From: L' Ermit (lhermit@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jan 28 2002 - 17:30:23 MST
[Hermit 3*] While I agree in principle with Richard's objection, I put the
start of the collapse of feudalism much earlier
[Richard Ridge 3] Hmmm. While divine right was originally an intrinsic
element of feudalism I'm not entirely convinced that the histories of both
of those are entirely congruent (I had always been rather under the
impression that although England remained essentially feudal until the act
of enclosure and related reforms, the concept of divine right had not been
articulated for some time before then and was largely a derelict signifier).
As such, I wouldn't disagree with your analysis, but as far as divine
right itself is concerned I still feel that the Elizabethan period was of
enormous importance and not just for the decay of support amongst puritans.
[Hermit 4] Nods. To all intents and purposes the Elizabethans were the
English Renaisance. And I agree that "Divine Right" was merely one component
of feudalism and that it was largely ignored relatively early in England.
That didn't prevent Charles I from dragging it out whenever it suited him,
and it certainly was a component of "Bonnie Prince Charlie's" appeal.
[Richard Ridge 3] From that point of view, the point concerning the war of
the roses (and Tyler) is certainly well made, though to my mind one of the
more important acts of the struggle for the throne was its final act in the
shape of Elizabeth's execution of the Duke of Norfolk, a Plantagenet, whose
lineage (IIRC) had placed him in a position to stake a claim to the throne.
Norfolk was also a catholic (at which point the issues of descent and
divinity intersected in their crudest form, particularly with the
possibility of a marriage to Mary) - the Papal bull "Regnans in Excelsis"
issued by Pope Pious V was also not unimportant in so far as it released
English Catholics from any loyalty to the same monarchy that bore the title
of fidei defensor (leading up to the gunpowder conspiracy, though Catholics
had admittedly not been entirely unacquainted with rebellion prior to that).
In other words,
the settlement of the Anglican Church as a somewhat inelegant compromise
between catholicism and protestantism, left neither extreme recognising the
divine legitimacy of the monarch, a prejudice Elizabeth confirmed to the
satisfaction of both sides by Mary's execution.
[Hermit 4] It wasn't just Elizabeth. She simply finished the "hatchet job"
on the Plantagenets started by Henry VII and continued by Henry VIII with
very deliberate thoroughness. Anyone with the slightest claim to the throne,
along with their families got married off to Lancastarians or got the chop.
And the slightest excuse sufficed. The Tudors were undoubtedly very aware of
their less than perfect claim to the throne. Henry VII tacitly acknowledged
this with his claim to the crown "de juris et de bello" (by right of law and
of conquest). But then Henry VII was just the great-grandson of the bastard
son of a younger son of a King. Not a particularly good basis to claim
Divine Right :-) If you are interested, I strongly recommend
[url=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684803860/thehermit0d]"The
daughter of Time", Josephine Tey.[/url] Superbly researched and well written
fiction that does a better job of dissecting the Tudors in 200 odd pages
than anything else I've read.
[Richard Ridge 3] That said, for the final curtain of divine right one has
to wait for the head of Charles to roll, or the coronation of either Charles
the Second or William of Orange, depending on where you wish to draw the
line in the sand.
[Hermit 4] I'd say that it was the coronation of William. Charles II could
(and did) claim birthright. William was chosen as king, simply because
Parliment thought he would be good for England - and on the whole, he
probably was (the Irish disagree, but then, that is their nature :-)). There
never was the slightest pretence that he had any legitimate claim through
lineage.
Regards
Hermit
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:41 MDT