Was King Charles I England’s Worst Monarch?
King Charles I is the only English king to have been tried for treason and executed. But does this automatically make him England’s worst monarch? Historians have long debated his reign—was he truly incompetent, or has history judged him too harshly?
King Charles I: Forever Condemned?
Historians have not been kind to Charles I. Barry Coward called him “the most incompetent monarch since Henry VI,” while Robert Hutton declared him “the worst king since the Middle Ages.” John Phillips Kenyon summed it up: “Charles Stuart was a man of contradiction and controversy.”
But was he really that bad? Did he lose his throne—and his head—through sheer incompetence, or was he simply a victim of his time? To answer this, we must examine both his failures and his overlooked successes.
Why Is Charles I Remembered as a Failure?
Charles I joins a notorious list of England’s royal disappointments:
– Ethelred the Unready – Lost England to Danish invaders.
– King John – Forced to sign the Magna Carta, lost the crown jewels in a river.
– Edward V – One of the doomed “Princes in the Tower.”
– Richard III – Lost his crown (and reputation) at Bosworth Field.
– Lady Jane Grey – Reigned for just nine days.
– Henry VIII – Famous for his six wives and religious turmoil.
– Edward VIII – Abdicated for love.
But Charles I stands out—he was executed after a treason trial. On January 30, 1649, he was beheaded outside the Banqueting House in Whitehall. His death marked the end of absolute monarchy and the rise of Oliver Cromwell’s Commonwealth.
Four Reasons for His Unpopularity
1. Suspected Catholic Sympathies – His marriage to Henrietta Maria of France, a devout Catholic, fueled fears he wanted to restore Catholicism in Protestant England.
2. Forcing the English Prayer Book on Scotland – His attempt to impose Anglican worship led to the Bishops’ Wars and rebellion.
3. Ignoring Public Welfare – His policies, like draining the Fens, angered commoners.
4. Dissolving Parliament – He ruled alone for 11 years, believing in the Divine Right of Kings—that monarchs answer only to God.
Did Charles I Do Anything Right?
Despite his reputation, Charles had some successes:
1. Strengthening the Royal Navy
He expanded England’s naval power, increasing warships and improving organization—laying the foundation for Britain’s future naval dominance.
2. Securing Peace Treaties
He ended England’s involvement in the costly Thirty Years’ War with the Treaty of Susa (1629) and Treaty of Madrid (1630).
3. Patronage of the Arts
Charles was a passionate art collector, acquiring works by Titian, Raphael, and Rembrandt. His collection became the foundation of the Royal Collection, the world’s largest private art collection. He also commissioned iconic buildings like the Queen’s House in Greenwich and the Banqueting House in Whitehall.
4. Religious Tolerance Efforts
His Declaration of Sports (1633) allowed Sunday recreation after church—a small but meaningful step toward easing religious tensions.
Queen Victoria’s Sympathy for Charles I
Even Queen Victoria admired Charles I—particularly his tragic daughter, Princess Elizabeth, who died in captivity. Victoria erected a memorial to her, showing respect for the Stuart family’s suffering.
Charles I’s Lasting Legacy
– His statue at Charing Cross marks the official center of London.
– His 1642 invasion of Parliament is still commemorated in the State Opening of Parliament ceremony.
– His life has inspired books like White King: Charles I, Traitor, Murderer, Martyr (2018).
Verdict: Was He Really the Worst?
Charles I was not a tyrant—he was a devoted husband, loving father, and patron of the arts. But his stubbornness, refusal to compromise, and belief in absolute power led to his downfall.
As historian Kevin Sharpe argued, he was “a dynamic man of conscience”—just one who ruled at the wrong time.
Final Thought: Maybe he wasn’t England’s worst monarch—just the most unlucky.
—
What do you think? Was Charles I unfairly maligned, or did he deserve his fate? Share your thoughts in the comments!