Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T11:04:34.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The People, the Law, and the Constitution in Scotland and England: A Comparative Approach to the Glorious Revolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Tim Harris
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Despite the growing interest in recent years in taking a British approach to the problems of the first half of the seventeenth century, Restoration historians have been slow to follow the trend. Instead, the historiographical traditions for Charles II's and James II's three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland have remained largely independent; rather than coming closer together, if anything they seem to be growing further apart. We see this in particular with the historiographies of the Glorious Revolution in Scotland and England, which have become curiously “out of sync.” It used to be the case that the Revolution in England was seen as a most unrevolutionary affair, a bloodless palace coup brought about as much by the Tories as the Whigs; by this account, James was not overthrown for breaking his contract with the people, but was regarded as having abdicated, and the framers of the Revolution settlement simply sought to vindicate ancient rights and liberties (as they put it in the Declaration of Rights), rather than assert any new constitutional principles. If the Revolution in England tended to be seen in a conservative, perhaps even Tory context, the radical, Whig revolution was still to be found, but north of the border, in Scotland. For it was in Scotland where the Whigs were unequivocally the architects, where James was seen as having forfeited his crown by his arbitrary and tyrannical style of government, and where a truly revolutionary settlement in church and state was established.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , January 1999 , pp. 28 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Pinkham, Lucile, William III and the Respectable Revolution: The Part Played by William of Orange in the Revolution of 1688 (Cambridge, Mass., 1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Carter, Jennifer, “The Revolution and the Constitution,” in Britain after the Glorious Revolution 1689–1714, ed. Holmes, Geoffrey (London, 1969), pp. 39–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Western, J. R., Monarchy and Revolution: The English State in the 1680s (London, 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jones, J. R., The Revolution of 1688 in England (London, 1972), pp. 327–28Google Scholar; Kenyon, J. P., Revolution Principles: The Politics of Party, 1689–1720 (Cambridge, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nenner, Howard, “Constitutional Uncertainty and the Declaration of Rights,” in After the Reformation: Essays in Honor of J. H. Hexter, ed. Malament, Barbara (Philadelphia, 1980), pp. 291–308Google Scholar.

2 Mitchison, Rosalind, Lordship to Patronage: Scotland, 1603–1745 (London, 1983), pp. 117–19Google Scholar.

3 Morrill, John, “The Sensible Revolution, 1688,” in his The Nature of the English Revolution (London, 1993), pp. 419–53Google Scholar. Claydon, , Compare Tony William III and the Godly Revolution (Cambridge, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who emphasizes the degree to which the events of 1688–89 were seen largely in providential terms by the new regime's defenders. Nevertheless, Claydon resists the conclusion “that the use of providence by royalist writers strengthened monarchical absolutism,” insisting that the government's rhetoric of courtly reformation “tacitly accepted that tenure of the throne was conditional” and thus “may have weakened high monarchism after 1688” (pp. 231–32).

4 Schwoerer, Lois G., The Declaration of Rights, 1689 (Baltimore, 1981)Google Scholar, and “The Bill of Rights, 1689, Revisited,” in The World of William and Mary: Anglo-Dutch Perspectives on the Revolution of 1688–89, ed. Hoak, Dale and Feingold, Mordechai (Stanford, Calif., 1996), pp. 42–58Google Scholar.

5 Speck, W. A., Reluctant Revolutionaries: Englishmen and the Revolution of 1688 (Oxford, 1989), quotes on pp. 141, 162, 242Google Scholar. See also Speck, W. A., “Some Consequences of the Glorious Revolution,” in Hoak, and Feingold, , eds., The World of William and Mary, pp. 29–41Google Scholar.

6 Beddard, Robert, “The Unexpected Whig Revolution of 1688,” in The Revolutions of 1688, ed. Beddard, Robert (Oxford, 1991), pp. 11–101Google Scholar, quotes on pp. 95–96.

7 Israel, Jonathan I., “General Introduction” and “The Dutch Role in the Glorious Revolution,” in The Anglo-Dutch Moment: Essays of the Glorious Revolution and Its World Impact, ed. Israel, Jonathan I. (Cambridge, 1991), quotes on pp. 12, 19, 161, 162Google Scholar.

8 Lenman, Bruce P., “The Poverty of Political Theory in the Scottish Revolution of 1688–1690,” in The Revolution of 1688–1689: Changing Perspectives, ed. Schwoerer, Lois G. (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 244–45, 249Google Scholar.

9 Cowan, Ian B., “The Reluctant Revolutionaries: Scotland in 1688,” in By Force or by Default? The Revolution of 1688–1689, ed. Cruickshanks, Eveline (Edinburgh, 1989), pp. 65–81Google Scholar; Colquhoun, Kathleen Mary, “‘Issue of the Late Civill Wars’: James, Duke of York and the Government of Scotland, 1679–1689” (Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1993), p. 21Google Scholar.

10 Davies, R. R., “In Praise of British History,” in The British Isles, 1100–1500: Comparisons, Contrasts and Connections, ed. Davies, R. R. (Edinburgh, 1988), p. 17Google Scholar.

11 Thompson, E. P., “The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century,” in his Customs in Common (New York, 1991), pp. 185–258Google Scholar; Walter, John, “Grain Riots and Popular Attitudes to the Law: Maldon and the Crisis of 1629,” in An Ungovernable People: The English and Their Law in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, ed. Brewer, John and Styles, John (London, 1980), pp. 47–84Google Scholar, and “A ‘Rising of the People’? The Oxfordshire Rising of 1596,” Past and Present, no. 107 (May 1985): 90–143Google Scholar; Harris, Tim, London Crowds in the Reign of Charles II: Propaganda and Politics from the Restoration to the Exclusion Crisis (Cambridge, 1987), pp. 24–25, 82–91, 191–204Google Scholar.

12 Sachse, William L., “The Mob and the Revolution of 1688,” Journal of British Studies 4, no. 1 (1964): 23–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beddard, Robert, “Anti-Popery and the London Mob, 1688,” History Today 38 (1988): 36–39Google Scholar; Harris, Tim, “London Crowds and the Revolution of 1688,” in Cruickshanks, , ed., By Force or by Default? pp. 44–64Google Scholar.

13 Dr. Williams's Library, Roger Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P, Q, and R (hereafter cited as Morrice), Q:351; Huntington Library, San Marino, Calif., HA 1226, Thomas Carleton to the Earl of Huntington, 13 December 1688.

14 Braithwaite, W. C., The Second Period of Quakerism (Cambridge, 1961), pp. 75–76Google Scholar.

15 The Declaration of His Highnes, William … Prince of Orange, etc. of the Reasons Inducing Him, to Appear in Armes in the Kingdome of England (The Hague, 1688), p. 3Google Scholar.

16 Luttrell, Narcissus, A Brief Historical Relation of the State of Affairs from September, 1678, to April, 1714, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1857), 1:477Google Scholar; Morrice, Ent'ring Books, Q:323.

17 Luttrell, , A Brief Historical Relation, 1:475Google Scholar; SirBramston, John, Autobiography, ed. Lord Braybrooke, Camden Society, o.s., vol. 32 (London, 1845), p. 332Google Scholar.

18 Harris, , “London Crowds and the Revolution of 1688,” pp. 51–55Google Scholar.

19 Macaulay, T. B., The History of England from the Accession of James the Second, ed. SirFirth, Charles, 6 vols. (London, 1913–1915), 3:1178Google Scholar. Compare [Leslie, Charles, ], An Answer to a Book Intituled the State of the Protestants in Ireland under the Late King James's Government (London, 1692)Google Scholar, sig. b 2v, who also alludes to a similar incident at Gloucester.

20 Harris, Tim, “Reluctant Revolutionaries? The Scots and the Revolution of 1688–89,” in Politics and the Political Imagination in Later Stuart Britain: Essays Presented to Lois Green Schwoerer, ed. Nenner, Howard (Rochester, N.Y., 1997), pp. 106–7Google Scholar.

21 Five Letters from a Gentleman in Scotland [London, 1689], p. 1Google Scholar.

22 [Reid, Robert], The Account of the Popes Procession at Aberdeene, The 11th of January, 1689 ([Aberdeen], 1689), p. 6Google Scholar.

23 Cowan, Ian B., The Scottish Covenanters, 1660–1688 (London, 1976)Google Scholar.

24 [Sage, John], The Case of the Present Afflicted Clergy in Scotland Truly Represented (London, 1690), pp. 5–6Google Scholar; [Leslie], An Answer to a Book, sig. b2; [SirMackenzie, George], A Memorial for His Highness the Prince of Orange, in Relation to the Affairs of Scotland (London, 1689) (hereafter cited as Memorial), p. 20Google Scholar; The Present State and Condition of the Clergy and Church of Scotland (London, 1689[/1990]), pp. 1–2Google Scholar; Burnet, Gilbert, History of His Own Time (London, 1850), p. 510Google Scholar.

25 [Sage, ], “First Collection,” in The Case of the Present Afflicted Clergy, p. 4Google Scholar.

26 Ibid., p. 42.

27 National Library of Scotland (NLS), Edinburgh, Wod. MSS Qu. XXXVIII, fols. 116–17, 119v, 121v.

28 NLS, MS 7035, fol. 86; [Sage, ], “First Collection,” pp. 45–49Google Scholar.

29 Thomson, T. and Innes, C., eds., The Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland (hereafter cited as APS), 12 vols. (Edinburgh, 1814–1875), 8:8–9Google Scholar.

30 [Sage, ], “First Collection,” pp. 1, 33–34Google Scholar.

31 NLS, MS 7026, fol. 119.

32 [Rule, Gilbert], A Vindication of the Church of Scotland. Being an Answer to Five Pamphlets ([London], 1691), p. 22Google Scholar.

33 [Leslie], An Answer to a Book, sig. c; [Morer, Thomas], An Account of the Present Persecution of the Church of Scotland (London, 1690), p. 40Google Scholar; Historical Manuscripts Commission (HMC), Laing, I:468Google Scholar; [Sage, ], “First Collection,” p. 6Google Scholar.

34 The Register of the Privy Council of Scotland, 3d ser., vol. 14, A.D. 1689, ed. Paton, Henry (Edinburgh, 1933), pp. 19–20Google Scholar.

35 All quotes from the Declaration of Rights are taken from Schwoerer, , Declaration of Rights, app. 1, pp. 295–99Google Scholar.

36 British Library, Add. MSS 15,949, fol. 16. For the debate on the meaning of the term “abdicate,” see Slaughter, Thomas P., “‘Abdicate and Contract’ in the Glorious Revolution,” Historical Journal 24 (1981): 323–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Miller, John, “The Glorious Revolution: ‘Contract’ and ‘Abdication’ Reconsidered,” Historical Journal 25 (1982): 541–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 British Library, Add. MSS 15,949, fol. 17v.

38 Frankle, Robert J., “The Formulation of the Declaration of Rights,” Historical Journal 17 (1974): 265–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 HMC, 12th Report, app. 6, p. 29Google Scholar.

40 Speck, , Reluctant Revolutionaries, chap. 7, quote on p. 162Google Scholar; Schwoerer, Declaration of Rights, esp. chap. 4.

41 Miller, John, “Crown, Parliament, and People,” in Liberty Secured? Britain Before and After 1688, ed. Jones, J. R. (Stanford, Calif., 1992), pp. 81–83Google Scholar, argues that most articles of the Declaration of Rights “reaffirmed the letter, or at least conformed to the spirit, of existing law.” Miller agrees, however, that with regard to the exercise of the suspending and dispensing powers, the Ecclesiastical Commission, and the standing army, it is questionable whether James had technically acted illegally.

42 Speck, , Reluctant Revolutionaries, p. 150Google Scholar.

43 Cobbett, William, ed., The Parliamentary History of England, 26 vols. (London, 1806–1820), 4:527, 546, 551Google Scholar.

44 Howell, T. B., ed., State Trials, 33 vols. (London, 1809–1826), 12:394Google Scholar.

45 Ibid., pp. 426–29.

46 Ibid., pp. 367, 371; Havighurst, A. F., “James II and the Twelve Men in Scarlet,” Law Quarterly Review 69 (1953): 539Google Scholar; Holdsworth, W. S., A History of English Law, 17 vols. (1922–1972), 6:222–23Google Scholar.

47 HMC, 7th Report, p. 759Google Scholar; HMC, 12th Report, app. 6, p. 29Google Scholar; Nenner, Howard, “Liberty, Law, and Property: The Constitution in Retrospect from 1689,” in Jones, , ed., Liberty Secured? pp. 103–4Google Scholar, and By Colour of Law: Legal Culture and Constitutional Politics in England, 1660–1689 (Chicago, 1977), p. 92Google Scholar.

48 Schwoerer, , Declaration of Rights, p. 63Google Scholar; Birdsall, Paul, “‘Non Obstante’: A Study of the Dispensing Power of English Kings,” in Essays in History and Political Theory in Honor of Charles Howard McIlwain, ed. Wittke, Carl Frederick (Cambridge, Mass., 1936), pp. 37–76Google Scholar; Holdsworth, , A History of English Law, 6:223–25Google Scholar.

49 Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1199Google Scholar; Nenner, , By Colour of Law, pp. 99–101Google Scholar.

50 Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1165–99Google Scholar, esp. pp. 1193–94, 1196–97; Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P:552; Bramston, , Autobiography, p. 232Google Scholar; Tanner, J.R., English Constitutional Conflicts of the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1928), pp. 289–91Google Scholar. SirHerbert, Edward elaborated on his verdict in his A Short Account of the Authorities in Law, upon Which Judgement Was Given in Sir Edw. Hales Case (London, 1688)Google Scholar.

51 Herbert, , A Short Account, p. 29Google Scholar; Bloxam, J. R., ed., Magdalen College and King James II, 1686–1688 (Oxford, 1886), pp. 219, 222–23Google Scholar; Havighurst, , “James II,” p. 537Google Scholar; Nenner, , “Liberty, Law, and Property,” pp. 109–10Google Scholar. For the government's case, see [Care, Henry], A Vindication of the Proceedings of His Majesties Ecclesiastical Commissioners, against the Bishop of London, and the Fellows of Magdalen-College (London, 1688), sec. 3, pp. 36–72Google Scholar.

52 Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P:545; Herbert, , A Short Account, “James II,” p. 34Google Scholar.

53 Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P:505, 507, 528; Havighurst, , “James II,” pp. 530–31Google Scholar; Miller, John, James II: A Study in Kingship (Hove, 1978), p. 156Google Scholar.

54 Luttrell, , A Brief Historical Relation, 1:384Google Scholar; Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P:588, 614.

55 Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P:559.

56 Atwood, William, The Lord Chief Justice Herbert's Account Examin'd (London, 1689), esp. pp. 26–28, 31–32, 70–72Google Scholar. Compare SirAtkyns, Robert, An Enquiry into the Power of Dispensing with Penal Statutes (London, 1689)Google Scholar, and The Power, Jurisdiction and Priviledge of Parliament (London, 1689)Google Scholar, discussed in Weston, C. C. and Greenberg, J. R., Subjects and Sovereigns: The Grand Controversy over Legal Sovereignty in Stuart England (Cambridge, 1981), pp. 237–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Atkyns's position is more questionable and somewhat partisan. Atwood's arguments, however, carry considerable weight, and legal scholars accept that his reading might well have been correct. See Birdsall, , “‘Non Obstante’” p. 71Google Scholar, n. 85, third point.

57 Schwoerer, , Declaration of Rights, p. 296Google Scholar.

58 Ibid., pp. 65–66; Ogg, David, England in the Reigns of James II and William III (Oxford, 1955), pp. 176–78Google Scholar. For the Act of 1661, see Luders, A., Tomlins, T. E., and France, J., eds., Statutes of the Realm, 12 vols. (London, 1810–1828), 5:315–16Google Scholar.

59 Clarke, J. S., ed., The Life of James II, 2 vols. (London, 1816), 2:89–90Google Scholar; Huntington Library, Hastings Religious Box 2, no. 9; [Care, Henry], The Legality of the Court Held by His Majesties Ecclesiastical Commissioners, Defended (London, 1688)Google Scholar, and Vindication of the Proceedings, sec. 1, pp. 5–20. For the commission, see Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1143–1155Google Scholar.

60 Luders, , et al., eds., Statutes of the Realm, 4:352Google Scholar.

61 Ibid., pp. 112–13; Gardiner, Samuel Rawson, ed., Constitutional Documents of the Puritan Revolution, 1625–1660, 3d ed. (Oxford, 1906), pp. 186–89Google Scholar.

62 Morrice, Ent'ring Books, P:593–94, 603, 619–20; Burnet, , History of His Own Time, p. 431Google Scholar; Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1160Google Scholar. Some of the legal experts Compton consulted tried to convince him that such a stance would be imprudent, because of the ambiguity of the legal situation. Most agreed, however, that he should refuse to acknowledge the authority of the Ecclesiastical Commission.

63 East Sussex Record Office, Lewes, ASH 931/50.

64 SirAtkyns, Robert, “A Discourse Concerning the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in the Realm of England: Occasioned by the Late Commission in Ecclesiastical Causes,” in Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1148–55Google Scholar. See also [Stillingfleet, Edward], A Discourse Concerning the Illegality of the Late Ecclesiastical Commission (1689)Google Scholar, which was written during James's reign (sig. A2); Edinburgh University Library, MS La. I. 333, pp. 1–16, “A MS treatise on the Court of High Commission.” It is necessary here to clear up a confusion over the numbering of the articles introduced by Kenyon, J. P., “The Commission for Ecclesiastical Causes, 1686–1688: A Reconsideration,” Historical Journal 34 (1991): 727–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Kenyon asserts that it is “clause 8, not 18, of the Act of Supremacy of 1559 [that] embodies the crown's visitorial powers” and is consequently at a loss to identify the alleged clause 17 that independently confirms Elizabeth's visitorial powers (p. 728). Kenyon has confused the paragraphs, which are numbered in the original Elizabethan statute, with the separate “branches, clauses, articles or sentences” of the 1559 Act, which are not. Thus paragraph 8 comprises articles or clauses 17 and 18. To confuse the matter further, contemporaries sometimes referred to article 18 as paragraph 18, e.g., Atkyns in Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1151Google Scholar.

65 Howell, , ed., State Trials, 11:1157, 1160Google Scholar; Ellis, G. A., ed., The Ellis Correspondence, 1686–1688, 2 vols. (London, 1829), 1:161Google Scholar; [Care, ], Legality of the Court, esp. pp. 11, 34Google Scholar, and Vindication of the Proceedings, pp. 4, 5, 62, 65. Schwoerer, , Declaration of Rights, pp. 65–66Google Scholar, is incorrect when she insists that “the commission was called a ‘court’ for the first time” in William of Orange's Declaration … of the Reasons of 10 October 1688.

66 Luders, et al., eds., Statutes of the Realm, 5:308–9, 358–64Google Scholar.

67 Grey, Anchitell, Debates of the House of Commons, from the Year 1667 to the Year 1694, 10 vols. (London, 1763), 7:64, 65, 70, 73Google Scholar; Knights, Mark, Politics and Opinion in Crisis, 1678–81 (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 19, 45Google Scholar.

68 Luders, et al., eds., Statutes of the Realm, 5:934Google Scholar; Malcolm, Joyce Lee, To Keep and Bear Arms: The Origins of an Anglo-American Right (Cambridge, Mass., 1994), p. 107Google Scholar.

69 Butler, Richard, Earl of Arran, A Speech … to the Scots Nobility and Gentry (Edinburgh, 1689)Google Scholar; Clarke, , ed., Life of James II, 2:345Google Scholar.

70 Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 9:33–34Google Scholar.

71 Lenman, , “The Poverty of Political Theory,” p. 255Google Scholar.

72 Melville, William Leslie, ed., Leven and Melville Papers: Letters and State Papers Chiefly Addressed to George Earl of Melville, Secretary of State for Scotland, 1689–1691 (Edinburgh, 1843), p. 9Google Scholar.

73 NLS, Wod. MSS Oct. XXX, fol. 68.

74 NLS, Wod. MSS Qu. XXXVIII, fol. 131v. For the United Societies' opposition to proclaiming James VII king, see Edinburgh University Library, MS La. III:350.

75 Colin Lindsay, third earl of Balcarres, An Account of the Affairs of Scotland, Relating to the Revolution of 1688 (London, 1714), p. 82Google Scholar.

76 All citations from the Claim of Right are taken from A Source Book of Scottish History, vol. 3, 1567 to 1707, ed. Dickinson, William Croft and Donaldson, Gordon (London, 1954) (hereafter cited as Source Book), pp. 200–207Google Scholar. The Claim of Right can also be found in Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 9:37–40Google Scholar.

77 Kirkton, James, The Secret and True History of the Church of Scotland, from the Restoration to … 1678 (Edinburgh, 1817), p. 94Google Scholar; [Shields, Alexander], A Hind Let Loose ([Edinburgh], 1687), p. 106Google Scholar.

78 Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 7:13Google Scholar.

79 Rait, R. S., The Parliaments of Scotland (Glasgow, 1924), pp. 98, 302Google Scholar.

80 Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 3:23, 8:238–39Google Scholar; Dickinson, and Donaldson, , eds., Source Book, pp. 185–86Google Scholar; SirLauder, John of Fountainhall, The Decisions of the Lords of the Council and Session from June 6th, 1678, to July 30th, 1713, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1759–1761), 1:157Google Scholar.

81 Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 2:535Google Scholar, 3:36.

82 Dickinson, and Donaldson, , eds., Source Book, p. 160Google Scholar; Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 7:554Google Scholar.

83 “Reasons for Abrogating the Penal Statutes,” in History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland, from the Restoration to the Revolution, by Wodrow, Robert, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1721–1722), app. 118, 2:163–67Google Scholar.

84 Fountainhall, , The Decisions of the Lords, 1:416Google Scholar.

85 SirMackenzie, George, Jus Regiutn, 2d ed. (Edinburgh, 1684), pp. 34, 47Google Scholar.

86 Fountainhall, , The Decisions of the Lords, 1:374Google Scholar.

87 Wodrow, , History of the Sufferings, app. 117, 2:161–63Google Scholar, and app. 119, 2:168–73.

88 Burnet, , History of His Own Time, pp. 377–78Google Scholar; Wodrow, , History of the Sufferings, 2:336–37Google Scholar; Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 7:455–56Google Scholar.

89 Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 8:461Google Scholar.

90 Ibid., p. 352.

91 Burnet, , History of His Own Time, p. 538Google Scholar.

92 NLS, MS 7026, Ms. 173, 190.

93 Dickinson, and Donaldson, , eds., Source Book, pp. 207–8Google Scholar; Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 9:45Google Scholar.

94 Thomson, and Innes, , eds., APS, 9:41Google Scholar; NLS, Wod. MSS Oct. XXX, fol. 60; Balfour-Melville, E. W. M., ed., An Account of the Proceedings of the Estates in Scotland, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1955), 1:85–89Google Scholar; HMC, Hamilton, pp. 181–82Google Scholar; Luttrell, , A Brief Historical Relation, 1:533Google Scholar.

95 An Account of the Affairs of Scotland, in Relation to Their Religious and Civil Rights (London, 1690)Google Scholar; A Collection of All the Acts of Parliament (London, 1693)Google Scholar; Halliday, James, “The Club and the Revolution in Scotland,” Scottish Historical Review 45 (1966): 143–59Google Scholar; Riley, P. W. J., King William and the Scottish Politicians (Edinburgh, 1979)Google Scholar, chap. 2.

96 Goldie, Mark, “The Revolution of 1689 and the Structure of Political Argument,” Bulletin of Research in the Humanities 83 (1980): 473–564Google Scholar. See also Pincus, S. C. A., “‘To Protect English Liberties’: The English Nationalist Revolution of 1688–1689,” in Protestantism and National Identity: Britain and Ireland, c.1650–c.1850, ed. Claydon, Tony and McBride, Ian (Cambridge, 1998), pp. 75–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

97 Goldie, Mark, “The Roots of True Whiggism,” History of Political Thought 1 (1980): 195–236Google Scholar. Compare Worden, Blair, “The Revolution of 1688–9 and the English Republican Tradition,” in Israel, , ed., The Anglo-Dutch Moment, pp. 241–77Google Scholar.

98 [Mackenzie, ], A Memorial for His Highness the Prince of Orange, p. 5Google Scholar.

99 [Morer, ], An Account of the Present Persecution, p. 32Google Scholar.

100 [Rule, Gilbert], A Vindication of the Church of Scotland. Being an Answer to a Paper, Intituled, Some Questions Concerning Episcopal and Presbyterial Government in Scotland (1691), p. 28Google Scholar.

101 Kidd, Colin, Subverting Scotland's Past: Scottish Whig Historians and the Creation of an Anglo-British Identity, 1689–c.1830 (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 19–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

102 Lenman, , “The Poverty of Political Theory,” p. 245Google Scholar.

103 Clarke, Tristram, “The Williamite Episcopalians and the Glorious Revolution in Scotland,” Records of the Scottish Church History Society 24 (1990): 33–51Google Scholar.

104 Canaries, James, A Sermon Preach'd at Selkirk upon the 29th of May, 1685 (Edinburgh, 1685), quote on p. 12Google Scholar.

105 Canaries, James, Romes Additions to Christianity (Edinburgh, 1686), sig. A3v, p. 19Google Scholar.

106 Canaries, James, A Sermon Preached at Edinburgh, In the East-Church of St. Giles, upon the 30th of January, 1689 (Edinburgh, 1689), p. 79Google Scholar.

107 Ibid., pp. 1, 6–16.

108 Ibid., p. 22.

109 Ibid., pp. 23–25.

110 Ibid., pp. 38–40.

111 Ibid., pp. 70, 79.

112 Ibid., p. 66.

113 Pocock, J. G. A., “The Limits and Divisions of British History: In Search of the Unknown Subject,” American Historical Review 87 (1982): 317CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

114 Donaldson, Gordon, Scotland: James V to James VII (Edinburgh, 1965), p. 383Google Scholar. Compare Mitchison, , Lordship to Patronage, pp. 116–17Google Scholar.

115 A criticism that has been leveled against Conrad Russell's approach by John Morrill. See Morrill, , Nature of the English Revolution, pp. 252–72Google Scholar.

116 Culloden Papers: Comprising an Extensive and Interesting Correspondence from the Year 1625 to 1748 (London, 1815), p. 318Google Scholar.

117 [Strachan, William], Some Remarks upon a Late Pamphlet (London, 1694), p. 48Google Scholar.

118 These are themes that I shall develop in my British Revolutions: The Making of the Modern Nation, 1660–1707 (forthcoming from Penguin).