Elizabeth and Parliament -No 2-How serious was Parliamentary conflict between Crown and Commons? by

GIve your judgements on statements 1-6

picknella — 2014-05-06 10:21:13 UTC

Francesc

2014-05-06 10:25:07 UTC

1) Elizabeth was definitely domineering, refusing to allow her parliaments to override her royal prerogative. However, in the case of Strickland in 1571

Hayden!

2014-05-06 10:25:15 UTC

1) Elizabeth's........

Claire

2014-05-06 10:25:41 UTC

Isobel

2014-05-06 10:25:42 UTC

Francesca

2014-05-06 15:53:51 UTC

Elizabeth was definitely domineering, refusing to allow her parliaments to override her royal prerogative. However, in the case of Strickland in 1571, she allowed him back into parliament after there was uproar - showing that she wasn't always entirely in control.
Elizabeth did face significant parliamentary opposition, but primarily from Puritans on religious issues and then parliament at large when concerning her succession. Some areas, such as finance and politics, rarely saw heavy parliamentary opposition or debate.
The royal prerogative was not necessarily bypassed, but its importance was set aside when matters such as the succession had an uncertain future - matters that were important not only to Elizabeth, but to the entire nation. It may be argued that Elizabeth overestimated the extent to which her royal prerogative reached, and as a result felt affronted when she saw the parliament to be stepping on her toes while they were unaware of their own wrongdoing.
The dominant institution did remain the Crown, with Elizabeth to this day being hailed as a great historical figure. However, over the Tudor period and specifically the reign of Elizabeth, more and more power was placed in the hands of institutions like parliament and like the monarch's council. This became increasingly evident under Elizabeth because of her position as a female monarch without a husband and without an heir - the men surrounding her in such aforementioned institutions felt it their duty to aid her as much as possible for, naturally, she was limited by her status as a woman in the 16th century.
The influence of parliament was certainly not negligible. Parliament was often vital for Elizabeth in terms of gaining extraordinary revenue and raising funds outside of the normal parameters of income. It also provided a filter through which Elizabeth could run her ideas, to ensure that they would be feasible and popular before putting them into place, so as to avoid potential uprising or civil unrest.
Elizabethan parliaments were certainly not noted for *their (nb: why does it say "there" on the sheet? I'm disappointed and upset with this flagrant disregard for basic grammar - especially as it's followed by "were" when referring to a singular "notable thing") timidity - rather for their voracious pursuit of what they felt was owed to them. Whether a more Protestant settlement for England or an answer to the question of the succession, the members of parliament never seemed to be too afraid to say exactly what was on their mind.

The 6 statements for anyone who left their sheet at school:

2014-05-06 16:12:23 UTC

Elizabeth dominated her parliaments
Elizabeth faced serious parliamentary opposition
The royal prerogative was, to some extent, bypassed in Elizabeth parliaments
The dominant institution in the Tudor system of government remained the Crown under Elizabeth
Parliament's influence was negligible under Elizabeth
The most notable thing about Elizabethan parliaments was their timidity

Eleanor

2014-05-07 12:31:54 UTC

1 Elizabeth was determined to dominate her parliaments, limiting their free speech on matters which she considered to be personal, and not of national interest, such as her marriage and the succession. When parliament attempted to pressurize her into marrying, as it did vehemently in 1563 after she had nearly died of smallpox the previous year, she responded forcefully with a furious speech. Nonetheless, Elizabeth was not able to control whatever matters her councillors discussed outside parliament, as can be seen particularly towards the end of her life when her authority was gradually slipping away and the succession of James VI of Scotland was being secretly orchestrated behind her back.

2 Elizabeth did not face significant parliamentary opposition. Neale's idea of a "Puritan Choir" certainly overestimates the importance of a group which was very much the minority. Parliament, although it had been gaining autonomy since 1529, was still very much deeply loyal to its monarch. Events when opposition did arise, such as with Peter Wentworth's assertion of the right to parliamentary free speech in 1576, were very much isolated, and the instigators of such disobedience were swiftly dealt with by their peers and the Queen, with for instance Wentworth being sent to the Tower twice.

3 The royal perogative was occassionally questioned in Elizabethan parliaments, but very rarely truly undermined. It is highly admirable, as historians such as Susan Doran have noted, how Elizabeth managed to retain her royal perogative in parliament, even though she came to the throne a young, female ruler. When it was bypassed, such as when parliament pressurized Elizabeth into agreeing against her will to the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots in 1587, this was done only because the Queen was stubbornly refusing to agree to something which was ultimately in the best interests of the nation.

4 This was certainly true: although during Elizabeth's reign some important steps were undertaken away from a Medieval style of government towards a more modern one, the personality of the monarch continued to dominate government. Elizabeth, as very much Henry VII's great granddaughter, although not particularly involved with the bureaucracy of government, nevertheless had a lively interest in what was going on in her name.

5 Parliament's importance had increased, as ever since they had played such a vital role in the Reformation Legislation the governing classes had come to expect that they would have some say in how the country was ruled. This was also beneficial for Elizabeth as it gave her laws greater authority and allowed her to discern whether a particular prospective policy would be received positively or not. Although parliament was still very much at the beck and call of the monarch, important steps had been taken in the direction of modernity which were irrevocable.

6 Elizabethan parliaments were fairly timid, for example they agreed every time Elizabeth was forced to petition them for money or taxes. However, there were encouraging signs towards the end of her reign that the new generation was now beginning to consider themselves servants of the nation, rather than personal servants of the monarch, and as such would not be timid when they thought the national interest was followed. The most potent example of this was the scheming which went on when it became clear that Elizabeth did not have much longer to live, although partially motivated by self-interest, in order to secure a swift and faultless succession, and avoid plunging England back into the depths of civil war, whose damaging effects had been seen not too long ago in the Wars of the Roses.

Hayden

2014-05-07 13:09:12 UTC

1) There is no doubt that Elizabeth was domineering within her parliament. She made it compulsory that matters that were discussed were only the things that she wanted to discuss (this meant that nobody could talk or mention about the succession crisis or who she should marry). Elizabeth until her later years could therefore forcefully keep parliament in control, unfortuantly she did eventually fade under the Cecil and Essex, who both made contact to James VI behind the back of her.

2) Parliamentary opposition within court was limited, free speech was banned which made it hard for opposition to fully grow and explore idea's outside of Elizabeth's agenda. The Puritan choir which is considered the main opponent to Elizabeth has been overestimated by historians, especially as they were considered a minority.

3) The royal perogative was never undermined, this is due to parliament respecting the grants that can come to them if they agree with the queen. The major disregard to the perogative came with the execution of MQS as Elizabeth was pushed to execute her when she felt that it would cause more harm than good, however, in hindsight, this was the best option in the long run.

4) The crown had been and was the most powerful institution within the tudor system of government. Elizabeth was very interested in politics and economics and therefore took a forward and dominant role in government (when she could). Only at very rare times did important decisions go ahead without the approval of the monarch, however only happened it very rare circumastances.

5) This is not the case. Parliament played a very important role within Elizabeth's rule, such as passing the acts to change England back to a protestant country, to offering subsidies in order to fund Elizabeth's foreign policies and wars. Parliament had some role in controling how the country was run - this indicating a shift in the power of government.

6) Parliament under Elizabeth can be seen as timid, but this is due to Elizabeth's reaction and control of parliament at the time. At the begining of her reign, Elizabeth was adamant that important issues such as the succession crisis and who she would marry could not under any circumstance be talked about (this is seen by the treatment of Wentworth who believed in free speech) however, by the end of her rule, Parliament under the new MP's became more open. Even though this was behind the back of the dying queen.