The lineaments of customary culture shaped and were shaped by the lives of plebeian Londoners. Although some historians like Keith Thomas have noted of the capital generally that ‘the growing anonymity of daily life set people free from the constant invigilation and moral surveillance which was such a feature of smaller communities’, this was less the case in plebeian neighbourhoods. The spatial arrangements of houses virtually guaranteed that neighbours would be closely aware of one another's activities. Privacy was difficult, and much of the time impossible: even intimate bits of one's life were open to comment and judgement. The pressures to conform socially may have been slackening generally, but communal supervision of morality and behaviour were still the norm in central neighbourhoods. Plebeian Londoners were not isolated, alienated individuals tossed hither and yon in an anonymous sea of humanity, which Thomas certainly recognized when he continued that ‘many districts in big cities were essentially little villages, where anonymity was impossible’. Plebeian London was a city of neighbourhoods, and while today this term congers up warm and positive images, the situation was somewhat different during the period of this study. Neighbourhoods were not simply oases of sweetness and light, sustaining and nurturing women and men in an otherwise hostile environment. Rather, they played a more ambivalent role in the lives of Londoners. They were often the locus of tension and discord as well as mutual support.