Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T03:47:13.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Publics and Participation: England, Britain, and Europe in the “Post-Reformation”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2017

Peter Lake
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article responds to the pieces collected in this special issue of the Journal of British Studies, all of which seek to take some notion of the politics of the public sphere and either apply it to, or break it upon the wheel of, various versions of British history during the post-Reformation period. It seeks to bring the other articles into conversation both with one another as well as with existing work on the topic.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 56 , Issue 4 , October 2017 , pp. 836 - 854
Copyright
Copyright © The North American Conference on British Studies 2017 

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 Lake, Peter and Pincus, Steven, The Politics of the Public Sphere in Early Modern England (Manchester, 2007)Google Scholar; Lake, Peter, “Post Reformation Politics, or, On Not Looking for the Long-Term Causes of the English Civil War,” in The Oxford Handbook of the English Revolution, ed. Braddick, Michael J. (Oxford, 2015), 21–39 Google Scholar; idem, “The Theatre and the ‘Post Reformation Public Sphere,’” in The Oxford Handbook of the Age of Shakespeare, ed. Smuts, Malcolm (Oxford, 2016), 179–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, Bad Queen Bess? Libels, Secret Histories, and the Politics of Publicity in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth I (Oxford, 2016)Google Scholar; idem, How Shakespeare Put Politics on the Stage: Power and Succession in the Histories (London, 2016)Google Scholar.

2 Harris, Tim, “Publics and Participation in the Three Kingdoms: Was There Such a Thing as ‘British Public Opinion?,’” Journal of British Studies 56, no. 4 (October 2017): 731–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Collinson, Patrick, “The Monarchical Republic of Queen Elizabeth I,” in Elizabethan Essays (London, 1994), 31–57 Google Scholar. See also idem, “The Elizabethan Exclusion Crisis and the Elizabethan Polity,” Proceedings of the British Academy 84 (1994): 51–92 Google Scholar, reprinted in idem, This England (Manchester, 2011), 61–97 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. On the succession crisis, see Doran, Susan and Kewes, Paulina, eds., Doubtful and Dangerous: The Question of Succession in Late Elizabethan England (Manchester, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Sandeep Kauchik of Princeton University began and substantially completed, but never submitted, an outstanding thesis in the 1990s on John Williams as a purveyor of the politics of popularity.

5 Muldrew, Craig, The Economy of Obligation (Basingstoke, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Millstone, Noah, Manuscript Circulation and the Invention of Politics in Early Stuart England (Cambridge, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Millstone's text is a seminal work whose impact on this field will be transformative, although I think that “politics” in the sense intended had already been “invented” in the late sixteenth century.

7 Lake, Peter and Questier, Michael, The Antichrist's Lewd Hat: Protestants, Papists and Players in Post Reformation England (London, 2002)Google Scholar.

8 McMillin, Scott and MacClean, Mary-Beth, The Queen's Men and Their Plays (Cambridge, 1998)Google Scholar.

9 Lake, Peter, The Boxmaker's Revenge: Orthodoxy, Heterodoxy, and the Politics of the Parish in Early Stuart London (Manchester, 2001)Google Scholar; Como, David and Lake, Peter, “Puritans, Antinomians and Laudians in Caroline London: The Strange Case of Peter Shaw in Contexts,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 50, no. 4 (October 1999): 684–715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, “‘Orthodoxy’ and Its Discontents: Dispute Settlement and Production of ‘Consensus’ in the London (Puritan) Underground,” Journal of British Studies 39, no. 1 (January 2000): 34–70 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Lake, Peter and Questier, Michael, The Trials of Margaret Clitherow (London, 2012)Google Scholar.

11 Peter Lake and Michael Questier, “Taking it to the Street? The Archpriest Controversy and the Issue of the Succession,” in Doran and Kewes, eds., Doubtful and Dangerous, 71–91.

12 Lake, Peter, “Constitutional Consensus and Puritan Opposition during the 1620s: Thomas Scott and the Spanish Match,” Historical Journal 25, no. 4 (December 1982): 805–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Freddy Cristobal Dominguez, “‘We Must Fight with Paper and Pens’: Spanish Elizabethan Politics, 1585–1598” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2011).

14 Millstone, Manuscript Circulation. See also Sharpe, Kevin, Reading Revolutions (London, 2000)Google Scholar.

15 Millstone, Manuscript Circulation; Kisery, Andras, Hamlet's Moment: Drama and Political Knowledge in Early Modern England (Oxford, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Peacey, Jason, Politicians and Pamphleteers: Propaganda during the English Civil War and Interregnum (Aldershot, 2004)Google Scholar; idem, Print and Public Politics in the English Revolution (Cambridge, 2013)Google Scholar; Raymond, Joad, The Invention of the News Book: English News Books, 1641–1649 (Oxford, 1996)Google Scholar; idem, ed., The Newspaper, Public Opinion and the Public Sphere in the Seventeenth Century (London, 1999)Google Scholar; idem, Pamphlets and Pamphleteers in Early Modern Britain (Cambridge, 2003)Google Scholar; Boys, Jayne, London's News Press and the Thirty Years War (Woodbridge, 2011)Google Scholar.

17 Harris, Tim, The Politics of the London Crowd in the Reign of Charles II (Cambridge, 1984)Google Scholar.

18 Mendle, Michael, “The ‘Prints’ of the Trial: The Nexus of Politics, Religion, Law and Information in Late Seventeenth Century England,” in Fear, Exclusion and Revolution: Roger Morrice and Britain in the 1680s, ed. McElligott, Jason (Aldershot, 2006), 123–37Google Scholar.

19 Brian Cowan's ongoing research on the Sacheverell affair will prove of the greatest significance here. I thank him for the many discussions upon which this paragraph draws heavily.

20 Harris, “Publics and Participation.”

21 This paragraph is based on long discussions with, and forthcoming work by, Alex Barber. See also Cowan, Brian, “Mr. Spectator and the Coffeehouse Public Sphere,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 37, no. 3 (Spring 2004): 345–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 351.

22 Pincus, Steve, 1688: The First Modern Revolution (New Haven, 2009), 461–71Google Scholar.

23 Stewart, Laura, Rethinking the Scottish Revolution: Covenanted Scotland, 1637–1651 (Oxford, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Harris, “Publics and Participation.”

25 Stewart, Rethinking, esp. chaps. 1–2.

26 Peacey, Jason, “Print Culture, State Formation, and an Anglo-Scottish Public, 1640–1648,” Journal of British Studies 56, no. 4 (October 2017): 816–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Harris, “Publics and Participation.”

28 Bowie, Karin and Raffe, Alasdair, “Politics, the People, and Extra-Institutional Participation in Scotland, c. 1603–1712,” Journal of British Studies 56, no. 4 (October 2017): 797–815 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 The seminal work is Tyacke, Nicholas, Anti-Calvinists: The Rise of English Arminianism, c. 1590–1640 (Oxford, 1987)Google Scholar. For the notion of hegemony, see Lake, Peter, “Calvinism and the English Church, 1570–1635,” Past and Present, no. 114 (February 1987): 32–76 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 Stewart, Rethinking, chap. 6.

31 Bulman, Bill, Anglican Enlightenment (Cambridge, 2015), 219 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 251. Cf. Sowerby, Scott, Making Toleration (Cambridge, MA, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Geertz, Clifford, “Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture,” in The Interpretation of Cultures (Basic Books, 1973), 3–30 Google Scholar, at 3. I owe this reference to David Magliocco.

33 Bradshaw, Brendan, “The Tudor Reformation and Revolution in Wales and Ireland: The Origins of the British Problem,” in The British Problem, c. 1535–1707, ed. Bradshaw, Brendan and Morrill, John (Basingstoke, 1996), 39–65 Google Scholar.

34 Harris, “Publics and Participation.”

35 Peacey, “Print Culture, State Formation.”

36 Ibid.; Harris, “Publics and Participation.”

37 Darcy, Eamon, “Political Participation in Early Stuart Ireland,” Journal of British Studies 56, no. 4 (October 2017): 773–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 788.

38 Bradshaw, “Tudor Reformation.”

39 Bowen, Lloyd, “Structuring Particularist Publics: Logistics, Language, and Early Modern Wales,” Journal of British Studies 56, no. 4 (October 2017): 754–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stewart, Laura A. M., “Introduction: Publics and Participation in Early Modern Britain,” Journal of British Studies 56, no. 4 (October 2017): 709–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Bowen, Lloyd, “Information, Language and Political Culture in Early Modern Wales,” Past and Present, no. 228 (August 2015): 125–58, at 150CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Bowen, “Structuring Particularist Publics”; Darcy, “Political Participation.”

42 Ibid.; Stewart, “Publics and Participation.”

43 Cust, Richard, ed., The Papers of Sir Richard Grosvenor, 1st Bart. (1585–1645) (Lancashire and Cheshire, 1996)Google Scholar; Lake, Peter, “Puritans, Petitions and Popularity: Local Politics and National Contexts, Cheshire, 1641,” in Politics, Religion and Popularity, ed. Cogswell, Tom, Cust, Richard, and Lake, Peter (Cambridge, 2002), 259–89Google Scholar.