The Personal Rule (also known as the Eleven Years Tyranny) was the period between 1629 and 1640 in which Charles I ruled without recourse to parliament. However this was not a time of rejoice; it was in fact received with much hostility, not only from Parliament, but from the English, Irish and Scottish population. This was often due to conflicts of interest, for example Laud’s new policies were see by many as being too close to Roman Catholicism and were disliked by most of the protestant population. Also the introductions of harsh punishments by Laud were seen as being too cruel by many. The increasing power of the church and the introduction of the English prayer book in Scotland and was resented by most. However there were other important factors that led to the unpopularity of the Personal Rule besides religion. An example of this would be forced loans and ship money angering the population. Also Wentworth’s harsh rule in Ireland and the lack of parliament in which grievances could be discussed also caused upset. There may be more evidence to show that new religious canons and rules upset the population more so than taxes and a lack of parliament (although these were also important). So it may be said that religious reforms had more importance in the unpopularity of the Personal Rule.
In 1633 Charles appointed William Laud as the Archbishop of Canterbury and Laud used this to his advantage to make, what he considered to be, necessary changes to the church. In simple terms, William Laud’s aims were to make church practices uniform and more extravagant (to an extent), to eradicate Puritanism and to increase the influence of the church in government. He went about trying to achieve these aims by imposing rules upon the church. For example all of the services had to follow the same prayer book. He also suggested that churches should display the ‘beauty of holiness’ through decorative stained glass and candles. Puritan books and pamphlets were also censored and he used the courts of high commission and the Star Chamber to punish those who did not follow his new command and harsh punishments were introduced for critics, such as pillory and mutilation. Generally, people did not like these new reforms. Laud and many bishops came from humble backgrounds, which cause the gentry to become angry when their family pews were moved to make room for the new altars at the east end of the church. They did not like being told what to do or the threat of punishment from their social inferiors. Laud’s church was also seen as being too close to Roman Catholicism and was inked to the belief that there was a Catholic clique at court led by Henrietta Maria, who was supposedly working for the re-conversion of England to Catholicism.
Laud’s policies heavily contributed to the unpopularity of the Personal Rule as it caused tensions within religious communities. The enmity towards Laud was clear, but a deeper hatred towards Charles ran through the population as it was his decision under the Personal Rule that began these seemingly unfair reforms.
Religious reforms were not just imposed on England; they were also established in Scotland. The introduction of the English prayer book to Scotland was not well received, as they were considered to be too Popish for many of the Presbyterians. For example Jenney Geddes famously threw a stool at the priest in her church. The new canons that were introduced in 1636 were enforced without consultation to the Scottish Privy Council, the Scottish Parliament or the General assembly of the Kirk; so not only was Charles upsetting the lower classes, but he also managed to insult those in authority too. Charles and his advisors had expected some resistance but also thought that it would eventually die down. However the Scottish councils sympathised with the protestors as they too thought that the new reforms were popish and unnecessary. The unpopularity of these new reforms was so extreme that Charles would need an army to deal with the rebellious scots.
This was a very significant factor in the outbreak of rebellion towards the Personal Rule and its downfall. By imposing these new rules upon Scotland when Charles had shown little interest towards the Scots before, he managed to lose nearly all of his support from the north. This undoubtedly caused huge religious tensions, but also a much deeper resentment toward Charles and his policies ran within the Scots. Charles would also find later that morale ran low in his own army as his soldiers related to the Scots as they too felt that they had had harsh rule imposed upon them.
However, religious dispute was not the only reason for the disapproval of the Personal Rule. Charles often used risky strategies of raising revenue, for example the introduction of Ship Money was extremely unpopular. Many people were unwilling to pay as they believed that it was an unfair taxation as England was not currently at war, so many believed that there was nothing to protect the country against. The inland population were also unhappy as they had never before been made to pay this tax and again felt that it was prejudicial. And to make matters worse there was no Parliament to call on, in which these grievances could be aired. Charles’s popularity was diminishing and he was losing the support of many people in the country. People disliked Charles running the country on his own and wanted for there to be a parliament again in which they could air their opinions. Those who did speak against Charles and his regime or refused to pay Ship Money were imprisoned.
People were understandably unhappy with the way the country was being run. Many people believed that the rules were unfair and that the new taxations exploited them for Charles’s own selfish purposes, as they did not seem to be benefitting the people.
Charles also implemented harsh rule in Ireland. In 1633 Wentworth was appointed Lord Deputy of Ireland. Trying to govern Ireland had ruined the careers of many others. Ireland was home to the native Irish (Catholic), Scottish (Presbyterian), old English (Catholic), and the new English (protestant). All of these groups tried to promote their own beliefs, whereas Wentworth was determined to impose English authority and did not falter. Wentworth enforced authority of the state by extending the settlement of Protestants in the north at the expense of the native Irish. He also enforced Laudian reforms upon the church in order to make it conform to that of the Anglican Church. He then exploited the country in the am of raising revenue.
Wentworth had certainly angered Irish residents, and had done little in the way of improving the popularity of the Personal rule. Wentworth’s rule may not have been the primary reason for the downfall of the Personal rule, however with his harsh regime he had managed to exploit and alienated those who may have supported Charles before.
To conclude there is clear evidence to show that, although unfair taxation and harsh governing bodies undoubtedly caused a steep incline in the discontent of Britain, it was the religious reforms made namely in Scotland and England that created a deep-seated hatred towards the Personal rule. Laud’s harsh regime and rule changing, and Charles’s inconsideration towards the Scots had caused a great deal of upset within all of the social classes. Everyone felt that his or her rights had been exploited and had no system in which their grievances could be aired without parliament being put into place. Without parliament people had no way of expressing their deep concern without full-scale rebellious acts, thus ending the Personal Rule of Charles I.
No comments:
Post a Comment