Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Glorious Revolution'

This study examines the ways in which drama in the reign of William III interacted with the rhetorical and cultural conditions and contentions of the Glorious Revolution in England. By viewing the Revolution more as a cultural instead of a political event, I argue that the vocabulary, theory, and ideology formulated by the polemics of the Revolution in forms such as speeches, pamphlets, broadsides, glassware, and paintings provided a rhetorical repertoire for post-revolutionary drama and enabled multiple opportunities for interpretation in texts. Furthermore, the rhetoric and discourse formed by those polemics testified to the socio-economic changes that were not only identified but also debated and shaped by plays. In this light, I suggest that while we can read drama in relation to its historical and cultural contexts, we should not assign it a secondary and passive role. Instead, drama actively shaped and commented on the literary and social cultures in post-Revolution times by participating in the Revolution’s debates relevant to the everyday life of the 1690s. The thesis is divided into three parts. Part I examines the transmission of Revolution rhetoric from the above-named polemics to the literary arena and their levels of usage. Part II focuses on two interrelated linguistic cultures created by the supporters of William III and James II: the languages of triumphalism and deliverance in Chapter II, and the languages of lamentation and hope in Chapter III. Part III examines gender and economy in a socio-economic perspective. Chapter IV examines the questions of gender and domestic authority in drama and post-revolutionary society raised by the Revolution’s invention, Dual Monarchism, in which William III (husband) and Mary II (wife) shared regal authority. Chapter V shows how drama reacted to the social and economic changes engendered by the Nine Years’ War, a major consequence of the Revolution.

This thesis analyses civil-military relations in North-East England during an extended eighteenth century that begins with the Glorious Revolution and ends with the outbreak of the French Revolutionary Wars. The study will focus on the relationship that developed between soldiers and civilians by analysing a number of themes including recruiting, billeting and garrisoning, the maintenance of public order and the role of soldiers in local crime. By looking at this type of daily interaction it is possible to gain an understanding of how the actions of the army, and the reactions of society, affected civil-military relations. Through this process the study attempts to discover whether the army was prone to lewd and violent behaviour that terrorised local communities and consequently resulted in poor relations with the civilian population. This thesis argues that despite the relative unpopularity of the army, and its occasional involvement in criminal activity and violence against civilian society, civil-military relations in the region were never overwhelmingly frictional or confrontational. The main sources of tension actually arose out of the burden placed on the civilian population by their financial, logistical and constitutional commitments to the army. At the same time the army's role in opposing civil unrest, and enforcing local and central government policy, undermined its relationship with local communities.

The thesis examines individual Scottish soldiers and Scottish regiments abroad in the second half of the seventeenth century, with particular focus on Scottish military service in France and the Netherlands, c.1660-92. The study contends that privately contracted units, of the sort common in the period of the Thirty Years' War (1618-48), evolved into regular standing regiments by the end of the seventeenth century. This process is visible in the altered conditions experienced by professional Scottish officers and ordinary soldiers who served abroad in this period. This study proposes that Britain's foreign policy was primarily affected by that of her two most potent neighbours: France and the Netherlands profoundly affected the attitude of the Stuart monarchs towards their subjects fighting abroad.<br>Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Thesis (M.A.)--Indiana University, 2009.<br>Title from screen (viewed on August 27, 2009). Department of History, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). Advisor(s): Jason Kelly. Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 106-113).

The Scottish perspective of the Glorious Revolution of 1688 has received limited scholarly attention. The opposite is true of the Union of 1707 and this defining moment, which resulted in the loss of Scottish independence, continues to stimulate debate. The lives of Scottish noblewomen in the years from Revolution to Union have generally been disregarded. This thesis will demonstrate that acknowledging and exploring the experiences of noblewomen augments understanding of this momentous era. Investigating the lives of Scottish noblewomen using their letters to explore how they lived through the Revolution, the ‘ill years’ of King William’s reign, the Darien venture, European war and ultimately the negotiation of Union provides fresh perspectives on the social, economic and political life of Scotland. Recovering the experience of noblewomen engages with a wider process in Scottish history which has transformed understanding in some areas of historical study but has by no means permeated all. Redefining female political activity has illuminated the influence of elite English women in the later eighteenth century. Scottish noblewomen require similar extensive study. The research presented here supports the argument that political analysis alone cannot provide the fullest assessment of this period. Women are revealed as a vital element within social aspects of political manoeuvring and both created and maintained family networks. This research challenges the constricting framework of the public and private dichotomy. It aims to reveal and redefine the responsibilities of noblewomen within an expanded sphere of activity and suggests a much more inclusive role for women than has previously been considered. The formation of a British parliament in 1707 reduced the number of Scots parliamentarians and changed the role of the governing elite in Scotland but did not diminish Scottish women’s influence and participation. This thesis argues that Scottish noblewomen operated with autonomy within patriarchal parameters to support menfolk, exert authority and in some cases wield influence. Demonstrating their roles, abilities and a new form of social politics at work in Scotland is a vital part of understanding the post Union period and the development of British politics.

Le terme de guerre de religion apparaissait déjà sporadiquement à la fin du XVIe siècle. Il se trouva de façon accrue dans les imprimés de l’époque de la Guerre de Trente Ans. Cependant, une discussion élargie sur ce phénomène ne s’établit qu’au seuil du XVIIIe siècle. La guerre de religion ne devint qu’à cette époque-là un mot-clé politique. L’idée de guerre de religion ne gagna son importance historiographique que dans le débat politique contemporain. Le but de cette étude est de répondre à la question de savoir comment s’est établie une conception, comment est née une image historique (Geschichtsbild), comment enfin a été délimitée l’époque de la guerre de religion. La présente étude se restreint aux trois foyers de conflits confessionnels essentiels pour le débat sur la guerre de religion : la France, l’Angleterre et le Saint-Empire Romain Germanique. Elle s’élargit en même temps à l’échelle européenne en étudiant l’influence décisive qu’eut la perception des dernières grandes guerres de Louis XIV. Aussi bien la Guerre de Neuf Ans que la Guerre de Succession d’Espagne furent perçues comme des guerres de religion. La propagande imprimée de Louis XIV et des alliés ses ennemis y contribua largement en cherchant à rendre légitimes leurs politiques respectives. Ainsi la France et les guerres de Louis XIV eurent-elles un rôle déterminant dans la discussion sur la guerre de religion – qui paraissait impensable sans la personne et la politique du roi de France. Le lien entre guerre de religion et politique internationale aboutit à l’européanisation du débat sur la guerre de religion<br>The notion of religious war emerged for the first time at the end of the 16th century. The use of this term increased immensely during the time of the Thirty Years’ War via printed media. Yet, a widespread discussion of the phenomenon only started towards the end of the 17th century. War of religion became a constant political keyword. The idea gained its historiographical importance through its usage in the actual political debate. The aim of this research is to question the development of the concept of religious war, the underlying perception of history and the labelling of an era with this term. The thesis will confine itself to three territories where in the late 17th and early 18th century examples of confessional conflicts were intertwined with the debate on religious wars: France, England and the Holy Roman Empire. The scope of the study is, nevertheless, widened to the European arena by examining the decisive influence the last wars of Louis XIV had on the perception of religious wars. In fact, both the Nine Years’ War and the War of the Spanish Succession were perceived by contemporaries as wars of religion. The printed propaganda of Louis XIV as well as that of his allied enemies contributed largely to this perception by legitimising their respective politics. Thus, France and the wars of Louis XIV had a shaping role of the discussion on religious wars. In sum, the connection of confessional conflicts, international politics and the personality of the French king led to the Europeanisation of the debate on religious war

Le terme de guerre de religion apparaissait déjà sporadiquement à la fin du XVIe siècle. Il se trouva de façon accrue dans les imprimés de l’époque de la Guerre de Trente Ans. Cependant, une discussion élargie sur ce phénomène ne s’établit qu’au seuil du XVIIIe siècle. La guerre de religion ne devint qu’à cette époque-là un mot-clé politique. L’idée de guerre de religion ne gagna son importance historiographique que dans le débat politique contemporain. Le but de cette étude est de répondre à la question de savoir comment s’est établie une conception, comment est née une image historique (Geschichtsbild), comment enfin a été délimitée l’époque de la guerre de religion. La présente étude se restreint aux trois foyers de conflits confessionnels essentiels pour le débat sur la guerre de religion : la France, l’Angleterre et le Saint-Empire Romain Germanique. Elle s’élargit en même temps à l’échelle européenne en étudiant l’influence décisive qu’eut la perception des dernières grandes guerres de Louis XIV. Aussi bien la Guerre de Neuf Ans que la Guerre de Succession d’Espagne furent perçues comme des guerres de religion. La propagande imprimée de Louis XIV et des alliés ses ennemis y contribua largement en cherchant à rendre légitimes leurs politiques respectives. Ainsi la France et les guerres de Louis XIV eurent-elles un rôle déterminant dans la discussion sur la guerre de religion – qui paraissait impensable sans la personne et la politique du roi de France. Le lien entre guerre de religion et politique internationale aboutit à l’européanisation du débat sur la guerre de religion<br>The notion of religious war emerged for the first time at the end of the 16th century. The use of this term increased immensely during the time of the Thirty Years’ War via printed media. Yet, a widespread discussion of the phenomenon only started towards the end of the 17th century. War of religion became a constant political keyword. The idea gained its historiographical importance through its usage in the actual political debate. The aim of this research is to question the development of the concept of religious war, the underlying perception of history and the labelling of an era with this term. The thesis will confine itself to three territories where in the late 17th and early 18th century examples of confessional conflicts were intertwined with the debate on religious wars: France, England and the Holy Roman Empire. The scope of the study is, nevertheless, widened to the European arena by examining the decisive influence the last wars of Louis XIV had on the perception of religious wars. In fact, both the Nine Years’ War and the War of the Spanish Succession were perceived by contemporaries as wars of religion. The printed propaganda of Louis XIV as well as that of his allied enemies contributed largely to this perception by legitimising their respective politics. Thus, France and the wars of Louis XIV had a shaping role of the discussion on religious wars. In sum, the connection of confessional conflicts, international politics and the personality of the French king led to the Europeanisation of the debate on religious war

The research aims to provide a first introductory look to the life and thought of Jacques-Vincent Delacroix (1743-1831), Avocat au Parlement in Paris during the Ancien Régime, a well-known professor of Public law at the Lycée from 1789 to 1793, Judge in Versailles since 1795 and author of a real bestsellers of the Revolutionary Era, the “Constitutions des principaux États de l’Europe et des États-Unis”. Lawyer and man of letters who lived between the reign of Louis XV and the French Revolution of 1830, Delacroix has been both a prolific writer and an eye-witness of the political and cultural changes who finally lead to the creation of the Modern France. So, the life of Delacroix became a case of study due to the fact that it helps to understand better the many ups-and-downs and the late successes of an entire generation, who asserted itself only at the end of the Ancien Régime and slowly became the trait d’union between the revolutionaries of 1789 and the men who arose again in defense of freedom in 1830. This study, who wants also be a first contribution to a future fulfillment of a more specific political biography of Delacroix, takes shape as an interdisciplinary approach to his life – where the first part is a description of the put on trial of Delacroix in front of the Revolutionary Tribunal in 1795 and a report of both the contemporary and the historical debate that surrounded the event, the second one is a complete and revisited biographic profile, and the third one is a reconstruction of his carrier during the Ancien Régime – that finally lead to explain how Delacroix came closer to the revolutionary line-up and what are the origins of his following faithful, but always critical, acceptation of the ideals of 1789.

碩士<br>國立臺灣大學<br>歷史學研究所<br>102<br>The Glorious Revolution in 1688 established the British constitutional monarchy, and paved the way for the Whig Supremacy in the early 18th century. A hundred years later, when the French Revolution erupted in 1789, many British radicals linked the French Revolution to the Revolution of 1688, encouraging Britain people to support French one. Yet Edmund Burke, the famous Whig parliamentarian, was against French Revolution. He committed to elaborate the difference between Glorious Revolution and French Revolution in his works and speeches. One of them particularly interesting was An Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs. In this pamphlet, Burke cited a political trial concerning the nature of 1688 revolution and the right of resistance, which happened in 1710, to prove that his own arguments coincided with the early Whigs’. He hoped it could persuade his Whig fellows to give up on the “New Whigs” represented by Paine and embraced the “Old Whigs” creed instead. About Burke’s dichotomy of “New Whigs” and “Old Whigs”, historians have known that it was Burke’s invention and not identical to the older meanings of similar terms. As for how could Whigs’ testimony in the Sacheverell Trial of 1710 be used to support Burke’s counter-revolutionary statements, scholars like J. P. Kenyon and Pocock had suggested it was because the Whigs in 1710 had become conservative. This thesis examined Burke’s interpretation of 1688, and introduced Sacheverell Trial’s background, process, and outcome. Then it analyzes Burke’s uses of this trial. For Burke, the main difference between “New” and “Old” Whigs were about the right of resistance, the ancient constitution and social contract. On the right of resistance, Burke or “Old Whigs” were not very different to Locke, all argued that resistance was only just when the ruler illegally harmed the ruled. About contract theory, traditional Whigs tended to mix it with the ancient constitution, believed the later was the representative of the former. The ancient constitution and the ideal of balanced polity composed of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, were discourses common to both Court and Country party at least until French Revolution. Overall, Burke’s interpretation of 1688 belonged to the mainstream Whig context.

Praca stanowi analizę angielskiej myśli polityczno-prawnej okresu rewolucyjnej zmiany funkcjonowania monarchii, w latach pomiędzy upadkiem reżimu króla Jakuba II Stuarta w wyniku Chwalebnej Rewolucji a przyjęciem tzw. „Septennial Act” (1688-1716). Poprzez zestawienie konserwatywnego charakteru, dominującej w okresie rewolucyjnym, teorii polityczno-prawnej z głębokością faktycznej reorganizacji struktury instytucjonalnej państwa oraz logiki stojącej za działaniami organów państwowych i pozapaństwowych ośrodków nacisku, wskazano problematyczny charakter podejmowanych przez angielski naród polityczny działań, których efektem było powstanie pierwszego pełnoprawnego systemu władzy parlamentarnej. W toku analizy wskazano paradoksalne konsekwencje upadku modelu władzy królewskiej opartego na prerogatywie monarszej, jak również następstwa włączenia parlamentu w proces aktywnego rządzenia państwem, które nie ograniczały się wyłącznie do prostego przeniesienia kompetencji, lecz prowadziły do wpisania reprezentowanej w Westminsterze wspólnoty w dynamikę życia politycznego i ekonomicznego, przyczyniając się tym samym do zakwestionowania relewantności dawnych kategorii analitycznych, w tym przede wszystkim tradycyjnego ideału jedności wspólnoty, rządzonej przez obiektywne normy racjonalnego systemu prawnego. Przyjmując perspektywę rozbieżności pomiędzy konserwatyzmem języka a rewolucyjnością rzeczywistych przemian instytucjonalnych, po raz pierwszy na gruncie polskim wskazano kluczowe problemy związane z formowaniem się najstarszej pełnoprawnej formy rządów parlamentarnych (m.in. kwestie partii polityczna, doraźności podejmowanych działań legislacyjnych, lobbingu). W efekcie wskazano również zasadniczą krytykę najbardziej kontrowersyjnych obszarów funkcjonowania parlamentarnego systemu władzy, której znaczenie, ze względu na współczesną powszechność parlamentaryzmu, wykracza poza wąski kontekst historyczny, w którym została pierwotnie sformułowana.<br>The work aims to analyse the English politico-legal thought in the period between the fall of James II's regime as a result of the Glorious Revolution, and the adoption of the "Septennial Act" (1688-1716) - i.e. during the revolutionary changes to the monarchy's functioning. The conservative politico-legal theories that dominated the revolutionary period are set against the depth of the real reorganization of the state-structure as well as against the logic guiding the actions undertaken by both the state authorities and the non-state pressure groups. By doing so, the work highlights a deeply problematic character of the decisions taken by the English political nation which resulted in the emergence of the first full-fledged parliamentary system of power. The analysis also shows the paradoxical consequences brought by the fall of the prerogative-based model of royal power, as well as the ramifications of Westminster's active engagement in the exercise of governmental power. It is shown that, far from being but a simple transfer of authority, those consequences led to the inclusion of the whole body politic (represented in Westminster) into the dynamics of political and economic life, which in turn questioned the relevance of the old analitical catagories such as the traditional ideal of the unity of commonwealth, ruled by objective norms of a rational legal system. From the perspective of a discrepancy between the conservatism of the employed language and the revolutionarity of the actual institutional changes, there are shown, for the first time in the Polish scientific literature, the crucial problems associated with the emergence of the first form of parliamentary government (i.e. the questions of political party, legislative contingency, lobbying). Due to the contemporary widespread character of parliamentarism, the relevance of the critique of its most controversial areas analysed in the work, exceeds the narrow historical context in which it was originally formulated.

In 'Political Atheism vs. The Divine Right of Kings,' I build on Thompson and Scrivener’s work analysing John Thelwall’s play 'The Fairy of the Lake' as a political allegory, arguing all religious symbolism in 'FL' to advance the traditionally Revolutionary thesis that “the King is not a God.” My first chapter contextualises Thelwall’s revival of 17th century radicalism during the French Revolution and its failure. My second chapter examines how Thelwall’s use of fire as a symbol discrediting the Saxons’ pagan notion of divine monarchy, also emphasises the idolatrous apotheosis of King Arthur. My third chapter deconstructs the Fairy of the Lake’s water and characterisation, and concludes her sole purpose to be to justify a Revolution beyond moral reproach. My fourth chapter traces how beer satirises Communion wine, among both pagans and Christians, in order to undermine any religion that could reinforce either divinity or the Divine Right of Kings.<br>A close reading of an all-but-forgotten Arthurian play as an allegory against the Divine Right of Kings.

American jurisprudence currently applies two incompatible validity standards to determine which laws are enforceable. The natural law tradition evaluates validity by an uncertain standard of divine law, and its methodology relies on contradictory views of human reason. Legal positivism, on the other hand, relies on a methodology that commits the analytic fallacy, separates law from its application, and produces an incomplete model of law. These incompatible standards have created a schism in American jurisprudence that impairs the delivery of justice. This dissertation therefore formulates a new standard for legal validity. This new standard rejects the uncertainties and inconsistencies inherent in natural law theory. It also rejects the narrow linguistic methodology of legal positivism. In their stead, this dissertation adopts a pragmatic methodology that develops a standard for legal validity based on actual legal experience. This approach focuses on the operations of law and its effects upon ongoing human activities, and it evaluates legal principles by applying the experimental method to the social consequences they produce. Because legal history provides a long record of past experimentation with legal principles, legal history is an essential feature of this method. This new validity standard contains three principles. The principle of reason requires legal systems to respect every subject as a rational creature with a free will. The principle of reason also requires procedural due process to protect against the punishment of the innocent and the tyranny of the majority. Legal systems that respect their subjects' status as rational creatures with free wills permit their subjects to orient their own behavior. The principle of reason therefore requires substantive due process to ensure that laws provide dependable guideposts to individuals in orienting their behavior. The principle of consent recognizes that the legitimacy of law derives from the consent of those subject to its power. Common law custom, the doctrine of stare decisis, and legislation sanctioned by the subjects' legitimate representatives all evidence consent. The principle of autonomy establishes the authority of law. Laws must wield supremacy over political rulers, and political rulers must be subject to the same laws as other citizens. Political rulers may not arbitrarily alter the law to accord to their will. Legal history demonstrates that, in the absence of a validity standard based on these principles, legal systems will not treat their subjects as ends in themselves. They will inevitably treat their subjects as mere means to other ends. Once laws do this, men have no rest from evil.