Editing John Pym (section)

==Career==
Pym was educated at [[Pembroke College, Oxford]], then known as Broadgates and famous for 'advanced Protestantism'.{{sfn|McGee|2004|p=406}} Since legal knowledge was considered part of an education, he subsequently attended the [[Middle Temple]] in 1602; while he does not appear to have formally graduated from either, he made a number of lifelong friends, the most important of which being [[William Whitaker (MP)|William Whitaker]].{{sfn|MacDonald|1969|p=42}}

In June 1605, he was appointed collector of taxes for the [[Exchequer]] in [[Hampshire]], [[Gloucestershire]], and [[Wiltshire]]; this gave him a broader range of connections than many contemporaries, who were often confined to family or county networks. Whitaker's father had been [[Member of Parliament]] for [[Westbury (UK Parliament constituency)|Westbury, Wiltshire]], and in 1621, Pym was elected for the nearby seat of [[Calne (UK Parliament constituency)|Calne]].{{sfn|Ferris|Hunneyball|2010}}

===Forced Loan and Petition of Right===

Pym's diary shows he viewed Parliamentary legislation as a whole, not just issues of interest to himself; combined with an ability to explain them clearly, it led to his appointment to numerous committees. Since direct criticism of the king was considered treason, the only way to express opposition was by attacking his advisors, using the process of [[Impeachment in the United Kingdom|impeachment]]. Pym argued it was for the [[House of Commons of England|Commons]] to decide guilt or innocence, leaving the [[House of Lords|Lords]] only to determine the penalty; this would become significant in his future Parliamentary career.{{sfn|Ferris|Hunneyball|2010}}

[[File:Francis, 4th Earl of Bedford by Henry Bone.jpg|left|thumb|upright=0.8|Pym's patron and political ally, the [[Francis Russell, 4th Earl of Bedford|Earl of Bedford]], 1587–1641]]

Even in an era when it was common, he was notable for his anti-Catholicism, and opposition to alleged [[Arminianism in the Church of England|Catholic practices in the Church of England]]. One reason for this was the close links in the 17th-century between religion and politics, with alterations in one viewed as implying alterations in the other. Many contemporaries fought in the [[Thirty Years' War]] and were concerned at the apparent failure of [[James I of England|James]] to defend his [[Frederick V of the Palatinate|own son-in-law]] and [[Protestantism|Protestant Europe]] as a whole.{{sfn|MacDonald|1969|pp=45–50}}

Following the dissolution of Parliament in 1621, Pym was arrested, and brought before the [[Privy Council of England|Privy Council]], but released in August 1622. In 1624, he was elected for [[Tavistock (UK Parliament constituency)|Tavistock]], a seat controlled by [[Francis Russell, 4th Earl of Bedford|Earl of Bedford]], which he retained for the rest of his career.{{sfn|Ferris|Hunneyball|2010}} In 1626, he led an attempt to impeach the [[George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham|Duke of Buckingham]], an action which led to Parliament being dissolved. Only Buckingham's assassination in August 1628 prevented a second attempt, while Pym supported the presentation of the [[Petition of Right]] to [[Charles I of England|Charles I]] in 1628.{{sfn|Ferris|Hunneyball|2010}}

Pym, his stepbrother [[Francis Rous]], and [[John Hampden]], also led the Parliamentary attack on [[Roger Maynwaring]] and [[Robert Sibthorpe]], two clergymen who published [[sermons]] supporting the Caroline precepts of the [[divine right of kings]], and [[passive obedience]]. Though censured by Parliament for preaching against the established English constitution, Charles pardoned them, and dissolved Parliament, initiating the period of [[Personal Rule]] that continued until 1640.{{sfn|Little|2008|p=33}}

Pym became treasurer of the [[Providence Island Company]] in 1630, a role that increasingly consumed his time, and he relinquished his Exchequer position in 1639. Participation in the colonial movement was common among Puritan leaders, while company meetings later provided cover for co-ordinating political opposition. Many of these became leaders of the Parliamentary opposition in 1642, among them Hampden, Rous, Henry Darley, [[William Fiennes, 1st Viscount Saye and Sele|Lord Saye]], [[William Waller]], and [[Robert Greville, 2nd Baron Brooke|Lord Brooke]].{{sfn|Duinen|2007|p=531}}

===Leader of the opposition; 1640 to 1641===
[[File:John Hampden portrait.jpg|thumb|right|upright=0.8|[[John Hampden]]; Pym's colleague, and one of the [[Five Members]]]]

Following defeat in the first of the [[Bishops Wars]], Charles recalled Parliament in April 1640. When the [[Short Parliament]] refused to vote him taxes without political concessions, he dissolved it after only three weeks. When the [[Treaty of Ripon]] imposed by the Scots after a second defeat forced him to hold fresh elections in November, Pym became the unofficial leader of the opposition.{{sfn|Jessup|2013|p=25}} 

Historians like [[Timothy J. G. Harris|Tim Harris]] argue that, with the exception of a few extremists, by 1640 there was general consensus attempts to rule without Parliament had gone too far. This changed after the [[Grand Remonstrance]] in November 1641, when [[Constitutional monarchy|constitutional monarchists]] like Clarendon switched sides, arguing Parliament now wanted too much.{{sfn|Harris|2014|pp=457–458}}

Where Pym differed from Clarendon, and many of his own colleagues, was recognising Charles would not keep commitments he felt had been forced from him. Even during negotiations with Parliament, he and [[Henrietta Maria of France|Henrietta Maria]] openly told foreign ambassadors any concessions were temporary, and would be retrieved by force if needed. These suspicions increased after [[Irish Rebellion of 1641|October 1641]], when Irish Catholic rebels claimed his approval for their actions. Many believed them, given previous attempts by Charles to use Irish troops against the Scots, and his initial refusal to condemn the rebellion.{{sfn|Wedgwood|1958|pp=26–27}}

However, Pym was hampered by the fact Charles was essential to a stable government and society. Regardless of religion or political belief, in 1642 the vast majority believed a 'well-ordered' monarchy was divinely mandated; where they disagreed was what 'well-ordered' meant, and who held ultimate authority in clerical affairs. [[Cavalier|Royalists]] generally supported a [[Church of England]] governed by [[Episcopal polity|bishops]], appointed by, and answerable to, the king; [[Roundhead|Parliamentarians]] believed he was answerable to the leaders of the church, appointed by their congregations.{{sfn|Macleod|2009|pp=5–19 passim}}

[[Puritan]] was a term for anyone who wanted to reform, or 'purify', the Church of England, and contained many different sects. [[Presbyterian polity|Presbyterians]] were the most prominent, and included leaders like Pym and [[John Hampden]], but there were many others, such as [[Congregational church|Congregationalists]], often grouped together as [[Independent (religion)|Independents]]. Close links between religion and politics added further complexity; one reason for opposition to bishops was their presence in the [[House of Lords]], where they often blocked Parliamentary legislation. Their removal by the [[Clergy Act 1640]] was a major step along the road to war.{{sfn|Wedgwood|1958|p=31}}

Most Presbyterians were political conservatives, who believed in a limited electorate, and wanted to keep the Church of England, but as a reformed, Presbyterian body, similar to the [[Church of Scotland]]. In general, England was a structured, socially conservative, and largely peaceful society, while the devastation caused by the Thirty Years' War meant many wanted to avoid conflict at any cost. Pym was one of the few who believed only military defeat would force Charles into agreeing meaningful reforms.{{sfn|Wedgwood|1958|p=253}}

===Road to war; 1641 to 1643===
Shortly after the [[Long Parliament]] assembled, it was presented with the [[Root and Branch petition]]; signed by 15,000 Londoners, it demanded England follow the Scots, and expel bishops.{{sfn|Rees|2016|p=2}} This reflected widespread concerns about 'Catholic practices', or [[Arminianism in the Church of England]], given weight by Charles' apparent willingness to make war on the Protestant Scots, but not assist his nephew [[Charles I Louis, Elector Palatine|Charles Louis]] regain his [[Electoral Palatinate|hereditary lands]].{{efn|A perspective summarised by Pym's stepbrother Francis in 1641; "For Arminianism is the span of a Papist, and if you mark it well, you shall see an Arminian reaching to a Papist, a Papist to a Jesuit, a Jesuit to the Pope, and the other to the King of Spain. And having kindled fire in our neighbours, they now seek to set on flame this kingdom also."}} Many feared Charles was about to sign an alliance with Spain, a view shared by experienced diplomatic observers like [[Republic of Venice|Venice]], and even France.{{sfn|Wedgwood|1955|p=248}}

[[File:Wenceslas Hollar - Trial of Strafford (State 2) cropped.jpg|left|thumb|upright=0.8|The trial of [[Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford|the Earl of Strafford]], March 1641]]

This meant ending Charles' arbitrary rule was not only important for England, but the Protestant cause in general. Since respect for the institution of monarchy prevented direct attacks on Charles, the traditional route was to prosecute his 'evil counsellors.' Doing so made it clear that although the king was above the law, his subordinates were not, and he could not protect them; the intention was to make others think twice about their actions. Archbishop [[William Laud]] was impeached in December 1640 and held in the [[Tower of London]] until his execution in 1645; [[Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Strafford|Strafford]], former [[Lord Deputy of Ireland]] and organiser of the 1640 Bishops War, was [[Attainder|attainted]] and executed in May 1641.{{sfn|Ferris|Hunneyball|2010}}

The Commons also passed a series of constitutional reforms, including the [[Triennial Acts]], abolition of the [[Star Chamber]], and an end to levying taxes without Parliament's consent. Voting as a block, the bishops ensured all these were rejected by the Lords.{{sfn|Rees|2016|pp=7–8}} In June 1641, Pym secured passage of the Clergy Act in the Commons; one of its key provisions was to remove bishops from the Lords, which therefore rejected it. The growing political tension was brought to head in October with the outbreak of the [[Irish Rebellion of 1641|Irish Rebellion]]. both Charles and Parliament supported raising troops to suppress it, but neither trusted the other with their control, fearing any army would be used against them first.{{sfn|Hutton|2003|p=4}}

Pym helped draft the [[Grand Remonstrance]], presented to Charles on 1 December 1641; unrest culminated in 23 to 29 December with widespread riots in [[Westminster]], led by the London apprentices. Suggestions Pym and other Parliamentary leaders helped organise these have not been proved, but as a result, bishops stopped attending the Lords.{{sfn|Smith|1979|pp=315–317}} On 30 December, [[John Williams (archbishop of York)|John Williams]], [[Archbishop of York]] and eleven other bishops, signed a complaint, disputing the legality of any laws passed by the Lords during their exclusion. Viewed by the Commons as inviting Charles to dissolve Parliament, all twelve were imprisoned for treason.{{sfn|Rees|2016|pp=9–10}}

[[File:Attempted Arrest of the Five members by Charles West Cope.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.0|Victorian re-imagining of the arrest the [[Five Members]], January 1642]]

In response to the growing unrest, on 4 January Charles made an unsuccessful attempt to arrest the [[Five Members]], one of whom was Pym. Having failed to do so, he left London accompanied by many [[Cavaliers|Royalist]] MPs and his supporters in the Lords, a major tactical mistake as it gave the opposition majorities in both houses.{{sfn|Manganiello|2004|p=60}} When the [[First English Civil War]] began in August, Pym headed the [[English Committee of Safety|Committee of Safety]]; his reputation for integrity and ability to keep a diverse coalition of interests together was crucial to surviving the first 18 months of the conflict.{{sfn|MacDonald|1969|p=37}}

By early August 1643, a series of Royalist victories combined with the death of the popular [[John Hampden]] in [[Battle of Chalgrove Field|June]] meant the Parliamentarian cause seemed close to collapse. At this crucial point, it was saved by Pym's leadership and determination, which led to a renewed commitment to win the war.{{sfn|Johnson|2012|pp=172-174}} He created the foundations of victory by ensuring Parliament had sufficient financial and military resources, one of his last acts being to negotiate the [[Solemn League and Covenant]] that secured Scottish support.{{sfn|Russell|2009}} Amidst the escalating tensions, one particular step Pym took played a major role in consolidating Parliament's authority. He orchestrated the expulsion of [[Henry Marten (regicide)|Henry Marten]], a fellow Parliamentarian known for his radical views and outspoken criticism of the monarchy. Marten had publicly advocated for the deposition of King Charles I, a stance deemed too extreme by many in Parliament. Pym seized upon this opportunity to remove Marten, demonstrating his commitment to maintaining a more moderate and unified Parliamentarian front.  Historian [[David Como]] believes this maneuver underscores Pym's political acumen and his influence within Parliament during this critical period.{{sfn|Como|2018|p=177}}

He died, probably of cancer, at Derby House on 8 December 1643; Parliament agreed to pay off the debts he incurred as a result of neglecting his private business interests, although they were still being disputed in 1665.{{sfn|Royle|2004|p=278}} Buried in [[Westminster Abbey]], his remains were exhumed after the [[Stuart Restoration]] in 1660 and re-buried in a common pit at [[St Margaret's, Westminster]].{{sfn|Stanley|1882|pp=204-205}}

His chief opponent, the [[Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon|Earl of Clarendon]], a senior advisor to Charles during the [[First English Civil War]], later wrote; 'he had a very comely and grave way of expressing himself...and understood the temper and affections of the kingdom as well as any man'.{{sfn|Clarendon|1704|pp=321–322}} Pym's reputation suffered in comparison to less complex figures like Hampden and [[Lucius Cary, 2nd Viscount Falkland|Viscount Falkland]], especially during the [[Victorian era]] which romanticised the Royalist cause. One exception was the historian [[Goldwin Smith]], who described him as "the greatest member of Parliament that ever lived".{{sfn|MacDonald|1969|p=38}} He is now generally viewed as an astute politician who laid the foundations of modern Parliamentary democracy and effective speaker, whose ideas and language were adapted by [[Patriot (American Revolution)|Patriots during the American Revolution]] and [[Liberalism in the United States|19th century American liberals]].{{sfn|Kuypers|Althouse|2009|pp=225-245}}