What do you think?
Rate this book
Revel, Riot, and Rebellion: Popular Politics and Culture in England 1603-1660
What have maypoles, charivari processions, and stoolball matches to do with the English Civil War? A great deal, argues David Underdown.
Using three western counties as a case-study, he shows that the war was neither a dispute confined to the elite nor a class struggle of the 'middling sort' against a discredited aristocracy. It was in fact the result of profound disagreements among people of all social levels about the moral basis of their communities; commoners as well as ruler held strong opinions about order and governance. But these opinions varied from place to place, and through a pioneering synthesis of social history and popular culture, Underdown relates political diversity to cultural diversity, and shows that local difference in popular allegiance in the Civil War coincided with regional contrast in the traditional festive culture. The book is thus an important reinterpretation of both the English Revolution and the relationship between society, politics, and culture in the seventeenth century.
Using three western counties as a case-study, he shows that the war was neither a dispute confined to the elite nor a class struggle of the 'middling sort' against a discredited aristocracy. It was in fact the result of profound disagreements among people of all social levels about the moral basis of their communities; commoners as well as ruler held strong opinions about order and governance. But these opinions varied from place to place, and through a pioneering synthesis of social history and popular culture, Underdown relates political diversity to cultural diversity, and shows that local difference in popular allegiance in the Civil War coincided with regional contrast in the traditional festive culture. The book is thus an important reinterpretation of both the English Revolution and the relationship between society, politics, and culture in the seventeenth century.
340 pages, Paperback
First published January 16, 1986
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
December 5, 2025
This was much more like it, as far as non-fiction books about the seventeenth century English Civil Wars and Restoration are concerned. Yes indeed, David Underdown's ‘Revel, Riot, and Rebellion: Popular Politics and Culture in England 1603-1660', was written the way I'd have wished and expected all the others, by the likes of, Michael Braddick, Christopher Hill and Diane Purkiss, to have been written. Where they've taken all the evidence from back in the day, and relayed the findings back to us in their own words, and thankfully used our own contemporary language to do so, hallelujah! Praise the Lord! Finally, someone has written a book on the English Revolution (I noticed that Underdown, unlike Purkiss, had no qualms about using the term, 'English Revolution', which he did throughout the book. So Diane Purkiss was entirely wrong when she stated in her own book, 'The English Civil War: A People's History', that Christopher Hill was the only historian and author to do so), that isn't a chore to be endured by having to wade through reams and reams of flowery seventeenth century English language.
Sure, there was a little, but it was thankfully minimal and very much in a short exemplifying context, so it was therefore, wholly acceptable.
For example, we were given verbatim, the proclamation from a ’Clubmen’ banner, 'If you offer to plunder or take our cattle/be assured we will bid you battle'. Brilliant! Love it, granted, that example isn’t particularly flowery, but it is short and on point.
The author sets out to try and understand, just what exactly made people fight during the seventeenth century Civil Wars and the journey he takes us on, is eminently interesting, throwing up myriad examples and anecdotes, that really take us down into the nitty gritty of everyday life of the ordinary citizens during that tumultuous period. Where there is a multitude of variables, involving culture, religion, regionalism and politics, to name but a few, on why someone would take up arms for one particular side or the other.
With many surprising results, including that localist neutralism was more prevalent than either cavalier or roundhead zeal. Meaning, if push came to shove, most people would have preferred to stay well out of it. It was also interesting to note, that people didn’t necessarily blindly follow their ’master’ and join the side they were on, and likewise, the ’boss’ classes would often pile in on the side the majority of his local community were fighting for, it was much less hassle than rocking the boat and bringing down upon their heads, the wrath of the neighborhood sectarian mob!
We also have to bear in mind, not to transplant contemporary ways of thinking and terminologies onto the period. Unfortunately that’s something I'm extremely guilty of doing, but the author here, really helps you out in this department, by reiterating things like,
’……the importance of not importing into the period an anachronistic modern conception of class antagonism. There was no ’middle class', no ’working class' in Stuart England, though in every town and village there were people of middle rank, artisans, and labourers. And especially in the towns and clothing districts an early stage of the process out of which the later society of classes was to form can be observed, as the gulf between the respectable and the ’lower sort' widened. The parish elites of clothiers, yeomen and more prosperous husbandmen often viewed themselves in Calvinist terms - they were the Godly, the elect. They played an important part in the campaign for moral reformation, and in advancing the cause of Parliament. They succeeded, temporarily at least, in conveying some of their urgency and Godly discipline to many of their less affluent neighbours, but the programme was meant to serve their interests, not those of the poor…..’
This kind of writing really served to help me understand the era way better than just copy and pasting vast scrolls of pamphlet and news sheet writings from the time.
The book starts by giving us many examples of everyday life from almost the beginning of the seventeenth century, and the years of both state and clerical oppression building up, and enforced on the people. As more and more Puritans maneuvered themselves into positions of power within the local communities and the state apparatus, the build up, inevitably bursts, and erupts into Civil War.
'Puritans and the Godly along with reformist elements of the gentry and clergy mounted campaigns against the traditional culture of the lower orders, against alehouses, popular sports, festivals and all other seemingly disorderly customs of the poor.',
Preacher Richard Allein convinced parishioners that,
"It was a greater sin for a man to 'play bowls' on the Sabbath day, than to lie with another man's wife on a week day!"
Two women were pilloried for ’walking through fields' on the Sabbath.
Just a few examples of the many, many anecdotes of egregious Protestant zealots, bigots and fanatics ensembling this extremely interesting and thoroughly researched book, and I ask you, is it any wonder that in some places, Christians are thrown from rooftops? Or indeed, were fed to lions by the Romans? Jeezo! What a crew. **taps side of head** "These Puritans are crazy!"
The book concludes however, that as well as an overriding fear of Papacy, most people were in favour of moderate Protestantism, and really, just wanted to be left alone.
We also, and somewhat amusingly, had a small delve into terms of abuse. With a new vocabulary of abuse appearing. Epithets like 'cavalier rogue' or 'roundhead dog' used to target someone's politics, as opposed to 'cuckoldly knave ' or 'whoremaster' (hehe, snigger, snigger!) were of their morals. Religious taunts like 'papist' or 'atheist' retained their currency, but 'cavalier' or 'roundhead' were explicitly political.
Speaking of swear words, this was also the third book I've read in as many weeks (see my reviews of 'The English Civil Wars' by Diane Purkiss and 'Down Cemetery Road' by Mick Herron), where the word 'blade' has been used to describe a deviant person or people, haha! Having not previously heard it used at all, here it says,
'In the 1650's the old Clubman, Humphrey Willis continued to deplore that the world was turned upside-down. In Willis as in the Clubmen generally, social conservatism - complaints about 'blue apron blades' taking over from the gentry -is combined with religious conservatism'
Haha! Trivial indeed, but for me, highly amusing and strangely coincidental! **Cue ‘Twighlight Zone’ theme tune**
The only real downside to this terrific book was, because of the nature of the author’s research and his many, many examples, it did tend towards being somewhat repetitive, but that hardly makes the work stand out as unique. It’s a criticism I’ve leveled at many works of non fiction. I’d actually have thought repetitiveness in non fiction books, part and parcel by now, if not for the fact that there are a few, who seem to have managed to avoid it (see my reviews of ’King Leopold’s Ghost’ by Adam Hochschild and ’Adolf Hitler’ by John Toland for just a couple of examples. Toland’s book in particular is surprising, given its size). The book is also pretty old now, and it does sometimes come across as a little rusty in places. I also appreciate that contemporary scholars feel that the book appears to rest on major fallacies and misinterpretations, but I didn’t get a sense of that at all. Apart from considerably more detail on the lives of ordinary citizens, the author says much the same as most of the other authors that concentrate on this period, particularly Christopher Hill. Personally, I think the author’s assumptions and conclusions, that for the most part, people only concerned themselves with local issues and that ostensibly, they couldn’t give a sh*t one way or the other and just wanted to be left alone to get on with their lives, sounds entirely plausible and that that way of thinking echoes out through eternity haha, and you’ll not get much argument about it from me.
To finish up, we also had, what now seem like old friends, usual suspects like Nehemiah Wharton popping up again, but many new faces, like the strangely named, Herefordshire J.P. and Laudian, Wallop Brabazen! So, on that amusingly immature note, I'll sum up with, all in all, the best book by some distance on the English Revolution and Restoration that I've read so far. Extremely interesting and thankfully written, for the most part, in contemporary parlance, which was easy to understand and a pleasure to follow. Brilliant, well done and thank you Professor Underdown. R.I.P.
Sure, there was a little, but it was thankfully minimal and very much in a short exemplifying context, so it was therefore, wholly acceptable.
For example, we were given verbatim, the proclamation from a ’Clubmen’ banner, 'If you offer to plunder or take our cattle/be assured we will bid you battle'. Brilliant! Love it, granted, that example isn’t particularly flowery, but it is short and on point.
The author sets out to try and understand, just what exactly made people fight during the seventeenth century Civil Wars and the journey he takes us on, is eminently interesting, throwing up myriad examples and anecdotes, that really take us down into the nitty gritty of everyday life of the ordinary citizens during that tumultuous period. Where there is a multitude of variables, involving culture, religion, regionalism and politics, to name but a few, on why someone would take up arms for one particular side or the other.
With many surprising results, including that localist neutralism was more prevalent than either cavalier or roundhead zeal. Meaning, if push came to shove, most people would have preferred to stay well out of it. It was also interesting to note, that people didn’t necessarily blindly follow their ’master’ and join the side they were on, and likewise, the ’boss’ classes would often pile in on the side the majority of his local community were fighting for, it was much less hassle than rocking the boat and bringing down upon their heads, the wrath of the neighborhood sectarian mob!
We also have to bear in mind, not to transplant contemporary ways of thinking and terminologies onto the period. Unfortunately that’s something I'm extremely guilty of doing, but the author here, really helps you out in this department, by reiterating things like,
’……the importance of not importing into the period an anachronistic modern conception of class antagonism. There was no ’middle class', no ’working class' in Stuart England, though in every town and village there were people of middle rank, artisans, and labourers. And especially in the towns and clothing districts an early stage of the process out of which the later society of classes was to form can be observed, as the gulf between the respectable and the ’lower sort' widened. The parish elites of clothiers, yeomen and more prosperous husbandmen often viewed themselves in Calvinist terms - they were the Godly, the elect. They played an important part in the campaign for moral reformation, and in advancing the cause of Parliament. They succeeded, temporarily at least, in conveying some of their urgency and Godly discipline to many of their less affluent neighbours, but the programme was meant to serve their interests, not those of the poor…..’
This kind of writing really served to help me understand the era way better than just copy and pasting vast scrolls of pamphlet and news sheet writings from the time.
The book starts by giving us many examples of everyday life from almost the beginning of the seventeenth century, and the years of both state and clerical oppression building up, and enforced on the people. As more and more Puritans maneuvered themselves into positions of power within the local communities and the state apparatus, the build up, inevitably bursts, and erupts into Civil War.
'Puritans and the Godly along with reformist elements of the gentry and clergy mounted campaigns against the traditional culture of the lower orders, against alehouses, popular sports, festivals and all other seemingly disorderly customs of the poor.',
Preacher Richard Allein convinced parishioners that,
"It was a greater sin for a man to 'play bowls' on the Sabbath day, than to lie with another man's wife on a week day!"
Two women were pilloried for ’walking through fields' on the Sabbath.
Just a few examples of the many, many anecdotes of egregious Protestant zealots, bigots and fanatics ensembling this extremely interesting and thoroughly researched book, and I ask you, is it any wonder that in some places, Christians are thrown from rooftops? Or indeed, were fed to lions by the Romans? Jeezo! What a crew. **taps side of head** "These Puritans are crazy!"
The book concludes however, that as well as an overriding fear of Papacy, most people were in favour of moderate Protestantism, and really, just wanted to be left alone.
We also, and somewhat amusingly, had a small delve into terms of abuse. With a new vocabulary of abuse appearing. Epithets like 'cavalier rogue' or 'roundhead dog' used to target someone's politics, as opposed to 'cuckoldly knave ' or 'whoremaster' (hehe, snigger, snigger!) were of their morals. Religious taunts like 'papist' or 'atheist' retained their currency, but 'cavalier' or 'roundhead' were explicitly political.
Speaking of swear words, this was also the third book I've read in as many weeks (see my reviews of 'The English Civil Wars' by Diane Purkiss and 'Down Cemetery Road' by Mick Herron), where the word 'blade' has been used to describe a deviant person or people, haha! Having not previously heard it used at all, here it says,
'In the 1650's the old Clubman, Humphrey Willis continued to deplore that the world was turned upside-down. In Willis as in the Clubmen generally, social conservatism - complaints about 'blue apron blades' taking over from the gentry -is combined with religious conservatism'
Haha! Trivial indeed, but for me, highly amusing and strangely coincidental! **Cue ‘Twighlight Zone’ theme tune**
The only real downside to this terrific book was, because of the nature of the author’s research and his many, many examples, it did tend towards being somewhat repetitive, but that hardly makes the work stand out as unique. It’s a criticism I’ve leveled at many works of non fiction. I’d actually have thought repetitiveness in non fiction books, part and parcel by now, if not for the fact that there are a few, who seem to have managed to avoid it (see my reviews of ’King Leopold’s Ghost’ by Adam Hochschild and ’Adolf Hitler’ by John Toland for just a couple of examples. Toland’s book in particular is surprising, given its size). The book is also pretty old now, and it does sometimes come across as a little rusty in places. I also appreciate that contemporary scholars feel that the book appears to rest on major fallacies and misinterpretations, but I didn’t get a sense of that at all. Apart from considerably more detail on the lives of ordinary citizens, the author says much the same as most of the other authors that concentrate on this period, particularly Christopher Hill. Personally, I think the author’s assumptions and conclusions, that for the most part, people only concerned themselves with local issues and that ostensibly, they couldn’t give a sh*t one way or the other and just wanted to be left alone to get on with their lives, sounds entirely plausible and that that way of thinking echoes out through eternity haha, and you’ll not get much argument about it from me.
To finish up, we also had, what now seem like old friends, usual suspects like Nehemiah Wharton popping up again, but many new faces, like the strangely named, Herefordshire J.P. and Laudian, Wallop Brabazen! So, on that amusingly immature note, I'll sum up with, all in all, the best book by some distance on the English Revolution and Restoration that I've read so far. Extremely interesting and thankfully written, for the most part, in contemporary parlance, which was easy to understand and a pleasure to follow. Brilliant, well done and thank you Professor Underdown. R.I.P.
December 22, 2019
I can agree with his conclusions about the contrast in beliefs, but I’m uncertain about his belief in their geographic breakdown: “Adherents of one set of beliefs stressed the values of good neighbourhood and co-operation; adherents of the other, those of individual piety and sobriety, and the duty of the godly to reform their less enlightened neighbours.” 275
I can agree with his conclusions about the contrast in beliefs, but I’m uncertain about his belief in their geographic breakdown: “Adherents of one set of beliefs stressed the values of good neighbourhood and co-operation; adherents of the other, those of individual piety and sobriety, and the duty of the godly to reform their less enlightened neighbours.” 275
“In rural areas less subject to population pressure and land shortage, both a more paternalistic form of society and older habits of good neighbourhood had survived.” 276
He disagrees with the notion that people were pawns led by elites though deference was an “element” in some people’s behavior. But how much of an element was it?
I can agree with his conclusions about the contrast in beliefs, but I’m uncertain about his belief in their geographic breakdown: “Adherents of one set of beliefs stressed the values of good neighbourhood and co-operation; adherents of the other, those of individual piety and sobriety, and the duty of the godly to reform their less enlightened neighbours.” 275
“In rural areas less subject to population pressure and land shortage, both a more paternalistic form of society and older habits of good neighbourhood had survived.” 276
He disagrees with the notion that people were pawns led by elites though deference was an “element” in some people’s behavior. But how much of an element was it?
November 3, 2023
David Underdown's Revel, Riot and Rebellion is a great introduction to the Clubmen movements of the 17th century. This publication highly influenced me in my own writings on the Clubmen. David Underdown’s Fire From Heaven is also an excellent read. I would recommend any reader to David’s books. Often compared to Christopher Hill, another influential writer on the Civil Wars of the three kingdoms.
August 23, 2007
nonfiction,history
July 26, 2011
Makes a good case for his thesis but not as convincing as Hill and friends
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews