Search results

Abstract only
Philippa Maddern

produced by the central government (excluding legal documents). 55 To members of the upper classes of county communities, minute status distinctions articulated within a system of honour-recognition could be vital for both men and women, determining whose word and reputation were held to be sound, who should hold administrative power, who would control the execution of law, and whose patronage should be sought by whom. To

in Gentry culture in late-medieval England
Phillipp R. Schofield

pervasive conception of the medieval community. While Carpenter posits, only circumspectly, that the term might have some potential referential worth for the medieval village (which, though noting evidence to the contrary, she identifies as capable of being perceived as ‘isolated’ and with ‘clearly defined borders, both geographical and social’), she suggests that the concept of community as applied to the county community or the village community has been overly influenced by structural-functionalist anthropology and the kinds of investigation that saw in modern

in Peasants and historians
Richard Cust and Peter Lake

the ‘imagined’ or ‘symbolic’ communities of early modern England. Historians have become more aware since the 1970s of how problematic it is to talk about ‘communities’ in this or any other period. Aside from the specific challenges to the notion of county community, and a wariness of the associations of the term ‘community’ – with images of natural, consensual societies, wreathed in nostalgia for a ‘world we have lost’ – there is an understanding that individual lives were worked out not so much in terms of a community as in terms of a multiplicity of complex

in Gentry culture and the politics of religion
Abstract only
Peter Fleming

. 12 Virgoe, ‘Aspects of the county community’, pp. 8–11; Payling, ‘Widening franchise’; McFarlane, ‘Parliament and “bastard feudalism” ’, in his England in the Fifteenth Century , pp. 1–21; Paston Letters , ed. Davis, I, pp. 577–80 (no. 354), and II, pp. 47–9 (no. 460) and p. 54 (no. 464

in Gentry culture in late-medieval England
Abstract only
Deborah Youngs

link that cut across rank and gender distinctions: for example, unlike networks identified through administrative records and county communities, this literary network allowed women an active role. What is also notable is that the Fastolf network was based in a particular household, in East Anglia, a region which has been described as ‘distinctive and self-sufficient, impatient, even suspicious’ of

in Gentry culture in late-medieval England
The colonies during the interregnum, 1642-1660
Robert M. Bliss

civil war in England. Because Governor Bell wanted a firmer basis for government than the compact of 1645, he looked forward to the day when ‘God shalbe so Mercifull unto us as to unite the King & Parliament’. Nor could the island’s rising sugar barons count on the traditional local ties which sustained some English county communities in their efforts to minimize the disruptive potential of civil war by

in Revolution and empire
The English empire at the end of the seventeenth century
Robert M. Bliss

diffused to operate as a corporate polity. By the century’s end the claim of Virginia’s gentlemen burgesses to represent a wider commons of other gentlemen and substantial freeholders, indeed to represent their neighborhoods, their county communities, was not only more plausible than it had been before, but a good deal safer. 70 Colonists’ changing political self-regard was replicated in England, where the

in Revolution and empire
Abstract only
Contestation and cultural resistance
Edward Legon

Rebellion, pp. 46–47; Seaward, Cavalier Parliament, p. 50; D. J. Appleby, ‘The Restoration County Community: A Post-conflict Culture’, in J. Eales and A. Hopper (eds), The County Community in Seventeenth-Century England and Wales (Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press, 2012), pp. 100–124; and D. J. Appleby, ‘Veteran Politics in Restoration England, 1660–1670’, Seventeenth Century, 28:3 (2013), 323–342. See, for instance, Neufeld, Civil Wars after 1660, pp. 15–16. Appleby, ‘Veteran Politics’, 329–330. See, for instance, Bywaters, ‘Representations’, 255–270. TNA, SP29

in Revolution remembered
The machinery of the Elizabethan war effort in the counties
Neil Younger

this picture warrants a certain amount of revision). The commission was responsible for local order and low-level judicial work. Tudor councils and parliaments piled ever more responsibilities onto the commission, both as a body and as a collection of individual justices of the peace (JPs).101 Indeed, some historians have seen the commissions of the peace as the authentic voices of the counties and an expression of the ‘county communities’, almost parliaments of the semi-autonomous statelets seen by Everitt, for example, to constitute early modern England.102 Yet the

in War and politics in the Elizabethan counties
Neil Younger

, broadly speaking, unappealing both to the gentry who had to do it and to the wider county community who had to play their parts. It was troublesome and involved a great deal of often dull work; it produced no tangible benefit to the community; and it was expensive. It did not fall into that category of the work of local government which arose organically from society, such as maintaining local order, enforcing the law, or relieving poverty or hunger. Instead it was imposed from above, and there can be little doubt that, all things being equal, local communities would

in War and politics in the Elizabethan counties