The Restoration Under Charles II
Generally, the English people had a great celebration when Charles II returned to the throne in May of 1660.1 Many believed that restoring the monarchy was the only way to secure constitutional rights. In fact, there was an expectation that bringing back the king would return life to the way it was before 1642 and the rule of Cromwell. Charles II was responsible for improving the government for the people. However, despite some achievements, the king was not very successful in creating a stronger and more effective monarchy. He was dependent on his advisors and other parts of the government from the very beginning of his reign. There were constant conflicts between the king and Parliament over religious issues. When Charles II finally did gain some independence, he still did not accomplish much to improve the monarchy. Overall, the government was very inconsistent during the 1660s and 1670s, and the people became disillusioned with the monarchy. The king did not hold all of the responsibility for what happened to the government, though. The people should have taken charge and worked for a change in the system. The rule of Charles II helped show the English citizens that they could not rely on the government so much, but they needed to take more of the power into their own hands and become more autonomous.
Edward Hyde Clarendon
From the very beginning, Charles was determined to establish himself as a constitutional leader. Also, his advisors wanted to make sure that the new monarchy followed the law, so the people could begin to trust the government again.2 The most influential of these advisors was Edward Hyde Clarendon. For the most part, Charles foll...
... middle of paper ...
...688 (Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield,
1979), 8-10.
3. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 12.
4. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 21.
5. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 13.
6. J. R. Jones, ed., Liberty Secured? Britain Before and After 1688 (Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 1992), 138-140.
7. Jones, Liberty Secured, 130.
8. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 15.
9. J. R. Jones, Charles II: Royal Politician (London: Allen and Unwin, 1987), 60-62.
10. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 10.
11. Jones, Royal Politician, 74-75.
12. Jones, Royal Politician, 79.
13. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 15.
14. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 19-20.
15. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 10-11.
16. Jones, Royal Politician, 162-163.
17. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 21.
18. Jones, Royal Politician, 187.
19. Jones, Restored Monarchy, 23.
20. Harris, 37.
“The key factor in limiting royal power in the years 1399-1509 was the king’s relationship with parliament.”
Throughout Charles I’s Personal Rule, otherwise known as the ‘Eleven Year Tyranny’, he suffered many problems which all contributed to the failure of his Personal Rule. There are different approaches about the failure of Personal Rule and when it actually ended, especially because by April 1640 Short Parliament was in session. However, because it only lasted 3 weeks, historians tend to use November 1640 as the correct end of the Personal Rule when Long Parliament was called. There was much debate about whether the Personal Rule could have continued as it was, instead people generally believed that it would crumble when the King lost his supporters.
training when he came to power in 1485, had managed in the time he was
1637 as the Highpoint of the Personal Rule of Charles I Charles' personal rule started in 1629 after the second session of his third Parliament ended in arguments and disagreements between King and Parliament about the methods (tonnage and poundage) Charles used to generate personal income. Charles adjourned Parliament during this session and Parliament declared three resolutions that would force Charles into personal rule and isolation from Parliament and its wealth. Charles had to contend with a lot of problems in his personal rule. Most importantly was the issue of how to finance himself and the country without the availability of Parliament.
To start, the death of Charles I led to scientific discoveries in England, which helped build the economy and establish the superpower status of England. During his reign, Charles I constantly oppressed ideas that went against the Church of England due to his religious ideals and belief that he could impose religious conformity across all of his lands. Between 1650 and 1659, after Charles’ beheading, both the supporters of Cromwell and the defeated monarchists turned to science and technology for its potential economic and social benefits. The commonwealth made it a priority to pay off their debts from the civil war in any way...
The English Civil War broke out in 1642. There were many causes. Charles 1 reined from 1625 to 1649. Over that time, many of Charles’ English subjects became alienated by his religious policies. Many English Protestants or “puritans” came to believe in the existence of a sinister royal plot, one which aimed at the restoration of the Catholic faith in England. He displayed an apparent determination to rule without parliament. The personal rule of Charles 1 lasted eleven years. A key cause was that many people were unhappy that “illegal” taxations took place and had little faith in their king’s ability to manage money effectively.
King Charles the Second, to gratify some nobles about him, made two great grants out of that country. These grants were not of the uncultivated wood land only, but also of plantations, which for many years had been seated and improved, under the encouragement of several charters granted by his royal ancestors to that colony. Those grants were distinguished by the names of the Northern and Southern grants of Virginia, and the same men were concerned in both. They were kept dormant some years after they were made, and in the year 1674 begun to be put in execution. As soon as ever the country came to know this, they remonstrated against them; and the assembly drew up an humble address to his majesty, complaining of the said grants, as derogatory
One of the key factors that led to the civil war was the contrasting beliefs of King Charles and the parliament. The monarchy believed in the divine rights of kings, explained by Fisher (1994, p335) as a biblically-based belief that the king or queen's authority comes directly from God and that he is not subjected to the demands of the people. On the other hand, the parliament had a strong democratic stance and though they respected and recognized the king's authority, they were constantly desiring and fighting for more rights to power. Although climaxing at the reign of King Charles, their antagonism stretched for centuries long before his birth and much of the power that once belonged to the monarchy had shifted over to the parliament by the time he came into power.
These types of decisions define why Louis XIII is an important example of the primacy of the king over all other sources of political and governmental power in the 17th century. Certainly, Louis XIII’s rise to power defines the lack of checks and balances that would typically be a part of a lesser monarchy in which the aristocracy could have an influence on governmental decisions. However, this was not the case with Louis XIII, since he had gained complete control over the government through military might and the wealth of the royal family. This historical example defines the primacy of the absolute monarch within the context of the king’s role in governing in 17th century
Political and religious turmoil during Henry VIII’s reign (r. 1509-1547) resulted in Henry VIII assuming the roles as head of both the state and the Church of England through the separation of the Church of England from papal authority, the dissolution of monarchies, and the ‘Act of Supremacy’. Fundamental changes to the English constitution and the establishment of precedent features regarding Parliamentarian inclusion came as a result of opposition during his time on the throne. King Henry VIII’s reign is arguably the largest reason as to why England was so successful during Queen Elizabeth I’s reign from 1558-1603. This paper will chronicle the events of large scale that developed his historic reign and the perpetual changes to the English
bill of rights), that established general rules for England and “stipulated that the king should levy no taxes without the consent of those he taxed, that no free man should be punished until he had been judged guilty by a jury of his peers, that no one should be arrested or imprisoned without a warrant, and that no unqualified person should hold public office.” (Pg. 226). So this limited the power of King John of England greatly. A big difference that set England apart from Spain and France is that they did not have something like the Magna Carta, also they transitioned, religiously speaking, from Christianity to Catholicism all the way to Protestantism, which neither Spain nor France had as many transitions.This was the start of the evolution of England of giving more power to the people, rather than the King and later on the Church. Eventually, new monarchs came to power in England due to the Glorious Revolution in 1688-89, and England now became a mixed monarchy that was “governed by the ‘king in Parliament’ according to the rule of law. After 1688, no English monarch ever again attempted to govern without Parliament, which has met annually ever since, while strengthening its control over taxation and expenditure.” (Pg. 412). France did in fact, have a parliament system like England’s but it was not as successful and used as properly, during their evolution to the seventeenth century. So we saw England start out with absolute Monarchs and eventually through the Magna Carta and Glorious Revolution, evolve into power for the commercial
They both wanted more power than the other. If Charles had not held such a great belief in ‘the divine right of kings’, he might have been able to avoid a lot of the tensions which built up to and resulted in the civil war. Charles’ personality played a part and showed his opponents that he was arrogant and had little understanding or sympathy for the fears and aspirations of his people. Ultimately, Charles lacked many of the personal qualities needed to be a successful monarch. Finally, he was not good at developing good relationships with and support amongst the politicians and noblemen he needed to rule the country
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...
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...
What was it like to be looked upon as the most noble group of people in a nation as important and vast as England? The most powerful positions of the royal family were the king and queen of course, depending on who had the crown at that time. When one became the king he would inherit all of the riches and powers that come along with being the king. If he were to marry a woman then she would become part of the royal family, but not really be a ruler with the king. If one were not part of the royal family they would never live the glamorous life they lived. The king and queen could show their power through public executions, making new laws, and their ability to do whatever they wanted to. The royal family changed the course of history by bringing about new religions, theories, the English Reformation, the changing of boundaries, taking part in the Enlightenment, and countless other things.