• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent do you agree with the view expressed in the extract on the importance of the New Model Army during the years 1645-1649?

Extracts from this document...


"The rise of the New Model Army was both the mainspring of the revolution and the force that deterred more radical change" To what extent do you agree with the view expressed in the extract on the importance of the New Model Army during the years 1645-1649? It is questionable how much of an impact the Army had on the English Revolution of the seventeenth century. However, their importance during the years 1645-1649 is undeniable. Evidence suggests that the Army was the "mainspring of the Revolution and the force that deterred more radical change". Yet some historians, such as Christopher Hill, question the possibility of the Revolution as being a "Bourgeois Revolution" or a "Puritan Revolution", moreover, Peter Gaunt along with other historians tampers with the possibility that the Revolution may have been caused by economic transformations. Though these are all possibilities, the Army has the most impact, in my opinion, and were therefore the "mainspring of the Revolution": "Battles were won because of the discipline, unity and political consciousness of the masses organised in the New Model Army" (Christopher Hill). It is important, I feel, to look at the causes of the English Civil Wars because they were, after all, what paved the way for the Revolution. Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, who lived through the war, believed that constitutional issues caused it and issues concerning religion, while James Harrington, who also lived through the war believed that it was a result of social and economic problems. ...read more.


Even if they did, a compromise probably would have never been reached, as both wanted only what would benefit themselves. The King had become militarily weak and had disregarded of Parliaments rights and liberties yet he still had his legitimacy. Parliament disrespected his legitimacy and did their up most to overthrow the monarchy. The Army could be seen as a mere sector that happened to side with Parliament and then won them the Civil War by breaking stalemate, therefore gaining the label as the "mainspring of the Revolution". The "mainspring" could be the decline in the relationship between King and Parliament yet without the help of the Army, stalemate would have probably resumed for much longer than it had done, and could not have led to a Revolution. Though the fact that the Army were the "mainspring of the Revolution" seems somewhat aggressive, it did deter more radical change. Opponents to the King did carry with them very radical ideas. Opponents included Puritans, militant Presbyterians and radical sectaries. Each group had different radical ideas. The Puritans wanted to maintain the Established church and retain a reformed episcopacy. There aims were to get rid of the "remnants of popery". The Presbyterians wanted pretty much the same. They accepted the Established Church but wanted to change the way it was governed from the Episcopalian to the Presbyterian form. ...read more.


In order to achieve their aims, 40 Diggers, led by Gerrard Winstanley and William Everard, began digging uncultivated lands, making them suitable for farming etc. However, the New Model Army dispersed of them and both leaders were later arrested. Again, the New Model Army and "deterred more radical change" and maintained the force that was to be the "mainspring of the Revolution". In conclusion, the Army was the "mainspring of the Revolution and the force that deterred more radical change". However, an ongoing bad relationship between King and Parliament influenced this. If their disagreements and arguments had not reached stalemate, perhaps the Army would not have become such a politicized force. The Army deterred social radicals though. Groups such as the Puritans, Presbyterians, the Levellers and the Diggers all failed to gain complete control even though they did try. The Army intervened by using force and stop radical succeeding: "This was a revolution in that it involved a change of a political system by force" (Christopher Hill). This quote sums up the situation completely. The political system was changed due to the force of the New Model Army. Finally, the English Revolution had took place and though the Monarch was restored in 1660, "there could be no question of putting it back to where it had stood before the Civil War" (R.C Richardson), due to the actions of the New Model Army sparking off and making a Revolution inevitable. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree 1600-1699 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree 1600-1699 essays

  1. Would you agree that the future of the Bourbon monarchy was doomed from the ...

    second time, but they did not really want to as he had now been truly identified with the enemies of France; therefore his regime would be unpopular. Parts of France remained in virtual civil war for several months after Waterloo.

  2. The Dutch trade during the Anglo- Dutch wars. The Anglo-Dutch wars were instigated ...

    The third Anglo-Dutch war was caused by Charles II secretly signing the Treaty of Dover10. The Treaty of Dover stated that Charles II would help the French king, Louis, to prepare and execute an invasion on the Southern Netherlands and that Charles II had to abandon the Triple Alliance.

  1. How, and how effectively, did Charles I raise new sources of revenue in the ...

    best and cheapest rates, the expense would have been very much less'5, the public realised that Charles intended to collect ship money every year, and began to dispute its legality. It is evident that there was great attachment to the notion of taxation by consent and to Parliamentary statute as

  2. Assess the view that Charles I rather than Archbishop Laud directed ecclesiastical affairs during ...

    half-hearted support for it is not; as Foster points out, if this were truly the case then why did Laud get himself into so much trouble on the issue when dean of Gloucester in 1617?7 Fincham too argues, there are 'major methodological and evidential problems about accepting [Davies'] interpretation'8, some

  1. Why, and with what consequences did Charles I fail to defeat the Covenanters in ...

    the King's forces suffered.[8] The King clearly did not have the required funds necessary to fight a long campaign against the Covenanters. By June 1649 the First Bishops' Wars was over with barely any direct conflict between the two sides.

  2. Salem, Spectral Evidence and Recovered Memory Syndrome

    It is sufficient to say, however, that while I have on many, many occasions attempted to block those instances from my mind, I live with those experiences daily, and their occurrence at a point in my past dramatically and irrevocably has altered the course of my life.

  1. Economics in 17th Century New England

    Keayne rationalized his behavior when he argued that merchants in London frequently raised the prices of products in order to recoup losses from disasters at sea, miscalculations in the worth of goods, or bad deals.[14] If one looks at modern business economics, Keayne had fair business practices.

  2. How far was the English civil war a result of rule over multiple kingdoms?

    Charles? persistent control over litigation within court cases often took a violent and oppressive form. One such example involved the court minister; Alexander Leighton who had published articles that denounced bishops and supported the rule of parliament over the monarchy.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work