Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:26:54.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A King in Search of Soldiers: Charles I in 1642*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Joyce L. Malcolm
Joyce L. Malcolm
Affiliation:
Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his celebrated work England under the Stuarts George Macaulay Trevelyan dismissed in a single sentence the question of the position adopted by the bulk of the English rural population during the Civil War: ‘The tenant-farmer was in no position to avow any political or religious faith but that of his landlord.’ Given this assumption it was logical that Trevelyan and his successors should concern themselves with the problems and opinions of landlords and other, more independent, men and leave the doings of the peasantry to students of agrarian and social history. And so they have, never seriously questioning the proposition that the aristocracy's sympathy for the Crown would be reflected in the attitudes and behaviour of their tenants. Indeed, the king himself had felt confident of the peasants' support, and an assortment of facts and myths have been marshalled post facto to persuade us that his confidence was justified. For example, since peasants were assumed to have been rather simple-minded and very conservative men, it was deduced that they ought to have sided with their monarch. The Great Chain of Being, the accepted basis of heavenly and earthly society, placed kings between man and the angels, surely a height bound to inspire awe in a plain man of the soil. According to some historians, Charles I had been a veritable champion of the poor with his vigorous campaign to enforce the poor laws and his commissions for the prevention of enclosure. His humbler subjects must have been grateful for such paternalism. In any case, as Trevelyan pointed out, the stark reality of their dependent position would have forced tenants to adhere to the party chosen by their landlords, and most landlords who committed themselves to a party joined the king's.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , June 1978 , pp. 251 - 273
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Trevelyan, George Macaulay, England under the Stuarts, 21st edn (London, 1965), p. 218.Google Scholar

2 Both Margaret James and Ellen M. Leonard regarded Charles I as exceedingly paternal and considerate of the poor: James, Margaret, Social problems and policy during the Puritan Revolution, 1640–1660: Studies in economic and social history (London, 1930), pp. 2–3Google Scholar; Leonard, Ellen M., The early history of English poor relief (London, 1900), pp. 150–3, 159, 164.Google Scholar

3 Everitt, Alan, The community of Kent and the Great Rebellion, 1640–1660 (Leicester, 1966)Google Scholar; Morrill, John, Cheshire, 1630–1660: county government and society during the English Revolution (Oxford, 1974)Google Scholar; Underdown, David, Somerset in the Civil War and Interregnum (Newton Abbot, 1973)Google Scholar; Holmes, Clive, The Eastern Association in the English Civil War (Cambridge, 1974)Google Scholar. Morrill, 's recent book, The revolt of the provinces (London, 1976)Google Scholar considerably broadens his focus and includes a good discussion of the clubmen.

4 Hill, Christopher (ed.), The English Revolution, 1640 (London, 1940)Google Scholar and The century of revolution (Edinburgh, 1961); Manning, Brian, The English People and the English Revolution (London, 1976)Google Scholar. Manning comes closest to a real treatment of the role of the peasantry but backs off from a rigorous analysis. In his article ‘The peasantry and the English Revolution’, The Journal of Peasant Studies, II (1975), he describes the attacks of the king and other landlords on customary rights and concludes that for this reason royalist landlords were not supported by their tenants during the Civil War. Yet he does not go on to prove this. Again, in The English people and the English Revolution he reiterates these facts and then, on page 184, leaps to the conclusion that not only did the peasantry refuse to support the king and the royalist nobility but that their defection ‘probably explains the defeat of the royalists in the civil war’. After this almost off-hand comment he drops the subject, presumably because his argument is that the ‘middle sort’, from whom he carefully excludes tenants, were the determining factor in the revolution.

5 Ollard, Richard, This war without an enemy: a history of the English Civil Wars (New York, 1976), pp. 12, 80–1.Google Scholar

6 Thomas, J. M. Lloyd (ed.), The autobiography of Richard Baxter: being the reliquiae Baxterianae (London, 1925), p. 34.Google Scholar

7 Hyde, Edward, earl of Clarendon, The history of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England, ed. Macray, W. Dunn (6 vols., Oxford, 1888), 11, 295–6, 461, 472Google Scholar; May, Thomas, The history of the parliament of England, which began November 3, 1640: with a short and necessary view of some precedent years (Oxford, 1854), pp. 225–6, 308, 317, 322–3.Google Scholar

8 See Hyde, Edward, earl of Clarendon, The life of Edward, earl of Clarendon: being a continuation of the history of the Great Rebellion from the Restoration to his banishment in 1667 (2 vols., Oxford, 1857), I, 111–13Google Scholar; Firth, Charles H., ‘Clarendon's History of the Rebellion’, English Historical Review, XIX (1904), p. 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Wedgwood prefers to believe that Charles hesitated for some time after leaving London before deciding upon war; however, Clarendon's testimony and the king's unusually well-coordinated moves after leaving the capital are persuasive evidence of advanced planning (Wedgwood, Cecily V., The king's war, 1641–1647 [London, 1973], pp. 56–7).Google Scholar

9 The Venetian ambassador in London reported that the king invited to this meeting all those Yorkshire gentlemen who possessed an income of over 100 crowns a year (Calendar of State papers Venetian, 1642–3, ed. Hinds, A. B. [London, 1925], p. 53).Google Scholar

10 Rushworth, John, Historical collections of private passages of state, weighty matters of law, remarkable proceedings in five parliaments: 1618–1649 (7 vols., London, 1682–1701), iv, 616–17, 620Google Scholar; Bell, Robert (ed.), Memorials of the Civil War: comprising the correspondence of the Fairfax family (2 vols., London, 1849), I, 15–16.Google Scholar

11 Rushworth, , Historical collections, iv, 621Google Scholar; Bell, , Correspondence of the Fairfax family, 1, 15–16; Lords journal, v, 74Google Scholar; CSPD 1641–3, p. 325; Francis Newport to SirLeveson, Richard, 17 05 1642Google Scholar, HMC, 5th Report, p. 148.

12 Among catholic officers who played an early and prominent role in the royal army were Sir Arthur Aston, Charles Gerard, John Belasyse, Lord Robert Dillon, Lord Theobald Taafe, Thomas Tyldesley, and Sir John Beaumont (Young, Peter, Edgehitt 1642: the campaign and the battle [Kineton, 1967], p. 54)Google Scholar. The suggestion that a special dispensation was given English catholics to subscribe to the oaths of allegiance and supremacy is a serious charge and, if true, was done in the utmost secrecy. Further evidence is frustratingly lacking.

13 ‘A letter sent by a Yorkshire gentleman, to a friend in London…being a full and true relation of the proceedings betweene his Majesty and the county of York, at Heyworth Moore, upon Friday June 3’ (London, June 1642), Thomason Tracts, E. 150 (5), p.5.

14 Bell, , Correspondence of the Fairfax family, I, 15.Google Scholar

15 The debate over the oath is discussed in a letter from Thomas Fairfax to his father, York, 13 June 1642 (Bell, , Correspondence of the Fairfax family, pp. 13–16Google Scholar; Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 184–5).Google Scholar

16 When the king had attempted to institute Commissions of Array in 1640 in the West Country a Devon grand jury informed him that it had found that the statute on which the commission was based had lapsed and that, in any case, its terms were ambiguous and the Commission itself therefore illegal (PRO, S.P. vol. 469/54; Rushworth, , Historical collections, III, 1201, 1230Google Scholar; Morrill, John, Revolt of the provinces, p. 40).Google Scholar

17 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 295–6.Google Scholar

18 Ibid. II, 201–5; CSPD 1641–3, p. 376.

19 Eliot Warburton sets the attendance at 80,000–100,000 (Warburton, Eliot, Memoirs of Prince Rupert and the Cavaliers; including their private correspondence, 3 vols. [London, 1849], I, 276–7)Google Scholar. This is probably high, as Edward Lord Howard in his report to the House of Lords placed it at 40,000 (Lords journal, v, 107).

20 Lords journal, v, 107.

21 Ibid. p. 138.

22 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 284Google Scholar; Rushworth, , Historical collections, IV, 614.Google Scholar

23 ‘Advertisements from Yorke and Beverly, July the 2Oth 1642’ (London, 20 July 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 107 (30), p. 3. For reports of meetings and musters called during July and August by the royalists in Yorkshire see Calendar of state papers Venetian, 1642–3, pp. 101, 105; ‘Some speciall passages from Hull, Alanby, and Yorke: Truly informed Munday the first of August 1642’ (London, 1 August 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 108 (33), p. 4; ‘An abstract of severall letters from Hull, York, and Beverly, of his Majesties proceedings’ (London, 2 August 1642), Wing A 121, p. 5; ‘Exceeding welcome newes from Beverley; or, York-shires love to London’ (London, 4 August 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 109 (29), p. 1.

24 ‘Advertisements from Yorke and Beverly, July the 20th 1642’, p. 3.

25 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 282, note 5.Google Scholar

26 ‘Some speciall passages from Hull, Alanby, and Yorke: truly informed Munday the first of August’, p. 5.

27 ‘An abstract of severall letters…,’ p. 5.

28 ‘An extract of a letter from Yorke…,’ p. 1.

29 Ibid.

30 ‘Some speciall passages from Hull, Alanby, and Yorke: truly informed Munday the first of August’, p. 4.

31 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 228.Google Scholar

32 CSPD 1641–3, pp. 54, 117, 189, 333.

33 Lambert, Mary R. and Sprague, M. S., Lincoln (Oxford, 1933), p. 45Google Scholar; ‘An extract of all the passages from Hull, York, and Lincolnshire… being a true relation of His Majesties proceedings in those parts’ (London, 19 July 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 107 (12), p. 3.

34 Rushworth, , Historical collections, IV, 652–3.Google Scholar

35 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 343–4.Google Scholar

36 Nicholas to Sir Thomas Roe, 20 July 1642, CSPD 1641–3, p. 359.

37 ‘Exceeding joyfull news from Lincolnshire; or, the resolution of the gentry and commonalty inhabiting in the county of Lincoln concerning the kings majesty and the parliament’ (London, 17 August 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 112 (20), pp. 3–4.

38 P. M., , ‘Trve intelligence from Lincoln-shire’ (London, 22 08 1642)Google Scholar, Wing M., P. 67, pp. 3–6.

39 Nicholas to Sir Thomas Roe, Beverley, 27 July 1642, CSPD 1641–3, p. 362.

40 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 241.Google Scholar

41 Ibid. p. 242.

42 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 332–5Google Scholar; Manning, Brian, ‘Neutrals and neutralism in the English Civil War, 1642–1646’ (Oxford D.Phil., 1960), p. 57.Google Scholar

43 ‘A full relation of all the late proceedings of His Majesties army in the county of Yorke…August 19, 1642’ (London, 20 Aug. 1642), Wing F 2358.

44 Ibid.

45 For the agreement arrived at by Charles and the Yorkshire grand jury see ‘Exceeding welcome newes from Beverley; or, York-shires love to London’, pp. 2–3; Rushworth, , Historical collections, IV, 646–7Google Scholar; Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 285–7.Google Scholar

46 ‘An extract of a letter from Yorke…’, p. 3.

47 Clarendon wrote that when the king raised his standard at Nottingham not one regiment of foot had yet been levied (Clarendon, History of the Rebellion, II, 288, note 1). According to Warburton, when the standard was raised the whole royalist force present including attendants was not 1,000 men (Warburton, , Memoirs of Prince Rupert, 1, 321)Google Scholar. Charles did not even have the full 1,375 horse promised him in May by a group of 39 lords at York.

48 ‘A true relation of His Majesties comming to Coventry…’ (London, 24 August 1642), Wing T 2906.

49 ‘His Majesties proceedings in Northamptonshire, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Warwickshire from the 16 of August to the 23…’ (London, 23 August 1642), Wing H 2086.

50 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 290–1.Google Scholar

51 Ibid. p. 291.

52 ‘A letter from a gentleman neere Nottingham, to a friend in London’ (London, 30 August 1642), Thomason Tracts 669, f. 6; ‘A true and exact relation of the manner of his Majesties setting up of his standard at Nottingham’ (London, 22 August 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 115 (4).

53 Warburton, , Memoirs of Prince Rupert, I, 118–19Google Scholar, note 2.

54 Wedgwood, , The king's army, pp. 111–12.Google Scholar

55 Estimates of the size of the crowd vary markedly depending on the party of the observer. A royalist account sets the number at between 10,000 and 12,000 (Chadwyck-Healey, C. E. H. [ed.], Bellum Civile: Hopton's narrative of his campaign in the West, 1642–1644, and other papers, Somerset Record Society, XVIII [1902], p. 10)Google Scholar. A parliamentary account by John Ashe, member of the Somerset committee, reported that about 40,000 people appeared (Hopton, , Bellum Civile, p. 10, note I)Google Scholar. David Underdown, in his recent study of Somerset, accepts the royalist figure (Underdown, , Somerset, p. 37).Google Scholar

56 John William Bund, Willis, The Civil War in Worcestershire, 1642–1646; and the Scotch invasion of 1651 (Birmingham, 1905), p. 22Google Scholar; Lords Journal, X, 66–71Google Scholar. Also see Roy, Ian, ‘The royalist army in the first Civil War’ (Oxford D.Phil., 1963), p. 255Google Scholar; Warburton, , Memoirs of Prince Rupert, I, 429, note 1.Google Scholar

57 ‘Speciall passages from divers parts of this kingdome…August 16–23, 1642’(London, 23 Aug. 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 113, p. 13.

58 ‘A private letter, from an eminent cavalier…to his highly honoured friend in London; freely relating the present state of His Majesties forces’ (London, 10 September 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 116 (32), p. 3.

59 Dragoons were mounted soldiers more lightly armed than the regular cavalry. See ‘A continvation of our weekly intelligence from His Majesties Army…’ (London, 16 September 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 116, p. 4.

60 ‘A private letter, from an eminent cavalier…’, p. 6.

61 ‘A continvation of our weekly intelligence from His Majesties army…’, p. 4.

62 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 347.Google Scholar

63 Cited by Pickles, J. T., ‘Studies in royalism in the English Civil War, 1642–1646, with special reference to Staffordshire’ (Manchester M.A., 1968), p. 60.Google Scholar

64 Ibid.

65 ‘Speciall passages and certain information from severall places…’, no. 6 (London, 20 September 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 118, p. 48.

66 May, , The history of the parliament of England, p. 246.Google Scholar

67 Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, II, 346Google Scholar; Owen, Hugh and Blakeway, John Brickdale, A history of Shrewsbury (London, 1825), p. 428Google Scholar. For a more detailed discussion of the work of the king's commissioners of array and of Derby and Stradling see Malcolm, Joyce, ‘The English people and the Crown's cause, 1642–1646’ (Brandeis Ph.D., 1977), chapter 3.Google Scholar

68 Robert Evans to Richard Grenvile, Oxford, Oct. 1642, in Warburton, , Memoirs of Prince Rupert, II, 47, note 1.Google Scholar

69 Hertford had raised between 7,000 and 12,000 men from South Wales but, as he led this army to the king, it suffered two disastrous defeats at the hand of the Earl of Stamford. The first, near Tewkesbury, resulted in 2,500 men killed and 1,200 taken prisoner; the second battle, near Hereford, cost another 2,000 lives. See Phillips, John Roland, Memoirs of the Civil War in Wales and the Marches, 1642–1649, 2nd edn (London, 1878), pp. 131–4Google Scholar; Rees, James Frederick, Studies in Welsh history (Cardiff, 1947), p. 66.Google Scholar

70 Coate, Mary, Cornwall in the Great Civil War and Interregnum (Oxford, 1933), p. 38.Google Scholar

71 See Malcolm, , ‘The English people and the Crown's cause’, chapter 3.Google Scholar

72 Ibid.

73 ‘Orders and institvtions of war, made and ordained by His Majesty, and by him delivered to his generall his excellence the earle of Newcastle’ (York, 1642), Cambridge University Library, Syn. 7.64.236.

74 ‘His Majesties protestation made in the head of his army on Munday, September the 19th’, Bodleian Library, Clarendon state papers, fol. 21/134.

75 ‘Speciall Passages…’, no. 7 (27 September 1642), Thomason Tracts E. 118, p. 55.

76 Pickles, , ‘Studies in royalism’, p. 200Google Scholar; Gardiner, Samuel R., History of the Great Civil War, 1642–1649 (4 vols., London, 1893), I, 35–6.Google Scholar

77 Beamont, William (ed.), ‘A discourse of the warr in Lancashire’, Chetham Society, LXII (1864), pp. 12–14Google Scholar; Ormerod, George (ed.), Tracts relating to military proceedings in Lancashire during the Great Civil War, Chetham Society, II (1844), 38–40.Google Scholar

78 Lindley, Keith, ‘The part played by the catholics’, in Manning, Brian (ed.), Politics, religion and the English Civil War (London, 1973), pp. 127–78Google Scholar. For an evaluation of the importance of Catholics to the royal army see Malcolm, , ‘The English people and the Crown's cause’Google Scholar, ch. 6.

79 Oliver, George, The history of the city of Exeter (London, 1861), p. 112.Google Scholar

80 Bossy, John, ‘The character of Elizabethan Catholicism’, Past and Present, XXI (04 1962), pp. 41–2Google Scholar; James, Mervyn, Family, lineage, and civil society: a study of society, politics, and mentality in the Durham region, 1500–1640 (Oxford, 1974), pp. 143–4Google Scholar; Mousley, J. E., ‘The fortunes of some gentry families in Elizabethan Sussex’, Economic History Review, 2nd ser., XI (1958–1959). 478–9.Google Scholar

81 For a more extensive analysis see Malcolm, , ‘The English people and the Crown's cause’, chapter 6.Google Scholar

82 Besides the four Welsh regiments which reached Charles in the months after the battle of Edgehill still others were quickly mustered. In February 1643 Hertford formed a Welsh army of 1,500 foot and 500 horse and in July of that year drew another 4,000 foot and 800 horse from South Wales (Phillips, , Memoirs of the Civil War in Wales and the Marches, pp. 131–4Google Scholar; Rees, , Studies in Welsh History, p. 66Google Scholar; Clarendon, , History of the Rebellion, 11, 482–4).Google Scholar

83 Roy, , ‘The royalist army in the first Civil War’, p. 174.Google Scholar

84 Further evidence for this and a discussion of the king's Irish troops is contained in a forthcoming article of mine which will appear in Irish Historical Studies.