The Trial Of King Charles Essay

After being jailed in the Birmingham city jail, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a Baptist minister who preached nonviolence, wrote this response to a published statement by eight fellow clergymen from Alabama. This letter was not only composed under somewhat constricting circumstances but was written in a way that can be analyzed to be considered as a classic argument. Not only does it contain the five elements needed in a rhetorical situation, but the letter includes the six parts of an argument, the five types of claims, and even the three types of proofs. Dr. King’s letter fully satisfies all requirements needed in order to be considered a classic argument.

After reading Machiavelli’s The Prince and watching Shakespeare’s Henry V in class, one begins to notice similarities between the authors’ idea of what a “perfect king” should be. The patterns between the ideal ruler of Shakespeare and the ideal ruler of Machiavelli can be seen in numerous instances throughout this story. For the duration of this essay, I will compare the similarities in both pieces to give the reader a better understanding of how Shakespeare devised his view of what a “perfect king” should be.

in 1629. It was symbolic of a time when the King felt that any joint

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 Dr. King's essay 'Letter from Birmingham Jail' he addresses the claims made about his arrest by the eight clergymen. His responses are very long and detailed, giving a very compelling and moving point of view. His letter is directed to his audience, which consists of white middle class citizens who Dr. King refers to as the 'white moderates'. Dr. King's letter is very persuasive because his use of pathos makes the audience think or imagine themselves in the situation. It is very poignant of him to write his letter this way. He is in touch with the views of his audience, which makes a greater impact on his readers. Dr. King uses antecdotes to make his readers see the injustice

After the end of the civil war, officers of the New Model Army, formed by Cromwell, decided to put Charles on trial. Parliament voted to negotiate with the King in order to come to a peace agreement, but that was met with a fierce rebuke from Cromwell and his army. In order to kill any hope for the King and to prevent any kind of compromise between the King and Parliament, one hundred and eighty members of Parliament were excluded, and forty five were imprisoned for showing resistance. This act of purging was described simply as a coup d'état. (23 Laughland) If the king is truly guilty and hated by his people, Cromwell wouldn’t have needed to perform this despicable action of arresting and barring Parliament members from their seats. At this point, the authority of Parliament that was supported by the Roundheads, over the King’s, has lost all its legality. Parliament became a military tool in the hand of Cromwell and his army. In addition to this, Cromwell’s son-in-law, Henry Ireton, was the one who submitted a request to prosecute the King, which was naturally accepted by the one third of the Parliament left. A court with the name of ‘High Court of Justice’ was formed to be responsible for the King’s trial. (103-104 TURCHETTI)

Cunning. Crafty. Creative. Cruel. “Charles”, written by Shirley Jackson in 1948, is a rather chilling short story about the vulnerability of a young child’s imagination, about the fantasies of the human mind, about the manipulation of humans, and about the insidious dangers of change. Jackson’s horrific tale stealthy kidnaps the oblivious reader from their seat and takes him or her on a non-stop ride that begins in a simple family home and ends in the darkest corner of the human imagination. By manipulating the innocent thoughts as a young boy into those of a grim reality, by employing innocence to camouflage hypocrisy and duplicity and by hiding behind the faultless nature of a young imagination to hide the insidious nature he possesses,

found in a prison in the time of Charles II’ the narrator says ‘I will

Under the different Kings and Queens of Britain, executions were common in these time periods. The many different types of executions that took place and have many unique differences. Why the executions took place, how were the speeches carried out, and how were they staged is something that needs to be examined. There are many sources that explain these different situations and it is a very interesting subject to examine. Each of these different monarchs varied in the way they carried out these executions and had different reasons in why these executions needed to happen. These executions were dependent on many different factors. One of these factors is the gender of the ruling king or queen calling for the execution in this specific

Wolsey served as the king’s principle minster from 1515 to 1529, till his failure in securing the divorce for Henry VIII resulted in his fall from power. Though Wolsey has been criticised due to suggestions of limited usefulness he provided to Henry, Wolsey provided clear dedication to the crown. These three extracts provide convincing insights into the interpretations of the effectiveness of Wolsey as the king’s principal minister. Extract A can provide a convincing insight into the actions Wolsey took as the King’s principal minister, in relation to the responsibility he held. C.S.L Davies evaluates that Wolsey did little to change the manner of maintaining the justice and peace of the country, and was not greatly effective as the King’s

Evidence proves that charles was drunk coming down the stairs. Charles was so drunk that he was at a point that he couldn’t walk anymore and he came down stairs for another drink but he tripped and fell down the stairs and died from a wound in his head. Second Piece of evidence that proves that margaret is innocent is because she was cooking. Margaret was cooking while charles was upstairs drinking there is no way margaret would have pushed him because if margaret would have pushed him then the food she was cooking would have overcooked and smoke would have been all around. Last piece of evidence proves that margaret is innocent because charles looks likes he has slippery shoes

Charles I and the Establishment of Royal Absolutism Royal absolutism is a state of government whereby the monarch rules supreme, with virtually no legislative power placed in other organisations such as Parliament. For the people of England in the 1630s, it was a very real threat. After the dissolving of Parliament in 1629, Charles I embarked on his Personal Rule. Without analysing whose fault the breakdown in relations was, it was probably the only thing Charles could do in the circumstances. Certainly, no dialogue with Parliament was possible.

“The Tryal and Condemnation of Mervin, Lord Audley Earl of Castle-Haven At Westminster, April the 5th 1631” and “The Arraignment and Conviction of Mervin Lord Audley, Earle of Castlehaven” detail the proceedings

Reporter #1 (John)- What did you first think when Charles V wanted to force you back to the Catholic church?

While Newton was a young child, England’s civil war was still raging (Gullien, 1995, p. 16). His hometown of Woolsthorpe had been captured. Nevertheless, Newton went to school like every other child. However, Newton’s world was soon turned upside down, when he heard the news that the Puritan-dominated Parliament had defeated the king’s armies and had beheaded King Charles I (Gullien, 1995, p. 16). Newton did not like Parliamentarians.