Representation and Democracy in Britain 1830-1931

I have that exact essay that I did. I took the stance that it was a key factor but not the main one. I was told it would be a high B/Low A grade... Quote me if you want me to copy and paste it

Yes please!
I just have no idea what other key factors I could write about...

To what extent was the declining power of the aristocracy a key factor in the development of a representative system of parliamentary government in Britain between 1830 and 1931?

As long as the Aristocracy in Britain retained total power, I don’t believe that the British system could be accurately described as a representative system of parliamentary government. Even by the 1884/5 Reform Act, only 1 in 3 men could vote, women were entirely overlooked and the majority of MPs and Cabinet Ministers came from landowning backgrounds. After this, their power began to decline and the middles classes and later working classes were able to become MPs. So I think that the declining power of the aristocracy was a key factor in the development of a system of Parliamentary government in Britain between 1830 and 1931 but not the only main one.

The declining influence of the Aristocracy had a significant effect on the system of parliamentary government in Britain.
The first reform that showed a real change in the nature of the Cabinet was in 1867. Before this reform, 12 Cabinet ministers came from noble landowning backgrounds and after this, it dropped to just 9. This change in style and attitude towards the system of government can be seen in the changes of the Liberal Party, who in 1874 were the first to elect 2 working class men to parliament. Both of them came from mining constituencies and this marked a change in social and political attitudes. This shows how the increase in representation is linked to the decline in aristocratic power.
This erosion of aristocratic power continued throughout the rest of the period. The decline of the traditional Whigs led to a decline in the aristocracy. In a Liberal Dominated era, the Liberal associations looked for more radical candidates and the aristocracy just weren’t radical enough. This was then further exacerbated on the reform of local governments in 1888, when county councils became elected and the landowners could no longer exert their influence through domination and force. This did, however, obviously make the system of governing Britain much more democratic because the middle classes were more in touch with what was needed for true democracy and equal representation.
This was followed by a period of increased taxation and therefore a decline in the wealth of the aristocracy. This meant that by 1906, only 10% of MPs came from landowning backgrounds and Prime Ministers were also becoming middle class such as Asquith in 1908 and then Lloyd-George in 1916.

Despite this, the noble landowning elite did not entirely die away. They did retain some power as the government was becoming truly representative. Though the traditional Whigs had died away (the last significant Whig Prime Minister being Viscount Palmerston, who died in 1865) the aristocratic conservative kept the majority of the position in the House of Lords until the Parliamentary Act of 1911 when the significance of the House of Commons, which was less aristocratic in nature, increased. It also introduced a salary for MPs which helped to encourage the less wealthy classes to become politically active.
Aristocratic families did, however, remain fairly wealthy and kept significant amounts of land and property allowing them to exert at least some influence. They retained a special position in society throughout the rest of the period which was widely viewed as unfillable by the lower classes. The House of Commons was also dominated by professional rather than lower classes. Despite this, the system by 1931 can be described as representative because the whole nation was enfranchised equally regardless of class or gender and all classes had an equal chance of having positions of power and only 7% of the Liberal and 26% of the Conservative party MPs were landowning.

Other factors do also need to be considered, as they also contributed to the development of a representative system. The main one of these is undoubtedly external pressure on the government in the form of pressure groups. These developed throughout the 100 years and helped to encourage the reforms which caused the destruction of the aristocracy and so are just as important. These went from the Birmingham and London Political Unions pre-1832, through the Chartist movement in the 1840s to the NRU and the NRL who played an extremely important role in the development of the 1867 act which marked the change from aristocratic domination to a representative system and then later the Women’s suffrage movement which helped sway the mind of the last remaining traditional ministers that it was time for true representation and democracy in Britain.

Overall, I think the decline in power of the aristocracy was a key factor in the development of a representative system of parliamentary government in Britain because without it, the system of government wouldn’t have changed quite so rapidly or significantly but it shouldn’t be given emphasis at the extent of other factors which were just as important. Both the factors outlined here were equally important and were both essential in the change from unequal political representation to democracy.

Hope it helps

To what extent was the declining power of the aristocracy a key factor in the development of a representative system of parliamentary government in Britain between 1830 and 1931?

As long as the Aristocracy in Britain retained total power, I don’t believe that the British system could be accurately described as a representative system of parliamentary government. Even by the 1884/5 Reform Act, only 1 in 3 men could vote, women were entirely overlooked and the majority of MPs and Cabinet Ministers came from landowning backgrounds. After this, their power began to decline and the middles classes and later working classes were able to become MPs. So I think that the declining power of the aristocracy was a key factor in the development of a system of Parliamentary government in Britain between 1830 and 1931 but not the only main one.

The declining influence of the Aristocracy had a significant effect on the system of parliamentary government in Britain.
The first reform that showed a real change in the nature of the Cabinet was in 1867. Before this reform, 12 Cabinet ministers came from noble landowning backgrounds and after this, it dropped to just 9. This change in style and attitude towards the system of government can be seen in the changes of the Liberal Party, who in 1874 were the first to elect 2 working class men to parliament. Both of them came from mining constituencies and this marked a change in social and political attitudes. This shows how the increase in representation is linked to the decline in aristocratic power.
This erosion of aristocratic power continued throughout the rest of the period. The decline of the traditional Whigs led to a decline in the aristocracy. In a Liberal Dominated era, the Liberal associations looked for more radical candidates and the aristocracy just weren’t radical enough. This was then further exacerbated on the reform of local governments in 1888, when county councils became elected and the landowners could no longer exert their influence through domination and force. This did, however, obviously make the system of governing Britain much more democratic because the middle classes were more in touch with what was needed for true democracy and equal representation.
This was followed by a period of increased taxation and therefore a decline in the wealth of the aristocracy. This meant that by 1906, only 10% of MPs came from landowning backgrounds and Prime Ministers were also becoming middle class such as Asquith in 1908 and then Lloyd-George in 1916.

Despite this, the noble landowning elite did not entirely die away. They did retain some power as the government was becoming truly representative. Though the traditional Whigs had died away (the last significant Whig Prime Minister being Viscount Palmerston, who died in 1865) the aristocratic conservative kept the majority of the position in the House of Lords until the Parliamentary Act of 1911 when the significance of the House of Commons, which was less aristocratic in nature, increased. It also introduced a salary for MPs which helped to encourage the less wealthy classes to become politically active.
Aristocratic families did, however, remain fairly wealthy and kept significant amounts of land and property allowing them to exert at least some influence. They retained a special position in society throughout the rest of the period which was widely viewed as unfillable by the lower classes. The House of Commons was also dominated by professional rather than lower classes. Despite this, the system by 1931 can be described as representative because the whole nation was enfranchised equally regardless of class or gender and all classes had an equal chance of having positions of power and only 7% of the Liberal and 26% of the Conservative party MPs were landowning.

Other factors do also need to be considered, as they also contributed to the development of a representative system. The main one of these is undoubtedly external pressure on the government in the form of pressure groups. These developed throughout the 100 years and helped to encourage the reforms which caused the destruction of the aristocracy and so are just as important. These went from the Birmingham and London Political Unions pre-1832, through the Chartist movement in the 1840s to the NRU and the NRL who played an extremely important role in the development of the 1867 act which marked the change from aristocratic domination to a representative system and then later the Women’s suffrage movement which helped sway the mind of the last remaining traditional ministers that it was time for true representation and democracy in Britain.

Overall, I think the decline in power of the aristocracy was a key factor in the development of a representative system of parliamentary government in Britain because without it, the system of government wouldn’t have changed quite so rapidly or significantly but it shouldn’t be given emphasis at the extent of other factors which were just as important. Both the factors outlined here were equally important and were both essential in the change from unequal political representation to democracy.

Hope it helps

Might might want to link a few external events to the desire of the aristocracy to retain power e.g
Prior to 1832, there was the French and US Revolution.
Prior to 1918, there was the Russian Revoultion (1917)
You can link these to the aristocractic fear of doing nothing..

my teacher told me that only 3 types of questions come up
can anyone clarify for me what these are?

Less than two weeks to go and I STILL hate this module...
My history teacher is predicting horrible questions to come up this year as last year's weren't bad (apprarently anyway...I still failed at trying to answer them)

You can't go wrong, tbh..

Believe me, I can

But thanks for the reassurance anyway - I just get the feeling I shouldn't find this module as hard as I do (esp as I'm doing history at uni next yr!)

It's my least faviorate unit. However, the one on which I always get an A on because the questions are so easy and the same. You can just make one or two essay plans and learn them.
The Heinemann book is realyl good.

If you think this is bad, try doing Chartism.

This module is fun in comparison lol.

can anyone provide a checklist of what we need to know for this unit? im finding it very hard to revise!