Which king of England lost the English Civil War?  Which type of government did James I believe should exist?
96857
Charles I lost the English Civil War.  He was tried for tyranny and then beheaded in January 1849.  James I preferred a more centralized monarchal role, in striking contrast to the more decentralized system in Scotland, which he had been ruling until Elizabeth I's death.
253780
ummmm..... I think you may be confused....  The Church of England is an establishment (like the Catholic Church, for example), not a building.  So you can't really tear something down from the top of it if it's not a physical structure....   Also, the English Civil War started in 1642, not 1648.  It ended in 1648
912650
There isn't one.  Tony Blair is the Prime Minister of Britain.  Jack McConnell is the First Minister of Scotland and under the present constitution there is no Prime Minister of England.
900347
The Revolution of 1688, commonly known as the Glorious Revolution was the overthrow of James II of England in 1688 by a union of Parliamentarians and the Dutch stadtholder William III of Orange-Nassau (William of Orange). It is sometimes called the Bloodless Revolution, although there was fighting and loss of life in Ireland and Scotland. Many modern historians prefer the term "Revolution of 1688", as "Glorious" or "Bloodless" reflect the biases of whig historians. The Revolution is closely tied in with the events of the War of the Grand Alliance on the continent of Europe, and may be seen as the last successful invasion of England.[1] It can be argued that James' overthrow began modern English parliamentary democracy; never again would the monarch hold absolute power. The deposition of the Catholic James II finally and firmly established Protestantism in England.\n\nDuring his three-year reign, King James II fell victim to the political battles in England between Catholicism and Protestantism on the one hand, and on the other, between the divine right of the Crown and the political rights of Parliament. James' greatest political problem was his Catholicism, which left him alienated from both parties in Parliament. The low church Whigs had failed in their attempt to exclude James from the throne between 1679 and 1681, and James's supporters were the High Church Anglican Tories. When James inherited the throne in 1685, he had much support in the 'Loyal Parliament', which was composed mostly of Tories. James's attempt to relax the penal laws alienated his natural supporters, however, because the Tories viewed this as tantamount to disestablishment of the Church of England. Abandoning the Tories, James looked to form a 'King's party' as a counterweight to the Anglican Tories, so in 1687 James supported the policy of religious toleration and issued the Declaration of Indulgence. By allying himself with the Catholics, Dissenters and nonconformists, James hoped to build a coalition that would give him Catholic emancipation.\n\nIn 1686, James coerced the Court of the King's Bench into deciding that the King could dispense with religious restrictions of the Test Acts. James ordered the removal of Henry Compton, the anti-Catholic Bishop of London, and dismissed the Protestant fellows of Magdalen College, Oxford and replaced them with Catholics.\n\nJames also created a large standing army and employed Catholics in positions of power in the army. To his opponents in Parliament this seemed like a prelude to arbitrary rule, so James prorogued Parliament without gaining Parliament's consent. At this time, the English regiments of the army were encamped at Hounslow, near the capital. The army in Ireland was purged of Protestants who were replaced with Catholics, and by 1688 James had more than 34,000 men under arms in his three kingdoms.\n\nIn April 1688, James re-issued the Declaration of Indulgence and ordered all clergymen to read it in their churches. When the Archbishop of Canterbury, William Sancroft, and six other bishops (see the Seven Bishops) wrote to James asking him to reconsider his policies, they were arrested on charges of seditious libel, but at trial they were acquitted to the cheers of the London crowd.\n\nMatters came to a head in 1688, when James fathered a son; until then, the throne would have passed to his daughter, Mary, a Protestant. The prospect of a Catholic dynasty in the British Isles was now likely. Some leaders of the Tory Party united with members of the opposition Whigs and set out to solve the crisis.\n\n\n[edit] Conspiracy and William's Landing\n \nWilliam III\nKing of England, Scotland and Ireland, Stadtholder of the Netherlands.In 1686, a group of conspirators met at Charborough House in Dorset to plan the overthrow of "the tyrant race of Stuarts". In 1688, a further conspiracy was launched at Old Whittington, in Chest
235187
It would be the prime minister.  If I remember correctly Jamaica is a former British colony and still has the Queen of England as it's head of "state", while the PM is the head of "government."
694516
The Cousins Wars, by Kevin Phillips. \nCovers the English Civil War, the Stuarts, the Glorious Revolution\nand on into the Revolutionary, War of 1812 American Civil War. \n\nPart of the reason why we HAD a separation between church and state has to do with the aversion many of the English colonists had with any kind of state sponsored religion and especially so if it is paired with a monarchy - in in particular a European monarchy.
1044366
The United States would go into chaos if we had a monarchy! Most people don't have a clue about how the royal families work, or Parliament, for that matter (if you are saying we should have royalty like the U.K.). To change our way way of existence as a nation to having a royal family would be a complete 180.\n\nWho would be our king and queen, anyway? Brangelina?
494139
The Civil War was caused by a disagreement over state's rights. \n\nThe southern states thought that all states should decide taxation, slavery, and other things in the state. The northern states thought that all decisions should be made by the national government. \n\nThe south decided to leave the union, feeling that the centralized government was being given too much power against what the founding fathers had intended. The north decided that they could not secede and break up the union. \n\nThey fought a war, and due to many reasons (the north being more industrialized and richer is just one), the south lost the war.\n\nYes, economics affected the civil war because the north had more resources to call on to support the war effort and more connections with Europe to get support and help blockading the southern ports from them as well.
746192
Valcour Island.   He lost a navel battle with the British, but caused a delaying action.  Forced the British to delay for one year the attempt to divide the Colonies.
559337
Broke the absolute power of the king in England, and opened the door for Parliament to eventually form.  Beginnings of what we view as "democracy" in the modern world.
406400
The term Glorious Revolution refers to the generally popular overthrow of James II of England in 1688 by a conspiracy between some Parliamentarians and the Dutch stadtholder William III of Orange-Nassau. The revolution was the last successful invasion of England. It is sometimes referred to as the Bloodless Revolution but this name is a misnomer as there was much fighting with loss of life in Ireland and, to a lesser degree, in Scotland. Some modern historians, alternatively, prefer the more neutral Revolution of 1688.\n\nLegacy:\nThe Glorious Revolution was one of the most important events in the long evolution of powers possessed by Parliament and by the Crown in England. With the passage of the Bill of Rights, it stamped out any final possibility of a Catholic monarchy, and ended moves towards monarchical absolutism in the British Isles by circumscribing the monarch's powers. The King's powers were greatly restricted; he could no longer suspend laws, levy taxes, or maintain a standing army during peacetime without Parliament's permission. Since 1689, England, and later the United Kingdom, has been governed under a system of constitutional monarchy, which has been uninterrupted. Since then, Parliament has gained more and more power, and the Crown has progressively lost it.\n\nThe success of the revolution came three years after the failure of the Monmouth Rebellion to overthrow the king.\n\nThe Williamite victory in Ireland is still commemorated by the Orange Order for preserving British and Protestant dominance in the country.\n\nFor more see:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution\n\nPS \n(For the other ansewer(s) )\nThere was bloodshed.\n\nSee \n"It is sometimes referred to as the Bloodless Revolution but this name is a misnomer as there was much fighting with loss of life in Ireland and, to a lesser degree, in Scotland."
16383
Overall this war was casued due to the economic policies of the British Empire.  \n\nThere are also political causes such as the feelings of a lack of political representation within the English Empire, which then resulted in the above said economic policies.  This argument would be disputed by historical materialists.
586845
False. Civil War was not WITHIN Kansas, and the Missouri Compromise is more directly to blame for setting the stage for the Civil War.\n\nYou'd better do some research to back that up before you use it on your homework.
365358
Battle of Hastings (1066) - William the conqueror)\nBattle of Bouvines (1214) - England lost most parts of France\nMagna Charta (1215)\nFoundation of the Church of England - Henry VIII\nColonisation of America - Mayflower (1612)\nIndependence war with America (1775-83)\nVictorian Age (1832–1901)\nWW I, WW II, Winston Churchill, "Thatcherism" - war with Falkland islands
535361
King. Before the Magna Carta screwed it all up. :)
122222
Henry VIII (28 June 1491 – 28 January 1547) was King of England and Lord of Ireland (later King of Ireland) from 22 April 1509 until his death. He was the second monarch of the Tudor dynasty, succeeding his father, Henry VII. He is famous for having been married six times and for wielding the most untrammelled power of any British monarch. Notable events during his reign included the break with Rome and the subsequent establishment of the independent Church of England, the Dissolution of the Monasteries, and the union of England and Wales.\n\nSeveral significant pieces of legislation were enacted during Henry VIII's reign. They included the several Acts which severed the English Church from the Roman Catholic Church and established Henry as the supreme head of the Church in England, the Laws in Wales Acts 1535-1542 (which united England and Wales into one nation), the Buggery Act 1533, the first anti-sodomy enactment in England; and the Witchcraft Act 1542, which punished 'invoking or conjuring an evil spirit' with death.\n\nHenry VIII is known to have been an avid gambler and dice player. He excelled at sport, especially royal tennis, during his youth. He was also an accomplished musician, author, and poet; according to legend, he wrote the popular folk song Greensleeves, along with the lesser-known Pastyme With Good Company (The Kynges Ballade). Henry VIII was also involved in the construction-from-scratch and improvement of several significant buildings, including Nonsuch Palace, King's College Chapel and Westminster Abbey - the existing buildings improved were often properties confiscated from Wolsey (such as Christ Church, Oxford, Hampton Court Palace and palace of Whitehall).
908679
Robert Walpole, 1st Earl of Orford, KG, KB, PC (26 August 1676 – 18 March 1745) was a British statesman who is generally regarded as having been the first Prime Minister of Great Britain. This position had no official recognition in law, but Walpole is nevertheless acknowledged as having held the de facto office due to the extent of his influence in the Cabinet. However, the term "Prime Minister" was never used officially at this time.\n\nWalpole, a Whig, served during the reigns of George I and George II. His tenure is normally dated from 1721, when he obtained the post of First Lord of the Treasury; others date it from 1730, when, with the retirement of Lord Townshend, he became the sole and undisputed leader of the Cabinet. The "longer" version of the tenure is generally upheld by the contemporary press, most notably that of the opposition, who focused far more attention upon Walpole than his counterpart. Walpole continued to govern until he resigned in 1742, making his administration the longest in British history.