@
Blodyn Yeah the whole Puritan thing was pretty wrongheaded in many ways ( and dont even get me started on how Cromwell treated Ireland)>
But Charles I, well , where to start? He tried to institute the Divine Right of Kings, to rule however they want without restriction - he ruled without any Parliament at all for most of his reign, imposing taxes at a whim, arresting & occasionally executing political opponents without any legit trial (the whole Star Chamber secret trials thing), and a lot of other terrible political ideas, which is why the people revolted against him
The worst thing tho, was after he comprehensively lost the first English Civil War, he signed agreements for a more limited form of rule in conjunction with Parliament, then kept breaking his word on the agreements, and inciting fresh rebellions & civil wars, til he drove Parliament to realise that he would never stick to any agreement at all, and was completely untrustworthy. They couldnt even exile him, because the French & Spaniards would keep funding attempts to insert him back on the throne. He really was incredibly foolish and vain, and brought his disasters upon his own head. If he'd had any spirit of compromise or willingness to negotiate rather than asserting his right, like any 4 year old, to do anything he wanted, then he would never have been executed.
The idea that he died a martyr for his faith is a sad lie pushed by his son & supporters after the son ascended the throne as Charles II. Which, fair do's, any son would try to find some way of framing it as noble, but that doesnt mean we should agree with it out of filial piety.
Oops, end of rant. Sorry.
