Source skills for Kenilworth and Personal Rule
Why Source Skills Matter for This Period
The period 1629–1660 generated an extraordinary quantity of documentation. The breakdown of pre-war censorship, the political crisis of the 1640s, and the existence of Parliament as a deliberating body all created records that survive today. For historians and for students using historic sites, understanding what these sources are, how they were created, and what their limitations are is as important as knowing the events themselves. This lesson focuses on the main source types for the Personal Rule and Civil War, and on how English Heritage interprets Kenilworth Castle for the twenty-first century visitor.
Parliamentary Diaries
One of the richest source types for the 1640s is the parliamentary diary. The Long Parliament did not keep verbatim official records of debates — the closest equivalent was the Journals of the House of Commons, which recorded votes and formal business but not the substance of speeches. Individual MPs therefore kept their own diaries. Sir Simonds D’Ewes kept one of the most detailed, recording speeches, exchanges and the atmosphere of debates. Such diaries are invaluable but must be used carefully — they reflect the diarist’s perspective, can misremember speeches, and were not always written up immediately.
Parliamentary diaries such as those of Sir Simonds D’Ewes record the detail of Long Parliament debates not captured in official records. They are valuable primary sources but reflect the diarist’s perspective and may not be entirely accurate transcriptions.
Royal Proclamations
Royal proclamations were the primary tool of communication for Charles I during the Personal Rule, when Parliament was not available to pass legislation. They were printed by the King’s Printer and distributed to sheriffs across the country. Proclamations imposed ship money, regulated religious practice, and suppressed political opposition. For historians, they provide direct evidence of royal intent — but they tell us what the Crown wanted, not necessarily what happened in practice. A proclamation ordering ship money to be paid does not by itself show that it was collected, or that it was accepted.
The collapse of royal censorship in 1640–41 unleashed a flood of printed material. Thomason Tracts — named after London bookseller George Thomason who collected them — contain approximately 22,000 titles from the years 1640–1661. They include newsbooks (early newspapers), political pamphlets, religious tracts, and the Levellers’ petitions. Thomason often noted the date he acquired each item, making the collection a remarkable archive of how print culture evolved during the crisis. Using pamphlets as historical sources requires care: they were propaganda, often anonymously published, and designed to persuade rather than inform. The Putney Debates were recorded in the “Clarke Papers” by an army secretary, a different kind of internal document altogether.
Using Sources for the Kenilworth Historic Environment
For questions about Kenilworth Castle, students must use both documentary evidence and the physical evidence of the site. The key source types are:
Orders and accounts: The Council of State’s orders for slighting Kenilworth (1649), and financial accounts of the demolition work, give specific evidence of what was planned and carried out. These are more reliable than pamphlet propaganda because they were internal government records, not public-facing.
Visual surveys and maps: Surveys of the estate before and after slighting, combined with estate maps, allow historians to reconstruct what was removed. The presence and then absence of the mere is documented in estate records.
Physical evidence: The cut walls, roofless buildings and flat ground where the mere once stood are direct physical evidence. Physical remains are primary sources but require interpretation — a damaged wall does not automatically tell us whether it was destroyed by a siege, natural decay or deliberate slighting without documentary corroboration.
English Heritage interpretation: English Heritage’s guidebooks, information panels and digital reconstructions are secondary sources — they synthesise the available evidence and present it for visitors. They are authoritative but they can simplify, and they reflect current scholarly consensus which can change.
Council of State slighting orders are primary sources — created at the time by the government concerned. English Heritage guidebooks are secondary sources — modern interpretations created for a different audience. Both can be useful; neither tells the whole story alone.
For any source from this period, ask: Who created it? What was their purpose? What can they directly tell us? What must we infer? What do they leave out? A royal proclamation tells us what Charles wanted but not how it was received. A pamphlet tells us what one writer wanted readers to think but not whether they were persuaded. D’Ewes’ diary gives debate texture but not verbatim accuracy. Physical evidence at Kenilworth is direct but requires documentary context to be understood. Comparing two sources from different perspectives on the same event (e.g. a Royalist and a Parliamentary pamphlet on ship money) is a core exam skill for this unit.