the king, thy sovereign, is not quite exempt from envious malice
Since I commented on it yesterday, I was quite happy to find, in one of the essays I'm reading on Stuart-era political theory, a remark to the degree that the later Stuart period tends to get overlooked in treatments of early modern English political science. I feel slightly less ignorant!
I spent much of my afternoon reading about efforts to define/locate sovereignty during the English Civil War and the interregnum. I really do think this paper is going to work out well, but there's so much stuff to deal with. It's appallingly confusing, but it helps to remember that that's not my fault. ;)
(Incidentally, my favorite thing that I read today was the statement that, although the legal fiction that England was governed by "the king-in-parliament" was full of contradictions and theoretically incoherent, but it also described how things worked. Until they stopped working, anyway.)
In other news, I have Swedish fish! They never taste as good as I think they're going to.
I spent much of my afternoon reading about efforts to define/locate sovereignty during the English Civil War and the interregnum. I really do think this paper is going to work out well, but there's so much stuff to deal with. It's appallingly confusing, but it helps to remember that that's not my fault. ;)
(Incidentally, my favorite thing that I read today was the statement that, although the legal fiction that England was governed by "the king-in-parliament" was full of contradictions and theoretically incoherent, but it also described how things worked. Until they stopped working, anyway.)
In other news, I have Swedish fish! They never taste as good as I think they're going to.