Why did the personal rule end?
The Personal Rule (also known as the Eleven Years Tyranny) was the period between
1629 and 1640 in which Charles I ruled without recourse to parliament. However this was
not a time of rejoice; it was in fact received with much hostility, not only from Parliament,
but from the English, Irish and Scottish population. This was often due to conflicts of
interest, for example Laud’s new policies were see by many as being too close to
Roman Catholicism and were disliked by most of the protestant population. Also the
introductions of harsh punishments by Laud were seen as being too cruel by many. The
increasing power of the church and the introduction of the English prayer book in Scotland
and was resented by most. However there were other important factors that led to the
unpopularity of the Personal Rule besides religion. An example of this would be forced
loans and ship money angering the population. Also Wentworth’s harsh rule in
Ireland and the lack of parliament in which grievances could be discussed also
caused upset. There may be more evidence to show that new religious canons and rules
upset the population more so than taxes and a lack of parliament (although these were
also important). So it may be said that religious reforms had more importance in the
unpopularity of the Personal Rule.
In 1633 Charles appointed William Laud as the Archbishop of Canterbury and Laud used
this to his advantage to make, what he considered to be, necessary changes to the
church. In simple terms, William Laud’s aims were to make church practices uniform
and more extravagant (to an extent), to eradicate Puritanism and to increase the
influence of the church in government. He went about trying to achieve these aims by
imposing rules upon the church. For example all of the services had to follow the same
prayer book. He also suggested that churches should display the ‘beauty of holiness’
through decorative stained glass and candles. Puritan books and pamphlets were also
censored and he used the courts of high commission and the Star Chamber to punish
those who did not follow his new command and harsh punishments were introduced for
critics, such as pillory and mutilation. Generally, people did not like these new reforms.
Laud and many bishops came from humble backgrounds, which cause the gentry to
become angry when their family pews were moved to make room for the new altars at
the east end of the church. They did not like being told what to do or the threat of
punishment from their social inferiors. Laud’s church was also seen as being too close to
Roman Catholicism and was inked to the belief that there was a Catholic clique at court
led by Henrietta Maria, who was supposedly working for the re-conversion of England to
Catholicism.
Laud’s policies heavily contributed to the unpopularity of the Personal Rule as it caused
tensions within religious communities. The enmity towards Laud was clear, but a deeper
hatred towards Charles ran through the population as it was his decision under the
Personal Rule that began these seemingly unfair reforms.
Religious reforms were not just imposed on England; they were also established in
Scotland. The introduction of the English prayer book to Scotland was not well received,
as they were considered to be too Popish for many of the Presbyterians. For example
Jenney Geddes famously threw a stool at the priest in her church. The new canons that
were introduced in 1636 were enforced without consultation to the Scottish Privy
Council, the Scottish Parliament or the General assembly of the Kirk; so not only was
Charles upsetting the lower classes, but he also managed to insult those in authority
too. Charles and his advisors had expected some resistance but also thought that it would
eventually die down. However the Scottish councils sympathised with the protestors as
they too thought that the new reforms were popish and unnecessary. The unpopularity of
The Personal Rule (also known as the Eleven Years Tyranny) was the period between
1629 and 1640 in which Charles I ruled without recourse to parliament. However this was
not a time of rejoice; it was in fact received with much hostility, not only from Parliament,
but from the English, Irish and Scottish population. This was often due to conflicts of
interest, for example Laud’s new policies were see by many as being too close to
Roman Catholicism and were disliked by most of the protestant population. Also the
introductions of harsh punishments by Laud were seen as being too cruel by many. The
increasing power of the church and the introduction of the English prayer book in Scotland
and was resented by most. However there were other important factors that led to the
unpopularity of the Personal Rule besides religion. An example of this would be forced
loans and ship money angering the population. Also Wentworth’s harsh rule in
Ireland and the lack of parliament in which grievances could be discussed also
caused upset. There may be more evidence to show that new religious canons and rules
upset the population more so than taxes and a lack of parliament (although these were
also important). So it may be said that religious reforms had more importance in the
unpopularity of the Personal Rule.
In 1633 Charles appointed William Laud as the Archbishop of Canterbury and Laud used
this to his advantage to make, what he considered to be, necessary changes to the
church. In simple terms, William Laud’s aims were to make church practices uniform
and more extravagant (to an extent), to eradicate Puritanism and to increase the
influence of the church in government. He went about trying to achieve these aims by
imposing rules upon the church. For example all of the services had to follow the same
prayer book. He also suggested that churches should display the ‘beauty of holiness’
through decorative stained glass and candles. Puritan books and pamphlets were also
censored and he used the courts of high commission and the Star Chamber to punish
those who did not follow his new command and harsh punishments were introduced for
critics, such as pillory and mutilation. Generally, people did not like these new reforms.
Laud and many bishops came from humble backgrounds, which cause the gentry to
become angry when their family pews were moved to make room for the new altars at
the east end of the church. They did not like being told what to do or the threat of
punishment from their social inferiors. Laud’s church was also seen as being too close to
Roman Catholicism and was inked to the belief that there was a Catholic clique at court
led by Henrietta Maria, who was supposedly working for the re-conversion of England to
Catholicism.
Laud’s policies heavily contributed to the unpopularity of the Personal Rule as it caused
tensions within religious communities. The enmity towards Laud was clear, but a deeper
hatred towards Charles ran through the population as it was his decision under the
Personal Rule that began these seemingly unfair reforms.
Religious reforms were not just imposed on England; they were also established in
Scotland. The introduction of the English prayer book to Scotland was not well received,
as they were considered to be too Popish for many of the Presbyterians. For example
Jenney Geddes famously threw a stool at the priest in her church. The new canons that
were introduced in 1636 were enforced without consultation to the Scottish Privy
Council, the Scottish Parliament or the General assembly of the Kirk; so not only was
Charles upsetting the lower classes, but he also managed to insult those in authority
too. Charles and his advisors had expected some resistance but also thought that it would
eventually die down. However the Scottish councils sympathised with the protestors as
they too thought that the new reforms were popish and unnecessary. The unpopularity of
