The English Civil War of 1642-1651 can be considered a feud between the king and the English parliament. Long before the Civil War began, Parliament and King Charles I had distrusted each other. As a result, Parliament often refused to finance the king's wars. Unable to gain sufficient support from Parliament, Charles I challenged the local control of nobles and landowners, who made up the majority of Parliament, by “imposing new tariffs and duties, attempting to collect suspended taxes, and subjecting English property owners to… forced loans and then imprisoning those who refused to pay… as well as quartering troops in private homes” (Craig et al. 560) . Parliament attempted to check the king's power when it presented Charles with the Petition of Rights in 1628. This petition requested that there be no loans or taxes without the consent of Parliament, that Charles would not be able to imprison any freeman without just reason and that no troops. they would be quartered in private homes. Although Charles initially agreed to the petition, he dissolved Parliament in 1629 and did not recall it again until 1640. Parliament's resentment of the king's tyrannical actions, combined with its resistance to the king's control, refused to grant Charles support financial for the war with Ireland in 1640. Charles took revenge and made civil war inevitable when he once again dissolved Parliament and arrested five of its members (Taylor vii). The resulting tension between Charles and Parliament eventually resulted in a civil war in 1642 and lasted until 1651. Many scholars have associated the phenomenon of the English Civil War with a variety of causes and motives. Among the supports of Parliament... half the paper... Furthermore, Charles I had attempted to make himself the first despot by reducing Parliament to a nullity (Macaulay 64). It should be noted that during the time of Charles I, the king did not have a standing army and that he could not legally raise funds without the consent of Parliament (Taylor 3.4). However, since Charles had always been in favor of the notion of absolute monarchy (Taylor viii), he had dared to take extra-parliamentary action without the consent of Parliament. These included the violation of the constitutional rights of the English people, the imposition of taxes without the consent of Parliament, the imprisonment of civilians and court nobles without just cause, and the quartering of troops in private homes during times of war (Macaulay 63-64). All of these actions challenged the local control of nobles and landowners (Craiget al. 560).