Parliament and the Absolutism of the Tudors
The War of the Roses, in addition to plunging the kingdom into anarchy, decimated the nobility, making it possible for the new king, Henry VII (1485-1507), to restore royal authority (Hicks 2003, 90-91), which would ultimately be shored up by his son, Henry VIII, who reigned until 1547, and his granddaughter, Elizabeth I (1558-1603).
These three Tudor monarchs were able to reassert royal prerogative and prevail against Parliamentary power, which certainly did not disappear, but was held in check during this period, during which there were long intervals without a session (Maitland and Fisher 2001, 248-251).[523]It must be said that, despite their authoritarian tendencies, the Tudors demonstrated undeniable political skill. Specifically, they astutely favored a bourgeoisie which had become richer by acquiring many of the assets of the nobles who had perished in the War of the Roses, and others expropriated from the religious orders, abolished by Henry VIII after his divorce from Catherine of Aragon and his break with Rome (Law of Supremacy, 1534). Thanks to these events, England grew from a country of herders and farmers into an industrial and mercantile power. Thus emerged a powerful class of merchants who rubbed shoulders and eventually merged with the old landed nobility, giving rise to a new ruling class in England: the gentry.[524]
With such a wide and solid social background, Henry VIII firmly consolidated his authority over the “Reformation Parliament” (Lehmberg 2009),[525] creating a strong government and an efficient administration in what Geoffrey Rudolph Elton called the “Tudor Revolution”.[526] As Crossman (1969, 51) points out, the Tudor era was essentially one of action and of expansion; men were so busy forging the new state that they had little time to speculate about it. Therefore, neither Henry nor Elisabeth explicitly claimed Divine Right for their sovereignty, nor did they explicitly demand passive obedience. Rather, they ruled as secular autocrats, in a way that Machiavelli himself would have endorsed, and were prudent enough to often placate their supporters and submit to their wishes.[527]
11.4