A substantial difficulty that Charles II faced was that of finance. Finance was a major issue between crown and parliament, especially in-between the years 1665 to 1667. The Crown’s income had dropped by £200,000, and MPs believed that the problems were down to crown management rather than structural problems with the finance system. This shows that Charles II faced difficulties more to financial concerns as he was gaining a low income, concluding in him unable to fund and solve matters needed. It also shows that finance provoked further issues, as it is shown here to drive crown and parliament away from one another. Parliament also used finance to restrict the greater religious freedom Charles wanted to allow, again showing finance splitting the crown and parliament. In 1669 the commons used their financial influence over Charles in response to their concerns about his decision to allow the conventicle act to expire in 1668. Therefore in 1670 Charles issued a much more rigid conventicle act as the commons refused a £300,000 grant. The issues with finance clearly show the divide between Charles and Parliament, and these difficulties only increased.…
2. Political- It changed England by having William and Mary sign the Bill of Rights. This made England a Constitutional Monarchy. A constitutional monarchy acknowledges the monarch as the official head of state but the real power is in the hands of the parliament.…
The rejection of constitutionalism by Charles I’s sour relationship with the Parliament and Oliver Cromwell’s dissolving of Parliament, along with the acceptance of constitutionalism through the Glorious Revolution during the reign of William and Mary all resulted in a strong English power and newly reinforced parliamentary rights.…
When King Charles I dismissed Parliament in 1629, he was set on the idea of a personal rule without any help from Parliament. This he could manage, as long as he avoided war. His aim was to sort out the country's finances, and with the help of Strafford and Laud, impose a 'Policy of Thorough'. This policy was the idea of a fair and paternalistic government with no corruption. However, within 11 years, Charles' personal rule had failed and England was drifting into war. There are mixed opinions on whether this failure was solely due to the actions of the King, or those of third parties, for example, Strafford or Laud.…
Buckingham formed a very close relationship with Charles which many MP’s feared. This close relationship and the amount of power that Buckingham possessed, often led to arguments between the King and Parliament, which eventually led to the king adopting personal rule. Buckingham monopolised Patronage at court, and advancement in Office was only approved with Buckingham support. Many MP’s were suspicious of his close relationship with both Charles 1 and James 1, and despised the fact that they could only gain advancement in the career with his consent. Furthermore Buckingham had arranged the marriage of Charles and Henrietta Maria who was Catholic. Many MP’s thought Buckingham was trying to introduce Catholicism in England, which they thought would threaten the ancient liberties of the Church of England. The king’s protection of Buckingham led to Parliament being dissolved which angered many MPs. In 1626 Parliament attempted to Impeach Buckingham, however the King stopped this by dissolving Parliament which prevented them from passing the subsidies which the King needed. These show how Buckingham’s action caused disputes between the King and Parliament, which eventually led to the king adopting Personal Rule as he thought he could manage without Parliament. However…
Queen Elizabeth I’s monarchy shares eerie resemblances to Caesar’s Roman Republic. Both Elizabeth and Caesar were driven by power. Although Caesar was not a descendant of power through family, he worked his way from a poor family and ended up ruling the great Roman Empire. Similarly, Queen Elizabeth was not guaranteed power, specifically the throne despite being a descendant of her family’s royal line. She was “declared illegitimate through political machinations” (“Queen Elizabeth I”), and dismissed as a future heir to the throne.…
1. How did the relationship between the king and Parliament change during the early 18th century?…
The people who followed Queen Elizabeth said that it was the duty of the people to follow the Queen because England is a monarchy (doc. 3 and 4). The French ambassador of England reports the parliament wants to find Queen Elizabeth a successor while she was still alive (doc. 6). William Tooker Says that the queen is a strong believer in god and would never do anything to take away from the belief in God (doc. 9). Queen Elizabeth speaks to Parliament and tells them that she will not get married and it is their job to advise her, not degrade her and fight her every step of the way (doc. 11).…
Queen Elizabeth I was one of the most influential rulers or history not only because she was a strong, independent woman, but because she ruled despite all the struggles and she proved everyone wrong.…
Elizabethan government has its similarities and differences with the US government now. First, the courts of the Elizabethan era are very different from the US branches today. Secondly, crime and punishment was not as enforced in the Elizabethan era as it is today in the US. Third, the branches of the US government contradict the ideas of the Elizabethan monarchy.…
Queen Elizabeth I of England, who ruled for 45 years from 1558-1603, had an uneasy reign. Since she was a female monarch and not male, which was rare in England, people believed that she wouldn’t be a competent monarch. The people who were not favorable for female monarchs or even females in general, believed very strongly abut the issue. John Knox, a Scottish religious reformer, declared in First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women, that a women ruler is “against all nature” (D1). However, there are some who are favorable to Queen Elizabeth’s rule as a female. Marcus Gheeraerts, an English court painter, depicts Queen Elizabeth as a person who is rich and in control by dressing her in extravagant clothes and putting the world underneath her (D8). During Queen Elizabeth’s reign, there were those who were not favorable to her rule and those who were, but apart from what others said, she herself thought that she was a competent ruler.…
The clash between the two political models of absolutism and constitutionalism is the catalyst for the progression in English politics. With William and Mary as their rulers, the Parliament didn’t need to worry about a Catholic ruler and even better they were able to get their rulers to recognize the Bill of Rights of 1689. Finally able to limit the power of the monarch, making the ruler subject to the law and the consent of Parliament, the theory of a constitutional monarchy was put into action through this bill. This is the beginning of England’s, later Great Britain, rise to being a world power and setting an example that others will soon…
All substantial threats to Elizabeth’s position as Queen were symptoms of the tension between Catholicism and Protestantism. The threats posed by Mary Queen of Scots, as well as those of the Spanish Armada of 1588 and the war with Spain (which dominated the last twenty years of Elizabeth’s reign), were consequences of a Catholic desire to gain supremacy in England. However, the extent to which the Catholic threat was centred on Mary Queen of Scots is debateable. Whilst she was undoubtedly a figurehead for Catholic opposition to Elizabeth’s rule and was the monarchical figure around whom several treasonous plots were designed, there is much evidence for the view that Mary became a focal point for a Catholic threat that would have existed even if she had been absent. The extent to which the structure given to the Catholic cause by Mary’s presence strengthened the Catholic threat is also debateable. There were others who could have become the rallying point for Catholic opposition (as Philip II of Spain did after Mary’s death), although none had as good a claim to the throne as Mary. A great threat was presented by Catholic opposition to Elizabeth’s rule, but Mary’s influence over this, and therefore the threat that she posed as an individual, may be called into question.…
The Privy Council was responsible for the general administration of the country. Who was on the Council depended on Elizabeth, but as some of the nobles of her realm had a lot of power, Elizabeth had to make sure that the most powerful men in her country had their interests represented. One of these powerful men was William Cecil whom of which was regarded as one of the best at his job at the time. Yet his success in his job of running the country, it could not last forever. Therefore Williams’s son had to take his place – his name was Robert Cecil. Others argued that this was a main reason for the monarch being more important as once the first generation of ministers had died then their sons usually took their place and it quickly became apparent that they were not in fact as good as their predecessors either due to lack of experience or just a lack of skill, none the less Robert did not stand up to the job nearly as well as someone such as William Cecil. Therefore the Queen had to work just that…
Throughout history, women have been constantly viewed and treated as inferior to men. Throughout English history, there have been many female monarchs. Among these monarchs is Elizabeth I. Elizabeth’s predecessor was Mary I, who tried to restore England to Catholicism and was heavily disliked by her subjects. Elizabeth’s period of rule commenced during 1558 and lasted until 1603. Since Elizabeth I ensured that England stayed an Anglican country, she was greatly loved by her people and was able to earn respect as a ruler. However, since Elizabeth I was a female during a time where the idea of female inferiority was shared by the majority of people, she did not attain as much respect as a king would have. During Elizabeth’s reign, she used her…