God's Fury, England's Fire_ A New History of the English Civil Wars - Michael J. Braddick [386]
22. Gardiner, History of England, X, pp. 191–3; Russell, Fall, pp. 503–4.
23. Russell, Fall, pp. 505–6.
24. See above, p. 182; Gardiner, History of England, X, pp. 154–6; Fletcher, Outbreak, pp. 185–6.
25. Bernard Capp, ‘Naval Operations’, in John Kenyon and Jane Ohlmeyer (eds.), The Civil Wars: A Military History of England, Scotland and Ireland 1638–1660 (Oxford, 1998), pp. 156–91, at pp. 157–8. Malcolm Wanklyn and Frank Jones are more sceptical about the significance of parliamentary control of the navy to the overall course of the war: A Military History of the English Civil War 1642–1646: Strategy and Tactics (Harlow, 2005), pp. 12–13.
26. Russell, Fall, p. 505.
27. Cited in Smith, Stuart Parliaments, pp. 46–7.
28. Gardiner, CD, pp. 249–54. For an introduction to the controversy see David Wootton (ed.), Divine Right and Democracy: An Anthology of Political Writing in Stuart England (Harmondsworth, 1986), intr. and ch. 3; M. J. Mendle, ‘Politics and Political Thought 1640–1642’, in Conrad Russell (ed.), The Origins of the English Civil War (London, 1973), pp. 219-45. The key work is Michael Mendle, Dangerous Positions: Mixed Government, the Estates of the Realm, and the Making of the Answer to the 19 Propositions (Tuscaloosa, 1985).
29. Smith, Constitutional Royalism, pp. 90–91. See also Wootton, Divine Right, ch. 3.
30. Following the summary in Mendle, ‘Great Council’, p. 160. See also Mendle, Dangerous Positions; Michael Mendle, Henry Parker and the English Civil War: The Political Thought of the Public’s ‘Privado’ (Cambridge, 1995); Michael Mendle, ‘Parliamentary Sovereignty: A Very English Absolutism’, in Nicholas T. Phillipson and Quentin Skinner (eds.), Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 97–119; Michael Mendle, ‘Henry Parker: The Public’s Privado’, in Gordon J. Schochet, P. E. Tatspaugh and Carol Brobeck (eds.), Religion, Resistance and Civil War: Papers Presented at the Folger Institute Seminar ‘Political Thought in Early Modern England, 1600–1660’ (Washington, DC, 1990), pp. 151–77; Michael Mendle, ‘The Ship Money Case, The case of shipmony, and the Development of Henry Parker’s Parliamentary Absolutism’, HJ, 32 (1989), 513–36; Richard Tuck, Philosophy and Government 1572–1651 (Cambridge, 1993), esp. pp. 221–33.
31. Quentin Skinner, ‘Rethinking Political Liberty’, History Workshop Journal, 61:1 (2006), 156–70; see, more generally, Quentin Skinner, ‘Classical Liberty and the Coming of the English Civil War’, in Martin Van Gelderen and Quentin Skinner (eds.), Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage, vol. 2: The Values of Republicanism in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge, 2002), pp. 9–28, esp. pp. 17–28.
32. For the declarations see Skinner, ‘Rethinking Political Liberty’, pp. 165–8; for Parker and the Committee of Safety see Jason Peacey, Politicians and Pamphleteers: Propaganda during the English Civil Wars and Interregnum (Aldershot, 2004), pp. 53–4.
33. For Reasons, see Skinner, ‘Rethinking Political Liberty’, pp. 167–8. For the output of Bishop and White see Jason Peacey, ‘“Fiery Spirits” and Political Propaganda: Uncovering a Radical Press Campaign of 1642’, Publishing History, 55 (2004), pp. 5–36. I am grateful to John Morrill for discussing this material with me.
34. For this general phenomenon see Peacey, Politicians and Pamphleteers.
35. See above, p. 172.
36. A. D. T. Cromartie, ‘The Printing of Parliamentary Speeches November 1640–July 1642’, HJ, 33 (1990), 23–44; John Morrill, ‘The Unweariableness of Mr Pym: Influence and Eloquence in the Long Parliament’, in Susan D. Amussen and Mark A. Kishlansky (eds.), Political Culture and Cultural Politics in Early Modern England: Essays Presented to David Underdown (Manchester, 1995), pp. 19–54, esp. pp. 36–43.
37. Fletcher, Outbreak, pp. 255–6. His comment on the Grand Remonstrance