Bullet Point 3: Search for Settlements Flashcards
Why was no Peace settlement achieved following the war?
- The Role of divisions within the victors
- The Role of the Army
- The Role of the Levelers
- The Role of the Scots
- The Role of the King
Divisions within the Victors
Parliament worried by the power of its army once victory had been secured and wanted to disband it quickly but didn’t have money to pay arrears
Also worried by growing radicalism - levelers, Fifth Monarchists, baptists and ranters - wanted quick settlement to avoid anarchy
Parliament divided between:
- Hardliners and Moderates
- Independents and Presbyterians
Moderates
Associated with the ‘Peace party’ - Led by Holles
Wanted to pay off Scots quickly and disband the NMA (also send selected regiments to Ireland) associated with the ‘Peace party’
Hardliners
Many of the ‘win the war’ party - led by Vane, St. John and Cromwell
Thought disbanding the army would allow the King to dictate settlement
Presbyterians
Wanted a new coercive national Church based on Presbyterian lines.
Independents
Wanted to allow individual congregations some degree of independence in formulating their own theological ideas and practices - liberty for ‘tender consciences’
Politicization of the Army
Came in reaction to the growing split with moderates in Parliament.
Army was owed about £3 Million in arrears and frightened of ‘cavalier backlash in the counties once they are disbanded.
Army officer s and men elect a general council of the Army - partially in response to the Declaration of Dislike, seize the king in 1647 and issue Heads of the Proposals
Declaration of Dislike
Issued by Holles in April 1647
Declared that soldiers petitioning Parliament for redress of grievances were ‘enemies of the state’
Army’s seizure of the King
Cornet Joyce seizes the king from Holdenby House -June 1647
Heads of the Proposals
Issued as possible basis for new monarchical constitution - the army wanted to limit the power of Parliament as well as the King
Divisions within the Army
Rank and file in the army were distrustful of the officers (grandees) who were seen as self-seeking and corrupt.
Thought Heads of the Proposals as pathetic sell out to the King - why had they fought and died if it were merely to restore the pre-war constitution?
Also influenced by Levellers, who issued the Agreement of the People as basis on new constitution in October 1647 - divisions patched up in Putney debates but had been exposed
The signs of a split in the Army encourage d the King to make the Engagement with the Scots.
Agitators
Represented the rank and file in the army.
The Agreement of the People
Leveller manifesto
Outlined a republican system of government that was partly adopted by the army in 1649
The Putney Debates
October-November 1647
The Levellers
A group of intellectuals led by John Lilburne - not a coherent party and had no clear programme and the leaders disagreed with each other
Although influencial in the army and London, they were not a serious threat to the army or parliament - soldiers more interested in ‘bread and butter’ issues about arrears of pay and indemnity - Lilburne charismatic but easily silenced by the authorities
What the Levellers wanted
- To see the end of tyrannical Kings (seen in the 1630s) and tyrannical parliaments (seen in Civil War)
- Universal male suffrage
- Many wanted the end of central government with political decisions taken at local level
- Wanted genuine religious tolerations, no national church and abolition of tithes
Complication of the Scots
1646 they had the King and were keen to see Presbyterian Church set up in England to match the one in Scotland - Parliament not happy and wanted to pay the Scots off
Scots hand over the King to Parliament in January 1646, worried about Montrose and his Royalist army (Clear this up)
Charles’ Stubbornness
All parties in 1646-48 assumed that the new constitution would see the King restored to power - albeit diminished.
Charles believed he could use this to hold out for better terms - thought he could retain all his prerogative powers as his enemies were so divided.
Sparked off Second Civil War (1648) by negotiating with the Scots - signed the ‘Engagement’, promising a trial run of Presbyterianism in England - defeated but looked as if Charles would get better terms when Parliament repealed the Act of No Address
Would rather face martyrdom than forsake authority of the crown - especially after forsaking Strafford
Newcastle Propositions
To do later
Second Civil War
1648
Charles helped spark off the Second Civil War by negotiating with the Scots and playing his enemies against each other- but their ‘Engager’ army defeated by Cromwell at Preston - led to Royalist stirs elsewhere
Despite the resumption of the war parliament voted to restart negotiations with the King - Looked as though Charles would get better terms, the moderates in Parliament were desperate to make a settlement and destroy the growing power of the army
Led to Pride’s Purge
Pride’s Purge
December 1648
Colonel Pride purged parliament - soldiers only allowed MPs who were prepared to put Charles on trial
King was executed January 1649
The Act of No Adress
January 1648
In response to the King’s signing of the Engagement with the Scots and his subsequent defeat - there would be no more negotiations with the King.
Revoked in August 1648 - this caused the army’s patience to snap and led to Pride’s Purge.
The Reasons for Regicide
Not for ideological reasons - those who did it (the army grandees and their supporters in Parliament) were not republicans
Predominantly practical reasons - army leadership realized there could be no lasting settlement with the King - Charles was not prepared to negotiations seriously and had sparked off the Second Civil war. The Army called him ‘this man of blood’
There was a real worry that the country would descend into anarchy if the army did not intervene.