¹ ‘Charles the Second of England’, American Historical Review, XLIII (1938), 533.Google Scholar

² The latest manifestation being John Harold Wilson's biography of Buckingham, which bears the suggestive title, A Rake and his Times(London, 1954).Google Scholar

³ I am told that its American sales were comparatively trifling—a significant fact, if true.

⁴ Exceptions, of course, are monographs which deal conclusively and finally with a limited field of fact and are therefore not open to general criticism. But these are few.

⁵ ‘Party and party organisation in the reign of Charles II’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th ser., XXX (1948), 21.Google Scholar

⁶ Mr Godfrey Davies, with various assistants, has also published several highly specialized papers in the Huntington Library Quarterly. Noneof them possesses any very wide significance.

⁷ I am aware that Dr J. Rees Jones has completed a study of ‘The Whigs 1678–84’, but here I can only deal with published work. In any case, so far as I know he is alone.

⁸ Miss Dorothy Thirsk's research into the difficult question of royalist lands has not yet reached a stage definitive enough to make it applicable to political problems. Cf. her articles in Economic History Review, V (1952), 188Google Scholar, and Journal of Modern History, XXV (1954), 315.Google Scholar Professor H. J. Habakkuk is now turning his attention to this period, but I was net fortunate enough to hear the paper he read on the subject to the last Anglo-American Conference of Historians (1956).

⁹ ‘The Long Parliament of Charles II’, Pt 1, English Historical Review, XXI, 21.

¹⁰ Ibid XLIV, 400, XLV, 58

¹¹ With the outstanding exception of a too-brief article by de Beer, E S on ‘The House of Lords in the Parliament of 1680’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XX (1943), 22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹² Too much has been made of the Commons Resolution of 3 July 1678 on money bills. As late as 1739 it could be challenged by Carteret, and in 1740 and 1741 Lord Chancellor Hardwicke twice denied its validity

¹³ Cf. ‘Daniel Finch, 2nd Earl of Nottingham, his house and estate’, Studies in Social History, ed. Plumb, J. H. (1955), 139Google Scholar, and ‘English Landownership, 1680–1740’, Economic History Review, 1st ser., X (1940), 15.Google Scholar Also ‘Marriage settlements in the eighteenth century’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th ser., XXXII (1950), 15.Google Scholar

¹⁴ I have left out of account the work done in recent years on the political theory of the reign. The most useful items, perhaps, for the political or social historian are: Fink, Z. S., The Classical Republicans (Evanston, 1945)Google Scholar; Behrens, Miss C. B., ‘The Whig theory of the constitution’, Cambridge Historical Journal, VII (1941), 42–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Mr Peter Laslett's edition of Filmer's, Sir Robert Patriarcha (Oxford, 1949).Google Scholar