Lecture 3: Glorious Revolution (wk 2) Flashcards
THE RESTORATION 1660-61
- Charles II (very popular ruler) returned from exile in the Spanish Netherlands on 25 May 1660 after almost a decade of Republican rule. The news of his arrival was well received in all corners of his kingdom.
- Charles’s landing in England promised a return to more halcyon days before the religious strife, civil war and intrusive Cromwellian occupation of the previous decades.
- The Restoration was an opportunity for the nobility to re-assert themselves and reclaim its role in government; return to status quo.
-has authority, very popular, can work independent of parliament
RESTORATION SETTLEMENT1660-61
- Parliament restored the king’s royal prerogative and authority ceded to parliament.
- The nobility reasserted its authority.
- King granted a generous financial settlement.
- Lords of the Articles restored.
- King’s right to appoint Privy Councillors, Officers of State and Lords of Session was restored.
- Charles described as ‘Supream Governour of this Kingdome’.
- Controversial religious settlement; described as ‘fundamental blunder’ of the restored monarchy.
-religion: Charles II in charge of church, bishopical? not presbyterian church in scotland (brings back bishops, gives more control in parliament), causes problems
-presbyterian killed ARCHBISHOP JAMES SHARP
(1618-1679)
-from this period into 1680 was war between presbyterians and government troops in scotland
-by end of Charles reign, government not tolerant, use torture -> eg Boot
(couldn’t hear everything in notes)
KING JAMES THE SEVENTH, THEIR PRESENT GLORIOUS MONARCH …
James VII and II succeeded his brother on 6 February 1685. Despite their efforts to have him excluded from the succession, the English Whigs had been broken in the final years of Charles’s reign. Likewise, although religious dissent in Scotland was still a problem, the crown’s recent campaign to forcibly subdue Presbyterian nonconformists had left them demoralised and on the back foot. Consequently, the new King’s accession met with no immediate challenge in any of his three kingdoms.
PREROGATIVE POWER, POPERY AND PARLIAMENT
- Appointment of Catholic army officers causes a breach with English Parliament.
- Similar policy in Scotland and Ireland; Catholic commanding officers.
- February 1686 freedom of worship granted to Catholics and Quakers in Scotland.
- Converts replace Protestant officers in several posts.
- Catholic printing press and Jesuit college established; Chapel Royal restored 1687.
James catholic in protestant place, but still popular
- problem comes when to do an ill advised policy
- appoints people he trusts
- tries to convert people to catholism
CATHOLICISM, TOLERATION AND THE LIMITS OF ABSOLUTISM, 1685-88
- James’ attempts to secure Catholic toleration in April 1686 defeated in Scottish parliament.
- King falls back on prerogative power and issues declarations of indulgence which offered a complete toleration to Catholics and later Presbyterians in February and June 1687.
- The King initiates an ambitious attempt to engineer or ‘pack’ sympathetic parliaments in both Scotland and England.
- Effort to remodel burgh electorate in Scotland, and boroughs and incorporations in England.
- > knows parliament won’t accept his wishes so dissolves parliament an decides to start own, consisting of men he hand pick, protestans start to get worried
ROAD TO REVOLUTION?
- The King’s actions had become increasingly reckless and provocative.
- This attitude perhaps explains his decision to reissue the English declaration of indulgence with instructions that it should be read in all Anglican churches.
- The Archbishop of Canterbury and six bishops petitioned the King on 18 May 1688 asking him not to insist on this measure. James decided to prosecute them for seditious libel and they were imprisoned in the Tower of London for a week. They denied the King’s right to issue the declaration, were tried in June, and acquitted. The trial was disastrous for the King.
- 1685 power very high has gradually undermined himself
- people not too worried because yes catholic king but not going to do much change, old just wait for one of his daughters (Protestant) but there was a gam changer
- > Mary of Modena with James Francis Edward Stuart by Benedetto Gennari
- James has a child, boy so will be air before daughters
- people say something have to be done
THERE ARE NINETEEN PARTS OF TWENTY OF THE PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE KINGDOM WHO ARE DESIROUS OF A CHANGE…
- James’s intrusive and increasingly provocative policies added to the level of unrest and suspicion already evident in both kingdoms. This was the background to Revolution and the freedom of Parliament a pretext for the Prince of Orange’s invasion. However, if this was the background to Revolution, the catalyst was the birth of the King’s son, James Francis Edward – a Catholic male heir – on 10 June 1688.
- British Protestants were faced with the prospect of Catholic dynasty – James would succeed to the throne before either of his elder half-sisters.
- people thought that king too old to father son, think something suspicious
- > lots rumours
- > people question whether boys the king, think maybe catholic priest dad
TO PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN THE ESTABLISHED LAWS, LIBERTIES, AND CUSTOMS …
-Daughter Mary of Orange
The Prince of Orange commanding an army of some 15,000 men landed at Brixham near Torbay in Devonshire on 5 November 1688. He made no overt reference to settling the kingdom, maintaining his objectives were to secure the Protestant faith from Catholicism and arbitrary government, and to restore the independence of Parliament.
Had William declared an interest in usurping the King’s authority he risked being cast as a foreign invader. As it was he entered Britain as a deliverer.
->only here to help you, not here as an intruder, not here to had rebellion
THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION?
The Prince of Orange was asked to call a Convention and assume direction of the provisional English administration until it had met on 22 January 1689.
Within a matter of weeks William and Mary were offered the English throne which they accepted on 13 February. William was now King of England but a suitable settlement in Scotland had yet to be reached.
Simmering discontent in Scotland did not take long to boil over shortly after the invasion. Likewise, the sizeable émigré Scots contingent that accompanied William guaranteed the Revolution would not be without a Scottish context.
RELUCTANT REVOLUTIONARIES?
[The invasion] brought no immediate reaction from [Scots] politicians who wished to assure their own positions before committing themselves to a new master.
Ian B. Cowan
[The establishment of an effective government owed a great deal to the Scots nobility] not so much because of what they did, as because of what they chose not to do.
Bruce P. Lenman
(listen)
THE GLORIOUS INSTRUMENT OF DELYVERING THESE KINGDOMES FROM POPERY AND ARBITRARY POWER …
The Dutch invasion was a signal for many Scots to descend on London. Their relocation is often cited as evidence that the Scots elite cared more for royal favour and the rewards this could bring than the effective government of Scotland.
The decision to order the several Scottish regiments into England at the beginning of October presented an ideal opportunity for the ‘Presbyterian and discontented party’ to establish itself in the capital.
- scots descend to London
- should James be king?
- > daughter becomes Queen
PRELATES AND POPERY
Serious anti-Catholic riots in Edinburgh and Glasgow late 1688.
Holyrood Abbey sacked December 1688.
Episcopalian ministers ‘rabbled’ in almost every Parish south of Forth and Clyde.
Twenty-six ministers in the Presbytery of Edinburgh – twenty-five deprived after the Revolution.
Representative of what happened throughout Scotland south of the River Tay.
Prince of Orange refused to sanction a coordinated effort to suppress Episcopacy in Scotland.
- glorious revolution said to be bloodless but not in scotland
- riot, unpleasant, catholic chapels ransacked
[THE] COMMISSIONERS BEING PROTESTANTS WITHOUT ANY OTHER EXCEPTION OR LIMITATION …
Test Oath suspended and franchise extended to all Protestant burgesses.
Unprecedented increase in the size of the burgh electorate – Popular Politics!
Seats contested by Revolutioner candidates and representatives of King James’s burgh councils.
Electioneering – intimidation, force and forgery.
Williamite candidates largely successful; secure the majority of available seats.
The struggle for control of the Convention of Estates was won several weeks before it first met, in the parish kirks and tolbooths where most elections were staged.
- more people take place in politic process than ever before
- most seats contested
THE PRESENT PARLIAMENT IS MORE NUMEROUS OF PRESBITERIANS BY THE NEW METHOD OF ELECTION OF BURROWES
The notion that the majority of Scots were reluctant revolutionaries – a description coined by Ian Cowan – is based on the premise that the political elite were indifferent, opportunistic and slow to react to news of William’s invasion. As a result, it has been suggested that the Convention of Estates contained few committed protagonists. Most historians have subscribed to the belief that the members were largely undecided and that the two contrasting letters of William and King James, received by the Estates on 16 March, proved the defining moment of the Convention.
-prof doesn’t agree that Scots were reluctant revolutionaries
NEW KING, NEW KINGSHIP?
Long tradition of constitutional theory in Scotland – George Buchanan (1579); Samuel Rutherford (1644); Declaration of Arbroath (1320).
Did the Revolution result in elective or contractual kingship?
Can the Claim of Right can be considered part of this tradition?
In April 1689 clear indication that the crown was a condition of the Scottish settlement – William of Orange had bound himself to accept the limits determined by the Claim of Right and to redress the Grievances outlined by the Convention of Estates.
Did this alter the nature of Kingship in Scotland?
- power limited
- has to go through parliament for approval
