The Blazing World: A New History of Revolutionary England

Product Information

It definitely confirmed to me that hereditary titles above Baron (which can be earned in the UK) should be abolished, if you can’t “earn” a title like you could when they were relevant, then you shouldn’t be able to pass them on either! There is one chapter (17) which felt out of place, perhaps because I have already read detailed histories of this period, 1665 and 1666, discussing the Dutch naval wars, the Plague and the Great Fire of London. I like narrative history and I like concrete examples to illustrate and amplify the broad story being told. This excellent history of seventeenth century England reads easily, with this from the introduction:

This history of Britain set in a global context for our times offers a new perspective on how the rise and fall of an empire shaped modern European politics. The similarities between those times and our own (on both sides of the Atlantic) are impossible to ignore. At the beginning of the 1600s, harvests were good, so England experienced a period of increased prosperity. Due to improving schools, literacy swelled and publications proliferated, creating a better-informed middle class. For perhaps the first time, those beneath the gentry engaged with new ideas and had the confidence to take their debates out of the taverns and into Parliament. A detailed account of the rise, fall, and potential resurrection of graphic storytelling in the U.S. A very readable, comprehensible, and always engrossing account of the monumental seventeenth Century in England – one which is ideal for (and I think aimed at) the interested amateur historian/reader rather than the academic/expert.

By Chris Matthews

To Cromwell we come then. His influence arose from his successful military leadership of the "New Model" Army under Charles, new as in its national scope with central government funding (p. 196) and its disciplined professional soldiers. As in so many other factional disputes like enumerated above, officers and fighting men often had different political and religious viewpoints, which may explain why no military coup was attempted through the revolutionary century. In fact when Charles finally surrendered it was "Not to Parliament [and its New Model Army]. . . but to the [Scottish] Covenanters." (p. 208). The path from surrender to execution (p. 256) was political not military, as was the selection of Cromwell as leader: "The new regime had toppled the monarchy and established the power of the Commons, but they had done so without rooting the new government in actual popular consent." (p. 258). Cromwell was the executive of the government, and "there was no doubt that Cromwell was the leading political figure of the nation" (p. 280) but he still ruled through Parliament and other councils of state. In his own words, "I am ready to serve not as a King, but as a Constable" (p. 306), to which Healey offers the assessment that "one of the great tragedies of Cromwell was that he prevented the Republic being so much more. He was, at heart, a conservative East Anglian landowner." (p. 310) It was an unfortunate clash. The festivities would be boisterous, and hardly compatible with the solemnity of a commemorative sermon. Or, to put it another way, the gravity of the sermon was out of keeping with a traditional day of relaxation and sport. So the parish elders had suggested a compromise. Those wishing to bear rushes, they asked, should wait until Mr Fletcher had finished his sermon. Then they could let themselves loose, and the dancing and football could begin. Everyone would be happy. So, if you followed the recent developments with the British royals, you know that Queen Elizabeth II died after a long reign and was succeeded by King Charles III. Change the plan you will roll onto at any time during your trial by visiting the “Settings & Account” section. What happens at the end of my trial? The Pulitzer Prize-winning biographer brings to life the most intriguing woman in the history of the world: Cleopatra, the last queen of Egypt.

Healey’s enthusiasm and love for the period is clear. Thanks to the explosion of published material of the time, there is a wealth of surviving pamphlets, manuscripts, diaries and documents forming a treasure trove of material for scholars such as Healey to delve into. This was the first century to provide such riches for it’s future historians. It also includes rather a lot about Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle, which although interesting, read as though inserted to introduce a female voice. Cavendish’s achievements were considerable, including a early work of speculative/utopian fiction, The Blazing World and Other Writings, and being the first female inducted into the Royal Society (discussed natural philosophy, which is the contemporary description of scientific knowledge). However, Cavendish comes across as very much unique because of her social position, ahead of her time, and not part of some larger feminist movement. Eileen M Hunt: Feminism vs Big Brother - Wifedom: Mrs Orwell’s Invisible Life by Anna Funder; Julia by Sandra NewmanThis combination of Puritanism and the uneven & incons Though “an absolutist by nature”, James was canny enough to realise the limits of ambition in his wealthy new kingdom. His son, Charles – the spare who became the heir following the death of his glamorous brother Henry in 1612 – was less flexible. Healey is scathing in his judgment (and, refreshingly, never afraid to judge) about this “man of blood” who in the 1640s led his country into two needless civil wars, describing him as a “stuffy authoritarian… never ruthless enough to be a successful tyrant”, though he concedes, as did Rubens, that the king had a good eye for a painting. It was not to be. Following the execution of the stubborn and slippery king, a Commonwealth was proclaimed. Cromwell’s conquest of Ireland – here given no more and no less space than required – and of Scotland secured these isles in preparation for experiments in government. First, there was the fundamentalist Nominated Assembly, or Barebone’s Parliament, which Cromwell disbanded in favour of the settlement devised by the soldier and intellectual John Lambert – for whom Healey, a fellow Yorkshireman, cannot disguise his admiration. Lambert’s Instrument of Government, Britain’s first and only written constitution, reimagined the old trinity of King, Lords and Commons as Protector, Council of State and Commons. Cromwell took top spot in 1653, though the Protectorate was doomed from the afternoon of September 3 1658, when “Cromwell died, people not much minding it,” as an Essex clergyman wrote in his diary. Jonathan Healy does a magnificent job of telling this story. He focuses on trying to explain what it was like. He does not go deeply into the military tactic of the battles or the minutia of Court or Parliamentary wrangling. He does try to explain the mind set of this religion-soaked world where fine points of theology were matters of life and death. The threat of international Catholicism was more powerful than the communist threat of the 1950s or the recent Islamophobia. Their equivalent to 9/11 was Guy Fawkes' almost successful attempt to blow up Parliament and the King. Any student of US History would be well served by understanding the British Civil War period. The founders of the US and framers of the constitution and bill of rights were *very* familiar with those decades and it absolutely shaped the US government design and balances of power. The idea that the founders would have had *any* intention of allowing - for example - the vice president of the US to decide which electors were valid, is as absurd as it comes.

Many other books I have read concentrate on only one of these events/periods – or often even only certain aspects/sub-periods of them – so where this book really works is in bring the whole period into one cohesive account. I found this book fascinating and at times quite moving. It was a great insight into how society shaped democracy as we know it today. It documents the struggles for democracy and the many attempted forms of this. And makes very clear that absolute power corrupts absolutely, whether monarchy or republic. It sets out the twists and turns of history and the impact they made. In his wide-ranging new history of revolutionary England, Jonathan Healey has given us a masterly account of a period that urgently needs to be reclaimed and recognised for its importance and interest. . . . Perhaps the greatest strength of Jonathan Healey’s book is how much it reveals of the lives and interests of those whom their contemporaries were pleased to describe as ‘the middling sort’. During the seventeenth century their voices were being raised—and heard—more vociferously and eloquently as the years went by. He is also very good on the role of women in society. . . . Painstakingly researched and elegantly written, The Blazing World is that rare achievement—a window into the past that is at once profoundly different and yet startlingly familiar.” —Dr Linda Porter, Writing Desk The book is split into twenty chapters and for my own reference I have made well over a hundred notes. The 17th century was the most dramatic and consequential in British history, the period during which the modern world was formed, and Jonathan Healey is as assured a guide to its twists and turns, its tragedies and triumphs as one could wish for. The Blazing World is a triumph of scholarship and concision.” —Paul Lay, historian, author of Providence LostHealey vividly describes all the political and social upheavals of the 1600s: from the Guy Fawkes Gunpowder Plot of 1605, through the chaos of the civil wars, the execution of King Charles I, the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, the Restoration of the monarchy, to the Glorious Revolution of 1688. It was a century of revolutions which set the stage for the modern concept of representative government.

One of the many virtues of Jonathan Healey's exciting new history of England during its most revolutionary period is the skilful way in which he thoroughly dissects the often obscure points of contention while never losing sight of the need to keep the narrative flowing . . . A rich and compelling account of one of the most fascinating and turbulent periods in all our history Charles I was a disaster. He triggered a civil war. He was captured and beheaded by Parliament. For the next 11 years there was no King. England was ruled by Parliament and then by Oliver Cromwell, acting as a "Protector". Funder reveals how O’Shaughnessy Blair self-effacingly supported Orwell intellectually, emotionally, medically and financially ... why didn’t Orwell do the same for his wife in her equally serious time of need?’ So this book is about raw politics, but it is also about the social change that conditioned those politics. It is narrative history, and for this it makes no apologies, but it’s also about how those two forces combined to create nearly a hundred years of turbulence, out of which arose a remarkable new world, one which – for better or worse – was blazing a path towards our own.King James, King of Scotland, inherited the English throne in 1603 from his aunt, Queen Elizabeth. He slowly alienated Parliament. When he died, his son Charles I inherited the throne. I read Devil Land last year and thought it was excellent (I would have given it four stars out of five, the same as this book review) but didn't review it at the time as I was a bit occupied with other things (moving house). ↩︎ It was interesting to see the rise and fall of the aristocracy as well. A man could come from relatively humble beginnings and become a Duke in one lifetime. And lose their titles, lands (and heads) even faster. A] lively, compelling and combative study of the most dramatic and consequential century in English history . . . The Blazing World offers a thrilling panorama of the period, from perspectives high and low, told with a winning combination of impish wit, sound judgment, and serious scholarship . . . It will delight those new to its extraordinary age, and fire up its grizzled veterans