Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1899. / Reprinted from the University of Illinois publications. New series, vol. I, no. 7. The university studies, vol. I, no. 4.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1899. / Reprinted from the University of Illinois publications. New series, vol. I, no. 7. The university studies, vol. I, no. 4.

This thesis on the Grand Remonstrance represents an attempt to deal with the central question of Stuart Historiography, the question which asks "What were the causes of the English Civil War, and why did it occur when it did?" The question of causation is fundamental to an understanding of the early 17th century, and it has created considerable controversy among successive generations of historians. The central issue in question is whether the English Civil War was caused by a long term revolution in English society, generated by substantial changes in socio-economic conditions, or whether, in fact, it was caused by a fundamental breakdown in the working relationship between a particular monarch and a particular representative body. The choice of the Grand Remonstrance as the subject of the thesis was made after considerable study in the period led me to believe that the latter theory was correct, and furthermore, that a careful study of the Grand Remonstrance, and its relationship to the Long Parlament would provide important evidence to support that hypothesis. I realized when I made the decision that I had chosen a piece of parliamentary reform that spanned, in its development, a full year of parliamentary history, and that I had, therefore, committed myself to a study of rather sizable proportions, both chronologically and topically. Nonetheless, I have tried to limit the study to the history of the Remonstrance itself, and to the issues which directly influenced its development, and which clearly reflected the political conditions prevailing in England immediately prior to the Civil War.