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

Why was there so much hostility towards Charles by 1640?

Extracts from this document...


Nishaant KaushalHistory12V Why was there so much hostility towards Charles by 1640? In 1629 Charles prorogued Parliament, and instigated Personal rule, which would last until 1640. Although the King was entitled to do this under the Royal Prerogative his actions caused discontent among those who provided the ruling classes, such as the gentry. In 1633, Charles appointed William Laud as Archbishop of Canterbury. Together, they began a series of anti-Calvinist reforms that attempted to ensure religious uniformity, however this caused mass opposition among puritans. Parliamentary Privileges vs. Royal Prerogative There were a number of issues that had begun to ruin the relationship between the Crown and Parliament. One such issue was that, just like James before him, Charles had a strong belief in the ?Divine right of Kings?. In 1610 James even stated that kings were ?not only Gods Lieutenants upon Earth, and sit upon Gods throne, but even by God himself, they are called Gods?. Charles therefore believed that he had the power to do as he wished, without opposition. ...read more.


However in between the conflict between Catholicism and Puritanism there was another struggle, that of Arminianism and Purism. The Arminians believed in more Catholic ideas, such as the use of ritual and Ceremony in Church. The puritans however were extreme Protestants, and wanted simple and bare churches. The Crown favoured Arminianism; however it could not openly admit its catholic persuasion without rebellion from the Puritans. So instead, Charles used William Laud to enforce Uniformity, and bring the conflicting ideas into one religion. However Uniformity still incurred the wrath of many Puritans. For instance one rule of Uniformity was that, ?Priests to wear vestments, to bow at the name of Jesus, and to light candles at the altar?. This induced extreme opposition from Puritans. Fear of Absolutism Parliament began to fear that Charles might impose Absolutism on the country. Charles had formidable enforcement powers and used these to great extent to find a way around Parliaments laws, so that he could be independent of Parliament. For instance, the King appointed all judges. ...read more.


They introduced the idea of ?Thorough?, which would hold officials accountable for their oversights and mistakes. An example of this in use was the publication of the ?Book of Orders? in 1631. This gave instructions to Sheriffs and clarified their responsibilities and made them accountable to the Privy Council. It meant that the King would be served by more responsible, accountable subjects, and would be in harmony with his subjects. In conclusion, there was much hostility towards Charles in 1640. His personal rule caused many to oppose him and his ideals. Among this was the provocation of the Puritans. His refusal to appease them, and instead appoint Archbishop Laud who imposed Arminian ideals, only served to anger them, and lead to greater hostility. Also Charles? attitude towards Parliament, and his belief that it was his divine right to rule, led to many enemies within, and outside of the Parliament, mainly among the gentry, as they believed that the king had to ac within the law. Lastly, his enforcing of absolutism meant that many officials began to fear his rule, and to react negatively toward Charles. Therefore it was expected that there was lots much hostility towards Charles in 1640. ...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 Trying to Establish Royal Absolutism during his Personal Rule?

    It was also true that this was a result of increasing pressure of reform from parliamentarians. But Charles realised that Catholicism was impossible in the current political situation. The proportion of Catholics in England was no more than 2%. Also, many people were fairly anti-Charles: few were avid supporters.

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

    So it came as a surprise to him when it failed. Part of the problem was that the officials responsible for collecting the money believed they were answerable to the community they governed, and not primarily the King. They therefore refused to partake in "black-listing" those who did not pay.

  1. This essay examines the actions of Charles VII in relation to events pertaining to ...

    Charles was in the midst of negotiating peace with the Duke of Burgundy, thus he might have been trying to avoid taking actions which would aggravate the Duke. Even so, Charles owed much of his success to Joan therefore the process of his acquisition of the throne, and his means of securing, it was being questioned.

  2. How far were the actions and beliefs of Charles responsible for the crisis of ...

    But it would be unfair on James to lay too much blame on him because we must look at the character of Charles, now king of England. Growing up in the shadow of older brother Henry until Henry died when Charles was twelve, Charles was small, sickly and shy.

  1. The Trend Towards Absolutism.

    Communication was of an extremely poor standard so by the time so sent out or received a message, it could take over six-month to get a reply. This was also true in the same country. France had no territories outside it's boarders but communication was sill a major problem.

  2. In 1640 most MP's wanted and expected redress of grievances and a settlement of ...

    Understandably Charles reacts badly and many MP's can see why. These rules were no longer reactive but were now proactive as they were initiating proposals, and seriously encroaching on the king's rights. Many had begun to realise that the old agenda they had all agreed on had been slowly replaced

  1. An unmitigated disaster. How valid is this assessment of Oliver Cromwells experiment with the ...

    And was therefore by far the most balanced and authoritative study of mid century England in the two centuries that followed the restoration. The Major Generals have also received some muted and qualified approval from prominent twentieth century historians. In the early 1960s Christopher Hill described as being both efficient and honest.

  2. To what extent had Francebecome a nation-state by 1610?

    The monarchs did not have sufficient resources to recapture these principalities during the latter part of the fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth centuries and so they had to skilfully marry into the controlling noble family instead. Louis XI, Charles VIII and Lois XII, who were all monarchs in the

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