Why Was Charles I Given the Death penalty?

As an Anglican monarch, Charles I of the House of Stuart governed Scotland, England, and Ireland. He is the first British monarch ever to be deposed and executed.

Charles was born at a castle near Dunfermline, Scotland. His father was King of Scotland at the moment, but not of England.

His elder brother, Henry Frederick Stuart, Prince of Wales, was supposed to be the successor to the throne. He died of illness in 1612, leaving Charles as the heir to two thrones.

In 1616, he became Prince of Wales, or the anticipated successor to the English crown.

His father’s favorite, George Villiers, the first Earl of Buckingham, had a big effect on him. The latter took him to Spain in 1623 in search of a suitable bride. The Spanish insisted that Charles convert to Roman Catholicism, but this was futile.

His early life

James VI of Scotland and his wife Anna of Denmark had a son named Charles. In Dunfermline, Scotland, he was born in their palace. His father was not yet King of England at the moment, but he would become such later. At first, Charles was not James’s successor.

Following Henry’s death from fever in 1612, Charles was named successor to James’ reign and granted the title Prince of Wales. In 1616, he was given this title.

George Villiers, Earl of Buckingham, had a big effect on Charles when he was younger. Villiers was a close friend of Charles’ father’s and accompanied him to Spain in 1623. While Charles was reared as a Protestant, Spain is a Catholic nation. They looked for a good wife together.

The English parliament was enraged, and King James disbanded it. Because the Spaniards insisted that Charles become a Catholic, the search yielded no results. He afterward married a princess from France.

The Civil War of England

Europe was mainly controlled by kings who aspired to absolute authority during the time of Charles’ birth, such as the French king Louis XIII. Charles was aware of his father’s actions and wanted to emulate them. Parliament stymied him in this endeavor. Many of his ideas, such as utilizing the Star Chamber to take the wind out of dissidents’ sails, were met with considerable resistance.

He also pursued a theological strategy of moving the Anglican Church closer to the Roman Catholic Church without seeking legislative permission for controversial financial increases.

Following George Villiers’ death, two other figures in the administration gained prominence: Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, and William Laud, who became Archbishop of Canterbury and contributed to the state church’s supremacy.

He followed the Arminianism path in doing so, which led to clashes with the rising Puritan group.

All was peaceful, though, and England prospered until Charles I attempted to bring the Scots into line with the English in 1637. As a consequence, the National Covenant was revived, and the first of the Bishops’ Wars began, culminating in a humiliating ceasefire for Charles I on June 18, 1639.

In April 1640, he called a Parliament to raise money for his war against the Scots. This Short Parliament, however, refused to comply with his desires and was dissolved once again on May 5. After yet another loss, Charles I called a new session of parliament.

After the war, Charles was sent to Court

Charles I was brought before the courts of justice in Westminster Hall on January 20, 1649, just after the Civil War ended. On horseback, the Serjeant at Arms entered the Hall, wielding the mace and escorting six trumpeters. To the tune of trumpets and drums, the King’s trial was proclaimed at the south end of the Hall.

Despite the dangers of transporting the king through a large crowd in the north, the trial had to be open to the public.

A wood barrier stretched from wall to wall and was encircled by railings, with guards stationed on the leads, separating the courthouse from the general public.

The king was brought before his judges four times, each time being charged with tyranny and treason. The debates were always of the same kind, with the King contesting the court’s authority and legitimacy to bring him to trial.

The death of Charles I

The unusual nature of the trial reflects not only the fact that a king was on trial, but also the fact that both the king and his accusers stood firm on what are still important principles, the king on his right to a fair trial by a properly constituted court following established law, and his accusers on the need to hold a tyrant who had shed his people’s blood to account.

The judges were disturbed by the king’s insistence, but there was little question about the result, and the death sentence was announced on January 27.

Originally Published on Medium by me (Bryan Dijkhuizen)

Sources and References

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *