Charles II: The Merry Monarch
How Far Do the Events in his Reign Reflect This Nickname?
Charles II’s title of the ‘Merry Monarch’ proves controversial among many historians in regards to its accuracy. One of Charles’s recent academic biographers, Ronald Hutton, has admitted that he ended up disliking Charles intensely and found the whole process of working on such a man ‘genuinely depressing’. This essay will attempt to prove that he was ‘Merry’-in other words; ‘interested in only self and pleasure’ and not the good of his kingdom.
Charles II (29 May 1630 – 6 February 1685) was king of England, Scotland and Ireland. After his father’s (Charles I’s) disastrous reign, the civil war and the Puritan rule, most saw Charles’ restoration as the end of the hardships they had endured in previous years. The view of Charles II as a fun-loving, likeable person – the kind you would like to have round for dinner …show more content…
Reports of plague around Europe began to reach England in the 1660s, causing the Privy Council to consider what steps might be taken to prevent it crossing to England. Quarantining of ships had been used during previous outbreaks and was again introduced for ships coming to London in November 1663, following outbreaks in Amsterdam and Hamburg. Naval ships were assigned to intercept any vessels entering the Thames estuary. Ships from infected ports were required to moor somewhere else for a period of 30 days before being allowed to travel upriver. Ships from ports free of plague or completing their quarantine were given a certificate of health and allowed to travel on. The fact that Charles fled London, which was by no means uncommon of the rulers of his day, does not strongly support that he was indeed ‘merry’. The way that Charles fled immediately without offering some kind of help to his people
How Far Do the Events in his Reign Reflect This Nickname?
Charles II’s title of the ‘Merry Monarch’ proves controversial among many historians in regards to its accuracy. One of Charles’s recent academic biographers, Ronald Hutton, has admitted that he ended up disliking Charles intensely and found the whole process of working on such a man ‘genuinely depressing’. This essay will attempt to prove that he was ‘Merry’-in other words; ‘interested in only self and pleasure’ and not the good of his kingdom.
Charles II (29 May 1630 – 6 February 1685) was king of England, Scotland and Ireland. After his father’s (Charles I’s) disastrous reign, the civil war and the Puritan rule, most saw Charles’ restoration as the end of the hardships they had endured in previous years. The view of Charles II as a fun-loving, likeable person – the kind you would like to have round for dinner …show more content…
Reports of plague around Europe began to reach England in the 1660s, causing the Privy Council to consider what steps might be taken to prevent it crossing to England. Quarantining of ships had been used during previous outbreaks and was again introduced for ships coming to London in November 1663, following outbreaks in Amsterdam and Hamburg. Naval ships were assigned to intercept any vessels entering the Thames estuary. Ships from infected ports were required to moor somewhere else for a period of 30 days before being allowed to travel upriver. Ships from ports free of plague or completing their quarantine were given a certificate of health and allowed to travel on. The fact that Charles fled London, which was by no means uncommon of the rulers of his day, does not strongly support that he was indeed ‘merry’. The way that Charles fled immediately without offering some kind of help to his people