Rationality and Interpretation: Parliamentary Elections in Early Stuart England

Abstract

Ferejohn contrasts two interpretations of English parliamentary “elections” in the early seventeenth century. The “Whig” interpretation, based on the increasing incidence of competition between candidates, is similar to that which we might offer for many elections in contemporary democracies. It focuses on competition between representatives of distinct ideological groupings, each seeking the authority to formulate public policy that supports his personal material interests, which are—presumably—largely shared by other members of his group. The “revisionist” interpretation perceives instead a high degree of consensus among constituencies during this period as to which members of leading families merited parliamentary office. This interpretation further views the activities surrounding many uncontested elections as celebrations of a unified society, whereas occasional competition among candidates represents, in this view, a lamentable breakdown of societal consensus, frequently based on the personal foibles of a particular candidate. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 99 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.