Cambridge 1983 nidottu
American scholar, Dr. Mark Kishlansky, highlights unison in the coalition called 'Parliament' fighting the first Civil War. The New Model Army, 'departing little from the armies it replaced', is seen as a child of compromise. Not until the spectre of defeat was lifted in 1646 did 'adversary politics' seriously disturb Westminster internally, encouraging outside pressures. Factious now, Parliament failed to comprehend genuine professional grievances – arrears of pay and whatever – and by denying the right to petition politicised the Army, equating national liberties with soldiers' rights, making it seem more radical than it really was. (To all this the Levellers were irrelevant.) Stung in its honour the Army, reluctant but in good order, entered London in August, 1647 to restore 'a free and lawful parliament' against internal and external 'faction and interest'. At this point the story breaks off – on the brink of a revolution as yet undefined.Time is needed to assess this re-interpretation of the men and events of 1643-47, told, as it should be, as a complex narrative. But it is already clear that Dr. Kishlansky has fired a powerful whiff of grapeshot in the 'devastating historiographical wars' of the 1640s which he calmly tells us he has tried to avoid.
240 sivua + kuvaliite
Korko 0 %, kulut 0 €
Kuukauden kuluton maksuaika ostoksille.
IPF Digital Finlandin omistama Credit24.