As we all likely know, Queen Elizabeth II, 'the Queen' our entire lives (unless you're far older than I) passed away in September. She was the second longest reigning monarch in history after Louis XIV of France. Her son, the decades-long Prince of Wales, is now King Charles III. There was apparently some thought he may choose another regnal name, as is his right, on his ascension, but that clearly didn't happen. The presumption, had he chosen otherwise, was that he'd become King George VII, following his grandfather (George VI) and great-grandfather (George V). Another reason, potentially, is the history of the previous two Kings Charles, which is what I want to talk more about.
Full disclosure: I got this idea from a Washington Post headline, or more accurately a tweet of one. It seemed like a great topic, one I already knew something about, and I outlined what I wanted to do before ever reading the article itself. I wasn't surprised to see what I wrote here is more thorough (though that other one is good too!)
To learn about King Charles I, we'll start with Queen Elizabeth I. The Elizabethan era spanned much of the 16th century (she ruled 1558-1603) and was a golden age for England, one seminal in forging what it meant to be English. This is when Shakespeare (1564-1616) lived and wrote. When Sir Francis Drake circled the world (1577-80) and Sir Walter Raleigh was granted a charter for the colony in Virginia (1584). When the Spanish Armada and a foreign invasion were repelled (1588), resulting in a long period of (relative) peace. This all contributed to the growing legendary status of 'The Virgin Queen.' Elizabeth also founded a new Protestant church, one that would become the Church of England. If you didn't know, she was the daughter of Henry VIII (by Anne Boleyn).
It became a problem Elizabeth was a virgin queen with no heirs, because the House of Tudor would end with her. This happened in 1603 and the English crown passed to her relative, the man on the throne in Scotland. In England this was the beginning of the House of Stuart. This king is labeled (at least on Wikipedia), confusingly, as 'James VI and I,' as he was the sixth James in Scotland and the first in England. It was through James' personal union that the United Kingdom was formed, connecting the English and Scottish kingdoms as continues today. An important detail on James is he was born Catholic (to Mary, Queen of Scots) but, even so, aided England's move toward Protestantism. Church issues were a pressing concern, inflamed especially in 1605 when Guy Fawkes, a Catholic, attempted to blow up Parliament in the Gunpowder Plot.
In 1625 James died and was succeeded by his son, Charles I. We made it. While James largely held the realm together, it fell apart under Charles. As a proud proponent of the divine right of kings he pressed the limits of his power and intended to rule England, Scotland and Ireland as one kingdom. Pushing uniform changes on all three churches led to being seen as too Catholic, and he wasn't helped by his marriage to the French princess Henrietta Maria (who was never crowned) or his lack of support for continental Protestants during the 30 Years' War. Unrest in Scotland began the unraveling. A Stuart king, viewed as too Catholic in England, more or less tried to force Anglicanism on the Scots (which is amusing considering later events). After the Bishop's Wars (1639-40), where pro-parliamentary soldiers fought an army of the king, Charles was forced to reconvene parliament, dissolved earlier that year. The new parliament was not supportive. Several of Charles' ministers were impeached for treason and his right hand, the Earl of Strafford, was executed. New laws said parliament could no longer be forcibly dismissed and that all taxes needed their consent. Charles eventually acquiesced but it didn't end there. There was another rebellion, now in Ireland, and parliament kept pushing the king with a long list of grievances grouping him into a large-scale Catholic conspiracy. They were also working on taking control of the army and impeaching the queen. On January 3, 1642 Charles attempted to arrest five members inside the House of Commons. It was the first time a king had entered parliament and the decision was ruinous. This kicked off the English Civil War.
If I have any intention of finishing this post I can't cover most of the events of this complicated war. Parliamentarians faced off with Royalists over who held the power and how England (and Scotland and Ireland) would be ruled. In 1648, after two distinct phases of warfare between the shifting factions, both lost by Charles, parliament was purged of the king's supporters. The remainder became known as the Rump, which put the king on trial for treason. On January 30, 1649 Charles lost his head.
After the regicide a new government was needed. Parliament declared it would be a republic, called the Commonwealth, with parliament and a small council (the 'Council of State') in charge. Four years later (1653) the Rump was dissolved entirely, by the army, and England was ruled directly by Oliver Cromwell, 'Lord Protector,' in what was military dictatorship for life. Cromwell, a Puritan, rose to prominence during recent wars, becoming the top Parliamentarian general and later advocating for the death of King Charles. His life is still much debated (pros: order>chaos, emphasis on morality; cons: power-hungry, brutal) and I find it fascinating he has a statue outside Westminster Abbey in London.
The man opposing Cromwell during the Interregnum was another Charles Stuart, son of the first King Charles. After Charles I was executed in 1649, Charles II was declared king in Scotland. In 1651 the new King Charles was defeated by Cromwell in battle and snuck away to Europe. Cromwell, unchallenged on the British Isles, became a dictator. The one-and-only British republic collapsed following the Lord Protector's death in 1658. Charles II was then invited back as king and returned on May 29, 1660. It was the Restoration, and a big celebration. Official documents would later claim he became king in 1649, ignoring the previous 11 years.
Charles II's reign contained many of the same problems as his father's, most importantly a major divergence on religion between the king and parliament. Parliament in the 1660s enacted the Clarendon Code, cementing the Church of England in English government and life. It was thoroughly anti-Catholic. King Charles, however, allied with Catholic France in 1670 and promised to convert to Catholicism at some point in the future. He pushed religious toleration of Catholics and other dissenters in 1672. Biggest of all, it became known that his brother and heir, James, was himself Catholic (Charles had no legitimate children). This led directly to the Exclusion Crisis (1679-81), and several attempts to remove James as heir. Nothing passed and the issue was left to be decided later. Apparently, overall, Charles II was a popular king. But his actions resulted in the end of the House of Stuart as monarchs.
Why do I say this? Well, James II (and VII) became king in 1685. And in 1688 he was deposed during what's called the Glorious Revolution. The birth of a male, presumably Catholic, heir following his ascension was one development. Another was James' decision to go after several Anglican bishops, destroying his political and popular standing in the process. A coalition soon invited William of Orange, a prince in the Netherlands, to invade and claim the throne. The justification for this was better than you'd think. William, a Protestant, was married to James' eldest daughter Mary, who'd been heir prior to the new son's birth. William invaded in 1688 and rather bloodlessly succeeded. James went into exile and William and Mary (yes, like the college) were proclaimed joint monarchs in 1689. The most important development with this revolution was the establishment of parliament's power over that of the crown, in theory creating a contract between the people and the king (or queen) to replace the concept of divine right. 1689 is also when the English Bill of Rights was passed, codifying these rules. In 1701 the Act of Settlement removed the Catholic descendants of Charles I from the line of succession for good, ensuring only Protestants would sit on the throne. This is how they got the Hanoverian kings, beginning with George I in 1714.
The major issues appeared finally settled. Parliament was now supreme over the crown and England would permanently be Protestant via the monarchy and the established Church. The people in England, it seemed, were happy. What are we forgetting? Oh, right, both Scotland and Ireland were not. There were uprisings immediately in 1689 and in subsequent years came a number of so-called Jacobite rebellions seeking a return of the Catholic Stuart kings. I'd love to cover and learn about these in more detail (which ended with the battle of Culloden, a tidbit you might know from the Outlander series), but this post is too long already. Elizabeth through the Glorious Revolution is a lot.
So, it shouldn't be surprising Charles III perhaps wouldn't use that regnal name. Charles I lost his head and Charles II's heir lost his crown. It's forever connected with Catholicism, the wars of religion and absolute monarchy. And after all that, another Charles was a leading Jacobite (see: the 'Bonnie Prince Charlie'). None of this was, in the end, enough to avoid using the name, and that's okay. Most of it is probably simple: we've known him as Charles for 73 years, what's the point of changing now?
That has to be enough for today. Hopefully you found this look back as fun as I did.
Comments