Abstract
‘Supremacy and Uniformity’, wrote A. F. Pollard, ‘occupied less of the time of parliament [in 1559] … than did the scramble for episcopal lands …’ This fact, apparent to anyone who glances at the Journal of the House of Commons for 1559, has been ignored by historians who wrote before Pollard and by those who wrote after him. Concerned only with bills dealing with religion, scholars failed to recognize that proposals concerning the distribution of ecclesiastical lands dominated the session. During the two months before Easter private land bills monopolized the Commons' time for three weeks, ruining any timetable the government might have had and helping to persuade, if not forcing, the queen to continue the session after Easter.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference4 articles.
1. Davis E. J. (ed.), ‘An unpublished manuscript of the Lords Journal for April and May, 1559’, English Historical Review (1913), p. 540
Cited by
17 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. HERESY AND FORFEITURE IN MARIAN ENGLAND;The Historical Journal;2013-10-30
2. Notes on the appendixes;The Royal Prerogative and the Learning of the Inns of Court;2003-09-04
3. Conclusion;The Royal Prerogative and the Learning of the Inns of Court;2003-09-04
4. The Edwardian readers and beyond;The Royal Prerogative and the Learning of the Inns of Court;2003-09-04
5. Spelman, Yorke, and the campaign against uses;The Royal Prerogative and the Learning of the Inns of Court;2003-09-04