This book examines the experiences of the expropriated loyalist
clergy during the highpoint of the English Revolution. It offers new insight
into the practices and of this significant group.
The first thing that strikes you about McCall's book is
a heavy concentration on the Loyalist clergy. She, unfortunately, has little to
say about the English revolution. In this circumstance, it is unclear to me
whether the author chooses the title or as I suspect the editor or publishers
did. Baal's Priest steers clear on any political controversy surrounding the
resurgence of studies of Royalist involvement of the English revolution.
The book is groundbreaking in other aspects with it
being the first major study that uses the John Walker collection of manuscripts
held in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. It is hard to believe that this
excellent collection of oral histories has not been mined before. You have to
admire her adherence to the historian's craft. She must have spent a long time
in that archive. The underuse of the Walker archive by historians is a
little mysterious as it appears to contain a goldmine of material.
However, caution is needed in that this source should be approached with extreme caution. Drawing political conclusions from a relatively unreliable source such as an archive based on oral transcripts is a challenging and complicated thing to do. A thing that Mcall has largely avoided. Some might say this detracts from her book. Oral testimonies are a valuable source of material but can take a historian only so far. As the great old Karl Marx said Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honoured disguise and borrowed language."[1] Hopefully, McCall's book will provoke an interest in the archive.
However, caution is needed in that this source should be approached with extreme caution. Drawing political conclusions from a relatively unreliable source such as an archive based on oral transcripts is a challenging and complicated thing to do. A thing that Mcall has largely avoided. Some might say this detracts from her book. Oral testimonies are a valuable source of material but can take a historian only so far. As the great old Karl Marx said Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honoured disguise and borrowed language."[1] Hopefully, McCall's book will provoke an interest in the archive.
The Walker collection began life in 1702 following
the publication of Edmund Calamy's work which catalogued some ministers who
were driven from their livings during the restoration of the monarchy in 1660. John Walker was given 'over a thousand letters' along
with contemporary letters and legal documents dating back to the 1640s and the
1650s, They catalogue a trail of misery for large numbers of clergy who
supported the royalist cause in one form or another. The strength of this book is the detailed description
of the various maltreatments of Loyalist clergy at the hands of the Cromwellian
regime. For any student or a general reader wishing to study the impact, the
civil war had on significant sections of the population this book would be a
good start. The vast majority of the accounts are incredibly detailed
and were written by people who were members of the sufferer's family or their Clergymen.
These Clergymen were often imprisoned.
The
Walker Archive
According to R. Freeman Bullen, "the "Sufferings
of the Clergy" is two distinct works. The first part treats ecclesiastical affairs under Puritan rule part two deals with the persecution
suffered by individual clergy; it is this moiety that will mainly interest the
local historian. Walker had been engaged in his work for about ten
years when it was finally published in 1714. This means that from 60 to 70
years had elapsed since the period of the sequestrations and that to a very
great extent, Walker was dependent upon existing documents, plus tradition, for
his data. His notes and correspondence still exist in the Bodleian Library, and
from these, we may gather some ideas of his method. Walker
conducted his research using printed and manuscript sources available to him.
He also directly solicited information, via a circular sent to archdeacons to
disseminate amongst parish clergy. He
received over a thousand letters in response. After his death accounts were
deposited, along with his other papers, as the J. Walker archive in the
Bodleian Library".[2]
In many ways, McCall faced the same problems
encountered by Walker. Both had to interpret the material as best they could.
Both questioned how accurate and truthful the records were. Despite some
reservations, McCall is happy to treat the Walker manuscripts as a generally
reliable archive of materials. Caution should be observed when viewing the Walker
accounts of trauma. Those on the receiving end sought to back up their accounts
in order not to be dismissed. Walker was a good enough historian to err on the
side of caution himself when recording events and testimonies. There are
inconsistencies within the archive and should it not be treated as verbatim. Despite McCall's aversion to politics, she does offer
the reader glimpses of class relations and even class antagonisms between
loyalist clergy and their tormentors.
Some of these battles were personal others followed
the battle lines drawn in the revolution itself. Perhaps one of the strongest
attributes of the book is its opposition to some historians attempts to "consign
Civil War experiences to oblivion." As James Mawdesley from the University of Sheffield
points out in his review of the book "None of this is to suggest that
these clergymen only accepted their lot as poor sufferers for their king.
Jonathan Swift, the grandson of Thomas Swift, the vicar of Goodrich in Herefordshire,
claimed that his grandfather's setting of a trap in a river resulted in the
deaths of 200 of the enemy (p. 107), and McCall has calculated that no fewer
than 150 of the Walker accounts include acts of aggression by the 'sufferer'
(p. 201)."[3]
McCall's book establishes that the attacks on
loyalist clergy were sanctioned by the highest authorities with Parliament
operating as a rubber stamp. While McCall treads carefully in her book to
separate the subjective interpretation of walker's collection from the objective
assessment of the material this even for a trained historian is a difficult
task for the general reader it is doubly difficult.
I also agree with Maudsley when he says the book
would "have benefited from being interwoven with a general account of the
civil wars and republic: the execution of Charles I in January 1649 is omitted
from McCall's chronology, and it is not made clear when governance without a
monarchy commenced".McCall is fascinated with how memory is used to
portray historical events. The trauma suffered by the Loyalist clergy and their
families and supporters was really clear to see. I would, however, have liked a
more balanced approach after all suffering on a large scale appeared on both
sides of the barricades. It is ironic in the least as McCall points out that
the clergy who suffered during the civil war and under the Cromwellian regime
despite the monarchies return to power the loyalist clergy in many places fared
not better than under Cromwell. Charles II was more interested in settling old
scores.
Historiography.
As with a large number of modern books on the
civil war, it is extremely hard to fathom McCall's historiography. She does not
favour the view of an English revolution. McCall is sympathetic to the
historical writing of 'Marxists' like Christopher Hill, but her historiography has
more connection to historians Like John Morrill who saw the civil war as the
last religious conflict of the 17th century and continuation of the Thirty
years war.
To conclude, any reader looking for an attack on revisionist
historians downplaying the social effects of the English Civil War will be
disappointed for them this relatively mild conflict and a 'war without an
enemy.' In Baal's Priests, Fiona McCall has written an
important study that will hopefully provoke an interest in the Walker
manuscripts. The book is solidly researched and is written in a style that is
both accessible to the academic and general reader. It is hoped that if McCall
returns to this subject, she is able to draw some political conclusions from
her hard work. It should be seen as an excellent introduction to the subject
and not the final word on royalism, or the Walker manuscripts.
.
