This a correction to my blog
Supplementary Notes for a further Article on the True Levellers Part Two. I
have already apologised to him for the error.
Christopher Thompson Wrote:
Keith Livesey has given some
details of his ideas for working on the Levellers here. I was surprised to see
my 1980 Past and Present article cited as the basis for a claim that Petty had
supported a restricted franchise in the Putney debates of October, 1647 on the
first Agreement of the People. In fact, I argued that Petty's position had
changed: he came to it as a supporter of manhood suffrage but, towards the end
of the debate, sought consent on a more restricted franchise excluding
Royalists, servants and other dependents.
My argument was a criticism of the claims of
C.B.Macpherson that the Levellers were consistent supporters of a restricted
franchise. But it must be said that the view held then that the First Agreement
of the People was a Leveller document no longer seems tenable. Elliot Vernon
and Philip Baker have recently argued in The Historical Journal (Volume 53.
No.1 (March, 2010), Pp.39-59) that the document was the product of a group of
London radicals, including Maximilian Petty, around Henry Marten and not a
Leveller tract at all.
This means that the
assumption upon which Macpherson, Keith Thomas, Monk, Aylmer and I worked was
wrong. I am grateful for their research on this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment