Editing English Civil War (section)

==Background==

The English Civil War broke out in 1642, less than 40 years after the death of Queen [[Elizabeth I of England|Elizabeth I]]. Elizabeth had been succeeded by her [[Cousin chart|first cousin twice-removed]], [[James VI and I|King James VI of Scotland]], as James I of England, creating the first [[Union of the Crowns|personal union of the Scottish and English kingdoms]].{{Efn|Although the early 17th-century Stuart monarchs styled themselves ''King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland'', with the exception of the constitutional arrangements during the [[Interregnum (England)|Interregnum]] (see the [[Tender of Union]]), full union of the Scottish and English realms into a new realm of Great Britain did not occur until the passing of the [[Act of Union 1707]].}} As King of Scots, James had become accustomed to Scotland's weak parliamentary tradition since assuming control of the Scottish government in 1583, so that upon assuming power south of the border, the new King of England was affronted by the constraints the [[Parliament of England|English Parliament]] attempted to place on him in exchange for money. Consequently, James's personal extravagance, which resulted in him being perennially short of money, meant that he had to resort to extra-parliamentary sources of income. Moreover, increasing inflation during this period meant that even though Parliament was granting the King the same nominal value of subsidy, the income was actually worth less.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Durston |first=Christopher |title=James I |date=1993 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=9780415077798 |page=26}}</ref>

This extravagance was tempered by James's peaceful disposition, so that by the succession of his son Charles I in 1625 the two kingdoms had both experienced relative peace, internally and in their relations with each other. Charles followed his father's dream in hoping to unite the kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland into a single kingdom.<ref>{{Harvnb|Croft|2003|p=63}}.</ref> Many English Parliamentarians were suspicious of such a move, fearing that such a new kingdom might destroy old English traditions that had bound the English monarchy.{{Clarify|reason=What traditions, and in what sense did they bind the monarchy?|date=January 2024}} Because James had described kings as "little gods on Earth", chosen by God to rule in accordance with the doctrine of the [[Divine Right of Kings]], and Charles shared his father's position, the suspicions of the Parliamentarians had some justification.<ref>{{Harvnb|McClelland|1996|p=224}}.</ref>

[[File:King Charles I after original by van Dyck.jpg|thumb|upright=1.1|[[Charles I of England|Charles I]] believed in the [[divine right of kings]]; painting by [[Anthony van Dyck|Van Dyck]]]]

===Parliament in an English constitutional framework===
At the time, the Parliament of England did not have a large permanent role in the English system of government. Instead, it functioned as a temporary advisory committee and was summoned only if and when the monarch saw fit. Once summoned, a Parliament's continued existence was at the King's pleasure since it was subject to dissolution by him at any time.

Yet in spite of this limited role, Parliament had acquired over the centuries ''de facto'' powers of enough significance that monarchs could not simply ignore them indefinitely. For a monarch, Parliament's most indispensable power was its ability to raise tax revenues far in excess of all other sources of revenue at the Crown's disposal. By the 17th century, Parliament's tax-raising powers had come to be derived from the fact that the [[gentry]] was the only stratum of society with the ability and authority to collect and remit the most meaningful forms of taxation then available at the local level. So, if the king wanted to ensure smooth revenue collection, he needed the gentry's cooperation. For all of the Crown's legal authority, its resources were limited by any modern standard to the extent that if the gentry refused to collect the king's taxes on a national scale, the Crown lacked a practical means of compelling them.

From the thirteenth century, monarchs ordered the election of representatives to sit in the [[House of Commons of England|House of Commons]], with most voters being the owners of property, although in some [[potwalloper]] boroughs every male householder could vote. When assembled along with the [[House of Lords]], these elected representatives formed a Parliament. So the concept of Parliaments allowed representatives of the property-owning class to meet, primarily, at least from the point of view of the monarch, to sanction whatever taxes the monarch wished to collect. In the process, the representatives could debate and enact [[statute]]s, or [[act of parliament|acts]]. However, Parliament lacked the power to force its will upon the monarch; its only leverage was the threat of withholding the financial means required to implement his plans.{{Sfn|Johnston|1901|pp=83–86}}

===Parliamentary concerns and the Petition of Right===
[[File:Sir Peter Lely 001.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Henrietta Maria of France|Henrietta Maria]], painted by [[Peter Lely]], 1660]]
Many concerns were raised over Charles's marriage in 1625 to a [[Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] French princess, [[Henrietta Maria of France|Henrietta Maria]]. Parliament refused to assign him the traditional right to collect customs duties for his entire reign, deciding instead to grant it only on a provisional basis and negotiate with him.{{Sfn|Gregg|1984|pp=129–130}}

Charles, meanwhile, decided to send an expeditionary force to relieve the French [[Huguenots]], whom French royal troops held [[Siege of La Rochelle|besieged in La Rochelle]]. Such military support for Protestants on the Continent potentially alleviated concerns about the King's marriage to a Catholic. However, Charles's insistence on giving command of the English force to his unpopular royal favourite [[George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham|George Villiers, the Duke of Buckingham]], undermined that support. Unfortunately for Charles and Buckingham, the 1627 relief expedition proved a fiasco,{{Sfn|Gregg|1984|page=166}} and Parliament, already hostile to Buckingham for his monopoly on [[Patronage|royal patronage]], opened [[Impeachment in the United Kingdom|impeachment]] proceedings against him.<ref name="Gregg-175">{{Harvnb|Gregg|1984|p=175}}.</ref> Charles responded by dissolving Parliament. This saved Buckingham but confirmed the impression that Charles wanted to avoid Parliamentary scrutiny of his ministers.<ref name=Gregg-175/>

Having dissolved Parliament and unable to raise money without it, the king assembled a new one in 1628. (The elected members included [[Oliver Cromwell]], [[John Hampden]],<ref name="Adair 1976">{{Harvnb|Adair|1976}}.</ref> and [[Edward Coke]].) The new Parliament drew up a [[Petition of Right]], which Charles accepted as a concession to obtain his subsidy.<ref name="Purkiss 2007 93">{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=93}}.</ref> The Petition made reference to [[Magna Carta]],<ref>[[Petition of Right]] at III, VII.</ref> but did not grant him the right of [[tonnage and poundage]], which Charles had been collecting without Parliamentary authorisation since 1625.{{Sfn|Sommerville|1992|pages=65, 71, 80}} Several more active members of the opposition were imprisoned, which caused outrage;{{Sfn|Sommerville|1992|pages=65, 71, 80}} one, [[John Eliot (statesman)|John Eliot]], subsequently died in prison and came to be seen as a martyr for the rights of Parliament.{{Sfn|Russell|1998|p=417}}

===Personal rule===
Charles avoided calling a Parliament for the next decade, a period known as the "[[personal rule of Charles I]]", or by its critics as the "Eleven Years' Tyranny".<ref>{{Harvnb|Rosner|Theibault|2000|p=103}}.</ref> During this period, Charles's policies were determined by his lack of money. First and foremost, to avoid Parliament, the King needed to avoid war. Charles made peace with France and Spain, effectively ending England's involvement in the [[Thirty Years' War]]. However, that in itself was far from enough to balance the Crown's finances.

Unable to raise revenue without Parliament and unwilling to convene it, Charles resorted to other means. One was to revive conventions, often outdated. For example, a failure to attend and receive [[knighthood]] at Charles's coronation became a finable offence with the fine paid to the Crown. The King also tried to raise revenue through [[ship money]], demanding in 1634–1636 that the inland English counties pay a tax for the [[Royal Navy]] to counter the threat of privateers and pirates in the English Channel.<ref name="Adair 1976"/> Established law supported the policy of coastal counties and inland ports such as London paying ship money in times of need, but it had not been applied to inland counties before.<ref name="Adair 1976"/>

Authorities had ignored it for centuries, and many saw it as yet another extra-Parliamentary, illegal tax,<ref name="Pipes-143">{{Harvnb|Pipes|1999|p=143}}.</ref> which prompted some prominent men to refuse to pay it. Charles issued a writ against [[John Hampden]] for his failure to pay, and although five judges including George Croke supported Hampden, seven judges found in favour of the King in 1638.<ref name="Adair 1976"/> The fines imposed on people who refused to pay ship money and standing out against its illegality aroused widespread indignation.<ref name=Pipes-143/>

During his "Personal Rule", Charles aroused most antagonism through his religious measures. He believed in [[High church|High Anglicanism]], a sacramental version of the [[Church of England]], theologically based upon [[Arminianism in the Church of England|Arminianism]], a creed shared with his main political adviser, Archbishop [[William Laud]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Carlton|1987|p=48}}.</ref> In 1633, Charles appointed Laud [[Archbishop of Canterbury]] and started making the Church more ceremonial, replacing the wooden [[Mass (liturgy)#Communion rite|communion]] tables with stone altars.<ref>{{Harvnb|Carlton|1987|p=96}}.</ref> [[Puritans]] accused Laud of reintroducing Catholicism, and when they complained he had them arrested. In 1637, [[John Bastwick]], [[Henry Burton (Puritan)|Henry Burton]], and [[William Prynne]] had their ears cut off for writing pamphlets attacking Laud's views – a rare penalty for [[Gentleman|gentlemen]], and one that aroused anger.<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=201}}.</ref> Moreover, the Church authorities revived statutes from the time of Elizabeth I about church attendance and fined Puritans for not attending Anglican services.<ref>{{Harvnb|Carlton|1987|p=173}}.</ref>

===Rebellion in Scotland===
{{Main|Bishops' Wars}}

The end of Charles's independent governance came when he attempted to apply the same religious policies in Scotland. The [[Church of Scotland]], reluctantly [[Episcopal polity|episcopal]] in structure, had independent traditions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=74}}.</ref> Charles wanted one uniform Church throughout Britain<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=83}}.</ref> and introduced a new, High Anglican version of the English [[Book of Common Prayer]] to Scotland in the middle of 1637. This was violently resisted. A riot broke out in Edinburgh,<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=75}}.</ref> which may have been started in [[St Giles' Cathedral]], according to legend, by [[Jenny Geddes]]. In February 1638, the Scots formulated their objections to royal policy in the [[National Covenant]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=77}}.</ref> This document took the form of a "loyal protest", rejecting all innovations not first tested by free Parliaments and General Assemblies of the Church.

In the spring of 1639, King Charles I accompanied his forces to the Scottish border to end the rebellion known as the [[Bishops' War]],<ref name="Purkiss-96">{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=96}}.</ref> but after an inconclusive campaign, he accepted the offered Scottish truce: the [[Pacification of Berwick]]. This truce proved temporary, and a second war followed in mid-1640. A Scots army defeated Charles's forces in the north, then captured [[Newcastle upon Tyne|Newcastle]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=97}}.</ref> Charles eventually agreed not to interfere in Scotland's religion.

===Recall of the English Parliament===
{{Main|Short Parliament}}
Charles needed to suppress the rebellion in Scotland but had insufficient funds to do so. He needed to seek money from a newly elected [[Short Parliament|English Parliament]] in 1640.<ref name="Coward-180">{{Harvnb|Coward|2003|p=180}}.</ref> Its majority faction, led by [[John Pym]], used this appeal for money as a chance to discuss grievances against the Crown and oppose the idea of an English invasion of Scotland. Charles took exception to this ''[[lese majesty|lèse-majesté]]'' (offense against the ruler) and, after negotiations went nowhere, dissolved the Parliament after only a few weeks; hence its name, "the [[Short Parliament]]".<ref name=Coward-180/>

Without Parliament's support, Charles attacked Scotland again, breaking the truce at Berwick, and suffered comprehensive defeat. The Scots went on to invade England, occupying [[Northumberland]] and [[County Durham|Durham]].<ref name=Coward-180/> Meanwhile, another of Charles's chief advisers, [[Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford|Thomas Wentworth, 1st Viscount Wentworth]], had risen to the role of Lord Deputy of Ireland in 1632,<ref name="Purkiss-89">{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=89}}.</ref> and brought in much-needed revenue for Charles by persuading the Irish Catholic gentry to pay new taxes in return for promised religious concessions.<ref>{{Harvnb|Coward|2003|p=172}}.</ref>

In 1639, Charles had recalled Wentworth to England and in 1640 made him Earl of Strafford, attempting to have him achieve similar results in Scotland.<ref name=Purkiss-89/> This time he proved less successful and the English forces fled the field at their second encounter with the Scots in 1640.<ref name=Purkiss-89/> Almost the whole of Northern England was occupied and Charles forced to pay £850 per day to keep the Scots from advancing. Had he not done so they would have pillaged and burnt the cities and towns of Northern England.<ref>{{Harvnb|Sharp|2000|p=13}}.</ref>

All this put Charles in a desperate financial state. As King of Scots, he had to find money to pay the Scottish army in England; as King of England, he had to find money to pay and equip an English army to defend England. His means of raising English revenue without an English Parliament fell critically short of achieving this.<ref name="Purkiss 2007 93"/> Against this backdrop, and according to advice from the [[Magnum Concilium]] (the [[House of Lords]], but without the [[House of Commons of England|Commons]], so not a Parliament), Charles finally bowed to pressure and summoned another English Parliament in November 1640.<ref name=Purkiss-96/>

===The Long Parliament===
{{Main|Long Parliament}}
[[File:Platform_of_the_Lower_House_of_this_Present_Parliament_(of_England)_Assembled_at_Westminster_1640.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|right|A sitting of the [[Long Parliament]], 1640]]
[[File:Attempted Arrest of the Five members by Charles West Cope.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|right|The king's attempt to arrest the [[Five Members]], depicted in a 19th-century painting.]]
The new Parliament proved even more hostile to Charles than its predecessor. It immediately began to discuss grievances against him and his government, with Pym and [[John Hampden|Hampden]] in the lead. They took the opportunity presented by the King's troubles to force various reforming measures – including many with strong "anti-[[Popery|Papist]]" themes – upon him.{{Sfn|Purkiss|2007|pp=104–105}} The members passed a law stating that a new Parliament would convene at least once every three years – without the King's summons if need be. Other laws passed making it illegal for the king to impose taxes without Parliamentary consent and later gave Parliament control over the King's ministers.{{Sfn|Purkiss|2007|pp=104–105}}

Finally, the Parliament passed a law forbidding the King to dissolve it without its consent, even if the three years were up. These laws equated to a tremendous increase in Parliamentary power. Ever since, this Parliament has been known as the [[Long Parliament]]. However, Parliament did attempt to avert conflict by requiring all adults to sign [[Protestation of 1641|The Protestation]], an oath of allegiance to Charles.{{Efn|See {{Harvnb|Walter|1999|p=294}}, for some of the complexities of how the Protestation was interpreted by different political actors.}}

Early in the Long Parliament, the house overwhelmingly accused [[Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford|Thomas Wentworth]] (now Earl of Strafford) of high treason and other crimes and misdemeanors. [[Henry Vane the Younger]] supplied evidence of Strafford's claimed improper use of the army in Ireland, alleging that he had encouraged the King to use his Ireland-raised forces to threaten England into compliance. This evidence was obtained from Vane's father, [[Henry Vane the Elder]], a member of the King's Privy Council, who refused to confirm it in Parliament out of loyalty to Charles. On 10 April 1641, Pym's case collapsed, but Pym made a direct appeal to the Younger Vane to produce a copy of the notes from the King's Privy Council, discovered by the Younger Vane and secretly turned over to Pym, to the great anguish of the Elder Vane.{{Sfn|Upham|1836|p=187}} These notes contained evidence that Strafford had told the King, "Sir, you have done your duty, and your subjects have failed in theirs; and therefore you are absolved from the rules of government, and may supply yourself by extraordinary ways; you have an army in Ireland, with which you may reduce the kingdom."{{Sfn|Upham|1836|p=187}}{{Sfn|Hibbert|1968|p=154}}{{Sfn|Carlton|1995|p=224}}

Pym immediately launched a [[Bill of attainder|Bill of Attainder]] stating Strafford's guilt and demanding that he be put to death.{{Sfn|Carlton|1995|p=224}} Unlike a guilty verdict in a court case, attainder did not require a [[legal burden of proof]] to be met, but it did require the king's approval. Charles, however, guaranteed Strafford that he would not sign the attainder, without which the bill could not be passed.{{Sfn|Carlton|1995|p=225}} Furthermore, the Lords opposed the severity of a death sentence on Strafford. Yet increased tensions and [[First Army Plot|a plot in the army]] to support Strafford began to sway the issue.{{Sfn|Carlton|1995|p=225}}

On 21 April, the Commons passed the Bill (204 in favour, 59 opposed, and 250 abstained),{{Sfn|Smith|1999|p=123}} and the Lords acquiesced. Charles, still incensed over the Commons' handling of Buckingham, refused his assent. Strafford himself, hoping to head off the war he saw looming, wrote to the king and asked him to reconsider.{{Sfn|Abbott|2020}} Charles, fearing for the safety of his family, signed on 10 May.{{Sfn|Smith|1999|p=123}} Strafford was beheaded two days later.{{Sfn|Coward|1994|p=191}} In the meantime, both Parliament and the King agreed to an independent investigation into the king's involvement in Strafford's plot.

The Long Parliament then passed the [[Triennial Act 1640]], also known as the Dissolution Act, in May 1641, to which [[royal assent]] was readily granted.{{Sfn|Carlton|1995|p=222}}{{Sfn|Kenyon|1978|p=127}} The Triennial Act required Parliament to be summoned at least once in three years. When the king failed to issue a proper summons, the members could assemble on their own. This act also forbade ship money without Parliament's consent, fines in distraint of knighthood, and forced loans. Monopolies were cut back sharply, the courts of the [[Star Chamber]] and [[Court of High Commission|High Commission]] abolished by the [[Habeas Corpus Act 1640]], and the Triennial Act respectively.{{Sfn|Gregg|1981|p=335}}

All remaining forms of taxation were legalised and regulated by the [[Tonnage and Poundage Act 1640]].{{Sfn|Kenyon|1978|page=129}} On 3 May, Parliament decreed [[Protestation of 1641|The Protestation]], attacking the 'wicked counsels' of Charles's government, whereby those who signed the petition undertook to defend 'the true reformed religion', Parliament, and the king's person, honour and estate. Throughout May, the House of Commons launched several bills attacking bishops and Episcopalianism in general, each time defeated in the Lords.{{Sfn|Kenyon|1978|p=130}}{{Sfn|Abbott|2020}}

Charles and his Parliament hoped that the execution of Strafford and the Protestation would end the drift towards war, but in fact, they encouraged it. Charles and his supporters continued to resent Parliament's demands, and Parliamentarians continued to suspect Charles of wanting to impose [[Episcopal polity|episcopalianism]] and unfettered royal rule by military force. Within months, the Irish Catholics, fearing a resurgence of Protestant power, [[Irish Rebellion of 1641|struck first]], and all Ireland soon descended into chaos.{{Sfn|Purkiss|2007|pp=109–113}} Rumours circulated that the King supported the Irish, and Puritan members of the Commons soon started murmuring that this exemplified the fate that Charles had in store for them all.<ref>See {{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=113}} for concerns of a similar English Catholic rising.</ref>

On 4 January 1642, Charles, followed by 400 soldiers, entered the House of Commons and attempted to arrest [[five members]] on a charge of treason.<ref name="Sherwood-1997-41">{{Harvnb|Sherwood|1997|p=41}}.</ref> The members had learned that he was coming and escaped. Charles not only failed to arrest them but turned more people against him.{{Sfn|Hibbert|1993|p=32}}

===Local grievances===
In the summer of 1642, these national troubles helped to polarise opinion, ending indecision about which side to support or what action to take. Opposition to Charles also arose from many local grievances. For example, imposed drainage schemes in [[The Fens]] disrupted the livelihood of thousands after the King awarded a number of drainage contracts.<ref>{{Harvnb|Hughes|1991|p=127}}.</ref> Many saw the King as indifferent to public welfare, and this played a role in bringing much of eastern England into the Parliamentarian camp. This sentiment brought with it such people as the [[Edward Montagu, 2nd Earl of Manchester|Edward Montagu, Earl of Manchester]] and [[Oliver Cromwell]], each a notable wartime adversary of the King. Conversely, one of the leading drainage contractors, the [[Robert Bertie, 1st Earl of Lindsey|Robert Bertie, Earl of Lindsey]], was to die fighting for the King at the [[Battle of Edgehill]].<ref>{{Harvnb|Purkiss|2007|p=180}}.</ref>