A study of the fundamental change in the meaning of treason in the 1640s.This study traces the transition of treason from a personal crime against the monarch to a modern crime against the impersonal state. Prior to the Civil Wars of the 1640s English jurists construed the law of treason largely as a personal crime against the monarch. The book reveals how the events of the 1640s challenged pre-existing interpretations and led to a revised understanding of treason as a crime committed against 'the state' as an impersonal corporate entity.This study traces the transition of treason from a personal crime against the monarch to a modern crime against the impersonal state. Prior to the Civil Wars of the 1640s English jurists construed the law of treason largely as a personal crime against the monarch. The book reveals how the events of the 1640s challenged pre-existing interpretations and led to a revised understanding of treason as a crime committed against 'the state' as an impersonal corporate entity.This study traces the transition of treason from a personal crime against a monarch to a more modern crime against the impersonal state. Prior to the Civil Wars of the 1640s, English jurists construed the law of treason largely as a personal crime against the monarch. The book reveals how the events of the 1640s challenged pre-existing interpretations and led to a revised understanding of treason as a crime committed against the state as an impersonal entity.Acknowledgements; List of abbreviations; Introduction; Part I. Concepts: 1. The statutory basis of English treason law; 2. Sovereignty and state; Part II. Practice: 3. Thomas Wentworth, First Earl of Strafford; 4. William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury; 5. Connor Lord Maguire, Second Baron of Enniskillen; 6. Charles Stuart, King of England; Conclusion; Bibliography; Index. D. Alan Orr offers a more detailed and thoughtful discussion of the concept of allegiance and its opposite, treason, than has often been the caslC1