Wars of the Three Kingdoms: There could have been a negotiated settlement at the end of the first civil war.

Current version: 21 Oct 2009 | 12:11 | booji

<< Older version | Newer version >>

All versions

Key

  • Text coloured Greenhas been added snce the previous version
  • Text marked red and striked-throughhas been deleted

Yes, because... War not fought over big differences

 

No, because...

A settlement should have been relatively easy to bring about. There was no clash, as yet, between irreconcilable ideologies.[1] The war had been fought over relatively small differences both accepted that it was King and parliament together who held power, the disagreement was over who should give way in the event of conflict, in this case over the Militia bill. For Parliament, if the King was in the hands of evil counsellors sovereign power resided in Parliament, whereas Charles believed this power should remain with the King.[2]

If parts of the opening proclamations are taken as the war aims of the two sides then they should never have been fighting. In His maiesties proclamation for the suppressing of the present rebellion the King called upon the trained bands:

Charles I
“to serve us for the defence of Us, & of Our Kingdom, and of the true Protestant Religion, and the known Laws of the Land, and the just Liberties of our Subjects, & the just Priviledges of Parliament… and for re-setling of the happy peace of this Kingdom.”[3]
A parliamentary declaration in response to the King’s declaration was that Essex’s forces were for:
Parliament
“the maintenance and preservation of the true Protestant Religion, the Kings Person, the Laws of the Land, the Liberty and Property of the Subject, and the Rights and Priviledges of Parliament.”[4]
  1. ^ Austin Woolrych, Britain in revolution 1625-1660, Oxford 2002, p340
  2. ^ C.V. Wedgwood, The King’s War 1641-1647, London, 2001, p73
  3. ^ England and Wales. Sovereign (1625-1649 : Charles I), His Maiesties proclamation for the suppressing of the present rebellion under the command of Robert Earle of Essex, Oxford, 1642, EEBO, p8-9
  4. ^ England and Wales. Parliament. A declaration and resolution of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, London, 1642, EEBO, E.112[6], p6

 

Both declarations are very similar however Charles and Parliament both had different ideas about what the true protestant religion was, and what the privileges of parliament should be. Both sides also declared that the other were traitors to the King and offered pardon if the opposing side laid down their arms.