DOCSLIB.ORG

The Turbulent Careers of the Earls of Danby and Shaftesbury Synopsis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Turbulent Careers of the Earls of Danby and Shaftesbury Synopsis The Turbulent Careers of the Earls of Danby and Shaftesbury Synopsis Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby and later 1st Duke of Leeds, and Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, were two of the most significant political figures in post-restoration England. They had radically different political outlooks, but above all else, each craved power and their rivalry in the 1670s left its mark on history. Their efforts to build support led directly to the emergence of the first political parties; a government or Court block of support, was built up by Osborne, and would later be characterised as Tory, while the Whigs grew out of Ashley Cooper’s opposition grouping. Other innovations in the period have also survived to the present day. However, politics was still a risky occupation, and both men spent lengthy periods in the Tower; Osborne for almost 5 years and Ashley Cooper for 18 months in two spells, before he finally fled the country shortly before his death in 1682. Osborne governed England between 1674 and 1679, not least because of his mastery of the nation’s finances, though he was unable to achieve the same control of foreign policy for which his objectives diverged from those of King Charles II. In the same period, and for a few years afterwards, Ashley Cooper mounted an effective opposition which eventually overthrew Osborne, and he came close to altering the Royal succession, and establishing himself as the chief power in the land. The careers engrossed much else besides. Ashley Cooper fought on both sides in the Civil War, held important office under Cromwell and then Charles II, and became one of the leading members of the notorious Cabal ministry. Osborne obtained his release from the Tower in 1684, but then risked his career and his head again, by taking a major part in the Glorious Revolution of 1688, before going on to dominate another government, which served King William III between 1690 and 1695. It is fair to say that history has been kind to neither, and while the book does not gloss over the unattractive aspects of their personalities and careers, it is intended to be a re-appraisal, as well as a narrative account. The Turbulent Careers of the Earls of Danby and Shaftesbury Contents List of Illustrations 1. Introduction 2. The Rise of Anthony Ashley Cooper, (later Earl of Shaftesbury) 2.1. Ancestry and Early Years 2.2. Marriage and Parliamentary Ambitions 2.3. Civil War Dilemmas 2.4. Cromwellian Politician 2.5. Surviving the Chaos of the Later Years of the Interregnum 2.6. A Royalist Again 2.7. Confusion and Drift during the Clarendon Ministry 3. The Cabal Ministry 3.1. The Grand Design of King Charles II 3.2. The King Takes Charge 3.3. Preparations for War with the Dutch 3.4. Early Setbacks and Ashley Cooper’s Promotion 3.5. Fissures in the Cabal and Osborne’s Spectacular Ascent 4. The Emergence of Thomas Osborne, (later Earl of Danby) 4.1. Ancestry and Early Years 4.2. A Young Royalist in Republican England 4.3. First Steps towards Power 4.4. Ministerial Office 5. The Osborne Ministry and Ashley Cooper’s Opposition 5.1. Osborne’s Solution to a Financial Crisis 5.2. The Crumbling of the Cabal and the Continuing Rise of Osborne 5.3. Ashley Cooper’s Drift towards Systematic Opposition 5.4. The Great Debates about Osborne’s Test Bill 5.5. The Widening of the Struggle between Osborne and Ashley Cooper 2 6. Osborne in the Ascendant, Ashley Cooper in the Tower 6.1. Osborne and Ashley Cooper regroup during the Prorogation 6.2. Ashley Cooper’s Greatest Blunder 6.3. Osborne’s First Great Mistake 6.4. The Dutch Marriage 7. The Resurgence of Ashley Cooper and the End of the Osborne Ministry 7.1. The Release of Ashley Cooper from the Tower 7.2. England betwixt War and Peace 7.3. The Popish Plot 7.4. The Re-Appearance of the Montagu Letters 7.5. The Resignation and Imprisonment of Osborne 8. Ashley Cooper’s Contest for Power with the King 8.1. Ashley Cooper’s Return to Office 8.2. The 1st Exclusion Parliament and its Aftermath 8.3. The 2nd Exclusion Parliament 8.4. The 3rd (Oxford) Exclusion Parliament 8.5. The Reassertion of Royal Authority and Ashley Cooper’s 2nd Imprisonment 8.6. End-Game, the Flight and Death of Ashley Cooper 8.7. An Appraisal of Ashley Cooper 9. Osborne’s Decade of Difficulties 9.1. An Unrepentant Prisoner for Five Years 9.2. Osborne’s Failure to Resurrect His Career 9.3. The Construction of an English Conspiracy 9.4. The Dutch Descent on England and the English Uprising 9.5. Osborne’s Limited Favour with the New Regime 10. Osborne’s Second Ministry under William III 10.1. The Failure of Lord Halifax as First Minister 10.2. The Return of Osborne as First Minister 10.3. Osborne’s Struggles to Maintain and Increase His Power 10.4. The Decline in Osborne’s Authority 10.5. The Eclipse of Osborne’s Power 10.6. Ambitious to the End 10.7. An Appraisal of Thomas Osborne 3 11. The Careers in Perspective Timeline Bibliography After-word 4 The Turbulent Careers of the Earls of Danby and Shaftesbury List of Illustrations 1. Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury by Greenhill 2. Sir Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby by Lely 3. Wimborne Manor largely as rebuilt by Ashley Cooper c1650 4. King Charles II. 5. George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham 6. The House of Lords in the early 18th Century 7. Osborne’s Southern Palace, Wimbledon Manor House 8. James Scott, Duke of Monmouth 9. King James II, formerly Duke of York 10. King William III 11. George Savile, Marquis of Halifax 12. Osborne’s Yorkshire Mansion, Keeton Hall at Kiveton Park 5 1. Introduction In November 1682 it appeared that the careers to be described in this book had both ended in failure. In one part of London, still for now beyond the reach of the King, an old man had put his affairs in order as best he could and had taken what was to be final leave of his wife before boarding a ship which would take him to Holland and exile for the remaining few months of his life. His name was Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, (Figure 1.), and for the past 8 years he had been engaged in a struggle, at first with the King’s apparently all-powerful first minister, and thereafter with King Charles II himself, ostensibly to prevent the succession to the throne of the Roman Catholic brother of the King, but as much to determine who wielded the chief power in England. He had lost decisively many months earlier but had been protected from retribution by his supporters’ ability to sway the verdicts of the courts in London. Even this lifeline had recently been removed by the government, leaving him no option but to go into hiding and prepare to flee the country. The alternative would have been arrest, imprisonment, conviction for high crimes against the state and most likely, his execution. Across London, in the Tower, Thomas Osborne, Earl of Danby, (Figure 2.), the erstwhile first minister, languished as a prisoner, and his prospects appeared to be little better. He had been confined to the Tower for more than two years since impeachment and then draconian attainder proceedings had been orchestrated against him in parliament by Ashley Cooper. The King’s attempt to pardon him for the actions of which he had been accused only increased the level of hostility to him in political circles and after he had refused to obey the King’s wish that he go into exile, he had been lodged in the Tower to await trial on what amounted to charges of Treason. A guilty verdict might have cost him his life, though this fate had become less likely as Ashley Cooper’s power had waned. However, Osborne was not to be freed for another two and a half years, and it was to require further tumultuous events before he again became a power in the land. These then were the disastrous results for the principals, of the political struggle between Thomas Osborne, then Earl of Danby and recently Lord Treasurer of England, and Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, which played out during the latter years of the 1670s. It is tempting to see the collision between two of the most ambitious and able politicians of their age as a precursor to the rather better known parliamentary clashes involving William Pitt the Younger and Charles James Fox during almost 25 years up to the year after Trafalgar, 1806, and Gladstone and Disraeli in the middle years of the 19th century. This was my own initial view, but I now think that the political landscape altered so much between 6 the 1670s and the 1780s, never mind over the hundred years afterwards, that attempts to make comparisons are largely unhelpful. Yes, Danby and Shaftesbury were dominant political figures, and they were rivals, just as were the later contenders for power, but their rivalry was expressed in a very different and more dangerous environment than that occupied by the later politicians. It can be said that a number of features of politics that now seem normal did make an appearance in the 1670s; for example, serious attempts to organise support for the government in both houses of parliament, systematic opposition which involved the formation of the first political party, the Whigs, and conflict between the two houses of parliament, the Lords and the Commons, over their respective rights and privileges.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Making of an Evangelical Tory: the Seventh Earl of Shaftesbury (1801-1885) and the Evolving Character of Victorian Evangelicalism
    The Making of an Evangelical Tory: The Seventh Earl of Shaftesbury (1801-1885) and the Evolving Character of Victorian Evangelicalism David Andrew Barton Furse-Roberts A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy UNSW School of Humanities & Languages Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences November 2015 CONTENTS Page Abstract i Abbreviations ii Acknowledgements iii Introduction I Part I: Locating Anthony Ashley Cooper within the Anglican Evangelical tradition 1 1.1 Ashley’s expression of Evangelicalism 2 1.2 How the associations and leaders of Anglican Evangelicalism shaped the evolving 32 religious temperament of Ashley. 1.3 Conclusion: A son of the Clapham Sect or a brother of the Recordites? 64 Part II: A just estimate of rank and property: Locating Ashley’s place within the 67 tradition of paternalism 2.1 Identifying the character of Ashley’s paternalism 68 2.2 How Tory paternalist ideas influenced the emerging consciousness of Ashley in the 88 pre-Victorian era 2.3 The place of Ashley’s paternalism within the British Tory and Whig traditions 132 2.4 Conclusion: Paternalism in the ‘name of the people’ 144 Part III: Something admirably patrician in his estimation of Christianity: Ashley 147 and the emerging synthesis between Evangelicalism and Tory paternalism 3.1 Common ground forged between Tory paternalism and early Victorian Evangelicalism 148 3.2 Ashley and the factory reform movement: Project of Tory paternalism or 203 by-product of Evangelical social concern? 3.3 The coalescence of these two belief systems in the emerging political philosophy of 230 Ashley 3.4 Conclusion: Making Evangelicalism a patrician creed 237 Part IV: Ashley and the milieux of Victorian Evangelicalism 240 4.1 Locating Ashley’s place within the Victorian Evangelical Terrain 242 4.2 Thy kingdom come, thy will be done: The premillennial eschatology and 255 Evangelical activism of Ashley 4.3 Desire for the nations: Ashley and Victorian Evangelical attitudes to imperialism, 264 race and the ‘Jewish question’.
    [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]
  • British Reaction to the Sepoy Mutiny, 1857-1858 Approved
    BRITISH REACTION TO THE SEPOY MUTINY, 1857-1858 APPROVED: Major /Professor mor Frotessar of History Dean' ot the GraduatGradua' e ScHooT* BRITISH REACTION TO THE SEPOY MUTINY, 1857-185S THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By Samuel Shafeeq Denton, Texas August, 1970 PREFACE English and Indian historians have devoted considerable research and analysis to the genesis of the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 but have ignored contemporary British reaction to it, a neglect which this study attempts to satisfy. After the initial, spontaneous, condemnation of Sepoy atrocities, Queen Victoria, her Parliament, and subjects took a more rational and constructive attitude toward the insurrection in India, which stemmed primarily from British interference in Indian religious and social customs, symbolized by the cartridge issue. Englishmen demanded reform, and Parliament-- at once anxious to please the electorate and to preserve the valuable colony of India--complied within a year, although the Commons defeated the first two Indian bills, because of the interposition of other foreign and domestic problems. But John Bright, Lord Edward Stanley, William Gladstone, Benjamin Disraeli, and their friends joined forces to pass the third Indian bill, which became law on August 2, 1858. For this study, the most useful primary sources are Parliamentary Debates. Journals of the House of Commons and Lords, British and Foreign State' Papers, English Historical Queen Victoria's Letters , and the Annual' Re'g'i'st'er. Of the few secondary works which focus on British reac- tion to the Sepoy Mutiny, Anthony Wood's Nineteenth Centirr/ Britain, 1815-1914 gives a good account of British politics after the Mutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • Mundella Papers Scope
    University of Sheffield Library. Special Collections and Archives Ref: MS 6 - 9, MS 22 Title: Mundella Papers Scope: The correspondence and other papers of Anthony John Mundella, Liberal M.P. for Sheffield, including other related correspondence, 1861 to 1932. Dates: 1861-1932 (also Leader Family correspondence 1848-1890) Level: Fonds Extent: 23 boxes Name of creator: Anthony John Mundella Administrative / biographical history: The content of the papers is mainly political, and consists largely of the correspondence of Mundella, a prominent Liberal M.P. of the later 19th century who attained Cabinet rank. Also included in the collection are letters, not involving Mundella, of the family of Robert Leader, acquired by Mundella’s daughter Maria Theresa who intended to write a biography of her father, and transcriptions by Maria Theresa of correspondence between Mundella and Robert Leader, John Daniel Leader and another Sheffield Liberal M.P., Henry Joseph Wilson. The collection does not include any of the business archives of Hine and Mundella. Anthony John Mundella (1825-1897) was born in Leicester of an Italian father and an English mother. After education at a National School he entered the hosiery trade, ultimately becoming a partner in the firm of Hine and Mundella of Nottingham. He became active in the political life of Nottingham, and after giving a series of public lectures in Sheffield was invited to contest the seat in the General Election of 1868. Mundella was Liberal M.P. for Sheffield from 1868 to 1885, and for the Brightside division of the Borough from November 1885 to his death in 1897.
    [Show full text]
  • Oliver Cromwell and the Regicides
    OLIVER CROMWELL AND THE REGICIDES By Dr Patrick Little The revengers’ tragedy known as the Restoration can be seen as a drama in four acts. The first, third and fourth acts were in the form of executions of those held responsible for the ‘regicide’ – the killing of King Charles I on 30 January 1649. Through October 1660 ten regicides were hanged, drawn and quartered, including Charles I’s prosecutor, John Cooke, republicans such as Thomas Scot, and religious radicals such as Thomas Harrison. In April 1662 three more regicides, recently kidnapped in the Low Countries, were also dragged to Tower Hill: John Okey, Miles Corbett and John Barkstead. And in June 1662 parliament finally got its way when the arch-republican (but not strictly a regicide, as he refused to be involved in the trial of the king) Sir Henry Vane the younger was also executed. In this paper I shall consider the careers of three of these regicides, one each from these three sets of executions: Thomas Harrison, John Okey and Sir Henry Vane. What united these men was not their political views – as we shall see, they differed greatly in that respect – but their close association with the concept of the ‘Good Old Cause’ and their close friendship with the most controversial regicide of them all: Oliver Cromwell. The Good Old Cause was a rallying cry rather than a political theory, embodying the idea that the civil wars and the revolution were in pursuit of religious and civil liberty, and that they had been sanctioned – and victory obtained – by God.
    [Show full text]
  • Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 46100 I I
    INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again - beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Restoration
    The Restoration England in the 1660s N. H. Keeble The Restoration A History of Early Modern England General Editor: John Morrill This series provides a detailed and vivid account of the history of early modern England. One of its principal aims is to capture the spirit of the time from the point of view of the people living through it. Each volume will be broad in scope covering the political,religious,social and cultural dimensions of the period. Published The Birth of the Elizabethan Age England in the 1560s Norman Jones The Restoration England in the 1660s N. H. Keeble England in the 1670s John Spurr England in the 1690s Craig Rose The Birth of Britain* A New Nation 1700±10 W. A. Speck * denotes out of print In Preparation England in the 1590s David Dean England in the 1650s Ann Hughes The Restoration England in the 1660s N. H. Keeble # 2002 by N. H. Keeble 350 Main Street,Malden,MA 02148-5018,USA 108 Cowley Road,Oxford OX4 1JF,UK 550 Swanston Street,Carlton South,Melbourne,Victoria 3053,Australia KurfuÈrstendamm 57,10707 Berlin,Germany The right of N. H. Keeble to be identified as the Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright,Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system,or transmitted,in any form or by any means,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recording or otherwise,except as permitted by the UK Copyright,Designs and Patents Act 1988,without the prior permission of the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Conceiving an Anglo-American Proprietorship: Early South Carolina History in Perspective1
    CHAPTER THIRTEEN CONCEIVING AN ANGLO-AMERICAN PROPRIETORSHIP: EARLY SOUTH CAROLINA HISTORY IN PERSPECTIVE1 L.H. Roper The Carolina proprietorship, assembled towards the end of 1662, provides an almost stereotypical case study of the rationale and lim- itations of this popular form of early modern colonization. The gov- ernment of Charles II (1660–85), lacking the resources and, arguably, the desire to engage itself directly in overseas settlement, delegated responsibility for building a colony in territory ranging from thirty- six degrees north latitude south to Spanish Florida to eight “true and absolute Lords and Proprietors”: Edward Hyde, earl of Clarendon; George Monck, duke of Albemarle; William, earl of Craven; John, baron Berkeley of Stratton; Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper (later first earl of Shaftesbury); Sir George Carteret, Treasurer of the Navy; Sir John Colleton, Barbados planter; and Sir William Berkeley, gover- nor of Virginia. In addition to title to the soil and rights in adjoining waters and in any mines, the grantees received powers, in the manner of those exercised by palatine Bishops of Durham, to create courts, laws, “Assemblies of Freeholders,” and constitutions, to recruit migrants (and to naturalize same), to conduct trade with Indians, to conduct trade, to grant titles of nobility, to charter municipalities and build fortifications, to maintain an army, and to permit liberty of con- science while undertaking the ecclesiastical authority of the Church of England. In exchange, the Crown claimed the customary one- fourth of any gold and silver found in the province and a yearly rent of twenty marks.2 1 This essay derives from my book-length history of South Carolina’s proprietary period, Roper, Conceiving Carolina.
    [Show full text]
  • LOCKE STUDIES Vol
    LOCKE STUDIES Vol. 18 https://doi.org/10.5206/ls.2018.6177 | ISSN: 2561-925X Submitted: 27 NOVEMBER 2018 Published online: 8 DECEMBER 2018 For more information, see this article’s homepage. © 2018. D. N. DeLuna Shaftesbury, Locke, and Their Revolutionary Letter? [Corrigendum] D. N. DELUNA (UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON) Abstract: A correction of an article originally published in vol 17 (2017). In 1675, the anonymous Letter to a Person of Quality was condemned in the House of Lords and ordered to be burned by the public hangman. A propagandistic work that has long been attributed to Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, and less certainly to his secretary John Locke, it traduced hard-line Anglican legislation considered in Parliament that year— namely the Test Bill, proposing that office-holders and MPs swear off political militancy and indeed any efforts to reform the Church and State. Careful examination of the text of the Letter, and that of one of its sources in the Reasons against the Bill for the Test, also circulated in 1675, reveals the presence of highly seditious passages of covert historical allegory. Hitherto un-noted by modern scholars, this allegory compared King Charles II to the weak and intermittently mad Henry VI, while agitating for armed revolt against a government made prey to popish and French captors. The discovery compels modification, through chronological revision and also re-assessment of the probability of Locke’s authorship of the Letter, of Richard Ashcraft’s picture of Shaftesbury and Locke as first-time revolutionaries for the cause of religious tolerance in the early 1680s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Return of the King (1658±1660)
    1 The Return of the King (1658±1660) 1 The Fall of the Protectorate (September 1658±April 1659)1 `All Men wondred to see all so quiet, in so dangerous a time' wrote the Puritan minister Richard Baxter of the autumn of 1658.The death of Oliver Cromwell on 3 September signalled no discernible quickening of either royalist or repub- lican pulses.There was no sudden or general upsurge of public opinion either against the Protectorate or for a return to monarchy: `Contrary to all expec- tation both at home and abroad, this earthquake was attended with no signal alteration', recalled Charles II's Chancellor, Edward Hyde, afterwards Earl of Clarendon.2 Nor, though `all the commonwealth party' may have `cried out upon [Richard's] assuming the protectorship, as a high usurpation', was there any concerted attempt by republicans to undo what they saw as the perversion of the Good Old Cause into the tyranny of rule by a single person: `There is not a dogge that waggs his tongue, soe great a calm are wee in', observed John Thurloe, Oliver's, and now Richard's, Secretary of State.3 The Humble Petition and Advice, the Protectorate's constitution since 1657, empowered Cromwell to name his successor, but this was managed `so sleightly, as some doubt whether he did it at all' reported John Barwick, future Dean of St Paul's, in a letter to Charles II.Nevertheless, despite the want of any formal or written nomination, Richard Cromwell's succession was generally accepted not only without opposition but with signs of positive relief.The proclamation of his
    [Show full text]
  • Cromwellian Anger Was the Passage in 1650 of Repressive Friends'
    Cromwelliana The Journal of 2003 'l'ho Crom\\'.Oll Alloooluthm CROMWELLIANA 2003 l'rcoklcnt: Dl' llAlUW CO\l(IA1© l"hD, t'Rl-llmS 1 Editor Jane A. Mills Vice l'l'csidcnts: Right HM Mlchncl l1'oe>t1 l'C Profcssot·JONN MOlUUU.., Dl,llll, F.13A, FlU-IistS Consultant Peter Gaunt Professor lVAN ROOTS, MA, l~S.A, FlU~listS Professor AUSTIN WOOLll'YCH. MA, Dlitt, FBA CONTENTS Professor BLAIR WORDEN, FBA PAT BARNES AGM Lecture 2003. TREWIN COPPLESTON, FRGS By Dr Barry Coward 2 Right Hon FRANK DOBSON, MF Chairman: Dr PETER GAUNT, PhD, FRHistS 350 Years On: Cromwell and the Long Parliament. Honorary Secretary: MICHAEL BYRD By Professor Blair Worden 16 5 Town Farm Close, Pinchbeck, near Spalding, Lincolnshire, PEl 1 3SG Learning the Ropes in 'His Own Fields': Cromwell's Early Sieges in the East Honorary Treasurer: DAVID SMITH Midlands. 3 Bowgrave Copse, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 2NL By Dr Peter Gaunt 27 THE CROMWELL ASSOCIATION was founded in 1935 by the late Rt Hon Writings and Sources VI. Durham University: 'A Pious and laudable work'. By Jane A Mills · Isaac Foot and others to commemorate Oliver Cromwell, the great Puritan 40 statesman, and to encourage the study of the history of his times, his achievements and influence. It is neither political nor sectarian, its aims being The Revolutionary Navy, 1648-1654. essentially historical. The Association seeks to advance its aims in a variety of By Professor Bernard Capp 47 ways, which have included: 'Ancient and Familiar Neighbours': England and Holland on the eve of the a.
    [Show full text]
  • The Canterbury Association
    The Canterbury Association (1848-1852): A Study of Its Members’ Connections By the Reverend Michael Blain Note: This is a revised edition prepared during 2019, of material included in the book published in 2000 by the archives committee of the Anglican diocese of Christchurch to mark the 150th anniversary of the Canterbury settlement. In 1850 the first Canterbury Association ships sailed into the new settlement of Lyttelton, New Zealand. From that fulcrum year I have examined the lives of the eighty-four members of the Canterbury Association. Backwards into their origins, and forwards in their subsequent careers. I looked for connections. The story of the Association’s plans and the settlement of colonial Canterbury has been told often enough. (For instance, see A History of Canterbury volume 1, pp135-233, edited James Hight and CR Straubel.) Names and titles of many of these men still feature in the Canterbury landscape as mountains, lakes, and rivers. But who were the people? What brought these eighty-four together between the initial meeting on 27 March 1848 and the close of their operations in September 1852? What were the connections between them? In November 1847 Edward Gibbon Wakefield had convinced an idealistic young Irishman John Robert Godley that in partnership they could put together the best of all emigration plans. Wakefield’s experience, and Godley’s contacts brought together an association to promote a special colony in New Zealand, an English society free of industrial slums and revolutionary spirit, an ideal English society sustained by an ideal church of England. Each member of these eighty-four members has his biographical entry.
    [Show full text]