Warning: Use of undefined constant referer - assumed 'referer' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /usr/home/essaywo/public_html/essays on line 102

Warning: Use of undefined constant host - assumed 'host' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /usr/home/essaywo/public_html/essays on line 105

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /usr/home/essaywo/public_html/essays:102) in /usr/home/essaywo/public_html/essays on line 106

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /usr/home/essaywo/public_html/essays:102) in /usr/home/essaywo/public_html/essays on line 109
Before 1640, Parliament Was No - College Essays

Before 1640, Parliament Was No

"t powerful and it did not contain an opposition". Discuss.
There are two schools of thought concerning parliamentary power and opposition prior to 1640. The older Whig ideal argues that Parliament was indeed powerful, and contained opposition to the government, i.e. the Crown, because a power struggle ensued, while the Revisionist faction denounces this view of a power struggle between Crown and Parliament. it is important that two key words are defined (Chambers dictionary); powerful will be known as "having great power" and "force", while opposition will be regarded as "the parliamentary body that opposes the government", i.e. the Crown.
The Revisionist critique that Parliament ...

Want to read the rest of this paper?
Join Essayworld today to view this entire essay
and over 50,000 other term papers

over the "matters of state" (religion, foreign policy, marriage, succession and finance) in which Parliament couldn't discuss without her consent. Parliament having the contradictory view that it was their privilege and right to discuss these matters. The era of Elizabeth is a chronological chart of parliamentary opposition. 1566, a petition from Parliament over her marriage, Elizabeth ordered them to stop this debate because it was a "matters of state", Wentworth reacted to this by saying this was "a breach of the liberty of the free speech of the House". Elizabeth, strongly as possible; "let this my discipline stand you in stead of sorer strokes, never tempt too far a prince's patience", a warning to Parliament that they should not oppose her wishes. There were many instances in which the Queen had to rebuke Parliament for infringing her prerogatives, 1572 where a passing of a Bill concerning Mary Queen of Scots was delayed because Parliament were indulging in other ...

Get instant access to over 50,000 essays.
Write better papers. Get better grades.

Already a member? Login

CITE THIS PAGE:

APA
MLA
Chicago
Turabian

Before 1640, Parliament Was No. (2007, April 27). Retrieved November 22, 2024, from http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Before-1640-Parliament-Was-No/64017

"Before 1640, Parliament Was No." Essayworld.com. Essayworld.com, 27 Apr. 2007. Web. 22 Nov. 2024. <http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Before-1640-Parliament-Was-No/64017>

"Before 1640, Parliament Was No." Essayworld.com. April 27, 2007. Accessed November 22, 2024. http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Before-1640-Parliament-Was-No/64017.

JOIN NOW

Join today and get instant access to this and 50,000+ other essays

PAPER DETAILS

Added: 4/27/2007 10:04:42 PM
Category: World History
Type: Premium Paper
Words: 1206
Pages: 5

Save |

Report

SHARE THIS PAPER

SAVED ESSAYS

Save and find your favorite essays easier