personal rule - finance

?
View mindmap
  • How accurate is it to say that Charles 1sts personal rule was a financial success
    • background
      • personal rule began to prevent impeachment of queen and in agner at reaction to parliment
    • LOA = partially accurate - however was not sustainable
    • P1 - yes it was successful - able to still raise funds
      • used ship money to raise funds for navy in towns
        • john hampton tried to bring. case aganst the crown in 1637
        • only 20% was payed in1639
      • revival of forest laws - taxing areas which cut down forests
      • sold off crown land
      • However these were unpopular with the commons - therefore would not be sustainable long term
      • enclosure fines
    • P2 role of Charles himself
      • 1630- treaty of madrid ended the war with spain
      • fined noble men eg - earl of salsbury- 70,000 in 1630s and fined london 100,000
      • reduced spending from 500,000 (1625-29) to 70,000 in the 1630s
      • less spending = relied less on tax and wouldnt need parliment
      • crowns debt went from 2 mill1629 to 18000 by 1635
      • personal income rose from 600,000 to 900,000
    • p3- no as parliment had to be called eventually
      • without the right to tonnage and poundage C1 could not survive without parliment
      • prayer book rebellion meant that charles needed more funds
        • had to re call parliament
      • the very fact that parliament had to be recalled to provide financial aid shows that personal rule could not have been financially successful
      • failure of ship moeny
      • only able to gather forces of 15,000 in 1639

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar History resources:

See all History resources »See all British monarchy - Tudors and Stuarts resources »