English Revolution Textbook Section One

James I was also known as James VI (he was the son of Mary Queen of Scots) and he succeeded Elizabeth I. His court was vulgar and he was a flexible thinker and generally successful ruler.

After Elizabeth died, the puritans used the opportunity to draft a list of reforms for James to consider which became known as the 'Millenary Petition'. It was hoped that James would share the same enthusiasm as the Scottish Kirk and make a settlement that would establish their 'purer' form of Protestantism in England. Any hopes of a Scottish-style Presbyterian restructure were dashed: "No bishops! No King!" was James's firm response to a proposal that the church should lose it episcopal structure.

For a short while it appeared that England might become an unprecedented beacon for religious toleration. His first parliament forced him to reverse his tolerant approach by withholding money from him. This triggered the gunpowder plot in 1605 which was an attempt by catholics terrorists to kill the king and his government and replace it with a catholic monarch. Some of the consequences from this include recusancy fines increasing, catholics being removed from government posts, public fear of catholics increasing and catholics having to affirm a new oath of allegiance in 1606.

Until the outbreak of the Thirty Years War in 1618, James was relatively successful in managing the Church of England.

Contrary to his expectations, James inherited a very different style of Parliament in England to one that he mastered in Scotland. James found his personal court to be argumentative, with growing sense of its institutional independence. He expected to be the head of the court but instead found that it was a body beginning to strain towards an authority of its own.

The relationship between James and Parliament was strained as he faced many financial problems. These include significant debt being transfered to James, England still being at war with Spain, needing to display generous patronage to his new subjects and more. In 1610, Robert Cecil devised a fiscal measure called the 'Great Contract' and was intended to clear James's debts and set the Crown on a viable footing with a budget of £200 000 guaranteed by parliament. In return, the crown would lose many of its powers. This failed though because James was annoyed with long lectures about his royal authority, parliament were worried they would lose power if James had enough money and more.

In 1618, tensions in Europe that had been simmering point for many years broke out into what became known as the Thirty Years War, a conflict in which Catholic and Protestant power blocs fought for territorial deominance over central Europe. This forced the royal family into exile, and war raged across Europe for the next thirty years.

James died in 1625 and passed the throne onto his son Charles.

Charles I had a stutter and was very shy. Charles preferred the company of only a few, trusted advisors and had a loving relationship with the French Catholic, Henrietta Maria and showed loyalty to the Duke of Buckingham, Archbishop Willaim Laud and Thomas Wentworth. He believed in the Divine Right of Kings

Charles I aimed to maintain law and order within his kingdoms, defend his kingdoms from external threats, provide effective religious leadership and ensure financial/economic wellbeing.

Henrietta Maria had freedom to practice catholism but posed as a major obstacle to her acceptance. As her political power and religious influence grew, the ability to create a unique court culture also rose. Masques were a feature of the royal court for years and the queen was an exuberant participant during the early part of her reign, causing consternation to some of the onlookers (including puritans). She was associated with the Virgin Mary for her personality in art.

Buckingham's influence had nearly destroyed the functionality of the 'inner sanctum' because he had effectively replaced the king as the front of patronage and power and was distributing royal favour among his own factions. The court Charles inherited was corrupted.

Charles's commission to Rubens for 'The Apotheosis of James I' reveals the depth of his convictions about royal authority and specifically the extent to which he interpreted his father's strongly held belief in the Divine Right of Kings. 

Some members of the House of Lords and more in the House of Commons resisted such a view of monarchical power as it seemed to sweep all before it, removing Parliament's independent authority and subjecting Parliament to the royal will rather than on the will of the people. 

Catholics refused to accept that the Pope's authority could be displaced. This is why allegiance was such a complex issue for them, because they continued to believe that the Pope was a higher authority than the King.

Extreme Puritans believed that the king only had earthly power and should therefore not be allowed to appoint bishops and other spiritual leaders.

Charles turned the powers he possessed into tools to reinforce his royal authority and the more strident the opposition became, the more strongly he responded. This made people think that Charles was aiming to become an absolute ruler.

Charles tended to emphasise his Divine Right and authority but Parliament said that this was to establish 'arbitrary' government. Charles felt that Parliament was being arrogant and innovative, demanding powers to which it was not entitled.

Tonnage and Poundage, 1625

The forced loan, 1626

The Five Knights' Case, 1627

Calvinism - God decided the path that humans would follow in their earthly lives: this doctrine is called predestination. Most like puritanism.

Arminianism - God allowed each person to make a free choice in their earthly lives so that all could be saved, but not all might choose to be save. Similar to catholicism. This deas appealed to Charles as he like how it valued order, ceremony and hierarchy which chimed with his ideas about Divine Right and dignity.

York House Conference, 1626

Parliament had attempted to bring Montagu to trial because of his religious writings in 1625. One of the reference points that Parliament had for believing that Charles's conduct of foreign policy was inept was the Mansfeld expedition of 1624. This was a military campaign which intended to provide military assistance to the Elector Frederick. This was a disaster as the soldiers wasted away through starvation and sickness.

The Cadiz Expedition, September 1625. Continued to endeavour to support the Elector Frederick and next decided to send an invasion fleet to the Spanish port of Cadiz. It was financed by the queens £120 000 dowry. It was a humiliating fiasco as the English failed to capture the port or any Spanish treasure ships but most of the soldiers rendered themselves useless by getting hideously drunk on spanish wine. This failure was blamed on Buckingham as Lord Admiral.

Charles blamed Parliament for not giving him enough money to conduct war effectively. What made Charle even more antagonistic towards the 1626 Parliament was that despite his attempts at compromise by indicating a shift to an anti-french policy, MPs launched impeachment proceedings against parliament. It was easy to make a case that Charles was becoming absolutist because of his continued reliance on prerogative financial measures and the dissolution of the 1626 Parliament in order to protect Buckingham and Montagu

The La Rochelle raids, 1627-28. Buckingham launched another naval expedition in the hope of relieving the Huguenots under attack by Richelieu's at La Rochelle. After months of deadlock, a direct assault failed because the English scaling-ladders were too short! Charles's loyalty to the duke now appeared even more misguided and dangerous to England's interests. Worse still for Charles, all his funds had been spent and he had to recall Parliament in 1628.

The Parliaments of the 1620s were packed with highly competent men, mainly lawyers, who were skilled at debating and determined to protect the rights of Parliament. These included Sir John Pym, Benjamin Rudyard, Sir John Eliot, Sir John Coke, Denzil Holles and Sir John Selden. Charles recalled parliament in March 1628 because he was in dire need of money to fund his foreign policy but it is clear from peace-making actions on both sides that Crown and Parliament hoped to make something of a fresh start in their relationship. The Commons hoped that the king would respond to their concerns about extra-parliamentary taxation and billeting.

The Petition of Right, 1628, asked the king to confirm four ancient liberties that Parliament claimed were basic precepts of English government, and that could be traced to the Magna Carta of 1215. The King's officials via the House of Lords made a case that Parliament should accept the 'word' of the king to abide by the spirit. Charles accepted the Petition on 7 June 1628, chiefly because Parliament threatened further proceedings against Buckingham and he was, once again, desperate for money. It served to heighten Parliamentary fears that this particular king could not be trusted

On 28 August 1628, Buckingham was assassinated by John Felton. Charles held Parliament responsible for it, Charles felt betrayed by apparent disloyalty of his subjects and was shocked by public celebration, he distanced himself further from ordinary people, criticism would be directed more at Charles now that Buckingham was dead and he couldn't act as a scapegoat for Charles and more consequences.

Charles recalled parliament on 20 January 1629. Two fundamental issues that had not been addressed in the Petition of Right swiftly came to proceddings which included Tonnage and Poundage and Religion.

In 1929, Charles dissolved parliament once again and didn't call them again until 1640. This was known as his personal rule.