Words of Wisdom:

"Please, give me an example essay of Toefl Test." - Aimanmirza

How Widely Accepted Among Historians of Side-Taking Is the View That Attitudes and Allegiances in 1642 Were Largely Shaped by “Local Concerns”

  • Date Submitted: 12/05/2012 02:28 PM
  • Flesch-Kincaid Score: 41.1 
  • Words: 1359
  • Essay Grade: no grades
  • Report this Essay
Study Sources A, B, C, D and use your own knowledge
How widely accepted among historians of side-taking is the view that attitudes and allegiances in 1642 were largely shaped by “local concerns” (line 6)?
It is commonly agreed amongst historians that there were many factors that combined together to form a watershed moment, that created the English Civil War. However the cause of side-taking, attitudes and allegiances during 1642 has constantly been up for dispute amongst historians.
In source A, William begins his argument by quoting Ivan Roots “In Dorset, Somerset and Lancashire it was local rather than national politics that men revelled in” and supports the localism view by himself saying “Why had the king no army in Essex...because more men chose to obey the Militia Ordinance than the King’s commission of Array. This was one of those occasions when the beliefs and prejudices of ordinary people really made a difference”. This clearly supports the localism view that it was the local man’s own choice on who to support, rather than following a man of great conviction. However, he later says “It was Puritanism and anti-Catholicism that bought Godly aristocrats (in Essex) in to a temporary coalition with disaffected members of the county’s middle and lower classes”. Making you think that Hunt believes that side-taking in the Civil War in the county of Essex was affected by local concerns, but more specifically local concerns regarding religion. Hunt makes you think that local concerns in 1642 revolved around the fear of a Catholic conspiracy amongst Royalists, to turn the country to Catholicism. From my own knowledge, I know that fear of a Catholic conspiracy were very widespread indeed, from the lowest echelons of society to the highest. Furthermore, he mentions how “It was Puritanism and anti-Catholicism that brought godly aristocrats in to a temporary coalition with disaffected members of the country’s middle and lower classes”. This of which supports the...

Comments

Express your owns thoughts and ideas on this essay by writing a grade and/or critique.

  1. No comments