Advertisement

Saints in Power:

The Barebones Parliament
Chapter
  • 62 Downloads
Part of the International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idees book series (ARCH, volume 61)

Abstract

Ideologically speaking, the calling of the Barebones Parliament represented the triumph of Puritan millenarianism; or, to be more specific, it was the embodiment of the Independent eschatological precept of the saints. For almost a decade now from the beginning of the Puritan Revolution, the Independent divines and their more radical brethren among the gathered churches had preached the doctrine that the saints were the great interest of the nation and the very pillars of Zion. In the critical years of 1648 and 1649, the saints were accorded a higher authority in the world than the political and civil institutions of human tradition. Now at long last, the saints were in power.

Keywords

Exact Relation National Ministry Army Officer Civil Marriage Independent Scheme 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Ref

  1. John Hall, Confusion Confounded: Or, firm way of settlement settled and Confirmed (London, 1654), p.8.Google Scholar
  2. Stuart E. Prall, The Agitation for Law Reform during the Puritan Revolution (The Hague, 1966 ).Google Scholar
  3. Christopher Hill, “The Norman Yoke,” in Puritanism and Revolution (New York, 1964), esp. pp. 50–87.Google Scholar
  4. Goldwin Smith, “The Reform of the Laws of England, 1640–1660,” The University of Toronto Quarterly, X (1941), 469–481Google Scholar
  5. Leo F. Solt, “Anti-Intellectualism in the Puritan Revolution,” Church History, XXV (1956), 306–316Google Scholar
  6. R. Robinson, “Anticipation under the Commonwealth of Changes in the Law,” in Selected Essays in Anglo-American Legal History, comp. and ed by a Committee of the Association of American Law Schools (Boston, 1907 ), I, 467–491.Google Scholar
  7. F.A.Inderwick, The Interregnum (London, 1891),Google Scholar
  8. Margareth James, Social Problems andPolicy During the Puritan Revolution, 1640–1660 (London, 1930), pp. 326–338.Google Scholar
  9. Sir William Holdsworth, A History of English Law (London, 1956), I, 423–434Google Scholar
  10. C.H. Firth and R.S Rait, eds., Acts and Ordinances of the Interregnum(London, 1911), 2, 455, 497.Google Scholar
  11. The Clarke Papers, ed. By C.H. Firth (London, 1899), III, 4.Google Scholar
  12. Montagu Burrows. Ed., The register of the Visitor of the University of Ocford, from A.D. 1647 to A.D. 1658 (Westminster, 1881), p.372.Google Scholar
  13. Mark H. Curtis, Oxford and Cambridge in Transition, 1558–1642 (Oxford, 1959), p.183.Google Scholar
  14. Margaret James, “The Political Importance of the tithes Controversy in the English Revolution, 1640–1660,” History, XXVI (1941), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. William Erbury, Ministers for Tyhes (London, 1653)Google Scholar
  16. Ethyn W. Kirby, William Prynne: A Study in Puritanism ( Cambridge, Mass., 1931 ), p. 112Google Scholar
  17. Thepphilus philadelphus [i. e., John Ley], Exceptions Many and Just Against two Injurious Petitions Exhibited to the Parliament (London, 1653),Google Scholar
  18. Rome Rvin’d by Whiehall (London, 1650), “To the Supreme Power of the Nation, The Commons assembled in Parlaiment.”Google Scholar
  19. R. W. [i.e., Roger Williams], The Fourth Paper, Presented by Major Butler, To the Honourable Committee of Parliament, for the Propagating the Gospel (London, 1652);Google Scholar
  20. Zachary Grey, An impartial Examination of the Fourth Volume of Mr. Daniel Neal’s History of the Puritans (London, 1739)Google Scholar
  21. Peter Toon, ed.,The Oxford Orations of Dr. John Owen (Cornwall, 1971), p. 42.Google Scholar
  22. Sir James Balfour Paul, ed., The Diary of Sir James hope, 1646–1654 in Miscellany of the Scottish History Society, new series, XIX (1919), 164–167Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tai Liu

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations