¹ Thompson, E. P., The making of the English working class (London, 1975), p. 12.Google Scholar

² For previous works by sociologists see in particular Michael, Vester, Die entstehung des Proletariats als Lernprozess (Frankfürt-am-Main, 1970)Google Scholar, and Francis, Hearn, Domination, legitimation, and resistance: the incorporation of the nineteenth century English working class (Westport, Connecticut, 1978)Google Scholar, both written chiefly from a Frankfurt School perspective. Much of the earlier critical literature on Thompson is discussed in Donnelly, F. K., ‘Ideology and early English working-class history: Edward Thompson and his critics’, Social History, II (1976), 219–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a summary of the debate about ‘class’ see also Neale, R. S., Class in English history, 1680–1850 (Oxford, 1981), especially pp. 100–93.Google Scholar

³ Calhoun, The question of class struggle, p. 140. At least one interpreter has drawn a similar conclusion from Thompson's own account. See Currie, R. and Hartwell, R. M., ‘The making of the English working class?’, Economic History Review, viii (1965), 638Google Scholar. See also Ben, Roberts’ discussion of his similar findings in ‘On the origins and resolution of English working class protest’, in Graham, H. D. and Gurr, T. R., eds., Violence in America: historical and comparative perspectives (Washington, D.C., 1969), pp. 197–220.Google Scholar

⁴ Calhoun, The question of class struggle, p. 76. Such charges seem on the other hand rarely to be proffered against men like John Cartwright, about whom N. C. Miller has written that Cobbett actually ‘feared his tendency to form clubs and societies’, in ‘John Cartwright and radical parliamentary reform, 1808–1819’, English Historical Review, LXXXIII (1968), 710Google Scholar. Henry Hunt should perhaps be seen as somewhere between these extremes; on him see in particular John Belchem, ‘Radicalism as a “platform” agitation in the period 1816–1821 and 1848–1851: with special reference to the leadership of Henry Hunt and Feargus O'Connor’, Sussex D.Phil., 1977, especially pp. 59–144, and ‘Henry Hunt and the evolution of the mass platform’, English Historical Review, xciii (1978), 739–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the general question of radical extra-parliamentary organization throughout this period see Parsinnen, T. M., ‘Association, convention and anti-parliament in British radical politics, 1771–1848’, English Historical Review, LXXXVIII (1973), 504–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Prothero, I., ‘William Benbow and the concept of the “general strike”’, Past and Present, LXIII (1974), 132–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵ Calhoun, The question of class struggle, p. 60. Amongst the local studies which treat the theoretical aspects of this theme see in particular Kaijage, F. J., ‘Working class radicalism in Barnsley, 1816–1820’, in Pollard, S. and Holmes, C., eds., Essays in the economic and social history of south Yorkshire (Leeds, 1976), pp. 118–34.Google Scholar

⁶ Hopkins, J. K., ‘Joanna Southcott: a study of popular religion and radical politics, 1789–1814’, Texas Ph.D., 1972.Google Scholar

⁷ In particular Clarke, Garrett, Respectable folly: millenarians and the French Revolution in France and England (Baltimore, 1975)Google Scholar, Oliver, W. H., Prophets and millennialists (Oxford, 1978)Google Scholar, and Harrison, J. F. C., The Second Coming: popular millenarianism, 1780–1850 (London, 1979).Google Scholar

⁸ Hopkins, Joanna Southcott, pp. xxi, 63, 83, 215. On evangelical religion as a conservative force in this period see Kiernan, V. G., ‘Evangelicalism and the French Revolution’, Past and Present, I-II (1952), 44–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The debate on Methodism was then picked up by Hobsbawm, E. J., in ‘Methodism and the threat of revolution in Britain’, History Today, vii (1957), 115–24, and is discussed at length in Thompson's Making of the English working class, pp. 385–440.Google Scholar

⁹ Hopkins, Joanna Southcott, p. 102.

¹⁰ ibid. p. xii. See the remarks by J. F. C. Harrison in The Second Coming, pp. 225–6, in this regard.

¹¹ See John, Saville's ‘J. E. Smith and the Owenite movement, 1833–34’, and Oliver, W. H., ‘Owen in 1817: the millennialist movement’, both in Pollard, S. and Salt, J., eds., Robert Owen: prophet of the poor (London, 1971), pp. 115–44 and 166–87 respectively. Owen was scarcely a prophet at all in the Southcottian sense, since the Bible played extremely little role in his writings or ideas. Smith saw himself more clearly in this role, but his influence in Owenism was very short-lived, and few other Owenites are known to have been Southcottians, though the circle of ‘Sacred Socialists’ around James Pierrepont Greaves and the Ham Common Concordium merit some attention for their mysticism. There was also some coalescence of millenarianism and feminism in Owenism, for which see Barbara Taylor, ‘The feminist theory and practice of the Owenite socialist movement in Britain, 1820–45’, Sussex D.Phil., pp. 162–246.Google Scholar

¹² J. Hone, For the cause of truth, p. 356, and Stevenson, J., ‘The Queen Caroline affair’, in Stevenson, J., ed., London in the age of reform (London, 1977). Calhoun describes the Caroline agitation as the last great movement of the common people in the early nineteenth century (The question of class struggle, pp. 105–15).Google Scholar

¹³ Prothero, I., Artisans and politics in early nineteenth century London: John Gast and his times (London, 1979), p. 141.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Spater, W., William Cobbett, II, 522Google Scholar. See Cole, G. D. H., The life of William Cobbett (London, 1927). p. 434.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Epstein, Feargus O'Connor, pp. 236, 239, 247. A somewhat similar view is reached in Asa Briggs’ ‘Chartism reconsidered’, Historical Studies: papers read to the third conference of Irish historians (London, 1959), p. 56.Google Scholar

¹¹ Epstein, Feargus O'Connor, p. 251. The closeness between the socialistic Harney and O'Connor had other causes, however. See Henry, Weisser, ‘The role of Feargus O'Connor in Chartist internationism, 1845–1848’, Rocky Mountain Social Science Journal, vi (1969), 82–90Google Scholar. The most detailed treatment of the empirical aspects of the Land Plan is Hadfield's, A. M.The Chartist Land Company (Newton Abbot, 1970).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Claeys, G., ‘Owenism, democratic theory and political radicalism: an investigation of aspects of the relationship betwen socialism and politics in Britain, 1820–1852’, Cambridge Ph.D. (1983), pp. 213–14 and 313 n. 48Google Scholar. O'Connor's change of views is stressed far more strongly by Read, D. and Glasgow, E. than by Epstein, in their Feargus O'Connor: Irishman and Chartist (London, 1961), pp. 111–12.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Goodway, London Chartism, pp. 15, 224–5, and Prothero, I., ‘London Chartism and the trades’, Economic History Review, xxiv (1971), 202–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Rowe's, D. J. more specific study on ‘Chartism and the Spitalfields silk-Weavers’, Economic History Review, xx (1967), 482–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jenkin, A., ‘Chartism and the trade unions’, in Munby, L., ed., The Luddites and other essays (London, 1971), pp. 75–92Google Scholar; Crossick, G., An artisan elite in Victorian society: Kentish London, 1840–1880 (London, 1978), pp. 201–10Google Scholar; Jones, D., Chartism and the Chartists (London, 1975), pp. 138–47Google Scholar. Some recent articles also contain useful material. See in particular Rowe, D. J., ‘Some aspects of Chartism on Tyneside’, International Review of Social History, xvi (1971), 17–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Edwards, J. K., ‘Chartism in Norwich’, Yorkshire Bulletin of Economic and Social Research, xix (1967), 85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Searby, P., ‘Chartists and freemen in Coventry, 1838–1860’, Social History, vi (1977), 761–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁹ Goodway, London Chartism, pp. 24–30. For earlier accounts see Prothero, I., ‘Chartism in London’, Past and Present, xliv (1969), 76–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Rowe, D.J., ‘The failure of London Chartism’, Historical Journal, xi (1968), 472–87. The latter however agrees that the relative strength of the L.W.M.A. was one of the chief reasons for the ‘failure’ of London Chartism (486).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ Stedman Jones, ‘The language of Chartism’, in Epstein and Thompson (eds.), The Chartist Experience, p. 31. This does not however necessarily controvert the conclusions of Asa Briggs’ ‘The language of “class” in early nineteenth century England’, in Briggs, A. and Saville, J. (eds.), Essays in labour history (London, 1959), pp. 43–73Google Scholar, where the class consciousness of the Chartist years is emphasized. On the history of the teleological view of Chartism see Morris, M., ‘Chartism and the British working class movement’, Science and Society, XII (1948), 400–17Google Scholar, and Cowden, M., ‘Early Marxist views on British labor, 1837–1917’, Western Political Quarterly, xvi (1963), 34–52Google Scholar. Ideological continuity is also stressed in Prothero's, I. ‘London Working Class movements, 1825–1845’, Cambridge Ph.D., (1966), p. 272Google Scholar. For another recent account of the importance of the changing attitudes and actions of the state after 1842 see Mick, Jenkins, The general strike of 1842 (London, 1980), especially pp. 253–7.Google Scholar

²¹ For previous analyses of problems of Chartist organization see Rowe, D. J., ‘The Chartist Convention and the regions’, Economic History Review, XXII (1969), 58–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Judge, K., ‘Early Chartist organisation and the Convention of 1839’, International Review of Social History, xx (1975), 370–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²² Treble, J. H., ‘O'Connor, O'Connell and the attitudes of Irish immigrants towards Chartism in the north of England 1838–48’, in Butt, J. and Clarke, J. F. (eds.), The Victorians and social protest (Newton Abbot, 1973), pp. 33–70Google Scholar. An earlier account is Higgins’, R. ‘The Irish influence in the Chartist movement’, Past and Present, xx (1961), 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²³ Actual attempts of various types have been summarized in Thomis, M. and Holt, P., Threats of revolution in Britain, 1789–1848 (London, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Here too a relative decline in the possibility of revolution is argued for the period following 1817–20. See pp. 124–6 in particular. For recent research emphasizing the predominance of moderation in Glasgow during the latter part of this period see Montgomery, F. A., ‘Glasgow radicalism, 1830–1848’, Glasgow Ph.D., 1974, especially p. 265.Google Scholar

²⁴ Foster, J., Class struggle in the industrial revolution: early industrial capitalism in three English towns (London, 1974), p. 207CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For further discussion of this and related themes see Jones, G. Stedman, ‘Class struggle and the industrial revolution’, New Left Review, xc (1975), 35–69Google Scholar; Musson, A. E., ‘Class struggle and the labour aristocracy, 1830–60’, Social History, III (1976), 335–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Foster, J., ‘Some comments on “Class struggle and the labour aristocracy, 1830–60”’, Social History, III (1976), 357–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gray, R., ‘Politics, ideology and class struggle under early industrial capitalism: a critique of John Foster’, Marxism Today, xxi (1977), 367–71Google Scholar; Gadian, D. S., ‘Class consciousness in Oldham and other north-west industrial towns 1830–1850’, Historical Journal, xxi (1978), 161–72Google Scholar; Field, J., ‘British Historians and the concept of the labour aristocracy’, Social History, III (1978), 61–82Google Scholar; Reid, A., ‘Politics and economics in the formation of the British working class: a response to H. F. Moorhouse’, Social History, III (1978), 347–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁵ Smiles even gave some assistance to the semi-Owenite land settlement plans of the Leeds Redemption Society in the late 1840s. See Morris, R. J., ‘Samuel Smiles and the genesis of Self-Help; the retreat to a petit bourgeois utopia’, Historical Journal, xxiv (1981), 105.Google Scholar