This is a study of the politics of a county community during the Civil Wars and Interregnum. The leaders of Kent, the gentry, were not newcomers, as might be supposed, but descendants of families indigenous to the county — conscious of its history, rooted in their lands, and insular and anglican in outlook. Their opposition to Charles I in 1640 was therefore moderate. When, in 1642, parliament attacked the church and opposed the king by farce, they withdrew their support. A military expedition from London secured control of the county, however, and during the next few years a number of then, anxious to preserve order, supported the county committee set up by parliament. But the tendency of the Houses to extremes, and the ascendancy of Sir Anthony Weldon and his uncompromising adherents in the committee, made their position increasingly difficult. By 1648 their alienation was complete and they led the county in revolt. The parliamentarian government was re—established only by the military arm of Fairfax. The greater gentry remained aloof during the Interregnum, and their place was taken by the minor gentry. But the latter were unable to control the county, and the moderates, though unwilling to oppose a government which promised security, and unsympathetic towards the cavaliers, were antagonised by the tendency to centralisation. The liberties of their county and church and the stability of an agrarian economy were undermined. In 1660 they voted for the restoration, and in restoring the king they regained their own position as county leaders.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:282793 |
| Date | January 1957 |
| Creators | Everitt, A. M. |
| Publisher | Royal Holloway, University of London |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds