the story of mankind-第55章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！





In　the　year　1603　the　old　lady　died　at　the　age　of　seventy。

Her　cousin；　the　great…grandson　of　her　own　grandfather　Henry

VII　and　son　of　Mary　Stuart；　her　rival　and　enemy；　succeeded

her　as　James　I。　By　the　Grace　of　God；　he　found　himself　the

ruler　of　a　country　which　had　escaped　the　fate　of　its　continental

rivals。　While　the　European　Protestants　and　Catholics　were

killing　each　other　in　a　hopeless　attempt　to　break　the　power　of

their　adversaries　and　establish　the　exclusive　rule　of　their　own

particular　creed；　England　was　at　peace　and　‘‘reformed''　at

leisure　without　going　to　the　extremes　of　either　Luther　or

Loyola。　It　gave　the　island　kingdom　an　enormous　advantage　in

the　coming　struggle　for　colonial　possessions。　It　assured　England

a　leadership　in　international　affairs　which　that　country

has　maintained　until　the　present　day。　Not　even　the　disastrous

adventure　with　the　Stuarts　was　able　to　stop　this　normal　development。



The　Stuarts；　who　succeeded　the　Tudors；　were　‘‘foreigners''

in　England。　They　do　not　seem　to　have　appreciated　or　understood

this　fact。　The　native　house　of　Tudor　could　steal　a　horse；

but　the　‘‘foreign''　Stuarts　were　not　allowed　to　look　at　the

bridle　without　causing　great　popular　disapproval。　Old　Queen

Bess　had　ruled　her　domains　very　much　as　she　pleased。　In

general　however；　she　had　always　followed　a　policy　which　meant

money　in　the　pocket　of　the　honest　（and　otherwise）　British

merchants。　Hence　the　Queen　had　been　always　assured　of　the

wholehearted　support　of　her　grateful　people。　And　small　liberties

taken　with　some　of　the　rights　and　prerogatives　of　Parliament

were　gladly　overlooked　for　the　ulterior　benefits　which

were　derived　from　her　Majesty's　strong　and　successful　foreign

policies。



Outwardly　King　James　continued　the　same　policy。　But　he

lacked　that　personal　enthusiasm　which　had　been　so　very　typical

of　his　great　predecessor。　Foreign　commerce　continued　to　be

encouraged。　The　Catholics　were　not　granted　any　liberties。

But　when　Spain　smiled　pleasantly　upon　England　in　an　effort

to　establish　peaceful　relations；　James　was　seen　to　smile　back。

The　majority　of　the　English　people　did　not　like　this；　but

James　was　their　King　and　they　kept　quiet。



Soon　there　were　other　causes　of　friction。　King　James　and

his　son；　Charles　I；　who　succeeded　him　in　the　year　1625　both

firmly　believed　in　the　principle　of　their　‘‘divine　right''　to

administer　their　realm　as　they　thought　fit　without　consulting　the

wishes　of　their　subjects。　The　idea　was　not　new。　The　Popes；

who　in　more　than　one　way　had　been　the　successors　of　the

Roman　Emperors　（or　rather　of　the　Roman　Imperial　ideal　of

a　single　and　undivided　state　covering　the　entire　known　world）；

had　always　regarded　themselves　and　had　been　publicly　recognised

as　the　‘‘Vice…Regents　of　Christ　upon　Earth。''　No　one

questioned　the　right　of　God　to　rule　the　world　as　He　saw　fit。

As　a　natural　result；　few　ventured　to　doubt　the　right　of　the

divine　‘‘Vice…Regent''　to　do　the　same　thing　and　to　demand　the

obedience　of　the　masses　because　he　was　the　direct　representative

of　the　Absolute　Ruler　of　the　Universe　and　responsible

only　to　Almighty　God。



When　the　Lutheran　Reformation　proved　successful；　those

rights　which　formerly　had　been　invested　in　the　Papacy　were

taken　over　by　the　many　European　sovereigns　who　became

Protestants。　As　head　of　their　own　national　or　dynastic

churches　they　insisted　upon　being　‘‘Christ's　Vice…Regents''

within　the　limit　of　their　own　territory。　The　people　did　not　question

the　right　of　their　rulers　to　take　such　a　step。　They　accepted

it；　just　as　we　in　our　own　day　accept　the　idea　of　a　representative

system　which　to　us　seems　the　only　reasonable　and　just

form　of　government。　It　is　unfair　therefore　to　state　that　either

Lutheranism　or　Calvinism　caused　the　particular　feeling　of

irritation　which　greeted　King…James's　oft　and　loudly　repeated

assertion　of　his　‘‘Divine　Right。''　There　must　have　been　other

grounds　for　the　genuine　English　disbelief　in　the　Divine　Right

of　Kings。



The　first　positive　denial　of　the　‘‘Divine　Right''　of　sovereigns

had　been　heard　in　the　Netherlands　when　the　Estates　General

abjured　their　lawful　sovereign　King　Philip　II　of　Spain；　in　the

year　1581。　‘‘The　King；''　so　they　said；　‘‘has　broken　his　contract

and　the　King　therefore　is　dismissed　like　any　other　unfaithful

servant。''　Since　then；　this　particular　idea　of　a　king's

responsibilities　towards　his　subjects　had　spread　among　many　of　the

nations　who　inhabited　the　shores　of　the　North　Sea。　They　were

in　a　very　favourable　position。　They　were　rich。　The　poor　people

in　the　heart　of　central　Europe；　at　the　mercy　of　their

Ruler's　body…guard；　could　not　afford　to　discuss　a　problem

which　would　at　once　land　them　in　the　deepest　dungeon　of　the

nearest　castle。　But　the　merchants　of　Holland　and　England

who　possessed　the　capital　necessary　for　the　maintenance　of

great　armies　and　navies；　who　knew　how　to　handle　the　almighty

weapon　called　‘‘credit；''　had　no　such　fear。　They　were　willing

to　pit　the　‘‘Divine　Right''　of　their　own　good　money　against

the　‘‘Divine　Right''　of　any　Habsburg　or　Bourbon　or　Stuart。

They　knew　that　their　guilders　and　shillings　could　beat　the

clumsy　feudal　armies　which　were　the　only　weapons　of　the　King。

They　dared　to　act；　where　others　were　condemned　to　suffer

in　silence　or　run　the　risk　of　the　scaffold。



When　the　Stuarts　began　to　annoy　the　people　of　England

with　their　claim　that　they　had　a　right　to　do　what　they　pleased

and　never　mind　the　responsibility；　the　English　middle　classes

used　the　House　of　Commons　as　their　first　line　of　defence

against　this　abuse　of　the　Royal　Power。　The　Crown　refused　to

give　in　and　the　King　sent　Parliament　about　its　own　business。

Eleven　long　years；　Charles　I　ruled　alone。　He　levied　taxes

which　most　people　regarded　as　illegal　and　he　managed　his

British　kingdom　as　if　it　had　been　his　own　country　estate。　He

had　capable　assistants　and　we　must　say　that　he　had　the　courage

of　his　convictions。



Unfortunately；　instead　of　assuring　himself　of　the　support

of　his　faithful　Scottish　subjects；　Charles　became　involved　in

a　quarrel　with　the　Scotch　Presbyterians。　Much　against　his

will；　but　forced　by　his　need　for　ready　cash；　Charles　was　at

last　obliged　to　call　Parliament　together　once　more。　It　met　in

April　of　1640　and　showed　an　ugly　temper。　It　was　dissolved

a　few　weeks　later。　A　new　Parliament　convened　in　November。

This　one　was　even　less　pliable　than　the　first　one。　The　members

understood　that　the　question　of　‘‘Government　by　Divine

Right''　or　‘‘Government　by　Parliament''　must　be　fought　out

for　good　and　all。　They　attacked　the　King　in　his　chief　councillors

and　executed　half　a　dozen　of　them。　They　announced　that

they　would　not　allow　themselves　to　be　dissolved　without　their

own　approval。　Finally　on　December　1；　1641；　they　presented

to　the　King　a　‘‘Grand　Remonstrance''　which　gave　a　detailed

account　of　the　many　grievances　of　the　people　against　their　Ruler。



Charles；　hoping　to　derive　some　support　for　his　own　policy

in　the　country　districts；　left　London　in　January　of　1642。　Each

side　organised　an　army　and　prepared　for　open　warfare　between

the　absolute　power　of　the　crown　and　the　absolute　power

of　Parliament。　During　this　struggle；　the　most　powerful　religious

element　of　England；　called　the　Puritans；　（they　were

Anglicans　who　had　tried　to　purify　their　doctrines　to　the　most

absolute　limits）；　came　quickly　to　the　front。　The　regiments　of

‘‘Godly　men；''　commanded　by　Oliver　Cromwell；　with　their

iron　discipline　and　their　profound　confidence　in　the　holiness　of

their　aims；　soon　became　the　model　for　the　entire　army　of　the

opposition。　Twice　Charles　was　defeated。　After　the　battle

of　Naseby；　in　1645；　he　fled　to　Scotland。　The　Scotch　sold　him

to　the　English。



There　followed　a　period　of　intrigue　and　an　uprising

of　the　Scotch　Presbyterians　against　the　English　Puritan。

In　August　of　the　year　1648　after　the　three…days'　battle　of

Preston　Pans；　Cromwell　made　an　end　to　this　second　civil　war；

and