Preface Introduction: the Seven Bishops and the Glorious Revolution

Notes Preface 1. M. Barone, Our First Revolution, the Remarkable British Upheaval That Inspired America’s Founding Fathers, New York, 2007; G. S. de Krey, Restoration and Revolution in Britain: A Political History of the Era of Charles II and the Glorious Revolution, London, 2007; P. Dillon, The Last Revolution: 1688 and the Creation of the Modern World, London, 2006; T. Harris, Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy, 1685–1720, London, 2006; S. Pincus, England’s Glorious Revolution, Boston MA, 2006; E. Vallance, The Glorious Revolution: 1688 – Britain’s Fight for Liberty, London, 2007. 2. G. M. Trevelyan, The English Revolution, 1688–1689, Oxford, 1950, p. 90. 3. W. A. Speck, Reluctant Revolutionaries, Englishmen and the Revolution of 1688, Oxford, 1988, p. 72. Speck himself wrote the petition ‘set off a sequence of events which were to precipitate the Revolution’. – Speck, p. 199. 4. Trevelyan, The English Revolution, 1688–1689, p. 87. 5. J. R. Jones, Monarchy and Revolution, London, 1972, p. 233. Introduction: The Seven Bishops and the Glorious Revolution 1. A. Rumble, D. Dimmer et al. (compilers), edited by C. S. Knighton, Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series, of the Reign of Anne Preserved in the Public Record Office, vol. iv, 1705–6, Woodbridge: Boydell Press/The National Archives, 2006, p. 1455. 2. Great and Good News to the Church of England, London, 1705. The lectionary reading on the day of their imprisonment was from Two Corinthians and on their release was Acts chapter 12 vv 1–12. 3. The History of King James’s Ecclesiastical Commission: Containing all the Proceedings against The Lord Bishop of London; Dr Sharp, Now Archbishop of York; Magdalen-College in Oxford; The University of Cambridge; The Charter- House at London and The Seven Bishops, London, 1711, pp. 1, 9, 27. 4. What has been may be: Or A View of a Popish and an Arbitrary Government ... To which is added the Twenty-One Conclusions Further Demonstrating the Schism of the Church of England, London, 1688. 5. Bishop Sancroft’s Ghost with his Prophesie of the Times, And the Approach of the Anti-Christ, London, 1712, pp. 1–2. 6. M. G. Smith, Fighting Joshua, Sir Jonathan Trelawny 1650–1721, Redruth, 1985, p. 174. 7. Poem XCIII ‘On the Seven Bishops’ in A Collection of Epigrams, London, 1727. 8. National Library of Wales [NLW], Plas Yn Cefn Ms, 2939. 204 Notes 205 9. The second of these (The Proceedings and Tryal in the Case of the Most Reverend Father in God, William, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, ... in the Court of the King’s Bench, London, 1739) was printed ‘for the booksellers in town and country’. 10. The Eclectic Review, April 1848, p. 557. 11. Ibid., pp. 549–51. 12. Lords Hansard, 30 June 2005, col. 356. 13. T. B. Macaulay, History of England, London, 1848, vol. 2. 14. The full title of Strickland’s book was The Lives of the Seven Bishops Committed to the Tower in 1688 Enriched and Illustrated with Personal Letters, Now First Published, from the Bodleian Library, London, 1866. 15. H. Lucock, The Bishops in the Tower, London, second edition, 1896, p. xi. 16. C. Hill, The Century of Revolution 1603–1714, London, 1961, pp. 220–39. 17. M. Mullett, James II and English Politics 1678–1688, London, 1994, pp. 29, 49, 57. 18. G. M. Straka, Anglican Reaction to the Revolution of 1688, Wisconsin 1962, pp. 21, 120pp. 19. G. Every, The High Church Tradition, London, 1956, p. 21. 20. Published in 1985. 21. B. W. Hill, The Growth of Parliamentary Parties 1689–1742, London, 1976. 22. K. Wilson, ‘Inventing Revolution: 1688 and Eighteenth Century Popular Politics’ in Journal of British Studies, vol. 28, 1989, p. 350. However Wilson concedes that the Revolution came to be understood as revolutionary because it gave rise to radical ideas of popular and non-violent political change. 23. J. C. D. Clark, English Society 1660–1832, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 74, 80, 85. All of this falls into a section headed ‘Church before State: The Revolution of 1688’. 24. J. R. Jones, The Revolution of 1688 in England, London, 1972. 25. Ibid., p. 12. 26. J. Stoye, ‘Europe and the Revolution of 1688’ in Beddard (ed.), The Revolutions of 1688, Oxford, 1991, p. 208. 27. See for example D. H. Horsford, ‘Bishop Compton and the Revolution on 1688’ in Journal of Ecclesiastical History, vol. xxiii, 1972, p. 209. 28. J. Miller, James II a Study in Kingship, Hove, 1977; J. R. Western, Monarchy and Revolution: The English State in the 1680s, London, 1972; B. Coward, The Stuart Age: A History of England 1603–1714, London, 1980. 29. L. Pinkham, William III and the Respectable Revolution, Cambridge MA, 1954. 30. J. Israel (ed.), Anglo-Dutch Moment, Essays on the Glorious Revolution and Its World Impact, Cambridge, 2003; J. Black, A System of Ambition? British Foreign Policy 1660–1793, London, 1991. 31. T. Claydon, Europe and the Making of England 1660–1760, Cambridge, 2007, p. 243. 32. Jones, The Revolution of 1688, pp. 7–17 and 328–31. 33. G. V. Bennett, ‘The Seven Bishops: A Reconsideration’ in D. Baker (ed.), Studies in Church History, vol. 15, 1978. 34. W. M. Spellman, The Latitudinarians and the Church of England 1660–1700, Athens GA, 1993, pp. 54, 134. 206 Notes 35. Roger D. Jones, ‘The Invitation to William of Orange in 1688’ University of Wales Cardiff, MA thesis, 1969, p. 31. 36. J. P. Kenyon, ‘Introduction’ in E. Cruickshanks (ed.), By Force Or by Default? The Revolution of 1688–1689, Edinburgh, 1989, p. 3. 37. J. Miller, ‘James II and Toleration’ in E. Cruickshanks (ed.), By Force Or by Default, p. 8. 38. Ibid., p. 19. As Miller conceded ‘the suddenness of James’s conversion from persecution to toleration is, I think, a significant argument against claims that he consistently favoured toleration’. But equally he asserted ‘I have suggested that those who saw James’s advocacy of toleration as an example of Popish duplicity were wide of the mark’. 39. Miller, James II, pp. 124, 126, 127. Did James have a plan to forcibly convert the English to Catholicism? Certainly Barillon, the French Ambassador, told Louis XIV that ‘this prince has thoroughly explained to me his inten- tions with regard to the Catholics, which are to grant them entire liberty of conscience and the free exercise of their religion’. When, in April 1687, he issued his first Declaration of Indulgence he said ‘we cannot but heartily wish, as it will be easily believed, that all the people of our dominion were members of the Catholic Church’. 40. Ibid., pp. 128, 143–5. 41. Ibid., pp. 64, 128, 155, 168, 196–7, 241. 42. J. Miller, Popery and Politics in England 1660–1688, Cambridge, 1973, pp. 258, 259. 43. Smith, Fighting Joshua, p. 44. 44. Sunderland was rehabilitated to some degree by J. P. Kenyon who argued that his position may not have been quite as cynical as previously assumed. Kenyon judged Sunderland as a maladroit and credulous royalist rather than any great schemer capable of betraying James. J. P. Kenyon, ‘The Earl of Sunderland and the Revolution of 1688’ in Cambridge Historical Journal, vol. 10, 1955. 45. A. F. Havighurst, ‘James II and the Twelve Men in Scarlet’ in Law Quarterly Review, vol. 69, 1953, p. 545. 46. R. A. Beddard, ‘The Unexpected Whig Revolution of 1688’ in Beddard (ed.), The Revolutions of 1688, Oxford, 1991, p. 97. 47. D. Defoe, A New Test of the Church of England’s Loyalty: Or Whiggish Loyalty and Church Loyalty Compar’d, London, 1702, p. 16. 48. J. P. Kenyon, The Nobility in the Revolution of 1688, University of Hull, 1963, p. 7. 49. M. McCain, ‘The Duke of Beaufort’s Defence of Bristol during the Monmouth’s Rebellion 1685’ in Yale University Gazette, April 2003. 50. Kenyon, The Nobility in the Revolution of 1688, pp. 8–19. 51. J. Carswell, The Descent on England, London, 1969, p. 144. 52. At the same time, other historians have emphasised the Protestant motives of those active against James – even in Catholic strongholds. – P. D. Heitzman, ‘The Revolution of 1688 in Lancashire and Cheshire’, Manchester University MPhil thesis, 1984. 53. M. Goldie, ‘The Political Thought of the Anglican Revolution’ in Beddard (ed.), The Revolutions of 1688, Oxford, 1991, p. 105. 54. Ibid., pp. 113–21, 132, 135. Notes 207 55. Ibid., pp. 122, 123, 133. 56. Ibid., p. 124. 57. Y. Sherwood, ‘The God of Abraham and Exceptional States, Or the Early Modern Rise of the Whig/Liberal Bible’ in The Journal of the American Academy of Religion, vol. 76, no. 2, 2008. 58. W. A. Speck, Profiles in Power: James II, London, 2002 and Harris, Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy. 59. Harris, Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy, pp. 14, 236, 240, 275–7, 478, 486–514. This view seems to endorse Dickinson’s judgement that the scholarly consensus is that the Revolution was conservative. H. T. Dickinson, ‘The Eighteenth Century Debate on the “Glorious Revolution” ’, History, vol. 28, 1976, p. 29. 60. Pincus, pp. 29–33. 61. Claydon, Europe and the Making of England 1660–1760, p. 242. 62. Mullett, James II and English Politics, pp. 68, 71–2, 81, 82. 63. Dickinson, ‘The Eighteenth Century Debate on the “Glorious Revolution” ’, p. 32. 1 The Bishops: Unlikely Revolutionaries 1. An Address to His Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Right Reverend the Bishops Upon their Account of their Late Petition, by a true member of the Church of England, London, 1688, p.

Load more