The History of England Volume 5

James I and Charles I

De: David Hume

Narrado por: Mark Elstob

Despite considerable concerns throughout England, the transition of the House of Tudor to the House of Stewart, from Elizabeth to James I (reigned 1603-1625) proved untroubled, not least because the queen left the country in ‘flourishing circumstances'. The new monarch moved to London and, despite being James VI of Scotland, made it his home for the next two decades.

Unsurprisingly, his early distribution of honours benefitted more Scots figures than English, and coloured the nature of his English court, though he prudently left most of the main offices in the hands of Elizabeth's ministers. Various plots—involving among others Sir Walter Raleigh, and, in 1605 the ‘Gunpower Conspiracy'—were swiftly dealt with; and though James regarded himself ‘an absolute king', this was leavened by pragmatism.

Hume considers the continuing activity of learning and the arts in the reign of James, through the work of Shakespeare, Ben, Johnson, John Donne and Francis Bacon; and that James himself was a ‘middling' writer. He died aged 58 in 1625.

Unlike his father, Charles I (reigned 1625-1649) came to the throne aged 25 ‘unexperienced and impolitic,' and was further challenged by personal debts and public commitments due to overseas military ventures. This forced him to request Parliament for extra funds, which he expected would be little more than a formality, and, bearing in mind this was a new relationship, Parliament acceded.

But the strengthening of the ‘puritanical' party in the house of commons set the seeds of future disruption, flames which were fuelled by the king's increasingly ‘lofty ideas' of his monarchical authority over constitutional practices in the government of the country.

Hume's extensive research presents the growing animosity between king and Parliament in detail, culminating Charles ordering the dissolution of Parliament on 10 March 1629. For the next 11 years the king ruled alone.

Hume takes a balanced view of Charles the man and Charles the king. ‘A kind husband, an indulgent father, a gentle master, a steadfast friend; to all these eulogies, his conduct in private life fully entitled him. As a monarch too, in the exterior qualities, he excelled; in the essential, he was not defective…But the high idea of his own authority, which he had imbibed, made him incapable of giving way to the spirit of liberty, which began to prevail among his subjects.'

What's more, Charles allowed himself, inadvisedly, to be influenced by a few strong personalities which eventually led to his destruction. 1639 finds Charles, ‘in despair of being able to stem the torrent'. With a historian's care, but with a natural flair for telling the story, Hume relates the descent into civil war, the fluctuating fortunes of both sides, the ascendence of the new model army, and the execution of the king. This, one of the astounding moments in English history, is finely told, with Hume uncovering the conflicting emotions on all sides, adding vivid colour to the facts.

Public Domain (P)2024 W. F. Howes Ltd.

Whig history at its most confident

Talk about Catholic bigotry is a bit rich coming from a "liberal" writer who hardly mentions the penal laws. What does stand out is the long legal history of taxation as a gift to the Crown by the common people out of their pockets based on common consent. Not one lawyer or judge in a hundred would realise the importance of that concept in construing legislation today.