Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 2 - Consensus in the Commons, 1547–1642

  • William J. Bulman, Lehigh University, Pennsylvania
  • Book:
    The Rise of Majority Rule in Early Modern Britain and Its Empire
    Published online:
    22 March 2021
    Print publication:
    01 April 2021, pp 21-62

  • Summary

    This chapter describes the institutionalized form of consensual decision-making that prevailed in the House of Commons from the advent of consistent record-keeping in the Tudor period to the first two years of the Long Parliament. It highlights the role of status interaction in maintaining the primacy of consensual decisions while also specifying under what conditions these same status interactions occasionally resulted in meaningfully majoritarian decisions. Despite the presence of regular procedures that enabled majoritarian decision-making, the members of the early Stuart House of Commons almost completely avoided making decisions that were meaningfully majoritarian prior to the outbreak of the English Civil War. The House instead forged consensus with recourse to debate, committees, and a variety of other procedural mechanisms. They did so because enumerated votes (divisions) and meaningfully majoritarian voice votes had damaging status implications for Parliament, the Commons, and its members.