The Role Of King Charles I And His Hand In The Civil War

Kings Charles I and His Hand in The Civil War

James I of England, the Predecessor and father of Charles I, had his crown by negotiating with Elizabeths Secretary of state and the sitting government. James I arrived to cheering and hopeful crowds in London and made great contributions to Great Britain. His son Charles I however, was well hated to say the least and only saw crowds at his own execution. Though many are quick to say that Charles I is one of the worst Kings in the history of England, Mark Kishlansky has argued that historians have consistently misread his character and the role played by King Charles leading up to The Civil War in England. Kishlansky argues that the view of Charles and his reign over England, Scotland, and Ireland from 1625 to 1649 has been misinterpreted and spun to fit the historic narrative of a Tyrant King. Kishlansky argues that the narratives spun by the parliamentarian propaganda of the 1640’s have only grown stronger in the most recent centuries.

“What began as propaganda,” says Kishlansky, “has been transmuted into seeming fact.” Kishlansky’s argument pushes one to exceed the greatly studied Civil War as being chalked up to King Charles unfortunate behaviour. Although it is difficult to not fault Charles for his tyranny, it is important to look at Kishlansky’s argument as an invitation to study kings Charles from the perspective of a young king with poor education. Removing King Charles I character from the equation also sparks the question of whether or not the Civil War in England was Inevitable and to what extent was King Charles I