Moments in Time: England's Parliament Stands Up to a King

Twice a year, I record a broadcast (or series of broadcasts) for my college's public radio station, WUCX, for their Moment in Time segment. I decided to collect the texts of these together here, as I have not been using this blog for anything else. Bear in mind these are aimed at a popular audience, so they are not the most cutting-edge scholarship. I have oversimplified a little at times, but hope I've avoided any outright errors. 

Because of the nature of these broadcasts, I tend to pull my political punches, and I hid my enthusiasm for the English Revolution somewhat. My description of the English Republic as "shambolic" is unfair, and makes me wince a little when I reread it.

This entry is the second in a pair that were first broadcast in July 2017.

The audio of this broadcast can be found here.

1641: England's Parliament Stands Up to a King

Last time, I talked about how the English Parliament emerged during the Middle Ages. However, it was still essentially a consultative body rather than an institution of government, its powers limited to approving taxation (or not) and removing the king’s more unpopular ministers.

Parliament became a truly powerful body in the early modern period via the two Rs: Reformation and Revolution. The Reformation raised its importance as Tudor monarchs such as Henry VIII and Elizabeth I needed it to legitimize their religious reforms. Henry broke from the Roman Catholic Church when the Pope refused to annul his first marriage. When persuasion failed, Henry simply declared that the English Church was independent of Rome and that he was its head. But who could ratify such an ambitious claim? Parliament, of course, the one body that could claim to represent the English realm and people.

The seventeenth century saw revolution. We English tend to deny that we have revolutions, which we see as incompatible with a culture based on unexciting pursuits like cricket and high tea. But it’s hard to think of a better word to describe the tumultuous changes of that period. The good relationship between the Tudors and their Parliaments fell apart under the next dynasty, the Stuarts. The Stuart kings were Scottish, and unused to ruling a kingdom like England that had a strong-minded Parliament. The second Stuart king, Charles I, was constantly short of money, and when he asked Parliament to vote him taxes they tended to place conditions on giving him the money. He also offended their religious scruples; Charles was seen as a little lukewarm about the Reformation, and was even accused of being a secret Catholic, whereas many members of the House of Commons were Puritans from the more radical wing of Protestantism.

Matters came to a head in 1641. Charles had tried to rule without Parliament but was forced to recall it, only to find it as rebellious as ever. A clumsy attempt to arrest dissident Members of Parliament failed, and is commemorated every year in one of the curious ceremonies that mark British politics. 

The Queen gives a speech at the opening of Parliament setting out her government’s policies. Of course, she has no real power, and is merely a mouthpiece for the Prime Minister, who was still Theresa May last time I checked [July 2017]. But it does give Her Majesty a chance to show off her sparkly crown. As her representative arrives to summon the House of Commons, the doors of the House are ceremonially slammed in his face, a reminder that Parliament, not the monarch, is sovereign.

The falling out between King and Parliament was now irrevocable, and led to a bloody civil war that Parliament won. King Charles was tried and found guilty of treason against his own people, removed from power, and beheaded. The republic that followed was a shambolic regime, and Charles’s son was invited back to be king eleven years later, but never again could a king rule without Parliament, and over the following three centuries Britain slowly evolved into a representative democracy.

So England as well as the USA has a tradition of people standing up to royal tyranny, and if anyone makes a hip-hop musical about them, I will let you know.