To be chosen by God to be a king, or to be the voice of God is a pretty far fetched idea. However, I find that it was rather common in earlier times when the church and state were not separate. Both Charles I and James established that they were an extension of God. This is a red flag when it comes to tyrannicide. This is not necessarily true in the church, but when a king has these ideals.
Charles I was truly a Tyrant. His ideals with God, and the manipulation he used to try and create a civil war. In addition he was using this to his own benefit. The speech he made before his execution ran along the lines of a narcissist. Narcissism and tyrannicide go hand in hand. With one you usually find the other.
I agree that Charles I was something along the lines of a tyrant. He ruled with arrogance and can somewhat be seen as a traitor. You made a good point when you mentioned how narcissism goes hand in hand with tyranny.
I liked how you connected narcissism with tyranny and I agree with that statement. I believe with a certain level of narcissism you get a tyrant. I also liked how you used the example of the last speech he had he seemed very narcissistic and that showed how he thought as a person, even to his last few moments alive.
I like your idea of how narcissism and tyranny go hand in hand. This is because when you have a narcissistic leader and obtains those qualities, the leader has great potential to be a tyrant of some sort.
There is no doubt in my mind that Charles I was a tyrant. As we discussed in class, a tyrant uses his power for his own benefit, and these readings made it clear that Charles I fits the definition. His conspiring with the Scots is a shocking example of how Charles I was willing to do anything he believed it was moral.
I definitely agree that there was a problem of narcissism there. Charles I definitely was also a tyrant until the day he died which is crazy. So I love the point that you made about tyrannicide and narcissism going hand in hand.