THE Navy UNDER CHARLES I 1625-40

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

THE Navy UNDER CHARLES I 1625-40 THE NAvY UNDER CHARLES I 1625-40 ANDREW DEREK THRUSH University College Ph.D. Dissertation C ABSTRACT This study is primarily concerned with how the Caroline Navy was run, both in theory and in practice. Previous assessments of early Stuart naval administration have generally been superficial and unsympathetic in tone, but this new work, in shedding fresh light on a variety of themes, attempts to offer a more detailed and balanced view of the quality of administration in the 1620s and 1630s. Starting with an examination of the Navy's senior executive, the thesis broadens out into a discussion of the role of the Navy Board and the manner in which the yards were administered. Here it is argued that the yards were a good deal better regulated than has sometimes been appreciated. It is also suggested that the Navy's ability to reform its own administration has been understated. In the second part of the thesis, two chapters are devoted to the question of finance, in which both financial procedures and management are discussed. In the final section, the Navy's ability to man, victual and prepare its ships for sea is scrutinised. Detailed consideration is also given to the Ordnance Office, which was responsible for gunning and munitioning the Navy's ships. In these later chapters considerable space is devoted to administrative deficiencies which persistently dogged the Navy, but the author argues that institutional factors, such as underfunding, were often to blame rather than mismanagement, a theme which is echoed in the final conclusion. -2- PREFACE In the process of writing this thesis I have incurred many debts of gratitude. I owe most thanks to my supervisor, Professor Conrad Russell, whose generosity with his time frequently exceeded the call of duty, and whose keen eye and sharp mind saved me from innumerable errors of Judgement. I owe scarcely less thanks to Mr. Roger Lockyer, who initially stimulated my interest in the early Stuart Navy while I was an undergraduate. Mr. Lockyer read the whole of the second draft, and made many perceptive observations which have served to improve the quality of the text. In addition, I should like to thank Dr. Roger Morriss of the National Maritime Museum for his comments upon Chapter 3, Mrs. Sabrina Baron for her observations on an early draft of Chapter 1, and Dr. David Hebb for many invaluable discussions at the outset of my research. As far as archives are concerned, I am deeply indebted to the Duke of Northumberland f or permission to examine the Northumberland papers, and to Lord Fairfax of Cameron f or allowing me to consult the Duchess of Buckingham's MSS. In addition, I am grateful to the staff of the Berkshire Record Office, the Birmingham Reference Library, the Bodleian Library, the British Library, the Ciwyd Record Office, the Derbyshire Record Office, the Devon Record Office, the Dyfyd Archives Service, the Hampshire Record Office, the Glamorgan Record Office, the House of Lords Record Office, the Kent Archives Office, the National Library of Scotland, the National Maritime Museum, the Public Record Office, the Scottish Record Office, the Society of Antiquaries, the University of London, the Victoria and Albert Museum and the West Sussex Record Office. This thesis would not have been started without the aid of a three-year -3- British Academy grant, and it might never have been finished without the award by the National Maritime Museum of the Caird Junior Research Fellowship for 1989-90. Both the Academy and the Museum deserve my deepest thanks. Throughout the text I have kept to the original spelling of quotations, but have lengthened abbreviations and added punctuation where necessary. Dates are given in the Old Style, but the year Is taken as beginning on 1 January. Richmond-upon-Thames, June 1990 -4- CONTENTS Abbreviations 6 Introduction 7 PART ONE: THE GOVERNMENT OF TIlE NAVY 1. The Senior Executive 23 23 1. The King ii. The Authority of the Lord High Admiral 44 66 2. The Administration of the Yards 66 I. The Navy Board: The Structure of Government The Navy Board: Administrative Constraints 70 ii. iii. Reform 85 102 lv. Storekeeping 110 v. Timekeeping vi. Theft 114 PART T1: FINANCE 3. The Mechanics of Naval Finance 123 1. Basic Finance 123 129 ii. The Private Purse iii. Private Profit 163 4. The Management of Naval Finance 170 PART THREE: SERVICING THE FLEET 5. Manning 202 248 6. VIctualling 248 I. Conditions of Service 252 ii. Finance 258 iii. Organisation and Personnel iv. Allowances 273 279 v. Procurement 284 vi. Delivery and Stowage vii. Surveys and Complaints 288 7. The Ordnance Office and the Navy 299 332 8. The Seaworthiness of the King's Ships 332 I. Hulls 348 ii. Masts and Yards 354 iii. Cordage 360 iv. Sails v. Conclusions 363 Conclusion 364 Bib) lography 370 -5- ABBREVIATIONS A.P.C. Acts of the Privy Council B.R.L. Birmingham Reference Library Bodl. Llbr. Bodleian Library Brit. Libr. British Library C.S.P.D. Calendar of State Papers, Domestic C.S.P. I. Calendar of State Papers, Ireland C.S.P.v. Calendar of State Papers, Venetian D. N. B. Dictionary of National Biography Derb. R.O. Derbyshire Record Office ii. M. C. Historical Manuscripts Commission K.A.O. Kent Archives Office Longleat Longleat House N .M. M. National Maritime Museum N. R. S. Navy Records Society P .R. 0. Public Record Office R.P.C.S. Register of the Privy Council of Scotland Scot. R.O. Scottish Record Office T.H.D.T. Trinity House of Deptford Transactions, 1609-35, ed, G.G. Harris, London Record Society, xix, (1983). W.S.R.O. West Sussex Record Office -6- INTRODUCTION The Navy inherited by Charles I in March 1625 was in better shape than it had been for many years. Following the end of the Elizabethan war with Spain in 1604 it had been allowed to decay under the benevolent auspices of the aged Lord High Admiral, Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham. Robert Kenny, in a vivid phrase, has said that Nottingham's subordinates on the Navy Board 'made the navy a fat, lifeless, supine organism which seemed to exist to be ravaged and robbed by Its own personnel'.' However, following a damning report compiled in 1618, the Board was suspended and a twelve-man Navy Commission was appointed in its place. In their task of reform the Commissioners were encouraged by the new and youthful Lord High Admiral, George Villiers, Marquis (later Duke) of Buckingham, who replaced Nottingham in January 1619. Over the next five years the Commissioners put the Navy's finances on a sound footing. They also disposed of a number of old ships and built ten new vessels In their place. The results were, by contemporary standards, highly impressive. By the accession of Charles I, the royal fleet consisted of twenty-five seaworthy capital ships and a handful of pinnaces. 2 This strength, remarked Sir John Coke, the leading Commissioner who was then in his sixties, was 'better then ever It was in my memorie and exceeded the Navies of former times'. 3 His observation was echoed by an anonymous tract writer in 1628, who commented that 'the shipping of England is at this present much more greater, and more warliker then it hath beene in any former age'. However, this same writer was 1 Robert W. Kenny, Elizabeth's Admiral: The Political Career of Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham, 1536-1624 (Baltimore & London, 1970), p.293. 2 P.R.O., S(tate] P(apers]16/13/59, fleet list, n.d., (1625-6). This figure excludes the White Bear, which was unserviceable: BrIt. Libr., Add(itional] MS. 64884 fo.59. 3 Brit. Libr., Add. MS. 64889, fo.155v, Sept. 1626, (draft). -7- undoubtedly exaggerating when he added that Charles I possessed 'the most powerful navy that any king hath in Christendome', for the Spanish fleet was considerably larger than its Caroline counterpart.' Nevertheless, Spain's overseas empire meant that her naval strength was dissipated around the globe, unlike England's, which was concentrated exclusively in home waters. In 1626 Secretary of State Sir Edward Conway at least believed that this fact made it 'faisible for us to keep the seas against them'. Under Charles I the newly refashioned English Navy was soon put to use. In October 1625 a large fleet was despatched under the command of the experienced soldier Sir Edward Cecil with the aim of striking a blow against Spain. However, Cecil's attempt to emulate the Earl of Essex's feat In 1596 of seizing Cadiz ended in ignominious failure. The following year a fresh fleet was set out under Lord Willoughby. This time the ships got no further than the Bay of Biscay before fierce storms forced them to return home. The fault was laid at the door of the Navy's administration, and a Special Commission was briefly established to investigate the activities of the Navy Commissioners. No further expeditions were mounted against Spain after 1626, although the war continued untIl December 1630. The bulk of England's naval effort was instead diverted into a fresh conflict with France, which lasted until April 1629. In July 1627 Buckingham led a combined expedition to the lie de Re to assist the Huguenots of La Rochelle. However, he was forced to withdraw in November, and part of the blame for this defeat was laid on the Navy Commissioners for failing to keep him supplied. They were dismissed in 4 Longleat, Coventry MS. vol. 117 fo.25. The anonymous author's choice of words excluded from comparison the Navy of the republican Dutch, which was also larger than England's.
Recommended publications
  • AUGUST 2021 May 2019: Admiral Sir Timothy P. Fraser
    ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 May 2019: Admiral Sir Timothy P. Fraser: Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, May 2019 June 2019: Admiral Sir Antony D. Radakin: First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, June 2019 (11/1965; 55) VICE-ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 February 2016: Vice-Admiral Sir Benjamin J. Key: Chief of Joint Operations, April 2019 (11/1965; 55) July 2018: Vice-Admiral Paul M. Bennett: to retire (8/1964; 57) March 2019: Vice-Admiral Jeremy P. Kyd: Fleet Commander, March 2019 (1967; 53) April 2019: Vice-Admiral Nicholas W. Hine: Second Sea Lord and Deputy Chief of the Naval Staff, April 2019 (2/1966; 55) Vice-Admiral Christopher R.S. Gardner: Chief of Materiel (Ships), April 2019 (1962; 58) May 2019: Vice-Admiral Keith E. Blount: Commander, Maritime Command, N.A.T.O., May 2019 (6/1966; 55) September 2020: Vice-Admiral Richard C. Thompson: Director-General, Air, Defence Equipment and Support, September 2020 July 2021: Vice-Admiral Guy A. Robinson: Chief of Staff, Supreme Allied Command, Transformation, July 2021 REAR ADMIRALS: AUGUST 2021 July 2016: (Eng.)Rear-Admiral Timothy C. Hodgson: Director, Nuclear Technology, July 2021 (55) October 2017: Rear-Admiral Paul V. Halton: Director, Submarine Readiness, Submarine Delivery Agency, January 2020 (53) April 2018: Rear-Admiral James D. Morley: Deputy Commander, Naval Striking and Support Forces, NATO, April 2021 (1969; 51) July 2018: (Eng.) Rear-Admiral Keith A. Beckett: Director, Submarines Support and Chief, Strategic Systems Executive, Submarine Delivery Agency, 2018 (Eng.) Rear-Admiral Malcolm J. Toy: Director of Operations and Assurance and Chief Operating Officer, Defence Safety Authority, and Director (Technical), Military Aviation Authority, July 2018 (12/1964; 56) November 2018: (Logs.) Rear-Admiral Andrew M.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Navy and World War I: 1914–1922
    Cover: During World War I, convoys carried almost two million men to Europe. In this 1920 oil painting “A Fast Convoy” by Burnell Poole, the destroyer USS Allen (DD-66) is shown escorting USS Leviathan (SP-1326). Throughout the course of the war, Leviathan transported more than 98,000 troops. Naval History and Heritage Command 1 United States Navy and World War I: 1914–1922 Frank A. Blazich Jr., PhD Naval History and Heritage Command Introduction This document is intended to provide readers with a chronological progression of the activities of the United States Navy and its involvement with World War I as an outside observer, active participant, and victor engaged in the war’s lingering effects in the postwar period. The document is not a comprehensive timeline of every action, policy decision, or ship movement. What is provided is a glimpse into how the 20th century’s first global conflict influenced the Navy and its evolution throughout the conflict and the immediate aftermath. The source base is predominately composed of the published records of the Navy and the primary materials gathered under the supervision of Captain Dudley Knox in the Historical Section in the Office of Naval Records and Library. A thorough chronology remains to be written on the Navy’s actions in regard to World War I. The nationality of all vessels, unless otherwise listed, is the United States. All errors and omissions are solely those of the author. Table of Contents 1914..................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Staff Working Paper No. 845 Eight Centuries of Global Real Interest Rates, R-G, and the ‘Suprasecular’ Decline, 1311–2018 Paul Schmelzing
    CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007
    [Show full text]
  • The Professionalisation of the Royal Navy: 1660-1688
    The Professionalisation of the Royal Navy: 1660-1688 by Samantha Middleton The thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY of the University of Portsmouth September 2020 Abstract This thesis analyses the developments made between 1660 and 1688 that contributed towards the Royal Navy becoming a more professionalised organisation. It outlines the impact of individuals and their methods towards achieving professionalisation. The political and financial problems facing the navy before the restoration of the monarchy are also addressed. Biographical case studies of three influential naval reformers; James Stewart, The Duke of York; William Coventry; and Samuel Pepys are used to demonstrate the significant influence that they had on the process of professionalization. This thesis ascertains that although the terminology had not been invented at this stage, the principles of Management Control were implemented by Pepys, Coventry and the Duke of York as a method of organizational professionalisation, identifying examples of performance measurement, rewards systems and the implantation of standard operating procedures. An in-depth analysis of the Duke of York’s instructions for the duties of the Principal Officers demonstrates that the Duke of York introduced enhanced accounting procedures and additional control mechanisms to reduce abuses and increase administrative efficiency. Additionally, a set of professional responsibilities has been created within this thesis for Coventry, whose role as secretary is absent from the instructions. This shows for the first time, that Coventry identified his professional remit as focusing primarily on retrenchment and the reduction of abuses. This contributed towards wider professionalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • “Will You Marry Me?” Some First-Hand Accounts of Marriage Proposals, 1600-1900
    \Will You Marry Me?" Some First-hand Accounts of Marriage Proposals, 1600-1900 Edited by Ernest Davis The Gentleman Next Door Declares his Passion for Mrs. Nickleby \Phiz" (Hablot K. Browne), 1839. For my dear brother Joey My teacher and guide in all matters historical i Also by Ernest Davis on the subject of marriage proposals: \How does a 19th century heroine accept a proposal of marriage?" May 2015. \Proposals of Marriage in the Hebrew Bible" February 2019. \Proposals of Marriages in the Plays of Shakespeare" June 2019. ii Laura Ingalls (1867-1957) and Almanzo Wilder (1857-1949). Married 1885. 1 Anna Snitkina (1846-1918) and Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881). Married 1867. 4 Malvina Shanklin (1839-1916) and John Harlan (1833-1911) Married 1856. 9 Rutherford B. Hayes (1822-1893) and Lucy Webb (1831-1889). Married 1851. 13 Robert Browning (1812-1889) and Elizabeth Barrett (1806-1861). Married 1846 18 Julia (1823-1900) and George Foote Married 1841 21 Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882) and Lydia Jackson (1802-1892). Married 1835. 23 Illustration: Edmond Blair Leighton, "Off" 25 Fanny Burney (1752-1840) 26 Proposal from Thomas Barlow (1750/-?) Declined 1775. 27 Proposal from Alexandre d'Arblay (1748-1818). Accepted. Married 1793. 36 Elizabeth Sarah Villa-Real (1757-1807) and William Gooch. Married 1775. 43 James Boswell (1740-1795) and Margaret Montgomerie (1738?-1789). Married 1769. 44 Lady Mary Pierrepont (1689-1762) and Wortley Montagu (1678-1761) Married 1712. 47 William Byrd II (1674-1744) and Lucy Parke (1688-1715). Married 1706. 64 Illustration: Alfred W. Elmore, "The Proposal" 66 Anne Murray Halkett (1622-1699) 67 Proposal from Thomas Howard (1619-1706).
    [Show full text]
  • Six Unpublished Letters of Queen Henrietta Maria
    SIX UNPUBLISHED LETTERS OF dUEEN HENRIETTA MARIA R. A. BEDDARD IN the morass of papers left by that diligent servant of the House of Stuart, Sir Edward Nicholas, Secretary of State to Charles I and Charles II, is a small cache of six letters written by, or at the command of, Queen Henrietta Maria.^ Five of them are addressed to Nicholas in his official capacity as Secretary.^ Three of them are informal, being little more than hastily penned notes in the Queen's own hand. These are undated by her, but two of them have been endorsed by Nicholas with the date on which he received them: 5 September and i October 1641. His endorsement locates them in the difficult period of Charles Ts residence in Edinburgh, when his master was seeking to build a party among the Scottish nobles. The third most probably belongs to the same year. All three show that the King was during his absence from England regularly employing his wife in the routine business of despatching, and, on occasion, restraining the time of delivery of his correspondence.^ The other two letters addressed to Secretary Nicholas are of greater historical moment. Not only are they more ample in content, they are also more formal in nature. They belong to a much later period in the Queen's life, when she had taken up residence in her native France following her successful flight from Exeter in July 1644.^ The two communications are cast in the form of royal warrants, drafted by the clerk attending the Queen at the palace of St Germain-en-Laye, outside Paris, where for a time she occupied grace and favour lodgings given to her by her sister-in-law, Anne of Austria, Queen Regent of France and the widow of Louis XIII.^ As such, they are signed by Henrietta Maria at the beginning in the customary fashion, and are dated coram regina 9 and 22 June 1648 respectively, according to the New Style of the Gregorian calendar in use in Catholic France: that is, 30 May and 12 June, according to the Old Style of the Julian computation still in use in Protestant England.
    [Show full text]
  • XXX. Notices of the Tower of London Temp. Elizabeth, and the Morse Armoury Temp
    XXX. Notices of the Tower of London temp. Elizabeth, and the Morse Armoury temp. Charles I. In a Letter addressed byWu. DTJRRANT COOPER, Esq., F.S.A. to Robert Lemon, Esq., F.8.A. Read February 18, 1858. 81, Guilford Street, Russell Square, London, MY DEAR SIR, 15th February, 1858. THE facilities which you have afforded hy the publication of your Kalendar for the puhlic use of the valuable documents preserved in the State-Paper Office, relating to the first half of Queen Elizabeth's reign, and your kindness in per- mitting me to make extracts from your own book of MSS. on ancient armour, consisting of the scattered Exchequer documents, enable me to send to our Society some notices of the Tower of London and of the armouries there and at Green- wich, which are very interesting in themselves, and are chiefly of a date forty years earlier than the lists communicated by William Bray, Esq. P.S.A. to our Society, and reprinted by Meyrick from the Archseologia.a It was only after Elizabeth's public entry into London from Hatfield and the Charter House, on her accession in Nov. 1558, and her return from Westminster to the Tower on 12th January following, preparatory to her procession to West- minster on the 14th, the day before her coronation, that the Tower of London was used as a royal residence in her reign. It was, however, during all her reign the chief arsenal, the principal depdt for the ordnance and armoury, the depository for the jewels and treasures, the site of the Mint, the place where the public records were preserved, and the most important state prison.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of the Introduction of Heavy Ordnance on the Development of the English Navy in the Early Tudor Period
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 8-1980 The Influence of the Introduction of Heavy Ordnance on the Development of the English Navy in the Early Tudor Period Kristin MacLeod Tomlin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the European History Commons Recommended Citation Tomlin, Kristin MacLeod, "The Influence of the Introduction of Heavy Ordnance on the Development of the English Navy in the Early Tudor Period" (1980). Master's Theses. 1921. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/1921 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE INFLUENCE OF THE INTRODUCTION OF HEAVY ORDNANCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENGLISH NAVY IN THE EARLY TUDOR PERIOD by K ristin MacLeod Tomlin A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of History Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 1980 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis grew out of a paper prepared for a seminar at the University of Warwick in 1976-77. Since then, many persons have been invaluable in helping me to complete the work. I would like to express my thanks specifically to the personnel of the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, England, and of the Public Records Office, London, for their help in locating sources.
    [Show full text]
  • World War I Context Follow up in 1915, Europe Was Embroiled in U.S
    1915: World War I Context Follow Up In 1915, Europe was embroiled in U.S. newspapers aroused outrage war, but U.S. public sentiment op- against Germany for ruthlessly kill- posed involvement. President ing defenceless Americans. The U.S. Woodrow Wilson said they would was being drawn into the war. In “remain neutral in fact as well as in June 1916, Congress increased the name.”23 size of the army. In September, Con- gress allocated $7 billion for national Pretext Incident defense, “the largest sum appropri- On May 7, 1915, a German subma- ated to that time.”30 rine (U-boat) sank the Lusitania, a In January 1917, the British British passenger ship killing 1,198, said they had intercepted a German including 128 Americans.24 message to Mexico seeking an alli- The public was not told that ance with Germany and offering to passengers were, in effect, a ‘human help Mexico recover land ceded to shield’ protecting six million rounds the U.S. On April 2, Wilson told of U.S. ammunition bound for Brit- Congress: “The world must be safe ain.25 To Germany, the ship was a for democracy.” Four days later the threat. To Britain, it was bait for lur- U.S. declared war on Germany.31 ing an attack. Why? A week before the attack, Real Reasons British Admiralty leader, Winston The maneuvre which brings Influential British military, political Churchill wrote to the Board of an ally into the field is as and business interests wanted U.S. Trade’s president saying it is “most serviceable as that which help in their war with Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • Puritan New England: Plymouth
    Puritan New England: Plymouth A New England for Puritans The second major area to be colonized by the English in the first half of the 17th century, New England, differed markedly in its founding principles from the commercially oriented Chesapeake tobacco colonies. Settled largely by waves of Puritan families in the 1630s, New England had a religious orientation from the start. In England, reform-minded men and women had been calling for greater changes to the English national church since the 1580s. These reformers, who followed the teachings of John Calvin and other Protestant reformers, were called Puritans because of their insistence on purifying the Church of England of what they believed to be unscriptural, Catholic elements that lingered in its institutions and practices. Many who provided leadership in early New England were educated ministers who had studied at Cambridge or Oxford but who, because they had questioned the practices of the Church of England, had been deprived of careers by the king and his officials in an effort to silence all dissenting voices. Other Puritan leaders, such as the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, John Winthrop, came from the privileged class of English gentry. These well-to-do Puritans and many thousands more left their English homes not to establish a land of religious freedom, but to practice their own religion without persecution. Puritan New England offered them the opportunity to live as they believed the Bible demanded. In their “New” England, they set out to create a model of reformed Protestantism, a new English Israel. The conflict generated by Puritanism had divided English society because the Puritans demanded reforms that undermined the traditional festive culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Anglo-Habsburg Relations and the Outbreak of the War of Three Kingdoms, 1630-1641
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Charles I and the Spanish Plot: Anglo-Habsburg Relations and the Outbreak of the War of Three Kingdoms, 1630-1641 A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by Patrick Ignacio O’Neill March 2014 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Thomas Cogswell, Chairperson Dr. Randolph Head Dr. Georg Michels Copyright by Patrick Ignacio O’Neill 2014 The Dissertation of Patrick Ignacio O’Neill is approved: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Bertolt Brecht posed the question, “Young Alexander conquered India./ He alone?” Like any great human endeavor, this dissertation is not the product of one person’s solitary labors, but owes much to the efforts of a great number of individuals and organizations who have continually made straight my paths through graduate school, through archival research, and through the drafting process. First and foremost, I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Thomas Cogswell, for his excellent guidance throughout my years at the University of California, Riverside. When I arrived as a first-year graduate student, I had very little certainty of what I wanted to do in the field of Early Modern Britain, and I felt more than a bit overwhelmed at the well-trod historiographical world I had just entered. Dr. Cogswell quickly took me under his wing and steered me gently through a research path that helped me find my current project, and he subsequently took a great interest in following my progress through research and writing. I salute his heroic readings and re-readings of drafts of chapters, conference papers, and proposals, and his perennial willingness to have a good chat over a cup of coffee and to help dispel the many frustrations that come from dissertation writing.
    [Show full text]
  • 'The Admiralty War Staff and Its Influence on the Conduct of The
    ‘The Admiralty War Staff and its influence on the conduct of the naval between 1914 and 1918.’ Nicholas Duncan Black University College University of London. Ph.D. Thesis. 2005. UMI Number: U592637 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U592637 Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 CONTENTS Page Abstract 4 Acknowledgements 5 Abbreviations 6 Introduction 9 Chapter 1. 23 The Admiralty War Staff, 1912-1918. An analysis of the personnel. Chapter 2. 55 The establishment of the War Staff, and its work before the outbreak of war in August 1914. Chapter 3. 78 The Churchill-Battenberg Regime, August-October 1914. Chapter 4. 103 The Churchill-Fisher Regime, October 1914 - May 1915. Chapter 5. 130 The Balfour-Jackson Regime, May 1915 - November 1916. Figure 5.1: Range of battle outcomes based on differing uses of the 5BS and 3BCS 156 Chapter 6: 167 The Jellicoe Era, November 1916 - December 1917. Chapter 7. 206 The Geddes-Wemyss Regime, December 1917 - November 1918 Conclusion 226 Appendices 236 Appendix A.
    [Show full text]