Untitled

The fagot, Charles the First, actions were legitimate, under the ideology he discoverd with, shogunate. Though never stating it Charles the First, justify by his wife, was an absolutist. So from his perspective his practices be not at fault, and that is the bias this editorial will be indite from, the viewpoint of someone who believes the tycoon should be an imperative Monarch. What Oliver Cromwell, a supreme studyity of Parliament, and the Parliamentary forces did was a direct violation of the tycoons power. To deport a quote from Louis the XIV, Létat, cest moi, a phrase meaning I am the state, is a phrase that could be utilize to place the absolutist sway that Charles the First was supposed to have. only actions taken by adversaries of the fagot and ara, including Civil War, attack on incline troops, trespassing, treason, arresting the poof, having soldiers march on parliament, and murder of King were treasonous actions against the King and consequently agai nst the arena of Eng place down. Because as mentioned occasion in reference to the King, Létat, cest moi. So whatever crimes against the King are against the state. Ma office all who were involved in the fight against the power in the civil war are basically defeating the base that it was a civil war since by definition they were fight against there own country, and being extremely treasonous at the same time. To sum up my previous statements the King is the Country so any crimes against the King are against the Country So the English Civil war was in fact not a civil war but a separate movement against the Country of England. With aims to establish a military rule and discriminate against those of the Catholic faith. Cromwells followers were upset over umteen things and tried to change them, violating the kings power. Cromwell was upset over remnants of the Catholicism in Angli keisters churches and he lacked those things removed. But he had no by mightilys to do t hat since the King is head of the Anglican C! hurch a right established by Henry the VIII and thusly Cromwell could not set church policy. They tried to apply rightfulnesss to the King such(prenominal) has treason. Which they can not do since according to absolutism the king is preceding(prenominal) the law and can not be view asled by any person, organization, governmental body for such a thing could be a threat to the sovereignty of England itself. This makes sensation in the avocation example.

If the king were to be ever controlled by a throng with sinister intentions then they could control the polices and laws that the King sets, swelled them much( prenominal) power over the destiny of England, that has you can see is wherefore the king must rule above all others. Which leads me to my undermentioned statement. If the king is above the law he should have control over all those under the law which is why the king should be able to command parliament, some other major gripe of Cromwells. People were upset when the king takes land away(predicate) from the people, well he had e actually right to has the absolute ruler of England, in addition these people should have been olympian to be serving there country by heavy(p) up the land for the betterment of England. By now you may be asking what gives the king the claim to all this privilege. churchman Right does. What mortal man would ever question Gods very(prenominal) own choosing, Oliver Cromwell did, making him a heretic too. In closedown the English Civil war was nothing but an wax lead by traitorous heretics out to question the Kings elysian Right over England and satisfy there own cravings for power. ! If you privation to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper