Constitutional Ideas and Parliamentary Developments in England 1603–1625

Abstract

in his last book, a massive study of The House of Commons 1604–10, published in 1971, Professor Wallace Notestein placed his great authority firmly behind the traditional view of Jacobean parliamentary history, drawing a stark contrast between Elizabeth, the ‘great Queen’ who handled the House of Commons skilfully, and James, ‘a foolish man … wanting in common sense’, who ‘failed not only to understand English personalities but also to adjust himself to English codes and traditions. By 1614 he was a weary old potentate disinclined to effort.’1 This view was not altogether accepted by Professor Robert Zaller, one of the younger generation of early seventeenth century parliamentary historians in his study, also published in 1971, of The Parliament of 1621.2 He did not deny that James made errors, but also depicted the king as a man who sometimes showed considerable shrewdness in attempting to deal with a multitude of difficulties which were exploited by the members of an aggressive House of Commons to serve their individual and collective ambitions.