Despite the continuing growth in early modern Irish studies, the Irish Parliament has arguably been the proverbial elephant in the room. Compared to the early modern English and Scottish parliaments, it has attracted considerably less attention. The early modern Irish Parliament is often seen as the poor relation to its English counterpart or more mundane compared to the Irish Confederation of Kilkenny. Yet despite the turbulence and the dislocation of Irish society during the seventeenth century, the Irish Parliament continued to function as an integral part of Stuart Ireland. Therefore, Coleman Dennehy's The Irish Parliament, 1613–89 is a very welcome addition to the historiography and should be essential reading for scholars with an interest in Stuart Britain and Ireland. This book will be of interest to scholars working in the fields of legal history, Irish law, and the judiciary, as Dennehy places an emphasis on parliament as a legal body as well as one of governance and legislation.

Although there are clearly parallels to be drawn alongside the English Parliament, Dennehy shows that the Irish Parliament was a distinctive and unique institution that organically evolved in response to the specific needs of Ireland, and, accordingly, the Irish Parliament should be viewed on its own merits. In approaching the subject, he is keen to step away from the historiographical emphasis on the ethnic and religious divisions of early modern Ireland, and focuses on the long-term institutional procedures and traditions. The picture that emerges is of a confident parliament keenly aware of its function, traditions, and place in Irish society. There are some valuable new insights into parliamentary petitions and adjudication of the law alongside some interesting chapters on the process of legislation, the staff that ensured the smooth running of the institution, and the uses and abuses of parliamentary privilege that affected the parliament's day-to-day affairs.

As Dennehy states, it is surprising given how much time the Irish Parliament spent on petitions and how little it has been studied by historians. Dennehy provides the first solid analysis on the subject, and it is essential reading for any scholar working on petitions in early modern Britain and Ireland. As his research shows, 87 percent of all petitions put before the parliament were on issues of parliamentary privilege. It is clear that petitions were also a clear response to major controversies at the time—most notably Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, monopolies, and the new liturgy in the 1630s or in the 1660s as a response to the Restoration land settlement. The numbers of petitions gradually increased throughout the seventeenth century, and the Irish Parliament evolved its procedures to meet demand. This highlights that the parliament was not unresponsive to change.

When the parliament created and passed legislation, procedure followed Irish tradition and precedents. Dennehy opens chapter 3 by giving a very clear and detailed outline of the use of Poynings’ Law, which ultimately distinguished the Irish Parliament from its English cousin. There is also a very fair and convincing case made for the legality of the Jacobite Parliament of Ireland. The processes of the Irish and English parliamentary procedures are compared and contrasted, showing that, although there were clear similarities between the two, the Irish Parliament had distinct responsibilities, functions, and procedures that differed significantly from the English Parliament, and these had evolved in response to Ireland's own history, environment, legal precedents.

In relation to its staff and parliamentary privilege, a comparative approach between the English and Irish Parliaments reveals broad parallels but also Irish distinctiveness. This is particularly the case in relation to government influence over key appointments such as the speaker of the house and the clerks whose job it was to organize and set out the agenda in Parliament. Dennehy shows that, unlike the English Parliament, there was no stipulated freedom from arrest, freedom of speech, and advance forgiveness for unintended provocation. These are again a reflection of Irish precedent, law, and tradition. Indeed, as Dennehy highlights, this is integral to understanding the nature and impact of parliamentary privilege upon parliament's proceedings. Unlike its English counterpart, however, it was based on statute and extended to members’ servants. Unsurprisingly these privileges were open to abuse. Other privileges included freedom from physical harm and offensive words, which if breached, was addressed within the parliament as the highest judiciary in the land. The conducting of Irish elections, as Dennehy highlights, was the most jealously guarded privilege of them all.

Dennehy convincingly shows that the Irish Parliament was indeed its own institution distinct from the English Parliament and was a survivor in a turbulent century. This thoroughly researched monograph places the Irish Parliament in its rightful and proper place in early modern Irish history.