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

Charles the first was completely responsible for the civil war- to what extent is this statement true

Extracts from this document...


Charles the first was completely responsible for the civil war- to what extent is this statement true Is Charles the first completely responsible for the civil war to break out, No, this statement is partially true, yes Charles did contribute to the war to break out, but he was not completely responsible, he started his reign really badly by marrying a French catholic, he had a lot of problems with parliament, this was inherited from his father James the First, Charles dissolves parliament and rules for 11 years between 1629 and 1640. In this period he introduces preposterous taxes, like ship tax to get money, he also introduced the court of Star Chamber 1635, with this court that he ruled, he took money from civilians, and furthermore if they refused they would get punished. On the other hand parliament had their contribution for the civil war to break out, firstly when Charles called the parliament back, the parliaments gave Charles some demands, these would reduce Charles's power. Then in 1641 the parliament asked for bishops power to be reduced, this was narrowly passed by a very close vote, then the parliament wanted no bishops,, then the last string was pulled, the parliament asked for 19 propositions, this outraged Charles and then the civil war broke out. Some historians say Charles was to blame, others say it was parliament, and others say that both were to blame, in this essay I will show you who is the real person to blame. ...read more.


then the Scots invaded northern England, they started to ask for 850 pounds a day to the king to stop them going any moving further south, Charles the first did not have this vast amount of money, so again in his desperation for money he recalls parliament hoping that they would compromise and give him the money, this parliament eventually lasted 20 years this is why it is called long parliament. The parliament had the upper hand when they last met, now they looked more superior than Charles in this certain situation. All the members of parliament were unified against Charles; at this point there was no question about the civil war due to no army that was on Charles' side. If parliament were to give money to the king, Charles would have to accept the terms and conditions. In November 1640 parliament released their demands, some of the most important ones were 'ministers should be appointed who will advise Charles, some of these ministers should be appointed by parliament' Charles hated this one. 'The king should get rid of court of Star Chamber' this meant that Charles could not get everything that he wanted and finally 'regular meetings should be held of parliament' this way parliament could keep control of the situations. I think all these demand are fair. Some of the important concessions made by Charles were 'parliament must meet every 3 years' this is very minimal amount of meetings, Charles did this so he could keep some power, 'Strafford has been tried for treason and executed' this made Charles furious that he had to kill his own advisor, he was forced to do this by parliament on may 1642. ...read more.


On 22nd of august 1642 the armies were ready to fight. This is all parliaments fault due to them being over greedy for power; they released these demands because they could no longer trust him due to Charles embarrassing himself when he tried to arrest 5 mp's Too much extent Charles was to blame, he made huge blunders, but it was not entirely Charles' fault, parliament had their share especially towards the end of the build up to the civil war, at the beginning they gave Charles money for only one year, forcing him to kill his advisor, seizing control over the army and most importantly the 19 propositions that pulled the last string, however Charles triggered a lot of these, he started absurd taxes, complications in religion, but most importantly he abused his power, this left him with absolutely no supporters. By trying to arrest 5 mp. The statement has a fair balanced motion, both parties to blame, Charles ruled without parliament for 11 years due to parliament doing bad things to trigger it off. Parliament asked some fair demands in November 1640 due to Charles having financial problems, Charles big blunder was when he tried to arrest 5 mp's because they criticised him, Charles abused his power too much but on the other hand parliaments big blunder was when they asked the 19 propositions, this made Charles lose all his power this was really unfair to chares the first. So I think the civil war ended up being both parties fault due to them being greedy for power. It is not fair saying it was one sides fault. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE History Projects 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 GCSE History Projects essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent was Custer to blame for the defeat at the battle of ...

    3 star(s)

    Saturday June 24th, Custer arrived early and realised just how many Indians there were. On Sunday 25th June 1876, Custer arrived early and decided to defeat the nation by himself. Custer divided his troops into 3 groups. Each of the groups had too little warriors to fight with the Indians.

  2. To what extent was the Irish Famine merely an excuse for Peel to repeal ...

    It was a miserable and degrading spectacle. The whole mass of the Protectionists cheered him with vociferous delight, making the roof ring again, and when Peel spoke, they screamed and hooted at him in the most brutal manner. When he vindicated himself, and talked of honour and conscience, they assailed him with shouts of derision and gestures of contempt...

  1. How far was the monarchy responsible for its own downfall in September 1792? Explain ...

    sent back to Paris, but Louis's actions showed his unwillingness to reform and proved he was not to be trusted. Louis refused to pass laws to deport priests who had not sworn the oath of allegiance to the Civil Constitution and to take steps to protect Paris.

  2. Gallic war

    * Pharnaces (son of Mithridates) ? permitted to keep European possessions. * Other states included Cappadocia, Armenia Minor, etc. The Benefits of Pompey's Eastern Settlement For Rome For the provincials For Pompey * Added to and consolidated Rome's empire and sphere of influence.

  1. To what extent wasBritain Romanised

    Britain did not absorb the language as well; however, not just early English but also the Celtic languages (such as Welsh and Cornish) took on many new words during the time of the Roman invasion. These words, "borrowed" from Latin, illustrated new concepts and ideas, as well as aspects of ordinary daily life.

  2. Who was the real Custer, and to what extent was he to blame for ...

    However, this battle didn't go as planned and Custer disobeyed orders by following fleeing Indians to another camp, and killing them all. 103 Indians were killed, of which only 11 were warriors and the other 92 were women, children and old men.

  1. What Do Roman Authors Tell Us About The Celts? To What Extent Are Their ...

    area, which could account for his apparent accuracy of measurements and other geographical points that he made. He was fairly accurate, although vague, about Ireland, saying that it was the same distance from Gaul as Britain and about half its size.

  2. Causes and consequences of the English Civil War

    the ?Eleven years of Tyranny? Him closing Parliament this many times showed that he did not want Parliament`s advice, he wanted Parliament`s money. This had its gradual effect as Charles was losing his money and things like food and clothes were priced higher.

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