How Far Can The Failure of The Levellers Be Attributed to the Anachronistic nature of their Political Ideas?

The Levellers wanted sole sovereignty of The House of Commons, as explained above. Although, it was likely following on from their existing ideas this would include the abolition of the House of Lords and possibly the Monarchy. The fixed term of sitting for a parliament was also included. This would hopefully avoid problems such as the Long Parliament of 1640. They also wanted drastic reform of the legal system, to include the introduction of English to all legal proceedings, and an introduction of equal legal rights and liabilities regardless of age and social class. This would have made the legal system much more accessible to the less well educated. The Levellers also wanted to make an impact on the economic side of the country with the abolition of monopolies, tithes and excise tax. A reform to the tax system would allow fairer taxing of both the rich and the poor. But this could not have worked. It was poorly thought out and unconstructive. They were not trying to solve economic problems, just remove the parts they did not like. With their strong defence of ownership of private property, they had little to offer the landless peasants and even less for simple wage earners. The final part of their ideas were inevitably religious, and demanded protection of Puritans against extremist Presbyterians, some went further requesting the separation of church and state.

The Heads of Proposals was Ireton's opposition to the petition, which followed Parliaments rejection of it. Parliament was more interested in the introduction of a constitutional monarchy, something far off what the Levellers had hoped for.

The first Agreement of the People was another major pamphlet of 1647, which followed The Case of The Armie Truly Stated of October 1647. This provided the basis of discussion at the Putney debates. This document seems greatly concerned with the situation and need for the army. This could possibly have been used to win support for the Leveller cause amongst the army.

It must be understood that the Levellers faired well amongst the enormous exploitation of technology of the time, where pamphlet literature was widely available. The Levellers accounted for only a small part of this.

The support base of the Levellers was mainly in the army, although they flourished amongst civilians in London, near to the centre of power. It was towards the end of the second civil war that the Levellers ideas changed, for the worst, and thus excluding a large part of their original support base.

They gained their support in the army by playing on the lack of pay the rank and file received, and by causing a rift between the rank and file and Grandees in the army, questioning the motives of the Grandees. These men were "not a mere mercenary army" (Representation of The Army, June 1647), they believed in a cause and after the first civil war they wanted what they had fought for to be recognised, and so took a political stand to assure this. If it had not been for the Long Parliament of 1640 there would not have been a New Model Army.

Rainsborough had stated that all should logically have the right to vote, although children, lunatics, convicted criminals and royalist still caused confusion as to what rights they should be given. It was the later exclusion of apprentices, paupers and servants from the right to vote by some Levellers that divided the group, which lost them further support.

It was not long before the Levellers hoped for accept less than complete male suffrage. Something in the beginning they would never have done. By doing this they were isolating themselves from more potential supporters. Although they never truly considered universal female suffrage this is not surprising, as women had no political power at this time.

The Leveller movement is now centred around three main men, John Lilburne, Richard Overton and William Walwyn. At the time this was not so clear with many other men coming and going from centre stage frequently. It seems their ideas were never truly centrally organised, as these ideas were amorphous, different throughout the group. Although it seems that an elaborate network of members existed with regular subscriptions to pamphlets. But these people had no true leader and it seems this is where the Levellers went wrong.

By the time Lilburne became part of the Leveller movement he had already been sentenced by Star Chamber and flogged publicly. He had also fought in the first civil war between 1642-45 and left due to a feeling of discontentment at the parliament he had been fighting for.

The Engagement with Charles I to allow a Presbyterian Church in England encouraged Lilburne to question Parliaments and the Churches toleration of Puritans. But found himself imprisoned for much of 1646 and 1647. This was not unusual for himself and Overton. The state had too much control over its opposition at this time, and so had Lilburne imprisoned. This did not encourage a strong leadership for the Levellers with their leading members being frequently imprisoned.

The lack of organisation, due to weak leadership was apparent throughout the 1640's especially so at the Burford mutiny. It was the lack of bravery shown by Lilburne, the most obvious contender for the role of leader of the Levellers, which encouraged such an amazing sense of loyalty towards Cromwell at Burford by the army. If Lilburne had confronted Cromwell maybe support for the Levellers would have increased. The Levellers had given their all with the direct action of the rank and file of the army, and it was an enormous failure.

The strength of their opposition hindered the Levellers throughout the 1640's. The strength of military strength, ability and social status of Fairfax as he was both a General and later a Lord, the intellectual ability and debating skills of Ireton, as seen at the Putney debates of 1647. For example his speech on male suffrage not being necessary for men with "not a permanent, fixed interest in this kingdom." The other important opposing figure was the all around ability and standing in the army, parliament and puritan sect of Cromwell made it difficult for the Levellers to succeed. The established opposition the Levellers faced was therefore going to be very strong. The Ware mutiny is an excellent example of this. If it had also not been for the escape of the King, which unified the army against a common enemy, the defeat may also have not been so bad. He arrived at Ware to see members of the army wearing Leveller colours and carry "The Agreement of The People" in their hats. Initially they ignored Cromwell and Fairfax's orders, until he arrived there in person. He ordered them to disband, when he could have easily been shot, this reasserted courage and bravery throughout the army. This was a turning point for Leveller support, or lack of it.

The Putney debates are also an example of Leveller opposition with Cromwell and Ireton fighting strongly against the first Agreement of the People.

It was not just leading military and Parliamentary figures attacking the Levellers by 1649. The writings of more radical groups started appearing, the Ranters and the Diggers. The leader of the Diggers or "True Levellers" was Gerrard Winstanley. This status of "True Levellers" gave Winstanley plenty of ways to attack the Levellers. He had gone just that bit further, and his ideas were truly revolutionary, as by 1649 he was expressing communist ideas. Something the Levellers were strongly against.

Although the Levellers were flawed some of their ideas were eventually taken on by the government, for example the use of English in the legal system, Cromwell was a strongly in favour of religious toleration, an idea promoted by the Levellers, and the redistribution of parliamentary seats amongst constituencies. The Levellers were never prepared for a violent revolution, which is what would be necessary for a full effect of their ideas to be felt. It was also unfortunate that the civil war ended and much of their support base was dispatched to the bloodshed of Ireland by 1649. In the long term ideas have been developed and much of what they wanted has been achieved. With any similar groups not being seen until the late 18th century.

Hannah Lacey 17:49 11/9/2001