This book traces the transformation of history from a Romantic literary pursuit into a modern academic discipline during the second half of the nineteenth century, and shows how this change inspired Victorians to reconsider what it meant to be a historian. This reconceptualization of the ‘historian’ lies at the heart of this book as it explores how historians strove to forge themselves a collective scholarly persona that reflected and legitimised their new disciplinary status and gave them authority to speak on behalf of the past. The author argues that historians used the persona as a replacement for missing institutional structures, and converted book parts to a sphere where they could mould and perform their persona. By ascribing agency to titles, footnotes, running heads, typography, cover design, size, and other paratexts, the book makes an important shift in the way we perceive the formation of modern disciplines. By combining the persona and paratexts, it offers a novel approach to themes that have enjoyed great interest in the history of science. It examines, for example, the role which epistemic and moral virtues held in the Victorian society and scholarly culture, the social organization and hierarchies of scholarly communities, the management of scholarly reputations, the commercialization of knowledge, and the relationship between the persona and the underpinning social, political, economic, and cultural structures and hierarchies. Making a significant contribution to persona studies, it provides new insights for scholars interested in the history of humanities, science, and knowledge; book history; and Victorian culture.

A 1998 collection which takes an alternative look at the courtly masque in early seventeenth-century England.

A year after the death of James I in 1625, a sensational pamphlet accused the Duke of Buckingham of murdering the king. It was an allegation that would haunt English politics for nearly forty years. In this exhaustively researched new book, two leading scholars of the era, Alastair Bellany and Thomas Cogswell, uncover the untold story of how a secret history of courtly poisoning shaped and reflected the political conflicts that would eventually plunge the British Isles into civil war and revolution. Illuminating many hitherto obscure aspects of early modern political culture, this eagerly anticipated work is both a fascinating story of political intrigue and a major exploration of the forces that destroyed the Stuart monarchy.

William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury (1633-45), remains one of the most controversial figures in British ecclesiastical and political history. His rise to prominence under Charles I, his contribution to the framing and implementation of highly contentious religious policies, and his subsequent and catastrophic downfall remain central to our understanding of the coming of civil war. This book presents Scotland as a case study for a fresh interpretation of Laud, his career and his working partnership with Charles I. This approach throws much needed light on the depth of Laud's engagement in kirk affairs and reveals the real reasons for his ostensible abandonment by the king in 1641, enabling a better understanding of Anglo-Scottish politics in the early Long Parliament as well as developments connected to religion and the 'British Problem'. Importantly, the book demonstrates that Laud's involvement in Scotland was broadly consistent with, although differing in detail from, his approach in England and Ireland. It represents a major contribution to key debates on the nature of religion and politics in the 1630s and early 1640s and to current thinking on the role of Charles I and William Laud in the formulation of ecclesiastical policy, the 'British problem', and the causes of the British Civil Wars.

This book considers the personality of Charles and the effect of his decisions as ruler. Beginning with Charles as a prince, Durston goes on to assess the monarch's role in the outbreak of war and the crisis of the 1640s. Centring on the degree of personal responsibility Charles should bear for the events of his reign, the author considers: * contemporary and modern portrayals of Charles' reign * the King's military leadership * the context and prelude to his execution * his status as a martyr king in the 1650s and beyond.