OCR Specification focus:
‘Forms of rule and the relationship between Britain and its American colonies, 1660–1713.’
The years 1660–1713 witnessed fundamental changes in colonial governance and the development of increasingly complex metropole–colony relationships. The Restoration monarchy, the evolving role of Parliament, and the dynamics of European wars all shaped Britain’s authority and methods of rule in its American colonies.
Restoration and Early Governance
The Restoration of Charles II in 1660 brought renewed attention to the colonies. The monarchy sought to reassert royal influence after the uncertainties of the Civil War and Interregnum.
Colonial Charters were reissued and modified to reinforce royal oversight, while some colonies, such as Virginia, were directly brought under tighter crown control.
Proprietary colonies like Pennsylvania and Carolina reflected the continued practice of granting authority to individuals or groups in exchange for loyalty and financial support.
Proprietary Colony: A colony granted by the Crown to one or more proprietors, who held governing authority under the English monarch’s overall sovereignty.
The Restoration period thus laid the foundations for a dual structure of governance, where both proprietary and royal colonies operated within the empire.
The Role of the Crown and Parliament
During this period, Crown authority remained formally paramount, but Parliament increasingly shaped colonial policy.
The Navigation Acts (1660, 1663, 1673, 1696) embedded Parliament’s role in regulating trade and enforcing mercantilism.
The Glorious Revolution of 1688–89 further enhanced Parliament’s supremacy, restricting royal prerogative and reshaping colonial governance through the requirement of greater accountability to metropolitan political institutions.
Colonial governance thus became a shared enterprise, with Parliament asserting influence over trade and finance, while the monarchy attempted to maintain symbolic and constitutional authority.
Mechanisms of Control
The late seventeenth century saw the emergence of new structures designed to enforce imperial policy.
The Board of Trade (1696) was established to oversee colonial administration, monitor governors, and advise Parliament and the Crown.
Royal governors in colonies such as New York and Virginia were tasked with upholding British authority, though their powers were often limited by local assemblies.
The Crown reserved the right to veto colonial legislation, reinforcing the principle of imperial sovereignty.
Imperial Sovereignty: The principle that ultimate political and legal authority rested with the Crown and Parliament in Britain, overriding colonial autonomy.
Despite these mechanisms, enforcement remained inconsistent, and colonial assemblies frequently exploited the gaps in metropolitan oversight.
Colonial Assemblies and Local Autonomy
Colonial assemblies expanded their influence during this period, particularly in the American colonies where self-government traditions were strong.
Elected representatives gained control over taxation and expenditure, ensuring that governors could not easily act without their consent.
Interior view of the House of Burgesses chamber at Williamsburg, seat of Virginia’s elected assembly. Such assemblies wielded control over finance and local legislation, shaping the balance between royal governors and colonial self-government. Note: this is a documented photograph of the reconstructed historic chamber used for interpretive purposes. Source
Local assemblies framed laws to suit colonial conditions, often pushing against mercantilist restrictions.
Conflicts frequently arose between governors and assemblies over taxation, trade regulation, and military contributions.
This balance of power created a delicate relationship: while colonies recognised British sovereignty, they increasingly expected to manage their internal affairs with significant independence.
The Impact of the Glorious Revolution
The Glorious Revolution had profound effects on colonial governance.
The deposition of James II ended his attempts at centralisation, notably the Dominion of New England (1686–89), which had sought to unite northern colonies under one administration.
Map showing the Dominion of New England as of 1688, with constituent and neighbouring colonies labelled. The dominion exemplified James II’s effort to centralise colonial administration before the Glorious Revolution reversed course. Some borders were contested at the time, which the map notes. Source
William III’s reign established a more pluralist system, where colonial assemblies regained authority but operated under closer parliamentary supervision.
Religious and political developments in Britain, including new commitments to Protestant liberties, influenced the political culture of the colonies, embedding ideas of representation and rights.
The Revolution thus reinforced a model of negotiated authority, with both Britain and the colonies adjusting their expectations of governance.
European Wars and Colonial Governance
Between 1660 and 1713, repeated European wars had major implications for colonial rule:
The Anglo-Dutch Wars and later the Nine Years’ War (1689–97) and War of the Spanish Succession (1702–13) demanded resources from the colonies.
Colonial assemblies gained leverage by controlling supplies and militias, strengthening their bargaining power with royal governors.
The wars also heightened the strategic importance of colonies in imperial rivalry, encouraging Britain to prioritise military bases and naval defence in colonial governance.
The intersection of war and governance reinforced the dual dependency: Britain needed colonial support, while colonies relied on Britain for protection against rival European powers.
Shifting Metropole–Colony Relations
The relationship between Britain and its colonies during 1660–1713 evolved into a complex negotiation of interests.
Britain emphasised mercantilist regulation and the preservation of imperial unity.
Colonies prioritised local autonomy, economic growth, and political representation, often bending metropolitan regulations to suit local needs.
The tension between imperial sovereignty and colonial rights defined this era, laying the groundwork for later conflicts in the eighteenth century.
By 1713, Britain’s American colonies were both integrated within imperial structures and increasingly confident in their autonomy, reflecting the fragile but enduring balance of metropolitan control and colonial self-governance.
FAQ
Proprietary colonies were granted by the Crown to individuals or groups, who had the right to appoint governors and design local institutions. This meant that political structures could be more flexible and tailored to settler needs.
Royal colonies, by contrast, had governors appointed directly by the Crown, ensuring stronger metropolitan oversight. However, in both types, colonial assemblies emerged as powerful institutions, asserting control over taxation and local affairs.
The Board of Trade centralised colonial administration by monitoring trade, reviewing legislation, and advising the Crown and Parliament.
Its role included:
Supervising governors to ensure loyalty and efficiency.
Collecting information about colonial economies and populations.
Recommending vetoes of colonial laws that conflicted with imperial interests.
Although influential, it lacked executive power, making its impact dependent on cooperation from governors and Parliament.
The emphasis on Protestant liberties after 1688 reinforced assemblies as defenders of local freedoms. Colonists often viewed their elected representatives as guarantors of both religious and political rights.
In New England, the overthrow of the Dominion encouraged renewed Puritan influence in assemblies. In colonies such as Maryland, the Revolution led to restrictions on Catholic office-holders, embedding religious identity into governance.
Assemblies held the “power of the purse,” meaning they decided taxation and expenditure. This allowed them to limit governors’ ability to act independently.
Strategies included:
Withholding funds for defence unless governors accepted local conditions.
Passing tax laws that favoured colonial traders over metropolitan interests.
Using budgets to reinforce the assemblies’ role as protectors of local autonomy.
Wars such as the Nine Years’ War and the War of the Spanish Succession placed heavy demands on colonial resources. Governors required assemblies to provide money, soldiers, and supplies.
Assemblies used this dependency to negotiate concessions, such as greater control over taxation and appointments. Thus, conflict enhanced their political leverage, embedding traditions of self-government even as Britain sought tighter imperial control.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Identify two ways in which colonial assemblies limited the power of royal governors between 1660 and 1713.
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for each valid point identified, up to a maximum of 2 marks.
Acceptable answers include:
• Control over taxation and expenditure.
• Passing local laws without governor approval.
• Refusing to fund military contributions unless conditions were met.
• Using assemblies to represent colonial interests against royal instructions.
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain how the Glorious Revolution affected the governance of Britain’s American colonies between 1660 and 1713.
Mark Scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks): Limited explanation, with simple statements (e.g. “The colonies had more self-government after the Glorious Revolution”). Little or no supporting detail.
Level 2 (3–4 marks): Some explanation with supporting detail. May mention the end of the Dominion of New England or the increased role of assemblies, but limited development of points.
Level 3 (5–6 marks): Developed explanation with clear knowledge. Likely to include two or more well-supported points, such as:
• The collapse of the Dominion of New England after James II’s deposition.
• Greater authority for colonial assemblies under William III, though still under Parliamentary oversight.
• Influence of Protestant liberties and representative government shaping colonial expectations.
• The balance of negotiated authority between Crown, Parliament and colonies.
