In 1660 Charles II appeared to be a very different sort of king from his aloof, dignified, and majestic father. He began his reign needing and wanting to heal the divisions of his kingdoms through a show of affability, accessibility, and openness to almost all of his subjects, regardless of their former political and religious dispositions. The “merry monarch” of historical caricature originally shared his presence, his income, and his sexuality with many. Yet Charles soon found that the provision and denial of access were among his greatest political weapons, and he ended his reign both as the king of a party and almost as aloof as Charles I. Brian Weiser seeks to explain Charles's about face and to consider the role of access in the politics of his reign.

Weiser's reconstruction of the chronology of royal access in the Restoration provides a framework for treating topics ranging from palace architecture to the regulation of trade. After 1662, approaches to Charles became more restricted as both ambitious ministers and the king's desire for greater privacy closed doors to many. But the parliamentary crisis of 1666–67 reopened those doors when Charles discovered that restrictive politics could breed opposition. The collective ministry of the Cabal (1667–73) provided multiple points of access to power, while Charles himself kept his options open, playing different ministers and their followings off against each other. When the question of toleration and the discovery of the conversion to Catholicism of the duke of York unhinged the ministry and the country in 1672–73, Charles abandoned his attempt to be everybody's king and re-embraced the Anglican loyalist faction that had dominated the government in the early 1660s. The earl of Danby, who rode Anglican loyalism into power, monopolized patronage and access until the allegations of the Popish Plot toppled him as an “evil counselor.” As the nation reacted against an exclusivist court in 1679–81, Charles returned briefly to open access, by broadening the Privy Council, but he subsequently embraced Anglican loyalism again (this time without a dominant minister) in an effort to maintain obedience, respect for monarchy, and the succession of his Catholic brother.

This history of access is equally notable in Charles's palace projects, a topic Weiser handles in a particularly fascinating chapter. The open access of the early Restoration coincided with Charles's residence in the twenty-three-acre sprawl of apartments and lodgings known as Whitehall, a disorderly setting that contributed to the chaotic politics of those years. As the king began to yearn for great privacy and control, he turned briefly to the construction of a more orderly palace at Greenwich, only part of which was ever built; and he spent less and less time at Whitehall. (A useful appendix provides an itinerary of Charles's movements for most of the reign.) Improvements to the royal apartments at Whitehall after 1667 sought to balance royal comfort with ease of access; but the mid-1670s’ ceiling paintings at Windsor, which depicted Charles in all the trappings of baroque monarchy, reflected the politics of distance practiced by Danby. Finally, as the crisis of 1679–81 gave way to a loyalist reaction, Charles launched the construction of another never to be completed palace at the Arthurian site of Winchester, seeking, as much as Louis XIV at Versailles, to regulate access through an architectural statement about royal authority.

The greatest strength of Weiser's book is the versatility with which he utilizes the concept of access to examine architecture, ministerial and parliamentary politics, local affairs, and matters of trade. But this strength is also a weakness, for the work lacks extended analysis of some of the topics it examines. It is a series of variations upon a theme, but some of the variations take insufficient account of the many social, economic, religious, and political factors that had an impact on the provision of access. By its very definition, access is a matter of personality and relationships; but Restoration politics was about much more than the personalities and presence of even its most skilled practitioners, whose choices were often limited by circumstances over which they had little control. While it is helpful to understand the reaction against Danby in 1678–79 as a reaction against an “evil counselor” who had monopolized access to the king (79–82), for instance, access was but one of an expanding set of issues about church and state (and their relationship) that brought Danby down and that brought Charles into a critical confrontation with many in the Commons and the country. And Charles's fluctuating response to the ensuing crisis, as reflected in the politics of access, simply cannot be understood without attention to the ideas that prompted petitions, addresses, pamphlets, and purges. At less than 180 pages of text, the work is simply too short, and occasionally too dependent upon some secondary sources, to tackle adequately such complex historical topics as the crisis of 1679–81 or to justify the publisher's exorbitant price.

Weiser has apparently been let down by his publisher in another respect as well: chapters about local politics and about merchant politics are given subtitles with dates focused on the early 1660s that do not do justice to the range of their contents. In fact, Weiser's treatment of both topics covers the entire reign. He is particularly helpful about royal management of the localities and the politics of trade in the understudied 1670s. But he is somewhat too eager to introduce the language of party to Danby's era (37, 76, 109), without considering the historiography of party, just as he too readily accepts the Compton Census of nonconformity, despite noting reservations about its accuracy (75, 106–9). He provides an admirable analysis of the history of the three Restoration Councils of Trade, connecting their composition and work to Charles's accessibility to merchants and merchant companies. His accounts of how different merchant groups and guilds turned to parliament and to public opinion for remedy, when they encountered difficulties in access to the crown, are also helpful in considering the broader political structures of the Restoration. Indeed, one could not find a more accessible introduction to the mercantile issues of the Restoration than Weiser's final chapter.