Due to his firm belief in the “divine right of kings,” Charles ordered to persecute them. As a result, the English were mainly angered by the persecution, not by the reform of the Church, and so the disputation of religion was out of this. Moreover, many were frustrated by the poor method of raising money. When the king asked rich men to buy the title, they refused. Consequently, they were fined the same sum of money it would have cost for the title anyway.
William was her husband” (Damerow). 2. (Elaborate and Analyze-connect to thesis): The members of Parliament invited William and Mary to overthrow James for the sake of Protestantism. So, William III and Mary II replaced King James on the throne. C. Research-answer second question: Because King James II was disliked by so many people, the fearful members of Parliament forced him to hand over his title of being king to allow a different person to take the throne.
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.
In the eyes of many people Strafford was seen to be a tyrant and he was also accused of cheating and squeezing taxes. People thought that the King would have ruled better without him. Another choice that the King made was appointing Laud to be the new Archbishop of Canterbury. Laud was a Catholic while most MPs and the King were either Protestants or Puritans. According to some historians the stages that led to a civil war commenced in 1625 when king Charles I married an unpopular queen, Henrietta Maria, who was a Catholic.
Charles married Henrietta Maria, a French Catholic, in 1625. This was bad because the Protestants started to think that Charles was a Catholic and that his wife would influence him on to making the country Catholic. Another problem was Charles' main adviser Buckingham. The parliament didn't trust him and thought of him as the devil in disguise. Parliament tried to punish him in 1626 for bungling a naval expedition against Spain but instead of punishing him, they got punished and two MP's were sent to prison by Charles because of this!
When they were killed, they were both king, and therefore the right-hand man of God, the creator, who controls the entire world and who could have stopped them from being killed. In Richard II, Richard bankrupts the country with his blatant mismanagement and his excessive spending on his 'favourites', who are already rich aristocrats, while ignoring the common people who are living in poverty. Richard's behaviour leads to both the aristocracy and the common people disliking him. The aristocrats disliked him because he was bankrupting the country, which they did not like because they were proud to be English and wanted their country to dominate for many more years. The common people disliked Richard because they were living in poverty while Richard was spending huge amounts of money on people who were already wealthy.
This event shows how corrupt and money hungry the government had become, by letting anyone get high up in the political chain just by feeding the gluttonous king. The next king, Louis XVI saw that the majority of France (75%) was peasants and serfs. Consequently, to try to ensure their happiness (and prevent the Revolution), he had the Estates-General abolish the feudal system, in which they held no ranking.4 This made the nobility extremely unhappy. With no feudal system, they no longer were much higher up politicly than the commoners. The next noble atrocity came with Louis XVI making the nobles pay taxes.
Among Parliament’s support... ... middle of paper ... .... Furthermore, Charles I had attempted to make himself the first despot by reducing Parliament to a nullity (Macaulay 64). It should be noted that during the time of Charles I, the king had no standing army, and that the king could not legally raise money without the consent of Parliament (Taylor 3, 4). However, because Charles had always been in favor of the notion of absolute monarchy (Taylor viii), he had dared to make extraparliamentary actions without the consent of Parliament. These included the trespass onto the constitutional rights of the English people, levying taxes without the consent of Parliament, imprisoning civilians and court nobles alike without due cause, and quartering troops in private homes during times of war (Macaulay 63-64).
Both monarchs ruled under the idea of Divine Right. Divine Right is the belief that God has chosen the king and as a result anything he does is ordained by God. Yet the people lost faith in their leaders as these two countries were not the once great kingdoms they were. Laurence Stone writes: The most important cause, and symptom, of the decay of any government or institution is the loss of prestige and respect among the public at large, and the loss of self-confidence among the leaders themselves in their capacity to rule” (p. 79). Louis XVI and Charles I did a poor job ruling their country by starting wars and overspending to live extravagant lifestyles.
This caused a power struggle because it was the king's right to choose his ministers, but Parliament has to approve of them. Sir John Eliot was Charles biggest opponent until 1629. He was imprisoned in the Tower of London he died in 1632. Fights between the King and Parliament were manly about money. Which were very low because of the many wars.