Eric the Bish on 13 October, 2024 clarified the word “Presbyter“ as NOT NECESSARILY being a Presbyterian but could have been an Anglican minister:
Following the Restoration and the re-establishment of the Church of England, the term “priest” became more standard within the Anglican tradition. However, "presbyter" would still have been understood and used in theological discussions or to emphasise the role of ministers as "elders" within the church.
When Pepys said “… a sleepy Presbyter preached“ he could have means the sleepy clergyman was in the reformed tradition of the C. of E. https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
"... a proud trick my man Will hath got, to keep his hat on in the house, but I will not speak of it to him to-day; but I fear I shall be troubled with his pride and laziness, ..."
Hats on and off: This has much significance, as we will find out later when Pepys has to hear a petition from his old boss, Downing. Who then wears the hat?
Yes, Hewer could have been wearing his hat in the house to indicate that he was a Quaker, and did not recognize that he was inferior to Pepyses. (Just because his family were Non-Conformists did not mean they were Quakers. I suspect that they, being very wealthy, would have insisted on their servants and tradesmen being bare-headed during conversations, even if it was cold outside. It was a way of establishing and maintaining power by the ruling class.)
I'm amazed Pepys didn't knock the hat off Hewer's head the moment he saw it. What was he thinking? Teenage insolence must be confronted immediately, not ignored. (If you break the office dress code, expect to hear about it publicly on the spot -- oh, that's very old school and sexist, isn't it.)
Pepys calls the hat wearing 'pride', twice. I think that means Pepys thought Hewer was reminding the Pepyses that he out-ranked them socially, and so the hat was not a religious statement.
Bill on 18 Oct 2014 told us these stories. If William Penn (1644 - 1718) was really 22 when this happened, it was 1668:
... here is an interesting anecdote concerning Adm. William Penn and his famous Quaker son, also William.
Having left college, at his return home to the vice-admiral his father, instead of kneeling to ask his blessing, as is the custom with the English, he went up to him with his hat on, and accosted him thus; "Friend, I am glad to see thee in good health." The vice-admiral thought his son crazy; but soon discovered he was turned Quaker. -- The Works of M. de Voltaire. T.G. Smollett, 1762.
Upon his Arrival in England (He was then two and twenty Years old), he waited on his Father like a true Quaker, with his Hat on, without bowing to him, Theeing and Thouing him, and calling him Friend. The Reception he met with was not very gracious, he was looked looked upon as a Visionary and a Madman. His afflicted and angry Father tried all Means, Prayers, Threats, Arguments, Punishments to bring him back from his Errors, and despairing at last to overcome his inflexible Stubbornness, turned him out of his House. -- The Ceremonies and Religious Customs of the Various Nations of the Known World. C. Du Bosc, 1737. https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
In 1799 a FRIGATE was a very fast fifth rate ship. In the 1660s they wouldn't have been as fast, but their general use would have been much the same as this -- how much the enemy respected them at that time, I don't know:
"With a single deck of armaments and a long, sleek waterline, frigates were built not for massed fleet action but for speed and self-sufficiency.
"They sailed under a different set of rules, respected by the enemy: larger ships were not supposed to fire upon them unless provoked to do so by an opening salvo. They, on the other hand, could pick and choose their fights, sailing away with honor if they were out-numbered or out-classed. When they did fight, it was usually a dual with another single ship on an open sea.
"They were the scouts, the dispatch runners, the convoy escorts and the lone hunters of the fleet, as versatile as they were indispensible.
"Horatio Nelson relied on them more than any other class of ship, quipping that if he dropped dead, the surgeon would find the words 'More frigates' carved into his heart."
FROM a fabulous true adventure book A SENSE OF THE WORLD : HOW A BLIND MAN BECAME HISTORY'S GREATEST ADVENTURER by Jason Roberts -- page 31 Printed by HARPER PERENNIAL 2007 https://www.amazon.com/Sense-Worl…
Rating was not the only system of classification used.
Through the early modern period, the term "ship" referred to a vessel that carried square sails on 3 masts. Sailing vessels with only 2 masts, or a single mast, were technically not "ships", and were not described as such at the time. Vessels with fewer than 3 masts were unrated sloops, generally 2-masted vessels rigged as snows or ketches (in the first half of the 18th century), or brigs in succeeding eras.
Some sloops were 3-masted or "ship-rigged", and these were known as "ship sloops".
Vessels were sometimes classified according to the substantive rank of her commanding officer. For instance, when the commanding officer of a gun-brig or even a cutter was a lieutenant with the status of master-and-commander, the custom was to recategorise the vessel as a sloop. ...
Practices in other navies: Although the rating system described was only used by the Royal Navy, other major navies used similar means of grading their warships. For example, the French Navy used a system of five rates ("rangs") which had a similar purpose. British authors might still use "first rate" when referring to the largest ships of other nations or "third rate" to speak of a French seventy-four. By the end of the 18th century, the rating system had mostly fallen out of common use, although technically it remained in existence for nearly another century, ships of the line usually being characterized directly by their nominal number of guns, the numbers even being used as the name of the type, as in "a squadron of three seventy-fours".
United States (1905) As of 1905, ships of the United States Navy were by law divided into classes called rates. ...
FOR THE ENTIRE ARTICLE AND CITATIONS, SEE OUR WIKI PAGE
The largest third rates, those of 80 guns, were likewise 3-deckers from the 1690s until the early 1750s, but both before this period and subsequent to it, 80-gun ships were built as 2-deckers. All the other third rates, with 74 guns or less, were likewise 2-deckers, with 2 continuous decks of guns (on the lower deck and upper deck), as well as smaller weapons on the quarterdeck, forecastle and (if they had one) poop. ...
A special case were the Royal Yachts, which, for reasons of protocol, had to be commanded by a senior captain. These vessels, despite their small size and minimal armament, were often classed as second or third rate ships, appropriate for the seniority of the captain.
The smaller fourth rates, of about 50 or 60 guns on 2 decks, were ships-of-the-line until 1756, when it was felt that such 50-gun ships were now too small for pitched battles. The larger fourth rates of 60 guns continued to be counted as ships-of-the-line, but few new ships of this rate were added, the 60-gun fourth rate being superseded over the next few decades by the 64-gun third rate. The Navy did retain some fourth rates for convoy escort, or as flagships on far-flung stations; it also converted some East Indiamen to that role.
The smaller 2 deckers originally blurred the distinction between a fourth rate and a fifth rate. At the low end of the fourth rate one might find the 2-decker 50-gun ships from about 1756. The high end of the fifth rate would include 2-deckers of 40- or 44-guns (from 1690) or even the demi-batterie 32-gun and 36-gun ships of the 1690–1730 period. The fifth rates at the start of the 18th century were generally "demi-batterie" ships, carrying a few heavy guns on their lower deck (which often used the rest of the lower deck for row ports) and a full battery of lesser guns on the upper deck. However, these were gradually phased out, as the low freeboard (i.e., the height of the lower deck gunport sills above the waterline) meant that in rough weather it was often impossible to open the lower deck gunports.
Fifth and sixth rates were never included among ships-of-the-line. ...
Sixth-rate ships were generally useful as convoy escorts, for blockade duties and the carrying of dispatches; their small size made them less suited for the general cruising tasks the fifth-rate frigates did so well.
Essentially there were two groups of sixth rates. The larger category comprised the sixth-rate frigates of 28 guns, carrying a main battery of 24 9-pounder guns, as well as 4 smaller guns on their superstructures. The second comprised the "post ships" of between 20 and 24 guns. These were too small to be formally counted as frigates (although colloquially often grouped with them), but still required a post-captain (i.e. an officer holding the substantive rank of captain) as their commander. ...
The Royal Navy's rating system was used from the beginning of the 17th century to the middle of the 19th century to categorise sailing warships, initially classing them according to their complement of men, and later according to the number of their carriage-mounted guns.
The rating system of the Royal Navy ended in the late 19th century by declaration of the Admiralty, because they now focused on new types of guns, the introduction of steam propulsion, and the use of iron and steel armor which made rating ships by the number of guns obsolete. ...
By the early years of King Charles I's reign ships had been given a numerical sequence: the royal ships were now graded as first rank, the great ships as second rank, the middling ships as third rank, and the small ships as fourth rank. Soon afterwards, the structure was modified, with the term rank being replaced by rate, and the former small ships being sub-divided into fourth, fifth and sixth rates.
The earliest rating was on the established complement (number of men). In 1626, a table drawn up by King Charles used the term rates for the first time. The table specified the amount of monthly wages a seaman or officer would earn, in an ordered scheme of six rates, from "first-rate" to "sixth-rate", with each rate divided into 2 classes, with differing numbers of men assigned to each class. The 1626 table made no connection with the ship's size or number of armaments, and it appears to only be related to seaman pay grades.
This classification scheme was altered in late 1653 as the complements of individual ships were raised.
From about 1660 the classification changed to one based on the number of carriage guns a ship carried.
Samuel Pepys, when Secretary to the Admiralty in 1677, revised the structure to a "solemn, universal and unalterable" classification. The rating of a ship was of administrative and military use. The number and weight of guns determined the size of crew needed, and hence the amount of pay and rations needed. It also indicated whether a ship was powerful enough to stand in the line of battle.
Pepys' original classification was updated by further definitions in 1714, 1721, 1760, 1782, 1801 and 1817, ...
On the whole the trend was for each rate to have a greater number of guns. For instance, Pepys allowed a first rate 90–100 guns, but on the 1801 scheme a first rate had 100–120 guns. A sixth rate's range went from 4–18 to 20–28 (after 1714 any ship with fewer than 20 guns was unrated).
A first-, second- or third-rate ship was regarded as a "ship-of-the-line".
The first and second rates were 3-deckers; that is, they had 3 continuous decks of guns (on the lower deck, middle deck and upper deck), usually as well as smaller weapons on the quarterdeck, forecastle and poop.
I'm right: Sir Robert Bernard as Lord of the Manor of Brampton was also Steward of the Manorial Court. He was also the Recorder of Huntingdon. He would know where the deeds were. My citations both have spoilers, so you could just take my word for it. https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl… https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
This annotation says Sir John Bernard succeeded to Brampton Park in 1666, so that's probably where Sir Robert currently resides. https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
"The October 10 report adds that "those of Algiers have, recently, killed their Chief, being quite at odds among themselves [fort broüillez entr'eux], in particular over the proposals for Settlement, that had been made to them by (...) Admiral Montagu". Possibly true; sadly there's no source, and "those of Algiers" ain't writing letters to the Gazette."
Pasha Ramadan Agar's administration ended in 1661, so he must have been murdered. An example of Algeria's state of anachy. https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
The church stands on the east side of the road to Bell End and on the south side of the churchyard is the Old Black Bull public house, an early 17th-century house with an 18th-century addition. South of this house is the Manor Farm. There are a few timber-framed cottages in the High Street, and at West End, fixed over a spring, is the stone base of a cross of the 13th or 14th century. The base is square brought to an octagon with bold angle stops. Perhaps it was part of one of the 'four stone crosses' which Cardinal Pole ordered the parishioners to rebuild in 1556. The Manor House is on the opposite side of the road to the church. FOR THE MANOR HOUSE DISCUSSION, SEE https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
There is mention of the Guild of Our Lady of Brampton in 1531 and there was a Brotherhood priest here in the 16th century. Lands called Brotherhood Lands or Lady Lands or Lady Brotherhood Lands were dealt with in 1628–9, which doubtless were those of the Guild of Our Lady. William Ball, Brotherhood priest, obtained these lands and they passed to his sisters, Frances and Anne Bawdes.
In 1086 there were two mills belonging to the manor; in 1278–9 there were three, all water and one a fulling-mill; and in 1576–7 there were four, one a fulling-mill, all on the Ouse. There is still a mill on the Ouse to the west of the railway. The fishery in the mill ponds belonged to the manor.
Brampton Wood Green and the bridge called Kate Bridge are mentioned in 1652, and some early field names are: 'the Axe and the Helse' (now Axe and Helve), Hardhill acres (now Hurdle Acres), the Castell Gore, Mylne Pitt (now Mill Pits), Curriers Holme, Great Bonest (now Great Bonurst), being parcels of meadow lying, in 1550, in the common meadow called Portholme. The present Port Holme may represent the 'great meadow of Brampton in Estholm super Oldeland near the ford' mentioned in 1205, and lying on the north-east boundary. 17th-century names are: Long Stonegill (Stonehill), Bolsgraffe meadow, Banbury close, 'the bailiff's swayth near the ford'; and Haddon dole, Shipping dole, Sharndole, and Thackingdole, all in Portholme.
The Pepys Family in Brampton John Pepys, father of Samuel Pepys the diarist, inherited from his elder brother Robert a property of about £80 a year in Brampton. He resided here from 1661 until 1668, when Paulina Pepys married John Jackson and he went to live with them at Ellington. Samuel's nephew John Jackson, to whom he left his library, is called 'son of John Jackson of Brampton.' The house in which the Pepys lived is still pointed out, and an iron pot of silver coins, discovered at the foot of the garden wall about 1842, is believed to have been hidden by Samuel Pepys during the Plague, when he hid his gold. YES, AND A PHOTO OF THE LOVELY PLACE. NO WONDER SAM WANTED IT!
The History of Brampton in Cambridgeshire Historical notes about the town of Brampton in Cambridgeshire.
The parish of Brampton adjoins Huntingdon on the south-west, and comprises an area of 3,557 acres, 30 of which are covered with water. The soil is gravel and the subsoil clay. The greater part of the parish is grass land, and the arable land produces cereals and roots. Formerly the higher part of the parish was forest, but there are now only some 300 acres of woodland. The River Ouse forms the eastern and south-eastern boundary and the Alconbury Brook forms the northern boundary. Another brook, which rises about the middle of the parish, flows eastward through the parish to the Ouse. The land between the two brooks and that adjoining the Ouse is low lying, being about 33 ft. above the Ordnance datum, but the ground rises towards the southwest boundary, where it reaches 164 ft.
The Great North Road forks as it enters the parish from St. Neots on the south, throwing off a branch road northeast which joins the Huntingdon to Thrapston road at Bell End, a little north of Brampton village. The Huntingdon to Thrapston road passes through the parish, crossing the Great North Road about a mile north-west of the village of Brampton. At the crossing stands an inn now called Brampton Hut, but formerly known as Creamer's Hut, well known in the coaching days. There was an Inclosure Award in 1772.
The district of Houghton ... and the field of Houghton was on the west of the Great North Road extending southward to the north-east corner of Brampton Wood. Houghton Field is mentioned as late as 1628–9, but now the name has been almost lost.
The village is large and rather straggling and stands partly along the branch road from the Great North Road to the Huntingdon to Thrapston road, but mainly along the winding High Street, which runs westward from the branch road back to the Great North Road. The northern part of the village is called Bell End, the south part Bridge End, from the bridge over the brook here, the cutwaters of which are the remains of a 17th-century bridge, and the west part Brook End, West End or Green End, from the village green on the south side of the street.
The property deeds for Graveley were held at "the manor court" and Pepys paid for them to be found and reviewed. I imagine much the same system holds for Brampton. There are three known places where this manor court could have been. https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl… https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
A full description of Brampton village includes this information about the manor:
"The Manor House is on the opposite side of the road to the church. It was rebuilt in 1875, but probably stands where there was a royal residence from before the Norman Conquest until the 13th century. Henry I stayed here; Stephen spent the autumn of 1136 hunting at Brampton; Henry II visited it immediately after his accession, and here it was that he promised a new charter to the Abbot of Ramsey in order to restore the abbey after its sufferings in Stephen's reign. His houses and birds are mentioned. Henry was here in July 1174, when his corrody was accounted for at £18 4s. King John also stayed here on 4 January 1213, and Henry III on 22 November 1227. The principal lay manor having been alienated by John, and Harthay granted by him in 1215 to the bishops of Lincoln, the royal visits ceased. The hall is mentioned in 1251, and in 1348 it is said to have been destroyed by floods. In 1595 the 'site of the manor or tenement called Lordship's house' is mentioned, and it was called Brampton Berry in 1652.
"Brampton Park, the property of the Duke of Manchester, covers about 100 acres to the south-west of the village. The history of Brampton Park (q.v.), and probably that of the house, goes back to the 12th century. In 1328 the house was said to be ruinous. An Elizabethan house seems to have been built here, probably by the Throckmortons, which is described as a fair brick house. This building was incorporated in a house probably built by Sir John Bernard, who succeeded to the property in 1666. The mid 17th-century house was rebuilt by Lady Olivia Bernard Sparrow about 1820. Over her front door were the arms of Bernard, Bernard with St. John, and Sparrow and Bernard quarterly impaled with Acheson. Lady Olivia lived here until her death in 1863. In 1889 it became an institution for the cure of stammerers and was completely burnt down in 1907, when a smaller house was built on the site, which is now the residence of Viscount Mandeville.
"Another capital messuage was called in 1559 'Austin Frier' which possibly belonged to the Austin Friars of Huntingdon. The lands of the Friars (q.v.) were granted to the Ardernes and from them passed to Philip Clampe of Brampton, who died seised of 'Austin Frier' in 1559." http://ephotocaption.com/a/3/Bram…
Possibly there is some confusion between Edward Montagu, Earl of Manchester and Edward Montagu, Earl of Sandwich? But Viscount Mandeville still lives there, so maybe not. Maybe this Brampton Manor should be correctly called Brampton Berry Manor -- but if Lady Sandwich preferred it to Hinchinbrook, it can't have been 'site of the manor or tenement called Lordship's house'? So maybe they bought Austin Friars? This calls for a local historian.
In Old English, cucumbers were called “eorthappel,” or “earth apples.” The word “cucumber” came from the Latin “cucumerem,” and arrived in the English language either via Old French (“cocombre”) or through a 14th-century translation of the Bible that may have pulled directly from the Latin root.
Over the next few centuries the name evolved to a somewhat less-elegant pronunciation: “cowcumbers.” Given that the term sounds like a bovine pun, one theory for this pronunciation is that cucumbers were not well liked and were thus regarded as only fit for livestock.
By the end of the 18th century, “cowcumber” had become a standard pronunciation, and even spread to the U.S., although some academics yearned for a return to the original form of the word.
In the 19th century, the tide started to change, as more educated Brits began calling the plant a “cucumber.” Eventually, how you said the word became a class marker. Charles Dickens used the difference as a literary device to indicate lower-class characters, and an 1890 slang dictionary listed “cowcumber” as a “vulgar… corruption of ‘cucumber.’” Louisa May Alcott joked about “cowcumbers” in an 1870 letter to her sister Anna. Even after the English-speaking world came back around to the word “cucumber,” regions of the U.S. clung to the butchered pronunciation until the 1930s, and some stragglers even kept the term alive until the late 1960s.
The word “cowcumber” is still in use today as a name for a specific kind of magnolia tree — not to be confused with the cucumber tree, a different kind of magnolia. https://historyfacts.com/world-hi…
Thank you, Bill, for mentioning John Bunyan. He spent the entire time of the Diary in Bedford Jail, so he wasn't able to contribute to events. But he kept himself occupied:
• John Bunyan (1628-1688)’s Bedfordshire Baptist congregation was banned at the Restoration and Bunyan was arrested and imprisoned for 12 years, during which time he wrote his most famous works. • Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners (1666): spiritual autobiography. Very successful. • The Pilgrim’s Progress (1678): written as a spiritual guide to becoming a good Christian. Based on his religious meanderings, it emphasised the primacy of conscience. The book saw 11 editions in Bunyan’s lifetime. • Upon his release from prison in 1672, following Charles II’s Declaration of Indulgence, John Bunyan resumed preaching and traveled to London and the Midlands, where he engaged in further debates with other denominations (Quakers, Baptists…). He was a prolific writer and published many works, including millenarian titles in which he argued that Christ’s Second Coming was imminent. ...
For the rest of Bunyan's biography, in context, see: English Puritanism from Cromwell to Wesley Lipscomb University - Anglo Educational Services By Dr. Lionel Laborie, Goldsmiths, University of London 5 March, 2015. https://www.academia.edu/11289655…
• Cromwell’s son Richard succeeded him in 1658, but lacked the authority and competence of his father. Too much social unrest for some, who had enough of the Puritan experiment. Charles II returned to England in 1660. No bloodshed; the monarchy and the Church of England were restored.
FROM THE DEFINITIONS SECTION OF English Puritanism from Cromwell to Wesley Lipscomb University - Anglo Educational Services By Dr. Lionel Laborie, Goldsmiths, University of London 5 March, 2015. https://www.academia.edu/11289655…
• The monarchy and the Church of England were abolished. The republic was proclaimed. Toleration Act (1650) introduced freedom of religion and repealed legal requirements to attend church on Sundays for both Protestants and Catholics. Jews were readmitted into the country in 1656. • Protectorate (1653-1658): Cromwell became ‘Lord Protector of the Commonwealth’ in 1653 after the failures of the Rump and Barebone Parliaments. Authoritarian regime, Censorship abolished, but theater and the arts too. Ruled for the people, but not by the people. • Cromwell was a moderate Puritan. As a gentleman, he opposed arbitrary taxation as well as the ‘levelling’ movement within the Puritan revolution (=> class distinction and private property part of English identity, in his view). As an Independent, he believed in freedom of conscience and religious toleration => no persecution for religious reasons under his rule. However, blasphemy and licentiousness were severely repressed.
• Religious dissenters: • Baptists: separatists who believed congregations should be autonomous. Baptists composed of several groups, divided over infant baptism. They advocated baptism by immersion. • Levellers: led by John Lilburne (1615-1657) => active in the New Model Army; promoted political and social action => advocated a more egalitarian society (universal suffrage, abolition of primogeniture…) • Diggers: led by Gerrard Winstanley (1609-1660). Defined themselves as the ‘true Levellers’ => opposed private property and advocated use of public land for the people. They created agrarian communities in various parts of England (St. George’s Hill, Surrey), where they grew food to share with the common people. • Fifth Monarchists: believed Christ’s Second Coming on earth was imminent. They were active among the New Model Army and saw Cromwell as an instrument of God. They advocated a theocracy and social reforms (abolition of taxes, poor relief…) to prepare for the millennium, including the use of force if necessary. • Quakers: led by George Fox. They believed in an indwelling spirit or ‘Inner Light’ => mocked for their enthusiastic (=> quaking) preaching. Quakers were regularly arrested under Cromwell not for their beliefs, but for disrupting church services and public order. • Ranters: also believed in an indwelling spirit. They denied the reality of sin (antinomianism) => accused of being religious libertines => smoked, drank, fornicated… The Blasphemy Act of 1650 directed at them. • Floating boundaries between denominations => Ranters and early Quakers often confused as the same.
• Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658): from a landed gentry, Puritan family in Cambridgeshire. Intermarriage with families from similar backgrounds => several relatives sitting in the Long Parliament in 1640. • Triennal Act (1641): forced Charles I to call Parliament at least every 3 years. • Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford (1593-1641) impeached and executed. • Oct. 1641: Irish rebellion against English rule. Repressed by Charles’ army, but growing fear that he might also use it against his own people in England. • Grand Remonstrance (1641): list of political, religious, social and financial objections presented by the Parliament (led by John Pym) to the King. It demanded further reformation of the Church and parliamentary control over the army. The Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud (1573-1645) impeached and imprisoned. • Jan. 1642: Charles sends royal guards to arrest 5 MPs (including Pym), in response to the Parliament’s growing opposition to his authoritarian rule => civil war became inevitable. • Archbishop Laud executed for treason, 1645. • The Westminster Assembly (1643-48) => ordered the removal and dismantlement of images, altars and even organs from parish churches because they were deemed reminiscent of Catholic liturgy. Parishes ignore these directives in several parts of the country. • New Model Army: created by Cromwell in Feb. 1645. • Based on individual merit rather than social status or wealth => no class distinction. • Defeated the royal army at the battles of Naseby and Langport (1645). • Putney debates (Oct.-Nov. 1647): discussions between the Levellers and the New Model Army on the future of England => roots of English democracy. • Growing demand for individual freedom. Independents asked for full religious freedom from any form of ecclesiastical structure => called for religious tolerance. • Some argued that the common people ought to be represented in Parliament (the Levellers called for universal suffrage), while Cromwell and his party believed only the landed gentry should have the right to vote (=> defense of private property and social status).
• Trial of Charles I • Col. Thomas Pride’s Purge (Dec. 1648): pro-Presbyterian MPs were removed from Parliament by the New Model Army => remaining MPs were pro-Independent and hostile to the king. They formed the Rump Parliament (1648-1653). • 1 Jan. 1649: Charles I accused of tyranny and treason against his own people by the Rump Parliament => severe blow against those defending the divine right of kings theory. • 20 Jan. 1649: Charles found guilty: ‘For all which treasons and crimes this Court doth adjudge that he, the said Charles Stuart, as a tyrant, traitor, murderer, and public enemy to the good people of this nation, shall be put to death by the severing of his head from his body.’ => breach of the social contract between the King and his people.
• 30 Jan. 1649: Charles executed in front of Banquet House, Whitehall.
Comments
Third Reading
About Presbyterianism
San Diego Sarah • Link
Eric the Bish on 13 October, 2024 clarified the word “Presbyter“
as NOT NECESSARILY being a Presbyterian but could have been an Anglican minister:
Following the Restoration and the re-establishment of the Church of England, the term “priest” became more standard within the Anglican tradition. However, "presbyter" would still have been understood and used in theological discussions or to emphasise the role of ministers as "elders" within the church.
When Pepys said “… a sleepy Presbyter preached“ he could have means the sleepy clergyman was in the reformed tradition of the C. of E.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Sunday 20 October 1661
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... a proud trick my man Will hath got, to keep his hat on in the house, but I will not speak of it to him to-day; but I fear I shall be troubled with his pride and laziness, ..."
Hats on and off: This has much significance, as we will find out later when Pepys has to hear a petition from his old boss, Downing. Who then wears the hat?
Yes, Hewer could have been wearing his hat in the house to indicate that he was a Quaker, and did not recognize that he was inferior to Pepyses. (Just because his family were Non-Conformists did not mean they were Quakers. I suspect that they, being very wealthy, would have insisted on their servants and tradesmen being bare-headed during conversations, even if it was cold outside. It was a way of establishing and maintaining power by the ruling class.)
I'm amazed Pepys didn't knock the hat off Hewer's head the moment he saw it. What was he thinking? Teenage insolence must be confronted immediately, not ignored. (If you break the office dress code, expect to hear about it publicly on the spot -- oh, that's very old school and sexist, isn't it.)
Pepys calls the hat wearing 'pride', twice. I think that means Pepys thought Hewer was reminding the Pepyses that he out-ranked them socially, and so the hat was not a religious statement.
About William Penn
San Diego Sarah • Link
Bill on 18 Oct 2014 told us these stories. If William Penn (1644 - 1718) was really 22 when this happened, it was 1668:
... here is an interesting anecdote concerning Adm. William Penn and his famous Quaker son, also William.
Having left college, at his return home to the vice-admiral his father, instead of kneeling to ask his blessing, as is the custom with the English, he went up to him with his hat on, and accosted him thus; "Friend, I am glad to see thee in good health."
The vice-admiral thought his son crazy; but soon discovered he was turned Quaker. -- The Works of M. de Voltaire. T.G. Smollett, 1762.
Upon his Arrival in England (He was then two and twenty Years old), he waited on his Father like a true Quaker, with his Hat on, without bowing to him, Theeing and Thouing him, and calling him Friend.
The Reception he met with was not very gracious, he was looked looked upon as a Visionary and a Madman. His afflicted and angry Father tried all Means, Prayers, Threats, Arguments, Punishments to bring him back from his Errors, and despairing at last to overcome his inflexible Stubbornness, turned him out of his House. -- The Ceremonies and Religious Customs of the Various Nations of the Known World. C. Du Bosc, 1737.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Ratings
San Diego Sarah • Link
In 1799 a FRIGATE was a very fast fifth rate ship. In the 1660s they wouldn't have been as fast, but their general use would have been much the same as this -- how much the enemy respected them at that time, I don't know:
"With a single deck of armaments and a long, sleek waterline, frigates were built not for massed fleet action but for speed and self-sufficiency.
"They sailed under a different set of rules, respected by the enemy: larger ships were not supposed to fire upon them unless provoked to do so by an opening salvo. They, on the other hand, could pick and choose their fights, sailing away with honor if they were out-numbered or out-classed. When they did fight, it was usually a dual with another single ship on an open sea.
"They were the scouts, the dispatch runners, the convoy escorts and the lone hunters of the fleet, as versatile as they were indispensible.
"Horatio Nelson relied on them more than any other class of ship, quipping that if he dropped dead, the surgeon would find the words 'More frigates' carved into his heart."
FROM a fabulous true adventure book
A SENSE OF THE WORLD : HOW A BLIND MAN BECAME HISTORY'S GREATEST ADVENTURER by Jason Roberts -- page 31
Printed by HARPER PERENNIAL
2007
https://www.amazon.com/Sense-Worl…
About Ratings
San Diego Sarah • Link
CONCLUSION:
Rating was not the only system of classification used.
Through the early modern period, the term "ship" referred to a vessel that carried square sails on 3 masts.
Sailing vessels with only 2 masts, or a single mast, were technically not "ships", and were not described as such at the time.
Vessels with fewer than 3 masts were unrated sloops, generally 2-masted vessels rigged as snows or ketches (in the first half of the 18th century), or brigs in succeeding eras.
Some sloops were 3-masted or "ship-rigged", and these were known as "ship sloops".
Vessels were sometimes classified according to the substantive rank of her commanding officer. For instance, when the commanding officer of a gun-brig or even a cutter was a lieutenant with the status of master-and-commander, the custom was to recategorise the vessel as a sloop. ...
Practices in other navies:
Although the rating system described was only used by the Royal Navy, other major navies used similar means of grading their warships. For example, the French Navy used a system of five rates ("rangs") which had a similar purpose. British authors might still use "first rate" when referring to the largest ships of other nations or "third rate" to speak of a French seventy-four.
By the end of the 18th century, the rating system had mostly fallen out of common use, although technically it remained in existence for nearly another century, ships of the line usually being characterized directly by their nominal number of guns, the numbers even being used as the name of the type, as in "a squadron of three seventy-fours".
United States (1905)
As of 1905, ships of the United States Navy were by law divided into classes called rates. ...
FOR THE ENTIRE ARTICLE AND CITATIONS, SEE OUR WIKI PAGE
About Ratings
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
The largest third rates, those of 80 guns, were likewise 3-deckers from the 1690s until the early 1750s, but both before this period and subsequent to it, 80-gun ships were built as 2-deckers.
All the other third rates, with 74 guns or less, were likewise 2-deckers, with 2 continuous decks of guns (on the lower deck and upper deck), as well as smaller weapons on the quarterdeck, forecastle and (if they had one) poop. ...
A special case were the Royal Yachts, which, for reasons of protocol, had to be commanded by a senior captain. These vessels, despite their small size and minimal armament, were often classed as second or third rate ships, appropriate for the seniority of the captain.
The smaller fourth rates, of about 50 or 60 guns on 2 decks, were ships-of-the-line until 1756, when it was felt that such 50-gun ships were now too small for pitched battles.
The larger fourth rates of 60 guns continued to be counted as ships-of-the-line, but few new ships of this rate were added, the 60-gun fourth rate being superseded over the next few decades by the 64-gun third rate.
The Navy did retain some fourth rates for convoy escort, or as flagships on far-flung stations; it also converted some East Indiamen to that role.
The smaller 2 deckers originally blurred the distinction between a fourth rate and a fifth rate.
At the low end of the fourth rate one might find the 2-decker 50-gun ships from about 1756. The high end of the fifth rate would include 2-deckers of 40- or 44-guns (from 1690) or even the demi-batterie 32-gun and 36-gun ships of the 1690–1730 period.
The fifth rates at the start of the 18th century were generally "demi-batterie" ships, carrying a few heavy guns on their lower deck (which often used the rest of the lower deck for row ports) and a full battery of lesser guns on the upper deck. However, these were gradually phased out, as the low freeboard (i.e., the height of the lower deck gunport sills above the waterline) meant that in rough weather it was often impossible to open the lower deck gunports.
Fifth and sixth rates were never included among ships-of-the-line. ...
Sixth-rate ships were generally useful as convoy escorts, for blockade duties and the carrying of dispatches; their small size made them less suited for the general cruising tasks the fifth-rate frigates did so well.
Essentially there were two groups of sixth rates.
The larger category comprised the sixth-rate frigates of 28 guns, carrying a main battery of 24 9-pounder guns, as well as 4 smaller guns on their superstructures.
The second comprised the "post ships" of between 20 and 24 guns. These were too small to be formally counted as frigates (although colloquially often grouped with them), but still required a post-captain (i.e. an officer holding the substantive rank of captain) as their commander. ...
About Ratings
San Diego Sarah • Link
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW FROM OUR WIKI PAGE:
The Royal Navy's rating system was used from the beginning of the 17th century to the middle of the 19th century to categorise sailing warships, initially classing them according to their complement of men, and later according to the number of their carriage-mounted guns.
The rating system of the Royal Navy ended in the late 19th century by declaration of the Admiralty, because they now focused on new types of guns, the introduction of steam propulsion, and the use of iron and steel armor which made rating ships by the number of guns obsolete. ...
By the early years of King Charles I's reign ships had been given a numerical sequence: the royal ships were now graded as first rank, the great ships as second rank, the middling ships as third rank, and the small ships as fourth rank.
Soon afterwards, the structure was modified, with the term rank being replaced by rate, and the former small ships being sub-divided into fourth, fifth and sixth rates.
The earliest rating was on the established complement (number of men).
In 1626, a table drawn up by King Charles used the term rates for the first time. The table specified the amount of monthly wages a seaman or officer would earn, in an ordered scheme of six rates, from "first-rate" to "sixth-rate", with each rate divided into 2 classes, with differing numbers of men assigned to each class.
The 1626 table made no connection with the ship's size or number of armaments, and it appears to only be related to seaman pay grades.
This classification scheme was altered in late 1653 as the complements of individual ships were raised.
From about 1660 the classification changed to one based on the number of carriage guns a ship carried.
Samuel Pepys, when Secretary to the Admiralty in 1677, revised the structure to a "solemn, universal and unalterable" classification. The rating of a ship was of administrative and military use. The number and weight of guns determined the size of crew needed, and hence the amount of pay and rations needed. It also indicated whether a ship was powerful enough to stand in the line of battle.
Pepys' original classification was updated by further definitions in 1714, 1721, 1760, 1782, 1801 and 1817, ...
On the whole the trend was for each rate to have a greater number of guns. For instance, Pepys allowed a first rate 90–100 guns, but on the 1801 scheme a first rate had 100–120 guns. A sixth rate's range went from 4–18 to 20–28 (after 1714 any ship with fewer than 20 guns was unrated).
A first-, second- or third-rate ship was regarded as a "ship-of-the-line".
The first and second rates were 3-deckers; that is, they had 3 continuous decks of guns (on the lower deck, middle deck and upper deck), usually as well as smaller weapons on the quarterdeck, forecastle and poop.
About Saturday 12 October 1661
San Diego Sarah • Link
I'm right: Sir Robert Bernard as Lord of the Manor of Brampton was also Steward of the Manorial Court. He was also the Recorder of Huntingdon. He would know where the deeds were.
My citations both have spoilers, so you could just take my word for it.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
This annotation says Sir John Bernard succeeded to Brampton Park in 1666, so that's probably where Sir Robert currently resides.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
About Monday 26 August 1661
San Diego Sarah • Link
"Hayter isn't serving them dinner or wine, or answering the front door wearing a braided velvet uniform. ..."
Apologies, this should read Hewer, not Hayter.
About Tuesday 24 September 1661
San Diego Sarah • Link
"The October 10 report adds that "those of Algiers have, recently, killed their Chief, being quite at odds among themselves [fort broüillez entr'eux], in particular over the proposals for Settlement, that had been made to them by (...) Admiral Montagu". Possibly true; sadly there's no source, and "those of Algiers" ain't writing letters to the Gazette."
Pasha Ramadan Agar's administration ended in 1661, so he must have been murdered. An example of Algeria's state of anachy.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Brampton, Cambridgeshire
San Diego Sarah • Link
CONCLUSION:
The church stands on the east side of the road to Bell End and on the south side of the churchyard is the Old Black Bull public house, an early 17th-century house with an 18th-century addition.
South of this house is the Manor Farm.
There are a few timber-framed cottages in the High Street, and at West End, fixed over a spring, is the stone base of a cross of the 13th or 14th century. The base is square brought to an octagon with bold angle stops. Perhaps it was part of one of the 'four stone crosses' which Cardinal Pole ordered the parishioners to rebuild in 1556.
The Manor House is on the opposite side of the road to the church.
FOR THE MANOR HOUSE DISCUSSION, SEE
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
There is mention of the Guild of Our Lady of Brampton in 1531 and there was a Brotherhood priest here in the 16th century.
Lands called Brotherhood Lands or Lady Lands or Lady Brotherhood Lands were dealt with in 1628–9, which doubtless were those of the Guild of Our Lady.
William Ball, Brotherhood priest, obtained these lands and they passed to his sisters, Frances and Anne Bawdes.
In 1086 there were two mills belonging to the manor;
in 1278–9 there were three, all water and one a fulling-mill;
and in 1576–7 there were four, one a fulling-mill, all on the Ouse.
There is still a mill on the Ouse to the west of the railway. The fishery in the mill ponds belonged to the manor.
Brampton Wood Green and the bridge called Kate Bridge are mentioned in 1652, and some early field names are: 'the Axe and the Helse' (now Axe and Helve), Hardhill acres (now Hurdle Acres), the Castell Gore, Mylne Pitt (now Mill Pits), Curriers Holme, Great Bonest (now Great Bonurst), being parcels of meadow lying, in 1550, in the common meadow called Portholme.
The present Port Holme may represent the 'great meadow of Brampton in Estholm super Oldeland near the ford' mentioned in 1205, and lying on the north-east boundary.
17th-century names are: Long Stonegill (Stonehill), Bolsgraffe meadow, Banbury close, 'the bailiff's swayth near the ford'; and Haddon dole, Shipping dole, Sharndole, and Thackingdole, all in Portholme.
The Pepys Family in Brampton
John Pepys, father of Samuel Pepys the diarist, inherited from his elder brother Robert a property of about £80 a year in Brampton. He resided here from 1661 until 1668, when Paulina Pepys married John Jackson and he went to live with them at Ellington.
Samuel's nephew John Jackson, to whom he left his library, is called 'son of John Jackson of Brampton.'
The house in which the Pepys lived is still pointed out, and an iron pot of silver coins, discovered at the foot of the garden wall about 1842, is believed to have been hidden by Samuel Pepys during the Plague, when he hid his gold.
YES, AND A PHOTO OF THE LOVELY PLACE. NO WONDER SAM WANTED IT!
After that it's all more modern info.
http://ephotocaption.com/a/3/Bram…
About Brampton, Cambridgeshire
San Diego Sarah • Link
The History of Brampton in Cambridgeshire
Historical notes about the town of Brampton in Cambridgeshire.
The parish of Brampton adjoins Huntingdon on the south-west, and comprises an area of 3,557 acres, 30 of which are covered with water. The soil is gravel and the subsoil clay. The greater part of the parish is grass land, and the arable land produces cereals and roots.
Formerly the higher part of the parish was forest, but there are now only some 300 acres of woodland.
The River Ouse forms the eastern and south-eastern boundary and the Alconbury Brook forms the northern boundary. Another brook, which rises about the middle of the parish, flows eastward through the parish to the Ouse.
The land between the two brooks and that adjoining the Ouse is low lying, being about 33 ft. above the Ordnance datum, but the ground rises towards the southwest boundary, where it reaches 164 ft.
The Great North Road forks as it enters the parish from St. Neots on the south, throwing off a branch road northeast which joins the Huntingdon to Thrapston road at Bell End, a little north of Brampton village.
The Huntingdon to Thrapston road passes through the parish, crossing the Great North Road about a mile north-west of the village of Brampton.
At the crossing stands an inn now called Brampton Hut, but formerly known as Creamer's Hut, well known in the coaching days. There was an Inclosure Award in 1772.
The district of Houghton ... and the field of Houghton was on the west of the Great North Road extending southward to the north-east corner of Brampton Wood. Houghton Field is mentioned as late as 1628–9, but now the name has been almost lost.
The village is large and rather straggling and stands partly along the branch road from the Great North Road to the Huntingdon to Thrapston road, but mainly along the winding High Street, which runs westward from the branch road back to the Great North Road.
The northern part of the village is called Bell End, the south part Bridge End, from the bridge over the brook here, the cutwaters of which are the remains of a 17th-century bridge, and the west part Brook End, West End or Green End, from the village green on the south side of the street.
About Saturday 12 October 1661
San Diego Sarah • Link
The property deeds for Graveley were held at "the manor court" and Pepys paid for them to be found and reviewed. I imagine much the same system holds for Brampton. There are three known places where this manor court could have been.
https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
About Brampton Manor
San Diego Sarah • Link
A full description of Brampton village includes this information about the manor:
"The Manor House is on the opposite side of the road to the church. It was rebuilt in 1875, but probably stands where there was a royal residence from before the Norman Conquest until the 13th century.
Henry I stayed here;
Stephen spent the autumn of 1136 hunting at Brampton;
Henry II visited it immediately after his accession, and here it was that he promised a new charter to the Abbot of Ramsey in order to restore the abbey after its sufferings in Stephen's reign. His houses and birds are mentioned. Henry was here in July 1174, when his corrody was accounted for at £18 4s.
King John also stayed here on 4 January 1213, and Henry III on 22 November 1227.
The principal lay manor having been alienated by John, and Harthay granted by him in 1215 to the bishops of Lincoln, the royal visits ceased.
The hall is mentioned in 1251, and in 1348 it is said to have been destroyed by floods.
In 1595 the 'site of the manor or tenement called Lordship's house' is mentioned, and it was called Brampton Berry in 1652.
"Brampton Park, the property of the Duke of Manchester, covers about 100 acres to the south-west of the village. The history of Brampton Park (q.v.), and probably that of the house, goes back to the 12th century. In 1328 the house was said to be ruinous.
An Elizabethan house seems to have been built here, probably by the Throckmortons, which is described as a fair brick house. This building was incorporated in a house probably built by Sir John Bernard, who succeeded to the property in 1666.
The mid 17th-century house was rebuilt by Lady Olivia Bernard Sparrow about 1820. Over her front door were the arms of Bernard, Bernard with St. John, and Sparrow and Bernard quarterly impaled with Acheson. Lady Olivia lived here until her death in 1863.
In 1889 it became an institution for the cure of stammerers and was completely burnt down in 1907, when a smaller house was built on the site, which is now the residence of Viscount Mandeville.
"Another capital messuage was called in 1559 'Austin Frier' which possibly belonged to the Austin Friars of Huntingdon. The lands of the Friars (q.v.) were granted to the Ardernes and from them passed to Philip Clampe of Brampton, who died seised of 'Austin Frier' in 1559."
http://ephotocaption.com/a/3/Bram…
Possibly there is some confusion between Edward Montagu, Earl of Manchester and Edward Montagu, Earl of Sandwich? But Viscount Mandeville still lives there, so maybe not.
Maybe this Brampton Manor should be correctly called Brampton Berry Manor -- but if Lady Sandwich preferred it to Hinchinbrook, it can't have been 'site of the manor or tenement called Lordship's house'?
So maybe they bought Austin Friars?
This calls for a local historian.
About Saturday 12 October 1661
San Diego Sarah • Link
"... the descent of the copyhold tenures was controlled."
A village without a "town hall" would logically use the local manor as the safest neutral place to store legal documents.
About Cucumbers
San Diego Sarah • Link
In Old English, cucumbers were called “eorthappel,” or “earth apples.” The word “cucumber” came from the Latin “cucumerem,” and arrived in the English language either via Old French (“cocombre”) or through a 14th-century translation of the Bible that may have pulled directly from the Latin root.
Over the next few centuries the name evolved to a somewhat less-elegant pronunciation: “cowcumbers.” Given that the term sounds like a bovine pun, one theory for this pronunciation is that cucumbers were not well liked and were thus regarded as only fit for livestock.
By the end of the 18th century, “cowcumber” had become a standard pronunciation, and even spread to the U.S., although some academics yearned for a return to the original form of the word.
In the 19th century, the tide started to change, as more educated Brits began calling the plant a “cucumber.” Eventually, how you said the word became a class marker.
Charles Dickens used the difference as a literary device to indicate lower-class characters, and an 1890 slang dictionary listed “cowcumber” as a “vulgar… corruption of ‘cucumber.’”
Louisa May Alcott joked about “cowcumbers” in an 1870 letter to her sister Anna.
Even after the English-speaking world came back around to the word “cucumber,” regions of the U.S. clung to the butchered pronunciation until the 1930s, and some stragglers even kept the term alive until the late 1960s.
The word “cowcumber” is still in use today as a name for a specific kind of magnolia tree — not to be confused with the cucumber tree, a different kind of magnolia.
https://historyfacts.com/world-hi…
About Friday 29 June 1660
San Diego Sarah • Link
Thank you, Bill, for mentioning John Bunyan. He spent the entire time of the Diary in Bedford Jail, so he wasn't able to contribute to events. But he kept himself occupied:
• John Bunyan (1628-1688)’s Bedfordshire Baptist congregation was banned at the Restoration and Bunyan was arrested and imprisoned for 12 years, during which time he wrote his most famous works.
• Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners (1666): spiritual autobiography. Very successful.
• The Pilgrim’s Progress (1678): written as a spiritual guide to becoming a good Christian. Based on his religious meanderings, it emphasised the primacy of conscience. The book saw 11 editions in Bunyan’s lifetime.
• Upon his release from prison in 1672, following Charles II’s Declaration of Indulgence, John Bunyan resumed preaching and traveled to London and the Midlands, where he engaged in further debates with other denominations (Quakers, Baptists…). He was a prolific writer and published many works, including millenarian titles in which he argued that Christ’s Second Coming was imminent. ...
For the rest of Bunyan's biography, in context, see:
English Puritanism from Cromwell to Wesley
Lipscomb University - Anglo Educational Services
By Dr. Lionel Laborie, Goldsmiths, University of London
5 March, 2015.
https://www.academia.edu/11289655…
About Oliver Cromwell
San Diego Sarah • Link
CONCLUSION:
• Cromwell’s son Richard succeeded him in 1658, but lacked the authority and competence of his father. Too much social unrest for some, who had enough of the Puritan experiment.
Charles II returned to England in 1660. No bloodshed; the monarchy and the Church of England were restored.
FROM THE DEFINITIONS SECTION OF
English Puritanism from Cromwell to Wesley
Lipscomb University - Anglo Educational Services
By Dr. Lionel Laborie, Goldsmiths, University of London
5 March, 2015.
https://www.academia.edu/11289655…
About Oliver Cromwell
San Diego Sarah • Link
PART 2
• The monarchy and the Church of England were abolished. The republic was proclaimed. Toleration Act (1650) introduced freedom of religion and repealed legal requirements to attend church on Sundays for both Protestants and Catholics. Jews were readmitted into the country in 1656.
• Protectorate (1653-1658): Cromwell became ‘Lord Protector of the Commonwealth’ in 1653 after the failures of the Rump and Barebone Parliaments. Authoritarian regime, Censorship abolished, but theater and the arts too. Ruled for the people, but not by the people.
• Cromwell was a moderate Puritan. As a gentleman, he opposed arbitrary taxation as well as the ‘levelling’ movement within the Puritan revolution (=> class distinction and private property part of English identity, in his view). As an Independent, he believed in freedom of conscience and religious toleration => no persecution for religious reasons under his rule. However, blasphemy and licentiousness were severely repressed.
• Religious dissenters:
• Baptists: separatists who believed congregations should be autonomous. Baptists composed of several groups, divided over infant baptism. They advocated baptism by immersion.
• Levellers: led by John Lilburne (1615-1657) => active in the New Model Army; promoted political and social action => advocated a more egalitarian society (universal suffrage, abolition of primogeniture…)
• Diggers: led by Gerrard Winstanley (1609-1660). Defined themselves as the ‘true Levellers’ => opposed private property and advocated use of public land for the people. They created agrarian communities in various parts of England (St. George’s Hill, Surrey), where they grew food to share with the common people.
• Fifth Monarchists: believed Christ’s Second Coming on earth was imminent. They were active among the New Model Army and saw Cromwell as an instrument of God. They advocated a theocracy and social reforms (abolition of taxes, poor relief…) to prepare for the millennium, including the use of force if necessary.
• Quakers: led by George Fox. They believed in an indwelling spirit or ‘Inner Light’ => mocked for their enthusiastic (=> quaking) preaching. Quakers were regularly arrested under Cromwell not for their beliefs, but for disrupting church services and public order.
• Ranters: also believed in an indwelling spirit. They denied the reality of sin
(antinomianism) => accused of being religious libertines => smoked, drank, fornicated…
The Blasphemy Act of 1650 directed at them.
• Floating boundaries between denominations => Ranters and early Quakers often confused as the same.
About Oliver Cromwell
San Diego Sarah • Link
• Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658): from a landed gentry, Puritan family in Cambridgeshire.
Intermarriage with families from similar backgrounds => several relatives sitting in the Long Parliament in 1640.
• Triennal Act (1641): forced Charles I to call Parliament at least every 3 years.
• Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford (1593-1641) impeached and executed.
• Oct. 1641: Irish rebellion against English rule. Repressed by Charles’ army, but growing fear that he might also use it against his own people in England.
• Grand Remonstrance (1641): list of political, religious, social and financial objections presented by the Parliament (led by John Pym) to the King. It demanded further reformation of the Church and parliamentary control over the army. The Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud (1573-1645) impeached and imprisoned.
• Jan. 1642: Charles sends royal guards to arrest 5 MPs (including Pym), in response to the Parliament’s growing opposition to his authoritarian rule => civil war became inevitable.
• Archbishop Laud executed for treason, 1645.
• The Westminster Assembly (1643-48) => ordered the removal and dismantlement of images, altars and even organs from parish churches because they were deemed reminiscent of Catholic liturgy. Parishes ignore these directives in several parts of the country.
• New Model Army: created by Cromwell in Feb. 1645.
• Based on individual merit rather than social status or wealth => no class distinction.
• Defeated the royal army at the battles of Naseby and Langport (1645).
• Putney debates (Oct.-Nov. 1647): discussions between the Levellers and the New Model Army on the future of England => roots of English democracy.
• Growing demand for individual freedom. Independents asked for full religious freedom from any form of ecclesiastical structure => called for religious tolerance.
• Some argued that the common people ought to be represented in Parliament (the Levellers called for universal suffrage), while Cromwell and his party believed only the landed gentry should have the right to vote (=> defense of private property and social status).
• Trial of Charles I
• Col. Thomas Pride’s Purge (Dec. 1648): pro-Presbyterian MPs were removed from Parliament by the New Model Army => remaining MPs were pro-Independent and hostile to the king. They formed the Rump Parliament (1648-1653).
• 1 Jan. 1649: Charles I accused of tyranny and treason against his own people by the Rump Parliament => severe blow against those defending the divine right of kings theory.
• 20 Jan. 1649: Charles found guilty: ‘For all which treasons and crimes this Court doth adjudge that he, the said Charles Stuart, as a tyrant, traitor, murderer, and public enemy to the good people of this nation, shall be put to death by the severing of his head from his body.’ => breach of the social contract between the King and his people.
• 30 Jan. 1649: Charles executed in front of Banquet House, Whitehall.