Origins of the English Civil War

Pym stated that the parties at fault should be dismissed and replaced with people approved by Parliament. Charles attempted to impeach Pym and others, but word of his plans leaked out and the individuals got away. This was the beginning of conflicts between Parliament and the King and although discussions between the two groups went on until March of 1641, war was inevitable. When the war began, it was clear that the King held the upper hand. However, after four years of fighting (1642 - 1646), Parliament em... ... middle of paper ... ...igions emerged and formed and the Monarchy was completely dissolved only to be revived again by the winners of the war- Parliament.

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.

Pride's purge in December 1648 had done far from guarantee the loyalties of Parliament, but instead served only to raise suspicion against the army, through its use of force against them. In spite of this fear of the army, the rump was very dependent upon them for protection both internal and external. Army mutineers led by Levellers uprisings were soon put down by Cromwell, reducing the political threats towards the Parliament. The rump had been left there to make a change. To create a social and legislative reform.

The passing of this tax was Britain’s way of reinforcing their authority in the colonies and lessening their financial burden. However, from British standpoint that was not the sole purpose for the acts as they also wanted to build a defense against foreign nations and insure Britain benefited from her Acts of Trade (Alden 4). This ideology of lessening their burden through taxing the colonies failed instantly, because the colonist refused to pay the taxes at all cost. It became impossible to sell the stamps and anybody who dared try was threatened with violence. American’s rebellious nature against the new taxations methods lead to the creation of The Stamp Act Congress.

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.

This eventually led to the conclusion that King Charles I was the type of man who could not be trusted with the legal promises he made to his people. The worries of Parliament were not seen as a major concern of his and he repudiated to consider any negotiations with whatever Parliament had to say. The king’s intractable ways caused Parliament to break away from his power before England became a place of political disaster. Although the obstinate king refused to recognize Parliament’s authorized power and influence, he turned his back on his Protestant country to form foreign alliances against his own people. If that wasn’t ghastly enough, the king acted in an outrageous and appalling way when he put religion into the conflict and made it worse.

While the governments tried to come together to an agreement with Great Britain, King George continued to ignore them. Nobody was protected of wars because the war was heading toward the colonists, this King George stated in the Declaration of Independence. The town... ... middle of paper ... ... In his pamphlet, Paine said the government did not want to come to a compromise and continuously lied to them. Jefferson and Paine both had strong documents.

King James, however, would have none of the Puritan argument and declared, in 1604, that he was fully in the camp of the religious conservatives. This division between the monarch and the Puritans, which would be continued by his son, Charles I, lit the fire that ignited the English Civil War. Charles sided with the religious conservatives against the more radical Puritans. The archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, was particularly hostile to the Puritans' complaints and Charles allowed him to freely take any measures to stifle their dissent. In 1633, Charles forbade Puritans from publishing or preaching, and in 1637, they tried to bring Scotland under the fold of the English church.

The Magna Carta is a document of King John, signed on June 10th of 1215 that limited the power of the king. Despite his greed, King Henry was pressured into signing this document by the church and by his Barons. This was the first document in history that ever challenged the Divine Right Theory. This initially was the beginning of constitutional government in England. It ultimately proved that the king’s power can be limited through ... ... middle of paper ... ...ocial Contract by only allowing powers from the consent of the governed, giving the people the right to abolish a government that didn’t suit their interests, and allowing them to institute a new one.

With both parties refusing to yield, civil war was imminent. Rather than one main reason for the outbreak of English civil war in 1642, it was several key problems and disagreements between the parliament and King Charles that amounted together and evolved into a long running rivalry. Slowly but gradually, the rivalry grew, with both sides guilty of provoking the other. Ultimately, their differences could not be solved, and the rash actions of King Charles sparked of the civil war. Works Cited Cust, Richard (2005), Charles I: A Political Life, Harlow: Pearson Education Fisher, David A.