The legitimacy of the trial of Charles I: historical precedent, the law and the roots of political power in England

Abstract

The prevailing view amongst scholars is that there was no precedent or legal basis for the trial of Charles I: the trial was contrary to both the substantive and procedural law of the land. This thesis argues that such a view fails to take into consideration the justifications for the king’s trial that can be found in contemporary printed works. During the trial, the Lord President of the High Court of Justice, John Bradshaw, advanced arguments justifying the people’s right to try their king. These arguments have been the primary source used by historians when examining the legitimacy and legality of the king’s trial. However, Bradshaw was constrained by his position as the Lord President of..