Help
HI, I was wondering how you would answer this question:
How far was Elizabeth able to maintain control of her council and her ministers throughout her reign?
also what is the difference between her council and ministers?
Thanks!
Page 1 of 1
Ocr A2 History Elizabeth I
MultiQuote
#2
- Group: Moderating Teacher & Admin
- Posts: 4,674
- Joined: 29-December 03
- Gender:Male
- Location:County Durham
Posted 07 June 2009 - 04:07 PM
Useful resources list from OCR here.
and from AQA here.
And what about this wonderful summary from OCR:
Read this useful article.
This previous thread has some relevance, as does this one, and this one.
To all practical purposes Council - ministers, though not all her ministers would have been on the Privy Council.
and from AQA here.
And what about this wonderful summary from OCR:
Quote
3.4 Interpretations of Elizabeth I
The Traditional View
Adulation of Elizabeth, in particular her ability to end the ‘mid-Tudor crisis’, control parliament and
restrain religious conflict, developed soon after her death and was widely accepted until the mid-
1960s.
It emphasised conflict between Elizabeth and her Parliaments and religious division as major
themes because it regarded events of Elizabeth’s reign as a precursor to the mid-seventeenth
century conflict.
It stressed Elizabeth’s skilful management of Parliament.
A major theme was the growth in the power of the House of Commons at the expense of the Lords.
It stressed Elizabeth’s ability to manage the growing religious diversity of her subjects.
The Revisionist View
Rejected the idea of a ‘mid-Tudor crisis’ and hence of the relative strength and skilful management
of Elizabeth’s government.
Also rejected the idea that the Civil Wars of the 1640s had causes going back before 1637.
Rejected the idea of a progressive movement in religious development with Puritanism challenging
religious conformity and hence the monarchy.
Emphasised a slow Reformation; Catholic survival rather than Protestant militance was the major
ecclesiastical problem.
Rather than being self-confident, Elizabeth’s government was deeply afraid of, in particular,
Catholic threats (especially in the 1580s).
Acknowledged the surviving importance of the nobility in local and central government.
Rejected the growing confidence of the House of Commons in challenging the crown.
Challenged the concept of the centrality of factionalism in government.
The Post-Revisionist View
Examined the rule of Elizabeth from the feminist perspective, particularly regarding the marriage
and succession questions, but also in the context of a patriarchal society.
Undertook research into the contribution of Elizabeth’s style and image to her dealings with
politicians.
Recognised that conflict between Queen and Parliament was often the result of unresolved matters
between Queen and Privy Councillors.
Saw Elizabeth as a weaker monarch than either of the other views suggest, as there were so many
constraints on her power and she had far less room for manoeuvre than had previously been
suggested.
The Traditional View
Adulation of Elizabeth, in particular her ability to end the ‘mid-Tudor crisis’, control parliament and
restrain religious conflict, developed soon after her death and was widely accepted until the mid-
1960s.
It emphasised conflict between Elizabeth and her Parliaments and religious division as major
themes because it regarded events of Elizabeth’s reign as a precursor to the mid-seventeenth
century conflict.
It stressed Elizabeth’s skilful management of Parliament.
A major theme was the growth in the power of the House of Commons at the expense of the Lords.
It stressed Elizabeth’s ability to manage the growing religious diversity of her subjects.
The Revisionist View
Rejected the idea of a ‘mid-Tudor crisis’ and hence of the relative strength and skilful management
of Elizabeth’s government.
Also rejected the idea that the Civil Wars of the 1640s had causes going back before 1637.
Rejected the idea of a progressive movement in religious development with Puritanism challenging
religious conformity and hence the monarchy.
Emphasised a slow Reformation; Catholic survival rather than Protestant militance was the major
ecclesiastical problem.
Rather than being self-confident, Elizabeth’s government was deeply afraid of, in particular,
Catholic threats (especially in the 1580s).
Acknowledged the surviving importance of the nobility in local and central government.
Rejected the growing confidence of the House of Commons in challenging the crown.
Challenged the concept of the centrality of factionalism in government.
The Post-Revisionist View
Examined the rule of Elizabeth from the feminist perspective, particularly regarding the marriage
and succession questions, but also in the context of a patriarchal society.
Undertook research into the contribution of Elizabeth’s style and image to her dealings with
politicians.
Recognised that conflict between Queen and Parliament was often the result of unresolved matters
between Queen and Privy Councillors.
Saw Elizabeth as a weaker monarch than either of the other views suggest, as there were so many
constraints on her power and she had far less room for manoeuvre than had previously been
suggested.
Read this useful article.
This previous thread has some relevance, as does this one, and this one.
To all practical purposes Council - ministers, though not all her ministers would have been on the Privy Council.
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1