To what extent was a revolution in England between 1642 and 1688?

What was the English revolution really a revolution? Or was it selfish men trying to steal power from each other? Where were the limits to the revolution introduced?

In the dictionary, a revolution is described as:

“A revolution is a violent attempt by a group of people to change the political system of the country, a complete turn that is an important change in an area of human activity.”

So was what I’ve studied in the section fit that definition, well I can’t yet say a definite answer until I have analysed the events carefully. However, I do think that the definition is correct though it wasn’t a whole turn of the country because different leaders of England constantly repeated many things. Also, it’s not right to say that this was set particularly on a political matter there were many other large issues that surrounded.

I wonder if people who were not a member of the public wanted a war to take place because they seemed eager to fight any opposition to get power for them. They all had an image of how they wanted to run Britain, a major country, they all had dreams to improve. It is like nowadays; we still have wishes to how the world should be though it’s harder that we think and we always criticise other leaders. However the more important fact, I think, is how and how desperately they wanted power and what limits were they going to take it. I have discovered many leaders mind and I found they all work for their own good apart from a few and focus on three main things: religion, money, and politics. I think this is the period where things where it all fell apart with the nation who had once being one, splitting up into different sides and religion (again).

The English revolution was really a revolution because it was a period of time when various group of people (Cromwell, Charles, Parliament) tried to change the political system of Britain as shown on the passages above. However, the system was not changing much when each contender was in control of the country though more problems occurred and religious laws altered. Never the less if we just jump from 1642 and compare the difference in 1688, ignoring the facts in the middle of it, we will notice a huge difference.

The rule as it stood in 1642 was:

Chosen ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

The rule as it stood in 1642 was:

Chosen by God
Can rule without Parliament
Is a Catholic nation
Rules with ministers’ help
Controls the army

These were the basic rules of the time, which was quite simple, and you can say organised with control. However, if you look at1688 the points are stricter:

Must call Parliament every three years
Cannot be a Catholic
Cannot raise without Parliament’s consent
Cannot have an army in peacetime
Chosen by Parliament
Cannot suspend laws

You’ll see that there is more control of Parliament and when you compare the difference that it is the complete opposite to each statement. However the revolution extended to a limit, it wasn’t a total turn over to the political system because many laws abided by the Kings in 1642 were still used by Parliament and obeyed by many through Britain. The only thing that had a major change was religion, which through the past years has being altering with the leaders of the country. The revolution in my opinion, took a step towards control, I think Britain needed strict laws because anybody who was anybody was doing things out of the country’s limits. Especially the Kings, who thought that they had the right to treat the public as their personal bank, to get money that the people themselves, who probably cannot afford the price asked. Many people were hurt because of bad rules; they were mistreated and were constantly under pressure from the King or the Parliament’s orders and crimes.

Review

It all started with reformation of Britain, however this as we found out lead to communities breaking apart, the matter of religion being disobeyed, and tearing families apart. The start of the plan to improve a country that was injured already was to be diseased by what was to come and the victims were the British people. While the ‘BIG’ men tried ridiculously to arrange things, the people were getting hurt too much.

The Royalty were once the most significant leaders of Britain, the held power and respect and were often labelling themselves as the family- man, the God’s choice and many looked up to this. However there was something that could take over, that was Parliament who was growing potential strength, with outrageous demands to the king.

1641-It was hard to avoid a war between the Royals and Parliament because of the ever growing tension, hatred and disagreements that was helping in no way, it had to be sorted who had the real power and who was the strongest to takeover. Many would blame it on both sides for the start of the war however there are things that don’t scale up, in my opinion to what Charles (the king at the time ordered because they were thinking beyond what they were, being beheaded:

E.g. I would use the word, ‘stealing’ in this explanation, even though Charles was the king he had no right to take unnecessary money from the people because he wasn’t doing well, stealing Ship Money without Parliament’s permission. Parliament looked like angels at the this stage, giving way for the Royals however they were slowly getting the power needed to over rule and ordering things that the King obeyed!

In 1646, the Royalists were defeated by the Parliament in the first leg of the Civil War and then the second started in 1648 however was also ended by Parliament by 1649, when Charles was held on a trial. Many people would argue that this was a very unfair and ludicrous act because Charles was the king, could it be possible to charge a King in his own courts for action that he himself did not do and for actions that Parliament also done.

Between 1649 and 1660 Britain didn’t have a monarch, it was a Republic because many people didn’t have an idea how to control a disaster. Though, Oliver Cromwell a smart man with ideas was noticed and advised to be the next leader. Never the less, many were afraid that he would be similar to Charles as things started repeating itself, with the equivalent problems recurring. It looked from a point that there was going to be another rebellion. Cromwell realising this fled to another country.