During the reign of Henry III (1216-1272) in England a parliament arose, which made the royal power limited. Henry III was a sovereign who loved flattery and generously rewarded positions and lands for it. The closest people to him were foreigners who entered the royal service, numerous knights from France and a fairly large number of clergy from Italy who were sent to England by the popes. All the behavior of the king and his foreign minions was very disliked the English nation, formed in the middle of the XIII century. from the fusion of the Normans with the Anglo-Saxons. Prelates, barons, knights, and townspeople united in opposition to the king. Henry III convened several times conventions of prelates and barons("Big councils"), which for the most part sharply condemned his policies. The main role in this opposition was played by Simon Montfort, a native of French (his father was a leader in the crusade against the Albigensians), who moved to England, where he received the title of Earl of Leicester and married the king's sister. Having quarreled with Henry III, this talented and energetic nobleman went over to the side of the English barons and even became their leader. First, the larger barons on the "grand council" in Oxford(1258) forced the king to admit over himself guardianship of a special committee of 24 barons, but petty barons and knights were dissatisfied with this oligarchic form of government and began to complain about its establishment. Henry III refused to fulfill this promise, but Simon Montfort went to war against him, took him prisoner and became the ruler of England. Distinguished by a great state mind, he saw, however, that some of the big barons would not be able to arrange the government of the country, and therefore, convening v 1265 BC on behalf of the king "great council", he invited not only prelates and barons, but also representatives of the shairs (counties) and cities(two representatives from each county and the most important cities). This was first English parliament... By inviting the chivalry and the townspeople to participate in the reign, Simon incurred the displeasure of the great barons. They went over to the side of the king, and the eldest son of Henry III (Edward) escaped from captivity and became the head of the disaffected. Simon Montfort was defeated and killed in a battle with the royal army, but the measure he had invented, that is, the convocation of "great councils", in addition to prelates and barons, also chivalry and townspeople, entered into force, and Parliament in England has existed continuously for more than six centuries.

183. Structure of Parliament

The English Parliament is divided into two chambers: upper, or chamber of peers(lords), and lower, or house of commons... This division, which still exists today, was finally formed only in the middle of the XIV century, eighty years after the convening of the first parliament. Members of the Upper House bishops, abbots and major vassals of the king, of which each sat in it by virtue of their personal right, and the rank of secular lord began to pass by inheritance to the eldest son. The lower chamber was formed from elected representatives from both petty royal vassals and knights, i.e. vassals, and from the free population of counties and cities. In the counties (sheirah), representatives were chosen at meetings that existed even earlier for various local affairs and for the court, and here it happened merger of small feudal lords with the rest of the free population. The House of Commons became house of all estates, and in this the English parliament from the very beginning began to differ from other similar assemblies that arose about the same time in different states of the West, where each estate sat separately. (And in the upper chamber the higher clergy and the higher nobility sat together).

Introduction 3

The emergence and formation of the English Parliament 4

Parliamentary structure in England 7

Functions of Parliament in England 11

Conclusion 14

List of sources and literature 16

Introduction

Studying the history of state and law of foreign countries is of great importance for a Russian law student. Indeed, many countries adopt the experience of other peoples in their development. And our country is no exception.

England has passed an interesting path of historical development from the early feudal states of the Angles, Saxons, Utes and Friesians to one of the most developed countries in the world.

One of the interesting and important milestones in the history of England is the period of the parliament, which continues to this day.

This question is relevant because modern Great Britain has retained a historical form of government - a parliamentary monarchy. And also this country is considered the birthplace of modern parliamentary democracy.

1. Study of the history of the English Parliament;
2. Consideration of the structure of parliament;
3. Outline of the main functions of parliament.

1. Study of literature on the topic;
2. Collection and synthesis of materials;
3. Formulation of conclusions.

The emergence and formation of the English parliament

The English Parliament went through an interesting and instructive history: being at present the main organ of political life in England and a model for the constitutional institutions of Europe, it gradually developed in the past from conditions that had little in common with the orders of modern political freedom.

At the beginning, the structure of England had more features of similarity to the structure of neighboring barbarian states, but gradually the general Western European institutions on the island receive a peculiar setting, among which the embryos of a parliamentary structure are formed. Already in the Anglo-Saxon period, some preparatory facts can be indicated. According to Tacitus' description of the Germanic tribes, supreme power belongs not to the king, but to the people, and this popular supremacy is exercised in the activities of two institutions - the veche and the council of tribal chiefs. The Anglo-Saxons, in the era of their division into small kingdoms, have both of these institutions: the tribal assembly - folkmot - and the council of the wisest — Vitenagemot.

When the small kingdoms merged into one, the tribal assemblies turned into regional, by counties; The general council of the Angles was not formed, but the rights of the previous council were partially transferred to the Witenagemot under the king. The Vitenagemot became, as it were, a two-sided institution: on the one hand, it acted as a royal council and was replenished to a large extent at the behest of the king, from his warriors and officials; on the other hand, he limited the power of the king. The exact relationship between the two authorities has not been defined.

The Normans, having conquered England in 1066, preserved the ancient regional institutions, as well as the Witenagemot. The first Norman kings usually convened three solemn sessions of the council, for the administration of the most important matters. One of the outward signs of such ceremonial meetings was that the king was wearing a crown. The Norman conquest was, however, for England the beginning of a new, feudal period, and under the influence of feudalism the form and essence of the conferences changed.

Instead of a poorly organized "tribe" and more or less subordinate advisers, the kings found themselves face to face with a powerful feudal aristocracy, which recognized them only as the first among equals. Due to the division of the feudal states into many almost independent seigneurs and ecclesiastical estates, the implementation of any decree, binding on all these parts, required the participation of all of them.

Everywhere in Western Europe of this time, seims or congresses of feudal lords appeared, which decided questions about international relations, about measures of internal administration, about legislative decisions, about taxation. These conventions are made up, by analogy with the seigneurial curiae, from the king's vassals.

The kings of England also turn to such congresses to approve general decrees and receive subsidies; but the authority of the English congresses is strengthened by the fact that they are, as it were, a continuation of the ancient withenagemot. When the feudal lords join the estate and enter into a systematic struggle with the kings, one of their main requirements concerns the convening of congresses to permit emergency subsidies (4 cases were considered legitimate reasons for collecting subsidies from vassals: when the lord gave his daughter in marriage, when he made his son a knight, when he had to be ransomed from captivity when he went on a crusade).

In Magna Carta, given in 1215 by John Lackland, a paragraph was introduced according to which in such cases the Commune consilium of the kingdom is convened. When the Magna Carta was approved by Henry III, this article was omitted, but the general view that feudal lords should not be imposed extraordinary subsidies without their consent was rooted in the very foundations of the feudal system, and the king had to reckon with it. This is not to say that kings willingly submitted to feudal theories or accepted them entirely. At the court, views were formed that were in sharp contradiction with feudalism - views according to which the king was the source of all power in the country and was not obliged to conform to the desires and advice of his subjects. Throughout the reign of Henry III, there is a struggle between these views and the social forces that represent them.

In 1264, the barons defeated the king under Lewis and their chief leader, Simon de Montfort, organized a council of 9 members, which actually took the king under his wing and assumed the supreme leadership of state affairs. In support of this council, Montfort at the beginning of 1265 convened Parliament, which differed in its composition from the previous feudal congresses: barons, bishops and abbots who supported the Montfort party were summoned, and in addition, two knights from each county and 2 deputies from the most important cities. There have been cases before that kings appealed to the deputies of chivalry or cities for money, but Montfort for the first time united all the listed groups into a general council of the kingdom or parliament. Montfort's adversary and victor, Edward I, constantly busy with the wars in France, Scotland and Wallis, was forced to return to the same system in order to secure sufficient subsidies. Beginning in 1295, he began to convene Parliament on the model of 1265.

Parliamentary structure in England

From the middle of the XIV century. Parliament began to be divided into two chambers: the upper - the House of Lords, where prelates and barons sat, and the lower - the House of Commons, where the knights and representatives of the cities sat. The fact that the townspeople and knights met together distinguished the English parliament from the estate-representative assemblies in other countries, their strong alliance provided the House of Commons with great influence in the political life of England. The clergy were not particularly highlighted in the English parliament.

The House of Lords included representatives of the secular and ecclesiastical aristocracy who were members of the Royal Grand Council. They were sent personal invitations signed by the king. In theory, the monarch might not have invited this or that tycoon, but in reality, cases when the heads of noble families were not invited to parliament began by the 15th century. a rarity. The established system of case law in England gave a lord, who once received such an invitation, reason to consider himself a permanent member of the upper house. The number of lords was small. Even if all the invitees gathered for a session, and such in the XIV-XV centuries. almost never happened, it rarely reached 100 people.

Meetings of the House of Lords were held in the White Hall of Westminster Palace.

The situation with the House of Commons was different. As a separate parliamentary structure, this chamber took shape gradually, during the second half of the XIV century. The name of the lower house comes from the concept of "Commons" (communities). In the XIV century. it denoted a special social group, a kind of "middle" estate, which included chivalry and the elite of the townspeople. That is, "communities" began to be called that part of the free population, which possessed full rights, a certain wealth and a "good" name. The rights of this "middle" class gradually included the right to be elected and to be elected to the lower house of parliament. Awareness of its importance, which was actively formed during the XIV-XV centuries, sometimes determined the position of the House of Commons in relation to the lords and even the king.

By the end of the XIV century. the post of speaker arose, who was elected by the deputies from among his own ranks and represented the chamber, by no means leading it, in negotiations with the lords and the king. The appearance of this figure is characteristic of the lower house, which was primarily an assembly, that is, a collective organization.
The deputies of the lower house were elected locally according to the same principle that has operated since the first parliament of de Montfort: 2 knights from each county and 2 representatives from the most significant cities. The number of such cities has changed over time, and the number of members of the House of Commons has changed accordingly. On average, it was in the middle of the XIV century. 200 people.
The members of the lower house, in contrast to the lords, received a monetary allowance: the knights of the counties - 4 shillings, the townspeople - 2 shillings for each day of the session. By the beginning of the 15th century. these payments have become traditional.

The House of Commons sat in the chapter of Westminster Abbey.

Elections were held before each session, about two to three months before its opening, and began with letters - orders that were sent from the royal office to the sheriffs of the counties. After the elections, these documents were to be returned to the Office of the Chancellor with the names of the elected deputies inscribed in them.

In the XIV-XV centuries. the society is developing an idea of ​​the status of a deputy. This concept equally applied to members of both chambers and included a number of legal privileges, primarily parliamentary immunity. She entered into practice by the beginning of the 15th century. and meant the protection of the life and property of the deputies, as well as freedom from arrest, but only during the session.

The sheriff was in charge of the elections, and they were held in the county assemblies.

These organizations, which had a more ancient history than parliament, were part of the structure of local self-government. Its objects were urban and rural communities, parishes and monasteries, united in larger corporations: communities of hundreds and, finally, communities of counties.

Meetings of hundreds and counties, dating back to the ancient popular assemblies of tribal society, have been convened regularly since pre-Normandy times. After the conquest, they assumed administrative functions - judicial and fiscal - and were placed under the control of the central government. However, their independence was partially retained.

Medieval England, therefore, had a solid system of local government and self-government (throughout the territory, not just in the cities).

If personally dependent peasants - villans - could participate in the meetings of hundreds, then only free peasants could participate in the meetings of the counties, starting with freeholders and ending with magnates, who, however, preferred to send a deputy in their place. Thus, the majority in the county assemblies were middle and small feudal lords and wealthy peasantry, i.e. those middle strata that were defined by the term community.

The main role in the elections belonged to the sheriffs. They possessed significant powers and, accordingly, great opportunities for abuse, the number of which grew with increasing pressure from the nobility. Most often, the violations consisted of falsifying the election results: the necessary names were entered into the returned text of the royal instructions, and the legally elected deputies did not get into parliament.

The House of Commons has consistently, although not very successfully, fought this evil. She initiated the adoption of statutes against violations of electoral norms. The proposed measures were rather harsh. So, according to the statute of 1445. the sheriff had to pay a large fine for each violation: one hundred pounds to the treasury and the same to the victim, i.e. a person whose name was not included in the favorites list. For comparison, the annual income from real estate, which gave admission to the knighthood, was only forty pounds. However, repeated proposals by the House of Commons to put a limit on the abuses of the sheriffs did not meet with the support of the monarchs.

According to researchers, all English cities that had the right to parliamentary representation can be conditionally divided into four groups - depending on their position in the county.

The lower category included small towns that did not elect their own deputies, but sent delegates to a county meeting. London possessed a complex of administrative, judicial, commercial and other privileges and sent four deputies to parliament.

The fact that the city has parliamentary status was indicated by the royal order to the sheriff on the election of deputies for the next session. The city could receive an electoral mandate even if it fell into decay. In the first decades of the parliament's existence, there were frequent cases of cities refusing to send their representatives - because of the need to collect money for the salaries of deputies, to take them away from important matters, etc.

The participation of representatives of the city in parliament required from the municipal treasury, albeit small, but real expenses.

However, most cities in the 14th century. changed their attitude towards participation in parliamentary activities. She became more and more attractive in the eyes of the townspeople. If at the end of the 13th century. in parliament were represented by about 60 cities, then in the middle of the 15th century. - already more than a hundred. In 1377. about 130 thousand voters lived in 70 cities of England, i.e. an order of magnitude more than in the counties. The number of deputies from cities could also significantly exceed the number of knights of the counties.

Unlike other estates-representative institutions in Western Europe, in the English parliament, representatives of cities did not constitute a separate chamber. In parliamentary documents, the deputies of the House of Commons were designated as "knights of the counties and townspeople of the city and burgs."

At the same time, the representatives of the counties in parliament were in a much more advantageous position than the townspeople. Elections in cities are rarely reflected in the statutes of the kingdom.

Functions of Parliament in England

At first, the possibilities of parliament to influence the policy of the royal power were insignificant. Its functions were limited to determining the amount of taxes on movable property and to submitting collective petitions to the name of the king. True, in 1297, Edward I confirmed the Charter of Liberties in parliament, as a result of which the Statute "on the impermissibility of taxes" appeared. It stated that the imposition of taxes, benefits and extortions would not take place without the general consent of the clergy and secular magnates, knights, townspeople and other free people of the kingdom. However, the Statute contained clauses that allowed the king to levy pre-existing fees.

Gradually, the parliament of medieval England acquired three most important powers: the right to participate in the issuance of laws, the right to decide questions about extortions from the population in favor of the royal treasury and the right to exercise control over high-ranking officials and in some cases act as a special judicial body.

Of particular importance was the activities of the parliament, or rather, its lower house, related to taxation. Note that taxes on movable and immovable property (like others) in England were paid by everyone, not just the "third estate". Since 1297, parliament has had the power to authorize direct taxes on movable property. Since the 20s. XIV century. he voted (authorizes) the collection of extraordinary taxes. The House of Commons soon won the same right with regard to customs duties. Thus, the king received the bulk of the financial receipts with the consent of the lower house, acting on behalf of those who were to pay these taxes. The strong position of the House of Commons in such an important matter for the king as finance, allowed it to expand its participation in other areas of parliamentary activity.

Communities have made significant progress in the area of ​​legislation. By the middle of the XIV century. in England there were two types of supreme legal acts. The king issued decrees - ordinances. Acts of Parliament passed by both houses and by the king also had the force of law. They were called statutes. The procedure for issuing the statute provided for the development of proposals from the lower house - the bill. Then the bill, approved by the lords, was sent to the king for signature. Signed by the king, such a bill became a statute. Sometimes royal ordinances were based on proposals from the House of Commons. Already in the XV century. no law in the kingdom could be passed without the approval of the House of Commons.

Parliament sought to influence the appointment and dismissal of senior officials in the kingdom. In the XIV century. the practice of "impeachment" of officials accused of serious violations of the law, abuses and other unseemly acts is developing. Parliament did not have the legal right to remove from power the officials it did not like, but under the influence of his speeches, the king was forced to remove persons with a damaged reputation from their posts.

Parliament acted as the body legitimizing the succession of kings on the English throne. Thus, the deposition of Edward II (1327), Richard II (1399) and the subsequent coronation of Henry IV of Lancasteria were sanctioned by parliament.

The judicial functions of parliament were very significant. They were within the competence of his upper house. By the end of the XIV century. she acquired the powers of the Court of Peers and the Supreme Court of the Kingdom, to consider the most serious political and criminal crimes of the aristocracy, as well as appeals. The House of Commons could submit to the Lords and the King its legislative proposals to improve judicial practice.

As the highest court and legislative body, parliament has accepted numerous petitions on a variety of issues, both from individuals and from cities, counties, trade and craft corporations, etc. The importance of parliamentary work with petitions is extremely high. It was a school of political and legal education, both for parliamentarians and for those who approached them. Thus, the central government constantly received information about the state of affairs in the state. The most important issues raised in private and collective petitions were reflected in legislative drafts of the House of Commons, and then in statutes.

Conclusion

The emergence of estate representation was of great importance in the growth of the centralized state.

With the emergence of the parliament in England, a new form of the feudal state was born - the estate-representative, or estate, monarchy, which is the most important and natural stage in the political development of the country, the development of the feudal state.

The emergence of parliament and the estate monarchy reflected the successes of the political centralization of England and, in particular, the fact of the formation in the country of nationwide estate groups - barons, chivalry and townspeople. In turn, the parliament, by its emergence, contributed to the further strengthening of the feudal state. As an instrument of the ruling class, the parliament still played in England in the XIII-XIV centuries. a progressive role, since he limited the political aspirations of the most reactionary layer of the feudal lords - the barony - and directed the king's policy in the interests of the more advanced strata of society of that time - the chivalry and the elite of the townspeople. The admission of city representatives to parliament meant the official recognition of certain rights and the increased importance of the urban class.

During the first centuries of the parliament's existence, the system of elections to the House of Commons was unified, although not debugged in all details. The efforts of parliamentary legislators in this area were mainly aimed at combating abuses of election administrators in counties and cities, as well as to prevent people from having too low property and social status in elections.

Thus, thanks to the creation of parliament, in England, first of all in the medieval world, preconditions for the formation of a rule of law (i.e. a state in which the rights and freedoms of citizens and their protection) and civil society (i.e. a society consisting of free, independent and equal people).

The development of the state and political system of Great Britain in the 18-19th centuries. as a result, it formed the most classic example of the parliamentary system. This parliamentarism provided England with a stable reform of various areas of social and political life, the solution of many acute economic and political, including foreign policy, problems in the interests of the social world. By the beginning of the 20th century. England represented the most free country in the political and legal sense, the most powerful state in the entire Western world, the center of a huge colonial empire, the existence of which also ensured political stability in the country.

List of sources and literature

1. General history of state and law / ed. prof. K.I. Batyr. - M .: Jurist, 2009.
2. A. A. Vasiliev. History of the Ancient World / R. Yu Vipper. History of the Middle Ages / - M .: Republic, 2008.- 511 p .: ill.
3. P.N. Galanza History of State and Law of Foreign Countries. Moscow 2010, 552s
4. AS Goldenweiser Social trends and reforms of the 19th century in England. - Kiev, printing house S.V. Kulzhenko, 2008
5. A. V. Dicey Fundamentals of public law in England: Per. from English / Ed. P.G. Vinogradov. - SPb., 2009., 710s.
6. VF Deryuzhinsky From the history of political freedom in England and France. - St. Petersburg, printing house of M.M. Stasyulevich, 2009
7. O. V. Dmitrieva, Parliament and Parliamentary Culture in England in the 16th - early 17th centuries. Special course program / O. V. Dmitrieva. - M.: Editorial URSS, 2001 .-- 12 p.
8. N. A. Krasheninnikova History of state and law of foreign countries: Textbook for universities: in 2 vols. - M .: Norma, 2007 .-- T. 2. - 816 s
9. D. Petrushevsky Magna Carta. With the attachment of the translation of the text of the Magna Carta (3rd edition). - St. Petersburg,
10. V.A. Tomsinov (Compiler). Reader on the history of state and law of foreign countries (Antiquity and the Middle Ages) .. - M., 2010.
11. M. Chernilovsky. General History of State and Law. - M .: Jurist, 2007.
12. E. Fishel State system of England /. - SPb: Edition of the bookseller-typographer M.O. Wolf, 1862 .-- 542.http: //lib.mgppu.ru
13. V.V. Karaev, History of the Middle Ages / [Electronic resource] / Access mode http://society.polbu.ru/kareva_midhistory/ch21_ii.html
14. Encyclopedic Dictionary of F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron / [Electronic resource] / Access mode http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/brokgauz_efron/77384/Parliament
15. Official website of the Parliament of Great Britain / [Electronic resource] / Mode of access http://www.parliament.uk

Liked? Click on the button below. To you not difficult and we nice).

To free download Abstracts at maximum speed, register or log in to the site.

Important! All presented Abstracts for free download are intended for drawing up a plan or the basis for their own scientific works.

Friends! You have a unique opportunity to help students like you! If our site helped you find the job you need, then you certainly understand how the job you added can make the work of others easier.

If the Abstract, in your opinion, is of poor quality, or you have already met this work, let us know about it.

The English Parliament was a specific estate-representative body, unlike any other representative institution in Europe. It took shape during the civil wars of 1263-1267. These wars were led, on the one hand, by the extremely strengthened royal power and, on the other, by the desire of the English barons to limit it. By the XIII century. the English barons became so economically strong that they felt the need for their own strong political positions. During the civil wars, the stability and balance of political power inherent in the British state were seriously undermined.

Civil wars of the XIII century. were already the second deepest political crisis in the history of England. The first crisis fell on the reign of the English king John Landless(1199-1216), who began to catastrophically quickly lose English possessions in France. The barons took advantage of this situation to demand that the king grant them political rights and political independence. John Landless was forced to meet them, and in 1215 g... he provided the barons Magna Carta- the first constitution of the English feudal monarchy.

Even before the outbreak of civil wars, in 1258, the barons gathered for a convention in Oxford. This congress was called the "Furious Parliament". Furious Parliament has drafted a new constitution - "Oxford Provisions"... This constitution approved the regime of the baronial oligarchy in the country. All power in England was transferred to the "Council of Fifteen Barons", without the consent of which the king could not make any decisions. Thus, the "Furious Parliament", not being constitutionally formalized by Parliament, already significantly limited the power of the king. In addition, the "Council of Fifteen Barons" created a commission to carry out political reforms in England. All these events served as a prelude to the creation of a constitutionally formalized English Parliament.

The first English Parliament was convened in 1265 g... It was attended by representatives of various social strata - secular and spiritual feudal lords, knights from counties and representatives from cities. After the end of the civil wars in 1267, the Parliament was not liquidated. By this time, he was already firmly rooted in the state system of England. From the end of the XIII century. in England the parliamentary constitutional system was finally established.

With the establishment of Parliament, the English feudal state takes the form of an estate-representative monarchy.

At Edward I(1272-1307) Parliament was used by the king as a counterweight to the claims of large feudal lords. Edward I tried to conduct tax policy without Parliament. This brought the king into conflict with him, and the king was forced to issue a law called the "Confirmation of the Charter". The law confirmed the Magna Carta of 1215.

In the XIV century, in addition to the function of approving taxes, Parliament seeks the right to issue laws - bills. Since 1343, the English Parliament is formed as a bicameral: the House of Lords, or Peers, and the House of Commons. Large secular and spiritual feudal lords sat in the House of Lords, knights and townspeople in the House of Commons. With each passing century, the Parliament gained more and more strength. The House of Commons was from the very beginning much larger than the House of Lords. The House of Commons gains strong influence in Parliament - not so much because of its numerical superiority, but because of the spirit of harmony that prevailed there. An alliance of knights and townspeople was formed early in the House of Commons.

With the development of commodity-money relations, with the emergence of elements of capitalism, in the House of Commons the alliance of chivalry and townspeople was increasingly strengthened, leading to a further strengthening of their political positions in Parliament and in the country.

The phenomenon of the English Parliament causes numerous controversies in English and in Russian historiography. A number of historians argue that since its inception, the Parliament has never been a national representative body and has not been the spokesman for the country's national interests. The lower classes of the urban population and the peasantry have never been represented in Parliament.

The British Parliament in its concrete actions expressed the interests of secular and spiritual feudal lords, supporting their anti-peasant policy. With the development of capitalism in England, Parliament passed tough labor legislation.

And yet Parliament has played a significant political role in the history of England. It was he who, by limiting the power of the king, brought the country at a new historical stage political stability and balance, which entailed stability in all areas of state life - economy, social relations, culture, etc. By limiting the supreme power, Parliament contributed to the centralization and strengthening of the centralized state. An organic, state-run binary system of power, Parliament - King, was and remains the main reason for the stability and prosperity of modern England.

The English Parliament is one of the first estate-representative institutions in Western Europe, which turned out to be the most viable of them. A number of features of British history contributed to the process of gradual strengthening of the power of parliament, its formation as a body reflecting the interests of the nation as a whole.

After the Norman conquest of 1066

The British state was no longer aware of political fragmentation. Separatism was characteristic of the English nobility, however, for a number of reasons (the non-compactness of the feudal possessions, the need to resist the conquered population, the island location of the state, etc.), it was expressed in the desire of the magnates not to isolate themselves from the central government, but to seize it. In the XII century. England experienced a long civil strife. As a result of a long political struggle, the rights of the Plantagenet dynasty prevailed, and its representative, Henry IF, became king. His youngest son Ioann176, who succeeded the knight king Richard the Lionheart1 in 1199, had no success either in foreign or domestic policy. In an unsuccessful war, he lost the vast holdings that the English crown had in France. This was followed by his quarrel with Pope Innocent III177, as a result of which the king was forced to recognize himself as a vassal of the Pope, extremely humiliating for England. This king was nicknamed Landless by his contemporaries.

Constant wars, the maintenance of the army and the growing bureaucratic apparatus required money. By forcing his subjects to pay for the multiply increased expenses of the state, the king violated all the established norms and customs in relation to both the cities and the nobility. Particularly painful was the violation by the king of the norms of vassal relations that connected him with the class of feudal lords.

Some features that distinguished the estate structure of English society should be noted: the extension of the king's seigneurial rights to all feudal lords (in England the classical principle of feudalism “my vassal's vassal is not my vassal” did not work) and the openness of the “noble” estate, which could include any landowner, who had an annual income from 20 (20s. XIII century) to 40 (from the beginning of the XIV century) pounds1. A special social group was formed in the country, occupying an intermediate position between the feudal lords and the well-to-do peasantry. This group, active both economically and politically, sought to expand its influence in the English state; over time, its number and importance increased.

The situation in the 10s of the XIII century. united all dissatisfied with the royal tyranny and failures in foreign policy. The opposition performance of the barons was supported by the chivalry and the townspeople. The opponents of John Landless were united by the desire to limit royal arbitrariness, to force the king to rule in accordance with centuries-old traditions. The result of the internal political struggle was the movement of magnates, in fact, pursuing the goal of establishing an "oligarchy of barons".

The program of the opposition's demands was formulated in a document that played an important role in the development of the estate-representative monarchy in England - the Magna Carta1. The magnates demanded from the king guarantees of the observance of the rights and privileges of the nobility (a number of articles reflected the interests of chivalry and cities), and, above all, the observance of an important principle: lords should not be levied with monetary fees without their consent.

The role of the Charter in English history is ambiguous.

On the one hand, the full implementation of the requirements contained in it would lead to the triumph of the feudal oligarchy, the concentration of all power in the hands of the baronial group. On the other hand, the universality of the wording in a number of articles made it possible to use them to protect the rights of the individual not only of barons, but also of other categories of the free population of England.

The king signed the Magna Carta on June 15, 1215, but refused to abide by it a few months later. The Pope also condemned this document.

In 1216, John Landless died, power nominally passed to the young Henry III178 - and for some time the system of government came in line with the requirements of the baronial elite. However, having come of age, Henry III actually continued his father's policy. He got involved in new wars, and tried to get the necessary funds from his subjects by extortion and oppression. In addition, the king willingly accepted foreigners into the service (the wishes of his wife, the French princess, played an important role here). The behavior of Henry III irritated the English nobility, but opposition sentiments grew in other estates as well. A wide coalition of those dissatisfied with the regime was made up of tycoons, knights, part of the free peasantry, townspeople, students. The dominant role belonged to the barons: "The conflicts between the barons and the king in the period from 1232 to 1258, as a rule, revolved around the question of power, again and again reviving plans for baronial control over the king, put forward as early as 1215" 179. In the 5060s. XIII century England was gripped by feudal anarchy. Armed detachments of magnates fought with the troops of the king, and sometimes among themselves. The struggle for power was accompanied by the publication of legal documents, which established new structures of government - representative bodies designed to limit royal power.

In 1258, Henry III was forced to accept the so-called "Oxford Provisions" (demands), containing a reference to "parliament" 2. This term designated the councils of the nobility, which were to be regularly convened to participate in the government of the country: “It must be remembered that ... there will be three parliaments in a year ... state of the kingdom and to interpret the general affairs of the kingdom, as well as the king. And at other times in the same way, when there is a need at the behest of the king. "

Researchers note the presence of two currents in the movement of the baronial opposition of the middle of the 13th century. One sought to establish a regime of omnipotence of the magnates, the other sought to take into account the interests of its allies, and, therefore, objectively reflected the interests of chivalry and the middle strata of the urban population1.

In the events of the civil war 1258-1267. a significant role was played by Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester2. In 1265, in the midst of a confrontation with the king, on the initiative of Montfort, a meeting was convened, to which, in addition to the nobility, were invited representatives of influential social groups: two knights from each county and two deputies from the most significant cities. Thus, the ambitious politician sought to strengthen the social base of his "party", to legitimize the measures taken by it to establish baronial tutelage over the monarch.

So, the origin of the national estate representation in England is closely connected with the struggle for power, the desire of the feudal nobility to find new methods of limiting the power of the really acting king. But the parliament would hardly have been viable if the matter had been limited to this. The institution of parliament opened up the possibility of political participation of cities and chivalry, and participation at a high, national level. It was implemented in the form of extended meetings with the king, consultations on topical issues (primarily in connection with taxes and other fees).

King John Landless signs Magna Carta

"Gutnova E. V. The emergence of the English parliament (from the history of English society and the state of the XIII century.). - M., 1960. - S. 318.

2 Simonde Montfort, Earl of Leicester (c. 1208-1265) - one of the leaders of the baronial opposition to King Henry III. Born in Provence (Southern France). Participated in the preparation of the Oxford provisions. On May 14, 1264, at the Battle of Lewis (south of London), defeated the royal forces. Then, for 15 months, he was actually a dictator (formally the Seneschal of England). In 1265, on his initiative, the first English parliament was convened. August 4, 1265 died in battle.

Initially, parliament was imposed on kings by a feudal oligarchy, but the monarchs realized the possibility of using this structure to their advantage. Sometimes they put up with the opposition of the deputies, which manifested itself in legal, "parliamentary" forms.

In 1265, the royal power was able to restore the positions that seemed to have been lost as a result of Montfort's speech. The rebel count was defeated and killed in battle. But already in 1267, Henry III again convened a parliament of "the most prudent people from the kingdom, great and small" 180, and under the new king, Edward I, when the consequences of feudal turmoil were finally overcome, the so-called "Model Parliament ”1295 is one of the most representative in its entire medieval history.

At the end of the XIII - beginning of the XIV century. Parliament took a central place in the process of gradually establishing new principles for organizing relations between royalty and society; the institution of parliament contributed to the fact that these relations acquired a more "legal" character.

The presence of a supreme representative structure was in the interests of all participants in the political process. With the formation of parliament, the king received a new and, what is essential, a legitimate instrument to achieve his goals: first of all, to receive monetary subsidies.

Parliament was passed by a majority of the magnates. The barons supported the idea of ​​representing chivalry and cities in it - a kind of "middle class" of feudal society. This is due to the close connection of all estates on the basis of a common economic interest. Excessive financial claims of the monarch impoverished cities and "communities", which could not but affect the well-being of the lords. The lords positively perceived the innovation, which made it possible to establish a framework for the monetary expenditures of the royal administration, limit the arbitrariness of the king in relation to his subjects in collecting taxes, and, thereby, introduce the practice of monitoring the activities of the authorities.

In addition, the middle and partly lower groups of the population received the opportunity to present their requests to the king through the deputies and could count on their being heard.

The maxim of Roman law was used as a legal basis for such an order of relations between authorities and subjects: "Quod omnes tangit, omnibus tractari et approbari debet" - "As for everyone, should be considered and approved by everyone." In the Digests of Justinian, this legal formula determined the order of actions of a group of guardians in the process of disposing of property. In the XII-XIII centuries. on its basis, in ecclesiastical law, a theory of restrictions imposed on the sole actions of ecclesiastical and secular rulers, undertaken without the discussion and consent of their advisers and main subordinates, was created. With regard to the organization of parliamentary representation, this maxim was raised to the level of a constitutional principle181.

The formation of a new political and legal ideology - the ideology of parliamentarism - is reflected not only in the monuments of law of the 13th century, but also in secular literature. The poem "The Battle of Lewis" is dedicated to the events of 1265. In it, the author conducts an imaginary dialogue between the king and the barons. The king is inspired with the idea that if he really loves his people, then he must inform his advisers about everything and consult with them about everything, no matter how wise he is182. The poem substantiated the need for society to participate in the formation of the circle of royal advisers: “The king cannot choose his advisers. If he chooses them alone, he can easily be mistaken. Therefore, he needs to consult with the community of the kingdom and find out what the whole society thinks about it ... People who have arrived from the regions are not such idiots, so as not to know better than others the customs of their country, left by ancestors to descendants ”183.

1295 was the starting point for regular and orderly parliamentary sessions. By the middle of the XIV century. the division of parliament into two chambers was outlined - upper and lower. In the XVI century. began to use the names of the chambers: for the upper - the House of Lords, for the lower - the House of Commons.

The upper house included representatives of the secular and ecclesiastical nobility, who were part of the 13th century. to the Royal Grand Council. These were the peers of the kingdom, "great barons" and the highest officials of the king, church hierarchs (archbishops, bishops, abbots and priors of monasteries).

All members of the upper house received nominal summons at the session signed by the king. In theory, the monarch might not have invited this or that tycoon; in reality, the cases when the heads of noble families were not invited to parliament began by the 15th century. a rarity. The established system of case law in England gave a lord, who once received such an invitation, reason to consider himself a permanent member of the upper house. The number of persons involved, by virtue of their social and legal status, in the activities of the chamber was small. The number of lords in the XIII-XIV centuries. ranged from 54 in parliament in 1297 to 206 people in parliament in 1306.184 In the XIV-XV centuries. the number of lords is stabilizing; during this period it did not exceed 100 people, in addition, not all invitees came to the session.

At the initial stage of the parliament's existence, it was the assembly of magnates that acted as an authoritative institution capable of influencing the kings, to get them to make the necessary decisions: it belonged to the House of Lords "" 1.

Meeting of the House of Lords of the English Parliament during the time of Edward I (miniature of the early 16th century)

The traditional view of the English parliament as a "bicameral" assembly emerged at a later date. Initially, the parliament acted as a single institution, but it included structures that differed in status, social composition, principles of formation, and requirements. As we saw above, already in the first parliament of Montfort, in addition to a group of magnates (lords), there were representatives of counties (two "knights" from each county), cities (two representatives from the most significant settlements), as well as church districts (by two "proctors" - deputy-priest1).

County representation was originally recognized by both barons and kings. The situation with the deputies from the cities was more difficult. Their permanent participation in parliament has been observed only since 1297.

In the XIII century. the structure of the parliament was unstable, the process of its formation was going on. In some cases, all persons invited to participate in parliament sat together. Then the practice of separate meetings of deputies began to take shape - by "chambers": magnates, representatives of the church, "knights", townspeople (for example, in 1283, the townspeople formed a separate meeting). The "knights" met with both tycoons and townspeople. The "chambers" could gather not only in different places, but also at different times.

In the first centuries of its existence, the parliament did not have a permanent sitting place. The king could call him in any city; as a rule, he met in the place where the king and his court were located at that time. As an example, let us indicate the locations of some parliaments of the late XIII - early XIV centuries: York - 1283, 1298, Shrewsbury - 1283, Westminster - 1295, Lincoln - 1301, Carlyle - 1307, London - 1300, 1305, 1306

In the XV century. The complex of buildings of Westminster Abbey has become the permanent residence, the place where the sessions of the Houses of Parliament are held.

The frequency of parliaments also depended on decisions coming from the king. Under Edward I, 21 representative assemblies were convened, attended by the deputies of the "communities"; at the end of this king's reign, parliaments met almost annually. Under Edward III, parliament was convened 70 times. Meetings, excluding travel, holidays and other breaks, lasted an average of two to five weeks.

At the beginning of the XIV century. it was not uncommon for several parliaments to meet in a year, depending on the political situation. However, later, until the end of the 17th century. the frequency of parliamentary sessions was never fixed in legal norms.

During the XIV-XV centuries, the main features of the organization of the parliament's activities, its procedure and political tradition were gradually taking shape.

The separate meeting of the chambers predetermined the presence of separate rooms in which the meetings of the lords and "communities" were held. Meetings of the House of Lords were held in the White Hall of Westminster Palace. The House of Commons worked in the Chapter Hall of Westminster Abbey. Both chambers united only to participate in the solemn ceremony of opening the parliamentary session, the main act of which was the king's speech to the assembled parliamentarians; the members of the lower house listened to the speech standing behind the barrier.

But despite the division of the chambers in space, “the three estates - the nobility, the clergy and the burghers, were rather united in them than separated from each other, in contrast to the way it was in continental countries, which certainly made it difficult to manipulate them with sides of the king and pushing them together ”1.

The process of constitution of the House of Commons as a separate parliamentary structure continued throughout the second half of the 14th - early 15th centuries.

The term "house of commons" comes from the concept of "commons" - communities. In the XIV century. it denoted a special social group, a kind of "middle" class, including chivalry and townspeople. “Communities” began to be called that part of the free population, which possessed full rights, a certain wealth and a good name. Representatives of this "middle" class gradually acquired the right to elect and be elected to the lower house of parliament (today we call such rights political). Awareness of its importance, which was actively formed during the XIV-XV centuries, sometimes determined the position of the House in relation to the lords and even to the king.

In the XIV-XV centuries. 37 English counties have delegated two representatives to parliament. In the XVI century. the County of Monmouth and the Palatinate of Cheshire began to send their deputies to parliament; from 1673 - Palatinate Durham. The representation of the counties expanded significantly in the 18th century: 30 deputies joined the House of Commons after the union with Scotland, another 64 deputies were elected in the counties of Ireland.

The number of "parliamentary" cities and townships also increased over time; the total number of members of the lower house of parliament increased accordingly. If in the middle of the XIV century. it was about two hundred people, then by the beginning of the XVIII century. there were already more than five hundred of them, thanks to the strengthening of the representation of cities and townships.

Many members of the lower house have been repeatedly elected to parliament; they were brought together by a common interest and a similar social status. A significant part of the representatives of the "communities" had a fairly high level of education (including legal education). All this contributed to the gradual transformation of the lower chamber into a capable, in fact, professional organization.

At the end of the XIV century, the post of speaker appeared), who was actually a government official, called upon to preside over the sessions of the House, to represent the House of Commons in its daily activities, in negotiations with the lords and the king, but not to head this collective meeting. At the opening of the next session, the candidacy of the Speaker was submitted by the Lord Chancellor on behalf of the King. According to tradition, the deputy, on whom this high choice fell, had to defiantly resign from office, while delivering a prepared speech.

The language of parliamentary documentation, primarily the minutes of joint sessions of the chambers, was French. Some of the records, mostly official or related to church affairs, were kept in Latin. In the oral parliamentary speech, French was also mainly used, but since 1363, the speeches of the deputies were sometimes delivered in English.

One of the important problems of the formation of parliamentary representation was the material support of the members of the lower chamber. Communities and cities, as a rule, provided their deputies with a monetary allowance: knights of the counties four shillings, townspeople two shillings for each day of the session. But often the remuneration was "done" only on paper, and parliamentarians had to fight to ensure that these payments became part of the legal tradition.

At the same time, there were prescriptions (1382 and 1515), according to which a deputy who did not appear at the session without good reason was subject to a monetary fine185.

The most important of these was participation in decision-making on taxation issues. The fiscal system of the state was still in its infancy, and most taxes, primarily direct ones, were extraordinary. Note that in England taxes were paid by all subjects, not just the "third estate", as was the case, for example, in France. This circumstance eliminated one of the possible causes of confrontation between estates. In 1297, parliament acquired the power to authorize the king to collect direct taxes on movable property. Since the 20s. XIV century. he consents to the collection of extraordinary, and by the end of the XIV century - and indirect taxes. The House of Commons soon won the same right with regard to customs duties.

Thus, the king received the bulk of the financial receipts with the consent of the lower house (officially - in the form of its "gift"), which acted here on behalf of those who were to pay these taxes. The strong position of the House of Commons on such an important issue for the kingdom as finance, allowed it to expand its participation in other areas of parliamentary activity. According to the figurative expression of the English historian E. Freeman, the chamber, the lower one by name, gradually became the upper one in reality186.

Parliament has made significant progress in the area of ​​legislation. Long before its appearance, there was a practice in England of submitting to the king and his council private petitions - individual or collective petitions. With the emergence of parliament, petitions began to be addressed to this representative assembly. The parliament received numerous letters reflecting the most varied needs of both individuals and cities, counties, trade and craft corporations, etc. On the basis of these requests, the parliament as a whole or individual groups of its members worked out their own appeals to the king - “ parliamentary ”petitions. These appeals usually dealt with important issues of general public policy, and the answer to them had to be some kind of nationwide events187.

Already in the XIV century. parliament had the opportunity to influence the king, in order to pass laws that reflected the interests of large and medium landowners, the merchant elite. In 1322, a law was passed stating that all matters "concerning the position of the lord of our king ... and ... the position of the state and the people, must be discussed, received consent and adopted in the parliament of our lord the king and with the consent of the prelates, counts, the barons and communities of the kingdom ”188. In 1348 the parliament demanded from the king that his requests be fulfilled even before the taxes were approved. "

Later, the development of the institution of "parliamentary petitions" led to the emergence of a new procedure for the adoption of legislation. Initially, parliament designated a problem requiring the issuance of a royal law - an ordinance or statute189. In many cases, statutes and ordinances did not adequately reflect the wishes of parliament (especially the House of Commons). The consequence of this was the desire of the parliament to fix in its decisions those legal norms, the adoption of which they sought. Under Henry VI, the practice of considering a bill in parliament developed. After three readings and editing in each house, the bill, approved by both houses, was sent to the king for approval; after his signature, it became a statute.

Over time, the formulation of acceptance or rejection of the bill acquired a strictly defined form. The positive resolution read: “I please the king”, negative: “The king will think about it” 1.

The development of parliamentary rights in the field of legislation was also reflected in legal terminology. In the statutes of the XIV century. it was said that they were issued by the king "with the advice and consent (par conseil et par assentement) of the lords and communities." In 1433 it was first said that the law was issued "by the authority" of lords and communities, and from 1485 a similar formula became permanent.

The participation of parliament in the political process was not limited to its legislative activities. For example, parliament was actively used by the king or rival groups of the nobility to eliminate high officials. In this case, parliamentarians came forward with exposing persons suspected of violating the law, abuses, and unseemly acts. Parliament did not have the right to remove dignitaries from power, but it had the ability to accuse individuals of wrongdoing. Against the background of "public criticism", the struggle for power acquired a more substantiated character. In a number of cases, speeches were made within the walls of the House of Commons in which the actions of kings were accused. In 1376, the Speaker of the House, Pieter de la Mar, made a statement sharply criticizing the activities of King Edward III.

During the struggle for the royal throne and feudal civil strife, parliament acted as the body that legitimized the change of kings on the English throne. Thus, the deposition of Edward II (1327), Richard II (1399) and the subsequent coronation of Henry IV of Lancaster were sanctioned

The judicial functions of parliament were very significant. They were within the competence of his upper house. By the end of the XIV century. she acquired the powers of the court of peers and the supreme court of the kingdom, which tried the most serious political and criminal offenses, as well as appeals. The House of Commons could act as an intercessor for the parties and present its legislative proposals to the Lords and the King.

The meaning and role of parliament was different at different stages

From the second half of the 15th century. difficult times began for him. During the years of feudal civil strife - the wars of the Scarlet and White Rose (1455-1485), parliamentary methods of resolving state issues were replaced by force. At the end of the 15th century. political life in the kingdom has stabilized. In 1485 a new dynasty came to power - the Tudor dynasty, whose representatives ruled England until 1603. The years of Tudor rule were marked by a significant strengthening of royal power. Under Henry VIII, in 1534, the English monarch was proclaimed the head of the national church.

The following principles were established in the relationship between the royal court and parliament. The monarchs sought to use the authority of the assembly to their advantage. They issued flattering declarations, emphasized their respect for the institution of parliament. At the same time, the influence of the latter on the supreme power and the possibility of implementing independent political initiatives were minimized.

The composition of the House of Commons was formed with the active, interested participation of the royal administration. The nature of parliamentary elections in medieval England was significantly different from what is observed in modern times. The modern author believes: “To say that manipulation of elections was born simultaneously with the elections itself is not enough. It is better to say that elections were born only because manipulations are possible with them ”1. The electoral process was almost always influenced by influential people; the candidacy of the future chosen one was most often determined not so much by the sheriffs or the city elite, as by influential tycoons or the king himself.

Structures subordinate to the king (for example, the Privy Council) exercised control over the activities of parliamentarians, the course of debates, and the process of considering bills. It should be noted that under the Tudors, parliaments were rarely and irregularly convened.

Queen Elizabeth I in parliament

Nevertheless, parliament occupied a rather important place in the system of English statehood in the era of absolutism. He not only approved the orders of the crown, but also actively participated in the legislative activity of the state192. The Chambers worked a lot and fruitfully on bills regulating various spheres of the socio-economic life of England (foreign trade, customs rules and duties, unification of weights and measures, navigation issues, regulation of prices for goods produced in the country). For example, in 1597, Elizabeth I approved 43 bills passed by parliament; in addition, 48 more bills were passed on her initiative.

Under Henry VIII and his successors, the participation of parliament was prominent in the reform of religion and in resolving issues of succession to the throne.

Even in the new historical conditions, the parliament not only continued to function, but also retained a fairly high prestige, in contrast to the similarly representative institutions of many European countries, which, during the period of the establishment of absolutism, as a rule, stopped meeting.

Parliament was viable primarily because representatives of different social groups sitting in it could work together. For all the complexity of the relationship and the difference in interests, they turned out to be capable of cooperation. Being at the same time the head of state and parliament, being the initiator of the convening of sessions and the ultimate authority of all parliamentary powers and decisions, the king tied himself with this organization in the closest way. Parliament did not exist without the king, but the monarch was also limited in actions without the support of parliament. A reflection of this feature of the British political system was the formula "king in parliament", which symbolized state power in its entirety.

It should be noted that it was in the Tudor era that the tendencies for the acquisition of special "political" rights and freedoms by members of parliament, originating at the turn of the XIV-XV centuries, developed. In the XVI century. members of both chambers acquired a number of significant legal privileges, the so-called "parliamentary freedoms" - prototypes of future democratic rights of the individual. Since parliament was the highest political assembly of the kingdom, speeches delivered during the sessions of its chambers had to inevitably acquire a certain legal "immunity", since many deputies understood their mission as the most accurate statement of the opinions that they came to defend. The earliest recorded case of claims of the House of Commons for certain privileges occurred in 1397, when, on the initiative of a deputy of Hexi (Naheu), it was decided to reduce the costs of maintaining the royal court. The Lords accused the deputy of treason, and he was sentenced to death, but then pardoned. In connection with this incident, the lower house passed a resolution stating that the deputy was persecuted “against the law and order that was customary in parliament, in violation of the customs of the House of Commons” 193.

1523, Speaker of the House of Commons Thomas More194 set a precedent by asking King Henry VIII to speak in parliament without fear of prosecution for his words195, and under Elizabeth I this privilege was legalized (although it was often violated in practice).

The problem of “freedom of speech” is partly related to the broader concept of parliamentary immunity. Even in antiquity, in England there was a custom of the so-called "king's peace" ("King" s peace): each person who went to the gemot or returned from it was on the way under royal patronage. if the subject himself committed a crime, violated the "peace".

The above-mentioned incident of 1397 highlighted the importance of the problem of legal immunity of an elected deputy "1 during his tenure as a parliamentarian. Hexi was accused of treason, one of the most serious crimes, but the House of Commons considered it to be contrary to her rights and customs. Consequently, already at the end of the 14th century parliament, as a corporation, was aware of the need to protect the freedom of its members from political and other persecution.In the 16th century, an incident occurred that showed that the House of Commons considered the arrest of a parliamentarian inadmissible. Ferrers) was arrested for debts while on the way to the session. The House asked the sheriffs of London to release Ferrers, but was rudely refused. Then the officials were arrested by the decision of the House of Commons. In the resulting legal conflict, King Henry VIII issued an order on privileges of members of the House of Commons: their identity and property were declared free from arrest during parliament session.

Members of the chamber could lose their immunity and be expelled from its composition for unlawful acts directed against parliament or for other serious misconduct (treason, criminal offense) 196.

The English Parliament is the symbol of Great Britain.

The rise of the Parliament in England falls on the reign of Henry III. It was his mistakes in domestic politics that led to the usurpation of power by the English barons. The power of Henry III was limited to the baronial council (15 people). Sometimes also convened council of the nobility, which elected a special committee for reforms, consisting of 24 people. The reforms carried out by the barons significantly curtailed the rights and privileges of knights and townspeople.

The outraged people in 1259 opposed the policy pursued and put forward their demands, the main of which was the protection of the interests of the free citizens of England and the equality of all before the law. As a result, the so-called. Westminster Provisions. But the barons refused to fulfill them, and the king did not want to intervene in a conflict situation.

Moreover, Henry III decided to use it to strengthen his own power. As the anointed of God on the throne, Henry III received from the Pope exemption from all obligations to the disaffected part of his people. It was a kind of immunity from the need to resolve a conflict situation.

As a result, a real civil war broke out in the country in 1263. Knights, townspeople (merchants and artisans) opposed the power of the barons and the king, Oxford students, peasants and even a few barons... So at the head of the rebels was Baron Simon de Montfort.

The king took refuge in Westminster Abbey, and his army was led by Crown Prince Edward.

The active support of the townspeople allowed the rebels to win. Thus, London citizens sent 15 thousand people to Montfort. The rebel army took the cities of Gloucester, Bristol, Dover, Sandwich, etc., and went to London.

In May 1264, at the Battle of Lewis, the army of Montfort utterly defeated the royal army. The king and Prince Edward were captured and forced to sign an agreement with the rebels, according to which it became necessary to involve representatives of different classes to rule the country.

As a result, on January 20, 1265, a meeting of the meeting of the barons, supporters of de Montfort, the higher clergy, as well as 2 knights from each county and 2 townspeople from each large city of England was opened in Westminster Abbey. This was the first English parliament. From now on, representatives of various estates began to control the power in the country.

However, the war continued on August 4, 1265, the royal army defeated the army of Simon de Montfort (battle of Ivzeme). Montfort himself was killed. The scattered rebel groups continued to fight until the fall of 1267.

But even having restored his power over England, Henry III, and later his son and heir to the throne, Edward I, did not abandon parliament, although they tried to use it mainly to introduce new taxes.