DOCSLIB.ORG

Accounts of the Conduct of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, 1704-1742

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Accounts of the Conduct of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, 1704-1742 ACCOUNTS OF THE CONDUCT OF SARAH, DUCHESS OF MARLBOROUGH, 1704-1742 FRANCES HARRIS SARAH, Duchess of Marlborough's self-justifying narrative of her years at Court, An Account of the Conduct of the Dowager Duchess of Marlborough^ attracted a considerable amount of attention at its first publication in 1742, and has since frequently been used as an historical source. For not only had she been the wife of one of Queen Anne's chief ministers and the close associate of several others, she was also the intimate for many years of the Queen herself, and an active figure in Whig politics in her own right. The Duchess made it clear that the Conduct was compiled, not from her recollections in old age, but from writings of a much earlier date. Three of these are specifically mentioned in the introductory paragraphs: an account of *the unhappy differences between queen Mary and her sister', which she had written about forty years before for Bishop Burnet's wife; a defence of the management of her Court offices under Queen Anne, drawn up after her dismissal in 1711, with a view to publication; and a narrative of her political conduct and her loss of Queen Anne's favour, composed with 'the assistance of a friend, to whom I furnished materials'.^ All three of these accounts are now among the Blenheim Papers at the British Library, together with several related items which the Duchess does not mention. Most survive in more than one copy, some in as many as five or six drafts or versions, and in general these manuscript originals, for all their repetitiveness, political bias, and obsessive self-justification, are of considerably more importance than the much-expurgated published compilation. Although biographers of the Duke and Duchess of Marlborough, and other historians of the period, have made use of these documents, certain basic facts about them, including the chronology and purpose of their composition, the identity and contributions of the Duchess's various collaborators, and the relationship of the narratives to one another, have never been fully established. Perhaps this is not surprising in view of the quantity of material involved, and the disorganized state in which it has always been kept. In 1718 the Duchess sent a box containing a random selection of these manuscripts to her friend Mary Godolphin, wife of the Provost of Eton, with an invitation to read them through; and she added: I know you are a person of such order that you will laugh to see any body keep their things in no better way then I have don, but I am allways now in some sort of hurry as I usd to bee Fig. I. Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough. Miniature from life by Bernard Lens the Younger, 1702 (By courtesy of the Victoria and Albert Museum) at court, and all I can do is to put these papers by as they come up, being mix'd with a great many other things, and hope to get some body to place them as they should bee some summer when I happen to have a good deal of time in the country.^ It is clear that this systematic arrangement was never fully carried out, either in the Duchess's lifetime or afterwards. In 1815 the manuscripts were discovered among 'a large mass of loose papers' in a closet at Blenheim Palace, after William Coxe's arrangement of the main archive there was complete. Coxe put them together in bundles,^ but without attempting a detailed reorganization. In a note to the first draft of her narrative for Mrs. Burnet, the Duchess herself, in old age, has recorded the loss of several pages. These were still mislaid when the packet containing the draft arrived at the British Library, and in the course of sorting were found in one of the other bundles.''^ There were several similar instances in which closely related documents, or portions of a single document had become separated, making accurate comparison and description very difficult. Coxe's catalogue of these manuscripts, together with his annotations on the originals and on the partial transcripts made for his biography of the ist Duke of Marlborough, have remained the basis for most subsequent references to the documents.^ But his descriptions, although helpful as far as they go, leave several questions unanswered, and can occasionally be misleading. The manuscripts, arranged as far as possible in order of composition, now occupy six volumes of between 121 and 274 folios apiece: Add. MSS. 61421-6. Some related items, in the form of copies of, and annotations to the correspondence of Queen Anne and the Duchess, have been placed with the letters to which they refer, at Add. MSS. 61414-18. The following account of the composition of these manuscripts is intended to supplement the description of the volumes in the British Library catalogue, and to indicate the basis of the present arrangement. As the Duchess recorded in the Conduct, the first of her narratives (Add. MS. 61421) was written for her friend Elizabeth Burnet, third wife of Gilbert Burnet, Bishop of Salisbury. The two women had strong Whig sympathies in common, but Mrs. Burnet's Vonderfull partiality' for King William and Queen Mary was a challenge to the Duchess (fol. i). Accordingly, in November 1704, she set herself to compose an account of her own part in the Revolution of 1688, and of Queen (then Princess) Anne's subsequent quarrels with the King and Queen. The narrative centred round Anne's refusal in 1692 to comply with their demands for Sarah's dismissal from her household. Its purpose was twofold: to persuade Mrs. Burnet that the Princess had been genuinely ill-used by the King and Queen, and to criticize the conduct of two Tory ministers, the Earls of Rochester and Nottingham, who had failed to side with her. By the end of 1704, in fact, the Duchess's own relations with Queen Anne had become very strained,^ but she was anxious to conceal this as long as possible, and the narrative contains no hint of it. The first draft, however, dated from her Lodge in Windsor Park (fol. i), was written during one of the long, brooding, and solitary absences from Court, which were to become increasingly common as her favour with the Queen declined. The following year her friend Lord Bradford, remonstrating with her for another such absence, remarked, 'I shrewdly suspect you are wryting another History, I cannot possibly imagine what else can keep you there soe long'.*^ The greater part of the draft is written in the Duchess's headlong scrawl on sheets of ordinary letter-paper (fols. 5-54, 59-60). Only a few leaves at the end are in the more legible handwriting of her two favourite amanuenses, her steward Charles Hodges (fols. 57-8),^ and chambermaid, Judith Forster (fols. 61-70).^ It was obviously composed without prior planning, several incidents and copies of documents being interpolated out of chronological sequence, just as they happened to be recollected: 'tis my first essay and therefore I hope you will excuse it', the Duchess apologized at one point (fol. 58^). Alterations and additions at the beginning of the narrative (fols. 1-16) indicate that at first she had intended a much shorter account, probably consisting of annotated copies of correspondence concerning the quarrel. But characteristically she warmed to her task as she progressed. Her later admission, *when I am writing I run on as if I were speaking ... in my strange scrawl, when at the sitting down I dont design to say very much', gives a very fair picture of her style and method of composition. ^^ The extensive quotation of letters and documents in support of her statements was to remain a characteristic of all her subsequent narratives, and in the Duchess's eyes a vital adjunct to them. 'It shows the exact truth of the whole proceeding', she told Mrs. Burnet, 'and will be a meanes some time or other of makeing it knowne, when by some better hand tis put in order' (fol. 58^). This adaptation by a *better hand' was to be many years in the future, but the comment is an interesting indica- tion that even at this early stage the Duchess was contemplating something like the Conduct. Mrs. Burnet's offer to make a list of passages 'where I think a litle more charity may with reason be admitted', suggests that she was not entirely convinced by the Duchess's version of events. But she did praise the lively spontaneity of style, and added flatteringly: the Bishop really compaired you to one of the most celebrated Historians and says he hopes you will write the memoiers of your whole observations so far as within your own knowledg. He is sure it would be very valuable. Understandably, in view of the freedom with which she had criticized certain individuals, the Duchess was anxious that her draft should not come into unauthorized hands, and Mrs. Burnet reassured her on this point.^^ But the Duchess did have copies made (e.g. fols. 71-136) for the benefit of a few close friends. The Earl of Bradford was evidently one. The Whig leader Lord Halifax, like Mrs. Burnet, reserved judgement about the subject-matter ('I will not deny that I was sorry there was such a Story to be told'), but praised the unstudied style. Another friend. Lady Arundell, afterwards Countess of Pembroke, urged Sarah not to restrict the circulation of the narrative, for 'I think it would be so much more for your servise to have it known'.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Queen Anne and the Arts
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by MURAL - Maynooth University Research Archive Library TRANSITS Queen Anne and the Arts EDITED BY CEDRIC D. REVERAND II LEWISBURG BUCKNELL UNIVERSITY PRESS 14_461_Reverand.indb 5 9/22/14 11:19 AM Published by Bucknell University Press Copublished by The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706 www.rowman.com Unit A, Whitacre Mews, 26-34 Stannery Street, London SE11 4AB All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote passages in a review. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data <insert CIP data> ™ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992. Printed in the United States of America 14_461_Reverand.indb 6 9/22/14 11:19 AM CONTENTS List of Illustrations ix Acknowledgments xiii Introduction 1 1 “Praise the Patroness of Arts” 7 James A. Winn 2 “She Will Not Be That Tyrant They Desire”: Daniel Defoe and Queen Anne 35 Nicholas Seager 3 Queen Anne, Patron of Poets? 51 Juan Christian Pellicer 4 The Moral in the Material: Numismatics and Identity in Evelyn, Addison, and Pope 59 Barbara M. Benedict 5 Mild Mockery: Queen Anne’s Era and the Cacophony of Calm 79 Kevin L.
    [Show full text]
  • Kit-Cat Related Poetry
    ‘IN AND OUT’: AN ANALYSIS OF KIT-CAT CLUB MEMBERSHIP (Web Appendix to The Kit-Cat Club by Ophelia Field, 2008) There are four main primary sources with regard to the membership of the Kit-Cat Club – Abel Boyer’s 1722 list,1 John Oldmixon’s 1735 list,2 a Club subscription list dated 1702,3 and finally the portraits painted by Sir Godfrey Kneller between 1697 and 1721 (as well as the 1735 Faber engravings of these paintings). None of the sources agree. Indeed, only the membership of four men (Dr Garth, Lord Cornwallis, Spencer Compton and Abraham Stanyan) is confirmed by all four of these sources. John Macky, a Whig journalist and spy, was the first source for the statement that the Club could have no more than thirty-nine members at any one time,4 and Malone and Spence followed suit.5 It is highly unlikely that there were so many members at the Kit-Cat’s inception, however, and membership probably expanded with changes of venue, especially around 1702–3. By 1712–14, all surviving manuscript lists of toasted ladies total thirty-nine, suggesting that there was one lady toasted by each member and therefore that Macky was correct.6 The rough correlation between the dates of expulsions/deaths and the dates of new admissions (such as the expulsion of Prior followed by the admission of Steele in 1705) also supports the hypothesis that at some stage a cap was set on the size of the Club. Allowing that all members were not concurrent, most sources estimate between forty- six and fifty-five members during the Club’s total period of activity.7 There are forty- four Kit-Cat paintings, but Oldmixon, who got his information primarily from his friend Arthur Maynwaring, lists forty-six members.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint James's, Or, the Court of Queen Anne
    Library of Emory University • ff 1 i • T ,-y # • • - \ • v. .&• 7 'V * - • • 4 • • m i • •* ' > it *• 1 - 4 ' 4 i ^ . i SAINT JAMES'S: THE COURT OF QUEEN ANNE. &n Historical Romance. BY WILLIAM HARRISON AINSWORTH, ESQ. AUTHOR OF "THE TOWER OF LONDON," "WINDSOR CASTLE," ETC. WITH ILLUSTRATIONS BY GEORGE CRUIKSHANK. IN THREE VOLUMES. VOL. I. LONDON: JOHN MORTIMER, ADELAIDE STREET, TRAFALGAR SQUARE. 1844. TO G. P. R. JAMES, ESQ. My dear*James, It gives me sincere pleasure to inscribe this book with, your name. Not that I think it worth your acceptance, but that the Dedication will afford me an op- portunity of expressing the great regard which, in common with the rest of your private friends, I entertain for you, as well as the admiration with which, in com- mon with the whole reading world, I regard your many and varied performances. ! IV BEDICATION. *The idlest of the race* of authors myself, as you are the most industrious^ I used to be filled with wonder at your extraordinary fertility of production ; but when I became more intimately acquainted with, your ener- getic character, and unwearied application, and understood better the inexhaustible stores of fancy, experience, and reading you have to draw upon, my surprise gave way to admiration. Your brother writers owe you a large debt of gratitude, though I fear it has been but imperfectly paid. It is mainly, if not entirely, to your influence and exertions, that Continental Piracy has received a check, and that unauthorized foreign re- prints of English works have, been kept out of the market.
    [Show full text]
  • Berkeley Technology Law Journal
    BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL VOLUME 25 NUMBER 3 SYMPOSIUM 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS SYMPOSIUM: COPYRIGHT @ 300 KEYNOTE ADDRESS: HAPPY BIRTHDAY STATUTE OF ANNE: THE DANCE BETWEEN THE COURTS AND CONGRESS.. .............................. 1145 Hon. M. MargaretMcKeown THE COPYRIGHT PRINCIPLES PROJECT: DIRECTIONS FOR REFORM................... 1175 Pamela Samuelson and Members of The CPP THE UNTOLD STORY OF THE FIRST COPYRIGHT SUIT UNDER THE STATUTE OF ANNE IN 1710 ........................................... 1247 H. Tomds Gdme-Arostegui ALL CHANGE FOR THE DIGITAL ECONOMY: COPYRIGHT AND BUSINESS MODELS IN THE EARLY EIGHTEENTH CENTURY....................... 1351 IsabellaAlexander THE INVENTION OF COMMON LAW PLAY RIGHT.......... ............... 1381 Jessica Litman THE ADVENTURES OF THE STATUTE OF ANNE IN THE LAND OF UNLIMITED POSSIBILITIES: THE LIFE OF A LEGAL TRANSPLANT ............ 1427 Oren Bracha "THE SOLE RIGHT... SHALL RETURN TO THE AUTHORS": ANGLO- AMERICAN AUTHORS' REVERSION RIGHTS FROM THE STATUTE OF ANNE TO CONTEMPORARY U.S. COPYRIGHT ....................... ........... 1475 Lionel Bently & Jane C Ginsburg SUBSCRIBER INFORMATION The Berkeley Technolog Law Journal (ISSN1086-3818), a continuation of the High Technolog Law journal effective Volume 11, is edited by the students of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall), and published four times each year (May, August, November, February) by the Regents of the University of California, Berkeley. Journal Publications, School of Law. Periodicals Postage Rate Paid at Berkeley, CA 94704-9998, and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Journal Publications, 2850 Telegraph Avenue, Suite 561 #7220, Berkeley, CA 94705-7220. Correspondence. Address all correspondence regarding subscriptions, address changes, claims for non-receipt, single copies, advertising, and permission to reprint to Journal Publications, 2850 Telegraph Avenue, Suite 561 #7220 Berkeley, CA 94705-7220; (510) 643-6600; JournalPublications@ law.berkeley.edu.
    [Show full text]
  • The Harley Family and the Harley Papers
    THE HARLEY FAMILY AND THE HARLEY PAPERS CLYVE JONES IN 1759 John Dalrymple of Cranstoun, a Scottish observer of British politics, wrote that the English 'bore two very low men Lord Oxford [Robert Harley] and Lord Orford [Sir Robert Walpole] long to reign over them, who had nothing but their own abilitys and their princes favour to support them, men of low birth and of no connexions'.^ It would be no exaggeration to say that Harley and Walpole were the most influential, and in stature the greatest politicians of the first half of the eighteenth century. Though in the popular mind Walpole is credited with being the first 'prime minister' of Great Britain, Harley has an equally good claim to that title; indeed his own brother referred to him as 'becoming the "Primere" Minister'.^ Two major differences between Harley and Walpole were, however, the length of time each spent in office as head of the administration, four years in Harley's case and twenty-one in Walpole's, and the amount of personal papers they left behind. Walpole's papers, which form the Cholmondeley (Houghton) Collection in Cambridge University Library, are disappointingly sparse for such a great figure, the remaining items showing evidence of'weeding' at some time.^ In contrast, Robert Harley's papers are probably the most extensive surviving for any early eighteenth century English politician (with the possible exception of Thomas Pelham-HoUes, Duke of Newcastle).^ Besides his own papers, there is an almost equally vast archive of papers relating to the Harley family. Furthermore, though the papers of the Harley family are scattered, the bulk ofthem are in five major deposits, the Portland Collection (split between the British Library, Nottingham University Library and the Nottinghamshire Record Office), the papers remaining at the Harleys' ancestral home at Brampton Bryan Hall in Herefordshire, and those at Longleat House in Wiltshire.
    [Show full text]
  • F .T . DIC. KINSON, " HENRY ST. JOHN and the STRUGGLE FOR
    f .T . DIC.KINSON, " HENRY ST. JOHN AND THE STRUGGLE FOR THE LEADERSHIP OF THE TORY PAR'.i'Y 1702-14" Volume Two. Chapter Eight. The Emerging Rival to Harley. The supreme political skill and management of Harley had engineered. the ministerial revolution of 1710, but he had not been able to prevent a large and potentially unruly Tory majority in the Commons. Though Harley had the support, if not the absolute allegiance, of many Tory leaders, including Bromley, Rochester, St. John, and Harcourt, there were already those who opposed his trimming policy. The most important of these was the earl of Nottingham, whose integrity and high Church principles commanded widespread respect in the Tory ranks. Kept out of the ministry he appeared a potential rallying point for those Tories disgruntled with Harley's. moderate policy. As early as 28 October 1710 his lieutenant, John Ward, was trying to recruit a party for him and was 1 hoping to enlist Sir Thomas Harmer. The duke of Shrewsbury warned Harley that many other peers, besides Nottingham, were dissatisfied and he listed Argyll, Rivera, Peterborough, Jersey, Fitzwalter, 2 Guernsey, and Haversham. There were soon reports that the 1 Leicester Record Office. Finch bliss. Box vi, bundle 23. Ward to Nottingham, 28 Oct. 1710. 2 H. N. C. Bath Mss. 1,199.20 Oct. 1710. , , - 435 - 3 ministers would fall out among themselves. Despite all these manifestations of early trouble Harley pressed on with his plans to reduce faction at home and secure peace abroad. The essential prerequisite was to restore financial confidence, a task more 4 difficult than the Tory backbenchers ever realised.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (443Kb)
    University of Warwick institutional repository: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/wrap This paper is made available online in accordance with publisher policies. Please scroll down to view the document itself. Please refer to the repository record for this item and our policy information available from the repository home page for further information. To see the final version of this paper please visit the publisher’s website. Access to the published version may require a subscription. Author(s): MARK KNIGHTS Article Title: Introduction: The View from 1710 Year of publication: 2012 Link to published article: http;//dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-0206.2011.00284.x Publisher statement: : ‘The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com’. Introduction: The view from 1710 Mark Knights Abstract: The essays in this volume, planned to mark the tercentenary of the impeachment of Dr Henry Sacheverell on 23 March 1710, reassess the importance of his trial. Sacheverell’s attack on the revolution of 1688, and the principles which underpinned it, allows us to question how far, twenty years later, a Whig revolution had prevailed. The essays suggest that the revolution continued to be contested; that in 1710 the High Church Tory vision temporarily triumphed; that the flood of print showed the importance of religious dispute in shaping the public sphere; that the debate over Sacheverell connected Westminster and the public, not just in England but also in Ireland; that there was an important disagreement between High and Low Church about how to respond
    [Show full text]
  • By a Thesis Submitted to the University of London, for the Degree of Doctor
    ,ý ýýý ýi A STUDY OF THE PAPER WAR RELATING TO THE CAREER OF THE 1st DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH, 1710-1712 1, by Frances Marjorie Harris + a t, : r 'w (Westfield College) A thesis submitted to the University of London, for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 1975 2. ABSTRACT The thesis deals with the party journalism of the years 1710-1712 as it concerned Marlborough, relating it to its political context and discussing the techniques of controversy employed. The introduction outlines Marlborough's popular status during the earlier years of Anne's reign, the uneasiness aroused by his family's monopoly of royal favour, the growing discontent with the war, despite his repeated victories, and Marlborough's personal reactions to such criticism. The first three chapters concern the issues arising from the ministerial changes and General Election of 1710, measures which many pamphleteers justified by censuring Marlborough's abuse of royal favour and conduct as general and plenipotentiary. The important contribution of Marlborough's principal apologist, Francis Hare, to this latter controversy is discussed in detail. Chapter III demonstrates that journalistic. pressure was also a determining factor in Marlborough's retention of his command under the new ministry. Chapters IV to'VI trace the efforts of Marlborough's Journalistic supporters during his last campaign to make his continuing military success the spearhead of their opposition to the ministry's secret peace negotiations, a procedure more favoured by the Duchess of Marlborough than by the Duke, and culminating at the end of 1711 in major ministerial press attacks on the latter and finally in his 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Jonathan Swift: Journal to Stella: Letters to Esther Johnson and Rebecca Dingley, 1710–1713 Edited by Abigail Williams Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-84166-5 - Jonathan Swift: Journal to Stella: Letters to Esther Johnson and Rebecca Dingley, 1710–1713 Edited by Abigail Williams Frontmatter More information the cambridge edition of the works of jonathan swift © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-84166-5 - Jonathan Swift: Journal to Stella: Letters to Esther Johnson and Rebecca Dingley, 1710–1713 Edited by Abigail Williams Frontmatter More information the cambridge edition of the works of jonathan swift General Editors Claude Rawson Yale University Ian Higgins Australian National University David Womersley University of Oxford Ian Gadd Bath Spa University Textual Adviser James McLaverty Keele University AHRC Research Fellows Paddy Bullard University of Oxford Adam Rounce Keele University Daniel Cook Keele University Advisory Board John Brewer Sean Connolly Seamus Deane Denis Donoghue Howard Erskine-Hill Mark Goldie Phillip Harth Paul Langford James E. May Ronald Paulson J. G. A. Pocock Pat Rogers G. Thomas Tanselle David L. Vander Meulen © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-84166-5 - Jonathan Swift: Journal to Stella: Letters to Esther Johnson and Rebecca Dingley, 1710–1713 Edited by Abigail Williams Frontmatter More information the cambridge edition of the works of jonathan swift 1. A Tale of a Tub and Other Works 2. Parodies, Hoaxes, Mock Treatises: Polite Conversation, Directions to Servants and Other Works 3.–6. Poems 7. English Political Writings 1701–1711: The Examiner and Other Works 8. English Political Writings 1711–1714: The Conduct of the Allies and Other Works 9 Journal to Stella: Letters to Esther Johnson and Rebecca Dingley 1710–1713 10.
    [Show full text]
  • The Life of Sarah Churchill and the History Behind the Major Motion Picture Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    THE FAVOURITE : THE LIFE OF SARAH CHURCHILL AND THE HISTORY BEHIND THE MAJOR MOTION PICTURE PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Ophelia Field | 592 pages | 29 Nov 2018 | Orion Publishing Co | 9781474605359 | English | London, United Kingdom The Favourite : The Life of Sarah Churchill and the History Behind the Major Motion Picture PDF Book Sarah further upset Anne by suggesting that Anne switch palaces to avoid reminders of her husband. A masterly biography which brilliantly captures the power and passion of its subject. The current film "The favourite" is based on this. Your review has been submitted successfully. Shortly afterwards, the German army disarmed Italian forces and, despite military and partisan resistance, quickly overran Rome. It is believed that Sarah largely used her friendship with Anne for personal gain more than anything else. Welcome back. The film garnered numerous nods from the Golden Globes and BAFTAs, and has even tied with Roma for the most Academy Award nominations, achieving recognition in a stunning 10 different categories. The Favourite. Carol marked it as to-read Apr 01, Your order is now being processed and we have sent a confirmation email to you at. Managing Cookies Manage In Chrome. The scandalous true story of the duchess who became her beloved queen's blackmailer , published in a new and updated edition to coincide with the Oscar-winning film starring Olivia Colman, Emma Stone and Rachel Weisz. More than 4, Allied POWs scattered all over Italy were sheltered, clothed and fed by these courageous Italians, whose lives were forfeit if their activities were discovered. Kissinger's Year: Ophelia Field.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Government's Participation
    THE EVOLUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT’S PARTICIPATION IN AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE IN LATE-SEVENTEENTH AND EARLY-EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ENGLAND A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts Aaron VanHorn December, 2014 THE EVOLUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT’S PARTICIPATION IN AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE IN LATE-SEVENTEENTH AND EARLY-EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ENGLAND Aaron VanHorn Thesis Approved: Accepted: ______________________________ _____________________________ Advisor Dean of the College Dr. Michael Graham Dr. Chand Midha ______________________________ _____________________________ Co-Advisor Interim Dean of the Graduate School Dr. Michael Levin Dr. Rex D. Ramsier ______________________________ _____________________________ Department Chair Date Dr. Martin Wainwright ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION .…………………………………………………………………….1 II. THE POPISH PLOT AND THE EXCLUSION CRISIS ..............................................7 III. THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION ...……………………………………………….42 IV. THE SACHEVERELL “INCIDENT” AND ITS AFTERMATH ………………….63 V. THE END OF THE WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCESSION AND THE TREATY OF UTRECHT …..………………………………………………………………………….86 VI. CONCLUSION ..…………………………………………………………………..114 BIBLIOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………………..122 iii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The late-seventeenth and early-eighteenth centuries saw England experience a dramatic shift.1 This change took place across a variety of fields. Two areas of interest to
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Crisis and Whig Constitutional Thought, 1720-1721
    An Economy of Violence: Financial Crisis and Whig Constitutional Thought, 1720- 1721 Adam Lebovitz* INTRODUCTION The South Sea bubble burst suddenly in September 1720, the second in a chain of panics that struck Paris, London, and Amsterdam in quick succession. The crash in London was by far the most severe; within weeks two-thirds of England's nominal wealth had evaporated, public credit had collapsed, and London's most distinguished banking houses tottered on the brink of ruin. Commerce ground to a halt, leaving a forest of half-built ships rotting in city harbors and a thicket of unfinished mansions in London's fashionable districts.' One awestruck correspondent compared the event to "a blazing Comet, [which] by its sudden and amazing Rise and Progress alarm'd all Europe, and now by a more sudden Downfall has greatly affected all the Nation." A second insisted that the "fire of London or the plague ruin'd not the number that are now undone, all ranks of people bewayling their condition in the coffee houses & open streets." A third alluded, succinctly, to "the death of our prosperity."2 These anxious * I am grateful to Eric Beerbohm, Greg Conti, Christine Desan, David Golove, David Grewal, Stephen Holmes, Daniel Hulsebosch, Sungho Kimlee, Janet Kwok, Eric Nelson, William Nelson, Steven Pincus, Frank Stewart, Lauri Tahtinen, and Laura Valentini, as well as audiences at Harvard and New York University, and the editors at the YJLH, for comments on an earlier draft. Special thanks to Sabeel Rahman for commenting on multiple successive drafts, to William Deringer for sharing his work in progress with me, and to Jos6 Argueta Funes for his detailed reading of the final draft.
    [Show full text]