We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Chapter 1 demonstrates that a key argument in justifying the establishment of the free state was the claim that the people or their representatives were entitled to alter the form of government. Earlier historians had paid no attention to this argument. The chapter first discusses the emergence of this argument in pre-revolutionary England and then traces its development in the 1640s. The question of the people’s, or their representatives’, right to change the form of government was thrown into sharp relief in late 1647 when the Levellers put forward their proposal for a novel constitution. The question was discussed in the famous Putney debates, and an argument for the right to alter the constitution was widely advanced from the autumn of 1648 onwards. It was based on the idea of popular sovereignty, that all public authority emanated from the people and that whoever exercised that authority only held it by trust. Some protagonists argued that the people could change the form of government when the king forfeited his trust, but many others insisted more radically that the people could do the same whenever they so wanted.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.