Introduction
“A Freeborn People” is a balanced examination of the ways in which the political cultures of the political elite and that of common people interacted in the 17th century England. In this book, the author shows that the two groups were not split in their expectations for good governance, as many historians thought. The author, David Underdown tells us that, all England women and men had the same expectations concerning their liberties as they were promulgated by their ancient constitution.
Underdown argues that, during this period both the political elite and common people were strongly influenced by postulations that prevailed among gender roles. He also points out that, in the period before the civil wars, England women and men were influenced by worries that England was under the threat of evil forces. He therefore observes that, the above influences were the reasons that led to 17th century revolutions in England.
Discussion
In this book, Underdown examines both cultures from the Stuart period up to the restoration time and concludes that although both cultures were distinct there was a zone of equal-feeling across the social order. He point out that, although there was a distinct and defined culture for elite before the civil wars, there were specific liberties which belonged to all people.
According the author, the English people had common predilections for social and familial order, monarchy, and norms before the civil wars broke up. Majority of people thought the above were threatened by aulic dishonesty and sexual disgrace as result of evil or satanic forces. This in essence brought about resistance to the Stuart courts. In the early 1640s, the writer asserts that modernism as well as inversion was thought as the cause of the transformations. Particularly, the selected malcontents were thought to showcase reformers, sectaries and specifically the levelers. According to Underdown, the levelers (majority of them women) were members of the seventeenth century political organizations, who took power after the civil wars.
According to the author, the common people could be as strongly angered as their elite by those who had aulic dishonesty and sexual disgrace. He however maintains that, the level to which the traditional elite pinned down the plebeian was high as they could not allow them to hold a public office or be in the senate. The plebeian were also not allowed to marry patricians.
Both the elite and common people in the war accused one another of sexual inversion and for this reason gender bashing lost some of its lure to restoration elite. He however notes that, the fall of witchcraft allegations after the restitution reflected smoothing of means in the gender conflicts that was an open, if probably unanswerable, query.
The writer point outs that, during the civil wars, the gentry still recognized the monarch and several of them thought that members of parliament seeking popularity who felt that the monarch was insignificant were thought to have gone too far and this led to trendy dissatisfaction outside parliament.
From the book we get to know that, the gentry had conventionally taken the front line in protests against unfair taxes. In 1639 many people were opposed to paying ship money, never attended auctions of detrained cattle and rescued police officers who had been apprehended for not co-operating with the government to collect taxes.
The writer observes that, what happened in the civil war persuaded the gentry that giving weapons to ordinary people was too perilous. At this point, we understand that some aspects of what was thought to be generally accepted culture were focused strongly at the popular level than at the elite one. For this reason, there was literary disagreement that was initiated by Joseph Swetman whereby women were fighting the masculine. He argues that cases of sexual misbehavior mostly involved deceitful Puritans and more importantly, women who revolted against male authority.
The author also notes that, mob protest against women more often than not was aggravated by their denunciation of differences in gender roles and class. He goes forth to note that, witchcraft allegations were directed to both men and women Quakers. The writer observes that witchcraft convictions ( with their fundamental recognition of disorder with boisterous women) were considered as powerfully by learned people as by their juniors.
Author source of information
The author’s primary sources information was the Ford Lectures. The Ford lectures provided a deep resonance for many 17th -century historians. These lectures offered comprehensive histories of England from 1603 to 1656. In this book, David Underdown provides a compressive insight of his 1992 lectures. Generally, this work can be regarded as vivid reinterpretation of the Stuart era, founded on the writer’s renowned 1992 Ford lectures.
From this lectures, historians have come to agree with what was earlier believed to be Puritan uprising in England was not, actually, about theology but was truly, a political uprising which brought about the modern England. Scholars have not nevertheless appropriately differentiated the social and political reasons which led to the English uprising, or understood the exact differences that can be drawn between the politics of the elite and the politics of the masses.
My opinion
This is a fascinating analysis of 17th century Britain which challenges historians to review their thoughts on political as well as social history of seventeenth century. In graceful and reasoned prose, the writer provides us convincing arguments against trendy contemporary views about fundamental questions in 17th century Britain history. The author also provides his own opinion. The end result is a proper evaluation Stuart political life and its connections with the social, cultural as well as regional history of that era.
The book has numerous illustrations. It has a good cover page and a more detailed index. Moreover, it has a comprehensive bibliography showing all sources of information. Additionally, the bibliography indicates the page numbers as well as the year of publication of these sources of information. The book also has an introduction, abstract and a table of contents. These features are very useful to the reader as they make the book easily readable.
The book is well structured. This is because each chapter brings forth ongoing debate over the historical meaning of England’s 17th -century revolutions which produce orderly and logical development of the account. The author’s prose is exceptionally good. He uses old-school style of graceful tale and of political history in its various guises.The author also uses his ability to see the landscape as would a royalist.
The book title is very appropriate. The title “A Freeborn People: Politics and the Nation in Seventeenth-Century England promise essentially what the book delivers. This is because as you go through the book you will find that the book provides excellent examination of the ways in which the political cultures of the leaders and of ordinary people linked in the 17th century. The book is a true portrayal of how the political elites and ordinary people interacted in the 17th century. In a nut shell, closer look at the book shows that both groups (elite and common people) had similar expectations contrary to how many historians have many a times believed them to be.
Conclusion
Overall this book is balanced coverage of the approaches in which cultures of the political elites linked with those of common men in the seventeenth century England. The book reveals that both the elites and the common men had common hopes with regards to how they were governed and on the traditional freedoms as they were provided in their old constitution. This book can therefore be regarded as a true reinterpretation of the Stuart era. The materials in this book are sourced from the writer’s 1992 Ford Lectures and can be said to open new debate with regards to the history of England’s 17th century uprising.
Reference
Underdown, David. A Freeborn People: Politics and the Nation in Seventeenth Century England. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996.