Religious tensions in Scotland sparked a series of conflicts that ultimately led to the breakdown of Charles I’s Personal Rule and the summoning of Parliament.
Religious Radicalism and Puritan Networks
During the late 1630s, religious radicalism intensified across England and Scotland, fuelled by opposition to the Laudian reforms. These reforms, imposed by Archbishop William Laud, aimed to enforce uniformity of worship and were viewed by many as dangerously close to Roman Catholicism.
Puritanism, already present in England, began to grow underground in response to censorship and persecution during Personal Rule.
Puritan networks were active in circulating forbidden texts and hosting secret conventicles (religious meetings), keeping radical Protestant ideas alive.
These groups were particularly strong in London, East Anglia, and the south-west, often including members of the gentry and merchant class.
Alongside Puritanism, millenarian beliefs—the expectation of Christ’s imminent return—spread among the more radical sects. These ideas added a sense of urgency and divine mission to their political and religious dissent.
The fear among English Puritans that Charles’s policies would permanently embed Arminian or Catholic-style worship created a volatile religious atmosphere, primed for rebellion.
The English Prayer Book and Scottish Reaction (1637)
Charles I, advised by Laud and others, sought to impose religious uniformity throughout his kingdoms. In 1637, this policy reached a critical point with the introduction of a new English Prayer Book in Scotland.
Causes of Unrest
Charles’s lack of consultation with the Scottish Kirk or Parliament on religious matters caused resentment.
The Prayer Book was based on the English Anglican liturgy, with Laudian ceremonial additions. It was perceived by Scots as an attack on their Presbyterian tradition, which emphasised simplicity in worship and the authority of local church elders.
There was a widespread belief that the Prayer Book was an attempt to reintroduce Roman Catholicism by stealth.
Rejection by Scottish Presbyterians
The first reading of the new Prayer Book at St Giles’ Cathedral in Edinburgh on 23 July 1637 provoked outrage. Famously, Jenny Geddes, a market woman, allegedly threw a stool at the minister, igniting a riot.
Protests erupted across Scotland, involving all social classes, from nobles to tradesmen.
Many ministers and congregations refused to use the new liturgy, and some services were violently disrupted.
This backlash against the Prayer Book catalysed a broader, more organised resistance.
The Scottish National Covenant (1638)
In response to Charles’s religious imposition, a broad alliance of Scottish nobles, clergy, and laypeople formed to defend their church and national identity.
Content and Purpose
The Scottish National Covenant, signed in February 1638, was a solemn oath to uphold the Presbyterian faith and reject innovations in worship.
It pledged loyalty to the crown while simultaneously opposing unsanctioned religious change, arguing such changes breached earlier acts of the Scottish Parliament and church assemblies.
Organisation of Resistance
Signatories included large portions of the Scottish nobility and gentry, many of whom were motivated by both religious conviction and a desire to protect national autonomy.
Covenanting leaders, such as Alexander Henderson and Archibald Johnston of Warriston, provided ideological leadership.
The movement swiftly became a national resistance campaign, and local committees, known as Tables, were established to mobilise support and coordinate action.
By 1638, the Covenanters had built an effective political and military organisation, posing a direct challenge to Charles’s authority in Scotland.
The First Bishops’ War (1639) and Pacification of Berwick
Determined to enforce his will, Charles I prepared to go to war against the Scottish Covenanters, initiating the First Bishops’ War in 1639.
Charles’s Position
Charles lacked both funds and popular support in England to raise an effective army.
His military force was largely composed of inexperienced levies, many of whom were reluctant to fight fellow Protestants.
Conversely, the Scottish Covenanters had prepared thoroughly, organising and training troops under the leadership of General Alexander Leslie, a veteran of the Thirty Years’ War.
Events of the War
Skirmishes occurred in the north of England and southern Scotland, but there was no major engagement.
English forces suffered from desertion, poor morale, and logistical failures.
Charles was unable to maintain the war effort and risked widespread opposition if he pushed further.
The Pacification of Berwick (June 1639)
The war ended in an uneasy truce, known as the Pacification of Berwick.
Both sides agreed to disband their armies, and Charles promised to allow a free General Assembly of the Scottish Kirk and a meeting of the Scottish Parliament.
The agreement was temporary, as neither side was satisfied: the Covenanters retained their military structure, and Charles remained determined to reassert control.
The truce did little to resolve the underlying tensions, and further conflict became inevitable.
The Second Bishops’ War (1640)
Charles, still refusing to abandon his aims, made another attempt to subdue the Scottish resistance, launching the Second Bishops’ War in August 1640.
English Preparations and Challenges
Once again, Charles faced a lack of funds and public support.
He attempted to raise money through forced loans and the sale of royal lands but failed to gather sufficient resources.
The English army, poorly equipped and underpaid, was no match for the more motivated and experienced Scottish forces.
Key Events and Outcomes
The Scottish army, under General Leslie, invaded northern England, occupying Northumberland and County Durham.
The English forces suffered a significant defeat at the Battle of Newburn (28 August 1640), allowing the Scots to press further south.
Scottish occupation placed key coal-supplying areas under their control, threatening the London economy and causing panic in the capital.
Treaty of Ripon and Charles’s Weakening Authority
Facing mounting pressure and unable to finance another military campaign, Charles was forced to negotiate.
The Treaty of Ripon (October 1640) required Charles to:
Pay the Scottish army £850 per day until a final settlement was reached.
Allow the Scots to remain in the north until negotiations concluded.
Crucially, Charles had to recall Parliament to raise funds, ending the eleven-year Personal Rule.
This crisis demonstrated the fragility of Charles’s authority and marked a turning point in his reign. The political nation, long excluded from power, would now reassert itself in Parliament, setting the stage for further confrontation and eventual civil war.
FAQ
Charles I fundamentally misunderstood the centrality of Presbyterianism to Scottish national and religious identity. Unlike in England, where the monarch was head of the Church, the Scottish Kirk was governed by assemblies and church elders rather than bishops. Charles’s belief in episcopacy and religious uniformity clashed with Scotland’s established church structure. His decision to impose the Laudian Prayer Book without consultation reflected a belief in royal supremacy over religion across his kingdoms. However, in Scotland, the Kirk was a pillar of national autonomy, and changes to worship were seen as direct attacks on both faith and national sovereignty. Charles’s failure to recognise these deep-rooted cultural and historical distinctions meant that his policies appeared arrogant and authoritarian. His actions provoked not only religious backlash but also constitutional defiance, as Scots linked church independence with political self-determination. This misjudgement alienated a loyal population and rapidly escalated local resistance into a national political crisis.
Scottish success in the Bishops’ Wars was significantly enhanced by the military expertise of veterans who had fought in the Thirty Years’ War, particularly in the service of Protestant European powers. Many Scots had served in the armies of Sweden, the Dutch Republic, or the German Protestant states and returned with battle-hardened experience and tactical knowledge. These veterans brought professional discipline, familiarity with modern warfare, and organisational skills to the Covenanting forces. The most notable among them was General Alexander Leslie, who became the Covenanters’ commander and had served under the famous Swedish general Gustavus Adolphus. Under his leadership, the Scottish army became well-trained and strategically competent, in stark contrast to the poorly trained and disorganised English forces raised by Charles I. This military edge allowed the Scots to successfully advance into northern England during the Second Bishops’ War, making them a formidable force and directly contributing to the king’s defeat and political humiliation.
The Scottish occupation of Northumberland and County Durham in 1640 had a devastating effect on Charles I’s reputation and authority. After the defeat at the Battle of Newburn, the Scots captured strategic northern towns and gained control over coal supplies essential for London’s economy, increasing pressure on the king from merchants and the public. Charles was seen as incompetent and humiliated, having failed to defend his own kingdom against what many perceived as internal rebellion. The financial burden of the Treaty of Ripon, which required Charles to pay the Scots £850 per day to maintain their army, further exposed his weakness. Crucially, this military and fiscal crisis forced him to recall Parliament, thereby ending eleven years of Personal Rule. This step was interpreted by many as a political surrender. The perception that Charles had been bested by his own subjects gravely damaged his monarchical prestige and emboldened parliamentary opposition, setting the stage for escalating conflict.
The Scottish crisis revealed several structural and political limitations of Charles I’s government under Personal Rule. Without Parliament, Charles relied on non-parliamentary sources of revenue like Ship Money and forest fines, which were deeply resented and limited in scope. This made it difficult to fund a sustained military campaign. Additionally, his Privy Council lacked the administrative breadth to manage a multi-kingdom war effort. Charles also lacked intelligence networks and regional authority in Scotland, meaning he was unaware of the full strength and organisation of the Covenanting movement. His centralised and autocratic decision-making style, coupled with poor communication and inflexible policy implementation, meant that local resistance quickly grew into a national movement without meaningful royal response. Furthermore, his failure to anticipate or manage dissent showed a lack of political acumen and adaptability. The crisis exposed that Personal Rule was not just unpopular, but fundamentally unsustainable when faced with serious opposition, especially in a context of cross-border governance.
English public opinion during the Bishops’ Wars was mixed but increasingly sympathetic to the Scots, especially among Puritans and critics of Laudian reforms. Many in England viewed the Scottish resistance as a righteous defence of Protestantism against a monarch they perceived as trying to impose popish innovations. The use of Arminian doctrine in both kingdoms, combined with harsh censorship and the persecution of dissenters, had alienated large sections of English society. Radical pamphlets and sermons praised the Covenanters, portraying them as defenders of the true faith. Additionally, the financial burden of war and royal policies like Ship Money turned neutral or passive subjects into critics. The Scottish occupation of the north also generated fears of further unrest, but these were often blamed on Charles’s mismanagement rather than the Scots themselves. Parliamentarians later capitalised on this sympathy by highlighting Scottish grievances to expose royal tyranny, making public opinion a key factor in the growing political crisis.
Practice Questions
Explain why Charles I's attempts to impose religious reforms in Scotland led to the collapse of his Personal Rule by 1640.
Charles I’s imposition of the English Prayer Book in Scotland sparked widespread outrage due to its perceived Catholic elements, conflicting with the Presbyterian Kirk. This led to the National Covenant of 1638 and armed resistance through the Bishops’ Wars. His military failures, particularly in the Second Bishops’ War, forced him to agree to humiliating terms and summon Parliament for funds. These events exposed his weakened authority and inability to govern without parliamentary support. The Scottish Crisis not only ended Personal Rule but also empowered opposition, initiating a chain of events leading towards the English Civil War.
How significant was the National Covenant of 1638 in undermining Charles I’s authority in the period 1637–1640?
The National Covenant of 1638 was highly significant in undermining Charles I’s authority as it unified Scottish resistance against his religious policies. It mobilised widespread opposition, combining nobles, clergy, and commoners in defence of Presbyterianism. This organisation gave legitimacy and strength to armed resistance during the Bishops’ Wars. The Covenant’s success demonstrated Charles’s inability to enforce policy across his kingdoms and highlighted the lack of consensus in his composite monarchy. By forcing Charles into military and financial weakness, it precipitated the recall of Parliament and the collapse of Personal Rule, marking a critical step towards national political crisis.
