Journal articles: 'Glorious Revolution 1688'

1

Groenhuis, G. "De Glorious Revolution van 1688 herdacht." BMGN - Low Countries Historical Review 105, no. 3 (January 1, 1990): 394. http://dx.doi.org/10.18352/bmgn-lchr.3242.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Harrison, George. "Prerogative revolution and glorious revolution: Political proscription and parliamentary undertaking, 1687–1688." Parliaments, Estates and Representation 10, no. 1 (June 1990): 29–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02606755.1990.9525768.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Underwood, T. L. "“It pleased me much to contend”: John Bunyan as Controversialist." Church History 57, no. 4 (December 1988): 456–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3166652.

Full text

Abstract:

In English history, 1688 is best remembered as the year of the Glorious Revolution. But that same year also witnessed the death of John Bunyan (1628–1688), the Nonconformist Bedford minister widely known as the author of The Pilgrim's Progress (1678; part two, 1684) and a preacher capable of drawing 3,000 persons to Sunday sermons in London. In subsequent centuries his fame increased, and, partly through translations into numerous languages, his story of Christian's pilgrimage became known in nearly every region of the world. In our own time his life and work have drawn the attention of many scholars from several fields, and the publication in modern editions of all of his sixty printed works has been undertaken. In 1988 the tercentenary of his death has been observed by a variety of activities including scholarly conferences and publications.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Scott, Hamish. "The Making of a Revolution?" Journal of Interdisciplinary History 41, no. 2 (September 2010): 227–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jinh_a_00051.

Full text

Abstract:

Interpretations of England's Glorious Revolution of 1688–1689 fall into two categories. The first views the opposition to James II as a national movement—establishing English religious freedom and political liberty under the auspices of a parliamentary monarchy significantly different from the continental kingdoms in which absolutism held sway. The second posits an international conspiracy involving only a small minority of England's peerage and gentry and culminating in the invasion of William III, Dutch Stadtholder and eventual English king, who wanted to deploy British resources in the struggle against French power. Scholars have recently combined the two positions to form a composite interpretation. Pincus' 1688, however, sets out to overthrow almost every piece of this established picture and to substitute the interpretation emblazoned in his subtitle; 1688 was nothing less than “The First Modern Revolution.”

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Schwoerer, Lois G. "Women and the Glorious Revolution." Albion 18, no. 2 (1986): 195–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4050314.

Full text

Abstract:

The role of women in revolutions has recently excited a good deal of scholarly interest. Innovative studies have appeared on women in the English Civil War, the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution that have not only rescued women from oblivion but also modified and enlarged understanding of the revolutions themselves. But for the English Revolution of 1688-89 there has been, aside from biographical studies of the two future queens, Mary and Anne, very little published work on the role of women. My purpose is to remedy that situation, and to broaden the inquiry by addressing four major questions: (1) what role did women from all social groups, lower, middle, aristocratic and royal, play in the Revolution: (2) why, in view of customary restraints, did they enter the public arena; (3) what influence did they have on the Glorious Revolution; and (4) what influence did the Revolution have on women? Underlying these queries is the basic question of what are the contextual conditions that encourage or even make possible women's participation in revolutions?Such a topic requires changes in the questions customarily used in studying political history. If politics is defined in traditional terms simply as the competition for and exercise of power by individuals through their office, voting, and decision making, then there is nothing to say about women in the Glorious Revolution. Women, whatever their social status, had no direct access to the levers of conventionally-defined politics. They did not vote, sit in either house of Parliament, or hold office on any level of government, unless they were queens. In a predominantly patriarchal society, females, except for widows, were customarily subordinate to their fathers or husbands and confined to the sphere of the family and household.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Norton, Philip. "THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION OF 1688 ITS CONTINUING RELEVANCE." Parliamentary Affairs 42, no. 2 (April 1989): 135–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pa.a052186.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Dickinson, H. T. "HOW REVOLUTIONARY WAS THE ‘GLORIOUS REVOLUTION’ OF 1688?" Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies 11, no. 2 (October 1, 2008): 125–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-0208.1988.tb00032.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Schwoerer, Lois G. "Celebrating the Glorious Revolution, 1689–1989." Albion 22, no. 1 (1990): 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4050254.

Full text

Abstract:

1988 and 1989 have been vintage years all over the world for centenary celebrations. People have celebrated the centenary of the Eiffel Tower, the bicentenary of the French Revolution, the bicentenary of Australia, the bicentenary of the American Bill of Rights, the quatercentenary of the defeat of the Spanish Armada, the sexcentenary of the battle of Kosovo (this one may have escaped your notice, but it brought over a million people to a gathering in the city of Pristina in Yugoslavia in June 1989), and, of course, the tercentenary of the English Revolution of 1688–89, with which I am concerned tonight. You will have no trouble believing that I have been “concerned with” and “celebrating” the Glorious Revolution for two years now, but I want to confess to you in the intimacy of this festive occasion that it has really been at least ten years, and that sometimes it feels more like three hundred!How did centennial observances start? Why do people go to trouble, take time, and spend money to call to mind an event that happened one, two, or three hundred years ago? What is it about centennial moments that turns serious-minded, scholarly-inclined historians like ourselves into “party people”? What do celebrations tell us about the uses of the past in successive “presents”? The fact is that celebrations, each varying in character, have attended the Glorious Revolution from its beginnings on through each centennial anniversary thereafter — in 1788–89, 1888–89, and 1988–89. The observances at these centennial moments not only celebrated the Revolution itself, but also served, even as they reflected, current political, cultural, and/or economic ideas and goals. In a long perspective, the celebrations are an important part of the political and cultural history of the Revolution of 1688–89 itself. They illustrate how high and low politics may intersect, show how political ideas circulate through society and undergo transformation, and offer an index of changing ideological and cultural assumptions and aspirations over three hundred years.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Claydon, Tony. "William III's Declaration of Reasons and the Glorious Revolution." Historical Journal 39, no. 1 (March 1996): 87–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x00020689.

Full text

Abstract:

ABSTRACTThe paper considers reactions to William III's Declaration of reasons, the manifesto issued by the prince of Orange on the eve of his invasion of England in 1688. It questions recent historiography, which has argued for the importance of this document in William's success by claiming that it achieved a virtual hegemony of English political discourse in the period of the Glorious Revolution. The paper first shows that James II's supporters mounted an effective challenge to the Orange Declaration by reversing its claim that liberties were in danger under the existing regime. It then suggests that William lost control of his manifesto over the winter of 1688–9 by making moves to secure power and authority which were unadvertised in the document. Once this had happened, various groups opposed to Orange ambition were able to adopt the rhetoric of the Declaration and quote it back at the prince in attempts to block his advance. The paper concludes with the irony that the ubiquity of the Declaration in 1688 may have been a result of its failure as publicity for the Orange cause; and by suggesting that scholars should look in places other than the manifesto for an effective Williamite propaganda.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Hertzler, James R. "Who Dubbed It “The Glorious Revolution?”." Albion 19, no. 4 (1987): 579–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4049475.

Full text

Abstract:

It was not very glorious at first, at least to many English people of the late seventeenth century. With a king of undoubted legitimacy squeezed out and a new, albeit related monarch installed and recognized by Parliament, the transaction shook government, nation and church alike. It left Jacobite and non-juring splinters all round. The Revolution, happening in fulfillment of ideals of exclusionist Whigs, did not entirely satisfy those partisans, who soon learned that they could not control their masterful king, William III. As for the Tories, their consciences ached due to their resistance to a divinely-appointed sovereign. Few highly-placed Englishmen were comfortable with their need to call in a foreigner to help them solve their domestic squabbles. Indeed, one writer, reflecting on the letter inviting the Prince of Orange to invade England, thought it would have been “more glorious … to assist our undoubted Soveraign [sic], then to suffer him to be dethroned, solely because he is a Roman Catholic.”Twentieth-century historians called the Revolution other names than “glorious.” It has been dubbed a “sensible,” a “model,” a “moral,” a “respectable,” a “palace,” and simply the English Revolution. All agreed that it was indeed a Revolution, and they themselves were in agreement with some early writers who were contemporary with the event. The Orange Gazette, at the very end of the year 1688, reported on “the Revolutions that had occurred.” The historian Nicholas Tindal wrote that William of Orange himself, in a speech before the House of Lords, spoke of “this late Revolution.” Considerable discussion ensued in Parliament and in pamphlets as to whether William conquered James, or whether the king had abdicated, or had deserted his kingdom. But little question with contemporaries: there was a Revolution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Hodgson, G. M. "1688 and all that: Property rights, the Glorious Revolution and the rise of British capitalism." Voprosy Ekonomiki, no. 11 (November 20, 2017): 63–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2017-11-63-92.

Full text

Abstract:

In a seminal 1989 article, Douglass North and Barry Weingast argued that by making the monarch more answerable to Parliament, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 helped to secure property rights in England and stimulate the rise of capitalism. Similarly, Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson later wrote that in the English Middle Ages there was a “lack of property rights for landowners, merchants and proto-industrialists” and the “strengthening” of property rights in the late 17th century “spurred a process of financial and commercial expansion”. There are several problems with these arguments. Property rights in England were relatively secure from the 13th century. A major developmental problem was not the security of rights but their feudal nature, including widespread “entails” and “strict settlements”. 1688 had no obvious direct effect on property rights. Given these criticisms, what changes promoted the rise of capitalism? A more plausible answer is found by addressing the post-1688 Financial and Administrative Revolutions, which were pressured by the enhanced needs of war and Britain’s expanding global role. Guided by a more powerful Parliament, this new financial system stimulated reforms to landed property rights, the growth of collateralizable property and saleable debt, and thus enabled the Industrial Revolution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

HODGSON, GEOFFREY M. "1688 and all that: property rights, the Glorious Revolution and the rise of British capitalism." Journal of Institutional Economics 13, no. 1 (October 10, 2016): 79–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1744137416000266.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn a seminal 1989 article, Douglass North and Barry Weingast argued that by making the monarch more answerable to Parliament, the Glorious Revolution of 1688 helped to secure property rights in England and stimulate the rise of capitalism. Similarly, Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson later wrote that in the English Middle Ages there was a ‘lack of property rights for landowners, merchants and proto-industrialists’ and the ‘strengthening’ of property rights in the late 17th century ‘spurred a process of financial and commercial expansion’. There are several problems with these arguments. Property rights in England were relatively secure from the 13th century. A major developmental problem was not the security of rights but their feudal nature, including widespread ‘entails’ and ‘strict settlements’. 1688 had no obvious direct effect on property rights. Given these criticisms, what changes promoted the rise of capitalism? A more plausible answer is found by addressing the post-1688 Financial and Administrative Revolutions, which were pressured by the enhanced needs of war and Britain's expanding global role. Guided by a more powerful Parliament, this new financial system stimulated reforms to landed property rights, the growth of collateralizable property and saleable debt, and thus enabled the Industrial Revolution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Pocock, J. G. A. "The Fourth English Civil War: Dissolution, Desertion and Alternative Histories in the Glorious Revolution." Government and Opposition 23, no. 2 (April 1, 1988): 151–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.1988.tb00075.x.

Full text

Abstract:

EDMUND BURKE, REVIEWING IN 1790 THE EVENTS OF 102-101 years previously, saw no objection to penning and printing the following remarkable words: ‘The Revolution of 1688 was obtained by a just war, in the only case in which any war, and much more a civil war, can be just. Justa bella quibus necessaria’. He cannot have meant that the revolution was ‘obtained’, in the sense of ‘secured’, by the wars in Europe which followed from 1688 to 1697, for he speaks of ‘civil war’; nor is it likely that he intended his words to refer to the war in Ireland which ended with the Treaty of Limerick. Burke's Irish perspectives might indeed lead to his viewing this as a civil war rather than a war of conquest, but the context which surrounds the words quoted makes it clear that he is thinking of the ‘Revolution of 1688’ as an English political process and an English civil war. The ‘cashiering’ or dethroning of a king, he is instructing readers of Richard Price's sermon to the Revolution Society, is not a legal or a constitutional process, which can form one of the normal procedures of an established civil society.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Herrmann, Frédéric. "The Glorious Revolution (1688-1701) and the Return of Whig History." Études anglaises 68, no. 3 (2015): 331. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/etan.683.0331.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

HUMPHREY, SHAWN, and BRADLEY A. HANSEN. "Constraining the state's ability to employ force: the standing army debates, 1697–99." Journal of Institutional Economics 6, no. 2 (May 6, 2010): 243–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1744137409990348.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract:Britain's Glorious Revolution of 1688 is one of the most widely studied cases of institutional change. Recent institutional analyses of the Glorious Revolution, however, have failed to address one of the central issues in political science: control of the state's comparative advantage in violence. This paper examines this issue through analysis of the standing army debates of the late 1690s. Participants in the debates disputed whether a standing army or a militia would be the most effective institutional arrangement to guard against threats from abroad and tyranny at home. Both sides of the debate analyzed the effects of a standing army in terms of the incentives that it created for soldiers, citizens, the monarch, and foreign governments.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Le Fevre, Peter. "TANGIER, THE NAVY AND ITS CONNECTION WITH THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION OF 1688." Mariner's Mirror 73, no. 2 (January 1987): 187–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00253359.1987.10656138.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Rogers, Edmund. "1688 and 1888: Victorian Society and the Bicentenary of the Glorious Revolution." Journal of British Studies 50, no. 4 (October 2011): 892–916. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/661209.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Tarlton, Charles D. "‘The Rulers now on Earth’: Locke'sTwo Treatisesand the Revolution of 1688." Historical Journal 28, no. 2 (June 1985): 279–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x00003113.

Full text

Abstract:

When we believed that Locke had writtenTwo treatises of governmentto justify the Glorious Revolution, we could say a great deal about his purposes in relation to the events of 1688–89. The book served to interpret those events, to disclose their underlying meaning; philosophy and action were joined in such a manner that both gained lustre from the link. But, now we have generally accepted the view that Locke actually wroteTwo treatisesin the partisan heat of the Exclusion debate, and we have stopped saying very much of anything about the book's relation to William III and the events of the year in which Locke anonymously published it.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Wilson, Kathleen. "Inventing Revolution: 1688 and Eighteenth-Century Popular Politics." Journal of British Studies 28, no. 4 (October 1989): 349–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/385942.

Full text

Abstract:

The Revolution, the Glorious British Revolution, which the Americans have rejoiced in, and will ever rejoice in as the pride of the age in which it was brought about, and the admiration and blessing of succeeding times, must be looked up to with reverence as a precedent, the grandest precedent, that modern times have exhibited for the justification of any people insulted, plundered, or in the least manner oppressed by the unfeelingness of arbitrary power; it having legalized the natural right of resistance. [Public Advertiser, November 1, 1788]Over a decade ago, Tom Nairn alleged that lack of a populist potentially revolutionary nationalism in England was due in large part to the effective co-option of seventeenth-century upheavals by ruling elites. From his perspective, the Revolution of 1688 constituted only an episode in the “long, successful counter-revolution of the propertied classes” against the subversive ideological potential of the first English Revolution that has continued to the present day. This provocative and unrepentant neo-Marxist reading of English history has, ironically, become part of the new orthodoxy on 1688 that has emerged in the revisionist, anti-Whig historiography of the past fifteen years. The series of events once heralded as the foundation of modern parliamentary democracy is now presented as but a troubled and confusing hiatus in patrician politics, unrelentingly “conservationist” in ideological and political effect, in which Whig and Tory leaders managed to rid themselves of an unacceptable monarch without recourse to the political or ideological extremism of Charles I's reign.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Thrower, N. J. W. "Samuel Pepys FRS (1633-1703) and The Royal Society." Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 57, no. 1 (January 22, 2003): 3–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2003.0193.

Full text

Abstract:

Born in London during the reign of Charles I, whose execution he witnessed, Samuel Pepys lived through the Interregnum, the Restoration of the Monarchy and the Glorious Revolution of 1688. He is known to later generations through his secret Diary, first published in 1825, in which he reported such events as the Plague and the Great Fire of London, and on everyday life in seventeenth-century England. But to his contemporaries he was admired as an extremely able administrator in the Admirality Office. Pepys was elected FRS on 15 February 1665; and during his presidency of The Royal Society (1684-86) Newton's Principia was published.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Stewart, Robin S. "Comic Political Theology in Shakespeare's Richard II and the Glorious Revolution of 1688." Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies 18, no. 2 (2018): 83–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jem.2018.0012.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Colman, Clark Stuart. "The Glorious Revolution of 1688 in Cumberland and Westmorland: ‘The Merit of this Action’." Northern History 40, no. 2 (September 2003): 237–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/nhi.2003.40.2.237.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Fukuyama, Francis. "The Last English Civil War." Daedalus 147, no. 1 (January 2018): 15–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_00470.

Full text

Abstract:

This essay examines why England experienced a civil war every fifty years from the Norman Conquest up until the Glorious Revolution of 1688–1689, and was completely stable after that point. The reasons had to do with, first, the slow accumulation of law and respect for the law that had occurred by the seventeenth century, and second, with the emergence of a strong English state and sense of national identity by the end of the Tudor period. This suggests that normative factors are very important in creating stable settlements. Rational choice explanations for such outcomes assert that stalemated conflicts will lead parties to accept second- or third-best outcomes, but English history, as well as more recent experiences, suggests that stability requires normative change as well.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Corp, Edward T. "The Exiled Court of James II and James III: A Centre of Italian Music in France, 1689–1712." Journal of the Royal Musical Association 120, no. 2 (1995): 216–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jrma/120.2.216.

Full text

Abstract:

Following the Glorious Revolution of 1688–9, James II and the Stuart royal family lived in exile as the guests of Louis XIV at the Château de St-Germain-en-Laye, near Paris. James II died in 1701 and was succeeded as king-in-exile by his son, James III. The court of these two kings remained at St-Germain-en-Laye for well over 20 years, until James III was expelled from France at the demand of the British government.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

O'Regan, Philip. "ACCOUNTABILITY AND FINANCIAL CONTROL AS ‘PATRIOTIC’ STRATEGIES: ACCOMPTANTS AND THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE IN LATE 17TH AND EARLY 18TH - CENTURY IRELAND." Accounting Historians Journal 30, no. 2 (December 1, 2003): 105–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/0148-4184.30.2.105.

Full text

Abstract:

The decades immediately following the Glorious Revolution in 1688 witnessed a variety of political, social and structural responses to this cataclysmic event. In Ireland, religious conflict and economic under-development, as well as the devastation of war from 1689 to 1691, combined to ensure that the Anglo-Irish body politic found it difficult to capture the fruits of success from an English polity that had gradually accreted to itself much of the political power and economic wealth of the country. By 1704, however, the Anglo-Irish had managed to appropriate to themselves some of the economic and constitutional benefits of the Revolution by exploiting various parliamentary practices and structures. One of their strategies centered around developing and leveraging the role of the Public Accounts Committee as a means of imposing accountability on the executive and its officials. To achieve this the members were required to understand, contest and reconfigure official accounting information.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

North, Douglass C., and Barry R. Weingast. "Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England." Journal of Economic History 49, no. 4 (December 1989): 803–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022050700009451.

Full text

Abstract:

The article studies the evolution of the constitutional arrangements in seventeenth-century England following the Glorious Revolution of 1688. It focuses on the relationship between institutions and the behavior of the government and interprets the institutional changes on the basis of the goals of the winners—secure property rights, protection of their wealth, and the elimination of confiscatory government. We argue that the new institutions allowed the government to commit credibly to upholding property rights. Their success was remarkable, as the evidence from capital markets shows.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Weingast, Barry R. "The Constitutional Dilemma of Economic Liberty." Journal of Economic Perspectives 19, no. 3 (August 1, 2005): 89–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/089533005774357815.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper studies the problem of self-enforcing constitutions, addressing the question, how do some constitutions provide incentives for political officials to abide by the constraints announced in the constitution? To understand the mechanisms underlying successful constitutions, the paper begins by exploring a simple society facing the dilemma of policing the government: a sovereign, who controls the government, and two citizens. It then moves to a discussion of how constitutions are often formed out of crises, with some more detailed discussion of two main examples: England's Glorious Revolution of 1688 and the U.S. Constitution.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

KAMPMANN, CHRISTOPH. "THE ENGLISH CRISIS, EMPEROR LEOPOLD, AND THE ORIGINS OF THE DUTCH INTERVENTION IN 1688." Historical Journal 55, no. 2 (May 10, 2012): 521–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x1200012x.

Full text

Abstract:

ABSTRACTRecent scholarly debate about the Glorious Revolution has put renewed focus on the fear of a new aggressive Catholic confessionalism that was widespread among English and European Protestants. One important example is the threat of an imminent French-led joint Catholic aggression against the Netherlands and other Protestant states. This fear was shared by William of Orange and contributed to his decision to risk invading England in the autumn of 1688. Thanks to new archival sources, it is clear that Emperor Leopold contributed substantially to increasing this fear. In July 1688, the imperial government informed William of Orange about unprecedented French offers to Leopold to win over the emperor for a new Catholic alliance. Almost certainly these offers were fictitious, but nevertheless they had an alarming effect on William: he was convinced that an autonomous, ‘uncontrolled’ development in England (regardless of whether it would lead to a ‘popish’ despotism or to a Protestant republic) would only benefit France and should be avoided in this decisive situation. Consequently, after July 1688 William and his diplomats repeatedly referred to the supposed ‘indiscretions’ from Vienna to demonstrate the necessity of intervening in England.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Dacre, Lord. "The Continuity of the English Revolution (The Prothero Lecture)." Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 1 (December 1991): 121–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3679032.

Full text

Abstract:

In our history, the twenty years from 1640 to 1660 are, at first sight, years of desperate, even meaningless change. It is difficult to keep pace with those crowded events or to see any continuity in them. At the time, men struggled from day to day and then sank under the tide. Even Oliver Cromwell, the one man who managed, with great agility, but spluttering all the time, to ride the waves, constantly lamented his inability to control them. When all was over, men looked back on the whole experience with disgust. It was a period of ‘blood and confusion’ from which no one had gained anything except the salutary but costly lesson of disillusion. How different from the Glorious Revolution of 1688: that straightforward aristocratic revolt against a king who had so considerately simplified the issues, and ensured a quick neat result, by seeking to convert the nation, like himself, to Catholicism!

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Childs, J. "The Huguenot Soldiers of William of Orange and the 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688: The Lions of Judah." English Historical Review 119, no. 480 (February 1, 2004): 217–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ehr/119.480.217.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

SOMERS, TIM. "THE ‘IMPARTIALITY’ OF NARCISSUS LUTTRELL'S READING PRACTICES AND HISTORICAL WRITING, 1679–1710." Historical Journal 62, no. 4 (June 6, 2018): 921–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x18000110.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article explores the influence of ‘impartiality’ on reading practices, print culture, and historical writing in later Stuart Britain. It sheds new light on the most prolific collector of ‘cheap print’ during this period, Narcissus Luttrell (1657–1732), by assessing his reading practices in relation to the ideal of impartiality. Luttrell is analysed using his hitherto unstudied commonplace books and historical manuscript collection made in reaction to the Exclusion Crisis (1679–81) and the Glorious Revolution (1688). Their analysis demonstrates the way Luttrell used impartiality rhetorically to justify and express his whiggish judgement and interpretation of modern history. The article also highlights key continuities and differences between the early and later Stuart publics by connecting Luttrell to humanist rhetoric, earlier manuscript culture, and shifts in reading practices.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Harris, Tim. "Party Turns? Or, Whigs and Tories Get Off Scott Free." Albion 25, no. 4 (1993): 581–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4051311.

Full text

Abstract:

The Restoration period has attracted renewed scholarly interest in recent years, with the result that many of our commonly held assumptions about politics in the reign of Charles II have come under increased critical scrutiny. Nowhere is this more true than for the Exclusion Crisis and the subsequent Tory Reaction. For a long time we thought we had the dynamics of this period worked out: the Exclusion Crisis gave birth to two parties—the Whigs and Tories—with the Whigs being the anti-Catholic, exclusionist, and Parliamentarian party, who carried with them the support of the people out-of-doors, and the Tories being the party of divine-right, absolute monarchy, anti-populist in their outlook, putting their belief in the sanctity of the hereditary principle before the interests of the people. The Whig challenge was essentially defeated with the dissolution of the Oxford Parliament in 1681, and thereafter the 1680s saw a drift towards monarchical absolutism, until this trend was defeated by the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Yong-Jick Kim. "Comparing British Glorious Revolution(1688-89) and Korea’s Democratization(1987-97): A Comparative Study of Democratization by Compromise." Journal of Korean Political and Diplomatic History 38, no. 2 (March 2017): 271–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.18206/kapdh.38.2.201703.271.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Key, Newton. "The “Boast of Antiquity”: Pulpit Politics Across the Atlantic Archipelago during the Revolution of 1688." Church History 83, no. 3 (July 31, 2014): 618–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0009640714000584.

Full text

Abstract:

John Locke and many others noted the vibrant political commentary emanating from the pulpit during the Glorious Revolution. Preachers from the full confessional spectrum in England, and especially in Scotland, Ireland, and the colonies, used occasional or state sermons to explain contemporary upheavals from the perspective of God's law, Natural law, and Civil law. Most surprising is the latter, clerical reference to civil history and ancient origins, which preachers used to answer contemporary questions of conquest and allegiance. Clergy revisited the origins and constitutional roots of the Britons, Anglo-Saxons, Scots, and Irish, and deployed histories of legendary kings and imaginary conquests to explain and justify the revolutionary events of 1688–1692. Sermons of this revolutionary era focused as much on civil as on sacred history, and sought their true origins in antiquity and the mists of myth. Episcopalian preachers, whether Church of Ireland, Scottish Episcopalian, or Church of England, seem to have been especially inspired by thanksgiving or fast days memorialized in the liturgical calendar to ponder the meaning of a deep historical narrative. Scots, Irish, and Massachusetts clergy claimed their respective immemorialism, as much as the English did theirs. But, as they re-stated competing Britannic constitutions and origin myths explicitly, they exposed imperial rifts and contradictions within the seemingly united claim of antiquity. By the beginning of the next reign and century, state sermons depended more upon reason and less upon a historicized mythic antiquity.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Payne Fisk, Deborah. "Rehearsing the Revolution: Radical Performance, Radical Politics in the English Restoration. By Odai Johnson. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2000; pp. 184. $34.50 cloth." Theatre Survey 45, no. 1 (May 2004): 143–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0040557404340081.

Full text

Abstract:

This superb monograph examines how radical politics found expression in performance in the decade prior to the Glorious Revolution. The years from 1678 to 1688 saw the English monarchy rocked by successive crises, ranging from allegations of secret Catholic plots to murder the king (largely fabricated) to murmurings of dark dealings between Louis XIV and Charles II (largely true). The inability of Charles II to produce a legitimate heir also worried a Protestant citizenry who feared that the line of succession would devolve to James, the Catholic brother of Charles II. Arbitrary rule, strict censorship, excessive taxation, and an atmosphere of Stalinesque surveillance further inflamed the populace. As Johnson wryly notes, the problem with the Restoration was that it restored too much, especially the oppressive political attitudes that caused the Civil War in the first place. Amid this tumult, Johnson situates the patent theatres and street performance. He is certainly not the first scholar to do so, but he is, happily, the first in a long time to combine keen intelligence with common sense. That he tells this compelling story stylishly and with verve gives one all the more reason to read this first-rate study.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Kampmann, Christoph. "Ein großes Bündnis der katholischen Dynastien 1688? Neue Perspektiven auf die Entstehung des Neunjährigen Krieges und der Glorious Revolution." Historische Zeitschrift 294, no. 1 (February 2012): 31–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1524/hzhz.2012.0002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Peck, James. "Albion's “Chaste Lucrece”: Chastity, Resistance, and the Glorious Revolution in the Career of Anne Bracegirdle." Theatre Survey 45, no. 1 (May 2004): 89–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0040557404000079.

Full text

Abstract:

By all indications, the public persona of the late Restoration actress Anne Bracegirdle was built on the speculative foundation of maidenhead. A leading ingénue of multiple talents, Bracegirdle played significant roles in comedy, tragedy, and music-drama from her debut in 1688 to her retirement in 1707. In comedy, Bracegirdle specialized in marriageable young women of rank, wit, and fortune. In serious drama, Bracegirdle often played the pathetic heroine, a virtuous woman stalked by a predatory man. Though primarily an actress, Bracegirdle also called upon her impressive soprano voice in many entr'actes and the occasional musical part. A first-rank player and hardworking company member from very early in her career, Bracegirdle played some eighty roles over a nineteen-year span that kept her consistently before the public eye. Despite Bracegirdle's constant appearances on the stages of Drury Lane, Dorset Garden, Lincoln's Inn Fields, and the Queen's Theatre in the Haymarket, few extant sources identify the qualities that typified her playing; commentators rarely discuss her acting as a discrete set of practices, aptitudes, or characterizations. Rather, prodigious evidence attests to the public's obsession with Bracegirdle's reputation for virginity. Called the “Romantick Virgin,” the actress was thought to be chaste, and many writers focused attention on her sexual virtue. Indeed, Bracegirdle's chastity seems to have been the cornerstone of her fame. As Colley Cibber wrote, her star status rose in conjunction with her reputation for purity:

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Como, David R., Rachel Weil, and Steve Pincus. "Modernity and the Glorious Revolution Steve Pincus .1688: The First Modern Revolution. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009. xiii + 647 Pages; ISBN: 9780300115475." Huntington Library Quarterly 73, no. 1 (March 2010): 135–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/hlq.2010.73.1.135.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Zhuravlev, A. V. "The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in Stuart England, 1603–1688." History 17, no. 8 (2018): 20–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2018-17-8-20-29.

Full text

Abstract:

The article examines the history of the doctrine of passive obedience in England during the Stuart period. Traditionally weak financial and legal basis for royal absolutism in England forced monarchs to rely thoroughly on ideology. The concept of passive obedience promoted by the loyal Anglican clergy was one of the key elements of the absolutist ideology of the 17th century. This doctrine was employed as a counterbalance to revolutionary resistance and monarchomach theories embraced by protestant dissenters and papist recusants alike. During the course of the century the doctrine was embraced by numerous representatives of the Church of England’s establishment, including, but not limited to, John Donn, Roger Maynwaring, George Hickes, Edmund Bohun and many others and disseminated via an array of sermons and pamphlets. One component of the doctrine: non-resistance, was particularly stressed. Several political, social and economic factors conditioned the employment of this doctrine. The first instance of its pronouncement followed the failure of the Gunpowder plot and the necessity to refute catholic contractual theories. Charles I saw the doctrine of passive obedience as both the means to maintain social peace and promote fiscal interests. The new impetus the doctrine gained in the later years of the Restoration: an attempt to integrate it into the ‘ancient constitution’ failed, yet the doctrine of passive obedience was taken up as the chief ideological tool by the Anglican church and employed as a mighty instrument of suppressing resistance and dissent. The Glorious Revolution weakened the grasp of the doctrine in the minds of the English, though by no means killed it. Yet, the regime erected by the Convention of 1689 and strengthened by William of Orange claimed as much of its legitimacy in revolutionary resistance. Thus, henceforth the ideas of passive obedience and non-resistance could not be used as the sole basis of legitimate power in England.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Schofield, Thomas Philip. "Conservative Political Thought in Britain in Response to the French Revolution." Historical Journal 29, no. 3 (September 1986): 601–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x00018938.

Full text

Abstract:

In attempting to explain the stability of eighteenth-century Britain, and in particular the maintenance of political, social and economic supremacy by the landed aristocracy, scholars have begun to pay attention to the role of ideology and opinion. They see this not merely as providing an explanation of the way things were, but justifying and reinforcing them. The dominant ideological interpretation of society had emerged from the political and constitutional struggles of the seventeenth century, and in particular from the Glorious Revolution of 1688, an interpretation which might be denominated ‘Whig’, and which faced its most serious challenge at the very end of the eighteenth century from the French revolution. Despite the more tangible threat of French arms, the ruling classes in Britain did not underestimate the danger to social order from the arguments advanced by adherents of the rights-of-man doctrine propagated by the revolutionaries. If, in reply to these views, the status quo could be shown not only to be necessary and inevitable, but also right and good, that is to say correspondent with the true nature of man, then the morality of the existing practices and institutions of civil society would be proven. The problem at its most fundamental level was ethical, and it was a problem which conservatives attempted to solve in a variety of ways.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Khruleva, Irina. "“Neither Our Civil State nor Our Ecclesiastical System Will Ever Be the Same”: the Events of the Glorious Revolution of 1688—1689 in the New England Colonies." ISTORIYA 12, no. 1 (99) (2021): 0. http://dx.doi.org/10.18254/s207987840013585-2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Sirota, Brent S. "The Trinitarian Crisis in Church and State: Religious Controversy and the Making of the Postrevolutionary Church of England, 1687–1702." Journal of British Studies 52, no. 1 (January 2013): 26–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jbr.2012.7.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article sets the wide-ranging controversy over the doctrine of the Trinity that erupted in late seventeenth-century England firmly within the political context of the Glorious Revolution of 1688–1689. Against a voluminous historiography that confines the trinitarian controversy within the apolitical narrative of an incipient English enlightenment, this article considers the controversy as part of the broader political crisis that befell church and state in the final years of the century. The trinitarian controversy must be understood not simply as a doctrinal dispute but as a disciplinary crisis: a far-reaching debate over not only the content of orthodoxy but also the constitutional apportionment of responsibilities for its enforcement. As such, the controversy featured interventions from an unprecedented array of public authorities—Crown, Parliament, university, episcopate, and convocation—all claiming the preeminent custody of orthodoxy in an institutional landscape profoundly unsettled by revolutionary upheaval. This institutional dimension, long ignored by historians and theologians, placed the trinitarian controversy at the heart of civil and ecclesiastical politics during the reign of William and Mary. Indeed, the trinitarian controversy may be considered the defining event in church politics in the postrevolutionary era, exercising a prevailing influence on the content of Anglican ecclesiastical partisanship for much of the early eighteenth century. While recognizing the importance of these disputes to the emergence of an English enlightenment, this article insists that the trinitarian controversy is equally indispensable for understanding the rage of political parties in postrevolutionary England.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Brandon, Pepijn. "‘The whole art of war is reduced to money’: remittances, short-term credit and financial intermediation in Anglo-Dutch military finance, 1688–1713." Financial History Review 25, no. 1 (April 2018): 19–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0968565017000282.

Full text

Abstract:

The literature on the financial revolution and the rise of the English fiscal-military state frequently gives the impression that a singular set of reforms emanating from the Glorious Revolution of 1688 changed the entire landscape of English army finances, allowing a fundamental shift from patchwork solutions based on short-term credit and managed through a system of wholesale venality to a solid system of long-term funded loans raised on an impersonal market. This article focuses on the crucial role that merchant networks and the personal connections of financial intermediaries continued to play in international troop payments arranged by the English state through the Dutch Republic. Even when the English or Dutch treasuries could find the necessary money to pay and provision the troops in time, getting the money to the military commanders in the field or to their distant suppliers often depended on long and complex credit lines. Short-term loans acquired in making military expenditure – consisting of unpaid bills to suppliers, payments advanced by officials and officers, and temporary loans contracted by financial intermediaries – as well as the widespread reliance on commercial credit in the form of bills of exchange as a way to transfer funds effectively formed the life thread of army finance. The ability to finance the military in times of exploding costs and permanent emergencies without defaulting rested not only on the capacity to draw on financial resources at home, but also on the strength of commercial and financial networks abroad. In doing so, closeness to the centres of emerging international financial capitalism seems to have been of greater importance than a specific set of institutional innovations.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Levillain, Charles-Édouard. "French Diplomacy and the Run-up to the Glorious Revolution (1688): A Critical Reading of Jean-Antoine d’Avaux’s Correspondence as Ambassador to the States General." Journal of Modern History 88, no. 1 (March 2016): 130–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/684996.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Markuszewska, Aneta. "In the Shadow of the Lost Crown. ‘Oppressed Innocence’ in the Operas Dedicated to Maria Clementina Sobieska in Rome (1720–1730)." Musicology Today 17, no. 1 (December 1, 2020): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/muso-2020-0001.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract As a result of the Glorious Revolution of 1688, James II Stuart lost the throne of England, Scotland, and Ireland. He spent the last years of his life in France, in residence offered to his family and court by Louis XIV. Following his death in 1701, the title and claim to the throne of the three kingdoms was inherited by his son James III Stuart, who in 1719 married Maria Clementina Sobieska (1702–1735). James and his wife extended their patronage over one of Rome's major opera houses, the Teatro d’Alibert, at which 16 operas were dedicated to that couple in 1720–1730. Of those 8 that honoured Maria Clementina, 4 (half of them) deal with the topic of ‘oppressed innocence’, previously passed over by scholars studying the couple's patronage. These are: Eumene, (lib. A. Zeno, mus. N. Porpora, 1721), Adelaide, (lib. A. Salvi, mus. N. Porpora, 1723), Siroe, re di Persia, (lib. Metastasio, mus. N. Porpora, 1727), and Artaserse, (lib. Metastasio, mus. L. Vinci, 1730). This paper analyses the said operatic theme and attempts to explain why it is the dominant subject in operas dedicated to Sobieska. It also studies the political and propagandist potential which that theme could have for the Stuart cause.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Gwynn, Robin D. "Matthew Glozier. The Huguenot Soldiers of William of Orange and the “Glorious Revolution” of 1688: the Lions of Judah. Portland, Ore.: Sussex Academic Press. 2002. Pp. xi, 228. $69.95. ISBN 1-902210-82-4." Albion 36, no. 1 (2004): 130–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4054467.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Zook, Melinda S. "Gary S. De Krey. Following the Levellers, vol. 1: Political and Religious Radicals in the English Civil War and Revolution, 1645–1649; Gary S. De Krey. Following the Levellers, vol. 2: English Political and Religious Radicals from the Commonwealth to the Glorious Revolution, 1649–1688." American Historical Review 125, no. 5 (December 2020): 1970–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ahr/rhz970.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Ligou, Daniel. "Voltaire et la ‘glorieuse revolution’ anglaise de 1688." Parliaments, Estates and Representation 11, no. 2 (December 1991): 153–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02606755.1991.9525802.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Steele, Ian K., Robert E. Moody, and Richard C. Simmons. "The Glorious Revolution in Massachusetts: Selected Documents, 1689-1692." New England Quarterly 63, no. 2 (June 1990): 339. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/365813.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Bartlett, Thomas. "Reluctant revolutionaries: Englishmen and the Glorious Revolution of 1688. By W.A. Speck. Pp xii, 267. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1988. £17.50.The Jacobites. By Frank McLynn. Pp ix, 220. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. First published in 1985, reprinted as a paperback in 1988. £6.95." Irish Historical Studies 26, no. 102 (November 1988): 229–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021121400009792.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Glorious Revolution 1688'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles