Revisionists have also studied the Civil War, in the latter half of the twentieth century, they put stress on the roles of the individual and how the actions or inactions of certain persons led to war. They blamed mainly short term causes such as the level of inflation that had hit England and the egregious personality of Charles I.
These three main interpretations of the war differ greatly, as does the time period they were written in. They were all influenced heavily by the events that were unfolding around the world, the Whig’s were writing during a period where England was a major world power and was seen as being the height of civilisation, to continue this they needed to be the best at everything including politics. The Marxists were influenced by the cold war and communism, their work reflected the events that were transpiring around them.
There were political factors the led to the outbreak of war, the power struggle between the king and parliament, pitting the Divine Right of Kings and the Royal Prerogative against Parliament and the will of the people. Certainly the Eleven years personal rule would have contributed greatly to the tension between monarch and parliament, but would this have been sufficient to start a war? Most definitely not, Parliament had been able to prevent any further attempt at this with the Triennial Act and had removed Strafford and Laud the ‘evil advisors’ this would be enough to keep the King in line, at least for the time being.
The issue of religion was also very contentious, the people were growing increasingly concerned over the apparent reintroduction of Catholicism. The attempt of Charles I to introduce the Anglican prayer book into Scotland was an abysmal failure, and eventually led to the First Bishop’s War, the Godly Puritans of Scotland resisted and ultimately managed to force Charles I to recall Parliament in order to fund his war.
Social and economic factors also played a part in the war, the Gentry decided that the time had come to end the dominance of the Monarch and the Aristocrats, a class war of sorts began with the gentry trying to wrestle power from the ones who had held it for so long.
The role of the individual should not be overlooked however, as the revisionist historians suggest, the actions of single people are key in the breakout of war. Charles I’s aspiration for ‘Personal Rule’ was he intending to retake control after he had dealt with the Scots? Laud and Strafford had great influence on the monarch, did they use this beneficially or for their own personal gain? There are many questions that arise from discussing individuals such as the ones above, it would take too long to answer all of the issues that come from the persons directly involved in the outbreak of war. It is safe to say however that actions of key figures, like Charles and Laud contributed heavily to the Civil War.
Although the Long Parliament had abolished the majority of Charles’ innovations in taxation when they met in 1640, they faced the prospect of funding not only another Bishops war but ultimately a full blown Civil War. When the Long Parliament met in 1640, there was no possibility of a civil war as Charles I had very little support, politically or military. Inflation had hit England hard in the 1640’s and the peasants were suffering immensely.
Charles I needed to focus his attention on foreign affairs, the Irish had so far been quelled by Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford. Once he was executed by Parliament for treason there was no authoritarian to subdue the violent Irish people. This led to a lot of tension between Charles and Parliament over how to handle the situation. The Scots also proved troublesome, after the Bishop’s wars hostilities were rife between the two countries even though Charles was the reigning King of both countries.
The Civil war was a combination of long term, short term and trigger causes, there was no single event that led directly to war, however many key issues such as the personal rule and high levels of tension between King and Parliament led to a Civil War.
