Course:History 344 Nasty Families/Family structure/Wardship

Wardship was a feudal right of the monarchs of England (1). The crown had the right of wardship over any lands that were held by knight service (2). In 1540, Henry VIII created the Court of Wards in order to revitalize the practice of wardship and ensure that the crown received its rightful share of the wards’ inheritance (3). The Crowns’ share was one third of the entire inheritance (4). The Court of Wards was responsible for “grants of wardships, marriages, abuses of guardianship, licenses to widows to remarry, the suing of liveries” in addition to the administration of the affairs of those who were unfit to care for them themselves (5).

Wardship involved the right of the monarch to appoint guardians to minors, usually heirs. These guardians were responsible for ensuring that the child would be raised, educated and married in accordance with their social rank and were almost always responsible for caring for the lands of the ward. However, it was not uncommon for guardians to exploit their wards’ lands and fail to educate them properly (6). A common practice was for the wardship to be sold by the crown to a guardian who would then sell the wardship for an inflated price (7).

The practice of wardship brought in varying amounts of revenue for the crown, during the reign of Edward VI the income reached £I4,892 p.a. and £20, 020 p.a. during the reign of Mary I (8). The income brought in during the reign of Elizabeth only exceeded the high point of Mary’s reign early on, and then was reduced quite drastically (9). After the failure of the Great Contract in 1610 James I raised the price of wardships in an attempt to increase his finances (10).

There were numerous benefits for those who chose to purchase wardships. The use of the wards’ lands, the money from reselling the wardship, marrying the ward to the highest bidder or the marriage of the ward to oOthne of the guardian’s children were all possible benefits. The marriage of a ward to one’s own child could result in an increase in social status for the child (11).

Wardship was disliked throughout England, many people objected to the selling off of children to whoever was willing to pay the most for them (12). Complaints were also centered on the fact that children were taken away from their mothers, who until 1611, had no rights to their children (13). Opposition to wardship was so high that it was one of the major rights that James I had agreed to abolish in return for an annual income in the Great Contract (14).

Wardship, along with the Court of Wards, was abolished in 1646 by the Long Parliament (15).

Notes 1.Lindquist, Eric. “The Failure of the Great Contract.” The Journal of Modern History 57, no. 4 (1985): 624. 2. Pinchbeck, I. “The State and the Child in Sixteenth-Century England—II.” The British Journal of Sociology 8, no. 1 (1957):70. 3., Ibid. 4. Hurstfield, J. “Lord Burghley as Master of the Court of Wards, 1561-98.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, Fourth Series 31, (1949): 99. 5. Hurstfield, J. “Corruption and Reform under Edward VI and Mary: The Example of Wardship.” The English Historical Review 68, no. 266 (1953): 31. 6. Hurstfield, J. “Corruption and Reform,” 33. 7. Hurstfield, J. “Lord Burghley,” 107. 8. Hurstfield, J. “Corruption and Reform,” 24, 29. 9. Hurstfield, J. “Lord Burghley,” 102-103. 10. Coward, Barry. The Stuart Age: England, 1603-1714 3rd ed. (London: Pearson Education, 2003), 144. 11. Hurstfield, J. “Lord Burghley,” 96. 12 Pinchbeck, 70. 13 Hurstfield, J. “Lord Burghley,” 112. 14 Pinchbeck, 71. 15. Hurstfield, J. “Lord Burghley,” 95.