For such an organisation to have made a generous offer to the King previously shows a dichotomy between conservatism and radicalism. Cromwell embodied this dichotomy, first favouring the retention of the monarchy under Prince Henry, later rejecting the chance to wear the crown himself, feeling that God had condemned monarchy. This is important because it shows a significant proportion of those that supported parliament were not opposed to monarchy, but rather wished to secure the rights of parliament. As
We have a strong position in the West Country, the north and Wales and we firmly believe that the people will gladly support our sovereign in this conflict. The enemy may hold London, the midlands and the east but we are certain that with the aid of God almighty will vanquish them and restore the King back to his rightful God appointed position as head of the whole country! I pray for the souls of the casualties of those who have sacrificed themselves out of loyalty to our King. God save King Charles! The origins of the English Civil war was born out of a series of disputes between King Charles I and his Parliament dating back to his coronation in 1625.
But that’s not the only reason religion caused the civil war, King Charles believed in the divine right. It was when the king/queen believes that god put them on the throne. So Charles took all the power because of this and Parliament didn’t want to go with his decision which contributes to the civil war. Also he made Scottish churches uses English prayer books which caused riots and England went to battle with Scotland. England lost.
First of all we’ll look at Harald Godwinson. He had a strong claim to the throne because he was a blood relative of Edwards. He also had experience of power and he was very popular with the English. But when Edwards died Godwinson was expected to mourn his dead relative, instead he rushed to fight for the throne, instead of respecting his loss he was rude and disrespectful in his race for power and people were not happy with this. This section is all about Harald Godwinson!
The Parliament that assembled 3 November 1640 was fundamentally hostile to Charles I. Candidates associated with the court had been defeated, and almost everyone elected was aggrieved at some aspect of Charles' policies. Parliament had been assembled only because Charles needed money to pay the Scots army. To ensure that it was not dissolved as soon as the Scots army disbanded, Parliament forced Charles to sign an Act (10 May 1641) agreeing that this Parliament would not be dissolved without its own consent. The threat of the Scottish army was also used to persuade the King to consent to the Triennial Act (15 February 1641).
Alexander III re-implements Tsarist form, through the use of repression and terror. At the end of the Crimean War, Alexander II realised that Russia was no longer a great military power. His advisers argued that a backwards economy which is reliant on the serfs could not compete with modernized powers such as Britain and France. He also became increasingly unpopular at this time, meaning he needed to do something
The events in Scotland began with Charles introducing the English bible into Scotland, from there a religious protest developed and ultimately the National Covenant was set up. Charles wanted to base the Scottish Church on an English model (Hughes, 1998; p35) much to their disgust, and he declared the covenanters traitors, this united the movement early on. Importantly Charles knew that while the covenant existed he had no power in Scotland (Hughes, 1998; p37). The events led to the First Bishops War, which is the reason that Charles called the Short Parliament. He believed he had the support of the English Parliament.
It has been argued that Charles I was the main reason that war broke out. I will be investigating whether this is a far accusation by looking at the long-term and the short-term causes for the English Civil War and assessing how far Charles was really to blame. Firstly, it has been argued that Charles was to blame for the long-term reasons such as wanting to make changes to religion, the power of the king and money. For example, Charles was partly to blame for money because he was trying to buy off the Scottish with £850 a day (which he could not afford) as a result from trying to make the Scottish Puritans. They rebelled and tried to attack.
The nobility of England appeared to increase in power because of the weakness of the king. The King had clear favourites in both the Earl of Somerset and the Earl of Suffolk. The Earl of Suffolk was permitted to ‘dominate’ the royal household during the period Henry was too young to be ruler. When he was accused of treason by the commons due to the business in France, the King stood by him in protection. The king sent him to exile, however in the English Channel, the ship carrying the Earl of Suffolk was intercepted by ‘Nicholas of the Tower’, and Suffolk was beheaded by its sailors in April 1450.
He required that his subjects “loan him the equivalent of five subsidies” and although it was “opposed by significant numbers in the localities,” the taxation still occurred as the government had “employed all its powers to eliminate resistance”. Moreover, the Forced Loan only happened as a result of Charles dismissing the 1626 Parliament, forfeiting his opportunity of obtaining further grants for his wartime expenditure. Parliament had already been antagonised by Charles’ decision to dismiss them and now that Charles was forcing taxation on others in order to fund his wartime expenditure, due to disastrous foreign policy which Parliament largely disagreed with, it is clear that the Forced Loan had worsened relations greatly. In addition to this, the financing of foreign policy also affected the relationship between Crown and Parliament. As stated previously, the Forced Loan existed to fund England’s wars considering that Parliament was reluctant to grant Charles further subsidies.