Revolution, Republic, Restoration 1629-67


The Personal Rule: Finance

Sources of Income:      ((no serious opposition to these policies))
- from 1634, forest fines (boundaries declared by Edward III) introduced by Attorney General Noy
- nuissances, fines for building outside London's city walls without permission
- distraint of knighthood (landowners who refused to pay for knighthoods were fined)
- monopolies (technically illegal since 1624) reappeared as patents, widely granted
- licenses, sold by govt. to evade operation of patents
- City of London fined in 1632 after failing to provide Protestant settlers to take over Irish land
- wardship, under guidance of Cottingham (increased income from £35k p.a. to £62k in 1637 and £76k in 1640)
Ship Money:       ((aroused serious opposition, v. significant))
- extended by Charles in 1634 from maritime/coastal counties to all counties to 'maintain fleet'
- argued that everyone should pay for national defence, tax payed to Treasurer of the Navy
- collected by sheriffs, success in early years (c. £600k raised in first three years after 1634)
- John Hampden's Case 1637 (only 7-5 majority in King's favour), amount collected then dropped significantly
- 1637 saw drop in yield due to increasing foodprices/new taxes to raise troops against Scots/Hampden's case
- was not a decisive factor in men's allegiance when Civil War broke out in 1642
- many sheriffs who collected money for King fought for Parliament, as did half of towns who contributed to tax
Crown remained underfunded in the 1630s as Charles didn't attempt reform of money raising methods. The Personal Rule was successful as Charles ran effective govt. w/ money he had, funding sober/culturally exciting court.

1 of 21

The Personal Rule: Religious Policies

- up to 1533, Church in England part of RC Church owing allegiance to Pope in Rome until Henry VIII made himself Head of the Church (now Protestant)
- key features included monarch as Head, an English Bible and an English Prayer Book
Conservatives in the Protestant Church:
- liked ceremony, accepted older 'Catholic' church structure/liturgy, believed should have episcopacy
- wanted decoration in churches, to retain priests wearing clerical vestments
- believed they were reforming, not destroying, the old Catholic Church
- radical Protestants who believed the Pope was like the anti-Christ
- wished to transform Church in England so it displayed none of its Catholic origins
- wanted churches stripped of all decoration and images, priests dressed in black/white, the abolition of the episcopacy (bishops), the appointment of pastors by congregation/the replacement of altars (symbol of hated Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation) with simple communion tables
Charles' Approach:
- identified with the conservative Arminians, e.g elevated William Laud to bishopric of London in 1628 and archbishopric of Canterbury in 1633

- Puritans opposed their policies, also angered by increasing influence of Catholics at court (Charles then used recusancy as useful source of income rather than attempting to eradicatie it)

2 of 21

The Personal Rule: Laudian Ideas

Laud's Ideas:
- denied Puritan doctrine of predestination, that a man's actions can't shape destiny in the afterlife as God has already chosen who will go to Heaven and who to Hell (double predestination)
- stressed importance of ceremony/ritual/church services ('beauty of holiness' in Psalms)
- like Charles, favoured order/deference/hierarchy in Church (bishops insituted by God's law - 'de iure divino' episcopacy), clergy to stress power of the king/obedience owed to him, both desired uniformity
- Laud similar to Whitgift and Bancroft (persecuted Puritans, perceived as subversive), more active than predecessor Abbot
- moderate to Rome (in error but not as seriously as Puritans/Protestant sectaries), hoped for reconciliation of CoE/Rome
- believed CoE needed to be re-endowed, didn't want church land in lay hands, many Puritans (patronage, e.g. tithes/advowsons)
- local clergy becoming poorer/profession attracting fewer men, encouraged continuation of old corruptions (absenteeism/pluralism - holding more than one church office)
- wished to restore quality of clergy/fabric of churches (underfunded, decaying)

3 of 21

The Personal Rule: Laud's Actions

- encouraged move of altars from nave to eastern end of church behind rail, encouraged return of images (e.g. Virgin Mary, saints, candles, gold/silver ornaments), bowing at name of Jesus, bishops to carry out visitations of their curches/check up on Puritan meetings (Laud started 3 year visitation of diocese in 1634)
- reissued Cranmer's Book of Homilies (uncontroversial sermons for everyday use), encouraged sermons at same time on Sunday to prevent Puritans attending multiple services
- foreign churches attacked/told to conform, no wandering Puritan clergy, accredited ministers to give sermons/services
1631 - Charles and Laud raised money to repair fabric of St Paul's in London
1633 - Laud dissolved Feoffes for Impropriations for their Puritan sympathies, Charles reissued 1618 Book of Sports for sports on Sundays (Puritans were sabbatarians; Sundays for worship)
1640 - new canons (church laws) introduced by Laud, upheld Divine Right of Kings, denounced Popery/Seperatism, clarified altar question, all in holy orders to swear to uphold govt. of Church by bishops
Reasons for Puritan Alarm:
- episcopal influence in politics (Privy Councillors, Bishop Juxon of Lord made Lord Treasurer in 1636)
- believed Charles soft on Catholics, Catholic wife, 1636 Charles received first papal nuncio (ambassador) since Reformation, Laud offered but declined a Cardinal's hat by Pope, Charles seemed to follow pro-Catholic foreign policy (Spanish silver), refused court mourning death of Protestant hero (King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, 1632)

4 of 21

The Personal Rule: Religious Opposition

Opposition in England:
- puritans naturally opposed, open opposition in 1630s limited, no. of clergy suspended/Puritans censored not unusual
- 1629 - John Eliot (Speaker of the HoC) denounced those bringing 'innovation in religion' as traitors
- 1634 - altar controversies, Beckington excommunication
- 1637 - Bishop Williams of Lincoln (most prominent Puritan bishop) imprisoned in ToL until released by Long Parl.
- little persecution of Puritans, even in diocese of Norwich (fairly Puritan w/ Laudian bishop, Wren)
- 1637 - famous prosecution of William Prynne, Henry Burton, John Bastwicke (Puritan pamphleteers opposed to Laud), were condemned by Court of Star Chamber, mutilated (not martyred by Laud's regime)
- Puritan opposition in pamphlets lesser than 1580s, CoE = erastian church (hard to oppose religion w/o opposing King)
- manyu welcomed changes, vast majority conformed (most zealous Puritans were seperatists, not a threat, many emigrated to the Continent or NW for more congenial religious climate)
Opposition in Scotland:
- Scottish Church more Puritan than CoE, brought in new Book of Canons to replace John Knox's Book of Discipline
- 1637 - Charles introduced new prayer book in Scotland written by Scottish Bishops consulting w/ Laud
- 1638 - Scottish rebellion over prayer book, rebels signed National Covenant in opposition, met in Glasgow Assembly, abolished episcopacy in Scotland
- 1639 - First Bishop's War - Covenanters raised army, seized Edinburgh Castle, met w/ King at York, Pacification of Berwick (Charles then sent for Wentworth - Lord Deputy in Ireland - a year too late)

5 of 21

The Personal Rule: Recalling Parliament

- April to May 1640 - Strafford advised calling Parl after 11 years to vote money for Scots War, Short Parl called
- First Bishops' War showed Charles unable to raise/equip credible army w/o parl sanctions, Short Parl refused to grant supplies w/o redress of grievances (many MPs = Puritans sympathetic to Scots), Parl dissolved by King after 6 weeks
- August - October 1640 - Second Bishops' War saw English forces defeated near Newcastle, Scots occupy city/county
- Charles forced to agree to Treaty of Ripon - Scots paid £850 per day until settlement made, Charles had to recall Parl
- Nov 1640 - Charles called Long Parliament, apparently unanimous opposition Charles gave concessions to Parl
- Late 1640 - Laud and Strafford impeached as 'evil counsellors', monopolists expelled from HoC, Canons of 1634 condemned, Petition to Commons for abolishment of episcopacy ('root and branch' petition)
 - Early 1641 - Charles agreed to Triennial Act (to call Parl tri-annually, needed Parl's consent to dissolve it), Strafford put on trial in HoL on charge of high treason, executed when Pym introduced Bill of Attainder, Act of Parl declared him guilty of treason, Charles signed reluctantly, Courts of Star Chamber and High Commision abolished
- Summer 1641 - some chance of compromise, many MPs won over by Charles' conciliatory attitude/sacrifice of Strafford, worried about Pym/his supporters' religious/political radicalism, opposition leaders allied w/ Covenanters (controlled Newcastle, London's coal supply), Earl of Bedford's death prevented settlement in May 1641, replaced in negotiations by Saye and Sele (Puritan, deeply distrstful of Charles)
- Autumn/Winter 1641 - just as moderates gaining upper hand in HoC, news of Irish Rebellion (Oct), Pym exploited Irish Catholic uprising to claim as conspiracy approved by Charles, passed/published Grand Remonstrance by 159 votes to 148 of supposed crimes of King's supporters, Parl forced into claim that should control army (not Charles)

6 of 21

The Origin of the Civil War

- Charles attempted to arrest the 5 Members (leaders of opposition in Parl), motivated by rumour that Queen to be charged with high treason, failed to use troops at his disposal to close down Parl, fled London
- opposition leaders in HoC/HoL controlled London, able to claim King being advised to use military force against them
- Parl forced into revolutionary claims re: constitutional powers of King/Parl
- August - King raised standard in Nottingham
Nineteen Propositions (June 1642):
- all King's counsellors approved by Parl, Parl to control militia/troops for defence of nation, business concerning kingdom to pass through King's Council/Parl, Parl's approval of those educating King's children, laws against Papists enforced

- war began in 1642 - united opposition divided since 1640 w/ increasing political support for King
- radicals in Parl distrustful of King, moved from conservatism (maintaing Charles'/Lauds' reforms) to revolutionaries (demanding change in power balances)
- Adamson's Noble Revolt claims main centre of opposition = Puritan nobles (Warwick, Essex, Northumberland, and clients), revolutionary agenda to undermine King, politically astute, claimed King's income w/ ancient precedents
- Charles failed to remove opposition, unwilling to use military force, rediscovered perennial weakness of Crown in 1642 (hard to raise troops w/o Parliament)

7 of 21

Controversy: What Determined Side-Taking in 1642?

Marxist Historians - believed matter of class w/ aristocracy/gentry evenly divided between sides ((Adamson - importance of certain nobles in causing/sustaining civil war, vision of new constitution))
Parliamentary Side - men of Puritan persuasion, religious radicalism (enabled them to take up arms against King/contemplate new constitution w/ monarch as mere figurehead), feared Charles a closet Catholic, convinced King surrounded by evil counsellors, distrustful of King, no agreement possible (Royalist Side - Catholics/loyal CoE men)
For many, decision made by activists for one side or other within shire/town, e.g. followed local patron in allegiance,  shires/towns divided first between royalists/parliamentarians due to pre-existing political/religious divisions in shire
Geography of main protagonists - Charles in Nottingham issued Commissions of Array 1642 to gather army, therefore London/adjoining counties (SE) automatically in Parl's hands, active royalists joined King, left Parl in charge
London - Parl not due to merchants/traders/HoL/HoC favouring Parl  BUT because royalists joined King in Midlands
((Pym able to pass Grand Remonstrance because moderates/neutrals left London/were fearful of debates))
Parliamentarian activists moved to London, allowing N/W to be dominated by Royalists
Men w/o Choice - uncertainty, crisis both issued call to arms, Lady Sussex "both sides promise so fair, I cannot see why they should argue", both produced propaganda, decision made for them when armed men of either side arrived on doorstep, regional flavour (geographical split), if on borderland supported both (both taxed/robbed), forced changes
Minority wanted war - activists, impact of warfare, imposition of war economy dragged all in, clubmen/neutrals, neutrality pacts in c. 22 shires (collapsed quickly), landowners decided in terms of where they held land

8 of 21

The First and Second Civil Wars (I)

Main Battles - (1642) Edgehill, inconclusive, Rupert reached Turnham Green, Brentford, closest royalists got to London (1643) 1st Battle of Newbury, Royalists' three-pronged attack on London/SE from Newcastle from N/Oxford and Hopton from SW, inconclusive (1644) Marston Moor, parliament's victory in N (1645) Naseby, first outing of NMA, royalists defeated, secured entire victory for Parl.Not inevitable victory, if royalists had won Edgehill/Marston Moor/Naseby, would have won entire war.
Reasons for Parl's Victory:
- controlled London/SE throughout war - Charles had to capture London to win (beyond military capability), raised/maintained several regional armies, too small to besiege capital
- London, the SE, East Anglia - Parl held wealthier areas, economic/financial capacity to maintian war effort, controlled centres of commerce/credit (money from London merchants), more printing presses (had 6 wartime newspapers but royalists only had 2), success in propaganda war, London had most effective/efficient militia in the country, London militia protected Turnham Green 1642, relieved royalist siege of Gloucester 1643, Parl controlled all three arsenals throughout war (Tower of London, Portsmouth, Hull), Charles relied on less well-off areas, use of wealthy supporters' assets (exhausted in long term), Parl controlled most of sea ports/navy - kept trade going, benefitted from taxes on trade, kept London supplied, helped prevented Frnech aid to royalists (France/Spain too involved in 30 Yrs War to help)
- lightly garrisoned SE (control of navy prevented attack), Parl's ports in royalist areas, e.g. Liverpool/Lyme raided troops
Nature of Warfare - became series of regional conflicts (sieges/storming towns/small scale, indecisive battles), front line v long, troops therefore dispersed to guard towns/territories, Charles couldn't focus on taking London/winning one decisive encounter in open battle, royalist advances on capital slow (esp. after failure in 1643)

9 of 21

The First and Second Civil Wars (II)

Parl's War Effort - raising money/supplies became more systematic as war continued, set up county commitees (ruthless in overriding traditional rights of town/communities), weekly assessments enforced (tax on land), tried civilians by martial law (prepared to sacrifice ideals of govt. to win war), introduced excise ordinance 1643 (sales tax to raise money), quick to confiscate lands/goods from "delinquents"
Royalist War Effort - less severe in practice (King stressed traditional laws/constitution), in terms of army supplies more "hand in mouth" (gained reputation for plundering, taking free quarter)
NMA - Fairfax Commander in Chief, Cromwell led cavalry, "war winning army" (created late '45 in Parl's desperation for victory), large/mobile/coherent army (King's still regional/worn down), Charles' soldiers initally better, strength of NMA derived from regular pay, religious zeal, officers promoted according to ability not status, won decisively at Naseby 1645 (even though Rupert destroyed 1/3 of Parl's forces in cavalry charge), Charles unable to refresh forces so surrendered
Self-Denying Ordinance 1645 - allowed Parl to remove commanders e.g. Earls of Essex/Manchester (unable to inflict decvisive defeat on King), Cromwell exception to new law (believed firmly in justice of Parl's cause)
Rupert's Failures - brilliant cavalry commander, failed to convert royalist supremacy to victory (Edgehill/Marston Moor), charged uphill into parl's army twice the size at Naseby, Royalists had no reserves to compensate for successful charges
Charles' Tactical Mistake 1645 - divided armies in two, faced Fairfax and NMA w/ smaller force at Naseby
Religious Idealism - once thought radical Puritanism inspired Parl/its army (greater ideological resolve than royalists), hard to measure, helped Parl in bad times, maybe case Royalists overconfident in 1642

10 of 21

The First and Second Civil Wars (III)

Parl's Allies - more useful than King's - 1643's Solemn League and Covenant w/ Scots, provided Covenanter army of 20k infantry, 3k cavalry in Jan 1644 (most English armies = 10-15k), in 8 months Scots captured 1/3 royalist land in N, important role in MM (more cavalry than royalists, kept them in N), Charles surrendered to Scots 1646 at Newark, serious royalist army in Scotland under Montrose (destroyed returning Covenanter army at Philiphaugh 1645), Montrose allowed Parl to remove unwelcome ally when peace came
Charles' Allies - military aid from Irish Catholics, not as well trained as Scots, promoted idea of Irish conspiracy, Charles lost propaganda war, c. 6k of Irish infantry arrived in piecemeal fashion (1/2 destroyed at Battle of Nantwich)

Second Civil War 1648
- by playing enemies off against each other, Charles sparked event by negotiating w/ Scots ("Engager" army defeated by Cromwell at Battle of Preston), also led by royalists stirs elsewhere in country
- despite resumption of war, in December '48 Parl voted to restart negotiations w/ King, planned to bring him to London
, promised Charles would get better terms, moderates determined to make settlement/destroy army's growing power
- situation resolved until army took control - December '48 Pride's Purge allowing only those prepared to put King on trial into HoC, army leadership/Rump Parl voted to put King on trial/execute him (January 1649)
- Charles referred to this as "man of blood", army realised only way to prevent surge in royalist support to execute King and declare a republic

11 of 21

The Search for Settled Govt. 1646-53 (I)

Failure to  produce a peace settlement, execution of the King, abolition of the monarchy.
Victors divided - worried about power of army once victory secured, wanted it disbanded asap (didn't have money to pay soldiers' arrears), concern about growing no. of radical ideas/groups, e.g. Levellers/5th Monarchists/Baptists/Ranters, wanted quick settlement to avoid anarchy, Parl divided between "hardliners" (Vane, St John, Cromwell, old 'war' party, thought disbanding army would allow King to dictate terms of settlement) and moderates (Holles, old 'peace' party, wanted Scots paid off/disband NMA/send regiments to resolve Irish conflict), divisions between those wanting coercive Presbyterian national Church and Independents (e.g. Cromwell) wanting 'liberty to tender conscience'

Army politicised - reacted to split w/ moderates, owed c. £3mil in arrears, frightened of 'cavalier' backlash in counties if disbanded, April '47 Holles issued Declaration of Dislike (soldiers petitioning Parl for grievance redress 'enemies of State'), officers/men elected General Council of Army, June '47 Army seized King, in Aug took control of ToL, issued Heads of the Proposals (limiting King/Parl's powers)

Army divisions - rank/file represented by agitators, distrustful of self-seeking/corrupt officers (grandees), believed Heads of the Proposals a sell-out to King, influenced by Levellers, Oct '47 Agreement of the People, new consitutional, apparently resolved divisions in Putney Debates (Oct-Nov '47) but had exposed them, Nov '47 Corkbush Field, May '49 Burford, Leveller inspired army mutinies

12 of 21

The Search for Settled Govt. 1646-53 (II)

Levellers - intellectuals, led by John Lilburne (charismatic), wanted to end tyrannical kings/parls of '30s, for all men to get vote/equality of electoral districts, wanted end of central govt w/ decisions taken locally, not serious threat to Army/Parl although influential in Army/London (soldiers mostly concerned w/issues of arrears of pay/indemnity against war crimes), not coherent political party/not organised/no clear programme/leaders divided, secular, wanted religious toleration/no national church/abolition of tithes

Scots - complicating factor, in 1646 had king, wanted Presbyterian Church in England to match own, Parl unhappy w/ this, wanted Scots paid off, handed over King to Parl January '47, worry about royalist Scots (Montrose/his Scottish army)

Intransigence of King - all parties in '48 assumed new constitution w/ King restored (diminished), Charles believed could hold out for better terms, in '45 said to Rupert "God will not suffer rebels to prosper or His cause to be overthrown", thought could retain prerogative powers (enemies divided), believed God turned against him (defeat in war) as had given up God-given powers before war/broken word to Strafford, not interested in terms offered by Parl (Newcastle Propositions), played for time, almost successful, sparked 2nd Civil War '48 by negotiating w/ Scots, defeated by Cromwell at Preston, after Vote of No Addresses(Jan '48) Dec '48 voted to restart negotiations w/ Charles, plans for better terms

13 of 21

The Search for Settled Govt. 1646-53 (III)

December 1648 - Colonel Pride purged parliament, only allowed in MPs prepared to put King on trial, led to Army leadership for brief few weeks, Rump decided to execute King in January '49, executed 30th January

Reasons for execution of the King - not ideological motive for some, grandees/supporters of decision not republicans, practicalities dominated, army knew could be not lasting settlement w/ King, Charles unprepared to negotiate seriously, had sparked 2nd Civil War, Army called him "man of blood",  worry country would descend into anarchy if army failed to take charge, many MPs who voted for execution did so out of desperation

Charles' refusal to negotiate - refused to negotiate w/ rebels (took arms against lawful sovereign), saw opponents as revolutionaries wishing to change fundamental ancient 'mixed' constitution of country, e.g. negative response to Parl's 19 Propositions, thought revolution would lead to anarchy, thought enemies would fall out (nearly did), thought God against him in war as had given up some God given powers pre-1642, would rather face martyrdom than give up more powers, wrote Ikon Basilicae prior to execution

Rump Parl - opposed Charles as king, not office of king, realised after execution couldn't invite Charles' sons back, monarchy abolished by default, majority conservative, conservatives couldn't accept Charles' execution, many purged MPs returned February '49, radicals then outnumbered, disliked by Sir Arthur Haselrigge/Henry Vane but was only option, Cromwell politically most powerful army leader/politically conservative/made strenuous efforts to prevent King's execution

14 of 21

Strengths/Weaknesses of the Commonwealth (I)

Rump criticised for King's execution, abolishing monarchy/HoL, illegal regime, only portion of original Long parl, seen as instrument of army grandees/destroyed by army claiming was self-seeking/failed to introduce necessary reform
Reasons for Rump's Success (1649-53): - acheived degree of settlement, internal peace, prevented military dictatorship, most MPs from traditional governing class (landowners), moderate, worried about growth of radical sects, priority to suppress sects rather than new reforms, faced massive internal problems after war (corrected these), ruled via Council of State (40 members), more radical MPs divided politically/religiously (no clear ideology guiding them), likely unwillingness to introduce radical reform helped maintain political stability

Rump Successes in IRL - sent Cromwell to IRL to end Civil War July '49 - May '50, excesses/crimes committed at Drogheda/Wexford (inhabitants slain), ended fighting, imposed harsh new settlement, est. English control, estates confisctaed from Catholic landowners (Act for the Settling of IRL '52), conquest continued under Ireton/Fleetwood
Rump Successes in Scotland - problems due to Charles' heir Prince Charles hoping to use Scotland as springboard for restoration of monarchy in England (proclaimed King in Edinburgh February '49, crowned '51, Cromwell defeated Scots at Dunbar '50 (again at Worcester '51), thwarted attempt to secure throne, no more serious royalist uprisings (Charles not popular in England then, invited back in '60)
War w/ Dutch - growing trade rivalry w/ Dutch esp. after '48 (after Dutch gained official independence from Spain at end of 30 Yrs War), Rump passed two Navigation Acts '50 '51, led to naval war w/ Dutch '52-'53, English forces had upper hand under Admiral Blake (Battle of the Downs '52)

15 of 21

Strengths/Weaknesses of the Commonwealth (II)

Support for Rump - January '50 all office holders took Engagement (Oath of Allegiance) to Rump, non-subscribers banned from office, used to purge local communities of its enemies (Herefordshire 40% committee members ousted)
Finance - Rump used to ease govt's finance problems, used land confiscated from royalists/Crown/Church to help pay soldiers/mount campaigns in IRL/Scot/against Dutch, first English regime w/ standing army, kept taxation high, treated creditors badly/difficulty attracting loans, debt less than £1mil by April '53

Levellers - horrified Rump assumed power w/ army backing, Lilburne produced 'England's New Chains Discovered' claiming had usurped authority, mutiny at Burford '49 dealt w/ fast, 4 leaders sent to ToL March '49(Lilburne, Overton, Walwyn, Prince), by '50 a spent force, Rainsborough (role in Putney Debates) dead
Other Radicals - ranters an anti-religious sect claimed sin used to oppress others, disputes about Ranter existence, Rump passed moral code '50 inc. death penalty for female adulterers, diggers led by Gerrard Winstanley, published Law of Freedom '52, est. digger community in Surrey '49, others in '50, wanted abolition of private property/a pantheist, v small threat, easily suppressed by Rump
Fifth Monarchists - believed end of world at hand, that Saints should rule for Parousia, most notable leader was Major General-Harrison, claimed force legitimate to overthrow existing regimes to est. rule of 'Godly', wanted abolition of legal system, c. 10k members at height, not a threat to regime, Barebones Parl named after Praise-God Barebones, little persecution of this group during Rump as had some support from army leaders 

16 of 21

Strengths/Weaknesses of the Commonwealth (III)

Reasons for Rump's Failure: - army perceived failure, no extensive legal reform, Levellers wanted reduce no. of laws/quicker resolutions, summer '49 failed to relieve those imprisoned for debt, '50 decreed all legal cases conducted in English, rejected Hale Commission's law reforms Feb '53, MPs like Bulstrode Whitelock argued those favouring reforms not knowledgeable, opposition to radical reform

Religion: - unrest if had imposed religious settlement, CoE dismantled (episcopacy abolished/PB banned), Directory of Worship '44, repealed statutes enforcing attendance at church, no easy solution, divisions between Presbyterians/Independents, dealt w/ practical problems, voted £20k pa from confiscated Church/Crown lands to increase livings to £100 pa, survey of parishes '49 (merges of parishes), local opposition, '50 Commission to Propagate Gospel in N/Wales, ratified tithes '52 (all payed for upkeep of ministers if attended or not)

Other Issues:
- no electoral reform, Levellers/Army leaders wanted widened franchise, equalizeelectoral districts/regular elections, 3 plans ('48 Levellers', '49 Army Grandees', '50 Rump Commitee's), none enacted, self-perpetuating, Cromwell dissolved Rump April '53, claiming failed to hold fresh elections to gain legitimacy, theory dissolved as Crom/Army fearful would hold election and that new parl. would be royalist/moderates wanting erasure of army

17 of 21

The Commonwealth: Barebones Parliament

April - December 1653
Failure of Barebones:
- opted for Nominated Assembly w/ Council of Army Officers over elections, Lambert wanted executive Council of State (others wanted assembly of 'Saints'), named after Baptist lay preacher Praise-God Barebones, Cromwell believed would draw up new constitution, radical minority of c. 40 (c. 11-14 Fifth Monarchists who dominated), mostly lesser gentry, radical reform programme, failed as threatened vested interests, representatives from Scotland/IRL

Barebones' Desires: - wanted codification of law into pocket-book, abolition of Court of Chancery/tithes/gentleman's right to nominate men to church livings, Fifth Monarchists wanted introduction of Law of Moses, to gentry represented attack on property rights

Acheivements: - sensible reforms inc. Act to Settle IRL, Act to Link Scotland, England, IRL, '53 Civil Marriage Act allowing marriage outside Church, radical reforms inc. August '53 vote to abolish Court of Chancery (only saved by Parl's dissolution Dec. '53), August vote by 56-52 in favour of abolition of tithes, too much for moderates so when radicals at Prayer Meeting came to chamber, voted themselves out of existence

Instrument of Govt: - drawn up by Lambert, est. Cromwell as Lord Protector (after he refused Crown following Humble Petition and Advice), Protector assisted by Council of State (max. 21 people), Protector nominates CoS, CoS had power to nominate Protector's successor, triennial Parliaments (5 month meetings at least), no HoL, Parl to have 30 MPs each from Scotland/IRL, Protector had power to veto bills contrary to Instrument, 21 day suspensive veto on other bills, allowed to legislate via Ordinances. Also note the monarchical features of the Protectorate.

18 of 21

Collapse of the Interregnum

Basic Timeline: - sparked by Cromwell's death in September '58, succeeded by son Richard (lacked father's experience, influence w/ army), May '59 Army attempted to calm political disintergration by recalling Rump of '49-'53 (wanted constitutional support for Army rule), scheme failed, Committee of Safety dissolved Rump, led govt, struggled, Rump recalled, growing sense of anarchy inspired General Monck to march army from Scotland to England, encouraged Rump to recall Long Parl, voted to dissolve itself, Convention Parl. agreed to Restoration, alternative to Civil War/Military Dictatorship

Reasons for Restoration: - army/parl couldn't agree, distrusted each other, army powerful but leaders unwilling to est. dictatorship, gentry/landowners worried by rise of Quakers (seen as seditious alongside Baptists) although threat minimal, economic downturn '59-'60, Charles II issued Declaration of Breda (offered settlement, moderate, compromise), determination to avoid Civil War

 Richard Cromwell's Protectorate: - Sept '58-Apr/May '59, after Oliver Cromwell's death Republic lost stability, main split between army/civilians (popular royalism emerges), Richard proclaimed Protector but retired '59, Army took control (upset about arrears in pay)

Rump Parl. May to Oct '59: - army wanted Godly Reformation, Rump didn't, attempted to sack army leaders (Lambert, Desborough, Fleetwood), wanted army under civilian control, dissolved by army who est. Committee of Safety to rule

19 of 21

The Restoration of the Monarchy 1658-67 (I)

Committee of Safety: - Oct-Dec '59, led by army leaders in London, dissolved after few weeks, Lambert (main 'architect') left to deal w/ Monck's opposition (army commander in Scotland), Navy/Irish Army declare for Rump
Rule by Rump: - Dec '59 - March '60, Rumo returned to deadlocked situation, removed some army leaders (Fleetwood, Desborough, Lambert), Monck marched on London, re-est. Long Parl. by re-admitting members excluded in Pride's Purge '48, then dissolved in favour of fresh elections
Convention Parl/the Restoration: - new Convention Parl. met, Charles issued Declaration of Breda (offered general pardon except for regicides, parl responsible for settlement of land disputes, liberty to tender conscience, toleration for Protestant dissenters), Parl then voted to invite Charles back, returned in May '60

Restoration Settlement (Monarchy): - Convention/Cavalier Parl. imposed some restrictions on power of restored monarchy (ship money illegal/no prerogative courts, no feudal rights), didn't bring back restrictions imposed '41-'42, many believed Parl's power needed curtailing, monarchy controlled army (Militia Acts '61-'62), King allowed to appoint own ministers/retained veto on parl's legislation, claim that parl could legislate w/o king made illegal, act against tumultuous petitioning to put pressure on parl, triennial act modified in '64, no compulsion for monarch to call parl (although recommended), Act of Indemnity/Oblivion '60 healed tensions, lands confiscated from Crown/Church restored (only few royalists regained land, led to bitterness, but worse alternative), Crown voted annual income of £1.2mil, excise tax retained to make up for lost feudal revenues, new hearth tax (never effectively collected), Crown income relied on parl

20 of 21

The Restoration of the Monarchy 1658-67 (II)

Church Settlement: - attempts to settle matter of national church via national conference unsuccessful, Worcester House Conference '60, Savoy Conference '61, episcopacy reinstated, bishops re-admitted to HoL, local gentry/landowners est. much of pre-war church, Act of Uniformity, Prayer Book

Cavalier Parl's 'Clarendon Code':
- re-est. Church, mainly aim to crush dissenters (non-conforming Protestants)
- Corporation Act '61 - dissenters not allowed to hold town offices
- Act of Uniformity '62 - brought in New PB based on Elizabethan PB, ministers who refused to use it forced out
- Quaker Act '62 - severe penalties for Quakers
- Conventicle Act '64 - illegal to hold religious meeting of 5 or more w/o use of PB
- Five Mile Act '64 - no non-CoE preacher allowed within 5 miles of corporate towns
- easy to see as victory for Charles I's/Laud's church as intended but much of legislation not rigorously enforced
- de facto toleration for Dissenters/dissenting ministers provided were not guilty of sedition or were Quakers/Baptists

21 of 21


No comments have yet been made

Similar History resources:

See all History resources »See all England 1629-67 resources »