The restoration land settlement in Ireland: a structural view

1972 ◽  
Vol 18 (69) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl S. Bottigheimer

In the history of Europe political revolutions are commonplace; cultural and social revolutions are somewhat less abundant; but revolutions in the ownership of property are exceedingly rare. Even the French revolution, the prototype of profound social upheaval, is today regarded by many—particularly the followers of the late Professor Cobban—as a revolution which failed to transform the proprietary class. And in England, the believers in a great seventeenth-century social revolution have either evaded or artfully rationalised the considerable evidence that the land-owning families of 1660 were essentially the land-owning families of 1640. Despite enormous fiscal pressures, the Long Parliament and its successors never embarked upon a serious effort to expropriate or extirpate those it defeated. ‘It is their reformation, not their ruin, is desired’, wrote the author of Burton’s Diary, and the recent work of Mrs Joan Thirsk, the most exactingstudent of the royalist land sales during the interregnum, tends to confirm the verdict.

1917 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 190-193
Author(s):  
L. W. King

[An article written by the late Professor J. H. Moulton, and printed in the Expository Times for last December, has directed some attention to the recent work of Prof. Hrozný in deciphering Hittite texts and to his claim to have determined the character of that language. In view of the important bearing of the Hittite texts upon the history of ancient Egypt, Dr King was asked to summarize the facts and to estimate the probability of Prof. Hrozný's claim; in response to our request, he has written the note which is here printed.—Ed.]


2007 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL EDWARDS

The historiography of early modern Aristotelian philosophy and its relationship with its seventeenth-century critics, such as Hobbes and Descartes, has expanded in recent years. This article explores the dynamics of this project, focusing on a tendency to complicate and divide up the category of Aristotelianism into multiple ‘Aristotelianisms’, and the significance of this move for attempts to write a contextual history of the relationship of Hobbes and Descartes to their Aristotelian contemporaries and predecessors. In particular, it considers recent work on Cartesian and Hobbesian natural philosophy, and the ways in which historians have related the different forms of early modern Aristotelianism to the projects of the novatores.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document