1646-1649: The Levellers

The Levellers - Who were they and why did they have such influence?

"Wee still find the Nation oppressed with grievances of the same destructive nature as formerly though under other notions." (Leveller Large Petition, March 1647)

The Levellers were a group of people who called for economic, political and religious reform due to the result of economic distress caused by civil war. They were influenced by the ideas of natural law and built an intellectual tradition of dissent. 

• Natural Law - a law that is set by nature and therefore has validity everywhere above human laws. Associated with natural rights that limited the power of the monarchy. 

The Levellers were led by John Lilburne, Richard Overton and William Walwyn. John Lilburne had suffered persecution in the 1630's by publishing literature against the Armenian reforms of William Laud. 

The Diggers - the "True Levellers"

The Diggers were another response to the political, economic and social effects of the Civil War. They established a commune as a solution to the social inequalities. They were led by Gerrard Winstanely who said "freedom is the man that will turn the world upside down." They believed in total political and social equality. 

Kishlansky argued that the "Digger movement appeared more ominous that it actually was" because the ideas and actions of the movement offered a fundamental challenge to the nature of politics and society at the time, but their influence was limited.

Why did the Levellers deny connections with the Diggers?

Their agenda of "leveling of all debates" - the amendment of private property rights - was too much of a radical step for the Levellers, who were attempting to negotiate a political settlement within the existing social order. 

What were the main aims of the Diggers?

1. Communal cultivation of the land and end to property rights 
2. People to support themselves by cultivating the waste and common land of England 
3. Utopian communistic society

The Putney Debates

The Putney Debates, held in November 1647, were a series of discussions between factions of the New Model Army and the Levellers concerning a new constitution for England. They were held at the Church of St Mart the Virgin, Surrey. 

• The Grandees failed attempt to negotiate a settlement with Charles had lost the support of the military and civilian radicals. The Levellers criticised Ireton in particular for being too lenient in his negotiations with the King and Parliament, and accused the Grandees of betraying the interests of the common soldiers and people of England. 
• In October 1647, the 5 of the most radical cavalry regiments elected new Agitators - known as the "New Agents" - to represent their views. The New Agents issued a political manifesto: "The Case of the Armie Truly Stated" and endorsed the constitutional proposals drafted by civilian Levellers in the "Agreement of the People."
• The radicals wanted a constitution based upon manhood suffrage ("one man, one vote"), biennial parliaments and a re-organisation of parliamentary constituencies. Authority was to be vested in the House of Commons rather than the King and Lords. Certain "native rights" were declared for all Englishmen - freedom of conscience, freedom from imprisonment into the armed forced and equality before the law.
• Cromwell and Ireton regarded the Levellers' demands for manhood suffrage as "tantamount to anarchy"

The Agreement of the People, 1647

• MP's should be elected in proportion to the amount of people in their constituencies
• Parliament should be dissolved on the 30th September 1648
• Parliaments should be held biennially and sit every other year from April to September
• A biennial parliament should be the supreme authority in the land, with the powers to make/repeal laws, appoint officials and conduct domestic and foreign policy. 

The Whitehall Debates

• After the King's defeat in the 2nd Civil War, an extended version of the Agreement of the People was promoted by Lilburne who hoped to find a middle way between royal despotism (or tyrannical absolutism) and military dictatorship. 
• The new Agreement was discussed by Levellers, London Independents and the Army Council at Whitehall in December 1648 in the aftermath of Pride's Purge. 
• Lilburne wanted to secure Parliament's acceptance of the Agreement before the King was brought to trial so that the trial would  have a basis in a legitimate and legal constitution. 
• However, Lilburne and his colleague Richard Overton walked out of the discussions when Army officers, led by Ireton, insisted upon making further modifications to the Agreement before it was presented to Parliament. 

Why was this significant?

Here, both Cromwell and Ireton were trying to curb the extremism of the Levellers, particularly over a proposal that wanted to extend the vote to all adult males. Attempts to get support for the Agreement at a meeting of the Army at Cochbush field were forcibly opposed by the Grandees. Lilburne tried making a midway point between tyrannical anarchy and military dictatorship, but this still was not enough for Cromwell and Ireton. 

In the end, discussions continued without Lilburne's input. The revised Agreement was finally presented to the House of Commons as a basis of a new constitution on 20 January 1648, the very days that the public sessions of the High Court of Justice began. As Ireton had calculated, MP's postponed discussion of the Agreement until after the King's trial, and it was never taken up again by Parliament. 

1646-1649: The Heads of Proposals

Reading - July 16th, 1647

• The Army's General Council met. Appeared to be signs that the general unity of the army that had held to date was beginning to break down. 
• The agitators had become more impatient with the slow progress in achieving their demands and were pushing for a more immediate march on London to secure their demands 
• At Reading, it became more clear that senior officers now had a fundamental design for settlement and were negotiating directly with Charles
• These negotiations opened Ireton and Cromwel up to charges of hypocrisy. 

Heads of Proposals - August 2nd, 1647

• Regular biennial parliaments 
• Reform of parliamentary representation 
• Parliamentary control of army and navy
• Parliamentary appointment of great offices of state for 10 years 
• Religious settlement that maintained national Church with bishops, but no coercive power
• Act of Oblivion (pardon) that exempted only a few royalists from punishments 

Negotiations with Charles 

• Their willingness to compromise with Charles brought division in the army to a head and would also be the basis of their own more hard-line attitude to Charles after the 2nd Civil War 
• The Grandees of the NMA wanted settlement because they wanted a good working relationship with the King, with Berkley commenting that Ireton may able to get the "Heads" through the Army Council. 
• Ireton modified the "Heads" after talking to the King and there is little doubt that Ireton and Cromwell went as far as they felt they could in trying to get Charles to accept the Heads
• The tension between the Army and Parliament increased. The Political Presbyterians organised demonstrations in favour of peace on the 26th July, with the convenience of Holles, a mob invaded the Commons and forced the passing of a resolution to invite the King to London. 
• By 3rd of August, the Army was just outside of London, where the Political Independents joined them after walking out of Parliament. 
• Charles escaped from Hampton Court on 11th November. In response to the new military threat posed by Charles' escape and his negotiations with the Scots, the NMA officers reunited. An attempted Leveller inspired military in the army at Wore was crushed. 

1646-1649: The Role and Influence of the New Model Army

After Charles' surrender, the New Model Army became increasingly politicised. This was due to their dissatisfaction with the settlements offered to the King by Parliament. They also had material concerns - wages were £3 million in arrears and Parliament had proposed to disband them in the Newcastle Propositions. As Parliament failed to address their concerns, the demands of the army became more radical.

When Parliament proposed to disband the Army, Fairfax ordered a meeting at Newmarket on 4th/5th June 1647. During this meeting a more formal political structure in the army was developed. A General Council was created to allow official strategies and possible settlement to be discussed. The General Council was made up of two officers and two agitators (more radical, pushing for change) from each regiment. This was led by Henry Ireton who had the role of Commissary General.

What were the Heads of Proposals?

The army had so much say during the settlement period because:

Physical control of Charles: 
Charles had been placed under semi-protective house arrest by Parliament after his surrender. He was based at Holmby in Northamptonshire. On 2nd June, 1647, the Army seized Charles from Parliament. George Joyce, a Coronet in the army arrived at Holmby House and said that he had Cromwell's permission to remove the King. Joyce had associations with the agitators. He was allowed to take custody of Charles and immediately took him to the Army's headquarters at Newmarket. Most of the garrison protecting the King went with Joyce. Fairfax was furious but it seemed as though Joyce had the approval of Cromwell and Ireton

The Solemn Engagement:
The first step of the army's demands that had been declared in the Humble Remonstrance were put into action through the documents of the Solemn Engagement which encouraged cooperation between the army's officers and the agitators. This document was mainly drafted by Ireton. In June, Cromwell, Ireton and Fairfax met with Charles and to reinforce the Solemn Engagement, impeachment charges were drawn against 11 MPs, including Holles (Political Presbyterian) - the army saw him as leading Parliament against them.

Humble Remonstrance 
Produced on the 4th June, 1647. The Remonstrance declared that the army would not disband until their grievances were met - i.e. indemnity (no prosecution or punishment for affairs during the First Civil War) and also the removal of the Political Presbyterians who wanted to disband the army.

"A Representation of the Army" 
Drafted on the 14th June, 1647 by Ireton, Lambert and Cromwell. The Representation outlined the army's political position and what they wanted. Main points focused on:

• Purge of Parliament
• Future Parliaments of Fixed Duration 
• Guaranteed right of freedom or people to petition to Parliament (meaning free speech and say)
• Liberty of tender consciences (religious freedom)

All these influenced what was to be in the Heads of Proposals 

1646-1649: Overview of this Period

July 1646 - Newcastle Propositions: Parliament (Presbyterians) proposed that the armed forces should be controlled by Parliament for 20 years and that only Parliament could disband itself

May 1647 - Solemn Engagement: Army would not disband until they were paid

June 1647 - Declaration of the Army: said "we are not mercenaries" and demanded that anti-army MPs should leave. 11 MPs left as a result.

Summer 1647 - Heads of Proposals: army offered Charles a settlement where the Church would become independent of the State

August 1647 - Putney Debates: the Army debated what their political stance should be amongst themselves

December 1648: Pride's Purge.