Print this page

Strange turn of events. For much of the 16^th century England and Scotland hated each other with all the passion of warring neighbours. Yet in 1603 a Scottish king would ascend the English throne with the connivance and general approval of the English ruling elite. This unlikely turn of events owed much to the eccentricities of the Welsh Tudor dynasty that had occupied the English for almost precisely that century: the determination of the father, Henry VIII, to marry often and the equal determination of the daughter, Elizabeth, not to marry at all. But it also owed a great deal to Protestantism. There was little that bound together the English aristocracy and the Scottish king. It was a determination to preserve England as a Protestant nation.

A powerful reforming party emerges at Court. As Henry's health failed in the last years of his life it became clear that his own actions had encouraged the growth of a powerful evangelical party at Court. On his death in 1547 they moved quickly to establish their supremacy in the regency government made necessary by the youth of the new king, Edward VI (1547-1553). So, the short reign of Edward VI saw a determined attempt to introduce a full Protestant church polity into England, modelled on that of the Swiss and German Reformed churches and driven on by a powerful alliance of Archbishop Cranmer and the Lord Protector, the Duke of Somerset. In the 5 years of the king's life, much was achieved: two evangelical Prayer Books, a new English order of service and the stripping of the remaining Catholic paraphernalia from the churches. But time was too short to put down roots. On Edward's death in 1553, the changes were reversed easily by his Catholic half-sister, Mary (1553-1558). Only Mary's devotion to the papacy, and her determination to marry her cousin, Philip of Spain, provoked a half-hearted reaction. English Protestantism was reduced once again to a persecuted remnant; many of its ablest figures taking refuge abroad, to avoid martyrdom - the fate of those whom remained behind.

From Mary to Elizabeth. So, in 1558 Elizabeth acceded to a troubled throne. Elizabeth I is considered one of the country's most successful and popular monarchs. Clever, enigmatic and flirtatious, she rewrote the rules of being Queen. But what was Elizabeth really like? And was her success down to her own skill and judgement - or an intuitive grasp of public relations? Print this page

The reign of Elizabeth I is often thought of as a Golden Age. It was a time of extravagance and luxury in which a flourishing popular culture was expressed through writers such as Shakespeare, and explorers like Drake and Raleigh sought to expand England's territory overseas. The 16^th century was also a time when the poor became poorer, books and opinions were censored, and plots to overthrow the Queen were rife. Elizabeth's ministers had to employ spies and even use torture to gain information about threats to her life. In 1558 the Protestant preacher John Knox wrote, 'It is more than a monster in nature that a woman should reign and bear empire over man.' So was he right? Were women fit to rule the country? The people had lived through the unpopular reign of Mary I, known as 'Bloody Mary' for her merciless persecution of Protestants. Lady Jane Grey was Queen for only a matter of days before being toppled and eventually executed. And Mary Queen of Scots made a series of ill-judged decisions which led her to the executioner's block in 1587. Elizabeth was a different kind of Queen: quick-witted, clever and able to use feminine wiles to get her own way. Elizabeth could be as ruthless and calculating as any king before her but at the same time she was vain, sentimental and easily swayed by flattery. She liked to surround herself with attractive people and her portraits were carefully vetted to make sure that no physical flaws were ever revealed. She had a formidable intellect, and her sharp tongue would quickly settle any argument - in her favour. A new era was dawning, the age of Elizabeth I. As soon as her Council had been appointed, Elizabeth made religion her priority. She recognised how important it was to establish a clear religious framework and between 1559 and 1563 introduced the acts which made up the Church Settlement. This returned England to the Protestant faith stating that public worship, religious books such as the Bible and prayers were to be conducted in English rather than Latin. Elizabeth was known as a Queen who executed another Queen - Mary. To execute any Queen was a precedent. Catholic Europe reacted swiftly to the news and the Pope urged Philip of Spain to invade England. Mary's execution would be one of the factors contributing to the Spanish Armada the following year. Her death took a heavy toll on Elizabeth. The 1590s proved a difficult decade for Elizabeth. The question of how to govern Ireland had created terrible problems for the Queen over the years but 1594 saw the start of the Nine Years War in which hundreds of English troops were killed. On 24 March 1603 Elizabeth died and the crown passed to the Protestant King James VI of Scotland who became King James I of England.

IRELAND

The question of how to govern Ireland was one of the most difficult and sensitive issues of Elizabeth's reign. By the time of her death, the country had forged a new and distinct identity of its own. But what kind of policies did her government pursue and how did the people of Ireland react?

Print this page

Tudor Parliaments. The Tudor monarchs did not like governing through Parliament. Henry VII had used Parliament only for law making. He seldom called it together. Henry VIII had used it first to raise money for his military adventures and then for his struggle with Rome. His aim was to make sure that the powerful members from the shires and towns supported him, because they had a great deal of control over popular feeling. Perhaps, Henry himself didn’t realise that by inviting Parliament to make new laws for the Reformation he was giving it a level of authority it never had before. Tudor monarchs were certainly not more democratic than earlier kings, but by using Parliament to strengthen their policy, they actually increased Parliament’s authority. Parliament strengthened its position again during Edward VI’s reign by ordering the new prayer book to be used in all churches and forbidding the Catholic mass. Only 2 things persuaded Tudor monarchs not to get rid of Parliament altogether: they needed money and they needed the support of the merchants and landowners. Today Parliament must meet every year and remain “in session” for three-quarters of it. This was not at all the case in the 16^th century. In the early 16^th century Parliament only met when the monarch ordered it. Sometimes it met twice in one year, but then it might not meet again for 6 years. In the first 44 years of Tudor rule Parliament met only 20 times. Henry VIII assembled Parliament a little more often to make the laws for Church Reformation. But Elizabeth, like her grandfather Henry VII, tried not to use Parliament after her Reformation Settlement of 1559 and in 44 years she only let Parliament meet 13 times.

During the century power moved from the House of Lords to the House of Commons. The reason for this was simple. The Members of Parliament (MPs) in the Commons represented richer and more influential classes than the Lords. In fact, the idea of getting rid of the House of Lords, still a real question in British politics today, was first suggested in the 16^th century. In order to control discussion in Parliament, the Crown appointed a “Speaker”. Even today the Speaker is responsible for good behaviour during debates in the House of Commons. His job in Tudor times was to make sure that Parliament discussed what the monarch wanted and that it made the decision which he or she wanted. Until the end of the Tudor period Parliament was supposed to do 3 things: agree to the taxes needed; make the laws which the Crown suggested; and advise the Crown but only when asked to do so. In order for Parliament to be able to do these things, the Members of Parliament were given important rights: freedom of speech, freedom from fear of arrest and freedom to meet and speak to the monarch. By the end of the 16^th century Parliament was beginning to show new confidence and in the 17^th century, when the gentry and merchant classes were far more aware of their own strength, it was obvious that Parliament would challenge the Crown. Eventually this resulted in war.

Language and Culture. At the beginning of the Tudor period English was still spoken in a number of different ways. There were still reminders of the Saxon, Angle, Jute and Viking invasions in the different forms of language spoken in different parts of the country. Since the time of Chaucer, in the mid-14^th century, London English had become accepted amongst the literate population. For the first time people started to think of London pronunciation as “correct” pronunciation. Until Tudor times the local forms of speech had been spoken by lord and peasant alike. From Tudor times onwards the way people spoke began to show the difference between them. Educated people began to speak “correct” English, and uneducated people continued to speak the local dialect. Literacy increased greatly during the mid-16^th century. In fact, by the 17^th century about half the population could read and write.

Nothing, however, showed England’s new confidence more that its artistic flowering during the Renaissance. In the early years of the 16^th century English thinkers had become interested in the work of the Dutch philosopher Erasmus. One of them, Thomas More, wrote a study of the ideal nation called Utopia. Literature, however, was England’s greatest art form. Playwrights like Christopher Marlowe, Ben Johnson and William Shakespeare filled the theatres with their exciting new plays.

Date: 2015-01-29; view: 1003