Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:12:49.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The King's Two Genders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2012

Cynthia Herrup
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
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , July 2006 , pp. 493 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 2006

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

1 Kantorowicz, Ernst H., The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology (Princeton, NJ, 1957)Google Scholar.

2 The case of the Duchy of Lancaster, decided in 1561, involved a lease made by Edward VI. It was first published by Plowden, Edmund, Reports (London, 1571)Google Scholar, and in English translation in Plowden, , The Commentaries and Reports of Edmund Plowden, Originally Written in French and Now Faithfully Translated into English (London, 1779)Google Scholar. Spelling and punctuation in quotations have been modernized.

3 Joan Scott, as cited in Meade, Teresa A. and Weisner-Hanks, Merry E., “Introduction,” in A Companion to Gender History, ed. Meade, Teresa A. and Weisner-Hanks, (London, 2004), 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Alain Boureau argues that the foundation of much of Kantorowicz's work is, in fact, a search for specifically paternal hierarchies; see Boureau, Alain, Kantorowicz: Stories of a Historian, trans. Nichols, Stephen G. (London, 2001), 26–27, 39Google Scholar.

4 Googling “the king's two bodies” results in citations of Einstein, Virginia Woolf, and slavery in the United States as well as a recent entry on Prince Charles's right to marry Camilla Parker-Bowles. For Elvis, see Martin Jay's preface to Boureau, Kantorowicz, xi.

5 See, e.g., Davis, Natalie Zemon's presidential address to the American Historical Association, “History's Two Bodies,” American Historical Review 93 (February 1988): 1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; SirBaker, John's Clarendon law lecture The Law's Two Bodies (Oxford, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fraser Eaton, “Gender's Two Bodies: Women Warriors, Female Husbands and Plebian Life,” Past and Present, no. 180 (August 2003): 131–74; Minnis, A. J., “The Author's Two Bodies? Authority and Fallibility in Late Medieval Textual Authority,” in Of the Making of Books: Medieval Manuscripts, Their Scribes and Readers: Essays presented to M. B. Parkes, ed. Robinson, P. R. and Zim, Rivkah (Brookfield, VT, 1997), 259–79Google Scholar; Hammond, Paul, “The King's Two Bodies: Representations of Charles II,” in Culture, Politics and Society in Britain, 1660–1800, ed. Black, Jeremy (Manchester, 1991), 13–48Google Scholar.

6 Beryl Smalley, review of The King's Two Bodies, by Ernst Kantorowicz, Past and Present, no. 20 (1961): 30–35, quote on 32. Smalley cites other critical reviews. Even in the posthumous tribute (Benson, Robert L. and Fried, Johannes, eds., Ernst Kantorowicz [London, 1997]Google Scholar), most of the authors speak of the book's power as almost magical, a feat of erudition and artistic license rather than coherent or persuasive argument.

7 Boureau, Kantorowicz, 1, 94–95.

8 A sample of recent work on the impact of couverture for early modern women includes Erickson, Amy Louise, “Couverture and Capitalism,” History Workshop Journal 59, no. 1 (2005): 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; MacIntosh, Marjorie, “The Benefits and Drawbacks of Femme Sole Status in England, 1300–1630,” Journal of British Studies 44, no. 3 (July 2005): 410–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dolan, Frances E., “Battered Women, Petty Traitors and the Legacy of Couverture,” Feminist Studies 29 (Summer 2003): 249–77Google Scholar; Bailey, Joanne, “Favored or Oppressed? Married Women, Property and Couverture in England, 1660–1800,” Continuity and Change 17, no. 3 (2002): 351–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Maitland, Frederic, “The Crown as Corporation,” in his Selected Essays, ed. Hazeltine, H. D., Lapsley, G., and Winfield, P. H. (Cambridge, 1936), 104–27Google Scholar, quote on 108.

10 Axton, Marie, The Queen's Two Bodies: Drama and the Elizabeth Succession (London, 1977)Google Scholar. Lawyerly interest in the concept, Axton notes, receded after Mary Stuart died and James made his firm Protestantism clear.

11 Frederic Maitland, “The Corporation Sole,” in Selected Essays, 73–103; quote on 102.

12 Marcus, Leah S., Mueller, Janel, and Rose, Mary Beth, eds., Elizabeth I: Collected Works (Chicago, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Heish, Allison, “Queen Elizabeth I: Parliamentary Rhetoric and the Exercise of Power,” Signs 1, no. 1 (1975): 31–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Marcus, Leah S., Puzzling Shakespeare: Local Reading and Its Discontents (Berkeley, 1988), 53–59Google Scholar; Levin, Carole, The Heart and Stomach of a King: Elizabeth I and the Politics of Sex and Power (Philadelphia, 1994), esp. 121–48Google Scholar; Mueller, Janel, “Virtue and Virtuality: Gender in the Self-Representations of Queen Elizabeth I,” in Virtual Gender: Fantasies of Subjectivity and Embodiment, ed. O’Farrell, Mary Ann and Vallone, Lynne (Ann Arbor, MI, 1999), 37–64Google Scholar. I want to thank Laurie Shannon for pointing me to Mueller's intriguing essay.

13 Richards, Judith M., “Mary Tudor as ‘Sole Quene’? Gendering Tudor Monarchy,” Historical Journal 40 (December 1997): 895–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar, examples at 895; Mendelson, Sara and Crawford, Patricia, Women in Early Modern England, 1550–1720 (Oxford, 1998), 363CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Kantorowicz, The King's Two Bodies, 80.

14 Augustine, De Civitate Dei, secs. 21–22.

15 Seneca, De Clementia in Moral Essays, trans. Basore, John W., vol. 1 (Cambridge, MA, 1928)Google Scholar; James, I, Basilikon Doron, in James VI & I: Political Writings, ed. Sommerville, Johann P. (Cambridge, 1995)Google Scholar; other manuals relied on here include Machiavelli, Niccolo, The Prince, ed. Skinner, Quentin and Price, Russell (Cambridge, 1988)Google Scholar; Erasmus, The Education of a Christian Prince, trans. Cheshire, Neil M. and Heath, Michael J., ed. Jardine, Lisa (Cambridge, 1997)Google Scholar; SirElyot, Thomas, The Boke Named the Governour, ed. Croft, H. H. S., 2 vols. (1531; London, 1880)Google Scholar; James I, A Meditation Upon the 27th, 28th and 29th verses of the 27th Chapter of St. Matthew, in Sommerville, James VI & I: Political Writings; [Charles, I], Eikon Basilike: The Portraiture of his Sacred Majesty in his Solitudes and Sufferings, ed. Knachel, Philip A. (Ithaca, NY, 1966)Google Scholar; Slaughter, Thomas, Ideology and Politics on the Eve of the Restoration: Newcastle's Advice to Charles II (Philadelphia, 1984)Google Scholar, as well as more general texts on proper governance.

16 As well as the works cited above, see Born, Lester Kruger, “The Perfect Prince: A Study in Thirteenth and Fourteenth-Century Ideals,” Speculum 3, no. 4 (1928): 470–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The clearest differences between texts were not in how princes should behave but why: idealists focused on princely character, pragmatists on princely survival.

17 Erasmus, Education of a Christian Prince, 21; Seneca, De Clementia, 433; Slaughter, Ideology and Politics, xxvi.

18 For extended examinations of the mystical powers of kings, see Kantorowicz, The King's Two Bodies; Bloch, Marc, The Royal Touch: Sacred Monarchy and Scrofula in England and France, trans. Anderson, J. E. (London, 1961)Google Scholar; and, more recently, McCoy, Richard, Alterations of State: Sacred Kingship in the English Reformation (New York, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shuger, Debora Kuller, Political Theologies in Shakespeare's England: The Sacred and the State in “Measure for Measure” (London, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Monod, Paul Kleber, The Power of Kings: Monarchy and Religion in Europe, 1589–1715 (New Haven, CT, 1999)Google Scholar; Clark, Stuart, Thinking with Demons: The Idea of Witchcraft in Early Modern Europe (Oxford, 1997), pt. 5Google Scholar. Theologians disputed whether women and children who ruled had the same sacral powers accorded to adult male princes, but no one denied that as rulers they, too, had some species of divinity. The notion that kings were demigods was not always taken literally, but it would be foolish to assume it had no purchase.

19 1 Sam. 8:11–18.

20 On qualities associated with the female in the early modern era, see Maclean, Ian, The Renaissance Notion of Woman: A Study in the Fortunes of Scholasticism and Medical Science in European Intellectual Life (Cambridge, 1980), 20ff, 42ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar; Henderson, Katherine Usher and McManus, Barbara F., eds., Half Humankind: Contexts and Texts of the Controversy about Women in England, 1540–1640 (Urbana, IL, 1985)Google Scholar; for a more analytical understanding of these associations, see Weil, Rachel, Political Passions: Gender, the Family and Political Argument in England, 1680–1714 (Manchester, 1999), 4–6Google Scholar.

21 Isa. 49:23; James I, Basilikon Doron, 27; Gregg, Edward, Queen Anne (London, 1980), 402Google Scholar; Marcus, Puzzling Shakespeare, 58; Maclean, Renaissance Notion of Woman, 12, 38–39; Wind, Edgar, Pagan Mysteries in the Renaissance, rev. ed. (Oxford, 1980), 211–17Google Scholar; Bynum, Caroline, “Jesus as Mother and Abbot as Mother: Some Themes in Twelfth-Century Cistercian Writing,” in Jesus as Mother: Studies in the Spirituality of the Middle Ages (Berkeley, 1982), 110–69Google Scholar. Oliver Cromwell was called a “nursing father” to the church. See Cross, Claire, “The Church in England, 1646–1660,” in The Interregnum: The Quest for Settlement, ed. Aylmer, G. E. (London, 1972), 99–120, quote at 120CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Marcus, Puzzling Shakespeare, 55–58; see also the essays in Fradenburg, Louise Olga, ed., Women and Sovereignty (Edinburgh, 1992)Google Scholar; Stafford, Pauline, “More than a Man or Less than a Woman: Woman Rulers in Early Modern Europe,” Gender and History 7 (November 1995): 486–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For an argument that the procreative image is critical to understanding James's reign, see Spiller, Elizabeth A., “The Counsel of Fulke Greville: Transforming the Jacobean ‘Nourish-Father’ through Sidney's ‘Nursing Father’,” Studies in Philology 97 (Fall 2000): 433–54Google Scholar.

23 Seneca, De Clementia, 373; Machiavelli, The Prince, chap. 19; Erasmus, Education of a Christian Prince, 32. Tacitus taught the same lesson anecdotally; on his influence in late Elizabethan and in Jacobean England, see Smuts, R. Malcolm, “Court-Centered Politics and Roman History,” in Culture and Politics in Early Stuart England, ed. Sharpe, Kevin and Lake, Peter (Stanford, CA, 1993), 21–43Google Scholar; and Salmon, J. H. M., “Seneca and Tacitus in Jacobean England,” in The Mental World of the Jacobean Court, ed. Peck, Linda Levy (Cambridge, 1991), 169–88Google Scholar.

24 On the social conception of manhood, see Shepard, Alexandra, Meanings of Manhood in Early Modern England (Oxford, 2003)Google Scholar; Hitchcock, Tim and Cohen, Michelle, eds., English Masculinities (Harlow, 1999)Google Scholar; Amussen, Susan Dwyer, “The Part of a Christian Man: The Cultural Politics of Manhood in Early Modern England,” in Political Culture and Cultural Politics in Early Modern Europe, ed. Amussen, Susan Dwyer and Kishlansky, Mark A. (Manchester, 1995), 213–34Google Scholar.

25 Wright, Thomas, The Passions of the Mind, 2nd ed. (London, 1630), chap. 10Google Scholar, explains how and why certain passions prevail at particular ages in either sex. I want to thank Linda Pollock for this reference and for thoughtful discussion on this subject.

26 See Maclean, Renaissance Notion of Woman, chap. 3. The most influential recent discussion of medical conceptions of the body is Laqueur, Thomas, Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud (Cambridge, MA, 1991)Google Scholar, but see also the important critique by Katherine Park and Robert A. Nye, “Destiny Is Anatomy,” New Republic, 18 February 1991, 53–57.

27 Philip Stubbes (1583) and Greville (ca. 1610), cited in Young, Michael B., James VI and I and the History of Homosexuality (London, 2000), chap. 4Google Scholar; Hutchinson (1664), cited in Dolan, Frances, Whores of Babylon: Catholicism, Gender and Seventeenth-Century Print Culture (Ithaca, NY, 1999), 125Google Scholar; D’Anvers, cited in Weil, Political Passions, 111. Creeping effeminacy is the complaint in many of the pamphlets written against the theaters, life at court, and innovations in fashion and religion. For a different view of this evidence, see Cressy, David, “Gender Trouble and Cross-Dressing in Early Modern England,” Journal of British Studies 35 (October 1996): 438–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Hic Mulier, or the Man-Woman … printed for I.T. (London, 1620)Google Scholar. A facsimile has been published in Three Pamphlets on the Jacobean Antifeminist Controversy, ed. Baines, Barbara J. (New York, 1978)Google Scholar.

29 Dolan, Frances, Dangerous Familiars: Representations of Domestic Crime in England, 1550–1700 (Ithaca, NY, 1994)Google Scholar, and Whores of Babylon; Breitenberg, Marc, Anxious Masculinity in Early Modern England (Cambridge, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 See, e.g., Amussen, Susan Dwyer, An Ordered Society: Gender and Class in Early Modern England (Oxford, 1988)Google Scholar; Herrup, Cynthia, A House in Gross Disorder: Law, Sex and the Trial of the Second Earl of Castlehaven (Oxford, 1999)Google Scholar. Sarah Hanley has argued that in France, these centuries saw the creation of a “family-state compact” between men that traded stricter regulation of marriage for greater cooperation in royal finance. England's greater reliance on unpaid officials, greater turnover in offices, and deeper grounding in precedent seems to have precluded anything so neat, but the dynamic is worthy of further investigation; see Hanley, Sarah, “Engendering the State: Family Formation and State Building in Early Modern France,” French Historical Studies 16, no. 1 (1989): 4–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “The Jurisprudence of the Arrets: Marital Union, Civil Society and State Formation in France, 1550–1650,” Law and History Review 21, no. 1 (2003): 1–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Bodin, Jean, Six Books of the Republic, ed. and abr. Tooley, M. J. (Oxford, 1955), bk. 6, chaps. 4–5Google Scholar; Knox, John, The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women (London, 1558)Google Scholar.

32 Jordan, Constance, “Women's Rule in Sixteenth-Century England,” Renaissance Quarterly 40 (Autumn 1987): 421–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shephard, Amanda, “Henry Howard and the Lawful Regiment of Women,” History of Political Thought 12 (Winter 1991): 589–605Google Scholar; Richards, Judith, “‘To Promote a Woman to Beare Rule’: Talking of Queens in Mid-Tudor England,” Sixteenth Century Journal 28 (Spring 1997): 101–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McLaren, Anne, Political Culture in the Reign of Elizabeth I (Cambridge, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Potter, Mary, “Gender Equality and Gender Hierarchy in Calvin's Theology,” Signs 11, no. 4 (1986): 725–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

33 Howard, cited in Shephard, “Henry Howard and the Lawful Regiment of Women,” 591; Aylmer, cited in Jordan, “Women's Rule,” 439; see also Monod, Power of Kings, 66.

34 Richards, “Mary Tudor as ‘Sole Queen?’,” “To Promote a Woman to Beare Rule”; see below for references to her essays on Elizabeth I, James I, and Charles I.

35 Richards, “Mary Tudor as ‘Sole Queen?’”; see also Redworth, Glyn, “Matters Impertinent to Women: Male and Female Monarchy under Philip and Mary,” English Historical Review 112 (June 1997): 597–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar, especially Elizabeth Russell's comment that Mary promoted her own reputation for weakness (603).

36 Richards, Judith, “Love and a Female Monarch: The Case of Elizabeth Tudor,” Journal of British Studies 38 (April 1999): 133–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Cressy, “Gender Trouble,” 451.

38 Young, James VI and I and the History of Homosexuality; cf. Herrup, House in Gross Disorder, 26–38; Croft, Pauline, King James (London, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Richards, Judith, “The English Accession of James VI: ‘National’ Identity, Gender and the Personal Monarchy of England,” English Historical Review 117 (June 2002): 513–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Norbrook, cited in McLaren, Political Culture, 217 n. 57; Bingham, Caroline, James VI of Scotland (London, 1969), 75–76Google Scholar. On James's reign and reputation in Scotland, see Wormald, Jenny, “James VI/I: Two Kings or One?” History 68 (1983): 187–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar, as well as the essays in Goodare, Julian and Lynch, Michael, eds., The Reign of James VI (East Lothian, UK, 2000)Google Scholar. For the difficulties that Charles I had with these expectations, see Judith Richards, “‘His Nowe Majestie’ and the English Monarchy: The Kingship of Charles I before 1640,” Past and Present, no. 113 (1986): 70–96.

40 King, John N., Tudor Royal Iconography: Literature and Art in an Age of Religious Crisis (Princeton, NJ, 1979), 219, 220, 254ff.Google Scholar; Wind, Pagan Mysteries, 212–14; Montrose, Louis A., “Idols of the Queen: Policy, Gender and the Picturing of Elizabeth I,” Representations 68 (Autumn 1999): 108–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “‘Shaping Fantasies’: Figurations of Gender and Power in Elizabethan Culture,” Representations 2 (Spring 1983): 61–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Lisa Forman Cody tells me that similar cross-imagery appears in depictions of the Hanoverians; see Cody, Lisa Forman, Birthing the Nation: Sex, Science and the Conception of Eighteenth-Century Britons (Oxford, 2005)Google Scholar, which I was unable to see before completing this article.

41 See, e.g., Huehns, G., ed., Clarendon: Selections from the History of Rebellion and The Life by Himself (Oxford, 1978), 96–102Google Scholar; The King's Cabinet Opened (London, 1645)Google Scholar; Lucy Hutchinson, cited in Dolan, Whores of Babylon, 53, 122–25; Monod, Power of Kings, 105; Hibbard, Caroline, “Role of a Queen Consort: The Household and Court of Henrietta Maria, 1625–1642,” in Princes, Patronage and the Nobility, ed. Asch, Ronald G. and Birke, Adolf M. (Oxford, 1991), 393–414Google Scholar.

42 Cited in Hammond, “The King's Two Bodies,” 21–22; on the political uses of such images, see Weil, Rachel, “Sometimes a Scepter Is Only a Scepter: Pornography and Politics in Restoration England,” in The Invention of Pornography: Obscenity and the Origins of Modernity, ed. Hunt, Lynn (New York, 1993), 125–53Google Scholar.

43 Horwitz, Henry, ed., Parliamentary Diary of Narcissus Luttrell, 1691–1693 (Oxford, 1972), 55Google Scholar. See also Routh, M. J., ed., Burnet's History of His Own Time, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1833), 4:562–70Google Scholar. I have not cited a specific example from the reign of James II, but his public image fits the pattern.

44 Orlin, Lena Cowan, “The Fictional Families of Elizabeth I,” in Political Rhetoric, Power and Renaissance Women, ed. Levin, Carole and Sullivan, Patricia A. (Albany, NY, 1995), 84–110Google Scholar; Christian, Margaret, “Elizabethan Preachers and the Government of Women: Defining and Correcting a Queen,” Sixteenth Century Journal 24, no. 3 (1993): 561–76, esp. 568–69, 573CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hoak, Dale, “Iconography of the Crown Imperial,” in Tudor Political Culture, ed. Hoak, Dale (Cambridge, 1995), 54–103Google Scholar; Montrose, “Idols of the Queen,” 137.

45 Mary, II, Memoirs of Mary, Queen of England, ed. Doebner, R. (Leipzig, 1886), 23Google Scholar; Routh, Burnet's History, 4:98; Weil, Political Passions, 112 and chap. 4 more generally; Schwoerer, Lois G., “Images of Queen Mary II, 1689–1695,” Renaissance Quarterly 42 (Winter 1989): 717–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Weil, Political Passions, 167; Gregg, Queen Anne, 138; see Weil's discussion of Anne more generally, chap. 7.

47 Elyot, The Boke Named the Governour, 2:73, 79; British Library Harleian MSS 5220/9v; Eikon Basilike, chap. 27.

48 Cited in Linda Levy Peck, “The Mentality of a Jacobean Grandee,” in Peck, The Mental World of the Jacobean Court, 320 n. 97. I discuss mercy's dangers in detail in my forthcoming book on pardons and kingship in the seventeenth century.

49 Cited in Warner, Marina, Alone of All Her Sex: The Myth and Cult of the Virgin Mary (London, 1976; repr., London, 2000), 285Google Scholar.

50 Wright, Passions of the Mind, 40; Elyot, The Boke Named the Governour, 2:79; Hacket, John, Scrinia Reserta (London, 1693), 135–36Google Scholar. For the tradition of female intervention in medieval England, see Strohm, Paul, “Queens as Intercessors,” in his Hochon's Arrow: The Social Imagination of Fourteenth Century Texts (Princeton, NJ, 1992), 95–119Google Scholar; Lois L. Huneycutt, “Intercession and the High-Medieval Queen: The Esther Topos,” 126–46; and John Carmi Parsons, “The Queen's Intercession in Thirteenth-Century England,” 147–77, both in Power of the Weak: Studies on Medieval Women, ed. Carpenter, Jennifer and MacLean, Sally-Beth (Urbana, IL, 1995)Google Scholar; cf. Kesselring, K. J., Mercy and Authority in the Tudor State (Cambridge, 2003), 141–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51 Elyot, The Boke Named the Governour, 2:81; Digges, cited in McLaren, Political Culture, 26; Seneca, De Clementia, 30.

52 Seneca, De Clementia, 381–87. I have come across the Cinna story repeated by Elyot, Erasmus, Richard Morrison, Robert Cotton, and Michel de Montaigne, and this list is surely incomplete. Shakespeare uses pardons in many of his plays, not only in the two (Merchant of Venice and Measure for Measure) where mercy is a central focus. Except in battle, his petitioners are regularly women, and as women, they routinely frame their pleas in terms of pity, exactly the emotion contemporaries found so problematic. The episode discussed here is from Richard II 5.2–3.

53 I am grateful to Lena Cowan Orlin for pointing out to me the particularly elaborate depiction of Jane Shore in this regard in Thomas Heywood's First and Second Parts of King Edward IV.

54 Strohm, “Queens as Intercessors,” 95–119; “Ill May Day,” in Collier, , Broadside Blackletter Ballads, printed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, mostly in the possession of J. Payne Collier (London, 1868)Google Scholar, was reprinted several times in later reigns; cf. Kesselring, Mercy and Authority, 159–60, for an alternative version of the story. For other examples of intervention by Tudor consorts, see Kesselring, Mercy and Authority, 123; Loades, David, The Reign of Mary Tudor: Politics, Government and Religion in England, 1553–1558, 2nd ed. (London, 1991), 210–11Google Scholar.

55 Henry E. Huntington Library, EL MSS 7976 (anon.); see similar comments cited in Young, James VI/I, esp. chap. 4. Carla Pestana and Richard Ross kindly pointed out to me that John Winthrop faced similar criticisms; see Pestana, Carla Gardina, “The Problem of Land, Status and Authority: How Early English Governors Negotiated the Atlantic World,” New England Quarterly 78 (December 2005): 515–46Google Scholar. I thank the author for allowing me to see her essay before publication.

56 James I, Basilikon Doron, 20; Barroll, Leeds, Anna of Denmark: Queen of England (Philadelphia, 2001), 146–48Google Scholar, citing John Chamberlain. I am grateful to Alastair Bellany for discussion on this point. On the queen's influence on James in Scotland, see Maureen M. Meikle, “A Meddlesome Princess: Anna of Denmark and Scottish Court Politics, 1589–1603,” in Goodare and Lynch, The Reign of James VI, 126–41, esp. 130–31, 137–38.

57 Huehns, Clarendon: Selections, 316–17; see also Hacket, Scrinia Reserta, 184; British Library, London, Additional MSS 35331/26.

58 Cited in Maguire, Nancy, “The Duchess of Portsmouth: English Royal Consort and French Politician, 1670–1685,” in The Stuart Court and Europe: Essays in Politics and Political Culture, ed. Smuts, R. Malcolm (Cambridge, 1996), 247–72Google Scholar, quote at 258; see also Halifax, , “A Character of King Charles the Second,” in Saville, George, marquis of Halifax, Halifax: Complete Works, ed. Kenyon, J. P. (Harmondsworth, 1969), 247–70Google Scholar.

59 Mary II, Memoirs; Mendelson and Crawford, Women in Early Modern England (363) overstate the case on Mary's reluctance; quote from Roger Wilbraham, cited in Ashton, Robert, ed., James I by His Contemporaries (London, 1969), 6Google Scholar.

60 Loades, Reign of Mary Tudor, 210–11, 228–29; Mendelson and Crawford, Women in Early Modern England, 366; McLaren, Political Culture, 181; Christian, “Elizabethan Preachers,” 566–67; Weil, Political Passions, 170–73; Kesselring, Mercy and Authority, chap. 6.

61 The bibliography of work on aspects of Catholicism and antipopery is vast; the most trenchant recent commentators include Tim Harris, Mark Knights, Peter Lake, Michael Questier, John Spurr, and Alexandra Walsham; for the later period, Miller, John, Popery and Politics, 1660–1688 (London, 1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Kenyon, John, The Popish Plot (London, 1972)Google Scholar, are still very useful.

62 On the revival of impeachment, see Tite, Colin G. C., Impeachment and Parliamentary Judicature in Early Stuart England (London, 1974)Google Scholar; on later Stuart England, the most recent discussion is Harris, Tim, Restoration: Charles II and His Kingdoms, 1660–1685 (London, 2005)Google Scholar.

63 Among the Cromwellian innovations that outlived the interregnum was a vast expansion in the practice of trading pardons for exile in routine felonies; massive circuit pardons in return for transportation became a key element in Restoration penal policy. See my “Punishing Pardons: Some Thoughts on the Origins of Penal Transportation,” in Penal Practice and Culture, 1500–1900: Punishing the English, ed. Devereaux, Simon and Griffiths, Paul (Basingstoke, 2004), 121–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

64 Weber, Harold M., Paper Bullets: Print and Kingship under Charles II (Lexington, KY, 1996)Google Scholar; see also Hammond, “The King's Two Bodies”; Weil, “Sometimes a Scepter Is Only a Scepter.”

65 Bacon, Francis, “Of Empire,” in The Essays, ed. Pitcher, John (London, 1985), 115–19Google Scholar, quote at 119.

66 Feminist scholars have extensively explored the possibilities of this broader framework; one of the better-known examples is Collins, Patricia Hill, Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (Boston, 1990)Google Scholar.

67 Sharpe, Kevin, Remapping Early Modern England: The Culture of Seventeenth-Century Politics (Cambridge, 2000), pt. 2Google Scholar.

68 I want to thank Richard Ross for drawing my attention to the way that, in terms of shifting responsibilities, a two-gendered monarch had many of the same advantages as the idea of the Trinity.