1642-1652: The Diggers and the Levellers Home 1642-1652: The Diggers and the Levellers A history of the radical movements the Diggers and the Levellers which sprung up around the English Civil War. The political and social upheaval that resulted from the English Civil War in the seventeenth century [effectively two conflicts between 1642 -1646 and 1647/48] led to the development of a set of radical ideas centred around movements known as ‘Diggers’ and ‘Levellers’ The Diggers [or ‘True Levellers’] were led by William Everard who had served in the New Model Army. As the name implies, the diggers aimed to use the earth to reclaim the freedom that they felt had been lost partly through the Norman Conquest; by seizing the land and owning it ‘in common’ they would challenge what they considered to be the slavery of property. They were opposed to the use of force and believed that they could create a classless society simply through seizing land and holding it in the ‘common good’.

To this end, a small group [initially 12, though rising to 50] settled on common land first at St George’s Hill and later in Cobham, Surrey and grew corn and other crops. This small group defied the landlords, the Army and the law for over a year. In addition to this, groups travelled through England attempting to rally supporters. In this they had some successes in Kent and Northamptonshire. Their main propagandist was Gerard Winstanley who produced the clearest statement of Digger ideas in ‘The Law of Freedom in a Platform’ published in 1652. This was a defence and exposition of the notion of a classless society based in secularism and radical democracy The relatively small group of followers of Digger ideas was never particularly influential and was quite easily suppressed by Cromwell and Fairfax. The most significant of these movements were The Levellers whose revolutionary ideas resonated throughout the succeeding centuries, mostly notably in the demands of the Chartists in the nineteenth century.

The Levellers’ ideas found most support in the ranks of the ’New Model Army’, formed by Oliver Cromwell in 1645 and were largely responsible for the defeat of the Royalist forces led by Charles I, particularly in the decisive Battle of Naseby in June 1645. By the end of the first civil war in 1646 Leveller ideas were particularly influential and culminated in the Putney Debates where ordinary soldiers debated revolutionary ideas with their generals; it was at this series of meetings that Leveller Colonel Thomas Rainborough argued the case for universal suffrage: “I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live as the greatest he, and therefore truly, sir, I think it is clear to every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government.” Unfortunately, this outbreak of democracy within the ranks of the army was relatively short-lived; the outbreak of the second civil war in 1647 allowed the generals to reassert their authority and Leveller influence began to wane.

An attempted mutiny by Leveller soldiers was brutally suppressed in Burford, Oxfordshire in 1649; leaders were executed by Cromwell’s soldiers and others were tried for high treason. Why this brutal suppression? What did the generals find so threatening about the Levellers? Who were the Levellers? The Levellers were a relatively loose alliance of radicals and freethinkers who came to prominence during the period of instability that characterised the English Civil War of 1642 – 1649. The most prominent Levellers were John Lilburne, Richard Overton, William Walwyn, John Wildman, Edward Sexby and Colonel Thomas Rainborough. What bound these people together was the general belief that all men were equal; since this was the case, then a government could only have legitimacy if it was elected by the people. The Leveller demands were for a secular republic, abolition of the House of Lords, equality before the law, the right to vote for all, free trade, the abolition of censorship, freedom of speech and the absolute right for people to worship whatever religion [or none] that they chose. This programme was published as ‘The Agreement of the People’.

These ideas came out of the social classes from which the Levellers originated; they were mainly skilled workers and peasants and the ‘petty bourgeoisie’. Since many of them had fought in Cromwell’s New Model Army they were used to discussion, argument and the free dissemination of ideas; it was this intelligent debate allied to the need for discipline that had led to the defeat of the Royalists and the victory of the republic. The Levellers were essentially radical idealists; their demands could be seen as a form of early socialism [they were pretty much the same as the demands of the Chartists some two hundred years later], but they had little or no understanding of the workings of a capitalist economy. It is unfair, though, to expect this of them since capitalism as an organised form of social production would only assert itself much later in the development of Britain as an industrial nation.

Indeed, it is important to note that their views on the social order were not particularly progressive; these were rooted in the notion that prior to 1066 and the Norman Conquest a democratic society had existed in Anglo-Saxon times where the land was held in common by the people [perhaps this is in line with Karl Marx’s idea of the concept of ‘primitive communism’; that is, the form of social organisation that existed in pre-industrial society]. The victory of William the Conqueror in 1066 had enabled him to impose a form of foreign [that is, Norman] domination on the people. [1] This enabled him to reward his followers with huge swathes of land seized from the formerly ‘free men’ of England. This was particularly so in the North of England where opposition was brutally suppressed. The Levellers argued that since God had created all men as equals, the land belonged to all the people as a right.

Their programme was, then, essentially an attempt to restore the situation that they believed had existed previous to the Norman Conquest; they wanted to establish a ‘commonwealth’ in which the common people would be in control of their own destiny without the intervention of a King, a House of Lords and other potential oppressors. The Agreement of the People was drawn up by a committee of Levellers including John Lilburne which was to have been discussed at a meeting of the commonwealth armies at Newmarket in June 1647. In brief this is what they asked for: · Power to be vested in the people · One year Parliaments, elected by equal numbers of voters per seat.

The right to vote for all men who worked independently for their living and all those who had fought for the Parliamentary cause · Recall of any or all of their MPs by their electors at any time · Abolition of the House of Lords · Democratic election of army officers · Complete religious toleration and the abolition of tithes and tolls · Justices to be elected; law courts to be local and proceedings to be in English [not French!] · Redistribution of seized land to the common people "[T]here had never been anything like such a spontaneous outbreak of democracy in any English or Continental Army before this year of 1647, nor was there anything like it thereafter till Workers’ and Soldiers’ Councils met in 1917 in Russia" [2] It is hardly surprising, given this programme of demands, that the rich and powerful felt threatened by the Levellers. This is particularly so, given that some of the Leveller demands, almost 400 years on, have still not been met! Since Leveller demands went so much further than Cromwell and other republican leaders could even begin to meet, then they had to be crushed.

The outbreak of the second civil war gave them the opportunity to do this and so the movement which would have surely rid the people of the parasitical classes once and for all was brutally put down. The final victory of the Parliamentary forces later in 1648 not only led to the execution of the King, but also the suppression of Leveller ideas for a time. Leveller ideas, though, posed a real challenge to the power and authority of Cromwell particularly with their attitude to the situation in Ireland. The New Model Army had been set up to defend Parliament at home, not to act as a mercenary force which would advance the imperialist ambitions of the English ruling class. The Catholics in Ireland, it was argued, had a claim to freedom and equality which was just as valid as that which the Levellers were arguing for at home. In ‘The English Soldier’s Standard’, it was argued that military intervention in Ireland would only mean that the Irish would become a subject people exploited by precisely those who the Levellers were struggling to overcome in England. The point was that influential levellers were implacably opposed to the reconquest of Ireland.

When significant elements of the New Model Army refused to embark for Ireland it was obvious that a crucial point had been reached. Radical elements had to be crushed in order for Cromwell to assert his authority. This was achieved at Burford in Oxfordshire where Fairfax and Cromwell surprised the Levellers and defeated them [albeit it with only a handful of casualties]. From this time [May 1649] the New Model Army was completely in the control of Cromwell. This does not mean, though, that Leveller ideas were totally eradicated. On May Day 1649, the third and final version of the ‘Agreement of the People’ was published. This is the last collective statement of the Leveller leaders and is their most complete political programme. Its preface stated: “Peace and freedom is our design; by war we were never gainers, nor ever wish to be.” In this version of the Agreement, there is a restatement of essential Leveller ideas, though there is a divergence between them and the aims of the Diggers to eradicate the ownership of private property.

In all other respects, the programme is not dissimilar to earlier versions; the emphasis is still on universal [male] suffrage, accountable government, religious toleration, civil rights, and so on. Leveller ideas mainly appealed to the dispossessed in society; that is, those who were most threatened by what the Levellers were proposing were unlikely to be persuaded by appeals to the ‘common good’. Since the Levellers were unable to mobilise their followers to any great degree and, given their defeat at Burford, they lacked the ability to challenge the army or government, it is almost inevitable that they were unable to pose any future threat to the ruling class or [restored] Monarchy. Nevertheless, this is not to say that Leveller ideas are irrelevant or were consigned to the ‘dustbin of history’. Both the Levellers and Diggers are of crucial importance to the development of working class history since they stand in the proud tradition of English radicalism and challenge to the ruling orthodoxy.

Like the Tolpuddle Martyrs and the Chartists of a later period, the Diggers and Levellers posed a serious threat to the ruling class; their direct appeals to the poor and dispossessed resonate throughout the centuries – whilst the language and mode of expression may have changed, the essential demands of these radicals remain as vibrant and necessary today as they were when they were first put. Some 450 years after the Diggers established their commune at Cobham, we still need to establish the common ownership of property and the development of society based on need, rather than profit.

The words of Winstanley echo throughout the centuries: “When men take to buying and selling the land, saying ’This is mine’, they restrain other fellow creatures from seeking nourishment from mother earth…..so that he that had no land was to work for those, for small wages, that called the land theirs; and thereby some are lifted up into the chair of tyranny and others trod under the footstool of misery, as if the earth were made for a few and not for all men.” Our task must to be rescue the words of the Diggers and Levellers from obscurity and to locate them quite firmly in the context of working-class history and struggle; to seek inspiration from their words and actions; to ensure that all of these disparate voices are united under the common theme of working class resistance to poverty and oppression Jim Fox Levellers, English Civil War, New Model Army, Putney Debates, Parliamentary Army, Civil War Donations are welcome by cheque. Democrat May-June 2008 - Roots of Democracy The Levellers During the first English Civil war in 1645 a political party was formed nicknamed the Levellers. They believed the law should equally protect the poor and wealthy.

This party largely arose out of discussions in the New Model Army on soldiers’ rights. Pamphlets were written by radicals including John Lilburne a former Lieutenant Colonel in the Parliamentary Army. They drew attention to the fact that soldiers were part of Parliament’s forces but few could vote for MPs. They were fighting the Royalists under King Charles I who considered he ruled by divine right. The Levellers and many others believed that each man should have freedom limited only by regard for the freedom of others. After the end of the first Civil War the Putney Debates took place in 1647. Leveller supporters were elected from each regiment to attend the debates chaired by Oliver Cromwell to discuss the political situation of the day. To the surprise of the ‘Grandee’ senior officers the Levellers tabled a constitutional proposal known as ‘An Agreement of the People’. The Agreement proposed a written constitution to define England’s government, abolish arbitrary power, set limits to authority, and remove grievances. All Leveller soldiers carried this agreement proudly tucked into their hat-band and they were the majority in many regiments. Henry Ireton a senior officer and Cromwell’s son-in-law, opposed universal suffrage.

In support of the Levellers was Colonel Thomas Rainborough from a foot regiment and formerly vice admiral of the fleet. Consensus was reached during the Debate on granting the vote to all adult males, excepting servants, apprentices and beggars. Women were not included as they were deemed to be under the direction of their husbands. This was seen as the time the nation became a democracy of independent men marked by the Putney Debates and thinking through democracy. The day the Putney Debates ended King Charles escaped to the Isle of Wight and stated the Levellers intended to overthrow him. The King planned to organise action for his pro-royalist forces in Scotland. He also had supporters in Ireland and mainland continent. Cromwell had the king locked up again and simultaneously moved against growing dissent in the Army. Fairfax, commander of the New Model Army, rallied selected Leveller-influenced regiments. Cromwell rode amongst them, removed and tore up the Agreement they wore in their hats. Many Levellers were court martialed and their network of agitators broken. Despite this setback the power of Leveller ideas prevailed.

The second Civil War planned by the King began in 1648 with Scottish Royalists and uprisings in Essex which were defeated at Preston and Colchester. Presbyterian MPs, a majority in parliament, plotted the return of the King to the throne. They were kept out of Parliament by independent MPs and the Army. Parliament was then known as the Rump. Ireton and Cromwell feared a third civil war so Ireton united with the Levellers in a revolutionary proposal the ‘Remonstrance of the Army’ to put the King on trial as the Royalist Commander. Initially there was no intention to execute the King but he showed no remorse for the ‘troubles’ and blood spilt. The High Court decided that the King be executed over which the Levellers had serious reservations. The Court also decided that the House of Commons be the sole institution of legislative power and without the need of the consent of the King or House of Lords. The Commons abolished the office of king and House of Lords and set up the Commonwealth. The Levellers disagreed with the Commonwealth and Council of State. They correctly forecast the Council would fit the jack-boots of the Star Chamber and the Rump Parliament would not submit itself to an election.

Within the Army, war weariness and impending action against royalist forces in Ireland caused a mutiny when soldiers refused to serve in Ireland. Three hundred soldiers were locked up in Burford Church and three leaders executed. Leveller leaders were arrested and Lilburne put on trial for treason. But against the direction of the judges Lilburne was acquitted. This trial set a precedent which established the adversarial system and where an independent jury could return a ‘not guilty’ verdict. The Agreement and subsequent verdict of Lilburne’s trial indicate the far reaching vision of the Levellers. Some of their objectives have still not been achieved. Other Leveller objectives are now under serious threat from the wholesale attack, especially by the proposed EU Constitution, on all forms of democracy and fundamental rights. Roots of Our Rights I and II contains a series in similar vein of historical pieces in pamphlet form and now available for £2.40 the pair post free. The English Revolution, 1647-49 3. The Levellers . The Leveller movement began amongst London apprentices and artisans in about 1645, but it only became really important when Leveller ideas spread in the New Model Army.

The Levellers also attempted to spread their ideas amongst the people at large through a series of pamphlets . "For it is the known, established, declared and unrepealed law that tells all the freemen of England that the knights and burgesses chosen according to law and sent to make up the parliament, are those that all the commons of England (who send and choose them) are to obey." John Lilburne (1614-57) was a clothmaker's apprentice in the 1630s, but he soon became involved in radical opposition to the Bishops. He was imprisoned from 1638 to 1640. Lilburne fought for Parliament, but refused to subscribe to the Solemn League and Covenant and its endorsement of religious uniformity. Lilburne left the New Model Army in 1645. He attacked the powers of the House of Lords, and abandoned his early support of Oliver Cromwell. In and out of prison, he was popular with the people and a thorn in the government's side. Late in life, he became a Quaker.

"For by natural birth all men are equally and alike born to like propriety, liberty and freedom; and as we are delivered of God by the hand of nature into this world, every one with a natural, innate freedom and propriety ï¿½ as it were writ in the table of every man's heart, never to be obliterated ï¿½ even so are we to live, everyone equally and alike to enjoy his birthright and privilege; even all whereof God by nature has made him free." Richard Overton (fl. 1642-63) agreed with Lilburne on political questions but was more radical in his religious beliefs. In a pamphlet entitled Man's mortality (1643), he rejected the notion of an immaterial soul, arguing that the Scripture only gave grounds for belief in the resurrection of the body. This view was seen at the time as virtually the equivalent of atheism. Like Lilburne, he was imprisoned: - Once for his tracts against the Westminster Assembly under the pseudonym of "Martin Marpriest" - a direct reference to the Martin Marprelate tracts.

- Later he was arrested for his help with Lilburne's tract, England's New Chains Discovered (1649), an impassioned plea for freedom of speech. In 1655, he fled to Flanders with Edward Sexby, where he conspired with Charles II to overthrow Cromwell's regime. "That no man for preaching or publishing his opinion in religion in a peaceable way, may be punished as heretical, by judges that are not infallible, lest upon pretence of suppressing errors, sects, or schisms, the most necessary truths, and sincere professors thereof, may be suppressed, as upon the like pretence it hath been in all ages." William Walwyn (1600-81) was the younger son of a noble family, who became a prosperous silk merchant. His political views were close to those of other Levellers, although he laid less stress on Magna Carta and more on inalienable natural rights than did Lilburne. Walwyn's overriding concern was with religious freedom. He himself held Arminian views, but he came to the defense of Calvinists, insisting that persuasion was the only proper method of religious conversion.

Walwyn was imprisoned with other Leveller leaders in 1649, although unlike them he played no part in encouraging mutiny against Cromwell and the other army Grandees. "That in all laws made or to be made, every person may be bound alike; and that no tenure, estate, charter, degree, birth, or place do confer any exemption from the ordinary course of legal proceedings whereunto others are subjected. That as the laws ought to be equal, so they must be good and not evidently destructive to the safety and well-being of the people." John Wildman (1621-93) played an important part in the army disturbances of 1647 and was imprisoned in 1648. His career of political radicalism continued long beyond the English Civil War. He was imprisoned from 1661 to 1667 for plotting against Charles II. Soon after his release, he conspired with Algernon Sidney against the succession to the throne of the Catholic James II. Wildman finally found a government he approved in the reign of William and Mary, became postmaster general and was knighted.

"For really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he; and therefore truly, sir, I think itï¿½s clear, that every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government; and I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under;ï¿½" Thomas Rainborough (d.1648) was one of the leaders of the Leveller soldiers in 1647, and he opposed all attempts at compromise with Charles I. Yet as vice-admiral in 1648, his imperious conduct helped provoke his squadron into declaring for the King. In May 1648, while besieging Pontefract Castle, he was surprised by cavaliers and killed. "I do think the poor and meaner of this kingdom ï¿½ I speak as in relation to the condition of soldiers, in which we are ï¿½ have been the means of the preservation of this kingdom ï¿½ And now they demand the birthright for which they fought.

Those that act to this end are as free from anarchy or confusion as those that oppose it, and they have the Law of God and the law of their conscience with them." Edward Sexby (1616-1658) served in Cromwell's regiment of horse from 1643. He helped lead the Leveller soldiers in 1647, but remained in Cromwell's confidence and was made governor of Portland. He fought for Cromwell in Scotland and was sent as an agent provocateur to France in 1652-53. He grew disillusioned with Cromwell's government and in 1657 wrote Killing No Murder, an endorsement of tyrannicide. He came to England - apparently intending to act on his principles - but was arrested and died in the Tower, 13 January 1658. The Levellers were accused of wishing to institute communal ownership of property and level all ranks and estates - this was the origin of their name. In fact, the Levellers were not communists and it is not even clear that they wanted to extend the vote to landless laborers.

However, the Levellers did wish to undermine the monopoly of political power held by the nobility and the gentry, and this certainly would have had significant social and economic effects. All the Leveller theorists' shared certain basic principles : I. Sovereignty of the people. Many Parliamentarian theorists argued that Parliament was sovereign. The Levellers insisted that Parliament was accountable to the people as a whole. Hence the title of a 1647 pamphlet An Appeale from the degenerate representative body the Commons of England...to the body represented, the free people in general. The Levellers advocated regular parliaments, stripping King and House of Lords of their veto powers, and widening the franchise to financially-independent adult men. This would have excluded from voting household servants and those dependent on charitable handouts: there was no secret ballot, and the Levellers feared that poor, dependent men would simply vote as their masters' wished. It would also have excluded women; most adult women married, and wives were legally and financially dependent on their husbands. (Only Royalist theorists - mocking democratic ideas - argued that democracy meant that women too should vote).

The Army Grandees - Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton - agreed with the Levellers that the franchise should be more representative than it was. In particular, that populous areas should have more representatives. But they thought that only men with a permanent stake in the country - land or trading capital - could be trusted to vote responsibly. II. Individual natural rights The Levellers often appealed to Common Law and to Magna Carta to sustain their claims to the "birthrights" of "freeborn Englishmen". However, they were more willing than conventional common lawyers to admit that English law was defective and corrupt. Overton called Magna Carta "a beggarly thing" and many Levellers complained of a "Norman Yoke" imposed on the free English people by the Norman conquerors of 1066. Leveller theorists ultimately relied on a theory of inalienable natural rights. They argued that regardless of human law, every individual possessed certain fundamental rights including religious freedom 6. Pride's Purge 5 December 1648, the House of Commons decided to continue negotiating with Charles. 6 December 1648, Colonel Thomas Pride and a troop of soldiers prevented Presbyterian MPs from sitting in Parliament.

45 were temporarily imprisoned. (Cromwell only returned from the North after the event, although there is little doubt that Henry Ireton had planned the coup with him). The House of Commons was know after Pride's Purge as The Rump. The Purge reduced the number of MPs from about 240, to about 50. (In the weeks after Pride's Purge, the House of Lords' attendance was three and four, reaching a high point of eight peers on 28 December). The remaining MPs decided to stop talking with Charles and bring him to trial. 1 January 1649, the House of Commons proposed the establishment of a High Court of Justice to try Charles I. When the House of Lords refused to approve the measure, the House of Commons decided that the Lords was unnecessary, as the Commons alone represented the sovereign people. It was abolished 6 January 1649, (despite Cromwell's objections). 6 January 1649, the Commons appointed the High Court of Justice. 19 January 1649, Charles was brought to Westminster for his trial. 135 men had been appointed to try Charles, but only 67 put in an appearance.

(Sir Thomas Fairfax was amongst the absentees). Charles refused to recognize the Court's jurisdiction. It found him guilty of treason and sentenced him to death. There was a certain oddity in finding Charles guilty of treason, since the Statue in force at the time (The Treason Act, 1351) defined as treason: " ï¿½when a man doth compass or imagine the death of our lord the King, ï¿½or if a man do levy war against our lord the King in his realm, or be adherent to the King's enemies in his realm, giving to them aid and comfort in the realm, or elsewhere ï¿½" Parliament, of course, had spent the last few years levying war against the King, and was trying him for treason in order to compass his death. The Levellers The Levellers The Levellers were a group of civilians, mainly business men and skilled craftsmen, who formed the first political group based on a democratic basis. Their 'movement'' was based on a set of common ideas and demands on the ruling classes rather than an organised political party.

They met in small groups on regular basis in various London Inns, drawing up petitions against parliamentary actions and collecting subscriptions, amounts paid my members were according to income, to fund their propaganda. Petitions could have up to 30,000 signatures and in 1647, after a bad harvest and increasing starvation throughout the country, petitioned Parliament for poor relief. They also inspired many of the demands of the more radical elements of Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army. These elements were typically from the Cavalry regiments who had 'elected' spokesmen (who become known as the Agitators) to represent them. At this point the Levellers became very influential and had to be listened too. Even now, some 360 years later, some of our current politicians are said to have 'leveller' ideas and are still fighting for the same democratic changes originally proposed by Overton. Levellers The term Levellers was given to them by the King Charles as one of their aims was to level the enclosures land of the nobility. The term is also known to derive from the Levellers themselves as they declared that "all degrees of men should be levelled, and an equality should be established".

Summer 1647: The Army was now in effective control of the country and issued The Heads of the Proposals as an outline of a constitutional settlement. The Levellers' plan, An Agreement of the People , was more radical. Representatives of both viewpoints tried to arrive at a joint scheme during The Putney Debates (October to November 1647). Their manifesto for constitutional reform in Britain paved the way for many of the civil liberties we value today. The most prominent Levellers were: Edward Sexby (1616-1658) Served in Cromwell's regiment of horse from 1643. He helped lead the Leveller soldiers in 1647, but remained in Cromwell's confidence and was made governor of Portland. He fought for Cromwell in Scotland and was sent as an agent provocateur to France in 1652-53. He grew disillusioned with Cromwell's government and in 1657 wrote Killing No Murder, an endorsement of tyrannicide. He came to England - apparently intending to act on his principles - but was arrested and died in the Tower, 13 January 1658.

Colonel Thomas Rainsborough (1610 - 1648) One of the leaders of the Leveller soldiers in 1647, and he opposed all attempts at compromise with Charles I. Yet as vice-admiral in 1648, his imperious conduct helped provoke his squadron into declaring for the King. In May 1648, while besieging Pontefract Castle, he was surprised by cavaliers and killed. Richard Overton (1625-1664) Agreed with John Lilburne on political questions but, more radical in his religious beliefs, he rejected the notion of an immaterial soul, arguing that the Scripture only gave grounds for belief in the resurrection of the body. This view was seen at the time as virtually the equivalent of atheism. In 1655, he fled to Flanders with Edward Sexby, where he conspired with Charles II to overthrow Cromwell's regime. John Wildman (1621-1693) Played an important part in the army disturbances of 1647 and was imprisoned in 1648. His career of political radicalism continued long beyond the English Civil War.

He was imprisoned from 1661 to 1667 for plotting against Charles II. Soon after his release, he conspired with Algernon Sidney against the succession to the throne of the Catholic James II. Wildman finally found a government he approved in the reign of William and Mary, became postmaster general and was knighted. William Walwyn (1600-1681) A prosperous silk merchant, his political views were close to those other Levellers but, his overriding concern was with religious freedom, insisting that persuasion was the only proper method of religious conversion. Walwyn was imprisoned with other Leveller leaders in 1649, although unlike them he played no part in encouraging mutiny against Cromwell and the other army Grandees. John Lilburne (1614-1657) Became involved in radical opposition to the Bishops, he fought for Parliament, but refused to subscribe to the Solemn League and Covenant and its endorsement of religious uniformity. He attacked the powers of the House of Lords, and abandoned his early support of Oliver Cromwell. Left the New Model Army in 1645.

In and out of prison, he was popular with the people and a thorn in the government's side. Late in life, he became a Quaker We acknowledge all trademarks referred to in our content and that of the sites we link to. The Levellers - Foxiepedia Registered users may edit any page they think that they can improve - Join Fox's Regiment The Levellers overview The levellers were a radical group which grew out of conflicts of the first English Civil War with ideas that appear radical even to some modern day political groups. The Levellers also preached a message of religious toleration and concern for the poor and the destitute. Their program of anti-establishment reforms included: the abolition of the Monarchy, House of Lords; separation of Church and State; universal suffrage for most Englishmen; public elections for office; the House of Commons as the only constitutional elected law of the land; including various land, legal and tax reforms, etc. A government answerable to the People with guaranteed rights and liberities for the same.

Beginnings The movement had its early beginning with a small group of radicals: John Lilburne (c1614-57), an early friend of Oliver Cromwell , a former Army officer, and public dissident; Richard Overton (fl.1642-63) a supporter of Mortalism; and William Walwyn a rational humanist. These radicals preached a new doctrine of social democracy. The publication A Remonstrance of many Thousand Citizens (1646) by Richard Overton established the movement. The Levellers came to prominence after its backing of the New Model Army 's demands for their back pay in 1647. The leaders also gained supported among the New Model Army Council also known as the “ Agitators ”. A draft constitution was drawn up in October 1647 at Putney Church by the Levellers for consideration by the the Army Council. The Leveller's manifesto Agreement of the the People (1647) , and subsequent editions of 1648 and 1649 outlined their new democratic constitution for a new English nation. Primary to this was the universal suffrage for “free born” Englishmen.

The Putney Debates (1647-48) in the General Council of the Army pitted Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658) and Henry Ireton (1611-1651) against each other, and everyone else on the otherside including the Levellers. This major political and philosophical debate produced no final decisions for the Levellers. The Levellers were the first social democrats in English history. Their message was too radical for the traditional ruling classes of power and property. Their leadership were paper warriors, not men of physical action themselves. Many of the Levellers reforms and principles would not see fruit for over two hundred years and there are some who would claim that we still haven't got what the Levellers wanted even after almost 360 years… For some of the primary sources as zipped rtf documents. For a longer version including more leveller sources as a zipped rtf document. Trace: • The Levellers J.P.Sommerville Democracy and Revolution: the English Levellers The reading this week is The English Levellers , ed.

Andrew Sharp ; it is also in hard copy in the series Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought (the so-called blue books series). The hard copy has notes that the Internet version currently lacks. The Levellers were arguably the first organized political party in modern history, and the first democratic party. Led by John Lilburne ("Freeborn John"), Richard Overton , William Walwyn , and others, they first started lobbying for political change in London in 1645-6. A few years earlier, in 1642, parliament had gone to war with King Charles I in defense of the liberties of the English people, and of the established Protestant religion. Parliamentarians believed that the king's policies threatened both religion and liberty. They claimed that England was a limited and mixed monarchy in which the king was bound by the law. Many of them argued against the Divine Right of Kings, and claimed that monarchs get their powers not from God alone, but from the people. One common parliamentarian idea was that the first king had been granted authority by the people in an original contract which defined and limited his power. A king who infringed the contract, they said, could be resisted by his subjects.

Hobbes was to turn this idea in an absolutist direction. The Levellers, on the other hand, deployed it to advance democratic objectives. Most parliamentarians were social elitists and argued that the people - who had originally been sovereign, and who had granted authority to the king - were not the mass of the population, but the wealthy, landowning members of society. In the course of the Civil War (1642-6), different ideas began to spread in the parliamentarian army, especially from 1645, when it was organized on national (rather than regional) lines as the New Model Army. It was in London, and in the army, that Leveller ideas acquired most influence. Many soldiers came to believe that they, and other ordinary people, should be given a share in political power. They had risked their lives fighting against the king (who was finally defeated in 1646), and wanted some tangible rewards. When parliament tried to disband the army in 1647, it marched on London and seized effective power from parliament.

The Levellers proposed a new constitution called the Agreement of the People , and this was discussed by the army in the Putney Debates of October -November 1647. Ultimately, only a few aspects of the Leveller program were enforced - the abolition of the House of Lords in 1649, and the introduction in 1653 of the idea that the number of representatives it sent to parliament should be proportional to the population of each region. The English did not begin to put the democratic aspects of the program into action until 1832 and later. The reason for the failure of the movement was that the army high command (especially Henry Ireton and Oliver Cromwell - earlier a friend of Lilburne) strongly disliked it and ordered the soldiers (who had been bribed into abandoning their radicalism) to crush it in 1649. Though puritan in religion, the Levellers opposed the intolerance of most puritans and especially of Presbyterians , against whom they allied with the Independents (or Congregationalists).

In addition to religious toleration, they also advocated the abolition of monopolies (including trading monopolies, and the professional monopoly of lawyers), and argued that we all possess natural rights (such as equality before the law, and a right to due legal process). Modern left-wing groups have frequently claimed the Levellers as precursors, but arguably they should be seen as libertarians rather than socialists. They were accused of wanting to abolish property or at least equalize (or "level") property holdings (hence "Levellers" - the name their enemies used for them), but they always denied the charge, and they can be seen as supporters of the interests of the bourgeoisie against the aristocracy, rather than of ordinary people (most of whom were illiterate, and could not have read the Levellers' pamphlets). The Levellers were pamphleteers, and not systematic philosophers. So their ideas are scattered through their writings and not presented in any very organized form. Perhaps begin by reading their most famous political manifesto, the Agreement of the People (item 7), and the later Agreement of the Free People (item 12), then move to the extracts from the Putney Debates (item 8), and then read the rest.

Some further reading: G. E. Aylmer, The Levellers - good, clear introduction; David Wootton, "Leveller democracy," in J. H. Burns, ed., The Cambridge History of Political Thought 1450-1700; the chapter on the Levellers in John Sanderson, "But the People's Creatures": the philosophical basis of the English Civil War; and the chapter on them in C. B. Macpherson, The political theory of possessive individualism - an interesting Marxist interpretation, published in 1962. Pauline Gregg, Free-born John, is a very readable biography of the most important Leveller leader. Some Web sites include: The Levellers The Levellers References During the English Civil War some radicals began writing and distributing pamphlets on soldiers' rights. Radicals such as John Lilburne were unhappy with the way that the war was being fought. Whereas he hoped the conflict would lead to political change, this was not true of most of the Parliamentary leaders. "The generals themselves members of the titled nobility, were ardently seeking a compromise with the King.

They wavered in their prosecution of the war because they feared that a shattering victory over the King would create an irreparable breach in the old order of things that would ultimately be fatal to their own position." (1) William Prynne , a leading Puritan critic of Charles I, became disillusioned with the increase of religious toleration during the war. In December, 1644, he published Truth Triumphing , a pamphlet that promoted church discipline. On 7th January, 1645, Lilburne wrote a letter to Prynne complaining about the intolerance of the Presbyterians and arguing for freedom of speech for the Independents . (2) John Lilburne and the Levellers Lilburne's political activities were reported to Parliament. As a result, he was brought before the Committee of Examinations on 17th May, 1645, and warned about his future behaviour. Prynne and other leading Presbyterians, such as his old friend, John Bastwick , were concerned by Lilburne's radicalism. They joined a plot with Denzil Holles against Lilburne.

He was arrested and charged with uttering slander against William Lenthall , the Speaker of the House of Commons . Lilburne was released without charge on 14th October, 1645. (3) John Bradshaw now brought Lilburne's case before the Star Chamber. He pointed out that Lilburne was still waiting for most of the pay he should have received while serving in the Parliamentary army. Lilburne was awarded £2,000 in compensation for his sufferings. However, Parliament refused to pay this money and Lilburne was once again arrested. Brought before the House of Lords Lilburne was sentenced to seven years and fined £4,000. This picture of John Lilburne appeared on the front-cover of a Leveller pamphlet published in 1646. John Lilburne received support from other radicals.

In July, 1946, Richard Overton , launched an attack on Parliament: "We are well assured, yet cannot forget, that the cause of our choosing you to be Parliament men, was to deliver us from all kind of Bondage, and to preserve the Commonwealth in Peace and Happiness: For effecting whereof, we possessed you with the same power that was in ourselves, to have done the same; For we might justly have done it ourselves without you, if we had thought it convenient; choosing you (as persons whom we thought qualified, and faithful) for avoiding some inconveniences." (4) While in Newgate Prison Lilburne used his time studying books on law and writing pamphlets. This included The Free Man's Freedom Vindicated (1647) where he argued that "no man should be punished or persecuted... for preaching or publishing his opinion on religion".

He also outlined his political philosophy: "All and every particular and individual man and woman, that ever breathed in the world, are by nature all equal and alike in their power, dignity, authority and majesty, none of them having (by nature) any authority, dominion or magisterial power one over or above another." (5) In another pamphlet, Rash Oaths (1647), he argued: "Every free man of England, poor as well as rich, should have a vote in choosing those that are to make the law." (6) In 1647 people like John Lilburne and Richard Overton were described as Levellers. In demonstrations they wore sea-green scarves or ribbons. (7) In September, 1647, William Walwyn , the leader of this group in London , organised a petition demanding reform. Their political programme included: voting rights for all adult males, annual elections, complete religious freedom, an end to the censorship of books and newspapers, the abolition of the monarchy and the House of Lords , trial by jury, an end to taxation of people earning less than £30 a year and a maximum interest rate of 6%.

(8) An Agreement of the People The Levellers gained considerable influence in the New Model Army . In October, 1647, the Levellers published An Agreement of the People . As Barbara Bradford Taft has pointed out: "Under 1000 words overall, the substance of the Agreement was common to all Leveller penmen but the lucid phrasing of four concise articles and the eloquence of the preamble and conclusion leave little doubt that the final draft was Walwyn's work. Inflammatory demands were avoided and the first three articles concerned the redistribution of parliamentary seats, dissolution of the present parliament, and biennial elections. The heart of the Leveller programme was the final article, which enumerated five rights beyond the power of parliament: freedom of religion; freedom from conscription; freedom from questions about conduct during the war unless excepted by parliament; equality before the law; just laws, not destructive to the people's well-being." (9) The document advocated the granting of votes to all adult males except for those receiving wages. The wage-earning class, although perhaps numbering nearly half the population, were regarded as "servants" of the rich and would be under their influence and would vote for their employer's candidates.

"Their exclusion from the franchise was thus regarded as necessary to prevent the employers from having undue influence, and there is reason to think that this judgement was correct." (10) Colonel Thomas Harrison was sympathetic to the demands of the Levellers and in November, 1648, he began negotiating with John Lilburne . "He attempted to persuade the Levellers that before the agreement could be perfected it was necessary for the army to invade London and prevent parliament from concluding a treaty with the king." He argued that any agreement was likely that the New Model Army . would be disbanded, with the consequence "that you will be destroyed as well as we." (10a). Lilburne admitted that Harrison was "extremely fair" in the negotiations.

"We fully and effectually acquainted him with the most desperate mischievousness of their attempting to do these things, without giving some good security to the nation for the future settlement of their liberties and freedoms; specially in frequent, free, and successive representations, according to their many promises, oaths, covenants and declarations; or else as soon as they had performed their intentions to destroy the King (which we fully understood they were absolutely resolved to do, yea, as they told us, though they did it by martial law), and also totally to root up the Parliament, and invite so many members to come to them as would join with them, to manage businesses, till a new and equal representative could by an agreement be settled ; which the chiefest of them protested before God was the ultimate and chiefest of their designs and desires... I say, we pressed hard for security, before they attempted those things in the least, lest when they were done we should be solely left to their wills and swords." (10b) Putney Debates On 28th October, 1647, members of the New Model Army began to discuss their grievances at the Church of St.

Mary the Virgin , but moved to the nearby lodgings of Thomas Grosvenor, Quartermaster General of Foot, the following day. This became known as the Putney Debates . The speeches were taken down in shorthand and written up later. As one historian has pointed out: "They are perhaps the nearest we shall ever get to oral history of the seventeenth century and have that spontaneous quality of men speaking their minds about the things they hold dear, not for effect or for posterity, but to achieve immediate ends." (11) Thomas Rainsborough , the most radical of the officers, argued: "I desire that those that had engaged in it should speak, for really I think that the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live as the greatest he; and therefore truly.

Sir, I think it's clear that every man that is to live under a Government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that Government; and I do think that the poorest man in England is not at all bound in a strict sense to that Government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under; and I am confident that when I have heard the reasons against it, something will be said to answer those reasons, in so much that I should doubt whether he was an Englishman or no that should doubt of these things." (12) John Wildman supported Rainsborough and dated people's problems to the Norman Conquest : "Our case is to be considered thus, that we have been under slavery. That's acknowledged by all. Our very laws were made by our Conquerors... We are now engaged for our freedom. That's the end of Parliament, to legislate according to the just ends of government, not simply to maintain what is already established. Every person in England hath as clear a right to elect his Representative as the greatest person in England.

I conceive that's the undeniable maxim of government: that all government is in the free consent of the people." (13) Edward Sexby was another who supported the idea of increasing the franchise: "We have engaged in this kingdom and ventured our lives, and it was all for this: to recover our birthrights and privileges as Englishmen - and by the arguments urged there is none. There are many thousands of us soldiers that have ventured our lives; we have had little property in this kingdom as to our estates, yet we had a birthright. But it seems now except a man hath a fixed estate in this kingdom, he hath no right in this kingdom. I wonder we were so much deceived. If we had not a right to the kingdom, we were mere mercenary soldiers. There are many in my condition, that have as good a condition, it may be little estate they have at present, and yet they have as much a right as those two (Cromwell and Ireton) who are their lawgivers, as any in this place. I shall tell you in a word my resolution. I am resolved to give my birthright to none. Whatsoever may come in the way, and be thought, I will give it to none.

I think the poor and meaner of this kingdom (I speak as in that relation in which we are) have been the means of the preservation of this kingdom." (14) These ideas were opposed by most of the senior officers in the New Model Army , who represented the interests of property owners. One of them, Henry Ireton , argued: "I think that no person hath a right to an interest or share in the disposing of the affairs of the kingdom, and indetermining or choosing those that determine what laws we shall be ruled by here - no person hath a right to this, that hath not a permanent fixed interest in this kingdom... First, the thing itself (universal suffrage) were dangerous if it were settled to destroy property.

But I say that the principle that leads to this is destructive to property; for by the same reason that you will alter this Constitution merely that there's a greater Constitution by nature - by the same reason, by the law of nature, there is a greater liberty to the use of other men's goods which that property bars you." (15) A compromise was eventually agreed that the vote would be granted to all men except alms-takers and servants and the Putney Debates came to an end on 8th November, 1647. The agreement was never put before the House of Commons . Leaders of the Leveller movement, including John Lilburne , Richard Overton , William Walwyn and John Wildman , were arrested and their pamphlets were burnt in public. (16) Parliament and the Levellers On 1st August, 1648, the House of Commons voted for Lilburne's release. The next day the House of Lords agreed and also remitted the fine imposed two years earlier. On his release Lilburne became involved in writing and distributing pamphlets on soldiers' rights. He pointed out that even though soldiers were fighting for Parliament, very few of them were allowed to vote for it.

Lilburne argued that elections should take place every year. Lilburne, who believed that people were corrupted by power, argued that no members of the House of Commons should be allowed to serve for more than one year at a time. The House of Commons was angry with Thomas Rainsborough for his support of democracy in the Putney Debates and General Thomas Fairfax was called before Parliament to answer for his behaviour. For a time Rainsborough was denied the right to take up his post as Vice Admiral. Eventually, after support from Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell and Henry Ireton , Parliament voted 88 to 66 in favour of him going to sea. As a supporter of the Levellers, Rainsborough was unpopular with his officers and he was refused permission to board his ship. Parliament now appointed the Earl of Warwick as Lord High Admiral and Rainsborough returned to the army. On 29th October, 1648, a party of Cavaliers attempted to kidnap Rainsborough while he was in Doncaster . During the struggle to capture him he was mortally wounded. At his funeral in London the crowd wore sea-green scarves and ribbons.

(17) Oliver Cromwell made it very clear that he very much opposed to the idea that more people should be allowed to vote in elections and that the Levellers posed a serious threat to the upper classes: "What is the purport of the levelling principle but to make the tenant as liberal a fortune as the landlord. I was by birth a gentleman. You must cut these people in pieces or they will cut you in pieces." (18) In July, 1648, the Levellers published their own newspaper, The Moderate . Edited by Richard Overton it included articles by John Lilburne , John Wildman and William Walwyn . The articles written by Overton were more radical than contemporary writings by other Leveller leaders. Whereas radicals like Lilburne opposed the trial and execution of the Charles I , for example, Overton supported it as necessary for securing English liberties. (19) The newspaper controversially encouraged soldiers in the New Model Army to revolt. In March 1649, Lilburne, Wildman, Overton and Walwyn were arrested and charged with advocating communism. After being brought before the Council of State they were sent to the Tower of London .

(20) This picture of John Lilburne appeared in a pamphlet published in 1649. Riots and protests broke out in London where the Levellers had a strong following. Ten thousand signatures were collected in a few days to a petition demanding the release of John Lilburne. This was soon followed by a second petition signed and presented entirely by women. There were also disturbances in the army and it was decided to send the most disgruntled regiments to Ireland . (21) A petition of well over 8,000 signatures, calling for Lilburne to be released, was presented to the House of Commons . Sir John Maynard , the MP for Totnes , led the campaign to have Lilburne set free. Maynard was a great supporter of religious freedom and Lilburne described him as a "true friend and faithful and courageous fellow-sufferer" for his beliefs. Maynard told fellow members about "what this brave invincible Spirit hath suffered and done for you." As a result of the debate in August, 1648, the House of Lords cancelled Lilburne's sentence. (22) New Model Army Soldiers continued to protest against the government.

The most serious rebellion took place in London . Troops commanded by Colonel Edward Whalley were ordered from the capital to Essex. A group of soldiers led by Robert Lockyer , refused to go and barricaded themselves in The Bull Inn near Bishopsgate , a radical meeting place. A large number of troops were sent to the scene and the men were forced to surrender. The commander-in-chief, General Thomas Fairfax , ordered Lockyer to be executed. Lockyer's funeral on Sunday 29th April, 1649, proved to be a dramatic reminder of the strength of the Leveller organization in London. "Starting from Smithfield in the afternoon, the procession wound slowly through the heart of the City, and then back to Moorfields for the interment in New Churchyard. Led by six trumpeters, about 4000 people reportedly accompanied the corpse. Many wore ribbons - black for mourning and sea-green to publicize their Leveller allegiance. A company of women brought up the rear, testimony to the active female involvement in the Leveller movement.

If the reports can be believed there were more mourners for Trooper Lockyer than there had been for the martyred Colonel Thomas Rainsborough the previous autumn." (23) John Lilburne continued to campaign against the rule of Oliver Cromwell . According to a Royalist newspaper at the time: "He (Cromwell) and the Levellers can as soon combine as fire and water... The Levellers aim being at pure democracy.... and the design of Cromwell and his grandees for an oligarchy in the hands of himself." (24) Lilburne argued that Cromwell's government was mounting a propaganda campaign against the Levellers and to prevent them from replying their writings were censored: "To prevent the opportunity to lay open their treacheries and hypocrisies... the stop the press... They blast us with all the scandals and false reports their wit or malice could invent against us... By these arts are they now fastened in their powers." (25) Woodcut from the pamphlet, The World Turned Upside Down (c.

1649) David Petegorsky , the author of Left-Wing Democracy in the English Civil War (1940) has pointed out: "The Levellers clearly saw, that equality must replace privilege as the dominant theme of social relationships; for a State that is divided into rich and poor, or a system that excludes certain classes from privileges it confers on others, violates that equality to which every individual has a natural claim." (26) Although he agreed with some of the Leveller's policies, including the abolition of the monarchy and the House of Lords , Cromwell refused to increase the number of people who could vote in elections. Lilburne attacked Cromwell's suppression of Roman Catholics in Ireland and Parliament's persecution of Royalists in England and the decision to execute Charles I . In February, 1649, John Lilburne published England's New Chains Discovered . "He appealed to the army and the provinces as well as Londoners to join him in rejecting the rule of the military junta, the council of state, and their ‘puppet’ parliament. Leveller agitation, inspired by his example, revived.

He was soon in the Tower again for the suspected authorship of a book which parliament had declared treasonable". (27) In another pamphlet Lilburne described Cromwell as the "new King." On 24th March, Lilburne read his latest pamphlet, out loud to a crowd outside Winchester House, where he was living at the time, and then presented it to the House of Commons later that same day. It was condemned as "false, scandalous, and reproachful" as well as "highly seditious" and on 28th March he was arrested at his home. (28) Richard Overton , William Walwyn and Thomas Prince , were also taken into custody and all were brought before the Council of State in the afternoon. Lilburne later claimed that while he was being held prisoner in an adjacent room, he heard Cromwell thumping his fist upon the Council table and shouting that the only "way to deal with these men is to break them in pieces … if you do not break them, they will break you!" (29) In March, 1649, Lilburne, Overton and Prince, published, England's New Chains Discovered .

They attacked the government of Oliver Cromwell pointed out that: "They may talk of freedom, but what freedom indeed is there so long as they stop the Press, which is indeed and hath been so accounted in all free Nations, the most essential part thereof.. What freedom is there left, when honest and worthy Soldiers are sentenced and enforced to ride the horse with their faces reverst, and their swords broken over their heads for but petitioning and presenting a letter in justification of their liberty therein?" (30) The supporters of the Leveller movement called for the release of Lilburne. This included Britain's first ever all-women petition, that was supported by over 10,000 signatures. This group, led by Elizabeth Lilburne , Mary Overton and Katherine Chidley , presented the petition to the House of Commons on 25th April, 1649. (31) They justified their political activity on the basis of "our creation in the image of God, and of an interest in Christ equal unto men, as also of a proportionable share in the freedoms of this commonwealth".

(32) MPs reacted intolerantly, telling the women that "it was not for women to petition; they might stay home and wash their dishes... you are desired to go home, and look after your own business, and meddle with your housewifery". One woman replied: "Sir, we have scarce any dishes left us to wash, and those we have not sure to keep." When another MP said it was strange for women to petition Parliament one replied: "It was strange that you cut off the King's head, yet I suppose you will justify it." (33)

Question: The New Model Army and The Levellers were groups in which war?
Answer: English Civil War