Question 1
Using these four sources in their historical context, assess how far they support the view that the
first year of James II’s reign was a success for the King.
Source A: The King comments on his intentions regarding parliament on his accession to the throne.
I have resolved to call a Parliament immediately and to assemble it in the month of May. I shall publish at the same time a declaration that I am to maintain myself in the enjoyment of the same revenues the King my brother had. Without this proclamation for a Parliament I should hazard too much by taking possession directly of the revenue which was established during the lifetime of my deceased brother. It is a decisive stroke for me to enter into possession and enjoyment. For hereafter it will be much more easy for me either to put off the assembling of Parliament or to maintain myself by other means which may appear more convenient to me.
James II, conversation with French ambassador, 8 February 1685
Source B: Bishop Burnet describes the first election of James II’s reign.
At the same time a Parliament was called, and much art used to manage elections so as to procure one that would please the King. In the new charters that had been granted, the choice of the members was taken out of the hands of the inhabitants, and restrained to the corporation men, leaving all out who were not acceptable to the Court. In some boroughs they could not find a sufficient number to depend on, and so the neighbouring gentlemen were made corporation men; and in other places, persons of different counties, and not so much known in the borough, were named. And [they] settled a resolution to recommend themselves to the King by putting everything in his power, and ruining all those who had been for the Exclusion.
Gilbert Burnet, History of His Own Time, published in 1734 (after his death)
Source C: The King comments on the suppression of Monmouth’s rebellion.
But when we reflect, what an inconsiderable number of men began it [Monmouth’s rebellion], and how long they carried it on without any opposition, I hope everybody will be convinced that the Militia, which hath hitherto been so much depended on, is not sufficient for such occasions; and that there is nothing but a good force of well-disciplined troops in constant pay that can defend us from such, as, either home or abroad, are disposed to disturb us.
James II, speech to Parliament, 9 November 1685
Source D: A Tory MP comments on the debate concerning Catholic officers in the militia.
The 13th [November] the House of Commons voted a supply to be granted to the King for his extraordinary occasions; but would neither consent to name the amount nor the use to which it was to be given [the support of the army]. It was a long debate, and ended in a question on which the House divided. The noes were 250, the ayes were but 125 for that use. The same day there was another division, upon the question whether that House should first proceed upon supply to the King, or upon the second paragraph of his Majesty’s speech, concerning the popish officers in the army. It was carried for postponing the supply by one vote only. In this division it was told to the King that several of his servants and officers of the army that were MPs voted against him.
Sir John Reresby, Memoirs, 13 November 1685
[30]
Answer
