5.1 how significant were revolutionary ideals in the establishment of a constitutional monarchy? Flashcards
4 factors as to how significant were revolutionary ideals in the establishment of a constitutional monarchy?
ideals behind overthrow of james
passive obedience
bill of rights 1689
act of settlement 1701
basic narrative for 1687 to 1702
1687 april - declaration of indulgence = catholic toleration
1688 - james pregnant with catholic heir
invitation sent for william of orange to become heir
1689 jan - convention parliament rules william and mary to jointly rule
decleration of rights
1689 may - toleration act passed
1890 - battle of the boyne (james attempting to take back the throne
1694 triennial act
1694 bank of england created
1698 civil list created
1701 act of settlement
1702 wiliam dies and succession by anne (marys sister)
motivations behind overthrowing james (what the historians think)
- traditional
- whig
- Morrill
- Marxist
popular uprising of protestants against unpopular king??
traditional view = foreign invasion (only 7 signed the letter)
whig view = bloodless, democracy emerging
Vallance = when inc scotland and ireland = very bloodless
Morrill = due to consensus between Whigs and Tories = ‘sensible revolution’
Marxist = continuation of the bourgeoisie revolution of 1649
religious and political motivation behind overthrowing james
James reissued dec of indulgence 1688 tolerating catholics
so anti-Catholicism certainly a factor
but main problem of parliaments = dec of indulgence was james overruling parliament (as dec went against parliaments wishes)
Marquis of Halifax distribute leaflets stating the declaration set a precedent for absolute rule
Burnet = since restoration charles 2 and james had been trying to promote catholicism and arbitrary government (so both conformists and non conformists should work together to defend established church
ultimately james abandoned the throne = revolution
passive obedience
anglican held view of unquestioning obedience to the authority of the monarch, even when the monarch abuses his or her powers
whig argument of why james was overthrown
james had broken the solemn covenant between his people so citizens had right to remove him (as he had attempted to act as an absolute ruler)
John Locke = Two Treaties of Government 1689 revolution = opportunity for parliament to change the constitution
- seen as a justification for the kind of gov the Whigs wanted after the revolution
over arching as to how and why james was overthrown
conclusion
james abandoned the throne just as important as williams invasion (only 7 had signed the letter and there was no plan in place as to what to do and how invasion was going to work)
political change was just a result of panic after james’ resignation
if james had not resigned probably could have stayed in power (lords would not have voted against james)
when was bill of rights
1689
why did the bill of rights come about
december 26th 1688 to decide future of monarchy - who would summon parliament with no king?
convention parliament called 22nd jan 1689
voted to jointly offer crown to mary (who was in the line of succession) and william (because he was her husband and the one who had led the invasion)
decleration of rights outlined the new relationship between parliament and the king
1689 the new decleration was modified and many terms placed on the statute as the bill of rights
significance of bill of rights
arguments for
most clauses referred to abuses of prerogative by monarchs in past
elections to be free and regular
the legal position of the army made clear (in peace king could not raise army without parliament)
followed by a number of mutiny acts so king could not court martial at will (needed parliaments permission)
significance of the bill of rights
arguments against
just restated much of what was already known to be part of constitution
only cleared up a few grey areas
very vague (removed by triennial act 1694)
only statute law (John Morril argued)
no new procedure to hold monarch to account
monarch still able to chose own advisers
significance of act of settlement 1701 - what was the act saying
in order to bypass potential catholic heirs in future, sucession would be vested in House of Hanover (german royal dynasty)
so throne would only pass to protestants / CofE
under act all married to catholics would be barred from succession
also allowed the banning of removing judges without parliaments consent (so judges would be more independent / not under kings thumb)
significance of act of settlement 1701 - not significant
just a reaction against william, not a grand new ideal for the future
not symbolic
reflected concerns of williams calvanism more than anything else
no future monarch could leave country without parliaments permission (because fear william would do that)
no future monarch could enter england into war to defend their own country without parliament (because fear william would do just that - nine years war)
all matters of state to be discussed with full privy council
no foregin born could join privy council or have military title
fear of absolutism, no more
was the revolution settlement (bill of rights and act of settlement) the end of divine right
brief
was certainly severely damaged
technically no longer possible to state monarchs power was derived from god - as authority was granted by parliament
was the revolution settlement (bill of rights and act of settlement) the end of divine right
historical view points - whigs
whigs = return to stability rather than new dawn
some saw it as starting point for new constitution
some saw it as beginning of parliamentary sovreignty
