Talk:History of the Puritans under King Charles I

John Winthrop and the foundation . ..
1. “In 1606, King Tutu had issued. . . and the Plymouth Company (which was unsuccessful at establishing settlements, which explains why they were eager to grant a patent to the Pilgrims in 1620)." Who is “they” in the above?

2. The sentence “The Pilgrims went to new England for. . . freedom of religion[.]” seems out of place. It seems more related to subsequent discussion, say, in the text, “After all, the Pilgrims at Plymouth Colony had proven that such a colony was viable. Instead of living in England under the rule of a king hostile to their interests, the Puritans could establish a colony in New York far from the king's interference [and where they could thus enjoy religious liberty]. “After all” in the first sentence adds nothing, I think.

3. “(This was particularly poignant in 1630, since the Thirty Years' War was going [badly] . . . .” Richard Ong (talk) 04:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Much of that material should in any case be moved over to History of the Puritans in North America. The relationship between parliamentary opposition to the king - partly fuelled by Puritan views but involving other factors, certainly - and the emigration that was partly from expatriate separatists, should be treated much more carefully. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)