Location: London
John Rees
Summary
The lecture series explores the “fiery spirits” in the
English Long Parliament and their connections to broader political and social
crises from the late 1620s through the 1640s, situating parliamentary
radicalism within crowd mobilisations, media ecosystems, and evolving
military-political alliances. It traces how research expanded the book’s scope backwards
from the 1640s to the 1620s due to radical parliamentary confrontations (e.g.,
Speaker Finch held in his chair), widespread mutinies, riots, merchant tax
resistance, and the assassination of Buckingham by John Felton—framing the
1620s as a “dress rehearsal” for the revolution of the 1640s. The lectures
detail continuity figures such as William Strode (from the 1629 revolt to one
of the Five Members in 1642) and Alexander Rigby (championing victims of the
1620s persecutions), alongside Henry Marten’s leading role, wit, and radical
organising, and lineage links to Peter Wentworth.
Central themes include the autonomy of politics vis-à-vis
social class, arguing that classes are multiply represented by distinct
political projects and that outcomes are contingent rather than predetermined
by social composition. Organised parliamentary radicalism is highlighted
through committee work: with the king and court in Oxford, Commons committees
became executive instruments (e.g., the Committee of Public Safety, the Derby
House Committee). The “fiery spirits” were disproportionately active, shaping
decisions and execution even without numerical dominance.
The lectures integrate crowd mobilisation and parliamentary
interaction: London as a contested space with multiple crowd factions
(Presbyterian, Leveller, conservative, anti-puritan, pro-Christmas);
apprentices, guilds, and independent churches serving as organisational nodes;
and an underground press and petitioning hubs (like the Saracen’s Head)
enabling high public engagement in a literate city. Shop-to-shop message chains
(e.g., John Venn’s alerts) spurred immediate mobilisations. MPs like Marten
defended crowd interventions, and Levellers—an organised segment of the London
crowd—used petitions and street presence to pressure Parliament, building trust
ties with MPs such as Marten and Rigby.
The lectures chart the political bloc of fiery MPs,
Levellers, and army agitators, analysing how popular ideas were represented in
Parliament and how bloc dynamics shifted during the wars. They underscore the
“Royalist Summer” of 1643, the inheritance of popular mobilisation by the “Pym
project,” and subsequent parliamentarian military responses (raising
Gloucester, Newbury), noting that radical energy often yielded gains captured
by more conservative parliamentarians. Provincial dynamics feature prominently:
Lancashire’s Presbyterian-dominated parliamentarianism printed attacks on
Levellers while fear of a “rapacious” Scottish army dissolved religious
alignments, pushing locals toward Rigby-led resistance. Alliances with Scots
evolved from initial sympathy to campaigns to pay them off and expel them, with
warnings against “reading off last year’s almanack.”
A major archival revelation concerns Henry Ireton’s October
1648 resignation letters—long considered lost—which were found with the
Levellers’ Large Petition (September 1648). These documents show Ireton’s shift
from opposing the Levellers at Putney to advocating trying the king and
incorporating Leveller ideas into the New Model Army’s Remonstrance,
culminating in a pact for common action endorsed by Cromwell and contributing
to Pride’s Purge and the king’s trial. Strategically, the lectures contrast
fiery spirits with Independents: Cromwell and allies initially sought to “reinstate
the king” during the First Civil War, drawing Marten’s “king-riding” critique,
before the army revolt and Second Civil War radicalised positions.
Historiographically, the sessions review Marx’s and Engels’
scattered comments on the English Revolution via Christopher Hill’s synthesis,
affirm Hill’s dialectical materialism and recuperated reputation amid the ebb
of “high revisionism,” and note a renaissance in Leveller studies (e.g., Rachel
Foxley, Braddick’s Lilburne biography) and cross-disciplinary vitality
reconstructing the revolution’s character. The Q&A addresses sources,
constituency ties, Leveller–Digger distinctions (favoring a synthesis of Digger
ideas and Leveller organization), the function and proliferation of committees
(including a failed committee to abolish committees), the role of London crowds
and apprentices, transatlantic inputs from returning New Englanders (e.g.,
Roger Williams), and Scottish dimensions of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms.
Knowledge Points
1. Book Scope and Evolution
- Scope expanded from the 1640s back to the late 1620s due
to radical MPs and crises (mutinies, riots, tax resistance, Buckingham’s
assassination).
- The 1620s reframed as a precursor to the 1640s revolution,
analogous to 1905–1917 in Russia.
2. The 1620s Crisis and Parliamentary Confrontation
- Speaker Finch was restrained in 1629 while MPs read a
radical program; dissolution led to Personal Rule but reflected broader unrest.
- Countrywide mutinies, riots, deforestation protests, grain
disturbances, and merchant tax strikes fed parliamentary agendas.
3. Continuities into the 1640s
- William Strode: imprisoned after 1629, freed by the Short
Parliament, one of the Five Members in 1642.
- Alexander Rigby: Long Parliament lawyer championing
victims of earlier persecutions (Leighton, Lilburne), integrating past
grievances.
4. Fiery Spirits: Figures and Imagery
- Strode’s heroic cultural associations; local lineage at
Plympton.
- Rigby: trusted by Levellers; military role in Lancashire.
- Henry Marten: leading radical, committee builder, witty
polemicist (“nodders vs boars”), early repudiation of monarchical wisdom.
- Peter Wentworth lineage; archival pursuit of imagery via
the Dilke family.
5. Organised Radicalism and Committees
- Fiery spirits formed and dominated committees; Commons
committees functioned as the executive in wartime.
- Key bodies: Committee of Public Safety, Derby House
Committee, finance and army subcommittees.
- Active committee work amplified radicals’ influence beyond
their numbers.
6. Public Engagement, Media, and Information Flow
- London’s high male literacy (~70%) fostered intense
engagement via pamphlets and Mercuries.
- Petitioning hubs and briefing networks linked Parliament
and public; Saracen’s Head coordinated Leveller petitions.
- Crowds gathered at Westminster; MPs briefed supporters; the
gap between parliamentary action and public knowledge was narrow for
politicised sectors.
7. Crowd Mobilisations and Parliamentary Interaction
- London as a contested space with multiple factional
crowds; apprentices and guilds provided volatile, organised energy.
- Independent churches served as mobilisation hubs; the underground
press shaped opinion.
- Shop-to-shop dissemination (e.g., Venn’s calls) triggered
immediate armed citizen responses.
- Marten defended crowd actions; Levellers used the crowd as
a political presence while engaging trusted MPs.
8. Levellers, Diggers, and Army Agitators
- Levellers: serious organisation with substantial
influence; Diggers: smaller, post-Republic disappointment group with limited
practical impact.
- Political bloc included fiery MPs, Levellers, and army
agitators; representation carried popular ideas into Parliament.
9. Social Class and Political Representation
- Challenges reductionist class readings: Commons’ gentry
composition doesn’t fix political positions.
- Politics retains autonomy; classes are multiply
represented; outcomes are decided in contingent political contests.
10. Ireton’s 1648 Letters and the Large Petition
- Rediscovered Ireton letters (to Fairfax, Lenthall) found
with the Large Petition; show frustration and strategic shift.
- Leveller ideas informed the New Model Army’s Remonstrance;
meetings with Leveller leadership produced a pact endorsed by Cromwell.
- Convergence led to Pride’s Purge and the king’s trial.
11. Fiery Spirits vs Independents; Strategic Objectives
- Fiery spirits drove agendas; Pym alternately restrained
and relied on them.
- Independents initially sought monarchical reconstruction
(“rein throne the king”); Marten’s “king ridden” critique.
- Army revolt and Second Civil War radicalised strategy;
Ireton moved from “hammer of the Levellers” to incorporating their demands.
12. Provincial Dynamics, Scots, and Shifting Alliances
- The Second Civil War saw significant provincial crowd
activity; anti-Scots sentiment complicated royalist and parliamentarian
alignments.
- Lancashire’s Presbyterian parliamentarians attacked
Levellers yet resisted feared Scottish incursions.
- Alliances with Scots shifted from sympathy to opposition;
campaigns aimed to pay off and expel Scots; warning against outdated political
readings.
13. Imperial Connections and Returning New Englanders
- Returning figures (e.g., Roger Williams) influenced
toleration debates and intersected with Leveller thought, adding transatlantic
dimensions.
14. Historiography: Marx, Hill, and Revisionism
- Christopher Hill’s synthesis of Marx and Engels’ remarks
is a key entry point; Hill recuperated against high revisionism.
- Recent scholarship revives Leveller studies and
reconstructs the revolution’s character across disciplines (e.g., Foxley,
Braddick, and Como).
- Essays from the 50th anniversary of “The World Turned
Upside Down” forthcoming (Boydell & Brewer).
