God's Fury, England's Fire_ A New History of the English Civil Wars - Michael J. Braddick [369]
92. Hirst, England in Conflict, quotation at p. 142.
93. For an overview see Sharpe, Personal Rule, ch. 9; A. A. M. Gill, ‘Ship Money during the Personal Rule of Charles I: Politics, Ideology and Law 1634 to 1640’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Sheffield (1990).
94. Kenneth Fincham, ‘The Judges’ Decision on Ship Money in February 1637: The Reaction of Kent’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 57:136 (1984), 230–37.
95. Sharpe, Personal Rule, p. 721.
96. For a clear account see ibid., pp. 721–5.
97. Ibid. For Bramston and Davenport see Conrad Russell, ‘The Ship-Money Judgments of Bramston and Davenport’, reprinted in Russell, Unrevolutionary England, pp. 137–44; Clarendon quoted in R. W. Ketton-Cremer, Norfolk in the Civil War: A Portrait of a Society in Conflict (London, 1969), p. 91.
98. Clarendon, I, p. 86. Sharpe, Personal Rule, pp. 727–9, points to the slight improvement over the summer of 1638, as those waiting for the verdict paid up; for places where receipts held up see C. A. Clifford, ‘Ship Money in Hampshire: Collection and Collapse’, Southern History, 4 (1982), 91–106, at p. 102; Clark, Kent, pp. 358–61; John T. Evans, Seventeenth-Century Norwich: Politics, Religion and Government, 1620–1690 (Oxford, 1979), pp. 80–84. For those with worsening records of payment or difficulties in getting officials to serve from 1637 onwards see Barnes, Somerset, ch. 8, esp. pp. 228–33; M. A. Faraday, ‘Shipmoney in Herefordshire’, in Woolhope Naturalists’ Field Club, 41 (1974), 219–29, esp. pp. 226–7; Clive Holmes, Seventeenth-Century Lincolnshire (Lincoln, 1980), p. 131; Ketton-Cremer, Norfolk, p. 94; Mark Stoyle, Loyalty and Locality: Popular Allegiance in Devon during the English Civil War (Exeter, 1994), pp. 172–6.
99. For the politics of Star Chamber see Sharpe, Personal Rule, esp. pp. 665–82; for its wider history see Hindle, State and Social Change, ch. 3 and the references therein.
100. Quoted in Marshall, Reformation England, p. 197.
101. For religious policies in the 1630s see ibid., ch. 8; Kenneth Fincham (ed.), The Early Stuart Church, 1603–1642 (Basingstoke, 1993). Sharpe, Personal Rule, ch. 6, is, as always, full and informative and sympathetic to the views and aims of the regime.
102. Peter Lake, ‘The Laudian Style: Order, Uniformity and the Pursuit of Holiness in the 1630s’, in Fincham (ed.), Early Stuart Church, pp. 161–85, quotation at p. 167; Andrew Foster, ‘The Clerical Estate Revitalised’, in ibid., pp. 93–113; Holmes, Lincolnshire, pp. 112–21. For the argument that fears for the doctrine of predestination were not at the heart of the controversies, at least outside the universities, and that there had been other periods when it had been more threatened, see Peter White, Predestination, Policy and Polemic: Conflict and Consensus in the English Church from the Reformation to the Civil War (Cambridge, 1992). For a good overview and further references see Cressy, England on Edge, pp. 133–41.
103. For the local appeal of Laudianism among Catholics and anti- or non-Puritans see Michael Questier, ‘Arminianism, Catholicism and Puritanism in England during the 1630s’, HJ, 49 (2006), 53–28; Alexandra Walsham, ‘The Parochial Roots of Laudianism Revisited: Catholics, Anti-Calvinists and “Parish Anglicans” in Early Stuart England’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 49 (1988), 620–51; and for the ‘multiple realities’ of parish life see Christopher Haigh, ‘The Troubles of Thomas Pestell: Parish Squabbles and Ecclesiastical Politics in Caroline England’, JBS, 41 (2002), 403–28. For a judicious overview of the academic debate about the origins and appeal of ‘Laudianism’ see Marshall, Reformation England, pp. 199–205, which contains the key references. For examples of local enforcement see Anthony Fletcher, A County Community in Peace and War: Sussex 1600–1660 (London, 1975), ch. 4; Holmes, Lincolnshire, pp. 112–21; Evans, Norwich,