How the English Reformation was Named: The Politics of History, 1400-1700

How the English Reformation was Named analyses the shifting semantics of 'reformation' in England between the fifteenth and seventeenth centuries. Originally denoting the intended aim of church councils, 'reformation' was subsequently redefined to denote violent revolt, and ultimately a series of past episodes in religious history. But despite referring to sixteenth-century religious change, the proper noun 'English Reformation' entered the historical lexicon only during the British civil wars of the 1640s. Anglican apologists coined this term to defend the Church of England against proponents of the Scottish Reformation, an event that contemporaries singled out for its violence and illegality. Using their neologism to denote select events from the mid-Tudor era, Anglicans crafted a historical narrative that enabled them to present a pristine vision of the English past, one that endeavoured to preserve amidst civil war, regicide, and political oppression. With the restoration of the monarchy and the Church of England in 1660, apologetic narrative became historiographical habit and, eventually, historical certainty.

Table of Contents:
Introduction 1: 'In Head and in Members': Discourses of Reformation, c. 1414-1563 2: Dangerous Positions: Debating Reformation, 1553-1603 3: 'That Damned Dialogue': The Reformations of Jacobean Britain, 1603-1625 4: 'This Present Reformation in England': From Civil Wars to Apologetic Consensus, 1625-1660 5: Reformed Catholics, True Protestants: Tudor Religious History in Restoration England, 1660-1685 Conclusion

About the Author :
Benjamin M. Guyer earned his doctorate with Honours at the University of Kansas in 2016 under the supervision of Jonathan Clark. A lecturer in the Department of History and Philosophy at the University of Tennessee at Martin, he has published multiple essays and is co-editor of two books.

Review :
This is a thought provoking first book which will reignite conversations about the relationship between language and history. Guyer has made a significant contribution to the field of Reformation studies and its evolving historiography. A smashingly successful analysis of the religious changes in late medieval and early modern England that commonly and conveniently are called "the English Reformation". The best traditions of faithful learning are brought forward with good energy here in ways that would make his [Benjamin Guyer] predecessors Booty, Collinson, Lake, Marshall, and Ozment proud. Guyer's How the English Reformation was Named is an insightful reminder that history is rarely as simple as our inherited narratives might lead us to believe This study offers a range of valuable insights into the Reformation era and the English Reformation in particular...Guyer has made a significant contribution to the field of Reformation studies and its evolving historiography. Guyer prompts us to think critically and carefully about the terms upon which we habitually rely and reminds us that the process of naming historical events is not neutral. To understand this inheritance is better to understand the religious upheavals of the early modern period and their treatment at the hands of generations of historians. Guyer turns a useful contribution to church history into a guide to sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Protestant sources. This book is sure to spark conversation amongst those interested in the English Reformation and its legacy. The book nevertheless presents a good deal of new information and posits an interesting case for where the idea of the English Reformation as we know it today came from. This is a thought-provoking first book which will reignite conversations about the relationship between language and history. If a book's contribution is measured by the intensity of conversation it can raise, or the careful and expansive use of sources that are not often used in the same book, not tomention the breathtaking coverage of the period that many specialists fear to tread, Guyer's first book is an absolute success. If a book's contribution is measured by the intensity of conversation it can raise, or the careful and expansive use of sources that are not often used in the same book, not tomention the breathtaking coverage of the period that many specialists fear to tread, Guyer's first book is an absolute success. Scholars interested in these conversations of early modernreligion in Britain and its historiographies will benefit not only from Guyer's meticulous research but also from his suggestions of new approaches to the Reformation(s) that would bring a deeper understanding to these religious developments.