1995The American Historical ReviewRequires access

The Politics of the Ancient Constitution: An Introduction to English Political Thought, 1603-1642

Derek Hirst, Glenn Burgess

Open publisher page 189 citations

Abstract

The events of the years 1600 1642 have been argued over intensively by historians. Central to these arguments has been a search for the causes of the English Revolution. Many recent historians have denied that the Revolution had any long-term causes, and they have begun to see the period before 1642 in its own terms. These historians have suggested that before the 1640s English politics was based on rather than conflict or opposition. Glenn Burgess examines the implications of these recent revisions of the early Stuart period for the history of political thought. This book is primarily a study of the political ideas of common lawyers the ideology of the Ancient Constitution and looks closely at the ideas of such men as Sir Edward Coke and John Selden. On this Dr. Burgess builds a general interpretation of early Stuart political thought. He argues that before 1625 was maintained in England, not because everyone agreed with everyone else, nor because there was no conflict over matters of principle, but because there were agreed conventions that held together seemingly contradictory political theories. Burgess examines the history of political thought in relation to professional groups civil and common lawyers, and clerics, primarily and in terms of the distinctive discourses they produced. After 1625 the boundaries between their discourses began to dissolve and political disputes became more threatening to the nation's stability. Through this approach, Burgess is able to show why it was that a period of ideological consensus was also a period of bitter political conflict.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The events of the years 1600 1642 have been argued over intensively by historians. Central to these arguments has been a search for the causes of the English Revolution. Many recent historians have denied that the Revolution had any long-term causes, and they have begun to see the period before 1642 in its own terms. These historians have suggested that before the 1640s English politics was based on rather than conflict or opposition. Glenn Burgess examines the implications of these recent revisions of the early Stuart period for the history of political thought. This book is primarily a study of the political ideas of common lawyers the ideology of the Ancient Constitution and looks closely at the ideas of such men as Sir Edward Coke and John Selden. On this Dr. Burgess builds a general interpretation of early Stuart political thought. He argues that before 1625 was maintained in England, not because everyone agreed with everyone else, nor because there was no conflict over matters of principle, but because there were agreed conventions that held together seemingly contradictory political theories. Burgess examines the history of political thought in relation to professional groups civil and common lawyers, and clerics, primarily and in terms of the distinctive discourses they produced. After 1625 the boundaries between their discourses began to dissolve and political disputes became more threatening to the nation's stability. Through this approach, Burgess is able to show why it was that a period of ideological consensus was also a period of bitter political conflict.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 189 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The events of the years 1600 1642 have been argued over intensively by historians. Central to these arguments has been a search for the causes of the English Revolution. Many recent historians have denied that the Revolution had any long-term causes, and they have begun to see the period before 1642 in its own terms. These historians have suggested that before the 1640s English politics was based on rather than conflict or opposition. Glenn Burgess examines the implications of these recent revisions of the early Stuart period for the history of political thought. This book is primarily a study of the political ideas of common lawyers the ideology of the Ancient Constitution and looks closely at the ideas of such men as Sir Edward Coke and John Selden. On this Dr. Burgess builds a general interpretation of early Stuart political thought. He argues that before 1625 was maintained in England, not because everyone agreed with everyone else, nor because there was no conflict over matters of principle, but because there were agreed conventions that held together seemingly contradictory political theories. Burgess examines the history of political thought in relation to professional groups civil and common lawyers, and clerics, primarily and in terms of the distinctive discourses they produced. After 1625 the boundaries between their discourses began to dissolve and political disputes became more threatening to the nation's stability. Through this approach, Burgess is able to show why it was that a period of ideological consensus was also a period of bitter political conflict.

Key concepts: Politics, Opposition (politics), Ideology, Constitution, English Revolution, History of political thought, Period (music), Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Politics of the Ancient Constitution: An Introduction to English Political Thought, 1603-1642 — Research Paper | ScholarLens