8 reasons why the Civil War broke out

Tensions mounted as monarch and MPs argued over foreign policy, finances and Charles’s marriage to the Catholic Henrietta Maria. He further angered Parliament when he imposed a tax without their consent to pay for his war with France; then imprisoned without trial those who refused to pay, and implemented martial law and the billeting of troops.

• Read more | Henrietta Maria: Charles I’s warrior queen

In 1628, Parliament issued a Petition of Right, seeking redress to these grievances. The move demonstrates how concerned MPs had grown about the prospect of a king who believed he derived his authority from God holding himself above the rule of law.

Charles I’s Personal Rule

In 1629, Charles dissolved his combative parliament and went on to rule for the next 11 years without one, a period known as the Personal Rule. Being without a parliament to raise taxes actually brought about a period of stability in England as Charles needed to end his costly wars with France and Spain, but he also had to exploit questionable means of making money, such as citing outdated laws to fine gentlemen or selling monopolies.

The most unpopular earner was ‘ship money’, a levy on coastal communities to fund the navy in times of war, which Charles issued multiple times and, from 1635, extended to inland towns. Those who did not pay faced trial, most notably Buckinghamshire landowner and MP John Hampden. The court’s verdict in 1638 favoured the king, but only by seven votes to five, which emboldened opposition to ship money and struck a blow to Charles’s authority.

Religious divisions in England

Of all the policies of Charles’s Personal Rule, the religious reforms caused most alarm. Protestantism was the established religion and Catholics had been persecuted or driven underground since Tudor times. Shortly after his accession, Charles had married a French princess who openly practised her Catholicism, which raised suspicions among the largely Puritan members of parliament.

Concerns were exacerbated as the king, while Protestant, favoured High Anglican worship. Charles enthusiastically supported Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud’s moves to establish a greater sense of ceremony and hierarchy in the Church of England, as well as to re-introduce decoration and finery to worship. This meant railed altars rather than communion tables; stained glass windows and candles; ornamental vestments; and the enforcement of ritual, such as kneeling when receiving the Sacrament – all of which smacked of popery to many Protestants.

• Read more | How people power fuelled England's century of chaos

Laud followed up his reforms with persecution of the Puritans, especially those who criticised him. He had the Puritans William Prynne, John Bastwick and Henry Burton imprisoned during the 1630s for writing pamphlets or giving sermons attacking what they saw as a move towards Catholicism, and had their ears cut off. Prynne’s cheeks were also branded with “S L”, meaning ‘seditious libeller’ – although he reclaimed it to mean ‘Stigmata Laudis’, the ‘marks of Laud’.

Those who opposed the reforms were tried in the Court of High Commission, convened by the king at will and wielding significant power, or the Star Chamber, an arm of the monarchy able to dish out fines and prison sentences. Both became symbols of royal oppression.

Charles’s enemies in Scotland

Charles wished his religious reforms to bring uniformity to the Church north of the border as well as England. But he was met with even more resistance by the mostly Presbyterian (an extreme form of Protestantism) Scots, who believed in a church government of representative assemblies and presbyteries, rather than the rule of bishops.

The catalyst was Charles’s attempt to introduce a new Book of Common Prayer for Scotland, in 1637, which caused a riot when it was first used in St Giles’ Cathedral in Edinburgh – legendarily started when a market-trader named Jenny Geddes threw her stool at the dean.

Charles wished his religious reforms to bring uniformity to the Church north of the border as well as England. But he was met with even more resistance by the mostly Presbyterian Scots

In 1638, a large number of Scottish nobles and churchmen signed the National Covenant, an agreement affirming their commitment to Presbyterianism, determination to defend the Church of Scotland, or Kirk, and rejection of English governance. Although the document urged loyalty to the king, Charles regarded the Covenant as an unacceptable challenge.

Charles was resolved to crush this national uprising, but his campaign eventually ended in disaster when the Scottish covenanters defeated his army at the battle of Newburn, near Newcastle, on 28 August 1640. The Scots occupied Northumberland and County Durham, forcing Charles to pay £850 a day to stop them advancing further into England.

The Short Parliament

During the Bishops’ Wars, Charles found himself in desperate need of funds for his army and so, in early 1640, he summoned his first parliament for 11 years. It assembled on 13 April, but instead of acquiescing to the king’s request for money, MPs expressed more concern with addressing grievances with the policies from the past decade of Personal Rule.

It soon became clear that they would not support his war, and Charles dissolved the parliament after just three weeks, hence the name ‘Short Parliament’. Charles resumed the war anyway, without parliamentary support, but suffered his decisive loss at Newburn, in August 1640.

The Long Parliament

A humiliated and reluctant Charles had no choice but to call another parliament in 1640 to ensure he had the money to pay off the Scottish Covenanters who were refusing to leave northern England. This so-called ‘Long Parliament’ assembled in November and immediately went on the offensive. Led by the MP for Tavistock, John Pym, one of Parliament’s first acts was to accuse Charles’s much-hated chief minister Thomas Wentworth (the former lord deputy of Ireland and now Earl of Strafford), of high treason and ensure his execution.

The emboldened MPs passed an act ensuring Parliament would meet every three years, even if not summoned by the king, and could not be dissolved without its own consent. They simultaneously abolished the Court of High Commission and Star Chamber, and declared the forms of taxation Charles had been exploiting, such as ship money, illegal.

In November 1641, Parliament passed its ‘Grand Remonstrance’, a list of grievances totalling 204 points detailing their opposition to Charles’s policies during his entire reign. Not all MPs, however, agreed with Pym and his allies, especially as they pushed for yet more radical changes, including the abolition of bishops and further curbs on royal power.

• Read more | Has history been unfair to Charles I?

Parliament had become divided – indeed, the Grand Remonstrance had only narrowly passed. Charles gained support from some 148 MPs, who believed the Puritans were going too far or felt they could not go against their divinely anointed monarch. Relations continued to worsen into 1642, when Parliament sent Charles the Nineteen Propositions, a list of demands, among them the need for Parliament to approve the king’s ministers, supervise foreign policy and command the militia; and a reform to church government. When Charles rejected them all, there seemed to be no hope for reconciliation.

The failed arrest of the ‘five members’

On 4 January 1642, Charles launched a drastic, if imprudent, strike against Parliament. Accompanied by around a hundred soldiers, he entered the House of Commons – an unprecedented move, seeing as a monarch had to be invited before going inside – and attempted to arrest five firebrand MPs.

The parliamentary leader John Pym and John Hampden, whose trial for not paying ship money had rallied opposition to the king’s taxes, were among them. The others were: Denzil Holles, a vociferous voice for the bill to abolish bishops; Arthur Haselrig, a major figure in the impeachment of Charles’s chief minister; and William Strode, who had been imprisoned for 11 years for his condemnations of the king’s policies.

Charles asked to use the chair belonging to the Speaker, William Lenthall, before calling out the five names with no response. The Five Members, as they became known, had been warned of the king’s arrival and had just escaped in time. Lenthall kneeled before Charles, but refused to give them up.

“May it please your majesty, I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place but as this House is pleased to direct me whose servant I am here,” he said, declaring his allegiance to Parliament. Charles responded with, “I see the birds have flown,” and retreated from the Commons empty handed. Days later, having failed to force the surrender of the Five Members, the king left London with his family.

Ireland in rebellion

Since October 1641, a rebellion had been raging in Ireland – native Irish Catholics against English and Scottish Protestant settlers, many of whom were killed on both sides. Beginning in Ulster, the rebellion was partly born out of Irish fears that, with the Scottish Presbyterians and English Puritans riding high, they would soon force the king to adopt much more intolerantly anti-Catholic policies in Ireland. The rebels even claimed they were acting with Charles’s blessing, which served to fuel the rumours of the king being a secret Catholic.

• On the podcast | Mark Stoyle answers the big questions about the Civil War, the 17th-century conflict between royalists and parliamentarians that wracked the British Isles

In fact, Charles was in rare agreement with Parliament that an army had to be sent to suppress the rebellion, but they disagreed over who should command it. John Pym and his allies in Parliament believed that if the king put himself at the head of the army, he might turn it against them. In the end, some troops were sent across the Irish Channel, both from England and Scotland.

With no cooperation of synchronised tactics, though, the conflict continued for 11 years causing a massive loss of life and devastation in Ireland. Meanwhile, in England itself, both king and Parliament were by now raising armies of their own, and both sides refused to back down.

This article was first published in the January 2021 issue of BBC History Revealed