If this is your course, you are studying why relations between Crown and Parliament deteriorated under James I and Charles I, why civil war began, and why monarchy was replaced by a republic before being restored in 1660.

This OCR unit combines two different kinds of work. You need secure knowledge for an essay on 1603–1646 and a separate source-based enquiry on 1646–1660. This guide builds both foundations without assuming that you already understand Stuart politics.

First, check that this is your course

• OCR A Level History A;
• Unit group 1: British period study and enquiry;
• Y108/01;
• The Early Stuarts and the Origins of the Civil War, 1603–1660.

The course has two linked study areas:

1. The Early Stuarts and the Origins of the Civil War, 1603–1646 — tested through an essay.
2. The execution of Charles I and the Interregnum, 1646–1660 — tested through four contemporary sources.

Do not confuse this with OCR’s AS code Y138 or with broader AQA, Edexcel or WJEC Stuart options. The content overlap is real, but the assessment is different.

Your course in one view

Period study: 1603–1646

1. James I and Parliament: monarchy, finance, favourites, religion and foreign policy.
2. Charles I to 1629: Buckingham, war, finance, the Petition of Right and parliamentary breakdown.
3. Personal Rule, 1629–1640: financial policies, Laud, opposition and the crisis in Scotland.
4. The origins and opening of civil war, 1640–1646: the Long Parliament, Ireland, failed settlement, mobilisation and Parliament’s victory.

Enquiry: 1646–1660

1. From victory to regicide: negotiations, army politics, the Second Civil War, Pride’s Purge and the trial of Charles I.
2. The Commonwealth: Rump government, war, finance, religion and Cromwell’s rise.
3. The Protectorate: its constitution, parliaments, Major-Generals, religious policy and search for settlement.
4. Collapse and Restoration: Cromwell’s death, political instability, Monck and the return of Charles II.

The starting world in 1603

James VI of Scotland inherited the English throne as James I when Elizabeth I died. England and Scotland shared a monarch but remained separate kingdoms. Ireland was also governed by the English Crown, while Wales had been incorporated into the English legal and parliamentary system under the Tudors.

Early Stuart monarchy was powerful but not absolute. The king appointed ministers, directed foreign policy, summoned and dissolved Parliament and exercised prerogative powers. Yet he needed Parliament for extraordinary taxation and legislation. Parliament was not democratic in the modern sense, but MPs defended privileges and expected the monarch to consult political elites.

The Crown’s ordinary income had not kept pace with inflation and the growing costs of government. Elizabeth left debt, but James’s spending and generosity increased the problem. This financial weakness repeatedly turned policy disagreements into constitutional disputes.

Religion was politically explosive. The Church of England was Protestant and episcopal, with the monarch at its head. Puritans sought further reform. Catholics faced penalties and suspicion, especially after the Gunpowder Plot. Disputes about ceremony, bishops and doctrine were also disputes about obedience and authority.

Starting-world check

1. Why was James I king of several kingdoms rather than one united state?
2. Which powers belonged to the monarch?
3. Why did the Crown still need Parliament?
4. How could financial weakness create political conflict?
5. Why was religion connected to authority?

Essential vocabulary

• Divine right: belief that a king’s authority came from God.
• Prerogative: powers exercised by the monarch without ordinary parliamentary consent.
• Parliamentary privilege: rights claimed by Parliament, including freedom of debate.
• Imposition: a customs duty levied through royal authority.
• Puritan: a Protestant seeking further reform of worship, discipline or society.
• Arminianism: a religious outlook stressing ceremony, clerical authority and free will; opponents associated it with Catholicism.
• Personal Rule: Charles I’s government without Parliament from 1629 to 1640.
• Ship Money: a levy traditionally connected to coastal defence but extended by Charles I across England.
• Militia: locally raised armed forces whose control became crucial in 1641–42.
• New Model Army: Parliament’s centralised professional army created in 1645.
• Regicide: the killing of a monarch; here, the execution of Charles I.
• Commonwealth: the republic declared after the abolition of monarchy in 1649.
• Protectorate: government under a Lord Protector from 1653.
• Provenance: a source’s authorship, purpose, audience, date and circumstances.

Period study: The Early Stuarts and the Origins of the Civil War, 1603–1646

1. James I: monarchy, finance and Parliament

James believed strongly in divine-right monarchy, but he could compromise in practice. Parliament accepted monarchy yet objected when royal actions appeared to threaten taxation by consent or parliamentary privilege. Disputes were serious, but neither side was seeking civil war.

Finance created recurrent tension. James inherited debt and an outdated revenue system weakened by inflation. He also spent lavishly on court entertainment and gave generous gifts to favourites. The Crown increased customs impositions after the 1606 Bate’s Case, provoking parliamentary concern.

Robert Cecil’s Great Contract of 1610 proposed a regular parliamentary income in exchange for surrendering feudal revenues. It failed because king and MPs distrusted the cost and terms. The failure left the underlying financial problem unresolved.

James’s parliaments also defended their right to discuss foreign policy and religion. In 1621, disagreement over the Protestant Palatinate and a proposed Spanish marriage led James to tear Parliament’s Protestation from its journal. In 1624, however, king and Parliament cooperated more closely against Spain. The relationship could therefore recover when objectives aligned.

Knowledge check

1. Which financial problems did James inherit?
2. Which problems did his own choices worsen?
3. Why did the Great Contract fail?
4. Why did impositions concern Parliament?
5. What does cooperation in 1624 reveal?

2. James I: religion, favourites and foreign policy

Puritans presented the Millenary Petition in 1603. At the Hampton Court Conference, James accepted limited changes and authorised a new Bible but retained bishops and the existing Church structure. The Gunpowder Plot of 1605 intensified anti-Catholic fear, though James sometimes moderated enforcement for diplomatic reasons.

Court favourites became targets of criticism because they received wealth and access. Robert Carr’s fall and the rise of George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, encouraged claims that patronage distorted policy. Buckingham’s influence continued under Charles I.

The Thirty Years’ War placed James under pressure to defend his daughter Elizabeth and her husband Frederick. His preference for diplomacy and the Spanish Match angered Protestants who wanted intervention. When the marriage negotiations failed, policy turned towards war, leaving Charles and Buckingham with commitments they struggled to fulfil.

Knowledge check

1. What did Hampton Court change, and what remained?
2. Why did the Gunpowder Plot matter politically?
3. Why were favourites more than a personal issue?
4. How did the Palatinate crisis affect Parliament?
5. What problems did James leave Charles in 1625?

3. Charles I, Buckingham and breakdown, 1625–1629

Charles I was reserved, determined and strongly committed to royal authority. His marriage to the Catholic Henrietta Maria heightened suspicion. Buckingham directed failed expeditions against Cádiz and to relieve La Rochelle. Parliament attacked mismanagement and tried to impeach him.

War required money. When Parliament refused sufficient supply, Charles used a Forced Loan. Those who refused could be imprisoned, while troops were billeted in civilian homes and martial law was imposed in some areas. These measures connected immediate grievances to the larger question of whether royal power was limited by law.

The Petition of Right in 1628 opposed taxation without parliamentary consent, arbitrary imprisonment, billeting and martial law. Charles accepted it but disputed Parliament’s interpretation. Buckingham’s assassination removed the favourite without solving mistrust.

In 1629, MPs attacked Arminianism and customs collection. When the Speaker tried to adjourn the Commons, members held him in his chair while resolutions were passed. Charles dissolved Parliament and imprisoned leading opponents. Personal Rule began.

Knowledge check

1. Why did Buckingham damage Charles’s relationship with Parliament?
2. How did failed war intensify financial conflict?
3. What did the Petition of Right seek to establish?
4. Why did religious policy worsen the crisis?
5. Why did Charles choose Personal Rule?

4. Personal Rule, 1629–1640

Charles governed without Parliament for eleven years. Supporters could point to peace, administrative activity and improved royal income. Opponents later called it the Eleven Years’ Tyranny, but organised resistance remained limited for much of the decade.

Financial policies included distraint of knighthood, forest fines, monopolies and Ship Money. Extending Ship Money inland and collecting it annually made it especially controversial. John Hampden’s legal challenge failed narrowly in 1637, but declining payment showed weakening consent.

William Laud became archbishop of Canterbury in 1633. He enforced ceremonial worship, altar rails and clerical discipline. Charles saw uniformity and reverence; Puritans saw popery and persecution. The mutilation and imprisonment of Prynne, Burton and Bastwick made coercion visible.

The decisive crisis began outside England. Charles attempted to impose a new prayer book on Scotland. Scottish resistance produced the National Covenant and Bishops’ Wars. Without parliamentary taxation, Charles could not fund a successful campaign. He summoned the Short Parliament in April 1640 but dissolved it when MPs demanded redress. Military defeat forced him to summon the Long Parliament in November.

Knowledge check

1. Why did Personal Rule appear stable at first?
2. Why was Ship Money politically damaging?
3. How did Laudian reform create fear?
4. Why was Scotland decisive?
5. Was the collapse of Personal Rule sudden or long prepared?

You can pause here. You now understand the accumulated tensions and the immediate multiple-kingdom crisis that brought Parliament back.

5. From the Long Parliament to civil war, 1640–1642

The Long Parliament attacked Charles’s ministers and machinery of Personal Rule. Strafford was executed, Laud imprisoned, prerogative courts abolished and Ship Money declared illegal. The Triennial Act required regular parliaments. These changes restricted royal government but did not create agreement about what should replace it.

Religion divided Charles’s critics. Some wanted limited reform; others sought the abolition of bishops. The Irish Rebellion of 1641 produced reports of atrocities and created an urgent need for an army. MPs feared that Charles might use armed force against them, while royalists feared that Parliament was seizing the constitution.

The Grand Remonstrance passed narrowly, exposing parliamentary division. Charles’s failed attempt to arrest five members in January 1642 damaged trust. Parliament’s Militia Ordinance and the king’s Commissions of Array created rival claims to military authority. Charles raised his standard at Nottingham in August.

Civil war was not caused by one disagreement. Long-term conflict over finance, religion and trust combined with crises in Scotland and Ireland and immediate disputes over control of armed force.

Knowledge check

1. How did the Long Parliament dismantle Personal Rule?
2. Why did its members divide after initial agreement?
3. How did Ireland transform the political crisis?
4. Why did the arrest attempt matter?
5. Which development made war most likely?

6. The First Civil War and Parliament’s victory, 1642–1646

The royalists drew strength from much of the north, west and Wales, while Parliament controlled London, the south-east, major ports and greater financial resources. Allegiance varied locally, and many people attempted neutrality.

Early campaigns were inconclusive. Parliament’s alliance with the Scottish Covenanters brought military aid. The Eastern Association under the Earl of Manchester and Oliver Cromwell became increasingly effective. Parliament’s Self-Denying Ordinance reorganised command, while the New Model Army created a more centralised force.

Royalist defeat at Marston Moor in 1644 weakened the north. Naseby in 1645 destroyed Charles’s main field army and exposed correspondence that damaged his reputation. Royalist resources, coordination and leadership were inferior to Parliament’s by the final stage. Charles surrendered to the Scots in 1646.

Period-study overview check

1. What geographical and material advantages did Parliament possess?
2. Why did the Scottish alliance matter?
3. How did military reorganisation improve Parliament’s position?
4. Why was Naseby decisive?
5. Which mattered more to royalist defeat: Charles’s decisions or Parliament’s strengths?

Enquiry: The execution of Charles I and the Interregnum, 1646–1660

7. Failed settlement and regicide, 1646–1649

Victory did not answer who should govern or what religious settlement should follow. Parliament, the Scots, the New Model Army and Charles wanted different outcomes. Parliament tried to disband part of the army without settling arrears, turning soldiers into an organised political force.

The Levellers influenced debate about religious freedom, legal equality and political participation. At the Putney Debates in 1647, army officers and radicals disputed the basis of representation and consent. Meanwhile, Charles negotiated with competing sides and agreed an Engagement with the Scots, helping to trigger the Second Civil War in 1648.

Army leaders concluded that Charles could not be trusted. Pride’s Purge removed MPs willing to continue negotiations. The remaining Rump Parliament created a High Court of Justice. Charles rejected its authority, but he was convicted and executed on 30 January 1649.

For source work, distinguish what an author claimed publicly from wider circumstances. A parliamentary declaration, royal speech, army petition and later memoir may describe the same event for different purposes.

Knowledge check

1. Why did relations between Parliament and the army deteriorate?
2. What did the Putney Debates reveal?
3. How did Charles contribute to renewed war?
4. Why was Pride’s Purge necessary for a trial?
5. What contextual knowledge would help evaluate a source defending regicide?

8. Commonwealth and Cromwell’s rise, 1649–1653

The Rump abolished monarchy and the House of Lords and declared a Commonwealth. Its survival depended on the army. Cromwell’s campaigns in Ireland and against the Scots defeated major military threats, but conquest caused severe suffering and remains deeply controversial.

The regime faced royalism, Leveller mutinies, financial pressure and demands for legal and religious reform. It sold confiscated lands and struggled to build legitimacy. Some reforms were enacted, but critics saw the Rump as self-interested and slow.

Cromwell dismissed the Rump in April 1653. The Nominated Assembly, sometimes called Barebone’s Parliament, attempted godly reform but divided between moderates and radicals. Its dissolution cleared the way for a written constitution, the Instrument of Government.

Knowledge check

1. Why did the Commonwealth depend on the army?
2. Which threats did it defeat?
3. Why was legitimacy difficult to establish?
4. Why did Cromwell dismiss the Rump?
5. What might affect the value of a hostile royalist account of the Commonwealth?

9. The Protectorate, 1653–1658

The Instrument of Government made Cromwell Lord Protector, sharing authority with a Council and Parliament. It aimed to balance single-person rule, representative government and religious liberty for many Protestants. In practice, Cromwell repeatedly clashed with parliaments over constitutional and religious boundaries.

After Penruddock’s Rising, England and Wales were divided into military districts under Major-Generals. They maintained security, collected a tax from royalists and promoted moral reform. Supporters presented them as guardians of peace; critics saw costly military rule and intrusive Puritanism.

Religious policy allowed broad Protestant worship but excluded Catholicism and beliefs considered socially disruptive. The readmission of Jews showed a degree of toleration, while the punishment of the Quaker James Nayler showed its limits.

The Humble Petition and Advice of 1657 offered Cromwell the Crown. He rejected the title but accepted a revised constitution with a second chamber and power to name a successor. This search for traditional forms revealed the continuing problem of legitimacy.

Foreign policy brought victories and prestige, including Jamaica and Dunkirk, but war was expensive. At home, the Protectorate achieved order without creating a settlement strong enough to survive Cromwell.

Knowledge check

1. What balance did the Instrument of Government attempt?
2. Why were the Major-Generals controversial?
3. How tolerant was the Protectorate?
4. Why was Cromwell offered the Crown?
5. Did the Protectorate heal or deepen divisions?

10. Collapse and Restoration, 1658–1660

Oliver Cromwell died in September 1658 and was succeeded by his son Richard. Richard lacked military authority and could not reconcile army and Parliament. He resigned in 1659. The restored Rump, army leaders and rival commanders then competed for power.

General George Monck marched from Scotland and helped restore a freely elected Parliament. Charles II issued the Declaration of Breda, offering pardon, religious reassurance, respect for property settlements and payment of army arrears, subject to parliamentary decisions. The Convention Parliament invited him to return.

The Restoration succeeded because republican institutions had lost support, the army was divided and monarchy promised lawful order. It did not mean that nothing had changed: memories of civil war, regicide and military government continued to shape politics.

Enquiry overview check

1. Why could Richard Cromwell not preserve the Protectorate?
2. What role did Monck play?
3. Why was the Declaration of Breda useful?
4. Why did monarchy appear attractive in 1660?
5. Which source types would best reveal public versus elite attitudes to Restoration?

How to evaluate OCR sources

Section A does not reward a separate paragraph listing provenance. Evaluate each source as evidence for the specific claim in the question.

For each source:

1. Establish its argument: what does it support, challenge or complicate?
2. Use precise content: select a phrase or idea rather than copying a long passage.
3. Add historical context: test the claim against what was happening at that exact date.
4. Evaluate provenance: explain how authorship, audience and purpose affect what the source can reveal.
5. Reach a comparative judgement: decide how far the four sources collectively support the interpretation.

A Cromwell speech defending the Major-Generals is valuable evidence of official justification, but its defensive purpose may limit it as evidence of popularity. A royalist memoir may reveal hostility while exaggerating republican failure. Neither becomes useless because it is partial.

The whole story in six anchor dates

• 1603: James I succeeds Elizabeth I and begins Stuart rule in England.
• 1628: the Petition of Right defines major parliamentary grievances.
• 1640: the Bishops’ Wars force Charles I to recall Parliament.
• 1642: rival claims to armed authority lead to civil war.
• 1649: Charles I is executed and the Commonwealth is declared.
• 1660: Charles II returns and monarchy is restored.

What your OCR examination asks you to do

Y108 is a written paper lasting 1 hour 30 minutes, worth 50 marks and carrying 25% of the A level.

• Section A: answer the compulsory 30-mark source question on The execution of Charles I and the Interregnum, 1646–1660. You assess how far four contemporary sources support a stated view, using their content, provenance and historical context.
• Section B: answer one 20-mark essay from a choice of two on The Early Stuarts and the Origins of the Civil War, 1603–1646.

Do not turn Section A into four miniature essays containing detached knowledge. Context earns credit when it helps analyse a source. Do not turn Section B into narrative: compare factors, maintain focus and reach a substantiated judgement.

A small practice task

For Section B, try: How serious were James I’s financial problems? Define seriousness through scale, political consequences, durability and the Crown’s ability to manage the problem. Compare inherited weaknesses with James’s spending and political choices.

For Section A, gather four short contemporary extracts about the Major-Generals and test the claim that their policies were designed to heal divisions. Ask what each author was trying to achieve, what the source reveals and how exact context confirms or challenges it.

Your next layer of learning

When you are ready to go further, you can add detailed enquiries into the Great Contract, foreign policy, Buckingham, the Petition of Right, Ship Money, Laudianism, the Bishops’ Wars, the Long Parliament, the Irish Rebellion, civil-war mobilisation, the New Model Army, the Putney Debates, regicide, the Rump, Cromwell’s campaigns, the Major-Generals, religious toleration and the Restoration. You can also add OCR-style four-source sets and focused 20-mark essays.

You are allowed to stop here. If you can retell the 1603–1646 period study, explain the 1646–1660 enquiry, place the six anchor dates and distinguish contextual source evaluation from essay argument, this guide has built the foundation it is designed to provide.