AQA A2 HISTORY: The Triumph of Elizabeth, 1547-1603

This is a possible Q for tommorow;

'Throughout the whole of her reign, Elizabeth I was faced with significant opposition in parliament.' Asses the validity of this view.

What would you guys write?

thanks

Significant Events:
1559 Settlement - Having to lock up some Bishops to get it passed in the house of Lords
1562 Smallpox - Pressure of Succession
1563 Parliament Pressures her over marriage
1566 Parliament pressure again over it
1572 Admonissions to Parliament

But then there's this huge gap, where pressure comes mainly from Pricy Councillors instead.

And then we come to the Bill & Book of 1584, and its second coming in 1587.
Small gap again
1594 the bad harvests start
1597 Worst harvest of the century, coinciding with Parliament's aggitation over the monopolies, hence a Poor Law being passed
1601 Parliamentary Pressure again on Monopolies, "Golden Speech" to quell it

Interesteing Person - Peter Wentworth gets locked up numerous times, last time in 1593 for arguing over the succession (and dies in the Tower in 1597). Quote "a crude reminder of the realities of Royal Power" A.G.R Smith

Think about policy in the 70s and early 80s, there isn't much parliamentary opposition (oh, maybe the Alencon marriage negotiations could be thrown in 1579).

Some quotes you could use: "parliamentarians... were a waste of an intelligent woman's time" Haigh (at the start mainly)

Later on "the Commons could act as an effective channel for grievances" Penry Williams
and "Royal Councillors were running scared" again by Penry Williams in relation to the monoplies crisis of 1601.

Now come to your own conclusion

Thanks what is the difference between Parliament, Privy Council and Government?

I always get confused Parliament is under Government, but Privy Council is not? But the Privy Council has influence over the Government?

Thanks again

Erm, well I suppose through the year I worked hard on my essays (spending a long time on them) getting A's in all of them bar one, which was a B, and that was ages ago. So already I was developing some decent knowledge for my essays. I tend to pick up little things and remember dates better than most of my class, but there's two others who can write much better than I can (they do English, sod them!) so I tend to rely on my factual knowledge more than my literary skills.

I believe History as a subject is actually really quite simple, you can never be wrong! My advice is just to get down the basic knowledge of when things happen, what happened and a few quotes to go with that theme (such as French foreign policy). Just do some timelines, with quotes at the bottom, and do a "cover-up" style. You'll learn it very quickly by doing that!

Significant Events:
1559 Settlement - Having to lock up some Bishops to get it passed in the house of Lords
1562 Smallpox - Pressure of Succession
1563 Parliament Pressures her over marriage
1566 Parliament pressure again over it
1572 Admonissions to Parliament

But then there's this huge gap, where pressure comes mainly from Pricy Councillors instead.

And then we come to the Bill & Book of 1584, and its second coming in 1587.
Small gap again
1594 the bad harvests start
1597 Worst harvest of the century, coinciding with Parliament's aggitation over the monopolies, hence a Poor Law being passed
1601 Parliamentary Pressure again on Monopolies, "Golden Speech" to quell it

Interesteing Person - Peter Wentworth gets locked up numerous times, last time in 1593 for arguing over the succession (and dies in the Tower in 1597). Quote "a crude reminder of the realities of Royal Power" A.G.R Smith

Think about policy in the 70s and early 80s, there isn't much parliamentary opposition (oh, maybe the Alencon marriage negotiations could be thrown in 1579).

Some quotes you could use: "parliamentarians... were a waste of an intelligent woman's time" Haigh (at the start mainly)

Later on "the Commons could act as an effective channel for grievances" Penry Williams
and "Royal Councillors were running scared" again by Penry Williams in relation to the monoplies crisis of 1601.

Now come to your own conclusion

PARLIAMENT = commons + lords [note commons includes privy councillors]

GOVERNMENT = privy council + local gov


thats what ive done anyway and what it suggests in some books. E.g. how did government control parliament.

How do you manage to achieve the high marks (40+)- is it mainly through the use of historian quotes and using them to argue your point?

I thought it was

Parliament = Commons and lords

Government = Queen, Privy Council, Paliament, Local Government

yes queen is in government. aghhh i dont know :s just cos i read this chapter in a book stating how Government controlled parliament :s the most logical thing would be as you say including parl but i dont know!

Well I tend to think my teacher is a bit lenient (well one of them, the other is a Cambridge graduate and only 20 something years old, who I did my coursework for)

I'll find an example for you out of one of my essays, I did this one in September 2010 so my style has changed a bit (i.e not so big paragraphs!). The question ""Somerset good. Northumberland Bad": Assess thevalidty blah blah":

Law and order was of increasing importance for the state, especially as it was going through a period of radical religious reform, at least in the top echelons of English society. Again the economy influenced the Protectors’ decisions. The Chantries Act of 1547 was a logical step for a nation converting to more Calvinist ideals but also had the war in mind. The issuing of the Book of Common Prayer in 1549 further increased what Duffy has described as “class antagonism”, and sparked the so called Prayer Book Rebellion that same year. Of course Whigs would merely suggest that this was down to heretics, any upper class at the time would most likely be a Protestant who fully supported the Act of Uniformity. This is not an attack on Somerset, in fact he had done what was expected of him and followed the doctrine his King was following. Whilst Northumberland had some interest in continuing Somerset’s religious reforms, he knew that his position would allow him to exploit some of the Church’s wealth. He stepped up the shift to radicalism with a new Act of Uniformity in 1552, which would see two thirds of the Worcester estate’s wealth ending up in the Crown’s hands. This contributed to a “climate of discontent and disobedience” (Duffy) which had already been present under Somerset and continued through Northumberland’s time. In reality, any religious reform would lead to some civil unrest but the radical nature of the shift had already strained an out of work and hungry populace who’s only salvation was with the Church. Neither did anything to obey Henry’s Act of Six Articles which could of prevented further unrest at a particularly delicate time for the English state. Had the country been sound financially and in a position where its foreign affairs were no longer a threat to national security then extreme reformation could have taken place without domestic repercussions.

the speaker was chosen as the one most inline with the crowns policies
the PC set the tone of parliament, introducing the crowns policies
the PC also introduced new bills
Cecil in particular had control of parliament through his "men of business", which secured the death of Norfolk in 1572

the speaker was chosen as the one most inline with the crowns policies
the PC set the tone of parliament, introducing the crowns policies
the PC also introduced new bills
Cecil in particular had control of parliament through his "men of business", which secured the death of Norfolk in 1572

The ability of governmetnt to deal with internal enemies. ie mary queen of scots, the northern rebellion , ridolfi throckmorton babbington plot.

Any one care to help me on this?

So if a question on Parliament gets asked, how can you refer to events that happen with the Privy Council?

Like the 1596/1601 rebellion etc that was mostly a royal response, can you refer to that.

So if a question on Parliament gets asked, how can you refer to events that happen with the Privy Council?

Like the 1596/1601 rebellion etc that was mostly a royal response, can you refer to that.

Mary Queen of Scots: A continuous probelm for Elizabeth and in particular, Burghley and Leicster in terms of a potential Catholic takeover. She caused Burghley to get involved with France and Scotland- both of which cost a tremendous amount of money and caused inflation in England (This also caused Elizabeth to keep on asking parliament for subsidies etc- which took time). She was also a main reason for the Northern Rebellion which can be argued as being quite serious. All in all, MQS caused financial problems for the crown and led the councillors to make inneffective decisions. However, in the end, Elizabeths preperation and a bit of luck (through the Northern storms and the death of Francis I) meant that it was dealt with.

The Ridolfi Plot was in 1571 when sucsession was an issue and it backed by the Spanish which meant that potentially it was a threat. It was an attempt to get MQS married to Norfolk. However, it failed and I believe that it wasn't a serious threat.

The Thockmorton Plot was much more serious at it was at a time when there was inflation in england and there was a growing war with Spain, problems with the Catholic League etc. It was also backed by the Guisse family in France and they wanted to land in the Catholc Suffolk. However, Walsingham spoke to a French Mole and they were caught. Had potential to be a big problem. John Bossy; 'it was very dangerous.'

All of this fed the minds of Burghley and Leicster who believed that everyone was against them and that the Catholcs were all planning to take over.