God's Fury, England's Fire_ A New History of the English Civil Wars - Michael J. Braddick [431]
67. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 31–5; Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 150–51. These events are placed in the context of the increasing polarization of politics at Westminster and in the City by Kishlansky, Rise, chs. 5–6. See, here, pp. 157–60.
68. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 35–40; Kishlansky, Rise, pp. 159–60; Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 151–2; Gardiner, III, p. 231.
69. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 43–4.
70. The evidence and debate are summarized judiciously in Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 55–65, with full references. See also Gentles: ‘At the time the word “agitator” had none of its modern pejorative ring, and meant simply one who had been empowered to act on behalf of others’, New Model Army, p. 159. A re-reading of key texts has suggested that Edward Sexby was not the central figure that he has subsequently claimed to be, and that the texts may reflect the role of some officers in channelling the army’s grievances into a partisan political campaign, of sponsoring the emergence of the agitators: Michael Norris, ‘Edward Sexby, John Reynolds and Edmund Chillenden: Agitators, “sectarian grandees” and the Relations of the New Model Army with London in the Spring of 1647’, Historical Research, 76 (2003), 30–53.
71. Gentles, New Model Army, p. 152; for a detailed account of these events as a response to the triumph of the Holles-Stapleton group at Westminster, see Kishlansky, Rise, ch. 7, esp., here, pp. 206–9.
72. Gregg, Free-Born John, ch. 17. Lilburne was also close to Sir Lewis Dyve, another incarcerated royalist, and may have had a role in fostering approaches to the King in October. See also Gardiner, III, pp. 309–12.
73. Gardiner, III, pp. 239–40; Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 153–4.
74. Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 151, 154–7 and, for the comparison with the treatment of the Scots, p. 149.
75. Pearl, ‘London’s Counter-Revolution’, pp. 45–6; Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 157–9. For the Presbyterian mobilization in London see Hughes, Gangraena, ch. 5; Vernon, ‘Sion College’, chs. 2–3.
76. For the Book of Declarations see above, pp. 510–11; for Husbands see above, pp. 272–3.
77. Stevenson, Revolution and Counter-Revolution, pp. 82–90.
78. Gardiner, CD, pp. 311–16.
79. Gardiner, III, pp. 251–3.
80. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 71–96; Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 161–4; Gardiner, III, pp. 247–9.
81. Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 165–7; Gardiner, III, pp. 254, 256–61, 262.
82. Pearl, ‘London’s Counter-Revolution’, pp. 45–6.
83. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 106–12; Gentles, New Model Army, pp. 169–70.
84. Gentles, New Model Army, p. 170.
85. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, p. 112.
86. For a brilliant reading of this exchange see James Holstun, Ehud’s Dagger: Class Struggle in the English Revolution (London, 2000), ch. 1. For the view that Joyce was appealing to the shared purpose and interests of the soldiery, not naked force, see Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 107–10, 112.
87. Gardiner, III, p. 277. For his strategy more generally see Ashton, Counter-Revolution, p. 20.
88. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 100–105, 116–20.
89. Gardiner, III, pp. 279–85; Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 113–15, 116–20.
90. Gardiner, III, pp. 278, 285–6; Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, pp. 122–3, 125–6.
91. Braddick, ‘Excise Riot’, p. 615. Gardiner appears to misdate the ordinance to 8 July, although his interpretation of its motivation is the same: III, pp. 324–5. See A&O, I, p. 954; Hutton, Merry England, pp. 211–12.
92. Braddick, ‘Excise Riot?’, pp. 615–16; A&O, III, p. lii.
93. Woolrych, Soldiers and Statesmen, p. 125.
94. Gardiner, III, p. 325.
95. Reprinted in part in J. P. Kenyon, The Stuart Constitution, 1603–1688: Documents and Commentary (Cambridge, 1966), pp. 295–301, quotations