2B

Charles I’s Character and views on monarchy

Charles’s physical defect was seen as a sign of weakness, he was naturally shy and hampered by a speech defect, Charles was a poor public speaker, could be uncommunicative and was seen by others as unapproachable. He rarely explained or justified his actions, instead leaving others to interpret their meaning and with an inferiority complex he often overstressed his royal prerogative. He lacked shrewdness and flexibility, and seemed incapable of seeing anyone else’s viewpoint but his own. Charles required unquestioning obedience and would interpret even the slightest hint of disagreement with him as tantamount to open rebellion, thus, he was not averse to using dishonest and underhand measures to deal with his opponents. The one area of government where he was prepared to be more liberal was in his approach to religion, but allowing his court to be dominated by Catholics and more moderate Protestants created great resentment among a significant part of the Political Nation. He enjoyed arts and used it to propagate an image emphasising his power and authority through the Divine Right of Kings. Although he was a devoted husband and father, his eventual choice of wife – Henrietta Maria – aroused suspicion, as she was French and a Catholic.

Charles I’s Court

Charles’ rigid self-control was in stark contrast to his father, and he expected the rest of his court to show the same restraint and measure. Charles’s belief in Divine Right influenced ceremony to modelled on those exercised in France (where the monarch was seen as absolute). The wide variety of court entertainments were replaced with performances (plays, masques, etc.) which, while undoubtedly lavish, rarely deviated from a single theme: the power of the King and the value of subjects showing unquestioning loyalty to him. With a young and uncertain monarch, Buckingham was able to indulge his personal pride and ambition, having been given licence (as commander of England’s military forces) to embark on an aggressive foreign policy that England could ill afford. The wars that he was to enter against France and Spain in 1624-27 had no clear purpose and were inefficiently managed, although his decisions were supported all the way by the King. By 1628, MPs were openly describing Buckingham as ‘the cause of all our miseries’, and it has been argued that his was possibly the most significant role in the deterioration of Charles’s relationship with Parliament.

Charles I’s favourites

Charles’s suspicion of Parliament led him to rely heavily on the advice of a small number of royal favourites, most notably the Duke of Buckingham, who had also been his father’s most trusted advisor, but who was despised by the Political Nation for having too much power. Buckingham modelled an older brother role to Charles he had an unshakeable position in the King's esteem and affections. Their journey to Madrid in 1623 (an attempt to win the hand of the Spanish Infanta, Anna Maria) galvanised a friendship through political alliance. Thus, from the start of Charles’s reign, Buckingham enjoyed a unique trust from the King. Charles I secluded himself behind an elaborate ceremonial and formality. Within the privacy of the bedchamber, Buckingham acted as the principal confidant, advising the King not only on the conduct of diplomacy and war, but on his stormy relations with his new bride. Having survived the transition from one monarch to another and strengthened his position, Buckingham now received almost an exclusive monopoly of favour at court.

k

k