That memorable parliament medieval history in parliamentarian polemic, 1641–42
In 1647, Edward Chamberlayne professed that ‘The most probable way to know what will be, is to observe what hath beene’, adding that ‘The historian, by running backe to ages past, and then forward to present Affaires, comparing one with the other, can give a verdict of the State, well neer Prophetic...
Saved in:
| Published in | Writing the History of Parliament in Tudor and Early Stuart England p. 194 |
|---|---|
| Main Author | |
| Format | Book Chapter |
| Language | English |
| Published |
United Kingdom
Manchester University Press
01.09.2018
|
| Edition | 1 |
| Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
| Summary: | In 1647, Edward Chamberlayne professed that ‘The most probable way to know what will be, is to observe what hath beene’, adding that ‘The historian, by running backe to ages past, and then forward to present Affaires, comparing one with the other, can give a verdict of the State, well neer Prophetick’.¹ Such sentiments were unremarkable in an age drawn to politic history, and scholars have done much to analyse the work of poets and writers – from Sir Robert Cotton to Thomas May – who were fascinated by medieval monarchs. What makes Chamberlayne’s comments intriguing, however, is that they |
|---|---|
| ISBN: | 9780719099588 0719099587 |