ABSTRACT
Charles’s Personal Rule without parliaments in the 1630s did not induce a mood of conciliation when he was obliged to recall them in 1640. The king wanted unconditional supply, while the Commons still sought control of public finance. The popular demand was for more parliamentary input, not less, so the long gap produced a determination to ensure that such an “intermission” could never recur. This aim was achieved by the revolutionary Triennial Act of February 1641, ending the king’s discretion over parliament’s assembly and empowering it to meet automatically every three years. This was expected to give them control of taxation, continuous use of the vital legislative function, and a supervisory influence over ministers. This radical measure demonstrates the political relevance of the Rise of the Gentry. Their position should not be judged by the residual loyalty that many gave to the king in the Civil War. The first constitutional change, the Triennial Act, was forced on the king by a unanimous chamber of gentlemen MPs, and reflected the determination of the Commons over several decades to displace crucial prerogatives of the crown by representative rights.
