The Plum Pudding Riots and the Puritan War on Christmas

Podcast Transcript

Christmas is the time of year for getting together with loved ones, celebrating, and giving gifts.

As a song says, “It’s the most wonderful time of the year.”

Nobody could possibly dislike Christmas, right?

Well, some people don’t like Christmas, and historically, some people really don’t like Christmas.

In fact, in 17th century England, they actually banned Christmas….and that did not go over well.

Learn more about the Plum Pudding Riots and the Puritan War on Christmas on this episode of Everything Everywhere Daily.

The 17th-century attack on Christmas in England wasn’t something that came from anti-religious forces.

Quite the opposite. It came from extremely religious forces who opposed Christmas on religious grounds.

To understand how this happened, we have to go all the way back to Henry VIII. After the frustration of not getting his marriage to Catherine of Aragon annulled by the Pope, he personally took over the church, confiscated all church property, and established himself as the head of the Church of England.

This caused a conflict between Catholics and Protestants in England that lasted generations and a series of monarchs who flip-flopped between Catholic and Protestant.

I’ve covered this in multiple episodes, but the conflict between Catholics and Protestants wasn’t the only religious conflict in England.

The other major group in England was the Puritans. Puritans were dissatisfied with what they saw as compromises and felt that the reformation in England didn’t go far enough.

Their name came from the fact that they wished to ‘purify’ the Church of England.

This was because of the Church of England Religious Settlement under Elizabeth I, which aimed for a middle ground between Catholic and Protestant practices. It retained many traditional Catholic practices, rituals, and hierarchical structures.

The Hampton Court Conference of 1604 failed to pacify the Puritans. James I opposed their demands, famously declaring, “No bishop, no king,” tying the Church’s hierarchy to royal authority.

Tensions escalated as Charles I and Archbishop of Canterbury William Laud sought to enforce uniformity in worship. Laud’s reforms, known as “Laudianism,” emphasized elaborate rituals, the use of altars, and reverence for church hierarchy. This led to widespread persecution of Puritans and their growing opposition to royal policies.

Faced with persecution in England, many Puritans chose to emigrate:

Some Puritans, like the Pilgrims, initially fled to the Dutch Republic, where religious tolerance allowed them to practice their faith freely.

In the 1620s and 1630s, many Puritans migrated to the New World, particularly New England.

However, those who stuck around in England soon found the political pendulum swinging in their favor.

For 11 years, Charles I ruled without calling Parliament, bypassing the body entirely and raising funds through controversial methods like ship money, which was an ancient tax on coastal communities. This period of “Personal Rule” alienated many MPs, including Puritans, who resented the king’s perceived absolutism.

When Charles finally summoned Parliament in 1640 to address the financial crisis caused by the Bishops’ Wars, he faced an increasingly radical body. The “Short Parliament” was dismissed after just three weeks, but the “Long Parliament,” convened later that year, became a hotbed of Puritan opposition.

Puritanism had strong support among the rising merchant class, who shared its values of hard work, thrift, and personal responsibility. This class played an increasingly prominent role in Parliament.

The Puritans were staunch Clavnists.

Calvinism emphasizes simplicity and purity in worship, seeking to align all practices with Scripture while rejecting elements not explicitly prescribed in the Bible. This principle, known as the Regulative Principle of Worship, holds that only those activities directly commanded or modeled in Scripture are permissible in worship.

Calvinists opposed ornate ceremonies, the use of icons, elaborate music, and hierarchical rituals, seeing them as distractions from true spiritual devotion and remnants of Catholicism.

One of the implications of these beliefs is that they hated Christmas. Technically, they didn’t like any holy day, but they really didn’t like Christmas.

For the Puritans, Christmas represented an unacceptable mix of pagan customs and Catholic influences. They criticized its association with feasting, revelry, and idleness, arguing that such behavior contradicted the solemnity and simplicity that true Christianity required.

Furthermore, they viewed December 25 as an arbitrary date, not biblically justified as the birth of Christ.

In 1642, a civil war broke out between the forces of Parliament and those of Charles I

In 1644, during the Civil War, Parliament passed ordinances banning Christmas celebrations. They declared December 25 a day of fasting and repentance rather than festivity. This ban was further reinforced in 1647 when Parliament abolished traditional holy days, including Christmas, which involved feasting.

To compensate for the removal of feast days, the Puritans created a day of fasting on the last Wednesday of each month.

However, fasting is not feasting and not nearly as fun.

The banning of Christmas was deeply unpopular among the general population, who valued the holiday for its communal and festive traditions. Both Anglicans and Catholics resented Puritan dominance and their attempts to impose strict religious observance.

Christmas was a cherished cultural institution that marked a time of communal joy, charity, and family gatherings. Its suppression alienated even those who were otherwise loyal to Parliament.

People couldn’t even make traditional mince pies and plum pudding.

The conflict over Christmas came to a head in December 1647 when riots erupted across England.

The most notable of these took place in the city of Canterbury in Kent.

Local officials in Canterbury, under pressure to enforce Parliament’s orders, issued directives for shops to remain open and for all citizens to treat December 25 as an ordinary workday.

The problem was only a handful of shops bothered to open. The rest of them were closed as they always were on Christmas Day in open defiance of the orders of Parliament.

As tensions simmered in the city, the Lord Mayor of Canterbury took to the streets, walking through the bustling lanes and personally urging shopkeepers to comply with the mandate. He appealed to their sense of duty—or perhaps fear—encouraging them to remain open in defiance of the Christmas spirit so cherished by the townspeople.

However, the sight of the Lord Mayor enforcing such an unpopular decree did not go unnoticed. A crowd began to gather, initially murmuring their discontent but soon swelling in size and intensity. The mob surged forward, emboldened by their shared outrage, only to be confronted by the Mayor’s armed pikemen, who were ordered to hold the line and prevent further escalation.

What began as a standoff quickly descended into chaos. Goods started to fly through the air, hurled by angry townsfolk over the heads of the Mayor’s men. The crowd’s anger transformed into a full-blown mob, its energy driven by the collective determination to uphold their cherished Christmas traditions.

Nearby, a merchant, overwhelmed by the scene, decided to shutter his premises. The Mayor, determined to assert his authority, approached the merchant and demanded that he reopen his shop. When the merchant refused, the Mayor threatened to have him placed in the stocks for disobedience, a punishment meant to humiliate and deter.

The crowd, witnessing this confrontation, erupted with fury. They surged forward again, rallying in defense of the shopkeeper and directing their rage toward the Mayor. The air was thick with shouts of anger and chants supporting the defiant merchant.

As the mob pressed closer, their numbers overwhelming, the Lord Mayor’s composure faltered. He lashed out in an attempt to regain control, but his efforts were futile. The crowd retaliated, and he was violently knocked to the ground.

The Mayor’s situation grew dire as he struggled to rise. He was trampled into the mud, his ceremonial robes and garments shredded amidst the chaos. Dragged by his feet through the gutter, he became a symbol of the people’s rebellion against the enforcement of the Puritan regime’s Christmas ban.

Despite the humiliation and pain, the Mayor somehow managed to regain his footing. Gathering his remaining strength, he called for order with a commanding voice. Miraculously, the crowd grew silent, their attention focused on the battered Lordy Mayor.

Summoning what authority he could muster, the Lord Mayor issued a stern order: they were to disperse immediately. His words hung in the air, a plea for calm amid the fervor of rebellion.

Just then, instead of the mob getting worse, something happened totally out of left field. Someone brought out two inflated pig bladders, the makeshift “balls” of the era, and soon, a massive, unruly game of football erupted in the streets.

This was a far cry from the modern game of football, regardless of what sort of football you happen to be thinking of. These were the days before organized rules, goalposts, or referees.

Entire towns would participate in such matches, with boundaries extending across fields, streets, and even into neighboring villages. The population, whether enthusiastic or reluctant, often found themselves drawn into the melee, as these games were as much about community spirit as they were about sheer pandemonium.

These town-wide matches were notoriously violent, with participants frequently sustaining injuries in the fray. If it wasn’t technically a riot, it was the next closest thing to a riot.

As the pig bladders were kicked, thrown, and wrestled over, the people of Canterbury charged wildly through the streets, shouting cries of “conquest!” Their shouts echoed through the town as they transformed the day into a lively, albeit rebellious, celebration.

Adding to the festive atmosphere, some residents took the opportunity to decorate their homes with holly bushes, a traditional symbol of the holiday season. Others organized impromptu “entertainment,” offering a sense of camaraderie and defiance against the Puritan-imposed restrictions.

Basically, the people of Canterbury did all of the things that the Puritans hated.

Canterbury was not the only place where similar events happened.

In London, the heart of the Puritan government, there was widespread discontent over the suppression of Christmas. While large-scale riots were avoided due to the strong presence of government troops, many citizens defied the ban by decorating their homes with holly and ivy, refusing to open their shops, and gathering privately to celebrate.

The city of Norwich, known for its strong ties to traditional Anglicanism, saw a more organized resistance. Citizens openly refused to comply with the orders to treat Christmas as a regular workday. Church bells rang out in defiance of the ban, and large gatherings formed in the streets. Authorities attempted to intervene, but their efforts were met with jeers and illicit christmas acts, similar to the events in Canterbury.

In Ipswich, another town deeply affected by the Puritan ban, the townspeople similarly resisted. Market stalls were shuttered despite orders to remain open, and gatherings in the town square celebrated the holiday with caroling and feasting.

Despite all this resistance to banning Christmas, Parliament doubled down on its anti-Christmas policies, imposing fines and penalties on those who celebrated it.

Troops were deployed to restore order in affected areas. Leaders of the unrest were arrested and punished.

Pamphlets denouncing Christmas as a pagan and Catholic invention were widely distributed to justify the ban.

The ban on Christmas remained in place during the Interregnum period until 1660, when Oliver Cromwell and the Puritans ruled the country. Still, celebrations persisted underground or in defiance of the law.

The Restoration of Charles II in 1660 marked the end of the Puritan experiment and the revival of traditional Christmas festivities. Charles II recognized Christmas and restored it as a public celebration.

It turns out that Christmas is really hard to stamp out.

The Soviet Union tried to ban Christmas for totally different reasons than the Puritans from 1929 to 1935. Celebrations were outlawed, including the sale of Christmas trees.

Stalin eventually changed strategy in 1935, brought back Christmas trees, and turned it into a compulsory New Year’s celebration.

It just goes to show that whether it’s for religious or non-religious reasons, Christmas is something that is very hard to extinguish.