Crowds have long been part of the historical landscape. Professor Nicholas Rogers examines the changing role and character of crowds in Georgian politics through an investigation of some of the major crowd interventions in the period 1714-1821. He shows how the topsy-turvy interventions of the Jacobite era gave way to the more disciplined parades of Hanoverian England, a transition shaped by the effects of war, revolution, and the expansion of the state and the market. These changes unsettled the existing relationship between crowds and authority, raising issues of citizenship, class, and gender which fostered the emergence of a radical mass platform. On this platform, radical men (and, more ambiguously, women) staked out new demands for political power and recognition. In this original and fascinating study, Professor Rogers shows us that Hanoverian crowds were more than dissonant voices on the margins; they were an integral part of eighteenth-century politics.

Nicholas Rogers' profile page

Nicholas Rogers is a Professor of History at York University, Ontario.

'a gem ... The book is elegantly written and rich in insights, and will be essential reading not only for students of the crowd but for all who possess any interest in Britain's long eighteenth century.' Tim Harris, Continuity and Change

'Nicholas Roger's new book has a significance beyond the study of crowds. Although Rogers begins his monograph with an illuminating look at the historiography of crowds, his analysis ultimately challenges the conservative consensus in the historiography of eighteenth-century politics and society. ... Nicholas Roger's book ... is an important intervention in eighteenth-century studies, combining an archivally based close reading of specific incidents, attentive to the eighteenth-century crowd on its own terms, with a broader perspective that integrates radical history and high politics to refute the hypothesis of a conservative consensus.' Anna Clark, Journal of Modern History, Vol 72, No 4, December 2000.

'This is a treat of a book which enriches our understanding of eighteenth century culture. Its thematic chapters and judicous summaries of important debates will make it valuable for students as well as for academics.' Robert Poole, Social History Bulletin, Vol.25, No. 1., Summer 2000.

'Nicholas Rogers has published many important contributions to scholarly debate on eighteenth-century Britain over the past twenty-five years, and Crowds, Culture, and Politics in Georgian Britain... will add further to his reputation as one of the leading historians of the popular politics period... In short, this is a stimulating and very welcome book, which enables us to see, through different case studies, the development and changing style of crowd action and popular politics over more than a century.' Stephen Conway, English historical Review, Vol.115 No.461

'Where Rogers really comes into his own is in making connections between disturbances usually studied separately.' Robert Poole, Social History Bulletin, Vol.25, No.1, Summer 2000.

'compelling chapter ... on crowds and gender ... Throughout, Rogers handles the vexed issue of continuity and change in crowd politics with great sensitivity' Tim Harris, Continuity and Change

'an exciting and elegantly-written book.' Robert Poole, Social History Bulletin, Vol.25, No.1, Summer 2000.

'In the past thirty years, a mass of historical research and writing has combined to illuminate what Nicholas Rogers, in his new and important book, describes as "the apparent caesura of popular protest between the Civil War and Chartism". Crowds, Culture and Politics in Georgian England deserves wide recognition as a work which makes a distinctive contribution towards filling that caesura ... Rogers offers a brilliant evocation of the lost world of gestures, symbols, and an adherence to a distinctive political calendar which so characterized the popular politics of the Georgian era ... This is an important, impressive and exciting book, and one that deserves to be very widely read ... formidable achievement.' James Sharpe, Times Literary Supplement