547 alone, he gave out £112K for the care of the deserving poor, for example, to help parents whose child had gone missing. As he grew up, he took notes on the sermons of Ridley’s and Latimer’s, which criticised the injustices in England and sought a private audience with them, asking how he personally could do more.
*** Blueprint for Elizabethan laws ***
More importantly, the very framework of charity changed. Compared to medieval almsgiving, private, irregular, and a bit haphazard, charity now set out to become systematic and regulated.
While Elizabeth’s Poor Relief Act of 1601 is well-known, it was actually based on the less known resolution of London Council of 1547. For the first time in England, Londoners had to pay taxes to support poor relief in the city. Norwich followed with a compulsory tax in 1549.
Another policy Elizabeth ihnerited from her brother was to distinguish between “deserving” poor, who genuinely needed help, and the “professional beggars”, who had to be punished. To do that, cities had to draw up a census of inhabitants.
(It’s important to remember that this distinction between “deserving” and “undeserving” poor was very much in line with the humanist (not just Protestant) thinking in Europe at the time. One advocate of it was the Spanish humanist Juan Luis Vives. And of course, Martin Luther adhered to this principle when designing poor relief plans for Germany.)
TL;DR: In Edward VI’s reign, the State finally replaced the Church as the guarantor of welfare. Inspired by European humanist and reformist thinking, the monarchy, cities, and private benefactors together drove a surge in charitable giving unmatched until the 17th century, founding new and refounding closed schools, hospitals, and shelters to give children and adults a new chance at life. Although the setup wasn’t ideal and funds limited, we can say that the policies under Edward VI created a blueprint for Elizabeth’s Poor Laws of 1601, and as such, for the modern welfare system.
Sources:
- J. Simon, Education and Society in Tudor England
- W.K. Jordan: Edward VI: the threshold of power, Philanthropy in England, and The charities of London, 1480-1660