Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T06:54:19.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Bawdy House Riots of 1668*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Tim Harris
Tim Harris
Affiliation:
Emmanuel College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Holidays and festivals were traditional occasions when the young men of early modern London indulged in carnivals of misrule. One of the most striking examples of these were the ritualized attacks on brothels by apprentices, which customarily took place on Shrove Tuesday. These rituals, which often involved quite extensive destruction to property, seem to have occurred with persistent regularity, at least in the early Stuart period, there being twenty-four known Shrove Tuesday riots in the thirty-five years between 1606 and 1641. Such activities normally received moderate handling from the authorities, and only in exceptional circumstances did the courts choose to punish the rioters with heavy fines or a period of imprisonment. Contemporaries, it seems, were familiar with, and to a certain extent tolerant of this ‘ancient administration of justice at Shrovetide’ by the apprentices, as James Harrington called it. Such feats were even acclaimed in popular literature as being a sign of the virtue of London's young men. In this context, the response of the authorities to apprentice attacks on bawdy houses that occurred in Easter week of 1668 seems excessive. Here, fifteen of the ringleaders were tried for high treason, on a rather dubious interpretation of the law, and four were eventually hanged, drawn and quartered.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , September 1986 , pp. 537 - 556
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Burke, P., ‘Popular culture in seventeenth century London’, London Journal, III, 2 (1977), 144–6Google Scholar; Thomas, K. V., ‘Age and authority in early modern England’, Proceedings of the British Academy, LXIII (1976), 219Google Scholar; idem, Rule and misrule in the schools of early modem England (Reading, 1976), pp. 32–3; Lindley, K. J., ‘Riot prevention and control in early Stuart London’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, XXXIII (1983), 109–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Lindley, , ‘Riot prevention’, pp. 109–10Google Scholar.

3 Ibid. pp. 124–5.

4 Harrington, J., The commonwealth of Oceana (London, 1656)Google Scholar, in Pocock, J. G. A., ed., The political works of James Harrington (Cambridge, 1977), p. 289Google Scholar.

5 The honour of London apprentices (London, 1647)Google Scholar; A ballad in praise of London prentices and what they did at the Cockpit play-house in Drury Lane (London, 1617)Google Scholar, in Mackay, C., ed., A collection of songs and ballads relative to the London prentices and trades (London, 1841), pp. 94–7Google Scholar.

6 A complete collection of state trials, ed. Howell, T. B. (33 vols., London, 1809–1826), VI, fos. 879–914Google Scholar; London Gazette, no. 259, 7–11 May 1668. A very brief discussion of the riots can be found in Beloff, M., Public order and popular disturbances, 1660–1714 (London, 1938), pp. 30–1Google Scholar.

7 SirFirth, Charles, ‘London during the civil war, History, XI (1926–1927), 25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, S. R., ‘Almost revolutionaries: the London apprentices during the civil wars’, Hunttngton Library Quarterly, XLII (1978–1979), 313–28Google Scholar; Thirsk, J., ed., The Restoration (London, 1976), p. ixGoogle Scholar; Cragg, G. R., ‘The collapse of militant puritanism’, in Bennett, G. V. and Walsh, J. D. eds., Essays in modern church history in memory of Norman Sykes (London, 1966), p. 102Google Scholar.

8 The following outline is taken from these sources, unless otherwise stated: Greater London Record Office (hereafter G.L.R.O.), WJ/SR/1349; G.L.R.O., MJ/SR/1350, 1352, 1353;G.L.R.O., MJ/SR/1351; Corporation of London Record Office (hereafter C.L.R.O.), sessions files, Mar./Apr. and May 1668; Public Record Office (hereafter P.R.O.), S.P. 29/237, no. 59; Middlesex county records, ed.Jeaffreson, J. C. (4.vols. 1888–1892), iv, xiii–xvii, 8–12Google Scholar; State trials, vi, fos. 879–914; Pepys, S., Diary, ed. Latham, R. C. and Matthews, W. (II vols. London, 1970–1983), IX, 129–32Google Scholar; C.S.P.D. 1667–8, p. 306.

9 Ashton, R., ‘Popular entertainment and social control in later Elizabethan and early Stuart London’, London Journal, ix, 1 (1983), 13–14Google Scholar.

10 P.R.O., P.C. 2/60, p. 237.

11 Pepys, , Diary, ix, 129–30Google Scholar.

12 CS.P.D. 1667–8, p. 310.

13 Pepys, , Diary, ix, 129–30Google Scholar.

14 Linebaugh, P., ‘The Tyburn riot against the surgeons’ in Hay, D. et al. , eds., Albion's fatal tree: crime and society in eighteenth-century England (Harmondsworth, 1977), pp. 89–91Google Scholar; Rogers, N., ‘Aristocratic clientage, trade and independency: popular politics in pre-radical Westminster’, Past and Present, LXI (1973), 98–100Google Scholar; Rudé, G., Hanoverian London, 1714–1808 (London, 1971), p. 184Google Scholar.

15 Pepys, , Diary, ix, 132Google Scholar; G.L.R.O., MJ/SR/1350, recognizance 13 (to prosecute); Middlesex county records, IV, 8.

16 G.L.R.O., MJ/SR/1350, recs. 44, 143.

17 See below, p. 553.

18 P.R.O., S.P./29 237, no. 59; G.L.R.O., MJ/GSR/1351, indictments 3, 38, 40, 43; State trials, VI, fos. 880–8; Middlesex county records, iv, 8–11; Pepys, , Diary, ix, 132Google Scholar.

19 Pepys, , Diary, ix, 132Google Scholar.

20 State trials, vi, fo. 887. In fact the troops were led by Sir Philip Howard.

21 Ibid., fo. 880.

22 Pepys, , Diary, ix, 154Google Scholar.

23 The poor-whores petition. To the most splendid, illustrious, serene and eminent lady of pleasure, the countess of Castlemayne (London, 1668)Google Scholar.

24 Pepys, , Diary, iv, 431Google Scholar.

25 Bodleian Library, MS Don b. 8, fos. 190–3.

26 The gracious answer of the most illustrious lady of pleasure, the countess of Castlem…To the poor-whoores petition (London, 1668)Google Scholar.

27 Pepys, , Diary, II, 38Google Scholar. For the libertinism of the Court see Macaulay, T. B., The history of England from the accession of James II, ed. Firth, C. H. (6 vols. London, 1913–1915), I, 151–69Google Scholar.

28 Bedford, J., London's burning (London, 1966), pp. 150–76Google Scholar.

29 The gracious answer.

30 C.S.P.D. 1667, p. 196.

31 Pepys, , Diary, vIII, 269–70Google Scholar; C.S.P.D. 1667, p. 189, C.S.P. Venetian, 1666–8, p. 171; Gilmour, M., The great lady. A biography of Barbara Villiers, mistress of Charles II (London, 1944), pp. 118–19Google Scholar.

32 Burnet, G., History of my own time, ed. Airy, O. W. (2 vols. Oxford, 1897–1900), I, 453 and footnote 3Google Scholar; Pepys, , Diary, VIII, 584–5, 593Google Scholar.

33 Pepys, , Diary, VIII, 364Google Scholar.

34 Marvell, A., The last instructions to a painter (dated 4 09 1667, first published 1689)Google Scholar, reprinted in G. de F. Lord et al., eds., Poems on affairs of state: Augustan satirical verse, 1660–1714 (7 vols. New Haven, 1963–75), I, 133.

35 Pepys, , Diary, VIII, 585, 596Google Scholar.

36 The whores petition to the London prentices (1668).

37 Firth, , ‘London during the civil war’, pp. 32–6Google Scholar. But see the criticisms of this view in Hill, C., Some intellectual consequences of the English revolution (London, 1980), pp. 10–15Google Scholar.

38 I hope shortly to publish an article on popular attitudes towards the Restoration in London.

39 For example, see The rump serv'd in with a grand sallet (London, 1660)Google Scholar; The honest cryer of London (London, 1660)Google Scholar.

40 Surrey quarter sessions records, 1656–1666, ed. Jenkinson, H. and Powell, D. L. (3 vols. London, 1934–1938), II, 1661–3, 110, 149Google Scholar; Calamy revised, by Matthews, A. G. (Oxford, 1934), p. 338Google Scholar; The diurnal of Thomas Rugg, 1659–1661, ed. Sachse, W. L. (London, 1961), p. 154Google Scholar; P.R.O., S.P. 29/12, no. 114; Green, I. M., The re-establishment of the Church of England, 1660–1663 (Oxford, 1978), p. 188Google Scholar.

41 Gentles, I., ‘The struggle for London in the second civil war’, Historical Journal, XXVI, 2 (1983)Google Scholar,

42 The remonstrance of the apprentices in and about London (London, 1659)Google Scholar.

43 Bate, F., The declaration of indulgence, 1672: a study in the rise of organized dissent (London, 1908), pp. 2–6Google Scholar.

44 C.L.R.O., sessions files, 1661–6; G.L.R.O., M(W)J/SR/1204–1296; G.L.R.O., MJ/RC/1; Middlesex county records, III, 310–67, passim; Surrey quarter sessions, I, II, III, passim. This figure excludes those charged with non-attendance at church and also those presented in episcopal visitations.

45 C.S.P.D. 1660–1, pp. 538–9; Calamy revised, p. 144.

46 C.S.P.D 1660–1, pp. 538, 540.

47 P.R.O., S.P. 29/47, no 71.

48 Pepys, , Diary, 11, 167Google Scholar.

49 G.L.R.O., MJ/GSR/1304, ind. 19; Middlesex county records, III, 368.

50 G.L.R.O., WJ/SR/1257, rec. 5; Middlesex county records, III, 327.

51 C.L.R.O., sessions file, Nov./Dec. 1661, ind. of Adis; Adis, H., A fanaticks alarm, given to the mayor in his quarters (London, 1661), p. 30Google Scholar; [Humfrey, J.], A proposition for the safety and happiness of the king and kingdom both in church and state (London, 1667), p. 46Google Scholar.

52 Burnet, , History, I, 400–1Google Scholar.

53 Thomas, R., ‘Comprehension and indulgence’, in Nuttall, G. F. and Chadwick, O., eds., From uniformity to unity, 1662–1962 (London, 1962), p. 196Google Scholar.

54 Pepys, , Diary, VIII, 584–5Google Scholar.

55 Burnet, , History, I, 465–6Google Scholar; Thorndike, H., Theological works (6 vols. Oxford, 1844–1856), v, 301–8Google Scholar; DrStoughton, J., History of religion in England from the opening of the Long Parliament to the end of the eighteenth century (6 vols. London, 1881), III, 371–8Google Scholar; Williams, J. B., Memoirs of the life, character, and writings of Sir Matthew Hale (London, 1835), pp. 115–19Google Scholar; Simon, W. G., ‘Comprehension in the age of Charles II’, Church History, XXXI (1962), 440–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lacey, D. R., Dissent and parliamentary politics in England, 1661–1689 (Rutgers, 1969), pp. 56–8Google Scholar; Thomas, , ‘Comprehension and indulgence’, pp. 197–201Google Scholar; Sykes, N., From Sheldon to Secker: aspects of English church history, 1660–1768 (Cambridge, 1959), pp. 71–3Google Scholar; Toon, P., God's statesman: the life and work of John Owen, pastor, educator, theologian (Exeter, 1971), pp. 131–4Google Scholar.

56 Lacey, , Dissent, p. 58Google Scholar; Simon, , ‘Comprehension’, p. 445Google Scholar.

57 Commons Journals, IX, 44.

58 London Gazette, no. 242.

59 Bodleian Library, MS Don b. 8, pp. 192–3.

60 The gracious answer.

61 For example, see Adis, , Fanaticks alarm, p. 10Google Scholar.

62 Burnet, , History, I, 400–1Google Scholar.

63 Burnet, G., The life and death of Sir Matthew Hale, Kt. (London, 1682), pp. 43–4Google Scholar.

64 State trials, VI, fo. 884.

65 Ibid. fos. 896–7.

66 Ibid. fo. 899.

67 SirHale, M., Historia placitorum coronae: the history of the pleas of the crown, facsimile of the 1736 edition, with an introduction by Glazebrook, P. R. (2 vols., London, 1971), I, 134Google Scholar.

68 State trials, fos. 901–11. For the Tudor background see Bellamy, J., The Tudor law of treason (London, 1979). especially pp. 18–22, 78–81Google Scholar.

69 State trials, VI, fos. 893–5.

70 Ibid., XV, fos. 521–702. The Riot Act of 1715 generally meant that it was unnecessary to use the law of treason in this way in future, although in 1781 General Gordon was indicted for high treason on the basis of the law as laid down in 1668. See the discussions in Holdsworth, W. S., A history of English law (17 vols. London, 1922–1972), VIII, 318–21Google Scholar; Beloff, , Public order, pp. 136–7Google Scholar.

71 Johnson, W. G., ‘Post restoration nonconformity and plotting, 1660–1675’ (unpublished M.A. thesis, Manchester, 1967)Google Scholar.

72 C.S.P.D. 1663–4, P. 587.

73 Ibid. p. 621.

74 State trials, VI, fo. 884.

75 Ibid. fo. 897.

76 Pepys, , Diary, IX, 132Google Scholar.

77 C.S.P.D. 1667–8, p. 310.

78 London Gazette, no. 249.

79 State trials, VI, fo. 890.

80 Ibid, VI, fos. 880, 882, 883.

81 Ibid. fo. 885.

82 P.R.O., S.P. 29/237, no. 82.

83 P.R.O., S.P. 29/239, no. 167.

84 Rudé, G., ‘The London “mob” in the eighteenth century, Historical Journal, II, 1 (1959), 2–3Google Scholar; Harris, T. J. G., ‘The politics of the London crowd in the reign of Charles II’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge, 1985), p. 34Google Scholar.

85 B. L. Add. MS 25, 124, fos. 39, 43; C.S.P.D. 1675–6, p. 255; Dunn, R. M., ‘The London weavers' riot of 1675’, Guildhall Studies in London History, I, 1 (10 1973), 17, 19Google Scholar.

86 For example, a silversmith's apprentice was arrested for suspicion of involvement in the weavers' riot because he was wearing his green apron. See C.L.R.O., sessions papers, Sept. 1675, examination of Staherne.

87 Harris, , ‘Politics of the London crowd’, pp. 236–7Google Scholar.

88 State trials, VI, fo. 882.

89 P.R.O., S.P. 29/239, no. 167.

90 P.R.O., S.P. 29/237, no. 82.

91 Lindley, , ‘Riot prevention’, pp. 110 11Google Scholar; Burke, , ‘Popular culture’, p. 146Google Scholar.

92 Hobsbawn, E. J., ‘The machine-breakers’, Past and Present, I (1952), 59Google Scholar.

93 The sessions records for Southwark and Surrey were also examined, although no reference to these disturbances was found.

94 Holmes, G., ‘The Sacheverell riots: the crowd and the Church in early eighteenth century London’, Past and Present, LXXII (1976), 73Google Scholar, reprinted in P. Slack, ed., Rebellion, popular protest and the social order in early modern England (Cambridge, 1984), p. 250; Harris, , ‘Politics of the London crowd’, pp. 281–2Google Scholar.

95 Cf. Cockburn, J. S., ‘Early modern assize records as historical evidence’, Journal of the Society of Archivists, V (1975), 215–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

96 Because of limited data, no geographical analysis of the riots is presented. The domicile of only 18 rioters is known, and these do not reflect any geographical pattern. All that can be said is that the riots involved people from further afield than the immediate vicinity of the house being attacked.

97 Wrightson, K. and Levine, D., Poverty and piety in an English village: Terling, 1525–1700 (London, 1979), p. 101Google Scholar.

98 Retailers: innholder, tobacconist; artisans: clothworker (apprentice), cordwainer, smith, tailor(5), weaver; labourers/unskilled: carpenter's servant, grocer's servant, labourer (2), sawyer, tapster.

99 Gentry: gentleman; professionals: brewer's clerk, pharmacist, writer; retailers; grocer, haber-dasher, merchant tailor (5), mercer, tallowchandler, victualler (2); artisans: cabinetmaker, carpenter, clothworker, combmaker (2), embroiderer, feltmaker (2), joiner, plaisterer (2), potter, silkweaver (2), stone-cutter, sword-cutter, tailor (8), tanner, upholsterer, weaver (3), wheelwright; labourers/unskilled: labourer (2), sawyer (2).

100 Harris, , ‘Politics of the London crowd’, pp. 279–80Google Scholar.

101 Boulton, J. P., ‘The social and economic structure of Southwark in the early seventeenth century’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge, 1983), pp. 70–3Google Scholar.

102 For problems with using the hearth tax to this end see Husbands, C. R., ‘Describing local economies in seventeenth-century England: methodological pitfalls of the hearth tax returns’ (unpublished paper, Cambridge Population Group Accessions Library, 1984)Google Scholar.

103 Pocock, , ed., Political works of Janus Harrington, pp. 129–33Google Scholar; Pocock, J. G. A., The Machiavellian moment: Florentine political thought and the Atlantic republic tradition (Princeton, 1975), pp. 406, 415–16Google Scholar.

104 A letter from a person of quality to his friend in the country (1675). Two women were indicted at the Westminster quarter sessions for publishing this seditious book, the parts regarded as seditious being cited in the indictment. See Middlesex county records, IV, 66–9.

105 Harris, , ‘Politics of the London crowd’, chs. 4, 6Google Scholar.

106 Ibid. chs. 5, 6.