Elizabeth and Parliament Flashcards
(40 cards)
how did parliament change under Elizabeth
parliament met 13 times in 44 years of Elizabeth’s reign
how long did each parliamentary session last and what were they used for
No session lasted for more than few months and in 11 out of those 13 sessions parliament was asked to supply taxation
how was parliament controlled
Elizabeth used speeches to control MPs for example the golden speech in 1601 drew many MPs to tears and parliament was under the control of councillors who introduced bills and sat on committees that gave detailed consideration to the content of parliamentary bills. For example, William Cecil prepared the crown’s legislative programme and often shaped bills together with Christopher Hatton
what happened as a result of control
Parliament was expected to not question Elizabeth’s policies and to pass them.
how many bills did Elizabeth withdraw royal assent on
Over 60 Bills
what type of monarchy did Elizabeth operate on
personal monarchy
what does that mean for parliament
They were her subjects and she was chosen by God, so parliament is meant to let her have her own way
what is John Guy’s interpretation of parliament under Elizabeth
‘legislative business was properly directed’
did the control of parliament always mean they were in consensus with the queen
No, despite these attempts at control conflict remained.
why was there still conflict
As Neale argues, the power of the House of Commons increased
how did parliament’s power increase
There was an increase in well-educated MPs who represented the Boroughs which led to parliament becoming increasingly radical, though those MPs were carefully vetoed by the council, parliament became noticeably assertive regardless.
There was a rise in puritan MPs, who formed a group of over 40MPs called the puritan choir and they constantly challenged the queen’s royal prerogative
what does an increase in Borough representation mean for conflict in parliament
They are well educated with adequate legal training and they represent their local constituents, meaning they would constantly clash with the queen by interpreting laws in parliament differently from her and they would uphold the views of their local people which may oppose that of the queen’s and the national agenda
example of the puritan choir opposing the queen
MP Peter Wentworth together with the Puritan Choir demanded freedom of speech and he was imprisoned twice
Examples of ways parliament rebelled against the queen
They postponed the Subsidy Bill 1566 until Elizabeth agreed to a succession, though they eventually backed down.
when did the relationship between Elizabeth and parliament break down completely?
In 1601
did ultimate power reside in the crown
Yes, Ultimate power rested with the crown. Elizabeth had the prerogative to summon, dismiss parliament and
halt any debate
why did the relationship between Elizabeth and parliament break down
It broke down over the issue of monopolies, members of the HoC felt that Elizabeth’s use of monopolies restricted them from gaining income from other forms of trade and there was no competition due to monopolies.
what did Elizabeth have to do as a result of the breakdown
She had to meet with the MPs and promise to deal with the issues and remove the licenses that had been issued so that they would pass bills
What are the different historical interpretations of conflict in the Elizabethan Parliament?
John Neale takes an Orthodox view
Geoffrey Elton takes a revisionist View
Modern View
what does Neale say about the conflict in parliament
He takes an Orthodox view and argues that the power of the House of Commons increased during Elizabeth’s reign due to the arrival of a legally educated gentry into Westminster who created the Puritan opposition choir, as a result, the number of conflicts increased which eventually led to the Civil war in 1642. They regularly confronted the queen over the issue of parliamentary privilege vs the Royal Prerogative.
examples to back Neale’s view
Subsidy Act 1566 and 1601 Issues over monopolies
Elton’s view
He takes an opposite revisionist view with his research being based on the legislative role of parliament. He argued that parliament mainly dealt with routine administration concerned with land ownership and local issues, this meant that there was little to no room for conflict as parliament simply went about its business. Though some sessions witnessed heated debates, it was part of the normal function of parliament and it did not prevent the passing of bills and sessions from closing harmoniously.
example to support Elton’s view
Subsidy Bill 1566 was still passed, and 434 acts passed without trouble except with the Subsidy Bill.
Modern View
Parliament was changing and showing opposition to specific issues like Religion but that doesn’t mean they were turning into a radical institution of opposition. Elizabeth still controlled parliament well by using speeches, her councillors and isolating extremists. All of which preserved her royal prerogative.
