The outbreak, of, the Civil War in Britain, sixteen thirty-eight, sixteen forty-two.
In sixteen twenty-nine, young King Charles I, decided to rule without parliament, which in his first four years, had caused him a lot of problems he just couldn't get on with them.
So you get the eleven years of Charles's personal rule.
Which gradually broke down.
One after another the three kingdoms, Scotland, England, Ireland go into revolt.
Why. Um, the Whigs.
The Whig Theory of Sc_ School of History, in the nineteenth century, used to call, these eleven p_ years' personal rule, the 'eleven years' tyranny'.
Which one might say is a loaded, um, way of describing it.
In fact, was it so tyrannical. Largely no.
You could argue that, Charles I, in the sixteen thirties, was, far and away less blood-thirsty and tyrannical, than Henry VIII, in the fifteen thirties.
It was also the case, however, that a more sophisticated, and literate ruling elite, um, were less ready to put up, um, with, not being consulted.
Having no parliament to speak through, than their great-grandfathers had been in the time of Henry VIII.
So it's not so much the quality, or, terrible quality of Charles's rule.
But, the way, it was perceived.
The changing values of the time.
After all, kings had ruled without parliament, for long periods before.
Um, in the reign of the_ Charles's father, James I, between sixteen ten and sixteen twenty-one, there's only one parliament.
The Addled Parliament of sixteen fourteen, and as it's name implies, or it's nickname implies, that was rather abortive, and spent three weeks doing not very much before the exasperated king dissolved it.
Um, ruling without parliament was not unconstitutional.
There was nothing, in the English constitution said the king, had to call parliament.
Um, he called it if wanted to, um, also, it's_ ruling without parliament is purely negative.
It's not necessarily a positive program.
But some historians have seen a rather feeble, and halt in progress to absolutism.
Continental-style absolutism, in the sixteen thirties.
Um, but feeble and halting, because Charles should have built up a standing army if he wanted to be a real absolutist monarch.
And a civil service.
Um, professional civil service.
Perhaps he would have done if he'd had time.
Um, but things collapsed, before he could get round to it. We don't know.
What he did try and build up with the famous ship money.
The tax taken without parliamentary, authorisation, was a navy.
Which of course, it's not much use, to have land-based royal absolutism.
Um, so then, the factors which led to this great revolt, from fifteen thirty-eight, are many and various.
Scotland, was the first to go.
And here religion, is, very much the factor.
Um, Charles, and Lord, with supreme statesmanship intact, decide to introduce the Anglican Church, into Scotland.
Decide to make the official Scottish Calvinist Kerk, um, Anglican, if you like, and high Anglican at that. It's a national revulsion, ensues.
Which is the stuff of Scottish folklore, which I won't go into now.
Jenny Geddes, the kalewife, hurling a stool at the, um, in St. Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh, at the head of the officiating, pro-Anglican dean.
Anyway, the Scottish nobles and gentry signed the covenant.
Which says that they were not part, before Charles caves in, and restores_ recognises their own Calvinist Kerk, and they invade England.
That in itself, forces Charles, eventually, to call parliament.
The short parliament, sixteen forty, to get money to fight the Scots.
But the_ Pym and Saye and Sele, who dominate the short parliament, are in league with the Scots, and say they will not vote Charles any money before he, dismembers his personal rule regime.
Um, the English are annoyed about religion, the nor_ the Lordian innovations.
They're annoyed about arbitrary taxation like ship money.
And, above all, they want a parliament.
They want representative institutions.
So they, the English nobility and gentry can share power with the, um, king.
What about the Irish Revolt of sixteen forty-one.
If you want the cause of the Irish Revolt, um, to do them properly, I'll be here for a very long time.
So I'll cut them. Just about every issue conceivable in Ireland.
Ireland is the only one of the three kingdoms which is under colonial rule.
A foreign English, and to some degree Scottish elite, is imposing an alien culture, an alien language, and an alien religion, on the native Irish.
Remember, at this time, the Irish are overwhelmingly Gaelic-speaking.
They have their own language, and they're overwhelmingly Roman Catholic.
Um, also the ratio population of Ireland, to England, is much higher than today.
Uh, Ireland has about sixty percent of the population of England.
These days I would say it's got, um, more like eight percent the population.
So, a load of revolting Irish on your doorstep, is very alarming.
Particularly as they're Catholic, and there's a mutual racist hatred between the English, and the Irish.
Which let us hope, is not true today.
The fulcrum, however, of the whole Civil War explosion is usually England.
The revolts in the two Celtic countries, gave the English their chance.
The king had to recall Parliament, to get tax, to pay for the Scottish Revolt.
And, by the way, he did not get this tax.
Then in sixteen forty-one, the Irish Revolt of alien papists, from the English point of view, weakened him still further.
And also alarmed Parliament.
Um, though, a mixture of the, fear of the Irish Revolt, and the king's wish to exploit the situation, destroyed the constitutional compromise, which Parliament had forced on the king in sixteen forty-one.
If that had held, there might not have been a Civil War.
The result is well-known.
The Civil War, and eventual execution of the king, in sixteen forty-nine.
The monarchy was restored in sixteen sixty in the shape of Charles II, son of Charles I.
But was never the same again.
Um, absolutism, could never be seriously on the cards again.
The brief threatening of it in the sixteen eighties was more apparent than real, as a revolution_ revolution of sixteen eighty-eight showed.
What general explanations, then, can we give for the Civil War.
I'd say you have to avoid general explanations in one way.
And go into a lot of detail, which we can't do here.
But some which have been advanced, religion, and constitutional issues, those are the nineteenth century Whig School of History.
There's a lot in that.
Three, the Marxist idea, a bourgeois revolution against, what they awkwardly name, the feudal-absolutist monarchy.
I think that's more outdated.
That's an idea of the nineteen thirties to fifties.
Personally I think it's a more outdated organising principle, than the nineteenth century Whig theory.
And how, the_ the very awkwardness, of, that Charles's Monarchy was feudal-absolutist, um, shows that the theory is a bit cumbersome.
Three, um, one which is more recent, is that the Civil War, was a split in the elite. A split in the nobility and gentry.
After all, um, the parliamentary side, contains, some real, real raving left-wing radicals, like the Earl of Essex, the Earl of Manchester, the Earl of Pembroke.
Uh, the Earl of Bedford, and even the Earl of Salisbury.
The son of the minister of Elizabeth and James.
It's very hard to make out that, uh, the parliamentarians were the underdogs, while the royalists were the possessors.
It's a split in the elite. Who_ wha- really want to restore, what they imagined was the constitutional balance of the time of Elizabeth.
In fact, um, what they want to restore is not the constitutional balance of the time of Elizabeth. But, they think it is.
Um, and_ but once the elite is split, of course, as the years go on_ the sixteen forties go on, far more radical forces, emerge.
Cromwell, and his Ironsides, are one example.
But then, by sixteen forty-seven, you get the levellers and the diggers, who are too radical for Cromwell.
And the various lunatic, half-political, half-religious sects of the late sixteen forties.
So, as Shakespeare said, 'take but degree away; untune that string. And lo. What discord follows. '
Or to put it more crudely, if you open the box, you don't know what's going to fly out.