It was the reign of King Charles I which was perhaps more than anything else responsible for initiating the conflict which led, ultimately, to the English Civil War.

Charles I, King of England, Ireland, and Scotland, ruled from 1625-1649. Throughout his lengthy reign, King Charles was somewhat of a control freak (a common problem amongst those made into kings or queens throughout history, and in no way limited to this single monarch), consistently battling with the British Parliament over his rule, which he believed to have been ordained by God, and therefore, absolute. He believed that the king should be the sole leader of his domain, with no parliament-imposed limitations.

Perhaps one of the reasons for this attitude has to do with the fact that Charles had lived his entire life under the stigma of being both small and sickly. Indeed, he was both tiny and weak at birth, and problems due to this plagued him his entire life. As a fully-grown adult, he stood only 5'4” tall – the shortest of all Kings of England. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that Charles I was a bit more concerned with appearing more powerful to his subjects than he perhaps was in reality.

Charles Refuses to Call the Parliament to Assembly

For the first four years of his reign, Charles I and Parliament worked fairly well together, despite a few relatively minor issues.

It was in 1629 that Charles first began to have serious problems with Parliament over the war with Spain (part of the Thirty Years War between the Protestants and Catholics of Europe). Charles wanted to be aggressive in his campaign against Spain, while Parliament was more reserved, voting only a small subsidy for the war to the King.

Now, it should be noted that in England, Parliament is not allowed to convene unless called to do so by the King (or Queen) him/herself, so Charles, as a result of this little loophole, found a way around his dilemma. Parliament couldn’t bother him any more if they could not assemble.

The following eleven years are known by different names, depending on what opinion one takes of it; either “The Years of Personal Rule,” or “The Years of Tyranny.” It was during this time that Charles devoted to himself all authority in England. It was then that he had full freedom to make any laws that he desired.

The “Ship Money” Problem and the “Short” Parliament

It was only the need for money that forced Charles to reconvene parliament in 1640. He did his best to issue certain taxes in order to allow government to continue, but he found that the public did not appreciate being taxed without parliamentary consent. Specifically, it was the institution of a long forgotten type of tax, known as “Ship Money” that broke the camel’s back.

In England, during certain wartime periods, coastal towns were required to equip the British Navy, or else pay certain taxes in order to commute these responsibilities. It was a very controversial tax among the people of England, especially as it was only a ploy so to bring the government some much-needed funds.

It was only when rebellion among the people started to break out (as a result to both the ship money, as well as Charles’ many extreme religious proposals) that the king grudgingly reconvened the Parliament after eleven years. But by then it was very much too late. The people of Scotland refused Charles' religious viewpoints, and threatened to rise up against the king. Looming war in Scotland left the King with an even greater need for money.

When parliament was reconvened, everything seemed as if it was going to go back to normal – Parliament agreed to give money to defeat Scotland and Charles offered to repeal Ship Money. When Parliament wanted to discuss with the king his many abuses of power during the years of personal rule, he responded by dissolving it once again, after only a month in session.

The “Long” Parliament and Civil War

Parliament was reconvened in November of that year (1640), after Charles attempt at defeating Scotland on his own had failed horribly. This parliament refused to be bullied by the king, and as a consequence of his actions passed the “Triennial Act” in February 1641, which bound the king by law to convene the parliament at least once every three years, ensuring that such abuses of power would be limited in the future.

All of this, as well as several other issues, understandably forced a great rift between the king and Parliament. When Parliament threatened to impeach Charles' wife, Henrietta Maria (a French Catholic) due to religious differences, Charles entered Parliament with an armed force on January 4, 1642, but found that those who had voted for the impeachment had already escaped his wrath.

The English Civil War, between the supporters of the King, and the supporters of Parliament, had begun, and would not end for another nine years, when the forces of Parliament finally defeated their enemies at the battle of Worcester in 1651. Charles I had already been defeated and executed two years earlier, and the royal line (which had passed on to Charles II) was temporarily taken from power, replaced with a “protectorate” under the rule of Oliver Cromwell.

Indeed, it was a fairly horrible time in British History, and one which does much to show the importance of governmental checks and balances. Every government goes through periods of hardships, but the important thing is that mistakes can be learned from, and appropriate measures can be taken to ensure that they won’t happen again. These are the lessens which can and should be learned from history.

References:

"Timeline of Charles I." World History Database.

"Biography of King Charles I." British Civil Wars, Commonwealth and Protectorate 1638-60.