top of page
EPOCH

The Ranters and the Apocalypse

Jack Crosswaite | University of York


In his 2019 film, Fanny Lye Deliver’d, Thomas Clay depicted the arrival of two Ranters, Thomas Ashbury and Rebecca Henshaw, at an isolated Shropshire farm in 1657. The farm was the home of the Lye family, Fanny and John (portrayed by Maxine Peake and Charles Dance) and their son, Arthur. Although the family initially welcomed the arrival of the strangers, their contrasting religious and social beliefs led to a series of clashes between the Ranters and John Lye, a stereotypically firm Puritan who had fought for the ‘Good Old Cause.'


Underpinning these arguments are two distinct visions of religion and society, one of John Lye’s Puritanism and his belief in conservative hierarchical authority, juxtaposed against the Ranters, who proclaimed that the apocalypse had arrived, that they were free from sin, and free to practice in sexual libertinism. The film culminates with Fanny and Rebecca leaving the farm to join the Society of Friends, the Quakers. Inspired by the Ranters’ alternate vision of social order, Fanny liberates herself from her oppressive marriage.


A still from the film. Fanny and John Lye look out from the house nervously
Puritans Fanny and John Lye (Maxine Peake and Charles Dance) in Fanny Lye Deliver'd, Dir. Thomas Clay (2019)

Emerging religious sects insisted that the apocalypse was at hand. They also challenged existing religious orthodoxies, particularly Puritanism, which emphasised hierarchical order and insisted on pious living. Yet, the apocalypse was not merely a creed for cranks. The late 1640s and early 1650s saw a Ranter print sensation, showing that apocalyptic anxiety was widespread throughout wider English society. For the Ranters, the apocalypse welcomed a new society free from Puritan constraints. For the readers of anti-Ranter print, the Ranters were themselves an apocalyptic sign of a world turned upside down.


So, who were the Ranters, what did their works propose, and why, in practice, did they inspire such a threat to traditional society?


For a short period in the late 1640s and 1650s, the Ranters emerged in English society. The term ‘Ranter’ was used pejoratively and did not have a precise definition, but there were a few individuals who were widely regarded as leaders. The two most notable were Abiezer Coppe, a former postmaster of Merton College, and Lawrence Clarkson, a former army preacher. Both authored numerous pamphlets outlining their Ranter beliefs and practices. In addition, in 1660 Clarkson wrote an autobiography detailing his spiritual journey from Presbyterianism to Muggletonianism – a prophetic sect that denied the Holy Trinity, affirming that Jesus alone was God, and notorious for cursing their opponents. These works incited major fears among authorities. A warrant would be issued against Coppe on 4 January 1650 for ‘writing Some blasphemous truths.’ Later, under the direction of a parliamentary committee formed on 14 June 1650, the Blasphemy Act would be passed, described as a ‘Bill against the Raunters.’


The behaviours and lifestyle of the Ranters also inspired strong criticism from contemporary observers, even amongst other radical groups. Gerrard Winstanley, leader of the Diggers, wrote in his pamphlet A Vindication (1650) that ‘The Ranting practice is a peacebreaker; it breaks the peace in Families… causing both sides to run into the Sea of confusion, madnesse and distruction.’ Not only was Winstanley writing to stem the potential growth of Ranterism in his sect, but he also had to defend against the polemic of his opponents who were more than willing to slander the Diggers as Ranters. Fears of the spread of Ranters in the army were also documented. On 24 June 1650, it was reported that two of the senior Parliamentarian Colonel Nathaniel Rich’s troops had proved to be ‘companions of those called Raunters’ holding a ‘dangerous opinion against Gods Word.’


In his pamphlet, the Fiery Flying Roll, Coppe detailed his conversion to Ranterism. He described how he was thrown into Hell and then reborn a prophet after a ‘most terrible thunder-clap.’ Being reborn with the Ranter vision, Coppe was ready to announce the oncoming apocalypse. Coppe’s pamphlet, A Fiery Flying Roll, was to be ‘the last WARNING PIECE at the dreadfull day of JUDGEMENT’ and his, A Second Fiery Flying Roule, announced that the day had finally arrived.


The prominent leaders shared beliefs in antinomianism and mortalism. Antinomians believed that Christians were freed by grace from the need to obey the laws of the Old Testament. Thus, the Ranters believed that they were wholly free of sin. As Coppe would write, ‘sin and transgression is finished and ended.’ Clarkson stated that he had practised the antinomian doctrine in his 1660 autobiography, The Lost Sheep Found, as he had believed that ‘till acted that so called Sin, thou art not delivered from the power of sin.’ One freed themselves from sin through the practice of sinful acts.


Freedom from sin was also underpinned by the shared belief of the Ranters in annihilationist mortalism, which posited the duality of the flesh and spirit. They believed that the body would perish and the spirit would return to its centre, God. For Clarkson, ‘the spirit of man while in the body, was distinct from God, but when death came it returned to God, and so became one with God.’ This was often expressed in an analogy to rivers. In his pamphlet, Some Sweet Sips, of some Spirituall Wine, Coppe noted that ‘we are in that pure River of water of life… and that River in us… which is the Fountaine of life, the Living God.’ These views culminated in a rejection of Heaven and Hell as distinct entities – rather, they were states of mind. With Heaven and Hell rendered a state of mind, a Ranter convert would be freed from social and moral constraint, free to live without sin, with their actions being that of the indwelling God.


This radical view would translate into the practice of sexual libertinism. Coppe denied the existence of sin through his libertine practice; ‘I can if it be my will, kisse and hug Ladies, and love my neighbours wife as my selfe, without sin.’ Ranter writers would boast and detail how they acted upon their libertine beliefs. Coppe would write in lurid detail of his ‘notorious businesse with the Gypseys and Gaolbirds… at the prison in Southwark neer S. Georges Church.’ Clarkson also detailed how he ‘went up and down the countries’ with multiple partners as ‘man and wife.’ This flouted the authority of the newly established Commonwealth by disregarding established familial structures, the Blasphemy Act, and the Puritan Reformation of Manners.


The influence of apocalyptic theories, such as those advocated by Clay’s Ranters, on early modern society cannot be overstated. The visions of the apocalypse posed a significant threat to existing religious structures, as they had the potential to disrupt both social status and established institutions. Early modern theologians were acutely aware of the radically destabilising potential of the apocalypse. The language of apocalyptic vision was dangerous, and visions and prophecies had to be curtailed.


Having claimed to be a prophet, with God writing through his hand, Coppe revealed the importance of the experience of the English Civil War in the development of apocalyptic and Ranter thought. Through Coppe, the Lord condemned the ‘Kingdome-depopulating, and devastating’ civil war. It had filled His ears with ‘confused noise’ and ‘cries’ about ‘unnatural tyranny’ and ‘tythes, excise, taxes, pollings.’ The Civil War appears in Ranter's writings as the precursor to the apocalypse where Coppe would be joined by the ‘mighty Leveller’ to ‘lay the Mountaines low.’ The politics and violence of the English Civil War inspired the growth of Ranter thought and led to the articulation of a sociopolitical vision against the hierarchical authority and institutions upon which the Commonwealth government was attempting to establish itself.


The emergence of the Ranters generated an anxious frenzy of pamphlets that aimed to ridicule the radicals. Yet, in addition to the Ranters announcing the apocalypse, anti-Ranter printed pamphlets would fuel wider societal fears of the apocalypse. The Ranters were being presented as the Devil’s workers and as a sign that the world was being turned upside down. Although much of the print was exaggerated, and depicted fictional stories of Ranters, some addressed seriously the sociopolitical criticisms made by the Ranters. The pamphlets went into great detail describing Ranter beliefs and claimed to uncover Ranter meetings and conferences exposing their discussions to their audience. The pamphlets were a hit, gaining a large audience of curious and anxious readers.


The frontispiece of a pamphlet from the mid-seventeenth century with crude woodcuts representing the Ranters.
Illustrated title page of 'The Ranters Ranting', B. Alsop: London, 1650. From the British Library Archive/

To counter the Ranters, this sensationalist print campaign transformed the Ranters’ image of God into the Devil. For the writer of The Ranters Declaration, it was ‘Satans visage’ that had led the Ranters astray. Pamphlets argued that the Ranters were misled by their belief that they were following an indwelling God, rather they were possessed by the Devil. One pamphlet, A Blow at the Root, connected the Ranters to the Antichrist. The Ranters were part of ‘Satans plot’ so that he ‘and Antichrist his Vicegerent’ would be ‘God of this world.’ Fears of the Ranters were interconnected with wider anxieties around radical sects paving the way for the Antichrist and an oncoming apocalypse. The Ranter print sensation shows how the apocalypse was not simply the vocabulary of the radical sects. The Ranters were seen as agents of the Devil and the Antichrist who were acting to subvert social order in the Commonwealth and bring on the apocalypse.


The period of the English Civil War saw the emergence of an apocalyptic atmosphere. In an anonymous pamphlet of 1643, entitled Englands Alarm to War against the Beast, the author encouraged the Parliamentary cause against the ‘hidden works of darknesse.’  The author justified the war as a defence of Christianity from ‘the Evill-one’ who was acting through the wicked rule of Charles I.  The Antichrist had arrived in England, and it was the duty of the Godly to defend their nation from this apocalyptic threat.


Similarly, the horrific experiences of the war echoed the apocalypse. Descriptions of artillery are particularly striking. John Milton described cannons as a ‘devilish machination to plague the Sons of men.’ Whilst the playwright, Ben Jonson, suggested that ‘From the Devil’s arse did guns beget.’ The period of the war fermented depictions of the Devil and the apocalypse in popular language and mindset, with it being used to articulate the lived experiences of violence and politics.


Despite the frenzy of the pamphlets, the Ranters gained little long-term traction, with their prophetic leaders being quickly reprimanded and forced to recant their beliefs. Some followers would move on to other emerging religious sects like the fictitious Fanny Lye who joined the Quakers or Lawrence Clarkson who joined the Muggletonians. Others eventually returned to the Church of England. In 1667, Abiezer Coppe himself subscribed to the Church of England’s Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion and was licensed to practice as a surgeon. For Coppe and many others, the apocalyptic fervour of the 1640s and 1650s had subsided, leading them to conform once again to societal norms.


 

Further Reading:


  • Thomas, Clay (director), Fanny Lye Deliver'd (Pull Back Camera, 2019).

  • John Colin Davis, Fear, Myth, and History: the Ranters and the historians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).

  • John Hall, Apocalypse: From Antiquity to the Empire of Modernity (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2009).

  • Christopher Hill, The World Turned Upside Down: Radical Ideas during the English Revolution (Hermondsworth: Penguin Books, 1975).

  • Arthur Leslie Morton, The World of the Ranters: Religious Radicalism in the English Revolution (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1970).


Jack Crosswaite is a part-time master’s student at the University of York studying Early Modern History. His work examines the religious and political developments of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries with a particular focus on popular religion. He is the chair of the Cabinet of Curiosities, a postgraduate research forum at the University of York.


Twitter: @jack_crosswaite

bottom of page