Charles I: A Life of Religion, War and Treason: A Life of Religion, War and Treason

by Christopher Hibbert, David Starkey (Foreword)

When Charles Stuart was a young child, it seemed unlikely that he would survive, let alone become ruler of England and Scotland. Once shy and retiring, an awkward stutterer, he grew in stature and confidence under the guidance of the Duke of Buckingham; his marriage to Henrietta of Spain, originally planned to end the conflict between the two nations, became, after rocky beginnings, a true love match. Charles I is best remembered for having started the English Civil War in 1642 which led to his execution for treason, the end of the monarchy, and the establishment of a commonwealth until monarchy was restored in 1660. Hibbert's masterful biography re-creates the world of Charles I, his court, artistic patronage, and family life, while tracing the course of events that led to his execution for treason in 1649.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, British Literature, 17th Century, Royalty, Historical

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1968

About the author

Christopher Hibbert, MC, FRSL, FRGS (5 March 1924 - 21 December 2008) was an English writer, historian and biographer. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and the author of many books, including Disraeli, Edward VII, George IV, The Rise and Fall of the House of Medici, and Cavaliers and Roundheads.

Described by Professor Sir John Plumb as "a writer of the highest ability and in the New Statesman as "a pearl of biographers," he established himself as a leading popular historian/biographer whose works reflected meticulous scholarship.

Reviews

[Scott · Rating 2 out of 5]

I found this to be a distressingly poor biography of one of the most fascinating of the British monarchs.

Charles I is remembered primarily for the English Civil War and the circumstances of his regicide. Neither of these is detailed convoiningly in this vapid and dull text.

Whilst the general reticence and distance of Charles as a person makes him a difficult subject for analysis, the fact that he comes across as a blank slate after 300 pages of text suggests a less-than-engaged biographer.

The facts are all present, the sources assuredly immaculate, but this is a dull and lifeless work that consistently failed to engage this reader.

[Matthew Selby · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lots of unnecessary information that can easily be skimmed. But all in all very boring. Still got the info I needed though.

[Christina Rothfusz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Charles I has always been one of the most fascinating Kings of England for me. Being beheaded in a nation that has always loved and revered their Kings (even when they hated them) is quite an accomplishment.

This book though, tells the story of the man. If you want to understand why England came to this point and why he was eventually beheaded, then this is not the book you want to read. It did however, give a interesting insight into the man behind the King.

How Charles I became the adult man he was and the build up to his final days were well told and very interesting.

[Lois · Rating 3 out of 5]

Extremely readable mostlt interesting

[Jeremy Perron · Rating 5 out of 5]

His life could have been much better had his older brother Henry lived. That way England could have had its King Henry IX and Charles, the Duke of York, could have been a great art director. Instead death took his brother's life and sent Charles to a position in which he was so over his head that he lost it.

During the course of this book I wondered how a monarchy so powerful in the days of the Tudors could become so weak and feeble. Part of King Charles' problem was he was the son of King James. King James I had often boasted of his absolute power and wondered why his ancestors allowed an institution such as Parliament to come into existence. If King James had only done a tad bit of research he may have discovered that Edward Longshanks stole the idea from Simon De Montfort. King Edward I thought it would be best to have a meeting where the various interests of the kingdom could discuss any problems the kingdom was facing, raise money, and if anyone had any grievances to be able to air them. This allowed the King to govern more effectively and for most of its history Parliament was just a state of being as opposed to an institution with its own interests. For many effective monarchs, Parliament was just a method used by the King to strengthen his own power. One could imagine that Edward I, Edward III, Edward IV, Henry VII, Henry VIII, or Elizabeth I could have handled the problems the King Charles had to deal with far more effectively than he did. For King Charles I was brought up listening to his father's theories and believed every one of them.

Charles was clearly the wrong man for the job. He was so stubborn in his position that he would never negotiate until it was too late, and then, when willing, he wanted the previous terms offered to him. He had almost no sense of his situation. Despite being absolutely sure in his position he was slow to action. Everything he tried from his attempts to arrest Pym and other members of the Commons to his battle strategies he was too slow and unimaginative.

"Underlying melancholy there was a certain lack of sympathy in the King's responses, a defensive rejection of an intimacy that might reveal him as a less assured man than he tried to be. Few men ever felt that Charles really liked them. Few servants ever felt that their services were truly appreciated: if they did not do their duty they were politely dismissed, if they did do their duty they were doing what was expected of them, they were treated well but rarely with a hint of warmth or affection." (p.136)

After his defeat and imprisonment he remained as stubborn as ever, he made several attempts to escape and he tried to hold out hoping things might turn his way again. His moment of glory and greatness came, ironically, at his lowest moments. An American statesman, Senator Al Gore Sr., once observed that in defeat one could often let their glory out. Charles could and did at his trial and execution. He directly challenged the court questioning its legitimacy. His bravery and dignity at his own execution turned him into a martyr.

The one drawback of this book is there is no real discussion on the legitimacy of King Charles' trial. When Louis XVI is tried by his people it is done with the monarchy abolished and the former King reduced to just plain citizen Louis Capet. When King Charles is tired he is tired as the King of England. That the King could be tried under existing laws is something absurd when one thinks of it. Yet this is never brought up, the only thing about the legal irregularities brought about was the mention that most of the nation's top attorneys refused to participate.

In the end I found this to be a great an informative book. King Charles I was probably the second worst King of England, with only King Edward II being worse. Was Charles a tyrant like Richard II? I do not think so. Yes, he could be brutal, but no more than the Tudors or many other great kings and monarchs of this time period. I do feel what replaced him was, in the end, far worse.

[George Hodgson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not quite a four star book, but definitely more than three. A good quick read about a turning point in history. It has a decent biography following it, but not footnoted. A pretty good read.

[Brenna · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the age of the book, I think Hibbert covered all of the major bases and did it in a very informative way. I walked away with a much better understanding what why the Civil War occured but thought the ending was a bit over the top (the ending of the war, not the book). I would have liked the Author's Note to include a run down of what happened to Charles I's children who were left behind. Hibbert alludes to death but provides no explanation. Oh well, I guess I will find out in another book. Overall, a very good introduction and reference guide to Charles I.

[Julie · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very accessible biography on an often overshadowed monarch. Hibbert's book gives a "portrait in the round" of Charles I and the larger forces at work in England during the time of the Civil War.

[Katy M · Rating 2 out of 5]

I kept finding my mind wandering as I was reading this. It didn't hold my interest very well. And, I didn't really get the feeling that I knew Charles I at all at the end of the book.

[Eric Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

This biography of Great Britain's King Charles the First brims with detail, yet lacks a map, describes many playes, yet includes no dramatis personae to help us. Lacking these, the narrative drags, being harder to follow than it should be. I would give it four stars if these were included.

This narrative history, while being well told, does not feel modern. It feels polite and restrained, has a muffled quality as if to obscure embarrassing details. I'm not saying the author is hiding anything, rather it is a matter of style and approach to the material.

I'm glad I read this book, but I doubt it is the best biography of Charles I.

[Ed · Rating 4 out of 5]

One reason to read a biography is to get a better idea about the character of the subject. Character, it seems to me, to be revealed in a subject's decisions and how they are made. By this standard this biography of Charles I is excellent. Charles had to make many decisions on his road to disaster and Hibbert lays out how he went about making those decisions. It is a tragic story well told. At the same time Hibbert provides a lot of background about the period and other actors in the drama.

[Mike Pinter · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having read a more complete biography about Charles II by Antonia Fraser I had felt that this biography about his father was too brief, but in the notes at the end the author explains that this is more of a sketch and refers the readers to a rich bibliography. It is worth reading exactly because it gives a quick overview, but the importance of the events and people involved requires reading several books by different authors to get a fair overview.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hibbert's writing style makes the book much more interesting to read it was almost written as a story but with with historical facts. First got this for university but ended up ordering other books from the author

[Erik Graff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well and entertainingly written for the layperson, this is a rather shallow account of the life of Charles I of Britain. I call it shallow because it is weak in explaining the interests and passions that led to the civil war and the monarch's beheading.

[Ruth · Rating 4 out of 5]

very interesting

[Lady of the Lake · Rating 4 out of 5]

Christopher Hibbert did a fine job laying out the life of Charles I making it easy for me to "know" him. I came away from reading this book aware of so much more than just of Charles I. He grew from a weak child who was insecure and even had a stutter. No one would ever have imagined him to live let alone become the ruler that he did.His political marriage to Henrietta of Spain began to try and unite the two countries had eventually blossomed into a marriage of respect and true love. In this book there was so much to give me the human side of Charles which I liked very much.Charles I however is best known for starting the English Civil War in 1642. This books is a good representation of his life up until his execution for treason in 1649.

[Janine Urban · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. This book is a good overview of the life of Charles I. The second son of James I, Charles was a sickly, weak boy who succeeded his brother Henry as Prince of Wales upon his untimely death at age 18. It's clear that Charles was doomed from the get go. His father believed that the sovereign was all powerful. That he held Christ's place upon this earth; basically what he says goes. These opinions, which Charles also held, would mold and shape his reign; leading to the absolving of parliament, offices for his favorites, civil war, and loss of his head. I would have liked to have seen some more discussion of the trial; the few pages it covered didn't feel like enough, and more discussion on the events that led up to the civil war would have earned a higher rating.

[C · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you've made a trip to London (as I recently did), and it sparked your interest in the history associated with Charles I, this is wonderful follow-up read. The biography's most redeeming attribute is that it isn't bogged down with minutiae that can bore a non-historian to tears. In fact, it reads almost like a historical novel but, of course, contains more accuracy of account.

[Patricia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read. I've read some of Christopher Hibbert's other biographies and this is one of the best of them. I knew the history of Charles I but this book went into just the right amount of detail. I must admit I got a little bored with some of the battles but this book is still very good and very interesting.

[Mrs Cox · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book and indeed have dipped into it on many occasions when researching aspects of Charles' life. It is very informative, easy to read and leaves the reader wanting to learn more.

[Christieanddavid19 · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was as good as any of the other Hibbert books I've read except for the ending. I wish Hibbert had included some information about Charles I's family and other major players after Charles I was removed.

[Susan Grimshaw · Rating 4 out of 5]

More interesting than I had expected and very well illustrated. Several typing errors including a wrong date [1624 should have read 1642] had escaped the proof reading.