To create a social and legislative reform. The very reasons that had led to a decade of civil war and political dithering half-heartedness were still evident in the Rump however. As soon as the Rump came to power its most obvious threats came from problems abroad. The regime of the commonwealth -- created by the new constitution from an act created in May of 1649 -- became strongly contested in England's colonies, due to the disgust at the exec... ... middle of paper ... ...ember of 1650, which did not enforce attendance at the national church, but this did not go far enough to satisfy the army. The rump appeared to be more interested in issuing restrictive legislature - such as the aforementioned adultery and blasphemy acts -- rather than creating law and social reform.
From 1625 to 1629 his policies mainly consisted of trying to bring in money for the wars he was currently fighting. He tried to impose heavy taxes, but parliament refused to finance his wars until he dismissed the Duke of Buckingham. Charles also had married Henrietta Maria, a Catholic French Princess, and so had brought her Catholic friends and courtiers with her. Parliament were afraid of Charles bringing a Catholic influence into the country and also Charles was not as harsh on the Catholics as his predecessors had been. Charles finally dismissed Parliament in 1629 after long and bitter arguments and they were not allowed to meet ... ... middle of paper ... ...p as one of the charges against the King in his trial.
Indeed, crippling lack of money was a key problem for both the early Stuart monarchs. Charles was very religious. He he was of the Anglican branch, but many of his people, mostly in Scotland, wanted plainer forms. Charles promised Parliament in 1624 that there would be no advantages for people that did not go to te Church of England, but he married a Roman Catholic, French insisted to remove all laws against Roman Catholics. Charles's secretly added to the marriage treaty, despite his promise to Parliament.
In conclusion, from reading this essay it is not hard to assume John was a terrible King. His loss in 1204 because of diplomacy and not getting military aid and advice from Barons led to a chain reaction of events. He raised taxes enormously for no real reason other than targeting Barons who did not join his war cause and this was how Barons began to despise him. He soon after was the judge and had absolute authority over his subjects, fining and putting them away in jail because he did not like them. John was so rich from the taxes that half of England’s coins were in John’s possession (mrbuddhistory) but after the war in 1214, he had lost all of those taxes and they were all for no benefit.
What some find startling is that Charles I reign ended by being sentenced to death, and by being beheaded under the weight of an axe. Charles I was disliked by many of his people because he was trying to change the church to be more catholic, as opposed to being protestant before. Oliver Cromwell was a puritan and had very strong feelings about his religion. Cromwell & others took the view that Parliament had a say in government while Charles thought he had a divine right. In 1623 he took England to war with Spain and then parliament used this as one reason to bring a charge of treason against him.
Religious persecution was at its worst, which shows that the Tsar was very dependant on Orthodox Christians because they believed he was ordained by God. The situation was getting worse because the government's policy of increasing taxes had failed and now peasan... ... middle of paper ... ...hlighted the outdated form of government in Russia. However Kokovstov is not completely correct as it may have been that without war, Tsarism in Russia may have still collapsed. Tolstoy's idea appears to contribute more as it is clear that autocracy was out of date. The Tsar tried to handle too much responsibility all on his own.
Charles becoming king was obviously a cause because it was his decisions that influenced the war itself and him who raised the flag. Also in 1629 Charles decided to close down parliament because he felt they were exerting too much power than they should, also it almost seems as if Charles is afraid of parliament or jealous because he feels that he is entitled to the “divine right of kings” and seeing parliament using all this power made him feel as if he was less and not as important. This was then followed by the “eleven years of tyranny” which ended in 1640 when he recalled parliament due to shortage of money and mistakes he had made. An interesting decision Charles made was to marry Henrietta a foreign royal, some people would have said this was purely religiously influenced because she was a catholic and people feared he married her because his desire was to make England catholic. Others have said that it was a power driven choice because he wanted to unite the two countries and gain more power.
Along with the unjust charging of people who refused to follow the British laws many colonists op... ... middle of paper ... ...y any of the acts that Britain passes. The colonist’s lack of representation upset them very much. Without it the British were able to pass any tax act they wanted and unfairly load them up on the colonies. As this ensued the colonist became more and more enraged until they finally decided to take their rights into their own hands and pull away from Great Britain for good. The American Revolution has become an example for all revolutions to follow.
While the people living in Great Britain were subjects of the king, the colonists were not treated as such, and were given many unfair taxes, all without government representation in England. The Magna Carta wrote that this was not allowed, and the colonists demanded to be treated fairly. They were treated worse and worse, and at last, it was too much, so Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. John Locke’s ideas, which were that everyone had natural rights of life, liberty, and property, were put in the Declaration. Also, Charles Louis ... ... middle of paper ... ...mely violent before the radicals assumed the leadership positions, and afterwards, it got even more bloody.
The times leading up to the dissolving of Parliament were so fraught that it was understandable that people were concerned with whether the King would actually consider calling o... ... middle of paper ... ... trying to create Royal absolutism. However, this was probably not the case as Charles' aims were more about turning England into a powerful country by creating uniformity than creating absolutism. This is not to say that the Personal Rule would have not resulted in absolutism, but it was not Charles' original intention. His new initiatives were undermined by deep suspicion of him working without Parliament and also poor communication, particularly to rural areas. He may have been trying to change the Church of England into an Arminian High church but this was probably not directly linked to the creation of Royal absolutism.