Why glorious revolution was important

For almost a thousand years, Rome influenced the Church of England; Catholicism infiltrating and affecting just about every aspect of life: trade, contracts, marriage etc.

During the 17th century, the whole of Europe was inflamed with war and under a constant struggle to establish a unified church under a unified empire.

That implied that the crown would pass to his Catholic brother James which in turn incited the fear of absolute rule, popery, slavery, and subjugation to France and Rome. King James II brought many tensions between the people of England because of the political changes that he made while he reigned as king.

Coming into power as a Catholic already brought many concerns to the people because they feared popery and Catholic tyranny.

However, he assured the people that he beliefs would not contribute to his manner in leading the country. Soon after the beginning of his reign, all that began to change. Next, the king suspended the Test Acts and therefore allowed him to appoint Catholics as members of his council. All of these acts led people to begin to oppose the reign of King James II.

These bishops were arrested their rebellion. All of this lead the people of England to search for a new leader in fear of a Catholic monarchy. Many politicians were on a mission to remove King James II from the throne. In order to do this, they had to devise a plan, also know as, a conspiracy. This conspiracy became so popular that there were several names which grew from from its leader, William Orange.

For this reason, many called this conspiracy as the Orange Card or the Orangist Conspiracy. A king who lives within the constitution has less desire to renege on his commitments.

Recall that Charles II defaulted on his debts in an attempt to subvert the constitution, and, in contrast, Parliament after the Glorious Revolution generously financed wars for monarchs who abided by the constitution.

An irony of the Glorious Revolution is that monarchs who accepted constitutional constraints gained more resources than their absolutist forebears. Still, should a monarch want to have his government renege, Parliament will not always agree, and a stable constitution assures a Parliamentary veto. The two houses of Parliament, Commons and Lords, creates more veto opportunities, and the chances of a policy change decrease with more veto opportunities if the king and the two houses have different interests Weingast Another aspect of Parliament is the role of political parties.

For veto opportunities to block change, opponents need only to control one veto, and here the coalition aspect of parties was important. For example, the Whig coalition combined dissenting Protestants and moneyed interests, so each could rely on mutual support through the Whig party to block government action against either.

Cross-issue bargaining between factions creates a cohesive coalition on multiple issues Stasavage As a deterrent against violating commitments today, reputation relies on penalties felt tomorrow, so reputation often does not deter those overly focused on the present. A desperate king is a common example. As collective bodies of indefinite life, however, Parliament and political parties have longer time horizons than an individual, so reputation has better chance of fostering credibility.

A measure of fiscal credibility is the risk premium that the market puts on government debt. During the Nine Years War , government debt carried a risk premium of 4 percent over private debt, but that risk premium disappeared and became a small discount in the years to Quinn A related measure of confidence was the market price of stock in companies like the Bank of England and the East India Company. Because those companies were created by Parliamentary authorization and held large quantities of government debt, changes in confidence were reflected in changes in their stock prices.

Again, the Treaty of Ryswick greatly increased stock prices and confirms a substantial increase in the credibility of the government Wells and Wills , The fiscal credibility of the English government created by the Glorious Revolution unleashed a revolution in public finance.

To bolster credibility, Parliament committed future tax revenues to servicing the debts and introduced new taxes as needed Dickson , Brewer Credible government debt formed the basis of the Bank of England in and the core the London stock market.

While the Glorious Revolution was critical to the Financial Revolution in England, the follow up assertion in North and Weingast that the Glorious Revolution increased the security of property rights in general, and so spurred economic growth, remains an open question.

A difficulty is how to test the question. An increase in the credibility of property rights might cause interest rates to decrease because people become willing to save more; however, rates based on English property rentals show no effect from the Glorious Revolution, and the rates of one London banker actually increased after the Glorious Revolution Clark , Quinn In contrast, high interest rates could indicate that the Glorious Revolution increased entrepreneurship and demand for investment.

Unfortunately, high rates could also mean that the expansion of government borrowing permitted by the Financial Revolution crowded out investment. Distinguishing between crowding out and increased demand for investment, however, relies on establishing whether the overall quantity of business investment changed, and that remains unresolved because of the difficulty in constructing such an aggregate measure.

The potential linkages between the credibility created by the Glorious Revolution and economic development remain an open question. Carlos, Ann M. Clark, Gregory. Dickson, Peter. The Financial Revolution in England. New York: St. Israel, Jonathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Jones, James, Country and Court England, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Neal, Larry.

North, Douglass, and Barry Weingast. Quinn, Stephen. The prospect of a Catholic dynasty in the kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland was now likely. William was also stadtholder of the main provinces of the Dutch Republic.

He had already acquired the reputation of being the main champion of the Protestant cause against Catholicism and French absolutism. In the developing English crisis, he saw an opportunity to prevent an Anglo-French alliance and bring England to the anti-French side by carrying out a military intervention directed against James.

This suited the desires of several English politicians who intended to depose James. It is still a matter of controversy whether the initiative for the conspiracy was taken by the English or by the stadtholder and his wife. On June 30, , a group of seven Protestant nobles invited the Prince of Orange to come to England with an army.

By September, it became clear that William would invade England. William arrived on November 5. James refused a French offer to send an expeditionary force, fearing that it would cost him domestic support.

He tried to bring the Tories to his side by making concessions, but failed because he still refused to endorse the Test Act. His forward forces had gathered at Salisbury, and James went to join them on November 19 with his main force, having a total strength of about 19, Meanwhile, on November 18, Plymouth had surrendered to William, and on November 21, William began to advance.

James offered free elections and a general amnesty for the rebels. In reality, by that point he was simply playing for time, having already decided to flee the country.

James was received in France by his cousin and ally, Louis XIV, who offered him a palace and a pension. The status of William and Mary in England was unclear while James, though now in France, still had many supporters in the country. Anne declared that she would temporarily waive her right to the crown should Mary die before William, and Mary refused to be made queen without William as king.