Edit post Follow this blog Administration + Create my blog

Published by jack elliot


If there is a popular image of George II, it derives from the Whig historians of the 19th century, who established him as the counterpoint to their chief subject of 18th-century interest, his grandson and successor, George III. Claims that George III from 1760 wilfully disrupted a working two-party system, and unconstitutionally attempted to resurrect an older, Stuart-style personal rule, were made to seem plausible by comparing his actions with those of his immediate predecessor. George II, by contrast with George III, appeared as a king thoroughly controlled by the leading politicians of the day, as a captive of the Old Corps Whigs and who might complain bitterly that 'ministers were kings in this country', but buckled down to perform his duty as a proper constitutionally limited monarch but under control of Hannover.

To be informed of the latest articles, subscribe:
Comment on this post