Richard Cust – författare

King James VI and I and his English Parliaments is a posthumously published work by Conrad Russell, the foremost historian of his generation working on early Stuart parliaments, and is based on the Trevelyan lectures which he delivered at the University of Cambridge. It provides a chronological narrative of the early English Parliaments of James VI and I, covering in detail the four sessions of the 1604-1610 Parliament and the Addled Parliament of 1614, with a final chapter looking towards the parliaments of the 1620s. The narrative demonstrates that two problems in particular dominated these sessions: the financial problems of the Crown, and the pursuit of a formal Union between England and Scotland. These were a continuous source of division and disagreement, and neither was satisfactorily resolved. It also highlights important subsidiary issues, notably the clashes between James and his judges over the status of the Common Law and the relatively muted tensions over religion. Detailed consideration is given throughout to the character and style of James' kingship.This book can be read alongside the same author's Parliaments and English Politics, 1621-1629 (Oxford, 1979) and The Fall of the British Monarchies, 1637-1642 (Oxford, 1992) to provide the first continuous narrative of parliamentary proceedings from the accession of James to the outbreak of Civil War since the massive work of S. R Gardiner. Drawing on the much wider range of sources available to modern historians, in particular the full range of parliamentary diaries, it offers the most up-to-date analysis we have of conflict between Crown and Parliament during a turbulent phase of British History.

Revisionism has had a far-reaching impact upon the history of politics and religion in early Stuart Britain. The essays collected here were originally published in 2002, and set out to assess this impact and develop further some of the central themes highlighted in the work of the historian Conrad Russell, and address a series of themes arising out of recent debates on the causes of the English Civil War. The subject-matter ranges from high-political narrative to the study of rumour, gossip, and print culture. Topics covered include the character of Charles I's kingship, the place of Parliament in the political system, the divisive legacy of the English Reformation, and the problems posed by trying to unite England with Scotland and Ireland. The collection will interest readers concerned with the political and religious history, and also the literature, of early seventeenth-century Britain.

Revisionism has had a far-reaching impact upon the history of politics and religion in early Stuart Britain. The essays collected here were originally published in 2002, and set out to assess this impact and develop further some of the central themes highlighted in the work of the historian Conrad Russell, and address a series of themes arising out of recent debates on the causes of the English Civil War. The subject-matter ranges from high-political narrative to the study of rumour, gossip, and print culture. Topics covered include the character of Charles I's kingship, the place of Parliament in the political system, the divisive legacy of the English Reformation, and the problems posed by trying to unite England with Scotland and Ireland. The collection will interest readers concerned with the political and religious history, and also the literature, of early seventeenth-century Britain.

This important collection of essays, based on extensive original research, presents a vigorous critique of ` revisionist' analyses of the period, and reasserts the importance of long term ideological and social developments in causing the outbreak of the civil war.

This is a major study of Charles I's relationship with the English aristocracy. Rejecting the traditional emphasis on the 'Crisis of the Aristocracy', Professor Richard Cust highlights instead the effectiveness of the King and the Earl of Arundel's policies to promote and strengthen the nobility. He reveals how the peers reasserted themselves as the natural leaders of the political nation during the Great Council of Peers in 1640 and the Long Parliament. He also demonstrates how Charles deliberately set out to cultivate his aristocracy as the main bulwark of royal authority, enabling him to go to war against the Scots in 1639 and then build the royalist party which provided the means to fight parliament in 1642. The analysis is framed throughout within a broader study of aristocratic honour and the efforts of the heralds to stabilise the social order.

This important collection of essays, based on extensive original research, presents a vigorous critique of ` revisionist' analyses of the period, and reasserts the importance of long term ideological and social developments in causing the outbreak of the civil war.

This is a major study of Charles I's relationship with the English aristocracy. Rejecting the traditional emphasis on the 'Crisis of the Aristocracy', Professor Richard Cust highlights instead the effectiveness of the King and the Earl of Arundel's policies to promote and strengthen the nobility. He reveals how the peers reasserted themselves as the natural leaders of the political nation during the Great Council of Peers in 1640 and the Long Parliament. He also demonstrates how Charles deliberately set out to cultivate his aristocracy as the main bulwark of royal authority, enabling him to go to war against the Scots in 1639 and then build the royalist party which provided the means to fight parliament in 1642. The analysis is framed throughout within a broader study of aristocratic honour and the efforts of the heralds to stabilise the social order.

Charles I was a complex man whose career intersected with some of the most dramatic events in English history. He played a central role in provoking the English Civil War, and his execution led to the only republican government Britain has ever known. Historians have struggled to get him into perspective, veering between outright condemnation and measured sympathy.Richard Cust shows that Charles I was not unfit to be a king, emphasising his strengths as a party leader and conviction politician, but concludes that, none the less, his prejudices and attitudes, and his mishandling of political crises did much to bring about a civil war in Britain. He argues that ultimately, after the war, Charles pushed his enemies into a position where they had little choice but to execute him.