Mark Kishlansky

Along with Kevin Sharpe, Conrad Russell and John Morrill, Kishlansky pioneered the revisionist interpretation of early Stuart history.

The revisionist school sought to counter interpretations of the English Civil Wars that had been advanced by historians influenced by Marxist and Whiggish models of historical development.

Kishlansky advanced his interpretation in an article in 1977 in The Journal of Modern History[5] and in two books, The Rise of the New Model Army (1979) and Parliamentary Selection (1986).

The controversy began in 1990 when Kishlansky published an article in the Historical Journal criticising Adamson's use of sources.

[8] This was followed by an exchange of letters in the Times Literary Supplement in 1992, provoked by a review written by Lawrence Stone that mentioned the controversy.

A series of historians commented on the debate in the letters pages of the TLS, including Conrad Russell, Hugh Trevor-Roper, Kishlansky and Adamson.

This was covered in the British press, with The Times describing it as a "fierce high table row"[9] and The Independent calling it a "most uncivil war".