King Charles: the Martyr or the Traitor

458 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essay On Charles 1 Execution

King Charles: the Martyr or the Traitor

Royalist View

=============

Today was the day of the execution of the martyr and magnificent king,

King Charles I. The horrifying and bloodthirsty parliamentarians

decided to play god and wish to slaughter the gracious king that

brought prosperity and flourished England's economical value, he won

loyalty and admiration from the public eye through dedication and

that's why I have total support for the congenial king. Those

roundheads desired to execute the king despite the fact that in the

trial, the majority of the jurors were critical of executing the king.

I moved towards the wooden platform were the distressing slaughterer

would walk upon and eradicate the moderate man, their was a group of

people weeping about the disastrous future England would be put upon

if this man would die albeit a minority of the spectators were booing

and jeering which was directed at the king. The heavens opened for the

man who would join God in eternal paradise just when the king moved

along the stage towards the razor-sharp silver guillotine with

executioner holding the dignified king by his wrists as though the

superior king was a innocent child, the guy horrific man who was to

commit the worst sin ever was a stunted and boney figure was a dark

hood covering his appalling smile. The king was laid under the

guillotine and just when Oliver Cromwell asked the King to state his

last words, a deafening bolt hit the floor with huge impact and rain

trickled upon every parliamentarian, it soaked the sinners but left

the loyal royalists dry, this was a message from God that this was

wrong but despite this clear gesture Cromwell carried on with this

presentation and repeated the words that he muttered before the

lightening struck. He request the noble king for his last thoughts

furthermore the majestic King replied with these glorious words; " You

may take my life but never my people's freedom and I will rise and

punish all of you who hunted me.

Show More
Related

  • Louis Riel: A Hero or a Traitor?

    524 Words  | 2 Pages

    Was Louis Riel a hero or a traitor? Well, some individuals say that he was a hero, and others say that he was a traitor. Individually I believe that Louis Riel was a hero because he was the forefather of Manitoba, which is a province of Canada. The fact that he was a persuasive politician and spiritual leader made him a hero as well. Lastly, he stood up for Native rights. Others like the British had thought of him mostly as a traitor, because they were not able to understand that Louis Riel had just needed the Canadian government to treat his people fairly, and that he was willing to do everything for his people. Instead the government had thought that he was violent and evil, so a threat to them. Most people who had seen him as a traitor had realized that he did everything for his people…after his hanging.

    Read More

  • How strong was the opposition to personal rule in England between 1629-1640

    952 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first of these is Religion. Charles came under attack from, in simple terms, the Protestants and the Catholics. He had this attack on him for many different reasons. He was resented by the Catholics, because he was a protestant. To be more precise, he was an Arminian, which was a sector from the protestant side of Christianity. On the other side of the spectrum, he is resented by the puritans, as they see him as too close in his religious views to Catholicism. Furthermore, he is disliked by the puritans as he put restrictions on their preaching and themselves. The puritans were a well organised opposition to Personal rule. The top puritans, linked through family and friends, organised a network of potential opposition to the king and his personal rule. This ‘Godly party’ as they became known, was made up of gentry, traders, lawyers and even lords. This group of powerful and extremely influential people was the most well organised opposition to Charles’ personal rule.

    Read More

  • Historians' Changing Opinions of Oliver Cromwell

    1122 Words  | 3 Pages

    Oliver Cromwell was a well known military dictator. He helped the Parliamentarians win the First Civil War and was named Lord Protector. He died in 1658 but many people still remember him as one of the best leaders in history although others believe he was a harsh tyrant and always wanted too much power for himself. Throughout the years, numerous historians have changed their views on whether he was a good leader or not. This work will look at three interpretations from different people on who Cromwell was and what he was like and compare them.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Ivan And Charles

    1390 Words  | 3 Pages

    The nature versus nurture debate is one that has continued for years arguing over whether children are effected more by their innate personality or their personal experiences. Ivan and Charles are examples that both are factors in a person’s disposition. In what ways were Ivan IV and Charles VI’s upbringing similar and did this have a comparable effect on their leadership and later mental diagnosis? Ivan IV and Charles VI had a similar upbringing in relation to their lineage and throne inheritance which led to their analogous leadership styles and mental illnesses.

    Read More

  • To What Extent Was Parliament To Blame For The English Civil War

    1894 Words  | 4 Pages

    The eventual breakdown of severing relations between Charles I and Parliament gave way to a brutal and bloody English Civil War. However, the extent that Parliament was to blame for the collapse of cooperation between them and ultimately war, was arguably only to a moderate extent. This is because Parliament merely acted in defiance of King Charles I’s harsh personal rule, by implementing controlling legislation, attacking his ruthless advisors and encouraging public opinion against him. These actions however only proceeded Charles I’s personal abuse of his power, which first and foremost exacerbated public opinion against his rule. This was worsened

    Read More

  • Memoirs Of Reverend Hale.

    911 Words  | 2 Pages

    Here I write in the closing days of my life. My life has been full of many wonderful experiences, and I thank God for that. However, the events of almost ten years ago are a black mark on my legacy, an event that will forever haunt my spirit, while it walks the Earth within my body and when I have ascended to heaven to be with the Lord. The unjust hangings of many of God 's people, including the honourable John Proctor and Rebecca Nurse, was a regrettable moment in my life and all of New England.

    Read More

  • Reign Of Terror Dbq

    669 Words  | 2 Pages

    It was estimated that 16,000 people were guillotined during the Reign of Terror. Death was immediate. Killing thousands of people was not conveniant to the society (Document F). The Reign of Terror was not beneficial for France. People were getting punishment by speaking poorly about he government was a punishment that could lead to prison and even death (Documnet E). The punishment was not really a crime and Robespierre's rule was uncessesary to the people in France and led people to die. In this regard, the Reign of Terror was not justified because the fact that the leader of the Reign of Terror was executed. Additionally, Robespiere was ruthless and would execute people by doing small

    Read More

  • The Character of Henry V

    416 Words  | 1 Pages

    full a glory that I will dazzle the eyes of France.' Here he says he

    Read More

  • The Failure Of Charles I's Personal Rule

    1284 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout Charles I’s Personal Rule, otherwise known as the ‘Eleven Year Tyranny’, he suffered many problems which all contributed to the failure of his Personal Rule. There are different approaches about the failure of Personal Rule and when it actually ended, especially because by April 1640 Short Parliament was in session. However, because it only lasted 3 weeks, historians tend to use November 1640 as the correct end of the Personal Rule when Long Parliament was called. There was much debate about whether the Personal Rule could have continued as it was, instead people generally believed that it would crumble when the King lost his supporters.

    Read More

  • Why Civil War Broke Out in England in 1642

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    One of the key factors that led to the civil war was the contrasting beliefs of King Charles and the parliament. The monarchy believed in the divine rights of kings, explained by Fisher (1994, p335) as a biblically-based belief that the king or queen's authority comes directly from God and that he is not subjected to the demands of the people. On the other hand, the parliament had a strong democratic stance and though they respected and recognized the king's authority, they were constantly desiring and fighting for more rights to power. Although climaxing at the reign of King Charles, their antagonism stretched for centuries long before his birth and much of the power that once belonged to the monarchy had shifted over to the parliament by the time he came into power.

    Read More

  • Analysis of 1776, by David McCullough

    972 Words  | 2 Pages

    McCullough seems to have little bias when the novel begins with the introduction of King George the third. Still youthful at thirty seven, and still hardworking after fifteen years on the thrown, he could be notably willful and often shortsighted, but he was sincerely patriotic and everlasting duty-bound.” ( McCullough 6). The description of the King showed a side of the Revolution many do not think of. Often the British are just thought of as the enemy in red, not so much people who the war affected greatly, whose lives were also lost fighting for their country. The British and King George the third had reason, some may not agree, but it was valid from their point of view. David McCullough manages to open the readers mind to the differ...

    Read More

  • Henry VIII: The Life and Death of a Lady Killer

    1121 Words  | 3 Pages

    On June 28th, 1491, a boy was born in Greenwich Palace to Henry VII and Elizabeth of York. (Scarisbrick 1968) They named their son Henry VIII, after Henry VII. Henry was the second of the four sons that Elizabeth and Henry would have but he was the only one to survive to adulthood. His older brother was Arthur, and his two sisters were Margaret and Mary, and they would be the only ones who survived infancy. However, every ruler has a weakness, and Henry’s was women. The impact of women on Henry would show, even in his reign as king.

    Read More

  • The Appalling Leadership of King Henry V

    1259 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Henry V, the actions of King Henry portray him as an appalling leader. Among Henry's many negative traits, he allows himself to be influenced by people who have anterior motives. This is problematic because the decisions might not be the best decisions for the country, or neighboring countries. The bishops convinced Henry to take over France because they would be able to save land for the Church. Henry doesn't have the ability to accept responsibility for his actions, placing the blame on others. Before Henry begins to take over a French village, he tells the governor to surrender or risk having English troops terrorize civilians. This way, if the governor declines, it would be the governor's fault for the atrocities that would occur. Henry has gotten his troops to go along with the take over by manipulating them. He tells the soldiers that what they're doing is noble, and that they should be proud. In fact, they're attacking another country in order to conquer it. Henry's character comes off as coldhearted and careless. Henry shows ruthlessness towards civilians, threatening them with atrocities. He's careless with his soldiers, thoughtlessly allowing their executions, or playing hurtful games with them.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Lord Chesterfield

    845 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this letter, written by Lord Chesterfield to his traveling son, Lord Chesterfield shows his son the values he holds and the expectations he has for him. Lord Chesterfield clearly shows he values working hard, being superior to others, and doing what is right and noble. He informs his son these values are what are expected of him and anything less would be considered shameful. Lord Chesterfield organizes his letter by beginning with words that portray him as a friend and as show him to be comprehensive. He even relates his own youth with that of his son to show understanding. He later transforms his tone to be more assertive and describes to his son his expectations and the consequences of failure.

    Read More

  • Fall of Man in John Milton’s Epic Poem, Paradise Lost

    930 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the reign of Charles I, the people of England were divided into two groups due to their opinions on how the country should be run: The Royalists, and the Parliamentarians. The Royalists were those people who supported Charles I and his successor, while the Parliamentarians were those who supported the idea that Parliament should have a larger role in government affairs. Milton was a Parliamentarian and was an outspoken enemy of Charles I, having written numerous essays and pamphlets regarding his ideas as to how the government should be run, and “In one very famous pamphlet, he actually defended Parliament's right to behead the king should the king be found inadequate.” Charles I was seen as a corrupt and incompetent ruler, and “the Parliamentarians were fed up with their king and wanted Parliament to play a more important role in English politics and government.” This belief was held because of the unethical and tyrannical behavior of ruler Charles I. During his reign, he violated the liberties of his people and acted with hypocrisy and a general disregard for his subjects. Examples of his abuse of power in...

    Read More

More about King Charles: the Martyr or the Traitor

Open Document