To help answer the question “did Charles force civil war or parliament?” make a for-and-against organizer with the question as the title. List the points that for a No answer, with examples, in another column/ Write your conclusions at the bottom of the chart
i alrerady have this ffor the yes cloumn
Charles believed in the divine right of kings, which meant that he could not and would not accept any interference in his divine right by parliament.
i am confuzed what i shoudl put in the no cloumn
In what ways did Parliament help start the civil war?
Yes but it seems like charles was the soul reason for the civil war not parliament?
This site may give you some ideas.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/english_civil-war.htm
Suppose Parliament had cooperated with Charles?
To support a "No" answer to the question, "Did Charles force civil war or parliament?", here are some points you can include in the No column along with examples:
1. Parliament's actions: Charles did not solely force the civil war or parliament; rather, the actions and decisions of the Parliament played a significant role in escalating tensions. For instance:
- The Petition of Right (1628): This document, supported by Parliament, sought to limit the king's power and protect individual liberties.
- The Grand Remonstrance (1641): Parliament presented this detailed list of grievances against Charles, illustrating their resistance to his policies.
2. Long-standing conflicts: Historical tensions between Parliament and the monarchy existed long before Charles' reign, indicating that he was not the sole force in the conflict. For example:
- The clashes between King James I and the Parliament during the early 17th century over issues of taxation and royal prerogatives.
- The disputes between Charles' father, King James I, and the Parliament during the 1620s regarding the king's authority.
3. Popular support for Parliament: Charles faced opposition from many sectors of society that recognized Parliament as a necessary institution to represent their interests. Notable examples include:
- The rise of Puritanism and the growth of religious sects: Puritans, who held significant influence within Parliament, opposed Charles' religious policies and sought greater religious freedoms.
- The support of influential figures: Prominent Parliamentarians, such as John Pym and John Hampden, had significant support from various factions, including the gentry and merchants.
Conclusions:
Based on the points discussed, it becomes apparent that Charles was not the sole force responsible for either the civil war or the tensions with Parliament. Rather, it was a culmination of factors, long-standing conflicts, and Parliament's actions that contributed to the outbreak of the civil war. Charles' adherence to the divine right of kings may have played a role, but it was not the sole determinant.