Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

35
RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND THE "REFORM OF POPULAR CULTURE" IN EARLY MODERN ENGLAND* PETER BURKE HAS ARGUED THAT, BETWEEN THE FIFTEENTH AND THE eighteenth centuries, Europe experienced a set of politico-cultural changes aptly summed up in the phrase "the reform of popular culture". Many games, calendar rituals and other popular customs and beliefs were increasingly discountenanced by the ecclesiastical and secular authorities, and measures taken to reform or suppress them. The same period saw a growing divergence between the culture of elite groups (nobles, gentlemen, clergy, and some middle-class elements in town and country) and that of the mass of the people. The former withdrew from, and to an extent became hostile towards, activities such as carnivals which they had formerly patronized. In so far as they survived repression, many elements of popular culture came to be regarded by members of the 61ites as merely the vulgar pastimes of the rude, unlettered masses. 1 This thesis undoubtedly offers a valuable approach to some aspects of the social history of early modern Europe. Yet there is scope for debating just how profound and far-reaching the postulated changes were, and for considering in more detail — withreferenceto particu- lar areas of Europe and specific cultural forms — their nature and chronology. Moreover, as Burke himself recognizes, the basic concepts of "popular" and "elite" culture and of a developing split between them are themselves problematic and require careful handling. 2 Account must be taken of variations of attitude and cultural outlook among both the elites and the masses. Even more important, recognition of cultural divisions must not blind us to the existence, at any given point in time, of areas of common culture — shared meanings — which united all ranks of society. Some recent writings on England, the main focus of attention in this paper, have stressed cultural conflict to the relative neglect of * Earlier versions of this article were read at various seminars and I should like to thank the participants for their helpful comments and criticisms. I am also extremely grateful to Mrs. Dorothy Owen, Dr. John Post, Dr. James Sharpe, Mr. Keith Thomas, Mr. Timothy Wales, Mr. John Walter and Dr. Keith Wrightson for kindly communicating references to charivaris and other relevant material. My thanks are also due to the staffs of the various libraries and record repositories which I have had occasion to use. 1 Peter Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (London, 1978), esp. chs. 8-9. See also Robert Muchembled, Culture populaire el culture des ilkts dans la France modtme, XV-XVIII' nicies: essai (Paris, 1978). 2 Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modem Europe, pp. 23-9. by guest on May 21, 2014 http://past.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from

Transcript of Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

Page 1: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND THE"REFORM OF POPULAR CULTURE"

IN EARLY MODERN ENGLAND*PETER BURKE HAS ARGUED THAT, BETWEEN THE FIFTEENTH AND THEeighteenth centuries, Europe experienced a set of politico-culturalchanges aptly summed up in the phrase "the reform of popularculture". Many games, calendar rituals and other popular customsand beliefs were increasingly discountenanced by the ecclesiasticaland secular authorities, and measures taken to reform or suppressthem. The same period saw a growing divergence between the cultureof elite groups (nobles, gentlemen, clergy, and some middle-classelements in town and country) and that of the mass of the people.The former withdrew from, and to an extent became hostile towards,activities such as carnivals which they had formerly patronized. Inso far as they survived repression, many elements of popular culturecame to be regarded by members of the 61ites as merely the vulgarpastimes of the rude, unlettered masses.1

This thesis undoubtedly offers a valuable approach to some aspectsof the social history of early modern Europe. Yet there is scope fordebating just how profound and far-reaching the postulated changeswere, and for considering in more detail — with reference to particu-lar areas of Europe and specific cultural forms — their natureand chronology. Moreover, as Burke himself recognizes, the basicconcepts of "popular" and "elite" culture and of a developingsplit between them are themselves problematic and require carefulhandling.2 Account must be taken of variations of attitude andcultural outlook among both the elites and the masses. Even moreimportant, recognition of cultural divisions must not blind us to theexistence, at any given point in time, of areas of common culture —shared meanings — which united all ranks of society.

Some recent writings on England, the main focus of attention inthis paper, have stressed cultural conflict to the relative neglect of

* Earlier versions of this article were read at various seminars and I should like tothank the participants for their helpful comments and criticisms. I am also extremelygrateful to Mrs. Dorothy Owen, Dr. John Post, Dr. James Sharpe, Mr. KeithThomas, Mr. Timothy Wales, Mr. John Walter and Dr. Keith Wrightson for kindlycommunicating references to charivaris and other relevant material. My thanks arealso due to the staffs of the various libraries and record repositories which I have hadoccasion to use.

1 Peter Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe (London, 1978), esp. chs.8-9. See also Robert Muchembled, Culture populaire el culture des ilkts dans la Francemodtme, XV-XVIII' nicies: essai (Paris, 1978).

2 Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modem Europe, pp. 23-9.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 2: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

8O PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER IO5

cultural consensus. Keith Wrightson, for example, has emphasizedthat many elements of popular culture, including calendar festivities,games and sports, and the sociability of the alehouse, suffered severeif sporadic attacks in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,the result of stricter standards of public order and the influence ofPuritan ideas among clergy, gentry, urban oligarchs and the "mid-dling groups" of yeomen and substantial craftsmen who dominatedmany rural communities.3 Yet it is uncertain how widespread suchattacks actually were, especially in country areas,4 and their preciseimpact remains in doubt. The fact that some forms of popular culturewere apparently very vigorous in the eighteenth century might indi-cate that the effects had been limited; but account must be taken ofEdward Thompson's argument that there may have been a positiveefflorescence of popular culture in the Augustan age, aided by adecline in deference and other social and economic factors.s Despitesuch uncertainties a number of authors are prepared to argue thatperhaps by the middle of the seventeenth century, and certainly by1700, there was a sharp divergence between "elite" and "popular"culture. Thus Wrightson asserts that:

in the middle of the reign of Elizabeth, English villagers had largely shared acommon fund of traditional beliefs, values and standards of behaviour. By the lastyears of Charles II's reign that common heritage had become the property of those"rusticall", "rude", "silly ignorants" who remained wedded to their superstitionsand their disorders.

At least with regard to the Gloucestershire village of Westonbirt,David Rollison has taken up an even more extreme position, portray-ing the "Great Tradition" of the Elites and the "Little Tradition" ofplebeian culture in such direct conflict in that parish in the yearsaround 1700 as to justify discussion in terms of colonial acculturation,the "white man's burden" and an "Indian mutiny".6

No one would deny that there was considerable cultural differentia-tion in England even before 1500, and probably such differentiationbecame more marked in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as

3 Keith Wrightson, English Society, 1580-1660 (London, 1982), chs. 6-7; KeithWrightson and David Levine, Povertyand Piety in an English Village: Terlmg, 75.25-1700 (London, 1979), chs. 5-7; Keith Wrightson, "Alehouses, Order and Reformationin Rural England, 1590-1660, in Eileen Yeo and Stephen Yeo (eds.), Popular Cultureand Class Conflict, 1590-1914: Explorations in the History of Labour and Leisure(Brighton, 1981), pp. 1-27. See also William Hunt, The Puritan Moment: The Comingof Revolution in an English County (Cambridge, Mass., 1983), ch. 6.

4 Martin Ingram, "Religion, Communities and Moral Discipline in Late Sixteenth-and Early Seventeenth-Century England: Case Studies", forthcoming in Kaspar vonGreyerz (ed.), Religion and Society in Early Modem Europe, 1500-1800 (London,1984).

5 E. P. Thompson, "Anthropology and the Discipline of Historical Context",Midland Hist., i no. 3 (1971-2), pp. 53-5; E. P. Thompson, "Patrician Society,Plebeian Culture", Jl. Social Hist., vii (1973-4), pp. 382-405.

6 Wrightson, English Society, 1580-1680, p. 220; David Rollison, "Property,Ideology and Popular Culture in a Gloucestershire Village, 1660-1740", Past andPresent, no. 93 (Nov. 1981), pp. 70-97.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 3: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 81

a result of socially differential developments in literacy and otherfactors.7 But was there really such a marked split between "elite"and "popular" culture by 1700 as these authors seem to imply? Thispaper approaches that and related issues from only one angle, anexamination of the English forms of "charivari" — a set of popularcustoms, variants of which have existed in many parts of Europe overmany centuries, which characteristically involved a noisy, mockingdemonstration usually occasioned by some anomalous social situationor infraction of community norms.8 The justification for concentrat-ing on this phenomenon is that some social historians, notablyEdward Thompson, regard it as a characteristic element of plebeianculture; while a charivaresque incident, in which an act of buggerycommitted by a villager provoked in 1716 a demonstration called a"groaning", is the pivot of Rollison's analysis of cultural conflict inWestonbirt.9 The following essay first establishes the nature ofcharivaris in England in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, andthen considers reactions to them with a view to understanding thedegree of cultural differentiation and change which occurred in thatperiod.

The evidence on which to base a study of charivaris in early modernEngland is tantalizingly sparse and fragmentary. But enough refer-ences exist in court records, chronicles, diaries, letters, newspapers,and imaginative literature (the literary material according well withthe real-life evidence) to build up a reasonably satisfactory picture.It emerges that charivaris were a well-known and widely distributedphenomenon in England in this period; though they may have been,for reasons which are at present unclear, somewhat more commonand possibly more elaborate in western counties like Somerset andWiltshire, while certain types of community may have been more

7 Wrightson, English Society, 1580-1680, ch. 7. On literacy, see David Cressy,Literacy and the Social Order: Reading and Writing in Tudor and Stuart England(Cambridge, 1980).

8 For a wide-ranging treatment of charivaris, with an extensive bibliography, seeJacques Le Goff and Jean-Claude Schmitt (eds.), Le charivari: actes de la table rondeorganiste a Paris (25-27 avril 1977) par VEcole des hautes itudes en sciences sociaUs elle Centre national at la recherche scientifique (Paris, 1981). For nineteenth-centuryEngland, see also E. P. Thompson, " 'Rough Music': le charivari anglais", Annales.E.S.C., xxvii (1972), pp. 285-312; and for France, Natalie Zemon Davis, Society andCulture in Early Modem France (London, 1975), chs. 4-5.

9 Thompson, " 'Rough Music': le charivari anglais", passim; Thompson, "Anthro-pology and the Discipline of Historical Context", p. 55; Thompson, "PatricianSociety, Plebeian Culture", p. 393; E. P. Thompson, "Eighteenth-Century EnglishSociety: Class Struggle without Class?", Social Hist., iii (1978), p. 153; Rolhson,"Property, Ideology and Popular Culture", passim.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 4: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

82 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

apt to nourish the tradition than others.10 Wherever they mightoccur, charivaris could vary considerably in scale, from demonstra-tions conducted by just a few people to major spectacles, oftenprocessional in form, involving large numbers. Basic to all of themwas mocking laughter, sometimes mild and good-hearted, but oftentaking the form of hostile derision.

A vivid illustration is provided by events at Quemerford, a hamletof the small market town of Came (Wiltshire) in 1618. (Compare thefeatures of this account with the eighteenth-century print in Plate1.) Thomas Mills, cutler, deposed with his wife Agnes that:

upon Wednesday being the 27th day of May last past, about eight or nine of theclock in the morning, there came to Quemerford a young fellow of Calne namedCroppe, playing upon a drum, accompanied with three or four men and ten ortwelve boys; and Ralph Wellsteede of Quemerford, this examinate's landlord, andhimself came to them as far as the bridge in Quemerford, and asked them whatthey meant, and they answered that there was a skimmington dwelling there, andthey came for him . . .

This group was induced to turn back, but:about noon came again from Calne to Quemerford another drummer named WilliamWiatt, and with him three or four hundred men, some like soldiers armed withpieces and other weapons, and a man riding upon a horse, having a white night capupon his head, two shoeing horns hanging by his ears, a counterfeit beard upon hischin made of a deer's tail, a smock upon the top of his garments, and he rode upona red horse with a pair of pots under him, and in them some quantity of brewinggrains, which he used to cast upon the press of people, rushing over thick uponhim in the way as he passed; and he and all his company made a stand when theycame just against this ezaminate's house, and then the gunners shot off their pieces,pipes and homs were sounded, together with lowbells and other smaller bellswhich the company had amongst them, and nuns' horns and bucks' horns, carriedupon forks, were then and there lifted up and shown . . .

Stones were thrown at the windows, an entry forced, and AgnesMills was dragged out of the house, thrown into a wet hole, trampled,beaten, and covered with mud and filth. Her tormentors, however,failed in their final object of riding her behind the horseman to Cameto "wash her in the cucking stool".11

Shorn of elaborations, the core event recounted here was whatcontemporaries sometimes referred to as "riding skimmington" (anexpression particularly current in south-west England), "riding thestang" (the term normally used in northern England and Scotland),or more generally as a "riding".12 The term "skimmington" coulddenote not only a charivari, but also a husband who had been beaten

10 For some preliminary suggestions, based on a small number of cases, see DavidUnderdown, "The Problem of Popular Allegiance in the English Civil War", Tram.Roy. Hist. Soc., 5th ser., xxxi (1981), pp. 88-90. See also E. P. Thompson, " 'RoughMusic' et charivari: quelques reflexions complementaires", in Le Goff and Schmitt(eds.), Charivari, pp. 279-80.

11 Wiltshire Record Office, Trowbridge (hereafter Wiltshire R.O.), QuarterSessions Great Rolls, Trinity 1618, no. 168 (in this and all subsequent quotationsfrom contemporary sources, spelling and punctuation have been modernized). Thedocument has several times been printed in abridged versions: for example, Recordsof the County of Wilts, ed. B. H. Cunnington (Devizes, 1932), pp. 65-6.

12 O.E.D., s.v. "skimmington", "stang", "riding".

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 5: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

"Hud

ibra

s E

ncou

nter

s th

e Sk

imm

ingt

on"

by W

illia

m H

ogar

th:

Sam

uel

But

ler,

Hud

ibra

s (L

ondo

n, 1

726

edn.

), p

late

12.

By

perm

issi

on o

f th

e T

rust

ees

of t

he B

riti

sh M

useu

m

by guest on May 21, 2014http://past.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

Page 6: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

2.

A w

ife b

eats

her

hus

band

: de

tail

from

an

early

sev

ente

enth

-cen

tury

pla

ster

wor

k pa

nel

in t

he G

reat

Hal

l, M

onta

cute

Hou

se,

Som

erse

t.P

hoto

: B

. S.

Eva

ns

by guest on May 21, 2014http://past.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

Page 7: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

3.

A n

ding

: de

tail

trom

an

early

sev

ente

enth

-cen

tury

pla

ster

wor

k pa

nel

in t

he G

reat

Hal

l, M

onta

cute

Hou

se,

Som

erse

t.P

hoto

: B

. S.

Eva

ns

by guest on May 21, 2014http://past.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

Page 8: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

86 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

by his wife or the termagant herself.13 The link between thesemeanings was intimate: all the available evidence indicates that thegreat majority of ridings in early modern England took place becausea wife had physically assaulted her husband or otherwise dominatedhim.14 (See Plate 2.)

The central motif of a riding was, as the name implies, a horseand rider. The mount was variously represented — partly accordingto regional custom — by a real horse or by a "cowlstaff" or "stang"(a stout pole) carried on men's shoulders. (See Plate 3). Sometimesthe victims themselves were made to ride. En route they might bepelted with filth and could end up by being ducked, with or withoutthe aid of a cucking stool. But often a substitute rider was found,customarily the "next neighbour nearest the church". In other cases,effigies were used. Various elaborations were common. The ridersmight be transvestite or epicene figures; often a rider was made toface backwards (see Plate 4), or two figures were set "bum to bum"(see Plate 5); sometimes the riders were made to act out the domesticconflict which had given rise to the demonstration.15

Supplementary symbols were often present. The most commonwas cacophony — "rough music"16 — produced by the ringing ofbells, the raucous playing of musical instruments, the beating ofpots and pans and other household utensils, and the discharge ofguns and fireworks. Another common feature was a parade of armedmen, sometimes elaborately accoutred with armour and realweapons, sometimes merely carrying staves or arms improvised fromhousehold or workshop tools like ovenlugs, coalrakes and pitchforks.Yet another common motif was the display of animals' horns orhorned heads and, sometimes, obscene pictures or other foul objects.Mock proclamations and other legal motifs sometimes appeared, asdid parodies of religious rituals. Occasionally mocking rhymes, songsor lampoons provided a commentary; while a variety of refinementswere possible for added effect.17

It was conventionally assumed that a man who had allowed himself13 Ibid., s.v. "skimmington".14 By the early nineteenth century the focus had shifted to wife-beating, but there

is little evidence that this was a normal occasion for charivaris in England before1700; see Thompson, " 'Rough Music': je charivari anglais", pp. 293-304. In theearly modem context, whether the dominant wife, the beaten husband, or bothpartners were the focus of hostility seems to have varied from case to case, perhapsdepending on particular circumstances.

15 The features detailed in this and the next paragraph may be verified by referenceto the accounts of charivaris cited in succeeding pages.

16 It would seem, however, that this term was not generally current before 1700.The earliest usage cited in the O.E.D. dates from 1708.

17 Mocking rhymes and other libels often occurred alone, without any associationwith concrete symbols. The use of such rhymes to humiliate various kinds ofdelinquents was in some ways similar to charivaris, but in this article they are regardedas a separate genre and as such are excluded from the analysis. I hope to discuss verselibels on another occasion.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 9: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

o

o

o££

, ^ _

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 10: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 87

to be beaten by his wife was inevitably also a cuckold.18 Simplecuckoldry was in itself, sometimes, the occasion for charivaris. Inthese cases the "riding" motif was usually absent, the symbols oftenrestricted to the exposure of animals' horns and other bestial imagery.Nonetheless such demonstrations were occasionally quite elaborate.At Beckington (Somerset) in 1611 the demonstrators "disgraced" amare by cutting the hair from its mane, tail and ears, attached a largepair of horns to its head, bound a paper bearing a mocking rhymeto the stump of the tail, and "with great laughter and derision andwith great clamours, shouts and outcries" paraded the horse through

4. A henpecked husband and his punishment: Halfe a Dozen Good Wives: All fora Penny (London, ?i635), in The Roxburghe Ballads, ed. W. Chappcll and J. W.

Ebsworth, 9 vols. (London and Hertford, 1869-99), •> P- 451-

the most public parts of the village. But most demonstrations con-cerned solely with cuckoldry were much simpler, shading off intothe common practice of hanging horns outside the victim's house.Adultery (irrespective of cuckoldry) and other forms of sexual immor-ality were also, occasionally, the pretext for charivaris. In such casesthe symbolism was usually restricted to "rough music". Thus atFernham (Berkshire) in 1637, where a certain Thomas Rickettes hadbeen discovered in bed with Dorothy Greene in her husband's house,the demonstration simply comprised "some with a spice mortar, a

18 Cf. Samuel Butler, Hudibras, ed. John Wilders (Oxford, 1967), p. 146 (pan 11,canto ii, lines 711-12).

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 11: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

5.

Rou

gh m

usic

and

a s

kim

min

gton

rid

e: A

New

Sum

mon

s to

Hor

n F

air

(Lon

don,

c.

1780

;.B

y pe

rmis

sion

of

the

Bod

leia

n L

ibra

ry

by guest on May 21, 2014http://past.oxfordjournals.org/Downloaded from

Page 12: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

9 0 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

platter and a candlestick ringing and making a noise", and an attemptto put Rickettes in the stocks.19

These domestic situations, especially female domination, were themost usual occasions for charivaris in early modern England, butthere were others. Some ridings, often of a very simple nature, werelinked with holiday festivities. According to Philip Stubbes, peoplewho would not give money or other gifts to the lords of misrule andtheir followers who sometimes presided over holiday activities mightbe "mocked and flouted at not a little; yea, and many times carriedupon a cowlstaff. . .". Thus at a church ale at Yeovil (Somerset) in1607, a mock official called the "shrive", in company with an"ancient" and others, paraded round the town "to gather the liber-ality of the inhabitants" on pain of riding them on a cowlstaff.People who offended the holiday spirit in other ways could also bevictimized. On New Year's Eve 1586 a man was in an inn atChichester (Sussex), playing "tables", when "William Brunne whothen played the pan of a lord of misrule came in . . . and said thatthat game was no Christmas game and so perforce took [him] . . .from thence and made him ride on a staff to the High Cross". Suchridings could become less light-hearted when opposition to festivitieswas based on religious principle. The "shrive" and his men at Yeovilin 1607 complained that such as "would not [keep them company]. . . were Puritans". At Wells (Somerset) in the same year, a veryelaborate series of ridings was grounded on the fact that a Puritanconstable, John Hole, had attempted to suppress the city's Maygames — which he described as "unseemly pastimes and dangerousmeetings" but which the participants regarded as the "city's quintess-ence of wit".20

Since Puritans might well, like John Hole, occupy positions ofauthority, demonstrations against opponents of games might in prac-tice involve an element of social or political insubordination. In othercircumstances occurred demonstrations whose meaning was in somesense political. Arguably, indeed, a political flavour was sometimespresent even in charivaris ostensibly concerned with domestic situ-ations. Conceivably the parades of armed men and representationsof legal forms were deliberate parodies, implying that Jack wasas good as his master. It would certainly seem that ridings were

" P.R.O., London, STA.C. 8/92/10; Wiltshire R.O., Salisbury Diocesan Records,Bishop, Deposition Book 55, fo. 193; see also Deucta Book 6 (1585), fo. 41';Deposition Book 30 (1615-16), fo. ioT.

20 Philip Stubbes's Anatotny of the Abuses in England in Skakspere's Youth! A.D.1583, ed. Frederick J. Furnivall, 2 vols. in 3 (New Shakspere Soc., 6th ser., IV, vi,xii, London, 1877-82), i, p. 148 n. 14; Somerset R.O., Taunton, Q/SR 2/61; WestSussex R.O., Chichester, Chichester Diocesan Records, Ep. 1/17/6, fo. 79'; P.R.O.,STA.C. 8/161/1 (extracts from this document have been printed, with a commentary,in C. H. Sisson, Lost Plays of Shakespeare's Age (Cambridge, 1936), pp. 162-85). J o n n

Hole and his associates were, however, castigated for a variety of other offences aswell as opposition to games.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 13: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 91

particularly zestful if the victim happened to occupy some positionof authority, and such demonstrations were open to the chargeof anti-authoritarian or anticlerical intentions. Thus a riding atWaterbeach (Cambridgeshire) in 1602, where the vicar of the parishhad been beaten by his wife, was regarded by whoever reported thematter to the bishop's court as a "defacing of the ministry". A caseat Malmesbury (Wiltshire) in 1615, though ostensibly concernedwith cuckoldry, seems to have been principally intended to vilifythe magistrates. A certain John Vizard, on the eve of his examinationbefore the justices for rape and defamation, showed his contempt forthe law and terrified the constable of the town by organizing a paradeof armed men with rough music and a mock marriage ceremony,proclaiming that the morrow was his wedding day and biddingcompany to see him married — "which company . . . should benone but cuckolds and cuckold makers".21

But these cases at least made some reference to the characteristicdomestic occasions for charivaris. The play Arden ofFeversham (1592)refers to a simple form of riding apparently expressing crude anti-authoritarian mischief, completely unrelated to any domestic situ-ation: Black Will boasted how, among other misdoings, he and hiscompanions had "taken the constable from his watch and carriedhim about the fields on a coltstaff".22 But no corresponding incidentin real life has so far come to light. Certain enclosure riots, however,do seem to have involved elements of charivari. The most notableexamples occurred during the revolts against disafforestation andenclosure in the west of England in 1626-32. Some of the leaders wentby the name of "Lady Skimmington". When the rioters attempted topull down the fences erected by Sir Giles Mompesson in the Forestof Dean, they acted "by sound of drum and ensigns in most rebelliousmanner, carrying a picture or statue apparelled like Mompesson andwith great noise and clamour threw it into the coalpits which thesaid Sir Giles had digged". Such cases are suggestive, but overall itseems that until the late seventeenth century — the situation after1680 presents some special features and will be considered later —charivaris which were wholly political, making no reference to norpartly stimulated by domestic situations, were rare.23

21 Cambridge Univ. Lib., Ely Diocesan Records, B/2/18, fos. i74*-5; WiltshireR.O., Quarter Sessions Great Rolls, Michaelmas 1615, no. 107. For another charivariagainst a clergyman, see Hereford and Worcester R.O., Worcester, BA 1 Class no :21/68 (1614).

21 Three Elizabethan Domestic Tragedies, ed. Keith Sturgess (Harmondsworth,1969)) P- I 29 (scene xiv).

"Historical Manuscripts Commission, Twelfth Report, Appendix, Parts i-uv TheManuscripts of the Earl Camper, 3 vols. (London, 1888-9), '> PP- 429-30. See alsoD. G. C. Allan, "The Rising in the West, 1628-31", Earn. Hut. Rev., 2nd ser., v(1952-3), p. 81; Buchanan Sharp, In Contempt of All Authority: Rural Artisans andRwt in the West of England, 1586-1660 (Berkeley, 1980), pp. 104-5. For anotherthreatened "skimmington" in Braydon Forest in 1649, see Wiltshire R.O., QuarterSessions Great Rolls, Trinity 1649, Information of John Tomes and Examination ofThomas Ayres and others (this document was unnumbered when I examined it).

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 14: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

92 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

No other situations were consistently associatedwith charivaris inthis period. Demonstrations were occasionally directed againstthieves or miscellaneous other offenders, but if so reference wasusually made also to one of the characteristic domestic pretexts.24

There are also hints of charivari-like practices confined to particularsocial groups. A species of rough music was, at least by the lateseventeenth century, sometimes used against blacklegs in certaintrades; while in the Cambridge colleges, according to John Ray,scholars were ridden on a cowlstaff at Christmas for missing chapel.Both these specific usages may have derived from the more generalpractice of riding people who refused to take part in holiday festivi-ties.25

In charivaris two social contexts merged, the penal and the festive.These customs are commonly regarded as wholly independent of theformal legal system. But in fact in this period they had extremelyclose affinities with the shame punishments meted out officially bycertain courts of law, notably urban tribunals and the Star Chamber.At least as late as the seventeenth century, whores, bawds, slanderersand other offenders might be "carted" with basins ringing beforethem; while some delinquents, especially those guilty of perjury orother deception, were paraded on a horse or ass with their face tothe tail, sometimes to the accompaniment of officially prescribedrough music. The defilement and ducking which were sometimesfeatures of charivaris also had their legal counterparts.26

24 For example, Warwick County Records, ed. S. C. Ratcliff, H. C. Johnson andN . J. Williams, 9 vols. (Warwick, 1935-64), a, pp. xiii-xiv.

25 S. and B. Webb, The History of Trade Unionism, 2nd edn. (London, 1920), p.28; John Ray, A Collection of English Words Not Generally Used (London, 1674), p.44.

2 6 Songs, Carols and Other Miscellaneous Poems from . . . Richard HiWs Common-place-Book, ed. R. Dyboski (Early Eng. Text Soc., extra ser., ci, London, 1907), p.155; The Diary of Henry Machyn, Citizen and Merchant-Taylor of London, from A.D.1550 to A.D. 1563, ed. John G-ough Nichols (Camden Soc., 1st ser., xlii, London,1848), pp. 48, 56-7, 156, 161, 168, 211, 283; John Stow, The Survey of London, ed.H. B. wheatley (London, 1956 edn.) , p. 171; John Stow, The Abridgement of theEnglish Chronicle (London, 1618 edn., S.T.C. 23332), pp. 357-8; John Stow, TheAnnales of England (London, 1605 edn., S.T.C. 23337), pp. 1063, 1424; RichardCrompton,5Mr-Cfc»niCT-Ca«j(London, 1630, S.T.C. 6056), p. 26; Middlesex CountyRecords, ed. John Cordy Jeaffreson, 4 vols. (Middlesex County Rec. Soc., i-iv,London, 1886-92), i, pp. 234, 287, and ii, pp. 139, 224, 228; Some Annals of theBorough of Devises . . . 1555-1791, ed. B. H. Cunnington, 2 pts. (Devizes, 1925), i,p. 35 , and ii, pp. 3 , 12; West Riding Sessions Records, ed. John Lister, 2 vols.(Yorkshire Archaeol. Soc., Records Ser., ill, liv, Worksop and Leeds, 1888-1915),ii, pp. 18, 140; The Letters of John Chamberlain, ed. Norman Egbert McClure, 2 vols.(Amer. Phil. Soc. , Memoirs, xii, Philadelphia, 1939) , ' , pp. 98, 211 , and ii, p. 377;Thompson, " 'Rough Music' et charivari , p. 278.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 15: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 93

Charivaris concerned with behaviour which was forbidden by law,such as sexual immorality, can be seen as merely unauthorizedapplications of such sanctions. Cases involving female dominance orcuckoldry were less straightforward, since these matters were not inthemselves specifically proscribed by law.27 Common scolds — thatis, contentious women who disturbed their neighbours — weresubject to the punishment of the cucking stool, and this clearlyinfluenced popular action.28 Beyond this the practice of charivarisseems to have rested on a folkloric tradition that the populace hadthe right to supplement the legal system. Certainly the participantssometimes boldly asserted a quasi-legal purpose. Thus one of theactors in a riding at Haughley and Wetherden (Suffolk) in 1604claimed that their object was that "not only the woman whichhad offended might be shamed for her misdemeanour towards herhusband [in beating him] but other women also by her shame mightbe admonished [not] to offend in like sort".29 There was a legal basisfor this tradition in Continental, if not English jurisprudence. Thecustoms of Senlis and Saintonge around 1400 prescribed that hus-bands who had been beaten by their wives should be paraded on anass, face to tail. In Gascony the "next neighbour" was ordered tolead the animal, presumably to symbolize the duty of neighbourlysurveillance. This motif was, as noted earlier, widely current incharivaris in early modern England, and possibly derived fromcontact with French practices during the Hundred Years War.30

Charivaris involving some form of political protest were less easilyjustified, but the participants may nonetheless have believed thatthey were acting in quasi-legal fashion to draw attention to themalfeasance of their governors. The demonstrators against the"odious projector" Sir Giles Mompesson may have taken their cuefrom parliament itself, which: in 1621 sentenced Sir Francis Michell,one of Mompesson's associates and an alehouse patentee, "to ride ona lean jade backward through London" to Finsbury gaol.31

But simply to regard charivaris in this quasi-legal light does notdo full justice to their vigour and complexity. It is equally importantto recognize their strong affinities with festive customs. At least in

27 Wives who beat their husbands were, however, occasionally prosecuted forassault or bound over to keep thepeace: Court Rolls of the Wiltshire Manors of Adamde Stratum, ed. Ralph B. Pugh (Wiltshire Rec. Soc., xxiv, Devizes, 1970), p. 72;P.R.O., ASSI. 35/90/3/32; cf. T. E., The Lowes Resolutions of Women; Rights (London,1632, S.T.C. 7437). PP- "8-9.

23 John Webster Spargo, Juridical Folklore in England Illustrated fry the Cucking-Stool (Durham, N . C . , 1944), pp. 7-8, and passim.

" P.R.O., STA.C. 8/249/19, m. 18.30 Jean-Louis Flandrin, Families: partnti, maison, sexualitf dans Pancienne tociiti

(Paris, 1976), p. 122.31 P. Wtaiteway, "Notes from a Seventeenth-Century Diary", The Antiquary, xxxix

(1903), p. 69.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 16: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

94 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

their more elaborate versions, they had much in common with the"watches" or "ridings" (in general, non-charivaresque usage thisterm denoted a cavalcade) which, until the late sixteenth century,were often staged in the larger towns at Midsummer and aroundChristmas. These events consisted of parades of armed citizens and,though they had mostly been more or less institutionalized andofficialized by the fifteenth century, could still include such noisyactivities as trumpeting, drumming and the discharge of guns.32 Intheir ebullient informality, however, as well as in their forms,charivaris were even more closely linked with the repertory of festivecustoms associated with Maytime and Midsummer, the Christmasand New Year seasons, and parochial ales, feasts and revels. Thehorns and other animal images so prominent in skimmington ridesand the like were also sometimes in evidence at holiday times.Moreover, holiday customs included noisy cavalcades, marches andprocessions which often involved drumming and gunfire, the parad-ing of pageant figures in live or effigy form, transvestism and,sometimes, the rough music of pots and pans.33

It was common practice on holidays for groups of armed men,sometimes with festive trappings, to invade a neighbouring parish toseize a May garland or other trophy, occupy the local alehouse, beatup anyone who opposed them, and in general assert their dominanceover the other community. An account of a series of clashes betweengroups from the villages of Burbage and Wilton in Wiltshire in 1625is particularly interesting because it provides explicit evidence of alink with the custom of riding skimmington. In court, one of theleaders of the Burbage men asserted that "the men of Wilton hadbefore that time come in the like manner to them, with a jest to bringskimmington into the said parish of Burbage, which this examinate

32 Alan H. Nelson, The Medieval English Stage: Corpus Chrisd Pageants and Plays(Chicago, 1974), pp. 11-14, and passim; Charles Phythian-Adams, Ceremony andthe Citizen: The Communal Year at Coventry, 1450-1550", in Peter Clark and PaulSlack (eds.) , Crisis and Order in English Towns, 1500-ijoo (London, 1972), p. 63.

3 3 C. L. Barber, Shakespeare's Festive Comedy (Princeton, N .J . , 1959), PP- 18-30;Sisson, Lost Plays of Shakespeare's Age, pp. 159-62; E. K. Chambers, The MediaevalStage, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1903), i, pp. 89-419 passim; Sir Richard Colt Hoare, TheHistory of Modem Wiltshire: Hundred of Mere (London, 1882), p. 20; Diary ofHenry Machyn, ed. Nichols, pp. 125, 137, 162, 201-3, 283; Historical ManuscriptsCommission, Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Most Hon. the Marquis of Salisbury, 24vols. (London, 1883-1976), viii, pp. 191,201-3; Tudor Parish Documents ofthe Dioceseof York, ed. J. S. Purvis (Cambridge, 1948), pp. 168-73; Robert Plot, The NaturalHistory of Stafford-shire (Oxford, 1686), p . 434; Wiltshire R .O. , Salisbury DiocesanRecords, Dean, Churchwardens' Presentments, unnumbered file for 1635, LymeRegis, 20 Sept.; Somerset R .O. , Q/SR 86.2/17; Hereford and Worcester R.O. , BA 1Class n o : 11/4A; Birmingham Reference Lib . , MS. 377993 (Court Book of OldSwinford and Stourbridgc), fo. 26. Some university customs had strong affinities withcharivaris: see The Life and Times of Anthony Wood . . . 1632-1695, ed. A. Clark, 5vols. (Oxford Hist. Soc., xix, xxi, xxvi, xxx, xl, Oxford, 1891-1900), iii, p. 513;Reminiscences of Oxford by Oxford Men, 1559-1850, ed. L. M. Quiller Couch (OxfordHist. Soc. , xxii, Oxford, 1892), pp. 243-6.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 17: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 95

and the others of Burbage . . . resolved to carry back to them ofWilton". There is no hint in the extensive depositions relating tothis case that a wife had beaten her husband; in any event it is clearthat hostility and derision were chiefly directed, in this holidaycontext, not against an individual victim but against a group represent-ing an entire neighbouring village.34 Contrariwise, ridings whichwere occasioned by termagant wives or another of the characteristicpretexts sometimes involved the invasion of one parish by another.This feature emerges clearly, for example, in the accounts of theQuemerford skimmington ride: the demonstrators invaded the placeacross the bridge from the neighbouring town of Calne. Thus chari-varis merged with those holiday practices which involved conflictsbetween neighbouring communities.35

There were other important points of linkage between charivarisand calendar customs. The latter sometimes involved an element ofmoral condemnation, as in the Shrove Tuesday celebrations whenthe London apprentices interpreted Lenten renunciation in termsof attacking brothels. Holidays also included a strong element ofmockery. They were thus the occasions for inversionary rituals, thelicensed flouting of authority, and similar manifestations.36 At Wellsin 1607, even before the intervention of John Hole provoked thehostility of the populace, the May games were supposed to includea mock oration by someone disguised as the bishop of Bath andWells, while the cathedral choristers sang parodies of hymns andanthems. Such activities could become more pointed if the authoritieswere for any reason unpopular. At South Kyme (Lincolnshire) in1601 the activities of a lord of misrule and his company escalatedinto a demonstration against the earl of Lincoln, elaborated by theperformance of a derisive play, the exhibition of a mocking rhymeon the maypole, and the preaching of a mock sermon "out of thebook of Mab". The cause lay in the earl's manifold oppressionsagainst his family, neighbours and tenants.37 Save for the absence of

3 4 Wiltshire R .O. , Salisbury Diocesan Records, Dean, Act Book 28 (unfoliated),26 Jan. 1625/6, Office v. Noyce et al. For similar incidents, but without the referenceto "skimmington , see Wiltshire R .O. , Quarter Sessions Great Rolls, Trinity 1617,no. 147, Michaelmas 1620, no. 197, Michaelmas 1633, no. 178, Trinity 1641, nos.183-5, Trinity 1652, Informations and Examinations, contemporary no. 5; EssexR.O. , Chelmsford, Q/SR 425/44, 106; Hereford and Worcester R.O. , BA 1 Classn o : 29/67; P .R.O. , STA.C. 8/250/3.

3 5 Somerset R .O. , Q/SR 86.2/55, 56; Q/SR 91/40. This inter-community elementwas still a feature of some charivaris in the nineteenth century: see I. R. Chanter,"North Devon Customs and Superstitions", Trans. Devonshire Assoc. for the Advance-ment of Science, Literature and Art, ii (1867-8), pp. 38-42.

36 Steven R. Smith, "The London Apprentices as Seventeenth-Century Ado-lescents", Past and Present, no. 61 (Nov. 1973), p. 161; Norreys Jephson O Conor,Godes Peace and the Queenes (London, 1934), pp. 115, 117-18; Barber, Shakespeare'sFestive Comedy, pp. 24-30; Keith Thomas, The Place of Laughter in Tudor andStuart England", Times Literary Supplement, 21 Jan. 1977, p. 78.

3 7 P .R .O. , STA.C. 8/161/1, mm. 22 , 23' , and passim; O'Conor, Godes Peace andthe Queenes, pp. 108-26.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 18: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

96 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

such characteristic motifs as the "riding", such a case is barelydistinguishable from a charivari.

Thus charivaris may be seen, from one point of view, as a special-ized application of elements drawn from the wider repertory offestive practices. It should be noted, moreover, that although demon-strations against termagant wives and cuckolds could occur at anytime of the year, some of them did take place on or near importantholidays, and were probably part and parcel of the festivities.38

Furthermore, participants in charivaris, whether or not they claimeda corrective purpose, commonly described them as "games" or"sports", undertaken "in merriment".39 This is essential to anunderstanding of charivaris in early modern England. It is inadequateto view them simply as sanctions on behaviour. They plainly drewsome of their vitality from the fact that they were a form of festivityin their own right; and in some cases part of the hostile derisionwhich they expressed stemmed not from outrage at the offence ofthe immediate victim but from inter-community conflicts and othercomplicating factors.

This peculiar mixture of the penal and the festive (paralleled onthe Continent in carnival celebrations as well as in charivaris)40 maybe better understood by considering the nature of the ideas whichunderlay the customs, and the meaning of the symbols which theyemployed — though such an exercise in "decoding" inevitablyinvolves some speculation. I have explored these issues elsewhere;41

the following paragraphs provide merely a summary of the mainarguments, modified by more recent reflection.

Central to the symbolism of charivaris were notions of hierarchy,inversion, reversal, rule and misrule, order and disorder — the worldturned upside-down.42 The most straightforward explanation ofcharivaris is that they stigmatized as ridiculous inversions of the"natural" hierarchy. This was clearly true at one level. Yet it isarguable that at a deeper level of psychology these customs reflecteda sense of the precariousness or artificiality of that hierarchy; and

« For example, Somerset R . O . . Q / S R 25/23 (day of village revel); P .R.O. , STA.C.8/249/19, p. 1 (Plough Monday); Town Hall, Colchester, Colchester BoroughRecords, Sessions Book, 1630-63 (unfoliated), 11 May 1632 (Maytime).

3 9 P .R .O. , STA.C. 8/249/19; S .R.O. , Q/SR 25/23; Wiltshire R .O. , Quarter SessionsGreat Rolls, Michaelmas 1626, nos. 149-50.

4 0 Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modem Europe, pp. 198-9; Davis, Society andCulture in Early Modem France, pp. 97-100.

4 1 Martin Ingram, "Le charivari dans rAngleterre du X V P et du X V U ' siecle:apercu historique", in Le Goffand Schmitt (eds.) , Charivari, pp. 251-64.

4 2 For some general discussions of this theme, in England, Europe and beyond,see Barbara A. Babcock (ed.), The Reversible World: Symbolic Inversion in Art andSociety (Ithaca, N.Y., 1978); Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modem Europe, ch. 7;Ian Donaldson, The World Upside-Dovm: Comedy from Jonson to Fielding (Oxford,1970); Keith Thomas, Rule and Misrule in the Schools of Early Modem England (TheStenton Lecture, University of Reading, 1976); Stuart Clark, "Inversion, Misruleand the Meaning of Witchcraft", Past and Present, no. 87 (May 1980), pp. 98-127.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 19: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND POPULAR CULTURE 97

that the laughter of charivaris bore witness to ambiguities and unres-olvable conflicts in the ideal and actual social system.43

On examination all the characteristic occasions for charivaris turnout to involve elements of ambiguity and insecurity. The punishmentof people who opted out of festivities rested on the precariousauthority of mock officers like lords of misrule. Like the holidaysthemselves, they endured but for a day or so. Political charivaris,again, involved a temporary and exceedingly fragile assertion ofauthority by subjects. Yet therein lay a deeper truth. On the longview the authority of the magistrate himself was temporary, doomedto final dissolution in dust. Political charivaris — and domesticcharivaris where the victim was an officer or a clergyman — were areminder that rulers were, after all, only as other men.44 But sociallythe most important ambiguities were involved in charivaris provokedby the wife who beat her husband (and, with variations, by theweaker analogues of cuckoldry and sexual immorality). These demon-strations were grounded in the prevailing patriarchal ideal whichascribed active, governing roles to husbands and held that the chiefduties of wives and other females — who were, supposedly, bynature weak in reason and apt to be disorderly — lay in the negativevirtues of chastity, obedience and silence. The wife who beat herhusband turned this ideal world upside-down; and certainly at onelevel charivaris were an expression of outrage at this unnaturalcontrariness. Yet there was something deeper. Natalie Zemon Davishas suggested that charivaris sometimes involved an element ofrejoicing at, even encouragement of, female insurrection.45 In viewof the experiences of, say, Agnes Mills at Quemerford, this seems tobe going too far; yet it is probably true that these demonstrationsreflected an awareness that women could never be dominated to thedegree implied in the patriarchal ideal. For this ideal was only tooplainly in conflict with the realities of everyday life, and indeed withalternative ideals. A variety of sources testify that, in practice, thebalance of authority between husbands and wives in marriage variedconsiderably. Equally it is plain that strong, active, able wives wereoften prized, despite the fact that the behaviour of such wives wasunlikely to conform exactly to the stereotype of female virtue.46 Was

4 3 For the crucial ambiguity of inversionary motifs which enabled them both toaffirm the reality and importance of hierarchical relationships and to express thelevelling, even anarchic principle that all social distinctions are ultimately artificial,see Donaldson, World Upside-Dovm, ch. i ; Thomas, "Place of Laughter in Tudorand Stuart England", pp. 77-9.

4 4 Cf. Donaldson, World Upside-Doum, p p . 4-8.4 3 Davis, Society "^ Culture in Early Modem France, p. 140.4 6 For a sensitive discussion of marital relationships in this period, see Wrightson,

English Society, 1580-1680, pp. 89-104. See also Richard L. Greaves, Society andReligion in Elizabethan England (Minneapolis, 1981), pp. 251-67; Ingram, "Charivaridans l'Angleterre du XVI* et du XVII' sifccle", pp. 259-60. But for a rather differentview, see Lawrence Stone, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500-1800(London, 1977), ch. 5.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 20: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

98 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

it "better to marry a sheep than a shrew", or "better to marry ashrew than a sheep"? That both forms of the proverb were currentsuggests that contemporaries could never quite make up theirminds.47 Skimmington rides derided extreme violations of the patriar-chal ideal, and thus set firm boundaries on the range of permissiblebehaviour. But their psychology was more complex than that ofsimple correction. Rather, the explosive laughter of charivaris repre-sented a cathartic release of tensions built up by Everyman's experi-ence of the day-to-day conflicts between the dictates of the patriarchalideal and the infinite variety of husband/wife relationships. Preciselythe same tensions made representations of cuckoldry, termagantwives and the like a prime source of comic entertainment — endlesspermutations on these themes were staple fare in the comic theatre,broadside ballads, jest and story books, and other forms of litera-ture.48

Cognitively, charivaris helped to organize a variety of experiences(domestic, political and festive) within a single conceptual frame-work, the connections being made through the principle of analogyor correspondence. Integral to the total pattern were the characteristicsymbols which gave concrete expression to the underlying system ofideas and provided reinforcing layers of correspondences. The veryexistence of ridings or rough music demonstrations, which were ineffect highly stylized representations of anarchy, pointed the contrastbetween order and disorder, while representations of the institutionsof political power and the authoritarian motif of the horse and riderdemonstrated that order was to be conceived in terms of dominanceand subjection. Cacophony evoked a contrast between harmony anddisharmony, whether between wives and husbands in marriage orbetween rulers and ruled. Transvestite motifs symbolized the dichot-omy of roles between men and women and the inversions thereofperpetrated by the cuckold and his partner and the termagant wifeand her abject "skimmington". Animal symbolism evoked the con-trast between human and beast to classify aberrant conduct; whilethe symbols of mud and excrement (cleansed by ducking) played on

47 William George Smith and Janet E. Heseltine, The Oxford Dictionary of EnglishProvtrbs, 2nd edn. (Oxford, 1948), s.v. "shrew".

** Thomas, "Place of Laughter in Tudor and Stuart England", p. 77; Donaldson,World Upside-Dovm, passim. For some examples, see Two Tudor "Shrew" Plays, ed.J. S. Farmer (The Museum Dramatists, iv, London, 1908); Samuel Rowlands, "TheFour Knaves: A Series of Satirical Tracts", ed. E. r. Rimbault, in Early EnglishPoetry, Ballads and Popular Literature of the Middle Ages (Percy Soc., a, London,1844), PP- 101-2; The Cobbler of Canterbury, ed. Frederic Ouvry and H. NevilleDavits (Cambridge, 1976); "Westward for Smelts: An Early Collection of Stories",ed. J. O. Halliwell, in Early English Poetry, Ballads and Popular Literature of theMiddle Ages (Percy Soc., xxii, London, 1848); Humour, Wit and Satire of the Seven-teenth Century, ed. John Ashton (London, 1883), pp. 62, 336-9, 347; The RoxburgheBallads, ed. W. Chappell and J. W. Ebsworth, 9 vols. (London and Hertford, 1869-99), passim.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 21: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 99

a contrast between purity and filth — a distinction still current as ameans of categorizing sexual behaviour. Charivaris also demonstrateda contrast between the hidden and the manifest, the private and thepublic: destroyers of privacy, they asserted the validity of a system ofcollective values which were stronger than the vagaries of individuals.The existence of these polar opposites implied a multitude of bound-aries; and indeed boundaries of time, boundaries between parishes,boundaries between male and female and so on were such prominentfeatures of charivaris as scarcely to require emphasis. In this worldof symbols and correspondences, moreover, it is clear why there wassuch a marked overlap between festive practices and the forms ofcharivari. The ambiguous relations between husbands and wiveswere analogically linked with the relationship between neighbouringcommunities; while just as special times justified licence and inver-sion, so aberrant behaviour in everyday life justified practices moreusually associated with holidays. This framework of ideas allowed aballad writer of the 1640s to see Puritan attempts to abolish Christmasand other festivals, and so subvert the traditional calendar, as "theworld turned upside-down".49

Some of these ideas had obvious parallels with the "official" philos-ophy of the period, and hence raise the question, central to theconcerns of this article, of how far charivaris should be seen as anexpression of "popular" as distinct from "elite" culture. This pointwill be picked up later. Meanwhile let us consider reactions tocharivaris in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Did they comeunder attack, and in particular are there signs that elite groups suchas gentry and clergy became increasingly hostile to these customs?

In view of their festive associations and the use of such "abomin-able" motifs as transvestism, it might be expected that charivariswould be condemned by Puritan and other moralists. There are somesigns of Puritan disquiet. In 1587 Dr. Richard Crick, lecturer at EastBergholt in Essex, asked the Dedham conference for guidance indealing with a riding which had taken place during his absence. Hehad already "vehemently inveighed against it . . . but he wouldknow what he should further do in it". As with so many knottypastoral problems, the conference deferred the matter.50 In the nextcentury the reactions of John Bond, the recently ejected minister ofHolt (Norfolk), were more forthright: in 1661 he denounced a riding

49 Cavalier and Puritan: Ballads and Broadsides Illustrating the Period of the GnatRebellion, 1640-1660, ed. H. E. Rollins (New York, 1923), pp. 160-2.

50 The Presbyterian Movement in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth as Illustrated fry theMinute Book of the Dedham Classis, 1582-1589, ed. Roland G. Usher (Camden Soc.,3rd ser., viii, London, 1905), p. 63.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 22: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

100 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

which had taken place in the town as "a most horrid and prodigiousmisdemeanour . . .; such obscenity and filthiness acted publicly inthe face of the sun, that I am ashamed to mention it". He wasparticularly incensed by what he perceived as a "sodomitical kindof conjunction" between two of the actors (though the occasion forthe riding seems to have been the normal one of husband-beating),and demanded the "exemplary punishment" of the chief partici-pants.51 Such cases are consistent with the idea of growing Puritanhostility to charivaris on moral grounds, but they are relativelyisolated. It is striking that there is little evidence of wider concernto be found in moralist literature. Thomas Lupton and MargaretCavendish criticized the practice whereby the "next neighbour",rather than the actual offenders, was made to ride; but this hardlyamounted to a fundamental attack on charivaris. Indeed if one candeduce their real opinions from their writings, both Lupton andMargaret Cavendish seem to have approved the essence of ridings inthe sense that they favoured public demonstrations to humiliatetermagant wives, though Lupton seems to have envisaged an official-ized version of charivari supplemented by a month's spell in thehouse of correction for the unruly spouse.S2

While moralist criticism was infrequent or muted, it is true thatthe status of charivaris declined over the period in the eyes of thelaw; or rather, whereas around 1500 their status in secular law wasuncertain, by 1700 it had been established that they were illegal.Under church law they had probably always been subject to censure,either as defamations or breaches of Christian charity, and occasionalcases were prosecuted on these grounds.53 But overall, charivariswere and continued to be of only marginal concern to the ecclesiasti-cal authorities,54 as they were also to the courts of the University of

51 Norfolk and Norwich R.O., Norwich, Aylsham 1, John Bond to Sir JohnPal grave, 4 Mar. 1660/1. Mr. Timothy Wales informs me that additional materialrelating to this case, indicating that the occasion of the charivari was the beating ofa husband, exists in the Quarter Sessions files for 1661; but the relevant documents(C/S3/44) are at present unfit for inspection. For John Bond, see Francis Blomefieldand Charles Parkin, An Essay Towards a Topographical History of the County ofNorfolk, 11 vols. (London, 1805-10), a, p. 399.

" Thomas Lupton, Swqila: Too Good to be True (London, 1580, S.T.C. 16951),pp. 49-50; Margaret Cavendish, the Lady Marchioness of Newcastle, Orations ofDivers Sorts (London, 1662), pp. 221-2. On Lupton, see Elliot Rose, "Too Good tobe True: Thomas Lupton's Golden Rule", in DeLloyd J. Guth and John W. McKenna(eds.), Tudor Rule and Revolution: Essays for G. R. Elton from his American Friends(Cambridge, 1982), pp. 183-200.

5 3 For example, Borthwick Institute of Historical Research, York, York DiocesanRecords, CP. H. 495, CHANC. AB. 15, fo. 219' (and process entries continued tofo. 276) (Bolton Percy, Yorks., 1609: defamation and profanation of the Sabbath);Univ. of Durham, Dept. of Palaeography and Diplomatic, Durham Diocesan Records,DR/vl l i /2 , fo. 2 (Newcastle upon Tyne, 1619/20: breach of charity).

5 4 This situation contrasts with France, where ecclesiastical legislation againstcharivaris was frequent. But in France charivaris were often occasioned by remarriages,and hence directly offensive to the church which affirmed the lawfulness of suchunions. See Andri Burguiere, "Pratique du charivari et repression religieuse dans la

(COM. m p. lot)

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 23: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND POPULAR CULTURE IOI

Cambridge and, possibly, other courts of special jurisdiction.55 Thesecular courts had established by the end of the sixteenth centurythat mocking verses, signs and pictures (including cuckold's horns)were a threat to public order and could be prosecuted as criminal orcivil libels.56 It might be thought that, a fortiori, elaborate derisivespectacles like skimmington rides would be equally subject to cen-sure; but even by the early seventeenth century it seems to have beengenerally accepted only that participants in such demonstrationscould be bound over to keep the peace or be of good behaviour. Itis true that the great series of ridings at Wells in 1607, and thecharivaresque case involving the earl of Lincoln in 1601, came tojudgement in the Star Chamber and the perpetrators were heavilypunished. But these were highly complex cases, the offenders beingcharged with a variety of crimes, and did little to clarify the positionwith regard to simpler incidents.57 The key judgements came afterthe Restoration. In a case from Canterbury (Kent) in 1676, aftersome hesitation over whether the practice was allowed by specialcustom, the judges in King's Bench decided that riding skimmingtonconstituted a riot. By 1683 it had also been decided that an actionfor libel could be brought on the grounds of skimmington riding,and this was confirmed in a King's Bench judgment of 1693. Theselegal developments should not, however, be interpreted as a frontalattack on charivaris. The changes were slow, piecemeal and hesitant,and occurred partly by means of judgments in cases which were not,in themselves, directly concerned with charivaris. In any case itwould seem that throughout the period prosecutions for ridings andthe like were in actual practice rare.58

The hardening of the legal position towards charivaris seems tohave been rooted in considerations of public order rather than ofmorality; and the reasons which probably moved the judges to( S4 )

France d'ancien regime", in Le Goff and Schmitt (eds.) , Charivari, pp . 179-95;Francois Lebrun, "Le charivari a travers les condamnations des autoritesecdesiastiques en France du X I V au XVIII ' siecle", ibid., pp. 221-8. In Englandremarriage was not, apparently, a normal occasion for charivaris.

55 Cambridge Univ. L i b . , University Archives, Commissary Court, 1/2, fos. 93 ' -95'; Vice-Chancellor's Court, 1/4, fos. 393-4"; G. D . Squibb, The High Court ofChwahy (Oxford, I ? 5 9 ) J pp . 58-9.

56 The Reports of Svr Edward Coke, 13 pts. (Dubl in , 1793 edn.) , v , fos. I25a-I26a." William Hudson , "A Treatise of the Court of Star Chamber", in Collectanea

Juridica [ed. F . Hargrove], 2 vols. (London, 1791-2), ii, pp. 100-1.58 Joseph Keble, Reports in the Court of King's Bench . . . from the XII to the XXX

Ytar of. . . King Charles II, 3 pts. (London, 1685), iii, pp. 578-9; The Reports of SirBartholomew Shower . . . of Cases Adrudg'd in the Court of King's-Btnch, 2 pts.(London, 1708-20), ii, pp . 313-14; William Salkeld, Reports of Cases Adjudged in theCourt of Kings Bench, 6th e d n . , 3 vols. (London, 1795), iii, p . [226]; A View of thePenal Laws Concerning Trade andTrafick (London, 1697), appendix, s.v. "riot". Butcf. Sir Thomas Raymond, The Reports of Divers Special Cases (London, 1696), p .401; The Reports of Sir Peyton Ventris, 2 pts. (London, 1696), i, p . 348. The law asit existed in the eighteenth century is tinnmgriTi-H m Matthew Bacon, A NewAbridgment of the Law, 4th e d n . , 5 vols. (London, 1778), iii, p . 491 .

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 24: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

102 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

pronounce against ridings can be illustrated by accounts of particulardemonstrations, in which a variety of grounds for objecting to chari-varis as a threat to the peace were either stated or implied. Yet it isclear that such objections did not apply with equal force to allcharivaris: the customs had built-in safeguards which in many caseshelped to limit their dangerous potential. With regard to the concernsof this essay, moreover, it is important to stress that such criticismsof charivaris as occurred were not confined to 61ite groups. Many ofthe complaints came from the victims themselves, who were drawnfrom a wide social spectrum including very poor people. Otherobjectors ranged from Puritan ministers to the presumably humblefemale neighbours of Thomas and Agnes Mills at Quemerford(though women as such were not necessarily hostile to ridings: theysometimes took active part, or served such back-up functions asproviding ale for refreshment or lending female clothes for transvest-ite performances).59

Apart from fears of sedition, which will be considered later, therewere five main grounds for regarding charivaris as a threat to publicorder. The first was danger to property. This objection was voicedby Thomas Mills and his landlord at Quemerford in 1618, andcertainly some property damage did occur on that occasion. But itseems to have been exceptional. Thomas Mills and his wife alsocomplained of cruel physical assault, and there were other instancesof violent charivaris.60 But mostly, it would seem, physical abusewas avoided, the practice of using substitutes or effigies in ridingsprobably serving to reduce the dangers.61 A third objection was thatthe shame experienced by the victims was disproportionate, andmoreover that this could lead to tensions and bitterness withinthe community.62 Charivaris could, undoubtedly, seriously disruptsocial relationships and lead to further disorder. One of RichardNapier's mentally disturbed patients, a man of Olney in Buckingham-shire, complained in 1600 of his fears "lest a woman harmed himwith her tongue because he found her tugging with her husb[and]and rumoured it ab[road] and caused the next neighbour to be

5 9 For example, P .R.O. , STA.C. 8/249/19, m. 19; ASSI. 45/8/2/113-15; BorthwickI .H.R. , York Diocesan Records, CP. H. 495.

6 0 For example, Somerset R .O. , Q/SR 86.2/55-6, Q/SR 152/1A.6 1 There were even safeguards to ensure that the "next neighbour" was himself

protected; he could shout that he rode for his neighbour's fault and not his own, butif unwilling to ride at all he might be allowed to hire a substitute: Borthwick I .H.R. ,York Diocesan Records, CP. H. 495. At Cambridge in 1586 a rider complained thathe had only received 9d. instead of the 3s. which he should have had "for his labourfor riding* : Cambridge Univ. Lib. , University Archives, Commissary Court, 1/2, fo.94*

6 2 Brit. Lib . , Add. MS. 28000 (Oxinden Correspondence, 1640-4), fo. 284. Thiscase is quoted in The Oxinden and Peyton Letters, 1643-1670, ed. Dorothy Gardiner(London, I937)i PP- 33"5> a n d m Bernard Capp, "English Youth Groups and TheFinder of WakefieM", Past and Present, no. 76 (Aug. 1977), pp. 132-3.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 25: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 103

cfarried] to the cuckingstool. She threatened to be even with him".63

The victim of a stang-riding at Leeds (Yorkshire) in 1667, tauntedbeyond endurance, fired a gun into the crowd and killed twopeople.64 Such an extreme outcome was, however, highly excep-tional. Of course the infliction of official punishments (such asstocking or whipping) could equally arouse bitterness within com-munities. Contemporaries always had to weigh this possibility beforetaking either formal or informal action against delinquent neigh-bours.65

Yet another objection to charivaris was that they could be thecloak for malicious motives.66 This charge sometimes had substance.At Nottingham in 1617, for example, a libellous rhyme sung to therough music of candlesticks, tongs and basins originated in murkyfaction struggles among the town oligarchy.67 Yet it was probablynot easy to stimulate a charivari on wholly fabricated grounds. Farfrom being based on flimsy pretexts, many demonstrations seem tohave been provoked by circumstances which were either particularlyblatant or scandalous or involved some especially ridiculous element.For example, a skimmington ride at Marden (Wiltshire) in 1626was stimulated by the fact that a woman had not only beaten herhusband — badly scratching his face so that the matter becamepublic knowledge — but had also announced "that she would shortlymake an end of him . . . and of a daughter . . . which he had by aformer wife".68

Another objection sometimes voiced was that charivaris were anexcuse for disorder on the part of base and troublesome members ofthe community, ill-qualified to mock the follies of their neighbours.69

The evidence concerning the moral standing of participants is, unfor-tunately, inconclusive. It may be of significance that charivaris oftenbegan or ended in alehouses, which were no doubt vibrant centresof popular culture but which were also, perhaps, the haunt ofmen who might welcome an opportunity for troublemaking. Somecharivaris were certainly performed by individuals of very dubiousreputation. The Quemerford skimmington ride, for example, wasled by individuals who had already been, or were shortly to find

6 3 Bodleian Lib . , Oxford, MS. Ashmole 202, fo. 192" (cf. MS. Ashmole 415, fo.201*), quoted in Michael MacDonald, Mystical Bedlam: Madness, Anxiety and Healingin Sevenuenth-Cenaay England (Cambridge, 1981), p. 109.

6 4 P .R.O. , ASSI. 45/8/2/113-15; the indictment is in ASSI. 44/13 (unrepaired andunflattened indictments).

6 5 Martin Ingram, "Communities and Courts: Law and Disorder in Early-Seven-teenth-Century Wiltshire", in J. S. Cockburn (ed.), Crime in England, 1550-1800(London, 1977), pp. 116-18.

** The Annals of Cullen . . . 961-1887, ed. William Cramond, 2nd edn. (Buckie,1888), p. 95-

6 7 Sisson, Lost Plays of Shakespeare's Age, pp. 196-201.6 8 Wiltshire R .O. , Quarter Sessions Great Rolls, Michaelmas 1626, nos. 149-50.6 9 Brit. L ib . , Add. MS. 28000, fo. 284.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 26: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

104 P A S T A1*™ PRESENT NUMBER IO5

themselves, called in question for a variety of offences. WilliamBrooke, the most audacious of the demonstrators, was an excommuni-cate, accused of adultery and charged with various unneighbourlyoffences; his own wife, interestingly enough, was presented as acommon scold.70 Yet the participants in charivaris were not invaria-bly so suspect; many were, as far as can be ascertained, completelyinnocent and respectable.

The social status of demonstrators is of particular interest since itbears on the question of how far the more substantial members ofsociety withdrew from participation in popular customs in thisperiod. The evidence for London, fragmentary though it is, perhapsoffers some support for the idea that the social centre of gravity ofcharivaris gradually fell. There are indications that metropolitancharivaris in the sixteenth century were organized on a neighbour-hood basis, and some of them were so elaborate as to suggest theparticipation of citizens of some substance. By the early eighteenthcentury, London ridings seem to have been organized by particularoccupational groups of relatively low status, such as porters.71 Lon-don was, of course, undergoing a process of exceptionally rapidtransformation in this period. Evidence for the rest of the countrysuggests no great change in the social composition of participants incharivaris. Throughout the period the chief actors tended to be ofmiddling to low status, while the supporting crowds could includepeople of even more obscure position — "rude boys" and thelike.72 In this sense the performance of charivaris was always apredominantly plebeian affair. On the other hand, again throughoutthe whole period, more substantial members of the community oftenencouraged the demonstrators and sometimes took active part; or,at the least, were prepared to remain neutral.

70 Wiltshire R . O . , Quarter Sessions Great Rolls , Recognizances Michaelmas 1618,Presentments Easter 1621 and Easter 1625; Salisbury Diocesan Records, Dean,Churchwardens' Presentments, unnumbered files for 1616-17, 1622, Calne.

71 Diary of Henry Machyn, ed. Nichols , pp . 278, 301; Three Fifteenth-CenturyChronicles, ed. James Gairdner (Camden Soc . , 2nd ser., xxviii, London, 1880), p .132; Henri Misson, Memoirs and Observations in his Travels over England, trans. JohnOzell (London, 1719), p . 129; James Peller Malcolm, Anecdotes of the Manners andCustoms of London from the Roman Invasion to the Year 1700, 2nd edn. , 3 vols.(London, 1811), i, p. 400; John Ash ton, Social Life in the Reign of Queen Anne, 2vols. (London, 1882;, i, p . 324; The Country Journal: or, The Craftsman, no. 563, 16Apr. 1737.

72 Brit. L i b . , Add. M S . 28000, fo. 284*; see also the account of the Quemerfordskimmington ride quoted above. Children and unmarried people, including servantsand apprentices, often tookpart in charivaris in this period and were sometimes themain actors: for example, Wiltshire R . O . , Quarter Sessions Great Rolls, Michaelmas1626, nos . 149-50; The Municipal Records of the Borough of Dorchester, Dorset, ed.Charles Herbert Mayo (Exeter, 1908), p . 655. But these customs were not pamculariyassociated, as in rural France, with adolescents, nor is there evidence of the participa-tion of organized youth groups. T h e range of sources now available do not bear outthe prehminary suggestions made by Capp, "English Youth Groups and The Pmderof Wakefitld", pp. 130-1.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 27: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 105

Such "maintainers" of charivaris sometimes included officers ofthe law. At a skimmington ride at Ditcheat (Somerset) in 1653, theconstable and tithingman were present but did nothing to stop theproceedings. It later emerged that the tithingman was one of thechief instigators, and he professed to believe that "the justice hadapproved of it". At Burton on Trent (Staffordshire) in 1618 a couplewho had been found in bed together were dragged out of the house,paraded through the streets to the sound of rough music and criesof "A whore and a knave! A whore, a whore!", and set in thestocks. The constable of Burton freely admitted that he had led theproceedings, at the urgent request of "some of his neighbours". Heclaimed prescription of an "ancient usage and custom of long andvery ancient time within the town", and alleged that his actions hadbeen ex post facto approved by the justices in quarter sessions. In thiscase unofficial rough music is barely distinguishable from officiallyprescribed rough music for whoredom. But justices of the peacecould also be tolerant of ridings provoked by female dominance,which was not in itself liable to legal penalty. When the victims ofthe riding at Haughley and Wetherden (Suffolk) in 1604 complainedto the local justice, his response was to "discharge all the parties,and willed the complainant and his wife to be quiet".73

In their private capacity, gentry and other substantial members ofsociety could be even less inhibited in their support for charivaris.At Marden (Wiltshire) in 1626, a number of substantial parishionerswere said to have encouraged the demonstrators, while "the farmerof their town . . . told them it was well done of them and badethem go on". At Barham (Kent) in 1643 Henry Oxinden, the localgentleman, apparently encouraged and possibly even took part in ariding, declaring that it was "a harmless pastime, which accordingto the opinion of honest divines is not only lawful but in some sortnecessary".74 The skimmington ride which made legal history atCanterbury in 1676 was also led by a man described as a gentleman.At Maidwell (Northamptonshire) in 1672, when a smallholder ofthe parish named Anthony Cable came home drunk and was beatenby his wife, it was Lady Haslewood, wife of the local squire andjustice Sir William Haslewood, who proposed that a riding shouldbe held. Admittedly this suggestion was vetoed by Sir Williamhimself, but simply on the grounds that Cable had done him faithfulservice — not, as far as we know, because he had any great objections

73 Somerset R . O . , Q / S R 86.2/55-6; P . R . O . . S T A . C . 8/104/20, quoted in Joan Kent,"The English Village Constable, 1580-1642: The Nature and Dilemmas of theO f f i c e " , / / . Brit. Studies, xx (1981), pp . 38-9; P . R . O . , STA.C. 8/249/19, m. 18.

74 Wiltshire R . O . , Quarter Sessions Great Rolls, Michaelmas 1626, nos. 149-50;Brit. L i b . , Add. MS. 28000, fo. 281 . The divines Oxinden had in mind may haveincluded such writers as Gilbert Ironside, Seven Quotums of the Sabbath BrieflyDisputed (Oxford, 1637, S .T.C. 14268), pp. 270-5.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 28: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

IO6 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

to ridings as such. Finally an account of a charivari written in 1678by Edmund Verney, squire of East Claydon (Buckinghamshire),though perhaps a trifle supercilious, does testify to the complaisanceboth of himself and other substantial inhabitants — despite the factthat the victims of this riding were the respected local vicar and hiswife:

Candlemas day last, the men servants of Bottle Claydon made a riding about Mrs.Hart's beating her old husband, who was so unadvised as to take notice of ityesterday in his pulpit. They passed by my house yesterday and 'twas as foolish athing as ever I saw. I suppose their masters privately egged on the business, butappeared not themselves, nor their sons, only Will Holland my miller's son ledthe horse."

These examples indicate that by no means all gentlemen con-demned charivaris. On the contrary, some were as prepared as anyin local society to uphold them. The attitude of Henry Oxinden isespecially interesting, for he was a man of considerable learning, ascholar, poet, and author of a number of Latin works.76 His caseserves as a reminder that although gentry and aristocratic societywas undoubtedly becoming better educated and "cultured" in thisperiod, and in that sense widening the cultural gap between theupper and the lower ranks, such immersion in high culture did notnecessarily entail a repudiation of folk practices. Indeed, the motifof the charivari was actually included, at least to a limited extent, inliterary and other cultural products designed for 6b'te audiences. Itis of some interest that the mansion at Montacute (Somerset), builtaround 1600 by Sir Edward Phelips, master of the rolls and speakerof the House of Commons, included amid the welter of fashionableRenaissance motifs a huge plaster frieze of a skimmington ride asone of the main decorations of the hall — though it is, of course,possible that the tableau was intended primarily for the delectationof Sir Edward's retainers.77 (See Plates 2 and 3.) Literary referencesto charivaris occurred not only in ephemera such as broadside balladsand jest books,78 but also in authors of higher literary standing. Thelist, up to the middle of the seventeenth century, includes John

75 P.R.O., K.B. 27/1973, Fines and Amercements, etc., Hilary Term 27 and 28Charles II, rot. 3'; The Diary of Thomas Isham of Lamport (1658-81) Kept fry Him inLatin from 1671 to 1673, ed. Sir Gyles Isham and trans. Norman Marlow (Farn-borough, 1971), pp. 78, 155, 277; Verney Letters of the Eighteenth Century from theMSS. at Claydon Home, ed. Margaret Maria, Lady Verney, 2 vols. (London, 1930),i, pp. 367-8.

™ For a summary of his career, see D.N.B.7 7 Dudley Dodd and Mark Girouard, Montacute House, Somerset (The National

Trust, London, 1979), pp. 1 0 - n .78 For example, T . F. Thiselton Dyer, Folk Lore of Shakespeare (London, 1883),

p. 415; The Pinder of Wakefield, ed. E. A. Horsman (Eng. Reprints Ser. , xii,Liverpool, 1956), pp . 16-17; The Pefiys Ballads, ed. H. E. Rollins, 8 vols. (Cam-bridge, Mass . , 1929-32), i , p. 193; Poor Robin (London, 1699), t ig. A7 1 , cited inBernard Capp, Astrology ana the Popular Press: English Almanacs, 1500-1800 (Lon-don, 1979), p. 125.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 29: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 107

Fletcher (1579-1625), Thomas Heywood (?i574-1641), Sir JohnSuckling (1609-42), Richard Brome (died ?i652), and James Howell(?i594-i666). Though it would be wrong to make too much of thesereferences, they do indicate that the forms of charivari were commoncoin among some members of the literary elite, neither particularlyforeign nor especially repugnant to them, and capable of beingintegrated into works of some sophistication.79 Moreover it is notthe case that charivaris disappeared from literature in the periodfrom the Restoration to the early eighteenth century, as one mightexpect if such customs were coming to be regarded as impossiblyvulgar. Jonathan Swift, for example, wrote an entire poem on thetroubles of the patient husband, including the ordeal of being thevictim of a riding.80 But probably the best known literary referencein this period is Samuel Butler's detailed account of a riding inHudibras, part 11 (1664). (See Plate 1.) The fact that the motifwas introduced for mock heroic effect obviously testifies to theconsiderable degree of cultural differentiation which existed in seven-teenth-century England. Yet this certainly does not imply a simpleelite/popular dichotomy, and it is important to recognize that Butler'sattitude to popular practices was by no means dismissive. On theone hand his invocation of folk customs was an appeal to earthy goodsense to debunk intellectual pretension. On the other they served apolitical purpose: his satire of the Presbyterian killjoys of the Puritanrevolution firmly associated the restored monarchy with approval ofridings and other popular festivities, using them as symbols of therestoration of good sense and social stability. Andrew Marvell,erstwhile servant of the Protectorate, took up the theme and showedthat the skimmington ride could equally well serve the turn of anti-court propaganda. He used the motif — apparently referring to areal-life charivari mentioned by Pepys — in a scathing attack on theconduct of the Second Dutch War in his "Last Instructions to aPainter" (written 1667, published 1689). In line with his stance andpurpose, Marvell represented the riding as a wholesome means of

79 John Fletcher, The Woman's Prise: or, The Tamer Tamed, ed. George B. Ferguson(The Hague, 1966), esp. pp. 79-81; The Dramatic Works of Thomas Heywood, ed.R. H. Shepherd, 6 voli . (London, 1874), iv, pp. 231 , 234; The Dramatic Works ofRichard Brome, 3 vols. (London, 1873), ii, pp. 14-16; The Works of Sir John Suckling,ed. T . Clayton and L. A. Beaurline, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1971), ii, pp. 147, 150; JamesHowell, Epistolae Ho-Elianae: The Familiar Letters, ed. Joseph Jacobs (London,1890-2), pp. 568-9. There are brief references in other authors, while numerouscharivaresque references occur in the works of Ben Jonson. For discussion of someof these references, see Donaldson, World Upside-Down, chs. 1-4; Clark, "Inversion,Misrule and the Meaning of Witchcraft", pp. 120, 123-5.

8 0 "A Quiet Life, and a Good Name", in The Poems of Jonathan Swift, ed. H.Williams, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1937), i, pp. 219-21. For some other references about thistime, see Poetical Works of John Oldham, ed. R. Bell (London, 1854), p. 125; WilliamKing, Miscellanies in Prose and Verse (London, ?I7O9), pp. 530-2; The Poetical Worksof. . . William Mesum, 6th edn. (Edinburgh, 1767), p. 147.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 30: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

108 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

administering correction, in contrast to Butler who had stressed thefestive associations. But the point to emphasize here is that bothauthors evidently considered that the idea of the charivari wouldhave sufficient resonance for the e"lite audiences they were largelyaddressing to serve as an effective element in social and politicalsatire.81

To an extent this elite patronage of the charivari tradition forpolitical purposes was translated from the literary sphere into theworld of action from the 1670s to the early eighteenth century.During the Exclusion Crisis and afterwards, the Whigs' attemptsto muster popular support included patronage of processions anddemonstrations, most notably the great pope-burning ceremonies,which included charivaresque elements such as the backward-facingride and rough music. Tory and, later, Jacobite and anti-Walpoleanagitation involved similar activities. This helps to explain the promi-nence, noted by Nicholas Rogers, of elements of charivari in populardisturbances in early eighteenth-century London.82 In the case ofanti-Hanoverian demonstrations, the symbols of charivari wouldno doubt seem particularly appropriate; for, as one Hertfordshireindividual expressed it in 1716, George I could be seen as "a damnedcuckoldy rogue and a dog . . . [who] had banished his wife formaking him a cuckold". In this light, such an incident as occurrednear Hertford on Oak Apple Day, 1717 (29th May, the anniversaryof Charles II's restoration), when "a great multitude . . . [came] toWatton in a riotous manner with green boughs on their hats andhorns on their heads and with flags", might be interpreted as acharivari against the king.83

At this juncture we return full circle to one of the starting-points of our discussion. For this background of anti-Hanoveriandemonstrations must surely be taken into account when consideringthe reaction of the absentee Whig landlord Sir Richard Holford tothe charivaresque "groaning" which his tenants enacted on the manorof Westonbirt in 1716.M Although this demonstration was occasionedby a moral offence (buggery) and had no explicit anti-Hanoverian or

81 Butler, Hudibras, ed. Wilders, pp. 143-6 (part 11, canto ii, lines 585-712); AndrewMarvell, The Complete Poems, ed. Elizabeth Story Donno (Harmondsworth, 1972),p. 167 (lines 375-96); The Diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. R. B. Latham and W. Matthews,11 vols. (London, 1970-83), viii, p . 257.

•2 Nicholas Rogers, "Popular Protest in Early Hanoverian London", Past andPresent, no. 79 (May 1978), pp. 70-100. See also Peter Burke, "Popular Culture inSeventeenth-Century London , London JL, iii (1977), pp . 153-4, 157; John Steven-son, Popular Disturbances in England, 1700-1870 (London, 1979), pp. 26-7; ThomasWright, England under the House of Hanover . . . Illustrated from the Caricatures andSatires of the Day, 2 vols. (London, 1848), i, pp . 40-1 , 45 , 196.

83 Hertford County Records, ed. W. J. Hardy, W. Le Hardy and G. L . Reckitt, 10vols. (Hertford, 1905-57), ii, pp. 48 , 50; and see Rogers, "Popular Protest in EarlyHanoverian London , pp. 95-6.

84 Rollison, "Property, Ideology and Popular Culture", passim.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 31: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 109

anti-Whig content, it did involve a mock baptism. As noted earlier,religious parodies were among the traditional features of charivarisand there was, in any case, a long independent tradition of suchpractices.85 Pace Rollison's interpretation, there is no particularreason to suppose that in enacting the baptism the inhabitants ofWestonbirt were making any profound political point. Yet Sir Rich-ard seems to have regarded it as seditious. In the dangerous days of1716 this was perhaps understandable. In the even more dangerousdays of 1643 John Swan, the Puritan minister of Demon in Kent,had likewise expressed fears that a simple charivari might escalateinto sedition. Similarly in 1607 the court of Star Chamber had takena particularly serious view of the demonstrations against John Holeat Wells because of the coincidence with unrest in the midlandcounties.86 But the political crisis of the 1710s passed away, as hadthe earlier troubles. It would be a mistake to assume that becausesome political demonstrations of the early Hanoverian period in-volved charivaresque elements, while on the other hand jumpycarpetbaggers like Holford might over-react to incidents like the"groaning" which may not in fact have had a political meaning, allcharivaris and similar customs had by this time been tarred with thebrush of sedition and were hence anathema to the ruling classes.Most contemporaries seem to have realized that the common run ofridings and such like, stigmatizing beaten husbands and cuckolds,posed no great threat to church and state. Such ridings seem to haveoccurred quite frequently in London in the early eighteenth centuryand were tolerantly regarded. They also occurred in the provincesand, as earlier, sometimes involved substantial members of thecommunity and even gentlemen. Thus a skimmington ride at AvetonGifford (Devon) in 1738 included among the 150 or so participantsa substantial leavening of respectable tradesmen, several yeomen,two people described as gentlemen, and the wife of an esquire.87

What does the preceding discussion contribute to our understanding85 Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic: Studies in Popular Beliefs in

Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centwy England (London, 1971), p. 162; Thomas, "Placeof Laughter in Tudor and Stuart England", p. 78. For a threatened mock baptismduring an Elizabethan enclosure riot, see P.R.O., STA.C. 5/KJ/23. Another customreminiscent of charivaris was to toll the passing bell when a wife and husband wereat odds and would not speak to one another: for example, W. H. Hale, A Series ofPrecedents and Proceedings in Criminal Causes (London, 1847), p. 252; Wiltshire R.O.,Salisbury Diocesan Records, Archdeacon of Salisbury, Act Book (Office) 15, 30 May1639, Office v. Boulter and Smith.

** Brit. Lib., Add. MS. 28000, fo.. 284; Sisson, Lost Plays of Shakespeare's Age, p.177-

87 M. G. Dickinson, "A 'Skimmington Ride' at Aveton Gifford", Devon andCornwall Notes and Queries, zxziv (1981), pp. 290-2. For London charivaris, see n.71 above.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 32: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

110 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 105

of the "reform of popular culture" down to about 1715? Somefeatures of charivaris, such as their predominantly lower-class compo-sition, plainly reflect socially related cultural differences. But suchdifferences probably already existed at the start of the period. Itwould be possible to argue (though the evidence is not compelling)that by 1700 charivaris were regarded as more distinctively "vulgar"than was the case two centuries earlier; but not to the extent thatreferences to these customs came to be seen as unsuitable for inclusionin literature designed for elite audiences. The criticisms of charivarisvoiced by individual Puritan ministers, and the slow hardening ofthe legal position, are consistent with the idea of an active attack onpopular practices. Yet, for the reasons already noted, neither of thesefactors should be overstressed; and they are counterbalanced byevidence of the patronage of, or at least tolerance towards, charivarison the part of some members of the Elites. Overall, hostility towardscharivaris appears to have been infrequent or muted; and it doesseem plain that they were at least one form of popular custom, andan impressive one, which escaped any really serious attempt atrepression. If charivaris flourished with increased vigour in theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries, as Edward Thompson suggests,it was clearly on the basis of very solid survival from the earlierperiod.88 For a variety of reasons (some of which are implied in thefollowing paragraphs) it would be unwise, without further investiga-tion, to generalize on these points from charivaris to other customs.But this case study does suggest that such additional research wouldbe of value. Recent work has amply documented the attacks onpopular customs mounted by particular interest groups, above allPuritan clergy and laymen. More serious attention needs to be paidto clergy, gentry and other substantial members of society who weremore complaisant towards folk practices; and the actual patternof the survival or disappearance of popular customs needs to beinvestigated in more detail.89

Irrespective of the fate of other customs, why were charivaris inparticular regarded, by and large, with complaisance? Part of theanswer may simply be that they occurred too infrequently to arousemuch hostility. Unfortunately we shall probably never know justhow common charivaris actually were in this period. This analysisis based on a dossier of about sixty cases (excluding purely literaryreferences, doubtful instances, and a multitude of minor charivar-esque incidents such as the hanging of horns on cuckolds' houses).These examples were located by serendipity, and systematic searchof the local and central archives would no doubt yield more instances.

** Thompson, " 'Rough Music' et charivari", p. 279.89 For some preliminary investigations, see Ingram, "Religion, Communities and

Moral Discipline", passim.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 33: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" I I I

But our information will always be very incomplete because, in theabsence of any sustained attempt at repression, there was no particu-lar reason why charivaris should find a place in the records. Yetassuming that the characteristic pretext, the beating of a husband byhis wife, was a relatively unusual occurrence, it may be confidentlyinferred that charivaris were by no means an everyday affair inany particular community. But this is not a wholly satisfactoryexplanation of their relative immunity to repression. It does seemclear that charivaris were widely known, in which case their pre-sumed infrequency is arguably irrelevant to the issue of how muchhostility they aroused: forms of behaviour may be rare but none-theless excite condemnation. In any event it is necessary to findfurther reasons to explain not simply the lack of repression, but alsothe fact that charivaris were sometimes regarded with approval andeven, on occasion, actively encouraged by gentlemen and othermembers of 61ite groups.

Such reasons are not far to seek, and are of special interest becausethey demonstrate powerful linkages between charivaris and someelements of elite culture. In the first place these demonstrationscould to a considerable extent be seen as merely the unauthorizedapplication of shame sanctions very similar to those prescribed byofficial agencies. To that degree there was a close link between thesecustoms and the official punitive system. In so far as the officialanalogues of charivaris gradually went out of use — a process whichawaits detailed research — the link was of diminishing strength; butit was still powerful through most or even all of this period. Ofcourse the fact that charivaris involved the assumption of quasi-judicial powers by the populace could arouse some disquiet. Yet inpractice, in a legal system which relied heavily on local co-operationand which delegated considerable policing powers to non-profes-sional parish officers, such arrogation of authority could be regardedwith tolerance.

The symbols employed in charivaris and the framework of ideaswhich underlay them provided another overlap with elite culture.Specific references to charivaris in the literature of the period havealready been noted. Beyond this it is important to emphasize that theprinciples of inversion and correspondence characteristic of charivariswere (as Stuart Clark has recently stressed) equally central to thelearned philosophies of the period. Moreover many of the specificsymbols associated with charivaris, such as discordant noise express-ive of disorder or disharmony, were in one form or another and in avariety of contexts current in drama and literature designed for eliteaudiences. The educated versions of these ideas and motifs were oftenworked out at a much more sophisticated level. Yet the conceptualframework of, say, the homily against rebellion or the court masques

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 34: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

112 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER IO5

of Ben Jonson was recognizably similar to that of charivaris.90 In thelight of a host of anthropological studies which testify both to theubiquity of the kinds of ideas under discussion and the complexityof "primitive" thought,91 it would be unwise to assume that charivarisrepresented merely a debased version of 61ite ideas which had some-how trickled down to or even been imposed upon the masses. Rathercharivaris bear witness to a powerful body of shared concepts andsymbols elaborated with varying degrees of subtlety at differentsocial and cultural levels.

There was yet another area of shared meanings beyond this concep-tual framework. The social concerns which underlay charivaris,especially the issue of the relations between husbands and wiveswithin marriage, had resonance not only for the lower orders but forall ranks of society. The patriarchal ideal was shared by all. Soalso — though there were no doubt variations at different sociallevels — were the tensions arising from the incongruity between theideal and the actuality of husband and wife relationships. There wereunruly wives and cuckolded husbands in castles as well as cottages;92

and, as the cases of Socrates and Xanthippe, Aristotle and Phylliswere supposed to demonstrate, even wisdom might have to give wayto a wilful woman. As William Heale put the matter in 1609, voicinga sentiment which would have been equally familiar to Swift:

For diverse women being of a diverse stature, strength, complexion and disposition,there must needs fall out a diverse event . . . [of battles between husbands andwives] . . . If I should chance to marry with a stout and valiant woman . . . andafter a while from Cupid's wars fall unto martial arms, I doubt my learning wouldnot save me from some unlearned blows. 9 3

In fine, although charivaris might at times appear indecorous anddisorderly, fundamentally they made conceptual, moral and socialsense to the majority of contemporaries of whatever social rank, andhence were unlikely to come under severe attack.

To reaffirm a point made at the outset, it is not the intention ofthis essay to deny the existence of cultural differentiation in earlymodern England, or the possibility that such differentiation increasedover the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. But it is important notto exaggerate the idea of cultural split. When Rollison, for example,resorts to the language of colonial acculturation, implying a massivedichotomy between the mental worlds of the Elites and of the massof the population, he surely goes too far.94 The study of charivarissupplies a corrective. Their special interest lies in the fact that thesecustoms, so often regarded by modern historians as characteristically

9 0 Clark, "Inversion, Misrule and the Meaning of Witchcraft", passim.9 1 Babcock (ed.), Reversible World, pt. 2 passim.92 Greaves, Society and Religion in Elizabethan England, pp. 257, 264-6.9 3 William Heale, An Apologie for Women (Oxford, 1609, S.T.C. 13014), p. 15.

What appears to be a comment on charivaris appears on pp. 45-6.94 Rollison, "Property, Ideology and Popular Culture , pp. 89, 93.

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

Page 35: Past and Present 1984 Ingram 79 113

RIDINGS, ROUGH MUSIC AND "POPULAR CULTURE" 113

plebeian, actually bear witness less to cultural conflict than to areasof shared culture. They were relatively immune to attack because inimportant respects they articulated meanings common to all ranksof society. They thus serve as valuable reminders that throughoutthe period under review there remained important points of culturalcontact between rich and poor, rulers and ruled. It is surely necessaryto take account of such cultural homogeneities before insisting ontoo pronounced a split between "popular" and "elite" culture byabout 1700.

The Queen's University of Belfast Martin Ingram

by guest on May 21, 2014

http://past.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from