How accurate is it to say that the main cause of political instability in England in the years 1665 – 1685 was the Restoration Settlement? Both Charles and parliament’s handling of the country’s finances during the Restoration Settlement can be factored into the causes of political instability between 1665 and 1685. Whilst both the Convention and Cavalier parliaments granted Charles some funds, it was easily not enough. This lead to him having to increase taxes, and introduce the Hearth Tax, but neither of these raised nearly enough to stabilise things. From 1665 onwards, finances were still an underlying problem and perhaps if parliament had helped Charles initially by granting him more money, then the later problems, such as the financial …show more content…
Some of the responsibility for problems in the Restoration can then be passed to parliament and the fact that they seemed to demand too much after asking for Charles to take the throne. Having had a period without a monarch, and having much more freedom to do what they wanted, parliament made the mistake of thinking they had this freedom when Charles returned. This is may be why they passed so many acts and declarations, many of which the king was opposed to, and lead to political instability. Parliament’s over-ambitiousness can also be linked to the financial difficulties in the Restoration Settlement as they found themselves with more influence over Charles due to his lack of …show more content…
However, this was not always as successful as it could have been, particulary in the case of Danby, a strong Anglican and one who had been successful at creating an agreement with the Dutch in the form of a marriage between William of Orange and Charles’s niece. Sadly, this success did not continue so much when the Popish Plot revealed a lot of corruption and bribery which had not been hindered by the French funding. Charles make something of an attempt to save him when an attempt was made to impeach him by dissolving the Cavalier Parliament. But, like many dissolutions of parliament, they do not result in increased political stability. Although this instability could have been avoided if there had been better advisors appointed during the Restoration Settlement, who would not have been forced to resign after the Test Act was
Bush, Michael. ‘Up for the Commonwealth’: the significance of tax grievances in the English rebellions of 1536, English Historical Review 106 (1991).
Post reformation, Elizabeth faced a different type of challenge from nobility who were angered by the Tudor centralisation of government. Although the other factors are present, political, remains a consistent, underlying factor throughout the period. During Henry VII’s reign, there were two strong dynastically motivated challenges to the crown. Simnel and Warbeck in both 1486 and 1491 were both direct challenges to the throne. However, after the imprisonment of Edmund de La Pole in 1506 the Tudor rebellions changed from being direct challenges to the throne to indirect challenges against ‘evil misters’ for example the Amicable Grant in 1525.
The primary issues that fueled the Civil War in 1642-1649, the Commonwealth in 1649-1660, the Stuart Restoration 1660-1688 ...
The Rise in Political Power of 17th Century England and France In the seventeenth century, the political power of the Parliament in England, and the Monarchy in France increased greatly. These conditions were inspired by three major changes: the aftermath of the reformation, the need for an increased governmental financing, and the reorganizing of central governments. These three points were each resolved in a different way in both England and in France. The first major point which eventually increased political power was
It is no secret that Charles II was a strongly disliked man especially by the English Parliament. Charles II was reluctant to acknowledge the uprising in Virginia known as Bacon’s Rebellion that was towards William Berkeley, and waited until it was over with to grant Virginia the charter in 1675. “Sir William Berkeley had fused a governing body which seemed to work first for its own ends and only secondly for those of other Virginians, one might argue Charles II did a majority of Virginians a favor,” even though granting the carter was a slap in the face to Nathaniel Bacon. Charles II claimed he had divine right to rule and Parliament, led by Oliver Cromwell, was very unhappy creating a Civil War between the two. Like father like son, but Charles II decided in his later years to make more of a priority out
Religious and territorial conflicts between states led to almost continuous warfare. So it is no surprise that Charles I’s troubles began early in his reign in 1625 when he declared war on Spain. To raise funds for his army and support the war, Charles asked Parliament for money. However, since he answered only to God he felt he was under no obligation to share with Parliament what he hoped to achieve or the expected costs of the war. As a result, Parliament denied the King the ability to increase taxes. To get around this the King dissolved Parliament and unilaterally imposed measures to raise money for his army. “Two of the measures that were extremely unpopular were the forced loan and ship money”( Grv, Jonathan Dewald). Throughout his reign Charles continued to engage in war which required additional funds that Parliament refused to grant him. Between 1625 and 1629 Charles summoned and dismissed Parliament three times. In every case, Charles failed to achieve what he needed from Parliament so finally in 1639 Charles indefinitely suspended Parliament and no Parliament was active for the next eleven
King Charles I did not call parliament during his personal rule and because of this he was not able to ask parliament for money. Asking the parliament to consent for new or increased taxes had been the normal way Kings and Queens had raised money. Because King Charles was not able to collect Tonnage and Poundage due to unresolved financial difficulties (Source E) As King Charles I desperately needed money he needed other ways of obtaining it. Ship Money was a tax that was put on coastal areas to fund the navy as these areas are most likely to be needed to be defended from attackers. King Charles I decided to extend this levy to all of England in 1635. Concerted opposition started to gather momentum. Additionally many “monopolies” were put sold to various groups of people and these were sold for large sums of money. “Jesuits and Benedictines…dealing stocks rather than souls” (Source I). The first parliament that King Charles I called during his personal rule was in 1640. Charles desperately needed money in order to fight the Scottish war. The Scottish had crossed the border into England at the river tweed on 20th August 1640. They met little resistance and went on to occupy the Northern city of Newcastle. Charles had to pay the Scots 850 pounds a day for a treaty on the 21st October 1640. People were even being forced to “lend” money to the King and their refusal to do so could have them put into jail, “your people have been…required
In 1780 George III was the monarch, and Parliament existed under an unreformed system of a mixed constitution of the Monarch, Lords, and Commons. The majority of Members of Parliament were represented by two main parties comprising of the Whigs and Tories, with both coming from the landed aristocracy. Throughout the period of George III's reign there was a constant challenge for the government, a struggle between Parliament and King. The political rights of the vast majority of British men and women during the 18th century were very limited. Public opinion had been changing, pressuring the aristocratic cliques which had previously dominated British political life. Faced by reform and revolution, this essay will examine why the years 1780 to
Queen Elizabeth I notices the growing number of paupers in Great Britain. She and the Parliament had responsibility over these people and tried to figure out what to do. Parliament tried to avoid starvation and are struggling to have the authority over the public. Unfortunately, Great Britain suffered through economic situations. There were inflation of food prices. Prices in grain rose about 70% in the 17th percent. There was famine throughout the land. The workers’, especially the farmers, wages declined about 60%. Unfortunately, there was no source of relief because of the disintegrating feudal system (Boyer). The rest of the population mostly moved to provinces and towns. Only a few of the paupers had the ability to earn their own wages. Parliament sought help from numeral parishes. Although, there were misunderstandings within the paupers wandering place to place with no occupation. An act was issued later for this problem to punish the vagabonds and offer some poor relief. They were usually hanged (Bliss).
In 1642, Britain was a divided kingdom, on the brink of Civil war. The arrogance and selfishness of Charles I led to resentment from Parliament. A further important factor in the outbreak of war was religion. When he began to impose catholic customs on the predominantly Protestant country, he ignited the hatred of men such as Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell rose from an unadorned, puritan background through the ranks of the military to become Major-General of the army and eventually Lord Protector. Many believe his exploits during the Civil Wars were a primary factor in Parliamentarian victory although the true extent of his role is the subject of debate amongst historians, as I have explored.
The need for power dictated much of the decision making process of the leaders during the European Renaissance, and one factor that greatly impacted the struggle of power was the dispute over who should have control over England’s throne and all of its assets. During this time period, power changed hands often and new kings emerged quickly and disappeared frequently. This was a time where the people questioned their authority and who was the rightful ruler of the land. (Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica) The Wars of the Roses, as they became known as devastated most of the upper noble class while the lower and middle classes were indifferent and relatively untouched by it. Starting in 1455, opposing factions met at St. Albans where the first king had been killed, which marked the start of the dynastic civil wars. David Ross noted in regards to the wars that,” In reality these squabbles were an indication of the lawlessness that ran rampant in the land. More squalid than romantic, the Wars of the Roses decimated both houses in an interminably long, bloody struggle for the throne.”(2). It was not until Henry VII defeated a Yorkist r...
Charles won many small battles during the English Civil war, but as the war dragged on, many factors became his disadvantage. One important factor was that Parliament allied itself with Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans. From then on, Parliament and Cromwell won two major battles, the Battle of Naseby and Marston Moor. (Hill, p. 95) Ideologically, Cromwell’s New Model Army was more motivated than the King’s army. Defeat against Scotland caused the unwillingness of the King’s army to fight, the “first and most necessary prelude to revolution” (L. Stone, p. 135). Another noteworthy advantage was that Parliament controlled London, its resources, and recruited most of the population. Laurence Stone
The challenges to the power of the Monarch was by the reign of James I (1603-25) the monarch was faced with an increasing effective Parliament, culminating in the temporary abolition of the monarchy in (1625). Consequently, the monarchy’s powers were eroded by both revolution and by legal challenges, which included the case of Proclamations (1611) , the monarchy could not change the law by proclamation. The law of the land, which required that the law be made by Parliament, limited the prerogative. In the case of Prohibitions Del Roy (1607) the Monarch had no right to act as a judge, and in the case of the Ship Money Case (1637), although th...
Although he was loved by the peasants, they didn’t have the power to protect him from the law. Not much is said about the effects of what he did, but it may have caused more uprisings and revolts against the uneven distribution of money in cities like Nottingham. It could also have caused the corrupt rulers to realize their wrongdoings and make the changes necessary to make things right again. But more likely than not, it aggravated the rich and made them enforce more restrictions on income.
Prior to the restoration, Charles I was beheaded in January 1649. This lead to an Interregnum period between 1649-1668; Governed as a virtual dictator by Oliver Cromwell. Richard Cromwell was then put in charge after the death of his father from 1658-1660 which put England at an austere period in which theatres were closed due to no monarch ruling. By the end of the 1660's the Son of Charles I; Charles II was restored to the t...