000 04134nam a22005535i 4500
001 193411
003 IT-RoAPU
005 20231211163012.0
006 m|||||o||d||||||||
007 cr || ||||||||
008 230808t20142014mau fo d z eng d
019 _a(OCoLC)984688451
020 _a9780674979772
_qprint
020 _a9780674736030
_qPDF
024 7 _a10.4159/9780674736030
_2doi
035 _a(DE-B1597)9780674736030
035 _a(DE-B1597)460888
035 _a(OCoLC)891590014
040 _aDE-B1597
_beng
_cDE-B1597
_erda
050 4 _aJA84.U5
072 7 _aHIS036030
_2bisacsh
082 0 4 _a320.47309/033
_223/eng
084 _aonline - DeGruyter
100 1 _aNelson, Eric
_eautore
245 1 4 _aThe Royalist Revolution :
_bMonarchy and the American Founding /
_cEric Nelson.
250 _aPilot project. eBook available to selected US libraries only
264 1 _aCambridge, MA :
_bHarvard University Press,
_c[2014]
264 4 _c©2014
300 _a1 online resource (350 p.)
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
505 0 0 _tFrontmatter --
_tContents --
_tIntroduction. “The War of Parliament” --
_t1. Patriot Royalism --
_t2. “One Step Farther, and We Are Got Back to Where We Set Out From” --
_t3. “The Lord Alone Shall Be King of America” --
_t4. “The Old Government, as Near as Possible” --
_t5. “All Know That a Single Magistrate Is Not a King” --
_tConclusion. “A New Monarchy in America” --
_tAbbreviations --
_tNotes --
_tBibliography --
_tAcknowledgments --
_tIndex
506 0 _arestricted access
_uhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
_fonline access with authorization
_2star
520 _aGenerations of students have been taught that the American Revolution was a revolt against royal tyranny. In this revisionist account, Eric Nelson argues that a great many of our “founding fathers” saw themselves as rebels against the British Parliament, not the Crown. The Royalist Revolution interprets the patriot campaign of the 1770s as an insurrection in favor of royal power—driven by the conviction that the Lords and Commons had usurped the just prerogatives of the monarch. Leading patriots believed that the colonies were the king’s own to govern, and they urged George III to defy Parliament and rule directly. These theorists were proposing to turn back the clock on the English constitution, rejecting the Whig settlement that had secured the supremacy of Parliament after the Glorious Revolution. Instead, they embraced the political theory of those who had waged the last great campaign against Parliament’s “usurpations”: the reviled Stuart monarchs of the seventeenth century. When it came time to design the state and federal constitutions, the very same figures who had defended this expansive conception of royal authority—John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, James Wilson, and their allies—returned to the fray as champions of a single executive vested with sweeping prerogatives. As a result of their labors, the Constitution of 1787 would assign its new president far more power than any British monarch had wielded for almost a hundred years. On one side of the Atlantic, Nelson concludes, there would be kings without monarchy; on the other, monarchy without kings.
538 _aMode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
546 _aIn English.
588 0 _aDescription based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 08. Aug 2023)
650 0 _aConstitutional history
_zUnited States
_y18th century.
650 0 _aMonarchy.
650 0 _aPolitical science
_zUnited States
_xHistory
_y18th century.
650 7 _aHISTORY / United States / Revolutionary Period (1775-1800).
_2bisacsh
850 _aIT-RoAPU
856 4 0 _uhttps://doi.org/10.4159/9780674736030?locatt=mode:legacy
856 4 0 _uhttps://www.degruyter.com/isbn/9780674736030
856 4 2 _3Cover
_uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/cover/isbn/9780674736030/original
942 _cEB
999 _c193411
_d193411