OCR Specification focus:
‘Negotiations with Charles I; the roles of the Scots and the army.’
Introduction
The years 1646–1649 marked a tense and unstable period in England, as competing factions struggled to negotiate a settlement with the defeated king, Charles I.
Charles I’s Position after Defeat
Charles I’s capture at the end of the First Civil War (1646) placed him in a weak position militarily but he retained political leverage.
Portrait of Charles I by Anthony van Dyck, emphasising his royal stature and the contested authority at the heart of post-Civil War negotiations. Source
Charles believed in the divine right of kings, making him unwilling to concede authority to Parliament.
He pursued a strategy of delay and manipulation, engaging with different groups—Parliament, the Scots, and later the army—in turn.
His negotiations consistently stalled due to his reluctance to accept meaningful reform of the Church and state.
The Role of Parliament
Parliament, victorious after the Civil War, sought to establish a post-war settlement. However, it was internally divided between Presbyterians and Independents.
Presbyterians favoured a national Presbyterian Church system and a limited monarchy.
Independents, many allied with the New Model Army, pushed for greater religious tolerance and more radical reforms.
These divisions weakened Parliament’s negotiating position and allowed Charles to play for time.
The Scots and the Solemn League and Covenant
The Scots were crucial players in the post-war negotiations, having allied with Parliament during the Civil War through the Solemn League and Covenant (1643).
This alliance had promised the Scots the reform of the English Church along Presbyterian lines.
Title page of the Solemn League and Covenant (1643), the formal agreement whereby the Scots committed military support to Parliament in exchange for religious reform. Source
By 1646, the Scots wanted Charles to commit to Presbyterianism in England for three years.
Charles resisted, unwilling to abandon the episcopal structure of the Church of England.
Negotiations broke down, and in early 1647 the Scots handed Charles over to Parliament in return for payment of arrears.
Solemn League and Covenant: A 1643 agreement between Parliament and the Scots in which the Scots provided military aid in exchange for the promise of religious reform.
The Emergence of the New Model Army as a Political Force
The New Model Army, originally created as a fighting force, emerged after 1646 as a major political actor. Soldiers became increasingly radicalised due to unpaid wages, fear of disbandment, and opposition to Presbyterian dominance in Parliament.
Leaders such as Thomas Fairfax, Henry Ireton, and Oliver Cromwell began to act politically.
The Army issued the Solemn Engagement (1647), refusing to disband until grievances were addressed.
Army leaders pushed for religious toleration, parliamentary reform, and legal protection for their demands.
The army’s growing influence meant that Charles could no longer ignore them as a negotiating party.
The Heads of the Proposals
In 1647, the army put forward the Heads of the Proposals, a framework for a post-war settlement.
Biennial parliaments to ensure accountability.
Control of the militia by Parliament for ten years.
Religious toleration for Protestants.
Retention of the monarchy, but with reduced powers.
Charles rejected these proposals, continuing to hope for a better offer elsewhere, particularly from the Scots.
Heads of the Proposals: The New Model Army’s 1647 political settlement plan, balancing limited monarchy, parliamentary control of the militia, and religious toleration.
The Engagement with the Scots (1647)
Charles shifted his strategy towards the Scots, who were dissatisfied with Parliament’s religious policies. In December 1647, he secretly signed the Engagement with the Scots.
Charles agreed to introduce Presbyterianism in England for three years.
In return, the Scots pledged to invade England to restore him to power.
This led directly to the Second Civil War (1648), when the Scots and royalists rose against Parliament.
Breakdown of Trust and the Road to Trial
Charles’ duplicity in negotiations destroyed trust with all parties.
Parliamentarians increasingly saw him as unreliable, particularly after the Second Civil War.
The army, now dominant, concluded that no settlement was possible while Charles remained king.
Pride’s Purge (1648) removed moderate MPs, leaving a radical ‘Rump Parliament’.
Negotiations ended with Charles put on trial in January 1649.
Pride’s Purge: The forcible exclusion of MPs in December 1648 by Colonel Thomas Pride, leaving a Parliament dominated by those willing to try the king.
Key Turning Points in Negotiations
1646: Scots demand Presbyterianism; Charles refuses.
1647: Army seizes Charles, proposes Heads of the Proposals.
1647 (December): Charles signs the Engagement with the Scots.
1648: Second Civil War; trust in Charles collapses.
1649: Negotiations abandoned; trial and execution of Charles.
Significance of the Negotiations
The failure of negotiations was central to the eventual execution of Charles I. His refusal to compromise, combined with the shifting balance of power between Parliament, the Scots, and the army, meant that no lasting settlement could be achieved. The inability to reconcile monarchy with parliamentary and military demands set England on the path to regicide and republican experiment.
FAQ
Charles I thought his position as king gave him inherent authority and assumed his opponents’ divisions could be exploited.
He believed the Scots, Parliament, and the New Model Army all had competing interests. By engaging each side in turn, he hoped to secure better terms while avoiding any permanent concession that reduced royal prerogative. This tactic, however, deepened mistrust and ultimately worked against him.
The Scots wanted a Presbyterian Church structure across England.
Parliament was divided: Presbyterians supported this aim, while Independents wanted religious toleration.
The New Model Army generally supported the Independents, favouring tolerance for Protestant sects.
Charles resisted both, preferring the episcopal system with bishops, which he saw as central to monarchy. These differences made any lasting settlement highly difficult.
The Scots’ army had fought in England since 1643 and had not been fully paid.
In 1647, their decision to hand Charles over to Parliament was partly motivated by financial settlement: Parliament agreed to pay arrears in return.
This pragmatic choice demonstrates that economic needs were as influential as religious or political concerns in the Scots’ decisions during the negotiations.
The New Model Army’s proposals in 1647 sought compromise.
They kept the monarchy, albeit with reduced powers.
They limited parliamentary control of the militia to ten years rather than permanently.
They called for biennial parliaments, not full parliamentary sovereignty.
Compared with the harsher Nineteen Propositions (1642), which demanded sweeping curbs on royal authority, the Heads appeared more balanced, though still unacceptable to Charles.
Charles’ repeated rejection of settlements and his secret Engagement with the Scots in 1647 convinced many that he could not be trusted.
Parliamentarians began to see him as duplicitous, while the Army concluded that genuine settlement was impossible.
This shift in perception was vital: it hardened attitudes, legitimised radical measures such as Pride’s Purge, and laid the groundwork for Charles’ trial and execution.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
In which year did Charles I sign the Engagement with the Scots, and what did he agree to introduce in England as part of this agreement?
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for correctly identifying the year as 1647.
1 mark for stating that Charles agreed to introduce Presbyterianism in England (for three years).
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain why the New Model Army became a significant political force in the negotiations with Charles I between 1646 and 1647.
Mark Scheme:
Up to 2 marks for describing the context of the Army’s grievances (e.g., unpaid wages, threat of disbandment, opposition to Presbyterian dominance).
Up to 2 marks for explaining the political role of leaders such as Thomas Fairfax, Oliver Cromwell, or Henry Ireton in directing the Army’s demands.
Up to 2 marks for outlining the Solemn Engagement (1647) and/or the Heads of the Proposals, showing how these demonstrated the Army’s transformation into a political actor.
Maximum 6 marks. Marks awarded for accuracy, relevance, and clarity of explanation.
