Failure to reach a settlement between Charles I and Parliament 1646-49

HideShow resource information
Preview of Failure to reach a settlement between Charles I and Parliament 1646-49

First 296 words of the document:

Failure to reach a settlement 16461649
Factions in parliament 1646
Division had emerged from Charles' intransigence, about how to the fight the civil war
between moderates and radicals sometimes called Peace Party and the War Party
Two factions Religious and Political
Political Presbyterians
Conservative in social and political matters
Opposed religious toleration stop radicalism
Favoured a negotiated peace with the king
Disenchanted with the New Model Army
Closer to the Scots
Support for Presbyterian Church to prevent social revolution
Political Independents
Disliked the authoritarianism of Scottish Presbyterianism
Wanted considerable measure of religious toleration (people should pray how
they want to within reason) Catholics excluded of course
Most influential
1646 The Political Presbyterians, most people favoured them for their peace policy, the
whole country was weary of war.
Newcastle Propositions
Religion Charles was to accept establishment of the Presbyterian Church in
England for 3 years
Militia Parliament was to control militia and armed forces for 20 years (likely
to be the remainder of Charles life)
Parliament Triennial act to remain. Regular parliaments to limit power of the
Royalist Only 58 Royalists not to be pardoned ­ others should accept defeat
Charles failed to respond; he had no intention of agreeing to these terms, but did not say
this directly. (This infuriated the scots who handed him over to England)
Political Presbyterians:
Agreement based of the revision of the Newcastle propositions constituted of two parts.
1) Demobilise the New Model Army (whilst keeping a smaller force to go to Ireland)
2) Create an alternative "Safe" army based on London ­ trained bands new force into
settlement the New Model Army

Other pages in this set

Page 2

Preview of page 2

Here's a taster:

Proposed disbandment of the New Model Army (Holles)
Many wanted them disbanded because they had a reputation for radicalism. So when
they proposed a vote to disband army it was enthusiastically received by MP's who
voted in favour in February 1647.…read more

Page 3

Preview of page 3

Here's a taster:

The army declared its refusal to disband until a just settlement, which guaranteed the
rights of "freedom of Englishmen" was obtained.
A Representation of the army 14th June 1647
Ireton and Lambert
On the 14th of June, a representation of the army, drafted principally by Ireton and John
Lambert aided by Cromwell appeared.
It declares that the New Model Army was "not a mere mercenary army" It outlined the
fundamentals of the army's political position.…read more

Page 4

Preview of page 4

Here's a taster:

Dislike of religious radicalism, disorder and continuing expense provided a powerful
motivation, and the increasing Royalist London mobs were encouraged to demonstrate
for a settlement with the King.
Army joined by political independents
By the 3rd of August the army was just outside London, where the political independents
joined them after walking out of parliament. On the 6th August the army marched into
Westminster and on the 8 of August, the city of London.…read more

Page 5

Preview of page 5

Here's a taster:

Charles mistaken conclusion
Charles did not believe he needed to come to terms at this time.…read more

Page 6

Preview of page 6

Here's a taster:

Antiparliament / Ex parliamentarians
The "rebel" forces fell into three main groups (Scottish, Royalist, Parliamentarians) with
little in common other than a dislike of the existing central authority and its policies
Among ex parliamentarians as well as royalists there was a desire for a return to
normal and familiar forms of government and resentment of the country committees
and their ordinances.
Cavalier rising in Cornwall, Yorkshire and Wales, But the majority of ex royalists were
unwilling or unable to react in support.…read more

Page 7

Preview of page 7

Here's a taster:

Army intended to exercise its right to a voice
Reservations regarding the king's reliability in any settlement had been made public
and the army had declared its right to a voice in any political settlement. Charles
negotiations with the scots, his secret engagement, his willingness to see new war and a
foreign invasion meant that in the eyes of the army and a majority of MP's that Charles
could not be trusted.…read more

Page 8

Preview of page 8

Here's a taster:

Prides Purge
Army acted
After parliament voted to continue negotiations with the king, the army decided to act,
and they were acting on the threat they made in the Remonstrance (Purge of
parliament, put Charles on trial)
The Army decided to follow through on their threat in the Remonstrance and purge
parliament, so the questions of the settlement would be left to those who remained in
parliament after the purge.
Parliament became known as the rump
on the 6th of December 1648 the purge
occurred.…read more


No comments have yet been made

Similar History resources:

See all History resources »See all resources »