Rebellion or Revolution?: England 1640-1660

by G.E. Aylmer

The period from 1640 to 1660, which includes the Civil War, the beheading of Charles I, and the reign of a republican government, is one of the most controversial and dramatic in British history. This book offers an authoritative analysis of the debate among contemporary historians on the causes, significance, and consequences of the events of that era. Aylmer argues that there was at least a partial middle-class revolution, as well as a rebellion with both aristocratic and popular elements.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Civil War, 17th Century

288 pages, Paperback

First published March 20, 1986

About the author

Gerald Edward Aylmer, British historian of seventeenth-century England with particular interest in the administration of Government.

Reviews

[Jan-Maat]

I'm still mystified why the Tudors, for all their power dressing, feature more in the UK school history syllabus than the Stuarts. Maybe Holbein's paintings outweigh the Ranters, Levellers and Diggers with their wild ideas such as one man one vote (and if it wasn't bad enough that the Digger's communal farm didn't succeed a golf course has now been constructed on its site to add insult to injury).

But if you are looking to escape the Tudors and find out more about the civil war, regicide, republic and restoration this short book gives a brief overview. W.A. Speck's book Reluctant Revolutionaries continues the story to William of Orange's seizure of the throne in 1688.

The framing question is whether the civil war period was a revolution, in either the older sense of turning full circle or the more familiar definition of dramatic or major change, or simply a rebellion. Not entirely an academic question, there is still a division between the users of the term Interregnum and Republic to describe the years between 1649 and 1660. Naturally in best historical style Aylmer opts for a mixed answer. Even though the innovations of the Republic, including fairly harmless ones like the use of English as the language of record in the courts rather than Norman French, were abandoned after 1660 the regime of Charles II was no simple continuation of that of Charles I.

[C. B. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ruthlessly concise and very useful for students.

[Tony Gualtieri · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good overview of the events of 1640-1660, it sorts out the various strands of the Civil War, Commonwealth, and Protectorate. The style is one step removed from narrative, as if one is watching a movie by listening to the DVD commentary. This is not uncommon in academic history books, but I always find it makes for a somewhat frustrating reading experience.

[Alexandra · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm sure this is an interesting period, but the book was dry even for me...I'll have to find a biography of the main personages, I think...