Define the political beliefs of the Roundheads and the Cavaliers in England. What significant role(s) were played by each during the revolution?

History of Anglicanism...... Is Britain a right-wing country?

Nobody has ever been able to define the beliefs of 'left' and 'right' or the ... As for the political side of things their is know a straight battle between ... Let's face the truth: England is a right wing country, Scotland and ..... I've commented previously on the relevance of the cavalier-roundhead division. ...

England's Civil War, Cavaliers and Roundheads, tore at the heart of the people ... As years passed, the Church had to try and define itself among the more .... What doctrine and beliefs constitute the foundation of an Apostolic Faith? ...

HERE IS THE CIVIL WAR BETWEEN NORTH AND SOUTH

 southerners in 1860 were more than counterbalanced by common beliefs and assumptions. ... the Roundheads, and the South by the other, the royal party or the Cavaliers. .... sought to define themselves as different from and superior to northerners. ... "The Difference of Race": Antebellum Race Mythology and the Development of Southern Nationalism Ritchie Watson In January of 1860, less than one month after John Brown's execution and less than a year before the fateful election of Abraham Lincoln, the influential New Orleans periodical, De Bow's Review, presented for the edification of its readers an article entitled "The Basis of Northern Hostility to the South." The author advanced a provocative thesis that would explain, he contended, the widening chasm of opinion and sentiment between the northern and southern states. The article argued that the antagonism between northerners and southerners, which had most recently and dramatically manifested itself in the trial and execution of John Brown, constituted more than a mere disagreement over slavery. Indeed, the writer maintained, Yankees would remain eternally hostile to the South, even if they could be brought to agree with southerners on the issue of slavery, for the dispute between North and South was not merely political and economic in nature. It also reflected a deep cultural and racial division that had originated over two hundred years ago in England in the antagonism between Puritan and Cavalier. "The cavaliers and puritans of that age,   AND IT IS SAD TO SAY, IT IS STILL GOING ON,  BETWEEN PEOPLE  ONLY IN A DIFFERENT  WAY IN THE U.S.A.  AND CHURCHES.

GOD BLESS

NANADEE 

Project MUSE® - View Citation

• MLA
• APA
• Chicago
• Endnote

Watson, Ritchie Devon. ""The Difference of Race": Antebellum Race Mythology and the Development of Southern Nationalism." The Southern Literary Journal 35.1 (2002): 1-13. Project MUSE. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation]. 6 Nov. 2009 <http://muse.jhu.edu/>.
Always review your references for accuracy and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Consult your library or click here for more information on citing sources.

Watson, Ritchie Devon. (2002). "The difference of race": Antebellum race mythology and the development of southern nationalism. The Southern Literary Journal 35(1), 1-13. Retrieved November 6, 2009, from Project MUSE database.
Always review your references for accuracy and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Consult your library or click here for more information on citing sources.

Watson, Ritchie Devon. ""The Difference of Race": Antebellum Race Mythology and the Development of Southern Nationalism." The Southern Literary Journal 35, no. 1 (2002): 1-13. http://muse.jhu.edu/ (accessed November 6, 2009).
Always review your references for accuracy and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Consult your library or click here for more information on citing sources.

TY - JOUR
T1 - "The Difference of Race": Antebellum Race Mythology and the Development of Southern Nationalism
A1 - Watson, Ritchie Devon.
JF - The Southern Literary Journal
VL - 35
IS - 1
SP - 1
EP - 13
Y1 - 2002
PB - The University of North Carolina Press
SN - 1534-1461
UR - http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/southern_literary_journal/v035/35.1watson.html
N1 - Volume 35, Number 1, Fall 2002
ER -


Always review your references for accuracy and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Consult your library or click here for more information on citing sources.

Briefly, Roundheads were backers of the so called Parliament of the 1640's, while the Cavaliers backed the "Divine Right" theory of Charles-1. I hesitate to go on, wondering if you're referring to the American Revolution, the internal "civil war" revolution of the 1640's, the French Revolution etc. I'd consult Brittanica, or even Wikipedia,, which should be able to steer you in the right direction.

For cavaliers, generally political governance stemmed from inherited traditions analogous to the family.  Much as an extended family unit may have the eldest patriarch as its head, cavaliers saw the nation, or the "res publica" as a single body of interlocking personal relationships, both in descriptive terms, and as a matter of moral (e.g. Christian) right.  Naturally, a single body has one head and mind; thus royalism is natural.  Such a view is clearly non-abstract but highly conditional and personal.  Like with the Corleone family, and the mafia dons and subcaptains born into their respective situations, all classes from king to collier were historic-specific, and not justified by an appeal from the position of the abstract "man." 

In contrast, the roundheads adopted more whole-heartedly the notion of the social contract, with the free and autonomous individual at its core.  In this, they merely politicised their theological-thinking.  Moving away from Catholicism, and the Catholic notion of the Church as intermediary (for Catholics, Christianity was defined less as a belief than as a membership, a communion), Roundheads no longer saw secular social life as a larger whole.  The "organic order" like the Church, while both may be divinely ordained, were either man-made conventions or even merely necessary evils.  What were important were the individual's rights and duties (much like his faith and salvation), with no larger human moral order involved.  This was, in essence, early Modern revolutionary republicanism. 

I hasten to add that while Roundhead political thoughtwas certainly novel as a mass current, the cavaliers' Patriarchialism (See Sir Robert Filmer) was not entirely traditional either.  Medievalism--while certainly endorsing a natural order and organic kinds of "divine right" of the kings (Recall that today one might say that politics still has a "divine right" theory at its core--the "divine right" of the free and equal individual.)--it did not encompass the extensive claims of the Spanish, French, and English sovereigns of the later Renaissance era. 

Roundheads were parliamentary/puritain soldiers who wore tight fitting unorimented metal helmets, while Cavaliers were kings men who wore large hats with feathers as their uniform headdress.

Some differences between the round-heads and the cavaliers are that the cavaliers support the king and the round-heads support Parliament. the cavaliers had allot of expensive clothing and cared what they looked like while they fought and the round-heads cared about fighting and winning. the cavilers where catholic and the round-heads were extremely strong puritans. the cavilers were going around plundering, hitting, bullying and shouting and scaring women in there homes and the round-heads were not doing anything but fight and try to earn the trust of the public! and the cavilers believed in 'the divine rights of kings!'

In slang terms the words can also be used to mean if a man has a circumcised or uncircumcised penis.