Tradition and Exclusion: Parochial Officeholding in Early Modern England, A Case Study from North Norfolk, 1580–1640

Abstract

This article suggests that there has been a tendency to understate the degree to which officeholding during the early modern period was embedded within the community, moulded by local influences and fulfilling a range of different functions in the parish. An over-emphasis upon national processes of social and cultural change has resulted in a failure to appreciate the complexity of the politics of officeholding. There has been only limited recognition of both the presence of constraints upon the actions of parochial elites and the mechanisms through which particular groups established and maintained control over parochial institutions. A detailed analysis of officeholding within seven parishes lying on the north Norfolk coast stresses the extent to which 'parochial traditions' determined the way in which things were done. It is argued that the effective linkage of officeholding to these shared understandings and to ideals of participation and inclusion created a powerful rhetoric through which the exclusion of a large minority of the populace and uneven distributions of officeholding were justified.

The Micro-Politics of Water Management in Early Modern England: Regulation and Representation in Commissions of Sewers

“…The extra work the court engaged necessitated a greater number of people acting on behalf of the state. The growth of the early modern English 'participatory society' 39 is typified by the rise of the number of people engaging with Courts of Sewers as jurors. But who exactly were these people who served the state with renewed vigour in the later-sixteenth and early-seventeenth centuries?…”

?The pooreste and sympleste sorte of people?? The selection of parish officers during the personal rule of Charles I

“…Pitman admits that a nucleus of ambitious officers dominated by serving several times, but she also stresses the importance of local customs in the elections of officials. 25 While this research closes an important gap in our understanding of the workings of grass-roots government, the relationship between the vestry and the corps of parish officers remains unclear, particularly as constables -arguably the most significant parish officers -were still selected by the court leet, and not by the vestry. 26 The relationship between vestries and parish officers was significant because parish officers were not only regulators of the affairs of their villages, but crown officers and enforcers of Westminster's commands.…”

Review of periodical literature published in 2004

“…Aspects of the social order have been examined by Pitman and Worsley, with interesting case studies by Bettey, Broadway, Wall, and Gladwish. Pitman’s detailed dissection of the profile of parish officers in seven continguous parishes in North Norfolk in the period 1580–1640 identifies different concentrations of power and expectations about participation in these communities. There was no stable cadre of parish rulers who functioned as a distinct ‘middle sort’ at this time.…”