The English Presbyterians of the mid-seventeenth century have traditionally received poor treatment. Compared to the radical freethinkers and sectarians who can easily enrapture historians, the Presbyterians often seem a grey, unsympathetic presence. Some contemporaries thought that their efforts to impose a Presbyterian uniformity matched the worst excesses of Laudian oppression, an opinion which John Milton captured with the line ‘New Presbyter is but Old Priest writ Large’. The lack of a permanent Presbyterian church settlement in the Revolution has meant that the Presbyterians are not only portrayed as censorious, but as censorious failures.

One of those most important in challenging these negative characterisations has been Elliot Vernon. Vernon and other scholars, notably Ann Hughes, in recent decades have advanced a more nuanced picture of the Presbyterian community in seventeenth-century England. They have compellingly argued for seeing the Presbyterians as innovative, willing to engage with print, and capable of popular mobilisation. Vernon’s 2021 monograph on London Presbyterians, which has now been reissued in a paperback, has already been recognised as a major addition to studies of seventeenth-century politics and religion. Alongside monographs by Anthony Milton and William White, Vernon’s text is one of several groundbreaking works published within the last few years to have greatly furthered understandings of early modern religious history and the British revolutions.

Vernon’s basic aim in the book is to reexamine the Presbyterians in London as a movement. Paying close attention to their organisation as well as their theology and political thought, Vernon shows how the capital’s Presbyterian community formed and then responded to the events of the revolutionary decades while seeking a Presbyterian-inspired reform of the English Church. As he emphasises throughout the book, especially in an important chapter on Presbyterian church government in London, it is crucial to note the popular appeal of Presbyterianism. Throughout the mid-century, the Presbyterian movement in London enjoyed an enormously deep pool of lay supporters. The mobilisation of these supporters at key junctures had profound consequences on the shape of the period’s political history as the Presbyterian religious movement became an integral component of the factional struggles which characterised Westminster politics. By carefully analysing this relationship, Vernon makes a broad historiographic point: that the Presbyterians are ‘a case study in the interconnected nature of civil war and interregnum politics and religion’ (p. 4).

The book follows a largely chronological framework, beginning in the late 1630s and ending in Restoration England. This relatively short span allows Vernon to dive into the intricacies of the Presbyterian movement, at times charting its activities on an almost day-by-day basis. He begins towards the end of the Personal Rule, describing how the pressures of the Laudian administration on the Puritan community acted as a radicalising influence. A coalition of those disgruntled by the religious politics of the 1630s would emerge in response to the canons of 1640; London emerged as a nerve centre for their organisation. The London Presbyterian movement became an important force as early as 1641. The ‘Smectymnuus’ tracts, written collaboratively by a group of godly clergymen, epitomised an increasingly confident group. Their bullishness stemmed from their links to the parliamentary opposition to Charles i and their efficient organisation from the Aldermanbury home of the Presbyterian minister Edmund Calamy. However, even at this early stage it was clear that there were deep divisions among the ministers over how best ‘to reform the polity of the church’ (p. 35) leading to the pre-emptive ‘Aldermanbury Accord’ of November 1641, an agreement between Presbyterians and Congregationalists not to publicly reveal their differences.

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the Aldermanbury Accord is that it lasted for several years. As has been remarked before, the opponents of the Personal Rule and Laudian religious policy found it easier to agree on what they hated than on what they wanted. Divisions within the parliamentary cause over what a reformed church establishment would resemble were made harder to reconcile as Parliament’s political unity fractured during the First Civil War and the resultant factions became associated with different ecclesiastical settlements. The London Presbyterian movement became an important part of the parliamentary Presbyterian coalition which emerged in late 1644, led by the earl of Essex and the Scottish Covenanters, who offered the best hope for a Presbyterian church settlement. Their struggle with the Independents and their allies in the New Model Army is the heart of the book and Vernon does an excellent job of charting fast-moving events.

He also provides overviews of Presbyterian confessional and political ambitions. As Vernon argues, the London Presbyterians came to believe that ‘Reformed protestant doctrine would be protected by the dismantling of the king’s royal supremacy and the adoption of a localist but conciliar form of church polity in the national church’ (p. 312). The best guarantee of these aims was the Anglo-Scottish alliance ‘enshrined in the Solemn League and Covenant and the proposals for a limited monarchy contained in the Newcastle Propositions or the treaty of Newport’ (p. 312). Whereas many MPs in Parliament favoured an erastian church settlement, the London Presbyterians pushed for ‘community-based church structures which settled ecclesiastical power in the parish and locality, rather than the state’ (p. 312).

Until 1649, the Presbyterians represented a vital force in English politics pursuing a wide-reaching political and ecclesiastical settlement. Headquarters, such as Sion College, aided coordination. Institutional allies in the City and the Westminster Assembly provided heft. Vigorous polemicists meant that Presbyterianism was well-represented in the lively pamphlet culture of the time. The purge of Presbyterian MPs by Colonel Thomas Pride in December 1648, the regicide, and the subsequent republican regime represented the nadir for the Presbyterian community. Widespread refusal to take the Engagement and support for Charles ii led to harsh treatment. After suffering through the republic, the Cromwellian emphasis on healing and settling and desire for a de facto national Church gave a measure of succour to the Presbyterian community and allowed some to re-enter public life. The Restoration gave them hope of a favourable church settlement, but this was dashed and the majority of the Presbyterian ministry chose dissent and nonconformity after Black Bartholomew’s Day in 1662.

A particular strength of Vernon’s analysis is its nuance. He is extremely careful throughout the book to tease out the differences and distinctions among Presbyterians. As a result, there is never a sense of very different people with different ambitions being lumped together. Instead, Vernon’s central argument that the Presbyterians were a movement made up of diverse parts is compellingly advanced. There was organisation and there were leaders, but there were also disagreements and alternative viewpoints. Another quality of this book is its willingness to mix political and theological history. Vernon goes beyond mere lip-service to this aim. His analysis of bodies such as the committee for accommodation or of the Presbyterian ‘moment’ in 1646–7 would be impossible without extensive engagement with the political context and secondary literature. This book richly deserves the attention and praise it has received since its initial publication. Its intelligent analysis, thorough research and important conclusions will ensure that it is a staple of seventeenth-century historiography for years to come.