Why did England develop Constitutional Monarchy?

Question

Please address the following if possible:

Why was the monarch weak/poor and the aristocracy strong/rich in comparison to other European states?

Why/how did parliament gain control over taxation - and was this key?

Answer 1

The move from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy occurred over several centuries. It started in 1066, following the Norman conquest of Britain, when William I set up the first Parliament. Then in 1215, King John was forced by the nobles to sign Magna Carta which protected certain rights of all subjects, most notably the writ of habeas corpus which allowed appeal against unlawful imprisonment.

In 1649, King Charles I was executed on order of parliament for raising taxes, dissolving parliament for years and starting a civil war. The monarchy was replaced by a republic headed by Oliver Cromwell who proved to be a worse dictator than any King. After Cromwell's death, Charles II (son of the executed monarch) was asked by parliament to become King.

In 1685, Charles II died without an heir and his brother, James II, became King. James proved to be as tyrannical as his father, and in 1689 parliament removed him from power and asked Mary II (James’ daughter) and her husband William of Orange to become King and Queen. It was at this point that Britain became a constitutional monarchy, as parliament insisted that almost all executive power, including powers over taxation, be given to parliament, leaving the monarch as a figurehead.

The final step in Britain’s move to becoming a full constitutional monarchy took place in 1721, under George I, when a single parliamentarian (Robert Walpole) became head of government in the office of First Lord of the Treasury, which later became known as “Prime Minister”.

It is a common misconception amongst Americans that George III (king during the American Revolution) was an absolute monarch – this is not the case. George III had about the same amount of power as the current monarch, although he did state his opinion more often.

With the greatest of respect to Alan Turing, Queen Victoria never had any executive power and the British Empire thrived during her reign, it was only years after she died that the empire became a 'terrible burden'.

Several other European countries (Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway,  Spain and others) followed the UK's system and still exist as a result. All of the absolute monarchies in Europe were overthrown.

Answer 2

The British Empire was a terrible burden and it made the concept of an absolute monarchy insane.  Queen Victoria was convinced by her ministers to turn over most of the day to day activities of the government to her ministers and to Parliament.  That was a wise decision as it also headed off the possibility of a repeat of Oliver Cromwell's dictatorship occurring again.  In a modern guise it could have turned out as badly as Hitler's terrible reign in Germany.  The queen or king remains as the head of state and has largely symbolic duties but also serves as a unifying magnet for the Commonwealth Nations.  Loyalty to a ruler is an easier concept for people than loyalty to an amorphous state.

The British monarch was weaker but the aristocracy was more distributed in their wealth than their European counterparts.  But the state and its people were more unified and stronger and this saved England from the revolutions that savaged other countries like France.  This shows that civil rights are a key component in a modern representative state.

The role of taxation solved several problems when parliament gain control.  It put that responsibility in the hands of the people's representatives, both Lords and elected representatives.  It also prevented another King George III imposing irrational, unrepresentative taxes on its colonies and weakening the Empire, although that is mainly a historical note now.