Analysis of Women Education During The Tudor Period

Women education (essay)

There is some important background information that one must try to navigate and examine reader when it comes to women education. In this essay it would be of neglect to simply use the case study of men to investigate literacy rates among people in the Tudor period and ignoring women during this period. Therefore, it is important for one to gain some insight into what women were expected to learn and how they were educated.

Introduction

Many women were taught within their own household or within their Church community which have been problematic for historians because of the lack of sources coming for the period on this subject offered. There have been a variety of different historical debates on the subject of female education in Tudor England which has conveyed that “women education in Tudor England was differentiate along gender laws from that of boys in terms of advantional staring, the nature and range of subjects taught, and the social purpose of instruction.” It was for the exception that women were taught a wide range of subjects these women include Princess Elizabeth, Lady Jane Grey, the daughters of Thomas Moore, Anthony Cooke and Henry Fitzgerald who essentially had access to the male educational opportunities. Margret Sommerville has suggested that “‘classical, scriptural, patic and medieval authorities ‘upon which Renaissance though was based shared a basic assumptions of women intellectual inferiority to men and certain written questioned whether women were in fact rationed beings.” One way in which historians can research the subject of women literacy and their competence in the educational sense. Sommerville committed to a wide range of research into the subject of female letter where she found that “Some 390 or 60% of women were markers of the gentry, 30% of writers, approx. 19% were from the nobility and 15% were female courtiers.” This portrays to the exclusive nature of education for women during the Tudor period. This can be argued disputes the theory of R.D. Attick and Cressy, they suggest that education was more widespread and more accessible than first believed, which can offer a narrow view. It is very much the case that male education was more widespread than historians first assumed in the dissuasion of educational opportunities. Yet there was a lack differentiation for women education because only the very top of society who were offered the wide array of subject’s which men were offered.

Female education in the Tudor period: a research

Historians can use this narrative, but it is hard to get a grip on how education developed and occurred during the time, without using primary sources. Primary source analysis can help to gain some sort of idea of how education developed over time. For example, the King Edward VI Stratford Grammar School which was an incredibly noble school where those from high priority positions comes to this school. Children of Noble birth were invariably taught by tutors at one but, from the age of 7 to 14, children of a lower standing went to Grammar Schools – the most common institute for Elizabethan childhood and education during the Elizabethan period. The Grammar School in Stratford was called King Edward Grammar School and William Shakespeare would have started attendance at the Elizabethan Grammar school at the age of seven – his education truly beginning. The school and education would have been financed by the local Guild. The younger boys, including Shakespeare, would have spent their early childhood being taught by Ushers, a junior master or senior pupil at the Grammar School. This short introduction to grammar and education, complied by William Lily, had been authorised by Henry VIII as the sole Latin grammar textbook to be used in education and schools. In 1558 a child’s speller was written in England as spelling consistency gradually emerges. The first year of Elizabethan education the ciruclm would have consisted of learning parts of speech together with verbs and nouns. The Ushers often refused to be bothered with teaching of handwriting and this element of Elizabethan education was often taught by a temporary travelling scrivener for a few weeks during the school. From the age of 10 the boys would leave the Ushers to study with the Masters at the King Edward VI Grammar School thus continuing with their translations and extending their Elizabethan education by studying the works of the great classical authros and dramtislst, such as Ovid, Plautus, Horace, Virgil, Cicero and Seneca. The histories of Caesar, Sallust and Livy were studied too, for their moral example was believed relevant to life in Elizabethan England and therefore individual in their education. This was the basis of the Elizabethan childhood and education of Elizabethan children including William Shakespeare, may also have included the study of Greek, but textbooks were scarce and only the very best teachers had enough experience to teach the language. The salaries offered by the King Edward VI Stratford grammar school were £10 per year for a Master and £40 per year for the Headmaster and these were on par with the most prominent schools in England. This therefore attracted some of the most accomplished teachers. It is also probable that two Oxford graduates, Ben Hunt and Thomas Jenkins, were employed as Masters of Elizabethan Education at the time William Shakespeare attended the King Edward VI Stratford Grammar school. These references made it clear that the childhood of William Shakespeare and the Elizabethan education that he received at the King Edward VI Stratfor Grammar school was of high quality.

Some historians have suggested that research into illiteracy and literacy have been rather negligent and lacks in true substance. There are some fantastic historians such as Cressy and Holt who offer a great deal to the subject. However, perhaps the depth in the subject may not be present. This conveys the importance of researching and discussing these issues. A rather obscure issue within the subject of literacy is the subject of charity schools who did much for the spread of literacy and educational opportunities. For example, there was an increase in literacy of trade men between 1595-1604 which some historians have put the link directly to charity schools. Although we are yet to discuss the literacy of women it is widely accepted that women illiteracy was much more widespread than male illiteracy level’s H has suggested that it was the social structure that impacted illiteracy levels and it was consistent with the social perimeters which were placed on each social hierarchy. He insists that “yeomen never approached the commence of gentlemen while husbandmen were always inferior to yeomen. Among the composite category of tradesmen and craftsmen bricklayers never approached the literacy of weavers and they in turn were consistently more illiterate than grocers.” There is further evidence from records other than marks and signatures, namely marriage records, which convey that those records which were found during the sixteenth and seventh century were more advanced than those literacy levels during the eighteenth century. These are some important findings which must be discussed and debated because it does provide evidence for the concept that there was some sort of ‘educational revolution’ during the Tudor and Stuart period. Whereas there was a stagnation during the eighteenth-century literacy which conveys an even more staggered improvement or decline where changes were more sustainable to a more ruthless and unstable political climate. Therefore, it is extremely important to discuss the education structure during the Tudor and Stuart period to find out why literacy rates were higher during the Tudor period than in the Eightenth century. Education is a very fluid and ever-changing concept which is impacted by a variety of other factors such as politics, funding, religion etc. Therefore, to consider education simply just the sole indicator of literacy rates being higher is naive. Yet, there is a clear correlation between the two.

When mentioning this so called ‘educational revolution’ one does in a rather felicitous manner. This is because the evidence is not as clear and connective as I would like it to be. Yet it is still important for historians to consider this ‘educational revolution’ within the social perimeters of the Tudor society to consider whether this ‘education revolution’ correlates with an increase in education opportunities. Lawrence Stone suggests that “the very poor, the unskilled and property-fewer labouring classes Had no prospects, but the ordinary poor and everybody above them, were embraced by the educational revolution” Simon agrees that educational opportunity was socially arranged. Simon seems to imply that the middle class were the most active in the participation and spread of educational opportunity. This is refused by Stone who suggests that it was because of the influx of the gentry, while acknowledging the disadvantage of the extremely poor but the poor were available to some educational opportunities.

When researching literacy levels, not just during the Tudor period, it is clear for one to observe that literacy is a very fluid subject and something which varies over time. For this dissertation to be being relevance to the education research subject we must assume that literacy and education are defiantly linked in whatever way that may be, which convey changes in literacy over time along with an increase in educational opportunities. Literacy evidence is often highly disputed and sometimes up for subjective reasoning which is something that is not viable to use as evidence in a historical dissertation. Most of the problems with literacy estimates, even today, is that it assumes that if one was to become literature it was during their childhood which this was the case. Therefore, using their age to refine the search for literacy rates. Evidence has suggested that males from all classes were more than able to gain some sort of literature education. “Boys from all social backgrounds who were of school age in the period 1560 to 1590 made strong gains in their ability to sign. Yeomen improved from around 55 per cent illiterate in the cohort of the 1550’s to 30 pr cent by the 1570’s. Tradesment improved from 55% to 40% over the same period, while husbandmen also made progress, from 90% to 70% unable to sing This has landed to the title of a ‘educational revolution’ evidently spliced over into elementary instruction. Educational facilities were expanding in the Elizabethan period and educational opportunities throughout society may well have expanded with them.”

Between the period of 1574 and 1604 there were a variety of different changes in what children were taught and how they were taught. As a general comment the ability and the quality of schoolmasters were surprisingly high. Two thirds of men licensed as a grammar school schoolmaster had graduated from university. However, the most intruding part of these statics is that “a third of schoolmasters who simply just wanted to teach young children to read and write were also graduates. Further evidence for the existence of a wide variety of educational opportunities comes from the research into yeomen. Yeomen were more literature and could be expected to have some sort of disposable income. Income which they could spend on developing their educational skills and widening their educational opportunities. For example, a small number of colleges entrants from the Isle of Ely, compared to those from Cambridgeshire uplands one the hand, that yeomen from the uplands could afford to send their sons to university more often than could from the ferns”. When considering the geopedological locations of these educational opportunities it is clear that some place were more interested in education.

When discussing the educational opportunities, I have rather purposely ignored female participation in education up until this point. This is because it is a rather complex and confusing case which deserves a whole section by itself. When looking at the patterns of linguistic and any changes in style. There is a clear link between social structures and literacy. Sixtneth century literacy would permit the production of written language were shaped by cultural values of gender. According to pollock 'Education was functional, no aspirational'. Further supported by Clarke as enforced existing social distinctions” This led to many women receiving tuition in the domestic sense in the variety of different deomstic subjects siuch as needlework, cooking etc. However, this is disputed by some other theroeis and histroinas who consider themselves as educationalists who advocated female education to keep their purportedly “weaker minds” occupied. Clarke has offered a rather complex but intriguing explanation for the postion for women in the in Tudor society. Clarke has suggested that “this resulted in a paradoxical situation that women granted access to knowledge for their betterment could potentially disrupt the distribution of gendered social roles a situation exacerbated by the rise in humanist thinking which privileged individual access to knowledge.”. Clarke uses the way in which female authored texts the way in which they were wrote and their stylstic manner the expectations placed on textual production.

The examination of over one hundred letters, written by high ranking females in the social hierarchy written by Arbela have survived. Published by Sara Steen in 1993 she provides details on Arbela activities and ideas. During the biography “wreath for Arabella” written by Donis in 1948. Lanier examines these and recalls a personal friendship with Arbella that was unrequited, she addreed her as “Great learned Ladie … whom long I have known but not known so much as I desired”  Felicia Hermans poems Arbella Stuart she imagined her thoughts when she died in prison. Further research in this comes from Sarah Gristwood published in 2005 where the “Bess of Hardwick gave her granddaughter an education fit for a princess and Arabella proved herself an able pupil; fluent in Latin, Greek, French, Itlian and Spanish, learned in philophy and an accomplished musician.” Arbella being a bright and intellectual woman is explained by Arbella making such an impression on Elizabeth in court that “Arbella made such an impression that Elizabeth spoke openly about twelve year old Arbella one day being queen. Stuart’s letters range from lively familiar alters to carefully drafted court letters, from warmth and affection to anger and defiance. They reflect an intelligent and articulate woman who was willing to challenge convention and the crown.”

An intriguing aspect into women educational opportunities is researching women at the time who were well educated, investigating the expereicnes of these women. This is the case with Catherine Parr who was an incredibly intellectual and well educated individual. Historian Mueller has suggested that Parr’s texts “determined, a sustained act of intertextual approiation that constitutes a genuine claim to authorship”. This is rather complex and an argument which has stricken with allot of historians such as Coles. When there was comparative analysis “there is an autograph manuscript version of this work, held at Kendal, which is thought to have been produced as a gift manuscript for a daughter of Sir Brian Tuke.” There was the greater degree of agency in the production of a manuscript, and therefore its more reliable capturing of par’s own stylistic choices, this is ht eversion of prayer suesed for analysis. Lamentation was published in 1547, although the references to still-alive Henry Viii suggest a composition date of 1546. There were other political impacts other than religion to parr’s texts which is often ignored. These include education where she was herself extremely well educated and wanted an increase educational opportunity, whereby she includes thirteen autograph letters written to Henry VIII and Sir Thomas Seymour, among others. It was through the intellectual prowess and her educational learnt that she was thought as a “noble youth and feminity”. Later on in her life it was through her intellect and her reputation which gave her intelcutal moblity around her male counterparts.

During this essay I have discussed the various issues when discussing literacy rates in a period which was such a long time ago. While one must acknowledge the various issues in defining the meaning of literacy and providing enough evidence to support one’s argument. However, historians have generally turned a blind eye to the concept of educational opportunities and its link in literacy rates during Tudor times. One thing we must agree on is that illiteracy was much more widespread among the female gender than the male gender and the common narrative is that a male’s educational and literacy status is purely dependent on one’s social status and position within their own social sphere. The social structure of illiteracy changed very little which in all reality, illiteracy levels varied quite dramatically in years to year. Therefore, a true link between social status is loose and rather dismissing other aspects which impact educational opportunities and literacy rates. I have explained with the likes of yeomen who never approached the educational ability of gentlemen, while husbandmen were always inferior to yeomen. Within the tradesmen class there were different types of workers and the class of tradesmen varied in its competency such as the difference between bricklayers and weavers. Where weavers had a higher literacy rate than bricklayer while gorcers were more illiterate than bricklayers. Further evidence which I have conveyed from marriage records of the seventh century which conveys the inability to very similar to that found in depositions of sixteenth and seventh century.

Conclusion

To conclude, I have discussed the various different complexness involved in the discussion when it comes to educational opportunities and literacy rates. Historians have often seemed dismissal of the subject of educational within the Tudor period. Yet, it is a complex and a fluid subject which cannot be sectioned into narrow premasters removing the debate surrounding the subject of education and social structure. While one must acknowledge that there is a average correlation between wealth and literacy/educational opportunities, the evidence which is used to get these figures are extremely troubling. While there are other more substantial figures which take into account much more than those of, Cressy who argues that education was not widespread, which offer evidence to suggest that education (acknowledging that literacy is a clear link between education and literacy) was more widespread than the first statement in this dissertation would argue. There is further research which must be committed into this subject and further questions must be asked. For example, trying to find more enough and effective ways to decide literacy rates rather than using rather unreliable methods which are not enough to be used in a historical issue. While I have touched briefly on the issue of validity when it comes to evidence surrounding the subject of education. Yet, a further in-depth research essay must be committed to finding reliable sources which can offer to the subject. Overall, the surrounding debate on the issue of educational opportunities and literacy rates is relatively small. However, there is more debate and discussion which is surroundings the subject because the common, schoolbook narrative is that education opportunities were preserved for those in the higher societies. Yet, research has since found that this was not necessarily the case because literacy rates and primary sources offer a different insight into the issue.