The Levellers

Misha Glenny and guests discuss the group which came to be known as the Levellers and emerged during what would become arguably one of the bloodiest and most turbulent periods of English history. After the First English Civil War, the Levellers started calling for reforms to achieve legal and social equality. They pushed for a new constitution, extended franchise, popular sovereignty, and religious toleration. To do this, the Levellers pioneered the use of pamphlets and petitions, as well as taking to the streets in their thousands to demonstrate wearing their signature sea-green ribbons and sprigs of rosemary. To some they were radical, and to others not radical enough. Though the Leveller movement itself may have been short-lived, the arguments that they made have both inspired and challenged generations since. With Teresa Bejan Professor of Political Theory and Fellow of Oriel College, University of Oxford Ted Vallance Professor of History and Dean of Research and Doctoral Study at the University of Roehampton And Clare Jackson Honorary Professor of Early Modern History and Walter Grant Scott Fellow in History at Trinity Hall, University of Cambridge Producer: Martha Owen Reading list: Teresa M. Bejan, First Among Equals: Visions of Equality before Egalitarianism (Belknap Press, forthcoming in 2026) Michael Braddick, The Common Freedom of the People: John Lilburne and the English Revolution (Oxford University Press, 2018) Rachel Foxley, The Levellers; Radical Political Thought in the English Revolution (Manchester University Press, 2013) Christopher Hill, The World Turned Upside Down (Penguin, 1972) Ann Hughes, Gender and the English Revolution (Routledge, 2011) John Rees, The Leveller Revolution: Radical Political Organisation in England, 1640-1650 (Verso Books, 2016) John Rees (ed.), John Lilburne and the Levellers: Reappraising the Roots of English Radicalism 400 years on (Routledge, 2017), including 'Reborn John: The Eighteenth-Century Afterlife of John Lilburne' by Edward Vallance Andrew Sharp (ed.), The English Levellers (Cambridge University Press, 1998) Edward Vallance, A Radical History of Britain: Visionaries, Rebels and Revolutionaries - the men and women who fought for our freedoms (Abacus, 2010) Blair Worden, Roundhead Reputations: The English Civil Wars and The Passions of Posterity (Penguin, 2002) In Our Time is a BBC Studios production Spanning history, religion, culture, science and philosophy, In Our Time from BBC Radio 4 is essential listening for the intellectually curious. In each episode, host Misha Glenny and expert guests explore the characters, events and discoveries that have shaped our world.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.

• 0:06Speaker 01

  We all have routines. I'm Jabran, and with diabetes, mine was finger sticks. Sometimes, I skip them because they hurt. The Freestyle Libre 3 CGM changed that. It gives me glucose insights without finger sticks. Learn more at freestylelibre.us.

• 0:21Speaker 02

  Finger sticks are required if your glucose alarms or readings do not match symptoms, or when you see check blood glucose symbol for the first 12 hours. The views expressed should not be used for medical diagnosis or treatment as a substitute for professional medical advice. Individual circumstances may vary. For prescription only. Safety info found at freestylelibre.us.

• 0:36Speaker 03

  Hey, I'm Niall Rogers. This fall, I'll be driving across the country, meeting some of today's coolest and most fascinating artists. We'll explore the stories before the moments that changed everything. Because every musician remembers the moment where it all began. Experience Before the Moment, a Lincoln original series on the iHeart Radio app, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 1:08Speaker 04

  Cash flow crunch? OnDeck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory, or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing, and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today at ondeck.com. Funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 1:40Speaker 05

  The Crosstoirs Podcast Festival is back. Bigger and better this year in Sheffield. From Thursday the 2nd to Sunday the 5th of July 2026, BBC Sounds and Radio 4 Fringe are treating podcast listeners to an exciting lineup of shows all for free, including In Our Time. We'll be recording at the Montgomery Theatre on the 4th of July with a special edition of In Our Time on Casablanca. That's Bogart and Bergman and much more. Visit crossedwires.live/fringe for the full list of programmes and how to get free tickets.

• 2:21Speaker 05

  This is In Our Time from BBC Radio 4. I hope you enjoy the programme. Hello. For really I think that the poorest he that is in England had the life to live as the greatest he. That simple idea of equality was what one group of political radicals were calling for during arguably the bloodiest period of English history, the Civil War. They became known as the Levellers, a group who pushed for a new constitution, an extended franchise, popular sovereignty and religious toleration. The Levellers printed pamphlets, signed petitions and took to the streets in their thousands. Though the movement itself may have been short-lived, the arguments that the Levellers

• 3:06Speaker 05

  made have inspired and challenged generations since. With me to discuss the Levellers are Theresa Beauchamp, Professor of Political Theory and Fellow of Oriole College, University of Oxford; Ted Vallance, Professor of History at the University of Rehampton; and Claire Jackson, Honorary Professor of Early Modern History at the University of Cambridge and Fellow of Trinity Hall. Claire Jackson, the Levellers emerged during the mid-1640s. Can you set the scene for us? What was England like at this time?

• 3:39Speaker 02

  So I think the moment we'll be talking about most today, when the Leveller ideas, the movement, the voices are heard most prominently are the years 1645 to 1647. And this is the point at which militarily the English Parliament has been victorious in the first civil war. Parliament had been fighting the King, Charles I, since 1642. But as we know, as much today as in the 17th century, wars aren't decided permanently on the battlefield. There needs to be truces, ceasefires and some kind of peace settlement. In terms of why Parliament and King had gone to war, Charles I had acceded to the thrones of Scotland, England and Ireland in 1625. He was a deeply authoritarian monarch, believed very strongly in the divine right

• 4:22Speaker 02

  of kings, did not really believe in the right of others to counsel him, and also had a specific vision of the Church, the National Church, the Church of England. That many people found unacceptably popish and Charles found it very difficult to work with the English Parliament. He had embarked on a controversial, decade-long period of personal rule through the 1630s. Actually, opposition to Charles didn't emerge first in England. It emerged first in Scotland in the late 1630s. That's where arms had first been taken up against Charles and it had necessitated him calling the English Parliament in 1640, 1641. There was then an Irish rebellion and finally, King and Parliament went to war in England in 1642. And that is, as you said, a really bloody traumatic war.

• 5:04Speaker 02

  I think somehow in our national consciousness, it probably doesn't have the prominence that it perhaps deserves. But as a proportion of the population of the British Isles, more people lost their lives in the 1640s than in World War One and World War Two combined. And this is the point in 1645 where Parliament has won the war, but now has to reach some kind of settlement. And you begin to see the fracturing, ironically, or perhaps inevitably, within Parliament between a Presbyterian majority in Parliament, who can envisage some kind of settlement with the King that is still very much along a traditional lines of King, Lords and Commons, but a rising, what's often referred to as independent force within Parliament, coming from the sectarian congregations, as well as an army that feels it is now being undervalued.

• 5:49Speaker 02

  There are massive pay arrears, there's a lack of clarity about things like indemnity for soldiers afterwards. Parliament, the Presbyterian majority, is very keen to disband it as quickly as possible. And I think this is the army that has won the war for Parliament, but there's rising resentment. They feel that they have not only a right, but a kind of responsibility now to act on people's behalf. And this is the sort of fertile ground into which leveler ideas come from.

• 6:14Speaker 05

  Before we get into the ideas and the nature of the movement, tell us about the name levelers. Where does that come from? What does it actually mean?

• 6:23Speaker 02

  Well, it's like most names of most groups, it originally starts as a derogatory term. It's a nickname. One of the most prominent levelers, John Lilburne, later claims that it was Irtin, Henry Irtin Cromwell's son-in-law, who fixed it on them after the Putney debates. I'm sure we'll come to them later in 1647. To imply, very deliberately social levelling, a desire to bring everything down to a parity. The levelers themselves denied that this was really what they were about, but it evoked ideas of enclosure riots, rebels. It was taken up very quickly, so November 1647, a royalist newspaper, Mercurius Pragmaticus, calls its readers to the attention of the despicable and desperate knot of men who endeavour to cast down and level the enclosures of nobility, gentry and property,

• 7:08Speaker 02

  to make us all even, so that every jack should vie with a gentleman, and every gentleman be made a jack.

• 7:14Speaker 05

  Thank you very much, Claire. Theresa Bejyan, one of the key figures that Claire's just mentioned in this story is this man, John Lilburne. Who was he?

• 7:24Speaker 06

  So it would be wrong to say that Lilburne was the leader of the Leveller movement in any kind of exclusive way. But I do think it's right to say that without Lilburne, and without specifically his pre-existing celebrity as a Puritan martyr, nothing like the Leveller movement as we know it would have emerged. So basically, Lilburne is the second son of a downwardly mobile gentry family in the North, and he makes his way to London in the 1630s to take up an apprenticeship in the cloth trade. But while he's there, he sort of falls pretty quickly into this radical sectarian subculture, and he gets involved with clandestine printing, and particularly this kind of Puritan critique of the Episcopal Church of England, so the rule of bishops. And in that capacity, Lilburne finds himself put on trial in 1638 before the prerogative court of Star Chamber.

• 8:10Speaker 06

  In his trial, he refuses to acknowledge the authority of the court, he refuses to swear the oath that they put to him, and for this, and for printing, he is then sentenced to be whipped from Fleet Prison to Newcastle Yard, so about a distance of two miles. So he's whipped publicly, pilloried and put in prison. And it's Lilburne's bravery in kind of meeting this punishment that turns him into just an absolute phenomenon. So he becomes known as Freeborn John. He really becomes the poster boy, if you will, for the cruelty of Star Chamber and the kind of excesses of Charles I's personal rule. And so what ends up happening in 1641 is that the Long Parliament orders Lilburne's release from prison as one of its very first acts.

• 8:55Speaker 06

  And so this really sets him on a kind of trajectory that will become important for us, I think.

• 9:01Speaker 05

  So can you walk us through how the levelers understood equality? What was distinctive about it?

• 9:07Speaker 06

  Well, I think that the idea of equality that becomes essential in leveller arguments and leveller practices is one that Lilburne really comes up with on the fly in the summer of 1646, in the midst of one of his many legal battles. But basically, Lilburne invokes the natural and universal equality of human beings in the context of this court battle as having basically social and political implications. So in Lilburne's hands, we see the equality of human beings, really for the first time, being cited as a kind of basis on which ordinary men and women can make political demands and specifically can demand to stand as equals with the privilege in the way that that quote you read for us at the beginning shows.

• 9:50Speaker 06

  We take that kind of sense of equality as sort of obvious, but from the perspective of the history of political thought, it's not obvious at all, although the idea that every human being was equal is a very ancient idea. You find it in Roman law, you find it in Christianity and early modern natural law theorizing. It was mainly understood as a kind of assertion of, well, every human is somehow equally or indifferently subject to a legal authority, be it the Roman emperor, be it the Christian god, be it the natural law. What Lilburne does is sort of transform that into a kind of demand for social and political standing. So just to quote for you, Lilburne's wonderful postscript containing a general proposition in the summer of 1646, he says that, quote, "All and every particular and individual

• 10:32Speaker 06

  man and woman that ever breathed in the world, who are and were by nature all equal and alike in power, dignity, authority, and majesty, none of them having by nature any authority, dominion, or magisterial power, one over above another, but by their mutual agreement or consent."

• 10:51Speaker 05

  So there was this focus on Lilburne, the character, and Ted Vallance, I ought to point out that you are wearing a T-shirt with Lilburne on it and a Lilburne quote. But he wasn't the only leading figure in the levellers, was he? So who else was involved? Absolutely not. And I'd actually like to come back to what Theresa's just been talking

• 11:10Speaker 02

  About in terms of that quotation from Lilburne is a really useful one. Because we can see Lilburne there talking about the equality of women and men, not just men. So you open with that evocative quote from Thomas Rainsborough about the poorest he. But it's not just the poorest he for the levelers, it's the poorest he and the poorest she. Women are really important in this movement. In fact, we wouldn't be talking about John Lilburne's career as a leveler. Were it not for his wife, Elizabeth Lilburne. Because it's his wife, Elizabeth, who rides heavily pregnant from London to Oxford to save him from being executed by the Royalist for Treason. So there's a glaring example of a woman leveler intervening in a way which is absolutely fundamentally important.

• 11:52Speaker 05

  And presumably she succeeds.

• 11:54Speaker 02

  She succeeds, yes, yes, yes, yeah. So women are really important in terms of the organisation of the movement. They're critically important in terms of supporting the petitioning campaigns, the printing campaigns that the levelers get involved in. But there are a number of other male figures that we do associate with the Leveller movement and who have, I would say, equal importance with Lilburne in terms of the thought of the movement.

• 12:19Speaker 05

  You just mentioned this man, Thomas Rainsborough. Who is he?

• 12:23Speaker 02

  So Rainsborough is an officer in the army, Colonel Thomas Rainsborough. And he is really seen as one of the most supportive of the level of cause at Putney. It's interesting, though, that the words that he's actually speaking at Putney are words that previously appear in a pamphlet published by John Lilburne in 1646.

• 12:44Speaker 05

  Well, I wanted to ask you about that. We've heard about these freeborn rights that are inherent when you're born. But there's this document, Agreement to the People. Is that a sort of manifesto and what does it outline as rights?

• 12:59Speaker 02

  Yeah, so the Agreement to the People is a real, if you like, intellectual game changer. It's moving beyond the idea that your documents like Magna Carta, for example, give people certain rights. This instead is a document which says that by the people establishing a new form of government, certain forms of rights which are natural and innate and belong to all people will be protected against any form of governmental infringement, whether that's by the executive or whether that's by the legislature. Now, we think this idea of the agreement to the people is introduced by a figure called John Wildman. And it's Wildman who is one of a few civilian figures, or they're referred to often as

• 13:43Speaker 02

  civilian figures, although we think that they probably mostly had served in the parliamentarian army themselves, who were involved with discussions of the army after the end of the civil war. So, once the king's been taken into the army's custody, the army starts to develop its own proposals for negotiation with the king. And what is going on within the army is a struggle between the rank and file and the officers. The officers are seen as wanting a softer piece, so figures like Cromwell, figures like Iorthen are seen as wanting to give away too much to Charles. On the other hand, you've got rank and file representatives, so-called agitators, who are pushing for tougher negotiations. And one of the things that they're really conscious of and they really want to protect

• 14:28Speaker 02

  is any risk of prosecution for actions undertaken in the civil war. So, they want indemnity. Now, the problem with that, the practical problem that they face is how do we protect ourselves when a king in our constitution can basically overturn any kind of judgment through, you know, prerogative powers, or he can get a parliament to do it through and through statute law, or a parliament which is hostile to the army can do it through passing a law. So, the agreement is a way of solving this conundrum of creating a settlement which the king and parliament cannot infringe these certain fundamental rights, which include indemnity, but they also extend to liberty of conscience, which is critically important

• 15:11Speaker 02

  for Puritans like Lilburn and for his fellow believers in extensive religious toleration, Richard Overton and William Wallin.

• 15:18Speaker 05

  Again, we're seeing these remarkable demands emerge. How are they being disseminated? Claire, you mentioned print earlier on. What's happening? I mean, we've had the printing press for almost 200 years now. What's happening with pamphlets, books and so on in this period?

• 15:37Speaker 02

  So, the descriptor that's often used as an explosion in print, that with the Breakdown of civil authority, there's also a collapse in the state controls of the press. So before the civil wars, if you wanted to publish anything lawfully, you had to submit it for pre-publication approval. Obviously, as authority crumbles, there just isn't capacity to do that. So suddenly you see this explosion in the number of titles, whereas maybe 450 titles were published a year in the 1630s. It's about 2,000 in 1641, and it's over 4,000 in 1642. Now, that's not a quantitative exponential increase in the sheer amount of print. It's much more a shift towards cheap print, that there's many, many more titles, they're shorter, they're sort of brief interjections, they

• 16:20Speaker 02

  might even just be single sheets, sort of broad sheets. I mean, as historians, we're phenomenally lucky, because we have some sense of the scale of this, thanks to one man, a London bookseller, George Thomason, who wanted to preserve the sheer output of the press, so bought as much as he possibly could, and very conscientiously wrote the date of publication.

• 16:38Speaker 05

  So he's a contemporary who's

• 16:39Speaker 02

  He's a contemporary?

• 16:40Speaker 05

  Who's basically collecting them all.

• 16:41Speaker 02

  And over 22,000 of these tracts are in the British Library, and that's enabled historians to sort of sequence these debates. But print is straying into areas that were previously sacrosanct, you know, MPs' speeches are suddenly being printed, and the levelers are at the heart of this. I mean, a lot of them have got experience working in underground presses. So much of what they're about is very textual. The source that Lilburn quotes most often, apart from the Bible, is Parliament's own Book of Declarations that it issued in March 1643, and he wants constantly by the late 1640s to be showing how Parliament has betrayed the sort of things that went to war. It's also a very visual way of using print. There are two engravings of Lilburn that you can purchase at this time. One is a standard sort of likeness, and the other is a standard likeness behind bars. And that's

• 17:25Speaker 02

  the one that gets circulated to stir up support for his release when he's in prison. So there are paper bullets flying everywhere, if you like, as well as bullets on the battlefield.

• 17:35Speaker 05

  And one of the things they're also distributing is petitions. Ted Vallance

• 17:42Speaker 05

  How were the levelers using petitions? Because they're not quite like we understand petitions today, were they?

• 17:49Speaker 02

  No, and I think if we think of a petition today, we might think of it as a fairly kind of low-level sort of political engagement or intervention. You know, you click on a link to sign an online petition and you think you've done your bit. That is not what they're doing in the 17th century. It's a lot higher risk, particularly the types of petitions that the levelers are producing. So if you're producing a petition, you're supposed to be in a kind of supplicatory, humble position to the figures in authority that you're asking to resolve the matter of the petition to.

• 18:21Speaker 05

  And one of the things the levelers didn't like doing was things like doffing their cap. So this symbolism was important.

• 18:27Speaker 02

  Yeah, so that kind of symbolism, also just the language of it. So the petitions that they're producing are very assertive and in fact, they are clearly saying to Parliament, we are in fact the people who should be able to command you to do what we're telling you to do in this petition. A remonstrance of many thousand citizens says, we are the principals, you are our agents, so you should be doing what we tell you to. So it's reflecting the levelist political philosophy and that belief in popular sovereignty. But petitioning activity is also really important kind of organisationally as well. So you have to think about these as exercises in mobilising large numbers of people. These level of petitions are reputed to have tens of thousands of people signing them.

• 19:11Speaker 02

  The large petition of September 1648, 40,000 people were reported to have signed it, which would have been about 10% of the population of London at the time. Now, whether that's accurate or not, the levelers are using these kinds of figures, again, to show that they have public opinion behind them. The other thing that you see the levelers doing within these petitions is they're also broadening their appeal. They're not, if you like, just trying to speak to the converted, they're trying to reach out to other sorts of constituency. So they're trying to appeal to more moderate parliamentarians some of the times in these petitions. They're trying to appeal to the rank and file in the army, they're trying to appeal to their supporters in sector. Churches. So it's a way of coalition building too.

• 19:54Speaker 05

  And developing a sense of the political about how you go about growing this movement.

• 20:00Speaker 02

  Absolutely. And if you look at kind of what political scientists have said about political kind of campaigning, a lot of them think that this doesn't really happen until we get to the 19th century. But I think you can really see with the levelers, those sorts of political petitioning campaigns actually taking form in the mid 17th century.

• 20:20Speaker 05

  Theresa, was this really a movement which is promising equality for everybody? Or were there any constraints?

• 20:27Speaker 06

  Well, certainly if we look closely at the language of Lilburn's postscript containing a general proposition, it seems pretty clearly to be everyone. It's not just Englishmen. It's it's all men. And it's not just men, it's women too, rather explicitly. But for a long time, I think historians have really focused on the sort of universalism of this leveler promise of equality on the one hand, and then looking specifically at, for instance, the various revisions to the Agreement of the People, which introduce several exclusions, right? So at Putney, there is a debate about the parliamentary franchise, what they call equal voice. And Rainborough says, look, even the poorest man should have a voice as the greatest. But he doesn't make a case for

• 21:09Speaker 06

  the poorest she having a vote in parliamentary elections. And indeed, towards the end of what the transcript we have of the debates, Maximilian Petty, one of the civilian levelers present at the Putney debate, seems to say, well, look, we can agree that servants and alms takers should be excluded from the franchise as well, because they're not sufficiently independent. And so I think historians are really focused on these exclusions and making the argument that they revealed the levelers to be hypocrites in some sense, you know, violating their own egalitarian principles. But I think that what Claire and Ted have been emphasizing is right, is that we care about the franchise because we think about political equality primarily in terms of the right to vote. But I mean, for a very long time, and indeed until quite recently, hardly anyone

• 21:52Speaker 06

  had the right to vote. Right? So if you want to look at the sort of the radical egalitarian implications of the leveler arguments, you've got to look to petitioning. And there Precisely, we find two groups that seem to be excluded from the franchise at Putney, so women and servants, not only sort of asserting themselves as equals, but demanding to be acknowledged as equals. And so, again, to give you a wonderful quote in which we hear this echo of Lilburn's proposition, this comes from one of the several women's petitions of spring 1649. The women petitioners opened by saying, quote, "That since we are assured of our creation in the image of God equal unto men, as also of a proportionable share in the freedoms of the Commonwealth, we cannot but wonder and grieve that we should

• 22:36Speaker 06

  appear so despicable in your eyes as to be thought unworthy to petition this honorable house." And there, of course, that's the House of Commons, right? So here we have women demanding a political voice as women on the basis of this leveling argument.

• 22:54Speaker 03

  Hey, I'm Niall Rogers, producer, songwriter, guitarist, and co-founder of the group Sheik. A great song has a way of defining a moment, a moment of joy, heartbreak, or anything in between. This fall, I'll be driving across the country, dropping in on some of the coolest, most fascinating artists working today. We'll go deep into their lives and careers and hear what it was like before the moment that made them. From hitmakers like Miguel...

• 23:28Speaker 00

  That last year, finishing that record was the hardest experience of my life, regardless of how everyone else buys into this. I believe in this, and I'm gonna push.

• 23:39Speaker 03

  To rising stars like Alex Warren. You know, a song is a story, and the verse is setting the scene. And for me, at least, it's allowing me to be personal and vulnerable with the audience, whether it's about my wife and I'm being vulnerable about her, or it's about, you know, my parents and I'm being vulnerable to them. And it's almost like a cinematic piece in a way where each song tells that beautiful story. It's gonna be one hell of a trip. Experience Before the Moment, a Lincoln Original Series on the iHeartRadio app, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

• 24:13Speaker 00

  Hey, it's Covino and Rich Davis from Covino and Rich. Buy smart, drive for less, and trade for more. That's Toyota affordability. And it starts with a great deal on an off-road, ready Tacoma or half

• 24:24Speaker 05

  Tundra, two of Toyota's most capable and longest lasting trucks. Combining power for work, tech for adventures and style in between. Built on reputation for quality and reliability. Toyota trucks are known for holding their value, which can mean big savings when it's time for your next Toyota. So get a great deal today and great value tomorrow. Shop toyota.com for more. Toyota, let's go places.

• 24:47Speaker 03

  OnDeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team or bridging cash flow gaps, OnDeck's loans up to $400,000 make it happen fast. Rated A plus by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star Trust Pilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in minutes at ondeck.com. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by OnDeck or Celtic Bank. OnDeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

• 25:15Speaker 05

  Hello, Misha Glenny here. Did you know you can get episodes of In Our Time 28 days early with a subscription to the BBC website and app? Just head to bbc.com slash subscribe to find out more.

• 25:32Speaker 05

  Now, I haven't pulled up any of you for your liberal references to Putney. And I think we ought to clarify what the Putney debates actually were. Claire, who was there? What were they talking about? And why have they taken this, the sort of center stage of the debate about the levelers?

• 25:50Speaker 02

  So the Putney debates, as we think of them now, were discussions within the army with some civilian influence that took place in the autumn of 1648. They didn't have that sort of coherence among contemporaries. They wouldn't have referred to anything like sort of the Putney debates in the way that we do as a shorthand now, because that again is almost like the serendipity of how we know what happened. Theresa mentioned ago, the transcript that we have and the transcript that we have, we owe to the shorthand skills of a young army secretary, William Clark, who was present and noted in a newly learned shorthand verbatim what happened at Putney. So the army is camped about six miles upstream along the Thames and the army has got very used now to sort of debating how on earth it's.

• 26:33Speaker 02

  Going to, you know, what it wants as part of a durable settlement. But those transcripts lay, um, hidden in plain sight, but they lay in Worcester College, Oxford, for over two hundred years before they were discovered. Towards the end of the nineteenth century, a young military historian, Charles Firth, was given a tip off by the college librarian and then set to, uh, it's interesting, but, um.

• 26:55Speaker 05

  Presumably he had to decode the shorthand first of all.

• 26:58Speaker 02

  Clark himself had started decoding his own shorthand during the restoration. So in sixteen sixty two, um, Clark started decoding his shorthand notes that he'd taken in sixteen forty seven. And then he didn't live to finish them. He, he was killed in the Anglo Dutch wars in the mid sixteen sixties. And actually, Firth didn't venture into the shorthand. He just reproduced the bits that, um, Clark himself had transcribed. But the late nineteenth century is probably the first time as well that professional historians begin to get very detailed reconstructions of events during this incredibly complicated and convoluted period. But then you begin to get this very immersive sense of how the army sought to hear these different voices, um, some of which were much more radical, some of which, as Ted was saying, were more conservative.

• 27:42Speaker 02

  And I think Theresa's right to say that as historians in the twentieth and twenty first centuries, they've tended to hone in on things like the franchise. But looking at the debates as a whole, one gets not only a sense of the army's keen, acute sense of its own professional honour. And it wants to know that they will be treated properly for the services that they've done. I mean, what is the point of having fought and died for parliament if they're not going to be granted indemnity or any kind of protections? And if they're going to be treated that badly or shabbily, then that doesn't augur very well for citizens thereafter. So they're interested in things like indemnity, they're interested in legal reform is a, is a standard sort of, uh, leitmotif that reappears, abolishing monopolies, abolishing ties, really

• 28:22Speaker 02

  reimagining a settlement that's not any fairer, but also, they hope, durable, that won't just lead to some resumption of hostilities.

• 28:30Speaker 05

  Thank you, Claire. Ted, one thing that I haven't really understood yet is how coherent and organised a movement is this? I mean, we've heard of one or two characters who are prominent, but do they have membership? Do they have officers? Do they have, you know, local chapters of this organisation?

• 28:49Speaker 02

  Yeah, and this has been a big subject of debate amongst historians as well. And I think there are some historians who take the view that when we're talking about the levelers, we are talking about a label that's been created mostly by their opponents to create this image of this sort of organised, radical, dangerous movement. I mean, I gave you that example of the numbers signing up to the September 1648 petition. That comes from a hostile royalist newsbook, and the intention is to show you that there's this level of conspiracy that's about to kind of overturn monarchical government and the sort of established religion. But my view is that we can talk about them as a meaningful organisation,

• 29:30Speaker 02

  and I think that's for a number of reasons. Firstly, once we get to the point of having the agreement of the people, as if you like, the leveler's sort of manifesto, I think there is a coherence to what they're arguing. And that coherence stays with the movement until through to its sort of end as a meaningful movement in spring of 1649. And I think there is also an organisational structure behind them, and that's something that we see coming through in terms of that petitioning organisation. So, some of the information, again, that we get about the petitioning organisation comes from hostile sources. There's a report from a Shoreditch minister called George Masterson, who's basically operating as a spy,

• 30:12Speaker 02

  and he sneaks into one of these meetings in January of 1648 where they're about to kind of formulate a new petition and get it out. And what he says that they're doing is that they appoint commissioners who are there to basically distribute this petition. They're kind of producing lots and lots of multiple printed copies of the petition so that it can be easily disseminated. They're raising funds to support the petitioning activity. So we're seeing an organisation in place through this report. And even though it's a hostile report, we then get people like Lilburn and people like Wildman essentially endorsing what Masterson is saying about what they do. And I think we can see kind of similar references later on in later leveler petitioning campaigns that substantiate that sense of a

• 30:55Speaker 05

  Genuine organisation. But Theresa, there seems to be a consensus that this is a fairly revolutionary moment in in English history. But how radical were there and were there any other people who thought they were actually not radical enough?

• 31:13Speaker 06

  Well, quite. So Claire has sort of alluded to the modern historical reception of this amazing discovery of the Putney's transcripts in the late 19th century. And it sort of was not lost on historians at the time, that there seemed to be obvious parallels between the demand for equal voice at Putney, so the parliamentary franchise, and sort of modern campaigns for voting rights in this country and also then in the United States. And so there was a well-developed kind of historiographical debate in the 20th century about just how radical the levelers really were. And in particular, kind of in the middle of the 20th century, Marxist historians, so Christopher Hill and others, began to make the case that, well, you know what?

• 31:54Speaker 06

  I mean, sure, the levelers look radical from the perspective of many of the other sort of possible positions in the mid 1640s. But actually, the real radicals, the real egalitarians in the period are the group known as the Diggers, led by the failed mystic and merchant Gerard Wynn Stanley, who in the spring of 1649 begins to dig and manure and plant in the wasteland upon George Hill. Right? So the Diggers were kind of elevated as these proto-communist figures in the period, who made the levelers and sort of Lilburn's rejection of any kind of economic levelling look like a sort of, you know, to use the kind of Marxist language, the levelers appeared as just sort of bourgeois defenders of private property and free trade.

• 32:38Speaker 05

  Bourgeois, not a concept at the time, of course.

• 32:41Speaker 06

  No, not quite. And so I think, again, we need to get out from under this kind of modern historiography to sort of get to look anew at what was going on. And so the first thing to say is that this idea that somehow defending private property rights in the mid 1640s wasn't itself radical. It was just completely ahistorical. I mean, we're shortchanging leveler radicalism in that respect. The defence of the property rights of freeborn English men and women is part of a campaigning. Monopolies of all sorts, so religious monopolies, economic monopolies, but also print monopolies. So the idea that property rights also are part of a defence of freedom of speech. But on the other hand, we're also ignoring the extent to which the diggers, so when Stanley and his comrades on George Hill in 1649,

• 33:24Speaker 06

  they refer to themselves as the true levelers and are very self-consciously taking up these kinds of arguments from natural equality that you get in Lilburn and other leveler petitions and saying this also means that we should be able to stand as equals in creation without buying and selling or anyone looking down on or lording over anyone else.

• 33:45Speaker 02

  I mean, I think no group has probably suffered more than being sort of placed out of time. I mean, people often say they were ahead of their time, which doesn't help us as historians, or they were kind of remarkably modern. I think it is a fundamentally transformative moment, and I think that is part of the sheer upheaval of the country having been at war with itself. I mean, events like the Putney debates catalyse a huge amount of radical thinking in unforeseen circumstances. I mean, the idea that you could put your divinely ordained king on trial publicly and execute him with the acts of the common hangman is is an incredibly radical outcome. And I think you can certainly see these ideas among 18th century revolutionaries, 19th century chartists, sort of 20th century trade unionists.

• 34:27Speaker 02

  I came across exactly sort of 50 years ago, Tony Benn gave this very long lecture in Burford Church about the influence of the levelers. And he said it was a real comfort for him to have discovered that, you know, class struggles, industrial struggles had this long antecedent. And he asked this brilliantly sort of a historical question, what would the levelers make of us if they could see us today? And he identified lots of regions in which he would say, we're not doing so well. Massive inequality of wealth, persistence of poverty, all sorts of ways in which, you know, I can see why many subsequent generations have gone back to their writings and found real cause for inspiration, as well as just remembering what the impact of that kind of upheaval of civil war must have been.

• 35:08Speaker 05

  Ted, Claire's just pointed to the elephant in the room, which is the execution of Charles the First in sixteen forty nine. Were the levelers supportive of this? Were they involved with it? How did they approach this?

• 35:22Speaker 02

  Yes, they were, and I would argue that they're actually very important in explaining how we get to this remarkable point where Charles is put on trial and then executed. Lliban, again, gives us a bit of a distorting effect because Lliban comes out publicly in opposition to the trial of the king, but it's important to understand that this isn't because he thinks that Charles is wonderful. He describes Charles as being an evil man, but it's because he thinks that the type of court that has been set up is wrong. It doesn't have a firm legal basis. For him, the new government on the basis of an agreement of the people should have been established first, and then the king should have been placed on trial.

• 36:02Speaker 02

  But in fact, the levelers are, I think, really at the forefront of making the argument that responsibility for the civil war sits with Charles. So they talk about kings as being a source of continual oppression to the English people. So it's even the institution of monarchy that may be a problem. And we've been talking about the Putney debates and those famous debates around the franchise. But one of the other things that's going on at Putney is they are discussing what to do with the king. And a number of the people there at Putney are saying, actually, we need to deal with Charles. He is a man of blood, referring to this biblical ideal of blood guilt, that the stain and

• 36:43Speaker 02

  sin of blood on the land can only be cleansed by killing the person responsible. After the Second Civil War, it's the Leveller movement that kicks off the petitioning campaign to bring the king and other leading royalists to justice. But it's not even kind of outside of the court and outside of the trial. We can even see leveler supporters participating in the trial itself. So an underexamined aspect of the trial are the witnesses that are brought to give testimony against the king. Now, a number of these, we can see, actually have leveler connections. So there's witness called Arthur Young, who is an officer in Parliament's army. He's got a certain amount of fame because he's the man who takes the royal

• 37:25Speaker 05

  Standard out of the King's standard bearer's hands at the Battle of Edgehill, the first pitched battle of the Civil War. But importantly, he's also one of these agitators, one of these representatives of the army rank and file. And he's one of the agitators who signs a petition in support of the Agreement of the People in 1647. And we can find other agitators giving evidence as witnesses who also subscribed to that same petition. Okay, Theresa, you're a professor of political theory. So tell me, are the levelers political theorists? Are they activists? Are they a new breed of politicians? What are they?

• 38:02Speaker 06

  So I think that this is something that many modern political theorists and historians of political thought have maybe struggled with, sort of how to categorize the levelers and how, you know, I am a professor of political theory and I like to think of political theory as just the contemplation of politics in the abstract for the sake of doing it better. And on that definition, they're doing political theory, but they're doing it in a way I think that sort of offends maybe some intellectual historians, like maybe like Claire and also me and other guys, which is that we like to think that it's really sometimes the ideas and the arguments that are driving the bus and that the best ideas and the best arguments are the ones that matter most. But I think many of the levelers contemporaries at the time were very attuned to the fact that a

• 38:47Speaker 06

  lot of the arguments the levelers were offering were not particularly good arguments. So Lilburn is a great example again, you know, he's something of a jailhouse lawyer, you know, he had a grammar school education, but he never went to university. And so he's really teaching himself about the common law and Magna Carta during his various stints in prison and coming up with really inventive arguments about Magna Carta and everything on that basis. And so William Prin, one of his former friends and, you know, also fellow Puritan martyrs, ends up becoming incredibly critical of Lilburn and saying that he is an upstart monstrous lawyer called to the bar at Newgate Prison where he now practices. And they're constantly pointing out that he knows nothing about the common law, that the fact that his Latin isn't very good means that he's

• 39:31Speaker 06

  making inferences that no one better, that a person better educated never would have. But what I like about the levelers, and I think that they're political theorists in a sense that we need to maybe take more seriously, is that they are discovering arguments that allow them to do things politically. And the arguments end up being persuasive insofar as the doing of things looks good to others. And so that's, I think, the key when we see these leveler arguments proliferate. It's not because they're great philosophers, but they are excellent political activists and political theorists.

• 40:02Speaker 05

  Claire, two questions for you off that. First of all, are you offended? And secondly, they were short-lived, the levelers. What happens to them?

• 40:11Speaker 02

  So, no, I'm not offended at all. And I think Lilburn's celebrity at the time, we perhaps tend to look too much to the political theory and expect too much. Among contemporaries, Lilburn is famous for having been put on trial twice for treason and having been acquitted. And that is no mean feat in the 17th century. And this is the most serious crime against the state. And two juries in 1649 and 1653 acquit him. And there are celebrations and bonfires and all sorts of things. So I think among contemporaries, that's where they see his achievement. Because it doesn't end well, this movement. The regicide doesn't solve everything. A new utopia isn't created. And very quickly, Lilburn's on the case. England's New Chains Discovered is published in February of 1649, and then Part Two in March. And he

• 40:53Speaker 02

  is put into trial for treason. And his trial in October becomes this big set piece trial. There are scaffolds erected for people to watch. He makes this very strong claim that anyone who's put on trial for their life should at least be afforded defence counsel. He isn't given it. And he appeals to the jury and says, you should be jurors of law as well as of fact. Is this a lawful trial? Most of the trial revolves around his own works being read out. And there's great cheers. At one point, the judge sort of tells him, he's not here to tell the story of all your life. But when he is then acquitted by a jury, that is a massive humiliation for this new republican regime. There are medals created with the names of the jurors. And if you want to see the role of civilians as they

• 41:34Speaker 02

  have today, that's why jury trial and involvement of lay jurors today matters so much to people. It's in that moment.

• 41:40Speaker 05

  And just briefly, what happens at Burford? There's an event at Burford.

• 41:45Speaker 02

  That sort of epitome of Cotswold charm. Yes, there are, there are small instances of mutiny or rebellion in the ranks in different places. They start in London in April 1649 in Bishopsgate. So yeah, you have your rank and file and you have the top command, often referred to in a shorthand as the Grandees. And Cromwell and the Grandees fear that this could become really contagious and that there'll be, as they put it, a sort of standard of sea green, the colour that levelers have started wearing ribbons. And the two sort of forces, a very mutinous regiment, is met at Burford with Cromwell's regiment. Three hundred mutineers are rounded up, held in Burford Church. One of them, Anthony Sedley

• 42:26Speaker 02

  inscribes his name prisoner 1649 into a stone font. Three of these mutineers are then taken out to the churchyard, Corporal Perkins, Corporal Church, Cornet Thompson, and executed. And then, I mean, there's another standoff in Oxford. So these are suppressed very quickly. And again, that's some of the reason for the slightly ambivalent sense of subsequent historians who want to venerate Cromwell as this great military strategist. Military discipline is really important to these people. And the idea that there has been dissent in the ranks is quite difficult to accommodate into this sort of heroic story. I mean, Burford is one of those sort of very dramatic moments. And that's exactly why Tony Benn went to go and give this lecture in Burford Church in 1976.

• 43:07Speaker 05

  Ted, how are levelers remembered in the 18th century? Are they forgotten? Or do they actually inspire other movements?

• 43:17Speaker 02

  So they're certainly not forgotten. And I think one of, one of the reasons why they're not forgotten is to do with Lilleburn and his courtroom struggles in particular has just been discussed. So his kind of battles to defend his life in these treason trials are seen as resonant with 18th century radicals battles against authority as well. So in particular, John Wilkes and his North Britain case in the issue 45, where he's accused of basically libelling the king for criticising the king's speech over the Treaty of Paris. Wilkes is seen as a Successor of Lilburn, he's referred to as a kind of a new Lilburn.

• 43:58Speaker 02

  And there's a lot of similarities in terms of the style between Wilkes and Lilburn as well, that kind of celebrity radicalism, the emphasis upon the individual, their struggles, their appearance.

• 44:08Speaker 05

  Theresa.

• 44:09Speaker 06

  You do see these echoes at the end of the 18th century in the American Revolution and then the French Revolution. So it's just the strangest coincidence. It turns out that Thomas Jefferson is actually related to John Lilburn on his mother's side. So that kind of echo of Lilburn's postscript that we get in the Declaration of Independence, I mean, whether or not Jefferson is self-consciously channeling leveler ideals then, certainly 50 years later, when he's reflecting on the Declaration, he describes the palpable truth of equality in the Declaration in language borrowed from another leveler. So Richard Rumbold on the scaffold in 1685, who said, you know, that the mass of mankind had not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them.

• 44:52Speaker 05

  But the idea of equality, how important are the levelers for that? Where do they fit into the development of equality as an idea?

• 45:00Speaker 06

  I think they're hugely important and something really does change in the 1640s when leveler arguments and activism effectively make the idea of equality effectual in a way that it hadn't been before. It begins to be used to do things politically. And so, I mean, we've been talking about the kind of the sort of slightly paradoxical nature of leveler reception. So the Leveller movement fails. You know, the agreement of the people is not enacted, but Lilburn is remembered and his legal activism is remembered and that lives on and very sort of successfully in a sort of self-conscious way. I think there is also this kind of less self-conscious legacy. And I would argue that some of these leveler arguments about equality are preserved, as it were, in the arguments of their critics.

• 45:46Speaker 06

  So I'm interested in the way, for instance, that Thomas Hobbes ends up offering effectively a kind of satire of this leveler understanding of equality in the state of natures. Hobbes says, okay, well, if we are sort of equally lords, then what we would have is a war against all of all against all, in which these little lordlings try to vindicate their claims. To kind of equal respect in ways that are politically disruptive. But Hobbes's own critics, for instance, the Earl of Clarendon, also noticed the ways in which Hobbes ended up sort of taking on some of the leveler demands in his political philosophy as well, particularly the claim that, once we've left the state of nature, we still ought to acknowledge one another as equals by nature, not insult each other.

• 46:27Speaker 06

  So Clarendon actually accuses Hobbes at one point of having written Leviathan in order to flatter the delight that the common people have in the word equality, which in truth means nothing more than keeping on their hats.

• 46:40Speaker 05

  My thanks to Ted Vallance, Theresa Beauchamp and Claire Jackson. Next week, how William the Conqueror decided to deal with Wales after the Norman conquest. We'll be discussing the Welsh marches in front of an audience at the Hay Festival. Thank you for listening.

• 46:58Speaker 04

  And the In Our Time podcast gets some extra time now with a few minutes of bonus material from Misha and his guests.

• 47:05Speaker 05

  Okay, so now we go to the podcast bit, which is where we can sort of kick back a little and be more relaxed. But I have specific questions I want to ask that I've been dying to ask. And Claire, I want to start with you. The War of the Three Kingdoms. Is this the English Civil War or is that Anglocentric beyond belief? Or is this a War of the Three Kingdoms? What should we call this period?

• 47:30Speaker 02

  So I absolutely believe it's the War of Three Kingdoms. That's because I started my career as a Scottish historian and all of my career has been interested in the interplay of events in England, Scotland and Wales. I think as a shorthand, English, I'm happy with English Civil Wars rather than the English Civil War. I think War of the Three Kingdoms has become a term that's more often current in academia and I don't think it's quite caught on. But absolutely, this is a single king, Charles I, ruling over three separate kingdoms, each of which has a different confessional complexion to its neighbour. And Charles I's authority unravels first in Scotland in the late 1630s and then in Ireland and then in England. And, I mean, different historians have characterised it in different ways.

• 48:13Speaker 02

  Conor Russell talked about a sort of billiard ball effect. It's just simply that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for Charles to solve one of these kingdoms without there being ramifications in the other. And the English become quite resentful of the constant interference of Scottish and Irish events on their politics, but the English parliamentarians probably

• 48:33Speaker 05

  Wouldn't have had such a decisive military victory without the Scots at Marston Moor. And yet the Scots also refused to accept the regicide and immediately crowned the Prince of Wales, Charles the Second. And that poses a massive security threat to the New Republic, forcing Cromwell not only to have a Scottish campaign, but then also an Irish campaign. So this is absolutely three kingdoms. Um, great. And then my next question is, what's going on in Europe at all this time? And is there an interaction between the levelers and Europe in any way? Teresa?

• 49:06Speaker 06

  Well, so I think my colleagues are probably better able to speak to the specifics of kind of what's happening in European politics. But certainly we shouldn't lose sight of the kind of transnational, um, sort of radical Protestant kind of aspect of this. So I mentioned Lilburn's initial trial before Stargate Chamber in in sixteen thirty eight. I mean, he's he's technically put on trial for smuggling Puritan tracts out of the Netherlands to be sold in London, right? So there's quite a lot of kind of movement back and forth between radicals. And a lot of the unlicensed printing is kind of going on in both places. There's that one particular pamphlet that is again published in Rotterdam, I think, and then smuggled into London in sixteen forty nine called

• 49:50Speaker 06

  Tyrannapocrit discovered. And so that's the tyrannical hypocrite. But in this pamphlet, I mean, the author, I think we still don't know who it was, but makes the case not only for a lot of kind of standard leveler claims, but also for the claim for redistributive taxation. And the idea that if we're committed to the sort of natural equality of human beings, then we should be committed to eliminating extreme inequalities of wealth, not just in land ownership, which I think was more authentically what the um, what the diggers were after. The author of Tyrannapocrit says, no, we've got to have a redistributive taxation regime. Which again, I don't think you're going to find that sort of argument again until probably the twentieth century.

• 50:31Speaker 02

  I'd just come in and say that we can see that the levelers are reported on by foreign observers of the civil war. So we do get diplomatic correspondence in French and Italian, which is talking about. The levelers and it's talking about, you know, their threat and their radicalism. So they're certainly being noticed by international observers as well as domestically. There is an attempt to intervene in the French Civil War, the Front, in a way using leveler ideas. The French translation of the Agreement to the People is made. And the radical agitator Edward Sexby is tasked to take it to Bordeaux and sort of distribute it amongst the Fondeurs.

• 51:12Speaker 05

  This is the late 40s, early 50s.

• 51:14Speaker 02

  This is the 1650s by this point. It doesn't seem to have really caught on in Bordeaux, but there was an attempt to circulate it.

• 51:23Speaker 05

  Theresa.

• 51:24Speaker 06

  In French at the time, in the late 18th century, you get the new logism, nivelleur, meaning leveller. So that that word is sort of introduced into modern French at that time.

• 51:32Speaker 05

  Oh, that's fascinating.

• 51:33Speaker 06

  There's an interest in the Quakers and the politics of pronouns. So the abolition of the plural you is understood as be channeling this kind of English Civil War radical religious sensibility in a demand for social equality.

• 51:45Speaker 05

  Talking of Thomas Jefferson and slave owners, is there an impact on abolitionism later on at all?

• 51:54Speaker 02

  There is, and again, it's through Lilburne's courtroom struggles. So in Somerset's case, which is this celebrated late 18th century case of the slave James Somerset, who abolitionist campaigners basically issue writ of habeas corpus to have him kind of freed from his master, amusingly named Charles Stuart, for our purposes in terms of thinking about the 17th century resonances. One of the kind of precedents that they use here is a so-called Cartwright's case. And Cartwright's case is a precedent that pops up in Lilburne's attempts to get compensation for his punishment by Star Chamber in the 1630s. And it has this famous phrase,

• 52:36Speaker 02

  which is sort of, you know, this really resonant sort of idea that as soon as a slave person steps foot on, you know, English soil, they're automatically kind of the shackles drop off. And in fact, the case is much more limited than that. It doesn't really make that kind of claim. But it is something where Lilburne is now being connected, not only with struggles over freedom of the press, but also in terms of abolitionism.

• 53:02Speaker 05

  Claire, I mean, first of all, if there's anything we've missed out, you can now all say what we've missed out. But can I ask you about the relationship between Lilburn and Cromwell? Was there anything going on there at all? I mean, did they know each other?

• 53:15Speaker 06

  Yes, yes. I mean, in some ways, you could see Cromwell using level of interest quite cynically at that point when the bigger enemy is the Presbyterian majority to try and get more support for that independent view of a congregationist outcome that isn't going to sign up to something that looks like a Scots Presbyterian kind of clarity. So it is very much in Cromwell's interests to engage and preserve army discipline. And I mean, there are elements of the Putney debates that don't speak of hostility and suppression. And maybe that's where the shock

• 53:57Speaker 06

  of the brutal suppressions at Ware and then again at Burford and places, you know, come into play. Because there is a sense of a shared exploration of ideas at Putney. And again, I mean, it would be very easy to be quite sort of, you know, score points on who's the most sort of radical there. But, you know, there's a sense that people are thinking aloud, and you can see particularly in Iton, just sort of saying, well, I can see the argument, but that's just not going to wash. I mean, surely to make this work. And, you know, I think everybody is focused on achieving a settlement that not only does justice to the amount of bloodshed that's been spilled over the past few years, but that lasts. And the regicide isn't that.

• 54:41Speaker 05

  Do they exclude monarchy as a form of government? I mean, obviously, as you said, Ted, Charles is an evil man, according to Lilburn. But do they say it's done for monarchy?

• 54:54Speaker 06

  A lot of level of language is very much only really focused on the Commons. I mean, one of the reasons they become interested in the army is

• 55:00Speaker 02

  Because they won't deal with the lords and their petitions are sort of like, we really only want to deal with you as and their vision of a representative sort of institution is is a commons based one. Cromwell is pretty good at speaking whatever he wants to to different audiences. So he will stand up in Parliament and talk about King, Lords and Commons and then sort of say to the army later, well, I mean, that was in Parliament. Here I'm talking about a different kind of settlement.

• 55:23Speaker 02

  We didn't talk in the programme about the impact of the Second Civil War. So just after Putney debates, Charles probably tipped off, probably being fed this line that the army is full of dangerous levelers who might think of assassinating him. Escapes from Hampton Court and for a few days, nobody knows where he is. And then he turns up in the Isle of Wight. And then he makes an alliance with the Scots who are by this stage disillusioned with Parliament because they don't feel their Presbyterianism is getting anywhere. And the Second Civil War happens and it is much faster, much more brutal, and it lasts through late sixteen forty seven and sixteen forty eight. And that radicalises a lot of people who maybe weren't prepared to use that language of Charles being the man of blood at Putney, twelve months later absolutely will.

• 56:04Speaker 02

  So by then Cromwell, whether it's apocryphal, the sort of phrase cruel necessity about the regicide or not. By that stage, there's many more people who think that is, this is, this is a man that you cannot negotiate with. I would say the levelers are consistently anti tyrannical, but they're not consistently republican. And that's one of the reasons you can see them engaging in conspiracy with royalists in the sixteen fifty s. To overthrow the protectorates because, you know, if they can have a monarch who's bound by the agreement to the people, that's okay. It's worse to have a Cromwellian tyrant in place than to have a bounded king.

• 56:39Speaker 06

  Yeah. And I mean, that I mentioned Clarendon briefly at the end, but it seems that one of the reasons Clarendon is so keen to sort of tar Hobbs with the leveller brushes. Because Clarendon himself had been trying to entertain a kind of royalist leveller alliance following the the regicide. I mean, if I could just say, Ted mentioned this in the main programme, but Lilburn, you know, he's just such a. Died in the wool contrarians, or he just never, he never defends the position that you, and once, once his side seems to be winning, he instantly takes the other side. But sort of what's going on in the, the late, sort of in 1649 is, Lilburne is making the case that not only is the, the tribunal instituted to try the king illegitimate, because it's just not properly constituted, but also the several royalist peers who are

• 57:24Speaker 06

  being put on trial by similarly special tribunals, Lilburne befriends a bunch of them while he's in the Tower of London and begins to sort of offer them legal arguments for their case. And so he makes the case that even the peers are entitled to the same rights under Magna Carta, including to a trial by a jury of their peers. And so I think that's just a wonderful illustration of, you know, Lilburne's principles, leading him to sort of make friends with people you might not expect. And then also just one thing Claire mentioned, which I think is worth stressing. So the regicide, Charles is executed by beheading with an axe by the public executioner. I mean, if you look forward to the, to the French Revolution,

• 58:06Speaker 06

  and again, the awareness of leveling there, you know, we might think partly what the Jacobins are trying to do is have this idea of leveling up in the sense that even commoners ought to enjoy the privilege of being executed by beheading, which is how aristocrats had traditionally been executed. So again, this kind of, you know, so sometimes the egalitarianism doesn't cash out in the way that maybe we expect it to. But if you look at the details, you can see that, no, they're pretty consistent.

• 58:35Speaker 05

  I, I, I did find it extraordinary, reading about the levelers, that how much they anticipate movements which are 70, 100 years later. I kept thinking of Kant and the idea of universalism and universal rights, which, you know, at the time appeared to be revolutionary when Kant starts articulating this, but actually, the levelers already said all of this.

• 59:02Speaker 06

  I mean, I just, I don't think it can be stressed enough, right? Um, you know, intellectual historians and political theorists wanting to think that philosophers drive the bus. I mean, Kant was not driving the bus.

• 59:13Speaker 05

  Yeah.

• 59:13Speaker 06

  A lot of people got there first.

• 59:15Speaker 05

  Do you want some tea? Yes, please. Here comes Martha.

• 59:22Speaker 02

  I'd love a tea, please. Tea, please.

• 59:24Speaker 05

  Tea.

• 59:26Speaker 05

  In Our Time with Mischa Glennie was produced by Martha Owen.

• 59:29Speaker 00

  It's a BBC Studios production for Radio 4. If you've got a scrolling problem, then this is the podcast for you. It's called Top Comment with me, Matt Shea. And me, Mariana Spring. We both investigate social media for a living. Whether it's disinformation, conspiracy theories, internet culture, memes. We're going to be getting behind the stuff that is popping up on your feed on this podcast. That's Top Comment on BBC Sounds.

• 59:55Speaker 05

  Hello, Mischa Glennie here. Did you know you can get episodes of In Our Time 28 days early with a subscription to the BBC website and app? Just head to bbc.com/subscribe to find out more.