What do you think?
Rate this book
Revolution: The Great Crisis of the British Monarchy, 1685-1720
To an extraordinary extent everyone in Britain still lives under the shadow of the 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688. It was a massive, brutal and terrifying event, which completely changed the governments of England, Scotland and Ireland and which was only achieved through overwhelming violence. Initiated by a large Dutch army marching through southern England and climaxing in a series of the most terrible battles ever fought on Irish soil, the revolution by which William III seized James II' kingdoms could only for a very narrow and exclusively English viewpoint be called 'glorious'. Many thousands died during the Revolution, an event that marked a new and final orientation for Britain that, except for a large part of Ireland, has endured to the present day. Revolution brilliantly captures the sense that this was a great turning point in Britain's history, but also shows how severe a price was paid to achieve this.
Paperback
First published February 28, 2006
17 people are currently reading
230 people want to read
About the author
Tim Harris
11 books11 followersLibrarian Note:
There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Tim Harris received his BA, MA and PhD from Cambridge University and was a Fellow of Emmanuel College from 1983 before moving to Brown in 1986. He teaches a wide range of courses in the political, religious, intellectual, social and cultural history of early modern England, Scotland and Ireland. A social historian of politics, he has written about the interface of high and low politics, popular protest movements, ideology and propaganda, party politics, popular culture, and the politics of religious dissent during Britain's Age of Revolutions.
There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Tim Harris received his BA, MA and PhD from Cambridge University and was a Fellow of Emmanuel College from 1983 before moving to Brown in 1986. He teaches a wide range of courses in the political, religious, intellectual, social and cultural history of early modern England, Scotland and Ireland. A social historian of politics, he has written about the interface of high and low politics, popular protest movements, ideology and propaganda, party politics, popular culture, and the politics of religious dissent during Britain's Age of Revolutions.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
March 15, 2016
Be warned, this book is very detailed and I wouldn't recommend it for someone who hasn't already read about the Glorious Revolution. Harris has three points he wants to make: 1) the revolution wasn't from "above" but involved everyday people; 2) it WAS a revolution and; 3) one has to look at all three kingdoms--England, Ireland and Scotland--to understand it. He shows that while it might look like the people in power were higher up in social class, the lower orders ended up with positions in which they might choose to stand up for or against a law. This greatly influenced the revolution. He shows how different it was in the three countries and why.
February 12, 2022
This is a rather detailed historical account of the Glorious Revolution, and one which I would highly recommend for its emphasis on its multifaceted nature but still with a clear overarching thesis, or rather two. This account is divided between the three kingdoms at the time of the Revolution, England, Scotland, and Ireland, and examines each stage of the Revolution, before, during, and after, each in turn. While it highlights the political and national dimension and interests of the various actors, it rightly gives weight to the religious dimension which increasingly became the dominant concern as the Revolution progressed until it became the defining issue. It gives a very good explanation, with copious quotations from the primary sources, how the various kingdoms and parties understood and rationalised the Glorious Revolution often in frequently contradictory ways, as well as examining to what extent it was continuous with the constitutional and political arrangement before and how it changed thereafter.
His first overarching thesis is that the Glorious Revolution was not simply a "conquest" by William of Orange but rather because James II had alienated a lot of the local interests by his increasingly aggressive use of executive power to undermine the Protestant establishment, who at the beginning of his reign had actually supported him, his regime was already in advanced stage of decay and collapse before William had landed on the shores of England. The author however also emphasised that before the Revolution there were a number of significant frayed ends and underlying legal and constitutional issues which were not resolved and which James, arguably, could claim as justification for his actions. For example, royal absolutism was legally stronger in Scotland than in England, and his use of his prerogative to dispense with law could, arguably, be said to be within the letter of the acts of the Scottish parliament. King Charles II had indeed increased royal power towards the end of his reign, but could only do so with the support of his Protestant majority people who were assured that he and his Roman Catholic successor would "rule by law". It was this tension between royal absolutism and rule by law which would come apart through James II rather clumsy mismanagement of the achievements of his brother when he began to use the royal prerogative to unsettle the Protestant religion established by law.
His second overarching thesis is that the revolutionary implications of this event differed from nation to nation. It was more conservative in England, which was sufficiently ambiguous to garner the support and consensus of all sides in England, while more radical and partisan in Scotland. The English could claim that the Glorious Revolution was more continuous with the constitutional settlement which came before while the Revolution in Scotland was a much more radical break with the past.
Overall, I would highly recommend this book because of its representation of all sides and parties of the issue and its willing to grapple with the complexities and often contradictory forces and motivations at work in the historical events. I take away one star only because the quotations can get heavy at times and the point could be belaboured when one or just two quotes would do to make the point. Otherwise, I would highly recommend this book as a good overview of the history of the Glorious Revolution.
His first overarching thesis is that the Glorious Revolution was not simply a "conquest" by William of Orange but rather because James II had alienated a lot of the local interests by his increasingly aggressive use of executive power to undermine the Protestant establishment, who at the beginning of his reign had actually supported him, his regime was already in advanced stage of decay and collapse before William had landed on the shores of England. The author however also emphasised that before the Revolution there were a number of significant frayed ends and underlying legal and constitutional issues which were not resolved and which James, arguably, could claim as justification for his actions. For example, royal absolutism was legally stronger in Scotland than in England, and his use of his prerogative to dispense with law could, arguably, be said to be within the letter of the acts of the Scottish parliament. King Charles II had indeed increased royal power towards the end of his reign, but could only do so with the support of his Protestant majority people who were assured that he and his Roman Catholic successor would "rule by law". It was this tension between royal absolutism and rule by law which would come apart through James II rather clumsy mismanagement of the achievements of his brother when he began to use the royal prerogative to unsettle the Protestant religion established by law.
His second overarching thesis is that the revolutionary implications of this event differed from nation to nation. It was more conservative in England, which was sufficiently ambiguous to garner the support and consensus of all sides in England, while more radical and partisan in Scotland. The English could claim that the Glorious Revolution was more continuous with the constitutional settlement which came before while the Revolution in Scotland was a much more radical break with the past.
Overall, I would highly recommend this book because of its representation of all sides and parties of the issue and its willing to grapple with the complexities and often contradictory forces and motivations at work in the historical events. I take away one star only because the quotations can get heavy at times and the point could be belaboured when one or just two quotes would do to make the point. Otherwise, I would highly recommend this book as a good overview of the history of the Glorious Revolution.
February 27, 2014
This was pleasant to read, but I'm not sure if I would recommend it to anyone who wanted to know about the Glorious Revolution. Harris's book is really long. It IS written for a general audience, and it is a nice narrative history, with Kings doing Kingly things and un-Kingly things, so more people than just historians would like it. But I don't know...how many lay readers are out there chomping at the bit for hundreds of pages on the Glorious Revolution?
Harris definitely argues his key point well, which is that the Glorious Revolution was more violent and revolutionary than people have tended to give it credit for being. He writes that this is impossible to see without treating it as a "three kingdoms event," the three being England, Scotland, and Ireland. Treating as just an English story makes it seem less radical. And he includes lots of great anecdotes. You can get caught up in the story...Harris makes it really easy to imagine a guy like James II as a real person, with plans and bravery and stupidity and all that. You can understand his motivations.
Anyway, I guess there probably isn't a better choice for the lay readers who ARE interested in late 17th century Britain, so have at it.
Harris definitely argues his key point well, which is that the Glorious Revolution was more violent and revolutionary than people have tended to give it credit for being. He writes that this is impossible to see without treating it as a "three kingdoms event," the three being England, Scotland, and Ireland. Treating as just an English story makes it seem less radical. And he includes lots of great anecdotes. You can get caught up in the story...Harris makes it really easy to imagine a guy like James II as a real person, with plans and bravery and stupidity and all that. You can understand his motivations.
Anyway, I guess there probably isn't a better choice for the lay readers who ARE interested in late 17th century Britain, so have at it.
March 13, 2022
This is quite the most detailed history book that I read for quite some time. The subtitle is a little misleading. I was hoping to read a wider ranging history of the later Stuarts and the Hanoverian succession, but in fact all but the final concluding chapter focuses on the reign of James III and the Glorious Revolution of 1688-89.
In line with the trend over the past thirty years or so of viewing the seventeenth century in Three Kingdom terms, rather than simply English, Harris sets out his thesis as to why the Glorious Revolution was genuinely revolutionary. If the experience of the English was relatively benign - Harris scotches the idea that William of Orange's landing was truly a foreign invasion: it was two close relatives of the existing monarch landing with the goodwill of the political elite - the same could not be said for Scotland, and especially Ireland. Pitched battles were fought, politics and religion were overturned and a new course for the British Isles was set. In the concluding chapter, using a thought experiment Harris points out that someone time travelling from 1630 to 1680 would have seen comparatively little change, notwithstanding the mid-century civil war. On the other hand a time traveller from 1680 to 1720 would have seen a very different political and religious set-up.
A good book, but perhaps too detailed to warrant a re-rereading.
In line with the trend over the past thirty years or so of viewing the seventeenth century in Three Kingdom terms, rather than simply English, Harris sets out his thesis as to why the Glorious Revolution was genuinely revolutionary. If the experience of the English was relatively benign - Harris scotches the idea that William of Orange's landing was truly a foreign invasion: it was two close relatives of the existing monarch landing with the goodwill of the political elite - the same could not be said for Scotland, and especially Ireland. Pitched battles were fought, politics and religion were overturned and a new course for the British Isles was set. In the concluding chapter, using a thought experiment Harris points out that someone time travelling from 1630 to 1680 would have seen comparatively little change, notwithstanding the mid-century civil war. On the other hand a time traveller from 1680 to 1720 would have seen a very different political and religious set-up.
A good book, but perhaps too detailed to warrant a re-rereading.
October 23, 2024
Recommended by my professor but very enjoyable and interesting book on this period
September 9, 2017
A very technical account of the Glorious Revolution. The author has obviously researched his subject thoroughly ( as you would expect) and has left no stone unturned. Rather than delivering a romantic account of the period he has concentrated on reviewing (in depth) the policies and legislation enacted by James Ii in his failed attempt to restore the fortunes of the Catholic minority. A dry read but one well worth while for anyone trying to understand the politics of the time
April 25, 2008
An important and interesting account of the Glorious Revolution.
March 28, 2011
The Anglican royalist gentery strike again! This time, they choose Church over King.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews