Each age has used the debate about the English Reformation in its own way and for its own ends. This book is about the changing nature of the debate on the English Reformation, and is a study of Reformation historiography. It focuses the historiography of the Reformation as seen through the eyes of men who were contemporaries of the English Reformation, and examines the work of certain later writers from Thomas Fuller to John Strype. The book discusses the history of the sixteenth-century Reformation as written by modernist professional historians of the later nineteenth, twentieth and twenty-first centuries. All through the Tudor times the tide of Reformation ebbed and flowed as the monarch willed. The book sets out modern debates concerning the role of Henry VIII, or his ministers, the Reformation and the people of England, and the relative strength of Protestantism or Catholicism. Catholics and Protestants alike openly used the historical past to support their contemporary political arguments. Additionally, the nature of religious identities, and the changes which occurred in the Church of England as a result of the Reformation are also explained. The history of the Reformation in the 1990s and 2000s has to be viewed within the context of research assessment and peer review. The book shows how persistent the threat of postmodernist theory is to the discipline of history, even as leading academic authorities on the Reformation have rejected it out of hand.

Abstract only

form of newly established Muslim communities and outspoken advocates for and sympathisers with the faith. Considering these four narratives together helps to illuminate the process of cultural exchange within an imperial system characterised by increasingly aggressive British involvement in the Islamic world and more frequent and intimate contact between English people and Muslims. Through encounters in Egypt, new

in The harem, slavery and British imperial culture
Abstract only

held a dual identity (Heath and Kellas 1998 ) and, for the majority of English-based residents, being English and British was a synonymous state of being. That is not to say that some English people did not, as the Scots have long done, differentiate themselves and see themselves as English rather than British. However, this was a small percentage of the population – in fact in 1997, only 7 per cent of respondents to a mass survey declared themselves English and not British (British Election Study 1997 ). This was, of course, the same year that devolution was

in Scotland
Discovery

fellows which transformed what might otherwise have been a minor jurisdictional affray into a thoroughgoing change, not merely in the beliefs of the English people, but ultimately in their way of life.27 The Reformation historian, while she or he must be aware that the existence of Lollardy, anti-clericalism or Continental influence was not a necessary cause of the English Reformation, should appreciate also that such factors were important contributory causes of its eventual success as a popular movement. Because similar ideas already had a foothold in some parts of

in The Debate on the English Reformation
The English union in the writings of Arthur Mee and G.K. Chesterton

regarded English religion and patriotism as a seamless whole. This was grounded in three beliefs: first, in the existence of a distinctively English union forged by a common Christian faith; second, in the virtue of the English people against their elites ; and third, in place as the focus of a wider attachment to England. These three aspects of English nationhood run counter to

in These Englands
Abstract only
Nationalism, racism and xenophobia

generally seen as a facet of the wider process of state building. 9 Until this point, however, there has been virtually no consideration of whether a generalised distrust of enemy nations also drove the attitudes and responses of English people to the foreigners whom they encountered at home. This book has provided insights into the personal histories of many thousands of men and women who moved from other parts of the British Isles and continental Europe to spend some or all of the rest of their lives in England. It is the attitude to them that we need to make the

in Immigrant England, 1300–1550

works so powerfully shaped British perceptions of India that many English people had little idea where art ended and life began. Leonard Woolf, writing of his first days as a colonial administrator in Ceylon (Sri Lanka) around 1905, expressed this confusion: The white people were also in many ways astonishingly like characters in a

in Asia in Western fiction

ordinary and the small-scale, but not out of complacency or nostalgia – he was no suburbanite and no ruralist – but rather as the foundation of a national self-renewal that was to come from the bottom up: but only if the ‘extraordinary ordinary English people’ got a fair crack of the whip. More than anything else, Priestley was an English writer. It is not just that almost all of his novels and plays were set in England, or that he dealt continually with English characters and English situations – with the sole exception of the United States, no other country figured

in Priestley’s England
Abstract only
English activism and slavery redefined

contrast to the harem and Islam. In this chapter I examine the creation of this ideological system, a social event in itself, as well as how these ideas functioned politically and were expressed through grassroots activism within the wider British imperial culture. 1 Central to this framework was a belief that slavery was essentially immoral and that English people were responsible for its eradication. In

in The harem, slavery and British imperial culture

literature on English (and also Scottish) efforts to create British-like communities on the far side of the Atlantic, they also discount the evidence that English officials in Ireland resorted to legal and military stratagems that would not have been considered appropriate for England and Wales; whatever of Scotland.3 This chapter will attempt to extend the Quinn discourse into the seventeenth century, and in the course of doing so reopen the debate over the context English people of the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries considered appropriate for discussing the

in Ireland, 1641