Leo Santifaller: Ergänzungsband 2/2. Festschrift zur Feier des 200 jährigen Bestandes des HHStA 2 Bände (1951)
VII. Allgemeine und österreichische Geschichte. - 68. Eduard McCabe (London): Another centenary. The execution of Charles I
Another centenary. 335 sympathy with the Stuarts; like von Ranke, he was sensitive to attacks made on the liberty of the individual. His broad view was that Charles defended the old order. The Army brought in a new anarchy. There was a third way, and a middle way, namely that the nation in general wanted to preserve the old constitution but with guarantees of the independence of the institutions representing the people; this way being in fact adopted at the Restoration in 1660. But because Charles refused to give up his right to review proposals affecting the government (the Negative Voice) he lost the opportunity of putting himself at the head of the Body Politic. If Gardiner’s views are here correctly stated 1), it is clear that he made certain assumptions which must be examined further. The first assumption was that the ancient constitution with King, Lords and Commons was flexible enough to continue to serve the maturing genius of the people. The second was that this genius or temper was Puritan. In an article devoted to the development of criticism of Charles, the second assumption should be dealt with first, because it tinges, at least, all other interpretations. The word, Puritan, is one of the most elusive in the language; it means different things to different writers, and even different things to the same writer 2). The range of definitions includes the opinion of Aldous Huxley, “The Reformers read their Old Testament, and, trying to imitate the Jews, became those detestable Puritans to whom we owe, not merely Grundyism and Podsnappery, but also (as Weber and Tawney have shown) all that was and still is vilest, cruellest, most anti-human in the modern capitalist system”3); and Usher’s “Puritanism ... is the spirit of ceaseless change in man’s endeavour, which was the keynote of the Renaissance, which has always been the note of progress” 4 *). This is no place in which to launch a discussion on the nature of Puritanism. It must suffice to say that it was an attitude to religion and morality that was peculiar to England; since it showed Calvanist influence but in infinitely varying degrees. By itself that definition is inconclusive. The reader must in the circumstances accept a personal and unsubstantiated belief that the essence of Puritanism was to be found in the history of English society; before the Reformation it had been a turbulent and relatively backward society 6); after the Reformation, the leading spirits, who took pride in their obdurately unenlightened ancestry, were more free to follow each his own line of thought at a time when Europe was experiencing a succession of new movements. In England this conjunction issued in Puritanism. It would follow that those who, like Gardiner, consider that the proceedings in Parliament during the preceding 50 years, the Scottish wars, the fate of Laud’s church, the two civil wars, and Charles’ own execution were ultimately decisions on religion, are in error6). That means directly controverting Gardiner’s solemn sentence (Horresco referens). “If no other question had been at issue, than the political one, there would have been no permanent division of parties, and no Civil War” 7). Others, holding the balance, make reference to “religio-political” disputes. On the hypothesis mentioned above, these episodes were ultimately decisions on politics, on the shape of society, however much religion may have been the ground of dispute. The subsequent history of religion in England and *) Gardiner S. R., History of the Great Civil War, vol. IV, pp. 326 if. 2) Cf. Mathews, Social Structure of Caroline England, p. 10; Jordan W. K., Development of religious toleration, vol. II, p. 189; Usher R. G., Reconstruction of the English Church, vol. I, p. 246. 3) Quoted by Robertson H. M., Aspects of the Rise of Economic Individualism, p. 208. 4) Usher, ibid. 6) Cf. Smith A. L., Church and State in the Middle Ages, Lecture II, passim; Maynard-Smith, Pre-Reformation Church, Chaps. IV and V. 6) Cf. Davies, op. cit., p. XX. 7) Gardiner, History of England, vol. X, p. 32.
