25 Mark essays - The English Revolution 1625 -1660
Unit 1
How significant was parliamentary radicalism in the breakdown of relations
between Crown and Parliament in the years 1625 to 1629? [2017]
ARG. Whilst Parliamentary radicalism aggravated the breakdown of relations,
it was more prominently Charles' absolutist values and refusal to negotiate
that drove the breakdown of relations, all of which was underpinned by
religion.
FACTORS: Parliamentary radicalism, Charles’ leadership/absolutism and
Religion the foundation of broken relations.
‘Buckingham was the cause of the deterioration in Crown-Parliament
relations in the years 1625 to 1629.' Assess the validity of this view. [2018]
ARG. Charles’ absolutist method of rule fuelled Parliamentary radicalism that
underpinned deterioration of reactions 1625-1629. Whilst Buckingham’s role
gave Charles a scapegoat to conflict over foreign policy, it was an
aggravator rather than long term breakdown of relations.
FACTORS: Buckingham, Charles’ leadership and Parliamentary radicalism.
‘Charles I’s style of rule was the main source of conflict between Crown and
Parliament in the years 1625 to 1629,' Assess the validity of this view. [2020]
ARG. Charles I’s style of rule was a strong source of conflict, stimulating
Parliamentary radicalism, however this source of conflict was underpinned by
religious discontent and aggravated by financial and foreign conflicts.
FACTORS: Charles I’s style of rule, religion and foreign policy with Buckingham.
To what extent was the deterioration in relations between Crown and
Parliament, in the years 1625 to 1629, due to the character and aims of
Charles I? [2021]
ARG. To a large extent because Charles I’s absolutist character aggravated
Parliament to the point of radicalism and underpinned the foreign, financial
and religious conflicts 1625-1629.
FACTORS: Charles I’s character, Parliamentary radicalism and Religion.
To what extent was conflict over religion the main cause of tension between
the Crown and Political Nation in the years 1625 to 1629? [2022]
ARG. To a large extent because religion was the main reason for conflict as it
stimulated opposition and tension in financial and foreign policies.
, FACTORS: Religion, Finance and Foreign policy
‘It was Charles I’s stubborn adherence to the Divine Right that produced
conflict between Crown and Parliament in the years 1625 to 1629.’ Assess the
validity of this view. [Spec]
ARG. Charles’ stubborn adherence to the Divine Right promoted resistance
from Parliament and underpinned the divisive decisions made that eventually
dissolved Parliament and removed the voice of the people.
FACTORS: Charles’ leadership, financial policies and foreign policy/Buckingham.
‘Religion was the main reason for conflict between Crown and Parliament in
the years 1625 to 1629.’ Assess the validity of this view. [Spec]
ARG. Religion was the main reason for conflict as it stimulated opposition and
tension in financial and foreign policies.
FACTORS: Religion, Finance and Foreign policy.
‘In the years 1625 to 1629, Charles I successfully asserted his authority over
the Political Nation.’ Assess the validity of this view. [2025]
ARG. Whilst Charles had the already existing power of tradition and Divine
Right, his assertion of authority was met with significant hostility, even with
the authority to dissolve Parliament, respect towards him was limited.
FACTORS: Tradition & Prerogative rights, Parliamentary radicalism (Three
Resolutions and Buckingham disrespect) and Finance (met with hostility)
Unit 2
How seriously did Puritan opposition to Laudianism challenge the authority of
Charles I in the years 1633 to 1640? [2017]
ARG. Not to a large extent because it was opposition from the general
population that did not challenge Charles I’s position of authority but rather
contributed to already existing tensions.
FACTORS: Pamphlateers, emigration and individual uprisings.
‘Wentworth was successful in Ireland.’ Assess the validity of this view with
reference to the years 1633 to 1639. [2019]
ARG. Whilst Wentworth’s authority was imposed successfully to the point of
benefitting the King, the reaction to Thorough fundamentally increased
tensions and contributed to the outbreak of the Civil war.
FACTORS: Religion, Political and Irish profitability.
Unit 1
How significant was parliamentary radicalism in the breakdown of relations
between Crown and Parliament in the years 1625 to 1629? [2017]
ARG. Whilst Parliamentary radicalism aggravated the breakdown of relations,
it was more prominently Charles' absolutist values and refusal to negotiate
that drove the breakdown of relations, all of which was underpinned by
religion.
FACTORS: Parliamentary radicalism, Charles’ leadership/absolutism and
Religion the foundation of broken relations.
‘Buckingham was the cause of the deterioration in Crown-Parliament
relations in the years 1625 to 1629.' Assess the validity of this view. [2018]
ARG. Charles’ absolutist method of rule fuelled Parliamentary radicalism that
underpinned deterioration of reactions 1625-1629. Whilst Buckingham’s role
gave Charles a scapegoat to conflict over foreign policy, it was an
aggravator rather than long term breakdown of relations.
FACTORS: Buckingham, Charles’ leadership and Parliamentary radicalism.
‘Charles I’s style of rule was the main source of conflict between Crown and
Parliament in the years 1625 to 1629,' Assess the validity of this view. [2020]
ARG. Charles I’s style of rule was a strong source of conflict, stimulating
Parliamentary radicalism, however this source of conflict was underpinned by
religious discontent and aggravated by financial and foreign conflicts.
FACTORS: Charles I’s style of rule, religion and foreign policy with Buckingham.
To what extent was the deterioration in relations between Crown and
Parliament, in the years 1625 to 1629, due to the character and aims of
Charles I? [2021]
ARG. To a large extent because Charles I’s absolutist character aggravated
Parliament to the point of radicalism and underpinned the foreign, financial
and religious conflicts 1625-1629.
FACTORS: Charles I’s character, Parliamentary radicalism and Religion.
To what extent was conflict over religion the main cause of tension between
the Crown and Political Nation in the years 1625 to 1629? [2022]
ARG. To a large extent because religion was the main reason for conflict as it
stimulated opposition and tension in financial and foreign policies.
, FACTORS: Religion, Finance and Foreign policy
‘It was Charles I’s stubborn adherence to the Divine Right that produced
conflict between Crown and Parliament in the years 1625 to 1629.’ Assess the
validity of this view. [Spec]
ARG. Charles’ stubborn adherence to the Divine Right promoted resistance
from Parliament and underpinned the divisive decisions made that eventually
dissolved Parliament and removed the voice of the people.
FACTORS: Charles’ leadership, financial policies and foreign policy/Buckingham.
‘Religion was the main reason for conflict between Crown and Parliament in
the years 1625 to 1629.’ Assess the validity of this view. [Spec]
ARG. Religion was the main reason for conflict as it stimulated opposition and
tension in financial and foreign policies.
FACTORS: Religion, Finance and Foreign policy.
‘In the years 1625 to 1629, Charles I successfully asserted his authority over
the Political Nation.’ Assess the validity of this view. [2025]
ARG. Whilst Charles had the already existing power of tradition and Divine
Right, his assertion of authority was met with significant hostility, even with
the authority to dissolve Parliament, respect towards him was limited.
FACTORS: Tradition & Prerogative rights, Parliamentary radicalism (Three
Resolutions and Buckingham disrespect) and Finance (met with hostility)
Unit 2
How seriously did Puritan opposition to Laudianism challenge the authority of
Charles I in the years 1633 to 1640? [2017]
ARG. Not to a large extent because it was opposition from the general
population that did not challenge Charles I’s position of authority but rather
contributed to already existing tensions.
FACTORS: Pamphlateers, emigration and individual uprisings.
‘Wentworth was successful in Ireland.’ Assess the validity of this view with
reference to the years 1633 to 1639. [2019]
ARG. Whilst Wentworth’s authority was imposed successfully to the point of
benefitting the King, the reaction to Thorough fundamentally increased
tensions and contributed to the outbreak of the Civil war.
FACTORS: Religion, Political and Irish profitability.
