Locke’s life

2019 ◽  
pp. 9-12
Author(s):  
Georges Dicker
Keyword(s):  
John Locke ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Charles I ◽  
Oliver Cromwell ◽  
King Charles I ◽  
History Of ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
Political Works ◽  
Publishing Career ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

This chapter is a brief biography of John Locke. It summarizes how his fortunes waxed and waned under the regimes of King Charles I, Oliver Cromwell, King Charles II, King James II, and the “Glorious Revolution,” and it touches on his education at Westminster School and Christ College and on his ties to the Earl of Shaftesbury and to Lady Masham. The chapter also provides a brief history of Locke’s publishing career, including the Essay and political works such as the First Treatise of Government (a critique of the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings) and the Second Treatise of Government (an outline of the bases for democracy and an influence on the U.S. Constitution).

Fatal Adulteries: Sexual Politics in the English Revolution

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-29
Author(s):  
Samuel Fullerton
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Politics ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
English Revolution ◽  
Charles I ◽  
Political Commentary ◽  
Political Upheaval ◽  
Oliver Cromwell ◽  
King Charles I ◽  
Sexual Histories ◽  
Charles Ii

Abstract This article argues for a reconsideration of the origins of Restoration sexual politics through a detailed examination of the effusive sexual polemic of the English Revolution (1642–1660). During the early 1640s, unprecedented political upheaval and a novel public culture of participatory print combined to transform explicit sexual libel from a muted element of prewar English political culture into one of its preeminent features. In the process, political leaders at the highest levels of government—including Queen Henrietta Maria, Oliver Cromwell, and King Charles I—were confronted with extensive and graphic debates about their sexual histories in widely disseminated print polemic for the first time in English history. By the early 1650s, monarchical sexuality was a routine topic of scurrilous political commentary. Charles II was thus well acquainted with this novel polemical milieu by the time he assumed the throne in 1660, and his adoption of the “Merry Monarch” persona early in his reign represented a strategic attempt to turn mid-century sexual politics to his advantage, despite unprecedented levels of contemporary criticism. Restoration sexual culture was therefore largely the product of civil war polemical debate rather than the singular invention of a naturally libertine young king.

scholarly journals ALL THE KING’S MAN»: MILITIA IN THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND DURING THE STUART AGE

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 90-97
Author(s):  
D.O. Gordienko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
18Th Century ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The Political ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Charles I ◽  
Political Events ◽  
Regular Army ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

The article presents the results of a study devoted to the history of the British armed forces in the “long” 17th century. The militia was the backbone of England's national military system. The author examines the aspects of the development of the institutions of the modern state during the reign of the Stuart dynasty, traces the process of the development of the militia and the formation of the regular army. He reveals the role of the militia in the political events of the Century of Revolutions: the reign of Charles I, the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, the Restoration age, the Glorious Revolution, and also gives a retrospective review of the eventsof the 18th century.

What's New About the Restoration?

1997 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Harris
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
John Milton ◽  
Limited Range ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
History Of ◽  
Excellent Work ◽  
Modern Textbook ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
The Glorious Revolution ◽  
Field Of Inquiry

When I first began my researches into later Stuart history as a graduate student back in 1980, the Restoration was a relatively underdeveloped field of inquiry. Although there were a number of scholars producing excellent work in this area, there was not the same depth of scholarship as characterized study of the first half of the seventeenth century: wide gaps in our knowledge existed, and for some of the most crucial episodes of the period we were dependent upon a limited range of studies and dated works. The best general entrée into the period was still David Ogg's classic two-volumeEngland in the Reign of Charles II, first published in 1934! A suitable modern textbook did not emerge until 1978, with the publication of J. R. Jones'sCounty and Court: England 1658–1714, a book that had neither Ogg's range nor lively analytical style. For our understanding of why the monarchy was restored we were reliant upon a study that had come out in 1955, which was supplemented only in 1980 by Austin Woolrych's book-length “Historical Introduction” to volume seven of the Yale edition of theComplete Prose Works of John Milton. On the Exclusion Crisis we had J. R. Jones'sThe First Whigs, which had appeared in 1961, although for the first Tories we still needed to use Sir Keith Feiling's 1924History of the Tory Party. For the Glorious Revolution we had a book written by a man who tragically died (at a young age) before he could complete the work, and another self-consciously thought-provoking work designed to raise questions and suggest future avenues of research—both excellent studies in their own right, but hardly the plethora of monographs that we possessed for the mid-century revolution.

Four great magnalia of government. La riforma istituzionale di Henry Neville: un machiavelliano inglese alla corte di Cosimo III de’ Medici

2021 ◽  
pp. 001458582110254
Author(s):  
Luana Maria Alagna
Keyword(s):  
Time Frame ◽  
The State ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Charles I ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
The Glorious Revolution ◽  
Historical Moment ◽  
Political Thinker

The tumultuous phase running from the beheading of Charles I to the Glorious Revolution is the time frame in which England goes through the crucial phases that will put an end to royal absolutism. One of the most authoritative intellectual figures of that founding historical moment of modern constitutionalism is Henry Neville, author of political and satirical pamphlets who, taking up the lesson of the ancients with the experience of “modern things”, published in 1680 the Plato Redivivus, a work that will consecrate him as a Republican political thinker. The treaty, written and published in the context of the Exclusion crisis, exhort Charles II to reduce his powers. The disease suffered by the State, the causes of which Neville investigates by seeking remedies, arose precisely from the extension of the king's power and his arbitrariness.

scholarly journals The Doctrine of Passive Obedience in Stuart England, 1603–1688

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 20-29
Author(s):  
A. V. Zhuravlev
Keyword(s):  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Anglican Church ◽  
Charles I ◽  
Legitimate Power ◽  
Gunpowder Plot ◽  
Stuart Period ◽  
History Of ◽  
Stuart England ◽  
The Glorious Revolution ◽  
The Church

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.

Party and the Augustan Constitution, 1694-1716: Politics and the Power of the Executive

1978 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-208
Author(s):  
Dennis A. Rubini
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Commons ◽  
The Government ◽  
Charles Ii ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

William of Orange tried to be as absolute as possible. Inroads upon the power of the executive were fiercely resisted: indeed, William succeeded in keeping even the judiciary in a precarious state of independence. To maintain the prerogative and gain the needed supplies from parliament, he relied upon a mixed whig-tory ministry to direct court efforts. Following the Glorious Revolution, the whigs had divided into two principle groups. One faction led by Robert Harley and Paul Foley became the standard-bearers of the broadly based Country party, maintained the “old whig” traditions, did not seek office during William's reign, tried to hold the line on supply, and led the drive to limit the prerogative. The “junto,” “court,” or “new” whigs, on the other hand, were led by ministers who, while in opposition during the Exclusion crisis, held court office, aggressively sought greater offices, and wished to replace monarchy with oligarchy. They soon joined tory courtiers in opposing many of the Country party attempts to place additional restrictions upon the executive. To defend the prerogative and gain passage for bills of supply, William also developed techniques employed by Charles II. By expanding the concept and power of the Court party, he sought to bring together the executive and legislative branches of government through a large cadre of crown office-holders (placemen) who sat, voted, and directed the votes of others on behalf of the government when matters of importance arose in the Commons. So too, William claimed the right to dissolve parliament and call new elections not on a fixed date, as was to become the American practice, but at the time deemed most propitious over first a three-year and then (after 1716) a seven year period.

scholarly journals CULTURAL REPRESENTATION OF POWER AND THE COURT DURING THE PERSONAL REIGN OF CHARLES I STUART

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-110
Author(s):  
L. I. Ivonina
Keyword(s):  
Social Context ◽  
General Trend ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Cultural Representation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Charles I ◽  
The World ◽  
King Charles I ◽  
History Of ◽  
The One

The article analyzes the main features of the Caroline era in the history of Britain, which were reflected in the cultural representation of the power of King Charles I Stuart and the court’s daily life in the 1630s. The author shows that, on the one hand, the cult of peace and the greatness of the monarch were the cultural product of the Caroline court against the background of the Thirty Years' War in continental Europe. On the other hand, there was a spread of various forms of escapism, the departure into the world of illusions. On the whole, the representation of the power of Charles Stuart and the court’s daily life were in line with the general trend of the time. At the same time, the court of Charles I reflected his personality. Thinly sensing and even determining the artistic tastes of his era, the English king abstracted from its political and social context.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document