Jacobean political thought has often been studied from the viewpoint of a polarity of opinions between the king and his parliaments. James, together with his Anglican clerics and his lawyers, invoked royal absolutism, whilst the House of Commons attempted to oppose royalist claims by arguments based on their view of the nature and contents of the ancient constitution or, more generally, on theories of contract. This is the focal point of the older – or ‘Whig’ interpretation. But it is also that of recent studies whether written against, or in defence of, the older account. It is not the aim of this chapter to deny the obvious truth that perhaps the majority of early-seventeenth-century English political discourse centred upon the disagreements between the king and his parliaments and upon the debates on the nature of the ancient constitution. But what I do wish to argue is that the narrow concentration upon these issues, displayed by most scholars, tends to yield an over-restricted picture of the range of Jacobean political thought. It is, in other words, worth our while to take a fresh look at the political writings of the first two decades of the seventeenth century. Although the bulk of political discourse was conducted in juristic parlance – variously absolutist, contractarian or legal in character – it is argued below that the opposing tradition, which emphasized the virtuous citizen's active life, was also present during this period.

The advocates of royal absolutism often directed their arguments against contractarians – both Calvinist and catholic alike, as exemplified by Bartholomew Parsons, the incumbent of Ludgershall, Wiltshire, in his assize sermon at Sarum in Wiltshire in March 1615.