How significant was parliamentary radicalism in causing divisions in the long
parliament between November 1640 and August 1642? 25 marks
INTRODUCTION:Divisions in long parliament accumulatedand intensified overtime
ue to various significant factors. In this essay I will be discussing three factors
d
that contributed heavily to the divisions in Parliament, one being the actions and
retaliation towards Parliament of Charles I across his three kingdoms. For
instance, the Scottish plot against Parliament by Charles in the incident of October
1641 and later Charles’ plot to free Strafford in May 1641 further lead to debates
and divides in Long Parliament over the assertion of parliamentary power and
radicalism over the royalists and Charles I. Another factor that contributed to the
divide in the Long Parliament was the uprising of popular radicalism and rebellions
from the general population, which emphasised the influence of parliamentary
radicals on the population compared to the alienation of the population from the
monarchy. Therefore, this leads onto the most significant factor which stimulated
the key disagreements within Long Parliament, in particular individuals like Pym
introduced radical policies that aggravated existing points of conflicts such as
religion within Long Parliament.
PARA 1:
Parliamentary Radicalism
Point: This factor acted as a significant internal factor of divisions and a catalyst
of external aggravators of conflicts in parliament
Evidence 1: Pym and parliamentary radicals (Henry Vane, Hampden) Pyms aims:
-anti-Catholic (reform church (LINK TO ROOT AND BRANCH PETITION)
-Organise kings finances (Ship money)
-Enact against dissolution of Parliament
Evidence 2: Root and Branch Petition December 1640 - presented by Pym to reform
church to original state. Causing many debates, it was shelved in August 1641. The 3
sides to the proposal: - restore church to original state
- Completely change episcopacy to Puritan congregational
- Just remove Laudianism from church
Evidence 3: Grand Remonstrance December 1641 - Created by Pym’s recess
committee (Hampden in this committee) overviewing Charles’ personal rule blaming
evil advisers and demanding of constitutional change. Caused division in Parliament
(HOWEVER STIMULATED BY CHARLES’ ACTIONS)
Counter: It was Charles’ actions that initially stimulated these divisions and calls
for debate
Relative: Most significant but also decreased by Charles’ actions that are a
catalyst, the biggest internal factor of conflict in parliament.
PARA 2:
Actions of Charles
Point: Charles turned to deploying his remaining powers (control of the military
until the militia bill of December 1641 and rising powers in parliament) in order to
win back the powers he had lost, causing events that sparked disagreements
amongst parliament.
Evidence 1: Incident October 1641 - Charles visited Scotland with a plot to remove
the most radical parliamentarians with military force whilst parliament
simultaneously sent spies to keep an eye on him. This plan was leaked and
highlighted mistrust between radicals and royalists
parliament between November 1640 and August 1642? 25 marks
INTRODUCTION:Divisions in long parliament accumulatedand intensified overtime
ue to various significant factors. In this essay I will be discussing three factors
d
that contributed heavily to the divisions in Parliament, one being the actions and
retaliation towards Parliament of Charles I across his three kingdoms. For
instance, the Scottish plot against Parliament by Charles in the incident of October
1641 and later Charles’ plot to free Strafford in May 1641 further lead to debates
and divides in Long Parliament over the assertion of parliamentary power and
radicalism over the royalists and Charles I. Another factor that contributed to the
divide in the Long Parliament was the uprising of popular radicalism and rebellions
from the general population, which emphasised the influence of parliamentary
radicals on the population compared to the alienation of the population from the
monarchy. Therefore, this leads onto the most significant factor which stimulated
the key disagreements within Long Parliament, in particular individuals like Pym
introduced radical policies that aggravated existing points of conflicts such as
religion within Long Parliament.
PARA 1:
Parliamentary Radicalism
Point: This factor acted as a significant internal factor of divisions and a catalyst
of external aggravators of conflicts in parliament
Evidence 1: Pym and parliamentary radicals (Henry Vane, Hampden) Pyms aims:
-anti-Catholic (reform church (LINK TO ROOT AND BRANCH PETITION)
-Organise kings finances (Ship money)
-Enact against dissolution of Parliament
Evidence 2: Root and Branch Petition December 1640 - presented by Pym to reform
church to original state. Causing many debates, it was shelved in August 1641. The 3
sides to the proposal: - restore church to original state
- Completely change episcopacy to Puritan congregational
- Just remove Laudianism from church
Evidence 3: Grand Remonstrance December 1641 - Created by Pym’s recess
committee (Hampden in this committee) overviewing Charles’ personal rule blaming
evil advisers and demanding of constitutional change. Caused division in Parliament
(HOWEVER STIMULATED BY CHARLES’ ACTIONS)
Counter: It was Charles’ actions that initially stimulated these divisions and calls
for debate
Relative: Most significant but also decreased by Charles’ actions that are a
catalyst, the biggest internal factor of conflict in parliament.
PARA 2:
Actions of Charles
Point: Charles turned to deploying his remaining powers (control of the military
until the militia bill of December 1641 and rising powers in parliament) in order to
win back the powers he had lost, causing events that sparked disagreements
amongst parliament.
Evidence 1: Incident October 1641 - Charles visited Scotland with a plot to remove
the most radical parliamentarians with military force whilst parliament
simultaneously sent spies to keep an eye on him. This plan was leaked and
highlighted mistrust between radicals and royalists
