Article: Mark Stoyle, English Nationalism, Celtic Particularism and The English Civil War, The Historical Journal, Vol. 43, No. 4, 2000, pp. 1113-1128
Argument: The English Civil Wars were, in part, a conflict of national identity and ethnic divides. The parliamentarian faction was widely associated with ‘Englishness’ and united the ideas of patriotism and parliamentarianism. Parliamentarians were able to ensure the removal of an increasingly independent King by associating royalists with ‘the other’ and parliamentarians with nationalism and English values.
1)British and International Dimension of English Civil War
-Historians of British history have concentrated on Ireland/Scotland’s reactions to the English but Stoyle sees a need to explore how the ‘Celtic periphery’ respond.
-1642 – Scots and Irish essentially created de facto independence for themselves
-Civil War aroused fears of a group identity – hysterical fear of foreign invasion leads to fears of other nationalities and sees a rise in nationalism.
-Charles I = embodied so many different cultures/nationalities – how could the English rally behind him? – Gardiner
-England = “cradle of nationalism”
2)Parliamentarian vs. Royalists
-Parliament came to represent “the nation itself” and was the “symbol of nationhood” for Englishmen – seen as the pinnacle of ‘Englishness’
- ‘so longe as they remember themselves to be English-men, they will not forget to love and defend an English Parliament’ PARLIAMENT BECOMING SYNONYMOUS WITH ENGLISHNESS = PREVENTS ABSOLUTISM FROM TAKING ROOT.
-Charles I’s personal rule was a taste of absolutism for English people and they clung to parliament and heralded it as the fundamental English institution.
-New Model Army (NMA) – stressed its English character – an English army for the English people
-Royalist faction damaged by involvement of ‘foreign’ parties.
3)Wales
-Integrated into England but had distinctive traditions, communities and a concealed resentment towards the English
-Crown = traditionally generous towards Wales - Tudor roots, recognizing myth of ‘British Origins’ of English church more likely to support the Crown than Parliament.
-Civil War = Wales protecting their position within the English state and Parliamentarians reasserting English dominance over Wales alienated them from England by branding them as ‘foreign’ and ‘suspicious’
4)Cornwall
-Had generous parliamentary representation and had been more anglicanised than Wales – not a foregone conclusion that Cornish would support Charles
-Civil Wars = affront to Cornish ‘national pride’ hugely significant in royalist victories in the war – “no one contributed more the Charles’s victory than the Cornish”
Conclusions:
-Fear of ‘foreigners’ within both factions of the Civil War meant that when Parliamentarians lost good relations with the Scottish they could persuade the nation the King was looking to use foreigners to defeat the English
-Response of parliamentarian faction in dealing with Wales/Cornwall after they were left vulnerable following Royalist collapse = key in ensuring England avoided absolutism.
-Parliamentarians COULD have used force to bring the south-east back into line but instead they were more conciliatory.
-Civil Wars = ensured the victory of a conciliatory parliament that represented a nation and embodied nationalist ideas of ‘Englishness’ over an increasingly absolute monarch with ‘foreign’ roots – the international element and fear of foreigners ensured Charles’ defeat
- Therefore = English nationalism meant they avoided absolutist rule.