Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:40:07.212Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Butterfield's Tories: ‘High Politics’ and the Writing of Modern British Political History*

Part of: Historiographical Reviews

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Richard Brent
Richard Brent
Affiliation:
St John's College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Historiographical Review
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , December 1987 , pp. 943 - 954
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Butterfield, H, The whig interpretation of history (London, 1931)Google Scholar, Namier, L, The structure of politics at the accession of George III (London, 1929)Google Scholar

3 Watson, G, ‘The war against the whigs Butterfield reconsidered’, Encounter, LXVI (1986), 19–25Google Scholar, James, R R, The British Revolution (London, 1976), I, XI–XIIGoogle Scholar

4 By this I mean the operation of the system and institutions of political representation: elections, parliament, executive and monarchy.

5 See Moore, D. C., The politics of deference (Hassocks, 1976), p. 419Google Scholar; Cannon, J., Parliamentary reform 1640–1832 (Cambridge, 1973), p. 250Google Scholar.

6 Jones, G. Stedman, Languages of class (Cambridge, 1983)Google Scholar.

7 McKibbin, R., The evolution of the Labour party 1910–1924 (Oxford, 1974), p. 112Google Scholarn.

8 See Clarke, P. F., ‘Political history in the 1980s’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, XII, I (1981), 47Google Scholar; idem, ‘The impotence of being earnest’, Times Literary Supplement, 14 Mar. 1986, p. 271.

9 Cowling, M J, 1867 Disraeli, Gladstone and revolution (Cambridge, 1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, idem, The impact of Labour (Cambridge, 1971), idem, The impact of Hitler (Cambridge, 1975), Cooke, A B and Vincent, J R, The governing passion (Brighton, 1974)Google Scholar, Jones, A, The politics of reform 1884 (Cambridge, 1972)Google Scholar, Bentley, M, The liberal mind 1914–29 (Cambridge, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Clark, J C D, The dynamics of change (Cambridge, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Cowling, M J, The nature and limits of political science (Cambridge, 1963), p 87Google Scholar

11 The Economist, 22 July 1967, p 329, Times Literary Supplement, 25 July, 1975, p 839

12 See Letwin, S R, ‘The Christian decline’, The Listener, 115 (01 1986), 30Google Scholar

13 Bentley, M and Stevenson, J, eds, High and low politics in modern Britain (Oxford, 1983), p 2Google Scholar

14 On ‘rhetoric’, compare Cowling, 1867, p. 317 with the development of the notion in idem, The impact of Labour p. 5, and for the change from ‘minds’ to ‘temperaments’ see idem, 1867, p. 330 and compare with idem, The impact of Labour, p. 9.

15 Jones, A., ‘Where “Governing is the use of words”’, Historical Journal, XIX (1976), 253–4Google Scholar.

16 Cowling, , 1867, p. 3Google Scholar; Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p. 3Google Scholar.

17 Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p. xiGoogle Scholar.

18 Cowling, , 1867, p 1Google Scholar

19 Ibid p 3

20 Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p 10Google Scholar

21 Cowling, , The impact of Labour, pp 3–4Google Scholar

22 Ibid p 4

23 Ibid

24 Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, pp 21–2Google Scholar, Cowling, , The impact of Labour, p 10Google Scholar

25 Foster, R. F., Lord Randolph Churchill (Oxford, 1981), p. 6Google Scholar; Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p. 10Google Scholar.

26 Cowling, , The impact of Labour, p. 5Google Scholar.

27 Idem, 1867, p. 3.

28 E.g. Pelling, H., Cambridge Review, XCII (1970–1971), 180–1Google Scholar.

29 Cowling, , The impact of Labour, pp. 7–8Google Scholar.

30 For Burke, see Clark, J. C. D., English Society 1688–1832 (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 247–58Google Scholar, for Salisbury and Baldwin, see Jones, A. and Bentley, M., ‘Salisbury and Baldwin’, Cowling, M.J., ed., Conservative essays (London, 1978–9), pp. 25–40Google Scholar, Cowling, M.J., Religion and public doctrine in modern Britain (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 361–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar and idem, The impact of Labour, passim.

31 Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p XIIGoogle Scholar

32 Himmelfarb, G, American Historical Review, LXXIII, 1 (02, 1968), 822Google Scholar

33 Collini, S, Winch, D and Burrow, J, That noble science of politics (Cambridge, 1983), pp 348–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 Cowling, , The nature and limits of political science, p 1Google Scholar

35 Ibid p 210

36 Oakeshott, M., ‘The study of “politics” in a university’, in Rationalism in politics (London, 1962), pp. 301–33Google Scholar.

37 Cowling, , Religion and public doctrine in modern England, p. xxiiGoogle Scholar.

38 Oakeshott, M., ‘Rationalism in polities’, in Rationalism in politics (London, 1962), pp. 7–13, 14–17Google Scholar and passim. See also Oakeshott, M., ‘Scientific polities’, The Cambridge Journal, I (1947–1948), 350Google Scholar.

39 Cowling, , The nature and limits of political science, p. 121Google Scholar.

40 Ibid. p. 22.

41 Ibid. p. 178

42 Idid. p. 20–22.

43 Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p. 167Google Scholar

44 Ibid. p. 166.

45 Cowling, , The nature and limits of political science, p 152Google Scholar

46 Ibid p 185

47 Ibid p 188, idem, 1867, p 6

48 Idem, The impact of Labour, p 6

49 Ibid

50 Foster, , Lord Randolph Churchill, p. 5Google Scholar.

51 Cowling, , 1867, p. 311Google Scholar.

52 Ibid. pp. 311, 331; idem, The impact of Labour, p. 9.

53 Ibid.

54 Idem, 1867, p. 339.

55 Cowling, , The nature and limits of political science, p. 184Google Scholar.