The Trail of King Charles I

The governments of the interregnum failed to find an acceptable settlement predominantly due the power vacuum which was left by the King when he was executed. This wasn't helped by the lack of legitimacy of the regicide where only 59 MP's signed Charles' death warrant. However one could argue that Oliver Cromwell, Parliament and The New Model Army's want and desire for more power also led to the failure to find an acceptable settlement.

Moving along, the Parliament automatically felt more dissatisfied with their relationship. The parliament detested Charles I because he believed the parliament was a “waste of space”. Importantly, he would refuse to converse with parliament for any government issues but use them if money was desired. These disagreements lead to the civil war. According to our class lecture, “The king must go to parliament to get money to start an army and gets rejected so he closes the parliament and declares himself the single ruler of parliament and this tactic fails because community respects the rules of the parliament. Charles is forced to flea and forced to have an army. Charles has a large army and the dismissed parliament must also raise an army. As a consequence of farmers and artisan of that English class is radicalized” Charles ruled the Parliament government by putting taxes on ships and other products to use for army purposes. When Parliament was not on board with the new taxation, while the king starting arresting members of the parliament madness broke through and civil war took place. Parliament decided to create an army on their own to defeat the king, which they were successful. They put the king

In England, from about 1400 to 1700 there was a constant struggle between Parliament and the ruling monarch. During that time, there were six documents that tried to weaken or challenge the power of the monarch. One of these documents was the Petition of Right. The Petition of Right, although it did not last, challenged Charles I by stating that he could not levy taxes without Parliament’s approval, not declare martial law, not to quarter soldiers in private homes while during peacetime, and could not imprison someone without a valid charge. Another document is the Grand Remonstrance. The Grand Remonstrance was a list of grievances against Charles I. This lead to Parliament asking for control of the army. Although it was brutally denied, it

Repetitively, the authors announce the King’s crimes against the common man. The colonists cite him and his temperament as one of the grounds for which the want to separate. According to the authors, the King’s governance neglects an entire segment of his subjects -- the colonists. The authors showcase the King’s inability to cooperate with

Charles I and Louis XVI were put on trial for all the right reasons, making many mistakes throughout their reign. Deathly hallow of Monarchy is a relatable title to draw the attention of the young history students of Grade 9. The Deathly hallow reminds us the references of death and holy powers from the famous stories of Harry Potter. In this essay, we are using that already known terms to throw light on the two European kings who believed so strongly in their holy right to rule. They stubbornly refused to give up their belief even though the blade was hanging over their neck.

Ronald Hutton, the author of Charles II King of England, Scotland, and Ireland, believes that the Declaration of Indulgence was the key to keeping England unified. Hutton also believes that the Cavalier Parliament was attempting to bring England back to a pre-reformation era. In 1662, Parliament established this by

In the late 1600’s the political system in England was split between the monarch and the Parliament. Parliament was the taxing body, meaning they controlled all the taxes that the English citizens would have to pay to the government. The King, on the contrary, controlled none of the taxes. Anytime he wished to raise an army, or make use of government funds, the king would need to call Parliament to a meeting. The members of Parliament would then hear out the kings wishes, debate amongst themselves, and finally come to a decision to grant the king the funds necessary to complete his project. The king of England was wealthy, but he was not wealthy enough to consistently fund his own projects and objectives without the help of Parliament, as he did not possess the authority to tax his subjects. If the King were to ignore Parliament and not have any meetings, then eventually he would run out of

On January 1st of 1649, the Rump Parliament of England passed a mandate for the trial of King Charles I to which he would be charged with “subverting the fundamental laws and liberties of the nation while maliciously making war on the parliament and people of England.” After years of civil war and various failures in fulfilling kingly duties, Charles faced a trial against a strategically assembled English court that would choose his fate. This stands out in history as one of the most noteworthy and dramatic events in early modern England- a domestic political crisis unlike anything that had ever been seen before. Over the years historians have debated in how they characterize the king’s trial and its end result, referring to the execution as “a crime of the worst magnitude, a regrettable necessity, or a laudable challenge to either an individual ruler or the entire political system.” Due to the overall disapproval of the trial by prominent individuals, biased personnel assembled in the court, questionable legal legitimacy, improper court proceedings and unfortunate socio-economic circumstances during his reign, it can be concluded that King Charles I did not receive a fair trial.

After he completely dismissed parliament, he was then alone accountable for everything himself. When he could not live up to this responsibility, the public became furious. With an unrest in Scotland, Charles was obligated to make amends with parliament to fund wars. After getting into yet another disagreement with parliament, Charles attempted to get parliament members arrested. Charles surrendered to Scottish forces and was handed over to parliament.

Written in the first years of Louis the Pious’ reign, The Life of Charlemagne is a concise biography of the Frankish emperor, as written by a former member of his court, Einhard. This source provides historians with a first-hand account of Charlemagne’s activities and personality from someone close to him.

Because of the English Civil War, King Charles I was executed, and the protectorate took over to maintain British. When the protectorate passed away, restoration of parliament by crowning exiled Charles II initiated. Although British maintained its system, many scandals within parliament could be seen through Pepys. As his position and wealth grew, Pepys care-freely enjoyed his life by drinking, having affairs with other women, and benefiting himself while taking away from others. Even though he was stereotypical individual in parliament, he had feelings for British Navy, which he tried to fund by using his own expenses. Adding to these corruption, an unfortunate events occurred such as bubonic plague, the Second Anglo-Dutch War, and the Great

They refused him the funds he needed until he signed The Petition of Right. This, of course, would limit Charles’ ultimate power, but he signed due to his need for money. As the book states, “It set forth the idea that the law was higher than the king.” (Pg. 180) Now power should be shared between King and Parliament, right? Wrong.

Charles I was an integral conclusion to monarchical rule in England. Although reprimanded for his Eleven Years Of Tyranny, the king’s impact on modern constitutionalism is significant. Within the Stuart dynasty, he left a stain on English society by the way of authoritarian policies. Reliance on administrative control for power led to his demise too. Thenceforth, the Personal Rule of Charles became a historical reminder of the dangers of absolutism in England and the West.

Let's start with Protestants. The time period I’m going to be talking about was when King Charles V was in charge. King Charles V was the Holy Roman Emperor of Spain and many low countries. While he was ruling, in 1530, many German Princes joined Lutheranism and opposed him. Due to that he became controlling and many others join Lutheranism as well. Charles V waged war on Protestant Germany to try and get control back to the catholic church he did not do so great. But there are some other people who came up with new religions as well, like John Calvin who started Calvinism. Calvin also published a book in 1536 called “Institutes of the Christian Religion” . King Henry VIII came up with Englanism because he wanted to divorce his wife.Now to

By trying to arrest the 5 MP’s in January 1642 in the House of Common with an army of 400 soldiers, the King rose suspicion that he was trying to dismiss the Parliament once again. As the Parliament feared that it will happen, they tried to limit the King’s power by taking the control over the royal army and by voting to throw the bishops out of the House of Lords. Some moderate MP’s were beginning to become worried about the fact and went to support Charles with the belief of possible chaos if they do not do this. The Parliament took over the army to fight against the Irish without consulting Charles as they feared he would turn against