page 2 about civil war

The
transition from QUEEN
ELIZABETH I (1533-1603,
r.1558-1603) of the
Tudor House to that of
James I (1566-1625,
r.1603-1625) and the
Stuarts was quite
dramatic. Elizabeth had
been an astute manager
of men as well as of
England. She chose her
advisers well and
introduced a modicum
of civility into court
society and encouraged
the patronage of the
arts. However, Elizabeth
refused to marry and so
the successor to the
throne remained a
thorny problem. A crisis
was avoided when her
chief minister, Robert
Cecil (1563-1612),
arranged for the king of
Scotland, James Stuart,
or James VI, to succeed
the throne upon
Elizabeth's death in
1603.
Elizabeth also refused
to act decisively against
those Catholics
remaining in England.
There were those who
hoped that upon
Elizabeth's death, that
Mary, Queen of Scots
(1542-1587), a Catholic,
would succeed the
throne. Mary had
already been removed
from Scotland by
Calvinist nobles and was
now a prisoner in
England. A Catholic plot
to drive out Elizabeth
remained until Elizabeth
agreed to execute Mary
on February 8, 1587.
There were other
dangers that confronted
the English government
under Elizabeth.
Throughout the late
16th century economic
forces had transformed
English society. The
nobility no longer had a
vital military role to play
in England. They were
also losing their
authority in government
while the House of
Commons was
becoming the near
equal of the House of
Lords in Parliament.
Finally, the nobility
seemed to be losing out
in terms of England's
increasing prosperity, as
new elements, such as
the gentry, entered the
scene. The gentry was a
broad group of people
that had done quite
well since the early 16th
century when they
purchased the land the
English crown had
confiscated when the
monasteries were
closed. The gentry also
found themselves more
thoroughly involved in
the commerce of the
nation which found
them at odds with the
nobility who were
traditionally aloof from
business matters.
Integral to the
administration of the
local parishes, the
gentry now wanted a
voice in Parliament.
Their argument was
simply that since they
had helped increase the
wealth of the nation
they too ought to share
in the governing of the
nation. The existence of
the gentry in the early
17th century was not
enough to stimulate a
civil war.