Two Visons of English Revolutions (original) (raw)
Related papers
CorfieldPdf31 Eighteenth-Century Revolutions - full text
With thanks for stimulating discussions from panel chair Annelien de Dijn, fellow panellist Hanca Jürgens, and all ISECS seminar participants; to Anne-Marie Mai for the invitation to publish; and to Tony Belton for his as-ever critical reading of the text.
I. History and Ideology in the English Revolution
The Historical Journal, 1965
IDEOLOGICAL arguments are commonly sustained by an appeal to the past, an appeal either to see precedents in history for new claims being advanced, or to see history itself as a development towards the point of view being advocated or denounced. 2 Perhaps the most influential example from English history of this prescriptive use of historical information is provided by the ideological arguments associated with the constitutional revolution of the seventeenth century. It was from a propagandist version of early English history that the 'whig' ideology associated with the Parliamentarians-the ideology of customary law, regulated monarchy and immemorial Parliamentary right-drew its main evidence and strength. The process by which this 'whig' interpretation of history became bequeathed to the eighteenth century as accepted ideology has of course already been definitively labelled by Professor Butterfield, and described in his book on The Englishman and his History. 3 It still remains, however, to analyse fully the various other ways in which awareness of the past became a politically relevant factor in English society during its constitutional upheavals. The acceptance of the ' whig' view of early English history in fact represented only the triumph of one among several conflictin b ideologies which had relied on identical historical backing to their claims. And despite the resolution of this conflict by universal acceptance of the ' whig' view, the ' whigs' themselves were nevertheless to be covertly influenced by the rival ideologies which their triumph might seem to have suppressed. It is the further investigation of the complexity and interdependence of these historical and ideological attitudes which will be attempted here. 1 The final form of this paper owes much to discussion with Mr Peter Laslett, of Trinity College, Cambridge, to whom I am greatly indebted both for general encouragement and for scholarly advice. 2 The same ideology may of course draw on other sources, particularly on the society's less conscious reflexions about its own structure. For a remarkable attempt to analyse this type of source-for the same ideology as discussed here-see C. B. Macpherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism, Hobbes to Locke (Oxford, 1962). 3 H. Butterfield, The Englishman and his History (Cambridge, 1944). To avoid any repetition I assume familiarity in what follows with the ideological position which (following Professor Butterfield's analysis of it) I call simply 'whig'.
Revolutionary Britannia? Reflections on the Threat of Revolution in Britain, 1789-1848
The English Historical Review, 2002
Deux mille ans d'histoire de l'eT glise. Bilan et perspectives historiographiques. Edited by J. Pirotte and E. Louchez. Pp. . (Revue d'histoire eccle! siastique, , .) (). Louvain-la-Neuve : Louvain University Press. JEH () ; DOI : .\S The centenary of a great learned journal, a notable event both for individual readers and for libraries, is proper matter for a deep salute to the twin universities of Leuven\Louvain. This special volume celebrating the RHE contains thirtynine papers on selected problems in the two millennia of past Christian history. A discernible emphasis lies on the sense of tension between traditional conservative catholic theology and the assumptions of modernity. Some good essays on hagiography include an admirable stress on the scholarly achievements of the Bollandists, especially (but not only) Hippolyte Delehaye, who broke new ground by applying strict historical method to texts which, even when far from being sober and dry records, could often contain social history of high value. Mathlijs Lamberigts contributes a major paper on the modern rehabilitation of Pelagius, whose ' ism ' was largely a construct of his opponents and who found considerable sympathy in the Greek Churches. W. Frijhoff comments on rationalist histories of sorcery and demon possession. Two sections discuss the delicate topic of church authority, including a sympathetic piece by Bruno Neveu on the treatment of Jansenism, the problems of recruiting clergy and religious in western Europe, and the rise of an audible voice on the part of women and Catholic laity. Ecumenism, particularly Catholic-Orthodox dialogue, is handled perhaps more nervously but has developed a convincing method and offers a good process of education for those Catholics and Protestants to whom ecumenism is a polite term for treachery. J. A. Komonchak has here a candid piece on religious freedom and the confessional state. Emile Poulat, expert on Loisy and Modernism, reconsiders some of the lasting problems. Finally, the grand master Roger Aubert concludes the collection, analysing the distinct assumptions of those who think church history no branch of theology but only of history. The point is perhaps worth making here that theology has not only had but retains a decisive role in the formation of the central narrative.
This essay, first web-published in Danish research journal Literature, Culture & Media (2013), reveals the many uses of the term 'Revolution' to Britain by eighteenth-century observers and compares their verdicts with those of later historians. Many changes were detected; but defining them all as 'revolutions' risks confusion between great political/social upheavals on the one hand, and long-term macro-transformations in social, cultural and economic life on the other. Hence historians need a better, subtler and more variegated vocabulary of change.
Preface to "The London Revolution 1640-1643: Class Struggles in 17th Century England"
Book, 2022
And thus I hope even British respectability will not be overshocked if I use...the term "historical materialism," to designate that view of the course of history which seeks the ultimate cause and the great moving power of all important historic events in the economic development of society, in the changes in the modes of production and exchange, in the consequent division of society into distinct classes, and in the struggles of these classes against one another. ~Frederick Engels 1 The diminishing band who continue to write about the period have largely discarded the grand narratives of liberty and revolution. They no longer believe that two sides in the war were divided by great differences, whether social or ideological. Clear-cut interpretations of the conflict have given way to a complex and confusing story of contingency, accident, and unintended consequences. ~Keith Thomas 2 The history of the English Revolution, Civil War, unsettled Commonwealth and degenerating Protectorate took place during the years 1640-1660. The period remains a divisive line in English history, despite less notice being taken of it in British schools and the popular press than was the case not so long ago. Just as the effects and controversies of the American Civil War are still extant, those of the Introduction to Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, in Karl Marx and Frederick Engels Selected
Rethinking the English Revolution of 1649
The Historical Journal, 2017
It is generally assumed that the kingless Commonwealth established in 1649 was the unforeseen consequence of the regicide: an expedient taken hesitantly and nothing more than a stop-gap. ‘Republicanism’ was a minority position even among those who remained at Westminster during the dramatic events of 1648–9: the majority remained committed to monarchical forms of government. By reappraising the surviving evidence, this article proposes a radically different account of the genesis of the Commonwealth regime. Not only were preparations already underway in the weeks before Charles I's death that helped to pave the way for government without a king, but also the decision to abolish kingship after the regicide was itself taken relatively quickly, with no discernible signs of hesitation. Even if few who defended or served the Commonwealth were republican, this need not mean that the majority were attached to monarchy. Rather, many of those who supported the regime, drawing upon the ex...