KEH 2016
Seventeenth-century England appears to have existed as a hierarchal society with commoners answering to members of the social elite, who held a monopoly on England’s political and economic power through both government involvement and wealth. It can be argued that members of the lower class were typically uneducated, illiterate, and locally constricted, often never leaving their home cities. As a result of geographic limitations, the average townsperson received little information regarding the world around them. Given these conditions, political involvement was impossible for most citizens. It can be questioned if a popular politics even existed. With limited knowledge of English society, this series of bold statements appears to ring true; however, upon further inspection, it can be found that British citizens of a variety of backgrounds became increasingly involved in political discussion and change of the day.
In reality, politics involved a much wider audience than can be easily ascertained. It is true that many citizens of England remained illiterate; however, literacy should be viewed as a spectrum rather than a binary matter. Records of literacy tests most frequently consist of lists of signatures, which people signed before courts. While some failed at signing their names, they were capable of reading and comprehending information to some extent. Even in sixteenth-century England, means of bypassing literacy in political discussion existed: “Learned men like Sir Thomas More doubted whether many of their contemporaries could read, but it seems clear that the ability was more widespread than they realised, and that most communities could at least hear the new works read aloud in inns and private houses” (Loades 125). This trend of quasi-literacy continued into the next century and beyond. Literacy allowed citizens to participate in political discussions via informational and often accusatory pamphlets and even petitions. While it can be difficult to say just how literate English society was at the time, the ability to read was not even necessary in regards to memorized chants, libels, and songs. Anyone was able to create political opinions and engage in political discussion to some extent.
It is also true that most people were locally bound, rarely finding the need or means to leave their towns; however, communication within and between cities should not be underestimated. People shared their experiences with politics by means of discussions, gossip, and sermons. Churches were community hubs, with societies’ social worlds revolving around church involvement. These thoughts and feelings resonated with some, aiding in shaping individual political ideologies. Churches also served to spread ideologies of the leaders to mass audiences such as the congregations. Furthermore, the heads of families served to indoctrinate children with political beliefs. People could learn from people and media that surrounded them and had the ability to make decisions based on such knowledge. Political ideology always existed, but its expression is what was expanded in the seventeenth-century.
Political involvement tended to vary based on geography. Townspeople were often more politically involved than those in rural settings due to the close proximity to others and more active presence of governmental rule. David Underdown argues that two groups existed in England at the time: one that emphasized familiar, communal rituals and another that wished to emphasize distinguishing moral interpretations, with “the former more conspicuously in arable regions, the latter in cloth-making wood-pasture districts” (Morrill 452). These differences may be small but should definitely be acknowledged in the evaluation of the formation of political thought at the time. Among the cities in England, London was the most populated and served as an enormous medium for mass communication. The city was a melting pot of members of the clergy, merchants, and commoners alike. London was full of diverse opinions along with many policy-makers. Trade was an important way of disseminating information between cities. In conjunction with an increase in national wealth, Britain opened several ports for trade and commercial purposes. Those traveling from one British city to another or even internationally served the role of conveying information to massive populations, directly or otherwise. Political efficacy pervaded London with the presence of those with so many schools of thought. While London’s people had notable views, they cannot be held as representative of the entire nation.
Although the monarchy still dominated government, the existence of Parliament ushered in the belief that the governed could play a role in governing. Parliament was comprised of men who collectively made decisions in a manner similar to the king. As citizens pondered issues that affected them, they began appealing to the king through Parliament in the form of petitions. The early 1640s saw several petitions on a variety of issues, often accruing many signatures; however, it should be noted that these petitions still were not representative of the population, as primarily literate, land-owning males signed them. Groupthink often trumped the insight of the individual, as great numbers were almost necessary in presenting a petition to the House of Commons.
While individuals began thinking politically, local political opinion split. People based their ideologies on a variety of issues, but gender, region, and religious beliefs often swayed them. As mentioned, petitioning became a popular way for citizens to band together and attempt to incite change in the government. In 1642, a group comprised of only women petitioned Parliament for the first time, in order to promote the “purity of religion,” although they qualify their intentions with their proposition with “lowest submission” and “thankful humility,” so as not to threaten the men of Parliament (Doc. 4: 67). However, the petition did contribute to fears that government was able to be undermined.
It should be noted that while differences existed in political opinion, they were rarely due to class. Political ideology was vertically split, across the classes. Ideologies complicated the role of class in politics. Religion is one such sector that stirred up controversy in society, regardless of one’s social standing. With the anti-Catholic state of mind that paralyzed the nation, along with the emergence of Protestant denominations, people’s ideologies evolved.
Anti-Catholic sentiments ran rampant in seventeenth-century England, but even among the Protestants, divisions emerged. Fear of Catholicism inundated society after the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, the ruse of a group of English Catholics to attack the House of Lords during the opening of Parliament. Although ultimately unsuccessful, the plan was viewed by Protestants as one to wipe out the political elite, promote the return of Catholicism, and perhaps instill a Spanish government. In the following years, anti-Catholic preaching accompanied the anniversary of the planned attack and occurred in general. Instances such as this one linked Protestantism to patriotism. Anti-Catholic attitudes strengthened as the decades passed and is evident in documents written in the seventeenth-century. Propaganda spread throughout cities, such as the following libel against bishops, in particular: “So let the devil go bishop them, / as he hath done before, / for never man shall worship them / in any kingdom more” (Doc. 1: 42). This excerpt, and arguably entire piece, satirically criticizes the Catholic church. Libels such as this one were written in songlike rhymes and could easily be memorized and chanted, spreading the Catholic criticism throughout and beyond the city. In the 1642 remonstrance and petition of Huntingdon, a Catholic government is described as “a perpetual vassalage, an intolerable bondage, and…antichristian and diabolical” (Doc 1: 64). The aforementioned petition proposed by women also features anti-Catholic language regarding the “blood-thirsty faction of the papists and prelates,” further illustrating the widespread paranoia regarding Catholic threats (Doc. 4: 68). Anti-Catholicism fueled much of the legislation and proposed legislation of the time.
Even among English Protestants, disagreements arose. Multiple denominations of Protestantism emerged, as ideas of morality were interpreted in multiple ways. The Puritans and Laudians in particular held different opinions regarding how government should be handled, leading to a stark divide in political opinion. Puritans had taken a stronghold in England with their emphasis on godliness and Biblical text. To Puritans, church services should focus on the sermon, rather than superficial ceremonies. Puritans sought to lead godly lives based not on popish ceremonies but based on the word of God. William Laud, however, was a bishop who disagreed with the Puritans on the manner by which faith should be expressed, and he began the religious movement fittingly known as Laudianism. In opposition to Calvinism, Laud rejected the notion of predestination and supported free will. Laud also stressed the importance of the clergy and proposed a shift towards ceremonial rather than sermon-based church serviced. The two religious groups clashed, as religion and politics became intertwined. Petitions were brought forth in the 1640s regarding cases of religious disrespect including a “disrupted communion service,” “the violent demolition of altar rails,” and “iconoclasm,” or the presence of offensive symbols and images in churches (Doc. 5: 87-89). Both Puritans and Laudinists aimed to control the Church of England, and by extension, the State.
The formation of political groups also allowed citizens to express their beliefs to Parliament. The Levellers were one such group that promoted the liberty of conscience (to all but Catholics) and free thought. The group proposed The First Agreement of the People in 1647, a document proposing structural changes to Parliament, particularly focusing on representation and the creation of a single, elected House. The first of four articles argues that “the election of [people’s] deputies in a parliament ought to be more indifferently proportioned” (Doc. 9: 149). This was an early attempt at representation of the citizens in Parliament. Specific powers were to be given to Parliament such as those of creating legislature, creating and abolishing courts, appointing officials, waging war, and dealing with foreign affairs but constraints were also proposed in order to prevent to the abuse of power in government. For example, Parliament could not interfere with religion, force men to serve in the army, or prosecute anyone for involvement in the recent war. Levellers argued that a change in government was necessary in order to avoid another war and ultimately hoped to promote “the safety and well-being of the people” through legislation (Doc. 9: 150). The Agreement was tabled for debate at Putney the same year. The agreement ultimately did not pass but the Levellers did make an impact on British politics, serving as the framework for the nation’s eventual constitution. Extremists such as members of this political group pressed the boundaries of government with their presence through peaceful and rational means.
In discussing political ideologies, the credibility of available sources should be considered. Most documents come from the elite and are generally idealized, rather than completely indicative of reality. As in the incomplete literacy records, many variables go unconsidered in documents of the day. It should also be noted that there is a spectrum of forms of dissent among the lower class including petitioning along with grumbling and pub songs, many of which are not recorded but still arguably incited change. The available documents, however, point to a politically active British population.
Although not apparent at a first glance, the people of seventeenth-century England became increasingly politically active. There were limitations placed on England in the obstacles of a hierarchal society, illiteracy, and limited travel opportunities. However, England’s people were able to convey information on both a personal scale and to mass audiences alike. Divisions that were created in society, including gender, geographic location, and especially religion promoted differing political ideologies. While anti-Catholicism dominated English society, Protestants’ interpretations of the Bible differed, resulting in multiple political beliefs. These beliefs incited political change, and the church allowed for beliefs to reach massive numbers of people. The distribution of printed documents such as libels, pamphlets, and petitions, along with verbal sermons and gossip allowed the average citizen to engage in political thought. Political activity, however, was demonstrated through petitions and political groups. It is safe to say that popular politics thrived in seventeenth-century England.

Works Cited
Laudanism. (Doc. 1). Print.
The Levellers. (Doc. 9). Print.
Loades, D. M. Politics and Nation : England, 1450-1660. Oxford Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. Print.
Morrill, John. “The Ecology of Allegiance in the English Revolution.” Journal of British Studies. Vol. 26, No. 4 (Oct., 1987): 451-467. Print.
A petition of London gentlewomen and tradesmen’s wives, 1642. (Doc. 4). Print.
Religious Radicalism. (Doc. 5). Print.