The Now King of England’

Recent years have witnessed a vigorous debate as to whether the trial of Charles I was ever intended to end in regicide. But, even for historians who have questioned whether it was, the king’s execution generally remains the inevitable outcome of those proceedings: whatever his judges may have intended, there had been no real prospect that the king might actually accept the opportunity he was afforded to save his own life by submitting to them. This article demonstrates that, on the contrary, when the king came before the high court of justice in January 1649, he went out of his way to convey a willingness—in certain circumstances—to justify himself in the face of his accusers; and by the end, not only had he ceased declining his judges’ jurisdiction, he had even attempted to feign submission. It is argued that the king acted as he did partly because he perceived, in the crisis which now befell him, the glimmer of an opportunity to save the tattered remnants of England’s ancient constitution; and partly in an attempt to resolve, in accordance with his conscience, the painful dilemma in which he found himself, forcing him to decide whether his duties—to God, his people and his kingdoms–would be better served, and his family, their supporters, and their cause better protected, if he quit the stage in a martyr’s blaze of glory, or if he accepted the ignominy of living on, a king in name only, but a king nonetheless

Conscience · Dilemma · Duty · Economic Justice · Face (sociological concept · Glory · Jurisdiction · Kingdom · Martyr · Political science · Sociology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Historical Economic and Social Studies · History · Law · Philosophy · Reformation and Early Modern Christianity

• The Duke's Parrot

  Open Access•Jason Peacey•Parliamentary History•2020

  Add to list