English Civil War - How Far Does Source B Differ from Source a in Relation to the Reasons for the Breakdown of the Crown-Parliament Relationship?

942 Words4 Pages
Read Source A-C and answer the questions that follow. How far does Source B differ from Source A in relation to the reasons for the breakdown of the crown-parliament relationship? Sources A and B have both similar and different opinions concerning the reasons leading to the breakdown of the relationship between crown and parliament. Both sources indicate that within four years the relationship had broken down, however whilst source B acknowledges that although the relationship has “changed considerably” the tone of source A goes further to suggest that the relationship is totally irreconcilable with it “never to return”. Both sources A and B indicate that Charles was instrumental in the collapse of the relationship. In particular source A identifies Charles’ pursuit of ‘policies in religion, foreign affairs and finance” as major factors in contributing to the breakdown. This points to the attempts of Charles to reform the church and move it towards Arminianism; his disastrous failure at Cadiz and La Rochelle costing the country both money and men, and his attempt to finance the crown independently through the illegal collection of customs duties (tunnage and poundage). These policies drove a wedge between crown and parliament and were rooted in Charles’ behaviour and desire to exert his authority. Indeed source A attempts to remove the finger of blame from parliament, which had been accused of grasping to usurp the power and authority of the king, by suggesting that “money and parliamentary privilege were symptoms and not the cause of the breakdown.” Source B supports this notion as it indicates that the policies of Charles’ government “raised fundamental legal, constitutional and religious issues.” In this sense both sources A and B agree with each other,
Open Document