"In reaction to the classical—"Whig"—view, some more recent historians have gone to the other extreme, describing Charles as the personification of king-craft, a master of political tactics who skilfully played Shaftesbury and his supporters before finally destroying them. There can be no doubt that, in contrast to his father and brother, Charles was extremely intelligent and clever. But there was a limit to what cleverness could achieve during the Exclusion crisis. Although the King retained his prerogative powers he could not use them during the summer of 1679 against those whom he was now increasingly regarding as the enemies of the Crown as well as of his brother and the ministers. He possessed other, and eventually decisive, advantages, the protection of the Guards, the fund of old Cavalier loyalty which although overlaid by fear of Popery was bound to revive, and the unswerving support of the Church. Yet he was still obliged to play for time, and in order to do so he had to make concessions even if in bad faith. With the time which he gained Charles was able to rally support against Exclusion, and he was the real founder of the Tory party. Later in 1679–80 he succeeded in ruling for sixteen months without calling Parliament, and in ejecting the Whigs from all positions of influence in the central and local administration. Nevertheless, he was still checked by Shaftesbury, and his policy was only partially successful in lessening tensions. Despite all the advantages which the King enjoyed, Shaftesbury was able to defy him and to continue to do so until foreign intervention altered the balance of power. The Whigs were not to be defeated until the King chose to become a French dependent in preference to reigning as the servant of the most astute of his subjects."