Talk:Pilgrimage of Grace

---

Roman catholics?, Five Wounds

Is it strictly correct to refer to the Pilgrims as "Roman Catholics"? This would seem to be a retospective label. The nature of the schism at this point in the Reformation isn't quite that clear cut.

Use of the Five Wounds at the emblem of the rebellion seems worth a mention, but I'm not sure where. I'll have a think. Epeeist smudge 10:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The RCC debate has been done to death elsewhere. Both usages are correct. Five Wounds DOES need to be in here somewhere. -- SECisek 22:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Successes/Failures seems a bit biased

The entire section of Successes/Failures is heavily biased towards Catholicism, and is not at all from a NPOV...I think it's the point of view of the Catholic Church/the rebels, but that fact is never stated. It needs to be reworded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.199.13 (talk) 17:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

It's also inaccurate: "Princess Mary (later Queen Mary I of England) was restored to the succession in 1537". To start with Mary was, at this point, known as Lady Mary rather than Princess, and she wasn't restored to the succession in 1537. She was restored to the line of Succession with the Third Act of Succession, passed in July 1543.

It should be amended to "Lady Mary (later Queen Mary I of England) was restored to the succession in 1543."86.47.42.32 (talk) 12:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

If it even counts as a success of the Pilgrimage of Grace, of course. It would only really be a success for the Pilgrimage of Grace if Henry restored Mary because of it and, since he also restored Elizabeth, that doesn't seem to have been the case. Maybe it should be removed from the Successes list altogether.

It might even belong under Failures, given that Mary was not restored to the succession, as demanded, and that her restoration came separately. She got pregnant in 1538.

"Lady Mary (later Queen Mary I of England) was not restored to the succession following the Pilgrimage of Grace. However, she would later be restored to the succession when the Third Succession Act was passed in July 1543."

Perhaps the part about Cromwell should also be moved from Successes to Failures. He didn't fall from power after the Pilgrimage of Grace. His downfall resulted from his determination to get Henry to remarry after Jane Seymour's death, and from his part in arranging the marriage to Anne of Cleves, whom Henry disliked.

It'd probably be better not to give the Pilgrimage of Grace credit where credit isn't due. As it stands, it's misleading.86.47.42.32 (talk) 13:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I think this is a bad section, anyway. Having a list of "successes and failures" seems like an unencyclopedic concept to me to begin with. And then, it credits the Pilgrimmage of Grace with being solely responsible for things like the six acts - which I'm sure have at least as much to do with the state of Henry VIIIs mind and the things various councillors were telling him as because it's something these rebels wanted - I'd have thought the fact that something appeared as a demand of the rebels would have been an obstacle to Henry proclaiming that more than a help to it eventually becoming law. --PaulHammond (talk) 16:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Percy

Doesn't this article link to the wrong Thomas Percy? It should link to the Thomas Percy of the 16th Century, yes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WillHHudson (talk • contribs) 07:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Reference's and Citatation

There are numerous parts of this article i'd like to see citation from, such as the portion on the economic grievances, not just for verification but also to make the sources available to readers such as myself studying the topic in detail. - Kristian Richings 15/05/10 (14.54) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paradox711 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Henry Percy, 6th Earl of Northumberland

I am removing Henry Percy, 6th Earl of Northumberland, as one of those who was executed as part of the uprising. His younger brother Thomas Percy was indeed executed for his part in the rebellion but Northumberland was not. He died in 1537 but was not executed. He died of an unknown illness. For more details see the following article for an account of his life and death. [1] Biggsy1988 (talk) 20:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pilgrimage of Grace. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091006061742/http://www.channel4.com:80/programmes/henry-viii-the-mind-of-a-tyrant/articles/the-pilgrimage-of-grace-1536 to http://www.channel4.com/programmes/henry-viii-the-mind-of-a-tyrant/articles/the-pilgrimage-of-grace-1536

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:58, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Pilgrimage of Grace/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

. Requires addition of inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates Copy edit for WP:MOS Keith D (talk) 15:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:43, 22 February 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 03:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Lincolnshire rising

How many were involved? 40,000 or 22,000? The article seems to say both. MrDemeanour (talk) 10:36, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

The amount of men can only be estimated. This textbook estimates 30,000. If the estimates range between 20-40 thousand perhaps the article should be edited to clearly state this. RBMBH (talk) 5:28, 22 February 2023 (EST)

References

Events: Richmondshire

The title Richmondshire seems inappropriate given the historical context as it is a modern term. North Riding would seem more appropriate. Beowulf (talk) 02:45, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Bigod's rebellion into this page

I can see some discussion on the talk page of the merge object (and merge tag at the top of that article) but since the editors here at the merge target would be forced to live with the decision, normally the discussion is at the target talk. I'm creating this discussion so the tag has an appropriate link to this talk space. My effort in creating this discussion is procedural only; I have no interest in the outcome. BusterD (talk) 19:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

True, but the discussion is active at Talk:Bigod's rebellion#What rebellion?; I suggest that it continues there to its conclusion. Klbrain (talk) 11:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)