There is something exciting in the idea that in the middle of a bitter Civil War in which one in four died the army of Parliament sat down to discuss the future of England after the war with the King.
Reading the discussions there is something very modern about the position of Colonel Rainsborough who argued that “... the poorest he that is in England hath a life to live, as the greatest he; and therefore truly, Sir, I think it's clear, that every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government; and I do think that the poorest man in England is not bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under...”
And this in turn reminded me of the Forces Parliaments which took place in the British Army in India and Egypt during the Second World War. The Cairo Forces Parliament met in February 1944 and voted for the nationalization of the banks, land, mines and transport.
In their way it replicated those debates three hundred years earlier where the men who were fighting debated the future they wanted.
Now the Putney Debates and much more of the visions of the men who fought for Parliament was never taught to me. What we got was pretty much what was produced in The Pictorial History Book*
It is an interpretation which is replicated in other children’s history book.
Part of the reason may well have been that the records of the discussions were lost until the beginning of the 20th century but I suspect the absence of this story may also be down to content.
In an age when history was still taught from top down the idea that there should be an alternative history where ordinary people wanted a share in how their country was run and believed that they had as much a right to that say as the rich and powerful was indeed a challenging one.
Pictures; An Agreement of the People, 1647, and from The Pictorial History Book
No comments:
Post a Comment