Part A: How far do the sources support the argument that from 1529 to 1640 the powers and privileges of parliament increased steadily at the expense of royal power?
... in source 2. The interpretation of these sources is that it is clear that parliaments power was increasing but it was not at the expense of royal power, in source 4 it states that the strength the crown gained firm the union of king-in-parliament gave Henry power unequalled by any other English monarch, the break form the Roman Catholic church and the Pope was a clear indication of this. Sources 3,6 and 7 show us the conflict that king-in-parliament brought, due to the lack of co-operation, these sources lead us to believe that the power gained by parliament was not gained steadily, This also challenges the questioning statement. Source 3 looks at the aspect of freedom of speech and was the result of outbursts form the Wentworth’s with Paul raising the issue of freedom of speech in 1566 and Peter in1571,1576 and 1587, Peter ended up in the tower for his persistence. Elizabeth I asserts he wish that parliament debate issues regarding bills only. Elizabeth’s view on freedom of speech was that it is a privilege given by the monarch not a right. This source shows that parliaments increase in power was far form steady. Source 6 talks about freedom of speech and statutes passed without parliament’s approval. Parliament’s power has not increased as much as it has been implied in the source and it has not increased steadily, the fact that Charles dismissed parliament in 1629 shows this. Source 6 shows the kings dismissal of parliament by collecting forced loans and taxes without approval by parliament or any acts being passed. This did however lead to resistance in the form of the petition of rights. However the crown still gained finance therefore there was no power gained at royal expense, and any gained was not gained steadily. Sources 4 and 5 talk about the gain in power for parliament but do not mention times when there were conflict between the monarch and parliament. We can challenge the opinion of Graves in source for because it is a modern source and does not include mention of conflict for example James Morrice’s attack on the Arch Bishop of Canterbury in 1593 or the before mentioned exploits of Wentworth. Graves is the leading authority on the development o...