Charles I’s Personal Rule: his chief ministers; methods of government;…

The idea

Charles I’s Personal Rule (1629–1640) saw him govern without Parliament, relying heavily on chief ministers like Thomas Wentworth (Earl of Strafford) and William Laud. His methods of government bypassed parliamentary legislation, utilising prerogative courts like the Star Chamber to enforce royal will and maintain order. To survive without parliamentary subsidies, Charles implemented controversial financial policies, exploiting feudal prerogatives. The most notorious was Ship Money, levied inland from 1635, alongside distraint of knighthood and forest fines. The reaction against these policies grew increasingly hostile, culminating in the 1637 Hampden Case, which, despite a narrow royal victory, galvanised widespread opposition to what many perceived as arbitrary, absolutist rule.

What earns the marks

• Identify the roles of key ministers, specifically Wentworth (Thorough in Ireland) and Laud, in executing Charles's policies.
• Explain the function of prerogative courts, such as the Star Chamber and High Commission, as methods of government during the Personal Rule.
• Detail specific financial policies, including Ship Money, monopolies like Popish Soap, and forest fines, used to raise non-parliamentary revenue.
• Analyse the reaction against these policies, using the Hampden Case (1637) and the Providence Island Company as evidence of organised opposition.

Common mistakes and how to put them right

• Claiming Charles I raised taxes through Parliament during this period.

  Put it right: Charles relied entirely on prerogative income and feudal dues, as Parliament was not called between 1629 and 1640.

• Stating that Ship Money was universally refused from its introduction.

  Put it right: Ship Money initially had high collection rates of over 90 percent until the late 1630s when opposition and the Scottish crisis disrupted it.

• Confusing the roles of Wentworth and Laud.

  Put it right: Wentworth focused on secular administration and finance, especially in Ireland, while Laud focused on religious uniformity, though both promoted the policy of Thorough.

Exam tips

• Use the Hampden Case to demonstrate the legal and constitutional arguments used by the opposition against Ship Money.
• Evaluate the extent to which Charles's financial policies were successful in the short term versus their long-term political cost.
• Link the methods of government, such as the use of the Star Chamber, to growing fears of continental-style absolutism in England.