Spanning both the history of the modern West and his own five-decade journey as a historian, Gerald Stourzh’s sweeping new essay collection covers the same breadth of topics that has characterized his career—from Benjamin Franklin to Gustav Mahler, from Alexis de Tocqueville to Charles Beard, from the notion of constitution in seventeenth-century England to the concept of neutrality in twentieth-century Austria. This storied career brought him in the 1950s from the University of Vienna to the University of Chicago—of which he draws a brilliant picture—and later took him to Berlin and eventually back to Austria. One of the few prominent scholars equally at home with U.S. history and the history of central Europe, Stourzh has informed these geographically diverse experiences and subjects with the overarching themes of his scholarly achievement: the comparative study of liberal constitutionalism and the struggle for equal rights at the core of Western notions of free government. Composed between 1953 and 2005 and including a new autobiographical essay written especially for this volume, From Vienna to Chicago and Back will delight Stourzh fans, attract new admirers, and make an important contribution to transatlantic history.
The period from the fifteenth century to the late eighteenth century was one of critical importance to British constitutionalism. Although the seeds were sown in earlier eras, it was at this point that the constitution was transformed to a system of representative parliamentary government. Changes at the practical level of the constitution were accompanied by a wealth of ideas on constitutions written from different - and often competing - perspectives. Hobbes and Locke, Harrington, Hume, and Bentham, Coke, the Levellers, and Blackstone were all engaged in the constitutional affairs of the day, and their writings influenced the direction and outcome of constitutional thought and development. They treated themes of a universal and timeless character and as such have established themselves of lasting interest and importance in the history of constitutional thought. Examining their works we can follow the shaping of contemporary ideas of constitutions, and the design of constitutional texts. At the same time major constitutional change and upheaval were taking place in America and France. This was an era of intense discussion, examination, and constitution-making. The new nation of the United States looked to authors such as Locke, Hume, Harrington, and Sydney for guidance in their search for a new republicanism, adding to the development of constitutional thought and practice. This collection includes chapters examining the influences of Madison, Hamilton, Jefferson, and Adams. In France the influence of Rousseau was apparent in the revolutionary constitution, and Sieyes was an active participant in its discussion and design. Montesquieu and de Maistre reflected on the nature of constitutions and constitutional government, and these French writers drew on, engaged with, and challenged the British and American writers. The essays in this volume reveal a previously unexplored dynamic relationship between the authors of the three nations, explaining the intimate connection between ruler and ruled.
This book analyzes the consequences of the accession of James I in 1603 for English and British history, politics, literature and culture. Questioning the extent to which 1603 marked a radical break with the past, the book explores the Scottish, Welsh, and wider European and colonial contexts, to this crucial date in history.
Drawing on recent trends in both Atlantic and center-periphery literature, this book examines the relationship between the English crown - monarch, privy council, and ancillary bodies - and its Atlantic colonies under the early Stuart monarchs, James I and Charles I, circa 1603-1642.
This study examines how debates about history during the French Revolution informed and changed the nature of the British novel between 1790 and 1814. During these years, intersections between history, political ideology, and fiction, as well as the various meanings of the term "history" itself, were multiple and far reaching. Morgan Rooney elucidates these subtleties clearly and convincingly. While political writers of the 1790s--Burke, Price, Mackintosh, Paine, Godwin, Wollstonecraft, and others--debate the historical meaning of the Glorious Revolution as a prelude to broader ideological arguments about the significance of the past for the present and future, novelists engage with this discourse by representing moments of the past or otherwise vying to enlist the authority of history to further a reformist or loyalist agenda. Anti-Jacobin novelists such as Charles Walker, Robert Bisset, and Jane West draw on Burkean historical discourse to characterize the reform movement as ignorant of the complex operations of historical accretion. For their part, reform-minded novelists such as Charlotte Smith, William Godwin, and Maria Edgeworth travesty Burke's tropes and arguments so as to undermine and then redefine the category of history. As the Revolution crisis recedes, new novel forms such as Edgeworth's regional novel, Lady Morgan's national tale, and Jane Porter's early historical fiction emerge, but historical representation--largely the legacy of the 1790s' novel--remains an increasingly pronounced feature of the genre. Whereas the representation of history in the novel, Rooney argues, is initially used strategically by novelists involved in the Revolution debate, it is appropriated in the early nineteenth century by authors such as Edgeworth, Morgan, and Porter for other, often related ideological purposes before ultimately developing into a stable, nonpartisan, aestheticized feature of the form as practiced by Walter Scott. The French Revolution Debate and the British Novel, 1790-1814 demonstrates that the transformation of the novel at this fascinating juncture of British political and literary history contributes to the emergence of the historical novel as it was first realized in Scott's Waverley (1814).
Analyses the different ways in which historians over the last three centuries have tried to explain the causes, course and consequences of the English Revolution
Written by one of the world's most distinguished historians of early modern history, A Freeborn People is a provocative exploration of the ways in which the political cultures of the elite and of the common people intersected during the seventeenth century. David Underdown shows that the two worlds were not as separate as historians have often thought them to be; English men and women of all social levels had similar expectations about good government and about the traditional liberties available to them under the "Ancient Constitution". Throughout the century, both levels of politics were also powerfully influenced by prevailing assumptions about gender roles, and, especially in the years before the civil wars, by fears that the country was threatened by evil forces of satanic inversion. This dramatic reinterpretation of the Stuart period, based on the author's acclaimed 1992 Ford Lectures, begins a new chapter in the continuing debate over the historical meaning of Britain's seventeenth-century revolutions.