Preview

Why Did Civil War Break Out in 1642

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1681 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Why Did Civil War Break Out in 1642
Lack of Money One of the reasons why the civil war broke out in England in 1642 was because of Charles ' lack of money. To discover the source of this, we have to go back to the beginning of James ' reign. James was the first King to reign over both England and Scotland, and when he came down from Scotland it is said that he was astonished at how rich England was, while James had needed to borrow money for his travelling expenses. When James died in 1625, Charles came to the throne, and he, like his father, had very little money. Once Charles became King, the County Faction1 wanted him to go to war with the Catholics in Spain, so Charles asked them for taxes to use on the war. They refused to pay enough, so the war was hopeless, and Parliament blamed the King for this. The reason Parliament granted so few taxes was that they wanted to make sure they were called again. Charles, a firm believer in the Divine Right of Kings, thought that he should not have to rule with Parliament, and the only thing that kept him calling it was money2. One good example of the way Parliament made sure they were called back in Charles ' reign was tonnage and poundage. These were duties imposed on certain imports and exports. It was normal for these duties to be decided in the first Parliament of a monarch 's reign, but in the case of Charles, they only decided on it for one year, so the King would be forced to call them again. Although Charles tried to ask for more money, Parliament refused, because they believed he spent it on his favourites. Because of this, Charles had to get himself more money. He began using the Church Courts, exploiting taxes such as 'ship money '3, and selling monopolies and titles. He also opened a Court of Star Chamber, which he used to fine people heavily to raise money. Since the judges in the Star Chamber were officials of the Crown, and there was no jury, Charles could be sure of getting a favourable result. Parliament was furious with this,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In terms of finance, it can be argued that the situation was not successful. The Government managing it could not provide a stable financial settlement. Largely the King did not have much in the way of money, and Charles' excessive spending on pleasurable activities, at the beginning of his reign only exacerbated the disastrous financial situation. Initially, although Charles agreed to give up feudal dues that were revived by his father, he was granted an annual income of £1.2 million by Parliament. However, this arrangement had two drawbacks. Firstly, the financial settlement that Charles was given, was simply not adequate to his needs. Secondly, the hearth tax that was imposed to raise the money was highly unpopular to the people. It is hard to say a reign is 'successful' if the Monarch is unpopular, especially as the country at that time, was still suffering from the financial situation left behind by the…

    • 1214 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    For the greater part of the 1630’s Englishmen paid their taxes, most likely grumbling whilst doing it, but they were paid. During his personal rule 1629-40, Charles I needed to raise revenue by using non-parliamentary means, i.e. in ways he would not need a parliament’s permission to collect. In order to do this, Charles changed certain policies to make them more financially gaining and brought back taxes that had not been used for numerous years, ranging from Ship Money to Credit to Monopolies.…

    • 2109 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    A substantial difficulty that Charles II faced was that of finance. Finance was a major issue between crown and parliament, especially in-between the years 1665 to 1667. The Crown’s income had dropped by £200,000, and MPs believed that the problems were down to crown management rather than structural problems with the finance system. This shows that Charles II faced difficulties more to financial concerns as he was gaining a low income, concluding in him unable to fund and solve matters needed. It also shows that finance provoked further issues, as it is shown here to drive crown and parliament away from one another. Parliament also used finance to restrict the greater religious freedom Charles wanted to allow, again showing finance splitting the crown and parliament. In 1669 the commons used their financial influence over Charles in response to their concerns about his decision to allow the conventicle act to expire in 1668. Therefore in 1670 Charles issued a much more rigid conventicle act as the commons refused a £300,000 grant. The issues with finance clearly show the divide between Charles and Parliament, and these difficulties only increased.…

    • 1433 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    James I was an absolutist ruler who emphasized the divine right of kings and sought to restrain Parliament under his will. Consequently, conflicts were inevitable as James I, and ensuing rulers, often found himself deficient of funds, and Parliament served as the gateway to the money. James I and his successor Charles I called Parliamentary meetings solely to ascertain the issue of funds. During this period, Parliament was rarely called upon and after these debates for money, Charles I and James I completely dissolved the Parliament. I did so because he agreed to admit the illegality of his taxes in turn for funding from Parliament. Afterwards, he abolished the Parliament to pursue his own endeavors. Furthermore, during Charles tenure, the English Civil War took place as a result from the lack of amity between Charles and Parliament. The Scottish invaded England, but Parliament refused to allow Charles to raise an army, because they feared he would abuse his powers and assail English citizens who opposed him. Charles I was eventually defeated and executed by Oliver Cromwell. Following the inadequacy of Cromwell, Charles II rose to power and was keyed the "merry monarch" for his easy-going nature. He imposed the Cabal system, a group of five individuals who handled the political issues of England; the term Cabal stems from the initials of each official member. This system acted as a type of Parliament in its methods of governing. During this period as a whole, it is evident that Parliament often conflicted with the ideals of the ruling monarch.…

    • 540 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ap American History Dbq

    • 289 Words
    • 2 Pages

    During the 1630 's, there was a religious civil war. This war was between the Puritans, also known as the Protestants, and the Cavaliers, also known as the Catholics. This relgious war lasted from the year 1642 until the year of 1651. During this time, King Charles I was the monarch of England. His father, James I was ruler prior. James did not change anything about England after Queen Elizabeth 's death. He did not change the government, nor the religion. Unlike his father, Charles believed that Catholicism must be enforced in England. Because of Charles and his changing of religion, the civil war in England took place.…

    • 289 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Charles’s led the country without calling parliament for 11 years from 1629 – 1640. He initiated personal rule for many reasons. Firstly his close relationship with Buckingham alienated Parliament and caused resentment by Parliament. Secondly Charles had very strong believed in divine right and therefore saw no need for Parliament. Furthermore Charles religious policy’s led many to believe of a Catholic Conspiracy, which further distanced the King from Parliament. Lastly the King wasn’t getting substantial financial help from Parliament and decided that he would try and raise the finance without him.…

    • 1197 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    His childhood left a mark on Charles's behaviour as king. Like James he was a believer in the divine right of kings. Unlike James, he was absolutist and tried to put it into practice. Given his belief in divine right, he saw all parliaments privileges as being subject to the approval of the monarch, not as liberties that had existed without the judgement of the monarch. Also unlike James He saw all criticism and anyone who questioned him as disloyal. An example of these in combination is when Charles I dissolved parliament because he was being criticized by Parliament as he felt he didn't need them as long as he could avoid war. This began the 11 year period known as the Personal Rule where he ran the country through royal prerogative instead of in cooperation with parliament.…

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In England, during the first half of the 17th century, two monarchs came to power that attempted to develop royal absolutism in that country. Both James I (James VI of Scotland) and Charles I tried to rule without consenting Parliament, but Parliament had so much control at the time that neither James nor Charles successfully decreased the role of Parliament in English government. The English had been under the combined rule of both the king and the assembly for so long that they weren't ready to give all the power of government to a single person. The merchants and land-owning nobles supported Parliament, where members could be elected and changed in necessary, rather than an absolute monarch with no restraints. In 1642, differences between…

    • 751 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    What actually caused the American Civil War? Some people simplistically answer that it was a fight against slavery. While slavery did have an important part to play in the lead up to the Civil War, there were other causes that fed the fight between North and South that finally erupted into secession and Civil War with the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1864.…

    • 339 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Causes of the Civil War

    • 661 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Civil War, which lasted from 1861 to 1877, was mainly caused by the diverging society between the North and the South. The North and the South had different goals. There were many factors that led to the war and the chief ones were political decisions, morality of slavery, and economic differences between the North and the South.…

    • 661 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Causes of the Civil War

    • 1136 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The causes of the Civil War are many, the obvious being slavery, however that is merely on the surface. The underlying causes were far more detrimental to the health of the union, the main cause being money. The economic disputes between the North and the South, which were partially over slavery, were the root to the South seceding. The resentment felt by the South towards the North, because of the growth of cities, ports, and the economy there in general, in addition to the idea of the abolishment of slavery, which would put a serious dent into the economy of the South which was already struggling led them to secede. It has been said that money is the root of all evil, and it certainly is in this case.…

    • 1136 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    What Caused the Civil War

    • 957 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In April 1861, the United States of America went to war. They did not go to war with a foreign power, because of a border dispute, and they did not go to war with the native people because of their hunger for more land. No, this would be a war among themselves, north against south, brother against brother, and in some instances even father against son. In the four long and bloody years that this war lasted more than 600,000 of these brothers, fathers, and sons would die in the many battles. Many people point to slavery as the reason the civil war was fought. Although slavery was one of the key issues, the causes for the war run much deeper. Besides slavery, other issues that were causes of the civil war included the differences in moral value, and the different ways the politicians interpret the constitution.…

    • 957 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Civil War Causes

    • 692 Words
    • 3 Pages

    More than likely, when someone thinks about causes of the American Civil War they automatically think slavery. Slavery in America began in the early 17th Century. The majority of slaves came from Africa against their will and were forced to work on plantations under horrible conditions. This went on for a very long time, and as the demand for cotton and tobacco grew slavery in the South became the foundation of…

    • 692 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Causes of the Civil War

    • 940 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In 1860, the world 's greatest nation was locked in Civil War. The war divided the country between the North and South. There were many factors that caused this war, but the main ones were the different interpretations of the Constitution by the North and South, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the arrival of…

    • 940 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Causes of the Civil War

    • 1489 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The Political War The North and South fought over politics, mainly the idea of slavery. Basically the South wanted and needed it and the North did not want it at all. The South was going to do anything they could to keep it. This was the issue that overshadowed all others. At this time the labor force in the South had about 4 million slaves. These slaves were very valuable to the slaveholding planter class. They were a huge investment to Southerners and if taken away, could mean massive losses to everyone. Slaves were used in the South as helpers in the fields in the cultivation of tobacco, rice, and indigo, as well as many other jobs. The South especially needed more slaves at this time because they were now growing more cotton then ever because of the invention of the cotton gin. Cotton production with slaves jumped from 178,000 bales in 1810 to over 3,841,000 bales in 1860. Within that time period of 50 years the number of slaves also rose from about 1,190,000 to over 4,000,000. The plantation owners in the South could not understand why the North wanted slavery abolished that bad. Southerners compared it with the wage-slave system of the North. They said that the slaves were better cared for then the free factory workers in the North. Southerners said that slave owners provided shelter, food, care, and regulation for a race unable to compete in the modern world without proper training. . But after the American Revolution slavery really died it the North, just as it was becoming more popular in the South. By the time of 1804 seven of the northern most states had abolished slavery. During this time a surge of democratic reform swept the North and West. There were demands for political equality. The South felt these views were not important. All of these views eventually led to an attack on the slavery system in the South, and showed opposition to its spread into whatever new territories that were acquired. Northerners said that…

    • 1489 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays