The Politics behind King Charles' Execution

In regards to absolute monarchy, John Milton explains in “The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates” the vulnerability of the nation when one man is allowed to make decisions for all free men at his own will. Milton cannot deny that for many generations, the monarchy worked seemingly well with the rest of the country, but ultimately, England was gambling with the safety and well-being of the country by putting one man at the forefront of it. Milton explains, “These for a while govern'd well, and with much equity decided all things at thir own arbitrament: till the temptation of such a power left absolute in thir hands, perverted them at length to injustice and partialitie.” Milton’s use of the word arbitrary, although paired with the temperate rulers of the past, still drives home an excellent point that under absolute monarchy, there truly is no rhyme or reason to the law, even under the rule of a benevolent monarch. People that supported the idea of absolute monarchy argued that the King has as much right to his Crown as a son has to inheritance, to which Milton boldly points out that such an argument, “is to make the Subject no better then the Kings slave, his chattell, or his possession that may be bought and sould,” to suggest that those two things, are in fact not parallel because in one instance, one is dealing with property, in the other, one is referring to a nation of free people no less civilized or rational than the King himself. This argument, along with calling out the monarchy for being an arbitrary form of decision making and law making are just two primary examples of Milton’s contempt for Absolute Monarchy.

#milton #britishhistory #britlit #politics