Radicalism and Regicide, 1646–49 (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
The Impact of War, 1642–46
War's impact on societies extends beyond immediate destruction. Historians must distinguish between changes directly caused by conflict and those that would have occurred regardless. The English Civil War between 1642 and 1646 created conditions that allowed radical religious and political ideas to flourish, transforming the relationship between religion, politics and authority in unprecedented ways.
The emergence of radicalism
Protestant roots of radical thinking
Under James I and Charles I, tensions between Crown and Parliament were shaped by those labelled 'Puritans', although this term encompassed diverse positions. Puritanism represented a broad Protestant movement emphasising personal faith, Bible study and church reform rather than a single unified doctrine. Some Puritans sought reform within the Church of England structure, whilst others pursued more radical separation.
In 1958, the American scholar William Haller published 'The Rise of Puritanism', arguing that Puritan clergy formed the intellectual foundation for radicalism. Haller termed this 'Historic Puritanism' to distinguish it from wider Protestant religious culture. His analysis emphasised how these clergy used their preaching power to shape public opinion.
Between Elizabeth I's reign and the early seventeenth century, ministers gained unprecedented access to audiences through sermons, printed texts and pamphlets. They could inspire and direct their congregations but lacked mechanisms to control outcomes once ideas entered public circulation.
The Puritan reform agenda initially aimed to reorganise English society around Presbyterian principles (a church governed by elected assemblies and ministers). When summoned to the Westminster Assembly in 1643, clergy seized opportunities to present reform proposals. However, their freedom to preach and publish, though limited, promoted active religious experience and individual interpretation. This unintentionally encouraged faster development than traditional church structures could manage. Puritan preaching became increasingly revolutionary, creating literate and confident audiences. Ministers taught that people must obey conscience above earthly authority. When the Stuart regime collapsed in 1642, numerous preachers emerged alongside able, energetic writers who supplied content to busy printers. Among these were political journalists of exceptional talent and poets of considerable skill.
Haller specifically identified John Lilburne and John Milton as examples - both would actively participate in civil war and its aftermath, promoting revolutionary ideas based on individual freedom and equality. Nevertheless, both began their intellectual journeys under Puritan influence.
War as catalyst for radical expansion
Respectable Puritan clergy who initiated these developments were often horrified by their consequences. As Haller noted, the ferment of ideas producing New England's founding and English society's transformation characterised the entire period from 1603 to 1642, but most activity remained hidden. Radical thinking periodically surfaced through sectarian activities - individuals who lived and occasionally died for their faith in London's unlicensed printing presses, in pamphlets smuggled from Europe, and through popular demonstrations and debates forming the background to political nation struggles in 1640–42. Only when normal controls broke down in 1642 did radicals fully emerge to support and undermine Parliament's cause.
War's impact enabled separatist groups and their allies to emerge. Military experience against traditional masters (the King and his allies) heightened the effect of radical ideas. Success encouraged millenarian and providential aspects of their beliefs, creating certainty that victories were granted by God as confirmation they acted according to divine will. Their Cause was God's Cause; in their victories, God had spoken.
Providence meant belief in God's active governance of human affairs and earthly events. This was not simply radical thinking but formed part of mainstream Protestant theology. What distinguished radical thought was the extent to which events were interpreted as acts of divine will, and the courage and faith drawn from them.
For John Milton, the civil wars indicated God had chosen England to undergo trial by fire and create a truly godly nation as example to the world. To stand in the way of this process or reject God's will meant those who opposed must bear consequences, even if they were kings.
This radical religious thinking freed some from accepting rigid social and political hierarchy, enabling them to consider the unthinkable: if men were spiritually equal and equal in God's eyes, why not in other practical ways? If a king was chosen by God but stood against godliness, did his people not have the right to remove him?
Development of religious radicalism
Figure 1 in the source material traces religious radicalism's emergence from mainstream Protestant thinking. Several developments merit attention:
Origins and early development (1608-1640s)
Radical groups had existed in England before 1640, but illegal status forced secrecy. Roots lay in Protestant ideas emphasising salvation by faith alone, individual inner belief, and struggle between good and evil.
- The first separatists were 'radical' only in their desire to establish separate churches outside the Church of England, with members voluntarily joining
- Some separated because they found the Anglican Church inadequate and despaired of reform; others believed 'saints' (the godly minority predestined to salvation by God) should withdraw from sinful contact to find their path to God collectively
- Early separatists sought privileges for the saints rather than rights for all; their interests were religious, not political
- In 1608, John Smyth and John Robinson took separatist congregations to Holland, developing the first Baptist and Congregationalist groups
- The first Baptist church in England was established in 1616
Impact of the 1640s breakdown
Separation was practically a political act, threatening government and society that believed religious uniformity essential for political unity. Separatists had to develop in isolation and secrecy, tending to become more radical and eccentric, drawing new enthusiasms from the Bible and their own interpretations.
The collapse of authority, especially bishops who controlled preachers and the press in 1640–42, allowed radicals to emerge from hiding and develop ideas in new forms and directions. By 1644, a coherent campaign favouring religious toleration had developed in London. This led to political radicals' emergence like the Levellers and an explosion of new ideas. The execution of Charles I in 1649 convinced many that a new world was opening, with God's imminent return to rule personally.
Groups and their beliefs
- General Baptists stressed predestination and acceptance of free will
- Particular Baptists (Calvinist) held more rigid predestination beliefs
- Ideas of Smyth that God exists in all, and Leveller ideas of freedom and equality, influenced various groups
- Religious and political debate encouraged new ideas through groups like the 1644–45 Campaign for Toleration
- By 1646–51, groups like Diggers, Ranters, Seekers, and Quakers (1652) had emerged
- 'Enthusiastic' groups emphasised individual freedom and the indwelling of God's spirit in man
- Presbyterian schemes for reform were developed, whilst Anglians continued defending compulsory national church ideas
Key dates: sectarian steps
| Year | Development |
|---|---|
| 1608 | John Smyth and John Robinson took separatist congregations to Holland, where they developed first Baptist and Congregationalist groups |
| 1616 | First Baptist church established in England |
| 1641 | Breakdown of censorship; separatists emerged in London; seven Baptist churches published joint statement of doctrine |
| 1644 | Assembly of Divines – Independent ministers called for toleration; first Independent (Congregationalist) church established in England, at Hull |
| 1644–45 | Press campaign for toleration brought Leveller leaders together |
| 1645–46 | Emergence of Leveller political movement |
The effects of radicalism
Political division and military consequences
Radicalism's impact proved substantial in multiple ways. As early as 1641, separatist groups and popular preachers in London alarmed many conservative MPs into supporting the King's power as authority's guarantee - a tendency that intensified in 1642 as social disruption and popular unrest followed authority's breakdown. Simultaneously, radicals and their preachers provided many of Parliament's most dedicated supporters and activists.
The clearest military example appeared in the Eastern Association's army, where Oliver Cromwell deliberately recruited troopers who 'knew what they fought for and loved what they knew'. His cavalry's image, and the New Model Army they later created as a disciplined body of psalm-singing saints, has been considerably exaggerated, but men of this character formed an influential core contributing greatly to Parliament's forces' dedication and effectiveness. In the House of Commons and on battlefields, radicals contributed substantially to Parliament's victory.
For many conservative Parliamentarians celebrating this victory, radicals constituted a new and disturbing threat to their vision of reformed monarchy and Church. The first sign appeared in 1643–44, when the Solemn League and Covenant threatened imposing Presbyterian uniformity that would be no more acceptable to some radicals than the Anglican Church.
In early 1644, five members of the Assembly of Divines published an 'Apologetical Narration', arguing for orthodox Protestant saints' right to establish their own congregations outside the Church and exercise independent discipline over members. This cautious and limited appeal was quickly followed by bolder spirits arguing for extensive religious toleration. By 1644's end, an organised campaign for toleration and freedom of speech and press had emerged, bringing together figures such as Roger Williams (founder of the American colony of Rhode Island), John Milton (the Puritan poet), and later Leveller leaders John Lilburne, Richard Overton and William Walwyn. These men had begun arguing as matter of principle that religious beliefs were private and personal, no concern of governments and magistrates. The Puritan vision of godly uniformity was being threatened from within its own ranks.
Presbyterian and Independent factions
Presbyterian and Independent labels such as Presbyterian and Independent described political attitudes, causing confusion because not all members of either group strictly adhered to religious beliefs their names implied.
Defining political Presbyterians by their conservatism is probably easiest - they supported order and hierarchy, hence desired a reasonably strong monarch working alongside Parliament and the return of a compulsory national Church. Some preferred Presbyterianism; others would have accepted bishops with reduced powers. Both groups emphasised compulsion and authority.
The Independents are defined by their insistence on allowing religious freedom, which would also involve restricting the King's powers.
By 1645, division had become apparent both within and outside Parliament. The majority of MPs and their supporters, the City of London authorities and the Scots army remained committed to a single, national church and rapid peace to restore the King and his authority. They tended to be labelled Presbyterian, although not all were committed to fully Presbyterian church organisation. A minority of MPs, including influential leaders like Cromwell and Sir Henry Vane, were sympathetic to some radical demands and favoured limited toleration for 'tender consciences' who sought spiritual support in 'independent' congregations of like-minded souls. Labelled Independents, they also wanted to pursue war vigorously. They were prepared to restore the King, but only from a position of strength, with substantial limitations placed on his powers. They had radical groups' support and a strong base in the newly created New Model Army.
Conservative response and suppression attempts
The New Model Army's victories therefore proved a mixed blessing to conservative MPs. Whilst Royalists remained in arms, they depended on its successes throughout the country and could do little except worry about the radical churches appearing wherever the army went. By 1644, Baptist groups were already strong in London and parts of East Anglia, and that year the first Independent Church was formally constituted in Hull, helped by army chaplain John Canne's presence. By 1646, six such churches existed in Yorkshire alone. Although many were not specifically created by army men, the army's mobility, contacts created by soldiers drawn from many areas, and protection provided to radical preachers by leading officers like Cromwell made it a powerful influence in spreading radical ideas. Although radicals never constituted more than a tiny minority of the population, they were quite sufficient to frighten those who believed social harmony and their own social position depended on restoring authority in Church and State.
The result was conservative overreaction that widened divisions and drove some radicals to new heights. In 1645, an attack was launched against radical leaders, especially the outspoken and uncompromising John Lilburne. An account of his troubles and how they led to the Leveller movement's formation is set out in the following section. Meanwhile, conservative complaints about the army increased in volume and intensity.
In 1645, the Presbyterian minister Richard Baxter complained of soldiers' talk of 'church democracy and state democracy'. In 1646, the less moderate Presbyterian Thomas Edwards published a book entitled 'Gangraena', a vitriolic (vicious) account of radical groups and ideas, likening them to poison in the body politic.
When Parliamentarian victory and the desire for rapid peace strengthened conservatives' influence on parliamentary committees, they determined to use their position to ensure that the peace search included destroying radical influence.
John Lilburne and the emergence of the Levellers
Lilburne: the making of a Leveller
John Lilburne's life story represents in many ways Puritan development's story in this period, from enthusiastic but ill-defined beginnings to fragmentation and internal divisions, and undermined hopes of godly reform. In the process, godly reformers created something far more substantial and radical in the long term - a demand for fundamental human rights and political influence for the people as a whole. Whilst the Leveller movement, which formulated and published this demand, was short-lived and easily crushed in this period, its ideas were able to survive as a radical tradition and inspiration for later reformers.
John Lilburne was the second son of a gentleman from County Durham, a member of minor gentry, who was apprenticed at age 16 to a cloth merchant in the City of London. His family and his master were Puritan in outlook, and Lilburne regularly attended sermons preached by ministers of the day. He and other apprentices were in the habit of attending morning sermons and meeting later to discuss and debate their meaning. Through these activities, Lilburne became acquainted with John Bastwick and concocted a scheme to have Bastwick's 'Letany' (an illegal tract written against the bishops) printed in Holland and smuggled back for resale. The likelihood is that he hoped both to serve the Puritan cause and provide himself with enough money to establish his own business on completing his apprenticeship.
Lilburne's Stand Against Authority (1638)
Instead of achieving his business goals, Lilburne was arrested and brought before the Star Chamber in 1638. The sentence and his response marked a turning point:
Step 1: The Punishment
- Sentenced to be whipped and pilloried
Step 2: Lilburne's Response
- Protested loudly that this was an abuse of his rights as a free-born Englishman
- Harangued the gathering crowd so effectively that Laud had him gagged
Step 3: Continued Resistance
- Removed to the Fleet prison and placed in solitary confinement
- Continued to petition for release and deny the power of prerogative courts to punish free men
- Remained in prison until the meeting of the Long Parliament, when Oliver Cromwell secured his release
This initiated a friendship between the two men. The story of Lilburne's early troubles illustrates the variety of opinion held by 'Puritans' at this stage. Lilburne was already moving towards the General Baptist view that God offered salvation to all, and denied the Calvinist belief in predestination, held and defended by men like Bastwick, Prynne and Cromwell. Conflicting ideas could be lodged or set aside whilst there was common enemy to fight in Laud and the bishops, and ideas did not need to be fully explored and defined until the opportunity existed to put them into practice. That moment did not arrive until 1643–44, in the Solemn League and Covenant with Scotland, and then Lilburne had served in the army under Lord Brooke and later the Earl of Manchester, but in early 1645 he refused to join the New Model because it involved accepting the Covenant, with its commitment to a compulsory Presbyterian Church.
The Levellers: the making of a movement
Returning to London, he became engaged in a pamphlet war and campaign for religious freedom that had begun in 1644. At this point, he began to work with William Walwyn (a prosperous merchant) and Richard Overton (a shadowy figure who made a living through printing and publishing unlicensed political tracts). In July 1645, his activities led him to be imprisoned in Newgate by the House of Commons, on a charge of slandering the Speaker. Released in October, he continued his campaign for toleration, but now began to extend it by questioning MPs' behaviour in imprisoning men without proper trial.
In 1646, he was campaigning against similar imprisonment of Overton and his wife, when a combination of Presbyterian enemies from the army days and his London activities succeeded in having him brought before the House of Lords. Lilburne pointedly ignored their warrant, but presented himself at the bar of the House to tell their assembled lordships they had no right to try him, no power over free men, and no voice beyond their own interests. Not surprisingly, he found himself in prison in the Tower of London.
The 'Agreement of the People'
Lilburne's clash with the Lords marks the beginning of the Levellers as a coherent political movement. His stand against the Lords raised serious issues regarding individual rights under law, and he had widened that issue to question what Parliament stood for and what the war had been fought to achieve. Whilst Overton (now released) and Walwyn organised petitions and demonstrations calling for his release, Lilburne began to formulate and develop the argument that Parliament's power was derived only from the people and that the people could and should call them to account.
Against a background of economic distress, high taxation and the dislocation of trade, the Leveller leaders drew on the support of the 'middling sort' in London to demand:
- Social justice
- Economic freedom
- Political rights
Over the two years between Lilburne's imprisonment by the Lords and the beginning of the second civil war, they formulated a democratic constitution in the 'Agreement of the People'.
The hierarchical nature of seventeenth-century society and their own errors denied them the opportunity to put it into effect, but in historical terms their failure is far outweighed by the substance of their thinking.
Interpretations: the origins and development of radicalism
Debating radicalism's roots
William Haller's arguments stressed the importance of Puritan ideas and preachers in the origins of radical ideas that emerged in the 1640s and developed thereafter. Other historians have argued that a wider range of influences were at work, some related to war's impact, but others rooted in a longer past and a less controlled environment.
F.D. Dow's perspective - Adapted from 'Radicalism in the English Revolution' (Blackwell, 1989)
Dow argued that without mid-seventeenth-century England's conflicts and controversies and the breakdown of old order in Church and state, it is impossible to imagine such flowering of radical religious beliefs. However, they were not entirely new. At least as far back as Elizabethan times, radical dissent had a shadowy, underground existence in areas such as the Weald of Kent, the Chiltern Hills and moorland communities of Yorkshire.
After 1642, the relaxation of censorship allowed radicals an outlet for their ideas, whilst social and economic dislocation provided further stimulus to men to rethink their world. In this period, it is impossible to separate political from religious thinking. Puritan beliefs played an important part in the parliamentarian cause after 1642, but it would be wrong to see religious radicalism in the 1640s and 1650s as simply the extension of the type of Puritanism that had attracted large following before the war. Other streams flowed into it; yet the background to much radical religious thinking is formed by the loose cluster of beliefs, attitudes and assumptions which we call Puritanism.
Christopher Hill's interpretation - From 'The World Turned Upside Down' (Penguin, 1975)
Hill stressed the social background - the isolation and freedom which permitted radical ideas to develop among some communities in woodland and pasture areas; the mobile society of early capitalism, serviced by itinerant merchants, craftsmen, pedlars; the crowds of masterless men, vagabonds and urban poor who no longer fitted into the categories of a hierarchical agrarian society.
The great upheaval of the Civil War suddenly and remarkably increased social and physical mobility. The New Model Army itself can be regarded as a body of masterless men on the move. It linked up hitherto obscure radical groups scattered up and down the kingdom, and gave them new confidence, especially in the lonely North and West. It was also, in itself, an outstanding example of social mobility. The New Model Army was the match that fired the gunpowder, but once the conflagration started, there was plenty of material lying around, ready to burn.
H. Tomlinson and D. Gregg's analysis - From 'Politics, Religion and Society in Revolutionary England' (Macmillan, 1989)
In the course of the Civil War, an unexpected but not unnatural expansion of political consciousness occurred. Moreover, the breakdown in effective censorship of the press and pulpit enabled 'the lower sort' to participate more fully in political processes, and the focus of political debate gradually extended beyond Westminster, to include churches, taverns and places of work.
Those participants in the conflict who hoped for more radical change in English society tended to present their arguments in terms of freedom: liberty to express opinions, verbally or in print, liberty to attend whatever form of religious worship they desired, freedom of trade from monopolies and liberty to play an active role in political affairs through the franchise. The quest for liberty was first and foremost an attack on religious uniformity, but rapidly extended beyond the issue of individual conscience in the 1640s. The desire for toleration in religion naturally led to a campaign for secular liberties. When Parliament treated popular petitions with contempt, it caused the radicals finally to advocate political remedies for their grievances.
H. Shaw's economic argument - Adapted from 'The Levellers' (Longman, 1973)
The smaller tenant farmer (from land that his family had farmed for centuries) was frequently ejected. The woollen industry, the oldest and most important of English industries, had for some time been completely dominated by the capitalist clothier. The decline of the small operator was taking place all over the country; it was mirrored and magnified in London.
Its recent growth in population had been remarkable. From a figure of about 60,000 in the early sixteenth century, it had risen to something like 350,000 by 1650. It sprawled five miles along the northern bank of the Thames and three miles along the south. Seat of Court and government, centre of trade and law, London exercised a dominance that was, as Christopher Hill said, 'unique in Europe'.
The prosperity of the City was not shared by all its inhabitants: the master craftsman was a victim of the new capitalist age. He sold his labour - he was a wage earner - and bitterly mortified to find himself sliding down the social scale. Between 1646 and 1649, these tensions brought into high relief by the uncertainties of war and nature. A series of poor harvests had catastrophic effect on food prices, and wages failed to rise, whilst unemployment was widespread. The distress was countrywide, but it was in London that it merged with virulent Puritanism.
Key Points to Remember:
- War enabled radical religious and political ideas to emerge by breaking down censorship and traditional controls after 1642
- Radicalism had Protestant roots but intensified through war experience, creating belief that military victories demonstrated God's approval
- By 1645, a clear division emerged between:
- Presbyterians (favouring order, hierarchy, and compulsory national church)
- Independents (supporting religious toleration and limitations on royal power)
- The Levellers, led by John Lilburne, developed from radical London activists into a coherent political movement demanding democratic reforms based on popular sovereignty
- Historians debate radicalism's origins:
- Some emphasise Puritan ideas and preaching (Haller)
- Others stress social and economic factors like mobility, urban poverty, and breakdown of traditional society (Hill, Dow, Tomlinson and Gregg, Shaw)