• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent was Charles 1st responsible for causing the civil war in 1642?

Extracts from this document...


To what extent was Charles 1st responsible for causing the civil war in 1642? Charles 1st was reasonable to an extent, but not fully. Parliament was also to blame, but less so than Charles. Charles had a bad relationship with Parliament from the beginning, resulting in conflict between them. He believed in Divine Right of King, something that his father also believed in. Divine Right of King means that you were chosen to be King by God; therefore, God is on your side. Charles also shut down Parliament a number of times, and ruled without Parliament for a number of years. He took money from the people of his country without Parliament's permission and he introduced taxes without Parliament's permission. He started to make bigger changes to the Church, he gave the Scots a new Prayer book, and he made them use it. Parliament was greedy in the sense that when Charles did reopen Parliament that they asked for something in return, when if they did not act, their country would be punished. ...read more.


In 1639 on 20% of the Ship tax money was collected. In 1630 Archbishop William Laud made changes to Church of England.. Claiming that he and Charles were only trying to improve it, and not make in Catholic, they bought expensive paintings for it. They changed the layout, and the put in a Rood screen, which angered the people, because it was thought that everyone was equal, therefore why would one need a Rood screen. The Altar, which used to be able to be approached by anyone, was now railed off, behind the Rood screen. Charles was popular for a while. He was modernising the city by building new roads. He repaired his broken relationship with his wife. More demands kept coming in from the Parliament and the Houses of Commons, then they had a meeting and they had a voting to see which side was favourite, it ended up Parliament winning by 159 votes to 148, this was called the Grand Remonstrance. ...read more.


They thought it was too close to the Catholics Prayer book. In February 1642 Parliament debated some questions of religious disagreement. Some of Parliament wanted to rid Archbishop William Laud, while others of bishops all together. Parliament gave Charles more demands again, this time 19, this quarrelling had split the country in two. The MP's who were on the kings side felt this was the ' last straw '. Charles said " this would make him a mere phantom of a king ". In June 1642, Parliament ordered that all of the county's of England to raise an army to fight. This meant people had a choice, a choice that would spilt families in half because of their views. Charles raised his own army, something that Parliament did not expect. The civil war began. Parliament had their way, and Charles was executed. My view is that Charles part of the civil was significant, but not largely more significant Parliament, they provoked him throughout his rule. They may have done this knowing that he was venerable, from his damaged childhood. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics essays

  1. Was Charles I responsible for his execution?

    This seems to be evidence that Charles was put on trial to be made an example of by parliament, so that people would draw their own conclusions about the monarchy. Charles' belief in the Divine Right was certainly a strong factor in the outcome of his trial, because it led to most of his important decisions.

  2. Why did Civil war break out in 1642?

    The Parliament insisted that the king must fulfill their demands in order to give him the money he so desperately needed. By the summer of 1641 King Charles agreed to most of these demands. They were great sacrifices from the king. These included: * "Charles' evil ministers must be punished.

  1. Was Charles I Trying to Establish Royal Absolutism during his Personal Rule?

    Central control of local government was limited because JPs could not directly be removed from the bench, although the Privy Council could recommend a dismissal. Charles used his power to demand tax or payment to the limit as has already been discussed. He used a similar approach towards his Courts.

  2. Why did King Charles I Resort to Personal Rule in 1629?

    Because of the failure of the Free Gift, Charles responded with a more direct approach: the Forced Loan, also in 1626. Although it maintained the fiction that the money to be raised from this was voluntary, it was not. Men who refused to pay were imprisoned.

  1. The roles and leadership of Charles Stuart and John Pym in the English Civil ...

    who was helped by many other Mps, one of whom was Oliver Cromwell. This middle group wanted to negotiate a settlement which would give them control over the armed forces of the king and his advisors. However, this middle group's biggest problem was trying to hold the two extreme sides,

  2. In August 1642 the Civil War began, it was between Parliament and the King ...

    (But not all MP's agreed) But eventually they got their way because in February 1642 Parliament voted to throw Bishops out of the House of Lords. In March 1642 England needed an Army to put down the Irish Rebellion. But "Who should Control it"?

  1. What was the legacy that Charles 1st Inherited? How would it affect his relationship ...

    This was an expensive investment and parliament were very upset that the king had sent out an expedition, against their wishes and used up a vast majority of the kings money in trying to carry it out. This led to parliament breeding a dis-trusting atmosphere surrounding the king and his methods.

  2. How far & to what extent was Louis responsible for the turn of events ...

    This was a real problem for Louis - the first clash of interests. The nobles and some Bourgeoisie argued his power needed to be curbed, and ministerial despotism ended. This culminated in the revolt of the nobles. The revolt of the nobles was a direct response to Louis' domineering and underhanded methods of trying to force through the taxation legislature.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work