Radical Parliamentarians offers a new account of some of the most important and pivotal events of the English civil war of the 1640s, enhancing our understanding of the dramatic events of this period and shedding light on the long-term political and religious consequences of the conflict.
John Adamson provides a new synthesis of current research on the political crisis that engulfed England in the 1640s. Drawing on new archival findings and challenging current orthodoxies, these essays by leading historians offer a variety of original perspectives, locating English events firmly within a 'three kingdoms' context.
The influence exercised by Queen Henrietta Maria over her husband Charles I during the English Civil Wars, has long been a subject of interest. To many of her contemporaries, especially those sympathetic to Parliament, her French origins and Catholic beliefs meant that she was regarded with great suspicion. Later historians picking up on this, have spent much time arguing over her political role and the degree to which she could influence the decisions of her husband. What has not been so thoroughly investigated, however, are issues surrounding the popular perceptions of the Queen that inspired the plethora of pamphlets, newsbooks and broadsides. Although most of these documents are polemical propaganda devices that tell us little about the actual power wielded by Henrietta Maria, they do throw much light on how contemporaries viewed the King and Queen, and their relationship. The picture created by Charles and Henrietta's enemies was one of a royal household in patriarchal disorder. The Queen was characterized as an overly assertive, unduly influential, foreign, Catholic queen consort, whilst Charles was portrayed as a submissive and weak husband. Such an image had wide political ramifications, resulting in accusations that Charles was unfit to rule, and thus helping to justify Parliamentary resistance to the monarch. Because Charles had permitted his Catholic wife to interfere in state matters he stood accused of threatening the patriarchal order upon which all of society rested, and of imperilling the Church of England. In this book Michelle White tackles these dual issues of Henrietta's actual and perceived influence, and how this was portrayed in popular print by those sympathetic and hostile to her cause. In so doing she presents a vivid portrait of a strong willed woman who had a profound influence on the course of English history.
England on Edge traces the collapse of the government of Charles I, the disintegration of the established church, and the accompanying cultural panic that led to civil war. Focused on the years 1640 to 1642, it examines social and religious turmoil and the emergence of an unrestrained popular press. Hundreds of people not normally seen in historical surveys make appearances here, in a drama much larger than the struggle of king and parliament.
Trust and Distrust offers the first overview of Britain's history of corruption in office in the pre-modern era, 1600-1850, and as such will appeal not only to historians, but also to political and social scientists. Mark Knights paints a picture of the interaction of the domestic and imperial stories of corruption in office, showing how these stories were intertwined and related. Linking corruption in office to the domestic and imperial state has not been attempted before, and Knights does this by drawing on extensive interdisciplinary sources relating to the East India Company as well as other colonial officials in the Atlantic World and elsewhere in Britain's emerging empire. Both 'corruption' and 'office' were concepts that were in evolution during the period 1600-1850 and underwent very significant but protracted change which this study charts and seeks to explain. The book makes innovative use of the concept of trust, which helped to shape office in ways that underlined principles of selflessness, disinterestedness, integrity, and accountability in officials.