English Civil War
The English Civil War consisted of opposing forces that were unique to the country of England. Religion, tied with the new ideal of Calvinism, worked to bring together a new idea of liberty and freedom. This precept forced people to choose between the rebel or royalist forces, which in the end became the catalyst for a new model of democracy, building a stronger Parliament and a guide for future governments.
My family is puritan rebels that support the defense of Parliament. We wish for Charles to continue to reign, but only on terms that share governing our land with Parliament. We are indebted to Charles I for helping my grandfather, William Pennoyer in his business known as the "Company of Merchant Adventurers of London trading," involved in the shipping of cloth, spice, horses, and many other goods.[1] We have tow ships, the "Alum" and the "Paramoor," warships that serve us well. "...Charles I had given a patent to a group of merchants headed by Courteen and a royal favorite, courtier Endymion Porter, to trade where the East India Company had not yet established factories. Between 1642-1645, Maurice Thomson was linked with the Earl of Warwick and William Pennoyer with Capt. Jackson's second raid on the Spanish West Indies..."[2] This war was not planned, rather it was the amalgamation of various doctrines and political parties simmering underneath an already volatile mix. Many of us in England are related to each other through church, blood, or business. We have no ill will toward any of our fellow men, only we remember how we, as Puritans, have been treated by the Spanish Catholics in France, Germany, and other places. Furthermore, some of our own families remain faithful to the spiritual doctrine of one church, regarding neither Catholic nor Protestant above the other.[3] The nobility is tied to the Anglican Church and no longer has a vital military role to play in England. They are also losing their authority in government while the House of Commons is becoming the near equal of the House of Lords in Parliament. Finally, the nobility seems to be losing out in terms of England's increasing prosperity, as new elements, such as the gentry, enter the scene. Some of these new gentry, like my grandfather William Pennoyer, have the ability to be a good businessman, as well as keeping the laws of England and God. The gentry is a broad group of people that have done quite well since the early 16th century when they purchased the land the English crown had confiscated when the monasteries were closed. The gentry also found themselves more thoroughly involved in the commerce of the nation which found them at odds with the nobility who were traditionally aloof from business matters. Much money and fortunes are being made by Mercantile Adventurers in the spice trade as well as clothiers.[4]
The many fortunes made by the European countries through wool and spice trade are now being challenged by a new breed of Puritan. Fortunes are made worth more than a year's commerce in the whole of England, a fact that the Kings and Queens of England are quick to note. Essential to the administration of the local parishes, the gentry now wants a voice in Parliament. Their argument is simply that since they have helped increase the wealth of the nation they too ought to share in the governing of the nation. Since most of the gentry are Puritan like my grandfather, he is now allowed to take office in government unless he joins the Anglican Church. The existence of the gentry in the early 17th century was not enough to stimulate a civil war. What helped create the foundation for the civil war was the fact that many of the gentry was sympathetic to the Puritans who argued that the Anglican Church established by Elizabeth was far too close to Roman Catholicism, and so they sought to reduce the influence of ritual and hierarchy within the Church.[5]
Like many of the men in Parliament, my family is patriots for a new kind of England free from ritual and hierarchy in government and church. Our men accept the precepts of freedom for all to worship as they please, without the intrusion of government policies. Many of the men of Parliament do not agree with "The Rights of Kings," so they made Charles I agree to the "Petition of Rights." My grandfather believes the King is far too shifty to allow these rights to stand, so it will not be long until Charles reneges on his agreements with Parliament. Had these rights remained, the billeting of troops in our homes, as well as arbitrary taxation and imprisonment would have become illegal. The second session of Parliament in 1629 revealed the measures of King Charles' despotic soul, as two resolutions were passed by Parliament in protest to the numerous abuses by King Charles I. These resolutions declared that anyone who brought innovations in religion into the Kingdom, as well as anyone who levied custom duties without consent of Parliament, was to be considered enemies of the Kingdom. Due to King Charles' lack of diplomacy, the Puritan revolt began with the official dissolving of Parliament being the shot heard around the world. Parliament would not be called again for eleven years.[6]
Many of my Puritan family members view the attempts of Charles and James to justify their absolute control as just another group of despots trying to raise themselves above the laws of God and man. James I wrote "A True Law of Free Monarchies." James I viewed the Monarchy as a divinely ordained institution. He felt that the King is accountable to only God and is above the law. This manner of thinking brought James into frequent conflict with Parliament in 1604. In 1609, James delivered a series of speeches to Parliament in which he laid down his claim to rule by divine right. The Puritans and gentry wanted to reform the Anglican Church through legislation, as well as extend their influence in politic. My Puritan family soon realized that James hated our religion and our political ideas. Some Puritans also reacted against the systematic abuse of granting royal patents and monopolies to the worthless favorites of James. In turn, James threatened to drive some of my Puritan brethren out of the country, and so, in 1620, the Puritans established the "Holy Commonwealth" in the New World.[7] My Puritan family appealed to the defense of the constitution and the rights of all English subjects, specifically to protect religious tolerance. The heart of the issue was the divine right theory of Kingship, one which should have been curtailed by the Magna Carta's engrafted words long ago. My Puritan family argues that divine rights destroy any appeal of the law, a law founded on the tenets of the Magna Carta. Divine rights erode personal and property rights, allowing the historical re-emergence of the European fiefdoms of old. The majority of the Englishmen simply want to limit the King's prerogative by rule. By 1640, both houses still wished to preserve the King's prerogative, restore Parliament's privileges, while restoring liberty to all English subjects. Sadly, the Puritan challenge split the group into two groups, those who stressed reform of church structure, and those who stresses liberty of conscience and religious tolerance. James finally closed Parliament in 1611, and ruled by himself until 1621.
Although Charles I won popularity by being anti-Spanish like his father, Charles' rule included his belief in the divine right theory of Kingship as well. Charles was even more pro-Catholic and anti-Puritan than his father. His wife was a French Catholic named Henrietta Maria. Much of the conflict between King and Parliament centered around religion. Charles was widely believed to favor Catholics, leading many to believe that he was secretly one himself. His behavior toward Puritan churches in England lent credibility to the rumors.
When many of my Puritan families were told that we had to use the "Book of Common Prayer," recognized by the Anglican Church as the only one legal, my Puritan family denounced this level of state control over religious practice. We also saw that access to government public offices was being limited to only Anglicans.[8] King Charles attempted to force the Anglican prayer book on the Calvinist Scots, sparking as open rebellion. The "First Bishops War" against the Scots began in 1639. Rather than surrender, the Scots formed an army and invaded England. Charles discovered that h e would need the help of Parliament to save his kingdom. He reluctantly acquiesced by reinstating Parliament after eleven years. The fresh members of Parliament had a long list of issues against the rule of Charles I.
On November 3rd, 1640, Charles I called the illustrious Long Parliament in order to fund his war on Scotland. While in power, the Long Parliament tries to prosecute some of Charles' favorites and went on to eradicate the high courts of the Star Chamber and the High Commission. Charles I reluctantly allowed Parliaments proceeding, but meanwhile built an army to thwart Parliament. The next year my grandfather witnessed first hand the start of the rebellion against English rule in Ireland. Although the King proceeded to raise an army to defeat the rebellion, we feared Charles would use the army against us. One of our leaders in Parliament, John Pym, helped to draft the document "Grand Remonstrance," a document that plainly listed the evils of Charles' rule. The "Remonstrance" included our demand for church reform and parliamentary control of the army and over royal appointments. In 1641, Parliament used the little time they had left to pass a "Triennial Act" which provided that Parliament be called into session at least once every three years. Parliament had some pent up issues against Thomas Wentworth, the first Earl of Stafford, so they impeached him and sent him to the Tower.[9] Their actions against Thomas proved to be just as maniacal as Charles I. Thomas was charged with treason. Unproven, they used the legal action called the "Bill of Attainder" which essentially allowed them to execute him without a trial. William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was also impeached and imprisoned. Charles gathered his army at Nottingham on August 22, 1642. In the beginning of the English Civil War, at "Marston Moor," Parliamentary forces continued to be in retreat until 1644, when the Kings forces were finally routed.
The "New Model Army" was lead by Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell was a member of the gentry and was essentially a country gentleman, but as my family witnesses, he too becomes corrupted by absolute power. Cromwell's studies at Cambridge, which had included mathematics and law, prepared his sharp mind for the many power struggles he would encounter during the civil war. Although he was brought up a Puritan and experienced his spiritual conversion at the age of twenty-eight, he still had the inner yearnings for power that Charles welded. His birth as part of the English ruling class still gave him a certain high-minded authority which he used through his actions against Parliament. The addition of power, along with the sudden onset of wealth, served to only corrupt an otherwise Puritan upbringing. The added help of having twenty kinsmen at his side in Long Parliament gave Cromwell leverage he used to his advantage. Many of his family had intermarried with other such families. Cromwell had married into a wealthy manufacturing family, while his oldest daughter had conveniently married General Henry Ireton. Her marriage to General Ireton gave Cromwell absolute control over the New Model Army.[10]
By December 1648, the Levelers dominated London, keeping the more moderate members away by force and threat of force. "...The fragmentation of English religion was aided by the translation and mass production of the Bible, allowing each individual to interpret it for himself. Religious radicals, like John Lilburne (Leveler leader), drew upon the stories of Protestant suffering told by John Foxe in his Book of Martyrs..."[11] Parliament had now shrunk in size to about only seven members, all Independents under Cromwell's leadership, trying to wrestle a course between King and Presbyterians and Levelers. Cromwell's influential Parliament brought the King to trial for treason. A trial began on January 20th, 1649, and quickly brought back a guilty verdict. Charles I proved to be calm, with an air of dignity that said much about a man under duress. Perhaps Charles sensed the time was near, or perhaps he thought of the legacy that would remain after his death. He was convicted of treason by a vote of twenty-six to twenty. Twenty-four members refused to vote. Charles was beheaded before a large, but silent, crowd on January 30th, 1649. His display of dignity and silent meditation at his trial and at his execution somehow repaired the public opinion of him. My family has never heard of any public authority executing a king before, either in England or anywhere else in Europe. It marks how far political thinking has advanced, and it marks how during the non-noble classes have grown. The force of my Puritan thinking, tied with the "Leveler" thinking, soon spread to the colonies of America as well.
The Levelers are not content with the execution of Charles. In their view, the edifice of authority has not been leveled. Corrupt power remains under a different title. "We were before ruled by King, Lord, and Commons, now by a General, a Court Martial and House of Commons. And we pray you, what is the difference?"[12] They distanced themselves from the "Diggers" or "True Levelers," who were genuine farsighted communitarians. The radical wings of the movement are becoming even more radical, Fifth Monarchists and Diggers. Their creating of more revolts forced Cromwell to order more executions. His actions were quick and decisive, resulting in the swift breaking of the Levelers rebellions. The Levelers invoked the concept of natural rights against the despotism of the Stuart state. They drew their thoughts of natural law from the pages of Christopher St. Germain's book "Doctor and Student." Richard Overton, a leading Leveler advocate, expressed the belief like this. "...by natural birth all men are equally and alike borne to like propriety, liberty and freedom"[13] Philosopher, John Locke used these arguments in his writings and it is included in the precepts contained in the foundation of the United States Constitution. The Levelers echoed these rights and they assumed them to reside with all individuals. To them, each man should have freedom limited only by regard for the freedom of others.
From August 1649, until February 1650, Cromwell led battles to Ireland battling the rebels and their ideas of freedom. In 1650 he traveled to Ireland again. Left to fight off yet another Scottish invasion led by Charles' son, Cromwell defeated the invasion decisively at Dunbar and took Edinburgh in December. In August 1651, the Scots tried once more. Charles II led them once again and Cromwell defeated them, much to their dismay, near Worcester on September 3rd. Charles fled to France. In 1652, Cromwell fought a new war with Holland, winning this one the following year. The positive side to the battle in Holland was the innovative improvements and expansion of the British Navy. Cromwell appeared to my family of Puritans and to the group of Levelers to be just as distant from freedom and liberty as Charles had been when alive. Cromwell began to argue with Parliament, but was forced to deal with them because of his need for money to finance his many wars.[14] Finally, Cromwell asked Parliament to disband, and act most of my kinsmen saw as a sign Cromwell was becoming a dictator rather than a guide to liberty. In April 1653, Parliament rightly proposed to expand its membership along with becoming a permanent part of English government. Cromwell entered the House during this debate, listening, and then saying, "...Come, come! I will put an end to your sitting..."[15] The stunned MPs could not act fast enough. Cromwell proceeded to call his troops into the House and cleared it. Oliver Cromwell had seized power for himself. A new tyranny had begun.
When Cromwell attempted to usurp power from Parliament, religion, tied with the new idea of Calvinism, worked to bring together a new idea of liberty and freedom. Liberty became a precept which forced people to choose between the Rebel or Royalist forces, slowly leading England to develop a strong and lasting Parliament. However, a lasting Parliament does not occur until Cromwell finally passes away.
Cromwell creates a new Parliament known as the Parliament of Saints, or the bar-bones Parliament. It was the most dramatic yet, as Cromwell discovers, dissolving it after only six months of internal strife. Cromwell finally took on the guise and title of Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. He moves into Whitehall with his family in April 1653, Charles' former royal residence. He was, in fact, the dictator of England. The three Parliaments were convened during the Protectorate, and Cromwell argued with all three. In March 1657, moderated offered Cromwell the Crown, but he refused it. He did accept, however, the right to name his successor. He named his son.
Cromwell's rule as Lord Protector was inundated with war. There were Royalist revolts, a particularly serious one occurring in 1655. There was an additional war with Spain in 1656, including the earlier conflicts with Ireland, Scotland, and Holland. Because of these wars, the coffers of the treasury began to empty, making it difficult to run a balanced kingdom. Cromwell barely managed to hold England's many enemies at bay. He acquired Dunkirk and Jamaica as a result of his wars. Under Cromwell, the British Navy became a regular military service. My Puritan family finally managed to find a place in English government.
When Cromwell died on the 3rd September 1658, his son succeeded him. Richard Cromwell was not a powerful ruler by any means, motivating many in the Royalist party to call for the restoration of the Stuarts. Cromwell's Protectorate had always been viewed with hatred. England endured it because there was no one left to oppose the army controlled by Cromwell. Once the general died, the traditional political forces quickly re-establishing the power between king and Parliament.[16]
Finally, "The Declaration of Rights and the Bill of Rights of 1689 redefined the relationship between monarch and subjects and barred any future Catholic succession to the throne. There was a gradual process by which practical power shifted from the monarch to Parliament. The theoretical ascendancy of Parliament was never thereafter successfully challenged. The royal power to suspend and dispense with law was abolished, and the crown was forbidden to levy taxation or maintain a standing army in peacetime without parliamentary consent."[17] The Puritans and Parliament now had a lasting part in government and religious issues.
[1] Chaudhuri, E.N.
[2] <http://www.danbyrnes.com.au/business/business13.html>
[3] <http://huguenot.netnation.com/general/huguenot.htm>
[4] <http://www.economist.com/diversions/millenium/displa yStory.cfm?Story_ID=347231
[5] <http://www.historyguide.org/earlymod/lecture7c.html>
[6] <http://www.historyguide.org/earlymod/lecture7c.html>
[7] <http://www.historyguide.org/earlymod/lecture7c.html>
[8] <http://history.boisestate.edu/westciv/english/04.sht ml>
[9] <http://history.boisestate.edu/westciv/english/04.sht ml>
[10] <http://history.boisestate.edu/westciv/english/15.sht ml>
[11] <http://www.theadvoctaes.org/freeman/8905elli.html>
[12] http://www.theadvocates.org/freeman/8905elli.html>
[13] http://www.theadvocates.org/freeman/8905elli.html>
[14] Noble et al.
[15] http://history.boisestate.edu/westciv/english/23.sht ml>
[16] <http://history.boisestate.edu/eastciv/english/23.sht ml>
[17] <http://www.lawsch.uga.edu/~glorius/chron.html>