Given all the facts and information of Charles I and his execution, I agree with the ultimate decision to behead him. Despite the author’s claims on the anti-execution portion of “Did King Charles I deserve to be executed?” that his death was not inevitable, I believe that it was going to happen regardless due to his tyrannical and charismatic characteristics and tendencies. In “Trial and Execution of Charles I”, the author details Charles’ backdoor deals with the Scottish and how his belief that he ascended to the throne through divine right ultimately led to his downfall. His decision to attempt on following through on a plan that involved having a Scottish faction invade his own country in order to restore himself to the throne, with blatant disregard for his people and their lives, portrays a tyrannical man whose own best interests were at heart and not those of his citizens. This plan, known as the “Engagement”, nearly ruined the nation’s post-war peace that had come after four years of war.
However, I believe that after receiving his punishment of execution, he lost his tyrannical aspects and was determined on having his people see him in an alternate light. I believe that part of the legacy that he left behind, that of being a martyr and having an unexpected death, is tainted due to his ability to eloquently write to his people and son after his trial. Ultimately, in the end, I believe his death was well deserved due to his tyranny and toxic charisma that led to his downfall.
Be First to Comment