The late seventeenth century for European culture was a time of great struggle and hardship between differing opinions on almost all levels of life. Conflicts among individuals, groups, and even countries as a whole deciphered the ever-changing statuses of power, faith, and interaction between dominant areas of Europe. A particularly interesting point in European history is the rise and fall of James II of England, the intervention of William Prince of Orange, and ultimately England's Glorious Revolution. Key elements to this unusual set of events include the relationship between James II and William of Orange in terms of their personal visions of a "modernized" England, and why they, along with their supporters, approached this inevitable process so differently. To be more precise, the dance between these opposing views were mainly around religion of choice and practice, how this ecclesiastical preference dictated politics, and how these institutions affected opinions about a country's political economic involvement. Ultimately, this contrast of vision correlates directly to the views of Whig and Tory belief systems in the Netherlands and England, and to each standpoint, what the definition of power meant and what really signified modernity in the 1600s.
Before elaborating on what determined a country to be powerful and wealthy during this point in history, a vital background needs to be established to truly comprehend who Whigs and Tories were and what they stood for to establish why their beliefs created such binaries. It is stressed that their reality is consequently reflected upon James II and William of Orange's opinions and actions as well, as vice versa. Tories were supportive to the traditional Anglican Church and a hereditary monarchy. Whigs were advocates of parliamentary supremacy and toleration of Protestant dissenters.
Religious tendencies and preference in Europe was the key element that created a rippling effect onto almost all other areas of variation between countries. At this time, all English men and women were obligated by law to attend Church of England services every Sunday, so one can understand the importance of the Church and how it was a central role to the social culture of England. James II made no secret that he was a devout Catholic, and it was in fact because of the Tories that Charles II could not exclude James II from ascending to the throne because of their devotion to the Church. Nevertheless, James' actions to restore the Catholic faith soon alienated them. The reign of James II was a trying period for both high and low churchmen established by Charles II, and he wanted to secure toleration for Catholics as a preliminary to England's re-conversion to Catholicism. Penal Laws required all officers, civil and military, to take the same oaths and to make the Declaration against transubstantiation; soon James would overturn this requirement, but only issues relating faith. He tried to gain the support of Protestant Dissenters by offering toleration to them in a Declaration of Indulgence in 1687. "...as to establish our government in such as foundation as may make our subjects happy, and unite them to us by inclination as well as duty; which we think can be done by no means so effectually as by granting to them the free exercise of their own religion for the time to come..." (Pincus 132) However, very few trusted him and this somewhat subverted the independence of parliament. By 1688, James II imprisoned seven bishops (including the Archbishop of Canterbury) who resisted his policy of toleration. Their acquittal by a London jury showed the weakness of James' position. James had little support when it came to religious decisions, and this mentality extended to the Dutch as well. William of Orange was a renowned Protestant with his wife, Mary (daughter of James II). Englishmen held hope that since James bore no male inheritances to the throne, then surely Mary and William would step in as Protestants. The Dutch circulated letters about James criticizing him and saying that his modern policies about religious toleration were because of Mary and William. Even devout English Catholics could not side with his hyper-Catholicism because of his inclination to please the populous in a false manner. James II also secured a decision of the judges, in the Test case, by which he was allowed to dispense Catholics from the Test Act. Catholics were now admitted to the chief offices in the army, and to some important posts in the state, in virtue of the dispensing power of James. The judges had been intimidated or corrupted, and the royal promise to protect the Establishment violated. Subsequently, the army had been increased to 20,000 men. Jumping ahead after the Revolution, (to place in context) William and Mary (after taking James' throne) shared no vision with James II. They promoted new bishops who advocated religious toleration and insisted on the limited nature of royal power. During their reign, Parliament passed the Act of Toleration, guaranteeing freedom of worship for all Protestants. This immensely counters that of what James II believed for a religiously powerful England. James promoted clerics within the Church of England who commended the divine right of kings and the necessity for a compulsory, united state church. Although James' regime held increasingly despotic tendencies and many of his supporters saw him as England's last hope for a Catholic monarchy, consensus among the mass of English people was that of distaste for James II's ecclesiastical policies, yet unable to deny him political support because of unwillingness to stomach a revolution or a new regime that might mean combining forces with another country. William of Orange was well-aware of popular opinion at this time, as he held communication with some of his supporters in England that held respectable positions of power. James' attempts to woo the Whigs and Dissenters and to bully Tories (who persisted about endorsing the Test Act) merely resulted in the opposition of both. However, open revolt might have been avoided were it not for the birth of a son to James and Mary in 1688. England might put up with a Catholic king for a few years, but a line of Catholic monarchs was more than they could bare. Although carrying different views about what makes an effective and prosperous England in other realms, the Tories and Whigs agreed when it came to James II and his probable Catholic heir, that change was in dire need for the country's future.
When the concerns of faith spread into matters of politics, the only conclusion seen by English authorities was for William of Orange, the Dutch, to invade their kingdom. James II's supporters felt a great feeling of distrust to this Dutch ruler, as the Netherlands were just a group of republicans who did not value the tradition of the English King. Many Englishmen feared that Williams possible invasion meant succumbing to England's direct rival (the Dutch). As stated, William was kept up to date with the happenings under James II and was very interested in intervening in the deteriorating political situation. Being a possibility that him and Mary would have (until recently) inherited the throne anyway, William had already been considering military conquest. Although, he did not want to make any move without political support in England, and a secret letter signed by seven substantial Whig and Tory nobles played a critical role in convincing him that the support was present.
"We have great reason to believe we shall be every day in a worse condition than we are, and less able to defend ourselves, and therefore we do earnestly wish we might be so happy as to find a remedy before it be too late for us to contribute to our own deliverance....As to the first, the people are so generally dissatisfied with the present conduct of the government in relation to their religion, liberties and properties (all which have been greatly invaded), and they are in such expectation of their prospects being daily worse, that Your Highness may be assured there are nineteen parts of twenty of the people throughout the kingdom who are desirous of a change and who, we believe, would willingly contribute to it, if they had such a protection to countenance their rising as would secure them from being destroyed before they could get to be in a posture to defend themselves....if things cannot then be carried to their wishes in a parliamentary way other measures will be put in execution by more violent means; and although such proceedings will then heighten the discontents, yet such courses will probably be taken at that time as will prevent all possible means of relieving ourselves." (Pincus 38-39)
This letter virtually tells William that he would be met with support and relief and the noblemen hope that he decides to come to England with his army. And, regardless of his decision, (because of the current distress) there will be change in England even if that comes to violent means. William of Orange took this to mind and just a few months after his invitation, William responded with his Declaration. "And for our part will conquer in everything that may procure the peace and happiness of that nation, which a free and lawful Parliament shall determine..." (Pincus 43) William of Orange did come into England with his army of troops to invade and was met with cheering crowds the resignation of James II; thus the term coined to be the Bloodless Revolution (at least in England). William and Mary were soon after declared king and queen to the throne by English Parliament in 1689. William and Mary were almost placed into the throne by the English people, a very unique set of circumstances for the age. The power of the throne, Parliament stated in its Declaration of Rights, was now limited by the rights of the citizens of England. The new monarchs soon reversed many of the policies of the old regime, and declared war against France with the support of the powerful Dutch alliance. This completely contrasts that of James II in that he intensely admired France and Louis XIV as a compelling monarch; he looked up to the power Louis had and desired the same absolutist demeanor for England.
Keeping the contrasting viewpoints in mind, one more element to this set of events completes reasoning behind William and James' opposing opinions about a modern England, and that would be the state of political economy in the 1600s. Before the Glorious Revolution, many Englishmen sided with James on the mere idea that the Dutch could not be trusted because of their politics being so radical and the economic threat to European trade abroad. Before the Revolution, James' followers contended that war with the Dutch would make more sense because of their economic power and the fact that they accepted religious bigots into their republic. This strong, opinionated view of foreign trade was a growing factor of importance during the seventeenth century and underlined the differences between James and William, along with the Tories and Whigs. The importance of trade within political government is explained by an anonymous person supposedly within James II's political inner circle and fellow member of the Royal African Company,
"Trade and negotiation has infected the whole kingdom, and no man disdains to marry or mix with it. By this means the very genius of the people is altered, and it will in the end be the interest of the crown to proportion its maxims of power suitable to this new nature come among us...It should be considered that trade is a natural emanation of the mind's freedom, every man being left to his own choices in a manner, from what part of the world to raise his revenues by it, so that it infects by degrees their heads with popular and republican notions..." (Pincus 56)
The author analyzes that citizens will be naturally inclined to pursue wealth in the private sector, and that this interest will lead to republican ideals that undermine the power of the monarchy. The ending of the passage suggests that the king should marry the interests of the crown with that of the private sector. This possibility of a state-controlled economy would ultimately benefit the monarch of England; this was a centralizing ideal. Only the Dutch Republic and England possessed thriving economies between 1650 and 1700, creating an even larger contrast to how they differed in approaches to modernization and commercialism. James II abided by this idea as he promoted an imperial policy based on the ideas and aspirations of the East India Company. William and Mary on the other hand turned against the company and preferred instead to support the development of England's growing manufacturing industries. These differences also defined opinions within England of which end to support. Whigs supported William of Orange and the Dutch views of modernization in that power could be reached with trade and manufacturing, whereas the Tories sided with James II in that power lied in a classic mercantile economy and wealth through amount of land ownership. Each side saw a different future and path for economic prosperity for England. This divide aligns binaries and signifies why each ruler approached issues in every other aspect of life and political culture so differently.
As Pincus states, "Most accounts of revolutions begin with depictions of a rapidly changing social and economic system: This is because revolutions are rightly described as the consequences of processes of modernization." (7) The Glorious Revolution embodies a time of diverse changes--from being an agricultural society and ceasing to be so by the time of conflict; the production of manufactured goods; how to sell and disperse produced items; and how the Church might need to have a part in consumerism. How people are able to obtain wealth and what measures can enable power the best are criterium that can make or break a political system. James II of England embraced an absolute monarchy that spread into modernization ideals of trade monopolies, and William of Orange supported a republic ruling style that also correlated to ideals of types of free-trade. Religion, politics, and political economy are all areas that were intertwined in a web of issues, but economic visions of modernization and urbanization was at the core of this complex that led to revolution in seventeenth century Europe.
