Part Three: Personal Rule and build up to Civil War - "Eleven Years of Tyranny” - 1629 - 1640 Flashcards
What is the Star Chamber?
A repressive vehicle that maintained royal authority and controlled political dissent during Charles personal rule.
What is the Court of High Commision
The chief court of the church used by Laud to enforce conformity.
What was Charles’ debt by 1629?
£2,000,000
What were the two things that happened at the start of the Personal Rule to try and fix the 2 million debt?
- Treaty of Susa - 1629
- Treaty of Madrid - 1630
These wars were bleeding the treasuries so there ending was significant.
What was the Treaty of Susa?
Treaty of Susa - 1629
It ended hostilities between King Charles I of England and King Louis XIII of France.
England agreed to withdraw support for the Huguenots (French Protestants), particularly in La Rochelle, where they had been fighting against the Catholic French monarchy.
What was the Treaty of Madrid?
Treaty of Madrid - 1630
Helped settle peace between England and Spain after the failed Cadiz Expedition (1625) and the broader Anglo-Spanish War (1625–1630).
How did Charles use Customs Duties through his PR?
Tonnage and Poundage was granted to Charles for only one year in 1625, but he continued to collect it. During his PR, it brough in about £270,000 a year.
In 1635, a new book of rates updated the amount paid on goods in line with inflation rising this yearly income by almost 2x.
How did Charles use Fedual Dues in his PR?
The Crown had the right to run any estate inherited by an heir under 21.
During the PR this increased to about £75,000 a year.
How did Charles use monopolies in his PR?
A loophole in the monopoly act - 1624 (which limited the crown’s use of monopolies) allowed grants to corporations, the most notorious of which was the granting of the monopoly for soap to a group of Catholics, which earned Charles £33,000 - AKA popish soap.
How did Charles use Recusancy Fines during his PR?
These were from people not attending church originally aimed at Catholics - the income increased from these as more people opposed the Laudism practices.
What was Distraint of Knighthood?
Charles resurrected an all-but-forgotten law called the “Distraint of Knighthood”, which required any man who earned £40 or more from land each year to present himself at the king’s coronation to be knighted.
Relying on this old statute, Charles fined individuals who had failed to attend his coronation in 1626.
By 1635, Charles had raised nearly £175,000 this way.
Summarise Fiscal Feudalism
The methods used by Charles to increase income through royal prerogative have been labelled fiscal feudalism.
By exploiting his royal prerogative, Charles raised his annual income from £600,000 to £900,000 yet he was still in serious financial trouble and alienated landowners through his methods.
What was Ship Money?
Ship money was a prerogative form of income levied in times of emergency to fund the navy.
In 1635, Charles extended it to inland counties and levied it annually until 1639. Ship money raised an average of nearly £200,000 a year.
What was the outcome of the Hampden Case?
The Hampden Case, 1638
The crown won through a narrow majority of 7 judges to 5. This close result created a public perception that Charles’ authority was weak and the fact that the case gained so much attention meant that it wasn’t just about Ship Money—it became a matter of constitutional conflict, with questions raised about royal prerogative versus Parliamentary authority
It was a political loss for Charles. Alongside the Scottish rebellion and growing examples of religious opposition, this slim victory shows that Charles’ personal rule was under serious strain.
Who was John Hampden?
John Hampden, a significant member of the gentry, was closely connected to those who opposed Charles - including William Fiennes and John Pym.
Why did Charles take Hampden to court?
In 1637, Charles took Hampden to court for his refusal to pay ship money, hoping Hampden’s case would make the point to all that Charles’ authority should be obeyed.
What was the Book Of Orders
Book of orders, 1631
A set of administrative guidelines designed to improve the efficiency of local government in England. The Book of Orders also sought to increase the Crown’s ability to monitor local economic and social conditions.
It was resented by many local authorities for infringing on their traditional autonomy,
How did Charles revive forest laws?
Charles reasserted ancient royal rights over forests that were owned by the Crown. This fined people accessing the forests.
Saw lots of opposition as people relied on its timber, grazing lands etc. This opposition took the form of riots in Lecister and Wiltshire.
How successful was Charles I in financing his Personal Rule?
Successes:
✔ Ship Money (1634–1639) – A lucrative tax extended inland, raising revenue without Parliament.
✔ Monopolies & Fiscal Feudalism – Revived old fines (e.g., Distraint of Knighthood) to generate funds.
✔ Cost-cutting – Avoided expensive wars, reducing financial pressure.
Failures:
❌ Widespread Opposition – Ship Money led to legal challenges (Hampden Case, 1637) and resistance.
❌ Lack of Long-Term Sustainability – Revenue methods were controversial and alienated political elites.
❌ Scottish Rebellion (1639–1640) – Forced Charles to recall Parliament for funds, showing the failure in sustaining finance through the act of ending his Personal Rule.
Verdict: Short-term success but long-term failure, as financial policies fueled resentment, contributing to the collapse of his rule and the outbreak of the English Civil War.
Who was Laud before the PR?
His rise was the most visible sign of Charles’ favour to Arminianism. He was fiercely Arminian and was hated by James.
He played a key role in the forced loan in 1627 by stressing Charles DROK.
Was present at the York House conference (1626) alongside Montagu.
1628: Laud was appointed Bishop of London
Laud became known for his anti-Puritan stance, resisting attempts to reform the Church to be more Calvinistic.
He was ruthless, trampelled on anyone who got in his way.
What was Lauds’ prominence at the start of the PR
Began supressing Puritans in the star chamber
Became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633 - he became a royally backed religious dictator with complete control over the Church.
Laudinianism - “The Beauty of Holiness”
He replaced Buckingham, not in the King’s affections, but in power.
What was the religious landscape coming into the PR?
Before Charles, the Political Nation was majoraly Conservative Anglican Calvinist - the centre of the Jacobean balance. This meant they were able to tolerate Puritanism and Arminianism to an extent.
Charles detatached the religious power the political nation had through his Personal Rule.
What was Laudianism?
Properly emerged in 1633
Rejected pre - destination.
Less emphasis on the bible - increased ritual and ceremony.
Aimed to protect the kingdom from the “polluting tide of Purtianism”
What were the aims of Charles religious policy in his PR?
Promote uniformity of arminianism, ideas that consolidated his power through the Divine Right and Hierachy.
What was the reality of Charles religious policy in his PR?
Created division instead of uniformity.
Threatened complete disruption of the Jacobean balance. This meant non conformists were united against Laud.
What was the Book Of Sports in the PR?
Book Of Sports - 1633
- Reissued by Laud and Charles
It reflected the growing cultural and religious divide in England, and its issuance sparked widespread resistance that would contribute to the deepening political crisis that led to the English Civil War.
It was more impactful than the James I’ book because it was more intense and aggressive as well as confirming the royal overreach Charles was enjoying in his PR.
Why were Lauds positions across Charles’ PN causing unease?
Not only was he Archbishop, but his position on the star chamber, the Privy Council and the Court of High Commision mirrored those situations of Spain and France where secular (not connected with religious matters) roles were often taken by bishops.
Therefore, it looked Catholic.
Who did the Book Of Sports attack in 1633?
It directly attacked the Puritans - in their eyes, Sunday was for prayer and worship, not entertainment.
They (rightly) saw it as a direct attack on the Puritans control of local areas. It was more than sport - it was about religious conformity and an intensely political act!
Who were the Feoffees for Impropriations?
Feoffees for Impropriations
The Feoffees for impropriations was an unincorporated organization dedicated to advancing the cause of Puritanism in England. It was formally in existence from 1625 to 1633.
They were buying secular owned land and returning it to Puritan Clergymen, strengthening Puritan power.
What did Laud do to the Feoffees for Improprations?
He abolished them using the Star Court in 1632
He dissolved the group, imprisoned its members, and stopped their reform efforts. This action was part of his broader strategy to consolidate power within the Church of England and eliminate Puritan influence.
What was the St Gregory’s case?
St Gregory’s Case, 1633
Laud ordered for the removal of the Communion table in St Gregorys church, London and had it placed at the east end with richly, catholic style cloths.
This sparked resistance from the Puritans, who opposed the alteration, seeing it as a return to Catholic practices and so they moved the table back to its original position with a more simple decorative style
Who was Bishop John Williams?
Bishop John Williams was imprisoned in 1637 as a result of his published criticism of the altar policy.
He argued even the terminology was a source of contention because the word “altar” was regarded as Catholic.
Who were Prynne, Burton and Bastwick?
In 1637, 3 well respected Puritans were brought before the court of the Star Chamber for their criticisms of Church Policy. The three men were found guilty of criticising Laud’s measures.
They were each fined £5000 and imprisoned for life.
But it was the public cropping of their ears that earned the three men sympathy and made their names more household - growing opposition towards Laudism.
This was the final nail in the coffin for Puritan Gentry completley turning on the king.
Who was John Lilburne
Lilburne helped spread anti - laudism literature like John Bastwicks work. He was found guilty by the Star Court Chamber of printing unlicensed literature.
He was whipped and pilloried in public. The brutality of the punishment also built opposition towards Laudism and Charles and shifted more Protestants towards Puritanism.
What was another sign of Puritan opposition to Laud?
The high level of emigration to NA from 1629 to 1640. – about 20,000 people.
What was Charles aim of religion regarding the kingdom as a whole?
Charles I’s aim was conformity across all of his kingdoms.
What was the impact of the Personal Rule and Laudianism on Scotland before the Prayer books?
Charles was an absentee King of Scotland, and his policies and style of rule alienated the Scottish elite. The Scottish population were mostly Presbyterian in faith and their form of Puritanism meant that Charles’ imposition of Laudianism was even more infuriating.
Charles and Laud had long resented the independence and beliefs of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland and they wanted to align it with the Laudian Church of England and reform its practices and prayer book.
What was the Act of Revocation?
Act of Revocation, 1625
Charles I sought to reassert royal control over lands and resources that had been alienated from the Crown, especially during James I’s time, when many land grants were made to nobles and church leaders.
This foreshadowed the impositions Charles would have on Scotland in the personal rule.
It did well to unify the Scottish nobility against Charles and set a precedent for his Personal Rule.
When did Charles first visit Scotland and what was the significance?
1633 - It took Charles eight years to visit Scotland for the first time to be crowned, showing his care for the country was little.
Indeed, this very fact that it took him so long sent a very clear sign to Scots of his priorities.
His crowning in Scotland went against tradition and looked more Catholic than even Anglican let alone Presbyterian! In addition, in 1633, he announced his intention to introduce a new prayer book…
What else did Charles do to Scotland before the Prayer Book?
In 1636, Charles imposed new church laws on Scotland - basically a further escalation of the Laud 1625, 5 articles of Perth. It demanded the altar had to be placed against the east wall of churches, more focus on ceremony and improvised prayer was banned.
All of these canons were interpreted as an attempt to return to Catholicism. What made these reforms worse for the Scots was the fact they were imposed by the royal prerogative. The Scottish Parliament or the General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland (Scottish high court for the Church) had 0 say in any of the new laws.
What did Charles do about the 5 articles of Perth?
Charles also issued a re-proclamation in 1625 commanding observation of the Five Articles of Perth in a stricter more intense manner than the 1618 version.
(might not be true!?!?!?!)
What was the Laudian Prayer Book?
The Laudian Prayer book, 1637
In 1637, the new Laudian prayer book was introduced into Scotland. Again, Charles imposed this without any consultation with the Scottish Kirk or Parliament.
This was not the introduction of the English prayer book into Scotland but rather a book made specifically for them. What was so antagonising to the Scots about this prayer book was that for them it leaned clearly towards Catholicism and threatened their religious independence.
The new prayer book ultimately triggered conflicts and led to the Scottish Rebellion.
Aka, the Scottish or Common Prayer Book!!!
What is a strong argument regarding opposition and Laud?
What perhaps was most significant about the reaction to Laudianism was not so much the open opposition of committed individuals such as Puritans, but the perception of Laudianism as part of Charles’ Personal Rule.
It was not only what Charles did but also the way he did things that created the impression for many that he was undermining the church and state, and at worst striving for Catholicims and Absolutism
What was the significance of Laudianism towards the Puritan uprising?
Puritanism was the fuel needed for revolution, and bolstered by their faith, it was predominantly Puritans who were willing to take an open stand against the enforcement of Laudianism.
By breaking the Jacobean balance, Charles I had forced the religious divisions of the period into direct conflict. Puritans were the starting point of the rebellions.
What is the overall statement to use regarding the opposition in Scotland caused by Charles?
Charles was the cause of the Scottish Revolution. He cut himself off from influential Scottish opinion and was thus less aware of, or ignored the growing discontent in the nation.
His impositions of religious uniformity, especially with the role of bishops, alienated the Scots. As a predominantly Presbyterian population, the Scots had always regarded bishops with suspicion.
What was the reaction to the Laudian Prayer Book?
Bishops in Scotland armed themselves as they read for first time.
First read in Edinburgh in 1637, Bishop of E was stoned and mass riots started that spread across the country over the following months.
How did the Scots solidify their position after the Laudian Prayer Book?
In 1638, they created the Scottish National Covanent, a document that aimed to preserve Presbyterianism and oppose Charles’ religious policies.
How did Charles respond to the 1638 Document in Scotland?
Tried to legalise Ship money to impose on more nobles - this backfired as it only strenghthened opposition in England.
He settled for a poorly trained army of 20,000.
Summarise the 1st Bishops War
First Bishops War, 1639
Despite struggling to raise funds Charles marched up to Scotland with 20,000 men. There was a small skirmish but Charles underestimated the depth of resentment towards him. He had little support and no money so signed the treaty of Berwick.
What was the Treaty Of Berwick?
Treaty Of Berwick, 1639
The Covanters had the upperhand as Charles had 0 funds and did NOT want to recall parliament and so they forced their terms upon Charles, they both disbanded but this only delayed the inevitable.
Explain the buildup to the Second Bishops War
Wentworth was recalled from Ireland in late 1639. He advised Charles to recall parliament.
Wentworth believed they could manipulate and bribe MPs as well as use the anti - Scottish patriotism to fund a proper army. However, Charles had somehow made the Political Nation side with the Scots…
Explain the Short Parliament
Short Parliament, Early 1640
Charles was forced to recall and maintain parliament, however it only lasted one month.
Charles asked for funds, but it was clear this would not be granted without royal concessions.
The parliament showed how far Charles had alienated the political elite that many MPs were less concerned with their traditional Scottish enemy having an army on their border, than with their own king.
Charles recognising that only significant concessions would gain him the subsidies needed, dissolved parliament, Charles arrested three members of the house of lords whom he regarded as his leading critics (i.e Fiennes and Pym and Hampden) from the commons.
Charles’ decided to face the Scots without parliamentary backing in 1640
Explain the Second Bishops War
Second Bishops War, 1640
The Scots Covanters crossed the border and occupied Newcastle, Londons source of coal.
Following the failure of the Short Parliament, Charles had to face them alone - this was a grave blunder.
Again, the Scots had a massive upper hand and were able to force their terms onto Charles with the Treaty Of Ripon in 1640.
Explain the Treaty Of Ripon?
Treaty Of Ripon, 1640
Was a political embarrasment for Charles who was already financially weak.
It stated that the Covanters would occupy Newcastle until the settlement was fully agreed and that Charles had to pay £850 a day to the army.
This made Charles financial and political position even worse, forcing him to recall parliament.
Who was Thomas Wentworth
Black Tyrant Tom was known for his authoritarian style, he strengthened royal power in both England and Ireland. He imposed harsh policies, including raising taxes without Parliament’s approval, and was instrumental in suppressing political opposition.
What were Wentworth / Laud known as?
“The Evil Ministers”
What was “Thorough”
Wentworths policy in Ireland that centeralised power, imposed uniformity and supressed radicals in Ireland. He imposed Laudianism and taxed highly without any consent. He also reduced catholic power and was very repressive.
Wentworth also raised a Catholic army in Ireland that could be mobilised in England.
WW and Thorough succeeded in alienating pretty much every group in Ireland leading to the rebellion in 1641.
What was the Irish Rebellion?
Irish Rebellion, 1641
After WW was recalled to England to help Charles against the Scots, the repressed Catholics used the absence of crown presence to kill thousands of Protestants.
For instance, the Ulster massacre - 3000 Protestants died.
Why did the Irish Catholics uprise?
They wanted to protect themselves from the growing Protestant Radicalism forming in England in opposition to Charles and strengthen their power.
What did the Catholic Uprising do in England?
Fuelled anti catholic resentment and further upset radicals in England.
Overall argument for the opposition from 1637 - 1640?
So while there were cases of individual opposition in Ireland and England to Charles’ personal rule, it was only with the continued rebellion of the Covenanters in Scotland in 1637 to 1640 that Charles’ personal rule collapsed.
In addition, the removal of Wentworth from Ireland to deal with the Scottish crisis and obvious pressure Charles came under in the long parliament acted as a trigger for Irish Catholics to rebel in 1641.
Opposition to Charles’ policies was thus an interrelated multiple kingdom event across the years 1637 - 1642.
Essentially, his alienation of the Scots was a massive catalyst for wider rebellion
What was the Root and Branch petition?
Signed by 15,000 Londerners in 1640.
It was driven by Puritanism and demanded the end to episcopacy (bishops).
What were the majority of Long Parliaments inital views on religion?
The Long Parliament initially opposed Charles I’s religious influence, seeking to reverse minority Laudian/Arminian reforms and allow local control, favoring a more Calvinist system.
Pym and Puritans pushed for a Puritan-style church, while moderates accepted some reforms but wanted Charles to remain its political head. A small Royalist faction defended his authority.
Who was Pym?
Pym emerged as the leading figure in the Commons in 1640, and was regarded as a chief opponent of Charles I.
A fierce critic of King Charles I’s policies, Pym played a crucial role in opposing royal absolutism and securing greater parliamentary control over government.
He died in December 1643.
What were Pyms 3 aims?
- The removal and punishment of Charles I evil councillors
- A political settlement without the threat of being overturned by Charles I
- Removal of the threat of Catholic popery and the establishment of a strong protestantism.
What was one of the first acts from the Long Parliamen regarding WW?
Wentworth controlled a relatively strong Catholic army in Ireland.
In November 1640 they tried to impeach Wentworth.
The impeachment was proposed because parliament hoped without his evil councillors - Charles would see the need to accept reform and reason with parliament.
Pym, as one of the leading figures in prosecuting impeachment charges against Wentworth, but Wentworth very skillfully defended himself.
Because WW defended himself, how did parliament prosecute him?
Bill of Attainder
It was the addition of Charles’ supposed threats that convinced many commons to pass the Bill of Attainder against Wentworth.
Charles, fearing for his family and scared of the increasing backlash, gave his royal assent leading to Wentworth’s execution.
The execution of Wentworth and death of Bedford meant that any “ultra” peaceful attempt at co existence became impossible as Charles became less inclined to negotiate.
Essentially the point of no return beacuse now blood had been split.
How did Charles make the tensions in Wentworth’s trial worse?
During the trial, Charles worsened tensions by making it appear he was raising his army against parliament and preparing to dissolve it.
What was the Triennial Act?
Triennial Act, 1641
This abolished ship money without parliamentary consent. It also stated that Charles had to call a parliament every three years. This prevented another period of Personal Rule.
What were the Ten Propositions?
Ten Propositions, 1641
A set of demands from Parliament to King Charles I, aiming to limit his power.
Parliament sought to remove the king’s unpopular advisers, restrict the influence of Queen Henrietta Maria, enforce stronger anti-Catholic policies, and have a say in foreign affairs.
These demands reflected growing distrust of the king, especially after the Irish Rebellion (1641). Charles rejected the propositions, seeing them as an attack on his authority, further escalating the conflict and making war increasingly likely.
What was Bedfords settlement?
Bedford proposed a compromise without any fundamental change to the political system.
This involved the abolition of the most confrontational financial and political aspects of the Personal Rule. A return to an Elizabethean based protestant church and a separate financial settlement for Charles I agreed upon by parliament.
To carry this out Bedford proposed taking the position of Lord Treasurer with Pym as chancellor of the Exchequer.
Charles was reluctant to settle with Bedford - Bedford died the summer of 1641 halting any progress.
What was the significance of Bedfords death?
After Bedfords death, moderate MPs lacked real leadership and his settlement disappeared. His death made radicals more powerful which meant that Parliament became more aggressive in its demands, making settlement less likely.
Why was Wentworth such a big threat to Parliament?
He wanted to renew the war against the Scots, whereas parliament wanted to make peace.
Was regarded by many as the man with the potential to make Charles absolutist. MPs focused on him because of the danger he presented and used him as a scapegoat
What did the new “Royalist party” believe?
The Royalist party formed in fear that the actions and beliefs of radicals like Pym posed more of a threat to political order than Charles did.
In face of radical puritanism, in which parliament would take over royal prerogative and the mob hold power, many nobles and gentry panicked and looked to the concept of monarchy rather than Charles himself.
Why was there growth of opposition in parliament?
MPs could generally agree they did not want PR to happen again - but the way of going about this was contested.
After the grand remonstrance and ten propositions, some MPs saw Pyms actions as going too far. This lead to the emergence of royalist factions.
Without the divisions in parliament, the war would never of happened.
What was the grand remonstrance?
Grand remonstrance, 1641
- Listed over 200 criticisms of Charles’ government since 1625, arguing why the control of the army that was needed to crush the Irish rebellion should not be in his control.
This was key in dividing parliament because Although the document was careful not to accuse the King Directly, it was nevertheless seen as a direct attack on Charles.
The vote passing it was narrowly passed (159 to 148) showing how divided the opposition was.
What was the reaction in Scotland to the post PR long parliament events?
Many in Scotland also felt the radicals in the Covenant alliance had gone too far too fast. A group signed an agreement in 1640 to defend the king, Charles appreciated the agreement and chose to accept the abolition of bishops in Scotland
However this was to play on the division as the Scots were the main prop for Long Parliament to use against Charles.
Charles visited Scotland to try and make peace to build back support from them.
What happened while Charles was in Scotland while he was trying to build back support?
The incident, 1641
While Charles was in Scotland, there was a royalist plot to kidnap radical Scottish Covenanters. This was known as the incident because it destroyed Charles’ hopes of gaining further support in Scotland as he was linked to the plot. Charles left Scotland in 1641 with no support from the Scots.
What was the Militia Bill?
The militia bill, 1641
The militia bill forced MPs to take sides on who should command the army. It essentially proposed that Parliament would be in control of the army raised to crush the Irish rebels.
This was revolutionary as it directly questioned Charles’ prerogative and attempted to transfer prerogative powers to parliament. Pym hoped to use the anger of the London crowds to put pressure on MPs to pass the militia bill.
What was the 5 members coup?
5 members coup, 1642
The Five Members Coup of 1642 was King Charles I’s failed attempt to arrest five leading MPs including John Pym and John Hampden. Charles viewed them as key opponents who had pushed the Grand Remonstrance and threatened his authority. However, they had been warned and fled.
What was the impact of the 5 members coup?
The coup backfired badly—it outraged Parliament and the London public, who saw it as proof of Charles’s tyranny. Mass protests forced Charles to flee London soon after. This event destroyed any hope of reconciliation, polarized the country, and was a key step toward the outbreak of the English Civil War in August 1642.
Pym could easily use the coup as further proof of the danger Charles posed and that the king could not be negotiated with. This also fuelled the London crowd leading to Charles fleeing London - the next time he was in London was 7 years later at his execution.
What was the exclusion bill?
Exclusion Bill, 1642
This was a removal of all bishops from parliament due to the pressure from the London crowd.
This lessened the influence the king had on parliament.
Explain how a parliamentary army emerged?
After the militia bill was passed, parliament raised an army using ship money. Charles attempted to seize military supplies but failed.
Despite this, the majority on both sides still wanted to avoid war.
What were the 19 propositions?
The nineteen propositions, 1642
A final attempt by the English Parliament to limit King Charles I’s power and prevent civil war.
They demanded parliamentary control over the military, ministers, and royal children’s marriages, as well as sweeping religious reforms and the appointment of royal advisers approved by Parliament.
The propositions effectively sought to shift England toward a constitutional monarchy, severely restricting the King’s authority.
Charles rejected them outright, viewing them as an attack on his divine right to rule.
What was Iconoclasm?
To moderates, the riots and iconoclasm (destruction of icons in churches) confirmed that both the monarchy and church should be maintained to prevent anarchy.
This was essentially radicals against Laudian Churches.
Good stat for showing the growing royalist party?
In May 1641, only 59 MPs voted against the Bill of Attainder
In November 1641, 148 MPs voted against the Grand remonstrance
