The Huddersfield-based Lawrence Batley Theatre (LBT) is planning to commemorate the Luddite uprisings of 1812 on the bicentenary next year, and tomorrow are hoping to win the regional final of a funding competition which will enable them to bring the project to full fruition.
The LBT have applied for £55,197 from the Jubilee People's Millions fund, part of the Big Lottery Fund for the project, which is entitled 'Cloth, Culture & Communities' which will also involve the Mikron Theatre Company. If you are in the Yorkshire ITV region, you can view a short film about the project tonight between 6.00 and 6.30 p.m. and everyone can vote for the project by telephone tomorrow by calling 0871 62 68 141. We will update this blog post, as well as our twitter and facebook pages with the number when we know it.
We'll leave you to ponder the irony of a project that celebrates Luddism as part of a 'Jubilee' jamboree!
Huddersfield Anarchist League have called a public meeting in Huddersfield tomorrow night (Monday, 6th June 2011) to discuss their plans to mark the bicentenary. The main speaker is local historian Alan Brooke, the co-Author (with Lesley Kipling) of 'Liberty or Death: Radicals, Republicans & Luddites, 1793-1823', which is being relaunched at the meeting.
This is the first meeting we're aware of in the heart of Yorkshire Luddite country, and it has also drawn some attention from the local press. The venue is the Albert Hotel, 36 Victoria Lane, Huddersfield, HD1 2QF. The meeting starts at 7.00 p.m. and is free of charge.
We hope to provide a report of the meeting at a later date.
The Luddite conference at Birkbeck which took place on May 6th was the most important date so far for those interested in the bicentenary. With a somewhat stellar academic cast, it promised much, but the delivery was arguably somewhat patchy and it was possible to firmly divide it into three very distinct sections: historical, political and cerebral (or perhaps theoretical would be more apt).
There was no sign of Eric Hobsbawm, despite his late billing, and as people started to arrive in increasing numbers, the conference organiser, Iain Boal, announced that Hobsbawm could not attend due to a forthcoming stay in hospital the following week. Short of a medium channelling E.P. Thompson it would be hard to think of a more fitting start to proceedings than having the man who wrote 'The Machine Breakers' almost 60 years ago, so this was disappointing.
However, we did get a link to E.P. Thompson via historian Peter Linebaugh, an ex-student of his and co-author of a book. Linebaugh proceeded to 'pull a thread' through the history of roughly the Luddite period, but with an international dimension that was eye-opening with the connections. Noting that Frank Peel has talked of the 'flaming sword' of the Great Comet of 1811 heralding upheavals, and dubbing General Ludd an 'avenging avatar', Linebaugh declared that Luddism is 'incomplete' and proceeded to relate parallel 'avatars' in Ireland ('Captain Right' and 'Captain Knockabout' - the latter was lost in translation and should have been 'Captain Rock'), one place that experienced similar unrest. Linebaugh admitted early on that he did not have a script, only notes, and his presentation had a stream-of-consciousness feel to it, but it was a very rich concoction which also took in the Demerara slave revolt and the German coast uprising. Linebaugh's chief concern was to illustrate how the commons or 'commoning' was under attack across much of the world, mainly via the system of enclosure, whether of land of other aspects of life. I found this fascinating: it's too easy to confine history to a particular time and place, and Linebaugh's Marxist analysis is one which is open to examining what the international economic imperatives were underpinning the attack on the commons.
Following a break for lunch and prior to Session 2, we had an impromptu performance of Lord Byron's infamous maiden speech to the House of Lords in February 1812 (see video below). It was a fairly straight reading, albeit one executed fairly well. A bit of dramatic flair would not have gone amiss.
After lunch, Dave King stepped in for Beth Lawrence on behalf of the Luddites200 Organising Forum. King spoke about science and it's relationship to capitalism, with a particular emphasis on genetic and reproductive technology, saying the Luddites had resisted the capital intensification of production, with the issue now being the capital intensification of labour itself. Where the Luddites and others had resisted the enclosure of the commons, the issue now was the extension of that tendency into the bio-sciences, with the patenting of genes and cell-lines. King went on to speak about how the Organising Forum hoped to hold a technology politics conference, how there were ideas for arts and theatrical projects & public events involving education and 'wackiness'.
Iain Boal looked at latter-day Neo-Luddism and spoke in general terms about the politics of Earth First! & anti-GMO campaigners, with a particular emphasis on the American variants of those organisations, noting the divergent manner in which the organisations had developed, and also the different responses of governments in the US & elsewhere to them. Alongside Dave King's talk, there was here an attempt to address how technology is utilised by capitalism and whether or not it can ever be considered neutral in and of itself.
T.J. Clark's talk was a scripted, articulate and dense affair which was chiefly concerned with the Left - as the title suggested 'a Left with no future' - but questioning why the Left has to be 'looking forward' rather than present-centred. Virtually the only reference Clark had in his talk to the Luddites was the use of the same image of the card ticket to a Luddite meeting that we use as the banner for this blog. Clark also made clear that he viewed the current times as a watershed moment, similar to that after Waterloo in the 19th Century, a 'moment between paradigms.' Noting the Left's use of comedy, in particular the 'ironic mimicry of the language and assumptions of the ruling class', Clark harked back to Ned Ludd as a 'wonderful, appalling mask' which rhymes with Blood, Mud, Flood, Thud (of thetrap door), M'lud (putting on the black hood), leading to Lump, Judder, Lurch, Shudder, Lead (or Led), Dead, Dread - Ludicrous and Lunatic, with Red Blood as a 'phonetic threat' in the background.
The last talk of the day was billed as a response to Clark by Esther Leslie, although Leslie got off to a bad start by admitting she hadn't prepared for it. By this time, I had tweeted that 'Ned Ludd has left the building' as I was completely out of the academic lucozade that seemed to be fuelling the others to discuss the issues arising from Leslie's brief talk. In fact, I'm still lacking in it now and can't really grab anything from her talk to write here, but you can listen to the mp3 below if you're eager to know.
All in all, this conference was a patchy affair, both in terms of content and relevance to the Luddites and the issues their rebellion raise 200 years later. For myself, it was worth attending for hearing Peter Linebaugh's talk, and the debut of the Luddites200 Organising Forum, as well as getting my hands on the latest issue of the The Land, of which a review will follow.
Next month the Luddites200 Organising Forum are holding an open meeting in London entitled "Celebrating the 200 Anniversary of the Luddite Uprisings: Technology Politics Then and Now", the first of many to come over the next 18 months. Well let the blurb speak for itself:
In 1811-12 Artisan cloth workers in the Midlands and North of England rose up against factory owners who were imposing new machines and putting them out of work. Since the 1950s the Luddites have been painted as fools opposed to all technology and progress, but in fact the Luddites were very selective in their attacks, breaking only machines they thought were 'Hurtful to Commonality'.
What can the Luddites teach us about the ongoing use of technology to replace workers' jobs, as well as issues like GM food and nuclear power? Can we escape the myth that technology always brings progress? On the anniversary of the first action against a GM crop site in Britain, come and discuss the issues with speakers from the Luddites200 Organising Forum, Stop GM, a trade union activist, and the Stop Nuclear Network.
PLUS! Luddite entertainment
The meeting is being held on Wednesday 8th June at the Feminist Library in Lambeth and starts at 7 p.m. Residing in the Luddite heartlands, we are unable to make it, but would welcome any report back from anyone else who can attend. For more details, see our events page.
This coming Thursday (19th May) on BBC Radio 4, folk singer John Tams will be exploring the story of the Luddites through their songs. The 30-minute programme will be broadcast at 11.30 a.m., and it will remain available afterwards (until 2099!) via this page.
In 3 weeks time, the Society for Participation, Engagement, Action and Knowledge Sharing (or SPEAKS) is holding a day long meeting "to explore Luddite perspectives on the crises we face in 2011 and to plan what activities might be appropriate in the future."
Although it's not entirely clear what the aim of the meeting is, the programme tells us"there will the opportunity to read short sections of Luddite, or Luddite inspired, prose or poetry (sic)" and also talk about "what Luddism means to me." SPEAKS also says that it is involved in a project with the Food Ethics Council to "democratic control over science and technology associated with the food system (sic)."
The meeting takes place between 10.30 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. on Thursday, 2nd June at King's Place in London. The organisers are keen to facilitate access to the meeting via Skype or similar methods - see the programme for more details.
Tomorrow sees a major conference about the Luddites take place at Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities in London. The conference aims to look at the historical Luddites alongside contemporary resistance to capitalist modernisation. Announced some months ago, the speakers have now been finalised and the full programme finally drawn up. We'll publish it here, annotated as appropriate:
The conference begins at 10.00 a.m. with a 30-minute introduction by historian Eric Hobsbawm, who is the President of Birkbeck. In 1952, Hobsbawm wrote 'The Machine Wreckers', an essay about the Luddites in the first ever issue of Past & Present, arguably beginning the modern attempts to rehabilitate the Luddites and Luddism.
This is followed by Session 1, entitled "Ludd, Rebecca and History from Below" which begins with a talk entitled "The Luddites and the Atlantic commons" by historian Peter Linebaugh. Linebaugh was a student of E.P. Thompson, and co-authored a book with him, as is probably best known for his own book "The London Hanged".
After a break, the session recommences at 12.00 p.m. with a discussion moderated by Anna Davin
of History Workshop.
In between lunch and session 2, there's a reading of Lord Byron'smaiden speech to the House of Lords"In Defence of the Luddites", given on 27th February 1812 at the height of the disturbances in Nottinghamshire.
Session 2 is entitled "Modernization and Contemporary Movements of Resistance" and takes place from 2.00 p.m. in two sections: Beth Lawrence from Corporate Watch will outline the Luddites200 project which we looked at a few days ago, and Iain Boal of Birkbeck reflects on machines, sabotage and direct action in a piece entitled "To put your bodies upon the gears".
After a further audience discussion and break, the conference recommences at 4.00 p.m. for Session 3, which is entitled "Rebels Facing Backwards and the Dream of Modernity". T.J. Clark delivers a retort entitled "A Left with no Future". Clark is an art historian, and in the 1960s was a member of the English section of the Situationist International and also a member of King Mob in the 1970s. Session 3 ends with a response by Esther Leslie of Birkbeck, followed by closing general discussion, to end for 6 p.m.
Historians Jeremy Black and Katrina Navickas debating the Luddites, from BBC Radio 3 'Nightwaves' on Tuesday night. We may add our own thoughts at a later date.
The first, and so far only, explicitly political group set up to commemorate the bicentenary are the Luddites200 Organising Forum. The group emerged from the 2010 London Anarchist Bookfair, with a brief to celebrate the Luddite bicentenary, attempt to rehabilitate the term 'Luddite' and to focus on contemporary technology politics On their website, there's a founding statement which we'll reproduce below:
November 2011 – January 2013 are the 200th anniversary of the Luddite uprisings: a great opportunity to celebrate their struggle and to redress the wrongs done to them and their name. Today science and technology raises many more critical social, environmental and ethical issues, but from GM food and eugenics to plans for engineering the planets climate, from surveillance to nuclear power, these issues are rarely addressed properly, partly because anyone who raises criticism is denigrated as a ‘luddite’. History has been written by the victors and the Luddites are portrayed as opposed to all technology and progress: it is ironic that while the ideology of technology as progress has hardened into a rigid dogma, which must condemn all critics as ‘anti-science’, in fact the Luddites opposed only technology ‘hurtful to commonality’, (i.e. the common good). They destroyed some machines whilst leaving others, and earnt their living using a complex piece of technology, the hand loom. In their spirit, we make no apology for calling for real democratic control over science and technology.
Like the Luddite Link, the project is in the early stages, but their website also tells us that they plan "public events throughout the country, including arts and theatre projects and a poetry competition, and a conference for technology politics activists." We also understand that they have a short slot to promote the project at next week's Luddite conference at Birkbeck.
We will keep you informed of developments with this group.
Whilst there is still no news of any kind of commemorative events from Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire has already announced it is planning to remember the Luddites in 2012.
The University of Huddersfield and Kirklees Museums and Libraries have announced the Luddite Link, a project which aims to act as a portal for information about resources and events provided by organisations and institutions in West Yorkshire commemorating the bicentenary. A website has appeared with some details, and you can also sign up for a mailing list to receive advance notification of events.
Seven days after the previous reported instance of frame-breaking, the Nottingham Journal published a report1, which we have transcribed below, about the measures being taken by the authorities to quell the disturbances in Nottinghamshire.
What's most interesting about this report is that it admits that Bow Street Runners were active in the area a full ten months prior to the more well-known appearance of the fellow Bow Street magistrates Conant & Baker who were sent to Nottingham amidst the second wave of disturbances. It's certainly the only reference we can find to the presence of the fledgling police force prior to 1812.
The authorities were quite clearly most concerned about the relationship between the proto-Luddites and the crowd, with the latter displaying no intention to intervene in the direct action taking place, and this article serves as a warning, perhaps even hinting at collective punishment for those who "by being spectators, became abettors in the mischief." Given that the uprising had died down following an agreement between the Hosiers and Frame-work Knitters in the previous month, it's also possible to see the vanity of the authorities wishing to attribute the waning of the disturbances to the actions they had taken. There was no question of their admitting that the direct action of the Frame-work Knitters had brought the Hosiers back into line - no chance of admitting that violence and direct action worked.
We congratulate the public upon the vigorous proceedings adopted for putting an end to the shameful system of destroying frames, which has been lately pursued in this neighbourhood. In addition to the liberal rewards offered, some of the most active and intelligent Officers from Bow Street are now employed, and have been in the adjacent villages in the last week. Their known ability gives us every reason to expect, that an effectual stop will be put to the diabolical proceedings of a set of men, who, under the pretence of preventing an evil, have inflicted the most grievous injury upon their most industrious neighbours, by depriving them of the means of obtaining bread for their families, and have brought upon themselves the execration of all good men. The County Magistrates, we learn, have requested the continued services of these vigilant and indefatigable Officers, for an indefinite period. On this subject we cannot refrain from expressing our regret at the cultural apathy exhibited in the late tumultuous proceedings, in cases where the mischief was performed by ten or twelve individuals, in the pretence of, perhaps, two or three hundred, who, by being spectators, became abettors in the mischief, and thus justly rendered themselves liable to punishment. We understand that the County Magistrates have determined to punish with the utmost severity of the law, all persons who may be brought before them, for being present at any riotous and disorderly assemblage, where destruction of property has ensued.
Frames had already been broken in Bulwell during the fortnight following the Arnold incident, and in 7 months time, it would become a place of some notoriety.
15 days after direct action by Framework knitters had begun in Arnold, and the Hosiers in and around Nottingham were beaten: a public meeting was called for the 26th March to attempt to settle grievances. Our last post reported a letter published in the Nottingham Journal (NJ) on the 23rd March from an anonymous writer who called for "GENERAL MEETING of the TRADE, and come to a decided resolution on which to act, and publish the same," so it's a moot point whether this person was a clairvoyant or merely influential. The 30th March edition of the NJ contained the following report:
AT a numerous meeting of Manufacturers, (held this day at the Exchange)
RESOLVED, That this meeting do recommend to the Trade in general, to give for all full-fashioned Work the OLD prices, according to the annexed statement, and that the Deductions, in the inferior Goods for Work taken out, be also followed, agreeably to the Prices there specified.
At the same time they see, with Concern, the illegal measures which have been resorted to by some of the Frame-work Knitters; and are determined to support and aid the Civil Power in its Exertions to bring the Offenders to Justice (a measure in which every Rank in Society is equally interested), and for which purpose a large subscription has this Day been entered into.
Nottingham, March 26, 1811.
The Hosier's statement attempts to 'divide and rule' the Framework knitters between those they felt they could do business with and the 'criminal element', and there is still much unresolved debate amongst historians between how far the 'legal' and 'direct action' methods of redress for the Framework knitters represented either different tactics or different ideological standpoints. There will be much more time to devote to this in the coming months.
Nevertheless, the statement was true to its word, and the Hosiers did fund a reward of 50 guineas1 for information leading to conviction of the proto-Luddites, and a broadsheet was distributed on the same date (see above). As far as is known, no-one ever claimed the reward.
The agreement held (with one or two hiccups, which will be reported here) over the next 7 months until November 1811.
The following letter was printed in the 23rd March 1811 edition of the Nottingham Journal:
To Persons concerned in the Nottingham Manufactory
It is alarming to hear of the mischief which has been done, and is yet doing, in the villages around us, in almost every direction; and which seems likely to wear a more serious aspect.
Surely it is the duty of those in office to give full information to the Cost of these proceedings; that it may immediately take effectual measures to check designs which may yet be only in contemplation.
The folly of the Stocking Weavers, in destroying the Frames belonging to their masters (but many of them the property of persons no way concerned in the trade), is indeed most absurd and infamous.
It is the most effectual way of injuring themselves; by throwing out of work for month, or years, the machines by which they gain a livelihood.
It reminds us of children, who quarrel with their bread and butter, throw it into the dirt in a pet, and then cry because they have nothing to eat.
It is much to be regretted, that the Hosiers should avowedly be at variance at such a crisis.
If, instead of reproaching each other in the public prints, they would convene a GENERAL MEETING of the TRADE, and come to a decided resolution on which to act, and publish the same with the signatures of their respective names at the foot, as has been the usual custom on similar occasions, there can be no doubt when the Workmen saw these Resolutions founded upon general consent, that they would consider it vain to oppose the unanimous determination of their Employers, and quietly return to their work.
On the 22d inst. the body of a young man was found lifeless at Long Eaton, in this county, suspended by the neck to the branch of a tree; he was first discovered by a boy who procured the assistance of a stranger he accidentally met near the spot, whose first care was to rifle the pockets of the deceased, the contents of which together with his hat & neck handkerchief he carried away; but not satisfied with his booty he soon afterwards returned for the deceased's small clothes, and then made off.—The deceased who committed suicide proved to have been a resident of Nottingham of the name of Jon Peats, by trade a frame-work knitter, whose mind, naturally of a melancholy and desponding cast, has been entirely overset by the difficulties which that class of manufacturers are experiencing.
Sources of information about exactly what happened following the Arnold attack on 11th March are somewhat thin on the ground. Several authors allude to the fact that the disturbances carried on for two weeks, before being checked by the events of the 26th March (a post will follow on that date), and the information is drawn from local newspapers, as well as a report by two Bow Street magistrates, Nathaniel Conant and Robert Baker written almost 12 months later.1
In his timeline2, Thomis report that frames were broken in this period at Sutton-in-Ashfield, Kirkby, Woodborough, Lambley, and Bulwell in Nottinghamshire and also at Ilkeston in Derbyshire. Citing Conant & Baker, Darvall tells us that:
"Night after night in the surrounding villages mobs collected and entered various workshops in order to break the frames of unpopular hosiers. All over the north-western part of Nottinghamshire, in the various hosiery villages, often in several different places on the same night, and sometimes even by day, cases of framebreaking were reported."3
In Nottingham, the local magistrates ordered regular patrols by "six regular and six special constables", these being augmented by small parties of the military in some of the villages. Meanwhile, the Derby Mercury of 28th March 1811 has reports of large troop movements, with three whole divisions moving into Nottinghamshire:
"The 2d division of the first Royal Lancashire Militia, on its rout from Worcester to Hull on arriving here this morning, received a counter order to proceed to Nottingham, where the 3d division will follow it, to assist the civil power in preserving the tranquility of the town and neighbourhood. The 1st division which arrived here yesterday, was ordered to proceed to Mansfield, & halt there till further orders."
In a report on the 23rd March (below), the Nottingham Journal expresses alarm at the continuing disturbances, and notes that 100 frames have been broken4 in the past 14 days:
It is with great concern we hear, that the mischievous proceedings which took place at Arnold last week, have been extended to most of the manufacturing villages in the north western parts of this county, where upwards of one hundred stocking frames, the property of individuals have been destroyed. These outrages are the more to be deprecated, since they will be attended with less evil to the proprietor, than the unfortunate workman, who must for a length of time be thrown entirely out of employment. The persons engaged in these depredations, proceed in small companies, disguised so that their persons may not be known; in some instances, however, their designs have been frustrated by the determined resistance of those who were in employ. We hope, shortly to be able to announce a happy adjustment of existing differences between the workmen and their employers.
The following statement appears to have been issued by the same four hosiers that had earlier in January asked the stockingers not to accept work from hosiers paying low prices. You'll also remember that one of the firms, Brocksopp & Parker, were identified by the owner of their frames, a Mr Bolton, as renting his frames to them, and that the Nottingham Journal reported that his frames had been broken in the initial attack at Arnold on 11th March: the statement has the four firms complaining about the "destruction of our property."
The statement was presumably issued as a broadsheet or public notice, because it doesn't appear in the Nottingham Journal, but it does appear in the appendix of a Parliamentary Select Committee Report issued in May 1812.1 William Felkin also alludes to some of the negotiations that are implied in the statement in his 1867 book.2
STATEMENT of several Hosiers of Nottingham, to the Framework Knitters of that Town; respecting the reduction of their Wages, &.c.
IT appears, from the violent proceedings that have taken place within these few days past' in the destruction of our property, that you are led to suppose that we are the cause or the reduction of your Wages.—It is well known to you, that a great number of Hosiers had reduced their workmen, by direct and indirect methods, a long time before we gave notice of our intention of reducing the prices. Some have been making slender Womens Hose, in size, at the price of Maids, and other sizes in the same manner; others have been taking off 5s. and 6s. per dozen for work left out, which, to the workman, was not worth more than 3s. per dozen; others have been making 38 gauge Hose on 40 gauge Frames, and so on downwards till they have actually made Maids Hose on a 30 gauge Frame, at 10d. and 101/4 d. per pair; at the same time asserting their disapprobation of any reduction in the price of workmanship.
It is a notorious fact, that the workmen of Arnold have been working for a person there considerably under the stated and regular prices, which enabled him to sell his goods, to the Hosiers for less money than we could make them for.
These things made it absolutely necessary, for the preservation of our trade, that something should be done to counteract this system, which was destroying us. We had the choice of the following methods—either to reduce the full-fashioned work more to a level with the low-priced work, or to make the same work at the same price it was made at by our neighbours, or to let our frames stand still.
We have given our workmen their choice, and they have taken the full-fashioned work at reduced prices; they acknowledged it was still the best work, and they preferred it. This has been invariably confirmed to us by the numerous workmen we have since conversed with on the subject, but more particularly by your Committee, who we always supposed were properly appointed by yourselves to settle this business.
When the reduction of the price of full-fashioned work had taken place in January, we were called upon by the Hosiers to sign their advertisement of the 26th of that month, stating their disapprobation of a reduction. We declined, because we there saw the names, of those who had, for a length of time, taken every method in their power to get their work made at less price than their neighbours, by craftily undermining their workmen wherever they could. We were then told by them, that we should have pursued the same system, and then no notice would have been taken of it. Our answer was, "that we despised the system, and never would adopt it;" because, we were certain that, if that system were to be generally adopted, the most dreadful consequences would ensue to the workmen; and those Hosiers who had the hardest hearts and the least conscience, would get their work made at the lowest prices. We therefore determined to make our reduction, accompanied with such restrictions and regulations as we hoped would protect the workmen effectually from any imposition. Had those gentlemen been really anxious to prevent the reduction taking place, which they attributed to us, why did not they come forward and agree to pay the Standard price for standard sizes, and to pay a proper and fair price for the low-priced work? [We had promised to raise our price to the full standard, and return every farthing we had deducted from the work people.]
This has never been explained, but instead of so doing, they gave notice of their intention to reduce their Wages; thus by their conduct openly contradicting their own assertions in the public papers, (viz.) that they disapproved of the reduction of the price of workmanship. Several reasons might be given for their conduct; but their main object was to oblige us to raise our prices, that they might still continue to possess the advantages they had obtained over us, and be enabled to send their Goods to market on better terms than their neighbours, who were giving standard prices for standard sizes.
Your Committee afterwards waited upon us, and at their request we signed an Agreement, stating, that we would give the old standard price for full-fashioned work, provided the rest of the trade would agree not to continue the practice of making sham Hose on 30 Gauge Frames, and fine work on super Frames, &c.; nor to make Slender Womens Hose for Maids price; nor to deduct for fashion left out, more than that fashion was really worth.
Your Committee then expressed themselves perfectly satisfied with us, and went away filled with the most sanguine expectations that those gentlemen who had voluntarily come forward to express their decided disapprobation of the reduction, would have signed that Agreement without hesitation. But after the most urgent solicitation, they found themselves unable to procure even a single Signature to it.
We have thought proper thus to state to you publicly the motives for the reduction, and the steps taken to prevent it. We do not wish to possess any unfair advantage over our neighbours, in manufacturing our Goods on better terms than they; and on the other hand, we can by no means allow any exclusive advantage to them, of manufacturing their Goods at a lower price, by substituting one size or one gauge for another—as, in so doing, we are not capable of entering the market on equal terms with them.
Having thus given you a fair statement of Facts, we leave you to determine who are the real cause of the Reduction.
J. & T. WATSON, NELSONS, & CO.
CHURCHILL & PRICE.
BROCKSOPP & PARKER.
RICHD. SATTERTHWAITE, (for RICHD. EATON.)
Having never attended any meeting of a local history society before, I didn't know what to expect from this event - other than perhaps the stereotype of what such occasions may be like: average age mid sixties, tweeds, conservative ('small c' and 'big C'). The stereotypes didn't let me down after all. Despite my valiant attempt to lower the average age by 25 years or so, I was simply outnumbered - the organisers had underestimated the interest, and extra seats were called for.
What we got was a talk with a very high quota of dates and names and events, but with perhaps less analysis than you'd expect of a professor of history. In the circumstances, he was probably giving this audience what they wanted, and there is a lot to get through in a potted history of Midlands Luddism after all. A scholar of Luddism wouldn't have learned too much that was new here, but one nugget that did come out of it for me and explained a lot was the contemporary legal limitations on the Nottingham authorities which prevented an effective response to the events of Arnold on 11th March 1811: the Nottingham City authorities simply had no remit to stray over the Nottinghamshire County borders without obtaining permission from the Home Office - obviously impossible at such short notice.
Given that one of the Thoroton Society's most famous scholars is the author of several works about Luddism, Malcolm Thomis, it's perhaps unsurprising then that the conclusion that John Beckett reached chimes with Thomis' ultimately conservative historical analysis - that the Luddites were simply opposed to change, and that any resistance to innovation can only succeed in the short-term. There's a certain amount of truth to that - Luddites did oppose changes that would reduce them to penury & destitution, and who can blame them? Thomis saw the Luddites as apolitical and reactionary, and whilst Beckett didn't exactly go quite that far, one joke aimed at his conservative audience ('small c' but particularly 'big C') went down well, but was actually ahistorical and ignorant - he joked that perhaps local miners and Arthur Scargill had Luddite DNA, given the Miners' Strike of 1984-1985 . No doubt E.P. Thompson would delight in the parallels being drawn between the potentially revolutionary actions of Miners in the 1980s and the pseudo-revolutionary actions of the Luddites 170 years before, but that isn't what Beckett meant. The irony is that Nottinghamshire was the home of the scab Union, the Union of Democratic of Mineworkers - whilst their members may well indeed be ancestors of Nottinghamshire Luddites, their actions in breaking the strike 25 years ago prove they have nothing else in common with them, a parallel conveniently missed by professor Beckett.
In the meantime, let's hope there's a veritable festival of events to look forward to in Nottingham come November 2011, the anniversary of things getting really serious in the area 200 years ago.
In March 1811, two hundred years ago, the first stocking frames were broken by protesters who came to be called Luddites. In this lecture, John Beckett will recall the events of 200 years ago, the context in which they occurred, and the legacy of the Luddite disturbances in and around Nottingham and Loughborough.
Scholars of the Luddites will know that the Thoroton Society issued a fine publication from their 'Record Series' in 1972 by the historian Malcolm Thomis. Entitled 'Luddism in Nottinghamshire', the slim volume features transcripts of official government correspondence, Luddite threatening letters, reports of direct action etc. Whilst it's not as extensive as Kevin Binfield's 'Writings of the Luddites', it is equally essential, though it is long out of print.
The lecture is being held at Nottingham Mechanics Institute at 3 North Sherwood Street, Nottingham NG1 4EZ at 2.45 p.m. The venue has full disabled access and facilities. A bookstall is available from 2.15 p.m.
