Bibliographic details and abstracts are available to all. Downloads of full-text dissertations are restricted to University of Portsmouth members who must login. MPhils may be accessed by all.

Abstract

This dissertation will examine the responsibility placed on King Charles I for the outbreak of the English Civil War. Charles is rarely examined in a good light, therefore this dissertation seeks to re-examine the period March 1641 to August 1642, to get a better understanding of the characters involved in this conflict, in a bid to try and balance the blame, rather than placing all the blame on the King. I argue that Charles was a far more principled and compromising character than historians have made him out to be, whilst also arguing that radicalism existed in the legislative actions of Parliament, often terrorising their own members, even as early as the Trial of the Earl of Strafford in March 1641. I investigate how Parliament’s actions caused many MPs to become disenfranchised with the ruling group’s radical nature, turning moderates into Royalists. I also argue that the conspiracies and plots often attributed to Charles have been examined using little evidence of his involvement. While this is not a vindication, this will hopefully shed some more light on the idea that Parliament, the preserver of liberty, played a more militant role than previously examined. While this work will not vindicate the King, it fits into a larger debate about reassessing the nature of responsibility in the events leading up to the outbreak of war, rather than blaming one individual.

Course: History - BA (Hons) - C1087

Date Deposited: 2021-07-27

URI/permalink: https://library.port.ac.uk/dissert/dis13695.html