¹ McIntosh, Marjorie Keniston, Autonomy and Community: The Royal Manor of Havering, 1200–1500 (Cambridge, 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and A Community Transformed: The Manor and Liberty of Havering, 1500–1620 (Cambridge, 1991)Google Scholar.

² Bindoff, S. T., Tudor England (Harmondsworth, 1950)Google Scholar; Elton, G. R., The Tudor Revolution in Government (Cambridge, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³ Williams, Penry and Harriss, G. L., “A Revolution in Tudor History?” Past and Present, no. 25 (1963): 3–58Google Scholar; to which Elton replied in “The Tudor Revolution: A Reply,” Past and Present, no. 29 (1964): 26–49Google Scholar; Dickens, A. G., The English Reformation (London, 1964)Google Scholar; and Duffy, Eamon, The Stripping of the Altars (New Haven, Conn., 1992)Google Scholar.

⁴ McFarlane, K. B., The Nobility of Later Medieval England (Oxford, 1973)Google Scholar; Lander, J. R., Conflict and Stability in Fifteenth-Century England (London, 1969)Google Scholar; Storey, R. L., The End of the House of Lancaster (London, 1966)Google Scholar.

⁵ Laslett, Peter, The World We Have Lost (London, 1965)Google Scholar.

⁶ Hatcher, John, Plague, Population and the English Economy, 1348–1530 (London, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ Bridbury, A. R., Economic Growth: England in the Later Middle Ages (London, 1962)Google Scholar; Phythian-Adams, Charles, Desolation of a City (Cambridge, 1979)Google Scholar; the literature on the urban decline debate is too considerable to go into here, but see Dyer, Alan, Decline and Growth in English Towns, 1400–1640 (London, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar for a fair summary of the literature so far.

⁸ Dyer, Christopher, Lords and Peasants in a Changing Society: The Estates of the Bishop of Worcester, 680–1540 (Cambridge, 1980)Google Scholar.

⁹ Moreton, C. E., The Townsends and Their World: Gentry, Law, and Land in Norfolk, c. 1450–1551 (Oxford, 1992)Google Scholar.

¹⁰ See, e.g., Herrup, Cynthia, The Common Peace: Participation and the Criminal Law in Seventeenth-Century England (Cambridge, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, which deals with sessions and assize courts in Sussex between 1594 and 1640; Sharpe, J. A., Crime in Seventeenth-Century England: A County Study (Cambridge, 1983)Google Scholar, which deals principally with assize and sessions courts in Essex, between 1620 and 1680. The only work to focus exclusively on misdemeanor crime, and therefore the closest to the kinds of issues found in McIntosh's study, is nevertheless dependent on sessions records and concerns a later period: Shoemaker, Robert B., Prosecution and Punishment: Petty Crime and the Law in London and Rural Middlesex, c. 1660–1725 (Cambridge, 1991)Google Scholar. For examples of the studies of the church courts, see Houlbrooke, Ralph, Church Courts and the People during the English Reformation, 1520–1570 (Oxford, 1979)Google Scholar; Marchant, Ronald A., The Church under the Law: Justice Administration and Discipline in the Diocese of York, 1560–1640 (Cambridge, 1969)Google Scholar; and Ingram, Martin, Church Courts, Sex and Marriage in England, 1570–1640 (Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar.

¹¹ See, e.g., Pollock, Frederick and Maitland, Frederic William, The History of the English Law before the Time of Edward I, 2d ed., reissued and introduced by S. F. C. Milsom (Cambridge, 1968), 1:532, 568–71Google Scholar; Baker, J. H., An Introduction to English Legal History (London, 1971), pp. 17–18Google Scholar.

¹² See, e.g., Ingram, Martin, “‘Scolding Women Cucked or Washed’: A Crisis in Gender Relations in Early Modern England?” in Women, Crime and the Courts in Early Modern England, ed. Kermode, Jennifer and Walker, Garthine (Chapel Hill, N.C., and London, 1994), pp. 48–80Google Scholar.

¹³ For the later use of “nightwalking,” see Shoemaker, , Prosecution and Punishment, p. 26Google Scholar, n. 29, where Shoemaker quotes a seventeenth-century description as describing those who slept all day and frequented bawdy houses or the company of thieves at night. But it was a term also used about women suspected of prostitution (see Shoemaker, , Prosecution and Punishment, p. 61Google Scholar).

¹⁴ One of McIntosh's more curious findings is that the cucking stool, which we know from seventeenth-century illustrations, and which shows the offending women strapped into a chair at the end of a pole being lowered into the village pond or mill stream as punishment, occurs only once in a sixteenth-century record and seems to have become common only in the later seventeenth century: see the illustration which is dated ca. 1700 in Kermode, and Walker, , eds., Women, Crime and the Courts, between pp. 88 and 89Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Underdown, David, Fire from Heaven: Life in an English Town in the Seventeenth Century (New Haven, Conn., and London, 1992)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ See Todd, Margo, Christian Humanism and the Puritan Social Order (Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar, who argues reasonably that Puritan social ethics were largely unoriginal and based on humanist sources, but she does concede (p. 116, n. 85) that “to say this … is not to suggest that humanism was the only transformative influence on the puritan household.” “Puritans added their own peculiar accretions to the humanist intellectual tradition of which they were a part.” On the other hand, Paul Marshall has recently challenged these views, at least as they relate particularly to work and the calling, in A Kind of Life Imposed on Man: Vocation and Social Order from Tyndale to Locke (Toronto and London, 1996), pp. 37–53Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Wrightson, Keith and Levine, David, Poverty and Piety in an English Village: Terling, 1525–1700 (New York and London, 1979; 2d ed., Oxford, 1995), in particular pp. 186–220Google Scholar, where the postscript of the 2d edition deals explicitly and extensively with the controversy surrounding the initial claim; Herrup, The Common Peace; and Ingram, Martin, “Religion, Communities and Moral Discipline in Late Sixteenth- and Early Seventeenth-Century England,” in Religion and Society in Early Modern Europe, 1500–1800, ed. von Greyerz, Kaspar (London, 1984), pp. 177–93Google Scholar; see also Ingram, , Church Courts, Sex and Marriage, pp. 166–67, 233–37Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Spufford, Margaret, “Puritanism and Social Control?” in Order and Disorder in Early Modern England, ed. Fletcher, Anthony and Stevenson, John (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 41–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁹ Kingston upon Hull was by no means unique in the Elizabethan period. Northampton instituted a similar town reform in 1571; the “godly party” at Lincoln attempted a similar reform in the 1580s; and the Dedham godly agreed on reform orders in 1585: Cox, J. Charles, ed., The Records of the Borough of Northampton (London, 1898), 2:386–87Google Scholar; Hill, J. W. F., Tudor and Stuart Lincoln (Cambridge, 1956), pp. 101–5Google Scholar; and Usher, Roland, ed., The Presbyterian Movement in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, Camden Society, 3d ser. (London, 1905), 8:xxix–xliiiGoogle Scholar.