Why did France have political Revolutions while England did not? Queen Mary
Queen Mary, daughter of James II and wife of William of Orange. Source: www.reformation.org
In the last decade of the 18th century, both France and England
experienced revolutions. In France it was a political revolution against
the Old Order, and in England it was an economic revolution that
changed the way wealth was produced and shared. The Industrial
Revolution in England spread to mainland Europe, including France. The
French Revolution, along with the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 spread
to other European states. But it did not spread to England.
France and England followed different roads to political freedom and democracy. In England, the king had not enjoyed as much power as held by the French monarch. As far back as the 13th century, limits were put on the king’s power in the form of the Magna Carta, a document similar to a constitution. Further limits were put on him by the Parliament, without whose permission he could not raise taxes. Parliament consisted of two houses, namely the House of Lords (made up of noblemen and bishops) and the House of Commons (made up of knights and the middle class). By the middle of the 14th century Parliament had become a permanent government institution, ensuring that the king would not get absolute power.
This did not mean that the English kings did not desire absolute power, especially as they witnessed the French kings becoming more and more powerful and unlimited. In the 17th century this led to two revolutions in which Parliament acted against the kings’ attempts to become absolute rulers. Together, these two revolutions (1640-1649 and 1688-1689) are known as the English Revolution. The first one was a long war between the king and aristocracy on the one hand and Parliament and the middle class on the other. The revolutionaries won and king, Charles I, was executed. England became a republic, but by 1660, the English wanted to restore to a monarchy. In 1685 James II came to the throne. He wanted to establish absolute rule, and opposition to his reign grew. He was a devout Catholic, and the Anglican Church was also against him. In the first revolution much of the aristocracy supported him but eventually turned against him. They did not want another civil war, and hoped for a constitutional monarchy. In 1688 the Anglican Church and a number of noblemen formed a conspiracy against James and Parliament invited James’s son-in-law, Dutch Prince William of Orange and his wife Mary to become king and queen of England. They agreed, and a parliamentary law instituted them as the new monarchs.
This was the beginning of a new constitutional dispensation. In 1689, 100 years before the outbreak of the French Revolution, England became a constitutional monarchy. England did not experience another political revolution, but introducde reforms towards democracy. It was still dominated by the aristocracy and the majority of the population was not able to vote.
These reforms were made during the 19th century, as the rest of Europe was trying to win basic freedoms through political revolutions. As towns and cities grew with industrialisation, the English Parliament saw the need to adapt the English political dispensation to the new economic and social reality brought about by the Industrial Revolution. Reforms included greater religious tolerance, the abolition of slavery, the granting of greater autonomy to towns and cities, expansion of voting rights, limits on working hours and on child labour and the provision of free and compulsory education.
Many believe that England did not have a revolution because there were limits to the king’s power and a Parliament capable of reform. By the beginning of the 20th century, England was well on its way to being fully democratic.
On mainland Europe and especially in France, revolution seemed the only way to obtain political change and freedom. Unlike England, there were absolutely no limits to the king’s power in the 18th century, and no willingness to reform. The French Revolution did bring about certain changes. Because there were no limits on the king the possibility of restoring the Old Order and absolute rule remained. Centuries of absolute rule and oppression made the French masses determined not to risk keeping a king. Not even a constitutional monarchy would do. In England, people were willing to let the monarch stay in power, since Parliament had shown it could keep the monarchs’ power in check and had brought about many reforms and freedoms.
France and England followed different roads to political freedom and democracy. In England, the king had not enjoyed as much power as held by the French monarch. As far back as the 13th century, limits were put on the king’s power in the form of the Magna Carta, a document similar to a constitution. Further limits were put on him by the Parliament, without whose permission he could not raise taxes. Parliament consisted of two houses, namely the House of Lords (made up of noblemen and bishops) and the House of Commons (made up of knights and the middle class). By the middle of the 14th century Parliament had become a permanent government institution, ensuring that the king would not get absolute power.
This did not mean that the English kings did not desire absolute power, especially as they witnessed the French kings becoming more and more powerful and unlimited. In the 17th century this led to two revolutions in which Parliament acted against the kings’ attempts to become absolute rulers. Together, these two revolutions (1640-1649 and 1688-1689) are known as the English Revolution. The first one was a long war between the king and aristocracy on the one hand and Parliament and the middle class on the other. The revolutionaries won and king, Charles I, was executed. England became a republic, but by 1660, the English wanted to restore to a monarchy. In 1685 James II came to the throne. He wanted to establish absolute rule, and opposition to his reign grew. He was a devout Catholic, and the Anglican Church was also against him. In the first revolution much of the aristocracy supported him but eventually turned against him. They did not want another civil war, and hoped for a constitutional monarchy. In 1688 the Anglican Church and a number of noblemen formed a conspiracy against James and Parliament invited James’s son-in-law, Dutch Prince William of Orange and his wife Mary to become king and queen of England. They agreed, and a parliamentary law instituted them as the new monarchs.
This was the beginning of a new constitutional dispensation. In 1689, 100 years before the outbreak of the French Revolution, England became a constitutional monarchy. England did not experience another political revolution, but introducde reforms towards democracy. It was still dominated by the aristocracy and the majority of the population was not able to vote.
These reforms were made during the 19th century, as the rest of Europe was trying to win basic freedoms through political revolutions. As towns and cities grew with industrialisation, the English Parliament saw the need to adapt the English political dispensation to the new economic and social reality brought about by the Industrial Revolution. Reforms included greater religious tolerance, the abolition of slavery, the granting of greater autonomy to towns and cities, expansion of voting rights, limits on working hours and on child labour and the provision of free and compulsory education.
Many believe that England did not have a revolution because there were limits to the king’s power and a Parliament capable of reform. By the beginning of the 20th century, England was well on its way to being fully democratic.
On mainland Europe and especially in France, revolution seemed the only way to obtain political change and freedom. Unlike England, there were absolutely no limits to the king’s power in the 18th century, and no willingness to reform. The French Revolution did bring about certain changes. Because there were no limits on the king the possibility of restoring the Old Order and absolute rule remained. Centuries of absolute rule and oppression made the French masses determined not to risk keeping a king. Not even a constitutional monarchy would do. In England, people were willing to let the monarch stay in power, since Parliament had shown it could keep the monarchs’ power in check and had brought about many reforms and freedoms.
Activity
Write 1-2 paragraphs on each of the following questions:
Look critically at these representations. How do they depict these aspects of European life – positively or negatively?
What do they tell you about the transformation of Europe during the Age of Revolutions?
Write 1-2 paragraphs on each of the following questions:
- Why did England not have an absolute ruler?
- How did England become a constitutional monarchy?
- Why did France have revolutions during the age of revolutions?
- Why did England not have a political revolution during the age of revolutions?
- What was England’s role in the age of revolutions?
Look critically at these representations. How do they depict these aspects of European life – positively or negatively?
What do they tell you about the transformation of Europe during the Age of Revolutions?
